Workshop In An Alternate Homepower Environment
Too_Many_Tools
good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
anyone.
When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
homepower environment where every amp is precious?
Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
grid?
Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
need consideration because of their unique requirements.
I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
situation and what implementations they have adopted.
Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
TMT
Robert Bonomi
Too_Many_Tools <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I am posting this subject in three different groups to hopefully get a
>good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
>anyone.
>
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
>
>Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
>
>Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
cordless tools violate the 'every amp is precious' premise.
Charging batteries is *extremely* ineffcient.
>When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
>grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
>grid?
PTO-driven ones. The 'drive' can come from nerly anything -- a water-wheel,
a steam-engine, a tread-mill, etc. Even an electric motor, in extreme
circumstance. :)
>Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
>need consideration because of their unique requirements.
Welding -- gas, instead of electric arc.
Air compressor -- gasoline/deiesel engint, steam-powered.
Too_Many_Tools
I was thinking that they might fit in where they could be run from the
main bank of batteries themselves.
TMT
MikeMandaville
fashioned human power? Such machinery was once very common. Take a
look at some pictures of old machinery, and you will find an apprentice
who is busy turning a flywheel all day long, and observing his master
at work, thereby gaining a firsthand knoiwledge which no number of
words can communicate. Nowadays, however, such flywheel turners tend
to be very expensive. Therefore, I recommend that you build yourself a
squirrelcage apparatus, and purchase a greyhound to run in it. Retired
racing greyhounds are put to death if nobody wants them. I know a lady
who has a retired racer, and he is a wonderful pet. A racer is happy
when he is racing. This is of the very nature of a racer. So give a
veteran a job, for god's sake, and build a squirrelcage power plant.
Mike Mandaville
providing meaningful solutions for the workaday world
FriscoSoxFan
2. Buy a generator.
3. Buy a whole bunch of gas.
4. Start said generator
5. Plug in tools
6. Build.
MikeMandaville
gas, is unrealistic, here is the Mother Earth News "Plowboy Interview"
of L. John Fry, who powered his farm with a generator turned by an
engine which ran on this gas. This engine ran non-stop for six solid
years:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/MENintvus/fryintvu.html
arw01
Only real solution for running tools at home is a generator. A propane
generator might be the way to go if you already have auxilary heat that
way. Typically the machines don't run terribly long at a stretch,
except maybe a sander. My jointer and table saw only run a few minutes
max.
If your pace is slow, hand tools will get it all done. Watched alone
in the wilderness the other night. He did amazing time with cutting
through several feet of spruce tree with a large western hand saw.
Alan
samuelchamb
1.1kw + , (2) arc/mig,tig welder 2.2kw + , some large routers and table
saws . the list is endless . I at presant can run my 12speed pillar
drill or chop saw (not both) from my 1 kw mod inverter . high batt
voltage will help you start large motors so use in day light hours only
(solar)
wmbjk
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
8kW (surges to 16) can handle most everything a home shop is likely to
have. We have a few limitations - Hypertherm 600 suffers nuisance
cut-outs above 45 Amps. It will also temporarily shut down if the
compressor starts mid-cut. So I let the compressor tank fill, then
shut the pump power off before starting the cut. For prolonged cutting
at max output, I run the backup generator for boost. Lincoln SW TIG
175 can't be run at full output off our inverters, amp draw is too
high. Could be solved by trading up to an inverter based unit if I
didn't already have an engine driven substitute for the bigger jobs.
Powermig 255 seems perfectly happy at full output.
>Obviously hand nonpowered tools take on a special importance.
Yuck! Perish the thought.
>Cordless tools come to mind but which ones and what batteries?
Cordless tools are great for jobs where the cord is a nuisance, but
there' isn't any special need for them with home power. Careful though
if you're using some of the modsquare (often called modsine)
inverters, they can cook the chargers included with some cordless
tools.
>When considerng stationary tools like drills, lathes, mills, saws,
>grinders, etc., which ones fit best in an environment where one is off
>grid?
There aren't really any special considerations unless you're trying to
get away with too-small inverter capacity. Keep in mind that if you're
maxing out system capacity in the shop, it won't be available in the
house at the same time. Having said that, I don't bother to tell my
wife what I'm up to in the shop. If together we managed to exceed
capacity, the inverters would trip off automatically. And that could
happen more easily if for instance batteries were low, and you have
surges due to large loads starting. The temporary voltage drop might
be sensed, and cause a shutdown.
>Special operations like welding and using air compressors would seem to
>need consideration because of their unique requirements.
One thing I've done with all equipment purchases is to make sure
they're easily returnable just in case they're not compatible with the
inverters. VFDs could be an issue for instance. Although the only
thing we've ever returned due to incompatibility was a bread maker
that ran at double speed.
Wayne
wmbjk
wrote:
Booo! Hissss! Generators as a sole source are often the worst choice
for home power. Their only advantage is low up-front cost. But in the
long run they'll cost more, and are no fun to live with compared to
solar/wind/inverter/battery. Home use tends to be relatively high
energy but low power, while shop use tends to be high power but low
energy. So adding shop power usually means increasing charging sources
and batteries a little, but making the inverters substantially larger.
And if one were to choose a generator well suited for shop use, it's
likely to be way too big for backup on a properly sized home power
setup.
Wayne
wmbjk
wrote:
>Only real solution for running tools at home is a generator.
Nonsense.
Wayne
Steve Peterson
those amps add up to? With some extra margin, that is the demand you need
to satisfy. It isn't the sum of all the tools, unless they will all be
running at the same time.
Steve
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118776073....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Mike Henry
"MikeMandaville" <MikeMan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1118779337.5...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
AIR, it's possible to get somewhere in the neighborhood of 2-6 CF of methane
from a dry pound of biomass. It's interesting to ponder how many pounds of
biomass one must produce to replace the total consumption of natural gas in
the US. The idea can make sense in some situations but is far from a
universal solution.
MrSilly
on your method of power generation, and how often you work. Cordless
tools can be useful because you can charge them when you have peak
power available from your source. The same is true for compressed air.
If your home's battery bank is fully charged, you can divert your
energy to building spare power for the shop in your cordless batteries,
and building up compression in your air tank.
I also think that, depending on how you work, the loads may not be so
bad. You most likely don't crank your saws constantly for hours on end.
You use these things in bursts. You may be able schedule your work so
that the extra load from these machines is manageable.
Shawn
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118776073....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Have you ever been in an Amish woodshop? The last time I was in one it had
very many modern woodworking machines all driven by a jackshaft. There was
a Deutz diesel engine powering the jackshaft. The amish farmers in PA where
I grew up used the same diesel engine driving a jackshaft arrangement to
pump water, compress air, run the refridgeration units for their bulk tanks
and pump water. As a side note to this, they used an interesting pump down
the well that used compressed air as power to pump the water up to a holding
tank.
Shawn
@yahoo John P Bengi
"wmbjk" <wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:l5iua19akfhnla80n...@4ax.com...
John Grossbohlin
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118776073....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> good cross section of ideas. I apologize ahead of time if this offends
> anyone.
>
> When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
> what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
> homepower environment where every amp is precious?
clip
> I would be interested in hearing how others have approached this
> situation and what implementations they have adopted.
>
> Thanks for any suggestions or comments that you can offer.
I worked in a shop with no electric and no "alternative power" tools... We
had a forge with bellows, anvil, hardies, tongs, etc., out back for metal
shaping and welding and a large selection of files, screw plates, hacksaws,
etc. For woodworking there were axes, adzes, spoke shaves, draw knives,
frame saws, panel saws, rasps, spring pole lathe, etc. Light came through
the windows... It's doable... At the time there was a 10 year waiting list
for our output.
John
Too_Many_Tools
Some of them are from viewers in Florida who commented that this topic
is revelant to their situation after last year's storms. It would seem
that many were without power for many weeks/months and were living
subsistence energy wise for a long period of time while they were
trying to rebuild their lives and property.
As one person said.." you never realize how much you rely on your power
drill until you don't have the juice to run it".
TMT
Andy Dingley
Bonomi) wrote:
>Charging batteries is *extremely* ineffcient.
That depends. For a typical windpower setup, you have an excess of power
you can't store when you don't need it, then a shortage when you do.
Even inefficient batteries can improve _overall_ efficiency
--
Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.
Andy Dingley
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
Don't use the amps. I can't see any scenario where powering these tools
(bigger than trivial) from an existing setup where "every amp is
precious" can be viable. For lighting it's a different matter - simply
upping the battery capacity might be enough.
And what's the shortage here ? Amps or coulombs ? Is the limit on power
(ability to deliver it) or energy (stored capacity) ?
For convenience, go for a generator. You can use standard tools, the
cost of doing this is low, the convenience is high. For an occasional
use setup, or particularly for construction work, then this is almost
always the best way.
