Wind turbine explodes and topples.
Previously:
Wind turbine blade counterweight - GIF
Flat packing a wind turbine - GIF
Enormous wind turbine blade transported over stone arch bridge - GIF
Wind turbine explodes and topples.
Previously:
Wind turbine blade counterweight - GIF
Flat packing a wind turbine - GIF
Enormous wind turbine blade transported over stone arch bridge - GIF
New: BuildThreads.com - 300+ build posts/day (with photos)
bigtrev8xl (Dec 23, 2018), emu roo (Feb 21, 2026), Frank S (Dec 23, 2018), PJs (Dec 26, 2018)
emu roo (Feb 21, 2026)
If the mechanism that feathers the blades in high winds fails, the blades will spin faster and faster. Folks living nearby might notice the speedup and anticipate what the results might be.
Recently I watched a TV documentary that described the problems they're having with erosion of the leading edges of the blades and the efforts required to repair said damage before a blade fracture occurs. While blade weakening may certainly be a factor here, I think the real culprit is malfunction of the feathering equipment and the resultant overspeeding of the blades.
---
Regards, Marv
Smart phones are to people what laser pointers are to cats
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a definition
albertq (Feb 23, 2026), astroracer (Dec 23, 2018), emu roo (Feb 21, 2026), Frank S (Dec 23, 2018), PJs (Dec 26, 2018), Ralphxyz (Feb 25, 2026), that_other_guy (Jul 17, 2024)
All good analyses, including insurance. The explosion at base might be fracturing bolts and footing. Interesting to me; two lowest blades about 120° and 240° fly off at their respective angle. Third blade however launches good as vertical, not re-entering GIF frame til 3-4 seconds later. If the speed shown by the lower blades any indication, #3 near certainly flew up 1 blade length, because it appears to have flipped end for end! Holy Moley!
So Marv, what altitude can be calculated as attained?
Sincerely,
Toolmaker51
...we'll learn more by wandering than searching...
emu roo (Feb 21, 2026), Philip Davies (Dec 25, 2018), PJs (Dec 26, 2018)
I am not Marv but this is pretty elementary. The falling would have taken the same time as the time rising so if we say 2 secs to fall, the distance is 1/2 x a x t^2.
a = 9.807 so the altitude = 1/2 x 9.807 x 2^2 = 19.6 say 20 m. This ignores aerodynamic drag so if that is taken into account the height would be less.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks