Uncovering The Genius of Fibonnaci Turbines

[@ZirothTech]

If you enjoyed this video, you're going to love the interactive courses from Brilliant! Use my link at brilliant.org/ziroth/ for 30 days FREE and 20% off for the first 200 subscribers! Do you know of any other real places the Fibonacci sequence appears?

[@antoniopacelli]

Could you make some In Depth Study over Magnetic Recirculation of Ions as Thrusters for Dirigibles as the ones from LokeedMartin or Flying Wales. Taking in consideration that Constant Recirculation of Condensed Atmosphere Humidity could generate much more Passive Ions Production from Water Molecular Charge Interactions with Silver Particles. Basically the more Electricity the more Ions, the more Humidity the more Ions, the both of them Recirculation thanks to Magnetic Separation (Iron Nitride) would Build Up Ions which would be Subsequently Accelerated by Electrical Current Generating Even More Active Ions Thrust... It could becoming An Efficient Low Cost Propulsion for Low Atmosphere Commercial/Defensive/Scientific Dirigibles... [I think Plasma Channel Made already a Video upon that... You should call him and Make a Collabs... He Seems a Fairly Nicely Swaying Guy... He have Good Vibes over New Technologies Research & Development]

[@artcurious807]

conventional wind turbines have a lot of drawbacks (noise pollution, threatening endangered species like bald eagles and owls, toxic materials, landfill waste) and are only being implemented successfully in areas that have less severe weather and more wind. An Archimedes (or logarithmic) turbine would be more efficient, last longer, and cause less damage to the environment, It's an idea worth investing in.

[@antoniopacelli]

​@@artcurious807 I also hate Regular Turbines, but you need a Really Fucked Up Howl or Bald Eagle for Endangering themselves with Blades as Big as Palaces Moving... Theirs Little Big Eyes can See a Rat even from Miles Away... They should be using them for Closing the Rat Lines from WWII, not Using them as Expedient for not Making Turbine Technology Progress... There will be always something else for Carbon Investments... We don't have to Fear Change.. Is The 'Inhumane Status Quo' which have Feared Us...

[@1islam1]

​@@artcurious807⚠️ God has said in the Quran: 🔵 { O mankind, worship your Lord, who created you and those before you, that you may become righteous - ( 2:21 ) 🔴 [He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you. So do not attribute to Allah equals while you know [that there is nothing similar to Him]. ( 2:22 ) 🔵 And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. ( 2:23 ) 🔴 But if you do not - and you will never be able to - then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers.( 2:24 ) 🔵 And give good tidings to those who believe and do righteous deeds that they will have gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow. Whenever they are provided with a provision of fruit therefrom, they will say, "This is what we were provided with before." And it is given to them in likeness. And they will have therein purified spouses, and they will abide therein eternally. ( 2:25 ) ⚠️ Quran

[@lourias]

Wonderfully explained, great comparisons. 👍🏿

[@peter2327]

9:14 The green thing is NOT a savonius turbine. A savonius has to have a gap between the halves through which the wind can flow to the other half that runs towards the wind. If the gap is missing it is a pure resistance runner like for example an anemometer.

[@dennisbecraft1303]

Minor quibble. The version with no gap is included in the drawings of many embodiments of the concept revealed in his patent.

[@violettownmicroenterprises1528]

Ahhemmmm. not a "savonius turbine", its a "Savonius ROTOR"

[@FranzN57]

​@@dennisbecraft1303 In his patent document of 1926 in Austria, Savonius included drawings of a version without a gap as well as a dozen of versions with a gap. He explicitely explained in the text that the gap significantly enhances the performance of the rotor. In his patent document of 1930 in Germany a specific layout of the gap is the essential feature of his patent claim.

[@dennisbecraft1303]

@@FranzN57 Why lecture me? I'm not the one who said it must have the gap to be a savonius.

[@bobbob-gg4eo]

The most important metric of a wind turbine is the levelized cost of energy (LCOE). This metric allows you to compare all forms of energy generation in terms of total energy return during the lifetime of operation per investment dollar spent.

[@jensholm5759]

Not at all. You fx also has to add the local climate by temperaure and dirty air, where there are many buildings. That give people a lot of bills, they are not 100% and also needs for expensive beds.

[@bobbob-gg4eo]

@@jensholm5759 that is all accounted for when calculating LCOE. However, one Interesting thing that LCOE doesn't account for that I am interested in when designing my turbines is the cradle to grave environmental impact of mining, manufacturing, assembling, transporting, installing, operating, and decommissioning each turbine. It's best to keep these in mind during the design phase because ultimately you want to minimize the total emissions and negative environmental impacts involved.

[@dunhillsupramk3]

lets for a moment ignore the fact that wind turbines do affect the eco system for birds and other wildlife... most wind turbines do advertise a life span of 25yrs (which is true in a controlled environment) but we're almost at the end of some of these wind turbine government contracts and the true cost comes out, on avg these wind turbines last 1.5yrs- 2yrs on avg before needing to be replaced and the efficiency actually drops to less than 33% within the 1st 3mts of operation (on avg every 8-10mts the blades is replaced).. this is all thanks to the blades deteriorating much faster than expected, you can use the strongest materials known to man and this would still happen.. the other factors is the weather pattern and storms, in the real world when storms hit wind turbines they need to be replaced, even if you can't see the damage there is micro cracks all over the blades and 90% of the time the motor/ generator is damaged.. now if you think burying nuclear waste was a problem well getting rid of the glass fiber blades is a much MUCH bigger problem (in terms of space requirements) and no they don't biodegrade... as a comparison wind energy takes more ppl and more jobs is created than nuclear energy BUT because there is over 100times more ppl required to make the same power so that factor alone makes wind power more expensive than nuclear energy....

