Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 19316 to 19365 Page 280 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19316 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19317 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19318 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Re: Inside Minesto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19319 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19320 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Inside Minesto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19321 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19322 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19323 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19324 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19325 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19326 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19327 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19328 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: One aircraft

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19329 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19330 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19331 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19332 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19333 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19334 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19335 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: More "High power energy harvesting" AWE market investment reporting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19336 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19337 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19338 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19339 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Dr. Engblom's wonderful NASA FFAWE Presentation Video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19340 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Dr. Engblom's wonderful NASA FFAWE Presentation Video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19341 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: IFO "Windbot" Concept for NASA Jupiter Exploration

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19342 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19343 From: dave santos Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: "Energy Harvesting" buzzword (and another piezo-wind case w/ review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19344 From: dave santos Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19345 From: dave santos Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Enerkite coverage on Windtech-International.com

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19346 From: dave santos Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Megascale Magnetic-Skin Inflatable-Mechanics

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19347 From: edoishi Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Re: 22m2 Pilot Kites Lashed Together

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19348 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Topological Optimization of a Parafoil Rib (Thedens 2015)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19349 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Re: 22m2 Pilot Kites Lashed Together

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19350 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Kite-Matter Drones, Walkers, and Manipulators

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19351 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/5/2015
Subject: Exploring TWTAK flygen PTO from area-changing TW

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19352 From: dave santos Date: 11/5/2015
Subject: Terrain enabled windpower by Harry Valentine

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19353 From: dave santos Date: 11/5/2015
Subject: Power Maximization of a Closed Orbit Kite Generator [Mariam Ahmed, e

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19354 From: dave santos Date: 11/6/2015
Subject: More Aerotecture Concepts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19355 From: dave santos Date: 11/8/2015
Subject: Further developing SF Cable Car System as COTS Cableway Model

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19356 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
Subject: Ampyx coverage in Irish Times

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19357 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
Subject: Kontra Power (Turkey) debut at AWEC2015

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19358 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
Subject: Rocket Launch Assist by World's Largest Aircraft

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19359 From: dave santos Date: 11/10/2015
Subject: Wall Street Journal bullish on Tethered Drones

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19360 From: dave santos Date: 11/10/2015
Subject: Drone-assisted AWES Launch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19361 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/12/2015
Subject: Kiting in Hurricanes

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19362 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/12/2015
Subject: Re: Drone-assisted AWES Launch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19363 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2015
Subject: Re: Drone-assisted AWES Launch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19364 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 11/13/2015
Subject: Re: kPower's "TetraMorph" Groundgen Project

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19365 From: dave santos Date: 11/13/2015
Subject: Re: kPower's "TetraMorph" Groundgen Project



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19316 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Untethered breakaway kytoon
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19317 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
This Is How The Army's Loose $2.7 Billion Radar Blimp JLENS Was Supposed To Work

======================
My question: Did Raytheon have a system to cut the tether at the wing or not? Such a backup would prevent a dragging event.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19318 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2015
Subject: Re: Inside Minesto

Minesto fully-funds Deep Green MHK technology after raising US$17.2 million

VASTRA FROLUND, Sweden
10/28/2015
By Gregory B. Poindexter 
Associate Editor
===============================================

Minesto fully-funds Deep Green MHK technology after raising US$17.2 million

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19319 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
It's down - runaway Army blimp snagged in trees in Pa. field

 

Note: In the linked article: See a video of the wing dragging its approx. 6000 ft tether set. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19320 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Inside Minesto
Nice progress based on solid proof-of-concept performance. The challenge Minesto now faces is to fend off competition by alternative designs, since serious investment "bumps" boost the entire concept-space; but the optimal energy paravane design is not yet established. Its a similar dynamic in AWE, where each funding success tends to heat up the pool. 

The challenge for competitors is to achieve visibility in the primed investment world (eg. visibility under the Goggle-brand shadow), rather than just achieve early technical competence, which is getting easier for newcomers, given the pioneers have laid down some of the tech basics. Its a game of investment-leap-frog as much as a tech race.

Despite a few start-up failures in novel flow-harvesting tech, the obvious trend is very strong overall R&D growth to date, although we are still a small start-up sector with many orders-of-magnitude yet to grow by. The wild ride continues.



On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 8:20 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

Minesto fully-funds Deep Green MHK technology after raising US$17.2 million

VASTRA FROLUND, Sweden
10/28/2015
By Gregory B. Poindexter 
Associate Editor
===============================================

Minesto fully-funds Deep Green MHK technology after raising US$17.2 million
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19321 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
In the post-mortem fall-out to this mishap, we can now expect the US military to demand better prevention and chase methods that may help inform AWES and other technical-kite app designs to be breakaway fail-soft. We get to follow the investigation, which will necessarily be very public, given how public the failure was; but the design fixes and new operational protocols may be harder to follow...



On Thursday, October 29, 2015 5:58 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
 
Note: In the linked article: See a video of the wing dragging its approx. 6000 ft tether set. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19322 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
Just by way of interest years ago I worked on a high altitude cruise vehicle with very high aspect ratio wings. We calculated that if a wing broke the 100 foot long fragment could easily travel 60 miles before coming to ground. The premise was it would fly in a maple leaf spinning mode.

On 29 Oct 2015, at 16:35, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19323 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
Cool problem, ChrisC. It does bear on the general breakaway topic. At least landing a loose wing at a low descent rate far away can be better than a 100ft spear that falls on-station; like over a city, where a gliding breakaway clears the population. ("hey, its a feature" :)

Noting if the breakaway wing AR is too high, the maple-leaf mode will not stabilize. Interesting how wing -wash-out and outboard dihedral tends to create a working rotor in break-up scenario. In stable one-blade autogyro rotation the balance is sensitive, so a programmed breakpoint could unbalance stable rotation. Avoid reflex foil sections. Other possible fixes for extended autogyro glide include internal lanyards (very simple and cheap) to keep the airframe in one piece. If a wing really had to fly off alone, a means of passive reversal of up flap against down aileron could kill the autogyro mode. In principle, such a loose wing can autopilot itself to a suitable landing. (Open-AWE_IP-Cloud license hereby gifted to GoogleX :)

For flying model novelties over large audiences, where minimal dropped-object risk was required, I have long redundantly tied together my airframes and major components (batteries, motors, etc.) with internal lanyards, such that no brittle failure could result in high-impact-force component breakaway. The FAA has asked us to better define and implement modern sUAS "frangibility", and lanyard fibers is a good start. Large floaty but hot future aircraft could have fine tungsten or non-preg carbon cables running within them (tungsten and raw carbon-fiber being super tough and immune to most heat and shock).



On Thursday, October 29, 2015 11:41 AM, "christopher carlin christopher.m.carlin@btinternet.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Just by way of interest years ago I worked on a high altitude cruise vehicle with very high aspect ratio wings. We calculated that if a wing broke the 100 foot long fragment could easily travel 60 miles before coming to ground. The premise was it would fly in a maple leaf spinning mode.

