A portion of the disclosure of this patent document and its attachments contain material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the United States Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyrights whatsoever.
Exemplary embodiments generally relate to development of renewable energy resources and, in particular, to the development of renewable wind energy. Exemplary embodiments generally relate to structures that support wind turbines or antennas, to dynamo plants, and to fluid reaction surfaces (i.e., impellers) and, more particularly, to structures with bracing or guys.
High oil prices have renewed our interest in wind energy. Wind turbines are being planned and built to convert wind energy into electricity. Some wind turbines are built atop masts, while other wind turbines are supported by towers. A mast is a vertical structure supported by one or more stay cables (or “guys”). The stay cables provide stability to the mast to reduce oscillations from wind and seismic events. A tower, on the other hand, is a larger, stronger, and more expensive self-supporting structure designed to withstand the wind and seismic events. While the mast is less expensive than the self-supporting tower, additional land is needed for the stay cables. Moreover, the mast must withstand a sizable portion of the wind and seismic events. Often, then, design tradeoffs are required when stay cables are used.
The features, aspects, and advantages of the exemplary embodiments are better understood when the following Detailed Description is read with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The exemplary embodiments will now be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings. The exemplary embodiments may, however, be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein. These embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete and will fully convey the exemplary embodiments to those of ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, all statements herein reciting embodiments, as well as specific examples thereof, are intended to encompass both structural and functional equivalents thereof. Additionally, it is intended that such equivalents include both currently known equivalents as well as equivalents developed in the future (i.e., any elements developed that perform the same function, regardless of structure).
Thus, for example, it will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that the diagrams, schematics, illustrations, and the like represent conceptual views or processes illustrating the exemplary embodiments. Those of ordinary skill in the art further understand that the exemplary cables described herein are for illustrative purposes and, thus, are not intended to be limited to any particular manufacturing process and/or manufacturer.
As used herein, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless expressly stated otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “includes,” “comprises,” “including,” and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof. It will be understood that when an element is referred to as being “connected” or “coupled” to another element, it can be directly connected or coupled to the other element or intervening elements may be present. As used herein, the term “and/or” includes any and all combinations of one or more of the associated listed items.
It will also be understood that, although the terms first, second, etc. may be used herein to describe various elements, these elements should not be limited by these terms. These terms are only used to distinguish one element from another.
Exemplary embodiments conserve energy and further develop renewable energy sources. Exemplary embodiments describe a superior stay cable for vertical and non-vertical structures, such as monopoles, wind turbines, antennas, and buildings. The stay cable of this invention is constructed using parallel wires, whereas conventional stay cables are wound strands of wires. The parallel wire construction has superior strength and stiffness when compared to conventional strand cable. Moreover, exemplary embodiments have a much smaller diameter and weigh less than conventional strand cable. Exemplary embodiments thus describe a superior stay cable that reduces the costs of monopoles, wind turbines, antennas, and buildings.
Because the stay cable is stronger than conventional designs, the structures may be reduced in size and/or weight. Wind turbines, antennas, and any other generally vertical structure may thus be cheaper to manufacture, cheaper to transport, and cheaper to build. Masts that support wind turbines, for example, may be smaller, lighter, and cheaper, thus improving a cost-benefit analysis of alternative wind energy. Less material and labor are required to manufacture and erect wind turbines. Smaller and lighter designs also reduce transportation costs. Exemplary embodiments thus reduce the costs of alternative wind energy and reduce reliance on fossil fuel.
The mast 32 is supported by the at least one stay cable 22. Each stay cable has an upper end 50 attached to an upper region 52 of the mast 32. Each stay cable 22 also has a lower, opposite end 54 that is anchored to some point, such as earth 56. The stay cable 22 is tensioned and stressed to stabilize the mast 32. The stay cable 22 may extend an entire length L (illustrated as reference numeral 60) from the upper end 50 to the lower, opposite end 54. Dampers or other shock-absorbing devices may also be used, as is known.
The stay cable 22, though, does not collide with the rotating blade 40. Because the stay cable 22 has superior strength to similarly-sized conventional designs, the stay cable 22 may be orientated inside the spinning blade 40. Conventional stay cables are traditionally oriented at 45 degrees, so conventional stay cables interfere with a tip 62 of the spinning blade 40. The superior stay cable 22 of this invention, though, may be tensioned and still oriented at the much smaller angle θ (illustrated as reference numeral 26) of ten degrees (10°) or even less. That is, as wind spins the blades 40 of the rotor assembly 38, the stay cables 22 will not intersect a rotor disk 64 (best illustrated in
Another dramatic comparison is evident. A conventional mast for a conventional wind turbine is fifteen feet (15 ft.) in diameter. Such a large mast is difficult and costly to transport, often requiring specialized rail cars and/or barges. The above calculations, though, were based on a mast diameter of only ten feet (10 ft.). Exemplary embodiments, then, permit the mast 32 to be substantially reduced in diameter, while still supporting equivalent loadings. Moreover, the smaller mast 32 is more easily transported and may be hauled over-the-road by conventional tractor trailers. The smaller mast 32 also weighs substantially less than conventional designs, so material, installation, and erection costs are reduced.
The calculations illustrated by
Exemplary embodiments also reduce other loads. For wind towers, the acute angle θ (illustrated as reference numeral 26) of the stay cables 22 may also result in a substantial downward vertical load on connections between sections of the mast or tower. This vertical load, though, reduces the upward vertical load on the bolted connections from wind and turbine induced torque, which in turn reduces the tensile and fatigue load on the bolts. The loads used in the above calculations are the wind shear for the turbine and wind vanes at cut-off wind speed of a maximum 60 miles per hour. These loads reflects data obtained for deflection at the turbine during power production. For simplicity, full gravity and maximum code-induced wind loads are not included, but the design of the guyed tower will be more than adequate. The turbines are basically reducing their wind vane connection loads starting at about 35 miles per hour until about 60 miles per hour, at which point the turbines may be totally disconnected for any power production.
Again, then, the stay cables 22 provide substantial improvements. Even when the mast 32 is increased in height to 450 feet, the orientation of seven degrees (7°) still maintains deflection to less than fifteen inches. Even at this higher height, the stresses in the stay cables 22 are still within acceptable safety limits. The diameter of the mast 32 is still substantially smaller than conventional designs (10 feet verses 15 feet), so the mast 32 weighs less, is easier to transport, and is easier to erect. Exemplary embodiments thus provide substantially reduced costs for wind turbines, drilling rigs, antennas, and any other vertical mast.
The angle θ may be mathematically defined. The mast 32 has a height HM (illustrated as reference numeral 80), and the upper end 50 of the stay cable 22 is attached at a height HS (illustrated as reference numeral 82). The lower, opposite end 54 of the stay cable 22 is anchored at the distance DB (illustrated as reference numeral 74) from the base 76 of the mast 32. The stay cable 22 is attached at the much smaller acute angle θ (illustrated as reference numeral 26) than conventional designs. The acute angle θ may be determined from the trigonometric relation:
For maximum support, though, the stay cable 22 may be attached as high up the mast 32 as needed. The stay cable 22 is strong enough to be attached at or nearly equal to the height HM of the mast 32. Substitution yields:
As the above paragraphs explained, the angle θ is substantially less than conventional designs. The angle θ, in fact, may be in the range of nearly zero to ten degrees (0>θ≥10), which is much less than that possible with conventional designs. Indeed, as the calculations accompanying
where HB (illustrated as reference numeral 94) is a height of the tip 62 of the blade 40 of the rotor assembly 38, as measured from earth or ground 56. As the wind energy installation 30 is being designed, the maximum angular orientation of the stay cable 22 (e.g., the maximum value of the angle Θmax) may be determined from the height of the mast 32, the height of the tip 62, and the distance DTip. Any orientation greater than θMax may cause the stay cable 22 to collide with the rotating blade 40. Because conventional stay cables must be much larger in diameter, the larger diameter prohibitively increases costs and is too heavy to handle.