For improved efficiency, then go to lineshafts and a separate internal
combustion prime mover. This is likely to mean pre-WW2 vintage tools
though, and slow-speed metalworking rather than our modern high-speed
cutting. One of my neighbours has a 1900 house with its original
(commercial light engineering) workshop - power comes from a 12hp gas
engine (town gas, not gasoline) and it powers several lathes, mill and
drill by lineshaft. All still operational too! This seems more viable
for wood than for metal though.
With centralised lineshaft power, you're also geared up to use a water
turbine. I can't see this working for wind power, but water is certainly
viable. I've seen old UK cereal watermills which have had modern lathes
or potter's wheels attached to them, and smithing has regularly done
this to drive power hammers. The well-known Taunton press "Workshops"
book has photos and drawings in it of "Ben's Mill" in Vermont, a
water-powered mill with a 1900s iron water turbine, now supplemented by
a tractor.
A timber yard I use is on an old farm. It has a number of electric
machines, but the main rip saw is powered by a tractor and flat belt.
There's now a dedicated stripped-down tractor, on a permanent brick
footing.
A more modern approach than lineshafting is hydraulics. There are a
number of US religious groups (Amish, AFAIR) where there are
prohibitions on electric machinery. However a centralised diesel
hydraulic power pack and individual hydraulic motors are acceptable. Not
cheap though!
One of the simplest options is to not use powered tools at all. Why do
you need a workshop? What are you trying to make ? If you're a green
woodworker than you can use a shave horse and drawknife for much shaping
work, a pole, treadle or great-wheel lathe for turning (powered either
by the operator, or an assistant). Many such workers may also use these
in conjunction with a Wood-mizer or similar large bandsaw, with its own
petrol engine.
Andy Dingley
wrote:
>The idea can make sense in some situations but is far from a
>universal solution.
I've actually built one of these things. The justification was as much
waste disposal (dairy farm) as it was for power generation.
wmbjk
1. If you think that generators on their own make good sense for
permanent off-grid workshops, then that's another subject that your
sock puppet army doesn't know squat about.
2. Any guy who'd post under the name "pizza girl" shouldn't be allowed
around electricity or power tools, unless it's for electroshock
therapy, or for having a frontal lobotomy hole drilled.
3. Two of your identities, including the one you're using now, already
claimed to have killfiled me, so any response from you to my posts is
just more BS.
Wayne
F. George McDuffee
>When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
>what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
>homepower environment where every amp is precious?
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.
Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.
With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
Given the U.S. has a very limited (and rapidly diminishing)
domestic production capacity for machine tools [lathes, mills,
gear shapers, etc.], C.N.C. controllers, and perhaps most
critical M2 HSS and carbide inserts, this means the entire house
of cards will collapse as the existing machinery wears out,
replacements are unobtainable, and repair cannot be attempted.
Re-industrialization will be very expensive, time consuming and
dangerous, as even the most basic industries such as iron
foundries will have to be reestablished. Indeed, a generation or
more will be required, as the evolution, techniques and lessons
of the period 1890-1930 will have to be retraced, with no
assurance that the time required will be available before America
must again meet a serious international challenge to its
existence / hegemony.
twil...@cybermesa.net
On 2005-06-14 too_man...@yahoo.com said:
>Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower,rec.crafts.metalworking,rec.
>woodworking
My shop contains a 1HP air compressor (real, 1970's DeVilbiss), Miller
135amp 120volt MIG welder, metal lathe, drill press, radial-arm saw,
small table saw, assorted powered hand tools.
Because of all the motors, I chose a Trace sinewave inverter, 4KW to
cover starting surges (SW4024). Battery is 550 amp-hour, 24 volt,
T-105 golf cart, 3 parallel strings of 4 each. 1 KW of PV panels (16
Solarex 64 watt). System is in its 6th year of operation, supplying
household and work needs.
I work alone, so machines are run singly. Duty cycle is low; so is
energy consumption. I have yet to need to run a generator to cover
my working load, though I do use it to maintain the battery in our
rare cloudy weather, then avoiding power-intensive work.
When the shop was under construction, power initially was from the
generator. Most of the time is just sat, thrashing at no load, being
totally inefficient. Later construction was powered by the solar
system, blessedly silently recharging itself in between power draws.
When I have production welding, sand blasting, or intensive use of an
air-powered die grinder, I will probably have to use the generator,
passing power through the inverter and maintaining the battery
charge.
Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA
Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered
Too_Many_Tools
What is the largest motor that your equipment has?
Any of them three phase? I ask because many times industrial equipment
has three phase motors.
Any desire for changing any of the motors to DC?
TMT
Matt Stawicki
Well, hell. Might as well just cash in your chips now. Take a quick
vacation, and then head for your local crematorium.
Sheesh, George. You really need to get out more:-)
Matt
Ulysses
> On 14 Jun 2005 12:07:53 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
> <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
We have a few limitations - Hypertherm 600 suffers nuisance
> cut-outs above 45 Amps. It will also temporarily shut down if the
> compressor starts mid-cut. So I let the compressor tank fill, then
> shut the pump power off before starting the cut.
I only use my compressor for about 15-30 minutes a day. Right now I'm using
a gasoline generator to run it but I am considering the possibility of using
a belt-driven generator and replacing the AC motor with a 12 VDC motor. For
my purposes it won't matter much if it takes a little longer (lower gear
ratio on the compressor) to fill the tank. I also always manage to find
something to do while compressor is filling the tank anyway. The main
problem I see with a 12 volt compressor is motor life and having to change
the brushes etc.
I also use more human-powered tools than I would if I was connected to the
grid. For example I make custom picture frames and I can either (in most
cases) use a big noisy double-miter saw that uses a lot of power and throws
sawdust all over the place or use a foot-powered chopper that makes hardly
any noise and produces wood chips that I expect will be suitable fuel for
the woodgas generator that I plan to build in the not-to-distant future.
A few people mentioned that cordless tools are ineffecient but hey, it sure
is nice to be able to grab a cordless drill when you only need to drill a
couple of small holes and not have to go start anything up or turn anything
else on.
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
> <snip>
> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
> tools and blanks.
>
> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
> transfer.
Thank you, Chicken Little.
> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
They don't buy anything from you, do they?
And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
YOU!!!!!
"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
Thanks!
Rich
F. George McDuffee
>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>
>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
==================
Please forward this wonderful news to the International Monetary
Fund [IMF], the government of Argentina and the Argentinian
bondholders. It will cheer them no end.
Dave Mundt
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
<eatmy...@doubleclick.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>> <snip>
>> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>> tools and blanks.
>>
>> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>> transfer.
>
>Thank you, Chicken Little.
Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?
>
>> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>
>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>
>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>
>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>
>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>
>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>YOU!!!!!
>
>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>
>Thanks!
>Rich
>UT o
While your point may have some validity here, the
major difference is that the money in your examples is
circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
economy "forever".
As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
artery.
Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
We have to remember that the world economy
is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
All the countries in the world are jockeying to
gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
America, although economically large, is
not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
in relative value on the world market is proof that
the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
remember that the growing European Union can (and
perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
than America.
Finally, there is the basic problem that
the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
Countries that were our friends are now our
enemies; countries that were our enemies are
now our friends; The only lesson we can
learn from this is that this is likely to
happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
on another country for our major manufacturing
is a stupid thing to do.
Regards
Dave Mundt
Too_Many_Tools
I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
one can recharge them during off load hours.
Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
retrofit something like a table saw?
In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
TMT
Koz
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
There was a recent article in one of the wood working magazines about
cordless tools on the higher end beginning to use lithium ion batteries
instead of nicads. Apparently they can give one hell of a current draw
and run at a slightly higher voltage (28V?). Anyway, along with the
usual benefits for contractors on cordless drills and such there was
great promise for cordless table saws and larger equipment due to the
ability to run for extended periods at the higher current draw.
It doesn't help today but there is hope in the near future for the
off-gridders and job site work.
Koz
Scott Willing
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I really hesitate to jump in on this topic, but I advise you to make
sure to do your research carefully before pursuing the replacement of
AC motors with DC motors.
In the early days of homepower which was nearly universally 12V on the
primary side, this was a pretty common practice, but in the overall
picture of things today I'm not sure it's warranted in the general
case.
At one time I was given to understand that DC motors are just innately
more efficient than AC. It appears that this is not necessarily so,
and has much to do with the crappy design and build quality of
"shovelware" AC motors than any basic electromechanical principles. To
know whether you would actually be further ahead after a DC
conversion, you would have to consider each case individually.
Ignoring power factor, a 12V load of power "x" draws 10 times the
current that an 120VAC load will draw. Will the losses you avoid by
bypassing the inverter get chewed up in the wire? How close to the
battery room will the workshop be?
I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
Fortunately this hasn't represented a significant investment. With
each system upgrade I left myself options for going to a higher
primary voltage, and recently made the move to 24V when we replaced
our chargerless mod square wave inverter with a sine wave
inverter/charger. At some distant point in the future we might even
make the jump to 48V, but for the moment, 24V was "just right."
The punchline is that our little pumps (and other 12V DC loads) are
now running off a 24V/12V DC-DC converter. In the overall picture of
things this crazy scenario actually still makes sense here, but again
these are *small* loads.
The moral is that when you choose to run DC loads, you're creating
specialized equipment and there are serious implications that might
not be immediately obvious. If you stick with AC loads, your wire runs
can be far longer for a given power throughput / wire guage, you can
reconfigure the primary side of your system without affecting anything
on the load side, use a common AC generator when it's more convenient
or more sensible to do so, or take your gear with you and use it
elsewhere.
Having "inherited" a mixed DC/AC system and lived with it, off-grid,
for five years, there is no question in my mind that the new house we
build here will be wired almost entirely for conventional AC and will
likely have only some emergency lighting (power room!), and perhaps a
few very special-purpose devices and outlets wired for DC.
YMMV.
-=s
Me
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
3 Phase motors really aren't a problem if you just use a FreqDrive that
is 1 Phase input and 3 Phase output.
Me
MikeMandaville
> vacation, and then head for your local crematorium.
>
Many of these are now self-service. You just put your money in the
machine, and then lie down in your coffin. :-)
Mike Mandaville
John
<Snipped>
Hi Matt, Where've you been? Crankin' out too many parts to get into any of
the ongoing arguments? <g>
Hey, remember that little 3-48 x .054" set screw? We finally got it running
pretty good on the Tsugami. We're making it out of 416HT stainless and are
using a Habegger adjustable thread rolling die. Almost full thread profile
right to the ends. So far, so good. (crossed fingers).
I better get out of here before I get flamed for not being on-topic enough.
John
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Cliff
<eatmy...@doubleclick.net> wrote:
>Rich
"Libertarian"?
LOL .....
http://www.rackjite.com/9looney.htm
I doubt that this one can wear shoes ..... knots,
you know ......
--
Cliff
Ulysses
"Scott Willing" <NOTwillin...@mts.net> wrote in message
news:gvu0b1t6l2777mhv4...@4ax.com...
I absolutely agree with what you are saying. This is why the on-grid folks
are using Tesla's design and not Edison's DC idea. For a house I also think
it's probably not worth the trouble to run massive wires everywhere in order
to use DC effeciently. Of course the higher the voltage the smaller the
wire required, which brings you right back to 115VAC. Probably better to
have a few extra batteries and a couple of extra solar panels (or whatever)
to cover the loss of effeciency. When I first started reading about wind
generators about 20 or so years ago they were talking about 120 volt
generators charging batteries in series equaling 120 VDC. According to the
author most appliances wouldn't care if it was AC or DC. This idea is
definately simpler than having to buy and connect an expensive sine wave
inverter but I suspect that today's electronics might be a bit more
particular about their input current than a 20 year old dishwasher or vacuum
cleaner. If someone wanted to try it I suppose the best thing to do would
be to buy a new whatever and make sure you can return it. If it explodes
you go get your money back. And of course there's always the problem of
short circuits burning the house down.
However, for a stand-alone workshop that is to be powered seperately I would
consider using DC as opposed to running a gasoline/diesel generator on one
or two tools that I use regularly. For those that I only use occasionally
for me it's no big deal to start up a little generator (most of my saws etc
run fine from a Honda eu2000). As someone else pointed out running a
compressor during peak sunlight or wind times (or when a generator happens
to be running) and filling the tank can, at least in my case, supply enough
air to do quite a bit of work later without having to use any additional
power. Leaks, in this case, cannot be allowed to exist!
>
> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>
> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
> Fortunately this hasn't represented a significant investment. With
> each system upgrade I left myself options for going to a higher
> primary voltage, and recently made the move to 24V when we replaced
> our chargerless mod square wave inverter with a sine wave
> inverter/charger. At some distant point in the future we might even
> make the jump to 48V, but for the moment, 24V was "just right."
>
> The punchline is that our little pumps (and other 12V DC loads) are
> now running off a 24V/12V DC-DC converter. In the overall picture of
> things this crazy scenario actually still makes sense here, but again
> these are *small* loads.
Lol. As long as you don't plug a battery charger into it to charge the
batteries it's running off of ;-)
>
> The moral is that when you choose to run DC loads, you're creating
> specialized equipment and there are serious implications that might
> not be immediately obvious. If you stick with AC loads, your wire runs
> can be far longer for a given power throughput / wire guage, you can
> reconfigure the primary side of your system without affecting anything
> on the load side, use a common AC generator when it's more convenient
> or more sensible to do so, or take your gear with you and use it
> elsewhere.
I keep toying with the idea (12 volt motors) but I still use a gasoline
generator for the sizeable, short use loads. When it comes right down to it
I'm probably only using about 2 to 3 gallons of gasoline per month to run my
tools to produce around $15,000 worth of revenue. From a business
standpoint this is an insignificant expenditure. I simply manage the use of
my power tools and do work in batches. I don't work after the sun goes down
(usually, unless it's a RUSH order).
Andy Dingley
>
> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>infrastructure kept up?
Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?
Ulysses
"Matt Stawicki" <stawick...@sciti.com> wrote in message
news:41m0b1ludgarbac6n...@4ax.com...
Matt
Somehow methinks supply and demand will take care of itself.
Too_Many_Tools
not needed.
Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.
TMT
Too_Many_Tools
Your discussion is one of the major reasons for me starting this
thread. As I soon discovered when I started research into the design of
an AHP workshop...that the continuing progression of technology
(especially that of inverter design) changes the approach that one
should take in implementing a AHP system today.
While the lure to go "no power" is strong, I am no Luddite. Power
tools, both portable and stationary, have their place in a AHP
workshop. The opportunity to leverage consumer offerings allows one to
use conventional tools with minimal hassles. I also have a large
collection of older metal and wood working tools that would be awkward
to convert to something other than AC. In the past, I have always had a
policy of trying to do as little a modification as possible to a tool
since it is never a simple as it first seems. Machine tools were
designed with certain speed and torque requirements in mind and when
one departs from these, the tool's performance suffers.
Thanks for your input and please always feel welcome to contribute to
any of my discussions.
TMT
m II
> Some people, unlike you, have a real life though.
You wouldn't be in a position to know, you top posting loon.
mike
Ed Huntress
message news:pan.2005.06.15....@doubleclick.net...
>
> Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
> we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
> than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
> DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap, and
they have our two billion dollars.
This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
news:76m1b193ih0rm4lk3...@4ax.com...
Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.
They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.
--
Ed Huntress
Cliff
Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....
Then those taxes will ......
--
Cliff
Ed Huntress
news:97j2b1dqr5rde8ch8...@4ax.com...
I'm not looking forward to it. I have a feeling we're about to try, once
again, to follow the pea under the shells, with Milton Friedman moderating.
--
Ed Huntress
F. George McDuffee
==============================
Our buzzwords are "maximizing sharholder value" with "free
market" for the rondo.
People go out and drink too much even though they know they will
have a hang over the next day. The major difference in this case
is that the people who are enjoying the party are not the ones
who will suffer the hangover (and have to pay the bar tab).
F. George McDuffee
>> Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
>> What's America's excuse ?
>
>Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
>political spectrum who say it's necessary.
>
>They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
>foreign competition themselves.
This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
Ed Huntress
news:hj13b1lr09pn5ps1q...@4ax.com...
I didn't intend to lead that point to a discussion of how vulnerable service
sector jobs are, because, as you say, that situation in general is changing
fast.
With tongue in cheek, I was suggesting that US government economists, so
far, aren't showing much worry about having their *own* jobs outsourced to
India.
However, given that the ideological posture of our current administration
seems to have no throttle and a seemingly unlimited fuel tank, they may give
that one a try, as well.
--
Ed Huntress
J. R. Carroll
Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.
--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com
Ed Huntress
news:2Nfse.29437$J12....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@fpc.cc.tx.us> wrote in message
> news:hj13b1lr09pn5ps1q...@4ax.com...
> > This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
> > telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
> > For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
> > returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
> > externally H1B visas allow worker importation.
>
> Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is
that
> the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
> their bottom line.
That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
Detroit or Windsor.
--
Ed Huntress
F. George McDuffee
>Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
>the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
>their bottom line.
Big problem is that you can't tell what also comes off the bottom
line as a result because is concealed as higher taxes, and/or
quality of life issues such as higher crime rates with increased
insurance and alarm costs. It is also displaced in time, in that
you may see an immediate benefit now, but much higher costs
later. Think about changing the oil in your car. Don't change
it now, save a little money now, pay a lot more later or do
without a car.
J. R. Carroll
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:1Ufse.24979$So7....@fe10.lga...
Ed,
When I owned half of an injection molder we never lost a job we wanted to
Asia, not once. In fact, the first big tooling/molding package we nailed
down was something running in Malaysia. One project that was bid around the
world was commercial binary syringe assemblies for tooth whitening gel. The
quantities were 20 million units per month to start. You probably know the
company we did this for. If you have a Hot Springs Spa, 90 percent of the
molded parts are from my tools running in the United States. Carlsbad to be
precise. I could go on here at some length as 100 million dollars per year
in molded product is a lot of product. That isn't my point.
In each and every case the costs of making product were lower when customers
did business with us than if they made there purchase overseas. We were
shipping parts on several jobs to China as a matter of fact.
This is the important part - in no year between 1991 and 2002 did the
company's net after tax margin fall below 18 percent of gross revenues -
never, not once, period. It was almost embarrassing and we did not have a
single product of our own.
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
wrong damned question.
J. R. Carroll
This isn't a problem at all. Calculating the value in manufacturing is a
reasonable precise and very doable exercise.
It is not much of an art but does require a thougough understanding of every
element involved.
Ed Huntress
And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with 80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are distributed
quite evenly around the world.
--
Ed Huntress
J. R. Carroll
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:Nqgse.24985$So7....@fe10.lga...
> "J. R. Carroll" <jcar...@machiningsolution.com> wrote in message
> news:Legse.29447$J12....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> >
> > "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> > news:1Ufse.24979$So7....@fe10.lga...
> > > "J. R. Carroll" <jcar...@machiningsolution.com> wrote in message
> > > news:2Nfse.29437$J12....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> > > >
> > > > "F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@fpc.cc.tx.us> wrote in message
> > > > news:hj13b1lr09pn5ps1q...@4ax.com...
> > >
> > If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
> > they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking
> the
> > wrong damned question.
>
> And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
> claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.
>
> Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if
we
> neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
> what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
>
> Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with
80
> cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
> into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily
as
> to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are
distributed
> quite evenly around the world.
Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
that no one group has a lock on that.
If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for shit.
Ed Huntress
> <snip>
> >If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
> >they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking
the
> >wrong damned question.
> Right on!!!!! You also need to include Ford. A major
> contributing factor is that they can't decide if they are banks
> or car companies. They also seem to have forgotten than you
> can't milk a "cash cow" if it is dead.....
They're doing better as banks.
What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
--
Ed Huntress
F. George McDuffee
>If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
>they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
>wrong damned question.
Ed Huntress
>
>
>
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:Nqgse.24985$So7....@fe10.lga...
> > "J. R. Carroll" <jcar...@machiningsolution.com> wrote in message
> > news:Legse.29447$J12....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> > >
> > > "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> > > news:1Ufse.24979$So7....@fe10.lga...
> > > > "J. R. Carroll" <jcar...@machiningsolution.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:2Nfse.29437$J12....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@fpc.cc.tx.us> wrote in message
> > > > > news:hj13b1lr09pn5ps1q...@4ax.com...
> > > >
> > > If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be
because
> > > they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept
asking
> > the
> > > wrong damned question.
> >
> > And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
> > claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?
>
> It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
> work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.
Proven for what percentage of the economy? Are you suggesting this is a
general model that will sustain our economy as a whole? If so, how would you
apply it to, say, the manufacturing of shirts? What philosophy and business
model will let you make shirts at a price/quality tradeoff that competes
with rural China or Bangladesh? Child labor could help, I suppose...
>
> > Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if
> we
> > neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences
of
> > what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.
> >
> > Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with
> 80
> > cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
> > into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as
easily
> as
> > to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are
> distributed
> > quite evenly around the world.
>
> Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
> guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
> benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
> every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
> You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
> that no one group has a lock on that.
Your $5 premium probably was around 20% of 40% of your costs: as a round
approximation, perhaps 8% of your cost of production, based on
tooling-industry rules of thumb.
When you're up against 80 cents/hour, how do you account for the 96%
disadvantage? Do you think that improved efficiencies in general (not just
yours, but those of the economy as a whole) can cover 96% differences? Any
model that I know of, that points in that possible direction, is based on
getting rid of all of those people you employ and adopting the values and
standards of the Third World.
And then business in general winds up hoist on its own petard.
>
> If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or
pension
> obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
> business model if for shit.
So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better business
model than Toyota or Hyundai? And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
--
Ed Huntress
Scott Willing
> Greetings and Salutations....
>
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
><eatmy...@doubleclick.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> Given the current economic/social/political environment your
>>> concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
>>> problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
>>> but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
>>> spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
>>> tools and blanks.
>>>
>>> Whether by design or stupidity, the American
>>> manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
>>> destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
>>> transfer.
>>
>>Thank you, Chicken Little.
>
> Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
>is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
>even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
>infrastructure kept up?
Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
planet.
Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
(police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
conveyor.
Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.
I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
the homeland. (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
USA" on the goods produced there.
If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.
-=s
>
>>
>>> With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
>>> approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
>>> degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
>>> near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
>>> a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].
>>
>>Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)
>>
>>And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
>>well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
>>nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.
>>
>>Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
>>we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
>>than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
>>DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
>>How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
>>HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
>>They don't buy anything from you, do they?
>>
>>And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
>>your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
>>buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
>>YOU!!!!!
>>
>>"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!
>>
>>Thanks!
>>Rich
>>UT o
>
> While your point may have some validity here, the
>major difference is that the money in your examples is
>circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
>foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
>economy "forever".
> As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
>of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
>artery.
> Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
>those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
>DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
>Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
>somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
>money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
>it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
> We have to remember that the world economy
>is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
>All the countries in the world are jockeying to
>gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
>way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
> America, although economically large, is
>not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
>be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
>in relative value on the world market is proof that
>the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
>remember that the growing European Union can (and
>perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
>than America.
> Finally, there is the basic problem that
>the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
>Countries that were our friends are now our
>enemies; countries that were our enemies are
>now our friends; The only lesson we can
>learn from this is that this is likely to
>happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
>on another country for our major manufacturing
>is a stupid thing to do.
>
> Regards
> Dave Mundt
Pete C.
I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.
I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.
As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.
Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.
The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp. Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality. A
decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
practical solution.
If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
string to be practical.
Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
depending on how busy the shop is.
Pete C.
J. R. Carroll
No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to their
market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM product
built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
As a percentage it's about half.
>And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
> over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
> advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try. Good
value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It does
not work.
>
> These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
> Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
> you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
> business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
> abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.
>
Ed,
I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh perspective
is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This is
certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".
The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
very precisely.
Ulysses
"Too_Many_Tools" <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118860579.4...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
> one can recharge them during off load hours.
>
> Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
> retrofit something like a table saw?
While searching for a fan motor I came across some substantial DC motors on
eBay a while back. I think they may have been blower motors for furnaces or
air conditioners. What I had in mind was using a belt drive. I would think
it might be more difficult to find one that has the right shaft for a saw,
especially one with reverse threads. Come to think of it a DC powered saw
might make it possible (or at least safer) to use fluorescent lights in a
shop since it would not be running at 60 Hz.
Grainger has DC motors too.
http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/searchresults.jsp?xi=xi
>
> In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
> unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
> not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
> taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
> tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
> to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
> necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.
>
> TMT
>
Ulysses
"Scott Willing" <NOTwillin...@mts.net> wrote in message
news:gvu0b1t6l2777mhv4...@4ax.com...
> On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"> I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
> existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
> started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.
>
> Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
> pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
Outhouse?
F. George McDuffee
>What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
Unfortunately there may be no solution in the sense of "saving"
GMC, Ford, American, Delta, Northwestern, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.
etc. etc. All appear to be in the same situation as were the
steel companies, i.e. terminal H.I.V. patients. Like the typical
HIV patent, these companies sought immediate gratification at the
expense of their long-term survivability, using credit to support
their "lifestyle," using derivatives as their "crack cocaine."
Congress is currently nibbling around the edges of this critical
problem by holding hearings into the possible impact on the PBGC
if one or more of these companies/sectors should collapse. The
problem is that it is a question of "when," and "in what
sequence," *NOT* if.
Most of the underlying real assets such as physical plant, tools
and dies, knowledge base, customer base, and production/operation
expertise appear to be largely intact although obsolescent.
However, these have been "submerged" under mountains of debt and
neglect while "management" chased the latest fad, dissipating any
real income while not paying stock holder dividends nor
reinvesting in new products, equipment, etc. in their
core/foundational business. Additionally, these "assets" have
significant value only for an on-going business.
