Mr. Brush's Windmill Dynamo
Scientific American, 20 December 1890
It is difficult to estimate the effect of an invention on existing practices and industries. Occasionally a new invention will appear which will greatly affect a whole range of allied inventions and industries in such a way as to entirely change time-honored customs, inaugurate new practices and establish new arts. The commercial development of electricity is a notable example of this.
After Mr. Brush successfully accomplished practical electric illumination by means of arc lights, incandescent lighting was quickly brought forward and rapidly perfected. Gas lighting was also improved in various ways. Simultaneously with these, the electric distribution of power was carried forward, and important improvements were made in prime movers for driving dynamos. In this direction much has been done both in steam and water motors. Wind power has been repeatedly suggested for driving dynamos, but the adaptation of the windmill to this use seems to have been a problem fraught with difficulties. Few have dared to grapple with it, for the question not only involved the motive power itself and the dynamo, but also the means of transmitting the power of the wheel to the dynamo, and apparatus for regulating, storing and utilizing the current.
With the exception of the gigantic windmill and electric plant shown in our engraving, we do not know of a successful system of electric lighting operated by means of wind power.
The mill here shown, as well as all of the electrical apparatus used in connection with it, and the very complete system by which the results are secured, have been designed and carried out according to the plans of Mr. Charles F. Brush, of Cleveland, Ohio, and under his own personal supervision. As an example of thoroughgoing engineering work it cannot be excelled.
Every contingency is provided for, and the apparatus, from the huge wheel down to the current regulator, is entirely automatic.
The reader must not suppose that electric lighting by means of power supplied in this way is cheap because the wind costs nothing. On the contrary, the cost of the plant is so great as to more than offset the cheapness of the motive power. However, there is a great satisfaction in making use of one of nature's most unruly motive agents.
Passing along Euclid Avenue in the beautiful city of Cleveland, one will notice the magnificent residence of Mr. Brush, behind which and some distance down the park may be seen, mounted on a high tower, the immense wheel which drives the electric plant to which we have referred. The tower is rectangular in form and about 60 feet high. It is mounted on a wrought iron gudgeon 14 inches in diameter and which extends 8 feet into the solid masonry below the ground level. The gudgeon projects 12 feet above the ground and enters boxes in the iron frame of the tower, the weight of the tower, which is 80,000 pounds, being borne by a step resting on the top of the gudgeon. The step is secured to a heavy spider fastened to the lower part of the frame of the tower.
In the upper part of the tower is journaled the main wheel shaft. This shaft is 20 feet long and 6 1/2 inches in diameter. It is provided with self-oiling boxes 26 inches long, and carries the main pulley, which has a diameter of 8 feet and a face of 32 inches. The wheel, which is 56 feet in diameter, is secured to the shaft and is provided with 144 blades, which are twisted like those of screw propellers. The sail surface of the wheel is about 1,800 square feet, the length of the tail which turns the wheel towards the wind is 60 feet, and its width is 20 feet. The mill is made automatic by an auxiliary vane extending from one side, and serving to turn the wheel edgewise to the wind during a heavy gale. The tail may be folded against the tower parallel with the wheel, so as to present the edge of the wheel to the wind when the machinery is not in use. The countershaft arranged below the wheel shaft is 3 1/2 inches in diameter, it carries a pulley 16 inches in diameter, with a face of 32 inches, which receives the main belt from the 8 foot pulley on the wheel shaft. This is a double belt 32 inches wide. The countershaft is provided with two driving pulleys each 6 feet in diameter, with a face of 6 1/2 inches, and the dynamo is furnished on opposite ends of the armature shaft with pulleys which receive belts from the drive wheels on the countershaft.
The dynamo, which is on of Mr. Brush's own design, is mounted on a vertically sliding support and partially counterbalanced by a weighted lever. It will be seen that the countershaft is suspended from the main shaft by the main belt, and the dynamo is partly suspended from the countershaft by the driving belts. In this way the proper tension of the belts is always secured, the total load on the dynamo belts being 1,200 pounds, and on the main belt 4,200 pounds. The ends of the countershaft are journaled in sliding boxes connected by equalizing levers which cause both ends of the shaft to move alike. The pulleys are so proportioned that the dynamo makes fifty revolutions to one of the wheel. The speed of the dynamo at full load is 500 revolutions per minute, and its normal capacity at full load is 12,000 watts.
The automatic switching devices are arranged so that the dynamo goes into effective action at 330 revolutions a minute, and an automatic regulator is provided which does not permit the electromotive force to run above 90 volts at any speed. The working circuit is arranged to automatically close at 75 volts and open at 70 volts. The brushes on the dynamo are rocked automatically as the load changes. The field of the dynamo is slightly compounded. The current passes from the dynamo to contact shoes of polished and hardened steel carried by a crossbar on the tower, which shoes slide on annular plates surrounding the gudgeon. Conductors extend underground from these plates to the dwelling house. To guard against extraordinary wind pressure, the tower is provided at each of its corners with an arm projecting downwardly and outwardly, and carrying a caster wheel very near but not in contact with the circular rail concentric with the gudgeon. Ordinarily, the caster wheels do not touch the rail, but when the wind is very high, they come into contact with the rail and relieve the gudgeon from further strain.
In the basement of Mr. Brush's house there are 408 secondary battery cells arranged in twelve batteries of 34 cells each; these 12 batteries are charged and discharged in parallel; each cell has a capacity of 100 ampere hours. The jars which contain the elements of the battery are of glass, and each cell has its liquid covered with a layer of "mineral seal" oil, a quarter of an inch thick, which entirely prevents evaporation and spraying, and suppresses all odor. The automatic regulating devices are shown in one of the views of our engraving. At 1 are shown the voltmeters and ammeters employed in measuring the charging and discharging currents; at 2 is shown a series of indicators, one for each battery; 3 represents an electrically operated switch by means of which the current may be turned on or off the house mains by pressing push buttons in different portions of the house; 4 represents a ground detector, which is connected with the center of the battery and with the ground, so that should the conductor upon either end of the battery be grounded, the fact will be indicated by the movement of the index in one direction or the other from the zero point of the scale, thus showing not only that the battery is grounded, but indicating the grounded pole; 5 is a leakage detector connected up with the lamp circuits, and arranged to show any leakage from one conductor to the other; at 6 is shown a compound relay for operating the automatic resistance shown at 7. This resistance is placed between the batteries and the house mains, and is arranged to keep the voltage on the lamps constant at all times. In this device the resistance is secured by means of powdered carbon placed under varying pressure, the necessary movement being made by means of hydraulic pressure under the control of the relays.
The house is furnished with 350 incandescent lights, varying from 10 to 50 candle power each. The lamps most commonly used are from 16 to 20 candle power; about 100 incandescent lamps are in everyday use. In addition to these lights there are two arc lights and three electric motors. It is found after continued use of this electric plant that the amount of attention required to keep it in working condition is practically nothing. It has been in constant operation more than two years, and has proved in every respect a complete success.

