Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 20030 to 20080 Page 294 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20030 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20031 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20032 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20033 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20034 From: Rod Read Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20035 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20036 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20037 From: dave santos Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20038 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20039 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20040 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20041 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Video: Tensairity Drachen of 2009

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20042 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20043 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20044 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20045 From: benhaiemp Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20046 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20047 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20048 From: Rod Read Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20049 From: dave santos Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Aerology Lab History and Flying-Car Evolution

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20050 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: KIteWinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20051 From: benhaiemp Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20052 From: Joe Faust Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: KIteWinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20053 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20054 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20055 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20056 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20057 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20058 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20059 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Bungee Leap

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20060 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Gliding

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20061 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20062 From: Rod Read Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20063 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20064 From: dave santos Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Three kPower kite experiments yesterday (Tumbling-Wing performed sus

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20065 From: dave santos Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20066 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Latest "Artificial Rain" demo by means of kites (kPower Ilwaco)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20067 From: Rod Read Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20068 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: View from above 2030

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20069 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20070 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/4/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20072 From: dave santos Date: 5/5/2016
Subject: Floaty "Mushroom-Cap" HALE CSR Concept

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20073 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/5/2016
Subject: Re: Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20074 From: Joe Faust Date: 5/5/2016
Subject: Kiting Asteroids

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20075 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/6/2016
Subject: Re: more Minesto paravane farm details

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20076 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/6/2016
Subject: NASA and AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20077 From: dave santos Date: 5/6/2016
Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20078 From: dave santos Date: 5/7/2016
Subject: Makani struggles on; Astro ready to celebrate.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20079 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/7/2016
Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20080 From: dave santos Date: 5/9/2016
Subject: Notes on CSR Dynamics



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20030 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

DaveS,

 

You made a double error: making strong statement about facts without any verification. Then facts show your statement is wrong.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20031 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Pierre's message was somehow was delayed. Given the undue distraction that the trivial official error in attributing Todd Hodge as a CSR PI has caused, I finally feel it would be nice to know how it happened. Lets be clear its a trivial source of error Pierre himself shared, not at all comparable to the error-of-omission of not including Billy's original CSR work, under the French concept of a creator's Moral Rights. That I repeated the minor administrative error, with Pierre's unwitting help, while correcting the greater error, is better than Pierre seems to think.

The fact is CSR studies have many fine folks to credit.


On Thursday, April 28, 2016 8:56 AM, "Pierre BENHAIEM pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
DaveS,
 
You made a double error: making strong statement about facts without any verification. Then facts show your statement is wrong.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20032 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Given that the bullroarer was known from about 40,000yrs ago, from archeological remains where the wing survived, but the rope did not, we can surmise that ancient peoples also practiced CSR dynamics in the form of rope tricks, from a very early time. In our times, the Mexicans developed the Lasso CSR similarity-case to a very high art, not just as quasi-magical tricks, but as a folkloric danceform. It was my honor to learn roping from an early age from my grandfather on the Texas-Mexican border. A universal hero named Will Rogers, of mixed Indian descent, learned rope tricks from Mexican vaquero tradition, and popularized them. Note the pure joy in his face, which reflects the character of the culture. This is the man who said "I never met anyone I did not like", and just so were we raised in that rural culture in that part of the world, only incidentally traditional masters of CSR dynamics-







Here is an "ordinary" Mexican showing the popular dance-form, but there are wilder Mexican masters even beyond Will Rogers-






On Thursday, April 28, 2016 9:32 AM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Pierre's message was somehow was delayed. Given the undue distraction that the trivial official error in attributing Todd Hodge as a CSR PI has caused, I finally feel it would be nice to know how it happened. Lets be clear its a trivial source of error Pierre himself shared, not at all comparable to the error-of-omission of not including Billy's original CSR work, under the French concept of a creator's Moral Rights. That I repeated the minor administrative error, with Pierre's unwitting help, while correcting the greater error, is better than Pierre seems to think.

The fact is CSR studies have many fine folks to credit.


On Thursday, April 28, 2016 8:56 AM, "Pierre BENHAIEM pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
DaveS,
 
You made a double error: making strong statement about facts without any verification. Then facts show your statement is wrong.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20033 From: dave santos Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Another ancient CSR similarity-case to share from my part of the world, (in the Huastec tradition) is the Voladores bird-men ritual. Here we see a mechanism for CSR wing-satellite deployment that integrates the units on a common reel and maintains equal lengths-




Note that "Indian" for First Nations New World people like Will Rogers folks is still in common regional usage, although no longer proper in some contexts.


On Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:06 AM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Given that the bullroarer was known from about 40,000yrs ago, from archeological remains where the wing survived, but the rope did not, we can surmise that ancient peoples also practiced CSR dynamics in the form of rope tricks, from a very early time. In our times, the Mexicans developed the Lasso CSR similarity-case to a very high art, not just as quasi-magical tricks, but as a folkloric danceform. It was my honor to learn roping from an early age from my grandfather on the Texas-Mexican border. A universal hero named Will Rogers, of mixed Indian descent, learned rope tricks from Mexican vaquero tradition, and popularized them. Note the pure joy in his face, which reflects the character of the culture. This is the man who said "I never met anyone I did not like", and just so were we raised in that rural culture in that part of the world, only incidentally traditional masters of CSR dynamics-







Here is an "ordinary" Mexican showing the popular dance-form, but there are wilder Mexican masters even beyond Will Rogers-






On Thursday, April 28, 2016 9:32 AM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Pierre's message was somehow was delayed. Given the undue distraction that the trivial official error in attributing Todd Hodge as a CSR PI has caused, I finally feel it would be nice to know how it happened. Lets be clear its a trivial source of error Pierre himself shared, not at all comparable to the error-of-omission of not including Billy's original CSR work, under the French concept of a creator's Moral Rights. That I repeated the minor administrative error, with Pierre's unwitting help, while correcting the greater error, is better than Pierre seems to think.

The fact is CSR studies have many fine folks to credit.


On Thursday, April 28, 2016 8:56 AM, "Pierre BENHAIEM pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
DaveS,
 
You made a double error: making strong statement about facts without any verification. Then facts show your statement is wrong.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20034 From: Rod Read Date: 4/28/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

Not 1 of all these previously quoted devices / examples is the same nor works the same.
A child launches on a rope swing from the side of a tree on the crest of a hill, she flies a centfiugally stiffened arc (decreasing radius) , and lands on the other side of the tree. She imparted the energy impulse to the outer tip of the rotor.
Each device / toy / display  / experiment has a different dynamic... Even between 2 x identical devices @ same time or in same place.

Yes, Classify and describe as best you can. Why worry about the politics though?
Of course it was I who first invented the csr when I first swung a leaky bucket around my head... Nah

Just find a way to build one if you feel there's a need to. And there probably is.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20035 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

A similarity case is never exactly the same, but shares some vital partial aspect(s) as a class. In these cases, the shared aspects include swinging about on rope, with the according centrifugal dynamics. The Voladores mechanism really does suggest how to unfurl multiple ribbon wings from one vertical capstan, with desirable washout. The lasso dynamics really do inform about CSR states of interest.

Whats missing is a more precise classification of the cases, for example to situate the Daisy where MarkM can see its relation in specific qualities. 


Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device


------ Original message------

From: Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [A...

Date: Thu, Apr 28, 2016 11:17 PM

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com;

Subject:Re: [AWES] Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor


 

Not 1 of all these previously quoted devices / examples is the same nor works the same.
A child launches on a rope swing from the side of a tree on the crest of a hill, she flies a centfiugally stiffened arc (decreasing radius) , and lands on the other side of the tree. She imparted the energy impulse to the outer tip of the rotor.
Each device / toy / display  / experiment has a different dynamic... Even between 2 x identical devices @ same time or in same place.

Yes, Classify and describe as best you can. Why worry about the politics though?
Of course it was I who first invented the csr when I first swung a leaky bucket around my head... Nah

Just find a way to build one if you feel there's a need to. And there probably is.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20036 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Fundamental aspects devices in the CSR realm: 
  • Rotate mass about a center and have centrifugal force tensing the involved radial arm. 
  • The "arm" may be a string rotor, a set of strings rotor, a belt, a flat arm, a shaped arm, a set of arms, a compound arm, an arm speckled with special forms in, on, or attached to the arm. 
  • The tensing of arm forms may be found to stiffen parts of the radial arm. Parts of the arm that are laterally attached to the arm will not be stiffened by the primary tension in the radial arm. 
  • Parts laterally attached to rotating radial arm may serve various purposes. 
  • Cause the rotation of arms about a center by various means. Driven hub, driven arm, driven arm tip, passive deflection of media using gravity, passive deflection of media by resisting the relative motion of media, powered propulsion, combination of several causes, impulse, ...
  • Control the hub's position or center's position by various means.
  • Face the control challenges of the device in actual nature's fluids. 
  • Rigidity of elements of the CSR device (from soft to very hard)
  • Failure modes? Explore each for any given device. 
  • Facing slack events.
  • Elasticity of tensed parts.
  • Perturbation sources and effects. 
  • Simulating operations. 
  • Prototype testing. 
  • Scaling. 
  • Mission definition. 
  • ? ....[open for listing other fundamental aspects]
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20037 From: dave santos Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Rod's circular swinging bucket is in fact a terrific similarity case to throw light on CSR dynamics, building naturally on the mighty spinning-bucket physics foundation laid down by Newton and Descartes-


Rod's swinging bucket goes further by adding another orbital dimension to the classical model, and the motions specifically correspond to a CSR satellite that begins to tumble meta-stably (as a failure-mode). One can add a small vane on the bucket to explore the harmonic interactions between the two orbits and the aerodynamic input. Swinging his bucket is a first-class experimental dynamical system that Rod need not apologize for. The Mexican CSR similarity-case traditions would gladly have involved buckets, just like Newton, but the statistical colonial reality is that we only had some rope and fewer buckets generally tending to have more holes, or no handles. We did what we could with rope alone, and did not feel poor.

What unifies all these cases is fundamental orbital-mechanics, with varying degrees of aerodynamic interaction. In the case of planetary orbits, gravity and inertial forces combine to act much as elastic rope and buckets do. In our cases, Earth' s gravity field and fluidic effects modify the fundamental orbital mechanics of CSRs in deterministic engineerable ways. We want to master all the parts of the problem, and Mexican rope dynamics are a worthy study: If Newton had lacked a bucket, he might have lassoed instead.








On Friday, April 29, 2016 6:44 AM, "santos137@yahoo.com santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
A similarity case is never exactly the same, but shares some vital partial aspect(s) as a class. In these cases, the shared aspects include swinging about on rope, with the according centrifugal dynamics. The Voladores mechanism really does suggest how to unfurl multiple ribbon wings from one vertical capstan, with desirable washout. The lasso dynamics really do inform about CSR states of interest.
Whats missing is a more precise classification of the cases, for example to situate the Daisy where MarkM can see its relation in specific qualities. 

Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device

------ Original message------
From: Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [A...
Date: Thu, Apr 28, 2016 11:17 PM
Subject:Re: [AWES] Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor

 
Not 1 of all these previously quoted devices / examples is the same nor works the same.
A child launches on a rope swing from the side of a tree on the crest of a hill, she flies a centfiugally stiffened arc (decreasing radius) , and lands on the other side of the tree. She imparted the energy impulse to the outer tip of the rotor.
Each device / toy / display  / experiment has a different dynamic... Even between 2 x identical devices @ same time or in same place.
Yes, Classify and describe as best you can. Why worry about the politics though?
Of course it was I who first invented the csr when I first swung a leaky bucket around my head... Nah
Just find a way to build one if you feel there's a need to. And there probably is.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20038 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Centrifugally Stiffened Rotor
Release the centripetal force on the ball and what happens?
Athletics Men's Hammer Throw Final - 27th Summer Universiade 2013 - Kazan (RUS)

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20039 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open

I didi it! I just made some Airborne Wind Energy. Some, not a lot :) Enjoy the first footage of a proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an "Open Tensegrity Shaft" (OTS). This demo uses a swivel caster with a 5" hard rubber wheel as a base that holds a bicycle dynamo hub with a power output of incredible 3W.

I will post some more details on this contraption and how I plan to scale it up during the next days. Now I need a drink.

Enjoy:


Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open Tensegrity Shaft (OTS)


/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20040 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
You did! Congratulations. And great thanks for the sharing effort!



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20041 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Video: Tensairity Drachen of 2009

Leichtbau-Drachen als Stromproduzenten
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20042 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Fantastic prototype, which really helps keep us all moving forward! Congratulations to Christoff and team. Three Watts is a nice sip of Ambrosian nectar.


Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device


------ Original message------

From: snapscan_snapscan@yahoo.de [Ai...

Date: Fri, Apr 29, 2016 7:16 PM

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com;

Subject:[AWES] Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open Tensegrity Shaft (OTS)


 

I didi it! I just made some Airborne Wind Energy. Some, not a lot :) Enjoy the first footage of a proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an "Open Tensegrity Shaft" (OTS). This demo uses a swivel caster with a 5" hard rubber wheel as a base that holds a bicycle dynamo hub with a power output of incredible 3W.

I will post some more details on this contraption and how I plan to scale it up during the next days. Now I need a drink.

Enjoy:


Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open Tensegrity Shaft (OTS)


/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20043 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20044 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Kite
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20045 From: benhaiemp Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Bravo Christoff! The rotor is interesting and looks a little like this rotor where  the hub is light: KiteWinder - Home

 

 PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20046 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
http://web.iitd.ac.in/~sbhalla/thesispdf/ramakant.pdf

DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS AND MONITORING
OF DISMOUNTABLE TENSEGRITY STRUCTURE
RAMAKANTA PANIGRAHI
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI
JUNE, 2007
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20047 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/29/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
tensegrity - Emmerich, David Georges

 

== Emmerich

== Snelson

== Fuller
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20048 From: Rod Read Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
/cb   =   completely brilliant

Really like the miniaturisation of tracking. Everything is so neat looking compared to my efforts.
It looks like this 3 blade method has a fairly low Hz harmonic along the shaft.
I wonder how many of those you could stack and if that evens out the shake.
The new configuration of rods and line in the shaft is so much more stable than the flat one I had.
That's a really long narrow shaft and at a v high angle too.. plenty of lift there.
(How did the wee sand box ever hold it?)

completely brilliant


Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20049 From: dave santos Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Aerology Lab History and Flying-Car Evolution
Roy Mueller is a visionary kite maker in our close AWE circle who apprenticed with the great Jalbert himself. He works on all sorts of soft-kite concepts, like AWE and aerotecture, and invented the amazing SkyBow. His KiteCar concept has been a long special study. Here is a nice historical overview of his ongoing flying car evolution and kite work, with lots of unique historical background images hanging out with Jalbert and other rare kite sources-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20050 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: KIteWinder

Vantage Premium wordpress theme by SiteOrigin - kitewinder.fr
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20051 From: benhaiemp Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

This double crossed ladder as OpenTensegrity Shaft seems to provide a better transmitted torque/ tensegrity shaft diameter ratio. So congratulations for it. Some questions: as shaft diameter is too large, its scalability can be a robust concern; and as shaft diameter is too small, big gears can be required to drive the generator.

Concerning reliability in case of break ropes and spars can hit anything by travelling downwind., or perhaps spars could also retain the system thanks to a tree. Other cases of concerns by upscaling have been mentioned. 

Another transmission system with only ropes is studied for a flying rotor. Probably other concerns can be found. Then  advantages and disadvantages could be compared. http://www.awec2015.com/images/posters/AWEC25_Benhaiem-poster.pdf .


PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20052 From: Joe Faust Date: 4/30/2016
Subject: Re: KIteWinder
InternetArchiveOnKiteWinder

and
HEREmore
and
MoreHereTechnology

Archived was the following, but in French; the English here is via Google Translation and may have some errors: 

"My name is Olivier Normand, I am an aeronautical engineer specialized in the fields of electronics, mechanics and testing.

I live between Toulouse and Bordeaux for the needs of KiteWinder Project, which germinated in my head during a train journey there are already several years.

After seven years of professional experience in the aviation industry in the Toulouse area, I finally decided to give life to this project, which officially started in April 2014.

I am at your disposal to answer your solliciations, feel free to leave me a message."

===============================
Video

Fonctionnement KiteWinder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIcAtEcorGY

=======================
His YouTube channel: HERE
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20053 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Kite

Kite (K)

Title of model:  J-Model for K.

A working model for K:


K :: {W1. Wt, W2, M}      

    M :: media set

    Wt :: Tensed tether set as wing

    W1 and W2 are wing sets. 

    K has, unless empty, three wings or more. 

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


The model aims to efficiently capture kite realms with aim for uncovering practical opportunities for K.  Title of the model?   


