Digest

Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group. AWES 24727 to 24776

Page 386 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24727	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/25/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24728	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/25/2019
Subject: Re: Who is laughing now? Parafoils displacing LEI kites on Water.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24729	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/26/2019
Subject: (EP3431755) KITE BASED POWER GENERATION SYSTEM

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24730	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/26/2019
Subject: Re: Yves Parlier

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24731	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24732	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24733	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24734	From: Santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24735	From: dave santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24736	From: dave santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proportions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24737	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: KGM1 Project

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24738	From: Massimo Ippolito	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24739	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: KiteGen Kite Gen 2019

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24740	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24741	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: KGM1 Project's heroic journey continues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24742	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24743	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24744	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24745	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Kite Gen 2019

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24746	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24747	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: How to share aviation mishap knowledge in fine style

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24748	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24749	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24750	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24751	From: Joe Faust	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Fwd: WESC & AWEC 2019

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24752	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: More Northern EU AWE Conferences

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24753	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Airborne Wind Energy Conference 2019, 15-16 October in Glasgow, UK

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24754	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airborne

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24755	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24756	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24757	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Drone assisted (E-VTOL) launch of soft kites in TUDelft Paper

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24758	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24759	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24760	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Drone assisted (E-VTOL) launch of soft kites in TUDelft Paper

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24761	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Sustaining Flight of a Beaujean AWES in Calm, and High AR Blade Feas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24762	From: Peter Sharp	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24763	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Exotic Physics of Kites (Negative Gravity of Phonons)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24764	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24765	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24766	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24767	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24768	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Surface Tow Vehicle Arrays as Moving Anchor-Field

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24769	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24770	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24771	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Liebreich on AWE on Twitter

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24772	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24773	From: dave santos	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24774	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24775	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24776	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: Liebreich on AWE on Twitter

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24727	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/25/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Hi Tallak,

You wrote: "Progress is hard and comes in small increments."

Incremental advance in technology applies when the basis is well defined.

Progress with small increments apply to current wind turbines, but not for AWES as their technical-economic basis is not yet well defined. And going to AWE in regard to current wind turbines is a technology jump rather than an incremental progress. If the basis is not robust enough we jump into the space.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24728	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/25/2019
Subject: Re: Who is laughing now? Parafoils displacing LEI kites on Water.

https://forum.awesystems.info/ seems close now. Have you some explain please? Is it maintenance? Thanks.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24729	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/26/2019
Subject: (EP3431755) KITE BASED POWER GENERATION SYSTEM

EP3431755

KITE BASED POWER GENERATION SYSTEM

KURALAY FATIH
DEMIR FATIH

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

Abstract

(EN) The present disclosure relates to a kite based power generation system (100) which comprises a first kite (102) and a second kite (104) connected to each other using a tether (106), the tether (106) running via a base station (108) comprising an electrical power generator (110), and a controller (112) configured to control the first kite (102) and the second kite (104) to be lifted alternatingly with respect to the base station (108), wherein the electrical power generator (110) is driven by the tether (106) to generate power.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24730	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/26/2019
Subject: Re: Yves Parlier

Kite Structure

patent

PARLIER, Yves; FRLELOUP, Richard; FR

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24731	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

I don't think WE development is dependent on "investment", per se. Almost 100% of "investment" in AWE has been wasted up to now. I think AWE development is dependent on anyone having a good way to do it. Good working wind energy prototypes can be built for next to nothing in cost. The trick is to know what you're doing in the first place, starting with a truly promising approach.

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <pierre-benhaiem@...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24732	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

I guess I'll just repet my forst sentence: "I can only note for the reader, what you see below is a typical example of how responding to any statement by daveS resembles trying to get a grip on a greased water-balloon" - "off-topic" is a favorite "tehnicality of conversation" dodge of daveS and JoeF. Anything to create more fog and confusion, anything to change the subject, to continue pretending one is even relevant to AWE, let alone developing it..

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24733	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Barnard totally knows (knew) what he is (was) talking about. Pretty good for a non-wind person (as far as I know - never heard of any wind activity or turbines etc. from Barnard).

But what he does NOT know is what he is NOT talking about, which is what nobody is talking about: an economically viable AWE system. All Barnard can do is explain the weak points of current, highly-publicized AWE efforts, based mostly on poor concepts, group-selfies, and false promises. What he does NOT do is disprove AWE as a viable concept.

