Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES  24928 to 24977 Page 390 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24928 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: The Independent UK touts AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24929 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24930 From: tallakt Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: kPower's AWES Dancing Kite Rig driven by NPW

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24931 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: kPower's AWES Dancing Kite Rig driven by NPW

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24932 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Defining "Monkey-Rig" AWES Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24933 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24934 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24935 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24936 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24937 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24938 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24939 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24940 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24941 From: dave santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24942 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24943 From: dave santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24944 From: dougselsam Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24945 From: dougselsam Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24946 From: Santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24947 From: Santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24948 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24949 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24950 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24951 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24952 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24953 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24954 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24955 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24956 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/23/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24957 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: ORE Catapult

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24958 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Mike Blanch Associate Director BVG Associates

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24959 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Airborne generators

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24960 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Re: ORE Catapult

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24961 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Re: ORE Catapult

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24962 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Re: ORE Catapult

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24963 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Re: Airborne generators

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24964 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Lots of whacky wind ideas in this website

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24965 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
Subject: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24966 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: Re: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24967 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24968 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24969 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: Re: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24970 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: Re: Mike Blanch Associate Director BVG Associates

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24971 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2019
Subject: Scaling challenge for AWES noted in IEEE Spectrum article

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24972 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: Scaling challenge for AWES noted in IEEE Spectrum article

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24973 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24974 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24975 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: Lots of (more) whacky wind ideas in this website

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24976 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: Lots of (more) whacky wind ideas in this website

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24977 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
Subject: Re: KiteGen Research Hig h Altitude Wind Generation…



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24928 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: The Independent UK touts AWE
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24929 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24930 From: tallakt Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: kPower's AWES Dancing Kite Rig driven by NPW
Right now I see some tools on the ground, and an archive pic from 2017. I am looking at the yahoo groups web page. Would be nice to see the original picture as well. If nothing else, perhaps a link to Dropbox or similar tool?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24931 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: kPower's AWES Dancing Kite Rig driven by NPW
Tallak,

Its rather the same thing, a parafoil in flight image or an NPW. 

Our unreliable documentation resolves in time. Part of the excitement of AWE is racing from noisy clues. You might come up with a better rig by wrongly imagining mine by poorness of image. I'll do a rigging diagram soon, and there will be good photos and video.

Ok, making AWE look easy with a Berlin NPW really is too cool, I could retire now ;)

ds 



 

Right now I see some tools on the ground, and an archive pic from 2017. I am looking at the yahoo groups web page. Would be nice to see the original picture as well. If nothing else, perhaps a link to Dropbox or similar tool?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24932 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Defining "Monkey-Rig" AWES Research
With a few kite rigging basics, its easy to rig infinite "crazy" AWES configurations that are exciting to test. As you develop an expert range of kite methods, its ever more grand to rig crazy. In principle, any kite rig can be re-rigged into anything else, and firing up a rig is better than over-thinking. AWE's "improv research" process is to combine proven elements in the sky that heuristically/forensically reveal to the rigger design and tuning optimization paths. Reality is the kite's own supercomputer basis. This is more or less how electronics was first perfected, by hooking up everything every which way, like monkeys-on-typewriters duly writing Shakespeare. Engineering improvisation transcends standard-assumptions. In AWE, class any improvised or especially hairy kite rig as a Monkey-Rig. Will Monkey-Rig improv prevail over a-priori fixed architectures? Very possible, in the Kite Networks R&D track. 

Model Usage- 

       "The Dancing Kite AWES is a glorified Monkey-Rig."
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24933 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE
Looks like this Spanish team deserves careful review in their own topic, here's another overview link, quoted:

""The preparation of the testbed has required a significant investment of time, effort and resources, but it has also raised the interest from a large number of our students. Besides research, the project has enriched our teaching activities, as many of them have carried out their undergraduate and master final projects on AWES", comments Gonzalo Sánchez Arriaga, who teaches the Flight Mechanics course in the Aerospace Engineering Degree at UC3M."

We are seeing this considerable Spanish academic AWE effort suddenly pop up on our radar after around five years of quietly setting up shop, students writing papers, and no doubt an aggressive continued effort. This debut delay may be in part due to language barrier, and many other countries may be starting AWE R&D that we do not see in early phases. Its an explosive dynamic in a very open field.

Renewable energy generation with kites and drones






 

Here's the principal investigator of the Spanish team featured-

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gonzalo_Sanchez-Arriaga

On ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎20‎, ‎2019‎ ‎11‎:‎38‎:‎45‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CST, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24934 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: The Independent UK touts AWE
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24935 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24936 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24937 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news

Marine Energy Test Centre (Metcentre)



February 12, 2019

Quoting: 

12.02.2019   Makani LLC today announces a partnership with Shell. 

Makani will from June 2019 start a test program at Metcentre, Karmøy. Makani is an independent company founded by Alphabet (Google), based in California. They are developing energy kites that use a wing tethered to a ground station to generate electricity at utility-scale. They want energy kites to have a positive global impact, starting with a demonstration project in Norway.

==============end of quote=========

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karm%C3%B8y

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

Similar:

https://offshore-wind.no/makani-to-metcentre/
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24938 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news
Makani Power:
" We are also utilizing the experience and capabilities of more than two dozen Norwegian companies. "

It would be news to list the more than 24 Norwegian companies feeding the AWES project.   Anyone?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24939 From: dave santos Date: 2/20/2019
Subject: Re: Makani Power news
The IEEE Makani article has a revealing new M600 in Hawaii video. The design has been cleaned up and looks impressive to the world press; while its hidden power curve probably looks weak, given so much mass to sustain. Makani seems to have won its crazy bet and not crashed and burned for the PR flight. Don't expect many Hawaii flight hours. The pivot to Norway extends the venture game. The plot now resembles the Norwegian hit TV series, Lilyhammer, but the American mafia this time is Google trying to fence a hot Makani, and hilarity should ensue.

Shell's AWE angle is probably not to be masterminding AWE, or we would have detected signs. They just have lots of cash and have hit on AWE as great cheap PR for a company so deep into oil. For about the third time in fifteen years, we are seeing an AWE craze rock the global mediascape, and public awareness grows accordingly. If Big AWE begins as Google-Shell's Big Fail in the North Sea*, that's the golden moment for any better architecture to soar into the void.

=========

* Ask Rod if an M600 on a rather short offshore buoy can last a North Sea Winter. I think not. They may have to find a wave-protected bay that also has clean wind, a severe market-limiting constraint. Rogue wave clapotis must be epic along that shore, if anchored out there for every storm. We have discussed how big waves might suck the air out from under a struggling eVTOL, or sea-bird poop alone might kill a kiteplane several different ways. M600 engineering risk compounds offshore.



 

Makani Power:

" We are also utilizing the experience and capabilities of more than two dozen Norwegian companies. "

It would be news to list the more than 24 Norwegian companies feeding the AWES project.   Anyone?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24940 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

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

It seems fitting to dedicate a topic thread over the realm defined by the reach on Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) in the energy-kite systems universe.  Turning oil profits into kite systems that do good works might be one way to characterize the flow. 


Let's not miss the energy-kite flowering in the Shell field. And what bridges may yet be built with Shell by more AWES development centers?   

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

Royal Dutch Shell plc, commonly known as Shell, is a British-Dutch oil and gas company headquartered in the Netherlands and incorporated in the United Kingdom.

========================================
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24941 From: dave santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
Good topic JoeF, 

The challenge is that Shell is such a huge enterprise, but most AWE R&D is scattered small players. It would be a matter of luck if Shell or Google or any other big player actually leads broad engineering science research, rather than play the easy PR-venture game.

We once worried Google might buy dominance in AWE, but no way M600s can dominate any energy market. The funny possibility is that AWE may take off without existing institutional dominance. It could be a triumphant new AWE sector that buys up corporate oil dinosaurs for pennies-on-the-dollar, just to scavenge business components.

No one can monopolize AWE R&D for now. In the future every scale from Big AWE to DIY AWE can flourish. Big AWE will eventually become a very competitive huge global market with thin margins.



 

Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

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

It seems fitting to dedicate a topic thread over the realm defined by the reach on Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) in the energy-kite systems universe.  Turning oil profits into kite systems that do good works might be one way to characterize the flow. 


Let's not miss the energy-kite flowering in the Shell field. And what bridges may yet be built with Shell by more AWES development centers?   

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

Royal Dutch Shell plc, commonly known as Shell, is a British-Dutch oil and gas company headquartered in the Netherlands and incorporated in the United Kingdom.

========================================
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24942 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
 Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
    Kite systems involve wings and tethers among other assemblies leading to accomplishing tasks. Some of the parts of a kite system anchor other parts of the same system; and a part or an assembly may be seen in one perspective as an anchor and in another perspective as a wing or wing set. Parts "fly" or move in water or air or soil (dirt, ground, sea bed, etc.) or a combination of such media.  A kite system at sea joins its environment while fulfilling tasks. 

Review: 
  1. A small boat floating on a sea on which a person is holding a reel of line that extends to tether an air or water wing:  The wing is being anchored by the complex formed by tether, reel, hand, person, boat hull, and friction with the sea water.  The anchor system of the flown air wing or paravane wing set is complex. Delete any part of the complex anchor and thus alter the dynamics of the kite system. Neglecting engineering all parts in a kite-system anchor system may lead to unwanted results and surprises.   Reversing perspectives, the boat's hull may be seen as a wing of the kite system while the wing or paravane first considered may then be seen as anchoring the boat hull.  One may see echo of FFAWE in this rehearsal.  PTO (power take off)  may be inserted into the kite system in many ways in order to accomplish some intended task.

  2. A water-floating item (hull, buoy, body, raft, ship) may be free to travel over sea surfaces or may be further constrained by anchoring systems of various sorts. Both free or captured water-floating items may be employed in energy-kite systems. Indeed, the water-floating item may be the wing of a kite system while the system's tether set connects to water wings and/or seabed for anchoring. Again, PTO may be inserted in the kite system in various ways. 

  3. Some at-sea kite systems may employ a three-realm complex of wings and anchoring: air wings, sea-surface items, mid-deep-water items or wings, seafloor items or wings, and sub-sea-floor assemblies or wings. Balancing parts to accomplish tasks is the design game. Define a task and design a kite system to accomplish the task. 
A study of COTS hulls, buoys, wings, tethers, anchors, platforms, drogues, impellers, gravity blobs, etc. may help designers and innovators. A study of tasks may motivate designers and innovators to find kite-system solutions that will accomplish the tasks in focus. 

One big task is to produce electricity for electrical utility grids. Accomplishing this task by use of energy-kite systems at sea (off shore) beckons some workers. The lure of apparent non-congestion and lower reach to higher velocity winds are just two inviting Sirens of the sea. The sea will challenge heightened engineering because of other factors. 

=============================
buoy
anchor  
sea anchor  
spar buoy
midwater devices 
semi-submerged devices
Evopod 
articulated spar buoy  
ice floes
flotsam
submerged flotsam
claptotis  
..etc.
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24943 From: dave santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
Reminding where we left off on this topic, and where we are now:

Consider an M600 tethered to a comparable Minesto, that would be rather AWEsome. Also keep in mind simple kite/sea-anchor combo (a New Tech KayaKite comes with a sea anchor), and drogues formally as a wing limit-case. Many fine ideas are latent in JoeF's pioneering categorizations. The AWES Forum has done the most comprehensive exploration of opposed-kite concept spaces, which Wilson, German, and others gifted us.

Imagine a fleet of paravane/kite combos to tow-assist shipping and save fuel when conditions allow. Otherwise shipping keeps schedules by existing propulsion. We got this far in past years. Dave Culp had an early concept (~Y2K) of a kite-tugboat in similar role. We can now better see how to boost cruising velocity and closer to windward, just as foil-boarding and race-kites have matured.



 

 Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
    Kite systems involve wings and tethers among other assemblies leading to accomplishing tasks. Some of the parts of a kite system anchor other parts of the same system; and a part or an assembly may be seen in one perspective as an anchor and in another perspective as a wing or wing set. Parts "fly" or move in water or air or soil (dirt, ground, sea bed, etc.) or a combination of such media.  A kite system at sea joins its environment while fulfilling tasks. 

Review: 
  1. A small boat floating on a sea on which a person is holding a reel of line that extends to tether an air or water wing:  The wing is being anchored by the complex formed by tether, reel, hand, person, boat hull, and friction with the sea water.  The anchor system of the flown air wing or paravane wing set is complex. Delete any part of the complex anchor and thus alter the dynamics of the kite system. Neglecting engineering all parts in a kite-system anchor system may lead to unwanted results and surprises.   Reversing perspectives, the boat's hull may be seen as a wing of the kite system while the wing or paravane first considered may then be seen as anchoring the boat hull.  One may see echo of FFAWE in this rehearsal.  PTO (power take off)  may be inserted into the kite system in many ways in order to accomplish some intended task.

  2. A water-floating item (hull, buoy, body, raft, ship) may be free to travel over sea surfaces or may be further constrained by anchoring systems of various sorts. Both free or captured water-floating items may be employed in energy-kite systems. Indeed, the water-floating item may be the wing of a kite system while the system's tether set connects to water wings and/or seabed for anchoring. Again, PTO may be inserted in the kite system in various ways. 

  3. Some at-sea kite systems may employ a three-realm complex of wings and anchoring: air wings, sea-surface items, mid-deep-water items or wings, seafloor items or wings, and sub-sea-floor assemblies or wings. Balancing parts to accomplish tasks is the design game. Define a task and design a kite system to accomplish the task. 
A study of COTS hulls, buoys, wings, tethers, anchors, platforms, drogues, impellers, gravity blobs, etc. may help designers and innovators. A study of tasks may motivate designers and innovators to find kite-system solutions that will accomplish the tasks in focus. 

One big task is to produce electricity for electrical utility grids. Accomplishing this task by use of energy-kite systems at sea (off shore) beckons some workers. The lure of apparent non-congestion and lower reach to higher velocity winds are just two inviting Sirens of the sea. The sea will challenge heightened engineering because of other factors. 

=============================
buoy
anchor  
sea anchor  
spar buoy
midwater devices 
semi-submerged devices
Evopod 
articulated spar buoy  
ice floes
flotsam
submerged flotsam
claptotis  
...etc.
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24944 From: dougselsam Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
Yes now that we've had over a decade to develop land-based AWE systems, they are working so well the only way to make them better is more wind, unruly seas, freezing weather, injured seagulls, tangled fishing tackle, and salt-water getting in the generator!
I like the part where JoeF says "One big task is to produce electricity for electrical utility grids"
I'm thinking, really?  After ten years and we're still just talking about the main theme of AWE as "one big task"?  I thought it was "the main idea", and I thought there were at least ten companies claiming they were going to have done so long ago.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24945 From: dougselsam Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
"Big AWE will eventually become a very competitive huge global market with thin margins."
*** And as the leading AWE researcher and expert, you will buy up all the oil companies right after you retrofit the nuke plants to be powered by Bose-Einstein arrays of flapping, oscillating, or dutch-rolling single-skin kites.

"We once worried Google might buy dominance in AWE, but no way M600s can dominate any energy market."
*** So what has changed from then til now?  Why did you worry then but not now?  Do you mean now you're starting to disbelieve the ongoing (what turn out to be) "false statements of future activity"?  Why could M600's dominate any energy market before, but cannot now?

Did daveS say we are already at 12 years of the current hype-cycle in AWE?  Still nothing in daily operation?  Hmmmmm....  "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"  Can you say "Boy who cried Wolf"?


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

Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems

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

It seems fitting to dedicate a topic thread over the realm defined by the reach on Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) in the energy-kite systems universe.  Turning oil profits into kite systems that do good works might be one way to characterize the flow. 


Let's not miss the energy-kite flowering in the Shell field. And what bridges may yet be built with Shell by more AWES development centers?   

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

Royal Dutch Shell plc, commonly known as Shell, is a British-Dutch oil and gas company headquartered in the Netherlands and incorporated in the United Kingdom.

========================================
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24946 From: Santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
Doug overlooks that AWE has saved fuel in powered aviation, by seeking tailwinds, for over a century. Also, it won't be my job to do eventual M&A in AWE, my happy role is to explore domain art.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24947 From: Santos Date: 2/21/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
Doug seems unaware AWE land systems date back millennia, just like wind turbines, and electrical application took over a century to mature. If Doug has been a failure by his own criteria, that's his fate.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24948 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
"Doug overlooks that AWE has saved fuel in powered aviation, by seeking tailwinds, for over a century. Also, it won't be my job to do eventual M&A in AWE, my happy role is to explore domain art."
*** Silly to say I overlook it since we've been discussing whether it is included in wind energy statistics for ten years.  Oh well, what's one more inaccurate statement at this point?  Have fun!


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24949 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas

"---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24950 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
Doug, I expertly critiqued Makani's architecture in 2009, when it was announced. You did not. There was never doubt in my mind their concept was marginal, based on it's low power-to-weight and high complexity, high mass, and high velocity, but now that it's been rolled out, it's tested power curve and MTBF can confirm what predictions were most realistic. Similarly, you seem unable to forsee Shell's deep-pockets endgame, in covering AWE R&D broadly from KPS to Makani, may well converge on whatever works best, by an AE test engineering culture you mock, while imagining your driveshaft down-select can somehow prevail. Good luck.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24951 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
Doug, you have been sitting around not doing much but complaining for a decade, compared to the leaders in AWE. The tower-based example you cite was after all an engineering professor, no comparative crackpot with an empty slogan, like "every road..."
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24952 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
daveS: "Also, it won't be my job to do eventual M&A in AWE, my happy role is to explore domain art."
*** from DougS: I'd say your role is to be happy fooling around, while never producing a machine that returns much energy. if any.  There are unlimited ways NOT to do AWE.  Success would require focusing on at least one way that would work in the sense of reliably returning energy in economically-useful amounts.  If you say you're heading toward New York, but keep heading toward New Orleans, you won't make your destination.  I think your role so far has been to yap it up on the internet and fool around with a few kites.  Only you could change that.  The people who developed the "pumping parasol" hopping version of a "flying machine" had a similar "happy role to explore domain art" - the only thing is, their understanding of what was needed to make the art work was lacking.  They were not even close.  Hence, "the bloopers".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24953 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Royal Dutch Shell and Energy-Kite Systems
Wrong, the Wright Brothers were the happy testers of all kinds of ideas, not the pack of one-idea cranks. My favored ideas from testing center on COTS power kites, like ship kites, combined with rope-drive. It's the ST that has far less power and practical potential, as your stalled prototyping suggests.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24954 From: dougselsam Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
The tower-based example I cite worked for 20 years, as a first iteration.  I cited it in response to your attempted excuse for AWE pretending it took a century to get a wind turbine to work.  No, it took one try.  There is such a thing in this world as people who know what the hell they're doing.  There is such a thing as people who can just do things, as opposed to people who endlessly brag about things they "will do" at some mythical future time.  Hey, you can call what I've been saying for ten years "complaining", or you could also say I've made sure at least one person accurately described what was really going on.  That's so in retrospect, it can be seen that not everyone was so gullible and lacking in basic knowledge as to just believe all the hype.  As far as where "all roads lead", I guess you'll have to wait to see which road goes anywhere at all.  So far. it looks like everyone took the wrong road(s).  Even though I have plenty of other workable ideas, I think I'll stand by my previous statement in that one, for now anyway.  You seem to want to pretend it has somehow been disproven.  No, it is slowly being proven by the process of elimination, and by the recent success of even amateurs trying various versions.


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24955 From: Santos Date: 2/22/2019
Subject: Re: Kite-System Anchoring in Seas
Yes, try and test your 1000ft shaft, even better, test it offshore like your latest patent aims. It won't be your first try, but neither did the Wright Brothers succeed in one try.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24956 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/23/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite
Attachments :

    Hi DaveS,


    I am continuing the experiments. Perhaps some instability can be explored but later. For now I look after a isotropic kite stable enough. Is it possible? The parachute I use deflates at the slightest wind change. Generally parasails have stability by slots, and as slots are settled in regard to the wind direction they are not more isotropic kites. 

    The single skin Lynn pilot kite (see attachment) also used for Daisy, is almost an isotropic kite, but not quite. So studying a design...
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24957 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: ORE Catapult

    ORE Catapult
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24958 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Mike Blanch Associate Director BVG Associates
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24959 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Airborne generators
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24960 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Re: ORE Catapult
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24961 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Re: ORE Catapult
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24962 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Re: ORE Catapult
    The literature explaining their idea of the future of offshore wind reads like a checklist of proven bad ideas.
    Vertical-axis with maglev bearings: the go-to first attempt by people with no knowledge of wind energy to nonetheless "invent" something "new" in wind energy.  As though the bearings are the problem.  Geez.  I think part of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome" is wanting to include things that "just sound scientific", or things that are different just to be different, but without actual merit.  "Maglev."  "vertical-axis".  "Bose-Einstein" "drones".  Anything that reminds us of some recent scientific-sounding article.  Sound familiar?  The comedy section of the Windpower conferences.  Vertical-axis turbines "in their infancy" - yes and they always will be, because they have been found lacking and were abandoned as "bloopers".  Promoted as a solution to the heavy blades of regular turbines - but they usually have heavier blades - facts?  Who cares!  Knowledge - what?  The side-by-side multi-rotor offshore arrays - first promoted by Heronemus "the father of wind energy" (whose first patent references my patent) were never built, but a few similar ones have since been tried on land (as discussed on this forum) and had inter-turbine vibration issues.  Of course the people writing these articles have no such knowledge - for them, everything is "a newborn baby", a projection of the authors' "newborn" (uneducated and inexperienced) status.
    Interesting how 3 of 4 of the pics I saw used the vertical-tube floating foundation I invented, which is now copied by everyone, yet few people are even aware that it first appeared in my first wind energy patent, resulting in my newest U.S. patent now covering it for U.S. Waters.
    I wonder if some of the AWE people might, by now, be starting to realize the endlessly-repeating nature of wannabe wind energy innovation by amateurs and outsiders: they seldom have even a clue, seldom exhibit any working knowledge, usually promote known bad ideas, and by this point I don't think it will ever change.  One thing I'm trying to learn from it is how often actual expertise in a given field is for real, and trying to reinvent every wheel often places one into some well-understood category of previous discarded concepts, in whatever field.
    I will say though I still believe nobody has given simple side-by-side arrays the decent chance they deserve.  Besides the inter-turbine vibration issues of arrays of large rotors on one tower structure, maybe with smaller turbines it could work out OK.  Certainly it would be easier to test small before going big.  I'm not aware of rthat concept having moved far beyond a few back-of-the-envelope sketches and patent drawings.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24963 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Re: Airborne generators
    "After five years of development, Makani is partnering with Shell to bring energy kites to the offshore environment"
    ***I'm remembering ten (10) or eleven (11) years of development, but that doesn't sound so good by this point, with still nothing running, does it?

    Well, let's be patient and wait a few more years, so we can see if "Doug" got it right again.

    Every time some "household-name" company is cited in alternative wind energy, people fall all over themselves thinking the future has arrived.  Honeywell.  Mitsubishi. Google.  Boeing.  Airbus.  NASA.  MIT.  UDelfts.  Even the former director of the NWTC!  (Who wouldda thought?  Money talks!)  On and on, "the syndrome" is alive and well...   :)
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24964 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Lots of whacky wind ideas in this website
    Many discussed on this forum over the years:
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24965 From: dougselsam Date: 2/26/2019
    Subject: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea

    "Urban environment" - they always say that for verticals - part of "the syndrome"...
    Its because these turbines like to listen to hip-hop.
    oh well turn it sideways and fly it.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24966 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
    Subject: Re: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea
    Doug overlooks his own patented design of an ST with a VAWT at the base. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24967 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/27/2019
    Subject: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…
    Attachments :

      https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331312828_KiteGen_Research_High_Altitude_Wind_Generation_Tropospheric_Wind_Exploitation_Under_Structural_and_Technological_Constraints

      “The harvest efficiency of the KiteGen is always lower than the Betz limit by design, but the power harvested is threefold that of a wind turbine of equivalent size because of the lesser brake effect on the air masses, resulting in a higher speed of the airflow elaborated by the larger aerodynamic surface wiped.”

      Is this statement supported with some analysis?


      Another interesting point: “The Carousel architecture is fully operational 8,300 hours per year because it has a cut-in speed that matches nominal power. This greatly reduces the minimum wind speed requirement, creating a remarkable capacity factor of more than 95%, resolving any intermittency issues and providing humankind access to a tremendous energy accumulator represented by the atmospheric geostrophic pseudo-flywheel.”

      This paper evokes several topics that deserve to be more studied.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24968 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
      Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…
      Little new here. The big questions for KiteGen remain unanswered- how can they launch in surface calm (blowers never worked) and what happened with their big semi-rigid wings in testing. It's presumed KiteGen has not resolved these critical aspects, or they would cite the advances. 

      The paper errs fundamentally in dismissing square-cube scaling limit in AWE, which far more severely applies to semi-rigid kite design like KiteGen's, than conventional wind power.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24969 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
      Subject: Re: Another interesting (probbly crackpot) idea
      No, this 2007 VAWT item is not interesting in an AWE context (wrong forum). More interesting here is for Doug to show his 1000ft ST driveshaft is not "probbly crackpot" (sic) as an AWE basis.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24970 From: Santos Date: 2/27/2019
      Subject: Re: Mike Blanch Associate Director BVG Associates
      Mike Blanch is an off-shore wind-tech expert taking an early look at AWE. His prediction, that 2030 is the probable major market entry point for AWE, matches the 2030 timeframe WoW and KiteLabs calculated from critical path analysis. 

      Welcoming MikeB 2.0 ;)
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24971 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2019
      Subject: Scaling challenge for AWES noted in IEEE Spectrum article
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24972 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: Scaling challenge for AWES noted in IEEE Spectrum article
      This second IEEE Spectrum article in just a few days signals a new level of professional engineering awareness in AWE. Scaling up is indeed the major challenge, but ship kites have the highest TRL, almost COTS.

      Roland sees AWE control as inherently complex, while the big complexity gap in the new numeric modeling is likely in oversimplified wind-field chaos. The best AWES control may yet be the simplest, for topologically stabilized wing networks, which may not yet even be supported in the new code.

      Increasing engineering awareness is great for AWE, regardless of all our differing approaches.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24973 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…
      "“The Carousel architecture is fully operational 8,300 hours per year because..."
      *** Silly to read this stuff.  Flights of fantasy.  Stating wishes as facts. "If wishes were fishes..."
      After 200 man-years, where is the machine operating at all, let alone 8300 hours per year?
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24974 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: KiteGen Research High Altitude Wind Generation…
      Doug confuses a KG theoretic claim as a false tested claim, and once again reasons that AWE should develop at his impatient  emotional sense of time, rather than it's natural historic pace.

      At least KiteGen in 2006 made more power far higher than any ST may ever do, and KG's story is more topical than "crackpot" concerns.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24975 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: Lots of (more) whacky wind ideas in this website
      The previous link ended in /4/
      I tried modifying it to /3/ and came up with tons more ideas.
      Turns out you can put in 1 through 6 or 7 and pull up many more ideas.
      Not that they are all good ideas necessarily, but might spark a good idea.


      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <dougselsam@...
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24976 From: Santos Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: Lots of (more) whacky wind ideas in this website
      It seems SWE has mostly converged wind ideas to fabric wind dams. Old Kitelabs' review and testing suggests wind dams are a marginal extraction basis compared to the same polymer mass of a power kite hauling a rope drive.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24977 From: dougselsam Date: 2/28/2019
      Subject: Re: KiteGen Research Hig h Altitude Wind Generation…
      "Doug confuses", "Doug overlooks" etc. etc. etc.
      No, what I was reading "confused" a theoretic claim with a real claim.
      (I'm merely commenting on what I read)
      They stated a theoretical claim as though it was already happening.
      That has exactly been my main point from day-one - people describing their "wishes" as though they were actual caught "fishes" ready to take home and filet.
      There is no limit to what crackpots will say or claim.
      Why?  Because it's all hypothetical as long as they never have to show you it working.
      As long as someone will keep buying their BS, they will keep selling it.
      Wind energy crackpotism jumped to a whole new level with the prospect of AWE.
      Now it's right up there with religion and politics as a venue of endless, almost exclusively false statements.
      You'd think after ten years of hearing the same empty claims from team after team, that later simply disappear (giving up without even giving an "exit interview") you'd see the pattern by now.
      DaveS you keep claiming to be the top researcher in AWE.
      After ten years as this self-described top dawg, what's your most promising project to date?
      Your best performance in Watts?
      What the most important breakthrough you have achieved?  Why is it important?
      What solutions have you arrived at, after your decade of being the most prolific airborne wind energy researcher?  How about daveS "confuses" empty talk with action?  How about daveS "overlooks" that all of his supposed research has generated almost zero power? 


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