Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                           AWES15148to15197 Page 198 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15148 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15149 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15150 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15151 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15152 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15153 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15154 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15155 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15156 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15157 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15158 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15159 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15160 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15161 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15162 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15163 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15164 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15165 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15166 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15167 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15168 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15170 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15171 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15172 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15173 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15174 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15175 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15176 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15177 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15178 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15179 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15180 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: 10 easy ways to do AWE: - Done talking to Dave S.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15181 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15182 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15183 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15184 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15185 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15186 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15187 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: multiple blade hosting arrangement advantage on fixed position

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15188 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15189 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15190 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15191 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15192 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15193 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: 10 easy ways to do AWE: - Done talking to Dave S.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15194 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15195 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15196 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15197 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15148 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family
"as Harburg taught and followed apparently unknowing by Serpentine teacher Selsam" *** Hello JoeF: Harburg was some of the main prior art I overcame in getting my several patents issued.  The fact that you just stumbled across him after all these years is surprising.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15149 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
"Doug has clearly bet his public legacy on torque."  WEASEL - LIAR.  It is YOU who have "Bet your public legacy" on torque being an IMPOSSIBLE solution, citing "scaling".  Now you are trying to WEASEL YOUR WAY OUT OF YOUR PREVIOUS IDIOTIC STATEMENTS, AS USUAL.  DO NOT MISQUOTE ME.  DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.  I have said there are 1000 easy ways to do AWE, and you very well KNOW IT.  GO AWAY.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15150 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family
"All roads lead to SuperTurbine(R)"
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15151 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
"The groundgen stage can be regarded as ST (other stages?)" - JoeF
***Hey Joe, nothing about SuperTurbine(R) demands a groundgen.  Superturbine(R) is a very broad and versatile concept.  For example, the patents cite use as a flying machine.  That would be a motor, not a gen, not ground-based.  :) DougS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15152 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family
Doug wrote: "Harburg was some of the main prior art I overcame in getting my several patents issued. "

Rudy's patent was not "overcome" by Doug. Only a torque work-around method could do that (like rope-driving). Harburg, Fry, and a few other cases have inventive priority over Doug in the stacked-rotor torque-transmission AWES space. An issued patent these days is no assurance of validity, as Lemly's widely cited paper (including the AWES Forum) explains-

Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office by M Lemley - ‎Cited by 956 - ‎Related articles Jun 1, 2000 - terms, the patent office is "rationally ignorant" of the objective validity of ... 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15153 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
Doug,

You have long and often claimed "All roads lead to the SuperTurbine (TM)". This is essential AWES torque-transmission. Excepting your LadderMill, (which you disavow), torque-transmission is your public legacy in AWE (so far). Your recent endorsing of many other AWES schemes as "easy" is not well known, nor well supported (you are a non-participant).

Maybe you do have a secret non-torque AWES solution, but its not part of the public record. Its still in your power to guide your AWE legacy away from years of ST over-promotion, but you have to work seriously at it, and it will take time,

daveS


On Monday, October 6, 2014 9:10 AM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15154 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

"The groundgen stage can be regarded as ST (other stages?)" quotation from me (see message 27 on present topic). Thanks Doug for your precision.

 

PierreB 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15155 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
"the top rotors have the best wind.... If you make the top rotors bigger, as Doug proposes, ... rpm slows." *** No, increased diameter maintains RPM.  Matching RPM at higher heights was the REASON for increasing diameter, in the first place, REMEMBER?  This goes to show how this one recalcitrant person cannot maintain a train of thought, even long enough to finish a single sentence.
I will not answer this one person anymore.  That I should need to state this obvious inconsistency is a glaring example of why - he is on his own.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15156 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch
Ancient Kite-Fishing involves a kite with a secondary fishing line dangling in the water. This forms a type of natural Kite-Arch aligned with the wind; with many other informal cases known.

What is new is to see in the Wind-Aligned-Kite-Arch a systematic method with many potential novel uses. For example, an upwind line anchors the working kite in place at a low angle, and a downwind line can be set more or less vertical. A vertical line can comprise a superior PTO, cableway elevator, sensor tower, omnidirectional antenna, and so on. A downwind line can also range far downwind to work well beyond the kite above (esp. by a controllable winged pod), the potent enabling of action-at-a-distance.

