Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 23379 to 23428 Page 360 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23379 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2018
Subject: InnoEnergy: Why we Have Invested €4.5m in Minesto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23380 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2018
Subject: S. Gros

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23381 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2018
Subject: Super-wood products from Inventwood

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23382 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23383 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23384 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23385 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23386 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23387 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23388 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23389 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23390 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23391 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/15/2018
Subject: Minesto is to increase its IP

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23392 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/18/2018
Subject: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23393 From: dave santos Date: 2/19/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23394 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/19/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23395 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23396 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23397 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/23/2018
Subject: KSCL :: kite system cable laying

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23398 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2018
Subject: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23399 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23400 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23401 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23402 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23403 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23404 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23405 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23406 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Foxwell peeks into the future with some AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23407 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23408 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
Subject: Re: Foxwell peeks into the future with some AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23409 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/9/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23410 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/9/2018
Subject: Optimal Control of a Rigid-Wing Rotary Kite System for Airborne Wind

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23411 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/9/2018
Subject: Recharge Crystal Ball

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23412 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/10/2018
Subject: KAP Matters

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23413 From: dave santos Date: 3/12/2018
Subject: Makani in Golden Limbo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23414 From: dave santos Date: 3/12/2018
Subject: kPower demos AWE at Austin's 89th Kite Fest

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23415 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23416 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23417 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23418 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Two Ampyx positions announced

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23419 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23420 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23421 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Two Ampyx positions announced

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23422 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Electrical batteries in AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23423 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/13/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23424 From: dave santos Date: 3/14/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23425 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/15/2018
Subject: Above-wing kite controlling

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23426 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/19/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23427 From: dave santos Date: 3/19/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23428 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/19/2018
Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23379 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2018
Subject: InnoEnergy: Why we Have Invested €4.5m in Minesto
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23380 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2018
Subject: S. Gros

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=38fYqeYAAAAJ&hl=en

Many AWE papers holding S. Gros as author or co-author are listed; many have abstract and full-paper links. 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23381 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2018
Subject: Super-wood products from Inventwood
http://www.inventwood.com

=================================== 
... watching for ways to bring the new family of materials into kite systems for sake of good works.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23382 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Dear Gordon, Dave, Joe
of course, we can use the different ways in order to drop water, including sponge - thanks for your idea. However I suppose that it is better firstly to try obvious ways - hose, or open gravity channel, or even capillary flow along rope. Seems, the main task now is just to get water and estimate collection rate.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23383 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Andrew,

Capillary flow is new to our list of water conveyance means, but so slow it does not promise a high "flow-to-mass" ratio. Particularly for very high altitudes, like tapping clouds over hot deserts, the conveyance problem is severe. Even simple hose is problematic at high altitude, as the pressure and weight will be so great. Lifting a fog-fence with a lifter kite is less uncertain.

We can rely on established fog fence efficiencies, including embodied mass assumptions, as sound theoretic harvesting data, but the conveyance problem remains the largest source of engineering uncertainty. This is an old technical kite topic, yet unresolved, with major applications like regional irrigation and fire-fighting. The upper limit of conveyance efficiency seems to be large water bags (or perhaps a water column in a loose tube bag) falling near teminal velocity, with empty bags returned aloft at high speed. The Bambi Bucket used in wildfire fighting is the closest similarity case. As the crudest possibility, we could just dump a massive column of concentrated water, with less target precision and considerable evaporative loss the higher its dumped (nevertheless, a wonderfully surreal waterfall in the sky),

daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23384 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
For many years we have had:
" wicking tether          
JoeF proposes exploring water wicks and water-wicking tethers in some AWECS. Water wicks. Lofted devices may collect atmospheric water and wicks might carry the water to the ground; no report of uses in AWECS yet.   A wick might become part of a sensor or a trigger. Where fog is used to collect water for drinking or agricultural purposes, could kite systems advance the collection effort?   "
====================================================================

Also, we have using water at altitude for manufacturing aloft, habitat service aloft, ballast aloft, conversion to hydrogen and oxygen for energy and other uses aloft.
===========================
Sponges may be with firm form able to become excellent gliders. The water-heavy gliders could be released aloft and guided to need ground points or other aerial points. 
============================

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23385 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Notes: KiteLab Ilwaco tested both "bucket" and hose for kite water conveyance, at small scale, with good results. Polynesian kite culture offers a plausible sponge-cycle case. Any other tested methods are not yet known to us.