[@bobbob-gg4eo]

@@dunhillsupramk3 I'm interested in learning more. Can you cite your sources?

[@henryrossouw930]

Very interesting.Takes me back to June& July 2000 when I was part of a group of teachers that visited the USA to learn new methods of teaching Science, Maths and Technology.That is where I first learnt about Fibonacci.VERY VERY interesting that nature has the aswers to many of our questions about our lived world.

[@pedtrog6443]

'145% efficiency' raises a big red flag and makes me instantly suspicious. We're into perpetual motion machine territory here before I've even started watching. Assuming no losses - a big assumption - you cannot exceed 100%

[@zakglove6536]

You can if you're comparing it to existing turbine power created. Wind turbines are typically 20-30% efficient if this can hit the Betz limit then it could be 145%.

[@gaborbata8588]

Yeah, claims like this usually come with an asterisk and fine print...

[@rogerphelps9939]

Actually it is even lower. The Betz limit is 59%.

[@seeranos]

To produce those spirals, a living thing's cells need to be able to produce a consistent angles of an irrational rotation. Phi happens to be a good ratio for producing dense packing on a growing surface area. Keep in mind, though, dense packing on a growing surface area ALMOST ALWAYS produces a spiral of some kind if it's not a flat surface.

[@Elrog3]

It doesn't have to replicate the exact number. It just has to get close enough to work. Your computer doesn't account for the whole irrational sequence when it draws a spiral on the screen. The plants don't have to either.

[@shawermus]

​@@Elrog3excuse me, you don't need the perfect 1 to 1 distance between each point of a sphere to call it a sphere, you need to only get juuuust close enough, yet a perfect sphere produces infinite god damn pressure, as it has infinitely small curvature.

[@Elrog3]

@@shawermus "a perfect sphere produces infinite god damn pressure" - This is nonsense rambling.

[@Varadiio]

@@Elrog3 It is, but it's one of those "sounds right" factoids. Rates high on the "truthiness" scale. I'm not far enough into the quantum physics realm to fully explain any of this, but immediately you can understand where it's wrong by knowing that your eyes (and hands, etc.) really do deceive you. It's all an abstraction. You can't infinitely zoom into a sphere, because as you near the atomic scale, the sphere becomes a collection of atoms which definitely do not form infinitely small curvatures because they aren't even touching each other.

[@speed999-uj5kr]

​@@Elrog3not for me ... I am perfectionist

[@dhaval1489]

I am a Bharatiya, I am very thankful you mentioned where the fibinaci number actually came from, much appreciated

[@Fabian3331234333]

It was invented by Mr Fibonacci

[@HansMulliah]

Nope man it was invented by indian mathematien

[@ゆっくり鑑賞アカウント]

Indian claim everything indian. I don't trust it at this point

[@LimLux]

Now you can die in peace..

[@jake-jm8se]

what the hell is bharatiya

[@ivanallen4262]

As the entire surface of the front view of the spinning blades is solid material. Not transparent looking like the gaps between spinning straight blades. Birds might not try to fly through the "danger zone" as they will see the solid metal / plastic body of the turbine as they approach from the front or back. So perhaps fly around it. ☠

[@annaclarafenyo8185]

This is also why it doesn't work--- it's unstable to destructive winds and it's not as efficient as passing the air through to harvest energy.

[@draculakickyourass]

@@annaclarafenyo8185 another trick to get some money from investors who have no clue what they are looking at. I can bet that turbine can not even get close to the efficiency of a medieval windmill,not to mention modern eolics......Why i claim this? Because it have a huge drag and friction with very little active surface . Some people don't realise that a turbine is moved by the inertia of the mass of the air passing thru it. Reason why the eolics have only 3 blades with a lot of space between,having more blades would just swirl the air and increase the drag and the mass of the turbine,lowering efficiency.

[@duudsuufd]

@@annaclarafenyo8185 True. They can't brake them in destructive winds. The traditional blades can turn on their axes to capture less wind.

[@kennethferland5579]

Seems to me that the mountings they are using are sub-optimal, the wishbone bracket should be horizontal with a pair of rotors with opposite spin thus canceling the gyroscopic effect which would inhibit turning into the wind. This pair assembly then sits on a single pivot point where the two wishbones meet (like to back to back 'C' shapes) which is at the same height as the centerline of the spirals, which means far less torque force is needed to rotate it. This could even be expanded to a quad system all pivoting on one point. The reason you need to do this is that the main mast of a wind turbine is costly, so maximizing the amount of air captured by it is critical for cost effective deployments.

[@dennisbecraft1303]

Ignoring efficiency of scale & costs of complexity, adjacency interactions impeding ambient airflow etc., aren't you?

[@skyrask1948]

@@dennisbecraft1303 I would guess that having two counter rotating gear linked turbines in parallel with small clearance would increase efficiency thanks to high pressure zone forming in middle creating additional lift in direction of rotations.

[@dennisbecraft1303]

@@skyrask1948 Possibly, if it worked something like an augmenter shroud. I'm guessing too, but I was imagining the resulting higher pressure spot wouldn't be ideal because it's asymmetrical, like not having the rotor aimed directly into the wind. Established theory only gets you so far, then you have to test your own hunches empirically. A 15% improvement on a very old drag design is impressive.

[@planterion7969]

I don't know if placing many of these so close is a good idea. In conventional wind turbines a lot of care goes into placing them in a way that minimizes their effect on each other. I'd assume that if you placed two spirals right next to each other, the effect of the air being diverted to the side would be reduced, and the uneven load throughout one cycle would cause more significant material fatigue. Plus, if the rotation of the turbine was hindering it turning to the wind, you could just place the turbine further back, or add fins behind it, like you see in some old-school water pump wind turbines.

