Wind Generators - general query

I have an old (20 years?) Aerogen. This year it needed a major overhaul - the pivot bearings were shot. I think this maybe the weak link in the design of wind generators, as there is a significant leverage on not very large bearings.

Might be worth looking at this point. The rotor bearings were fine. Brushes needed replacing as they were worn as a result of the worn pivot bearings. Parts not expensive, c30 quid.
 
Where you plan to cruise makes a big difference - if its sunny go solar as these make much more power than a wind gen these days - I took a Rutland 913 off the boat after 2 years in the Med as it never put in anything worth having - in a 10 knot blow less than an amp - they do not live up to the figures they claim in any real world application. Perhaps make more sense in the Caribbean with 15-20 knots most of the time but do a lot of research first as to what real world users actually get. For the cost of a Rutland you could get 500 watts of solar power making perhaps 150 amp hours a day in summer in the Med against perhaps 12 ah a day from the wind gen...
 
Why WG?
Solar is a much more cost effective solution these days.
I have both, and reckon that the Solar is much more effective.
My WG is a Rutland 913, I understand the 914 is much better.
WG's don't work too well running downwind or in a balmy anchorage.
Solar doesn't work at night.
Both have their own mounting issues.
 
Trident said:
. . . I took a Rutland 913 off the boat after 2 years in the Med as it never put in anything worth having - in a 10 knot blow less than an amp - they do not live up to the figures they claim in any real world application. Perhaps make more sense in the Caribbean with 15-20 knots most of the time but do a lot of research first as to what real world users actually get. For the cost of a Rutland you could get 500 watts of solar power making perhaps 150 amp hours a day in summer in the Med against perhaps 12 ah a day from the wind gen...
Click to expand...

My experience was exactly the same. My Rutland 914i did not put out enough power even to cover battery self-discharge. Bloody useless, and I took it off, and took a big loss selling it on Fleabay.
 
mattonthesea said:
After a few years of being boatless I am looking for a small blue water yacht. In checking prices for my budget forecasting I have noted that Aerogen wind generators are significantly more costly than Rutland. Any ideas why? Is it to do with materials and quality or something else?
Click to expand...

Best wind-generators are the ones that don't make much noise (Rutland is quiet). If you have a noisy one, you will end up tying it off most of the time so it won't be making anything at all.

I'd agree though that wind generators should be the option of last resource for small-yacht electricity generation. For coastal boats, get a battery monitor, alternator regulator then solar, in that order. For offshore boats, get battery monitor, solar and hydro-generator in that order. On both, only add wind generator as last choice if you still need more Ah and if you spend a lot of time at anchor in a windy location.

I have Rutland 913 on my boat in the Med, mostly used for coastal cruising with occasional longish passages. It comes a poor fourth in terms of contribution (after Sterling, Solar and hydro).
 
Last edited:
I should have said that I had an Aerogen on my last boat. I found it a very good compliment to the solar. Downwind, across the Atlantic, I tied it off to face aft and it worked well that way. At anchor in the Carib it kept the batteries topped up.

The question is not so much about wg vs solar but the cost differentials
 
All the WG manufacturer's figures for power production are decidely optomistic, to say the least. (Downright fibs in the case of Rutland!)
 
Last edited:
>I have noted that Aerogen wind generators are significantly more costly than Rutland.

The reason Aerogens are more expensive than Rutlands is they produce a lot more power:

Aerogen Model Watts Rated Output
Aerogen 4 – 12 v 96 8 Amps
Aerogen 4 – 24 v 96 4 Amps
Aerogen 6 – 12 v 240 20 Amps
Aerogen 6 – 24 v 240 10 Amps

Rutland 913 Wind Turbine Power Output
• Wind speed start up of 5 knots
• 24W at 10 knots
• 90W at 19 knots
 
Matt: you might be interested in this comparison: http://windtechniek.nl/Yachting-Monthly.pdf

Unfortunately it's rarely realistic to put your boat on the back of a car to generate a breeze. As is abundantly clear from the preceding posts, real-world wind gen output is generally rather diappointing unless your're habitually somewhere draughty (such as the Trade Wind belt, as mentioned). And most of us try to anchor somewhere out of the wind rather than in the teeth of it.

In the right place wind can be a useful adjunct to solar, not least because at night it's generally breezier than it is sunny. But solar in generally king, and getting cheaper all the time.
 
mattonthesea said:
After a few years of being boatless I am looking for a small blue water yacht. In checking prices for my budget forecasting I have noted that Aerogen wind generators are significantly more costly than Rutland. Any ideas why? Is it to do with materials and quality or something else?
Click to expand...

Total guess, but judging by the way the aerogen4 which came with the boat still actually works I would guess at quality of materials & build.

I've always liked the look of KISS if you could wait 'til crossing the pond if you're heading that way.