While automobile/truck manufacturing, and the design, production
and operation of jumbo civilian aircraft appears to be
economically viable in the United States, it does not appear the
existing cadre management (and corporate culture) of these
organizations is capable.
"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.
The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
William
> <snip>
> >What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?
> <snip>
>
> "Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
> adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
> these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
> propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
> likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
> liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
> unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
> management position of the current and previous corporate
> executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
> all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)
Ed Huntress
> > > If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or
> > pension
> > > obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
> > > business model if for shit.
> >
> > So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better
> business
> > model than Toyota or Hyundai?
>
> No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to
their
> market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
> The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM
product
> built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
> As a percentage it's about half.
Hyundai understands the market pretty well, too. In fact, I bought one last
September, after trying out all of the Japanese and American competition.
The Europeans offer no competition in that market. Any European car that's
technically competitive costs $10,000 more, at the minimum. My Hyundai
Sonata is a hell of a car for the money, and 'way ahead of anything
comparably priced -- in other words, anything in that market.
The next day I bought a Ford Focus ZX3. It's another good car for the buck,
although the bottom-end Civics probably are better overall. I just liked the
handling and performance; with its 2.3-liter engine, it will stomp any
Civic. <g> I consider it a good buy, though, and not bad for an American car
built in...Mexico.
>
> >And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
> > over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain
that
> > advantage in a viciously competitive global market?
>
> They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try.
Good
> value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
> bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It
does
> not work.
What does work? Are you suggesting that GM can dope out the market better
than Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Audi, etc.? How would they do that? Are they
somehow smarter?
I don't think they're smarter. Since all of those foreign car makers have
good American marketing people to serve the US market, I don't think GM has
any greater knowledge of the market or greater insights into what people
want.
So, what's left?
>
> >
> > These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
> > Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success
when
> > you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
> > business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
> > abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.
>
> Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.
I thought I was until I spent a year of research in preparation for the
5,000 word articles I wrote about China trade a couple of years ago. Now I
realize we're living on a heap of wishful thinking and baloney.
Any advantages we have are going away very quickly. In fact, our
multinationals are shipping the advantages offshore as fast as they can. I'm
waiting for the Milton Friedman dollar devaluation, but there will be hell
to pay if and when it happens. The recent devaluation ain't it.
> Ed,
> I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
> I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
> questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
> underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
> exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh
perspective
> is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
> question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This
is
> certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
> I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
> embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
> confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
> not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
> scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".
When you get some time, John, it would be good to hear more about what
you're saying. It's one of the most important issues in metalworking today,
if not THE most important issue.
>
> The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
> very precisely.
Well, 8% was reasonably close, then. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress
Jeff Dantzler
Interesting comments by a former Fed chairman:
NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, June 10, 2005
"Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said he doesn't see how the U.S.
can keep borrowing and consuming while letting foreign countries do
all the producing.
It's a recipe for American economic disaster.
On Thursday the Wall Street Journal reported bluntly that
"Mr. Volcker thinks a crisis is likely."
[snip]"
Rest of article here:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/6/9/161923.shtml
JLD
Ed Huntress
>
> "Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
> adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
> these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
> propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
> likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
> liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
> unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
> management position of the current and previous corporate
> executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
> all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)
>
> The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
> pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
> management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
> should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
> conceal corporate assets.
>
> The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
> between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.
Jeez, you're brutal. <g> I'm going to wait to hear if John has a solution
that's less drastic.
--
Ed Huntress
Duane Bozarth
>
> <snip>
> >How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
> >"owners" of the companies :-)
> This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
> almost no control, ...
No fiction, fact. All you have to do is to get a majority to agree w/
you, go to annual meeting and vote w/ you, and you can do whatever you
want...
MrSilly
you spend 2 billion at home, or in China? Do you honestly think it's a
good sign that we send $2 billion to foreign countries instead of
spending it here at home?
We have plenty of 3rd-world states here in the USA that could use $2
billion a day. I'm guessing that you live in one of them.
F. George McDuffee
>How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
>"owners" of the companies :-)
This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
executives would have received human salaries. While there is
more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
shareholders when the music stops].
Pete C.
I believe the theory here is that the US is supposed to be producing and
exporting "intellectual property" with value that will offset the value
of the "hard goods" we import. Unfortunately this is not working since
we are also exporting our capacity to generate "IP" with all of the
overseas outsourcing, and we don't have an exclusive on the capacity to
produce "IP" to begin with.
What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
Pete C.
Ed Huntress
news:42B1D7EF...@snet.net...
> What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
> in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
> for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
> end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
Well, here's a guy who agrees with you...or he did <g>:
"We live in cheap and twisted times. Our leaders are low-rent Fascists and
our laws are a tangle of mockeries. Recent polls indicate that the only
people who feel optimistic about the future are first-year law students who
expect to get rich by haggling over the ruins.and they are probably
right." -- Hunter S. Thompson
wmbjk
wrote:
>Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>>
>> I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
>> not needed.
>>
>> Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.
>>
>> At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
>> my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
>> make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
>> have hopefully gone before me.
>>
>> TMT
>
>I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
>thoughts and comments to add to it.
>
>I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
>specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
>available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
>options.
>
>As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
>as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
>turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.
>
>A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
>saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
>Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
>free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
>compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.
Wind driven compressor -> storage tank -> air motors? Could be OK if
one had a really windy site, lots of surplus pressure vessels, and a
plenty of rotor diameter. To get an idea of the diameter versus work
produced, check out the size and pumping rates of Bowjon well pumps.
>In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
>power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
>refrigeration compressors.
Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.
>Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
>generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
power users. Ours is similar to this one
http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.
>Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
>charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
>limited to peak energy generation times.
For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.
>The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
>can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
>The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
>battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
>currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
>
>Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
>cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
>watch every miliamp.
That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
every milliamp.
>Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
>panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
>it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
>
>For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
>difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.
Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
shop.
> A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
>practical solution.
Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.
>If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
>it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
>welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
>bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
>string to be practical.
Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.
>Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
>home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
>a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
>cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
>total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
>depending on how busy the shop is.
That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.
Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
lawn with a garden tractor.
Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/horizontals%20only.jpg top 40' of
a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
finished and erected
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport
Wayne
WillR
Mexico -- Maquialldora.
> (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
> run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
> USA" on the goods produced there.
Don't think so.
--
Will
Occasional Techno-geek
jeff
> What we'll end up with is a bunch of lawyers feeding off of each other
> in the downward spiral as we end up with no capacity to produce anything
> for ourselves and consequently no money to import what we need. We'll
> end up rather like the undeveloped parts of the world are now.
>
outsourced to India as well.
--
jeff
J. R. Carroll
Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able to
reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for me
and my guys. The meeting ended an hour ago and before you ask me where we
found the capacity let me just tell you that we did, and we did it without
pushing any capacity envelopes.
I realize this is a small sum in the grand scheme of things but you know
what they say -it does add up. I also have to say that pulling something
like this off is better than sex -it lasts longer as well. I will probably
be bouncin' off the ceiling for a day or two at least.
Pete C.
Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
charging batteries. In either case you're capturing and storing the
intermittently produced power for later use and a more convenient rate.
A compressor powered by water or a solar steam generator would work well
also.
Various electric utilities have been experimenting with compressed air
storage as a way to store power from excess generating capacity during
off peak times for use later during the peak times. They also do this
with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
homepower environment.
>
> >In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
> >power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
> >refrigeration compressors.
>
> Mechanical drive all the way to the pump? That would work well with a
> large mill, when the wind is blowing, and be as efficient as these
> http://www.deanbennett.com/windmills.htm. But in that application
> there's the advantage of easy storage for when there's no wind.
No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> >Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
> >generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
>
> Which is why the conventional rotor/alternator is so popular with home
> power users. Ours is similar to this one
> http://www.windenergy.com/whisper_200.htm.
The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
potentially wasting captured energy during peaks. There is no such
limitation with an air tank, unless it's already at max capacity. Air
tanks are also a lot less expensive and lower maintenance than battery
strings. By combining both an electrical generator and an air compressor
on the wind plant you can better capture peak output.
The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
steps.
>
> >Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
> >charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
> >limited to peak energy generation times.
>
> For the usual home power setup, cordless tools are no more and no less
> advantageous than they are on-grid. Unless the power setup is very
> small, the double conversion isn't worth trying to work around.
I know, but someone posted elsewhere in the thread that charging
cordless tools was horrifically inefficient.
>
> >The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
> >can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
> >The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
> >battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
> >currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.
> >
> >Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
> >cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
> >watch every miliamp.
