Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 22925 to 22974 Page 351 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22925 From: dave santos Date: 8/11/2017
Subject: AWEC2017 Book of Abstracts (cover)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22926 From: dave santos Date: 8/14/2017
Subject: Why AWE is here to stay, and will only get bigger and better.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22927 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 8/15/2017
Subject: Re: Minesto news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22928 From: dave santos Date: 8/18/2017
Subject: Kite in Power Lines Scare

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22929 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
Subject: Jordan ProAirform Pilot-Lifters

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22930 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
Subject: Indoor Kite Train suggests possibilities...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22931 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
Subject: Mothra3 upgraded

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22932 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
Subject: Re: Minesto news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22933 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: Microsoft entering AWE R&D via IFO style autonomous gliders

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22934 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: Could SAAB make a flying energy paravane?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22935 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: AWEC2017 Program

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22936 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: Michiel Kruijff, Head of Product Development at Ampyx Power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22937 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: KPS on Real Engineering draws 600,000 views in one month

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22938 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
Subject: Allister Furey KPS ex-CTO

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22939 From: dave santos Date: 8/22/2017
Subject: New AWE forum on Kialo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22940 From: dave santos Date: 8/23/2017
Subject: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion solution"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22941 From: dave santos Date: 8/23/2017
Subject: Aerotecture Update

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22942 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 8/23/2017
Subject: Re: KPS on Real Engineering draws 600,000 views in one month

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22943 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/23/2017
Subject: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion solution"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22944 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22945 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
Subject: Deep and Broad Kite Quivers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22946 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
Subject: AWE as a load-following generation means

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22947 From: gordon_sp Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: MOTHRA VRS GANGED LIFTER KITES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22948 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: MOTHRA VRS GANGED LIFTER KITES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22949 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22950 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22951 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22952 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22953 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab and

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22954 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Kite Boarder trouncing Hot Sailboats on video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22955 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22956 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Kite Boarder trouncing Hot Sailboats on video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22957 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Re: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22958 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
Subject: Texas Hurricane testing Conventional HAWT v Kite Survival, plus KPS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22959 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Defining FlapStack AWE by Muzhichkov's old AWES Variants

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22960 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Re: Texas Hurricane testing Conventional HAWT v Kite Survival, plus

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22961 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Ampyx wave tank testing model offshore platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22962 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: AWEC2017 detailed schedule looking good

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22963 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Japanese ~VAWT under Kite Train AWES video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22964 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Oliver Tulloch's Networked Rotary Kite System?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22965 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Re: AWEC2017 detailed schedule looking good

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22966 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
Subject: Rod Read covered by ASME.org

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22967 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
Subject: Disambiguations of prior "Kite" usage- Kite Network and Kite Geometr

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22968 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
Subject: AWES System Identification by Taek Dief et al

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22969 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
Subject: Minesto Deep Green Environmental Impact and PTO documentation

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22970 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
Subject: Best Intro into Fuzzy Control for AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22971 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
Subject: Crash Course in Controls for DIY AWES Hackers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22972 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
Subject: Experimental lattice vibrations as AWES metamaterial dynamic visuali

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22973 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
Subject: Kiteline as Sonic Wormhole (Kite Physics as Quantum Gravity and Stri

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22974 From: dave santos Date: 8/29/2017
Subject: Passive Pumping by Wubbo's SpiderMill?



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22925 From: dave santos Date: 8/11/2017
Subject: AWEC2017 Book of Abstracts (cover)
The dramatic cover of AWEC2017's Book of Abstracts is a possibly very misleading visual impression of current AWES state-of-the-art as seemingly dominated by hot kiteplane ventures. Abstracts texts are apparently still pending. Hoping for any big new ideas at AWEC2017, since kite planes may already be proving impossible to effectively and economically scale up, by secretly held measured power-curve and mishap statistics. If so, the ongoing lack of domain consensus over truly scalable AWES architectural design may first have to be settled in the market, before becoming settled in academia- 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22926 From: dave santos Date: 8/14/2017
Subject: Why AWE is here to stay, and will only get bigger and better.
Ten years ago, the tiny merit-community active in AWE R&D struggled under general public ignorance and deep engineering uncertainty. A few technically unqualified AWE promoters dominated by marketing hype, claiming easy solutions, raising millions, but unable to deliver. AWE seemed a fragile "newborn" that might not thrive. Key engineering-science aspects slowly became better understood as academic interest grew. The first major sign of AWE viability was the AWE upper-wind resource soundly validated by data, such that no doubt remained about its outstanding potential.

AWE R&D went from weak newborn to preadolescent. One by one, talented team after team emerged and was able to make crude prototypes work, if not in effective mature form, at least well enough to encourage further research and investment. One by one, compelling historic antecedents were discovered, especially on the AWES Forum. One by one, academic papers accumulated, with consistently promising numeric predictions. One by one, large institutional investors entered into AWE R&D investment. Public ignorance slowly gave way to interested ongoing recognition in the world's top media outlets. The first modest but historic products entered student and kite enthusiast markets. Teams won new rounds of funding to scale up their concepts.

These trends continue to accelerate. We have even lately lost count of new players, events, prototypes, videos, papers, etc.. AWE remains a challenging research field even for the best developers, with a growing list of losers who lacked "the right stuff". The global urgency to scale-up AWE safely still remains unfulfilled, but is relentlessly yielding to a lot of patient work. Despite growing-pains, wonderful AWE R&D growth of the last ten years, along with the reality that aviation has for a century already harvested AWE, by systematically seeking tailwinds, and not least the terrific success of kite-powered sports, altogether clearly indicate that AWE is here to stay as an important technology, and will only get bigger and better.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22927 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 8/15/2017
Subject: Re: Minesto news

Change of foundation supplier noted as reason for a push back to 2018:


Installation of Minesto tidal device pushed to 2018
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22928 From: dave santos Date: 8/18/2017
Subject: Kite in Power Lines Scare
Ed Sapir once flew a HMWPE lined power kite onto a high voltage power line, kite land-boarding at kFarm, no harm done. We let the kite clear by letting the handles go over the top. Ordinary dry salt-free polymer line does not conduct electricity, as this new toy kite incident with nylon or polyester shows. Wire line or salt encrusted wet line is a different story-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22929 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
Subject: Jordan ProAirform Pilot-Lifters
Attachments :
    Pilot lifter kites are a key tool for DIY AWE, since they combine low-complexity classic autonomous flying with payload lifting. Dean Jordan is both a great parafoil pilot-kite designer (who apprenticed with Peter Lynn) and the top Wild Man in kites (esp. since Cory Jensen passed). He was my teacher at KiteShip, along with Dave Culp (father of ship kites). If you need a great pilot-lifter to lift your WECS, and are willing to spend a bit more for style than a penny-pinching Peter Lynn pilot lifter, this may be the design of choice. Beware of imitations-


    Inline image





    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22930 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
    Subject: Indoor Kite Train suggests possibilities...
    Kite oddities often lead to innovation outside of the starting case. Towed trains is a new idea here, and could figure in technical contexts. We can suppose Kite Golden Age trains of a century ago were towed aloft somewhere, in order to get into breeze above surface calm. Kite trains are a powerful method, reaching the highest altitudes like a staged rocket in principle, with summed force.

    Here we see two indoor kites of mixed size stacked as a train (stack v train distinction blurry, but stacks are closer-spaced). The smaller is above and tends to dance. Reversed stacking would stabilize more. Two kites of the same size can interact strongly in opposed motions, depending on stacking distance and velocity. Numerous identical kites stacked together will spontaineously develop powerful lattice waves.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22931 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
    Subject: Mothra3 upgraded
    Mothra3's five 22m2 primary lifters were modified last week at Bartlett Sails of Austin to be closely cross-linked across all LEs and TEs with elastic shock-cord. This should correct excess unit-kite disorder in higher wind by constraining individual dancing kite motions into one stable aggregation. Somewhat as Fokker engineers pioneered testing airframes to destruction for lighter stronger structure, Mothra3 began testing as a marginal minimalist rig, evolving step-by-step toward maximal robustness for aerotecture and AWES use. The violent Texas AWE Encampment session on Mustang Island also caused isolated rope-abrasion on fabric, promptly patched with adhesive cloth. A sixth pilot-kite, acting as launch pilot to the rest in a row, was not modified. The upgraded 132m2 Mothra3 rig will be reassembled and retested soon, and if shown sound, to be followed by large-payload experimental applications.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22932 From: dave santos Date: 8/19/2017
    Subject: Re: Minesto news
    Looks like common aerospace R&D delay, rather than an alarming sign of fatal problems. This Saab-supported energy paravane program is one the more solid players we follow.

    The same sort of common engineering delay is well known in software-








    On ‎Tuesday‎, ‎August‎ ‎15‎, ‎2017‎ ‎11‎:‎06‎:‎37‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Change of foundation supplier noted as reason for a push back to 2018:


    Installation of Minesto tidal device pushed to 2018
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22933 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: Microsoft entering AWE R&D via IFO style autonomous gliders
    Microsoft has not been known for aerospace R&D, but that is changing. Testing is underway of autonomous gliders, starting with control autonomy, and headed for RAT charging. Informed folks in AWE define soaring flight as a specific AWE class; the sustaining of HTA flight by vertical wind energy. This MS project could evolve into grid-supply AWE concepts like Gabor's IFOs, and others-



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

    Not quite AWE, but Google continues to dabble in E-flight, as this E-fliver shows-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22934 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: Could SAAB make a flying energy paravane?
    SAAB is the aerospace engineering giant behind Minesto. For eighty years SAAB has designed and built fighters, airliners, helicopters, spacecraft, and drones. Could they make a paravane with "flying fish" capability?

    Its not well known that aerospace engineering properly includes watercraft, especially hydrofoil prowess, but more generally systems prowess. Water testing of airframe aerodynamics is traditional. NASA has no problem working on things that fly in  Earth or Mars air, or Earth or Europa water, or even Titan hydrocarbon soup. Earth's waters are really in space, after all, as the Earth as a wonderful blue marble reveals. Never forget that you can fly any kite underwater, adding a small mass to balance it, but it will fly slower in proportion to the greater density of water, at equivalent loadings.

    Minesto is a paravane project, an underwater flying machine. Similar to how flying fish fly, the Minesto concept could in principle fly its wing above the water, while dipping its turbine in propeller mode, or do underwater plunging and aero-ballistic cycling. This could allow rapid commuting over distance at sea, as just one possibility. We have explored hapa kite-paravane tethered pairs, where the mirror units are functionally similar, but optimized to respective media. KiteLab has done many paravane experiments, based on DIY or sport-fishing "divers", to compliment AWE studies, as R&D diligence.

    Given the rich background, it seems evident SAAB could not only make an energy paravane work, but even a specialty paravane as a flying sub (in principle if not profitably). Even more promisingly, SAAB could pivot from energy paravane success to energy kite tech and enter AWE with a leg up, returning to its primary airborne domain. They certainly have the vast talent and resources to move forward in any aerospace direction that opens up.

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22935 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: AWEC2017 Program
    Still subject to change, the AWEC2017 program seems thin, yet often fragments into three session tracks, so that attendees then miss 2/3 of the action. Lets hope organizers post all sessions as video; plus papers and posters. There is an outdoor day before the two indoor session days, but AWES demos again seem not to be a high-priority activity. Poster sessions seem unusually prominent in the program, which suggests student work was specially encouraged, and maybe some fresh challenging thinking will emerge. Otherwise, there seems to be few surprises. Fort Felker should disclose interesting new details from within Makani's secretive but dramatic M600 testing program-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22936 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: Michiel Kruijff, Head of Product Development at Ampyx Power
    Good to see new faces emerging into prominence. Michiel is a seasoned aerospace pro inheriting the huge challenge to make Ampyx's 2MW AP3 a reality. He provides some new info on a LinkedIn webpage (linked below), and will be a major speaker at AWEC2017.

    We see that AP2 has 125 mishap free flight sessions; good so far as it goes, but how AP1 did is not mentioned; thus likely not so good. Commercial AP reliability requires thousands of safe all-mode sessions, and a few major crashes can end an R&D program. The engineering process planning image reveals many critical features "assigned", but only one "solved", and a mysterious "BOB" not even assigned.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22937 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: KPS on Real Engineering draws 600,000 views in one month
    Over a thousand comments, in effect recapitulating decades of questions, with a few clever observations, like a professional mariner's concern for tether wear, visible in the close KPS shots, or replacing one kite of the pair with a battery to even the cycle. Various sport kiters and Rod and MikeB weigh in. We really do know a lot more these days about issues like birds, air traffic, density, etc., and the public audience is bigger than ever before.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22938 From: dave santos Date: 8/20/2017
    Subject: Allister Furey KPS ex-CTO
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22939 From: dave santos Date: 8/22/2017
    Subject: New AWE forum on Kialo
    Notice as forwarded from RodR and endorsed by PierreB. This seems to be hidden AWE content, requiring a Google sign-in to view-

    "Become a discussion editor"
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22940 From: dave santos Date: 8/23/2017
    Subject: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion solution"
    They also see cloth sails as promising workhorses, given the grand history of sailing-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22941 From: dave santos Date: 8/23/2017
    Subject: Aerotecture Update
    The recent news that Mothra3 had been modified at the sailmaker's loft was both Aerotecture and AWE progress in raw lift. Rerigging the canopies into an arch is the pending task. The sailmaker provided some adhesive "insignia cloth" to patch minor rope burn holes that developed during wild testing in high-winds on Mustang Island, when we got our butts kicked. High winds should be far more manageable in future testing.

    Doug emailed me, impatient to hear aerotecture news about the Moab Monkeys, but not much has changed. The Mothra3 kite platform must be fully validated as reliable before any Monkeys are allowed to occupy it. Meanwhile, the Moab BASE pros are active from terrain and structures, and safety planning discussion continues. I grew up in airshow daredevil culture, with many close tragic fatalities, causing me to approach third party aerotecture safety R&D with diligent patience. On the other hand, I habitually assume varied adventurous risks, and may spontaneously climb up under Mothra3 just as soon as it looks reasonable, but come right down quick, to reduce statistical exposure.