Exemplary embodiments thus reduce the costs of the wind energy installation 30. Because the stay cable 22 is superior to conventional designs, the stay cable 22 may be attached higher up the mast 32 (e.g., the height HS), and closer to the base 68 (e.g., the distance DB). Moreover, the size of the mast 32 may be reduced for a given weight of the nacelle 34. Conversely, the mast 32 may support a greater size and weight of the nacelle 34, thus allowing the rotor assembly 38 and the alternator/generator 36 to be increased in capacity to generate more electricity. For example, longer blades may be used to turn a larger alternator/generator 36. Regardless, material, transportation, and labor costs are reduced for a given design of the wind energy installation 30.
If the blade 40 deflects due to wind forces, then the maximum acute angle θMax of the stay cable 22 may be computed to still prevent collisions with the rotating, deflecting blade 40.
The above calculations apply to swiveling nacelles. Some nacelles are mounted to a bearing which permits the nacelle 34 to turn, or swivel, about the mast 32. The nacelle 34 may thus capture wind energy from any direction, still without collision of the stay cable 22. Because the nacelle 34 may swivel about a centerline of the mast 32, each stay cable 22 must have an orientation that clears the rotor disk 64 (illustrated in
where HB is the height of the tip 62 of the blade 40 of the rotor assembly 38, as measured from earth or ground. The acute angle θ may also be corrected for wind deflection of the blade 40 (as explained above), thus yielding:
At the height HB of the tip 62 of the blade 40, the orientation of the stay cable 22 may not exceed the maximum acute angle θMax and/or the distance (DTip−DDef). Prudent designers may even include a safety factor that further reduces θMax.
The above figures illustrate that the vertical structure 20 (e.g., the mast 32) may have any number of the stay cables 22. If the vertical structure 20 is a utility pole, for example, then perhaps only a single stay cable 22 is needed. Other vertical structures, however, may require two, three, or more stay cables (as
The mast 32 may have any design and/or construction. The mast 32 may be constructed of any material, such as steel, aluminum, composite, concrete, and/or wood. The mast 32 may have a tubular, tapered, conical, and/or lattice design. The mast 32 may also have any height; indeed, many of the world's tallest structures are radio masts that support communications equipment. The mast 32, though, may support any equipment or load, including oil rigs or platforms, electrical equipment, bridges, and observation decks.
The stay cables 22 may include other features. Tall masts, for example, may reach into controlled airspace, so the mast 32 and/or the stay cables 22 may require lights, visible flags, or other safety markers. When the stay cables 22 are used with the communications equipment 102, any insulator may sheath at least a portion of the stay cable 22 to improve electromagnetic properties (e.g., insulation or conductivity).
The stay cables 22 may also include any end attachments. The upper end 50 of the stay cable 22, for example, may utilize any means of attaching the stay cable 22 to the mast 32. The opposite, lower end 54 may, likewise, utilize any means of anchoring to the ground or earth.
The stay cables 22 may also be utilized in any environment. Many wind turbines, oil platforms, antennas, and other vertical structures are erected in the ocean. Other vertical structures are erected onshore. Exemplary embodiments may be utilized in any onshore or offshore installation and in any ambient environment (e.g., mountains, deserts, arctic poles, plains, beaches).
The stay cables 22 may also support cantilevered structures. Some structures outwardly cantilever, such as entry overhangs, pedestrian overlooks, and even portions of buildings (e.g., the Clinton Presidential Library and Museum in Little Rock, Ark. USA). The stay cables 22 may be used to support cantilevered structures at the acute angle θ (illustrated as reference numeral 26) without obtrusive bracing. The strength of the stay cables 22 may thus be advantageously used in the design of cantilevered structures.
The stay cables 22 have a parallel construction. Each individual wire in the stay cable 22 is parallel to every other wire. The individual wires in the stay cable 22 are parallel along their entire length and may also be equal in length to every other wire. Each wire in the stay cable 22 is also individually pretensioned. Exemplary embodiments apply a tension value to each wire in the stay cable 22. That is, each individual wire in the stay cable 22 may have an equal, or nearly equal, tension to every other wire in the stay cable 22. Exemplary embodiments pretension every wire in the stay cable 22. The tension value is individually applied or pulled to each wire in the stay cable 22. Individual pre-tensioning of each wire provides lighter, cheaper, and stronger stay cable designs. An individually-tensioned stay cable 22 weighs significantly less than conventional designs, but the strength of the stay cable 22 is still greater than conventional designs. Alternatively, exemplary embodiments may be used to construct a stay cable 22 that is similar in size to conventional designs, but is substantially stronger to support greater loads. Regardless, exemplary embodiments offer greater design alternatives that require less material cost. If the reader desires a more detailed explanation, the reader is invited to consult U.S. application Ser. No. 13/084,693, filed Apr. 12, 2011, entitled “Parallel Wire Cable,” and incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Tension is applied to each wire, not strands of wires. Methods are known that tension strands of plural wires. A strand, in the art of stay cable, is defined as a group of multiple wires. Conventional methods are known that apply tension to a strand of multiple wires. Exemplary embodiments, in contradistinction, apply the tension value to each individual wire in the stay cable 22. Each wire has the equal tension value as every other wire in the stay cable 22.
While the exemplary embodiments have been described with respect to various features, aspects, and embodiments, those skilled and unskilled in the art will recognize the exemplary embodiments are not so limited. Other variations, modifications, and alternative embodiments may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the exemplary embodiments.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/179,645 filed Feb. 13, 2014 and since issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,458,642, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/910,186 filed Jun. 5, 2013 and since issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,667,766, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/181,551 filed Jul. 13, 2011 and since issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,474,219, with all applications incorporated herein by reference in their entireties. This application also relates to U.S. application Ser. No. 13/084,693 filed Apr. 12, 2011 and entitled “Parallel Wire Cable,” which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
364077 | Addis | May 1887 | A |
1459623 | Gerrard et al. | Jun 1923 | A |
1537698 | Robinson | May 1925 | A |
2095721 | Sunderland | Oct 1937 | A |
2141138 | Howe et al. | Dec 1938 | A |
2501202 | Bartleman | Mar 1950 | A |
2803363 | Hutchinson | Aug 1957 | A |
2808845 | Jarnatt | Oct 1957 | A |
2878498 | Gollnow | Mar 1959 | A |
2945457 | Avery et al. | Jul 1960 | A |
3083817 | Campbell | Apr 1963 | A |
3086232 | Nixon | Apr 1963 | A |
3104778 | Leonard | Sep 1963 | A |
3153696 | Blanchard | Oct 1964 | A |
3379000 | Webber | Apr 1968 | A |
3443607 | Dittrich | May 1969 | A |
3500625 | Gokyu | Mar 1970 | A |
3526570 | Durkee et al. | Sep 1970 | A |
3531811 | Baker et al. | Oct 1970 | A |
3542087 | Fegley | Nov 1970 | A |
3556168 | Baker et al. | Jan 1971 | A |
3586226 | Nippert, Sr. | Jun 1971 | A |
3659633 | Durkee et al. | May 1972 | A |
3885777 | De Carbon | May 1975 | A |
3919762 | Borelly | Nov 1975 | A |
4044447 | Hamada | Aug 1977 | A |
4106957 | Tournoy | Aug 1978 | A |
4192057 | Borelly | Mar 1980 | A |
4203267 | Langhorst | May 1980 | A |
4258518 | Xercavins | Mar 1981 | A |
4266911 | Helm | May 1981 | A |
4409050 | Carter, Jr. | Oct 1983 | A |
4488649 | Mark | Dec 1984 | A |
4533297 | Bassett | Aug 1985 | A |
4594827 | Finsterwalder | Jun 1986 | A |
4617789 | Borden | Oct 1986 | A |
4648146 | Nutzel | Mar 1987 | A |
4673309 | Schlaich et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4792700 | Ammons | Dec 1988 | A |
4840214 | Bourgois | Jun 1989 | A |
4841714 | Meier | Jun 1989 | A |
4979871 | Reiner | Dec 1990 | A |
5056284 | Ruckdeschel et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5083469 | Percheron et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5167399 | Delomel | Dec 1992 | A |
5299913 | Heidelberg | Apr 1994 | A |
5400584 | Ito | Mar 1995 | A |
5543196 | Robinson | Aug 1996 | A |
5573852 | Thal | Nov 1996 | A |
5688098 | Theno | Nov 1997 | A |
5809710 | Jungwirth | Sep 1998 | A |
5888321 | Kazama | Mar 1999 | A |
5956935 | Katayama | Sep 1999 | A |
6109460 | Herlevi | Aug 2000 | A |
6315249 | Jensen | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6523776 | Elder | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6523779 | Elder | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6614125 | Willis et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6658684 | Stubler et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6715176 | Stubler | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6800956 | Bartlett | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6929450 | Noble | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6944550 | Marchetti | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6968779 | Doyle | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6979175 | Drake | Dec 2005 | B2 |
