Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 19060 to 19109 Page 275 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19060 From: dave santos Date: 9/13/2015
Subject: Makani Update

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19061 From: dave santos Date: 9/14/2015
Subject: Field Testing Multi-Kite Rigs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19062 From: dave santos Date: 9/14/2015
Subject: Salvage airframes as HAPA hydrofoils

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19063 From: Rod Read Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Continuous control aloft / What we don’t yet know about balancing

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19064 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: What is a kite?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19065 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Re: What is a kite?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19066 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Re: [AWES] Continuous control aloft / What we don’t yet know about

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19067 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Pin-pointing Makani's M600 test site?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19068 From: Rod Read Date: 9/16/2015
Subject: superb kite control with abs Amazing Butterfly System apparently

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19069 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/16/2015
Subject: Re: 2016 Conference Planning?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19070 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/16/2015
Subject: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19071 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/16/2015
Subject: News headline: Kite Power targets £50/MWh

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19072 From: dave santos Date: 9/16/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19073 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/17/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19074 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19075 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
Subject: Drumbeat for AWE (Energy Harvesting Journal, Conference, and Kitemil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19076 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
Subject: Re: [AWES] News headline: Kite Power targets £50/MWh

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19077 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/17/2015
Subject: Re: Power Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19078 From: Rod Read Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19079 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Tethered gyroglider control systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19080 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19081 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Working Thermal and Atmospheric Subsidence AT ONCE by a kite system

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19082 From: dave santos Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19083 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19084 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: Inside Minesto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19085 From: dave santos Date: 9/18/2015
Subject: Re: 2016 Conference Planning?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19086 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19087 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Car Volant Reenactments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19088 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19089 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19090 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19091 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19092 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19093 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19094 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19095 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19096 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19097 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19098 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19099 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19100 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19101 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19102 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19103 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/20/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19104 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19105 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/21/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19106 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2015
Subject: 500+ Kitesurfer Flotilla

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19107 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2015
Subject: Surface Acoustic Waves in Kite Lattices

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19108 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/23/2015
Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19109 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/23/2015
Subject: Re: Surface Acoustic Waves in Kite Lattices



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19060 From: dave santos Date: 9/13/2015
Subject: Makani Update
Still very little inside news of the daunting technical challenges making life difficult for Fort's engineers; but there is some activity disclosed on Hawai'i (the Big Island). Apparently the test site is tall grassland, rather than nearby desert, which could be a fire hazard if crashes occur in high wind.

Interesting to see more First Nations involvement in the AWE quest; but this is not yet the self-empowered communities vision of Chief Planes-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19061 From: dave santos Date: 9/14/2015
Subject: Field Testing Multi-Kite Rigs
kPower tests extensively both in Austin and Ilwaco, in varied often extreme conditions. Austin has a large engineering-science student base, but the summer wind is fitful. Ilwaco, on the other hand, is a tiny fishing port, with very skilled maritime tradesmen, and the summer wind is ideal for kites. The World Kite Museum and famous kite festival are based nearby. The "off-season winds" are often hurricane-force. The thousands of hours of cumulative testing across both locations is a richly synergistic experience-base. Every session is unique and offers new knowledge. A mix of new folks and world experts is common at kPower tests, but solo flying is also quite basic, as deep kite skills only develop from a direct "personal" relationship with kite and wind.

Recent tests have focused on mastering basics and exploring new ideas with formations of 22m2 Peter Lynn pilot-kites. While these are a de facto lifter standard, they are not perfect; but more of a stepping stone to ever larger units. Working with lifters like this is akin to testing an airliner without passengers. WECS and aerotecture materiale are modular payloads to work into the mix carefully. The lifter session toil begins with setting the industrial-strength sand-anchors in an anchor field. Even just dragging the custom "roofer's tear-out tarps" around is work, and digging each hole is just a start (then comes back-filling and finally digging out, at day's end).

The quantity of rope used is considerable and large spool-reels help speed the laying out and taking up of the various lines, with several miles of walking back and forth possible, depending on the configuration. There is an assortment of fittings to rig, like shackles, slings, carabiners, and so on. Purely human factors also take time and effort, like setting up shade or wind shelter, cooler, chairs, etc. Packing and unpacking the vehicle(s) is part of the work. Over the large area, a sand cart is handy, but seldom is present, so everything tends to be hauled around by hand, and walking in soft sand is itself tedious.

The hardest work is flying the kites for maximum capacity. In "sucker winds", one walks around relaunching all day long to keep things going. High winds and turbulence cause the kites to go nuts. In kPower field testing to develop the tightest possible configurations, interference between kites is common. These spontaneous giant kite fights require considerable grit and insight to correct, and one can be more severely tested than the kite. This can be very dangerous work, akin to working with large animals. Anyone who discounts the danger should try it. Perhaps the most common cause of serious accident or death is not to let go right away when the kite carries one aloft.

Yesterday, on the beach near Ilwaco, the test was to rig and fly as many 22m2 pilot-kites in one formation as possible, single-handed. Ed and I flew six at a time on Mustang Island, which was hard work for two. In a five hour session, I managed to rig and fly four in a novel two-tier arch. The kites made quite a show for the late-season vacation crowd. I felt myself finally on the threshold of the elite world of kite showmen, like Gomberg, Bethel, and Lynn. Even at the top level, every detail remains a study-in-progress, and its a joy how much acquired skills make the work lighter, but also wonderful how much there is still to learn. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19062 From: dave santos Date: 9/14/2015
Subject: Salvage airframes as HAPA hydrofoils

It is in principle possible to use a standard airframe, such as a hang-glider or performance-glider, as an underwater hydrofoil to react against an aero power-kite. This would enable HAPAs resembling kite foilboarding hydrofoils on a grander scale. Instead of weight shift for steering, existing rudder, ailerons, and elevators would fly the novel paravane. This concept borrows from the old technique of testing aircraft designs underwater, with simple conversion factors. A faired underwater section pays, due to a lessened fairing-mass penalty underwater, compared to kites in air. The trick is to fly the airframe upside down underwater (negative lift), to optimally resist kite pull from above. This could be a rather easy experiment, based on COTS salvage.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

-------

Nice view of state-of-the-art foilboard foils resembling the archetypal airframe-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19063 From: Rod Read Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Continuous control aloft / What we don’t yet know about balancing

What we don’t yet know about balancing rigidity, weight and performance.

 

I want to consider breaking AWE into 2 types of kite, lifting and generating.

For each type, the mix of material and design gives the kite a quotient of its ideal performance.

Lifting kites are dependably up, with spare lift line tension to support generating kites.

Generating kites efficiently convert & transmit wind energy to ground.

 

Large kites take a lot of work to launch and control, especially in large wind.
Obvious, but bear with..
Breaking the work down into (human power) addressable packets so that a larger whole meta kite can be controlled by one person is desirable.

Scalable kites are made of tensile fabrics, but incorporated rigid components have advantages. Complementary rigid and tensile symbiosis exists in design just as in nature.

Rigid bearing, rails, levers, and cams can all find their place aloft in the right system. As can semi rigid spars, battens or control rods. Fully rigid wings may be the solution needed in generating with ring kite turbines. Electrical equipment can have many uses aloft too.

 

Balancing the functional advantages brought by solid components against their scale limiting weight penalty will give a good indication of arrayed system dimensioning. (e.g. rigid rings too heavy but are v powerful therefore array rings of ~15m up lift lines)


I had a mare trying to launch my 4 x windsurfer sail arch this weekend. It was still set just as last time when it worked fine. Stronger wind & a surf party this time. I think the anchor bags were a bit closer too.  It held solidly inflated once, for all of 2 seconds before thrashing itself. It needed trailing edge sheeting tension for stability. There is no auto adjusting bridling on it. Unlike some new designs. http://www.kite-line.com/2015-slingshot-turbine-kite-kite-only https://youtu.be/Q1p1ZFynK9E  new surf kite bridling elastic response capabilities described.


Instead of continuing, I launched a simple Morse sled lifter and went surfing. The stability provided by the tail let the Morse kite fly till long after dark. However stability from a high aspect ratio seems more appropriate in a lifting kixel, as it can slow turns, stabilise the kite and reducing complexity. But how do you incorporate that in a net?

 

Given the elasticity and deformations in reticulated net and sail forms, can we reliably fly 1000 small lifting kites? The small sail will tension rigging more than line drag does... So viable kite lattice forms will exist which can maintain lift & withstand a certain degree of turbulence.

 

A small rope ring rail, or a single point lifter? Single line lifters are unsteady but they can be controlled with electronics and power. (See TU Delft etc.) Can power for the controller be derived from running along the net? Power can be sent up the net. (conversely can this power be sent downward?)

A stretched net can hold holes tightly open. Can pipe trolleys, allowed to run around the perimeter of a hole support a lifting kite? At what size is this efficient? How much abrasion is on the net lines in either case? Can they be clad?
If a small sail is held wide and close on a rail is it self controlling, even in a wild gale?

Can it be mapped and multiplied into a kite lattice?

 

Does a lattice kite need high L/D kixels?

With less overall tether per kite, a kixel can afford (needs) to be stable. A higher L/D lattice will be able to support more generation kite turbine surfaces.

 

As a single line lifter kite inflates, it is able to spread its tether into bridling. More easily with longer bridles. Say the same lifter has shorter bridles but they are already spread out onto trolleys on a tensioned ring. Does the same kite now have more stability due to the wider tension base?


Too many experiments for just me there.


Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19064 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: What is a kite?

What is a kite?

Feel free when the urge moves you to post some answer to that question. We've had some responses spread in the forum and related Internet sites throughout the years. Benefits of the exercise may finally surprise AWES workers.

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

Some prior work has been collected in the yet to be modified file: 

http://www.energykitesystems.net/akiteis.html

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


Furthering the project this morning:

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


A kite is a trinity of wing sets in media (one or more) in which two of the wing sets are tensionally coupled by a wing set.   Each of the three wing sets may have one or more members. We neglect the "empty kite" where one or more of the essential wing sets is empty of members or where there is no media. We also recognize objects that are not yet kite but may be potentially kite upon supply of the essential parts or media.  In the mix of the involved wing sets may be identified less-than-the-whole collections that qualify as "kite" and thus "kite within kite" or sub-kite; hence a kite might, for example, hold within itself 1000 kites; and those sub kites could be varied in configuration with varied exchanges of works and energies; some sub kites of a kite might be seen as lifters; other sub kites in a kite might be seen as sound making specialists; other sub kites might be formed to be great at generating electricity; etc. 


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


Humans may march in universe and exclaim over a system in focus: "THAT is a kite!"    The involved human may or may see how immediately to explain the exclaimed. No pressure to perform; maybe someone else will be able to explain.  There will be differences of perspectives among humans; great!


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


On Sunday, Sept. 13, at a park, I was able to see a kite that was formed from the following parts: human body one, thread length, rotating tumble wing part, and another second human body. Together the parts formed kite. The media was a mix: air and grass/soil. The shoes were part of the kite. Each part of the kite reacted with the media and had their contributions of lift and drag and energy exchange. One human body with its shoes and clothes and hand formed what was seen as one of the three wing sets in the kite; the other human body with its shoes and clothes was seen as part of one of the three essential wing sets of the kite; the tumble wing was seen as one of the three essential wing sets. The tumble wing was coupled with the human-body anchoring wing sets tensionally by the thread (the essential wing set in tension that couples wing sets).    One of the good works of the kite was conversion of wind energy to a resultant that let wind speed be estimated (anemometer); the rotational speed of the tumble wing element permitted a means to estimate the wind speed.  Sound was also noticeably generated; low and hard-to-notice was the generation of electricity by the kite of instance. Heat and wear were other parts of the observed AWES kite. Entertainment and education were also produced by the kite.


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

~ Joe F.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19065 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Re: What is a kite?
The kite is as Plato, Byron, and Borges describe-

"The wing is the corporeal element which is most akin to the divine, and which by nature tends to soar aloft and carry that which gravitates downwards into the upper region, which is the habitation of the gods.
The divine is beauty, wisdom, goodness, and the like; and by these the wing of the soul is nourished, and grows apace" [Part II of Plato‘s Phaedrus]

Byron's kite presented as destiny in a quote was posted in 2011 (and another apt Byron quote posted somewhere)

Borges:  "How, then, can I translate into words the limitless Aleph, which my floundering mind can scarcely encompass? Mystics, faced with the same problem, fall back on symbols: to signify the godhead, one Persian speaks of a bird that somehow is all birds; Alanus de Insulis, of a sphere whose center is everywhere and circumference is nowhere; Ezekiel, of a four-faced angel who at one and the same time moves east and west, north and south. (Not in vain do I recall these inconceivable analogies; they bear some relation to the Aleph.)...; it is also said that it takes the shape of a man pointing to both heaven and earth, in order to show that the lower world is the map and mirror of the higher; for Cantor's Mengenlehre, it is the symbol of transfinite numbers, of which any part is as great as the whole."



On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 8:00 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
What is a kite?
Feel free when the urge moves you to post some answer to that question. We've had some responses spread in the forum and related Internet sites throughout the years. Benefits of the exercise may finally surprise AWES workers.
================
Some prior work has been collected in the yet to be modified file: 
======================

Furthering the project this morning:
==================

A kite is a trinity of wing sets in media (one or more) in which two of the wing sets are tensionally coupled by a wing set.   Each of the three wing sets may have one or more members. We neglect the "empty kite" where one or more of the essential wing sets is empty of members or where there is no media. We also recognize objects that are not yet kite but may be potentially kite upon supply of the essential parts or media.  In the mix of the involved wing sets may be identified less-than-the-whole collections that qualify as "kite" and thus "kite within kite" or sub-kite; hence a kite might, for example, hold within itself 1000 kites; and those sub kites could be varied in configuration with varied exchanges of works and energies; some sub kites of a kite might be seen as lifters; other sub kites in a kite might be seen as sound making specialists; other sub kites might be formed to be great at generating electricity; etc. 

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

Humans may march in universe and exclaim over a system in focus: "THAT is a kite!"    The involved human may or may see how immediately to explain the exclaimed. No pressure to perform; maybe someone else will be able to explain.  There will be differences of perspectives among humans; great!

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

On Sunday, Sept. 13, at a park, I was able to see a kite that was formed from the following parts: human body one, thread length, rotating tumble wing part, and another second human body. Together the parts formed kite. The media was a mix: air and grass/soil. The shoes were part of the kite. Each part of the kite reacted with the media and had their contributions of lift and drag and energy exchange. One human body with its shoes and clothes and hand formed what was seen as one of the three wing sets in the kite; the other human body with its shoes and clothes was seen as part of one of the three essential wing sets of the kite; the tumble wing was seen as one of the three essential wing sets. The tumble wing was coupled with the human-body anchoring wing sets tensionally by the thread (the essential wing set in tension that couples wing sets).    One of the good works of the kite was conversion of wind energy to a resultant that let wind speed be estimated (anemometer); the rotational speed of the tumble wing element permitted a means to estimate the wind speed.  Sound was also noticeably generated; low and hard-to-notice was the generation of electricity by the kite of instance. Heat and wear were other parts of the observed AWES kite. Entertainment and education were also produced by the kite.

=================
~ Joe F.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19066 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Re: [AWES] Continuous control aloft / What we don’t yet know about
We know a lot about tuning our rigs. The basic idea is to dial-in the right settings in our geometries by testing, having defined an adequate control topology. The kite revolution has started despite what we still don't know, but will know over time, to finish the job.

Kixels need not be high AR. in fact, high AR kixels crosswind would strum with high drag. Rev Kites for high wind have extensive mesh sections along with kixel like patches of many odd shapes, and they fly with precision side-by-side. Its the overall metakite AR geometry that counts most.

Having pondered how to pack kPower's six 22m2 pilots most closely in the sky, the top method seems to be to lash them together crosswind as one AR 6 wing made of six square kixels (like MegaFly and others before). I expect that the cracklike gap between kites will act as an observable drag stability factor, traded against max lift, by principles already known on the AWES Forum.



On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 6:31 AM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
What we don’t yet know about balancing rigidity, weight and performance.
 
I want to consider breaking AWE into 2 types of kite, lifting and generating.
For each type, the mix of material and design gives the kite a quotient of its ideal performance.
Lifting kites are dependably up, with spare lift line tension to support generating kites.
Generating kites efficiently convert & transmit wind energy to ground.
 
Large kites take a lot of work to launch and control, especially in large wind.
Obvious, but bear with..
Breaking the work down into (human power) addressable packets so that a larger whole meta kite can be controlled by one person is desirable.

Scalable kites are made of tensile fabrics, but incorporated rigid components have advantages. Complementary rigid and tensile symbiosis exists in design just as in nature.
Rigid bearing, rails, levers, and cams can all find their place aloft in the right system. As can semi rigid spars, battens or control rods. Fully rigid wings may be the solution needed in generating with ring kite turbines. Electrical equipment can have many uses aloft too.
 
Balancing the functional advantages brought by solid components against their scale limiting weight penalty will give a good indication of arrayed system dimensioning. (e.g. rigid rings too heavy but are v powerful therefore array rings of ~15m up lift lines)

I had a mare trying to launch my 4 x windsurfer sail arch this weekend. It was still set just as last time when it worked fine. Stronger wind & a surf party this time. I think the anchor bags were a bit closer too.  It held solidly inflated once, for all of 2 seconds before thrashing itself. It needed trailing edge sheeting tension for stability. There is no auto adjusting bridling on it. Unlike some new designs. http://www.kite-line.com/2015-slingshot-turbine-kite-kite-only https://youtu.be/Q1p1ZFynK9E  new surf kite bridling elastic response capabilities described.

Instead of continuing, I launched a simple Morse sled lifter and went surfing. The stability provided by the tail let the Morse kite fly till long after dark. However stability from a high aspect ratio seems more appropriate in a lifting kixel, as it can slow turns, stabilise the kite and reducing complexity. But how do you incorporate that in a net?
 
Given the elasticity and deformations in reticulated net and sail forms, can we reliably fly 1000 small lifting kites? The small sail will tension rigging more than line drag does... So viable kite lattice forms will exist which can maintain lift & withstand a certain degree of turbulence.
 
A small rope ring rail, or a single point lifter? Single line lifters are unsteady but they can be controlled with electronics and power. (See TU Delft etc.) Can power for the controller be derived from running along the net? Power can be sent up the net. (conversely can this power be sent downward?)
A stretched net can hold holes tightly open. Can pipe trolleys, allowed to run around the perimeter of a hole support a lifting kite? At what size is this efficient? How much abrasion is on the net lines in either case? Can they be clad?
If a small sail is held wide and close on a rail is it self controlling, even in a wild gale?
Can it be mapped and multiplied into a kite lattice?
 
Does a lattice kite need high L/D kixels?
With less overall tether per kite, a kixel can afford (needs) to be stable. A higher L/D lattice will be able to support more generation kite turbine surfaces.
 
As a single line lifter kite inflates, it is able to spread its tether into bridling. More easily with longer bridles. Say the same lifter has shorter bridles but they are already spread out onto trolleys on a tensioned ring. Does the same kite now have more stability due to the wider tension base?

Too many experiments for just me there.

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19067 From: dave santos Date: 9/15/2015
Subject: Pin-pointing Makani's M600 test site?
Attachments :
    Based on slight clues in photos of the recent site-blessing ceremony, the M600 test site (where construction supposedly began yesterday) is tentatively located at-

    Island of Hawai'i

    Attachment shows matched view in Google Earth
    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19068 From: Rod Read Date: 9/16/2015
    Subject: superb kite control with abs Amazing Butterfly System apparently
    https://youtu.be/yHn7xFiKM0k


    Rod Read

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

    07899057227
    01851 870878
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19069 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/16/2015
    Subject: Re: 2016 Conference Planning?
     Much appreciations, DaveS; for your steadfast faith in open, accountable industry association which AWEIA represents rather than narrow, selfish interests being championed by AWEConsortium turned AWESCO.
    Truth is AWEIA as a global association will support any venue fairly agreed to in an open process and not one already cornered by camouflaged vested interests.
    Further lifts
    JohnO
    AWEIA International
    John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
    Managing Consultant & CEO
    Hardensoft International Limited
    <Technologies  
    Buzz from PJ is that AWESCO is quietly acting as the AWE community's de-facto international conference organizer, and that UFreiburg has even already been chosen as the "logical" venue for 2016, for what would be a third-in-a-row German-Dutch event controlled by the same inside circle. This conflicts with a grass-roots proposal to have the long-overdue US-located conference in Seattle, at the Museum of Flight (as suggested by Fujino, Drachen Foundation, and endorsed by MoF). There are pros-and-cons for both sides, and maybe other candidate venues as well. The standing concern is that the mysterious Northern EU conference decision-making process is not open and accountable.

    On the US side, Makani and the many start-up ventures should work together for great US AWE conferences. After two California conferences, Seattle, Washington, moved to the fore, as the US aerospace capital home of Boeing (with MOUs and patents gathering) and Bill Gates (who is lately announcing investment goals in AWE). DaveN (NASA) had long predicted US R&D would depend on high-net-worth individuals, rather than government or NGO support. kPower proposes Gates be pitched an international R&D plan far beyond AWESCO's exclusive funding.

    John Oyebanji suggests the US side might organize a less academic-oriented more hands-on event (ie. AWEfest), which could mean we have grown enough to diversify into two broad camps, with two healthy events. Even if divided now, lets keep alive the original goal to unite for grand conferences that better balance all stakeholder circles (like 2009 and 2011). Open flying sessions and technical clinics have especially been lacking, in favor of academic papers and presentations.

    Wubbo Lives! Happy Energy :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19070 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/16/2015
    Subject: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    Trying to clarify about "crosswind" term. Autogyro-like and other rotating AWES are often not seen as "crosswind kite". Indeed the whole device does not go crosswind, but their blades work crosswind (the same for blades of a conventional wind turbine).On http://flygenkite.com there is a rotating kite (for Rotating Reeling method) of which wings go crosswind by rotation, but the whole device does not go crosswind; and there is also a ram-air crosswind kite carrying turbines and going crosswind.

    After this clarification, study of real swept area _ as an element of maximization of space _ looks easier.


    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19071 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/16/2015
    Subject: News headline: Kite Power targets £50/MWh

    Kite Power targets £50/MWh
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19072 From: dave santos Date: 9/16/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    "Crosswind" is a general notion applied in either the context of overall motion or motion of parts. Its up to the user to define which context. "Crosswind Component" is a specific measure of crosswind as the vector sum of True Wind and object Velocity and Direction. "Apparent wind" is wind direction and velocity from the  POV of a moving object (usually with a Crosswind component; excepting direct-upwind or -downwind object motion).






    On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 12:54 PM, "pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Trying to clarify about "crosswind" term. Autogyro-like and other rotating AWES are often not seen as "crosswind kite". Indeed the whole device does not go crosswind, but their blades work crosswind (the same for blades of a conventional wind turbine).On http://flygenkite.com there is a rotating kite (for Rotating Reeling method) of which wings go crosswind by rotation, but the whole device does not go crosswind; and there is also a ram-air crosswind kite carrying turbines and going crosswind.
    After this clarification, study of real swept area _ as an element of maximization of space _ looks easier.

    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19073 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/17/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    It is an easy mean to distinguish more or less crosswind kites (by Loyd's use) flying by figure eight or loop (Makani, Ampyx, TuDelft, FlygenKite...), so wholly moving, from (stationary) rotary devices (Sky Windpower, SuperTurbine(tm), Daisy, Parotor, RotoKite) where only blades are going more or less crosswind, like blades of wind turbines (which work quite crosswind).

    Swept area is optimized by rotary devices. Wing performances are optimized  by crosswind kites where some concern is an optimization of useful swept area.


    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19074 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    Pierre wrote: "swept area is optimized by rotary devices."

    Reply: The optimality of pure rotary motion is still an open question with kites. Frontal airspace is rectangular and the kite window is hemispherical, so rotary (circular) motion leaves gaps. Common sweeping similarity cases, like auto windshield wipers, tacking sailboats, and so on, are often only part rotary, but are Darwinian survivors. In fact "gyroboats" (rotor-based sailboats) do not have any sweeping advantage and remain very rare.

    A completely vertical rotary AWES would have no self-lift, so an added autogyro AoA or lifter-kite basis is needed. DSing is potent, but based on high L/D rigind wings and high intertial mass for penetration, does not scale greatly. The distorting "tidal" effect of gravity grows with rotating structure scale. Competitive kite sports are mostly non-rotory (figure-of-eights do contain oscillating rotations).

    Complex calculations and testing are needed to rigorously determine optimal performance design boundaries between rotary and part-rotary crosswind AWES.




    On Thursday, September 17, 2015 7:55 AM, "pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    It is an easy mean to distinguish more or less crosswind kites (by Loyd's use) flying by figure eight or loop (Makani, Ampyx, TuDelft, FlygenKite...), so wholly moving, from (stationary) rotary devices (Sky Windpower, SuperTurbine(tm), Daisy, Parotor, RotoKite) where only blades are going more or less crosswind, like blades of wind turbines (which work quite crosswind).
    Swept area is optimized by rotary devices. Wing performances are optimized  by crosswind kites where some concern is an optimization of useful swept area.

    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19075 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
    Subject: Drumbeat for AWE (Energy Harvesting Journal, Conference, and Kitemil
    More details emerging-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19076 From: dave santos Date: 9/17/2015
    Subject: Re: [AWES] News headline: Kite Power targets £50/MWh
    Another interesting data point is Kite Power's 10M capitalization goal, representing an internal estimate of cost of full-scale testing (rather than equity value, which is very uncertain in AWE). The trend continues for more schools and companies to enter AWE R&D small, and take things toward the ~10M capital level (Magenn, Laddermill, SkySails, KiteGen, Joby, Makani; and more coming). Its not hard to see evolutionary technical progress in the pipeline.



    On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 3:48 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19077 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/17/2015
    Subject: Re: Power Systems
    In forum we have sometimes left out Grant's last name's "e" in Calverley. 
    Incorrect: Calverly  (elsewhere on the Internet the same error has been used for kite-energy Grant Howard Calverley. 
    Correct: Calverley
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19078 From: Rod Read Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    Addressing Pierre's original question...
    Crosswind doesn't exist! Don't worry about it. It's just a reference to the world plane of reference to explain direction of a sailing system.

    You cross a harbour directly perpendicular to the wind direction. Your friend does the same but at 1/2 the speed.
    Did you go crosswind or did he? According to a pair (or a line) of wind molecules moving side by side ... neither of you went across the wind direction.
    According to 2 shore side observers you both did.

    Yes, a rail or cross harbour sailing AWES, will sail directly across the wind motion vector of the whole wind field.
    (A vector doesn't have to be fixed to a point... the point can move.. The same vector can be everywhere at once... most often in a wind field it's a tumbling swirling mess.  With turbulence dictated mainly by proximity to variously rough surfaces.)

    The tilted rotary plane devices you mention all lie ~on a downwind tether (varies with forces extracted), but due to the tilt of their rotary plane, project only a quotient of their full frontal surface area to the direct oncoming wind (wind field vector).
    The amount projected to the apparent wind varies with their progress around their axis. (e.g. apparent wind is fastest over the blade going into wind. (9'o clock-ish = strongest aerodynamic forces)... (ergo A multi blade ring may be more steady outputting than 3))
    The speed of the apparent wind over the blades depends on a handy fudge number called tip speed ratio. Given that the apparent wind is continuously varying through the rotary track of these blades, yet the rotation is a co-joined speed, tip speed ratio is at best an average guide to tilted rotary AWES performance.  Still if the blade is good through a variety of wind speeds... It's a handy guide.

    My unrefined prototypes, as tested with unsophisticated methods, are not yet described accurately enough, to specify my blade (2/3 of a ram air kite) tip speed ratio. The kite will originally have had an L/D rating (Although very similar, again L/D value is dependant on wind speed, varies) The specified L/D will have changed since I have altered the bridling geometry for tip twist and released the banking angle.

    At least, I should have put in twist, my recording and reporting standard is so primitive that even I don't know.
    Got to love this forum eh!

    As for the last post...? Optimality? rectangular airspace? etc... oh for goodness sakes!
    Optimality Theory (frequently abbreviated OT; second word normally capitalized by convention) is a linguistic model proposing that the observed forms of language arise from the interaction between conflicting constraints.


    Rod Read

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

    07899057227
    01851 870878
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19079 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Tethered gyroglider control systems

    Tethered gyroglider control systems

    Gregory Howard Hastings

    David Lang

    Grant Howard Calverley


    Priority date:  Feb 29, 2012


    Also published asCN104254480A, US20150039161,https://www.google.com/patents/WO2013130526A2?dq=Grant+howard+calverley&cl=en

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19080 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    M.L. Loyd's seminal paper Crosswind Kite Power, 1980, is seen, rightly in my opinion, as a reference by almost all companies and universities, by describing high power of a kite going more or less crosswind.


    The problem I saw is that often rotary devices (SWP, Daisy, Parotor, SuperTurbine(tm)...) are not seen as crosswind kites. But we can consider their blades are going crosswind, as blades of wind turbine are going quite (because in a perpendicular way) crosswind.


    This topic is only to simplify and also putting a level of link for appreciation of both "crosswind kites" and "rotary kites".


    Pierre

    FlygenKite - Kite wind turbine - Eolienne cerf-volant 

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19081 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Working Thermal and Atmospheric Subsidence AT ONCE by a kite system

    Working Thermal and Atmospheric Subsidence AT ONCE by a kite system

     (T&S AWE, a type of FFAWE, or T&S for further abbreviation)


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidence_(atmosphere)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal


    One mature graduation realm for AWE may be the mastery of working AT ONCE the vertical updrafts and downdrafts along with horizontal winds. Set kite system (anchor set, tether set, wing set, media; where anchor set may be seen as a wing set; and where tether set may be seen as a coupling wing set in tension between wing sets) so that a wing set is in updraft and its coupled wing set is in downdraft while the tether set finds itself in all drafts involved. Work the differentials. This huge realm was touched upon briefly (if my memory serves me) by Dave Santos in some past posted notes. Here is an invitation topic thread to focus on the variety of ways to mine the differences of the three wind spaces in an airspace. T&S looks to calm horizontal winds as a challenge type. As Santos brought up near this present consideration realm, the near equatorial zones features Intertropical Convergence Zone, or ITCZ where the complex setting might be ripe for T&S.

    ~ JoeF
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19082 From: dave santos Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    We have consistently here understood "crosswind" to mean just what Wikipedia states; therefore rotary motion with a "crosswind component", like the HAWT standard, airborne or not, is automatically classed as "crosswind". Loyd clearly intended the same meaning.

    Undue semantic confusion over Loyd sprang from the wide variety of possible AWES architectures with crosswind motion versus the narrow choice of architectures he was limited to studying, by both computational and conceptual limitations of the time. His ad hoc choice of "lift mode" and "drag mode" was particularly awkward terminology. He has lamented not taking more care in naming, unaware that his paper would be so influential.

    Almost forty years later, we see clearly that the key to Loyd is his two credited references, Pocock's book and Payne's patents. In these sources, crosswind motion is implicit, just as in sailing, crosswind motion has always been known as the ideal point-of-sail. On the technical side, no actual confusion exists. Loyd is still alive, doing well, and follows our efforts with interest; eager to see what AWES designs emerge as winners.



    On Friday, September 18, 2015 9:38 AM, "pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    M.L. Loyd's seminal paper Crosswind Kite Power, 1980, is seen, rightly in my opinion, as a reference by almost all companies and universities, by describing high power of a kite going more or less crosswind.

    The problem I saw is that often rotary devices (SWP, Daisy, Parotor, SuperTurbine(tm)...) are not seen as crosswind kites. But we can consider their blades are going crosswind, as blades of wind turbine are going quite (because in a perpendicular way) crosswind.

    This topic is only to simplify and also putting a level of link for appreciation of both "crosswind kites" and "rotary kites".

    Pierre
     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19083 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    A reader is invited to search our forum for the term "crosswind" and "crosswinding" to find scattered posts that use the two terms.     The present topic thread could join all the priors; or the priors be joined herein by urge.

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

    We have received a note from wind worker Doug Selsam, here shown:

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

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

    I have a comment on the current discussion over one... more... (ahem) word definition...
    Wind energy has gone through 2000 years+ of successful crosswind development without ever using the term "crosswind" as far as I am aware.  (I could be wrong, technically, but "crosswind" is not a term I've ever heard in regular old wind energy).  From the viewpoint of wind energy practitioners (as opposed to inexperienced outsiders attempting "advanced" theoretical mastery), the term "crosswind" is redundant to simple everyday reality.  
    "Not worthy of mention", 
    "Goes without saying",
    "par for the course",
    "obvious"
    would describe how real wind energy people would react if they were ever confronted with such a term, which they are not.

    In auto racing, an equivalent term might be "downroad" as though somehow nobody knew that cars normally go "down the road", but take note: one never hears the term "downroad" to describe auto racing.  How about "downroad rolling"?  Even more redundant, even less worthy of mention, it is simply a description of what cars do.  If anyone had to say "downroad" or "downroad-rolling" in describing the action of a car, most people would assume the person saying it was 100% ignorant of automotive technology to the point that they had never even seen a car and had no idea how they operated.  Hey I've got a completely new method of transportation called "downroad rolling"!  You'd think the person saying it was a complete idiot - a delusional nutcase!   Same with "crosswind".  The term "crosswind" is an announcement that the person using it has no familiarity with how wind energy works, and is on the path to discovering the most very basic facts of wind energy for themselves, and presupposes that most people would think that working surfaces would normally be traveling in some other direction such as downwind, pretending that the person using that term "crosswind" is revealing some new concept that was never before appreciated.  To people who already understand wind energy, the term is nothing but an announcement of ignorance on the part of the person using it.  A similar dynamic might emerge if someone wrote "a paper" on sailing strategy , maybe with the excuse that it referred to kite-sailing, called "crosswind tacking", or "tacking at an angle to the wind".  People in the field of sailing might point out "you could have left out the word "crosswind"  or "at an angle to the wind", because that is how tacking is already done, and everyone knows it.  But in wind energy it is way worse.  All good wind turbines are 100% crosswind and have been for 2000 years.  The only exceptions are considered "crackpot" technology.  The problem is the crackpots think being a crackpot is normal and therefore being normal requires special terminology to describe it.  It does not.  Normal is normal, and normal wind turbines operate normal to the wind, and always have, for at least 2000 years.

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

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

    End of the shared note from Doug Selsam


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

    Disclaimer: The opinions in the above note may not be shared by  some  robust scientists, wind workers, engineers.   Thus discussion!  Clarifying matters is invited.         

    Joe F.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19084 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: Inside Minesto

    Marine energy technology company Minesto names new CFO, COO

    GOTHENBURG, Sweden
    09/18/2015
    By Elizabeth Ingram 
    Managing Editor
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19085 From: dave santos Date: 9/18/2015
    Subject: Re: 2016 Conference Planning?
    Thanks John,

    We proceed cautiously until we can confirm or deny PJ's information that the wider AWE community is being kept unaware that AWESCO has taken over the lead conference role in AWE from AWEC. What PJ stated makes poor sense, that solely based on Curie Foundation funding and Moritz's career interests, Freiburg is the default AWE conference venue for 2016; with no regard for other options.

    It could be that AWESCO only intends small secondary conferences from its narrow geographic orientation, such that there is no actual conflict with a wider AWE conference on a more open basis. Perhaps AWESCO generously intends free global conferences, rather than imposing year-after-year of fees and global travel on the outside world. Its absurd if Curie funding imposes ongoing higher conference costs on all others.

    Surely the North EU inside circle understands the basis for years of complaints over its lack of transparency. Its very troubling how Makani, as a recent example, got conference opening status, yet its presentation is kept secret from the public. Meanwhile, you were blocked from planning participation. There is no justifying explanation to such facts. Who's values are these? They are not values of open knowledge and cooperation. Our conferences really are better when participation and format are most diverse (2009, 2011), rather than when stage-managed and boycotted. It would be progress if AWESCO finally allows you in a representative conference planning role comparable to Guido's default role; even if an American conference is once again to be neglected.

    Until we have confirmation from Moritz of Freiburg's claim, lets continue to refine an open plan for an international 2016 AWE conference in Seattle. If in fact the AWEC/BHWE/AWESCO inside group has once taken secretive control of conference planning, we have recourse to formal complaints to Curie and Freiburg authorities, with reasonable hope that the pattern of social exclusion by the inside elite cannot hold much longer. Your idea of a two-event track with cooperative aspects is on the table. So we await a bit longer for PJ's circle to clarify their intents, before the rest of us decide how best to move forward.

    dave







    On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 12:37 PM, "Hardensoft International Limited hardensoftintl@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
     Much appreciations, DaveS; for your steadfast faith in open, accountable industry association which AWEIA represents rather than narrow, selfish interests being championed by AWEConsortium turned AWESCO.
    Truth is AWEIA as a global association will support any venue fairly agreed to in an open process and not one already cornered by camouflaged vested interests.
    Further lifts
    JohnO
    AWEIA International
    John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
    Managing Consultant & CEO
    Hardensoft International Limited
    <Technologies  
    Buzz from PJ is that AWESCO is quietly acting as the AWE community's de-facto international conference organizer, and that UFreiburg has even already been chosen as the "logical" venue for 2016, for what would be a third-in-a-row German-Dutch event controlled by the same inside circle. This conflicts with a grass-roots proposal to have the long-overdue US-located conference in Seattle, at the Museum of Flight (as suggested by Fujino, Drachen Foundation, and endorsed by MoF). There are pros-and-cons for both sides, and maybe other candidate venues as well. The standing concern is that the mysterious Northern EU conference decision-making process is not open and accountable.

    On the US side, Makani and the many start-up ventures should work together for great US AWE conferences. After two California conferences, Seattle, Washington, moved to the fore, as the US aerospace capital home of Boeing (with MOUs and patents gathering) and Bill Gates (who is lately announcing investment goals in AWE). DaveN (NASA) had long predicted US R&D would depend on high-net-worth individuals, rather than government or NGO support. kPower proposes Gates be pitched an international R&D plan far beyond AWESCO's exclusive funding.

    John Oyebanji suggests the US side might organize a less academic-oriented more hands-on event (ie. AWEfest), which could mean we have grown enough to diversify into two broad camps, with two healthy events. Even if divided now, lets keep alive the original goal to unite for grand conferences that better balance all stakeholder circles (like 2009 and 2011). Open flying sessions and technical clinics have especially been lacking, in favor of academic papers and presentations.

    Wubbo Lives! Happy Energy :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19086 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    Crosswind design is in fact "obvious" in AWE, but it has not long been so for Doug. Loyd had already well reviewed the ancient crosswind principle (citing Pocock and Payne) while Doug was conceiving his non-crosswind laddermill concept. Doug's ST was patented as sprouting from a VAWT, even after 2000; still ignoring optimal crosswind design. We patiently review basic concepts like crosswind design for those who want to avoid designing-from-ignorance. The lesson may seem unduly obvious and repetitive, but not for those students who need learning reinforcement. Loyd's Crosswind Kite Power will remain a classic text in AWE.



    On Friday, September 18, 2015 8:50 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    A reader is invited to search our forum for the term "crosswind" and "crosswinding" to find scattered posts that use the two terms.     The present topic thread could join all the priors; or the priors be joined herein by urge.
    ========================================
    We have received a note from wind worker Doug Selsam, here shown:
    ===================================
    ===================================
    I have a comment on the current discussion over one... more... (ahem) word definition...
    Wind energy has gone through 2000 years+ of successful crosswind development without ever using the term "crosswind" as far as I am aware.  (I could be wrong, technically, but "crosswind" is not a term I've ever heard in regular old wind energy).  From the viewpoint of wind energy practitioners (as opposed to inexperienced outsiders attempting "advanced" theoretical mastery), the term "crosswind" is redundant to simple everyday reality.  
    "Not worthy of mention", 
    "Goes without saying",
    "par for the course",
    "obvious"
    would describe how real wind energy people would react if they were ever confronted with such a term, which they are not.
    In auto racing, an equivalent term might be "downroad" as though somehow nobody knew that cars normally go "down the road", but take note: one never hears the term "downroad" to describe auto racing.  How about "downroad rolling"?  Even more redundant, even less worthy of mention, it is simply a description of what cars do.  If anyone had to say "downroad" or "downroad-rolling" in describing the action of a car, most people would assume the person saying it was 100% ignorant of automotive technology to the point that they had never even seen a car and had no idea how they operated.  Hey I've got a completely new method of transportation called "downroad rolling"!  You'd think the person saying it was a complete idiot - a delusional nutcase!   Same with "crosswind".  The term "crosswind" is an announcement that the person using it has no familiarity with how wind energy works, and is on the path to discovering the most very basic facts of wind energy for themselves, and presupposes that most people would think that working surfaces would normally be traveling in some other direction such as downwind, pretending that the person using that term "crosswind" is revealing some new concept that was never before appreciated.  To people who already understand wind energy, the term is nothing but an announcement of ignorance on the part of the person using it.  A similar dynamic might emerge if someone wrote "a paper" on sailing strategy , maybe with the excuse that it referred to kite-sailing, called "crosswind tacking", or "tacking at an angle to the wind".  People in the field of sailing might point out "you could have left out the word "crosswind"  or "at an angle to the wind", because that is how tacking is already done, and everyone knows it.  But in wind energy it is way worse.  All good wind turbines are 100% crosswind and have been for 2000 years.  The only exceptions are considered "crackpot" technology.  The problem is the crackpots think being a crackpot is normal and therefore being normal requires special terminology to describe it.  It does not.  Normal is normal, and normal wind turbines operate normal to the wind, and always have, for at least 2000 years.
    =================================
    =================================
    End of the shared note from Doug Selsam

    ===================================================================
    Disclaimer: The opinions in the above note may not be shared by  some  robust scientists, wind workers, engineers.   Thus discussion!  Clarifying matters is invited.         
    Joe F.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19087 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Car Volant Reenactments
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19088 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades


    I assume my part of "ignorance on the part of the person using it" ("crosswind" term) since I search for not still existing and marketed utility e-AWES .


    M.L. Loyd wrote in http://homes.esat.kuleuven.be/~highwind/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Loyd1980.pdf 

    "The kite's motion would be approximately transverse to the wind, in the same sense that a wind turbine's blade moves transverse to the wind."

    1. So something is going crosswind, but this something is not a wind turbine, but a kite. And for a kite, crosswind motion was not a wide-spread use since kite were mainly used as stationary devices. So using "crosswind" term makes sense to describe motion being "transverse to the wind".
    2. It is made a similarity of crosswind kite motion with wind turbine but,
    3. As Doug wrote "Wind energy has gone through 2000 years+ of successful crosswind development without ever using the term "crosswind" as far as I am aware".
    4. So I can see both the requirement of "crosswind" term to describe transverse kite's motion, and a similarity  with wind turbine while there was no requirement to use "crosswind" term for it before.
    5. In use practises we can have "crosswind kite" where the whole kite moves, and rotary kites (or HAWT) where only blades move.

    I do not look after some fun for new définitions but after logic behind words allowing to resolve crucial points as:

    • What is ratio of power/space use, for rotary kites (with crosswind blades but stationary center), for crosswind kites?
    • What is their scalability regarding weight or control requirements?
    • What are costs in material?
    • What is cost in land and space use?

    For them some proposition to use both Loyd's equations for power wich are based on kite's performances AND Betz's equation as widened in frontal airspace to deduce land and space used.


    Pierre

    http://flygenkite.com/ 


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19089 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    "Crosswind kite" refers in both translation and rotation as a closed path of kite, while rotary kites and HAWT have only rotation as motion, their blades rotating crosswind.


    Pierre

    http://flygenkite.com 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19090 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    By the expansive definition of "kite" unique to the AWES Forum, its easy to see turbine blades as quasi-kite elements, and looping-kites as quasi-turbines. These ideas bound a common engineering spectrum where no definite technical boundary exists between them.



    On Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:02 AM, "pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    "Crosswind kite" refers in both translation and rotation as a closed path of kite, while rotary kites and HAWT have only rotation as motion, their blades rotating crosswind.

    Pierre
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19091 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19092 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    Suggesting more as argued at the beginning of the forum: 
    Even a simple classic SLK is exactly a turbine.   Complex kite systems carry the same character.
    "quasi-" may be put aside when one sees turbine in a natural kite system richly and clearly. 
    A kite system cannot help but be a turbine; energy is inescapably being converted and doing works without stop; rotations are continual and saturate the system. One of the tasks of the RAD is to configure kite systems so that its turbine resultant fulfills some chosen robust works effectively.  Some works are to lift, pull, generate electricity, etc. (thousands of works beckon).   Appreciating that kite is at once exactly a turbine gives a doorway to creative engineering of solutions with kite. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19093 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    I agree that the "quasi" is perhaps too generous to those folks who choke on strong counter-intuitive assertions. Its intended like "analog" in referring to phonon QM, to forestall petty objection by lay folk. Its due concession that there at least minor differences between cases that otherwise share fundamental identity.



    On Saturday, September 19, 2015 12:52 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Suggesting more as argued at the beginning of the forum: 
    Even a simple classic SLK is exactly a turbine.   Complex kite systems carry the same character.
    "quasi-" may be put aside when one sees turbine in a natural kite system richly and clearly. 
    A kite system cannot help but be a turbine; energy is inescapably being converted and doing works without stop; rotations are continual and saturate the system. One of the tasks of the RAD is to configure kite systems so that its turbine resultant fulfills some chosen robust works effectively.  Some works are to lift, pull, generate electricity, etc. (thousands of works beckon).   Appreciating that kite is at once exactly a turbine gives a doorway to creative engineering of solutions with kite. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19094 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    (Message without too heavy figure) Fig. 9 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1364032115007005/1-s2.0-S1364032115007005-main.pdf?_tid=82121558-5eef-11e5-b968-00000aab0f01&acdnat=1442682027_4b3b2e6a708860bfe07c9606afa4e032 : tethered quadropter(and also turbine of Altaeros' balloon)  is seen as "non-crosswind": that shows an agreement is needed to distinguish "crosswind kite" (translation and rotation) from "crosswind blades" (rotation of blades like the turbine within Altaeros' balloon). In my opinion this presentation is not as correct and precise as Loyd's presentation.

    No Joe: a kite is not a turbine.


    PierreB
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19095 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    (Message without too heavy figure) Fig. 9 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1364032115007005/1-s2.0-S1364032115007005-main.pdf?_tid=82121558-5eef-11e5-b968-00000aab0f01&acdnat=1442682027_4b3b2e6a708860bfe07c9606afa4e032 : tethered quadropter(and also turbine of Altaeros' balloon) is seen as "non-crosswind": that shows an agreement is needed to distinguish "crosswind kite" (translation and rotation) from "crosswind blades" (rotation of blades like the turbine within Altaeros' balloon). In my opinion this presentation is not as correct and precise as Loyd's presentation.

     

    No Joe: a kite is not a turbine. This topic is for clarification of "crosswind" notion. SLK is not a turbine as such. Arguing a kite is a turbine makes only confusion.

     

    Pierre

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19096 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    This topic is for clarification of "crosswind" notion. SLK is not a turbine as such. Arguing a kite is a turbine makes only confusion.


    Pierre
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19097 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    Pierre, 

           A proof had been given for the statement: A kite is a turbine. 

    And then when some people see and use that foundation, creative clarity has unfolded--- very opposite to confusion.    You are welcome to have use of a different definition; but others are welcome to the theorem: a kite is a turbine.  

         Further, it is nearly impossible for a kite not to be crosswinding. That there are categories of crosswind kiting is a given. Dealing with categories of crosswinding devices could be easy.  You are invited to find any real kite that fails to hold some crosswinding in its dynamic.   The task might be better set as this: Describe any particular kite; in the telling, specify how much crosswinding is occurring; and where, and why. Describe how the kite is fulfilling a certain specified work.  Then we will know something that we could carry to the investor.  Altaeros BAT is a kite system that is doing some significant crosswinding in more than one way. The simple real downwind SLK sitting as though it was rock solid in the sky is doing some crosswinding and is generating energies and doing works.... while fulfilling several types of rotations to accomplish the energy conversions and works; it is a happy turbine---even if not recognized as such by those perhaps saturated with seeing turbines only in some special clothing.   

         Struggle through the confusion and be rewarded with some bright clear lights; it is worth the journey. Simplification results. Power to design results. License to categorize and size results.  Stay wrestling against what has been proved and surely thus be holding a confusion doorway.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19098 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    I agree with Joe; a rotating kite is a true turbine. The essential principles are respected, just not plainly obvious. The required insight is to see the classic SLK kite as the (single) turbine blade and its single-line (or power kite and its multi-line set) as the rotor.  Single blade turbines are well known, and there is a continuum of stiffness across turbine rotors; no rotor being perfectly stiff or flexible, but some mix in between. Not all kites rotate freely in flight; like arches, playsails, isodomes, etc; so these can be classed as exceptions.



    On Saturday, September 19, 2015 2:47 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Pierre, 
           A proof had been given for the statement: A kite is a turbine. 
    And then when some people see and use that foundation, creative clarity has unfolded--- very opposite to confusion.    You are welcome to have use of a different definition; but others are welcome to the theorem: a kite is a turbine.  
         Further, it is nearly impossible for a kite not to be crosswinding. That there are categories of crosswind kiting is a given. Dealing with categories of crosswinding devices could be easy.  You are invited to find any real kite that fails to hold some crosswinding in its dynamic.   The task might be better set as this: Describe any particular kite; in the telling, specify how much crosswinding is occurring; and where, and why. Describe how the kite is fulfilling a certain specified work.  Then we will know something that we could carry to the investor.  Altaeros BAT is a kite system that is doing some significant crosswinding in more than one way. The simple real downwind SLK sitting as though it was rock solid in the sky is doing some crosswinding and is generating energies and doing works.... while fulfilling several types of rotations to accomplish the energy conversions and works; it is a happy turbine---even if not recognized as such by those perhaps saturated with seeing turbines only in some special clothing.   
         Struggle through the confusion and be rewarded with some bright clear lights; it is worth the journey. Simplification results. Power to design results. License to categorize and size results.  Stay wrestling against what has been proved and surely thus be holding a confusion doorway.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19099 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    Any kite that is a member of kite arches, kite playsails, kite isodomes, etc. is a kite; such kites are turbines. The "freeness" to have rotating occurring in the kite varies but will be found always to exist in a non-ideal real media environment. The tease is to find a counterexample; I look and look and think and think ... and have yet to find a kite playsail, a kite arch, and arch kite, a kite isodome that fails to have energy being converted from rotations and translations.  Recall that turning has direction; directions may change sense and direction; turning has rates; rates may be large or small. The clout of a tiny turn for a tiny amount of rotation is idiosyncratic to system and purpose. Ignoring rotations will involve taking some risk; the wear that might be ignored in the ignoring of rotations may come around to bite the system manager unexpectedly. 

    Of course, anyone is free to seek a counterexample to disprove the theorem; it would be very exciting if someone found such a counterexample!  A kite arch is just a special type of kite; watch the load lines relative to some fixed frame of reference, say earth surface fixed points; seek and find rotations occurring; watch the energy conversions occurring from those rotations. It would be a joy to have a theorem overturned, as that would mean a new fresh world of some sort with unthought-of adventures awaiting post adjustment to the new world. A specialized kite is still a kite. A complex kite is still a kite. Exceptionally uncommonly odd kites are kites; the theorem applies to all kites.   A kite is an object that has wing sets coupled by a tether set operating in media (perhaps compound). In real media such coupling of such wing sets (some of the wings anchor operating relative to other wings) will be having rotations and translations and energy conversions and works.  The universe is not a quiet place. Changes force real kites to be turbines; the unquiet of universe results in kite being turbine. 

    Of course, there can be political decisions that define against a theorem; governments or groups of people may define that the circumference of an ideal circle divided by its diameter is to be 3. Such political decisions are possible among kite engineers Some such decisions might be done for some accepted reasons.  When the bridge built on the 3 decision fails, maybe the politicos will rule 3.14; that might work for some time; later ages might get to 3.14159; and still later ages might have the politicos giving in to the transcendental character of actual pi while agreeing to use risk-taking truncations of pi in practical projects that have a time restraint for completion. 

    We had a fatality in hang gliding this May; a supposedly quiet guy line in the kite system kite hang glider (all :   a kite).   However, full respect for that "quiet" line would have recognized that even that part of the kite was a turbine; the rotations  (ever so tiny and difficult to measure ordinarily) at the metal cable sleeve set up to do work that moved fatigue and corrosion and electro-chemical changes in the cable to a point of catastrophic failure; the kite's wing folded and the kite (pilot is part of the kite) rapidly hit the ground for a giant loss to family and friends.  The pilot had not respected enough that his kite was a turbine in large and in parts. His kite was generating energy formats from reacting with the wind from rotations and translations and thus producing works at every instant; one of the works surprised him. Sylmar, California.    
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19100 From: dave santos Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    One can reasonably define rotation to consist of complete integer (~360 degree) cycles, and otherwise call partial rotations oscillations or reciprocations. Similarly one can define oscillation abstractly as phase rotation.

    It helps to be able to distinguish between cases, rather than generalize so totally that nothing can be distinguished. We can choose whether to distinguish or not by how we define/measure things. There is uncertainty as well.



    On Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:02 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Any kite that is a member of kite arches, kite playsails, kite isodomes, etc. is a kite; such kites are turbines. The "freeness" to have rotating occurring in the kite varies but will be found always to exist in a non-ideal real media environment. The tease is to find a counterexample; I look and look and think and think ... and have yet to find a kite playsail, a kite arch, and arch kite, a kite isodome that fails to have energy being converted from rotations and translations.  Recall that turning has direction; directions may change sense and direction; turning has rates; rates may be large or small. The clout of a tiny turn for a tiny amount of rotation is idiosyncratic to system and purpose. Ignoring rotations will involve taking some risk; the wear that might be ignored in the ignoring of rotations may come around to bite the system manager unexpectedly. 

    Of course, anyone is free to seek a counterexample to disprove the theorem; it would be very exciting if someone found such a counterexample!  A kite arch is just a special type of kite; watch the load lines relative to some fixed frame of reference, say earth surface fixed points; seek and find rotations occurring; watch the energy conversions occurring from those rotations. It would be a joy to have a theorem overturned, as that would mean a new fresh world of some sort with unthought-of adventures awaiting post adjustment to the new world. A specialized kite is still a kite. A complex kite is still a kite. Exceptionally uncommonly odd kites are kites; the theorem applies to all kites.   A kite is an object that has wing sets coupled by a tether set operating in media (perhaps compound). In real media such coupling of such wing sets (some of the wings anchor operating relative to other wings) will be having rotations and translations and energy conversions and works.  The universe is not a quiet place. Changes force real kites to be turbines; the unquiet of universe results in kite being turbine. 

    Of course, there can be political decisions that define against a theorem; governments or groups of people may define that the circumference of an ideal circle divided by its diameter is to be 3. Such political decisions are possible among kite engineers Some such decisions might be done for some accepted reasons.  When the bridge built on the 3 decision fails, maybe the politicos will rule 3.14; that might work for some time; later ages might get to 3.14159; and still later ages might have the politicos giving in to the transcendental character of actual pi while agreeing to use risk-taking truncations of pi in practical projects that have a time restraint for completion. 

    We had a fatality in hang gliding this May; a supposedly quiet guy line in the kite system kite hang glider (all :   a kite).   However, full respect for that "quiet" line would have recognized that even that part of the kite was a turbine; the rotations  (ever so tiny and difficult to measure ordinarily) at the metal cable sleeve set up to do work that moved fatigue and corrosion and electro-chemical changes in the cable to a point of catastrophic failure; the kite's wing folded and the kite (pilot is part of the kite) rapidly hit the ground for a giant loss to family and friends.  The pilot had not respected enough that his kite was a turbine in large and in parts. His kite was generating energy formats from reacting with the wind from rotations and translations and thus producing works at every instant; one of the works surprised him. Sylmar, California.    
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19101 From: benhaiemp Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

    JoeF wrote: "You are welcome to have use of a different definition; but others are welcome to the theorem: a kite is a turbine.".  

    Sure, and as a kite works by wind, so the deduced theorem is: a kite is a wind turbine. Here are examples of kites as Wind turbine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 

    Previous "theorems" said also: a kite is an AWES. So logic deduction is: a wind turbine is an AWES.


    Pierre 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19102 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/19/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    For some 60 years of my life I rotated deliberately by foot about say 15 degrees in happy walking, less than that in mild gentle walks. When machining outside diameters to precision dimensions I would rotate a part of the machine to much less than one degree of a turn. In dialing large telescopes a rotation of less than a second would jump past some targets. The amount of turning about an axis grabs the interest of a worker relative to the machine or art involved. In high jumping we would rotate the foot for take off using a rotation of about 70 degrees; then over the bar we would rotate about another axis about 180 degrees. Machine instances of rotation vary commonly also.  Yes, one may begin categories of machine actions and group the rotations in any useful set of categories relative to a field or art sector; indeed, categories frequently become useful. 
        Rotation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

     

    Rotation probably should be left as is commonly understood. Then in particular arts one might have names for certain patterns of rotations. In mathematics we simply say a 360 degree rotation about a point is one turn. Rotations are often quantified by number of turns or degrees or minutes or seconds. Rate of turning is the amount of turns per unit of time in a direction about a fix point. An owl seemingly can rotate its head more of a turn than I can turn my head; we both rotate our heads through our days. 

    Rotating and rotation get some special-field treatments. Sometimes in astronomy a planet's rotation is understood as one full turn (this follows the spirit of Dave Santos suggestion that rotation may be defined in integer counts of full turns. However, the planet rotates at a certain rate of one rotation per certain amount of time. Yet the planet would be rotating even during 15 degrees or 1 degree of turning. 

    A turbine or high jumper should not be disqualified from fair participation in the world for doing good works by rotating less than a full turn.   

    Windbelt's Humdinger describes themselves as "non-turbine". Of course they are free to describe their device any way they wish. However, I see their ribbon rotating about the fixed end points. The rotating changes direction because of tensional recoil in a fluttering dynamic. Without the rotating movement Shawn Frayne would not be generating electricity.  His reach to call his Windbelt a "non-turbine" allows him to categorize himself by definition into a special class of turbines that do reciprocations, as Dave S. just mentioned. Frayne had the choice to call his device a reciprocating turbine, but he did not go that language route. 
    New Wind Power - The Wind Belt Invention  The rotating belt (flutter) turns the belt-end-held-magnet about a fixed-point where the belt is held firmly; the magnet turns as it rides on the radial belt in one direction and then reverses rotating direction; those cycles of reversed rotating follow the flutter of the belt. The magnet turns one way and then the other way again and again and again. Because the magnet is close to some copper (usually) wire coins, then a current of electricity formed in the copper wires. Frayne's turbine generates electricity from the wind; Frayne calls his turbine a non-turbine.   I do not write to Frayne and direct his music or his choice of language; I just want to know what is going on with his device; I class his device as a turbine  that uses reciprocation. Reciprocating motion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia    Notice that some reciprocating devices may go 5 turns in one direction and then reverse for 5 turns in the other directions; or 1000 turns in one direction and then 1000 turns in the opposite direction; it is not required that less than a turn be the motion segment. In development of skybow Mallos came upon an arrangement that had a ribbon kite rotate many many turns in one direction and then the configuration built up energies to slow and stop and reverse direction; some toys we have mentioned in forum do such (button flywheel in mid-two-string; pull apart two anchors; I forget the name of the toy; the strings are twisted storing energy; pull apart finally slows the flywheel; then reversal occurs. Button and String Toy

     

     

     

    Kites may emphasize one kind of turbine over another kind of turbine. The string hummer musical kites are employing several types of turbine; the sound maker of high focus is the fluttering string specially held. 

    Employ definitions for handy reference.  But mechanically analyze without letting handy constructs miss the turning that occurs; that is, like Frayne, call what one wishes a non-turbine, but it is suggested to retain understanding that his device is having the ribbon and magnet turn about a fixed point (turbine), even if reciprocatively.  I cannot mechanically analyze Frayne's device and come up with "it is not a turbine" but I can come up with "it is a device that is not turning always in one direction like all those wind turbines with three blades on those mountains and fields; but is a turbine mechanically." 

    From  Patent US3101014 - Ultra-high-speed pneumatically driven machine tools, such as drills and the like

     

    "Another object is an air powered and variable-speed reciprocating turbine whose speed of rotation, and the direction and extent of whose axial movement, are selectively, and independently, air-controlled.     " 

    ~ JoeF


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

    One can reasonably define rotation to consist of complete integer (~360 degree) cycles, and otherwise call partial rotations oscillations or reciprocations. Similarly one can define oscillation abstractly as phase rotation.

    It helps to be able to distinguish between cases, rather than generalize so totally that nothing can be distinguished. We can choose whether to distinguish or not by how we define/measure things. There is uncertainty as well.


     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19103 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/20/2015
    Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
    Attachments :
      Attached tool gives may help show how that some wind turbines are not AWES. 
      Some wind turbines are AWES, not all. 
      Some AWES are non-kite.  All wind kites are wind turbines.

      Filling in examples for the sets and subsets will help solve the logic challenge.

      The brief deduction in prior post is not forced.

      ~Joe F.

      		   @@attachment@@
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19104 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2015
      Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
      Its true that any wing, vane, or paddle acting on an axial (rotary) structure is fundamentally a turbine, but this is the philosophical overview. Thus we find molecular true turbine rotors at the small-scale; and large-scale turbine rotors on geological and planetary scales (mountains, comet tails, etc.), in gas, liquid, ballistic, or plasma flows.

      However, for specific engineering problems, like reasoning between "rotary turbine" v. "reciprocating piston" engine designs, its quite proper to distinguish turbines by local directional statistics, disregarding outside (ie. cosmic) rotations, or secondary internal rotations (like piston rod/crankshaft motion), of the systems under consideration.





      On Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:49 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
      For some 60 years of my life I rotated deliberately by foot about say 15 degrees in happy walking, less than that in mild gentle walks. When machining outside diameters to precision dimensions I would rotate a part of the machine to much less than one degree of a turn. In dialing large telescopes a rotation of less than a second would jump past some targets. The amount of turning about an axis grabs the interest of a worker relative to the machine or art involved. In high jumping we would rotate the foot for take off using a rotation of about 70 degrees; then over the bar we would rotate about another axis about 180 degrees. Machine instances of rotation vary commonly also.  Yes, one may begin categories of machine actions and group the rotations in any useful set of categories relative to a field or art sector; indeed, categories frequently become useful. 
          Rotation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
       
      Rotation probably should be left as is commonly understood. Then in particular arts one might have names for certain patterns of rotations. In mathematics we simply say a 360 degree rotation about a point is one turn. Rotations are often quantified by number of turns or degrees or minutes or seconds. Rate of turning is the amount of turns per unit of time in a direction about a fix point. An owl seemingly can rotate its head more of a turn than I can turn my head; we both rotate our heads through our days. 

      Rotating and rotation get some special-field treatments. Sometimes in astronomy a planet's rotation is understood as one full turn (this follows the spirit of Dave Santos suggestion that rotation may be defined in integer counts of full turns. However, the planet rotates at a certain rate of one rotation per certain amount of time. Yet the planet would be rotating even during 15 degrees or 1 degree of turning. 

      A turbine or high jumper should not be disqualified from fair participation in the world for doing good works by rotating less than a full turn.   

      Windbelt's Humdinger describes themselves as "non-turbine". Of course they are free to describe their device any way they wish. However, I see their ribbon rotating about the fixed end points. The rotating changes direction because of tensional recoil in a fluttering dynamic. Without the rotating movement Shawn Frayne would not be generating electricity.  His reach to call his Windbelt a "non-turbine" allows him to categorize himself by definition into a special class of turbines that do reciprocations, as Dave S. just mentioned. Frayne had the choice to call his device a reciprocating turbine, but he did not go that language route. 
      New Wind Power - The Wind Belt Invention  The rotating belt (flutter) turns the belt-end-held-magnet about a fixed-point where the belt is held firmly; the magnet turns as it rides on the radial belt in one direction and then reverses rotating direction; those cycles of reversed rotating follow the flutter of the belt. The magnet turns one way and then the other way again and again and again. Because the magnet is close to some copper (usually) wire coins, then a current of electricity formed in the copper wires. Frayne's turbine generates electricity from the wind; Frayne calls his turbine a non-turbine.   I do not write to Frayne and direct his music or his choice of language; I just want to know what is going on with his device; I class his device as a turbine  that uses reciprocation. Reciprocating motion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia    Notice that some reciprocating devices may go 5 turns in one direction and then reverse for 5 turns in the other directions; or 1000 turns in one direction and then 1000 turns in the opposite direction; it is not required that less than a turn be the motion segment. In development of skybow Mallos came upon an arrangement that had a ribbon kite rotate many many turns in one direction and then the configuration built up energies to slow and stop and reverse direction; some toys we have mentioned in forum do such (button flywheel in mid-two-string; pull apart two anchors; I forget the name of the toy; the strings are twisted storing energy; pull apart finally slows the flywheel; then reversal occurs. Button and String Toy
       
       
       
      Kites may emphasize one kind of turbine over another kind of turbine. The string hummer musical kites are employing several types of turbine; the sound maker of high focus is the fluttering string specially held. 

      Employ definitions for handy reference.  But mechanically analyze without letting handy constructs miss the turning that occurs; that is, like Frayne, call what one wishes a non-turbine, but it is suggested to retain understanding that his device is having the ribbon and magnet turn about a fixed point (turbine), even if reciprocatively.  I cannot mechanically analyze Frayne's device and come up with "it is not a turbine" but I can come up with "it is a device that is not turning always in one direction like all those wind turbines with three blades on those mountains and fields; but is a turbine mechanically." 

      From  Patent US3101014 - Ultra-high-speed pneumatically driven machine tools, such as drills and the like
       
      "Another object is an air powered and variable-speed reciprocating turbine whose speed of rotation, and the direction and extent of whose axial movement, are selectively, and independently, air-controlled. " 

      ~ JoeF


      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

      One can reasonably define rotation to consist of complete integer (~360 degree) cycles, and otherwise call partial rotations oscillations or reciprocations. Similarly one can define oscillation abstractly as phase rotation.

      It helps to be able to distinguish between cases, rather than generalize so totally that nothing can be distinguished. We can choose whether to distinguish or not by how we define/measure things. There is uncertainty as well.


       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19105 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/21/2015
      Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades
      Former recent post of mine that mentioned Frayne's Windbelt: 
      please change "coins" to "coils". 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19106 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2015
      Subject: 500+ Kitesurfer Flotilla
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19107 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2015
      Subject: Surface Acoustic Waves in Kite Lattices
      As we create and scale-up novel kite lattices, we aim to understand and apply the inherent wave mechanics available to us. A major class of waves of interest are Surface Acoustic Waves (SAWs), with standard applications ranging in scale from microchips to earthquake characterization. Wave-field physics are suited to statistical mechanical engineering.

      Surfaces concentrate wave energy greatly (as Anyons), and kites, as largely quasi 1D and 2D surfaces, operate in surface modes. The Earth's surface is a primary medium for our wind-driven kite forces to act on, as a sort of mirror SAW medium. SAWs are also a hot basis for quantum computing research. As our lattices grow in depth, internal wave mechanics will apply in complex multimodal metamaterial dynamics.

      There are two major kinds of SAWs for us to study for kite lattices. Longitudinal Raleigh Waves include ocean waves and and the flowing billows in our kite surfaces. Love Waves correspond to periodic crosswind motions in our kite structures (How cool is that?). Studying many SAW similarity cases will continue to inspire and inform our AWES lattice designs-
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19108 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/23/2015
      Subject: Re: Crosswind kite and crosswind blades

      ERRATA:   I mixed two fatality reports:  The "May" fatality in Sylmar was turbulence-near-ground crash, not the wire incident.
      The intended wire-failure incident was this summer, concerning Rafael Lavin, and at Fort Funston in northern California.   The wire failure:  http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Hang-glider-killed-at-Fort-Funston-identified-6462000.php

        

      Thanks to Doug Selsam for catching my mixing the stories; please respect the correct two stories, if you forward the matters.  

      CAUTION: ERROR OF MIXED STORIES, SEE ABOVE FOR CORRECTION:---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
      We had a fatality in hang gliding this May; a supposedly quiet guy line in the kite system kite hang glider (all :   a kite).   However, full respect for that "quiet" line would have recognized that even that part of the kite was a turbine; the rotations  (ever so tiny and difficult to measure ordinarily) at the metal cable sleeve set up to do work that moved fatigue and corrosion and electro-chemical changes in the cable to a point of catastrophic failure; the kite's wing folded and the kite (pilot is part of the kite) rapidly hit the ground for a giant loss to family and friends.  The pilot had not respected enough that his kite was a turbine in large and in parts. His kite was generating energy formats from reacting with the wind from rotations and translations and thus producing works at every instant; one of the works surprised him. Sylmar, California.    
      http://ktla.com/2015/05/09/hang-glider-found-dead-near-sylmar/   ===== SEE CORRECTION ABOVE THIS PARAGRAPH.   Thanks, Joe F. 

       

        =======
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19109 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/23/2015
      Subject: Re: Surface Acoustic Waves in Kite Lattices
      Just in first glance of your post, the following came to mind for sharing: 
      Have large dome AWES at sea; have its anchor set water-wave impacted; let those water-wave impacts trigger wave resultants in the air kite dome array that cause continual differentia that can be mined by the the flying dome elements.  Thus, water ocean waves would play a control role in generating capturable energies from the flying dome array. 
      ==================================