Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                           AWES11429to11478 Page 125 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11429 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Online intro by Britannica on energy transformation

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11430 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: On the Feb. 5, 2014, Wikipedia "Wind power"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11431 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11432 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11433 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: AWES fuels generators

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11434 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing required

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11435 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11436 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing requ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11437 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing requ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11438 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: All Kites Convert Wind Energy (logical proofs)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11439 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11440 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Woo Jung Taek

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11441 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Payload Mass WECS (review and update)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11442 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Towards AWES Aerostructure?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11443 From: dougselsam Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11444 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: AWES fuels generators

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11445 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Payload Mass WECS (review and update)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11446 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11447 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11448 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Kites to hold large sheet that holds solar-energy conversions device

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11449 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11450 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11451 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11452 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11453 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: delft build massive bicycle wheel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11454 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Kites to hold large sheet that holds solar-energy conversions de

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11455 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Flygen-AWES hybird nets traveling electric aircraft?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11456 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11457 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: delft build massive bicycle wheel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11458 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Leonid Goldstein, AWE, non-AWE, and software development

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11459 From: edoishi Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Dog Stake Kite Flying

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11460 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11461 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Maritime kite trains

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11462 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11463 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11464 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11465 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11466 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11467 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11468 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11469 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11470 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11471 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Towards the realization of a rotating AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11472 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11473 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11474 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11475 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11476 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11477 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11478 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
Subject: Guenter Hoefgen




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11429 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Online intro by Britannica on energy transformation
I have not signed on to Britannica's "Free Trial"

but only see the articles' intro page that PierreB brought to or attention. A brief definition starts the article which PierreB shared with us 
energy conversion, the transformation of energy from forms provided by nature to forms that can be used by humans."
    The intent by Britannica is seemingly good, but the effort shorts probably what the Universe holds, unless humans can use EVERY kind of energy, which might ultimately have some merit.   Energy conversion is not fundamentally limited to the limits of humans as intimated by Britannica's intro definition, especially if humans fail to be able to use EVERY form of energy.     And it seems like, but I cannot be sure, that "nature" might be excluding humans in that definition; it might because it seems Britannica is setting up a favored "human" situation in the nearly forced "can be used by humans."  The potential smallness of the definition provided is offensive to me. Humans are a part of nature and it seems that human may also be a provider of energies that may be transformed into other forms of energy. Leaving out "nature" and "human" I take an effort to offering a more universal definition: My offer: Energy transformation is the formation of one energy form to another energy form. 
       Others may have an offer.
    ~ JoeF

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11430 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: On the Feb. 5, 2014, Wikipedia "Wind power"
PierreB brought forward a look at the article of about Feb. 5, 2014, circa, of Wikipedia on "Wind power"

and I took issue with the starting statement:  "Wind power is the conversion of wind energy into a useful form of energy."

As power is not energy, then wind power is not energy. Wind power is not a "conversion" but a rate that work is done. Energy is not a rate.  So, I have a wish that the editors of the locked article would massage the opening sentence. 

Thanks, PierreB, for bringing forward the item for some attention. 

~ JoeF

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11431 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)
Pierre,

There is no real contradiction between Britannica, Wikipedia, and AWE experts. Nowhere do the sources forbid kites to be AWES. 

Wikipedia notes that sailboats are windpower, which use wind to move, just as a simple kite moves upward from the ground, generating potential energy of mass-height. The kite then uses this potential energy to resist lulls.

Britannica is in terrible historical trouble, since it does not crowd-source Net intelligence like Wikepedia*, so it omited to mention sailing as wind power. This is an basic error of omission, not the logical exclusion of sailing. Wikpedia got it right.

For a Frenchman to blindly defend Britannica, with all its growing flaws, is freakish. You are arguing falsely ("appeal-to-authority") if you base any argument purely on the supposed infallibility of a human source. Joe and I are educated to spot errors in "authoritative" sources. Sailing and kiting is wind power, even if Brittanica were to directly deny it.

Kiting is sailing in the sky on a string, as a wind powered activity. Even the simplest kites convert wind energy to potential energy in many useful applications. You just can't admit this,

daveS

* Which allowed us to correct MikeB's abuse of Makani's Wikipedia entry. Note that WIkipedia is flawed too. It's Kite entry misspells "teather" [sic] in the first sentence.




On Friday, February 7, 2014 11:56 PM, Pierre BENHAIEM <pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11432 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)

DaveS,

 

"Wikipedia notes that sailboats are windpower, which use wind to move, just as a simple kite moves upward from the ground,..."

The appropriate correspondent of sailboat is rather kitesurf.

Now you do not agree with the definition of Britannica, it is a change.