The wind-aligned arch easily works like an inchworm, with the downwind leg able to detach and cast about. If the upwind line parts, the downwind line can act as a kite-killer (or kite-catcher, where kite stays up). I have long tested ad-hoc wind-aligned arches, and now test them as a fundamental method to refine. A Gomberg Falcon used as the lifter flies stably in a tighter airspace, as constrained by a vertical downwind line, enabling closer side-by-side kite-unit spacing. Wind-aligned arch flying is helping understand potential 3D kite structures, by contrasted dynamics between crosswind-arches. 

While the crosswind arch has most of the kite-arch mindshare, the wind-aligned kite-arch also has many unique capabilities to study and develop.

CC 4.x BY NC SA
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15157 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Some tests I just realized in free air are confirming DougS's hypothesis. So said tests also counter pessimist statements from DaveS about global loss of power by chocked flow.

I shall stop giving more details on the forum about R&D related in the present  topic, until a correct ethical and technical voice is the prevailing tone of the present forum.

 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com     

 

Below the message 6 from DougS with underlined hypothesis: "

"embedding rotors into wing sail bodies has a cost of increased blunt-body stream-stagnation tendency;" ***Are you sure about that?
" the wind will tend to see the whole sail as the barrier to flow around; embedded rotors get cheated some. Just how much PTO is reduced by tight-border embedding of rotors as opposed to rotors set in free stream is something designers will care about."~ JoeF
*** I'm not convinced an embedded rotor has any less power, and I'd say it might even enjoy more power.  I could imagine the kite might function to force more air through the rotor.  You're stating this "cost" as though you are stating something factual.  Do you have any evidence, or is this just an offhand momentary opinion?"
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15158 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Doug is mistaken: Making the top rotors bigger only slows rpm once the blade-tips reach max TSR. 

There is also the issue of exponentially growing rotor mass to maintain in flight, and extracting this parasitic lift by autogyro mode further slows rpm. Smaller lower rotors in poorer wind develop little power anyway. The shaft itself is doomed to work far below its most efficient rpm.

No "ignored genius" conspiracy theory is needed to explain why AE academia and industry is not actively exploring the ST; the problematic physics is explanation enough. Nor does the ST promise to be a practical helicopter, if it cannot even stand up stably on the ground.


On Monday, October 6, 2014 9:59 AM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15159 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15160 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
"Doug is mistaken: Making the top rotors bigger only slows rpm once the blade-tips reach max TSR." *** This person makes no sense whatsoever.  The idea was, since winds are faster at higher heights, ONE OF MANY possible responses could be to increase the diameter of the upper rotors, in proportion to the higher wind speeds. 

The first erroneous statement, way back, was that I had not considered this.  I had then pointed out that it is, in fact, described within the patent, to increase diameter of upper rotors, for exactly this reason of matching the natural RPM of all rotors, in the natural wind gradient (ground shear) all the way along the shaft. 

So the impossible person then erroneously complains that the upper rotors would spin slower. (!?!?!?)  Apparently the impossible person had already forgotten the reason for making the upper rotors larger. 

I countered by explaining that, with the higher wind speeds at higher heights, the larger rotors would spin the same speed as the lower ones, which was the entire reason for making them larger in the first place.

TO summarize, matching RPM was the entire reason to make the upper rotors bigger in the first place.  That was how the discussion started.

Now this impossible person is just making things up, to, as always, WEASEL their way out of LIES and MAKING NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.  This person's responses are not responsive.  I will not respond to any more illogical attempts at discussion and will not respond to this illogical person.


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@... helicopter, if it cannot even stand up stably on the ground.


On Monday, October 6, 2014 9:59 AM, "dougselsam@... [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15161 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
Thanks, Pierre, for correcting the author for the quote Doug put up.
But Doug's note with that is interesting; we may now see ST in the free-flight helicopter space. Turn on the motor and see above on the driveshaft 18 or 66 rotors spinning to fly the motor and perhaps person around the sky; multi-rotor helicopter on steroids; I like it; I want one!
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15162 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch
We have rehearse the wind-aligned arches with one or more secondary sub-kites; the unit wind-aligned (downwinding) arch of many sub-kites formed the unit element for doming where several downwinding arches are marriage with several crosswind arches.  
The one wing-downwind arch kite (your new term: wind aligned) is an elemental device; the downwinding line from the wing or held subkite may be drawn to far points in the air (like super-long tails) or to points on earth either directly down wind or to the side of the wind; and more than one line may tag from the one wing.   Then add wings to the down wind arch either in line or as sub kites or as train segments off the wind-aligned arch. The down wind arch may have say 1000 sub kites (one wingers or each as needed as sub-trains).   The down wind arch may be a spine bases for super shading construction. There may be 1000s of tag lines along the way of the spine.    As you note, the down wind arch foot or I add "feet" may be system killer lines.    Kite aerotechture may have people climbways from the downwind feet up into the spinal wind-aligned archway.
I append any novelty stated to your license posted.
 ~JoeF 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15163 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
"Pierre, we...have imperfect ways, ever with defects in efforts, ever with imperfect technical grasps." - JoeF *** Daily repeats of "I stand corrected" do not help.  Years of your guys' previous erroneous detractive statements, stated with certainty, are cracking around the seams.  Whatever credibility you may have had is tainted by now. 

Sure none of us are perfect, but that is just the typical weaseling you guys are relegated to at this point.  Citing the well-known fact of nobody being perfect is no excuse for what has been going on in this forum.  Your sidekick has ruined any pretense of a reasonable discussion here.  He starts out as "the guy who knows everything".  If he gets backed into a corner he cries "Have pity on us!" , pleading ignorance.   Nothing he posts makes any sense.  Everything he writes is self-contradictory. 

He has made a big stink, for years, that torque transmission is impossible, then today, you guys go on for message after message of ways to accomplish exactly that.  He's stated with certainty that my critiques of kite-reeling, and statements such as "all roads lead to SuperTurbine(R) are without merit, yet he is later relegated to discussing a myriad of the ST possibilities as his best stab at AWE, including multiple torque transmission scenarios, while the whole time, torque transmission has never even been a problem.  zMeanwhile, not one person has even tried to defend kite-reeling on here.  One can't make this stuff up.  It could never be in a movie because it is not believable.  The audience would never swallow the idea that people could be this stupid, so it wouldn't fly, even as fiction.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15164 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family
In the Serpentine patent, I do not see any nod to Harburg; do you have a quote that shows a nod to him? What novelty does Serpentine have over Harburg?  Thanks. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15165 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
Pierre,

What a wonderful finding, if true. Please soon post your test results elsewhere on the Net, where your objections do not apply.

It was not clear to me that Doug had any definite comment on the topic of in-plane turbines, except to mistakenly call my in-plane turbine prototype a "muffin-fan". What particular DougS theory are you validating?

daveS


On Monday, October 6, 2014 11:09 AM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15166 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Some tests I just realized in free air are confirming DougS's hypothesis. So said tests also counter pessimist statements from DaveS about global loss of power by chocked flow.

I shall stop giving more details on the forum about R&D related in the present  topic, until a correct ethical and technical voice is the prevailing tone of the present forum.

Below the message 6 (again quoted for the one who does not know how to read) from DougS with underlined hypothesis: "

"embedding rotors into wing sail bodies has a cost of increased blunt-body stream-stagnation tendency;" ***Are you sure about that?
" the wind will tend to see the whole sail as the barrier to flow around; embedded rotors get cheated some. Just how much PTO is reduced by tight-border embedding of rotors as opposed to rotors set in free stream is something designers will care about."~ JoeF
*** I'm not convinced an embedded rotor has any less power, and I'd say it might even enjoy more power.  I could imagine the kite might function to force more air through the rotor.  You're stating this "cost" as though you are stating something factual.  Do you have any evidence, or is this just an offhand momentary opinion?"
PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15167 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Doug,

You have long stated that making conventional rotors bigger is poorly scalable, due to the exponentially increased mass, and that the ST avoids that well-known defect by keeping its rotors small, for highest rpm. Now you say the trick is to make the higher rotors in better wind larger. You can't have it both ways.

The real test is if you can validate your fantastic predictions by scaled-up prototypes. Good luck producing developmental testing results to validate your ST claims, and silence doubts. Folks also want to see launching and landing modes, and many other essential design details. This may not be "easy", but its the normal hard work required to engineer AWES professionally,

daveS




On Monday, October 6, 2014 11:17 AM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15168 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
Doug misquoted me again. I have never thought Open AWE needed "pity", nor that the ST is "impossible".

I only ask Doug and Pierre have patience with requests for AWE information, and that they share their AWE knowledge as freely and cheerfully as others do. My exact one-word opinion of the ST is that it is "marginal", but let testing settle any doubts.

Its Doug and Pierre that will deserve our pity, if they fail to keep up with rapid progress in AWE, and become embittered. Most of us are only blessed by ongoing progress in mastering kite tech,

daveS


On Monday, October 6, 2014 11:51 AM, "pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
That was not my quote, but from Pierre. 
Differently, groundgen can be found in much earlier AWE public-domain art for multi-rotors. 

In general, it is common to realize that "ground" may be some fixed-based item, even items that fly. Resistance is needed for a kite system; anchors may be based in soil, in other wings, in water, in dragging air things. FF-AWE of two-wing sort has each wing as ground to the other wing.   A power boat towing a kited wing is the kite-system's moving "ground" that resists the line tension that pulls the upper wing assembly of the kite system; the power  boat is an essential part of such kite system. 

In the helicopter mode of a free-flight ST, the mass of the motor and its air drag form the "ground" of the multi-rotors that lift the system mass. And in reverse sense of such ST helicopter, the rotors are "ground" to the motor mass and the motor air drag.  The helicopter driveshaft does not know which end is using fuel, the rotor assembly or the motor; there is just torque and tension in the driveshaft at each station of the driveshaft which could be a taught flexible tether. 

~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15170 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

 

You quoted me : ""Thanks for your comments and observations. Making main features of AWES on a forum would be an interesting and new way for RAD.""

But it is not possible when all I write is deformed then denigrated, not by you, not by Doug, but by...guess who? I am not the only one to notice it.

 

PierreB 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15171 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Your belittlements about ST are off-topic DaveS. The same for personal attacks as "Its Doug and Pierre that will deserve our pity, if they fail to keep up with rapid progress in AWE, and become embittered". Please post when you have some plausible technical point to share, i.e. never. 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15172 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
"Now you say...to make the higher rotors... larger. You can't have it both ways." -MrPest  ***You're a blooming IDIOT.  One can easily match rotor diameter to windspeed, while remaining in the realm of small rotors.  Use small rotors of one diameter down low, double the size up high, all within the class of small rotors.  Only a complete IMPOSSIBLE MORON would need this explained, or would try to create a new argument out of it.  Need I point out that "large" and "small" are only relative terms, anyway?

Small rotors, however, are not the whole story:  Large rotors are also suitable for MANY SuperTurbine(R) embodiments, as well as the many other workable ideas I have, and others have. 

Now, go crawl back under your rock of ignorance, or spend the rest of your day nitpicking peoples' typos, or something equally suitable for your brand of amusement. This IDIOTIC level of conversation illustrates exactly why I will NOT RESPOND TO THIS PARTICULAR IDIOT anymore.  I will NOT WASTE ANY MORE TIME RESPONDING TO YOU.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15173 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Precision: to JoeF,

You quoted me : ""Thanks for your comments and observations. Making main features of AWES on a forum would be an interesting and new way for RAD.""

But it is not possible when all I write is deformed then denigrated, not by you, not by Doug, but by...guess who? I am not the only one to notice it.

 

PierreB 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15174 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: TT :: Torque Tether AWES Family
Doug, I posted Harburg's patent in EnergKiteSystems on June 22, 2009. 
Member-sent Notices

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15175 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
"In general, it is common to realize that "ground" may be some fixed-based item, even items that fly."  ***Joe, you are rambling and making no sense.  Nobody needs this.  Don't you have a job or something?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15176 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE

Message 163 quoting me:

"This topic thread started with a posted many-point message; near the end of the message Pierre B. wrote: 

"Thanks for your comments and observations. Making main features of AWES on a forum would be an interesting and new way for RAD."
 
During the progress of comments and observations, there seems to have grown a mismatch about just what the topic is about, I sense.  Along the way laconic exclamations of irrelevant matter seemed blocking. To get clarity about just what was wanted to be discussed seemed to me to be a heavy run.  Efforts to review and read more carefully did not seem to help clarifying just what the topic of this thread was about.  The multitude of hooks in the leading first post could reasonably spawn a huge panorama of discussion notes. 
 
Perhaps refining to new topic titles might help. Maybe smaller steps?  What could be some of the refined subtopics worthy of split-off discussions?
 
????
  • Ratio of wing area to tether length?
  • Stationary AWES versus wide swathing global cross winding AWES?
  • Sail-inset flygen rotors?
  • Free-air flygen rotors?
  • Wing-mounted flygen rotors?
  • Efficiencies of farming schemes?
  • Where is public-domain prior art found?
  • What leads technology? Do scientific papers tend to come after invention has been disclosed? When?
  • What scientific papers examined rotors? What among those papers respect shrouding, ducting, funneling, face insetting, ...
  • What prior art is related to Pierre B.'s concerns? What are his specific concerns? What might be said about what questions are not in his concern?
  • ??
  • ??
  • ?? (All are invited to discern refining topic that seem close to what might be in Pierre's concern.)"

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15177 From: dougselsam Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
"all I write is deformed then denigrated, not by you, not by Doug, but by...guess who? I am not the only one to notice it." *** Many others noticed it too, and left long ago.  Easy to notice.  This forum has been ruined, in my opinion, by that same person.  Rather than being a forum for AWE, it has become an exhibit for how irrational, obnoxious, mistaken, and irritating one person can be.

The miracle of computers and the internet:  One can now spend one's time suffering from hourly lies, accusations, and general insanity, from a person consistently acting irrationally, whom one would easily avoid "in real life".

I'm DONE with it.  I hope someday maybe there is a cure for whatever he has.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15178 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

(posted again but to correct topic)

Message 163 quoting me:

"This topic thread started with a posted many-point message; near the end of the message Pierre B. wrote: 

"Thanks for your comments and observations. Making main features of AWES on a forum would be an interesting and new way for RAD."
 
During the progress of comments and observations, there seems to have grown a mismatch about just what the topic is about, I sense.  Along the way laconic exclamations of irrelevant matter seemed blocking. To get clarity about just what was wanted to be discussed seemed to me to be a heavy run.  Efforts to review and read more carefully did not seem to help clarifying just what the topic of this thread was about.  The multitude of hooks in the leading first post could reasonably spawn a huge panorama of discussion notes. 
 
Perhaps refining to new topic titles might help. Maybe smaller steps?  What could be some of the refined subtopics worthy of split-off discussions?
 
????
  • Ratio of wing area to tether length?
  • Stationary AWES versus wide swathing global cross winding AWES?
  • Sail-inset flygen rotors?
  • Free-air flygen rotors?
  • Wing-mounted flygen rotors?
  • Efficiencies of farming schemes?
  • Where is public-domain prior art found?
  • What leads technology? Do scientific papers tend to come after invention has been disclosed? When?
  • What scientific papers examined rotors? What among those papers respect shrouding, ducting, funneling, face insetting, ...
  • What prior art is related to Pierre B.'s concerns? What are his specific concerns? What might be said about what questions are not in his concern?
  • ??
  • ??
  • ?? (All are invited to discern refining topic that seem close to what might be in Pierre's concern.)"

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15179 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
Maybe a perspective slant could help remed:  Consider seeing ideas in a post a wing. Then another person attaches a string to that wing and provides some resistance to see how that wing will kite for him or her. Maybe the resistance will be too much for the wing to stay flying well; maybe the resistance will be too little and the wing will just stay on the ground unnoticed for its mysteries. Maybe the resistance will be just right where the wing kites well fielding the resistance just right.   Having the wing in game is key. When the resistance is too much, then some adjustments may be made in the next flying session. When the wing does not receive enough resistance in the towing string, then the wing might not be seen for what it.   Post; let the wings be tugged in various ways; then the wing will be seen eventually in all its glories; it will have faced high and medium and low resistance; the wing will be noticed in many flying modes.  Apparent lock-out crashes explained away might to give modification to the wing for future better flying sessions.   When someone seems to distort a wing that is being flown in a post, then unfolding the distortion may end up in everyone seeing the wing better than ever.    Such process does not occur when the wing is not posted or seen by anyone.  Show your light; some might have shades over eyes; some workers might have microscopes or telescopes of a make that the poster is not using.  Almost always, no matter the post, there may be a path to some perspective that is new to some participants. Gradually value can grow through taking the risk to bare ideas and projects and reports.  Let opinions be sources of new mullings. 
Lift, Drag, Rotate, Tension, Risk, Observe, Renew, Redesign, 
Best, 
~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15180 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: 10 easy ways to do AWE: - Done talking to Dave S.
Doug,
I hope you can find it within your level to respond to self admitting idiots like myself.
Apologies that I supposed to know what you support in an earlier post on ST's Daisys etc
Hope I never caused any offence.
I'm really impressed you have taken your stance.
It can't have been easy.. continuously having to defend an AWE scheme from petty attack of an AWE scheme fanatic.
The whole situation left me more confused than ever.
:)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15181 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch
A Gomberg Falcon used as the lifter flies stably in a tighter airspace, as constrained by a vertical downwind line, enabling closer side-by-side kite-unit spacing.
There's probably more to be said and studied about that...
As a gust comes to move the kite left ... The line at the back would force a drop by being rotated about the drop line earth anchor point ... therefore maybe creating more lift on the dropping left side and lifting it back to face right....
supposes
where are you attaching this rear line? Just at the bridle point I'd further suppose to allow otherwise natural state kite behaviours...


Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15182 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Doug,

What then is the maximum diameter rotor that you define as "small"? Providing your basic scaling-limit assumptions helps you be properly recognized as an AWE expert.

Do you have a large-scale ST reference design, with dimensioned concept drawings, mass and power estimates, etc.? The alpha-weasel prize is yours if you have never bothered with even a preliminary specification for a utility-scale ST, after a decade of making relentless over-the-top marketing claims. No one has ever claimed more in wind power, nor apparently complained so much; but have you anything to test?

daveS





On Monday, October 6, 2014 12:35 PM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15183 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
max TSR

Say we just use one type of stock off the shelf kite or blade for all our driving of an ST / Daisy / spinny whatever.
This value Tip Speed Ratio (or kite similar equivalent) means how much faster than the wind your kite goes.

Your kite goes around a circular wind inflated track, held down by tethers.
Given a particular gradient profile (now this profile is changeable in the real world remember....)
How do you make the kites in the fast high wind rotate on their track with the same RPM as the kites in the slow wind?
???
A larger track. Is a perfectly acceptable and scalable answer.

Admittedly it gets trickier to launch bigger kites ... Doesn't it Dave?

As for the following.... you didn't answer the question....
Which component of a Daisy has torsional shear?

The same shear force causes the Daisy to contract in a twist when torque exceeds the tension required to keep extended. (It's a more linear relationship than this implies)
Granted, this is not as suddenly catastrophic as a brittle rigid torque shaft failure, but still causes collapse and probable line damage as the twist progresses and repeats.
How can the twist progress if there is so much lift on such a wide diameter?

Let's call it Gordon's Law, (Only if there is consensus from experts)
 that "Nature abhors torsion", if experiments always confirm his predictions. Both BobS and I especially remember Gordon's insistence on this exact point when we read his classic 20+ years ago. Twisting v pumping one's own arm, one easily notes the large difference in power-transmission capability. Add rope, for action at greater distance, to compound the twisting problem.
The torsion "constant" in the case of Daisys on a lift line is completely bonkers to try work out... but it's likely to be favourable as there is a wide diameter and resistance to compression from the wind and the lift tether.

So that's the torsional shear for Daisy as a whole...
Which component of a Daisy has torsional shear?
Isn't easy to answer

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15184 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: What is easy and what is hard in AWE
Doug,

JoeF was sharing one of his greatest teachings, that what a naive observer only sees as "ground" to tether to in simple kite flying is more universally understood by AWE experts to include other means of creating the opposing force required for flight. By "Joe's Law" here, one can appreciate that powered aircraft, gliders, tethered foil pairs, HAPAs, and so on, are all instances of a common fundamental "kite principle",

Better late than never, that you begin to understand JoeF's thinking, and other AWE expert teachings,

daveS







On Monday, October 6, 2014 12:40 PM, "Pierre BENHAIEM pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15185 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
I'll start to answer this for Doug if nobody minds.
Small is human scale... like a bike ring diameter track for the blade component to run around as a max... say 30cm radius .
This is not relating any detail of the blade nor sail nor kite size... which can be a unit repeatable as stated above.

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15186 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
There is a likely inverse scaling relationship between radius of ring and ring diameter in a typical mixed case scenario as presented above.... (or at least ring spacing density must increase at lower levels) A large torque ring spinning a smaller ring will require the smaller ring to hold against the flexion inferred without using a parachute to hold form.


Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15187 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: multiple blade hosting arrangement advantage on fixed position
Say you fit 3 or more of these ...
http://youtu.be/_PPgYmKtOfI
to the line-frame / network
the tops held on bearing pulleys
run a rope over the pulleys...
Or you could just take power out at the bottom instead..
Don't know ... whatever you prefer lets make em and sell em.
cc4.0 nc by sa

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15188 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
Pierre wrote: "Some tests I just realized in free air are confirming DougS's hypothesis."


My ST comments on this topic were incidental, and made in response to Doug wrongly quoting me about STs, and your vagueness about what Doug's hypothesis is. Thanks if you identify the "hypothesis" properly.

At least you are testing in-plane turbines, as I have in the past. Do not complain if I guess wrong about your withheld results, if you make us all guess.




On Monday, October 6, 2014 12:57 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15189 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Wind-Aligned Kite-Arch
Both windward and leeward lines meet at the delta keel bridle-point.


On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:10 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15190 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
What shears in the soft case is the free-space geometry of air and string. The shear zone collapses into a twist, with the rotors on either side of the twist displaced in the direction of the shear-force. A twisted solid rod simply shears more dramatically in sudden brittle failure, than a soft rod in soft failure.

I don't see that the torque ladder escapes Gordon's Law even if soft failure looks different; its still failure by the same general flaw of torsional weakness.


On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:48 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15191 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ
Pierre,
I am confident that even as odd as we all seem... We are all trying to be the change that we want to see.
It's just that we each express ourselves in terms of our own pet architectures...

JoeF (early hang-glider and journalist) writes loose screeds over massive sheets
DougS (whizzy spinner) writes high speed, sharp, unstoppably damaging yet brittle
Yourself (Pianist multi architectures) compositions are open to the ear's interpretation.
DaveS (space or bust) massively overarching truths which can't be denied much like astrology.
Myself yeah ... well I dunnoh where I fit in ... probably as helpful as a hamster in a squeeky wheel (my current background soundtrack) But I'm trying!

keep us posted you nutter.
Otherwise I'll restart gnawing the bars of my cage.

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15192 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Sorry I would reply but I've just realised the error of my ways...
I'm off to take the driveshaft out of my van... I'll let you know how it goes

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15193 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: 10 easy ways to do AWE: - Done talking to Dave S.
Rod wrote: "I'm really impressed you (Doug) have taken your stance."

What "stance" exactly "really impressed"? Is this a technical stance referenced? It can't be his repeated "done talking" stance, which is simply false. If his "stance" is many-easy-ways-to-do-AWE, let him show some easy progress then.

I confess to a fanatical belief in broad flight-testing as my professed AWE scheme, and think the only truly petty attacks on the Forum are non-technical purely-emotional complaints made with crude language. I would give Doug a pass, like I do many weak players, if he dropped all the public name-calling; otherwise, I'll take as many shots at the ST as its technical weaknesses allow.

Lets hope Rod and Pierre's efforts somehow give Doug the technical momentum he needs to test scaled-up against all contenders. I am content to be shown wrong (along with Gordon's Law), when friends are in the right.






On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:00 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15194 From: benhaiemp Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

"as I have in the past"; ?!?

 

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15195 From: dave santos Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Its been pointed out that drive-shafts work fine at the scale of Rod's van, without the urgency to avoid excess flight weight. But take that well-working shaft, and calculate how much it would weigh and cost to reach 300m, and it does not work well, not even on paper.

Only two unique torque modes have been found practical for AWE in KiteLab testing. One can torque against the surface by phased radial line tugs (like the tri-tether AWES) on an anchor-circle, or one can spin a mass like a weighted jump-rope, and it balances dynamically to spin a surface crank. Launching and landing are simple enough, but keeping the crank-base aligned and synched is hard. If one tries to make a giant symmetric rotor like the Daisy or WheelWind, the PTO is only one critical gap to solve. 

The design must be shown practical to launch and land. I have tried many torque apps and found "Gordon's Law" to define the limiting condition. Good Luck to Pierre and Rod proving otherwise, by retesting Gordon's assumption.

In my view, the ST has been incredibly over-promoted by a flood of anti-intellectual ranting, and formal testing against other AWES concepts will set everything right.



On Monday, October 6, 2014 2:29 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15196 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: AWES for electricity production in utility-scale? Turbines integ

Rod,

You raise well the problem. Indeed where are other AWE players, companies...? Perhaps there where will go my current R&D on the present topic for the reasons I indicated (however I will pursue posting on other topics comprising some R&D)."Our" forum is too much closed on itself and should open.

 

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15197 From: Rod Read Date: 10/6/2014
Subject: Re: Geared Stages to Harmonize ST Rotors to Wind Gradient
Did you see those hopelessly, nay shamelessly self promotional selfie videos I did holding the Daisy 1 handed, braking a little and filming with the other ?

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878