Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                                      AWES27807to27857
Page 6 of 9.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27807 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27808 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27809 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27810 From: Joe Faust Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27811 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27812 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27813 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27814 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27815 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27816 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27817 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27818 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27819 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27820 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27821 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27822 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27823 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27825 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27826 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stuttgar

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27827 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stut

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27828 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27829 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27830 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27831 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stut

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27832 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27833 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27834 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27835 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27836 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27837 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27838 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27839 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27840 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Extinct Delta Wing Lizard in its own class of "foot-wing" flight

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27841 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27842 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Extraction

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27843 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27844 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27845 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27846 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Power Kites according to Ground Handling, Launching, and Landing Qua

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27847 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Where the Kites are born- WeiFang FeiLong Kite Factory

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27848 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Live Neuronal Networks as AWES Lattice Analog

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27849 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: AWE Sci-Fi Video goes viral

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27850 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27851 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27852 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27853 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/23/2019
Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27854 From: tallakt Date: 7/24/2019
Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27855 From: dave santos Date: 7/24/2019
Subject: Christoph Fokken- Spiderkites' Super Designer

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27856 From: dave santos Date: 7/24/2019
Subject: Recoil Cams for pumping AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27857 From: tallakt Date: 7/24/2019
Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27807 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)
The longstanding kPower assumption is AWE can produce electrical energy on a vast scale, by both groundgen and flygen, but groundgen has the scaling advantage. This confidence dates back over ten years.

Let's see if Pierre comes to a better prediction with better data and fresh insight.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27808 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)
I provided some keys on https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/AirborneWindEnergy/conversations/messages/27432.
Be sure you carefully studied the different concerns then understand them. 

Indeed KitePower (https://kitepower.nl/tech/) claims they make the energy for the future.

But sometimes the result is not the expected result. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27809 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li
Hi PeterS,

I think about the gyroscopic effect as the balloon is large and rotates fast.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27810 From: Joe Faust Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Estimating AWE Developments

Estimating AWE Developments

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

  • State the branch and scale of AWE in one's focus for an estimate.  (e.g., electricity production at one of say ten scales; hull traction at say one of say ten scales; land transportation via traction at say one of ten scales; plowing and scraping earth surfaces at say one of ten scales; etc. or one or more hundreds of other applications that serve life on Earth or elsewhere.  That is, an estimate of the future may focus on a branch of AWE; stating specifically the branch and scale could be helpful in understanding someone's estimate. 

  • Make an estimate of what will be occurring for that branch of AWE.

  • State the time/date for the estimate.  When and where will what be occurring? 

  • Decide to publish one's estimate or not publish.
     
  • If one publishes an estimate of what may occur on the future timeline, then that estimate will be up for commentary and comparison with others' estimates and with what does actually occur as time passes. 

  • Estimates published will be backed by a certain profundity of research and a certain power of analysis.  

  • Belief in an estimate published will vary by members of the audience of an estimate. Audience members will vary in critical thinking skills and in readiness to believe an estimate. 

  • An estimate does not force the future.  However, belief in an estimate might alter someone decisions.  Investors might look to estimates from various authors and then make decisions using some or all or none of the matter of an estimate. 

  • The track record of an estimating author sometimes affects the belief quotient of audience members.   AWE has had estimators of the future. Studying the track record of those estimators may be part of the plan of some members of the audience. 

  • Estimates may be made with little analysis or with more or great analysis.  Estimates made with little analysis could turn out to be more in line with what actually later occurs.  Estimates made with deep quality analysis could turn out to miss greatly or not an alignment with what actually later occurs.  Deep analysis does not guarantee alignment, unless the depth is whole and absolute in which case "estimate" might be the wrong term, e.g. a published remark about the future by an all-seeing Being might not qualify as an "estimate."    However, it may be the case that quality deep analysis by sound thinkers over deep broad data may --on average-- get closer to what unfolds in the future than wild guesses from shallow data wells by non-invested authors --on average--.   

  • It is noted that estimating by AWE community members for the last eight decades has been happening.  Members have published estimates and also not published estimates.   One finds estimates of AWE futures in magazine articles, patent filings, and research center papers.  There is hardly an AWE technical paper that has no estimating of the future.  We humans seem in a habit of voicing and writing estimates of the future. We may want to know where we are going with our interests and investments and how long it might take to get to our targets, goals, or objectives. 

