Horizontal wind turbine on vehicle

[iridium]

"lose a lead" mode ON

But what do you all have to believe that I want to motorize a vehicle thanks to the wind turbine.

"Fuck a lead" mode OFF

No, that is not the case.
I don't believe in perpetual motion yet.
The goal is just to recover a little energy lost in the vacuum to recharge the batteries.
a bit like a turbo does with the exhaust gases on a thermal.
Everyone knows that motorized with the wind is impossible, but recovering some energy from it is possible and for a cost that should not be very high.
the weight is not high either.

PS: I modified the first message so as not to have to repeat myself again.

I don't want to motorize a vehicle with a wind turbine!!!!
Just recover some lost energy...

a+

[iridium]

@ the guilt

misinterpretation of the system.
the goal is not to move the vehicle forward to recover energy.
The goal is to move as we do every day but recovering part of the energy that faces the vehicle when it rolls.
The speed reached can be 90 km/h or even 130.

for example if we drove for 1 hour with a 10KW electric vehicle.
thanks to a wind turbine like this "say 1KW", we could drive 1h6min.

if the wind turbine can reach 3Kw
time goes to 1h18min.
and there, it is not negligible we reach almost 20% more autonomy, just by recovering the force of the wind which in any case will face the vehicle even if there is no wind turbine.

a+

[dirk pitt]

any energy you think you "recover" by any means as your vehicle moves forward is already "generated" by the vehicle itself.
this energy is not "wasted" as you say, it is just expended to move the vehicle forward.
any attempt to produce on-board energy whose source is the forward energy itself is futile because the yields of each of the chains (propulsion and generation) being <1, the final consumption - the recovery will still be greater than consumption without recovery.

[tigrou_838]

hello, so it's in mode, ON

the idea can be interesting, so you want to recover energy from the wind that you push with the car, in this case small turbines on the bumper in front of the car associated with a cx a little evolve, air channeling etc. .

or maybe under the car, there is a lot of air movement there, I can see four small turbines under the front bumper and four under the rear bumper in addition to a good air channel as it must, AIRCRAFT JET STYLE.

circuit breaker mode, OFF (although????)

if you have a station wagon, four small turbines on the back of the roof. whoops

tigrou

[dirk pitt]

already patented by Gaston Lagaffe

[iridium]

but why!?!?!?

we agree on the fact that it is not profitable to move a vehicle to produce energy.
but there if we move the vehicle is to move and not to produce energy.

the vehicle, we are obliged to make it advanced.
whether there is a wind turbine or not.
if we do it advanced there will be a headwind "almost all the time".
Headwind is a brake whether there is a wind turbine or not!

a horizontal wind turbine integrated under the grille would not modify the CX of the vehicle in any way or almost.
the weight of the wind turbine will be negligible compared to the weight of the vehicle.
in short, it will not take more energy to move the vehicle forward with or without a wind turbine.
in short, a wind turbine will not consume more.
on the other hand it will be able to produce energy.

and then this story of performance, was very nice.
we do not supply energy "except for manufacturing" to a wind turbine, its efficiency in use is greater than 100%.

As I have already said, I do not advance the vehicle to produce energy but only to move me.
The wind turbine is there to recover a little energy to increase autonomy.

it is the basic reasoning that needs to be changed.
I don't want to move the vehicle to generate power.
But took advantage of the movement of the vehicle to recover energy.

a+

[dirk pitt]

.
it will not take more energy to move the vehicle forward with or without a wind turbine.
in short, a wind turbine will not consume more.

precisely, if

I know it's not necessarily intuitive but the energy produced by the wind turbine on board will have to be provided by the engine in addition to that normally necessary to move the car forward without a wind turbine.

dura lex hundred lex

[tigrou_838]

yes irridium, my idea of ​​a micro turbine is not bad, even if already patented by gaston, instead of a wind turbine in the grille, I'll see more, four small electric turbines, or rather, a streamlined wind turbine, I think that the term and more appropriate, it allows you to channel the air better and to make the wind turbine microphones turn faster so to better recover electrical energy, so the idea of ​​an airplane reactor or an airplane turbine (for the design)

just for information, I had already had this idea while talking with an ex-engineer from AIRBUS, and who told myself that the idea is very interesting for recovering energy and returning it to the batteries.

maybe he reads it forum I do not know.

tigger on/off mode I don't know anymore

[iridium]

precisely, if

I know it's not necessarily intuitive but the energy produced by the wind turbine on board will have to be provided by the engine in addition to that normally necessary to move the car forward without a wind turbine.

yeah, indeed is not intuitive.
The only law in my eyes that could consume more is the Cx of the vehicle which increases.
If the Cx of the vehicle does not increase, no overconsumption.
If the Cx of the vehicle increases, there is overconsumption.

Do you want to tell me that the Cx of the vehicle increases????

a+

[loop]

Hello

The CX of a vehicle or any other object moving in the air is related to its master-couple (roughly apparent surface in the axis of the flow), the shape and the flow of the air around its outer (possibly inner) surfaces
Your wind turbine, by trying to make it draw energy, will necessarily modify the master torque and/or the air flow. This will be detrimental to CX.
To be convinced of this, just look at what is being done in aeronautics. Master torque, optimized profile and surface.

A+