Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 27143 to 27192 Page 434 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27143 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27144 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27145 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27146 From: Santos Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27147 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Drone launching of kited wing manned or unmanned?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27148 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Betz's law: validity and limits

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27149 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Clouds and AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27150 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Clouds and AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27151 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Betz's law: validity and limits

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27152 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27153 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27154 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27155 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27156 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27157 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27158 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27159 From: dougselsam Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27160 From: dougselsam Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27161 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27162 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27163 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27164 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27165 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27166 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27167 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27168 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
Subject: Re: Minesto News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
Subject: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27170 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
Subject: Re: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27171 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
Subject: Re: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27172 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
Subject: Re: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27173 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27174 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27175 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27176 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27177 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27178 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Minesto News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27179 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27180 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27181 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27182 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27183 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27184 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Minesto News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27185 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Traction News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27186 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27187 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27188 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27189 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27190 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27191 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27192 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27143 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate
I precise: "The author intended to take some energy from the about 40% of wind energy..."
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27144 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/3/2019
Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate
Attachments :

    PierreB, You say I’m wrong, but you give no evidence.

    I accept that you do not want to understand the ALT.

    Please don’t bother me any more. Just let it go.

    PeterS

     

    From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2019 2:31 PM
    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: RE: [AWES] The gear which does not rotate

     

     

    PeterS,

     

     

    You wrote: "The answer to your question is that there is no generator shaft attached to yy’." 

    Bad reply. I will give you two more tries before I permanently close the subject.

     

    Another hint: you wrote "The stationary gear does not rotate the central shaft."

    It is right.

    Yet another hint: you wrote "The generator shaft is xx”. "

    It is not the generator, it is one of the two generators. It is clearly indicated in the patent, in French language and in the translation. 



    Note also the author mentions "fluide hydraulique" that is also correctly translated into "hydraulic fluid".  The author uses the same expression for his other patents and wants mean "wind" (!!).  



    As I think you will not take account of the patent, I provide you the reason why ALT cannot work before closing the topic. The author intended to take the about 40% of wind energy that is not used in Betz Law which mentions that the limit is 59% as we know. It is not possible. Period. Betz Law is ... a law, not a rule. 

    Note it applies to a disk plane (particularly for current HAWT) but not quite for a device that is not in a disk plane, that due to partial renewal of the wind and possible other effects.



    So you have two more tries.



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27145 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/3/2019
    Subject: Re: The gear which does not rotate
    PeterS,

    Bad reply. Now it will be your last attempt. 

    If your reply will be not correct, I will close the topic but I in the same time I will give you the right answer, re precising that the question I ask is not fundamental. Then I will lead you with your 0.61 or 0.64 ALT VAWT.  Note that I am happy to not understand ALT, preferring understand right concepts.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27146 From: Santos Date: 7/3/2019
    Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
    The Danish physics serves, fantasy or not. 

    The toy rotor has an elongation dimension of force on tap that Betz by itself lacks.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27147 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/3/2019
    Subject: Drone launching of kited wing manned or unmanned?

    Earlier in forum we linked to a patent featuring unmanned drone towing a manned hang glider (kited manned wing) with aim of releasing the tow to effect free gliding of the manned hang glider.   We have also discussed using unmanned drone to launch kited wing intended to work as electricity-generating system.  


    Along the same spirit is a contemporary article HERE. 

    Multicopter towing for paragliders and hang gliders

    Text and graphics by Bernd Otterpohl

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27148 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/4/2019
    Subject: Betz's law: validity and limits

    There are many discussions leading to Betz's law and its validity.

    In first what is Betz's law? Betz's law is note a rule, but is a physical law. This law states there is a limit of kinetic energy of wind an idealized turbine can capture through an idealized disk-shaped area section. This limit is 16/27.


    Theoretically Betz's limit applies to all sorts of wind turbines.

    But pratically current HAWT are closer to the idealized turbine because their rotor has roughly two dimensions, leading to a swept area roughly corresponding to the idealized disk-shaped area section, so in a configuration preventing any renewal of the wind.


    If the turbine works in three dimensions, like VAWT, some renewal of the wind occurs. Said renewal of the wind could be neglected for small turbines but not for very large turbines which become far from the idealized turbine within an idealized disk-shaped area section. This has nothing to do with the eternal "beat the Betz limit" generally leading to so-called "breakthrough" but in reality fancy concepts of which one (ALT) recently discussed.


    Other turbines are expected to work in three dimensions, comprising AWES. By considering the frontal airspace of wind which is swept, Betz's law could be used but only as a first approximation. JoeF provides an example for a 1 km long snake: the renewal of wind occurs, and there are also other concerns like wakes, so said snake is very far to an idealized turbine capturing wind through an idealized disk-shaped area section. 


    This leads to Dabiri's work. He states the whole of a wind-farm should be considered, not the addition of parts, indicating that a single wind turbine facing the wind is more efficient in regard to Betz's law, but several turbines facing the wind lead to more important losses due to the wake effect. Resulting when the turbines are skew the whole wind-farm becomes more efficient. 


    In Dabiri's work, but also for AWES or other large devices working in three dimensions, the volume of air is considered, implying the renewal of the wind and the wake effect within said volume. So this could lead to find a rule, perhaps a law, concerning a limit of kinetic energy of wind that could be captured within said volume of air. 


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27149 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
    Subject: Clouds and AWE

    Clouds and AWE

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

    • Know clouds
    • Incidents in AWE and clouds
    • AWE flight planning and clouds
    • Rules and governance and clouds.  Waivers. 
    • Physics of clouds
    • AWE opportunities with clouds
    • Harvesting cloud moisture
    • Identification of clouds
    • Symbols for clouds
    • FFAWE and clouds
    • Absence of clouds
    • Cloud wiki
    • Video: Know Your Clouds - U.S. Army Aviation Training Film (1966)
    • ... ??

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27150 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
    Subject: Re: Clouds and AWE
    https://youtu.be/H2Pe4G6vfYY  

    Weather Basics: Clouds and Precipitation




    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27151 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/4/2019
    Subject: Re: Betz's law: validity and limits
    Some correction for my previous post: "practically" (typo), then some clarifying in the penultimate paragraph:

    This leads to Dabiri's work on https://nawindpower.com/stanford-researchers-boost-wind-productivity-with-wake-steering. He states that "we need […] to start thinking about the farm as a whole, and not just as the sum of its parts”, indicating that a single wind turbine facing the wind is more efficient in regard to Betz’s law, but several turbines facing the wind lead to more important losses due to the wake effect. Resulting when the turbines are “slightly away from oncoming wind” the whole wind-farm becomes more efficient.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27152 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
    Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
    Attachments :

      DaveS, You don’t understand the Betz limit. Fantasy physics.

      PeterS

       

      From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
      Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2019 6:56 PM
      To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [AWES] Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

       

       

      The Danish physics serves, fantasy or not. 

       

      The toy rotor has an elongation dimension of force on tap that Betz by itself lacks.

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27153 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
      Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
      The Betz Limit applies to an infinitely thin planar disc. That's why an elongated screw can develop greater-than-Betz performance.

      As reported here years ago in this case, wake entrainment is the working principle (not all wakes are bad).

      This is what modern understanding of Betz is like. There is also a thermal way to "beat Betz" in principle, extracting heat energy from wind.

      Betz can be beat under QM as well, that's an advanced analytic lense.

      Beating Betz is a science delight, not just a crank turbine claim.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27154 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
      Subject: Re: Study to know what novelty lives in US8931727
       Note: links are not provided in this posted note
      ============================

      Modeling, Simulation and Flight Testing to Support Proof of a Stratospheric Dual Aircraft Platform Concept
      • January 2018
      • DOI: 
      • 10.2514/6.2018-1492.c1
      • Conference: 2018 AIAA Information Systems-AIAA Infotech @ Aerospace
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27155 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
      Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
      The Betz game; it has rules and a specific playing court sized carefully.
      Different games may be played--games with different rules and different sized playing court.

      Entrainment downwind involves wake use and fresh-wind use; such begins to play a game different than the Betz game.   But both games deal with slowing the wind; both games for specific turbines have a limit to the power conversion. Somehow the analysis of both games will be looking at what happens to affected volumes of wind before and after interacting with the turbines.


      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27156 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
      Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
      Am seeing many beyond-Betz source. Many theoretic loopholes have been identified and corrected in academic literature. 

      We have reviewed some of the advancing mathematical physics. Great stuff. Also look at WP on Scientific Law, it's not what Betz diehards may allow. Also a test of Doug's WP-uselessness claim.

      Aero-Thermodynamics of Lift Enthalpy offer a more accurate and explanatory model for max Cp of a real turbine. Once again, wind far-field effects count, but have been neglected by past models.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27157 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
      Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
      Attachments :

        DaveS,

        The Betz Limit applies to an infinitely thin planar disc. That's why an elongated screw can develop greater-than-Betz performance.”

        That is wrong. You don’t know what you are talking about. Fantasy physics.

        PeterS

         

         

        From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
        Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2019 9:01 AM
        To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [AWES] Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

         

         

        The Betz Limit applies to an infinitely thin planar disc. That's why an elongated screw can develop greater-than-Betz performance.

         

        As reported here years ago in this case, wake entrainment is the working principle (not all wakes are bad).

         

        This is what modern understanding of Betz is like. There is also a thermal way to "beat Betz" in principle, extracting heat energy from wind.

         

        Betz can be beat under QM as well, that's an advanced analytic lense.

         

        Beating Betz is a science delight, not just a crank turbine claim.

        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27158 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27159 From: dougselsam Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        daveS said: "Also a test of Doug's WP-uselessness claim."

        DougS replies: Mischaracterizing my statements, as usual:
        I have no problem with Wikipedia.  And never said I did.
        You're trying one of your shell-games again, trying to change the discussion to obfuscate which shell the bean is under. 

        What I think is silly is referring to Wikipedia a thousand times, in thousands of mostly useless discussions where no wind energy solutions are being developed at all, meanwhile you go on and on and on about Wikipedia and word definitions for 12 years, all the while never getting anything working.

        Wikipedia is fine for what it is, but don't you have anything better to do?   Is there anything more to engineering than constantly referring to a general-audience encyclopedia and trying to rewrite the dictionary?  Most serious technology developers utilize references beyond the lowest-common-denominator. 

        Are you going to "Wikipedia" your way to finally generating any power?  No.  If you have chickenpox, a symptom is little red spots all over.  If you suffer from The Professor Crackpot Syndrome, a symptom might be referring to Wikipedia a thousand times while claiming to be a top wind energy researcher and never generating any electricity.  Not to mention spending all day analyzing the latest vertical-axis-rescue-rumor.  That's like you have the spots AND the fever.  Wikipedia is great, but you can't connect it to a power-meter!


        ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27160 From: dougselsam Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        You are all talk.  Real wind people do not feel the need to go on endlessly about Betz.
        The people who talk about Betz the most are typically the least likely to come anywhere near even approaching it.  I see we threw in some quantum mechanics too - genius!  And the thermal thing: bravo.  Add a multi-stage compressor,  Combustion chamber, and a multi-stage reactive turbine section inject JP-1 fuel, ignite.  Let's add a high-bypass set of blades on the output for fun.
        Thanks for inventing the quantum-mechanical betz-beater jet engine daveS. 

        When people who can make no power in wind nonetheless talk of their delight in beating the Betz coefficient, that is like having the headache, weakly stumbling while coughing and sneezing, in addition to the fever and red spots.  Diagnosis: Extreme case of The Professor Crackpot Syndrome.  (insert Twilight Zone Music here)  Anything else today?


        ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27161 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        Sorry PeterS, except yourself, multi sources agree Betz's math is based on an infinitely thin swept disc.

        Betz math is idealization, not fantasy. Betz dogma really is fantasy. Better equations of max Cp are known. Euler would have loved this toy turbine upset of Betz dogma.

        Those who think Betz is somehow perfect don't understand it. It's never been more than a crude approximation.

        Another Betz-beater is favorable pressure gradient between high and low pressure, like real wind. Had Betz math included this major factor, it would sum higher.

        Cool; how many exceptions will we find?
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27162 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        Doug still feels a need to go on about Betz.

        It's a good indicator of how subtle a person's turbine knowledge is.


        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27163 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
        Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
        Attachments :

          DaveS, Again you are avoiding the relevant distinction. Nobody is arguing against Betz. That is not the issue. You do not understand how to make use of the Betz limit with respect to WECs other that single rotor HAWT.

          PeterS

           

          From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
          Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2019 3:44 PM
          To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [AWES] Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

           

           

          Sorry PeterS, except yourself, multi sources agree Betz's math is based on an infinitely thin swept disc.

           

          Betz math is idealization, not fantasy. Betz dogma really is fantasy. Better equations of max Cp are known. Euler would have loved this toy turbine upset of Betz dogma.

           

          Those who think Betz is somehow perfect don't understand it. It's never been more than a crude approximation.

           

          Another Betz-beater is favorable pressure gradient between high and low pressure, like real wind. Had Betz math included this major factor, it would sum higher.

           

          Cool; how many exceptions will we find?

          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27164 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
          Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
          Doug, Wikipedia helps sort out the crackpot ideas, without just helplessly crying wolf.

          WP Betz = planar disc idealization
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27165 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
          Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
          I am arguing against Betz. It's obsolete. Sucks. This takes understanding 
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27166 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/4/2019
          Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
          Attachments :

            DaveS, You just demonstrated again that you do not understand the Betz limit. It is not obsolete.

            PeterS

             

            From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
            Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2019 4:05 PM
            To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [AWES] Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)

             

             

            I am arguing against Betz. It's obsolete. Sucks. This takes understanding 

            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27167 From: Santos Date: 7/4/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Betz's obsolete in the ordinary sense Newton is; physics has relentlessly advanced.

            Betz is totally obsolete for AWE because it disregards gravity. AWE's max Cp is extremely gravity sensitive; the power cost of flight mass.

            Betz was a Nazi, and not even originator of the idea named for him. That's social obsolescence on top of technical obsolescence.

            Betz explains almost nothing and does not help design. If you know better, add some insight.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27168 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/4/2019
            Subject: Re: Minesto News
            Minesto gets funding for Deep Green development
            Published note dated: 4 July 2019

            "The Swedish Energy Agency has awarded marine energy developer Minesto a SEK 12.5 million grant ..."

            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
            Subject: Traction News

            This topic thread might be used to post news on noteworthy traction AWES.

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

            A recent news point: 


            Louis Dreyfus signs up for kite system

            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27170 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
            Subject: Re: Traction News
            Big order potential! 

            K Line swoops for Seawing’s kite system


            "The Seawing automated system, developed by Airseas"


            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27171 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
            Subject: Re: Traction News
            International Wind Ship Association
            has some members involving kite system AWES

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


            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27172 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/5/2019
            Subject: Re: Traction News

            New Release

            =======================================
            Breakthrough in green shipping: the Japanese KAWASAKI KISEN KAISHA, LTD. (“K” LINE) signs for up to 50 automated kites from AIRSEAS Oslo, Norway: After 2 years of close technical and business cooperation, KAWASAKI KISEN KAISHA, LTD. (“K” LINE) announces a 20-year agreement with AIRSEAS to install and service one ship with Seawing, an automated kite based on parafoil technology used to tow commercial ship and reduce CO2 by 20% through wind propulsion. Once the first Seawing is successfully delivered, “K”LINE will contemplate to order up to 50 additional Seawing.

             “Seawing represents a breakthrough for our industry and for the environment. “K”LINE is proud to demonstrate its commitment to the global environment by applying leading technology to improve ship efficiency and to solve the core issues of maritime emissions. Beyond reducing our emissions by more than 20% with its kite, AIRSEAS is a top end digital partner looking at integrating their solution with our “Kawasaki Integrated Maritime Solutions” which is integrated vessel operation and performance management system in order to smartly manage our vessel operation. Seawing reduces the environmental footprint of capsize vessel by 5,200 tons of CO2 per year depending on the vessel voyage route, that is contributing to achieving our goal to reduce CO2 emissions by half, targeting year 2050, in “K”LINE Environmental Vision 2050.” says Mr Asano, SMEO of “K”LINE. 

            The Japanese “K”LINE, known for its excellence in safety and service quality, transports goods worldwide through its fleet of 520 vessels.

             “We are proud that K-LINE as a leading ship owner confirms its trust towards AIRSEAS following its two years of intense assessment of our solution. With this deal, AIRSEAS will kick-start its industrial scale up. Seawing’s innovative technology will become a leading energy efficient solution for the shipping industry, thus contributing to cleaner sky and oceans.” says Mr Bernatets, CEO of AIRSEAS. 

            ### 

            About “K”LINE: “K”LINE (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, LTD.) just celebrated its 100th anniversary and operates 520 vessels worldwide in dry bulk, energy resource transport and car carrying. Its corporate principal is to contribute to society so that people live well and prosperously. Innovating to preserve the environment is therefore one top priority in line with its corporate values. 

            About AIRSEAS: AIRSEAS combines aeronautical know-how in modelling and control laws with maritime technology to bring a game changing energy efficiency solution to shipping. As a spin-off of AIRBUS, it aims at equipping 15% of the world’s fleet by 2030. Its partners and supports are LMG Marin, MaxSea, ENSM, Nervures, ADEME, PIA, Région Occitanie and Région Pays de la Loire. 

            About Seawing: Seawing combines aeronautical know-how with maritime technology to create a breakthrough in the maritime transportation sector. A simple switch launches or recovers the kite which unfolds, operates and refolds autonomously. The system collects and analyses meteorological and oceanic data in real-time. Seawing adapts to this information in order to optimize its performance as well as to ensure maximum safety. 

            Contact for the media 
            communication@airseas.com 
            +33699707243 
            AIRSEAS 
            5 Rue Humbert Tomatis 
            31200 TOULOUSE 

            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27173 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            daveS, you posted about Betz 4 minutes before your post below..
            Then you posted about Betz again, 1 hour and 11 minutes fter your post below.
            5 minutes later, you posted about Betz again.
            29 minutes after that, you posted about Betz yet again.
            22 minutes later, you posted about Betz again.
             funny thing about accertain type of people, and it's pretty-well known:
            They always accuse others of doing exactly what they themselves do.


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27174 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Everyone knows that.  By now, even people here should understand Betz.


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27175 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27176 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Doug, I think Betz is a fine topic to review the evolution of aerodynamics.

             It's only you here that thinks it's somehow unworthy, but here you are.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27177 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            In addition to accusing others of the accuser's own sins (going on and on about Betz), this certain type of person degenerates technical discussions to name-calling, politics, and personal attacks on influential people unable to defend themselves.  Today, "betz is obsolete" and energy "suffers from overreliance on power-meters".  Anything else we need to know?


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27178 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Minesto News
            And today in "future-news"...
            (How many times do you have to read the same basic repeating headline before you go "big deal"?)
            What else, they ordered another bolt?

            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <joefaust333@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27179 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            DougS,

            PeterS seems unwilling to agree Betz is a planar disc model, hence the multiple questions. The next step is review of more realistic higher dimensional Cp models, to compare with Betz numerics.

            Understanding Betz is understanding it's limitations as a realistic model. The missing gravity and flight factors are critical shortcomings regular wind folks ignore.

            Repetition is simply whatever the learning curve demands.


            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27180 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Traction News
            More "future-news"...  :)  Did the boy cry wolf again?  This boy suspects more "emperor's clothes". 


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <joefaust333@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27181 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Who says Betz is "invalid"? It's accepted as governing its planar disc assumption.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27182 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            DougS,

            It's not power meters as such that matters. It's whether the testing is by certified third-party metering; that's what Gipe cares about.

            Anyone who needs a power meter to judge kite power should use one. Often just shorting the Gen to max load from no load is enough.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27183 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Two (2) days ago you said:
            "Doug still feels a need to go on about Betz. It's a good indicator of how subtle a person's turbine knowledge is." 
            So, who is it that "feels a need to go on about Betz"?  Answer?  You, the one person who needn't concern himself with the Betz coefficient at all, since you never come anywhere near even approaching it.

            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27184 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Minesto News
            12 million in gov funding is more news than slogan repetition of "All Roads...".

            Helpless complaining is not news either.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27185 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Traction News
            Once again, the power kite moves forward.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27186 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Doug, we both feel the need to go on about Betz.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27187 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Betz is a planar model, taken loosely as an "intercepted area" model.
            There is nothing in betz requiring a disc, per se, just area
            Too bad after 12 years where you could have earned.3 PhD's, you're still trying to figure out what you don't understand about Betz.

            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27188 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Still going on about Betz, huh?  Wow.  If you don't get it by now, you never will.


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27189 From: dougselsam Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Sure daveS, the new industry standard for "the special class" is just short the generator and estimate (just pick your favorite number) how much power you would like to say your configuration "is" "producing".  Or "could produce" if you were able to run it.  Great technical advice.  The only thing missing is your device needs to OUTPUT power, not prevent power output.  Being resistant to connecting your generator to a load, let alone any meters, is part of you being "allergic to facts".  If an AWE system falls in the forest and doesn't output any power, and nobody measures any power, did it really even fall?  Of course, when you are an "expert" like daveS, measuring power is a useless annoyance.  As they say in fake journalism, "Never let facts get in the way of a good story."


            ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27190 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            The swept disc assumption is intended as realistic, the shape a quasi-planar turbine rotor spins in.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27191 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Doug, we do get Betz here; that for AWE it's a very poor Cp model because it omits flight physics.

            We also repeat much knowledge for those new or struggling.
            Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27192 From: Santos Date: 7/6/2019
            Subject: Re: Toy Wind Turbines that beat Betz (review)
            Shorting a generator is a standard for max load.