    A primary specification has emerged for aerial habitat design, that habitable structure must hold itself open, and not fold or roll up around occupants, to favor quick easy emergency egress. A tubular triangle frame is proposed to hold apart AlexS's Tentsile habitat for aerotecture use. Stay tuned...
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22942 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 8/23/2017
    Subject: Re: KPS on Real Engineering draws 600,000 views in one month

    Clip from KPS's "NEWS" page:  NEWS


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

    Simon Heyes appointed Chief Executive at Kite Power Systems and Dr Andrew Tyler appointed non-executive Chairman

    Monday, July 3rd, 2017

    Kite Power Systems (KPS), the Scotland-based company developing kite power generation technology and the only company in the UK that is active in the high-altitude wind power sector, has appointed Simon Heyes as Chief Executive and Dr Andrew Tyler CBE as non-executive Chair.

    These latest appointments complete the company’s recruitment of its senior management team that will take forward and commercialise KPS’s pioneering wind power technology, and follows the recent news of the Scottish Investment Bank’s £2m investment in the company.

    Simon Heyes joins from Infinis Energy Holdings, where he was Wind Energy Development & Construction Director.  A Chartered Mechanical Engineer with a degree in Aeronautical Engineering, he worked at Infinis Energy for seven years after holding senior positions at SSE/Scottish Hydro-Electric and GEC Alstom.  His early career was in the aviation sector – working for Rolls-Royce on their civil aircraft engines before joining the RAF full time as an Engineer Officer.
    Simon will work closely with KPS’s new Chair: Dr Andrew Tyler.  Andrew is (since 2013) Chief Executive of the major international aerospace and defence company Northrop Grumman Europe and has been an advisor to KPS over the past two years.  During his 25 year career, Andrew has held senior positions within the Ministry of Defence and was Chief Executive of the tidal energy company, Siemens-owned Marine Current Turbines from 2011-13.  He is a Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering.

    In addition, following the £2m investment in KPS made by Scottish Enterprise (announced June 22nd 2017), Dr Sian George, a former Chief Executive of Ocean Energy Europe, will be joining the KPS Board as a non-executive Director.

    Sian joins the Board with a wealth of experience in policy at both UK and European levels and in the commercialisation of early stage technologies. Sian has held senior positions with several emerging technologies, including wave and tidal power, up to Chair level.

    KPS’s senior management team now comprises:

    Simon HeyesChief Executive
    Paul JonesChief Finance Officer
    Bill HamptonChief Technology Officer
    David AinsworthBusiness Development Director
    Colin PalmerDelivery Director

    The non-executive members of the KPS Board are:

    Dr Andrew TylerChair
    Dr Sian Georgeappointed by Scottish Enterprise
    Robert Linkappointed by Royal Dutch Shell
    Paul Hammondappointed by Schlumberger
    Niklas Roteringappointed by E.ON

    Simon Heyes, Chief Executive said: “I’m delighted to be joining KPS; it’s an exciting time for everyone involved in the company.  With the support of our investors, and with the talented people that we have working at KPS, we are in a strong position to develop and commercialise our technology.   We intend to commence testing of our 500kW system later this year, and within 3-5 years we hope to deploy our first 3MW onshore and offshore kite systems.  Our testing of our 40kW system is ongoing, and achieving performance above our expectations”

    KPS currently employs 24 people at its operations in Glasgow and West Freugh in south west Scotland.

    For further information:

    Kite Power Systems (www.kitepowersystems.com  / twitter @kitepowerltd) Paul Taylor, Taylor Keogh Communications: +44 (0)20 8392 8250 / +44 (0)7966 782611 / paul@taylorkeogh.com

    For Scottish media inquiries
    David Budge, Budge PR: 07831 156333 / david.budge@budgepr.com

    Notes to Editors
    1. The KPS power system has two kites that are flown as high as 1,500 feet (450m); their tether is attached to a winch system that generates electricity as it spools out. By achieving flight speeds of up to 100mph (45m/s) in 20mph (9m/s) winds, the kite’s tether tension causes the line to rapidly spool out from a drum, which drives a generator producing electricity.
    2. KPS’s technology can reduce the capex per MW of generation installed by as much as 50% when compared to current conventional offshore turbines, because its patented power system doesn’t require large quantities of steel or specialist installation vessels. In addition to the Balance of Plant being lower than for a traditional wind turbine, Kite Power Systems have a more effective wind efficiency per m² active area. The International Renewable Energy Agency’s Innovation Outlook for Offshore Wind (IRENA, published in October 2016) states a levelised cost of energy (LCOE) for conventional offshore turbines of US$170/MWh in 2015 reducing to US$95/MWh in 2030. Independent assessment of the KPS technology indicates a LCOE of US$62.5/MWh by 2020, reducing to less than US$50/MWh by 2030.
    3. In December 2016, KPS secured £5million of new investment from E.ON, Schlumberger and Shell Technology Ventures to support KPS’s technical and commercial development. On June 22nd 2017, it was announced that the Scottish Investment Bank had invested £2million into KPS.
    =============================== END OF CLIP FROM Kite Power Systems "NEWS" page

    Save
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22943 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/23/2017
    Subject: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion solution"
    Thanks for posting the article, Dave.
    Another solution is to use my Turboships. They are ship-sized,
    double-ended catamarans carrying a huge wall of stacked Sharp Cycloturbines
    on the windward hull, and they use turrets for energy kites on the leeward
    hull. Turboships sail slowly back and forth across the wind so as to
    maintain their position by converting some of their electricity into
    propulsion. They might operate in fleets of a thousand ships to create
    mobile wind farms at sea. They produce hydrogen, either pressurized or
    liquefied, which is stored in the leeward hull. The machinery is located in
    the windward hull. The hydrogen would be used for, among other things,
    propelling cargo ships. Cargo ships would refuel with hydrogen while at sea.
    Part of that hydrogen would then be offloaded in ports. The hydrogen would
    be used in conjunction with sails and traction kites mounted on the cargo
    ships. It should be possible to make cargo shipping entirely carbon free. It
    is important to enable sailing ships to travel directly into the wind so as
    to save time by shortening routes. Turboships could also be used to
    desalinate water. The concentrated brine would be widely dispersed so as to
    not be detrimental to sea life.
    Another solution is to use my extremely wide Tazmaran boats, each
    propelled by a pair of large Sharp Cycloturbines, as ocean-going tugboats.
    In principle, they can sail faster than the wind in all directions,
    including directly upwind and directly downwind. They could also be equipped
    with traction kites. They would be arranged in a long line to pull the ship,
    or perhaps to pull cargo submarines with reduced drag. Tazmarans could be
    used to tow extremely large, sausage-shaped, plastic bags filled with
    desalinated water from Turboships to shore. Operating in that mode, both
    Sharp Cycloturbines would produce power at the same time to produce maximum
    thrust at low speed, rather than alternating the "on" modes of the two VAWT
    for maximum speed as usual.
    Yet another solution would be to use twin, mutually-tethered
    dirigible-kites to produce hydrogen while sailing back and force across the
    jet streams by using ram-air-turbines to produce the necessary electricity
    to convert fresh water into hydrogen, and then deliver their hydrogen to
    ships at sea, or to permanently-based hydrogen refueling stations at sea.
    The dirigibles would reload with desalinated water produced by Turboships.
    The twin dirigible kites would need to use hydrogen for buoyancy since
    helium is a limited resource.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22944 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
    Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti
    PeterS,

    The cruise market is an appealing windtech incubator, since the cruising public loves novelty, and high speed is often not needed. Therefore, a small wind system only able to move the boat at "harbor speed" can do the job. The article even shows a proven mega-yacht/cruise-ship sailing rig reconceptualized for a cargo ship. It would be great to see your rotating wings held up vertically under a pilot-lifter kite anchored upwind, including on a crosswind catamaran like you suggest. A bit of shock cord buffers the pumping motion at the kite and returns energy to the cycle.

    Any chance you will do a fully airborne demo? You have tremendous prototyping talent to bring to bear, and it would be easy to replace the handheld suspension stick with a kite.

    daveS


    On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎August‎ ‎23‎, ‎2017‎ ‎05‎:‎55‎:‎49‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, 'Peter A. Sharp' sharpencil@sbcglobal.net [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Thanks for posting the article, Dave.
    Another solution is to use my Turboships. They are ship-sized,
    double-ended catamarans carrying a huge wall of stacked Sharp Cycloturbines
    on the windward hull, and they use turrets for energy kites on the leeward
    hull. Turboships sail slowly back and forth across the wind so as to
    maintain their position by converting some of their electricity into
    propulsion. They might operate in fleets of a thousand ships to create
    mobile wind farms at sea. They produce hydrogen, either pressurized or
    liquefied, which is stored in the leeward hull. The machinery is located in
    the windward hull. The hydrogen would be used for, among other things,
    propelling cargo ships. Cargo ships would refuel with hydrogen while at sea.
    Part of that hydrogen would then be offloaded in ports. The hydrogen would
    be used in conjunction with sails and traction kites mounted on the cargo
    ships. It should be possible to make cargo shipping entirely carbon free. It
    is important to enable sailing ships to travel directly into the wind so as
    to save time by shortening routes. Turboships could also be used to
    desalinate water. The concentrated brine would be widely dispersed so as to
    not be detrimental to sea life.
    Another solution is to use my extremely wide Tazmaran boats, each
    propelled by a pair of large Sharp Cycloturbines, as ocean-going tugboats.
    In principle, they can sail faster than the wind in all directions,
    including directly upwind and directly downwind. They could also be equipped
    with traction kites. They would be arranged in a long line to pull the ship,
    or perhaps to pull cargo submarines with reduced drag. Tazmarans could be
    used to tow extremely large, sausage-shaped, plastic bags filled with
    desalinated water from Turboships to shore. Operating in that mode, both
    Sharp Cycloturbines would produce power at the same time to produce maximum
    thrust at low speed, rather than alternating the "on" modes of the two VAWT
    for maximum speed as usual.
    Yet another solution would be to use twin, mutually-tethered
    dirigible-kites to produce hydrogen while sailing back and force across the
    jet streams by using ram-air-turbines to produce the necessary electricity
    to convert fresh water into hydrogen, and then deliver their hydrogen to
    ships at sea, or to permanently-based hydrogen refueling stations at sea.
    The dirigibles would reload with desalinated water produced by Turboships.
    The twin dirigible kites would need to use hydrogen for buoyancy since
    helium is a limited resource.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22945 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
    Subject: Deep and Broad Kite Quivers
    Kite sports normally depend on what we'll call a Broad Kite Quiver, a range of kite sizes to cover a broad spectrum of wind velocity. This has the effect of solving rapid kite wear by avoiding too much kite in higher wind and spreading out UV  and wear exposure. Kite sport pros do not wear out their kite quivers since they regularly upgrade them by ever cheaper more advanced models.

    AWE kite quivers are a bit different, since our utility load demand can vary more than a single human sport pilot of constant mass requires. Rigid AWE wings are "one-size-does-all" in existing theory and practice, and they may have a narrower performance envelope across load and wind conditions. The engineering trade is between soft-kite quiver and rigid wing, and a single crash ends the rigid wing's service life. An equivalent-capital analytical assumption may clearly reveal which approach will win in general.

    This message presents the idea of a Deep Quiver, with equivalent replacement kites at the ready if a given kite is damaged.  A kite pro might have a spare race kites for competition, but he average power kiter relies on overlapping flight envelopes to keep going if any one kite fails. In AWE use, quick swapping of an equivalent kite may be best. Managing the quiver operationally is important; older kites might serve as backups or sacrificial wings in uncertain conditions. A system of kite logs and use strategies will maximize capacity and capital, much as vehicle tires are rotated, including seasonal rotations.

    Soft -kite quiver service life and life-cycle cost is the proper comparison with rigid wing service life and life-cycle cost. Testing market acceptance is required to settle any doubts over whether soft kites or rigid wings will prevail in AWE, with deep and broad quivers the default soft-kite best-practice assumption. Sailboat racing sailors manage "suits" of sails in the same way, as a close similarity-case. In AWE, single sail life has been the early analytical case assumption, but quiver logic is the better choice.

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22946 From: dave santos Date: 8/24/2017
    Subject: AWE as a load-following generation means
    A reader of the Kite Quiver post had trouble understanding how a power-kite quiver can in theory "load-follow" grid-demand, matching its output to real-world load demand in varied winds. Flexible kite quiver operations might allow a broader operational range for higher capacity than any single rigid foil. Furling, variable AoA, and wind-gradient altitude changes are other means to help load-follow.

    The following linked Wikipedia article helpfully explains load-following power plants, and AWES kite quivers can in principle flexibly track load closely matched to variable wind conditions, by the sort of kite changes kiters do. Some changes are slow, like seasonal wind and load fluctuations; others occur over days or hours. Racing sailors in many boat classes change sails dynamically during races in seconds, and AWE could someday achieve similar fast kite changes. Testing is needed to settle anyone's doubts and refine quiver operations methods.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22947 From: gordon_sp Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: MOTHRA VRS GANGED LIFTER KITES


    A possible AWE solution is to use a lifter kite to support various energy generating devices such as turbines, oscillating or vibrating devices, electrostatic screens etc.  The advantage of these systems is that no expensive control system is required to control the kite(s) as in the case of crosswind or yo-yo devices.  In order to generate appreciable amounts of power, the lifter kite(s) must have a large surface area to provide adequate lifting force for the energy generating systems such as generators and conductive cables.  In the design I have proposed, additional lifting force is required to support a cable drive to transfer power to the generator on the ground.  I estimate that for a one MW system, 1,500 M2 lifting area will be required to generate 28,000 Kg.  of  lifting force at wind speeds of 13 M/sec.  This may be achieved by multiple lifter kites ganged together or one large Mothra system.


    Lifting Area – Since the ganged lifter kites are all optimally aligned for maximum lift, a larger area can be achieved compared to Mothra for the same footprint.


    Stability – Mothra’s two anchor points are much more stable. The ganged kite system will need multiple diagonal stays for stability.


    Launch – Mothra has demonstrated that it can self launch but the additional weight of generating devices might make it more difficult.  My idea of temporary hot air balloons for launch assist may be complicated and requires a coordinated launching procedure.


    Retrieval – I am not familiar with the retrieval method for Mothra.  With the ganged system, all cable drives must be wound up in a coordinated fashion and the diagonal stays must also be wound up, although their windup speed will vary.  When the windup is complete, droplines from each lifter kite can be manually anchored to various points on the ground to stabilize the system, and prepare for the next launch.


    Change of wind direction - The anchor points of Mothra can be on a circular track or heavy concrete anchors can be incrementally moved.  With the ganged system, all the cable drive systems can be rotated and the diagonal stay anchors must be moved by fork lift.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22948 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: MOTHRA VRS GANGED LIFTER KITES
    Hi Gordon,

    You are correct that in essence classic kite self-flying autonomy is an AWES design alternative or supportive basis for active avionic autopiloting. Its strange that many AWE theorists never mention passive control methods.

    Mothras are landed by "kite killing"; by releasing primary tether tension to catch the collapsed meta-kite (kite made of kites) by tail-lines, with no need for power-winching down. Mothra's can be rotated with little force by holding primary tension from a centerpoint while belaying the side lines around an anchor circle. An upwind side line can be paid out while helping cross-haul the downwind side line upwind.

    Launching can be done in cascaded stages, with flygens and other massive payloads hauled up last, once primary lift is established. Payloads can come down in lulls, with the lift layer able to keep flying in low wind.

    These kPower-developed methods are documented on the AWES Forum in the Open-AWE_IP-Cloud.

    daveS
    On ‎Friday‎, ‎August‎ ‎25‎, ‎2017‎ ‎11‎:‎04‎:‎31‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CDT, gordon_sp@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


    A possible AWE solution is to use a lifter kite to support various energy generating devices such as turbines, oscillating or vibrating devices, electrostatic screens etc.  The advantage of these systems is that no expensive control system is required to control the kite(s) as in the case of crosswind or yo-yo devices.  In order to generate appreciable amounts of power, the lifter kite(s) must have a large surface area to provide adequate lifting force for the energy generating systems such as generators and conductive cables.  In the design I have proposed, additional lifting force is required to support a cable drive to transfer power to the generator on the ground.  I estimate that for a one MW system, 1,500 M2 lifting area will be required to generate 28,000 Kg.  of  lifting force at wind speeds of 13 M/sec.  This may be achieved by multiple lifter kites ganged together or one large Mothra system.


    Lifting Area – Since the ganged lifter kites are all optimally aligned for maximum lift, a larger area can be achieved compared to Mothra for the same footprint.


    Stability – Mothra’s two anchor points are much more stable. The ganged kite system will need multiple diagonal stays for stability.


    Launch – Mothra has demonstrated that it can self launch but the additional weight of generating devices might make it more difficult.  My idea of temporary hot air balloons for launch assist may be complicated and requires a coordinated launching procedure.


    Retrieval – I am not familiar with the retrieval method for Mothra.  With the ganged system, all cable drives must be wound up in a coordinated fashion and the diagonal stays must also be wound up, although their windup speed will vary.  When the windup is complete, droplines from each lifter kite can be manually anchored to various points on the ground to stabilize the system, and prepare for the next launch.


    Change of wind direction - The anchor points of Mothra can be on a circular track or heavy concrete anchors can be incrementally moved.  With the ganged system, all the cable drive systems can be rotated and the diagonal stay anchors must be moved by fork lift.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22949 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti

    Hi Dave,

              Thanks for your comments. You may be confusing the Sharp Cycloturbine and the Bird Windmill. The SC is an H-rotor, usually with 3 blades. It can be used to propel a large boat at about half the speed of the wind. It can be made much wider than tall to keep the center of pressure especially low. Then ram-air-turbines (RATs) can be mounted out near the blades. That eliminates the torque reaction that would otherwise tend to turn the boat. And it would provide electricity for battery accumulators. Accumulators have been shown to increase the average speed of a boat, without any energy storage at the beginning of the voyage. In 1978, I built the first model land yacht propelled by a lift-type VAWT, the SC. It performed as expected.

              Other advantages of using an SC to propel a boat are reduced noise and increased safety. A parts failure would tend to throw parts away from the boat, not through the boat as would HAWT blade failure.

              It is possible to lock the blades of an SC so that they all face in the same direction and function as wing-sails so as to increase speeds across the wind. The rotor is then oriented with respect to the direction of the apparent wind to maintain the wing-sails at an optimum angle of attack.

              The single-blade Bird Windmill can be used to propel a catamaran by causing fin-drives to oscillate. The fins can be vertical or horizontal. Or, the BW can propel a mono-hull by causing the boat (a drone) to rock and pitch so that horizontal fins at the bow and stern create thrust. When there is no wind, the same horizontal fins create thrust using wave energy. The Bird blade is suspended between a bow mast and a stern mast.

              I invented a way to use a pair of alternating long-pull kites to propel a boat directly upwind. It's not very practical, but it could be done. The key is to transfer the drag of the kites to the water, not to the boat.

              In answer to your question, I have just started to be able to work again (still limping a bit), and I am building small, experimental SC blades to explore how to maximize their thrust. They may already be maximized, but I need to check. The goal is to keep the blades just below stall most of the time.

    I also want to increase the TSR of BW blades to a TSR well beyond 2 if possible. Then a RAT could be mounted on the Bird blade (which I have done, and it works).

              When I can, I hope to experiment with a land-based, short-pull BW suspended from a pilot kite for pumping water.

              You mentioned suspending a Bird Windmill from a kite that is upwind of the boat. Was that a typo? Did you mean to say “downwind”?

    PeterS
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22950 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti
    Yes, I meant what you call a "birdmill", which we had previously known by LeBreque's similar UMaine prototypes. Such wingmills are interesting from a kite perspective as a primarily fabric low-mass design, although they requires added upwind penetration mass like competitive gliders sometimes carry water ballast for glide penetration.

    Yes, I meant that a lifter kite *anchored* to windward can support a vertical birdmill suspended from its line. The kite above, itself, would be slightly to leeward of the suspended WECS.

    The cycloturbine H-VAWT seems like it would not have as great a power-to-mass as fabric windmills, a prime AWES criteria, but let testing settle any doubts.


    On ‎Friday‎, ‎August‎ ‎25‎, ‎2017‎ ‎01‎:‎45‎:‎34‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, 'Peter A. Sharp' sharpencil@sbcglobal.net [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Hi Dave,

              Thanks for your comments. You may be confusing the Sharp Cycloturbine and the Bird Windmill. The SC is an H-rotor, usually with 3 blades. It can be used to propel a large boat at about half the speed of the wind. It can be made much wider than tall to keep the center of pressure especially low. Then ram-air-turbines (RATs) can be mounted out near the blades. That eliminates the torque reaction that would otherwise tend to turn the boat. And it would provide electricity for battery accumulators. Accumulators have been shown to increase the average speed of a boat, without any energy storage at the beginning of the voyage. In 1978, I built the first model land yacht propelled by a lift-type VAWT, the SC. It performed as expected.