What you name as""authoritative" sources " allows understanding for a large part of concerned people. As you want to change a definition without the agreement of others you make an authoritative action.

 

PierreB 

  




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11433 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: AWES fuels generators
AWES fuels generators are devices that make fuels from the workings of AWES.

AWES when specially designed with a "fuels generator" deposit a  fuel that may be used in remote or near locations sooner or later. Instead of churning out pulling, electricity, pumping, grinding, cutting, noise, light, etc. as a main gift, have an AWES churn out fuels. This is not a new idea and there are some patents expressing essentially this matter. Dave Lang and others have rehearsed AWES churning out hydrogen which hydrogen may be burned at near or distant locations sooner or later. Jon Chul Kim is one in our AWES community that has worked on AWES fuel generators. 

    One of the tasks in this arena is to identify the fuels that may be wanted; and then figure out how to integrate an AWES with a fuel generator that indeed deposit for the world the chosen fuel.  The article in Wikipedia very well may be incomplete and with errors since any editor may place text in the article without or without expertise:  wikifor fuel.

AWES have already been proposed for transporting fuels made by fuel-generating AWES.  
From time to time, feel free to discuss  in this topic thread FGA (fuel-generating AWES) or kite systems that churn out fuels. We have fellow Gabor Dobos who includes in his airborne untethered systems some similar matter, but if "fuel" regards "heat" as main focus, then the "air" that is in his focus might not exactly qualify. Up for discussion!

Where will the FGA get the ingredients that will go into making the fuels?  How will the wind's energy route to play in the processes that will churn out the fuels? 

Lift, 
 ~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11434 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing required
Pierre,

AWES kite Arches are still primarily just a CONCEPT for massive wind-powered lift and and to host WECS subunits in dense arrays. Arches are not yet tested in those roles. Basic flight-testing of the 300m2 Mothra1 and follow-on models are just a start.

In principle, a Kite Arch could help keep Ortho KiteBunches (only a concept, no testing) from interfering; and better launch and land, and maintain flight in low-wind. Strange if you do not want the help.

Only more testing can prove your inexpert prediction that Kite Arches are not a promising basis for better AWES. You must await the results of current and upcoming phases of serious AWE testing. Go complain over the due pace of engineering-science on some other forum.

If Kite Arches finally do succeed brilliantly in AWE, extreme pessimism by you and MikeB* added comic melodrama,

daveS

* MikeB inexpertly wonders if AWES based on kite arches are too "delicate and complex" to even test at all (while censoring opposing evidence that pure rope-loadpaths and kixels are likely the most robust (and cheapest) known scheme).
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11435 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Great AWE Debate (Engineering-Science Winning)
Pierre,

You are correct not to depend on my "authoritative" definitions, even though I am an AWE domain expert, Britannica has no such expertise. You are wrong to blindly depend on the beleaguered EB staff for your AWE engineering science.

The experts depend on the thesis that testing will decide AWE's best concepts. KiteLab Group tests AWES concepts more widely than anyone, and will make a final down-select once testing is conclusive (hopefully in another couple of years!)

Good luck to you in finding the winner's circle in an obsolete encyclopedia,

daveS




On Saturday, February 8, 2014 10:46 AM, Pierre BENHAIEM <pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11436 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing requ

daveS,

 

"Go complain over the due pace of engineering-science on some other forum."

You too.

 

PierreB

 






 

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11437 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing requ
Pierre,

I think AWE progress is moving quite fast, thanks to the growing kite and aerospace talent pool. I have no complaint about the amazing progress.

Every day is a Joy of Discovery. Therefore, its easy to wait for AWE skeptics to be shown wrong. It will even be a bit sad for the pioneers when AWE someday becomes fully explored and proven. Meanwhile, we are just entering the Golden Age of AWE R&D. Vain complaints are for those unable to enjoy the wonder of it all.

The AWES Forum was created for those sharing RAD solutions, so focus on that, if you can,

daveS

PS Someday even Britannica will catch up to AWE progress. Then you can finally believe it ;)




On Saturday, February 8, 2014 11:33 AM, Pierre BENHAIEM <pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11438 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: All Kites Convert Wind Energy (logical proofs)
Fundamental Proof that Kites are WECS-

1) Let kites be defined naturally as a (Flight) System, including all common versions that fly in wind on tethers.

2) These kites rise up from the surface to higher altitudes, by natural operation.

3) The masses of these kites are raised against gravity. 

4) Raised kite mass contains Potential Energy, specifically Gravitational Energy.

5) The original source of this Kite Gravitational Energy is the Kinetic-Energy of the Wind.

6) Therefore, common Kites convert Wind Kinetic Energy into Gravitational Energy, as a WECS.


Corollary Proof of Utility of the Wind Energy Conversion according to Encyclopedia Britannica-

1) Simple kites have many known uses, like signalling, recreation, and therapy.

2) These uses only function if the kites fly.

3) Kites fly by converting Wind Kinetic Energy into Gravitational Energy.

4) Therefore, simple useful kites are formal WECS.

5) Therefore, useful kites are useful WECS, under Encyclopedia Britannica's criteria.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11439 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
I have an application for kite arches capable of generating lots of electric power at a coastal city in the southern hemisphere . . .  lots of mountain gorges and valleys that face the incoming ocean winds.

The country has a projected need for lots of additional electric power

Harry


To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 11:04:38 -0800
Subject: [AWES] Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing required)

 

Pierre,

AWES kite Arches are still primarily just a CONCEPT for massive wind-powered lift and and to host WECS subunits in dense arrays. Arches are not yet tested in those roles. Basic flight-testing of the 300m2 Mothra1 and follow-on models are just a start.

In principle, a Kite Arch could help keep Ortho KiteBunches (only a concept, no testing) from interfering; and better launch and land, and maintain flight in low-wind. Strange if you do not want the help.

Only more testing can prove your inexpert prediction that Kite Arches are not a promising basis for better AWES. You must await the results of current and upcoming phases of serious AWE testing. Go complain over the due pace of engineering-science on some other forum.

If Kite Arches finally do succeed brilliantly in AWE, extreme pessimism by you and MikeB* added comic melodrama,

daveS

* MikeB inexpertly wonders if AWES based on kite arches are too "delicate and complex" to even test at all (while censoring opposing evidence that pure rope-loadpaths and kixels are likely the most robust (and cheapest) known scheme).

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11440 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Woo Jung Taek
Woo Jung Taek    (spelling may be machine translated, not sure)  
[Wanted: good English translation of the tech announced in the patent. Wanted AWES volunteer for Korea. ] 
 



A clip from many drawings of the patent.  He shows other concepts other than the loop-driven groundgen by axis traverse to the stream as Magenn and various flip-wing.
For larger of the following images, see original document linked on the page hyperlinked below, the title. 



A AERIAL WIND POWER GENERATING SYSTEM HAVING AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR ON THE GROUND  


Page bookmarkKR101214277  (B1)  -  A AERIAL WIND POWER GENERATING SYSTEM HAVING AN ELECTRIC GENERATOR ON THE GROUND
Inventor(s):WOO JUNG TAEK [KR] +
Applicant(s):WOO JUNG TAEK [KR] +
Classification:
- international:F03D11/04; F03D3/00; F03D5/00; F03D5/06
- cooperative:
Application number:KR20110065433 20110701 
Priority number(s):KR20110065433 20110701
=============================
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11441 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Payload Mass WECS (review and update)
If I'm understanding this correctly, You have to always be opposing the drop through the pulley, and then descend and re-lift if you want to repeat the task.
The idea that all kites are AWES still makes me think I want to lift the least tether reasonable.
I'll keep advocating driving ground gen & pumps as best fit solutions until I see a need for snother solution. They can also smooth out kite responses when necessary.


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11442 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Towards AWES Aerostructure?
This feels like it is close to AWES aerostructure 
or otherwise might lend something towards AWES aerostructure.


Suspension type flying airport with stringed inflatable film staggering structure  


Page bookmarkCN102704714  (A)  -  Suspension type flying airport with stringed inflatable film staggering structure
Inventor(s):GUOGUANG LIU; ZHIWEI WU +
Applicant(s):UNIV CIVIL AVIAT CHINA +
Classification:
- international:B64B1/58; B64F1/305; E01C9/00; E04H3/00
- cooperative:

Application number:CN20121179320 20120604 
Priority number(s):CN20121179320 20120604
Also published as:CN102704714 (B) 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11443 From: dougselsam Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