>
> That depends. On very small systems, it's often true. Our setup isn't
> huge, and costs about as much as a medium priced SUV. The idle loads
> are about 100 Watts 24-7. That's a waste versus
> convenience/practicality issue, and it's a long way from watching
> every milliamp.
This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
appliances you turn the inverter off. You run your lighting and TV and
whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
conversion.
>
> >Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
> >panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
> >it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.
> >
> >For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
> >difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality.
>
> Not necessarily. Home welding tends to be short duration. The hardware
> to supply that kind of power is actually affordable, and if one is
> designing the power system from scratch for what most would consider a
> normal home, then the extra inverter capacity isn't a big deal. In our
> case, for the house loads alone we could have gotten away with a
> single SW4024 plus a transformer for the 220V loads. Instead we used
> dual inverters, which eliminated the need for the transformer, and
> provided sufficient power for most anything used in the usual home
> shop.
Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
minutes.
I'm on-grid, but having recently moved to an area with much better solar
and wind potential I'm investigating options to take advantage of those
sources.
>
> > A decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
> >practical solution.
>
> Welder generators aren't a good match for backup duty, or even for
> backup charging. Their advantage is portability for welding, and
> they're only best (in the home power context) when you need high amps
> for short periods. For any application that needs longer run times
> supplying small loads, something like the Honda EU series is far
> better. After a few years of living off-grid, like many others I found
> that a DC backup generator that works independently of the
> inverter/chargers is nice to have. The one I built drives a $5 scrap
> Delco 27SI, and only produces about 2000 Watts. When there's no sun or
> wind, we can do nicely on about 4 hours run time per day, at a
> charging rate that's similar to when the other sources are on line.
I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
powering larger shop tools.
If you want to make it a bit more efficient in this capacity you can
build an automatic transfer switch so that when you are not drawing a
load from the generator to operate say a 5 hp table saw, the capacity
can be diverted to a charger to add some extra power to your regular
battery string.
>
> >If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
> >it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
> >welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
> >bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
> >string to be practical.
>
> Like some of the other comments in this thread (line shafts for
> instance), that suggestion may be feasible. But unless one has way
> more time than money, conventional methods are more practical.
Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
inverters or load shedding.
>
> >Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
> >home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
> >a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
> >cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
> >total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
> >depending on how busy the shop is.
>
> That was probably me you're talking about, and my terminology was
> quite correct for our setup. Occasionally our shop energy use is
> higher than for our house, but usually it's the other way around by a
> big margin. Normal power tool energy consumption in a home shop is
> lost in the noise of an all-electric home's consumption. Welders,
> plasma cutters, chop saws, table saws, planers, etc. are all high
> power, but relatively low energy because of their short run times.
Shop = big gulps, house = long sips :)
>
> Keep in mind that we're talking *home* shop here, which I consider to
> be small projects by one person. Many off-gridders go the route of
> putting a high percentage of their loads onto propane, leaving much
> less for the actual power system to do. For them, shop energy
> consumption may indeed cause the need for a much larger system, or the
> pain and cost of running a big generator. But we're very nearly 100%
> solar/wind powered. We don't even have propane, and fuel use for
> backup generator and the welder/generator combined isn't much
> different than what some folks consume in a season of mowing a big
> lawn with a garden tractor.
Well, my home shop which is just for me, includes a Bridgeport mill, a
metal lathe, the big honkin' TIG welder mentioned earlier, a CNC router,
60gal compressor, 10" table saw, an electric forklift and a host of
smaller items like sawsalls and grinders.
This is of course partly attributable to my preference for metal
projects which tend to require bigger tools and more power tools than
woodworking.
>
> Here are a couple of my projects from my off-grid shop. I only needed
> the engine-driven welder a few times, mostly for its portability.
>
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/horizontals%20only.jpg top 40' of
> a 65' free-standing wind generator tower (in progress)
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/images/tower%20top.JPG tower nearly
> finished and erected
> http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/frank.htm cactus transport
>
> Wayne
Nice projects. Someday I'd like to do that. Somehow it seems to cost
more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
utilities...
Just out of curiosity how do you make a living?
Pete C.
Cliff
The neocons have a planned fix for this.
Default on Social Security (worthless junk bonds, like
T bills) and force the new money into stocks & T bills ...
where, if needed (and it will), it is all handy to be taxed again ....
Australia used to tax unrealized capital gains. Stock went up?
Pay taxes on it ... they still may for all I know .....
--
Cliff
Scott Willing
Yes and no. :-) We have a simple sawdust bucket toilet that sits
beside a commercial composting toilet, now retired. I'm going to tear
out the latter and build a nicer bucket toilet when the time is
available.
Long story, but the commercial toilet is, IMHO, a waste of money.
(Fortunately, wasn't my decision; came with the house.) A bucket
toilet is superior to it in every way.
Most so-called composting toilets, including this one, are actually
evaporating toilets and don't compost per se.
>Outhouse?
There are two of those here, also retired.
We have shallow groundwater, and an outhouse is an potentially nasty
polluter. Actually septic systems can be just as bad - so many people
manage to pollute their wells with those too. Above-ground aerobic
composting is the way to go IMHO.
-=s
Ed Huntress
> Let me offer you a little encouragement in the interim Ed. 65 million
> dollars per year worth of manufacturing will be back in the US from Korea
> beginning in October of this year and the customer involved will be able
to
> reduce their price, improve their margin and put a little sugar on it for
me
> and my guys.
That's great news, John! When you get to it, let us know how general you
think this approach can be for the rest of us. <g>
--
Ed Huntress
Scott Willing
From: http://www.thehoya.com/news/031700/news6.htm
>>
Students and faculty gathered Wednesday evening to hear Chie Abad, a
former Saipan sweatshop worker, speak about the conditions of offshore
garment factories as well as discuss the political ramifications of
sweatshop labor.
Abad, a Filipino accountant, found work in a factory on the small
island of Saipan in the Mariana Islands, located in the South Pacific.
Abad worked for a Korean contract company, producing clothing for Gap,
Inc. and collegiate apparel. Since Saipan is a protectorate of the
United States similar to Puerto Rico, manufacturers who purchase
manufactured goods in Saipan may use a label claiming "Made in USA."
However, U.S. labor laws are not enforced on the island, according to
Abad.
<<
This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
magazine here so don't hold your breath.
BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.
-=s
Me
Cliff <Clhu...@aol.com> wrote:
> Found a live one, eh?
> One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
> by that paper ....
>
> Then those taxes will ......
> --
> Cliff
Naw, we will just Nationalize their Dept, just like they did with
ours, years ago....Payback is a bitch...isn't it.....
Remeber the Red chineese never did pay us back for WWII........
Me
Charlie Self
You think? It was the Nationalist Chinese we assisted in WWII, not the
Reds. IIRC, Mao and buddies didn't take over until '49, at which time
the Nationalists boogied to Formosa (aka Taiwan). The Reds have never
owed us anything but a hard time, in their philosophy, which they have
given us time after time.
Cliff
<NOTwillin...@mts.net> wrote:
>This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
>I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
>magazine here so don't hold your breath.
USA is an island in Japan.
>BTW, a related article mentions Rep Tom Delay was working dilligently
>to ensure that US labour laws wouldn't be enforced there.
IIRC He also has part ownership ...
--
Cliff
Glenn Ashmore
WWII. The Chinese Communists were very helpful during WWII. The
Nationalist government, army and police were largely corrupt while the
Communist were much better disciplined and effective at fighting the
Japanese. That is also why it was so easy for them to chase the
Nationalists off the mainland. We supplied them with quite a bit of arms
and equipment. The communists returned any escaped POWs to US units while
the nationalist were just as likely to give them back to the Japanese if the
money was right.
It was only after the war when the Communists started gaining ground and Mao
aligned himself closer to Stalin that we started getting nervous.
--
Glenn Ashmore
I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com
"Charlie Self" <charl...@aol.com> wrote in message
wmbjk
wrote:
><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
>charging batteries.
Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
> They also do this
>with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
>homepower environment.
But both are less practical than batteries.
>No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
>driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
>it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
>does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
>combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
>charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
>The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
>potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
citing?
>The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
>for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
>energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
>AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
>compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
>the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
>steps.
You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
picture.
Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
(low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
>This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
>power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
>appliances you turn the inverter off.
That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
clock on the microwave. :-)
> You run your lighting and TV and
>whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
>conversion.
The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
diddling.
>Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
>Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
>weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
>the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
>duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
>minutes.
The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277,
which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
engine-driven unit outdoors.
>I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
>the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
>powering larger shop tools.
The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
>Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
>is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
>home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
>inverters or load shedding.
Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
per week run time.
>Somehow it seems to cost
>more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
>utilities...
Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
company) are some of the benefits. In talking to off-gridders, I find
that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
the grid for storage.