A sponge is limited in scale capacity by the pressure of water at its bottom surface v. the adhesion of the water to the sponge. We presume the unit-bucket to be the scaling path beyond the unit-sponge.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23386 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
We have in published file also:
rain and kite systems
  • Consider hydrophobic materials and surface treatments for all parts of a kite system
  • Consider on Jalbert-parafoil evolutes: drain holes
  • "Come in out the rain, my son!"  Some rain events are also lightning events. Electrical grounding tethers and other safety measures are to be addressed.
  • Hydrophobe
  • Related: icing, dew wetting, mildew, rot, weight change of the wing set, weight change of the tether set
  • Notice that some kite systems have a niche purpose of collecting water from the atmosphere. 
  • Some kite systems have a niche purpose of cooling drinking water.
  • Visibility is to be carefully considered. Is the kite system relating with other aircraft appropriately? Are airspace rules being followed during rain occurrence? Put safety first.
  • Capillary action may place water into places that may cause damage to the kite-system parts. Consider this in designing a kite system.  Consider that water drawn into tight places might become frozen; the freezing of water is an expanding scene; the expansion may crack and break parts.
  • Wing covers that absorb water or even stay wet will change aerodynamic performance. Do you want the change or not?
  • Many sport and hobby soft kites already have simple sand/water drains in the trailing-edge. Another helpful feature is a reduced frontal intake area (often with flap valves). A good example of all these features in a popular trainer kite is the HQ Hydra line. Parafoils, with so many cells, and the presumption of fair-weather use, have not required this capability. This point is a TACO omission, so it will be added in future versions. The obvious conclusion is that such drains be a design-default in safety-critical parafoil AWES, and perhaps be mandated in FARs.

    An intuitive parafoil drain design is to vent across all cells at the TE, as well as provide multiple small drains from wingtip to wingtip. Even hollow rigid wings need careful rain and condensation drain design, but single-skin concepts like Mothratech avoid the whole issue. Its well known that modern kites fly with only slightly reduced performance in rain (KiteLab Ilwaco flies single-skin experiments in rain routinely and Enerkite has reported parafoil AWES rain operation). 

    Lets not forget rain collection as a niche in our giant-kite design toolkit, with elaborate networks of gutters, drains, hoses, and tanks possible. Many hot deserts have considerable rainfall aloft that normally evaporates well above the surface, but in reach of kites. We also recall the ancient Polynesian kite magic of flying sponges into clouds to harvest fresh water
    . ~Dave Santos


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

Adding now: 
In some niche need: deliberately place water with intent that freezing will occur at some intended place and time. Use the freezing for purpose, perhaps to expand and crack or control. 
......................................
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23387 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Adding to JoeF's comments toward a sponge-glider, its possible that a sponge water load could be dumped by diving at the surface and pulling up sharply to increase G-force. A complicating factor is to avoid the highest-pressure wing-loaded undersurfaces. Alternatively, a sponge-glider could land hard to shed its water burden.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23388 From: dave santos Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Good review, JoeF.

Seeing new questions regarding how the unit-kite and unit-water collection/conveyance parts match. We suppose kites are currently only limited in size by ground-handling constraints more than any flying limitation (but can be pieced together aloft at megascale as meta-kites). Similarly, kite fog fences share such operational constraints.

Giant water hoses and buckets have different scaling constraints, but it may be that a farm of kite water harvesting units may be served by aggregation network of water aloft, with a single channel to the surface (like a single concentrated waterfall).

Open issues like these could be critical design issues in practice. Like AWES design, so much depends on the engineering details, not just basic (first-order) attraction. Reasoning only about "single-cell" cases may miss essential networked ("multi-cell") advantages.

Another huge issue is higher capacity-factor of systems that hunt for the resource v. those that sit in place. A system that can chase optimal conditions not just at different altitudes but also XC, perhaps even migrating seasonally, could well dominate (as migrating birds commonly dominate in their niches).
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23389 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
About capillary flow: see my experiments from 2013/09/15

I have put at home experiments on the use of PP cords and 2-4 mm ropes (sent from Ostashkov) and a new Chinese 2-kilometer 2 mm rope from Dainima as a water conduit to drain fresh water without using a tube/hose (plastic cambric). In general, the result is positive. A stream of water sticks to the rope or cord and does not drop off even with an almost horizontal slope of 20-30 degrees. The maximum speed of descent on a rope of 2 mm was half a liter in 77 seconds, i.е. more than 20 liters per hour, which is close to the expected maximum performance of the kite 6m2 (~ 30 l/h).
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23390 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/11/2018
Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23391 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/15/2018
Subject: Minesto is to increase its IP
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23392 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/18/2018
Subject: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite

My proposed AWE system consists of a series of turbines supported by a large lifter kite which is secured in position by diagonal stays.  It occurred to me that the lifter kite can be moved in a crosswind pattern by means of adjusting the length of the diagonal stays.  Each stay can be attached to a driving reel on the ground which can be wound and unwound in a specific program.  If stays are attached to the four corners of the lifter kite then perhaps we could design a program which will produce a figure-of-eight pattern.

Will crosswind flight improve the performance of the turbines whose axes are part of the tether system and are therefore not directly facing the wind?

Is it necessary to operate in a figure-of-eight pattern or will side-to-side motion achieve the same effect?  Does the movement have to follow the natural path of a free flying kite or can I choose another path?

Will we require stronger stays or is minimal force required for lateral movement?  


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23393 From: dave santos Date: 2/19/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite
A kite tends to always dance crosswind, but this motion can be almost unoticable or very obvious, and can be tapped for energy when properly rigged, and also actively or passively controlled.
--------------------------------------------
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23394 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/19/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite
With normal crosswind flight we use the power of the wind to maintain the crosswind pattern.  With my method we are using an external mechanical force.  Will we require large amounts of force to achieve this?  Can we operate at higher crosswind speeds than those obtained naturally?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23395 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite
A heuristic first order approximation is about 10ltr per 100Wthr. A "most efficient" design can do better, but not likely cheaper. The calculation is too complex to detail by phone text. LCOE is a market factor in persistent towed flight. Cost of water onsite is another.
--------------------------------------------
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23396 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2018
Subject: Re: Crosswind Flight with a Stayed Kite
Forgot to note that kite dancing motion is normally figure eight (dutch roll).
--------------------------------------------
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23397 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/23/2018
Subject: KSCL :: kite system cable laying

We have the lore of a kite system helping to build International Suspension Bridge as an indication of the usefulness of kite systems placing line or cable where wanted. This topic thread invites collecting notes and technology to further cable-laying tactics by use of kite systems.  Kite systems would compete with other tactics: ground-crew cable laying, helicopter cable laying, powered unmanned drone cable laying, etc.  Kite-system cable laying (KSCL) could, by agreement, imply the laying of cables, ropes, cords, strings, tapes, webbing, conductors, optical cable, power lines, leader lines, pilot lines, threads, pipe, antennae lines, and the like.  Just when and where KSCL would win choice over alternatives will become evident eventually; analyses, simulations, and experiences would play to bring the world a fuller story. 

Where non-KSCL is done, one might explore the matter with: could KSCL have been a better choice?


 Tasks?

  • Set line between poles.
  • Set line between buildings. 
  • Set line over a river. 
  • Set line between two extant kite systems. 
  • Set line across a lake. 
  • Set line from point A to point B
  • Set conductor lines to send electricity from AWES
  • ?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23398 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2018
Subject: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
Attachments :

    The success of Minesto leads me to think of less expensive methods of extracting tidal flow energy.   My concept is to remove all electric components from the water and operate a series of underwater sails in a crossflow pattern to achieve the same energy extraction.  The system is operated in a yo-yo fashion with the power reel and generator located on a vessel, bridge or overpass.  In this way most of the tether is located above the water.

    The device I conceived of is a number of ganged sails in a frame with a means of rotating all the sails at the same time.   The device is weighted at the bottom and has a float on top so that it is submerged a fixed distance below the water surface.  The timing to reverse the crossflow pattern can be determined by a fixed number of turns of the power reel as it unwinds.  A signal can be sent to a stepper motor which activates the orientation of the sails.

    How do we determine the optimum angle of the sails in order to extract maximum power?   Does the optimum angle vary during each crossflow tack?  


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23399 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2018
    Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
    Attachments :
      Sketches for above idea.
        @@attachment@@
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23400 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      Gordon,

      You are right that Minesto faces architectural competition and that a scheme like yours could compete. Minesto seems intent on staying deep enough to operate in shipping zones, while surface schemes have to avoid surface traffic under presumed "sense-and-avoid" logic. Most waters are not congested, and surface motion may not pose any big problem. This class of design is commonly called a "side-plane" in fishing, to carry a rig out into a current from shore. Keep in mind the power take-off (PTO) can also run to shore, with the gen onshore.

      Hydrofoil or airfoil AoA is a routine design concern to solve, not a big deal to get right. Yes, AoA will vary with the sweep and/or retract cycle by passive or active means. To reduce drag, you may as well omit the wing box frame and carry the structural loads in the wing spars.

      daveS
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23401 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      Generally you can use any CFD SW (I use Xflow, for example).
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23402 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      Its cool that CFD can produce similar results to traditional FD cases, for example, that Stone Age engineers could develop highly optimal boomerangs without digital computers, but now computers can also create a numeric boomerang algorithmically that can be 3D printed.

      The problem with CFD is that it cannot replace sound working knowledge of principles required for complex inventive design, nor does CFD help much with the essentially "dirty" process of rapid small scale proof of concept testing with many odd iterations. Think of the Wright Bros, with just hand-tools and hands-on testing, as having superiority over any software-based design tool ever developed.

      The fastest kite progress is throw together endless crude prototypes, test them ruthlessly, and correct and refine them empirically. Later in the development cycle CFD serves as a rough validation of the empirical data to academic publishing standards, and finally, at the industrial-scale, CFD can validate small optimizations, determine structural safety-margins (CFD with FEM, "hydro"elasticity dynamics), and so on, that cannot be pretested at giant scale.

      A full numeric simulation of a Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator would not only include a steady-state CFD model, but also all-modes dynamics, each mode and the complete state machine modeled. That's a big project compared to testing toy models in a local waterway, where real-world dynamics are still beyond digital computation. In fact, real-world testing is superior massively-parallel computation, under the formalism of "embodied computation".

      It is increasingly possible for a sufficiently talented programmer to do trail-blazing invention from processed code, if they also have the Wright Bros' practical domain-expert advantages to guide definition of a suitable custom software architecture. It may be longer than anyone thinks before machines can invent complex embodied systems without human experts, or before traditional methods are obsolete.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23403 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      Of course, Dave, you are absolutely right - a practice is better than CFD, if you have at least a little free time and money for living and R&D... :)
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23404 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      The beauty of the Wright Bros approach is how they only had relatively minor expenses, affordable as middle-class mechanics, while far better funded competitors lost. They also invented the modern wind tunnel, a superior engine by power-to-weight, and many other firsts.

      For things that first work as cheap primitive toys, large amounts of money become critical only when scaling up and entering mass production. Recall the Russian genius described by The First Circle ( в круге первом, V kruge pervom) by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, where brilliant gulag engineers delivered working prototypes for rewards as small as a rare piece of fresh fruit.

      I do not mean to belittle the pain of inventing as a pauper, as many do worldwide, only to insist there is hope...
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23405 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      Thanks, Dave, for very warm link for me (to A.I.Solzhenitsyn). But some projects like mine cannot be done in a little size - I cannot get water from clouds else if a scale of my device is less than km... And I can only try to simulate it by CFD and my math modeles like this http://barixa.net/AirHES_model_en.pdf

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23406 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Foxwell peeks into the future with some AWE
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23407 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Yo-yo Tidal Flow Energy Generator
      The good news for harvesting water by kites is that Polynesians were able to do it, and even ordinary kites get saturated in fog, so the principle is proven by real cases.

      The mystery is what scaling law prevents a small working scale model. After all, a toy train or model airplane can work by the same principles as far larger industrial versions, so why is any grand kite idea impossible to model at small scale?

      If a small working scale model can be flown, then there is plenty of opportunity to optimize design variations while awaiting major funding. The more success at small scale, the better that large scale development will attract funding and sooner be perfected.

      The sublime happiness of thinking and playing with kites at toy scale mitigates the pain of not having more resources. We become lean hungry competitors against those who have all along had too much money (as Google-Makani team members piteously lament).

      Andrew, when Low Complexity AWE finally gets its turn for major funding, we'll include you as a brother.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23408 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2018
      Subject: Re: Foxwell peeks into the future with some AWE
      As Foxwell describes, the UK Offshore Renewable Energy (ORE) Catapult science program is doing a fine job of seeing the same trends we have long followed. HAWTs will continue to grow and be refined*. AWES will come along in due time (2040 here), in the R&D pipeline. Relentless progress just did not happen fast enough for many of the pioneers, but the most exciting work is still to come.

      ---------------
      * For those who patiently anticipate fabric blades as a scaling path, "ACT Blade, in Edinburgh, is leading in this field, using techniques borrowed from creating ultra-efficient sails from racing yachts to engineer textile blades.".
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23409 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/9/2018
      Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
      Unfortunately, my invention has not received any investment for 6 years and I see no reason to spend money on supporting my patent - I decided to free all my patents.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23410 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/9/2018
      Subject: Optimal Control of a Rigid-Wing Rotary Kite System for Airborne Wind
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23411 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/9/2018
      Subject: Recharge Crystal Ball
      What's next for offshore wind?
       IN DEPTH | Floating wind arrays, drones and power-kites will soon be the ‘norm’ offshore — and that’s just the beginning, writes Darius Snieckus

      [free subscription might be needed for access]
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23412 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/10/2018
      Subject: KAP Matters

      KAP Matters

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

      Kite Aerial Photogrphy

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


      This post within "KAP Matters"

      has as focus to announce a new KAP website: 

      https://kapjasa.wixsite.com/kap-jasa



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


      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23413 From: dave santos Date: 3/12/2018
      Subject: Makani in Golden Limbo
      Follow the links for Makani's polished self-mythology of an epic AWE program without a wider AWE community, without M600 net power data, shared crash reports, actual "meet the team" identities, and so on. Its a sort of King Midas state of frozen Google gold that could have funded 10,000 student projects with far different results, but that's not how Astro rolls. Clicking on jobs link yields no open positions. This has been our one window thru the hype-wall, gone dim. Hawaii testing seems a very long way off; our local spotter (my uncle Roy in Kona) sees no signs.

      Meanwhile, the pauperized DIY AWE community abides pretty much on pure rag-and-string; a fresh round of modest global R&D activity is in the works. Stay tuned.


      https://x.company/makani/journey/
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23414 From: dave santos Date: 3/12/2018
      Subject: kPower demos AWE at Austin's 89th Kite Fest
      The longest running kite fest in the Western Hemisphere, the Austin, Texas, Zilker Park Kite Festival, once again featured a kPower AWE demo (KiteSat7), as announced over the PA system. The demo flew between competitions on the main field with before ~20k attendees. One elite hacker stepped out of the crowd and joined kPower, more later on new talent as current work progresses on AWEfest capability.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23415 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Air HES http://airhes.com/
      A reminder of the Open-AWE_IP-Cloud concept:

      All smallholder AWE IP is long invited to pool statistically into the Open-AWE_IP-Pool as an offset to large monopolistically-intended AWE patent portfolios like Makani and KiteGen. This pooling does not require normal criteria for participation, but can be applied on an "honor system", even potentially compensating AWE creators with lapsed patents or no formal IP filings. As AWE becomes an established technology, Open-AWE_IP licensing will be a low cost option for new developers, and original developers or their assigns will be paid according to merit-based criteria.

      This IP strategy evolved over several years to extend CC-IP into AWE in a systematic way, and there are more than enough stated patents, trademarks, and other intellectual work-products already to make the Open-AWE_IP-Pool the largest and highest quality IP collection in AWE. Kite tech is an unusual IP category, since key art is so ancient and many fine kite patents are old. There is no obvious blocking IP, like in many innovation fields, just a fading concern over venture-driven "patent war-chest" or "patent thicket" abuse. The enduring goal is simple fairness to early AWE pioneers regardless of "broken" IP law.

      This is notice that Andrew's Air HES IP will be duly recognized by the Open-AWE_IP-Pool according to its eventual real-world success, as judged by future peer-process.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23416 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      A common challenge to harvesting water aloft is a relative global scarcity of widespread fog (although stratus cloud layers are not so rare). On the other hand, partly cloudy sky conditions are very common, so a harvesting kite system that can hunt out isolated clouds could greatly enhance capacity most places. This suggests a crosswind steerable kite system to intercept passing clouds, and that the harvested water would need to be conveyed back to a fixed ground reservoir.

      Unfortunately, fast sweeping of a kite within moist air may not help much since high overall drag is a heating effect, when cooling for condensation is wanted. It may not pay in kite mass to create a low pressure condensation zone, say by a Venturi tube, with a more complex high-performance sweeping kite, than with a slower cheaper kite harvesting with a simple fog net, with less heat-of-drag.

      Finally, a novel harvesting principle is proposed for study; that a cumulus cloud in sunlight can simply be shadowed by a large membrane to release its moisture as rain. Earlier concepts on the AWES Forum envisioned fully bagging clouds ("eating" them) to release their moisture.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23417 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      Along an old line of thought, IFO (soaring work-glider) flocks in principle enable mass targeted cloud water harvesting and precision delivery. Recalling Pete Lynn's 2004 observation that a slow moving payload can be lifted by a fast circling kiteplane tethered above, so can a fast IFO circle over a slow moving fog harvesting net. Pete's big idea can be classed as a sort of topological tensile helicopter, and the principle has wide applications in many of our schemes.

      A further idea is that simply dropping a harvesting net over a cloud would drag its water down to a collection surface. A simple experiment would be a toy fog-net parachute that lands laden with water. Scary autonomous parachutes with precision targeting are super-bomb military tech in need of some peaceful "baptizing".
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23418 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Two Ampyx positions announced

      : )   Neat way to travel:


      "As our new Verification Engineer you will however travel along with our tethered aircraft."

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

       Click through company name for more:

      Ampyx Power 2 total jobs 
      Den HaagZH 
      Netherlands


       

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23419 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      I had active correspondence with Peter Lynn about possible construction of a lifter-kite and even bought the several kites from China by his design. Also I had investigated a possible dependences of lift, drag coefficients, and droplet harvesting effectivness for typical cloud LWC ~0.3-0.5 g/m3 by using CFD SW (Xflow).

      See part "Aerodynamics and efficiency of kite" in my article http://barixa.net/Mesh_airhes_en.pdf

      It is mistake to suppose that kite fabric or mesh will heat by condensation on surface of kite. Inside cloud the volume condensation is already happened. The best height for kite/mesh water harvesting is 0.5-1 km above cloud base (or dew point, or condensation line). Therefore kite does not condense water, but only collect droplets with rather big effectiveness ~30-40% for typical attack angles.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23420 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      The "heat of drag" is noted as thermodynamically required to mount the faster the air velocity. In the hypersonic limit there would clearly be too much heat to condense water, instead steam vapor would prevail and a normal kite would burn up. Let the actual temperature curves and operational impacts be settled by test data. There is highest sensitivity to small temperature changes near the dew-point.