From: http://www.tuuleenergia.ee/?path=0x126x48 

 

 

 

Some background on Forest City as we consider from a December 1, 2005 PD story:

Cleveland is home, but is that enough?

By Christopher Montgomery
Plain Dealer Reporter

It’s the question that, rightly or wrongly, follows Forest City Enterprises Inc. in its hometown:

Why not Cleveland?

The company is working on some of the highest-profile real estate projects in the country. It has been recognized nationally many times over for its expertise in handling difficult urban sites. And here, the case could be made, right outside the windows of its Terminal Tower headquarters, is an entire city awaiting redevelopment.
Some look at Forest City and see a company that hasn’t invested much here since it completed Tower City Center in 1990. They see executives whose sole effort locally has been to try to prop up the ailing retail center, and to do so at the expense of taxpayers.

Others look at Forest City and see a company that has given more to Cleveland than should be expected. They see executives who care deeply about the city, who are engaged in its stewardship and who would like nothing better than to tackle a big, new development in its back yard.

Forest City Chief Executive Chuck Ratner said the developer’s commitment to Cleveland is unassailable:

“Look, this is where we started. This is where we’ve been. This is where we are today. We’re here, and we’re going to continue to be here and be committed.”

Forest City employs about 700 people in Terminal Tower, 300 more elsewhere in Greater Cleveland.

Forest City paid $6.5 million in city and county taxes last year. And it continues to develop and manage properties in the region: planned communities in North Ridgeville and Pepper Pike, the Golden Gate shopping center in Mayfield Heights, senior apartments in Eastlake, a corporate park near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport and many others.

More important, some say, is the commitment of Forest City, and the Ratner family that controls it, to philanthropy and community leadership. Family members and others have given millions to various causes and organizations and have served on the boards of a long list of institutions, including Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland State University, the Cleveland Clinic, the Cleveland Foundation and the Jewish Community Federation of Cleveland.

“I bristle when people say they’ve turned their backs on Cleveland,” said David Browning, managing director of the Cleveland office of CB Richard Ellis, which handles leasing for some of the developer’s properties.

But the fact remains that Forest City doesn’t consider Cleveland one of its “core markets.” The bulk of its new projects are in California and the metropolitan areas of New York, Boston, Denver and Washington.

And what it does have here isn’t performing at the level Forest City has come to expect elsewhere. Chuck Ratner said “it’s no secret” that Tower City isn’t doing well, and the company has warned in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission that high vacancies and low rents in its Cleveland office properties could hurt future returns.