Hey Dave S.
A rock is held against the wind by contact with the ground.  A shear-tether, if you will.  And it deflects wind, turning kinetic energy into heat.  You can't tell, but the earth is deflected a teeny bit, so the rock is doing work.  So any old rock is a wind energy system, by your definition.  And I ick-splained how a lawnmower engine is really a wind energy conversion system (WECS) with its own internal weather.
And I noticed yesterday as I was slowing down from 72 mph on skis how when I stood up, I became a kite, well sort of.  Good thing.  Everything's a kite.  Safety first.  Some people say I should be wearing a helmet.  So many trees, so little time...
But what I really have to take exception to is your assertion that my aviation experience is limited to a few flights in my hang glider down a bunny slope.  That is not the sum total off my flying time.  I also flew Cox gasplanes in a circle or more often into the ground as a kid, AND last year I bought a cheap radio controlled electric airplane from Harbor Freight, placed it on the concrete floor (runway) opened one of my hangar doors, and "hit the gas".  I flew this plane so well, my first time, that I caught an updraft within the first minute.  So I cut the power to both motors and tried to just hit one motor or the other for brief bursts, to steer the plane and keep it overhead.  Well, it just kept going up.  And up.  And up and up and up, with no motor running.  Maybe it was caught in an invisible dust devil.  Soon it was hard to see, and after a while, we just couldn't find it in the sky anymore.  It was gone.  So there.  I'd like to see you pull that off.

Oh and of course I used to make and fly kites as a kid, but we know that has nothing to do with anything.  Kites.  Hmmph.  Kites are for kids...

:)




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11444 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: AWES fuels generators
I mentioned previously the possible link between floating bag / pipe / line     algal fuel generation systems and AWES.

Can we mount AWES (and underwater tidal energy systems UTES?) around algal ring tubes?

Can we lift algal doped pipes and water into clear light or warm air and drop it into collection vessels / pipes.

Can lifted lines be used to clear invasive seaweed / species / litter
Can lifted lines, pipes, bags or sheet walls be used to divert, lift or mix water across thermoclines , subducted flows, through nutrient gradients...
You have to be careful on that last one... never know what invasive species you'll promote with it.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11445 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Payload Mass WECS (review and update)
Rod,

No matter what, our kites all store some wind energy as converted gravitational energy, which we need to help compensate for lulls. The example just presented was primarily for reflection, not an endorsement yet. 

Still, there is something very attractive about growing ice blocks at high altitudes and lowering them to make power and supply water and refrigeration. Kites could seek out narrow icing layers (~32-39F) as the opportunity presents. The icing gravitational store is mightiest along the ITCZ, as a tropical paradox.

Harvesting water vapor as clean water is a related opportunity. The regenerated power of lowering is akin to mines that generate by the lowering of ore via conveyors. You rightly point out the cycling of kite wings needs to be solved, so more fun for us. Also, swinging large masses around is dangerous, so a lot of kite-safety R&D is needed.

In moving mass-energy methods, we also need to think of airborne fleets (even IFOs) of harvesters (and dispersers) that aggregate (or spread) a resource to (and from) central "kite elevators"*, for highest efficiencies. 

Agile niche AWE requires calls us to create an amazing kite culture; ready for anything, with a large varied quiver,

daveS

PS These AWE "trunk-line" concepts (electric-conductors; H2O, H2, pipes; people-movers, etc.) are more AWES Forum CC IP, with some prior work by AlexB.




On Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:46 PM, Rod Read <rod.read@gmail.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11446 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto
Doug wrote: "A rock is held against the wind by contact with the ground.  A shear-tether, if you will."


I will not. "Shear-tether" is all yours. If you over-generalize what a kite is, the definition loses usefulness. An archetypal kite wing actually flies up in wind on a string tether. Your rock does not.

The proper expert definition of a Kite is far narrower than your definition,

daveS


On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:13 PM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com" <dougselsam@yahoo.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11447 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
Harry,

Your South American location has the potential to be an AWE R&D test-leader first, and then make a major down-select. In any case, if you have the right terrain and wind, no kite arch is needed, as WECS can be simply suspended from cables anchored to cliffs, ridges, and peaks, which is easier, and still innovative (quasi-airborne).

Please let us know how we can help,

daveS




On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:34 PM, Harry Valentine <harrycv@hotmail.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11448 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Kites to hold large sheet that holds solar-energy conversions device
Have a kite system of multiple wings (one or more) with multiple tethers (one or more) that hold a large sheet of solar-energy conversion devices on the sheet or integrated with the sheet itself.   Fly the sheet above the clouds perhaps to get good solar radiation on the sheet. Send the gained electricity to the ground.  Or when the ground space is congested, the sheet could be kite-system lifted over the constraints to collect and convert solar energy.  Having kite systems fly solar-energy conversion devices is not a new idea and has been discussed some in the AWES forum. Some patent applications have kite systems feature such method in various ways, some have the very surface of the wings in the kite system be thin-film solar-energy-converting capable.


A similar strategy using "airplanes" is rehearse in the patent: 
by Mitubishi Electric Corporation: 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11449 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

DaveS,

 

A rock being a WECS, a kite being a WECS by your definition, a rock is a kite by your logic.

 

PierreB 



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11450 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto
No, Pierre.