Found this...

http://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/33_7/features/Sailing-Wind-Generators_5467-1.html
 
KellysEye said:
>I have noted that Aerogen wind generators are significantly more costly than Rutland.

The reason Aerogens are more expensive than Rutlands is they produce a lot more power:

Aerogen Model Watts Rated Output
Aerogen 4 – 12 v 96 8 Amps
Aerogen 4 – 24 v 96 4 Amps
Aerogen 6 – 12 v 240 20 Amps
Aerogen 6 – 24 v 240 10 Amps

Rutland 913 Wind Turbine Power Output
• Wind speed start up of 5 knots
• 24W at 10 knots
• 90W at 19 knots
Click to expand...


Does an Aerogen 4 produce a lot more power than a Rutland 913?

The Aerogen 6 will produce more but is a lot bigger and therefore more expensive. Comparison of Aerogen 4 with Rtuland 913 is probably fairer.

Figures I saw online showed that output was very similar for Aerogen 4 and Rutland 913 (at 10, 20 and 30 knots). The Rutland seemed to be slightly higher output but only by 5-10%. I realise that these are manufacturer's figures and could have been tweaked. Both models are small 6 bladed wind-gens with similar swept area and so I'd expect similar output.
Rutland 913 has about 9.5% greater swept area than the Aerogen 4 so 5% - 10% more output doesn't appear to be unrealistic.

Perhaps one design is more complex or construction more robust. I know that the Rutland is pretty simple, just a static disk sandwiched between spinning magnets. The disk seems to be loops of copper wire embedded in epoxy or similar with rotating rare earth magnets front and rear. Not much else apart from some rectifiers in the body.
 
Last edited:
Mistroma said:
Does an Aerogen 4 produce a lot more power than a Rutland 913?

Figures I saw online showed that output was very similar for Aerogen 4 and Rutland 913 (at 10, 20 and 30 knots). The Rutland seemed to be slightly higher output but only by 5-10%.
Click to expand...

The comparison test I linked to in post #10 put the 913 and Aero4gen exactly equal, extrapolating to 48Ah per 24 hours.
 
In answer to the original question

LVM were bought out or sold to ITT who then moved production to China and stopped making the aqua part of the model. Logically prices should have fallen if they have not fallen then someone is grossly inefficient or they are pocketing the difference. I don't know if ITT still own the business, have not checked. We have found our Aerogen 4 very reliable. It, as mentioned, works in the dark (when our solars really do struggle) and on days of cloud and wind.

They are undoubtedly expensive but then its extremely inconvenient if its windy, cloudy and you have no power (because you rely on solar). Its about money and convenience. Many yachts simply have not enough room for enough solar and the support for the solar makes them, or can make them, expensive

If we had unlimited cash I'd buy the biggest windgen sensible, the Aero 6, a WattnSea water generator and as many solar as I could fit. Once you bring cost into the equation you need to compromise and a WattnSea generator, for example, is a very expensive toy if you just potter around in the Blackwater but probably the best option if you are making an Atlantic circuit (and don't intend sitting in the sun at anchor for prolonged periods).

There is no best buy.

Jonathan
 
Neeves said:
In answer to the original question

LVM were bought out or sold to ITT who then moved production to China and stopped making the aqua part of the model. Logically prices should have fallen if they have not fallen then someone is grossly inefficient or they are pocketing the difference. I don't know if ITT still own the business, have not checked. We have found our Aerogen 4 very reliable. It, as mentioned, works in the dark (when our solars really do struggle) and on days of cloud and wind.

They are undoubtedly expensive but then its extremely inconvenient if its windy, cloudy and you have no power (because you rely on solar). Its about money and convenience. Many yachts simply have not enough room for enough solar and the support for the solar makes them, or can make them, expensive

If we had unlimited cash I'd buy the biggest windgen sensible, the Aero 6, a WattnSea water generator and as many solar as I could fit. Once you bring cost into the equation you need to compromise and a WattnSea generator, for example, is a very expensive toy if you just potter around in the Blackwater but probably the best option if you are making an Atlantic circuit (and don't intend sitting in the sun at anchor for prolonged periods).

There is no best buy.

Jonathan
Click to expand...

Not certain that this explains why Aerogen 4 is more expensive than Rutland 913. Unless you are saying Aerogen used to be a small UK company and so manufacturing costs were higher than they ought to have been.

I thought that Marlec were also a small UK company and that their units are made in UK. So actually pretty similar in that respect.

Solar is certainly the best value and for the same amount of money:
If you only fit solar then you will have a reasonable amount of power almost every day in summer.
If you only fit wind-gen then you only have a reasonable amount of power on very few days

Only worth fitting a wind-gen after all available space for solar has been used up. Max. out both if money is no object.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top