A look inside the corporate mindset

To get a view into Forest City’s corporate mindset, consider that Chuck Ratner has committed to memory statistics in an April Plain Dealer story about U.S. population trends. The story, citing U.S. Census Bureau figures, said Ohio’s population during the next 25 years will grow a paltry 1.7 percent, or roughly 200,000 people. California, Florida and Texas are each projected to gain more than 12 million people — more than the current population of Ohio.

“Now, as a real estate developer looking to develop a program and build a business, you obviously want to participate in that growth,” Ratner said. But that doesn’t mean, he said, that there aren’t opportunities in Cleveland.

He cited Case Western’s proposed 14-acre West Quad biotechnology campus, a $125 million project that Forest City is negotiating to develop. It would be Forest City’s largest development here since Tower City. And it’s a textbook case of the kind of deal that Forest City loves: a partnership with a university that plays on one of the region’s main strengths, the health sciences.

Forest City isn’t likely to take on other kinds of projects here because Northeast Ohio simply doesn’t yield the profits that a multibillion-dollar, publicly traded company needs to generate. Part of the problem is the region’s weak population and job growth; another drawback is the high cost of construction here, which developers and industry observers said was on par with better-performing markets like Chicago.

“What I always hear from [Forest City] is, if I have a dollar and have a choice to invest it here, where I can get $1.02 or 98 cents back in 10 years, or invest it in New York or L.A., where I can get $1.50, $2, $3 back, it’s an easy choice,” said Alec Pacella, vice president of investment services for the Cleveland office of Grubb & Ellis Co., a commercial real estate services firm. “That’s the philosophy that most real estate people have, and I can’t counter it.”

Cleveland should consider itself lucky to have a company like Forest City, regardless of its activity here, said Ronn Richard, president and CEO of the Cleveland Foundation.

“Cleveland needs the Ratners more than the Ratners need Cleveland,” Richard said. “There’s no business reason for them to stay here. It’s their pure affection for the city. And I think, frankly, they don’t get nearly their due.”

That kind of talk gets under the skin of Cleveland City Councilman Mike Polensek — one of the few elected officials willing to speak on the record about Forest City.

“How many times can you pat them on the back? I appreciate everything they’ve done, and I praise all of their charitable work, but since Tower City was built out, I’ve been disappointed,” said Polensek. “The public stepped up to the plate to help them, and now it’s their opportunity to rise to the occasion.”

While Polensek supported the more than $100 million in public subsidies that helped build Tower City, he criticized the additional public assistance that Forest City has sought to support the mall. Most recently, that has included lobbying to put a new Cuyahoga County governing center on Public Square and to build a convention center behind Tower City.

Polensek said Tower City has already received plenty of help because of its connections to the Gateway sports complex and the federal courthouse, built on Forest City-owned land behind it.

“Why does everything have to go there? Are we supposed to underwrite everything and get nothing in return? After all of the efforts with public money to link them up and inject bodies, every time I pick up the paper, I see them investing in Denver and Pittsburgh and New York.”

Polensek said Forest City should take on a big downtown project that could re-energize the city. His favored location: the Scranton Peninsula, roughly 70 acres of barren industrial land across the Cuyahoga River from Tower City. Forest City owns a large part of the peninsula and has flirted a couple of times with developing housing there.

When talk of building a new convention center turned serious in 2003, Forest City held out the promise that if it got the facility behind Tower City, it would develop the peninsula. When those talks fell through, it pulled the peninsula off the table and has since said that the market isn’t ready for more downtown housing.

Critic says company puts its interests first

Forest City’s involvement in the convention center debate, which is heating up again, is just another example of the developer putting its interests first, said Roldo Bartimole. He’s a corporate and media gadfly who published a one-man newsletter for decades and has been consistently critical of Forest City.

Over the years, he has chided the developer for the subsidies it received for Tower City, the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, M.K. Ferguson Plaza, Halle Building and other projects; for its close relationship with former Mayor Michael R. White; for requesting from Cuyahoga County, and receiving, lower values on its property that resulted in lower taxes; and for strong-arming the federal courthouse deal and demanding that every other big project be located near Tower City.

Developer Bob Stark countered by saying that Forest City “has invested more than anybody in the community and they’ve gotten the least amount of recognition or cooperation.”

“We have the geniuses of urban development in our midst, and they give us free advice all the time that we scorn, reject, ignore, and we go about paying millions of dollars to consultants that don’t know anything,” Stark said. “The city should run to the money to make things happen. . . . Instead, people are jealous and suspicious.”