Critical examination of J-Model could examine assumptions, undefined terms, consistency, challenges, kite-realm capture efficiency, extreme example handling, creativity quotient, defined terms, usefulness relative to purposes, ...


===============================================
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20054 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Thank you Pierre!

On your scalability question:

I don't see why the Open Tensegrity Shaft (OTS) should not scale nicely. My next goal is the 100*3 challenge (generate 100W at 100ft for 100minutes) - hence I will have to scale the OTS up to about 200 feet of length (to reach the 100ft of altitude) and to transmit 100W. I will first build a test stand to test different rod diameters and lengths and to test different types of rod/tether connections (my current zip tie approach might not be the best design :)

Based on that I will be able to calculate weight/(distance*power) of the OTS method - which should be a good metric to compare it to other methods.

If you do the same for your Rotating Reeling design we can compare our numbers!

/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20055 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Thank you Pierre for bringing this to my attention. I have reached out to Olivier:

"Dear Olivier,

Thank you for trying to make Airborne Wind Energy happen.

I am working on a similar design (three bladed rotor suspended under a lifter kite) - my main area of research is the torsion based power transfer to the ground. You can see my recent first test flight here:


I am now working on scaling it up to 300W power output. 

Two questions:

1. Despite my french last name I do not speak it - hence forgive me if you already wrote it on your page: What method of power transmission are you looking at? Some things I saw look like a generator in the air and electric transmission. Others look like a loop/belt based transmission.

2. You seem to have developed a carbon fiber based rotor. Could you share some specs with me? (diameter, weight, power output...). I will be looking at different rotor types on my Open Tensegrity Shaft - would you be willing to lend/sell me one of yours for the testing?

Everything I do is under the Open Source Hardware / Creative Common license - and I will be publishing my results and designs. If your rotor design is "closed source" I am fine and would not publish details about it."

BTW - if anybody else has a rotor (design) that could give me some 300W (stacked or not) I am happy to test it. I will ask Rod to send me some DAISYs too :)

/cb
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20056 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

Yea Christof,

 

My scalability question about OTS is only a question, not a statement. The scalability is a concern for all envisaged methods.

 

A point: power/diameter shaft ratio is far better for OTS than for Rotating Reel (excepted if the ground rotor rotation is motorized) for which the diameter of the flying rotor is a little higher than the diameter of the ground rotor. Rotating Reel is a sort of carousel and should be also compared to other carousels.

 

But to achieve a possible viability perhaps the study of an optimized flying rotor itself is more important, as your tests, Rod's tests, my tests, and some other's tests are realized with both a rotor and a lifting kite. 

 

PierreB

 

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20057 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Thank you Rod, for the kind words - I learned a lot by watching your progress :)

To your points:

tracking Yes the "snow canon" design we discussed here makes for a great passive tracking across all 360deg. horizontally. Vertically I limited it to 5-85 degree to prevent the disc from touching the base and to stop it from flipping over. The swivel caster makes a nice "off the shelf" part to start from.

stacking I think you could absolutely stack those rotors, if that's what you are into ;) The rotor itself is not very efficient - it just happens to be available "off the shelf" - they sell it in all kind of sizes (even much bigger than the one I used:

Riesen Windrad Göße L

 

I will try to get a better rotor before I think about stacking. Want to send me some DAISYs? ;)

Sandbox The key is to dig it in a little - aka "Sand anchor": Using sand anchors with your kites

 

This way the horizontal part of the tether force just presses the box against the earth.

Enjoy!
/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20058 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Re: Kite
The "J"  may be interpreted as title any way one wishes. A different matter would be an inquiry into the genesis by the author; only a hint: not "Joe" and also not something to be noted. A name is sufficient: "J-Model for K".   Just a tag for filing purposes.  The fertile matter about the model reveals itself to users of the model. Exercising various models may given data for comparisons among models.  The J-Model is a terminus that has built upon exploring prior models. Maturation of the J-Model may arrive following exercise of the model.   Some anticipated rooms within the J-model may involve thresholds of certain parameters to be defined by J-Model workers; perhaps special ratios or states of motion. 

The J-Model is not intended to disturb traditional toy-kite family matters.  Rather, the more appropriate venue for exercising the J-Model for K is the collection of workers profoundly working to find, extend, develop, organize, simplify, and comprehend a rich panorama of kite energy systems. 

I certainly remain interested in other models that aim to capture the kite-energy realm.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20059 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/1/2016
Subject: Bungee Leap

Bungee Leap

... a generalized method to enter free-flight for various reasons and final dispositions: 



Tether set may be with tethers that are elastic for full lengths or for partial lengths. 

Polygonal arrangement is just one method for three or more wings for Bungee Leap. 

Coteries and trees and clusters, etc. may be arranged.         Tech IP: per kPower, Inc. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20060 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Gliding

A cousin to Bungee Leap is a non-bungee method of powered kiting flight disclosed here:

is Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Gliding




 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20061 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20062 From: Rod Read Date: 5/2/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

I also like that you didn't use any stabilising lines on your lifter.
Work must get done on having a mini autopilot for lifters. Yes that'll limit the low wind cut in point a bit....  But if it's low wind where the lifter is... the lower rotors will be useless anyway.
My stabilising lines keep snagging on ground based stuff made of nature. There's just too much of it around.