Wayne
F. George McDuffee
I will repeat that it is a legal fiction that the stockholders
control a corporation. If this were not the case, corporations
would not be allowed to hoard cash (rather than paying
dividends), squander profits on extraneous and unrelated business
ventures of doubtful potential, and pay exorbitant executive
compensation and perquisites. Additionally, some stockholders
are more equal than others. Different classes of stock have been
introduced so that control is no longer proportional to
ownership.
The real controllers of corporations are their financers as they
can fund or not fund the operations, issue or not issue their
IPOs, etc. Note that in making " secured " loans, operational
[policy] control is achieved without any concurrent/concomitant
risk. As most of the problems of the basket case corporations
have been created, maintained and exacerbated by the availability
of " easy money, " it is only reasonable the people that supplied
the " easy money " [and earned enormous profits] should be forced
to stand the resulting losses.
When a corporation goes bankrupt and is either reorganized
[chapter 11] or liquidated [chapter 7] the stockholders generally
lose their entire investment. In too many cases the employees
are also the stockholders where the company has crammed their
defined contribution plan [401k] with the company stock. When a
corporation is reorganized, new stock is issued and may be used
to " pay off " the unsecured creditors. Stock in the old
corporation is worthless. Another typical scam is to create an
ESOP or employee stock ownership program, where the employees may
own stock but have no voting rights. It is this " vapor paper "
that several corporations are proposing to use to pay their
obligations to the PBGC.
While it would have not affect on the terminal corporations we
have been discussing, it would be worthwhile to force the
remaining major US corporations to distribute 50% [or more] of
all claimed annual earnings as dividends. This would prevent the
pyramiding of phantom profits from year to year, flush out bogus
acquisition assets such as " good will " and capitalized R&D,
frustrate attempts to create cash hoards to be squandered on CEOs
" pipe dreams " [generally with kickbacks] and force any real
corporate profits into the mainstream economy. DRIPs [dividend
reinvestment programs] would allow any stockholder that still
believe they are better served by having their share of the
[claimed] earnings to be " retained " by the corporation for "
reinvestment " to do so.
============================
Pete C.
>
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:55:15 GMT, "Pete C." <aux3....@snet.net>
> wrote:
>
> ><compressed air storage> Should be comparable or better efficiency than a wind driven generator
> >charging batteries.
>
> Perhaps in some niches... but in any event a practical home power
> setup needs some batteries, and charging them with wind, assuming
> there's wind to harvest, is highly recommended. So you're talking
> about *adding* systems because you believe it's worth the trouble, but
> you haven't supplied any numbers or examples to back up your position.
See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
efficient.
>
> > They also do this
> >with pumped hydro, but CAS is far more practical than pumped hydro in a
> >homepower environment.
>
> But both are less practical than batteries.
Not by a long shot, especially for a large scale installation as a power
utility would use. It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
every battery replacement.
The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years? A large air
tank that is drained regularly and kept in an area not exposed to
weather should easily last 80 years. When it finally is failing all you
have is scrap steel to dispose of and you can actually get a few dollars
for it.
>
> >No, not mechanically driven. The refrigeration compressor would be belt
> >driven from an air motor. The thermostat simply opens the air valve when
> >it needs to spin up the compressor. Again the ultimate source of power
> >does not have to be wind, and in fact with CAS it's even easier to
> >combine energy captured from multiple sources. No need to worry about
> >charge controllers when you're simply pumping air into a big tank.
>
> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
later.
>
> >The point is that batteries can only accept a charge at a certain rate,
> >potentially wasting captured energy during peaks.
>
> There's isn't any peak power wasting problem that I'm aware of with
> home power systems, since the cost of generating prevents people from
> buying excess capacity. Can you give an example of the problem you're
> citing?
This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
Hydro could have a similar case where excess capacity could go
uncaptured after heavy rains.
Solar PV is inherently pretty immune from generating peaks.
>
> >The efficiency of directly utilizing the energy of the compressed air
> >for mechanical applications is also higher. Instead of capturing wind
> >energy, converting to electricity, storing in a battery, converting to
> >AC, converting to mechanical energy with a motor, converting to
> >compressed air with a compressor coupled to the motor and then utilizing
> >the compresses air to fire your nail gun, you eliminate four conversion
> >steps.
>
> You left out the AC to DC conversion of the turbine, and assumed that
> energy used must be stored in a battery first. It's true that
> compressed air for tools is a very inefficient process, on-grid or
> off. Yet I've managed quite well with the just the same sort of
> compressor that grid-connected folks use. I could do wind-powered shop
> air more easily than most, but I wouldn't dream of adding another
> system to cure an inefficiency that's such a small part of the big
> picture.
Ok, so five less conversion stages.
It's all relative. The more use your shop has, the more potential
savings. If the shop demand is such that you'll require more generating
capacity, more storage capacity and more inverter capacity then there
may well be cost savings since components for an air system are cheaper.
If you an over-the-top green type, perhaps the ability to eliminate or
keep to an absolute minimum the need for big ol' lead acid hydrogen and
corrosive fume belching batteries might be a positive.
>
> Coincidentally, I have a neighbor who plans a Bowjon type installation
> (low tower, bulky rotor, single-stage compressor) for shop air using
> multiple surplus storage tanks. I've suggested that since he hasn't
> any wind power at present and could really use some, that the time and
> money he's going to put into the new setup would be better spent on a
> conventional wind genny and a tall tower.
Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
tower?
>
> >This is where you really need the hybrid system. You run the inverter to
> >power your conventional appliances. When you are not running the
> >appliances you turn the inverter off.
>
> That's one of those convenience/practicalities tradeoffs. Many
> appliances don't like being de-powered, and it's a nuisance to fight
> it. IMO, biting the bullet for full time capacity is one of those
> things that goes a long way to making off-grid living palatable for
> the average person. After a hard day of pining over the dearth of
> rural ballet, the last thing you want is to have to reprogram the
> clock on the microwave. :-)
True, maximizing efficiency does require active management of the
system. Some things can be automated, and I've even seen a few
microwaves where you can disable the clock though.
>
> > You run your lighting and TV and
> >whatnot that are your much higher duty cycle items from DC and avoid the
> >conversion.
>
> The conversion losses are lamentable, but not generally worth working
> around. As Scott mentioned, after you've fought that battle for a
> while, you're ready for straight AC in order to eliminate the
> diddling.
Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
capture the waste heat for your DHW.
>
> >Perhaps your home welding is less than mine. I've got a Miller
> >Syncrowave 250 that I love and it can see quite a bit of use on project
> >weekends. I'm thinking your inverters would gag at the 240v 100a gulps
> >the Syncrowave takes, even if the typical gulp is only about 10 seconds
> >duration. On a big project those 10 second gulps add up to quite a few
> >minutes.
>
> The fuses definitely couldn't handle it - 400A limit (24V system).
> What kind of *home* welding are you doing that takes 24k Watts input?
Pretty run of the mill stuff actually. The last moderate welding project
was building the CNC router which is framed mostly from 14ga square
steel tubing (http://wpnet.us/cnc_router.htm).
While the welder is rated at 250a and the full output at reduced duty
cycle is 310a, most of the time I'm running in the 150-175a range.
>
> People can size for whatever they can afford, but if I had the need
> for more indoor stick/TIG, I'd be after one of these
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=57039&item=7524207277,
> which should be a comfortable fit with our setup. But I find I rarely
> stick weld indoors above about 120A, although I use the Powemig 255 up
> to its max more often. The only really heavy stuff I have to work on
> are the tractors, and that's only occasionally. Since they don't fit
> inside, and neither does the smoke and dust of heavy work, I roll an
> engine-driven unit outdoors.
I primarily use TIG, if for no other reason than I'm most comfortable
with it. I also do aluminum from time to time.
The last time I did stick was a quick repair to my snow blower in the
middle of a storm. Even for that I would have used TIG if I was going to
take the time to do it right vs. just weld through the snow pack. I
won't be doing much of that anymore either since I'm in TX now and don't
get much snow.
>
> >I didn't really intend the welder / generator to be used for backup to
> >the regular power system. I really meant it more as an option for
> >powering larger shop tools.
>
> The auto-idle feature of a good unit will make that bearable, if the
> tools' idle use is compatible. Still, the generator is going to be
> either idling or roaring in between power tool use, at an average of
> about $2 per hour in fuel. When we first moved onto our site, but
> before we had the power system set up temporarily, I was stuck with
> the welder generator. The running hours add up quickly, and I wouldn't
> recommend it to anyone else except for occasional or temporary use, or
> because there was no alternative, or if it's for a job that pays
> enough to cover the expenses and aggravation.
Any generator is going to be most efficient at or near full rated
output. Load management is always difficult.
>
> >Modifying a DC inverter welder which are pretty inexpensive these days
> >is likely the most efficient way to get quality welding capacity from a
> >home power system. No line shaft required, and no need for oversized
> >inverters or load shedding.
>
> Everyone has different needs, wants, and budget, but I think you'll
> find that more and more people have a potential combination of house
> loads that need such capacity that shop use isn't a leap. Around here
> for instance are many who need to power the surge of a 2 hp well pump,
Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
valve? :)
> along with other use concurrent. It can be done with a smaller
> inverter and a generator, but it's sure nice to get that generator
> time down if you can. We used to have a couple nearby who had a
> generator/battery/inverter setup, over 10 hours generator time per
> day. That's about 4000 hours and 2000 gallons of fuel per year. I
> think the fuel cost, repair costs, and eventual generator replacement
> cost were big factors in their pulling out after a few years. Even a
> modest amount of PV could have cut that generator time in half, and
> would have been far cheaper in the long run. Better still, the cost of
> that (very nice) generator and fuel could have bought a combination of
> hardware including a much smaller generator needing only a few hours
> per week run time.
The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
bio-gas generator.
>
> >Somehow it seems to cost
> >more to live self sufficient off-grid than it does to just pay the
> >utilities...
>
> Not necessarily. Cashing out of a grid-connected place allowed us to
> retire, start with a clean slate, and as the yuppies say, "leverage"
> the advantages of home power to help keep the big picture cost down.
> Cheap land, lower taxes, fewer utilities (still need the phone
> company) are some of the benefits.
Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
connectivity. When I was moving to TX I had to base my house choice on
the availability of high speed connectivity. I investigated satellite,
but unfortunately it doesn't work well with VPN. I ended up on cable
which works well.
>In talking to off-gridders, I find
> that the main factor affecting success isn't so much the power issues,
> but whether the folks can afford and are comfortable with truly rural
> living. For most, that usually means retirement or telecommuting, and
> precludes having children at home. For those who need to commute or be
> close to school busses etc., they're usually stuck with paying the
> premium for grid access. Then again, when they want to generate their
> own power, they can have cheaper and more efficient systems, and use
> the grid for storage.
Well, I telecommute now. Trading a cubicle in a windowless concrete
dungeon for a sunny window office with a purring cat on the windowsill
is a wonderful thing.
Since I'm also single and also quite mechanically and technically
inclined, in theory I could do the off-grid in the middle of nowhere
thing. In the event my job changed and I was no longer able to
telecommute I'd be f'd though.
Unfortunately I don't really expect I'll ever be able to retire. I'm
theoretically making good money these days, at least it looks good on
paper. Unfortunately the economy is such that unless you are a DINK
you're still barely covering living expenses.
Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
Pete C.
Pete C.
>
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:19:43 -0500, Scott Willing
> <NOTwillin...@mts.net> wrote:
>
> >This isn't even quite as extreme as the example I was thinking of.
> >I'll see if I can dig up another cite, but I think it's probably in a
> >magazine here so don't hold your breath.
>
> USA is an island in Japan.
Why would the Japanese devalue their product by putting "Made in USA" on
it?
Pete C.
Arnold Walker
"wmbjk" <wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:lgk5b1dfa1qt24g0d...@4ax.com...
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
wmbjk
wrote:
>See my notes below re: saving four steps of energy conversion for
>applications where you are able to use air power directly such as nail
>guns and die grinders. Four fewer conversion steps *has* to be more
>efficient.
You only need to calculate the numbers for volume and consumption, as
I'm in agreement that with good wind, it's feasible that a resourceful
scrounger could put up sufficient rotor area.
> It is far cheaper and lower maintenance to use a
>large air or water reservoir than to use a huge string of batteries with
>limited life spans and hazardous lead and acid to dispose of properly at
>every battery replacement.
Excellent point, and I've committed it to memory in case I decide to
do a utility-scale installation. :-)
>The batteries in your string may last what, perhaps 8 years?
They're nearly ten years old now, and I won't be surprised if they
make 15 or 20. But home power systems pretty well always need *some*
batteries, so all we're talking about is whether the size could be
reduced somewhat by an additional system. And keep in mind that a
primary goal of home power (at least at my place), is to minimize the
energy that makes a trip through the batteries.
>Perhaps because I haven't seen the concept even proposed in any
>alternate energy books. As far as I know CAS and PH are both fairly new
>concepts that originated from electric utilities need for a way to store
>excess generating capacity during off peak times for use in peak shaving
>later.
Well, since my uh, somewhat unconventional neighbor ;-) thought of
doing compressed air, I think that if it were viable for home power,
it should have become popular by now. The subject of home power scale
pumped hydro comes up here regularly, and those impossible numbers can
be found in the archives.
>This would primarily apply to wind generation where peak gusts could
>produce power faster than the batteries could accept it, causing that
>power to be dissipated by the charge controller.
I've never heard of that being an issue, and it certainly hasn't come
up at my place, which has a high ratio of wind charging capacity to
battery size, and some pretty gusty winds.
>Any reason not to combine both and put up your tall tower with the
>electric gen up top and hang a compressor at a lower point on the same
>tower?
I think that once you run some numbers, you'll find that an air system
with the capacity you're thinking of will need several big rotors.
While I do have a small wind turbine scabbed onto my tower some
distance from the top, I couldn't add even one Bowjon type thing the
same way. Cheap rotors (multi-piece sheet metal) end up being pretty
heavy. IIRC, the Bowjon has a gearbox as well as the pump.
>Guess you just need to setup a heat exchanger from your inverter(s) to
>capture the waste heat for your DHW.
If you're serious, I'd like to see some numbers. How much can the
waste heat from 12kWhrs of inverter use raise the temperature of 80
gallons of water? And how practical is it to capture that by adding
yet another element to a solar water-heating system?
>Soft start inverter drive to a three phase well pump with an unloader
>valve? :)
Except for the unloader valve which isn't required, that's an approach
I've recommended previously here, partly because the drop in wire size
can save a few bucks on a deep hole. But you're still talking about a
good-sized inverter, plus a transformer, plus a VFD. Considering the
other benefits of dual inverters, our preference was to do that
instead, even though at 1/2hp a VFD wasn't required here, so the
savings on that didn't count.
>The only way to get reasonable efficiency out of a gen/bat/inv setup is
>to size the generator to just barely above the average load and run it
>24x7, and that requires a pretty specialized generator to handle that
>duty. Not something I'd consider unless I had my own nat gas well, or
>bio-gas generator.
Why do you say 24-7? An affordable startup concept I've recommended to
a few is an inverter/charger, batteries, and a Honda EU series. Run
the generator, say, every day for a couple of hours at max output
during peak load times, and for several hours every so often for
battery health. Add solar, wind, etc. as budget allows until generator
time is minimal. For example - DR1512, EU2000, and a string of
batteries from Sam's Club - perhaps $2k total.
>Looks like you had to go to some extremes to get your Internet
>connectivity.
We were fortunate to be the telco's guinea pig for a couple of radio
systems. The current one gives us multiple POTS lines (although we
only use one) plus DSL. Standard bill, same as if we were hard-wired.
Satellite intenet and next gen wi-fi brings similar connectivity to
just about anyone who needs it.
>Perhaps as I'm able to build up some AE projects I'll be able to cut
>operating expenses enough to start to get ahead.
You have a home shop and an idea for a cheaper alternative to
batteries, the cost of which home power users love to complain about.
Do I need to spell it out for you? ;-)
Wayne
wmbjk
<arnold...@consolidated.net> wrote:
>"wmbjk" <wmbjk...@citlink.net> wrote in message
>news:lgk5b1dfa1qt24g0d...@4ax.com...
>> How big a tank? I think you're going to find a fly in the ointment
>> once you run some numbers on air consumption. And if air power could
>> be so efficient and practical, why do you believe it is that
>> off-gridders, often known to be innovative and unafraid of breaking
>> with convention, haven't flocked to the concept?
>Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
>much effecient
>at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
>tools.
For the same reason that I use many air tools in my own shop - because
they're often lighter, cheaper, and more compact than electric
versions. Sometimes efficiency isn't very important.
Now, if compressed air is so much more efficient than batteries, then
why do *you* think that we're seeing ICE/battery hybrid cars driving
around, but not ICE/air hybrids?
Wayne
yourname
>
> Another fly in the oiment on your battery remark.....if batteries are so
> much effecient
> at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
> tools.
1] Habit; they were taught with air tools
2] They don't care a whit about efficiency
3] Seen a 300ft/lb cordless impact wrench lately?
4] electricity+gasoline=bad
Arnold Walker
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
Arnold Walker
much effecient
at storaging .Why are repair shop using air tools instead battery powered
tools.
>
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----