              Other advantages of using an SC to propel a boat are reduced noise and increased safety. A parts failure would tend to throw parts away from the boat, not through the boat as would HAWT blade failure.

              It is possible to lock the blades of an SC so that they all face in the same direction and function as wing-sails so as to increase speeds across the wind. The rotor is then oriented with respect to the direction of the apparent wind to maintain the wing-sails at an optimum angle of attack.

              The single-blade Bird Windmill can be used to propel a catamaran by causing fin-drives to oscillate. The fins can be vertical or horizontal. Or, the BW can propel a mono-hull by causing the boat (a drone) to rock and pitch so that horizontal fins at the bow and stern create thrust. When there is no wind, the same horizontal fins create thrust using wave energy. The Bird blade is suspended between a bow mast and a stern mast.

              I invented a way to use a pair of alternating long-pull kites to propel a boat directly upwind. It's not very practical, but it could be done. The key is to transfer the drag of the kites to the water, not to the boat.

              In answer to your question, I have just started to be able to work again (still limping a bit), and I am building small, experimental SC blades to explore how to maximize their thrust. They may already be maximized, but I need to check. The goal is to keep the blades just below stall most of the time.

    I also want to increase the TSR of BW blades to a TSR well beyond 2 if possible. Then a RAT could be mounted on the Bird blade (which I have done, and it works).

              When I can, I hope to experiment with a land-based, short-pull BW suspended from a pilot kite for pumping water.

              You mentioned suspending a Bird Windmill from a kite that is upwind of the boat. Was that a typo? Did you mean to say “downwind”?

    PeterS
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22951 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti
    Hi Dave,
    Thanks for the clarification.
    Your comment on the single-blade Bird Windmill blade needing additional mass
    to fly upwind is correct. The additional mass in the counterweight needs to
    be about equal to the weight of the rest of the blade. It also needs some
    stiffening to prevent the bottom of the V-blade from collapsing when upwind.
    Clarification on my part: I was discussing using the cycloturbine H-rotor
    Sharp Cycloturbine for boat propulsion by mounting it on a boat, not using
    it as a kite, so the weight is not critical in that application. However, if
    it were used as a kite, it could use single-surface, fabric V-blades for
    maximum lightness. The V-blades only need to be stiff enough for start-up --
    when there is no centrifugal force to stiffen the V-blades.
    PeterS
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22952 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Cruise Industry notes AWE potential as "hybrid propulsion soluti
    As this is an airborne (wind energy) forum, a cycloturbine on a boat is not very germane. I was trying to steer discussion back to AWE, and the "bird-" under a kite was the most logical bridge. Not quite clear without a drawing how you would rig one. Here is one way to rig a bird under a kite-

    kite
         \
         | \
         |  \
        b   \
        i     \
        r      \
        d      \
         |       \
         |        \    <= wind
         |         \
    --anchor--anchor----

    Still hoping for a true airborne wind demo worthy of your proven proof-of-concept talent, bird- or cyclo-. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22953 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab and
    Ansar is a brilliant maverick Swede wind tech experimenter whom I have corresponded with and followed for nearly 25 yrs. We share much specific background experience, like kite hacking, sailboat racing, and nomadic research. Like me, we have explored kite arches in exotic variants. He managed for two bikes with a kite arch between them to each short-tack and make good directly to windward overall. Unlike him, I do not have a PhD from the Swedish Royal Academy in physics. We have both over time settled on the Power Kite as the AWE WECS basis of most promise, based on modern Kite Sport success. Kite Sports are AWE's most iconic success to date.

    Here are Anasar's latest sharings, confirming scaling law dependencies in LEI kite design that I also have explored, leading us toward Single-Skin Power Kites as the probable winner in AWE, with the highest power-to-weight potential. He has confirmed low wing-loading as a critical advantage, if not quite yet discovering that low wing-loading = higher L/D, a KiteLab axiom. I am resuming contact with Ansar to report back how his AWE thinking is evolving.



    Ansars general homepage, showing the range of his DIY tech-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22954 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Kite Boarder trouncing Hot Sailboats on video
    Eventual overwhelming superiority of AWE over conventional wind energy is predicted by many academic sources, as these Children of the Wind are already showing-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22955 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab
    Correction- "Anders Ansar" is his correct name order.

    Note- The sailing video link of manifest kite speed superiority, in a separate post, came from his power-kite page.


    On ‎Friday‎, ‎August‎ ‎25‎, ‎2017‎ ‎08‎:‎43‎:‎39‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Ansar is a brilliant maverick Swede wind tech experimenter whom I have corresponded with and followed for nearly 25 yrs. We share much specific background experience, like kite hacking, sailboat racing, and nomadic research. Like me, we have explored kite arches in exotic variants. He managed for two bikes with a kite arch between them to each short-tack and make good directly to windward overall. Unlike him, I do not have a PhD from the Swedish Royal Academy in physics. We have both over time settled on the Power Kite as the AWE WECS basis of most promise, based on modern Kite Sport success. Kite Sports are AWE's most iconic success to date.

    Here are Anasar's latest sharings, confirming scaling law dependencies in LEI kite design that I also have explored, leading us toward Single-Skin Power Kites as the probable winner in AWE, with the highest power-to-weight potential. He has confirmed low wing-loading as a critical advantage, if not quite yet discovering that low wing-loading = higher L/D, a KiteLab axiom. I am resuming contact with Ansar to report back how his AWE thinking is evolving.



    Ansars general homepage, showing the range of his DIY tech-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22956 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Kite Boarder trouncing Hot Sailboats on video
    In this video LarryE's 15,000,000USD boat does beat Kai, a RedBull kite pro with a 1500USD Kiteboard rig; however, unlike the previous video, the kite board lacked a hydrofoil, and slowed in the North SF Bay chop that the 12m yacht barely felt, and the kite was an LEI, not a parafoil; the better airfoil. Had any of these handicaps been removed, the kite might have won.

    Furthermore, the sailboat had a rigid wingsail. Proper testing is still pending in AWE to objectively settle whether soft or rigid wings are economically superior. The economic question is somewhat like comparing facial tissues with handkerchiefs, with advantages on both sides, but one will likely ultimately dominate over the other.