      Note that "Pete" Lynn is the son of "Peter" Lynn, so its long customary to make sure which designer is meant, since they are both formidable, but often work on very different aspects of kite tech.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23421 From: dave santos Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Two Ampyx positions announced
      Absurdist Dutch Theatre- If the AP3 fails to be verified, logically its the poor Verification Engineer's fault. They should hire a Frenchman to take that fall. Staging the AP3's expected dénouement in Ireland is also too brilliant.

      A better Ampyx verification concept would be to fly side-by-side with KPS, and see who prevails. When will any major AWE investor support true comparative testing? So far AWE has been a venture speculation game where insiders get rich without delivering.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23422 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Electrical batteries in AWES

      Electrical batteries (batteries) in AWES

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

      Start: 

      http://batteryuniversity.com


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

      Some AWES will be using batteries in its different parts to achieve various purposes. System batteries will be of many sorts and sizes.  And some AWES will be charging small and large batteries. AWES workers nearing system's batteries will be safer team members by knowing how to properly interface with batteries. Batteries will need to be inspected for mission readiness; battery status in some advanced AWES might be recorded nearly continuously. 

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


       

       

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23423 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/13/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      Of course, there is "heat of drag", however obviously that for typical wind speed it is not enough in order to increase a temperature significantly because all this heat is easy "gone with the wind" by simple heat exchange. It is enough to remember that even with airplane speed (much more than wind speed) in a cloud we have a problem not heating wings but vice versa with icing.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23424 From: dave santos Date: 3/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      [Dickison 1959] found in testing that subsonic aircraft velocity has a significant impact on icing; that faster velocity, close to attainable kiteplane sweep velocity, proportionally causes less icing, just as our thermodynamic view of "heat-of-drag" predicts. Yes, excess "free" heat dissipates downwind, but the "zero-point" temperature of the fog mesh still rises parasitically.

      A STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF AIRSPEED ON AIRFRAME ICING
      R.B.B. Dickison, 1959, Weather, vol. 14

      The prediction stands in eventual need of actual test data that kinetic heating as a function of aircraft velocity, even at fairly low velocity, will make fog harvesting more marginal by a higher mass-to-harvest-factor. The aerospace test engineer ethos is to test all a priori assumptions, especially conflicting predictions. Our goal is to discover optimal harvest velocity, based on test data and calculation, subject to kite mass restrictions.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23425 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 3/15/2018
      Subject: Above-wing kite controlling

      Pilot is above and part of the kited wing arrangement

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

      The intended kite-system anchor is a powered aircraft.
      The kited pilot-wing is tethered to the anchor.
      The intended pilot is intended to be on top of the wing. 
      The intended pilot is part of the global-wing arrangement. 
      ===========================

      Channel of related videos 

      ===========================================
      Though first thoughts seem to be about recreation, 
      further applications of uncovered technology may be envisioned. 

         


      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23426 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      the proper analysis about icing shows that kinetic heating is very little value for low wind speed - for example, even for hurricane 100 km/h it is only ~ 0.2 C degrees in cloud - see in Russian http://flymeteo.org/stat/icing.php
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23427 From: dave santos Date: 3/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      That's a useful number. The question then becomes how much a practical reduction (or not)in harvest occurs compared to a larger slower mesh of the same mass. 100kmhr is a realistic assumption for a sweeping model. A two-stage harvestor of preturbulation-then-harvest may enhance harvest.

      ----------------------------------------
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 23428 From: andrew@airhes.com Date: 3/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Chasing Clouds for Water Harvesting
      To tell the truth, no sence to guess... when we can just calculate.

      It was the main reason for creating my complex model of AirHES - it can consider automatically many different factors to get some optimal design by using multi parameter optimization for target value (for example, water harvesting). Of course, the model is not universal, but allows easy to add any materials and solutions with proper precalculated dependences like X, Cl, Cd from attack angle and velosity (by CFD simulation or experimentally, if possible, for different meshes or fabrics).

      Please, all is opened... just take you data and try to optimaize by using this model.