I still think it was pretty funny though that daveS kept wanting to "debate" Barnard. What is needed is not a debate, it is a machine. Where's the machine, after a billion dollars wasted, not to mention all those expensive, difficult-to-obtain, group selfies?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24734	From: Santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Doug overlooks that it was Dr. Moore, NASA, took on MikeB in the comments section and many of us, me included, agree with MarkM and the other academic critics, as noted in past discussion. MikeB is also memorable for sockpuppeting his views on Makani's WP page.

The Great AWE Debate I write about is all of our differing views considered together. Formal debate is not a specific engineering requirement, like validation testing.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24735	From: dave santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Summarizing here that KGM1 is the best Italian AWE venture for aviation expertise and cost effective R&D, and Italy is one of the historic early players in AWE, via WoW and KiteGen. That is why its so painful to see the uneven investment in AWE, with many far less qualified teams getting so much more investment than the most cost-effective R&D players. This sort of imbalance is temporary, as the AWES down-select failures sort out, and what's left is the best.

Variable geometry in canopy

https://grabcad.com/library/study-of-a-variable-geometry-into-a-paraglider-canopy-1

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24736	From: dave santos	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proportions

Part of the complexity of finding optimal AWES designs is getting the kite-to-line proportions right. For over two decades, AWES researchers have flown power kites on long lines. Such proportions did not favor crosswind motion well. kPower has tested power kites short-lined as a model for giant power kites within a ~600m ceiling. This research direction has given promising results, progressively testing ever shorter line proportions.

The latest kPower Austin test (today) was of a 1.8m2 parafoil power kite flying just two meters high on a three meter wide crosswind PTO loop-line, with two pulleys on the loop and a two-line control-bar anchored about five meters to windward. It was found that the kite launched and parked at Zenith passively then responding to control inputs to sweep crosswind in a Dutch Roll pattern, driving the PTO loop at high efficiency.

Session photo pending.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24737	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/28/2019
Subject: KGM1 Project

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24738	From: Massimo Ippolito	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Doug,

I strongly disagree, we have not wasted a penny at KiteGen. Or better said, maybe we have wasted some of the many sponsorships, well over 1 M$, we have provided for the PhD theses and universities, but this is a human factor. it is very difficult to foresee the future honesty and intellectual strength of young students who approach the project with initial enthusiasm. Some went quickly affected by an overwhelming pejorative plagiarism and envy. No sign of gratefulness toward a company that trusted them and invested for their qualifications.

They show arrogance to consider all idiots and then produce junk scientific material with far-fetched ideas which as a result creates harmful fog, confusion and disorientation at worldwide scale, those guys are missing promises.

I still stress this aspect of this great adventure because is the most painful to me, I suffer of intellectual - professional loneliness while I enjoy and I’m really excited when I can put around a brainstorming table a lot intelligent people sharing brilliant methods and intuitions.

Fortunately, the project has gone on solidly without paying attention to the underlying noise and intellectual betrayals. Now the job is to activate the factory producing the machines on an industrial scale with the trained workers. Another barrier is to overcome the widespread mentality of hobbyists who think that the demonstrators are the way to fine-tune the technology, without having any idea of the underlying physics and mathematics, without knowing the structural limits of the materials and geometries, without having any competence in electronics and control.

by the way, the first worldwide prototype producing abundant energy was built by me personally in a couple of week of work in 2006, and was very cheap and based on two main gifts:

Some north sails kites gently provided by Don Montague and discounted alternators and servo drives provided by Siemens automation.

So I know very well the effort and the role of the demonstrators as theirs limits.

On 28/01/2019 16:50, dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy] wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24739	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: KiteGen Kite Gen 2019

Kite Gen

http://kitegen.com/

KiteGen

KiteGen Research

Kite Gen at Twitter

KiteGen Venture

https://twitter.com/KiteGenVenture

Mentioned in http://euanmearns.com/high-altitude-wind-power-reviewed/

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=Fxo8HofKofY Published in Dec.,2014. video

Carousel simulato

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

wiki

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

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

Very general search:

https://tinyurl.com/Kite-GenGENERALSearch

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

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24740	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: KGM-1's heroic journey continues

Pierre and others: What I'm trying to understand is how we keep reading about high power output figures, such as "500 kW", from the kite-reeling crowd, for years now, but we don't seem to be seeing such systems operating, even at the stated test sites, let alone as products. I'd like to know more about what factors remain preventing daily operation. What I seem to interpret, from reading between the lines in the information vacuum, is "they are still trying to figure out how to fly a kite" which I guess is what you;d expect from projects reliant on skillful flying of kites. But I think maybe the current "yo-yo" approach is still too close to "just flying kites" to be "the magic answer". Still waiting to see something a bit more impressive or promising. One thing is for sure, something seems to be fundamentally wrong in AWE if after ten years there is nothing running today. Is there? Do we have any promising grid-feed output data yet? I mean, it has been "next year" ten times by now. Weird to try and forensically reconstruct anything that might be going on from occasional, limited, press-releases.

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <pierre-benhaiem@...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24741	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: KGM1 Project's heroic journey continues

When posting to this topic, please alter the subject to hold KGM1 Project

instead of the improper hyphenated term that has been being used. Thanks for the moment.

Moderator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24742	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/29/2019
Subject: Re: Barnard's predictions

Doug wrote: "Pierre and others: What I'm trying to understand is how we keep reading about high power output figures, such as "500 kW", from the kite-reeling crowd, for years now, but we don't seem to be seeing such systems operating, even at the stated test sites, let alone as products...".

I would like to understand it also. It is also the reason why I tried to see what are really the two categories of AWES, as they are not crosswind drag (flygen like Makani') and lift (reeling yoyo) power systems categories, but rather stationary swept area systems (all excepted yoyo systems) and swept area going downwind systems (yoyo) categories, as I detailed on https://forum.awesystems.info/t/stationary-and-downwind-awes-as-the-two-main-awe-categories/262/10, and that could be also called as respectively 4/27 and 16/27 in regard to the Betz limit potential. Here is a paper about the 4/27 limit: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324448503_The_Betz_limit_applied_to_Airborne_Wind_Energy.

So let us try to refute Barnard's predictions by studying more stationary (16/27) swept area systems as they include not only crosswind flygen systems, but also rotating flygen AWES like Sky Windpower' or with torque transfer systems like Daisy and SuperTurbine (tm), or Rotating Reel, or belt transmission like Kitewinder', or even some carousels like KiteGen' or still Rotating Reel...

In my opinion the efficiency per wing area is overestimated compared with the power/space use ratio per swept area.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24743	From: benhaiemp	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

I advocated a larger kite in regard to the tether(s) length(s) for a long time, that in order to increase the power/space ratio: the Rotating Reel system is an example of it. OrthoKiteBunch is another old example.

I am waiting for the photo.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24744	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Attachments :

Yes, Pierre, there has also been specific Forum discussion of kite-size to tether-length as a key dimensionless number in AWES design, and several well-known architectures already have short-line proportions (but most do not). What makes this design special is its pure crosswind motion, after one of Payne's concepts, but enhanced with short-line proportion, modern power-kite, and special rigging details beyond Payne.

Sorry for the poor contrast of the kite lines, but a close look at the attached photo should still convey the basic idea of standard control-bar power-kite operation combined with a crosswind PTO loop. kPower has shared similar designs before, but continued refinements are developing superior performance.

I am waiting for the photo.

@@attachment@@

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24745	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Kite Gen 2019

Any fresh news from KiteGen is appreciated. Below is Massimo's text copied from the MikeB topic. Its an odd mix of attack on unnamed academic and hobbyist AWE efforts to contrast with KiteGen's still undisclosed flight statistics of its ~50m2 semi-rigid power-wing, which is what would most interest us.

Nice detail of Makani founder DonM providing North power kites to Massimo in 2006. KiteGen represents just how well conventional industrial automation experience compares with aerospace avionics experience as the "right stuff".

Past critique of KiteGen investment efficiency includes its WoW politics and specific high costs like custom carbon-composite mechanical parts, super-capacitors, and numerous patents that seem to lack either priority or essential inventive leaps, as carefully reviewed in past posts. Let anyone please state just what KiteGen has brought to AWE in its IP, of which GaetanoD quoted an old Massimo claim of a supposed KiteGen IP monopoly.

Massimo's heroic "couple of weeks" demonstrator in 2006 feels now to have been the high point in KiteGen's story. Its hard to imagine KiteGen ever starting factory production without a convincing pre-production demonstrator in regular operation, made public-

"...we have not wasted a penny at KiteGen. Or better said, maybe we have wasted some of the many sponsorships, well over 1 M$, we have provided for the PhD theses and universities, but this is a human factor. it is very difficult to foresee the future honesty and intellectual strength of young students who approach the project with initial enthusiasm. Some went quickly affected by an overwhelming pejorative plagiarism and envy. No sign of gratefulness toward a company that trusted them and invested for their qualifications.

by the way, the first worldwide prototype producing abundant energy was built by me personally in a couple of week of work in 2006, and was very cheap and based on two main gifts:

Some north sails kites gently provided by Don Montague and discounted alternators and servo drives provided by Siemens automation.

So I know very well the effort and the role of the demonstrators as theirs limits. "

Kite Gen

http://kitegen.com/

KiteGen

KiteGen Research

Kite Gen at Twitter

KiteGen Venture

https://twitter.com/KiteGenVenture

Mentioned in http://euanmearns.com/high-altitude-wind-power-reviewed/

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=Fxo8HofKofY Published in Dec.,2014. video

Carousel simulato

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

wiki

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

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

Very general search:

https://tinyurl.com/Kite-GenGENERALSearch

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

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24746	From: dave santos	Date: 1/30/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Attachments :

For some reason the last image was broken in my copy. Trying now a better image with annotations.

[Attachment(s) from dave santos included below]

On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎January‎ ‎30‎, ‎2019‎ ‎12‎:‎17‎:‎15‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CST, pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com

I am waiting for the photo.

@@attachment@@

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24747	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: How to share aviation mishap knowledge in fine style

A common failing of AWE ventures, in willful violation of traditional aviation safety culture best practice (and applicable laws), is to suppress failure reporting in favor of only presenting successful results, to the effect of misleading the public and investors. All serious AWES testing programs experience failures, so its rather conspicuous by omission which ventures are suppressing their failure history.

That's why its so refreshing to see the Open-AWE community share failures with humor, in good faith, like Rod's wonderful video linked here-

Dais truction How Not to do AWE!

Haywire nonsense

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24748	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

Another route to the shared image:

http://www.energykitesystems.net/DaveSantos/2019/AWESrig2019JanuaryDaveSantos.jpg

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24749	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

http://www.energykitesystems.net/DaveSantos/2019/AWESrig2019JanuaryDaveSantosUNABRIDGED.jpg

In online view of a wide photo, the right hand advertising section may be made to disappear by clicking a small vertical V symbol near the right edge of the photo.

Or go to the archived URL give above.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24750	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Latest kPower Testing identifies optimal Power Kite Rig Proporti

A few comments on the latest crosswind pumping rig-

- The control action is very natural, the same figure-of-eight/Dutch-roll dynamic a power kite loves.

- The motion limits of the kite and PTO loop are in tune; the kite wants to work optimally. The kite even takes on a more "C" shape to make quicker turns, while flattening during sweep for max power.

- The power kite is effectively "staked out" on the PTO line, providing a tunable topological stability factor. The staked-out kite is immune to looping failure.

- It should be possible to passively automate pattern flight by a control-bar rocking mechanism as simple as a tuned pendulum or spring mass to give due impetus, much as a clock works.

- This is the simplest groundgen design to date, very close to the sort of system remote rural users need to do all sorts of work, like pumping irrigation water.

- A fully passive version could also incorporate a pilot-lifter to maintain state in lulls and enhance self-relaunch response.

http://www.energykitesystems.net/DaveSantos/2019/AWESrig2019JanuaryDaveSantosUNABRIDGED.jpg

In online view of a wide photo, the right hand advertising section may be made to disappear by clicking a small vertical V symbol near the right edge of the photo.

Or go to the archived URL give above.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24751	From: Joe Faust	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Fwd: WESC & AWEC 2019

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Roland Schmehl <r.schmehl@tudelft.nl

Dear all,

I would like to bring to your attention that the call for abstracts for the mini-symposium on Airborne Wind Energy during the Wind Energy Science Conference 2019, 17-20 June in Cork, Ireland, closes on 1 March (as opposed to the submission to the 7 general conference themes, which closes tomorrow, 1 February).
Abstracts should be submitted directly to me as chair of this mini-symposium (https://www.wesc2019.org/theme-8-mini-symposia) with my co-chair in CC: Johan Meyers <Johan.Meyers@kuleuven.be

We have further started the planning of the Airborne Wind Energy Conference 2019, 15-16 October in Glasgow, UK. More information and the call for abstracts will appear soon on the conference website http://www.awec2019.com

I am looking forward to meet you at one of these events or both.

Best regards,
Roland Schmehl

-- 
-----------------------------------
Dr.-Ing. Roland Schmehl
Associate Professor
Delft University of Technology
Kite Power Research Group
Wind Energy Section / Faculty of Aerospace Engineering
Kluyverweg 1, 2629 HS Delft, The Netherlands
T +31 15 278 5318
M +31 61 495 6025
E r.schmehl@tudelft.nl
www.twitter.com/kite_power
www.kitepower.eu | www.awesco.eu | www.awec2015.com | www.awec2017.com

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24752	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: More Northern EU AWE Conferences

Dear all,

I am looking forward to meet you at one of these events or both.

Best regards,
Roland Schmehl

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24753	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Airborne Wind Energy Conference 2019, 15-16 October in Glasgow, UK

Post notes regarding the UK sited proposed conference.

As yet, an announced URL for the event is not working.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24754	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airborne

When Makani first down-selected its massive flygen architecture in 2009, it was critiqued the very next day here on the AWES Forum as not accounting for known aviation scaling laws. In the course of a few weeks of Forum discussion, severe aeroelastic limits, endless failure-modes, and misc. other specific engineering barriers were documented. Nevertheless, the Makani architecture was for years uncritically embraced by TUDelft. Now key lead PhDs (Schmehl, Lind) have coauthored a careful paper that blandly affirms-

"Fundamental scaling laws corroborate that the size increase of future AWTs increases the susceptibility to static and dynamic aeroelastic effects. "

Note that soft kites naturally damp and distribute aeroelastic forces, so are much less scale-limited in that respect, therefore far less power-limited.

What the TUD/Makani PhDs do not state plainly is the M600 and similar high-mass high-velocity AWES concepts will not scale effectively against soft power kites (which should have been known to the leads a decade ago). We are seeing young PhDs learn as they go and ultimately fail to reconcile Makani's premature AWES architectural down-select with standard scaling paradigms long known in the most relevant domain art (kites, aerospace).

There may even be a stark overdue debate raging behind the curtains as Makani seeks to test in Hawaii, and maybe never will...

Linked on New Forum-

Aeroelastic analysis of a large airborne wind turbine

Jelle Wijnja,* Roland Schmehl,† Roeland De Breuker‡ Delft University of Technology, 2629HS Delft, The Netherlands. Kenneth Jensen§ and Damon Vander Lind¶ Makani Power Inc., Alameda, CA 94501, USA.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24755	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325035554_Aeroelastic_analysis_of_a_large_airborne_wind_turbine

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24756	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

Reminds me of the old saying:

"The bigger they are, the harder they fall"

bigger they come...

whatever

At some point, such bloated efforts become a caricature of themselves.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24757	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Drone assisted (E-VTOL) launch of soft kites in TUDelft Paper

Continuing commentary of Papers noted but not fully examined.

In the paper cited below, multicopter-assisted launch is proposed to solve the long-known-to-us low-surface wind operational gap of static launching masts, another case where TUD's AWE PhD mill belatedly formalizes domain art long known to Open-AWE.

In fact, we have found that multicopter launch likely cannot compete with winch-tow step-tow launch from a kite-buddy surface vehicle, on multiple engineering considerations, from poor scaling potential to high-count failure-mode susceptibility. This paper presumes a 7kg multicopter barely able to lift its own weight in payload. Severe E-VTOL scaling limits remains undescribed and unresolved in the TUD circle.

Its beginning to look like AWESCO sadly has resulted in no major breakthrough AWES concepts because all the bright young candidates started too unaware of the rich heritage kite-aviation domain and its advanced state-of-the-art. Can anyone name any inventive-leap in AWES concept or practice from academia, besides Wubbo's SpiderMill? Nevertheless, we count on academia to validate and refine AWES design, from whatever Darwinian form prevails, and we hope they make crucial advances, not just helpfully play out losing paths.

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

Vertical Takeoﬀ and Landing of Flexible Wing Kite Power Systems
SebastianRapp∗ andRolandSchmehl† DelftUniversityofTechnology,FacultyofAerospaceEngineering

The previous "scientific community" (non Open-AWE) reference-

Bauer,F.,Hackl,C.M.,Smedley,K.,andKennel,R.,“OnMulticopter-BasedLaunchandRetrievalConceptsforLiftMode OperatedPowerGeneratingKites,”BookofAbstractsoftheInternationalAirborneWindEnergyConference2015,editedby R.Schmehl,DelftUniversityofTechnology,Delft,TheNetherlands,2015,pp.92–93. doi:10.4233/uuid:7df59b79-2c6b-4e30bd58-8454f493bb09

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24758	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: TUDelft and Makani researchers belatedly validate a "large airbo

Reminding Doug that no AWES architecture ever proposed is more massive (by unit) than his ST driveshaft, as applied to the ~500m high wind resource we seek to tap. Such a rotating tower basis would fall "harder" than a dozen M600s, under the same grim aeroelastic scaling limits.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325035554_Aeroelastic_analysis_of_a_large_airborne_wind_turbine

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24759	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Not bad for a starting AWES concept, but KiteLab Ilwaco experience with similar kites (like Prism UFO, etc) suggests this architecture is workable at small scale, but would not scale greatly-

Sustainable Energy | Michael Perlberger

Michael Perlberger from Brainwhere at ChangeNOW Summit 2018, in the Sustainable Energy session. Follow the chang...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24760	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: Drone assisted (E-VTOL) launch of soft kites in TUDelft Paper

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323369414_Vertical_Takeoff_and_Landing_of_FlexibleWing_Kite_Power_Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24761	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Sustaining Flight of a Beaujean AWES in Calm, and High AR Blade Feas

In principle, any kite can be "back-driven" (reverse pumped, reverse charged, rope-driven, or towed) to fly in windless conditions. On the New Forum, however, its been strongly opined that Dr. Beaujeans AWES concept could not sustain flight in calm. The solution is known here on the Old Forum, that AoA modulation of the fabric blades, according to blade bulk phase angle, can provide balanced lift when the turbine is back-driven by power from the surface. Flight could thereby be indefinitely maintained.

Another Beaujean misconception on the New Forum is that the ribbon-arch wings could not work by too high AR. However, AnsarA has flown individual arch wings of similar AR. Many means of passive high AR wing stabilization have been reviewed here, but the key enabling feature is the topological stability of a kite arch and the common kite dynamic of perturbed features sorting themselves out reliably.

It remains open whether Dr Beaujean's concept space could be made to work by sufficiently advanced design. I think so, but its likely a case like Wubbo described, where it would be up to the engineering talent to choose the design by meta-utilitarian quasi-utopian criteria.

JoeF's Index Page-

Joseph Beaujean, Joseph Marie Elise Beaujean, Sjef Beaujean

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24762	From: Peter Sharp	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

Attachments :

I suspect that Michael Perlberger has a poor understanding of cycloturbines and cyclorotors. In this video, his blades always face the true wind. That limits the TSR to about 1 and therefore requires a much higher solidity ratio and a much heavier set of wings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytY02M9g-NU

Also, it would be lighter to transmit power with a loop belt than by flying the generator and using an electrical tether.

From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 1:24 PM
To: Yahoogroups <airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com '>

Sustainable Energy | Michael Perlberger

Michael Perlberger from Brainwhere at ChangeNOW Summit 2018, in the Sustainable Energy session. Follow the chang...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24763	From: dave santos	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Exotic Physics of Kites (Negative Gravity of Phonons)

Anyone who has followed this Forum long enough will recall the ongoing matching of kite dynamics to advanced physics concepts. A rich zoo of exotic correlations gradually emerged, despite the howling pessimism of some readers unwilling to master the basic concepts.

It has been found here that the kite embodies principles ordinarily thought to be beyond ordinary experience, and yet the kite meets every formal criteria of deep thermodynamics, information theory and embodied cybernetics, analogue QM, String Theories, and so on. Once weird rag-and-string ideas, like negative absolute temperature, BES, or mechanical superconductance, have become familiar to us and stand unrefuted (if not cluelessly mocked). A lucky few have become over the years able to deeply apply phonon quasi-particle physics to kites with confidence. Expect ongoing validations from third-party kite papers, some known to be in process.

A kite system is a system of phonons, of packets of elastic mass-energy, the elasticity of air and polymer fields. The elastic energy in tether and wing in an air pressure field's High and Low (quasi-antiparticles) pressure features, in derecho or vortical packets; each such discrete instance, that's a genuine phonon. The latest of our revolutionary kite physics paradigm adventures is the recent finding that phonons radiate Negative Gravity. Well, we should have guessed as much, given the inherent levity of kite flight. Just how correct is this interpretation? Read the key paper by Columbia University physicists and judge for yourself.