    On ‎Friday‎, ‎August‎ ‎25‎, ‎2017‎ ‎09‎:‎23‎:‎47‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    Eventual overwhelming superiority of AWE over conventional wind energy is predicted by many academic sources, as these Children of the Wind are already showing-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22957 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Re: Ansar Anders lately focusing on Power Kites, confirming KiteLab
    Reviewing Anders Ansar's updated pages revealed another key kite insight exactly paralleling KiteLab and kPower thinking-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22958 From: dave santos Date: 8/25/2017
    Subject: Texas Hurricane testing Conventional HAWT v Kite Survival, plus KPS
    The Cat4 hurricane currently pounding the Texas coast landed right at Mustang Island, where kPower tests (Texas AWE Encampment). This area just inland has hundreds of conventional HAWTs, which are being severely tested feathered in 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22959 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Defining FlapStack AWE by Muzhichkov's old AWES Variants
    In ongoing background AWES Forum moderation discussion, Doug Selsam declines to share any new AWES solutions he claims to have in mind, insisting that he should be simply be allowed to cast everyone in AWE as "idiots", characterize their opinions as "lies", concoct misleading "quotes" that do not match search results, and typically lapse into angry profanity. He does not seem to willing to post anywhere else, like SomeAWE.org . His fixed posting pattern has worn out AWES Forum volunteer moderation over many years. If anyone new wants to volunteer to moderate Doug, editing his posts to normal technical and family-friendly language, the job is open.

    So it was rare AWES clue that Doug wrote that what he calls "flapstacks" might work, but he refuses to elaborate, only wanting to complain about all other AWE thinking, contrary to the Forum ethos of helpful RAD intent. So what could FlapStacks be, in relation to all known AWES concepts? A few years ago Alexei Muzhichkov posted two short animations of pumping Chinese centipede kites, a single unit, and a parallel unit. The multiple kite elements are stacked, and "flap" (pump) together to drive a ground-station PTO, hence FlapStack is a suitable descriptor.

    Alexei sends his best regards, and reports he is working on updated AWE ideas-















     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22960 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Re: Texas Hurricane testing Conventional HAWT v Kite Survival, plus
    MikeB on conventional HAWT hurricane Cat5 resistance, with a shot at Makani M5, seen rated at 5MW. Not sure if MikeB posted this after being curbed from anti-NIMBY wind tech opinion-making by his IBM boss. Checking Makani site reveals M5 designation missing, just as 600kW rated non-designated unit. Current Texas hurricane came in at Cat4, with some damage likely, if from flying debris-








    On ‎Saturday‎, ‎August‎ ‎26‎, ‎2017‎ ‎12‎:‎39‎:‎34‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CDT, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

    The Cat4 hurricane currently pounding the Texas coast landed right at Mustang Island, where kPower tests (Texas AWE Encampment). This area just inland has hundreds of conventional HAWTs, which are being severely tested feathered in 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22961 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Ampyx wave tank testing model offshore platform


    ===== translation from Dutch =====

    Energy plane platform tested

    The Engineer
    For a few years, Dutch Ampyx Power has been working on a plane that generates power. Now, for the first time, the landing platform for this aircraft has been tested in practice by exposing a scale model in a basin to high waves.
    The windplane (3.5 tonnes, 35 m span) describes eight, so the wind rolls a 800 m long cable. This cable drives a generator that generates power. The re-rolling of the cable by the electric motor then costs much less energy because the plane returns to dive.
    In windy weather the airplane is just in the air and supplies the system with electricity. But now and then the plane must land; With prolonged wind silence and when the appliance needs maintenance. For this reason, Ampyx Power has designed a landing platform with Mocean Offshore, which must be 30m long and 20m wide. It is on a stellage of three legs of 24 m high and each 5 m section. A scale model (1:25) of this landing platform has been tested in a marina at MARIN in Wageningen in recent weeks.

    Breaking waves
    There waves were generated that correspond to "real" waves up to 10 m high. The results are positive after a first analysis. "The platform has a bit less impact on the waves than we thought before. On the other hand, the movements due to the cable are just a little fiercer, "says Bernard van Hemert of Ampyx Power.
    Platform trials are important because excessive movements can cause fatigue of the cables with which the floating platform is on the seabed. But there is another reason why Ampyx Power wants to completely control the movement of the final platform. The company wants to know under what conditions the aircraft can still land. "The platform's movements have a regular component that is good for predicting - caving - and we can anticipate that. In addition, there is an arbitrary component due to the waves invading it. For this we are going to use mathematical models as known from aircraft carriers. '
    Newsletter
    If you found this interesting article, subscribe for free on our weekly newsletter.
    © The Engineer
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22962 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: AWEC2017 detailed schedule looking good
    Looking like a lot of new folks presenting, as well as many familiar names. Can't wait to see what this particular presentation reveals, having long awaited seeing what Japanese kite thinking brings, and, hurray, its a kite train concept, recalling "Kite Train Making" by sensei Eiji Ohashi-

    Hiroki T EndoKyushu UniversityExperimental setup to study airborne wind energy generation using a train of kites
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22963 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Japanese ~VAWT under Kite Train AWES video
    Nice pilot lifter train of Morse Sleds, but its WECS VAWT axis is tilted suboptimally; not quite the pumping train I hoped to see, but a great start nevertheless- 

    Hiroki T EndoKyushu UniversityExperimental setup to study airborne wind energy generation using a train of kites
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22964 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Oliver Tulloch's Networked Rotary Kite System?
    Another AWEC2017 presentation of high interest, Oliver's concept sounds a lot like a lattice of looping foils.

    Rod is also presenting on kite networks, plus Endo's train, and other hints, so its a trend. Perhaps Reinhart's Kiteswarms will somehow relate, as presented by Christoph Sieg.

    Oliver sounds like a go-getter-







    | Oliver Tulloch | University of Strathclyde | Modelling and Simulation Studies of a Networked Rotary Kite System |
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22965 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Re: AWEC2017 detailed schedule looking good
    The AWEC2017 conference line-up is looking good due to many new faces but, as in recent years, there are some troubling patterns.

    The conference roster is predictably skewed toward the AWESCO HWN500 insider circle that took over conferences a few years ago, while letting the US AWEC 501 c4 lapse, but keeping the AWEC conference brand. This power grab is most evident in the final conference session, AWE Outlook, with just one naïve outsider allowed, not even an AWE person. Make no mistake, love of venture capital profit rounds, based on marketing hype, are driving major AWE R&D spending far more than open objective engineering science merit.

    Major AWE conferences began in North America, by grass-roots organizing, as HAWPcon09; but at AWEC 2017, no American presenters except GoogleX's architecturally troubled Makani program are presenting at AWEC 2017. kPower, AWEIA, and other players have long boycotted the responsible AWEC insiders. Other US folks, unawares, are simply tired of flying overseas year after year to the same stage-managed conference monopoly. We have no idea if they will ever voluntarily give up control in favor of a US, or even French or Italian event, to break the established insider control.

    Despite tipping public visibility and funding their way, the would-be AWEC monopoly is not stable, since their early down-selects are being challenged by a flood of alternative concepts, in most cases by new parties unaware of the years of backroom AWEC politics. There is a sharp contrast between theoretic and empiric players. Once again, a disruptive conference outdoor demo component is neglected in favor of indoor pitches; an outdoor expo location has not even been chosen. When AWEC organized demos at Templehof, insiders got a year's advance notice, and the excluded teams got late notice and could not even arrange shipping in time. kPower's KiteSat was an exception, as it fit in carry-on luggage.

    Hurray for all the new folks, from as far as Japan. OpenAWE does have a low-key presence in the proceedings, with a dozen or so independent figures of merit not in the AWESCO HW500 club. Lets hope finally for a serious US conference next year in Seattle (at Boeing Museum of Flight as proposed to AWEC in past years), to go after BEV funding, not just Peter Harrop's jigged-up IDTechEx AWE infomercial conference in Santa Clara, CA in Nov.