All kites are WECS, but not WECS are kites, in my view. For example, a turbine on a tower or a solar panel on a rooftop are not kites to me.

You clearly stated you would stop arguing me on these points, which is a sound idea, since you do not understand me.


On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:50 PM, Pierre BENHAIEM <pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11451 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto
The following technical terms may not be in an encyclopaedia ...
nor worth arguing about

Doug I'm calling BS on the 72mph. Got a GPS readout?
What were you wearing?
See in the ladies moguls in Sochi today ... it's fast at the bottom but only ~50 max
There was an interesting similarity with the mens snowboard slopestyle
Loose baggy clothing as opposed to tight suits chosen for flexibility over speed performance ..
as at ~50 - 60 mph baggy clothing doesn't have that much effect...

The boarders spun and looked like AWES...Think there was a 1440 but

Of course as a TSR gets high   (wing or kite gets way fast) rigidity becomes v important
OK granted speed is super duper important for top end power .... but size is important for full power.
it's a lot of wind
A huge load of cheapy kites travelling fast in a controlled manner = a stack of reliable power and eventually a lower LCOE

I reckon a spinning tower of semi rigidised arch kites a bit like the bottled tornado designs spins in a suitable goldilocks size as to be practicable

Only kidding about the speed BS Doug. I'll still beat you on my board wearing baggies though.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11452 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
There are a few similar small scale sites a wee walk away from here......
Wouldn't need the lift kites demoed in this valley top lift vid

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11453 From: Rod Read Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: delft build massive bicycle wheel
This aint what you think (unless you are in Dleft)
https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/fba9f12fcbd0

But this evokes images of bicycle wheel rings pointing to the sky
& Energy change


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11454 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Kites to hold large sheet that holds solar-energy conversions de

Company spelling correction to: MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORP ============================================================

 (unlinked clip)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11455 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Flygen-AWES hybird nets traveling electric aircraft?
AWES charges its aloft batteries with aloft generator while tethered to the ground or ocean. 

Then the system releases its hold to earth-anchor and up-gathers its tether and anchoring method (??). 
With the charged batteries, the wing arrangement operates for travel as an electrically-powered untethered aircraft. 
Ready for another charge? Drop anchor and repeat cycle. 
This is not too unlike the NASA blimp art suggestion. But non-blimp options are suggested here. 
Who will be the first person to fly around the world using such hybrid AWES?

Ancient travel by kite methods included dragging resistive set on land or on water; such has been being revisited along several methods.   Contemporary combinations of cart, landwheeled boards, skis, hydrofoil, water board, ... let long distance travel occur. 

And we have the travel by FFAWE with the free-flight tethered upper wing set and lower wing set coupled. These are sharp interpretations of Woglom's early fugitive parakites. 

And the air guy Gabor Dobos has been developing a means that could give world-around travel using AWES untethered means and air as kind of fuel.    DSUTWP 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11456 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

The opportunities do seem to be a great multitude as noted near the beginning of this forum. 

How will we spend our time? Which AWES will receive our attention. A new room may be opened for specialties.   In mathematics literature in the search for what mathematics is, some seasoned mathematician suggest that "Mathematics is what mathematicians do."     AWE community will be known by what it does, I suggest. How much of our coin will be spent on rock WECS  (high interest in geology circles. http://geology.com/articles/racetrack-playa-sliding-rocks.shtml   Soil erosion respects wind energy on rocks in many ways. Serious science. The principle of anchor-tension-blown-wing plays in many places in scinece.)   Choices will be made by AWE community members and the resultant will be AWE.   We have a powerful see in kite.  As PierreB indicated, look over the general flow of what this forum is about and most of the doings is about generating electricity by tethered wings that have close resemblance to traditional kited wings; we have many secondary task interests on the record, some inspired by seeing the richness of the kite principle in even some its abstract glories. Appreciating the richness, the depth, the broadness of the kite has merits.   But then again, how will AWE known?  Perhaps by what we do. 

    Spend your kite coin and bless the world with energies in the form you choose; use the kite coin to solve the challenges you choose. The mission of this forum is that kite coins will be spent to do some significant good in the world by way of AWES.    Let's keep going as we are with a very interesting start. 

      

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11457 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: delft build massive bicycle wheel

Nice Rod!

       In article:  "one million kilograms. That much mass, constructed in this fashion, prevented torsion on the structure to keep it stable, but was insufficient to prevent severe vibrations due to winds."

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11458 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Re: Leonid Goldstein, AWE, non-AWE, and software development
One of his patent applications: 

And a collection: 

Fast researcher/document guy.   

Leo,
 DougS does not live far from you. 

