Perhaps the most primitive (& quite powerful) kite is the Play Sail. I had been trying to track this concept down under the erroneous name "play wing", with little luck. Thanks to Ray Bohn for setting me straight-   www.nyke.org/Play%20Sail%20Workshop.htm     ================== Also, my previous should have read-

Hi Folks,

Seeking funding $5000.00 to complete the 6 ft dia. by 10 ft long version of the Spiralairfoil Wind Turbine. Thank You.

Dan'l


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vSD8z4fzNg

What is the wattage output in a 10 or 20 mph wind?  How will it hold up in extremely high winds?  It is a very beautiful, unique sculpture to place in one's garden, though.  

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: spiralairfoil@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:50:41 +0000
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Funding

 

Hi Darin,
 
          I do not yet know exactly what the power curves are until the bird is built and tested, that is why I need the funding to do both. I believe we will be around 2-3 k, we are also working on a radical genny that'll be direct drive but firstly we intend to put an off the shelf genny into the Bird [M-24] The superstructure is bound together with stainless steel guide wires, [kinda hard to see in the pictures on youtube] that make for an incredibly strong overall structure, thus being able to withstand all wind condition barring huricane and tornado, a tribuchete fold down arm with counter weight will bring the bird to lock down fast for extreme weather situation. The H.A.W.T is the real deal and not the "Earth Spiral" which we produced, hoping to sell a lot of as a lawn ornaments and then reinvest those earnings into the H.A.W.T. Spiralairfoil Wind Turbine. The Economy went south so sales have not been there to reinvest.
          This is the first of many projects on the burner however I do not want to develope any other projects til this one is up in running, one at a time.
           This invention is backed by our support:
The Spiralairfoil Technology has great potential both in wind and water. The designs are limitless in size and shape and can be configured to virtually any application in the Wind and Water disciplines. The development has been based around two major concepts, one being cost effectiveness and the other being performance, every effort has been and continue to be made to keep the price cost effective and yet at the same time to make a wind turbine that will out perform other wind turbines in the extraction of wind energy into mechanical advantage. Traditional turbines are configured poorly as they tend to work off a short circular plane of opportunity and lets too much energy  be underutilizes and are thus less effective at the extraction of usable power i.e. not cost effective. The Spiralairfoil Technology addresses this fundamental flaw in an original way by extracting the energy from the wind in a linear field approach, enabling a smaller overall package to be developed and thus cost effective. The "Tee-Assembly" is adaptable to many configuration, gears, pulley's or direct drive, the "Tee-Assembly Shaft" is hollow( venting) allowing for longer bearing life, front and back wing assemblies can be attached and detached from central "Tee-Assembly current development a braided wire system transfers the power down the pole in a cost effective manor, the rotation of the complete unit will be restricted from over rotation, thus eliminating the need for costly slip rings, however other methods may and will be applied to larger versions.
Traditional tri blades have proven inefficient and expensive and call for a better way, I offer up to you that better way, twenty five centuries from now something very similar to the Spiralairfoil may dominate the landscapes of our Planet and the traditional tri blades will be relegated to the history books.
 thank you

 

 

---

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: darin_selby@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:10:00 +0000
Subject: RE: [AirborneWindEnergy] Funding

 

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/10/billionaire-pledges-1-billion.html

A subject extending TEWP subject.What are possibilities for AWE as UWE?

Here is the first installed UWE in France (Calais),by WindWall ,Dutch company.The structure of this horizontal axis of type Darrieus is next to Darrieus between buildings  which the great difference is no specific supports at the two ends of axis (supports are houses themselves),and its place between two houses (or mounts,as schown on TEWP topic). 

Urban Wind Energy  schows different UWE.

Pierre Benhaïem

OrthoKiteBunch  

To prosecute classification could be useful;for beginning into linear and cyclic AWE.Joe indicates some AWE into linear,some AWE into cyclic.
Sometimes it is not obvious.
What are criterions?
For example:
Linear AWE:variable distances between kites and ground anchoring.
Cyclic AWE:fixed distance between kites and ground anchoring.
Magenn Power would not be a cyclic AWE (and nor a linear AWE).

Other example:
Linear AWE:variable distances between tips of wings and the conversion point.
Cyclic AWE:fixed distance between tips of wings and the conversion point.
Magenn Power would be a cyclic AWE.

It would be interesting to make a shared definition for some theorical and pratical reasons:
-To easiness the work of searchers:advantages and inconvenients are common for such characteristic.For example a linear AWE requires much more aerial space than the effective swept area;but seems easier to implemente (Kitegen and Laddermill each have cyclic and linear AWE)

-to easiness the work of the examiners for patents:there are too much X or Y on search reports because of no light between state of art and novelty.