On 29 Oct 2015, at 16:35, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19324 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Re: Untethered breakaway kytoon
Dear Dave,

Good points all. In our case the issue came up in a flight test readiness review so a bit late to do anything to the design. We were flying out in Westen Washington. The probability of the failure was remote and the population sparse. Our biggest concern was having it go over the Canadian border. Interestingly it wouldn’t have had significant dihedral once emptied of fuel because dihedral came about only due to bending under load. Didn’t have any flaps. Look up Project Condor if you’re interested.

I like the lanyard concept.

Regards,

Chris
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19325 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2015
Subject: Boeing Condor
Hi Chris,

Shifting the topic to the amazing Condor, whose existence took me by surprise. What an amazing feat for its time. I am very interested in slow-flight at extreme altitude, in the huge gap between LTA and the Blackbird. The Condor flew well slower than other UAVs now operational at extreme altitude, like the Global Hawk. Condor endurance was generally superior, as a related design trade. Noting that the simple fuselage, its avionics projecting with simple fairings, did not need to super-clean in the low-Re regime (super long wing with low wing-loading was the trick).

So, some questions- What was the Condor max-endurance altitude (compared to max-altitude)? Also, guessing the under-slung engines' huge aft intakes and pods was for effective liquid-cooling system, given the increased burden to shed excess heat in thin air (?)

I am trying to pencil in how high and slow a slow-flyer, like the highest possible kite, can reach, based on closest real similarity cases. Is there not a hidden design flight envelope waiting up there, of even slower flight with hang-glider or paraglider style wings, not yet explored? The Mars airplane concept space may be needing such an option,

daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19326 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Dear Dave,

I don’t think anything I say is classified anymore and my memory isn’t that accurate anyway. The goal altitude was 65000 ft. Max and cruise were pretty much the same. It was really point designed for that altitude. The limitation on altitude was propulsion. The engines were Continental. We used the 350 block and put on water cooled heads which resulted in a 300 cubic inch displacement. The heads came from the engine used on Burt Rutans round the world flight. Two turbochargers in series were used to produce sea level manifold pressure at cruise altitude. If you climbed above that design point we ran out of turbo boost so power would have fallen off rapidly. The propeller was two speed in addition to being variable pitch. The aft intakes are actually just for the radiators - you’re right about high altitude heat dissipation. The engines themselves are actually forward of the wing and level with it. One of the big lessons from the program is that recips aren’t reliable even though they offer better SFC than jets.

I certainly don’t remember exact numbers but I know we were flying slow enough to go backward over the ground when we went through the jet stream. Confused the guidance and navigation software. Not designed for going backwards.

There is sort of a sequence in these things. Compass Cope flowed into Condor which flowed into Darkstar which flowed into Global Hawk.

I think you’re probably right about hang glider wings but you have to get them up there somehow. We had very high L/D ratio. Not sure you can do that with hang glider wings.

Much fun.

Regards,

Chris
On 29 Oct 2015, at 21:10, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19327 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19328 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: One aircraft

One aircraft may have several wings.

One AWES aircraft may have several wings, several tethers, several resistive/reaction anchors (wings). 


Biplane aircraft.

Triplane aircraft. 

Quadraplane or quadruplane aircraft. 

Etc. Notice Sellers' multi-plane aircraft. 


A kite (kite system) is composed of wing set, tether set, and anchor (resistive/reaction) set (which anchor set is a wing set).   Each kite has two wing sets that interact through the kite's tether set.  Yet, the kite is one aircraft (or media-craft: water, gas, mixed media).  


The nomenclature of "Dual Aircraft Platform" may bring on confusion or may not; the singular "platform" seems to struggle to notice the integrity of the DAP.  The "dual aircraft" seems to lose the appreciation that just one aircraft is actually involved in the FFAWE system being studied by Embry-Riddle team; or "dual" just meaning two parts with the singular "aircraft" might work.  What they have in focus is one aircraft that is a single kite system that is is in free flight in air media; that the two wings of the single kite system are anchors to each other in free flight does not form two aircraft, but the system remains one aircraft, one kite, one AWES.  Dual-winged platform (DWP) might save.   But it appears that DAP will be sticky.   My hope is that such will not slow the reach for FFAWE that feature three and four or n wings in a single AWES, that is, a single aircraft.    A cluster kite has a cluster of wings; yet the cluster kite is a single aircraft. 


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


http://www.batoco.org/photos/uncategorized/aeroespacio03.jpg

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDI3WDY0MA==/z/2t4AAOSwAHZUNC7O/$_3.JPG

http://user.xmission.com/~red/quadraplane2.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/03/08/article-2111901-12138F50000005DC-175_634x399.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/01/12/article-2085517-0F695A2300000578-900_636x430.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Cq82rikVDs8/VU74iAxcKqI/AAAAAAAA91o/7Ocbnr7SaQw/s1600/dualaircraft.png

http://www.post-gazette.com/image/2015/04/10/ca59,52,2588,1615/drone6.jpg

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2013/11/VC200_oben_T_A-660x362.jpg

A fail:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ab8DjQ-PMY0  One of the two wings is a human body; during the flight the tether broke.

http://test.fiddlersgreen.net/aircraft/Phillips-Multiplane/IMAGES/Phillips-multiwing.jpg

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--j00nyZUr--/199o37yvb7kh2jpg.jpg


It is not clear what novel step might be involved in the patent application:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20120232721

as the free-flight coupled-winged kite system has been active in kiting literature for well over 100 years. Woglom way back described actual event of flying FFAWE double-winged kite system.  It is really fun to see William A. Engblom  and his team forward FFAWE into the present era along with others mining the free-flight kite for practical purposes. 


Mining the differentia in media (even multiple media at once) via kite (wing set, tether set) has interesting practical potentials: transportation, communications, shading, photography, planet study, atmospheric study, sport, energy production, ...   


One aircraft. 

There may be two aircraft in the sky. Or a farm of aircraft in the sky.  Or similarly in water or mixed media at once (kiteboarding, e.g.).   Actually the classic kite is mixed media (air and soil, e.g.). 


More:  http://energykitesystems.net/0/FFAWE/


It seems exciting to see the DAP progress. 


The Levopter project is also in our eye.  And the Kramer soaring explorations. Etc.  
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19329 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

This topic thread invites study of the patent 

Patent US8931727 - Dual-aircraft atmospheric platform

for itself and for any novelty that may live in the patent.   All are invited.  William A. Engblom is invited. Students are invited. During the study FFAWE will obtain increased exposure.  And we hope to understand and appreciate any novelty that may be found during the study.    It will be a neat cool joy to find and feature any inventive step disclosed in the patent.     Have fun. 


Note: One may want in preamble to visit the post

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/AirborneWindEnergy/conversations/messages/19328

Contemporary news has some buzz over funds feeding the study of DAP: See news:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Embry-Riddle+DAP&oq=Embry-Riddle+DAP&aqs=chrome..69i57.9967j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19330 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727
Invitation for finding and describing any inventive step in the patent are the following: 
Dr. Engblom   (as already stated in former post)
Dr. Hever Moncayo
Dr. William Barott
Ryan Decker
Norm Princen
Kushan Patel
Esteban Sanchez
Dale Kramer
Wayne German
Dave Santos
.. and all members of group AirborneWindEnergy     

Help uncover gems ....   : )
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19331 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727
The asterisk "*" indicates that the patent examiner cited the patents listed.  Such citing does not mean that the subject patent is with a full clear freedom from influence from such patents; and any patent extant does not mean inventive steps were involved, only that the system supports that inventive steps might have been made; all claims are appealable.   And involved examiners may have missed citing other patents and literature that may affect the present case.

 The goal of this topic is to hug positively inventive step distinctions in support of furthering RAD. The exercise may bring novel thoughts to workers.
PATENT CITATIONS
Cited PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitle
US3226056Jul 12, 1950Dec 28, 1965Holland Jr Raymond PMultiple span aircraft
US4248394 *Mar 5, 1979Feb 3, 1981Klumpp Marlin KRemote control hang glider towing aircraft
US4403755 *Feb 14, 1980Sep 13, 1983Gutsche Gunter EMethod and apparatus for use in harnessing solar energy to provide initial acceleration and propulsion of devices
US4659940Oct 11, 1985Apr 21, 1987Cognitronics CorporationPower generation from high altitude winds
US6131856Jun 4, 1998Oct 17, 2000Brown; Glen J.Parachute trajectory control
US6913224 *Sep 29, 2003Jul 5, 2005Dana R. JohansenMethod and system for accelerating an object
US7263939 *Jun 10, 2005Sep 4, 2007Malcolm PhillipsSimplified elevated sailing apparatus
US7530527 *May 20, 2004May 12, 2009Qinetiq LimitedMethod and device for launching aerial vehicles
US7967238 *Sep 5, 2006Jun 28, 2011The Boeing CompanyComposite air vehicle having a heavier-than-air vehicle tethered to a lighter-than-air vehicle
US8668161 *Sep 8, 2011Mar 11, 2014Stratospheric Airships, LlcSystems and methods for long endurance stratospheric operations
US20010025900 *Jan 18, 2001Oct 4, 2001Kramer Dale C.System and method for wind-powered flight
US20040169111Sep 5, 2003Sep 2, 2004Horst ChristofControl unit for controlling paragliders, unlatching apparatus for triggering a flaring maneuver to be conducted by a load-bearing paraglider system, and a paraglider system
US20050067524 *Sep 29, 2003Mar 31, 2005Johansen Dana R.Method and system for accelerating an object
US20060000945 *Sep 9, 2004Jan 5, 2006Voss Paul BSystem and method for altitude control
US20090302149 *
Dec 10, 2009Fuchs Ronald PComposite air vehicle having a heavier-than-air vehicle tethered to a lighter-than-air vehicle
US20090302165Jun 30, 2006Dec 10, 2009Andreas ReinhardAutonomous Stratosphere Platform
US20100327104 *Dec 15, 2008Dec 30, 2010ThalesDevice for maintaining the altitude of a payload having an altitude-maintenance energy source that is permanent and extracted from the surrounding medium
US20120234964 *
Sep 20, 2012Stephen HeppeSystems and methods for long endurance airship operations
US20120234965 *Sep 8, 2011Sep 20, 2012Stephen HeppeSystems and methods for long endurance stratospheric operations
US20120312918 *Jun 13, 2011Dec 13, 2012Stephen HeppeTethered Airships
US20130037650 *
Feb 14, 2013Stephen B. HeppeSystems and Methods for Long Endurance Airship Operations
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19332 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Chris,

Am drooling over the idea of double-turbocharged water-cooled Continentals with two-speed variable-pitch prop. If anyone bothered to make a large powered HG or PG, with even just one such engine and the right gearing and a larger slower prop, it should be able to take off at sea-level and attain a comparable altitude. It now all fits together that Rutan's high-profile flight endurance R&D meshed with Condor's needs. Most of the below will be familiar to you, but new to the younger set.

Recalling the exact moment as a child, next to a weathered old Luscombe with birds nesting in its cowling intakes, when my dad taught me "a continental engine weighs about 2lbs per hp" (one of countless small facts with which to flight-plan or modify across many types). It seems that, Rutan's custom water-cooling not withstanding, the Condor's Continentals ran rather hotter for even greater power-to-weight. It seems that Boeing put a larger engine between Rutan's heads, that along with added-complexity (extra turbocharger and souped-up water-cooling) accounts for the reduced reliability; since stock Continental engines are renowned for reliability. Condor and Voyager were too slow to comfortably adopt a turboprop. Rutan and Boeing had no better choice than recip, at that time. Prototypes quite properly trade lifecycle hours for early proof-of-concept success.

The key to high L/D of a crude wing is slow-flight at very low wing-loading. At extreme altitudes, air-molecules begin to act more as simple ballistic objects than a gas pressure field. A good analogy is a ping-pong ball (air-molecule) hitting a moving ping-pong paddle (wing) and being deflected downward at fairly high efficiency. At the Condor's design speed and altitude, a good airfoil still counts, but a crude paddle wing is not that far behind, albeit at a slower velocity and lower wing-loading; for a comparable sink rate. Electrics are now moving up the recip performance range, and should match or exceed rotary jet engine reliability.

Compass Cope linked below; not too secret 40+ yrs on, thanks for the leads,

daveS





On Friday, October 30, 2015 7:02 AM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19333 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Dear Dave,

Since you seem to be interested I’ll try to put some facts straight at least as I remember them.

Rutan’s vehicle had a conventional 6 cylinder air cooled pulling and a 4 cylinder water cooled pushing. The idea was to use the water cooled engine which had “Ricardo” heads for high efficiency cruise with the puller throttled back or shut down. The cylinder heads on a Continental, as you probably know are individual assemblies which bolt to the crankcase at a flange. Condor started with the cylinder heads from the Rutan experiment but bolted them onto a six cylinder block so adding 50% to displacement. Rutan’s vehicle flew I believe normally aspirated and thus at fairly low altitude and only did one mission with relatively little preliminary testing. I don’t think we ran the engine at higher manifold pressure or operating temperature than did Rutan. Our reliability problems were more related to accessories and cooling system components than basic engine bits and simply the nature of prototype development. For a bunch of us who were turbine engine people the consequences of having an engine with shall we say impulsive torque rather than smooth torque weren’t initially apparent. If we can take this offline I’ll regale with some funny stories about what went wrong. We did succeed in setting a world altitude record for recipe and also endurance records at altitude.

Also FYI if you research it Boeing has continued development of high altitude APVs. At least one used a modified Ford engine running on Hydrogen which might be even more interesting as a way to get to altitude.

I wouldn’t describe our engines as souped up. Rather as configured for extremely good specific fuel consumption.

Regards,

Chris  
On 30 Oct 2015, at 18:26, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19334 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727
Dr. Engblom has clearly advanced FF over prior art with specific control equations and other novel details, but in the context of a decades-old concept space. Thus his patent has the character of a worthy design patent protecting his design-specific IP. However, for any specific set of control equations, a  formally "Turing equivalent" or informally functional equivalent control basis can be applied as a "work-around". For example, expert glider-pilot Dale Kramer in principle might train a neural-net based control system to do the FF task, without need for Engblom's explicit control equations (Engblom's patent cites Dale's).

The AWES Forum has for years raced to publicly explore and document FF (and AWE) prior art as open-source, but it will take a long time (if ever) to for priority claims to be fully sorted out. An established view is that no one has a lock on fundamental FF (or AWE) IP, and that the small circle of friendly FF aficionados will move forward without undue IP claims by any party to spoil the party. Serious IP battles are only sustained when very large profits are at stake, and FFAWE is still far from profitable, as a long-awaited "newborn baby" that seems to need a long time yet to grow up.



On Friday, October 30, 2015 8:41 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
The asterisk "*" indicates that the patent examiner cited the patents listed.  Such citing does not mean that the subject patent is with a full clear freedom from influence from such patents; and any patent extant does not mean inventive steps were involved, only that the system supports that inventive steps might have been made; all claims are appealable.   And involved examiners may have missed citing other patents and literature that may affect the present case.

 The goal of this topic is to hug positively inventive step distinctions in support of furthering RAD. The exercise may bring novel thoughts to workers.
PATENT CITATIONS
Cited PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitle
US3226056Jul 12, 1950Dec 28, 1965Holland Jr Raymond PMultiple span aircraft
US4248394 *Mar 5, 1979Feb 3, 1981Klumpp Marlin KRemote control hang glider towing aircraft
US4403755 *Feb 14, 1980Sep 13, 1983Gutsche Gunter EMethod and apparatus for use in harnessing solar energy to provide initial acceleration and propulsion of devices
US4659940Oct 11, 1985Apr 21, 1987Cognitronics CorporationPower generation from high altitude winds
US6131856Jun 4, 1998Oct 17, 2000Brown; Glen J.Parachute trajectory control
US6913224 *Sep 29, 2003Jul 5, 2005Dana R. JohansenMethod and system for accelerating an object
US7263939 *Jun 10, 2005Sep 4, 2007Malcolm PhillipsSimplified elevated sailing apparatus
US7530527 *May 20, 2004May 12, 2009Qinetiq LimitedMethod and device for launching aerial vehicles
US7967238 *Sep 5, 2006Jun 28, 2011The Boeing CompanyComposite air vehicle having a heavier-than-air vehicle tethered to a lighter-than-air vehicle
US8668161 *Sep 8, 2011Mar 11, 2014Stratospheric Airships, LlcSystems and methods for long endurance stratospheric operations
US20010025900 *Jan 18, 2001Oct 4, 2001Kramer Dale C.System and method for wind-powered flight
US20040169111Sep 5, 2003Sep 2, 2004Horst ChristofControl unit for controlling paragliders, unlatching apparatus for triggering a flaring maneuver to be conducted by a load-bearing paraglider system, and a paraglider system
US20050067524 *Sep 29, 2003Mar 31, 2005Johansen Dana R.Method and system for accelerating an object
US20060000945 *Sep 9, 2004Jan 5, 2006Voss Paul BSystem and method for altitude control
US20090302149 *
Dec 10, 2009Fuchs Ronald PComposite air vehicle having a heavier-than-air vehicle tethered to a lighter-than-air vehicle
US20090302165Jun 30, 2006Dec 10, 2009Andreas ReinhardAutonomous Stratosphere Platform
US20100327104 *Dec 15, 2008Dec 30, 2010ThalesDevice for maintaining the altitude of a payload having an altitude-maintenance energy source that is permanent and extracted from the surrounding medium
US20120234964 *
Sep 20, 2012Stephen HeppeSystems and methods for long endurance airship operations
US20120234965 *Sep 8, 2011Sep 20, 2012Stephen HeppeSystems and methods for long endurance stratospheric operations
US20120312918 *Jun 13, 2011Dec 13, 2012Stephen HeppeTethered Airships
US20130037650 *
Feb 14, 2013Stephen B. HeppeSystems and Methods for Long Endurance Airship Operations
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19335 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: More "High power energy harvesting" AWE market investment reporting
The same exclusive energy-harvesting (EH) tech report that costs thousands to buy, being shopped around the biz-news sphere, but with a sample AWE quote (bold added)-


"High power energy harvesting also embraces off-grid creation of electricity that will be used generally such as that harnessing photovoltaics, small wind turbines and what enhances or replaces them such as the new Airborne Wind Energy AWE. This is underwritten by both strong demand for today's forms of high power EH and a recent flood of important new inventions that increase the power capability and versatility of many of the basic technologies of energy harvesting. It all reads onto the megatrends of this century - reducing global warming and local air, water and noise pollution, relieving poverty and conserving resources. - See more at: High Power Energy Harvesting: Off-Grid 10W-100kW 2016-2026: The market for high power energy harvesting will be $1.68 billion in 2016 By MarketResearchReports.biz
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19336 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Dear ChrisC,

Thanks for the great details. The six-cylinder upgrade explains a lot. Of course my standard of "souped up" is pathetic compared to bleeding-edge high-performance AE cases, but double-turbocharging and custom water-cooled standard engines counts in general aviation. Seeing that Rutan seems to have used exotic "high-swirl" combustion chambers (Ricardo Heads link below) instead of less-exotic simple turbocharging for the IOL-200 (link below). Guessing added savings in weight and power consumption over conventional turbocharger use without high-swirl combustion.

Hoping we can meet up again, to share your Boeing R&D stories, whenever you come to the SW WA Coast, and also fly your choice of AWES demos. If you have not toured the World Kite Museum, I can get you into the collection room, with strange traditional flying objects of every description, including stone-age leaf-kites, and other designs with still-mysterious aero-features.

Yours,

daveS





On Friday, October 30, 2015 11:53 AM, "christopher carlin christopher.m.carlin@btinternet.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dear Dave,

Since you seem to be interested I’ll try to put some facts straight at least as I remember them.

Rutan’s vehicle had a conventional 6 cylinder air cooled pulling and a 4 cylinder water cooled pushing. The idea was to use the water cooled engine which had “Ricardo” heads for high efficiency cruise with the puller throttled back or shut down. The cylinder heads on a Continental, as you probably know are individual assemblies which bolt to the crankcase at a flange. Condor started with the cylinder heads from the Rutan experiment but bolted them onto a six cylinder block so adding 50% to displacement. Rutan’s vehicle flew I believe normally aspirated and thus at fairly low altitude and only did one mission with relatively little preliminary testing. I don’t think we ran the engine at higher manifold pressure or operating temperature than did Rutan. Our reliability problems were more related to accessories and cooling system components than basic engine bits and simply the nature of prototype development. For a bunch of us who were turbine engine people the consequences of having an engine with shall we say impulsive torque rather than smooth torque weren’t initially apparent. If we can take this offline I’ll regale with some funny stories about what went wrong. We did succeed in setting a world altitude record for recipe and also endurance records at altitude.

Also FYI if you research it Boeing has continued development of high altitude APVs. At least one used a modified Ford engine running on Hydrogen which might be even more interesting as a way to get to altitude.

I wouldn’t describe our engines as souped up. Rather as configured for extremely good specific fuel consumption.

Regards,

Chris  
On 30 Oct 2015, at 18:26, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19337 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Dear Dave,

In my mind anyway turbocharging and high swirl heads achieve different things. The turbocharging extracts more gross horsepower from a particular engine by boosting manifold pressure. In our case we weren’t trying to get more horsepower but rather maintain sea level performance at high altitude. The high swirl head improves combustion efficiency which means you extract more horsepower per unit of fuel consumed. In the process you may get more absolute horsepower at a given operating point but it’s SFC that was interesting to us. The problem with the Ricardo head is that the tower or swirl area creates areas of stress concentration in the head which if you’re designing for minimum weight  can create areas prone to cracking. Conversely a pure hemi head or even a simple flat surface is structurally better. In our case we suffered from a problem because the head casting quality was underspecified. In an air-cooled engine not a problem but in a water cooled engine the exhaust gases migrated through the head into the coolant system which caused problems. Once we figured it out we just had to get heads cast to a higher quality but it cost us months of flow time in the program.

Regards,

Chris
On 30 Oct 2015, at 20:20, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19338 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Chris, I agree completely: The Condor choice to have both Ricardo-heads and double-turbocharging was to combine the discreet advantages cited (fuel-economy AND high-altitude capability). What had stumped me was why turbocharging caught on in GA, but not Ricardo-heads, without intending to conflate their functions. Your explanation answers that puzzle. -daveS



On Friday, October 30, 2015 1:45 PM, "christopher carlin christopher.m.carlin@btinternet.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dear Dave,

In my mind anyway turbocharging and high swirl heads achieve different things. The turbocharging extracts more gross horsepower from a particular engine by boosting manifold pressure. In our case we weren’t trying to get more horsepower but rather maintain sea level performance at high altitude. The high swirl head improves combustion efficiency which means you extract more horsepower per unit of fuel consumed. In the process you may get more absolute horsepower at a given operating point but it’s SFC that was interesting to us. The problem with the Ricardo head is that the tower or swirl area creates areas of stress concentration in the head which if you’re designing for minimum weight  can create areas prone to cracking. Conversely a pure hemi head or even a simple flat surface is structurally better. In our case we suffered from a problem because the head casting quality was underspecified. In an air-cooled engine not a problem but in a water cooled engine the exhaust gases migrated through the head into the coolant system which caused problems. Once we figured it out we just had to get heads cast to a higher quality but it cost us months of flow time in the program.

Regards,

Chris
On 30 Oct 2015, at 20:20, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19339 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Dr. Engblom's wonderful NASA FFAWE Presentation Video
Thanks to Dr. "Bill" Engblom for this trenchant introduction to FFAWE, as recently presented to a NIAC (NASA affiliated conference) audience (scroll down session page to his presentation)-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19340 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: Re: Dr. Engblom's wonderful NASA FFAWE Presentation Video
Welcome Bill Engblom as member of FFAWE Club!    
"Shear-hunter Bill"
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19341 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2015
Subject: IFO "Windbot" Concept for NASA Jupiter Exploration
Another AWE-related presentation at NIAC- 

Adrian Stoica, NASA JPL, WindBots: persistent in-situ science explorers for gas giants


Energy harvesting in situ is all the rage in NASA planetary exploration planning. Included in this JPL WindBot concept space is soaring gliders, with obvious need of IFO motor-gen and storage capability. Elsewhere in the proceedings is a space-based fuel scheme as well. Nice to imagine swarms of IFOs colonizing the gas giants, or that Jupiter Mission studies might inform IFO adoption in Earths stormy ITCZ belt.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19342 From: christopher carlin Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
Dear Dave,

I suppose you could make a Ricardo head on a pure air-cooled engine but the basic GA technology as exemplified by the Continental air-cooled engines goes back to at the latest the 1950s and most of it I imagine to the 1930s. AIrcooling is cheaper, lighter, simpler and more reliable than water cooling. The Continental designs got certified way back in time and by the time the water-cooled Ricardo heads came along the GA market was suffocated by tort issues and not large enough to support certifying a new engine. Further some adapted automotive V8s entered the arena about the same time although I don’t think they ever found a large market. Bottom line is the light GA market got stuck in a time warp. Meanwhile Continental moved to Mobile Alabama from Wisconsin ( I believe). Most of the old timers quit on the move and the resulting company in Mobile really wasn’t in a good position technically to develop a new engine ( very much my opinion somebody from Continental might feel differently) The heavy end of the GA market I think went to turboprops.

Regards,

Chris 
On 30 Oct 2015, at 21:26, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19343 From: dave santos Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: "Energy Harvesting" buzzword (and another piezo-wind case w/ review)
Mark Moore of NASA LaRC introduced "energy harvesting" to AWE's language a few years ago, and the term continues to catch on in the wider renewable energy world.  Used as a search term, it led to a fuzzy Wikipedia page, and also another piezo-wind project, linked below, we seem to have overlooked. Whatever we think of the label, AWE is a prime case of "energy harvesting".

As stated here before, the typical shortcoming to piezo wind energy harvesting attempts are that crude mechanical harvester designs do not drive the piezo bimorphs fast and hard enough (to full working capacity) to be cost efficient for utility markets. It remains possible in principle for optimal harvesting structure to match wind to piezo, for high-efficiency. Small diameter cylinders and narrow ribbons attain piezo-pitch high frequencies in high winds, as the sounds aeolian harps produce. Extended membranes (like a flapping pennant) and star topologies can focus high-frequency energy, but the best design remains unknown. Mechanical degradation by over stressing is a problem to avoid, but established piezo driving suggests its manageable. 

The array approach shown below is similar to non-piezo solar-panels and soft AWES megascale array thinking-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19344 From: dave santos Date: 10/31/2015
Subject: Re: Boeing Condor
We can at least expect some residual continued innovation in air-cooled recip to continue by newer players like Rotax and motorcycle, chainsaw, and other small-engine markets. What encourages me greatly about how AWE might progress is that legacy light airplane tech evolved amazingly in just four decades. Ricardo Heads emerged in '27, so it seems likely that its real advantage was too marginal, or it would have made the cut in time to the standard COTS of GA now frozen in time (like Cuba's car fleet). Its clear lots of thought went into swirling fuel and air together in ICs, without excess complexity and capital cost. Evolutionary tech selection likely prevailed.