Best, 
~ JoeF

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11459 From: edoishi Date: 2/8/2014
Subject: Dog Stake Kite Flying
Attachments :
    Photo showing a Kite Ship OL being flown from a kPower pilot station through a kPTO along a crosswind cable-way. 

    Notice the "dog stake" method of flying; this enables the pilot to easily relaunch the kite without a long walk.  Note also the double drive kite engine in the foreground.  

    kPower cc by 3.0
      @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11460 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
    Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
    Dave,


    In the southern hemisphere at the location to which I refer, the southern winter winds (May 1 to Oct 1) blow from the west to the east  . . .  and directly into valleys of coastal mountains. There is great potential to install cables across the entrances to the valleys and operate a quasi-airborne wind energy technology.

    I will have to contact some local people to assess interest

    Of related interest, there are many cities around the world where winds blow directly into from the ocean and into the valleys of coastal mountains . . . . there is potential to install cables across many such valleys around the world, to suspend wind energy technology.

    Harry


    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
    From: santos137@yahoo.com
    Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 13:48:47 -0800
    Subject: Re: [AWES] -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arches (testing required)

     

    Harry,

    Your South American location has the potential to be an AWE R&D test-leader first, and then make a major down-select. In any case, if you have the right terrain and wind, no kite arch is needed, as WECS can be simply suspended from cables anchored to cliffs, ridges, and peaks, which is easier, and still innovative (quasi-airborne).

    Please let us know how we can help,

    daveS




    On Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:34 PM, Harry Valentine <harrycv@hotmail.com
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11461 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
    Subject: Maritime kite trains
    Many hobby kite builders have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to launch and fly kite trains.

    There may be a need to adapt kite trains to maritime propulsion, on routes that run parallel to the trade winds. While a kite train offers little gain in boat speed, it does offer the potential to pull a heavier resistance . . . . .  such as a much heavier boat.

    A boat pulled by a kite train may include a hydraulic turbine that drives electrical generating equipment . . . plus batteries to store electric power.

    Maritime kite trains seems do-able

    Has anyone in the group had any hands-on experience using a kite-train to pull a boat?


    Harry

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11462 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
    Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains

    Dave Culp in the late 1970s used kite trains to pull boats.   Dave Culp

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11463 From: Harry Valentine Date: 2/8/2014
    Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains
    Will there be any further development toward trains of mega-size kites to pull a ship such as a bulk carrier (they sail at lower speed than container ships)?

    The container ship Emma Maersk sails at speeds of up to 30-knots on trans-Pacific voyages, powered by an engine of 110,000-Hp.

    Any significant rise in the world price of oil could prompt the maritime transport to seek alternatives . . . . . on a large ship, a kite train may be an option.


    Harry



    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
    From: joefaust333@gmail.com
    Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 19:17:10 -0800
    Subject: [AWES] RE: Maritime kite trains

     

    Dave Culp in the late 1970s used kite trains to pull boats.   Dave Culp

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11464 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/8/2014
    Subject: Re: Maritime kite trains

    The Case for Transport Sail Craft

    by

    Billy Roeseler, Theo Schmidt, Andrew Beattie, Cory Roeseler,

    Dave Culp, Russell Long, Tad McGeer, & Richard Wallace

    A version of this paper was presented by the authors at the World Aviation Congress, 

    Los Angeles, California, on October 24, 1996

    ===========================================

    Harry, 

           I do not have any notes where teams are materially moving toward kite trains for heavy-ship traction use. It would be fun to know the backroom notes of SkySails Marne on this. 

    [Anyone?]    

    http://www.energykitesystems.net/Kites/Trains/  is a bucket of links on trains. 

    A room in AWESMuseum for study and discussing kite trains, yet a young room: KiteTrains



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11465 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Mothra for towing icebergs

    In some posts I point some too big difficulties to produce electricity with an Arch like Mothra.

    However its two anchors _ being an inconvenience for adaptation in all wind directions _ can take a serious advantage by holding the iceberg

    IcebergWaterbagKiteTowingMethod.89192722.JPG

    in two distant points or more without loss of useful kite area. To start some crosswind motion is realized, and for travel Mothra becomes static. Towing an iceberg has no forcing schedule _ only waiting for good winds _ contrary to transportation of goods where a precise schedule is required, the economy of fuel decreasing in spite of towing kite since ship speed must be constant.

     

    PierreB

     

     

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11466 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs
    Pierre,

    My opinion is that the risk and difficulty of operating kites far offshore is often underestimated in AWE, and that Kite Arches will be validated as an onshore AWES basis long before they ever find use towing at sea (as a "buddy-boat" (2 boat) rig already discussed)

    Flying directly from an iceberg or waterbag is unnecessary. Why not use a tow-ship with a real ship kite like KiteShip's or SkySails'?

    daveS


    On Sunday, February 9, 2014 2:45 AM, Pierre BENHAIEM <pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11467 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
    Pierre wrote: " I point some too big difficulties to produce electricity with an Arch like Mothra...its two anchors _ being an inconvenience for adaptation in all wind directions font-family:Georgia;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;">
    Pierre's prediction that kite arches will have "too big difficulties to produce electricity" is planned for testing. kPower is confident no inherent barriers exist to adding various electrical generation capabilities to the huge wings (like smaller "turbine-on-a-wing" AWES have been shown to work)

    Compass Belay of a large arch has been tested, and is only a minor "inconvenience" compared to the many major advantages of kite arches. Compass Belay was found to be quite easy and fast in testing*. Kite Arch weather cocking is predicted to be even easier by vehicles and/or tracks or rails.

     In every kite arch case, from the largest kites in the world, rigged with crosswind lines for stability, to the competitive kite arch events at WSIKF, arches are found to be practical to rotate. Large-scale Compass Belay is based on simple conventional rigging methods. Besides Compass Belay, Land-Rotate-Relaunch was also found practical in testing*, and a second "back-up" method.

    Pierre and MikeB do not seem to have experience with Kite Arches, nor the standard industrial rigging practices that Mothra-tech is based on. Ongoing kite-arch R&D will help settle the controversy between arm-chair pessimists and hands-on developers.


    * See 2012-13 kPower/KiteLab Austin kFarm Encampment reports. Note also that the SkyBow is a distinct kite arch being tested alongside Mothra-tech, including for electrical generation. A Mothra can, in principle, even host SkyBows like any other WECS.




    On Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:12 PM, Harry Valentine <harrycv@hotmail.com
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11468 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto
    Not that hard to exceed 70 mph on downhill racing skis.
    Just point them down and tuck.
    Make sure nobody is in your path.
    Moguls: slow
    Luckily we have no moguls since we have so many snowboarders and they naturally prevent moguls from forming.  That's good, so we can go fast.  It helps if the slope has been groomed recently.
    Slopestyle: not trying to see how fast they can go.
    Snowboarders also exceed 70 mph at Mt High.
    Yes everyone has GPS, some people have video cams with GPS readout on the final video.  We know how fast we go.  This is the 21st century.  Well, for some people...
    Roddy I had a surfing problem when I lived at the beach, but now that I'm up here, it's turned into a skiing problem.  Why just today...
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11469 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche

    "arm-chair pessimists" are people both criticizing serious teams like Makani and proposing schemes having no chance to usely produce electricity. A system like FlygenKite ( http://flygenkite.com ) is more suitable than any arch (but less than Makani which is yet insufficient) for this purpose, although I look after another serious possibility as rotative system.

     

    PierreB


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11470 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

    Dave S.  You said "If you over-generalize what a kite is, the definition loses usefulness." - I feel like I may be getting through to you...

    Tell Joe, K?

    :)

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11471 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Towards the realization of a rotating AWES

    For utility-scale crosswind kites show their inherent limits (moving tether, no maximization of space),while they are seen as the most promising AWES. Now helicopter like SWP is yet too heavy, but I think it is a problem of engineering (R&D) rather than an inherent limit: see the human powered helicopter on www.youtube.com/watch?v=syJq10EQkog . What are _ bad or good _ possibilities to make a rotor lighter and more scalable _before SuperTurbining it?

     

     

    PierreB

     

     

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11472 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: -Kite Arches - Correcting Pierre and MikeB about AWES Kite Arche
    Pierre,

    Do not be misled by extreme GoogleX-Makani hype so as to suggest them as the serious side of AWE*. I know Makani from direct inside observation. Dave Culp asked me to rate Makani from within (via the close KiteShip connection). I found no aerospace depth in their founding team (that made the 2009 down-select). Including Joby. They were elite playboys throwing a fabulous five year party (beaucoup"serious" Hawaii R&D :) ). Boeing Aerospace veteran and AWE follower, ChrisC rightly asked "what are they smoking?" (in regard to a typical Makani claim; to be targeting 10km altitude). Even MikeB, the top arm-chair pessimist about Makani, sees right through them.

    Just wait until the larger smarter open-side of AWE, including arches, is allowed to be directly tested against Makani. No one should be more surprised than you if  Makani's premature most-dangerous, most-expensive AWES concept  is confirmed as an engineering nightmare (failsafe autonomous offshore composite jumbo aeroabatic E-VTOL endurops  flygen). I do not even seem them able to effectively unit-scale to M600 size, as the power-curves, LCOE estimations, and reliability-metrics will show,

    daveS

    * Your idea of "serious" seems to tolerate Google-hype promoting a stealth-venture, AWEC pay-to-play secret leadership, Barnard-On-Wind  technical censorship, vanity and greed patents, and even playing the piano for AWEC stage-managed conferences that ban AWEIA from planning. The opposing sense of Serious in AWE is a global-urgency motive, superior open-knowledge, collaborative R&D, KIS, RAD, and comparative-testing diligence.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11473 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

    Maybe remotely controlling a from-iceberg kite tug could save from having to employ tug ships. Maybe one kite pilot person hundreds of miles away could kite-control a hundred smaller  kited ice bergs with smart connections to KCUs. Or maybe the KCUs could be robotic and using GPS and sensors for wind, etc. bring "home" the bergs all on their own.   


    The link PierreB brought forward had a suggestion to use ocean tidal forces or wave power (forget) to pump melted berg water to higher land locations.   Kite systems could also play in that pumping effort. 

    ~ JoeF

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11474 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

    Just as I closed the last post, a flash came to me about kite arches, say Mothra. Recall how those scissor-like large ice-block grabbers work that pinch the block.  Well, the anchors of the Mothra have a pinching component on soil earth that could possible be used to pinch an anchor into the sides of an ice berg  to get a grab; then the anchor terminal might be shaped as a plow wing and slowly "fly" into the ice berg as the pinch continues to grab the berg. 

    Vintage Ice GRABBER Ice Block LIFTING Tool Carrier HOIST Rustic 14 1/2  

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11475 From: dave santos Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs
    Joe,

    A kite arch does not squeeze so much as pull away. Large ice-hooks are less scalable than just tying a rope noose around an iceberg. Iceberg towing needs to be proven worthwhile first, then real ship kites should be first tested before arches.

    Mothra's are designed to operate over grass, as a dual harvest concept. Civil-engineered soil-anchors make a far better anchor-field than shifting ice. SLKs seem better for dynamically random-shaped capsizing lumps of melting ice.

    At least Pierre sees a plausible role for kite arches, but towing icebergs is not the most promising application for any universal kite method,

    daveS


    On Sunday, February 9, 2014 3:29 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com" <joefaust333@gmail.com
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11476 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Distinguishing some families of AWES regarding autorotating roto

    I hear what you are saying, DougS !     Usefulness is a neat arena.  Use language to move one's project forward; one need not use the words and concepts that are not helping one's project.  Be prudent for one's life and project. 

        For me, yet, I am finding neat usefulness for the findings about kite essence as such plays in different realms. I've advanced from your seeings; thanks for the play.  A mastery over the essence just may help one move in the most practical realms also. Yet, a worker may focus on one niche mechanical project and not have much need for mastering kite essence in other realms; he or she may have enough text to complete a certain project.    


        It took only a second to click-share a few years ago that a strand of string  in the air or in water will have its times as a true kite system and WEC and thus AWES; but such awareness may not much help Magenn MARS system project.  However, there well may be some niche scientific research that could benefit from appreciating the kiting going on in a strand of string out in the air or water.  The strand of string in a real dynamic fluid goes through many kinds of motions; some of the actions fly the end portions deferentially and sets up tension in the mid sections of the strand; compression and tension is occurring; segments react with the whole in various ways.  Have the string with ribbon flat shape and get even more actions.

        http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/files/2013/09/flying-balloon-spider.jpg

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/files/2013/09/ballooning-spider.jpg

    http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/94874/94874,1301591949,3/stock-photo-blue-ribbon-fly-and-bend-on-a-white-background-74402431.jpg

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11477 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Re: Mothra for towing icebergs

    My main focus was resolving the angle of an arch tether into its anchor vector two components; one component pinches toward the other anchor; the other component has a projection downwind. The two anchors' pinch component squeeze or compress the soil directly between them. http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/vectors/u3l1e2.gif


    The Fsub h  components of the two anchors of the Mothra are toward each other, a soil pinching. 



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 11478 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2014
    Subject: Guenter Hoefgen
    HOEFGEN GUENTER DR


    Device for obtaining wind energy  


    Page bookmarkDE3209368  (A1)  -  Device for obtaining wind energy
    Inventor(s):HOEFGEN GUENTER DR [DE] +
    Applicant(s):HOEFGEN GUENTER DR +
    Classification:
    - international:F03D11/04; F03D5/00; (IPC1-7): F03D5/00
    - cooperative:
    Application number:DE19823209368 19820315 
    Priority number(s):DE19823209368 19820315

    First page clipping of DE3209368 (A1)