  • Estimates may be short or long in their delivery.  Estimates may be in general or specific terms. Estimates may be embellished with display of mathematical analysis over good or poor data or not.  GIGO comes to mind as a caution; however, there may be a flaw in generalized GIGO, as human authors might massage poor data and yet with non-sequitur come up with a conclusion that fits the future well; that is, a flippant unprepared person might strike lucky in an estimate of the future after looking over or not good or bad data of the past. Quick guesses might align well with what does finally occur. 

  • Authority does not guarantee that an estimate will hit the target. 
  • https://tinyurl.com/PredictingAWE   is a general link that might interest those involved with predicting the future of AWE. 

  • Here is my prediction for toy electricity generation by AWES:  By end of 2020 there with be four distinct companies selling toy electricity-generation AWES products. 

  • Estimates of the future of branches and scales of AWE matters are welcome in this forum.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27811 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)
Let's be sure kPower and KitePower are not being confused. kPower avoids KitePower's dependence on control pods, com links, and single-line topology, nor consider the LEI kite a good scaling design. KitePower has missed over-optimistic commercialization targets, and it's single-line mishap is a huge setback.

kPower adopts USP3987987 crosswind motion in a power-arch topology, including as a unit in large airborne networks.

Let's see how specific Pierre's winning AWE method projection is. Power-to-weight is a key predictive metric, including for airspace capacity.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27812 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
JoeF, 

A welcome extension of the 2011 projection would be to give mechanical and electrical outputs each their own curve. The mechanical output curve would range higher since scaled-up power kites begin with purely mechanical output that adapting to electrical takes further R&D time.

Other graph refinements include passive vs active and manual vs digital control. This might help Pierre see the structure hidden in the single starting curve.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27813 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Indeed Dave's help has been precious ( ) for the curves and the figures that are on https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324135034_Airborne_Wind_Energy_Conversion_Using_a_Rotating_Reel_System . 
Perhaps Dave could show his papers with curves. But I would think he is shy and prefers to hide behind the structures.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27814 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Thanks, Pierre, it seems rotating reels is your current AWE winner prediction.

What time frame do you calculate for large-scale production?

Are not the airborne parts power kites?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27815 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
And?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27816 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
"and" we await your on-topic explanation of a timeframe for rotating reels. 

No chat posts.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27817 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Who is "we"?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27818 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Obviously rotating reels data is insufficient to predict much. The high capital cost of track and cars and weak upwind-downwind phases may not be necessary.

Rotating reels need better supporting data to be agreed as a winner. Power kites are the presumed wing class.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27819 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Massimo is still proposing the Carousel, and rotating reels is obviously closely related. Carousel kites linked in ring in an old idea here. Pierre adds PTOMode of the winch-reels.

This is a major competing AWES class, but it's not proven yet. I think USP3987987 will win on cost and simplicity. Let's test.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27820 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
Santos, 

When you will have a peer-reviewed article on a AWE book, without even talking about prototypes, you will be able to give your opinion. I again ask: who is "we"? And also I am waiting for your answer to my question: "and?".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27821 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/21/2019
Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li
Attachments :

    Hi PierreB,

    I wouldn’t count on it. The larger the diameter of the balloon, the smaller the centrifugal force for a given spin ratio. So largeness will work against stability rather than work in favor of stability.

    PeterS

     

    From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com]
    Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2019 9:58 AM
    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: RE: [AWES] Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying like a kite

     

     

    Hi PeterS,

     

    I think about the gyroscopic effect as the balloon is large and rotates fast.

     

    PierreB

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27822 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/21/2019
    Subject: Re: Stability of a Magnus effect balloon inflated with air flying li
    Hi PeterS,

    It is right, but in the other hand the air inertia mass increases by the cube while the angular speed decreases only by the square, as the balloon becomes larger, improving stability, at least for what I think now. A cylinder of 10 m diameter and 50 m long will contain 3925 m3 air (not helium!), leading to an air mass of roughly 4300 kg.Then the balloon works as a sort of flywheel with gyroscopic effect. It is only an assumption.

    An example of (not rotating) air mass inertia is on https://forum.awesystems.info/t/solar-balloon-jumping/136 with jumps thanks to the kinetic energy of the balloon (air mass x v²/2, the envelope mass being neglected) accelerating on its 10 m rope.

    PierreB 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27823 From: Santos Date: 7/21/2019
    Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
    Pierre, this is open peer publishing, any peer like yourself can review and comment, in perpetuity. You are reviewing as you read this.

    Think of the Wright Brothers if you wonder about the role of formal peer review. No major kite progress is born of closed peer review, but let's hope for better of open review.

    Congratulations on your peer review experience, if it helped you. My comments to you are peer review too.

    "We" is traditional in Scientific exposition to include all sympathetic readers. Go ahead and use it yourself when you are confident of a proposition. We do, since Newton at least.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27825 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
    Subject: Re: Estimating AWE Developments
    I estimate now potential (mainly review comment): 

    Cross-wind runs: 

    Sea: 
    Right now a large ship at sea could launch and control an army of huge power kites for traction; if the ship were fitted for hydro turbine generation of electricity, then the mechanical and electricity generation would be huge. 

    Land:
    Land now possible: have weighted large land platform wheeled with axles driving electric generators. Fly crosswind runs of significant length using large series of power kites. Reverse direction after the significant run. The platform gens could generate huge amount of electricity.  Mass for stability of platform could be electricity storage material.   Demonstration: have a spare 18-wheeler for conversion to generation and holding of electricity storage material? When charged, exchange material at end of run; off load charged material; onload uncharged material.  
     starting curve.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27826 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
    Subject: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stuttgar

    Airborne Wind Energy Challenge 

    Tim Hagemann, University of Stuttgart. 17 May 2019

    https://tinyurl.com/AWEChallenge001

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

    What is this document about?

    This
    document describes the opportunities and challenges of a student-driven
    competition for building and operating airborne wind energy (AWE)
    systems.

    The
    document is intended to help guide and form the competition and obtain
    input from interested parties. Please feel free to comment on any
    thoughts given in this document, not only on the directly posed
    questions.

    Who?

    Who can participate?

    The competition is open for student teams from all universities or other educational institutions.

    What?

    What is the Airborne Power Competition?

    The
    basic idea of the competition is for student teams to develop and build
    their own AWE system designs and join a competition based on 
    predefined criteria. There are many similar student competitions that
    have been successful, for example the Racing Aeolus
    that enables students to race with wind driven vehicles, while Formula SAE 
    takes a more conventional approach to vehicle design. Formula SAE has
    been holding races around the world since 1981 and shows an example of
    how to foster innovation in an university environment.

    Why should we arrange an Airborne Power Competition?

    The
    current stage of airborne wind energy (AWE) poses a large variety of
    scientific and engineering challenges and opportunities to experiment
    on different concepts. Combined with the disruptive potential of the
    technology, this provides a very suitable starting point for a
    competition between student teams.

    Why should my institution participate?

    Multiple
    advantages could be drawn from such a competition: Firstly the students
    participating are enabled to extend their theoretical capabilities with
    practical project work and think out-of-the-box approach to their field
    of studies. The students will develop project management skills to
    organise the work in their interdisciplinary teams to work
    interdisciplinary and researchers and industry benefit from the
    students who develop the relevant skills for airborne wind energy and
    enthusiasm for the technology. The competition has the potential to
    drive innovation in the AWE technology.  In addition, a successful
    - and visible - competition could be a major boost to the advance of
    airborne wind energy toward industrialization. 

    Do you see further advantages to mention?

    How?

    The
    goal for the competitors is to design and build the best-performing AWE
    system. Possible performance criteria are described below. The system
    development and construction should be carried by the student
    teams. 

    What will the performance criteria be?

    It
    is important to have measurable and fair performance criteria for the
    competition, which are clear of the influence of environmental
    conditions. The key performance indicators have to be identified and a
    fair performance evaluation developed.

    Suggested criteria include:

    • Produced energy; measured by running power curve flights with a lidar measurement of the reference wind speed

    • maximum power coefficient

    • Peak power production

    To
    avoid an unlimited, continuous increase in system sizes, a limit for
    maximum power can be set. Different classes of system ratings can be
    established.

    Factors
    like development costs or creativity would be nice to include but are
    not objective factors which can be measured or proven beyond
    doubt. 

    Possible discretionary jury prices could include softer criteria:

    • scalability

    • best colour scheme

    • creativity

    • ...

    What other competition criteria could we use?

    Will all teams compete in one pool?

    There could be several classes in the competition. For example, classes could be defined around :

    • maximum dimension size of the kite (e.g. < 1 m, 4 m, 10 m) 

    • total volume of the kite (e.g. < 1 m3, 8 m3, …)

    • maximum flight altitude. 

    • stiff or flexible lifting surfaces, inflatable leading edge

    • closed and open source systems

    If
    closed and open source systems will not be separated, a special price
    for the best performing open source system should be awarded. 

    Are there any limits? 

    Of
    course an organising institution has to lay ground rules and limits for
    maximum power or tether length to ensure a safe competition. But it is
    important to state, that restrictions on the system design or the like
    will deter innovation and creativity. All concepts should be included,
    whether they are scalable to higher power output or not. As the the
    rules will shape the spirit of the competition, they have to be set up
    carefully. A committee could be established to discuss and define the
    rule book.

    Are there reasonable guidelines or rules you could think of?


    How could safety constraints look like?

    To
    ensure a safe competition pre test Safety checking, scrutineering and
    marshalling can be a valid tool. Exclusion zones based on line
    lash-back and crash potential will have to be carefully established.

    How can we guarantee a running pulley will not heat a line above its melting point?

    Will there be a scientific outcome?

    A
    possible outcome for the scientific community could be a reference
    system for AWE which everyone could use to test innovative ideas. The
    competing teams could be encouraged to contribute their gained
    experiences to such an open source system.

    How can we reduce the effort of organising and running the event?

    On
    the event the position of scrutineers could be introduced to check the
    compliance of the systems with the rule book. While the winner needs to
    be fully checked, all other teams could be checked for randomly chosen
    constraints and safety related rules. This would reduce the 
    effort on the event significantly.

    What is necessary to run this competition?

    Currently the following requirements have been identified:

    • participants

    • organisers

      • event organisation

      • rule book committee

      • announcements/social media/network

    • budget and sponsors

    • location

    • official permission


    A
    first estimate of the budget per year needed for the organisation comes
    down to 50’000€ as shown in the table below. This costs could be
    covered with sponsors and participation fees.


    Expenses


    Possible “Income”


    personnel (0.5 * university position)

    33’000 €

    naming sponsor

    20’000 €

    travel expenses

    2’000 €

    other sponsors

    10’000 €

    event costs (infrastructure, catering, etc.)

    15’000 €

    participation fee (10 * 2000€)

    20’000 €

    Total

    50000 € 




    When?

    When will all this take place?

    It
    might be advisable to develop competition gradually to give the
    competing teams the chance to develop their infrastructure while
    building small demonstrators for a first pre-run of the competition.
    The experience gained in this starting phase can be used to develop a
    system for the first full event in the following year.

    An (incomplete) schedule could look like the following:

    • 08/2019 - organisation committee established 

    • 12/2019 - pool of participating universities finalised & start of recruiting 

    • 01/2020 - event location fixed

    • 03/2020 - rulebook established

    • 07/2020 - first pre-run based on open source approaches

    Where?

    Where will this take place?

    It
    might make sense to bind the location to the organising institution as
    the proximity will help the organisation. The site needs to have a
    strong and reliable wind resource to ensure a fair competition. In
    addition an official flight permission for various kites might be a
    limiting factor when it comes to the site selection.

    What are other requirements for such a site? 

    • Good wind, like Valkenburg (Leiden) or Majo County 


    Next Steps

    The
    idea for this competition will be presented in the Wind Energy Science
    Conference in Cork, Ireland. The presentation is part of the Session
    8.4b: MS Airborne Wind Energy at Tuesday 18/06/2019 14:10. Like this
    document, the presentation aims for feedback and interested parties to
    engage. After the conference, a first discussion could be held in July
    with the goal of establishing an organising committee. 


    This document has been sent to the following universities:


    • University of Bonn

    • NC State University  

    • TU Delft  

    • ALU-FR  

    • Grenoble Institute of Technology  

    • EPFL  

    • KU Leuven  

    • UC3M  

    • Politecnico di Milano 

    • University of Applied Sciences Munich 

    • UF Santa Catarina  

    • University of Strathclyde 

    • NTNU  N

    • ETHZ 

    Feel free to forward this document to any University not listed above.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27827 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/21/2019
    Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stut
    What was posted was the current form of a malleable document; editing continues by participants. 
    DRAFTING yet, apparently. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27828 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
    The ever-resourceful Coyote could also order a lifter kite from Acme and qualify for free shipping, when ordering an anvil.  An appropriate release mechanism could enhance the opportunities for dropping the anvil on Roadrunner's head.  meep-meep.
    Yes we have both Roadrunners and Coyotes in the backyard here in the vast, wide-open, Moe-Harvey desert.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27829 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
    Indeed this is a good work for an AWE system. There are hundred good works that can be done. 
    I think to an AWE system to cover crocodiles so they don’t catch a cold. The title is: Crocokite. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27830 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite
    Pierre: I've always favored the idea of fitting alligators with glider-wings and drooping them over populated areas.
    Just when you think you're having  nice day, a large alligator comes gliding in, and boy is he pissed!
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27831 From: dougselsam Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy Challenge Tim Hagemann, University of Stut
    After seeing several of these "student competitions" in regular wind energy, with nothing much in the way of results, I think this is well-intentioned, but...
    1) There already is, and has been, a "competition" open to ALL students, faculty, and everyone else:  Come up with an AWE system at any scale, having any useful purpose. I think Kitewinder might be the winner so far.
    2) The "rules" of such competitions seem only to constrain options.  Especially for such an undeveloped field, who is really in a position to define such restrictions, and why?  In a sense there should be no rules except what Mother Nature imposes, plus what turns out to be useful in terms of providing energy at a more competitive price or in a situation where the energy would be otherwise unavailable.
    3) Who is really in a position to "judge" various projects?  Faculty?  What if someone "wins" without even entering?
    4) It seems like a dodge - a diversion, in some sense:  If faculty is so darn smart, why not have a competition for faculty?  Could it be because when the kids end up with no results the faculty can go on pretending they are the smart ones?  Whereas if the faculty could come up with no results, the kids might start asking why they are paying so much to be enrolled?
    5) In my experience from regular wind energy, these sorts of competitions result in a very watered-down type of nursery-school or even "special-class" blah-blah-blah atmosphere, where no real results are even expected, let alone realized.  Construction-paper and rounded-scissors...
    6) The creativity spent toward contriving hundreds of rules for various classes and sizes quickly turns into a bureaucratic cluster-bleep.  It gives them  sense of authority to make "rules" and mkes them feel like they are "doing something".  Some people are addicted to creating "programs", "rules" etc. but it seems that "no rules whatsoever" favors AWE development better than "those who can't" trying to constrain those who would at lest try.  If you can't develop a useful AWE system, what business do you have making "rules" that constrain others?
    7) In regular wind energy, there are standards against which the entrants are "judged" since the industry has a standard design.  They can give a rotor size and a few rules and kids can try to do what is already known.  For AWE, depending on whom you talk to, there is not even an agreed-upon focus - some say they do not even care about generating electricity at all. 
    8) Certainly it would be difficult to judge by normal standards of cost, reliability, and total energy generated over time.  If someone HS such a solution, such a contrived "contest" would be irrelevant in lieu of simply developing the product.
    9) In the present case it even seems like the mark of desperation - well maybe if none of the adults can get it to work, let the kids fail at it!  You never know!
    10) Here's an AWE competition for you:
    A) Rules: There are no rules.
    B) Eligibility: See (A).

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27832 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)
    The winner for small and medium scales is Kiwee.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27833 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
    Croco Kite was apparently an event: 
    https://www.deviantart.com/microb-vc/art/KITEST-January-06-Event-26333731


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27834 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27835 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: The winning AWE method(s)
    KiteLab Portland KiteMotor1 pioneered this winning method in 2007, but chose not to commercialize it.  Hoping Kiwee wins a market. Rope-driving is a proven transmission winner. Lets not forget Dan Tracy's Pacific 40 system as another pervious "winner" early commercial AWES (kPower bought one). KiteSat and FlipWings are partial commercializations. Pierre's FlyGen too.

    All "winning methods" in their time and place.



     

    The winner for small and medium scales is Kiwee.


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27836 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
    Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
    Attachments :
      Vintage Coyote Kite Mishap

      Inline image





       

      Croco Kite was apparently an event: 

      https://www.deviantart.com/microb-vc/art/KITEST-January-06-Event-26333731


      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27837 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27838 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil Crockokite
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27839 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27840 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Extinct Delta Wing Lizard in its own class of "foot-wing" flight
      Flight has evolved many times and places-




      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27841 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
      https://tinyurl.com/PGEKiteFunBooks
      Pacific Gas & Electric 
      PG&E Kite Fun Books

      .... anticipate that utilities will be have even more reason to have kite fun book when AWE supplies the electricity traded on the markets!
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27842 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Extraction
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27843 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Coyote: Acme kite, Acme anvil
      https://www.flickr.com/photos/paulchapmanphotos/33990950578/in/dateposted/
      [not sure if photo taken by Paul Chapman will show from the link]
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27844 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers
      Power kites are developing faster than AWE as a whole, because they come from a far larger kite world. Year by year, like the power kite is converging toward technological perfection that no other airborne WECS class is keeping up with. The Ugly Duckling is becoming a Swan.

      The Mono joins the parade of new offerings in power kites. Not greatly scalable for its whisker-spars, but surely quite hot at 2m2, a clean cut kite with a hairy bridle. Good price, if it flies as well as it looks. A good update of carbon-whiskered SS design, a construction has popped up here and there for decades.

      It probably quite comparable to a parafoil in performance, with more inertial mass and speed than a pure SS, at perhaps lower cost due to easier build. Parafoils remain rather labor-intensive for all the cells that have to be sewn inside-out. A possible pattern model for BrunoL's high pressure thin spars to scale to about 20m2.




      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27845 From: dave santos Date: 7/22/2019
      Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers
      Clarification- "easier build" of Mono compared to a parafoil; slightly more complex build than pure a SS kite, by its whisker batten pockets.



       

      Power kites are developing faster than AWE as a whole, because they come from a far larger kite world. Year by year, like the power kite is converging toward technological perfection that no other airborne WECS class is keeping up with. The Ugly Duckling is becoming a Swan.

      The Mono joins the parade of new offerings in power kites. Not greatly scalable for its whisker-spars, but surely quite hot at 2m2, a clean cut kite with a hairy bridle. Good price, if it flies as well as it looks. A good update of carbon-whiskered SS design, a construction has popped up here and there for decades.

      It probably quite comparable to a parafoil in performance, with more inertial mass and speed than a pure SS, at perhaps lower cost due to easier build. Parafoils remain rather labor-intensive for all the cells that have to be sewn inside-out. A possible pattern model for BrunoL's high pressure thin spars to scale to about 20m2.




      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27846 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
      Subject: Power Kites according to Ground Handling, Launching, and Landing Qua
      Success in AWE may depend on factors hardly considered by most developers. From its KiteShip roots, kPower has been most active in researching best power kite ground-handling procedures and scaling limits. All kites are workable by suitable methods that vary widely. The designer must choose a wing on merits.

      Three major power kite classes by ground-handling properties-

      The classic LEI has both good and bad ground qualities. It will stay put face-down into the wind, only needing some sand tossed on to secure in strong conditions. The problem is popping a large LEI up directly downwind in high wind, which can be quite wild. The risk is similar to parafoil belly-launch in high wind. Landing the LEI in high wind can be hampered by the same capacity to roll on the surface that is so handy on the water, but not when you want the kite to kill and stay killed. In high winds, the kite is launched and landed at the edge of the window with kite-buddies helpful. Pumping up and letting air out is a cause of delay on the field. Kite Power intends some sort of mobile launching stand to scale its LEIs.

      The Parafoil has better surface operations properties. It can come out of its bag, fill its cells and go up in seconds, minimizing ground risk exposure. Except in light airs, with show kites, parafoil belly-launch is not done; instead its become common to peel the kite up off its back, and let the inflation delay damp the launch. PGs pre-launch from their backs to overhead, where full inflation is confirmed for final launch. Landing at the window edge is a bit more certain since the parafoil tends to deflate rather than roll downwind. SkySails has brought its handy parafoil handling mast ashore, but new and traditional handling options remain open.

      SS Powerkites have the most radical properties. One can throw them out of bag and launch instantly and land securely by simply crashing downwind harmlessly* (be sure to trim lines to stay killed). The trade-off is the cost-of-mastery, the training gap to be able to handle these kites much like a bullfighter handles bull and cape. This is how the poor will do AWE, for lack of the higher capitalization required for every other hope. KiteShip and kPower have been top SS kite AWES R&D practitioners, and Rod's SS PL PL use is an important operational case.

      Be ready to secure a run-amok power kite by dragging a brake-line or wingtip TE to windward. Avoid getting in the bridle lines. Stay downwind of the scope when passing under the kite, but you can get quite close safely. Its quite a thrill to have a powered up power kite pass closely in high wind. Train with your Drachens many fine hours.

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

      * Series a of harmless crashes starting at sec 1:50-




      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27847 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
      Subject: Where the Kites are born- WeiFang FeiLong Kite Factory
      FeiLong is more like Willy Wonka's factory than something Ford or Musk could come up with. Its a shifting rambling Ziabatsu universe of soft-goods, particularly those that fly, going back millennia. A "factory" of old and new, of alleyways and improvised sweatshops, a vast "Silk Road" network of specialty suppliers, more supply chain than monolithic industry.

      Weifang is an ecosystem of real Brands and Pirates everywhere confused; order anything "real" or "fake" by the thousands, even any dead kite design ancient to early-modern, even Willy Wonka's Victorian suit, in wearable facsimile or actual flight;any color or pattern you want. This is the place to order a sci-fi prophesized Flying City, to be made by quasi-Oompa-Loompas, at a reasonable price. Order a thousand to really save (the World).

      AWE's Future looks like Weifang's Oyster.

      A random sampling of power kite products from anywhere and everywhere-


      The Old Trade endures as well-


      Branded yet royalty-free official products common. FeiLong offers Rev's by the thousand, but JoeH draws no royalty on them. Often the fakes are better than the original, these days. They have already conquered Norway, with 30,000 addicted snow-kiters. Elite kite designers sense a vast pressure of anonymous talent. Kite IP monopoly is fantasy. Peter Lynn even pirates himself in Weifang. Its the Wild East.

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27848 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
      Subject: Live Neuronal Networks as AWES Lattice Analog
      Attachments :
        Astounding dynamics at both short and long timescales. Neurons are naturally mechanically dynamic, having evolved from protozoan motility organelles. Brains are seething masses of stringy motion, not just electrical and chemical marvels. Some insight into why neurons are formed like kites.



        Inline image


          @@attachment@@
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27849 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
        Subject: AWE Sci-Fi Video goes viral
        The post-apocalyptic mining AI's are nuke and AWE powered; battle ensues until the AWES is abused to kill the nukebot, but destroying the kite, so the AWEbot is screwed. Fairly typical AWE script-writing, ever since Short Circuit flew an actual NPW over the Lower Columbia River, nothing can shock us now.




        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27850 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
        Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers
        Attachments :
          For evaluation of historical progress in the Mono's construction class, a pirated Weifang pirate image of a '90s PL C-quad, as seen in the kitesurfing history video, that they are still ready to build if anyone orders-

          Inline image





           

          Clarification- "easier build" of Mono compared to a parafoil; slightly more complex build than pure a SS kite, by its whisker batten pockets.

          On ‎Monday‎, ‎July‎ ‎22‎, ‎2019‎ ‎09‎:‎25‎:‎09‎ ‎PM‎ ‎CDT, dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com


           

          Power kites are developing faster than AWE as a whole, because they come from a far larger kite world. Year by year, like the power kite is converging toward technological perfection that no other airborne WECS class is keeping up with. The Ugly Duckling is becoming a Swan.

          The Mono joins the parade of new offerings in power kites. Not greatly scalable for its whisker-spars, but surely quite hot at 2m2, a clean cut kite with a hairy bridle. Good price, if it flies as well as it looks. A good update of carbon-whiskered SS design, a construction has popped up here and there for decades.

          It probably quite comparable to a parafoil in performance, with more inertial mass and speed than a pure SS, at perhaps lower cost due to easier build. Parafoils remain rather labor-intensive for all the cells that have to be sewn inside-out. A possible pattern model for BrunoL's high pressure thin spars to scale to about 20m2.




            @@attachment@@
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27851 From: Peter Sharp Date: 7/23/2019
          Subject: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder
          Hi PierreB,
          I figured out how to construct a hot air balloon Magnus cylinder with very
          good insulation and a high internal temperature.
          Use a clear material for the balloon skin. Line the inside of the skin with
          2 cm of aerogel. Place an X shaped thin skin of black material down the
          length of the balloon.
          Sunlight can enter and pass through the silica aerogel, which weighs almost
          nothing. When the light hits the black material, it is absorbed and emitted
          as heat. The temperature rise can be as high as 50 degrees Centigrade
          (according to an article in this week's New Scientist). When the hot air
          reaches the inside of the aerogel, it can't pass through because the aerogel
          is an excellent heat insulator. So the balloon expands and is filled with
          hot air.
          Spinning forces the colder air outward, which increases the insulation. The
          result is a hot air balloon that can keep its hot air insulated for a long
          time. If and when the air can stay adequately insulated for roughly 12
          hours, then hot air Magnus cylinders could remain permanently aloft. The
          heat from the motor would extend the insulation time. Larger balloons should
          have better insulation.
          So maybe there can be a substitute for helium balloons.
          PeterS
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27852 From: dave santos Date: 7/23/2019
          Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder
          Its a good experiment, but the scale required to float overnight may not be worthwhile, since the platform will not last very long, unless carefully stored. That's the basic practical and scale-up barrier, the delicate painstaking operational demands. Its a cool novelty too weak and awkward to be seriously practical. Compare with the tissue-paper hot-air festival traditions, where one short session is not a problem, but part of the show.

          Hot air is not a substitute for helium or hydrogen, especially in lifting power; all have their niche cases. Hot helium is an interesting combo for an advanced experimenter. Kids should experience all of these variations; that's the true app.



           

          Hi PierreB,
          I figured out how to construct a hot air balloon Magnus cylinder with very
          good insulation and a high internal temperature.
          Use a clear material for the balloon skin. Line the inside of the skin with
          2 cm of aerogel. Place an X shaped thin skin of black material down the
          length of the balloon.
          Sunlight can enter and pass through the silica aerogel, which weighs almost
          nothing. When the light hits the black material, it is absorbed and emitted
          as heat. The temperature rise can be as high as 50 degrees Centigrade
          (according to an article in this week's New Scientist). When the hot air
          reaches the inside of the aerogel, it can't pass through because the aerogel
          is an excellent heat insulator. So the balloon expands and is filled with
          hot air.
          Spinning forces the colder air outward, which increases the insulation. The
          result is a hot air balloon that can keep its hot air insulated for a long
          time. If and when the air can stay adequately insulated for roughly 12
          hours, then hot air Magnus cylinders could remain permanently aloft. The
          heat from the motor would extend the insulation time. Larger balloons should
          have better insulation.
          So maybe there can be a substitute for helium balloons.
          PeterS

          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27853 From: benhaiemp Date: 7/23/2019
          Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder
          Hi PeterS,

          Aerogel could be replaced with a cheaper, lighter and more practical transparent enveloppe (allowing the radiation to pass through and then retaining the infrared radiation ), the black enveloppe being inside as I already done (about1.2 N/m3 instead of 0.85 N/m3). And with very large unities a part of the heat could be kept longer.
          On https://forum.awesystems.info/t/solar-balloon-jumping/136  the first video shows a double enveloppe balloon while the second video shows a single black enveloppe balloon. 
          That would allow to avoid some take-off and landing. It is only a supplement to a balloon without aerostatic lift.

          PierreB 
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27854 From: tallakt Date: 7/24/2019
          Subject: Re: well insulated hot air Magnus cylinder
          Place the magnus motors inside the insulated cylinder and just use the waste energy to heat the internals. So now it depends on the mass of the aerogel relative to the lift of the heated air to see if this could be worthwhile. Another option is to have solar panels on the skin of the magnus cylinder to power the rotation. The goal would not necessarily be to be positively buoyant, rather just have very few landings every year. For a magnus based rig I expect high winds is a landing every time... The drag is impossible to get rid of and cant be depowered...
          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27855 From: dave santos Date: 7/24/2019
          Subject: Christoph Fokken- Spiderkites' Super Designer
          Solving the mystery of who the advanced versatile designer-marketer behind Spiderkites' Mono is; former head of HQ R&D Christoph Fokken, with close relation to KiteGod George Peters and the Boulder Colorado Into The Wind circle. Only someone with Fokken's deep background can set-up and advance in today's super-competitive kite market.

          Christoph's long experience covers a diversity of modern kite design, with a top quality and value supply chain. His small foils may be the best available, on a par with the Prism Synapse, somehow tacked-on Spiderkite's site, so maybe he is also involved in Prism foil design.

          Profile Support (PS) nylon whiskers are a major innovation working down from PG parafoils to fun kites. 

          Note the complex overlaps of design branding and retailing overlaid on Chinese production. 





          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27856 From: dave santos Date: 7/24/2019
          Subject: Recoil Cams for pumping AWES
          Single Action Pumping AWES design has many Recoil design options. For experimenting, improvised elastic polymer and steel springs, and/or counterweights keep things moving, but for durable high-performance production design, careful engineering pays off.

          Compound Bow archery technology offers us great lessons in how to customize recoil with the use of Cams with roughly logarithmic curves that can be optimized to conditions. In AWE, tailoring recoil to varying wind and load is a complex problem. Recoil can be as simple as passive recovery or a complex as returning a power stroke in a dual pumping cycle.

          This page offers a good tutorial on modern cam physics for archery recoil-


          Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 27857 From: tallakt Date: 7/24/2019
          Subject: Re: Mono 2.0 SS Power kite with Carbon Whiskers
          You mistake specialization for evolution. Most kitesurfers will prefer an inflatable leading edge kite. Some kiters, eg foil boarders and kiteskiers, in particular those doing races, will want foil kites or single skin kites for different reasons.