A natural velocity spectrum is evident from recip-prop to turbo-prop to turbo-fan to pure-turbo; above the churn of market changes and the fray of detail-engineering.



On Saturday, October 31, 2015 1:45 PM, "christopher carlin christopher.m.carlin@btinternet.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dear Dave,

I suppose you could make a Ricardo head on a pure air-cooled engine but the basic GA technology as exemplified by the Continental air-cooled engines goes back to at the latest the 1950s and most of it I imagine to the 1930s. AIrcooling is cheaper, lighter, simpler and more reliable than water cooling. The Continental designs got certified way back in time and by the time the water-cooled Ricardo heads came along the GA market was suffocated by tort issues and not large enough to support certifying a new engine. Further some adapted automotive V8s entered the arena about the same time although I don’t think they ever found a large market. Bottom line is the light GA market got stuck in a time warp. Meanwhile Continental moved to Mobile Alabama from Wisconsin ( I believe). Most of the old timers quit on the move and the resulting company in Mobile really wasn’t in a good position technically to develop a new engine ( very much my opinion somebody from Continental might feel differently) The heavy end of the GA market I think went to turboprops.

Regards,

Chris 
On 30 Oct 2015, at 21:26, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19345 From: dave santos Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Enerkite coverage on Windtech-International.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19346 From: dave santos Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Megascale Magnetic-Skin Inflatable-Mechanics
Modern "super magnets" are astoundingly strong, and are resulting in ever better permanent magnet motors and generators, but also many unique new applications. A previous AWES idea on the Forum was megascale inflated drive gears and wheels somehow pushed together for required traction or friction. Instead, these membrane bearing-surfaces could incorporate a lattice or film of tiny super-magnets to augment traction between the inflated objects. Thus two spinning inflated balls would maintain contact and transmit drive forces without meshing texture or anything else needed to push the balls together.

A cool novel capability is that a cluster of inflated magnetic spin-baskets can pass rotation forces across the cluster by arranging the spin-units in alternating (checkerboard) North-South magnetic grids. Neighboring baskets of opposite-polarity would stick and drive each other, while neighboring baskets of like-polarity would repel with "mag-lev" low-friction. Without the magnetic arrangement, or elaborate secondary gearing, the spin-baskets would lock up or bounce apart uselessly. This Magnetic-Skin Inflatable method may be a workable basis for concepts like Pierre's WheelWind, and many other inflatable apps not yet identified.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19347 From: edoishi Date: 11/3/2015
Subject: Re: 22m2 Pilot Kites Lashed Together
Here is the video:

Rev Kite docking with aggregate kite arch

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19348 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Topological Optimization of a Parafoil Rib (Thedens 2015)
AWE academia will someday undertake the complex problems of formal topological evaluation and optimization studies of competing overall topologies of AWES, at the kitefarm level of integration; but for now formal AWES topological optimization work is restricted to the detail level, like Moritz's AWESCO call for a PhD to optimize bridle topology for rigid wings, and this TUDelft parafoil rib optimization master's thesis (work first publicly revealed in a 2014 TUDleft poster contest). It will be ironic if eventual winning overall AWES topologies do not particularly involve either parafoil ribs nor rigid-wing bridles; but at least topological form-finding is increasingly recognized as a critical AWES design issue-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19349 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Re: 22m2 Pilot Kites Lashed Together
Thanks Ed, for uploading and linking the video.

Two separate concepts are shown. First, the method of side-by-side placement of pilot-kite units is shown to result in nice stable unit-aggregation (without the defects of stacking). Second, the Rev kite is shown capable of operating as a kite-tender to larger kites, to do varied jobs, like hot-swapping parts. 

Follow-on sessions will demonstrate larger numbers of side-by-side kite-units, and a kite-killing method using a tender-kite to hook a kite-killer tag-line to a kite to be killed.



On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 3:39 PM, "edoishi@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Here is the video:

Rev Kite docking with aggregate kite arch
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19350 From: dave santos Date: 11/4/2015
Subject: Kite-Matter Drones, Walkers, and Manipulators
Attachments :
    KiteMatter is an engineered meta-material made of "rag and string" activated by flow energy (wind, water, solar wind, etc.), as explored in many prior posts. Kite masters in the '90's, like the visionary architect, Bondestam, developed articulated kite-based puppets able to perform complex aerial theatre. Kites are long shown capable of powerful traction and pick-and-place work, in simple cases with simple rigs. A new sport-kite specialty, of precision-coordinated aerobatic kite-units (Rev kites), has emerged. "3D-printing" of kite-matter in the sky is not far off, after all, spiders do it.

    What is proposed here is that many amazing capabilities like these are merging synergistically toward a new realm of megascale soft-cellular robotics made from artificially-intelligent kite-matter. We are daily learning how to someday configure wind drone, walker, and manipulator platforms on a grand scale. Benchtop versions of inflatable robotics suggest many possibilities for aggregated kite-matter units to offer similar capabilities by dynamically structured inflation and control-actuation forces. These powerful platforms will resemble clouds in size and motions, and could support populations, as aerotecture .*

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
    ----------------------
    * Goya's dramatic evocation-
    Inline image

    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19351 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/5/2015
    Subject: Exploring TWTAK flygen PTO from area-changing TW

    TW:  tumble wing

    TWTAK: tumble wing traverse arch kite


    Exploring TWTAK flygen PTO from area-changing TW


    Have a TW constrained on traverse-to-wind arch loadline. Notice the loadline develops toward catenary. Notice the TW when at rotary position where aft wing part is downwind and fore wing part is upwind. Notice the stress on the two wing parts: the downwind wing part is stressed to fan out; the upwind wing part is stressed to fan in.  Notice that the axis of rotation is catenary-stressed away from straight. The fan out and the compressive fan in as well as the catenary stressing of the axis of rotation all tend to cost against the free rotation of the wing; such is the general cause for designers to use rigid-keep-axis-straight tubes or rods. 


    But somewhat different tack would be the construction of the TW so that fan-out and fan-in is allowed; but moreso, when occurring, instead of just producing waste heat, aim to mine the fanning out and fanning in for PTO for useful energy. Notice that rib members might set up an at-axis rotation approximately normal to the axis of rotation; the rib would rotate one way and then reverse and rotate the other way per macro rotation of the TW.  A freewheeling or ratcheting arrangement having the oscillating ribs to drive pump or electrical gen aloft might find some niche use.   


    Such a TW increases its area on the downwind half of the full wing; and the area of the upwind half reduces its area. The net change of area for the TW would tend to be near zero. But the changing of areas of the two parts might drive a PTO method. 


    Avoid stalling the rotation. TWs that do fan-out and fan-in during each rotation may avoid some rotation stalling.  


    The structure type that permits fan-in and fan-out variously will affect the media flow. Aim to keep the flow as laminar as possible for the sake of keeping rotation of the macro wing going well. 



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

    Search TWTAK in forum for other explorations of a class of AWES that uses tumble wings. 


    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19352 From: dave santos Date: 11/5/2015
    Subject: Terrain enabled windpower by Harry Valentine
    Harry is a Canadian Civil Engineer active on the early AWES Forum who has long been interested in using terrain and cables to support WECS, and continues to keep the concept-space in the public eye. Here he features Doug's ST as a ready concept for terrain-enabled windpower, and mentions AWE as a future direction to keep in mind-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19353 From: dave santos Date: 11/5/2015
    Subject: Power Maximization of a Closed Orbit Kite Generator [Mariam Ahmed, e
    An admirable 2012 AWE paper from UGrenoble documenting that "closed orbit" kite pumping (with a brief recovery phase each orbit cycle) is a viable alternative to operationally problematic* "open-orbit" kite-reeling, with a long recovery phase. We had been loosely calling Open-AWE closed-orbit cycling "short-stroke" or "pumping", but this paper establishes "open orbit" as the preferred most-precise usage. Note that a AWES hybrid of open- and closed-orbit capability is possible, to cover launching, landing, and adjusting working altitude. A closed orbit acting on a short section of extra heavy-duty PTO tether can eliminate the excessive line wear of constant long stroke reeling.**


    -------------
    * Larger airspace obstruction, longer recovery phase, higher line-wear, etc..
    ** At Sommariva Perno, I saw how abraded KiteGen's original reeling lines ended up, after limited testing, and presume other reeling teams struggle with the same inherent line-wear problem.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19354 From: dave santos Date: 11/6/2015
    Subject: More Aerotecture Concepts
    The historical arc of techno-utopianism is lately trending toward an early-pastiche of visionary airborne urbanism of past and present to be fully operationalized. Three more cases, of hundreds out there, on the border of reality-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19355 From: dave santos Date: 11/8/2015
    Subject: Further developing SF Cable Car System as COTS Cableway Model
    We iterate our best ideas to advance them. A leading concept in Low-Complexity AWE is Joe Hadzicki's crosswind-cableway kite-car [Lang 2004]. A ready means to create a ~.5MW AWES "scale prototype" of Joe's concept would be to clone San Francisco cable-car techne, which is kept current (completely rebuilt, fully operational) despite having been developed almost 150yrs ago. The similarity-case is an economic existence-proof with public capital and operational cost data.

    A set-up option is the double-ended cable car, to avoid turntables (California Line). Lots of very mature detail engineering to exploit; for example the steel cable is sisal-cored, for best cable grip, and the cable grip is coated with bitumen, as a sacrificial surface. Control by the grip operator is manual actuation, avoiding high one-time automation cost of an incremental prototype (toward GW-scale lines). Radical AWES simplification of the urban cable car include a surface cable with non-tracked flat-bed wheeled cars.

    A single fixed cableway run is ideal for wind sites with a dominant prevailing wind direction. Two orthogonal cable runs cover a full wind-rose (with kites
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19356 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
    Subject: Ampyx coverage in Irish Times



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19357 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
    Subject: Kontra Power (Turkey) debut at AWEC2015
    A low-budget open-source start-up that presented at AWEC2015-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19358 From: dave santos Date: 11/9/2015
    Subject: Rocket Launch Assist by World's Largest Aircraft
    The same space mission support as this aircraft intends might be carried out at comparable altitude and velocity with even larger rockets, by means of kites. Rockets can be catapulted to the middle stratosphere by pure wind power. Kites and IFOs can make rocket fuel as well. Paul Allen's latest toy* sets a baseline for rocket launch assist-


    ---------------------------
    * I recall seeing in 2007, right below KiteShip (North Sails' old loft), Paul's deep-diving yellow party-submarine being fitted out in the Alameda Island dockyard. Dave Culp talked me out of opportunistically pitching AWE to Paul, which conflicted with Google-Makani's exclusive venture-track then starting on the same island.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19359 From: dave santos Date: 11/10/2015
    Subject: Wall Street Journal bullish on Tethered Drones
    There is a rich hybrid application-space between "pure" drones and kites whose technical side has been well covered in past years Forum discussion. Many AWES concepts occupy this space (particularly E-VTOL flygens like SkyWindPower, Twing, and and Makani). Any outdoor drone on a tether experiences kite-dynamics. UdoZ (Daidalos Capital) even proposes we adopt "Wind-Drones" as a marketing term. This WSJ article introduces tethered drones to a wider investment world, but partly blocked by a log-in/paywall-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19360 From: dave santos Date: 11/10/2015
    Subject: Drone-assisted AWES Launch
    This is mostly summary of old discussion, but in the context of recent public interest in "tethered-drones" [WSJ 2015]. KiteLab Group concluded in 2007 that a toy drone or helium party balloon suffices to catalyze a massive AWES "cascade-launch". KiteLab Portland experiments showed a drone or balloon* can lift up a small pilot kite into suitable wind at altitude, and then retire back to the surface. The pilot-kite then launches larger kite stages, that in-turn launch the largest stages of an integrated kite-farm at even GW scale. There is no requirement for the initial launch means to lift the entire WECS or stay flying during the entire session; in fact, over-dependence on drone or LTA tech is toxic to low-cost high-performance operations. An interesting kite-multicopter variant from AWEC2015 is linked below.

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

    ---------------------
    * Cascade launch was demonstrated by a single party-balloon with a kytoon skirt. Since then, cheap toy drones able to lift a comparable starting load have become widely popular.

    [Bauer 2015] combining soft-kite launch by multicopter, with RAT aux power for KSU actuation power-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19361 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/12/2015
    Subject: Kiting in Hurricanes

    A boost from Bond: 

    “You're like a kite dancing in a hurricane, Mr Bond”: First ...

    www.sparklyprettybriiiight.com/youre-like-a-kite-dancing-in-a-hurrican...
    Mar 31, 2015 - “You're like a kite dancing in a hurricane, Mr Bond”: First Spectre teaser trailer. ( image via IMP Awards). SNAPSHOT A cryptic message from ...

    ===========================================
    Who will mine for values and benefits hurricanes by AWES?

    This topic thread invites notes about using kite systems in hurricanes for practical purposes. 


    Safety first!. Design systems and operations to fully respect the conditions. 

    Here is an incident that went badly: 

    Kite Flying Accident-75 MPH Winds in Florida Hurricane 2008


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

    What purposes?

    [ ] Soften the hurricane?

    [ ] Move large loads?

    [ ] Finally uproot that challenging tree stump?

    [ ] Scrape the surface of a large area of land mines?

    [ ] Run huge pumps to pump water?

    [ ] Produce electricity?


    Investments might have non-hurricane-time uses.