 

Thank you Rod, for the kind words - I learned a lot by watching your progress :)


To your points:

tracking Yes the "snow canon" design we discussed here makes for a great passive tracking across all 360deg. horizontally. Vertically I limited it to 5-85 degree to prevent the disc from touching the base and to stop it from flipping over. The swivel caster makes a nice "off the shelf" part to start from.

stacking I think you could absolutely stack those rotors, if that's what you are into ;) The rotor itself is not very efficient - it just happens to be available "off the shelf" - they sell it in all kind of sizes (even much bigger than the one I used:

Riesen Windrad Göße L


Riesen Windrad Göße L
6,5 Fuss Wind Generator Rainbow Höhe:420 cm.Segeldurchmesser:200cm. Segel:Solarmax,witterung- und lichtbeständig.Lager:Stahl,Robust und ...

Preview by Yahoo

 

I will try to get a better rotor before I think about stacking. Want to send me some DAISYs? ;)

Sandbox The key is to dig it in a little - aka "Sand anchor": Using sand anchors with your kites


Using sand anchors with your kites
My 181st kite video. I use sand anchors often with my kites. It is the safest way to fly big kites at the beach, and allows one person to fly multiple kites....

Preview by Yahoo

 

This way the horizontal part of the tether force just presses the box against the earth.

Enjoy!
/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20063 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
I did not use any stabilizing lines because that HQ KAP Foil 1.6 I am using is absolutely stable - as long as you fly it with that beautiful tail :)

Btw. as you might have guessed that one extra line to the ground with the yellow winder dangling around at the beginning of the video is just my safety line in case my contraption blew apart. I was thinking about adding an extra kill line to the foil's tail - since I am flying very close to the city - but decided to trust my ground anchors a little.

/cb
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20064 From: dave santos Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Three kPower kite experiments yesterday (Tumbling-Wing performed sus
kPower flew three small experiments yesterday in gusty winds at the UTexas research campus. It was the usual mix of fizzle and dazzle.

The largest trial was a 250ft rope loop under a 22m2 PLPL (Peter Lynn Pilot-Lifter) that in principle could develop many kW of transmission capacity, if driven fast enough, but the small pulleys and twisted strand construction conspired to twist the loop into a locked state. It was a good lesson to either use more expensive braided rope or rig a more spread-out geometry. A new dousing trick was found, to shake up the pilot-kite to disturb its lift, allowing easier walk-down.

 Another minor experiment was to fly a Gomberg Falcon delta on 30m of bungee line, but the wind was too strong for the bungee to act in-tune as a gust-lull stabilizer. The kite merely stretched out to the 2x limit imposed by the nylon bungee cover, and we could not safely fly it higher in the strong wind, to allow more bulk elasticity into the line.

The prototype of JoeF's Tumbling-Wing in good wind was finally confirmed to loop passively is a strong pumping cycle. We had to add enough nose-mass to ensure penetration in the windward phase. The trick to bring down power from a tumbling-wing seems to be to pump downward opposed to pilot-lift, to tap the stroke via turn-back pulleys. This was a very promising experiment! Ed will post video soon.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20065 From: dave santos Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
Square-cube scaling law allows the following predictions-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20066 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Latest "Artificial Rain" demo by means of kites (kPower Ilwaco)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20067 From: Rod Read Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
What was written here...
Then there is the separate issue of low rotational velocity imposed by the wind turbine, with inherently low power-to-mass performance. At higher rpms, multi-tether and spar aerodrag from crosswind motion become a limiting factor.

The torque-shaft method remains valuable at small-scale, as a baseline case to compare with other methods, like rope-driving. Its a worthy exploration of torque transmission at an early stage of R&D.

 seems completely unjustified and unfounded.
Given the rotary AWES schemes posted on this forum, nobody should keep postulating that stance without evidence.

Rod Read

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

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20068 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 5/3/2016
Subject: View from above 2030
Attachments :

    Archival copy


    Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device
    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20069 From: santos137@yahoo.com Date: 5/3/2016
    Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an

    Rod,


    The evidence is not perfect, but consists of an absense of any close similarity-case, as well as scaling_laws. Please provide better evidence torque ladders can scale, 


    daveS


    Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device


    ------ Original message------

    From: Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [A...

    Date: Tue, May 3, 2016 6:36 PM

    To: AWE;

    Subject:Re: [AWES] Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an Open Tensegrity Shaft (OTS)


     

    What was written here...
    Then there is the separate issue of low rotational velocity imposed by the wind turbine, with inherently low power-to-mass performance. At higher rpms, multi-tether and spar aerodrag from crosswind motion become a limiting factor.

    The torque-shaft method remains valuable at small-scale, as a baseline case to compare with other methods, like rope-driving. Its a worthy exploration of torque transmission at an early stage of R&D.

     seems completely unjustified and unfounded.
    Given the rotary AWES schemes posted on this forum, nobody should keep postulating that stance without evidence.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20070 From: snapscan_snapscan Date: 5/4/2016
    Subject: Re: Proof of concept for an Airborne Wind Energy System based on an
    The proof is in the pudding aka power output & and a nice Youtube video :) In case you want to build your own Open Tensegrity Shaft based Airborne Wind Energy System and scale it up to its limits: I have just put the documentation needed to do so online:


    OTS1


    Hack away - let me know if you run into any questions, problems or improvements. In the meantime I will be busy scaling it up to 250W - still way below your suggested limits :)


    Enjoy!

    /cb 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20072 From: dave santos Date: 5/5/2016
    Subject: Floaty "Mushroom-Cap" HALE CSR Concept
    Two sorts of aviation platforms can currently loiter in the middle stratosphere; complex solar e-flight aircraft and simple LTA balloons. HALE CSR is a contender, but has to yet be proven. It may be wise to explore the "floaty" end of the CSR design spectrum while still retaining key performance elements of conventional motor-glider e-flight. Power generation is involved, but only for direct onboard use and battery storage. Early practical Atmosats are not intended to bring power to the surface, being located far too high, but to provide persistent information services from high altitude.

    Consider a very large membrane disc shaped like a thin flat mushroom-cap, about 1km across at around 20km high. A major starting advantage over competing HALE ideas is a large central solar area that skinny wings cannot match. The disc is envisioned as a CSR with distributed propulsion on many rim-wings to spin-up the membrane like a whirling-skirt. A large number of rim-wings with motor-gen props could operate at optimal velocity (Mach 0.5-.8) as high-performance composite-based aero-structures. The membrane disc might have variable gores to act as a spin-basket/spin-chute.

    CSR mode allows the flattened disc to translate faster, to better oppose headwind and keep station. The extra power by extra solar area may be the key to effective HALE operations. In the event of a systems failure, the entire rig might float down like a parachute. A thermal boost of warmer air under the disc should help ease operations. A lifting gas balloon might even figure at the center, perhaps as a hydrogen fuel store.  A key requirement is to tolerate total upset due to turbulence. A CSR based on a large membrane disc could simply open up again like un-wadded paper, while a multi-arm CSR might get terminally tangled and crash at high-velocity.

    Floaty HALE CSR might have a long term role far beyond current atmosat needs, even as the basis for floating cities of sci-fiction dreams.

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20073 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/5/2016
    Subject: Re: Kite
    "kite" in the J-Model for K  may have the following as a proposed theorem 
    awaiting rigorous proof within the J-Model: 

    All material objects that may potentially deflect media when pulled by a tether are potentially wings in a kite. 

    Direct proofs or discussion of the proposed theorem within J-Model is fair game. 

    Until a contradiction arrives from use of the proposed theorem, then the proposed theorem will be used as though it were proved. It might turn out to require being relegated to a basis assumption of the J-Model for K. 

    Exercise of the proposed theorem or assumption could have some interesting results and provide possibly useful opportunities for energy kiting.   Recall we have anchored kite systems that are fixed in a frame of reference while having the anchor assumptively fixed in such frame (recognizing that "fixed" is an approximation in actual material cases; real pulled anchors finally move, at least over long ages).. And we have free-flight FFAWE systems where the frame is fixed earth while the kite system moves entirely in the air or water or both at once. 

    So, have a J-Model "kite" (herein as just "kite")  that has Earth pulled by a kite's tether which tether is coupled to another wing object.   Then the Earth therein is a "wing" of the kite, as the Earth while in the kite system deflects media air when pulled by the kite's tether. Without refining further one may see that the kite hereon has the three wings: Earth, tether as wing, and the mentioned other wing object.  Each of the three wings is deflecting the media during the kiting operation. Each of the wings is being kited. 
       Some AWES teams are kiting specialized trucks holding humans, instruments, generator, motors, stored tether, ...; those parts in the truck wing are being kited.   Other teams' kite ground stations involve mechanical arms, chairs, boats, carts, pilot bodies, ships, poles, rocks; those ground stations are parts of a wing system of the kites. Other wings being kited are variously rigid-glider-appearing objects, parachute-appearing objects,historical object-appearing items (parafoils, Rogallo wings, Jalbert parafoil evolutes, military wings, Eddy wings, Malay wings, delta wings, tumbling wings, kytoons, playsails,Hargrave box wing evolutes).   The tethers of a kite in the J-Model are tensed. The wings at either end of tensed tethers in a J-Model kite may be any object that deflects the media (air, water, or other media).   

    Examples:

    Bolas: 
     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolas   Bolas in flight is a FFAWE kite where at first level of refinement has commonly three wings consisting of a tether set and two rock or balls.

    SkySails kite (as described by the J-Model for K)
    At first level of refinement of the "kite" reveals three wings in a SkySails kite:
    1. Water-air wing: ship     which deflects air and water during the kiting operation. 
    2. Tether wing deflecting air during the kiting operation
    3. Large Jalbert parafoil evolute wing operated fairly high in the air. The upper wing deflect air.
    The ship anchors the upper wing. The upper wing anchors the ship wing. The tether wing is anchored by both the ship wing and the upper Jalbert evolute wing.  

    How is "refinement" being used in the above note?
    It seems that the J-Model for K, allows levels of respect for what wings are in focus. The J-Model for K seems to have kite be a collection of a very high count of wings and subkites; more, there is a way to show that one may analyze an uncountable infinity of distinct wings in any particular kite, and an uncountable infinity of subkites in any particular kite.  But a worker may pause at low-count finite views of a kite and distinguish as little as three wings in a kite in a first level of "refinement."  A first level of refinement for a kite as to subkites in the kite is the one kite allowing the kite to play the subkite role; that is, such is a special case where the subkite is the whole kite; a second level of refinement for subkites has many different results. 
        Outside the J-Model for K are other alternative ways to talk about and analyze kite systems. One common traditional way outside the J-Model for K to look at the SkySails kite scene is to have the ship as the anchor, the let-out rope as tether, and the Jalbert evolute wing as the operation's "kite".  The alternative ways of looking at the scene may blessing sets that are non-equivalent.  "kite" is used in a particular sense in each kiting-analysis system.   

    ~ JoeF
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20074 From: Joe Faust Date: 5/5/2016
    Subject: Kiting Asteroids
    Hi Jim, 
         In your notes, did you reach the option of 
    tether-coupling two asteroids?   Or three? Or more?
    Without introducing any more wing material? 

    Just anchor tethers from one asteroid to another. 
    Let the photonic stream work on the new integrated
    system; the coupled asteroids would be the wings
    of the kite system; the tether would also act as
    a deflecting wing besides being the coupling device.
    Deflections on the two or more asteroids and the tethers
    would have a final kiting resultant deflection of mass.
    Such deflection might achieve orbital changes enough
    to avert diastase of Earth impact. 

    Best, 
    Joe
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20075 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/6/2016
    Subject: Re: more Minesto paravane farm details

    Minesto inks Subsea Riser Products order

    Written by  OE Staff Thursday, 05 May 2016 02:29

    ==================================================
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20076 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/6/2016
    Subject: NASA and AWE

    What is the entire history and record of NASA may be brought to the table to feed airborne wind energy, kite-energy, kite systems?   Looking carefully, one might say that nearly the whole of its record may impinge on AWE. I am having difficulty excluding NASA flow from the answer.  AWE realm has so many potential applications on Earth, in the air, in the water, and in photonic flows, and in planetary atmospheres ... that just about every NACA and NASA endeavor may be seen as lending some light on AWE matters. Make some progress on some detail of aerospace and aviation and risk being soaked into the AWE movement directly or by way of a niche application.   NASA employees are ever welcome to mention and discuss how what they are doing may affect something in tethered flight in various media: air, water, photonic flow, plasma, fuels, ... 


    Try it. Take something at random from NASA's historical good works. Seek how the selection might impinge airborne wind energy, kite applications, kite-energy systems. Take a random employee of NASA and find out what they are doing; seek how that person's works may be found to affect something in AWE. 


    Example: 

    I put in Google:   NASA 1974. 

    Of the selections I just grabbed

    ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1974 A Chronology by Nancy L. Brun The NASA History Series 


    Looking at January 1, 1974: 

    1 January: Appointment of Gerald J. Mossinghoff as Assistant General Counsel of NASA became effective. Mossinghoff had been Deputy Assistant Administrator for Legislative Affairs since 1971, after earlier serving as Director of Legislative Liaison. He would continue to serve as Acting Deputy Assistant until a successor was appointed. (NASA Ann, 3 Jan 74; NASA Release 74-1) 


    One of the many radiances of Mossinghoff would be to influence IP and world-patent movement. Such rubs the AWE IP and patent realm.   

    "World Patent System Circa 20XX, A.D." by Gerald J. Mossinghoff

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


    IP Hall of Fame - Gerald Mossinghoff  


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



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

    May 6, 2016


    Honorable Gerald J. Mossinghoff, 

    You are invited to review the IP spectrum of the Airborne Wind Energy movement and perhaps provide leadership on the IP and patent pool challenges. 

    Thanks for all the good you have done in long years of service, 

    Best, 

    Joe Faust

    ============================================
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20077 From: dave santos Date: 5/6/2016
    Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi
    JoeF has once again identified a crucial direction to explore in the thicket of AWES concepts.

    What is proposed by Joe is a new form of free-ranging powered-flight by winching only, without need for propellers, jets, fixed-anchors, or even wind, for that matter. Imagine Wubbo's SpiderMill roaming overhead by each satellite pulling in phased patterns along the gang-line. This is step-towing freed from "the surly bonds of Earth". Winch-provided kite-sets can also make power from wind-shears.

    A variation of the new paradigm is to redesign Dale Kramer's FreeFlight scheme of performance-glider and soft-kite. Imagine the large upper wing-unit as a Kytoon or simple kite, but with extensive solar-surface directly powering winching and charging batteries, and the lower wing-unit the same high-performance glider as before, but now also acting against the powered winch. Winching flight-modes might greatly extend windshear-dependent FF capability.

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud


    On Monday, May 2, 2016 8:18 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20078 From: dave santos Date: 5/7/2016
    Subject: Makani struggles on; Astro ready to celebrate.
    Attachments :
      Many months are passing in silence, and once again, Makani's open job listings, like the one copied below, provide the only public information on M600 progress. The absence of a credible system-architect, and current (updated April 8) open position of system engineer, defined on a broad critical basis, years after slipped deadlines, implies the project is in Limbo. A normal high-complexity aerospace project of this scope requires far more than the few late hires faced with superhero challenges seen here. Can the M600 really become anything but the sort of serial debacle Astro Teller has somehow adapted to celebrating? Good grief, the attached image of Astro "celebrating failure"  in front of an M600 projection, comes from GoogleX itself! He credibly claims at TED to not know just how the M600 will fail, but stands ready to party-on when it does ;)

       
      ======================

      You will use your experience in aircraft design to bring the next generation of Energy Kites to fruition. The position involves the fusion of tried-and-true techniques for aircraft design, with the rapid iteration of X technology development. While this position involves aerodynamics and aerostructures, the focus is aircraft systems as a whole and a broad range of expertise is desired.
      Responsibilities
      • Participate in architecture discussions focusing on reliability and fault tolerance. Participate in hardware or software reviews.
      • Ensure that the “gaps” between the subsystems being delivered are understood, and that the integration of those subsystems will be successful - or that tests you define will uncover any system interaction issues.
      • Plan, execute, and document analysis ands tests to verify and validate performance. Expose issues and identify root causes.
      • Work with Makani engineers on the conceptual design of Energy Kites, including: Flight envelope definition; requirements generation; determination of margins, and mass, power, and reliability budgets; risk accounting and management
      Minimum qualifications
      • Bachelor’s degree in Aerospace, Mechanical, or Electrical Engineering or related field (including Robotics, Controls, Engineering Physics) or equivalent practical experience.
      • 10 years experience developing aircraft systems.
      • Multidiscipline experience combining electro-mechanical systems, power systems, aerodynamics, and controls.
      • Experience with cost estimation and/or cost-down efforts of aircraft systems.

      • Preferred qualifications
        • Has held a significant role through every stage in the development of manned or large unmanned aircraft (from concept to operations).
      		   @@attachment@@
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20079 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 5/7/2016
      Subject: Re: Powered Kiting by Polygonal Centroidal Cyclic Winching and Glidi
      Joined is the topic being run in USHawks that faces just one of the applications of the PKPCCW&G
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 20080 From: dave santos Date: 5/9/2016
      Subject: Notes on CSR Dynamics
      The following notes were copied from off-Forum discussion with CSR experts, and did not meet with specific objections. Any errors are my own-

      --------------
      Previous open-AWE CSR discussion over many years identified primordial similarity-cases like bull-roarers, bolas, spinning skirts, and casting nets. A whirling bull-roarer blade is deliberately pitch unstable, with an interesting symmetry-reversing torsional limit-cycle. The nominal bull-roarer tumbling mode suggests CSR satellites will also tumble in adverse conditions, presuming a normal aeronautical design trade-off between inherent stability and maximum performance. Bull-roarer dynamics also suggest a basic kite-flier's method applies to CSR design, to incorporate swivels in cross-lines, so that line untwisting does not require reverse-aerobatics for "eternal-flight". The bolas similarity-case supports both the idea of three satellites and the idea of two-satellites anchored by a third, in handheld spinning. Other classic cases present interesting mixed and marginal dynamics for comparison.
       
      Toward ongoing advancement of CSR dynamics understanding, the fairly uniform mass distribution of MarkM's CSR (20% hub, 26% each of 3 satellites), plus wake interaction effects under pilot-wave field-theory, a standard rotor-disc unit assumption invoking swept area, UHMWPE as a high Q spring, low aerodamping of hub-mass motion, especially at low-Re HALE regime; therefore the following fundamental CSR harmonic mode is predicted:
       
      g
      Mode u_{01} (1s) with alpha_{01}=2.40483
       
      Collective Control inputs and wind-field turbulence will either excite or damp this fundamental mode, which the equations-of-motion and control implementation should account for, since the satellites might be perturbed to tumble. A general heuristic is to apply control inputs slowly and smoothly, passively avoiding coupling into resonant modes. Active damping inputs may not be required if a visco-elastic damping is employed on the cross-line(s). Hub-mass, if any, should be as large and disc-like as practical. A low-domed lenticular or spin-basket hub form could even contribute a bit of pumping lift in dissipating fundamental mode energy, and perhaps helpfully reduce sink rate in key flight modes.

      CSR mass distribution weighted at the rotor disc rim and center creates a well defined node/anti-node harmonic constraint structure that does not strongly promote higher normal modes than the second mode identified. For higher modes, the continuous single orbital disc assumption is replaced by multi-orbital models. The next modes of significance are subharmonics created by the satellite masses acting in a fractal subdimension of the whole. The satellites are in effect small distributed aircraft contributing their own fundamental motions in their own intertial frame, under Galilean Invariance.

      The best behaved dynamic modes of CSR satellites are yaw and roll lateral-directional modes. The main wing-root chord is broad enough along with sufficient nominal centrifugal stiffening to effectively suppress large "Dutch roll" deviations, although small-deviation high-frequency yawing and rolling will emerge to the extent that main-wing "strumming" couples to the satellite.

      The pitch mode has long been known* as the major satellite instability source, but its a more complex subject than early investigations treated. The phugoid mode of a CSR satellite is a long period instability that could couple with the bulk motion of the second normal mode (of the CSR in horizontal translation). In an extreme disturbance, this can lead to one or more satellites leaving the disc-plane orbit to enter sub-orbits. A basic example is a two satellite CSR with each satellite looping in opposition to the other in a bi-lobed "dumbell" geometry. What is suggested is a rich space of aerobatic Lissajous orbitals that might be working modes in future systems.

      "Luffing" is a short period pitch-mode moving along the long slender wings that can couple into the satellite's own short-period pitch oscillation tendency. A flexible wing that can recover from "wringing" may be desirable. Torsional stiffness can actually promote an excessively resonant interaction that overwhelms satellite horizonal-stabilizer damping. The solution is not just to add more stabilizer surface, but to structurally damp torsional modes all along the wing by local compliance of the airfoil to disturbance. Locating the CSR propulsion pod inboard allows it to act as a node against short-period luff as well as promote matched most-efficient operational velocity of both wing tips and propeller blade-tips. Fast throttling up tip-pod propulsion might cause a mid-wing luff event that inboard propulsion would avoid.

      Safety is a driving factor from the beginning of engineering design analysis. Many aero-concepts go unrealized from disregard for inherent safety. CSR operations under current UAS guidlines would be required to perform sense-and-avoid. The "sense" part must still be done by a Pilot-in-Command (PIC) or Visual Observer (VO). The "avoid" function suggests a special flight CSR flight mode based on a parallel spiral dive by the satellites. In this diving mode, the satellites operate in a strong side-slip with the unstiffened main wing trailing in a flag-like flutter-prone state. Given the crudeness of existing control models, all bets are off if a CSR experiences major upsets due to turbulence or improper control, and the satellites go slack respective of each other. A loosely tumbling CSR enters a complex chaotic regime of states defined by braid and knot mathematical theory, a nice direction for future research.

      An interesting lens into advanced aeroelastic dynamics of tensile CSR aerostructure is Lyapunov Time in the form of sonic relativity. Aeroelastic forces move at or below the speed-of-sound in the aerostructure. In tensed UHMWPE, sonic-c can be on the order of 10km per second, but moments later, in a slack state, the internal speed of sound can drop to zero. No CSR aeroelastic analysis that neglects sonic relativity in some form is complete. There is of course far more CSR aeroelasticity understanding to develop in coming years, in both theory and practice.

      -----------

      * The ancient bullroarer device exploited a CSR-satellite pitch aeroelastic mode.