Eric Hodderson, president of Neighborhood Progress Inc., a nonprofit group dedicated to revitalizing Cleveland neighborhoods, said Forest City has tackled important developments in the city that haven’t received much attention. They include a partnership with Rysar Properties and others to build 450 homes in Cleveland’s Central neighborhood and redeveloping the Lee-Harvard Shopping Center.

Cleveland City Councilman Joe Cimperman, whose ward includes downtown, said the city in recent years has taken the wrong approach with Forest City.

“The city hasn’t said, ‘This is what we’re willing to partner on.’ Instead, it’s always, ‘What are they going to develop?’ ” he said. “And the question is, how would we treat an out-of-town company that had the same presence here? If their survival benefits our existence, then why are we acting this way?”

There’s speculation that after a poor relationship with Mayor Jane Campbell, Forest City will become more active now that its choice for the office, Frank Jackson, will be taking over. For years there has been talk about handing Forest City the prime piece of real estate in the city: Burke Lakefront Airport. It’s an idea that could gain currency if lakefront plans start to move forward.

Alec Pacella, of Grubb & Ellis, is doubtful.

“That’s a lot of eggs to have in the Cleveland basket,” he said. “It’s a big chunk of land to take on in a market that’s growing this slowly.”

Cleveland commitment: Will it continue?

Chuck Ratner didn’t want to discuss his views on what could help the city, but he said Forest City wishes for “the same things that everybody wishes for.”

“We all want Cleveland to grow. We all want to create jobs. There’s no doubt about what we want to see happen,” Ratner said.

“The logical question is whether you think it can and what stops it from happening. And obviously we, like others, have opinions about all of that, but I think we’ve proven that we’ll work with whoever is here. We want to be helpful. We want to be a supporter. We’ve got a major investment here, and it’s a priority for us.”

But there are concerns about Forest City’s future in Cleveland. Some wonder whether the younger generation of family members will have the same commitment to the city as co-Chairmen Albert Ratner, 77, and Sam Miller, 84.

Richard Moore, a real estate analyst with KeyBanc Capital Markets in Cleveland who covers Forest City, said it’s likely that a nonfamily member will succeed Chuck Ratner, 64, as CEO. Some of the top executives — including David Larue, president and chief operating officer of the commercial group, and Bob O’Brien, executive vice president of finance and investment for the rental properties group — are outside the family.

Chuck Ratner said Forest City has “broadened the definition of family” by bringing in outside talent. But he said the founding family will continue to play an important role. Several younger family members, among them two of Chuck’s sons, work for the company. And Chuck said he doesn’t have any intention of leaving his job anytime soon.

Mark Rosentraub, dean of the Levin College of Urban Affairs at Cleveland State University, said Forest City’s presence in Cleveland is safe for another 20 years. The current leadership, including Chuck Ratner and his siblings and Albert’s son Brian, all live in Cleveland.

“It’s the generation after them that we have to worry about,” Rosentraub said. “At a certain point in time with family-owned businesses, it comes down to the question of whether they’re committed to keeping it in the region.”

Forest City has implied behind closed doors that its presence in Cleveland isn’t guaranteed, most recently during the heated competition to win the county building, which ended up going to a site owned by developer Dick Jacobs. Forest City wanted the county to choose the old Dillard’s building on Public Square.

Cuyahoga County Commissioner Jimmy Dimora said Albert Ratner, Sam Miller and other executives “pulled no punches” during the talks.

“They said they could fold up their operations here and pull out, that Tower City could go dark,” Dimora said. “They were throwing everything at us, including the kitchen sink, to try to get us into the Dillard’s location.”

Chuck Ratner said that “all we meant to imply was that we thought we had the best deal.”

“We said consistently that if we don’t have the best deal, don’t come to our place. But what better place is there to invest than Public Square? It’s good for you and it’s good for the community,” Ratner said. “We aren’t at risk, but our investment continues to be so.”

County Commissioner Tim Hagan said the risk to Cleveland is clear. “Where will Forest City be in 20 years? Who knows? But they’re going to make decisions that are based on the best interest of their publicly held company. If anyone thinks otherwise, they’re not living in the real world.”

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter: cmontgomery [at] plaind [dot] com, 216-999-4059

I think it is an excellent idea. But I agree Cleveland is so desparate for funds for so many things it would be hard to attract funding for something that is not highly functional. We'd need to build a serious cost benefit analysis that factors in tourist and industry dollars attracted by the wind turbine, how it would support job training to help develop that industry here, and even how much power it could generate. Perhaps we can combine the old Brush design with modern technology to create a more efficient design that make this a platform for advanced wind research and education and that does generate and transmit efficient power, and connects us with our history - the center of a wind research and training center.

How about the wind research center at the old Coast Guard station and the turbine on the point of Whiskey Island there.

Disrupt IT