[@danbanowetz]

Why does the thumbnail say 145% efficiency? I hate when people lie in their advertising. Unlike and unsubscribed.

[@morsecodeisawalrus3444]

I second this

[@northrocks]

yup. hate clickbaits

[@tymcat]

I agree - morally. But it got me to watch it. Advertising sells and as a design (advertising) professional who hates lies, I must admit that sometimes a sporty surface gets the edge.

[@gunnaralv]

Me too. Hate it.

[@Greyzonecompliant]

Do they mean 145% of a regular wind turbine then its plausible. But getting 145% of the actual wind energy (as the clickbait implies). Is just plain stupid.

[@AhamKaustubhGaur]

As an Indian, I really appreciate your work and thanks for giving us credit. Many mathematical concepts are originated by Indians (Hindus, jains, etc.) but most westerners just avoid giving credits.

[@raufjaleel8317]

Here we go again.

[@aurigo_tech]

9:09 you are welcome for that 1second of footage from my backyard.

[@kylexrex]

Haha

[@Friendly_Gamer_Mom]

Thank you for your video contribution. Wind energy paired with solar could essential help all single family home to be less grid dependant.

[@ZirothTech]

Sorry the credit wasn't clear in the corner - It's an automatic layer and I should have changed the colour of!

[@paul1979uk2000]

@@Friendly_Gamer_Mom True, wind and solar would complement each other really well on the home, solar is effective in summer weather whereas winds is effective in winter weather as well as nighttimes and at pretty much any time of the year, which if I recall, wind is stronger in winter compared to summer and is also a little stronger at nighttime when solar doesn't generate anything. The other potential advantage of having both, by having a more consistent energy being generated, you'll need less of a buffer when it comes to how many batteries you need. But we'll have to see, we've heard so many promising ideas for wind power in urban areas but most just don't work that well, but in recent times, we are seeing a lot more creative ideas on the table, so if any of them can generate some meaningful energy, be cheap enough to buy, it could become a game changer.

[@fire17102]

I think the most important thing is Cost Per Watt, across all scales. So im wondering whats is the cost of manufacturing vs relative production improvement compared to traditional turbines. Beautiful video

[@SolarWebsite]

Even more important is cost per Wh (or kWh, MWh, etc).

[@fire17102]

@@SolarWebsite yea that's what I meant, can my original comment be interpreted in any other way? He touched on this at the very end, I guess if you know the flat geometry you can bend sheets to this shape, but will they hold the shape in fast winds? I need to see a home made version of this

[@bobbob-gg4eo]

The most important metric of a wind turbine is LCOE

[@SolarWebsite]

@@fire17102 Uhm, well, you did say watt...

[@kennethferland5579]

@@fire17102 Actually your original statement is perfectly valid and the industry standard. Because reneable energy has a high upfront instalation cost and almost no marginal cost the primary investment choice is made on a metric of cost per unit of generating capacity aka (dollars per watt) which is driven by manufacturing and instalation of the equipment. In the end more detailed calculations are needed to determine profitability but by then many other non-technical factors like interest rates, tax incentives etc are also involved.

[@davidonfim2381]

The whole idea that some plants use that arrangement of leaves to maximize the amount of sunlight they get has never made any sense to me. First off, the number of plants that do that is quite small. Opposite leaves, whorled leaves, alternate leaves on the same plane, and other growth forms (grass-like plants, vines, columnar structures, etc) are VERY common. Second, I don't think there's much of a correlation here- not every plant wants to maximize its exposure to light (think of plants living in the desert) and many of those that don't still have a spiral pattern of leaves/branches (some cacti, aloes, yuccas, things like that). Many of the plants that you'd think would really want to maximize light exposure (understory plants, those living in high latitudes, etc) don't have such spiral patterns (trillium leaves, mayapples, clovers/Oxalis, Claytonia, most peperomias, etc). Third, you literally practically never find these spirals out in nature. Many of the examples people use have been strongly artificially selected. Some of them don't even have anything to do with light exposure (eg. pine cones, sunflower seed heads, or pineapples). Even the plants that, under ideal conditions, grow as those nice little spirals, often don't grow like that in the real world. They are often bent towards one side or another, the spacing between the spirals varies, etc. Fourth, that explanation only really works in a VERY limited set of conditions- light coming directly from above, and plants with leaves that are very close to each other and that can't move. However, the sun moves across the sky so that the light is practically never coming straight from above, plants are practically never oriented perfectly straight up and have many horizontal or diagonal components, the leaves are often not all that close to each other, and individual leaves can also move to face towards the light. No, I don't buy the light explanation for most plants (even many with a spiral pattern of growth). I think the real reasons involve just the fact that developmental processes are iterative and the fact that packing things into spirals is often an efficient way of packing a lot of things in a relatively small space.

[@3starsfell]

In case nobody knows who created this, it was Victor schauberger. He wrote a book we should all be reading, called copy and comprehend nature

[@hiltonian_1260]

There’s a number called the Betz Limit. It’s the maximum theoretical efficiency of any device extracting energy from moving air. That number is 59.3%. No actual physical turbine achieves this. At best, they get 80% of that, or 47% efficiency. When you look up the actual numbers on whirligig turbines like this one the efficiency is below that. There’s a reason that all commercial wind turbines look the same; three bladed, horizontal axis, slender blades, upwind. It’s not lack of imagination. Designers have tried thousands of designs over the past 60 years and that’s what works best. Please ignore the whirligig makers and their “ancient knowledge” grift.

[@daniele.ronzulli912]

the 145% efficiency has triggered my senses :D

[@silverhammer7779]

Anyone trying to claim that anything has over-unity efficiency is , 1) in possession of the universe's single exception to the Second Law of Thermodynamics; 2) is ignorant of simple physics; or, 3) is a grifting bullshit artist. Usually some combination of #2 and #3.

[@Skank_and_Gutterboy]

145% efficiency is total garbage and they've completely dumped all credibility.

[@jonathanmacdonald9609]

This clearly means 145% of the efficiency of other turbines, which is commonly stated as "145% efficiency compared to other designs."

[@Skank_and_Gutterboy]

@@jonathanmacdonald9609 "Clearly" = "Pulled it out of my @$$"

[@silverhammer7779]

@@jonathanmacdonald9609 This was not explicitly stated. Words mean things, not only the words you use but also the words you fail to use.

[@infinitedaves]

Very similar to Viktor Schauberger's impeller designs from the early 1900's. "Comprehend and copy nature" is a good watch, we can learn a lot about efficiency from the natural world.

[@dareese6778]

pee on hydrants, no flushing. 😮❤

[@davebutler3905]

Nature doesn't use many rotating components... Does it?

[@3.k]

@@davebutler3905 A spiral does not have to rotate to be a spiral.

[@0005yuki]

He wasn’t joking when it literally appears everywhere. Wonderful video ziroth

[@Syncrotron9001]

Its been in film since at least 1939, its the Yellow Brick Road from Oz

[@kommo1]

Okay the wind turbine in the middle off the road is awesome.

[@SixballQ45]

yup - harness the air from the constant traffic is genius

[@briankleinschmidt3664]

145% efficiency! that's astounding. I'll take 69% of one.

[@dimitri877]

The biggest win for these types of wind generators is that despite lower efficiency they have a broader operating range. A traditional three-bladed wind generator needs clean air to reach peak efficiency and cannot be used under or over a certain threshold. They need to be high up in an open space. Spiral types along with upright models usually only have one limit: speed. There are 'folding' designs out there which tuck in the blades to reduce surface area in order to stay within the 'speed limit', increasing the 'harvesting bandwidth' even more.

[@beansnrice321]

If you're into spirals, check out the Japanese martial art Aikido. Many spirals in nature are the natural and stable resolution of dynamic and opposite forces confronting each other. Such as when a high pressure zone hits a low pressure zone and a tornado forms as a result. Aikido forms dynamic spirals by actively receiving their opponents attack. In a sense the Aikidoka is the low pressure zone to their opponent's high pressure zone. A predictable spiral forms and the Aikidoka is trained to almost ride the vortex of the spiral to use the clash as a way to throw or pin their opponent.

[@jesseflores9087]

Aikido has proven to be a farse in real life application

[@Nebukanezzer]

That's pretty cool

[@BlueAmpharos]

When I read "Japanese" I thought you were about to troll everyone by recommending the Japanese horror manga about spirals, Uzumaki XD

[@wingnutbert9685]

The spirals can also be seen in Aikido, in Steven Seagal's spiraling out of control weight gain. His spiraling out of control ego. As well as his spiraling toilet full of schit, farcical arts demo's.

[@mugnuz]

but aikido is not really a martial art but a performance art

[@timothysands5537]

As a design engineer who also dabbles in involute gear tooth profiles with Inventor AutoDesk's equation line, I was elated to hear about all the various ratios and the history of how they came to be derived. What an exceptional video; you have my subscription. 👏

[@koiyujo1543]

some other engineers are saying this stuff is hype or clickbat marketing what can you say about that I'm asking your view on that?

[@MF-jo6jt]

145% efficiency does not exist its just a selling talk If you exceed 100% you create energy over unity which is impossible with the current physics

[@michaelvanallen6400]

*All practical tests show that small wind turbines hardly generate any electricity! And only at very high costs!* Because there is hardly any wind close to the ground. But 100% more wind generates 800% more electricity! Wind close to ground is also extremely gusty, which usually shortens the service life. Only if you need to be self-sufficient from the power grid, you should erect the largest possible wind turbine on a high mast. With solar modules, on the other hand, you can reliably generate green electricity for 25 years at approx. 3-10 cent/kWh!

[@bryanoneill5047]

I finally understand the Fibonucci set, thankyou, great video.

[@michaelbuckers]

Modern 3-bladed turbines are already more than 80% efficient. Using more blades you can get marginally more efficiency, at the cost of an extra blade - which is not a small amount. 3 blades is just about the perfect balance between extracting as much of wind power as possible and the lifetime cost of the turbine. Also any efficiency gains at slow water speeds mean absolutely nothing because slow moving water hardly contains any extractable power to begin with, the turbine cost will eclipse its lifetime electricity production value.

[@JohnThomas-ci9ml]

Being an avid fan of all things Φ, I found your video instructive and fascinating! A question I have is, "How do such turbines fare in really strong winds?", as conventional turbines can feather to prevent damage in such conditions. Other commentators have suggested the 'economics' are paramount considerations but I tend to view things through a resource-based economy lens rather than an imaginary usury-based bankonomic one with the utter nonsense of elastic & daily changing values of bankster currencies. I'd certainly would like to see houses fitted with these Fibonacci turbines to help lighten the load on both the power grid and our environmental footprints though I see no need to actually connect these turbines to the grid.

[@tealkerberus748]

Just don't mount them on the roof of any building that wasn't specifically engineered for them. The vibrations of a wind turbine can shake a building apart over the life of the turbine. Sticking them on a pole in the back yard also makes them much more accessible, because you can lay the pole down when you need to do maintenance or repairs. Of course, the turbines that have a vertical axis fix this by putting all the most wearing parts at ground level.

[@semaJ455]

Interesting. In my opinion, you explain things in a clear and engaging manner.

[@brokenacoustic]

I've delved into that rabbit hole a few times, its really easy to get lost, but if you take a step back and get an overview, its pretty clear the Fibonacci sequence is an inherent aspect of the way our universe functions. "Is the universe a fractal that can be calculated in equation? Is it Fibonaccis perfect golden spiral or is it just my imagination? Does the cosmic web of super clusters containing vast quantities of galaxies, that each within have countless systems that just like ours contain this curiosity?"

[@dennisbecraft1303]

No

[@JohnThomas-ci9ml]

Addressing your first sentence, I wholeheartedly agree that the Fibonacci sequence is indeed a fundamental & underlying aspect of the entire physical universe. There is an unassailable reason for the prominence of the Fibonacci sequence & Φ across the universe. I hope to elaborate on this shortly on KZbin & other platforms.

[@petterlarsson7257]

@@JohnThomas-ci9ml no

[@markhughes7927]

‘Crowd-resourcing sun-flowers’ - v. good!

[@jabyers]

Great video, look forward to checking your other videos. Not sure why there is '145%' in the Title Graphic, the one representing the video, it may stop many serious people watching it FYI.

[@jeremytaylor3532]

It seems to refer to the the study that found spiral blades to be up to 45% more efficient, than traditional blades. Thus assuming 100% of a traditional blade you would then have 145%. This is poor math at least and clickbait at worst. Hopefully someone will do a better video on the topic, as there are a few minor errors in this one.

[@edschultheis9537]

145% efficiency turned me off to this channel. I won't be back. Ed Schultheis, PE Mechanical design engineer and manufacturing consultant for 35 years

[@The-KP]

This was really one of the best researched and reported videos in a while.. long on info, short on channel begging. Well done

[@zangetsu6638]

that intro was tooo long

[@sbdruitt]

Loving the history/mythology crossover/backstory. Another great video!

[@MegaBanne]

All logarithmic spirals grow and shrink based on the same ratio every turn. That is what it means to be logarithmic. It could be that every turn doubles in size, meaning the ratio is 2. It could be that it increases/decreases in size by a ratio of 1.000001. It could be that it increases/decreases in size by a ratio of 9 million. The Fibonacci ratio is just one with very specific properties that relates to anything that is fractal. Nature is full of fractals. Seashells are not fractal and therefor do not need to follow the Fibonacci ratio. Natural spirals like the ones of the seashells has nothing to do with this number. Most of them are not even close. The Fibonacci spiral is very aggressive compared to that of a conch.

[@masterofthegame8764]

According to Betz's law, no wind turbine of any mechanism can capture more than 16/27 (59.3%) of the kinetic energy in wind!!

[@silverhammer7779]

Agreed. Don't you just hate it when someone plays fast and loose with the definition of "efficiency" and then tries to imply that something they're trying to sell you is an over-unity machine?

[@protoborg]

@@silverhammer7779What really bugs me is when people tried to imply that somehow it is possible to get more than 100% efficiency from ANYTHING. That is, by definition, impossible.

[@silverhammer7779]

@@protoborgYep. Unless they repealed the Second Law of Thermodynamics while we weren't looking... 🤔

[@SixballQ45]

@@silverhammer7779 Laws are meant to be broken...

[@silverhammer7779]

@@SixballQ45 Tell ya what...why don't you come up with something that actually produces energy over 100% efficiency and get back to us? Then you definitely won't have to rely on public assistance, and you can finally move out of mom's basement.

[@BTheHeretic]

Honestly I think the biggest advantage these have is that they look quite pretty. I could imagine these built as wind sculptures even if they didn't produce any power.

[@zeitgeist785]

Didn’t bother watching the video - seeing efficiency of greater than 100% told me all I needed about the credibility of the information.

[@TIMMEH19991]

I never understood the golden ratio until now. Thank you for explaining it so well!

[@drillerdev4624]

Kudos for mentioning our favorite tinker, mate!

[@boblossie3192]

Had to leave a separate comment. This is brilliant. When these discoveries are made hundreds of years ago - why on earth do we stray from them?! Three steps forward - Two steps back.

[@tzenophile]

Because they don't work better when you factor in the total cost/benefit. They must be a lot heavier than a standard turbine covering the same swept area, and as you scale that up to 10-20 MW turbines of today, imagine the inevitably increased mechanical and material challenges. If they were truly better, we would of course use them.

[@VictorY-mu6zp]

I missed the mentions of Pax Scientific who are making mixers based on the golden spiral like the Lilly Impeller. They have some turbine designs as well.

[@Knyex]

The reason Phi is seen so often in plants is simply because it's irrational, there's no mysticism there Many plants with spiral configurations follow different numbers for their spirals and some like mint forego the spiral configuration entirely and just grow leaves at a 90° angle. And the reason phi specifically seems to be so much more common than other irrational numbers is because it's the "most irrational" number, as in the hardest number to approximate using rational values.

[@Inertia888]

well… that just sounds irrational to me 😜

[@goolash1000]

A fun experiment to run would be to repeat your test using a stroboscope to test rotational speed from the space heater, then try again with the turbine mounted vertically to see which spins fastest.

[@peetsnort]

This would be lovely in capetown the southeaster is pumping this time of the years and the electricity blackouts has gotten worse

[@SolarWebsite]

Without the grid, you will need a battery for stable power.