Make no mistake, the ability to think about kites in new ways is the "right stuff", and those unable or unwilling to make such leaps of insight are disadvantaged in conceiving radical new kite art. This instant-classic paper which, besides its explosive negative gravity implications, has also left the Classical Limit (microscopic QM) in the historical dustbin. Many other papers previously cited have prepared us to follow the reasoning. Enjoy-

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24764	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

He intends "ladder" of systems to jet stream.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24765	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJUnJeA2_P3xHNz08vfnyuA

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24766	From: dougselsam	Date: 1/31/2019
Subject: Re: New AWES player, Michael Perlberger

After 20 years of seeing wind-o-vation ideas, mockups, and renderings come and go, this one, to me, seems like one that will never fly at all, but it is an interesting idea, part of a larger set of

1) airplanes with similar rotating sets of wings, (fanwings)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlXNEefLXz8&t=202s

2) Voith Schnieider vertical-axis Propellers for icebreakers

http://voith.com/corp-en/drives-transmissions/voith-schneider-propeller-vsp.html

3) Sharp and other cycloturbines

4) reel-type lawnmowers

Such a technology, if mastered, then, if it turns out to be advantageous, could have uses beyond AWE as flying machines etc., but this one, sorry to say, smells like pure vaporwhere to me

vaporwhere

vaporwherehouse

No matter the aerospace experience, wind energy is its own realm.

The machines are brutally beaten to death, and simplicity, robustness, and not fighting what's known, is the way to go.

The laddering concept is always something good to not forget - set the kite altitude record all those years ago.

That's my two cents.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24767	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: AirLoom News

AirLoom is an AWE and quasi-AWE player long tracked* by us, that once trademarked "KiteFarms", without regard to our common early usage in AWE community. Our Open-AWE variant in this design space are flygen kites that run on conductive tethers suspended by kites. A possible niche architecture, if not a major solution. AirLoom has run thru a lot of public funds without much apparent result. An AirLoom R&D advantage is their WY wind-paradise location, but that won't make up for a seemingly marginal concept.

AirLoom Energy Graduates from WTBC, Moves to West Laramie | News | University of Wyoming

AirLoom Energy Graduates from WTBC, Moves to West Laramie | News | Unive...

* pun not intended, but AirLoom does run its wind gliders on long tracks

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24768	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Surface Tow Vehicle Arrays as Moving Anchor-Field

On the New Forum, Tallak shares interesting offshore experience with towed sensor arrays, a paravane class we have examined here with interest, as evolving from traditional fishing (trolling) arrays. His AWE reasoning is that kite arrays could also be made to work, but as a harder engineering problem.

The problem eases if it is allowed that a kitefarm surface anchor-field can provide topological stability that a free-towed array cannot, unless we next imagine a moving formation array of kite winch-tow surface vehicles, wheeled or floated. Surface Tow Vehicle Arrays already seem workable given the easier demands of surface navigation and the higher TRL of self-driving vehicle tech.

A variant concept is for each wing unit to self-navigate like a flock of birds. Added passive logic is to imagine the locally self-coordinated flock as chain-ganged or wagon-teamed. In principle, this hybrid architecture can provide whatever reliability metric is required, better than either single approach.

Based on its long varied multi-kite testing experience, kPower thinks that passive interconnects alone may long be the most cost effective solution, and that active swarms (IFOs) may achieve workable reliability in a decade or two. We have explored vehicle arrays in past years, but should continue to push the concept for its high potential utility, especially to enable advanced kite networks.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24769	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

A possibly novel and useful AWES concept is a conductive surface for groundgen kite-winch/tow vehicles. The basic engineering challenge seems to be how best to provide free-roaming two-wire electrical connection only from below ( free-roaming carnival bumper-cars draw power from below and above). A related approach is to provide vehicle power only from above, with its own trade-offs.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

Challenge: Anyone know existing solutions or new ideas for free-roaming two-wire electrical connection only from below?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24770	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Two-wire surface properties are the 2D extension of common track contacts.

Presume that a kitefarm free-roamimg vehicle surface field, with two-wire properties, requires two buried conductive gridworks that do not touch, with two corresponding kinds of mutually exclusive surface contact mechanisms. A vehicle tapping the two conductor grids would have two corresponding contact surfaces that each only tap the correct gridwork.

A starting solution concept is for magnetic contacts of opposed polarity to attract pop-up and/or pop-down electrical contact only of correct connections. An entire vehicle underbelly could host enough contacts to allow maximal surface contact spacing, for lowest unit-area field cost. The opposite approach would be just two compact contact arrays on a vehicle, but with dense field surface spacing of contacts.

Other possible two-wire surface contact solutions might be purely mechanical, involving vehicle surface pressure interacting with flexible contacts, or articulated (keyed) surfaces, and many variations possible. What other big applications might result? Perhaps electric car roads with the roaming flexibility of current fueled-cars or battery-cars. Perhaps architectural surfaces with power available anywhere on a surface.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud

Challenge: Anyone know existing solutions or new ideas for free-roaming two-wire electrical connection only from below?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24771	From: dave santos	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Liebreich on AWE on Twitter

I got to meet Michael Liebreich in the '90s when he was touring around promoting mass-adoption compact florescent lights to replace incandescent bulbs, which was a great cause (now LEDs rule). Some will recall we pitched AWE to Michael a few years ago, but he did not have the AE background to judge AWE on merits, and still does not, as our AWE twitter community still finds him to be not himself the brightest bulb. Nevertheless, he could be a powerful promotor of AWE once the capability is shown obvious.

Michael Liebreich on Twitter

“@awesystems @Sustainable2050 @SkysailsYacht @Airseas_Tech I'm open-minded about wind-power kites, but yet to be...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24772	From: joe_f_90032	Date: 2/1/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

AirLoom Energy http://airloomenergy.com/

Robert Lumley, founder of AirLoom Energy

Justus Kornkven, a 2017 UW graduate in physics from Casper;

Alex Skorcz, a UW student from Rock Springs majoring in mechanical engineering;

Zach Tovar, a UW student from Longmont, Colo., majoring in electrical engineering.

Clipping a caption at UW:

"This rendering shows Robert Lumley’s AirLoom system, which uses small gliders that act as hybrids of kites and horizontal-axis wind turbines that travel along an oval track, where they continuously capture energy from wind. Magnets are mounted on each moving glider. The magnets create an electric current in the winding, located next to the rail. (Leanne Kroll Illustration)"

Note: "hybrids of kites"

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

https://www.ansys.com/-/media/ansys/corporate/blog/airloom-energy-2.gif?la=en&hash=5698A813C898913B490670F6DA06573230A6F1B4

Illustration.

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

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24773	From: dave santos	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

We can see the underlying topology of AirLoom's architecture as closely comparable to an electrical track on the surface with gen-cars pulled by kites. However, the way they are implementing seems to involve excessive elevated structure without the altitude advantage of operating in upper wind. Their fantastic local wind regime greatly makes up for this, but that's not going to help their design prevail in normal locations. I wonder if their prototypes can motor up to speed to start generating, which is an essential requirement for this scheme.

Perhaps there will be a wild Darwinian diversification of wind tech in niche wind habitats. AWE make take varied optimal forms according to local conditions, more so than wind farms so far. Instead of imagining one superior AWES scheme to eventually dominate, maybe all sorts of schemes will have their time and place.

AirLoom Energy http://airloomenergy.com/

Robert Lumley, founder of AirLoom Energy

Justus Kornkven, a 2017 UW graduate in physics from Casper;

Alex Skorcz, a UW student from Rock Springs majoring in mechanical engineering;

Zach Tovar, a UW student from Longmont, Colo., majoring in electrical engineering.

Clipping a caption at UW:

Note: "hybrids of kites"

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

https://www.ansys.com/-/media/ansys/corporate/blog/airloom-energy-2.gif?la=en&hash=5698A813C898913B490670F6DA06573230A6F1B4

Illustration.

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

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24774	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

I'd say the magnets on each "kite" with what, windings all the way along a rail? is a bad idea.

That is using a lot of extra material to generate electricity.

I thought this was supposed to use less material

By the time your "kites" are restricted to a low-level rail with windings, what's the point?

Looks like one more discredited-Honeywell-style "move the magnets full-speed rim generator" mistake.

Yes Virginia, it really IS a syndrome..,.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24775	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

I think your wandering mind has wandered back into la-la land...

Where's your best AWE system?

Can we see it running?

Do you have any here-and-now AWE solutions?

Any useful ideas that could actually be implemented?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 24776	From: dougselsam	Date: 2/2/2019
Subject: Re: Liebreich on AWE on Twitter

In my opinion, anyone who spent a lot of time running around promoting CFL's is someone with too much time on their hands, unless their actual job was promoting them for some company. Even then, they look stupid, don't operate well in the cold, are a mercury hazard, wear out, and still waste a large proportion of their power, compared to LED bulbs which use way less electricity, last way longer, and have improved color which just keeps getting better and better. With something like over 70 outdoor bulbs to change around here, I am thankful for LED bulbs because you could spend a LOT of time on ladders continually changing that many incandescent or CFL bulbs, as I did when I first moved here, not to mention the cost of the electricity for LED bulbs is almost free compared to incandescent and way better than CFL's. Looking back it seems that high-quality LED bulbs should have been developed long ago. If this guy is WE news, well, I guess there is no news.