Bringing wind energy to the ground through a giant pitot tube

AI Thread Summary
The proposed idea involves using a parachute attached to a flagpole to create a low-pressure area that could spin a turbine connected via a tube at ground level. While the concept aims to simplify maintenance and reduce tower costs, concerns arise regarding the practicality of the design, including the need for a sturdy structure to support the parachute and tube. Critics point out that the pressure difference generated by the parachute is minimal, likely less than 1 psi, which may not produce sufficient energy for practical use. Additionally, the need for a large tube to facilitate airflow raises questions about efficiency and feasibility. Overall, while innovative, the concept faces significant challenges in energy generation potential and practical implementation.
steamdreamer
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Ok not a great title, but let me try to explain the idea.
Imagine that you have say a parachute attached to the top of a flag pole. In the center of the parachute a hole is cut and connected to a plastic tube that goes to the ground. When the wind comes up the parachute exerts a drag on the air and this tube connects the low pressure backside of chute to the ground. At the ground level inside the tube is a turbine that will spin as a result of the suction created. To enhance the energy transfer there will be a tube concentrically centered around the low pressure tube that transmits the high pressure air to the underside of the turbine on the ground. Essentially its a giant pitot tube with the parachute acting as a flow obstructor, the two line then transmit differential pressure to the ground. So would it an effective way to transfer wind energy?

The pros would be that you could bring all maintenance to a ground level, and eliminate gigantic tower weights and costs.

I am not certain how to proced modeling or thinking numerically about such an idea. Any ideas?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I can't quite visualize this. I don't see where the low pressure is.

The pros would be that you could bring all maintenance to a ground level, and eliminate gigantic tower weights and costs.

You still need a tower for the parachute, and a plastic tube and a fragile parachute which will need to be repaired. The tube needs to be fairly large because the turbine won't spin unless there is a lot of air moving through it.
 
I've attached a very poor sketch of what I'm thinking. The low pressure region should be behind the parachute since it is blocked off from wind flow.
 

Attachments

  • Wind Pitot Tube.jpg
    Wind Pitot Tube.jpg
    9.8 KB · Views: 666
There isn't much pressure behind the wind so there would be an awful lot of loss.
 
Ignoring the practical details of building it, a basic problem with your thinking is that there is no "pressure drop" behind the HOLE in the parachute where your tube is.

Yes there is a pressure difference between the front and back of the rest of the chute, but even that is a very small pressure. Think about the size of an "old style" circular parachute that is needed to support a 200lb person doing a parachute jump. The pressure difference across the chute is probably less than 1 psi. That is not enough to generate an useful amount of energy.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top