[@speed999-uj5kr]

​@@SolarWebsitefactually incorrect

[@SolarWebsite]

@@speed999-uj5kr If you're running anything more advanced than an incandescent bulb or toaster on unstabilised power from solar and/or wind, good luck with buying new comouters etc regularly.

[@GregAtlas]

Assuming this is more efficient: There would likely have to be some sort of shroud that could be automatically put around the turbine in order to control the speed or even completely stop flow all together. The standard propeller types can turn their blades to get less wind power in addition to having brakes in the system otherwise high winds can damage them or even rip them apart purely from the centrifugal forces in extreme cases. Having this ability to stop the turbine is also important for maintenance.

[@beyondfossil]

Such an interesting video! For the wind turbines, another practical problem for Fibonacci blades is they need to be able to be "feathered" to slow down or completely stop in high winds -- or whenever the turbine operators need to stop the blade rotation. The traditional horizontal blades would just "feather" so they're parallel with the wind so that all wind rotation force ceases. But the Fibonacci blades don't appear to have this capability.

[@FrankLowe1949]

145% more efficient compared to what.?? Is it like a dam overflowing at 107% just asking??

[@pcka12]

You cannot have 145% (145/100) efficiency! 100% (100/100 or '1' (one)) "is your lot"! In other words 'totally' efficient (which never really exists).

[@zangetsu6638]

excuse me, but where in this video is this "145% EFFICIENCY" ??? Where does that number even come from? and why is "145% EFFICIENCY" plastered over the thumbnail like clickbait?

[@capitancodigo2165]

You clearly studied carnot engine.

[@zangetsu6638]

@@capitancodigo2165 ?

[@Walter-Montalvo]

1, 4, 5. So 1 + 4 = 5. So Fibonacci like sequence I guess?

[@aaronsmith593]

Best wind turbine is one that works, number one. Number two, generates electricity at low wind speeds. Number three, survives high winds and doesn't self destruct.😊

[@jorissimaitis7619]

Super fascinating and exciting

[@williammaxwell1919]

One spiral that is fascinating is the spiral that the eliptical orbits the planets make as our star moves through space

[@marcusreilly4935]

Thank you very much. It's amazing👍❤

[@NoFaceFiles]

Wow...I had almost this exact thought not too long ago its inspiring to see people are actually doing something with this design. What if we made each spiral have an airfoil cross section curved on the bottom side so there would be two sources of lift plus the drag? Or maybe just on the ends where the spirals don't overlap.

[@joehendrickson3156]

Thanks for taking the time to explain the many subject matters in this video.

[@bigfishoutofwater3135]

This concept seems promising but feels like an early iteration. There's too much surface at the outer edge which moves the fastest which is why I suspect it didn't do as well at higher speed. Wind turbines use 3 blades because that the smallest number that still balance forces that would wear them out. I wonder if a single bladed turbine in a spiral shape could be made to be perfectly balanced. That would need a lot of precision.

[@JohnDir-xw3hf]

Why overcomplicate and over engineere? 🤦🏼

[@dennisbecraft1303]

​​@@JohnDir-xw3hfThat's not complex or overengineered if it reduces to a single spiral and results in even a few percent increase in efficiency from now on. I see it as comparable to winglets, slats, washout & vortex generators on airplane wings.

[@etle113]

If we look at it, it's basically just a regular turbine with very large blades. Like the classical old farmer wind mill, the large surface is more efficient at low wind speed because it is hit by a larger number of slow air molecules. However, at high wind speed, where the wind is much more powerful, the large surface area acts like a brick wall and pushes most of the air around the turbine, instead of through it, where its energy can be extracted. . Regular wind turbine don't break the air as much, allowing for more power extraction from the high speed air passing through. So it really is a question of choice: Does one wants to efficiently extract a little power, most of the time, from slow moving air or a lot of power from fast moving air, but only when it's windy?

[@tim40gabby25]

Have a look at rotating spiral flagella - nature suggests this must be efficient, though possibly only at small scale. Add those bumps on whale flippers for good measure.

[@dennisbecraft1303]

@@tim40gabby25 You need more relevant analogues for that to be convincing, IMO.

[@Hellsong89]

Also thing to note, this design while may be better at lower speeds witch would be really nice in not so windy areas, fails moment you add in the real life problems like snow and ice. From the looks of it, this will just gobble up all the ice into the groove and fill it over time. Depending on the material used, you could use black non sticky material to melt off any ice forming, or use heating coil in the center axis, but like with any other wind turbine this uses energy and defeats the point, not allowing the turbine even spin when enough ice has formed during calm weather. Also due the surface area that would require chinook helicopter to spray enough ethanol to defrost the turbine, instead of smaller helicopter used today to defrost them.

[@AdrieKooijman]

A turbine slowly spinning in low wind still produces hardly any energy. It might look nice but just like solar panels on a cloudy day in December they are practically useless.

[@Spdman401]

That's pretty cool stuff.

[@Skank_and_Gutterboy]

145% efficient? You just dumped all credibility.

[@miketrissel5494]

If you were to take the 3 individual blades, and isolate them, there is another amazing possibility. If they could be placed on a scissor mechanism, much like the mechanical advance weights of an older car distributor, as the speed, or volume of the air increases, they could throw out from the center, to harvest even more wind power as it becomes available. Kind of a variable torque, dictated by available wind.

[@TheMythh]

why is 50% of this video just giving examples of fibonnaci irl?

[@keithnance4209]

Excellent episode! The market needs something like this for smaller to medium sized applications…more distributed power generation leads to energy security!

[@jacole1234]

I agree with this completely!

[@tzenophile]

Does it? Small wind turbines have been on the market for 100+ years. If there had been a real niche for them, why haven't this niche manifested in sales? There is a clear economy of scale here, sorry.

[@keithnance4209]

@@tzenophile there has been a stigma on ‘alternative’ energy generation for these past decades, driven by marketing FUD, scalability, poorly designed systems, etc…but if the price of these small systems can compete with Solar’s major price declines then the opportunity to use both types makes sense. Even if perhaps a supplemental component.

[@tzenophile]

@@keithnance4209 I would very much like to think so too. Having invested in solar and a battery (which work great) and living in a very windy place it would be wonderful to top up with a wind turbine. But I can't find any serious product (=HAWT) that would seem to recover its cost before breaking down. It would also have to be so big/tall that it would be hard to get a building permit. And with the solar and battery my remaining needs are only 2-3 MWh in the winter months, so the rational thing to do is to buy that from the Big Wind companies nearby.

[@kylexrex]

Your haircut is a golden ratio

[@FireFox64000000]

Another design that's related to this would be the lily impeller. I highly recommend you look it up.

[@timekiIIr]

where can one find the file you used to 3d print the turbine?

[@visnuexe]

He said In the video it was located at "Easy Cut Solutions" on KZbin. I am not sure how it is spelled out, but use your fractal imagination to find it! Lol!

[@dudeistpreist5721]

We have hooked up people's brains when looking at art and proportion seems to be the best standard of beauty.

[@PhysicsViolator]

There’s no such thing as efficiencies above 100% because otherwise you have invented perpetual motion LOL give me a break.

[@Gamert80]

I think it was comparing this shape to others, like it's 145% more efficient than another shape.

[@marceloamazonas2518]

Just one name for you - Viktor Schauberger... LOL

[@humblemonkm61]

For craps sakes! It's done for the messed up KZbin algorithms, if thumbnails don't create some sort of hyperbole or drama then the videos are seen less. It's a controversy, but it does indicate the psychological makeup of human beings. Because the data shows people click on drama over accurate information & since KZbin makes its money on clicks the algorithm demands drama in the thumbnails. The creator is forced to play this algorithm game in order just to compete & stay online. So stop getting upset with the creators it's KZbin choosing to create this dramatic overkill of how videos are displayed.

[@loiskimberleyplayer]

Another amazing video - love seeing engineering / nature crossovers 🌀

[@kaoskronostyche9939]

Next video - How to make one at home using common materials.

[@Inertia888]

My mind is already trying to find the least expensive way of doing this. First, I will plot various wind speeds in the area where I am able to set up a small wind turbine. Next, I think I will have to decide which plastic material to use. I don't think I will use 3D printing. I think ordering a small stack of appropriately sized sheets of my chosen material will do. Then, I will need to measure out the correct shape, and cut each sheet to size. Mounting each fin on a central axis will be the hardest part, I am guessing. Don't know how I'll do that yet. But it sounds like a fun, and (not prohibitively) expensive project to get into.

[@RuneRelic]

The Pyamid and Golden ratio is actuallly correct when you consider that the Golen ratio was used to approximate Pi via the fbonacci series. It is oft quoted as a graient of 280 cubits to 220 (1760 / 2 / 280) usings 22/7 as Pi which is 55/21 x 6/5 Herodotus quotes a vairation of this using The area of the face being equal to the square of the height using sqrt 8 x 100 cubits = sqrt 80,000 This is a Pyamid with gradient sqrt Phi : 1. The relaitonship between 280 and 100x sqrt 8 is the relationship between the 28 finger cubits, the 20 finger remen diagonal cubit and the 144/7" Greek cane cubit. These scale in the ration sqrt 0.98:1 (effectively 99%), which is exactly the same as the 30 finger sumerian cubits using 21 sides as a downscale factor of sqrt 0.98 Thus 280 remen diagonal royal cubits = 282+ 28 finger cubits. Thus 280 cane cubits = 282+ remen diagonal cubits.

[@parkersmith5212]

I forgot this video was even about turbines because I was so invested in just learning about the spirals until he brought the turbines up again.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

in·fin·i·ty MATHEMATICS a number greater than any assignable quantity or countable number (symbol ∞). What is the meaning of zero in Webster's dictionary? a. : the arithmetical symbol 0 or 0̸ denoting the absence of all magnitude or quantity. b. : additive identity. specifically : the number between the set of all negative numbers and the set of all positive numbers. Zero is the most important number in mathematics and is both a real and an imaginary number with a horizon through it. Zero-dimensional space is the most important dimension in physics and is both a real and an imaginary dimension with an event horizon through it.

[@samuelyigzaw]

I like your thinking. Check out the Riemann Sphere for a geometric framework that unites all numbers, from 0 to infinity.

[@dareese6778]

& it comes before page 1. 😅🎉

[@ready1fire1aim1]

@@samuelyigzaw There's a distinction between zero and nonzero numbers since 0 is not-natural and nonzero numbers are natural. That's how 0D can be dimensionless and timeless with 'dimensionless' being satisfied by '0D' and 'timeless' being satisfied by 0D being 'not-natural' so outside of space (1D, 2D, 3D) and time (4D).

[@Danji_Coppersmoke]

It won't scale well due to weight. One of the major limitation is the main bearing (cost) holding the turbine. For the same bearing loading capacity, it is better to carry larger diameter 3 blades with similar weight than this turbine with smaller diameter.

[@Trizzer89]

The reason the fibonacci sequence works in flowers is that it maximizes the spread of the flowers. Every other ratio will create some spirals with gaps in between, failing to fill the whole volume. I can see how this increases turbine efficiency by a small amount

[@vailias]

Phi is an emergent ratio from the algorithm of adding two numbers in a sequence to get the next number. The ratio between them will always approach phi regardless of starting digits. The Fibonacci sequence just happens to be a simple integer starting point.