Pierre Benhaïem

OrthoKiteBunch 

I dunno folks. Putting wind turbines atop buildings is cool and all that, but hey, does it really constitute "high altitude wind energy"? It isn't exactly new; the Dutch have been putting windmills atop their granaries for 5 centuries; Indians a couple centuries prior to that.

DaveC,   The FAA will rightly judge kite systems in the NAS as aviation. Anybody who fails to acculturate will not be allowed to fly.   Those who seek to define altitude in a new way are facing a tough climb. But i do agree letting the marketers have some latitude with the language is also reasonable.   Kites are aircraft, this is the birth of a new aviation,   dave S

Urban AWE is a huge win as that is where the biggest loads are. Darin's idea of darrieus beads along cables substantially overcomes single turbine scaling limits. Twist is not a problem if power conducting tag-lines run orthogonally to the ground. But there is much more power available for Urban AWE.   URBAN HAWP   Cristina & Ken identified New York & Tokyo as prime polar jet-stream HAWP locations & Mexico City as a tropical jet stream opportunity. A gigascale AWE string tripod (tri-tether or multi-line cone) could fly in the jet-stream over a metropolis. What a spectacular collective adventure.   As described in earlier posts, a generator/motor reel & each tether base can feed power to a grid as the apex array shifts back & forth across the wind between any two crosswind legs. In calm the apex array tows in a circle. Each generator could be itself gigawatt scale (the current biggest), far beyond flygen scale, & ring a city just as existing power plants do. In many cases existing plant locations will serve & hybrid generation can leverage generators & grid infrastructure.   Launching an urban AWE array can be a sequence of pilot lines flown up by pilot kites or "conventional" aircraft. Full rigging would be hauled up in stages & sail area added by popping large wings like the Gigafly parafoil from packs. The launch process would take about half a day. Killing the array would be fast, a sequence of kill lines & reeling in. Each leg can part & tow down to its base on a small wing without landing on population. Or the tripod cables, in a standard calm every few days, might land on cradles on structures or terrain.   The hazards are manageable as redundant layers of safety are possible. Modular apex arrays tolerate turbulence & single point failures. Multiple lines reduce runaway uncertainty & allow much greater infill v. single point AWE with its large sweep requirements. Simplicity & low mass construction is a basic aviation safety-critical condition. High altitude & slow descent rate buys time for the rig to fail-soft. There would typically be about an hour before the stuff floats down (1-2m per sec) in a shut-down emergency. An apex array might even cutaway whole & fly to a new location, perhaps towed.   Some very cool jobs would be created. Maintaining the rig aloft will require the services of highly technical "sky monkeys" who would need oxygen & zip along the lines like Spiderman & even base-jump home from work in skydiving "bat-suits". At first there would be many heroic situations & populations would be riveted.    All of these ideas are easily played with on a modest scale with cheap COTs elements, KiteLab style. Scaled up experiments can be debugged in remote locations.   COOPIP

Attachments :

The efficiency of the "H-Darrieus" is greater than the traditional "egg-beater"-shaped Darrieus.  The H-Darrieus has it's lift wing on a vertical axis.  From tip to tip of this blade wing, it is the same distance from the center.  This gives it much more leverage, which then translates into torque to spin the generator.  

Perhaps what this is pointing to is that, as fun as it is to go fly a kite, "high altitude" windpower generator devices just aren't as practical, reliable, or as durable as a single, carbon fiber H-Darrieus spinning on top of that grainery you mentioned.      http://www.carbonconcepts.co.uk/windpower/windturbine.htm

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: dave@kiteship.com
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:38:53 -0700
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Semantics

 

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Darin Selby <darin_selby@...

How UWE become Urban AWE,or UAWE.

Several devices and several locations as indicated on precedent messages and prospectives.

-Adaptation of Darin's Darrieus (good consonanceif correct).

-Dave's Tether-Tripod could be anchored on the top of several existent or non yet existent buildings with adequate disposition,and with advantage of non limitation of size.

-Add:much AWE could be installed on a roof without limitation of swept area to the size of the site (at the contrary of UWE):Kitegen,Laddermill,Tipping-Boom,OrthoKiteBunch...

The esthetic of AWE also must be considered;so town planning and AWE should be joint at the conception.

The morphing of MARS (Magenn) with Darrieus rotor seems interesting.However Magenn does not seem  pursue it.Two or three years ago I made a part of two blades for a small H-Darrieus (CNC  polystyren cutting is used for mockups of planes and can realize all profiles) and an UFO kite in polystyrene next to Savonius type.UFO flew at an angle of 30°  with Magnus effect,but no perceptible Magnus effect was observed with Darrieus blades.

Note:in a precedent message (classification) with my hypotethic definitions of cyclic AWE,Laddermill don't be one.So it is not obvious to give such a definition.

Pierre Benhaïem

OrthoKiteBunch 

 

Pierre,

     A very fat bladed H-Darrieus may give some Magnus effect.

Then I add a quick drawing to indicate tensional towering of H-Darrieus:

 liftedHDarrieus

In similar lift support, the efficient horizontal-axis turbines that are now dominant in hard-ground-hugging towers may find a home higher in the sky tensionally towered.

JoeF

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:14 PM, dave santos <santos137@yahoo.com Always a possible scenario. Certainly not inevitable, though. FAA regs
were promulgated over decades of best practices; nothing more. They
continually change with time, reflecting changing needs--and mores--of
humanity. To insist that technology exploration take place only within
existing "rules" is to stifle "clean sheet of paper" approaches, of
which yours are some of the best I've ever seen. First question should
be, "what is best for kites?" Much much farther down the list should
be, "what will the Feds allow?" Just IMO.


Nothing to do with marketing. Everything to do with POV and frame of
mind. I've watched this nascent industry hobble itself for years,
thinking that HAWT (Christine's definition) requires flight at
jet-stream altitudes. Some recognized early that this was (mostly)
hogwash; others didn't. International success or lack of same today
fairly closely parallels these world views... How many of tomorrow's
break-through geniuses have the scales of prejudice before their eyes
today? Is it not our duty to work to remove these, as carriers of the
older torches?
Yet another albatross we hang around our own necks, Dave. Aircraft fly
free, at ground velocities relatively much greater than zero. They
require 3-axis stability and fast response, ultra light controls and
construction. They withstand far larger loads for their weight and
never need be manned. They cannot effectively use wing-warping nor
weight/thrust re-alignment. Modern aircraft operate at
windspeeds--using aerodynamics optimized for--air velocities an order
of magnitude greater than kites must excel in. To call kites aircraft
greatly narrows the imagination-space within which we allow ourselves
to work.

I named this thread "Semantics" with my tongue firmly in my cheek. I
know from long experience that we self-designate our design-space,
often by the words we use. Change the words; change the viewpoint,
juice the innovation. There's too much evidence of this to ignore,
wouldn't you agree?

Dave

Joe,

Very explicit drawings.

In the first,Magnus effect works towards one side (so a torsion drop
tube is needed);in the second Magnus effect works upward (so no torsion
drop tube).

My blades and UFO roughly were realized.

However it is possible that there is much more drag (10/1 or more) than
Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.The configuration seems different from
a Savonius turbine or similar (3/1).
It would be interesting to improve Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.

Pierre Benhaïem

   Hi Dave and Group,
 
             Now, now Dave there yah go again, underasuming for others to do, whatta hoot.
      You know little of the Spiralairfoil concept, it can be built very light, alls it takes is imagination.
 
             I believe the Spiralairfoil concept is a new field and needs to be explored to it's full potential in reality before nay say'd. This is the beginning. Have a great Day.
 
                                                                                           Dan

---

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:32:19 -0700
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Turbine Myths

 

Misc thoughts; interspersed below:

Doug Selsam, who is part of this forum, has put together quite a humorous page, comparing everything to his multi-rotor "superturbine".  In the comparison, he speaks of the Magenn as well, and its very poor efficiency.  

Joe, that is a really nice drawing that you made so quickly.  What is the program that you use to do this?  Is it a digital touch-pad?   

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: joefaust333@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:58:18 +0000
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Re: a variable pitch H-Darrieus design

 

Dave,   Many aviation/AE types just can't misuse such a basic term like "High Altitude" & need terms like Low & Medium Altitude to clearly communicate deep technical realities. KiteLab seeks to differentiate from other AWE start-ups by owning Low Altitude reliability, safety, economy, & performance, & challenging the over-reaching AWE field by climbing strongly from there.   Let the supposed new thinkers do as they please with language & JoeF will happily keep track of the dialects. Some of the "High Altitude" hype is clearly marketing driven & not well informed. Its Orwellian to warp language to a false agenda. Scientists & engineers need a linguistic clean-room to advance optimally.   If we are eventually to fly in jet-stream winds & sweep a high efficiency wing at around 300 kts, such a wing will have a lot of aviation genes. The Feds are the gatekeepers of the NAS. & they know a kite when they see it & they know aviation risk. (The FAA has already found "AWE" suitable for their own use in written communication, but, not to my knowledge, HAWP.)   Its a burden to explain to aviation & aerospace folks that the "High Altitude" AWE misnomer is insisted on for reasons never made clear. Pilots will be major group to keep on our side as we invade Class G airspace, & poor cultural understanding could be the deal-killer. So lets keep two linguistic tracks, one for existing flying pros & another for newbies. We need both groups.   daveS   PS Thanks for the compliments. I could never have advanced so well in technical kiting without your (& Dean's) mentorship.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Spiralairfoil will have a lot of drag associated with it.  This is the advantage of the H-Darrieus rotor.  It spins by the specially-contoured blades being pulled around.  It is the lift imparted by the Bernoulli principle.  The Spiralairfoil will only spin like a pinwheel, by catching the wind, and pushing it around.  The H-Darrieus will spin up to 4X the speed of the wind blowing past it.  

---

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: spiralairfoil@hotmail.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:56:03 -0400
Subject: RE: [AirborneWindEnergy] Turbine Myths

 

True, viscous damping is a loss (unless the heat is usable) but its so practical, playing a role in many systems like vehicle transmissions & suspensions & boat stabilizers & can increase overall system performance. There are many losses in practical power mechanics & a viscous damped turret may often win over a more complex less reliable "smart" clutch mechanism. The key is high enough viscosity that the turret barely gives to short torsional pulse, but the weak persistent input of a change in wind direction is followed.   Clockwork is great for regulating the "firing" of a wing-mill or varidrogue. Clockwork is also suited for small off grid power smoothing. Its Steam-Punk cool. A compressed air servovalve over an airmotor/gen is also workable. One still wants synchronous AC to feed a utility grid even if the supply is up & down. Introducing AWE into the steam cycle of a conventional fossil fueled power plant may regulate chaotic power input at utility scale (Coal to Kite).   The heddle idea seems like the cheapest & simplest of many line varying solutions. Aerial tramways also have good tricks. Will look for your conveyor example.   Thanks for the parrel note. Boat rigging is a vast pool of AWE ready tricks.

"What is the maximum theoretical efficiency that a designer can expect from his wind turbine?"  Page 22-28 on this e-book "Wind Energy" link:

Joe, I really like what you've come up with in that latest drawing.  How about two H-Darrieus's that "Contra-spin" to cancel the torque?  Have the generator in-between, and then a dual-conductive tether to the ground.  http://www.magenn.com/ has got all of the tether stuff worked out to a tee.

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: joefaust333@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:58:18 +0000
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Re: a variable pitch H-Darrieus design

 

Betz is left in the dust?
Should be easy to prove with some simple test results. Where are they?
DRF




dougselsam wrote:

TO: Members of AWE
 
 
Besides undertaking research on some wind energy concepts, I also publish various energy-related articles in numerous periodicals.
 
One of the English-language periodicals from the Middle East (circulation circa 10,000) will feature wind energy in their December 2009 edition. They have invited me to submit an article (up to 2000 words) on new and ongoing developments in wind energy.
 
I will definately cover airborne wind energy. I will need a fe high-resolution images on some wind technology for the article.
 
 
Thanks,
 
Harry

---

New! Open Hotmail faster on the new MSN homepage!

Harry,

On files :two pictures (one with text on image) of OrthoKiteBunch (with texts)

Pierre

Hi Darin Selby,

The Spiralairfoil is new and needs further developement, please do not dismiss too early, a thin blade version is in the works also note that the wings will have an aero-dynamic foil, this is just the beggining.

Dan'l

Drag plays many positive advantageous roles in AWECS.

This thread is suggested as one place to bring forward the where, when, and how drag may play to effectively have AWECS be all it might be.

What have we .... about drag?

Hmmm. How can increasing drag possibly help the cP of a wind turbine? I
just don't see it.

"Lift" does not always have anything to do with any sort of airfoil or
Bernoulli "sucking" effect on a wind turbine rotor. "Lift" is
experienced by any object in the wind where the orientation of the
object allows the air flow to make it move; the more efficiently the
better. Add some Bernoulli and you increase your effect.

It seems all my math does not apply here on this list.... why is that?

DAN





Joe Faust wrote:

Dan,   True, Drag does not help the cP of a turbine, but a higher drag design that is far cheaper or more reliable, etc. might win in ROI (return on investment). One example is the traditional "Old West" Aeromotor style turbine optimized for low-wind start & storm resistance. Many are still running well after seventy years, fantastic ROI.   Numbers do count & this list has many great quantifiers lurking. Sadly, there is lot of fuzzy off-topic traffic lately & the list is suffering for it. Please folks, focus on AWE & only post when you have something technical to contribute. This list is supposed to be AWE pro & low traffic.   daveS

Hi Joe -- I just wanted to point out that I *do* understand how 'drag'
differs from 'drag.' ;-)
The term is widely misused. So is "lift." Or perhaps better stated, they
are both commonly painted with too broad a brush.
IMO, wind power is *all* about:
1) wind speed
2) swept area
3) ROI
I don't list cP, because it is included in ROI.
If you can increase #1 (wind speed) by flying a turbine on a kite, you
might be able to get good bang for your ROI buck thanks to the 'cubed'
part of 1/2 x rho x swept area x wind speed^3
But wow, what a complicated, labor intensive, and expensive way to
increase wind speed, compared to a sturdy tower....
So far all 'Betz-beaters' have turned out to be fantasy. Every single
one of them. I am not at all biased against any turbine design. But I
need real numbers, *not* 'estimated' numbers, to form any actual opinion
about any 'new' wind turbine design.
DAN FINK
(I'm NOT grouchy! Really. I'm surprised that Doug Selsam is surprised
that NREL doesn't answer his emails. They get pummeled with fantasy and
unworkable ideas on a daily basis. Show some real numbers to get the
wind power industry interested. Any talk of 'conspiracy' is absurd.
Energy = MONEY. That's why utility scale turbines look like they do -- ROI)







Joe Faust wrote:

Merci Beaucoup Pierre
 
 
Harry

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:12:33 +0000
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Forthcoming Article

 

How do you expect to keep all of those lines from getting tangled up with each other?

---

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: harrycv@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:55:32 +0000
Subject: RE: [AirborneWindEnergy] Forthcoming Article

 

To Harry and to Darin,

I indicate possible sources.Harry choices from them.For example the 40 words (OrthoKite...,KiteBunch...) in the middle on the image and text on files can be enough for text part.For example other indications as gigawatt scale can be under a common presentation with Kitegen carousel or Dave S' Tether-Tripod...

I don't know exactly the capacity for pictures,but the other image with only title on files can take off 1/6 of A4 format if necessary.So much projects can appear.

Pierre Benhaïem

 

Gladdening. Sure good news of great begining of greater things in the offing. Congratulations AWEIA. Soar on. JohnO

Dan:
Nice to see you here. I did not realize there was anyone here who understood the first thing about wind energy.
Well yes as you point out, I'm disappointed that the Federal agencies seem to have no curiosity, and my machines are independently tested to outperform commercially available turbines many times over, at the same diameter. The data is published. You can look it up. It is not a matter of opinion or speculation. My California Energy Commission-Sponsored machine used Whisper H-40 blades. making 6000 Watts instead of 900 Watts for the H-40. I don't think NREL has ever seen anything like it. Still to this day they haven't seen it. Why? How could they possibly refrain from coming to see it? It is powering a home today! Nobody cares! They are so mired in "procedures" that they accomplish no exploration whatsoever. Show me any machine they have built or tested that is significantly different from the status quo. I don't see any excuse for that, and I have no more time for them. Gotta move forward. My comment was that they dangle the carrot and thereby stop all progress. You can't move forward, and dance in place to their fiddle, at the same time. So all I can say is I will keep building and testing and patenting and they can jump in anytime they see fit.

Most peoples' "fantasy machines" are never built and if they are, make no power. I'm not sure how you could compare me to "them".
Here's what I notice in this list:
I am surprised to see you on this list - I just finished reviewing and notating your book. There is very little knowledge of wind energy, period, on this list besides you. Let alone taking it into the air. That lack of basic knowledge is why you see the least-efficient types of turbines known to mankind, now made even less efficient, and 20 times as expensive, by adding helium. Every wind inventor goes through a micro, personal version of the evolution of wind turbines, starting with drag-based machines, then learning what really makes power. Some people learn faster than others, and some never learn.

Ever bought a tank of helium? Believe me, that guy in the news, with the mylar balloon knew balloon-boy could not have been in that thing at a glance - it takes about $600 of helium to lift a 35 lb kid. His balloon would have been more full and sagging with his weight. Few people understand much of anything in this field, which is why a news story like that could be believed by so many.
I like your turbines. Let me know when you want me to make you a Permanent Magnet Alternator that uses a fraction of the amount of manpower, expense, and magnets that yours require, for the same output. :)
:)
Doug S.

   I'm experimenting with an idea similar to Pierre's OrthoKiteBunch, but with a single kite driving the see-saw. I assumed that a high LD kite would be preferable. But I find a high LD kite difficult to drive in a smooth oscillation due to  two tendencies: it's high acceleration across the wind and it's tendency to zoom to the top of the window when depowered.