    Systems used might be "on-call" and mobile for deployment at hurricane sites. 

    "Hurricane Kite Systems" ?  HKS


    ???
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19362 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/12/2015
    Subject: Re: Drone-assisted AWES Launch
    Is the guy thinking of adding a tether and kiting for energy production?
    The Swarm Manned Aerial Vehicle Multirotor Super Drone Flying

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19363 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2015
    Subject: Re: Drone-assisted AWES Launch
    Good idea, JoeF; an electrical tether would be lighter than batteries and enable AWE and endurance modes, but large E-VTOL still has a hard time leaving surface-effect lift*. COTS stabilization of this "Swarm" multicopter is by common KK2.15 RC helicopter unit, so these old-timers probably have decades of aeromodeling experience, hence the safer more-sensible design compared to kids doing similar things.

    We are again noting an attractive overlap in capability in multi-rotor drone and AWES design. The ultimate AWES Forum concept in this space has been a scalable fabric-of-small-rotors ("flying carpet"), which might even consist of cheap automated-manufacture insect-sized units, to best mitigate inherent low-unit-count thermal and structural scaling limitations [Open-AWE_IP-Cloud].

    -------------------
    * I still have a hard time imagining that the ~30m WS M600 will soon fly out to full tether extension. Its going to be very marginal flight, at best. Also, evident Swarm pendulum instability, despite the KK2, and lack of yaw authority are serious M600 issues as well (even with empennage and Y-bridle).



    On Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:08 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Is the guy thinking of adding a tether and kiting for energy production?
    The Swarm Manned Aerial Vehicle Multirotor Super Drone Flying
     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19364 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 11/13/2015
    Subject: Re: kPower's "TetraMorph" Groundgen Project
    Attachments :
      Preparing grounds for the comparative testing plan?
       
      John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
      Managing Consultant & CEO
      Hardensoft International Limited
      <Technologies  
      This is a preliminary note about a multi-disciplinary kPower groundgen scale prototype supporting four-channel WECS input, dubbed the "TetraMorph"; being developed in Ilwaco from two salvaged Nordictrack cores (each leg input is a sprag on a common shaft with a cast-iron bull-wheel). Its an example of how comparative study can be done on-the-cheap, using mostly COTS scrap.

      The compounded structure is fine vintage wood, in a basic working-baroque style that virtually predates SteamPunk esthetics. The unit aims to excite the public at AWEfest, while also advancing the technical state-of-the-art. It should hold its own in an elite art gallery, as a major sculpture; but also, hopefully, in an aviation or wind-tech museum, as a significant pioneering device.

      The serious engineering concept is that four different WECS can be flown together to validate group statistics (like power-smoothing and higher up-time). The unit will be overlaid with modern instrumentation (National Instruments) to generate large data-sets (and give the antiquesque wood-work its sci-fi veneer). Individual WECS designs will be compared in real-time, in the same wind conditions, for faster comparative evaluation. Realistic Kite Farm operational research is expected, just as an elaborate toy train set can faithfully model full-scale operations. 

      The choice of wood honors a past mentor, Ralph Moser*, who told me that if he had his career to do over, he would work in woood. Major components are now coming together in the shop, and photos will be posted soon.

      ----- background to the name -----------

      Naming this machine involved a broad review of mythological objects for a best-match. The name applies not just to the groundgen itself, but the complete AWES with all four channels active.  "Merkabah" lore won out, with the "TetraMorph" derivative being the most apt. Astoundingly, the trove of associated visionary art is a decent stand-in for the pending photos, and the kPower video should be altogether beyond-





      -------

      * He was my invited guest for a UTexas Seminar in robotics, back in the late 80s-
       Inline image
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 19365 From: dave santos Date: 11/13/2015
      Subject: Re: kPower's "TetraMorph" Groundgen Project
      Attachments :
        Hi John,

        Below is a progress photo from last week. The tricky part has been the transmission design to mix or isolate kite inputs, but the solution is now worked out. Additional features being developed include a concrete flywheel to smooth output, and aux gas engine to validate the kite-hybrid concept.

        Please say hello to the Nigerian AWE circle. It is looking like our best early chance to establish AWE is in the Caribbean; given the world class wind, extreme high-cost of electricity, and geographic location midway between us. You might want to inquire about travel to Granada Island in particular, where our friend, Shawn Thomas, grew up flying kites and he is eager to host AWE R&D at his best locations. This could happen very soon, with support from Branson's island energy initiative likely.

        Long term, the grandest AWE adventure will be to tap the stormy ITCZ equatorial belt, which has the most wind power of any planetary atmospheric zone, but the violent predominantly vertical motions require unique AWES designs. Nigeria is ideally positioned to undertake this dramatic direction, as it becomes better understood. In any case, the many bumps in the AWE road have not stopped us, and we really are so much farther along in domain knowledge than seven years ago.

        Cheers to All,

        dave

        WP_20151110_11_30_23_Pro.jpg




        On Friday, November 13, 2015 8:11 AM, "Hardensoft International Limited hardensoftintl@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
        Preparing grounds for the comparative testing plan?
         
        John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
        Managing Consultant & CEO
        Hardensoft International Limited
        <Technologies  
        This is a preliminary note about a multi-disciplinary kPower groundgen scale prototype supporting four-channel WECS input, dubbed the "TetraMorph"; being developed in Ilwaco from two salvaged Nordictrack cores (each leg input is a sprag on a common shaft with a cast-iron bull-wheel). Its an example of how comparative study can be done on-the-cheap, using mostly COTS scrap.

        The compounded structure is fine vintage wood, in a basic working-baroque style that virtually predates SteamPunk esthetics. The unit aims to excite the public at AWEfest, while also advancing the technical state-of-the-art. It should hold its own in an elite art gallery, as a major sculpture; but also, hopefully, in an aviation or wind-tech museum, as a significant pioneering device.

        The serious engineering concept is that four different WECS can be flown together to validate group statistics (like power-smoothing and higher up-time). The unit will be overlaid with modern instrumentation (National Instruments) to generate large data-sets (and give the antiquesque wood-work its sci-fi veneer). Individual WECS designs will be compared in real-time, in the same wind conditions, for faster comparative evaluation. Realistic Kite Farm operational research is expected, just as an elaborate toy train set can faithfully model full-scale operations. 

        The choice of wood honors a past mentor, Ralph Moser*, who told me that if he had his career to do over, he would work in woood. Major components are now coming together in the shop, and photos will be posted soon.

        ----- background to the name -----------

        Naming this machine involved a broad review of mythological objects for a best-match. The name applies not just to the groundgen itself, but the complete AWES with all four channels active.  "Merkabah" lore won out, with the "TetraMorph" derivative being the most apt. Astoundingly, the trove of associated visionary art is a decent stand-in for the pending photos, and the kPower video should be altogether beyond-





        -------

        * He was my invited guest for a UTexas Seminar in robotics, back in the late 80s-
         Inline image