[@kenb4849]

You need to discuss how it responds to high wind conditions and show a comparative curve of power vs wind speed up to the point of traditional turbine trail off or destruction. Thanks, Ken.

[@jayd6224]

Thank you for giving an objective and non-cultish video about these topics. This video was very professional and entertaining without being conspiratorial. Ofcourse I am all for fun conspiracy theories, but these ones are simply annoying. Thankyou for your professionalism on the topic.

[@billshiff2060]

Extra benefit= Birds less likely to be hit by those turbines.

[@histreeonics7770]

Generating the formula for the nth term of the Fibonacci sequence is a simple enough task for a homework problem after a first lesson in Z-transforms. The Z-transform solution for the Fibonacci recursion relationship generates a polynomial whose roots are those of the algebraic equation 1/x=1+x, whose roots are the golden ratio and its inverse. From that you get that the Fibonacci sequences goes as phi^n + phi^-n with coefficients that depend upon the first two values you feed into the Fibonacci recursion relationship. Hope you have fun doing the above.

[@visnuexe]

Just loved this practical explanation of wind turbines and its roots in history, and nature of the ferbinacci, or golden ratio's difference against the archimedes spiral. Am hoping to make some of these for electric generating project.

[@protoborg]

Archimedes spiral is MUCH more efficient.

[@waschklaus]

I love the video. Do you have a link to your 3d printed wind turbine

[@YTareWOKEBastards]

100% is max 145% is a load of BS...

[@polandsgarden]

So you can only increase the number 4 by 100% to 8? Lmao of course you can quantify percentage increases over 100

[@zangetsu6638]

@@polandsgarden increase over what?

[@Ed-ty1kr]

Wrong... Everything is relative to itself, meaning that turbine can never exceed 100% of it's output. It's output can only be an inclease of 145% that of a different turbine, but he never specified which turbine he was comparing it to. Which basically makes the video no more scientific that the rest of the clickbait videos on youtube. Large turbines that cover vast areas of wind, will still be more efficient due to their ability to capture large areas of wind, and making a huge contraption in the shape of a seashell, not only can't be shipped efficiently, but will require a far greater set of bearings, gears, along and vast amounts if gear oil. As in 145% as much gear oil, as it takes to operate current large industrial wind turbines. Speaking of gear oil, ever look up how much gear oil a large turbine requires on its annual gear oil replacment? But I will admit that is a nice propeller the kid has there, I recall playing with something similar made of confetty paper when I was kid.

[@nevermindmeijustinjectedaw9988]

i wonder how many of these urban models you need to noticably reduce wind strengths around skyscrapers, especially considering that skyscrapers usually only make up a very few percent of the total area of a city, whereas these could be placed all over it.

[@0055-g3i]

Congratulations to the increasing of the efficiency

[@liamredmill9134]

This was a fantastic documentary,thanks

[@lordreginaldfilibuster]

thanks for all the gret info, one thing at the end you said about them not replacing the others I disagree with, the other need to be higher up and further apart to not disrupt eachother, but I imagine the spiral you can have a small field of them packed together at different heights or on walls more out of sight from the skyline view. how close can they go together? infront of one another and abrest? diagonaly even.

[@dl200010]

With these turbines I can see another advantage. With the typical horizontal 3-4 straight blade a bird will fly through it and possibly get hit. With the spiral a bird will always see it and not try to fly through and thus not get hit.

[@Zo-hc2fn]

I am considering a vertical axis wind turbine that looks exactly like a tree, I call it : e-tree the trunk of the e-tree is brown, the spinning sails (blades) are green, attached to the trunk of the e-tree are features of : wifi/mobile network, light and power outlet, to charge a car for example

[@mohbeans]

Spelling = Fibonacci. Great video, thanks.

[@jeffhardin2131]

Zeroth, at 12.27 you mention an increase of 15%. I calculate this actually at 45.45%. 1.4545 x 33 = 48. This is a much more significant increase than the 15 % which would be 37.95. Overall very good discussion.

[@grzegorzkapica7930]

First thing I am thinking about is; how fish or birds would react when entering the turbine area. I am thinking; they may actually be much better off, than when hitting a propeller-turbine's blade. Second thing is; how material efficient this turbine is.

[@MatthewSuffidy]

Like you said the ratio is defined by the statement a/b = b/(a+b). Using the quadratic formula that is (sqrt5+1)/2 If that is specifically useful to any physics application or not, maybe. There may be some application for example in reducing product cutting waste. Looking at these propellers, they may be mostly effective in their surface contact to air, and possible complex interaction with the air caused by vacuum forces.

[@gregkral4467]

fascinating how natural patterns are so efficient. Fun and wonderfully informative vid. Subbed. Thanks for a wonderfully educational video.

[@hillarious2393]

Pretty interesting, dude, i would like to try it on my backyard

[@timofthomas]

Really like this idea, and tempted to see if I can make one at home to help charge the car!

[@jchoneandonly]

We should just ditch solar and wind power on a grid scale entirely. Power individual homes with solar and maybe a little bigger stuff. Power the grid primarily with nuclear power.

[@AdlerMow]

In small turbines, price and cost of maintenance is more important than actual efficiency. If it's cheap enough, one can simply scale it up a bit.

[@pappaflammyboi5799]

You can't create something with efficiency higher than 100%. That would create "free" energy, a common comparison to fraudsters and conmen.

[@rowanshole]

Wow- free energy!