7003835 | Figg, Jr. et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7010824 | Stubler et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7076985 | Rex | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7105940 | Weesner | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7124460 | Lecinq et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7126235 | Bernhoff | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7188814 | Davis | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7431610 | Laursen | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7508088 | Kothnur et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7677506 | Hammer | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7683498 | Stommel | Mar 2010 | B2 |
8074347 | Anderson et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8464497 | Lambert | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8667766 | Lambert | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8747219 | Wright et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8759678 | Filatov | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8881471 | Theobald | Nov 2014 | B1 |
8967943 | Drott | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9062421 | Brand | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9334091 | Zantout | May 2016 | B2 |
9458642 | Lambert | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9743764 | Lambert | Aug 2017 | B2 |
10036118 | Cullen | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10149536 | Lambert | Dec 2018 | B2 |
20020095878 | Henderson | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030086755 | Stubler | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110583 | Stubler | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030141721 | Bartlett | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040001752 | Noble | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040128776 | Eicher | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040237222 | Stubler | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040247438 | McCoin | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040265127 | Noble | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050151376 | Bernhoff | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050193794 | Rex | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060185318 | Lecinq | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070271897 | Hanna | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080078128 | Livingston et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080116152 | Datri | May 2008 | A1 |
20080210330 | Anderson | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080250576 | Brand et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090126313 | Jolly | May 2009 | A1 |
20090167023 | Nies | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090224498 | Diedericks | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090307998 | Zavitz et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100090053 | Stiltner | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100202881 | Nygaard | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100226772 | Deering | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100319983 | De Abreu et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100322766 | Haans et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110016804 | Howard | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110206510 | Landen et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110240626 | Mullebrouck | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110278852 | Hjort | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120045345 | Horton, III | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120084948 | Breen, IV | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120139253 | Lambert | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120260590 | Lambert | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130164134 | Goldstein | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130305624 | Thrush | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130309521 | Lambert | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140232118 | Luigi | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140361540 | Knight | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150128384 | Breen, IV | May 2015 | A1 |
20150308414 | Roer | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150335154 | Lambert | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160215761 | Rohden | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160215762 | Rohden | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160333853 | Knight | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170318962 | Lambert | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170362772 | Cullen | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180184805 | Lambert | Jul 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2835139 | Jan 2013 | CA |
1938931 | Feb 1971 | DE |
10309825 | Sep 2004 | DE |
103090825 | Sep 2004 | DE |
102015000818 | Dec 2015 | DE |
2732156 | Aug 2016 | EP |
Entry |
---|
Google translation DE 103 09 825 A1, 6 pages, translated Jul. 5, 2018. |
Irvine, H. Max, “Cable Structures,” 1981, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, pp. 61 and 72-74. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160369779 A1 | Dec 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14179645 | Feb 2014 | US |
Child | 15253990 | US | |
Parent | 13910186 | Jun 2013 | US |
Child | 14179645 | US | |
Parent | 13181551 | Jul 2011 | US |
Child | 13910186 | US |