    The saving grace is that the AWE race must be won in the sky, by the best practitioners, regardless of prevailing AWEC insider politics.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22966 From: dave santos Date: 8/26/2017
    Subject: Rod Read covered by ASME.org
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22967 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
    Subject: Disambiguations of prior "Kite" usage- Kite Network and Kite Geometr
    "Kite Networks" is trending as a current term-of-art in AWE. "Kite" geometric figure is a Euclidian form I think we have noted before-

    From:

    http://www.umasocialmedia.com/socialnetworks/lecture-4-characterizing-network-structure/


    "...a somewhat-famous “kite” network popularized by network pioneer David Krackhardt (1988):

    Krackhardt's Kite Network

    Which node is most central in this network? The answer depends on the kind of centrality measure you use. By degree centrality, d is the most central node. But by betweenness centrality, h is the most central node. Finally, by closeness centrality, f and g are tied for the most central node."

    -------------------

    Kite Geometry from Wikipedia-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kite_(geometry)

    GeometricKite.svgInline image
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22968 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
    Subject: AWES System Identification by Taek Dief et al
    Here is a second AWES System Identification to consider (the first having been the AWES as a MetaMaterial developing since 2014 on the AWES Forum). Engineering System Identification consists of matching a novel system to a formal paradigm. Here we see Fuzzy Logic applied to AWES state estimation; an expedient choice of many roughly equivalent formulations (like Bayesian Logic). UweF and RolandS coauthored the paper. Taek and Endo (kite train AWES) are presenting at AWEC 2017 as new faces to us, both from Kyushu U, putting their Japanese institution firmly on the world AWE map-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22969 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
    Subject: Minesto Deep Green Environmental Impact and PTO documentation
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22970 From: dave santos Date: 8/27/2017
    Subject: Best Intro into Fuzzy Control for AWE
    Co-Authored by Mamdani himself, this Scholarpedia article is a fine historical and technical overview of Fuzzy Control, comparing with Bayesian-based control, distinguishing direct and supervisory control, covering training and linguistic (semantic) modeling, and so on. I recall how Zadeh popularized Fuzzy Logic in the 70s, which appealed for its computational efficiency compared to Bayesian Logic, given severe computational limits at that time, and the semantic transparency of Fuzzy Sets appealed compared to opaque poorly-validable Neural Nets.

    A separate update post will review Embodied Control logic, the theoretic computational basis for flight autonomy of the classic children's kite, overlaying a partial predicate-calculus Semantic Model on the classic kite, which in turn could interface with a supervisory Fuzzy Controller. Cool stuff!
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22971 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
    Subject: Crash Course in Controls for DIY AWES Hackers
    Not everyone wanting to work in AWE has access to a fine technical university education, but fortunately there are options.

    Older techies may recall popular electronics books by Forrest Mims III, sold via Radio Shack, that taught more engineers proficiency than any other source in history. I got to know Mims in the '80s, then already a legend. He lives near Austin, and he and his engineer daughter have great hope in AWE. Now we have a new Mims for the 21st century, Brian Douglas, from Richardson, Texas, whose fun online Control Systems video tutorials have caught fire.

    Try this video to see why-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22972 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
    Subject: Experimental lattice vibrations as AWES metamaterial dynamic visuali
    Here is a wonderful extension of kite lattice wave theory, as walking-drop QM analogues are experimentally extended into vibrating crystal formations.

    First imagine a lenticular triangular lattice kite-dome, like Rod and I have explored conceptually, able to accept wind from any direction. Lifter kites on triswivels centered on lattice edge-lines can hold it up. Consider LeBreque-Sharp "birdmills" on vertical lines suspended from the lattice nodes, with PTOs at the surface nodes. What sort of load motion vibrations would result? Apparently the motions will be strongest toward the center, with less edge constraint. The video linked below shows just the sort vibrations to expect.

    Note Crouder and Fort's Lab involvement, the brilliant pilot-wave QM walking-drop analogue scientists who inspired the kPower observation that kites also obey pilot-wave QM equations. Follow the top link to see lattice-wave vibrations like we propose defined as phonon analogues, plus amazing new videos of walking drop crystal lattices moving just like looping-foils on vertical node lines would move a similar kite-dome lattice-
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22973 From: dave santos Date: 8/28/2017
    Subject: Kiteline as Sonic Wormhole (Kite Physics as Quantum Gravity and Stri
    Starting with [van Veen, 1996] we have come to know the kite as a rabbit hole into deep physics. In recent years studying kite physics we have noted how kite string is a model for string theory harmonics, and how sonic relativity and sonic black-holes can be created in moving string. We have noted how tensioned kite string mimics gravity, in that they both pull with traction force, and that tensioned kite string meets all quantum entanglement criteria, like long range instantaneous correlation of inverse spin, for twisted fibers, same energy level, inverse polarization, etc. Now we can make the analogy with wormhole physics, with almost all the pieces of the puzzle coming together in tangible form.

    The speed of sound in air is only a bit more than 300m/sec but can exceed 30,000m/sec in tensioned kite string. Thus kiteline acts like a sonic wormhole for phonons to travel far faster than possible in ordinary sonic space. Seeing two anchored string ends as entangled particles, whatever state one measures at one end is instantaneously the same state at the other; air supersonic speed. Part of the confusion from photon particle physics has long been crude experimental means that destroy the tiny particles it sought to measure, but newer experiments are increasingly able to make subtle measurements without wave-function collapse. Thus it might after all be possible to send information at superluminal or supersonic speeds, as long as the string-wormhole is not destroyed. 

    Here are two links relating entanglement, strings, wormholes, and gravity, showing how old puzzles in physics are yielding to new ideas. It seems increasingly clear that the mysteries we saw in kites, starting with force superconductance in our ~2008 ship-towing gedanken, share the same profound fundamental interpretations mainstream physics is relentlessly revealing. How cool is that?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22974 From: dave santos Date: 8/29/2017
    Subject: Passive Pumping by Wubbo's SpiderMill?
     A classic close-spaced Asian kite train will spontaneously develop lattice waves, but the potentially destructive motions are intentionally damped by various stabilizing features, so such trains are not suited for AWES pumping. Wubbo's Spidermill concept is more like a classic Eddy train, but with shorter branching pendant tethers, so the kites can develop develop strong individual natural harmonic orbits. It would not be too hard to add active controls to phase-lock SpiderMill kites, but is there a simpler passive pumping basis?

    It may be that a properly tuned SpiderMill geometry can combine the coherent waves of a close-rigged train with the powerful orbits of a slightly looser train without the traditional stabilizers. A tuning spectrum will probably be needed to vary according to wind velocity, but this should simpler than dependence on active real-time control, or at least eases active actuation demand. Keep in mind that SpiderMill structure can also be embedded in a larger parallel kite network as both a scaling and dynamic stabilization strategy. Of course all such kite conjectures are subject to validation testing; well worth the effort.

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud