Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                 AWES546to595
Page 11 of 552.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 546 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2009
Subject: Re: Hypersonic HAPAS, L1 KiteShades, etc.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 547 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2009
Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy and Afghanistan

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 548 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/13/2009
Subject: Suggestion for tests and power reports

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 549 From: dave santos Date: 11/13/2009
Subject: Re: Suggestion for tests and power reports

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 550 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/14/2009
Subject: China new-start for AWECS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 551 From: dave santos Date: 11/16/2009
Subject: HAWP09 Buzz

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 552 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/17/2009
Subject: HAWP09 Buzz

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 553 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2009
Subject: Comparing AWE Schemes by Heuristic Virtues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 554 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/18/2009
Subject: Re: Comparing AWE Schemes by Heuristic Virtues

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 555 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/20/2009
Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 556 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/20/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tu

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 557 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/21/2009
Subject: Areva foundation (energy)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 558 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 559 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 560 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: definitions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 561 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 562 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: definitions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 563 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 564 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: definitions

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 565 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 566 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 567 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 568 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: AWECS Airborne Wind Energy Conversion System

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 569 From: Dean Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 570 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 571 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 572 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 573 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 574 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Soaring Wind Turbine

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 575 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Misc on names

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 576 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 577 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: AWECS Airborne Wind Energy Conversion System

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 578 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 579 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: FF-AWE Jet-stream Sailors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 580 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/23/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 581 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 582 From: dougselsam Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 583 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 584 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 585 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 586 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 11/24/2009
Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 587 From: dave santos Date: 11/25/2009
Subject: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 588 From: Bob Stuart Date: 11/25/2009
Subject: Re: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 589 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 590 From: dave santos Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Re: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 591 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 592 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Re: Cleaning the Well- Vaporware

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 593 From: dave santos Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Re: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 594 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Anyone may edit this wiki

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 595 From: Bob Stuart Date: 11/26/2009
Subject: Re: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 546 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2009
Subject: Re: Hypersonic HAPAS, L1 KiteShades, etc.
Tethers Unlimited is a cool company, thanks (to daveC) for the link... Some clarifications/corrections now that i have studied up some-
 
A solar-sail is a mirror that deflects photons. Magnetic & electrostatic sails deflect solar-wind ions (protons) & are mesh-like, with the electric fields expanding the surface area seen by the protons. Photonic & electric concepts are roughly comparable by mass, but as photon momentum is energetically denser (~5000+) by area, a smaller (but denser) sail gives you similar propulsive force. Space is so large sail size is not a major limitation.
 
Electric sails can also interact with magnetospheres like Earth's usefully. Electric-space tethers use this principle. Pure photonic sails are considered to collapse against tether-spread, so KiteShip's scheme may require an electrostatic repulsion to stay "inflated". Seems like photo/electric hybrids might be good in several ways.
 
Opposed (or single) hypersonic tethered foils dipping into the atmosphere look like a good way to steer the tail(s) of a (partial geosynch) space-elevator around usefully, nevermind space sails. Electro-tethering might provide energy lost to aerodrag.
 
An L1 KiteShade can be stabilized by letteing the sail billow/spin closer to Earth while an opposed mass trails closer to the Sun, with the center of mass at L1.
 
====================
 
By the way, the definition of a kite came up preconference with DaveL & ScottS of Drachen & it was humorous that we were still fuzzy on the concept, even forgetting that "A Kite is a Wing on a String"; the most concise definition previously. Here is a proposed refinement, maybe the ultimate-
 
Winged String
 
DaveC has long proposed a sort of soft kitetrain, "Flying Rope"; simply throw it upward & it stays up.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 547 From: dave santos Date: 11/12/2009
Subject: Re: Airborne Wind Energy and Afghanistan
Alex,
 
Kites have a lot of potential, but our power generation systems are immature prototypes. Mountains are a challenge, as my Swiss kite friends attest. Mountain people tend to avoid the best wind-exposed sites for settlement, preferring protected terrain. Afghan kite fighting is very skilled & passionate but fairly seasonal & opportunistic.
 
There are some other great ways to help folks with cheap low-tech DIY-
 
Water Purification- Slow Sand Filters, Bio-sand Filters use a biofilm to make potable water from foul sources.
 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_sand_filter
 
Solar Cookers save on wood fuel & particularly ease rural women's lives.
 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cooker

Composting Toilets are far more sanitary than pit latrines & produce fertilizer. I don't include a link because most are far too fancy. A wooden box with a hole on top & one side removed can be drawn along as needed. The key is finding plenty off fine-grained local plant mulch to add a scoop after each use. Smell & flies are controlled. A wire mesh tail section keeps animals out. After a few months the resulting soil is safe for gardening. Keep rain & run-off from leaching out "sewage" & to protect nearby well water.
 
These techniques require some skills but are very practical. Check back in a year or two for better kite DIY.
 
Take Care,
 
dave
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 548 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/13/2009
Subject: Suggestion for tests and power reports
Attachments :
    Hi list,
     
    It is possible to test many systems without generator, possible smoothing device, and robotics (later for them).
     
    To deduce the power one can measure the torque and the angular speed. A torque meter is expensive (but can be necessary to refine measures); it is possible to obtain a first approach with chest jacks from old car or boat pump with manometer (for oscillating devices like OrthoKite) or old motors of different powers and torques (for rotating devices).
     
    It will be interesting to know power reports with identical parameters (kite, line(s) length, circular occupied space according all wind directions_...).
     
    Some systems can be tried easily with few modifications.
     
    For example the system on http://www.energykitesystems.net/DaveSantos/eddyloop.mpg
    can easily become OrthoKite http://pagesperso-orange.fr/OrthoKiteBunch/page-6.html (see illustrations 4 and 5, video, and prototype videos on attachments): on the original the kite control is like a small double lever (my comment is: the kite pulls both the two ends, so the tangential force is not maximized).

     

    On OrthoKite:  the kite control is implemented on a supplementary double lever and travels from one side to the other side to allow both an orthogonal transmission and a maximized torque according lines length.
    For a good comparison total length of the double lever on the two systems would be similar.
     
    Soon I will try it (with some do-it-yourself you can see on the videos), but it would be interesting (if possible) that expert Dave Santos tries different systems like Tripod and other suggested systems by the members on the list, and posts the results.
     
    If necessary, and if several members wish it, a small fund could be created for it with----why not a sponsor?.
    When good ways for transmission systems will be verified, other (working or not yet) more complex technologies can be used.
     
    Pierre Benhaïem
     
     
     
     
     
      @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 549 From: dave santos Date: 11/13/2009
    Subject: Re: Suggestion for tests and power reports
    Hi Pierre,
     
    You are right that one need not use a generator to experiment with kite power. In fact, its a source of power measurement uncertainty & claims are easily exaggerated. On the other hand, generators for low-hour prototypes are not expensive; just grab a scrap back-drivable DC gearmotor to suit. Cordless drills make nice experimental units with planetary gearing & universal chuck.
     
    John Borsheim of ATEC Test Engineering (KiteLab Group) taught us the elegant way to measure shaft/brake-power; a DeProny Brake. To make one requires but a wood screw clamp, lever arm, & spring scale. The levered wood clamp screws tighter on the shaft to a desired load & the lever arm pulls the spring scale to a reading. Lever length divided by spring resistance equals brake-power. Voila.
     
    We must also trust trained senses on the fly. Feel the power of rapid small experiments sensitively in your hands & numeric proving can come later, preferably by independent replication. Underestimating power is best-practice. To do AWE right is not mysterious; the power is tangible. Breaking a work-cell is plain fun...
     
    daveS

    ---
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 550 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/14/2009
    Subject: China new-start for AWECS
    Attendee at conference confirmed that there is an AWECS new start company in China, yet without web site. That is all I know. Information is invited. China is rapidly expanding ground-hug ompression towered turbines. Just when China will see that tethered high-placed AWECS can be multiply placed much more rapidly than the hard towers... and with superior gains ... is not known. Info from anyone is invited.

    JoeF
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 551 From: dave santos Date: 11/16/2009
    Subject: HAWP09 Buzz
    For all the folks unable to attend HAWO09, here are some highlights of a very successful conference-
     
     
    SkyMill unveiled an autogyro concept & small prototype that pulls on a groundgen reel, then folds its rotor to retract. Offshore location is a goal. The start-up has a developing relationship with Boeing's Phantom Works, the research arm of the aerospace giant.
     
    Joby Energy projects a year aloft endurance for its giant high altitude AWE platform concept, which would shatter old (non-aerostat) aviation endurance records. An animation showed the large modular wing structure taking off vertically with a folding empennage & sweeping eights to maximize energy in low wind.
     
    Makani Power thinks a 90% availability rate is doable for its composite wing flygen. This would halve the downtime of the best current aviation platforms. A video was shown of an actively controlled kite-looping aircraft flown from a tower. Former MP exec, Saul Griffith made a plea for collaboration across the field. Google.org's current AWE role went unclarified.
     
    Magenn is hoping to boost efficiency with a "beard" fairing that masks the draggy return side of its savonius LTA. Surveillance is a target value-added market.
     
    Several AWE players hinted at military research connections even as Wayne German made an impassioned plea for peaceful applications. Wayne described a vast crosswind "venetian blind affair" aimed at low-level jet streams.
     
    Selsam demoed a many-bladed turbine held up by helium balloons & showed off a variety of AWE array concepts in his patent portfolio. Dense arrays are a key scalability strategy.
     
    KiteLab Group showed off the simplest, least expensive, & most robust AWE prototypes of any presenter, albeit at a small scale.
     
    HAWP organizer & climate scientist, Christina Archer, won the innovation award from the overall Chico State University alternative energy conference. Co-sponsor Jamison Group's Virginia Walker confirmed that organization's long-term commitment to the AWE field. PJ Sheppard & Sky WindPower made vital contributions to the event's success. There was considerable press presence.
     
    Much more happened, this was but a sketch.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 552 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/17/2009
    Subject: HAWP09 Buzz

    An article on:HAWP09

    Pierre Benhaïem

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 553 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2009
    Subject: Comparing AWE Schemes by Heuristic Virtues
    Dave Lang made a huge contribution to the AWE field back in '04 by ranking a handful of schemes for Drachen Foundation's journal. Many of us entered the field on reading that paper.
     
     
    Since then new concepts emerged, key issues became more defined, & now there are dozens of proposed solutions. Technical due diligence, a combination of comparative analysis & testing, in combination with market forces, will ongoingly vett the AWE field. 
     
    Below is a partial DRAFT list of heuristic (rule-of-thumb) virtues that are essential or highly desirable in any successful AWE system. Each virtue has a vice as its inverse corollary. Its hard to derive a clean scoring matrix from such a hyper-dimensional space of fuzzy semantic values that overlap & vary in importance. Unknowns & biases abound. Still, by roughly summing a given AWE scheme's virtues a sense of worth emerges. Please forward any corrections, additions, or improvements to this evolving checklist-

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 554 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/18/2009
    Subject: Re: Comparing AWE Schemes by Heuristic Virtues
    Another heuristic virtue: Appearance

    Appearance in the mind users and viewing public?
    Is the system pleasant to behold?
    Is the system obstructing environmental views?
    Does the system appear to be friendly or threatening?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 555 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/20/2009
    Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin

    Let's have Tethered Turbines  show at this conference ... a booth to collect all AWECS companies and interests:                      Abstracts Due: December 11th 2009

    Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010  
    in Anaheim, California

    Important Dates        See:  Information for authors

    • Abstracts due: December 11th 2009
    • Notification: February 11th 2010
    • Papers due: April 12th 2010

    How and Why Exhibit

    So far:

    • Will AWE have representation at this conference?
    • Collaboration for a table or booth? Commitment is invited. Let's talk and get something there.
    • So far, it looks there is not one AWECS factor listed
    • Our AWEIA regional rep gave us notice about this conference: "The window is open......"    John Oyebanji Hardensoft International Limited
    • Stark demo?  ModelAWECS demo?  
    • Funding might come from collaborative effort among AWECS companies. Talk it up.
    • Conference registration. 
    • Exhibit space and costs.
    • How is the working committee doing, Roger C. ?  Virginia W. ?
    • Clean Technology Exhibit Space: Before January 31, 2010: $3,000 After January 31, 2010: $3,300 Pricing per 10’x10’ unit of space. Each unit includes: Draped booth space One conference pass and two booth personnel passes Twenty-five Expo Only passes
    • ?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 556 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/20/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tu

     Collaboration for a table or booth?  $3000 for 10'x10' booth.    Commitment is invited.    Let's talk and get something there.   Send interest note to  win@TetheredTurbines.com  c/o JoeF.   Your literature could be distributed from a common-AWECS booth by AWEIA.   Thirty companies at $100 each would fund the booth. However, only 4 companies have posted their slide show in Files at AWE group, so more participation would be needed to pull this off for a booth.    I am in for $100 and offer to be one of the two operating personnel permits the booth for all AWE.   Will Joby be there?  Will Magenn be there?  Will Sky WindPower be there?  .   

    Exhibition is for two days only of the expo.  Other days have other activities.



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 557 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/21/2009
    Subject: Areva foundation (energy)

    Areva project submission (Areva is the French nuclear energy but also wind energy firm).Furthering...

    Pierre Benhaïem

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 558 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    Hi Joe!
    What on earth are "tethered turbines"? Is that a windmill with a cable brace upwind? ;-) FWIW, "tethered turbines" is a horrible descriptor for kite-produced power generation. Just IMHO. I understand the issue of removing "kite" from what we do and applaud the effort, but more than half of all proposed systems do not include turbines on tethers! Many do not include turbines of any sort at all.

    Did I miss something at the Chico event? Was there some consensus to call kites "tethered turbines"??? This really, really misrepresents much if not the majority of what we do. The turbine is rarely tethered; it often sits on the ground. Worse, a significant fraction of kite power devices do not include a turbine at all. Others pump water, pull vehicles or use linear generators. The media is already calling what we do "flying windmills." Unless we as an industry come up with something more definitive--and better--this is gonna be what we are called. The flux is jelling even as we speak.

    Dave

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 559 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    Nice questions and concerns, Dave.  

    I hope others will come into the discussion. Maybe the 40 or so players   could reach phraseology that could be put up to a vote.  But what will happen one day when an investor or user finds out the historical fact that they are investing in or using a kited tethered turbine system? Will we want to be seen as ashamed of the raw engineering accuracy of our works?  Wayne German in his purity admonished the attendees as he proposed that the public culture in this pioneering time could learn to use the word "kite" in a proud and accurate manner; that goes against a thrust you put on the table.   Seeing the controlled OutLeader kite (even forget the electric generator tertiary step) as a true airborne turbine stands as an invitation, if such did not fit your seeing; such has minimal frequency of oscillation, but it fulfills as machine the meaning of turbine.

    At conference there was a huge amount of use of the word "kite" from professor Milanese from Italy, from Ireland, from USA, from Germany.    Weighing for consensus brought out that every system was a system made possible because of tethering to force a differentia that enabled kite systems to convert the wind resource into mechanical energy. THEN the mechanical energy was optionally used to do works--either works aloft or works at ground. The third action after the mechanical energy was made was variously sent to pump or make electricity either aloft or on ground. But in all the systems the tug kite included, etc. the first action was to convert the wind kinetic energy into mechanical energy; when done by means of an oscillatory machine we have a turbine, even in the simple tug kite system. Thus all the devices were tethered turbines very generically and accurately. The low frequency of the simple tug kite, the yo-yo system kite is still in macro a machine that extracts the stream's kinetic energy to result in a useful mechanical energy to later be used for tertiary uses. 

    In brief, in engineering and practice, nearly every AWECS is a tethered turbine, perhaps 100% of them, even your KiteShip tugging working OutLeader system in equal status with the airborne set of Selsam multi rotor  Superturbine Sky Serpent . The rotation rate may not be too exciting in the slower oscillators (in the extreme: zero) when steady one-direction simple tack is in place to give nearly zero-rotation on the tether for tug and zero-oscillatory motion of the kite's sail part; but go to higher rates of rotation in kite-control-unit for figure eights in SkySails and we get a kite-sail body that rotates in its way to play its part in capturing the kinetic energy of the stream of air for doing work. The OutLeader tug kite system is a tethered turbine system, as it has a low-frequency oscillation that converts wind kinetic energy to mechanical energy...fundamentally because it is a tethered system permitting reach and facing of higher differences (between the wind and the tugged mooring); without the tethering the OutLeader would sink to the water; without the tethering, the gained mechanical energy would not do the work of tugging.

     Likewise, the auto-gyro kite of SkyMill Energy is a tethered turbine.. They have the yo-yo method going with generator on ground for converting the extracted kinetic energy into mechanical energy  and then into electricity by tertiary choice; the wing and generator are coupled by tether; without the oscillating rotary wing extracting energy from the kinetic energy of the wind, the system would not have conversion choices (to heat, sound, electricity, light, potential energy via pumping, installation of potential energy via new tensions, etc.).  They even described that at low wind they will oscillate the kite body and the kite tether to get the relative wind increase advantage. At end of power phase, that is, at the end of their using the system as a tethered turbine, they will switch the generator to be a winching prime mover to reel in a pitch-changed lower-resistive loft body in order to have tether to release during a following power-phase. 

    The huge two-football-field sized Joby Energy powerable kite (kites in part of its sessions and becomes a powered aircraft in part of its flight session) is in two ways a tethered turbine: first in its macro behavior without looking at the node turbines in its framed matrix of wings and node turbines; then secondly the set of node turbines are tethered to groundstation.  Their rotation of the macro wing will be at zero when wind is sufficient; they noted that they will control the macro tethered wing to oscillate in special paths to increase crosswinding relative wind on the node turbines. The Joby Energy scheme thus is a tethered turbine.

    The Makani circle-pathing of its powerable kite (it too is proposed to have choice of positively powering itself when needed to become a tethered powered aircraft).  The turbine blades mounted in the kite body are horizontal-axis rotors relative to the relative wind during flight circle figures. Such mining-of-energy phase for their craft is made possible by the tether couple to groundstation.  Thus, the Makani device is a tethered turbine system. 

    The Sky WindPower device holds the tertiary-choice of generators aloft. First the device is a powered aircraft tethered to the groundstation as it powers to altitude; then the power is turned off and attitude is adjusted so that oscillation or rotary reaction from autorotation occurs in the unpowered kited mode...busy extracting energy from the wind made possible by the tethering of the kite body which holds autorotating blades.  The mechanical energy brought up from converting the kinetic energy of the wind is by choice kept aloft to drive a set of electric generators, which electricity is passed to either grid or storing loads at ground. Therefore, the Sky WindPower system is a tethered turbine system.

    The Magenn Power rotatable LTA blimp is a rotating body extracting mechanical energy from the stream; part of the extracted energy goes mechanically aerodynamically into driving the macro rotation giving some Magnus-effect lift; some of the derived mechanical energy is spent for making heat, some for making sound, some for putting tension and stretch in the tether; by tertiary choice they are setting up the device so that some of derived mechanical energy drives end-plate "toroid" electric generators for aloft production of electricity to be passed to loads at the ground.  Hence the Magenn device is a tethered turbine system.

    Similar generic descriptor analysis applies to the tethered turbine systems involved in the following companies:  Aeroix :: Project: EnerKite, Ampyx Power, Baseload Energy,  Advanced Rotorcraft Technology, HeliWind, HighestWind, Isentropic, Joby Energy, Kite For Sail, Kite Gen Research,  KiteLab KiteMill,  KiteNav, KiteSA, KiteShip,  KiteTugTM , KitVes, Laddermill Makani Power, Magenn Power, Modelway, OrthoKiteBunch Selsam,    Sequoia Automation,  SkyMill Energy,  SkySails,   Sky WindPower, SpiralAirfoilAirborne,  SwissKitePower,  Tethered Aviation,  TetheredTurbines,  Twind® Velocity Cubed Technologies,  WindLift,   WPI KPT,  ZapKites, Aerostat by Potter . The various tethered kiteMotors of KiteLab are likewise tethered turbines with tertiary choice to convert the mined mechanical energy to drive pumping or electricity generation aloft or on ground.

    So far, only tethered turbine systems come to mind at the moment in the emerging airborne wind energy industry.  Indeed we also were gifted with a demonstration by DaveS at conference with the fixture mounted tethered turbine of the two bladed HAWT sort tethered from lifter kite which invites Vestas to tether their turbine, but with the suggestion of leaving the gearbox and electric generator on the ground while a lifter system allows a replacement of the compression holding tower with a tether; the mechanical energy could drive an endless loop to do pumping or electric generation conversion at the ground for grid or potential energy storage, say hydro head.

    Tethering turbines in water streams is a going industry.      Minesto (using paravane tethered turbine),   proposes to adapt early patent schemes of generator in the paravane body. 

    What are tethered turbines?

    A turbine operating somewhere on a tether in a fluid is a tethered turbine. Turbines positioned in fluid streams (water, air, molten glass, methane gas, etc.) contrast with turbines positioned by non-tether frames.

    To get clear, maybe we would have on the table a definition for turbine and for tether.

    A brief "turbine" offer is
    "A turbine is an oscillatory machine that extracts energy from a fluid or air flow and converts it into useful work."

    A brief offer for "tether" is
    "something (as a rope or chain) by which object-A is fastened to some other object-B so that the objects can range under designed constraints."  

    I do not have your agreement yet on this platform, but I will continue with those offers for now for "turbine" and "tether" in this first reply. And it is on the table that frequencies can be zero to high.

    The constraint of a ground-hugging non-cord compressive tower to hold a wind turbine in its place as in the Vestas offers is ordinarily not respected as tethering its turbine. Differently, the airborne devices that are string (cord, rope, cable) tethered in the atmosphere or water streams are seen commonly as tethered turbines, not hard-towered-held turbines.

    AWECS are primarily kite systems (aerostatic kites and non-aerostatic kites or combine hybrids that involve aerostats and kites, some macro rotating and some whole-system rotating, albeit with some in oscillatory line oscillation). The dominant action in AWECS is not gliding or powered aircrafting, but interactions with the stream using kited complexes while spending as little energy as possible to position the tethered turbine systems for effective conversion of the kinetic wind energy to mechanical energy.  What one does with the mined mechanical energy is a tertiary choice; where one places the tertiary conversion action is another decision after the exercise of the tethered-turbine operation.   

    Finally, in the tethered turbine AWECS,  there are very many kinds of mounts for sub-elements that convert aloft the stream's kinetic energy.  Some blades are as beads set downwinding as nacelles can be low profile when gearing and electric generators are not unwind but say on the ground. Some windmill blades are kited themselves instead of giving full disk traverse to the stream. When the kite body is hybridized so some cross winding mainsails have in them sub-turbines and perhaps choiced electric generators, then solid mounts or sub-tether downwinding torque flex-cables could be employed.    When a kite system is simple as in traction work with using the gained mechanical energy immediately for tug (saving lots of coal and oil), then the system is still a tethered turbine with low frequency oscillation during the mechanical-energy mining.

    I have been listening closely. What I hear (and read) in patents, at conference, and in the kite energy literature is that AWECS are about systems that are tethered turbine systems.  Some are stretching themselves to say they have an energy glider, a turbine in an aircraft,... Some are doing giant gymnastics to avoid the mechanically accurate kiting mode descriptor.   If you have some phrases to offer, please begin to use them in text.   An investor who inescapably will be informed by someone that the objects are kite system working as tethered turbines will then have a more accurate connection with his or her investment.   If our emerging industry wants to forward phrases and vote upon them, then some consensus might occur.  If contortions go too far from the deep literature and an investor is later hit with kite ...then a balking and negative reaction might occur.  Kite system is two words that neglects turbine; energy kite system is three words and also neglects turbine, tethered turbines is two words but faces the key work of mining energy from the stream while showing the distinction that such is not a compressive towered fixture, but is remote at length on a tether.     I am all ears for options. The related patent literature is full of turbine while in the body of the patents is revealed that tether to the air above is essentially involved.   My ears and heart are open for phrases that our industry may want.  What have we?


    Out there ...

    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cable_Tethered_Turbine.png
    • "Capture Wind Energy with a Tethered Turbine" at a Science and engineering blog.
    •  
      • tether
      • tethered aerodyne
      • tethered airfoil
      • tethered airfoils
      • tethered airfoil systems
      • tethered airfoil technology            Wayne German           GeneralLink
      • tethered airfoil wind energy conversion system      1979 patent   TAWECS
      • tethered aviation
      • tethered energy glider      (kite that cycles into glide phase)
      • tethered foil
      • tethered hang glider
      • tethered horizontal axis wind turbines THAWT
      •  
      • tethered tensile wings
      • tethered vertical axis wind turbines  TVAWT
      • tether position sensor
      • tether scope     (issue comes in with respect to land use of AWE)
      • tether sensor
      • tethered tension field wind turbine      W. Roeseler "Billy"
      • tethered turbine                          www.tetheredturbines.com
        An old tethered turbine from the eighties, crushed in storage, Shawn is mistaken about the difficulty of small cheap reliable turbines. Blades are fom a beer can. Brooks saw many of these fly in public. They made music & lit LEDs. No failures. An old tethered turbine from the eighties, crushed in storage, Shawn is mistaken about the difficulty of small cheap reliable turbines. Blades are fom a beer can. Brooks saw many of these fly in public. They made music & lit LEDs. No failures.
      • tethered underwater current turbine energy generator
      • tethered wind turbine
      •  
      • tethered wind systems
      • tether frequency
      • tether hook    
      • tethermares     (nightmare situation with the tethers of a kite system; awful challenge)
      • tethers
      • tethister    August 2009: "The latest "tethister" tri-tether works well with trees. You simply anchor a line off from the top of the tree a & tap the center of it to a spragged generator. A tree is a dissipative aero/mass dampener array, not very efficient for extracting power, so only small devices are really practical      DaveS"
        think of a tetrahedron with its base on the ground; the sides of the tetrahedron are tethers to a kited apex; in the central region of the base is a working electric or pumping generator.

       

     

     

     

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 560 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: definitions
    Ok, Joe, that was some impressive writing on definitions for the industry and it is true that we must define our industry well, because banks, lawyers and courts of law demand it. But lets not get stuck in the minutia, lets move toward acronyms, with the words of the acronym defined by the dictionary, all kept in the strictest definition and let the creators broaden the acronyms by defining their own creations while staying within the confines of BASIC industry definitions. I call our creation an "Aerostat Wind Turbine".

    Lynn Potter
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 561 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    You bury me with verbiage, Joe. I won't respond to all that you say. You make many good points. However, language is a precise science, not an artform. When I google any part of your definition for "turbine" below, I get no hits at all. Someone made this up, from whole cloth.

    According to wikipedia, "A turbine is a rotary engine that extracts energy from a fluid or air flow and converts it into useful work." Dictionary.com agrees, "Any of various machines having a rotor, usually with vanes or blades, driven by the pressure, momentum, or reactive thrust of a moving fluid, as steam, water, hot gases, or air..." Websters corroborates, "A rotary engine actuated by the reaction or impulse or both of a current of fluid (as water, steam, or air) subject to pressure and usually made with a series of curved vanes on a central rotating spindle," and offers this etymology, " French, from Latin turbin-, turbo top, whirlwind, whirl, from turba confusion."

    Rotary motion is a part and parcel of a "turbine." If it doesn't rotate, it isn't a turbine. When I google any part of your definition for "turbine" below, ""A turbine is an oscillatory machine that extracts energy from a fluid or air flow and converts it into useful work." An oscillatory machine is NOT a turbine. Neither is one which describes a figure 8 (or other lissajoux curvature) motion. Language is not a toy.

    I've no problem with a consensus on the word "kite." I'll offer my 40 years experience with the term, state the case that using it *always* devolves into playful talk of toys and playthings, and go on my way. If Wayne wants to use "kite," proudly or otherwise, more power to him. I would ask whether Wayne is the group's chosen spokesman? How do Joby, Makani and SkyWind feel about that?

    Joe, you argue both sides of your own debate! "Tethered turbine" does not contain the word, "kite," yet you promulgate it. It does contain turbine, yet many (most) kites do not spin, or have any spinning parts. Many kite-powered turbines do not fly, but rather sit on the gound end of the assemblage, thus are not "tethered" (OK, I suppose you could argue that their turbines constitute one end of a "tethered system," but you beg the question of relativity--is the earth a "tethered" device when one flies a kite while standing on it?)

    An outleader kite is not a turbine, in any non-jocular sense of the word. A SkySail kite is not a turbine, again in any sense of the word. A Selsam rotor is certainly a turbine. Is it a kite? Should it be classed along with kites? I think yes, but it's far from a foregone conclusion. SkyMill Energy's sytstem is a case in point: Their airborne portion (the "kite") appears to contain a turbine device; however, only the rotating parts are a "turbine" The remainder of the airframe is just that--the airframe. On the other hand, their ground-based module is without doubt a turbine, to any lay onlooker. Turbines are what drive generators, and most (esily 95%) of them have turbines inside their generator shack. The airborne bit may be a turbine, or it may contain a turbine, or it may be a turbine-like device, but that's less than obvious. Calling the entire device a "tethered turbine" is confusing, when the next words are, "The turbine generator is over in that box there, on the ground." Just as language is a science, a lexicon should be non-confusing. Is the total device a turbine? Is the autogyro a turbine? Is only the rotating part of the autogiro the turbine? "Flying windmill," confusing as it is is much, much more precise than "tethered turbine."

    What is a water pump? Sometimes these are turbines, and sometimes they are piston principled, I see no way to re-classify a kite-driven piston pump as a "turbine" without just making stuff up. Is it the group's consensus that a kite pulling directly against a ground-based generator, without any rotating parts at all save for the generator, is a "turbine?" Is a Joby array , or a Makani Power kite, a "turbine?" I can see that Makani's wing contains turbines, and that Joby's array contains turbines as well, but neither provide lift, that is the job of the airframe--which is the great majority of the flying hardware one sees. Should the entire device be called a "turbine?" Is tethering even a part and parcel of their turbines? The airframe is tethered, the turbine(s) sit within the airframe. I'd like to hear some consensus--maybe from the companies who are actually building these things--and paying for the marketing they plan to use. Folks, are you building "tethered turbines?"

    Not to be a naysayer only, I'll offer an alternative, that of another of Wayne's terms, "tethered airfoil." This is a much better term for what we do. It's precise, semantically correct, easy to understand and has been in usage for 20 years. My kites are tethered airfoils, your kites are tethered airfoils, Sky Mill's kites are tethered airfoils. What's not to like?

    Yours,

    Dave Culp

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 562 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: definitions
    I fully agree with your sentiments, Lynn, but an "aerostat" is a
    device which flies statically; ie, without any airflow over it. In
    other words, a blimp. See my other post for why "turbine" is an
    overshoot. Most kites do not contain turbines of any kind.

    Dave
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 563 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur

     

    Perhaps this drawing will clarify the rotary engine: the kite.   The simple kite has always been a rotary engine that extracts energy into mechanical energy, and thus a wind turbine. The OutLeader is included in such. The rotation that suffices is at the mooring point, even in the very unlikely case of zero rotation, which physically almost never occurs. Rotation can reverse directions about the center of rotation. As to "tethered airfoil" ... does not address the aim of extracting energy which is a primary focus of AWE.But tethered turbines does address the mechanical facts and the focus on getting to the mechanical energy. What one does with the mechanical energy is a full third level of action that need not yet come into the discussion. The third step is not needed for the OutLeader to be a tethered turbine. That is, one need not bring in tug result or electricity making. It suffices to look at the first two steps: flow and extraction of mechanical energy from the flow by a rotary engine. It is not a stretch at all to see the kite as a machine with its parts: sail, bridle, tether, moor point(s), and control system. And it is not a jocular stretch to notice that that machine fundamentally rotates about its mooring point, sometimes little, sometime much, sometimes rotating one way, sometimes rotating the other way. Thus the flying kite is a rotary engine that is also extracting energy into mechanical energy when operating in streams with mooring poiint at a differential speed or/direction to the kite's sail body and tether.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 564 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: definitions
    Dave, it is true that an aerostat is a tethered blimp or lighter than air-ship (LTA), mine is a aerostat that supports a wind turbine.

    Lynn Potter
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 565 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin

    Airborne wind turbine is a Wikipedia good definition,and lets to include all the systems.In french language it would be "éolienne aéroportée".

    The extension of the term "turbine" from"turbine of the generator" to the ensemble with flying elements that produce its move seems natural.

    Morever oscillating motion can be assimilated to turbine motion for the following determiner:torque production.So pumping systems could be assimilated to turbines.

    Skysails and KiteShip have ennobled the name "kite" at least for towing use.However Saul Griffith considers a pejorative child toy sense for "kite" which takes off credibility.But it is true that all systems,even aerostat systems like Magenn or Twind,comprehend a kite part;so "kite wind turbine" or Airborne wind turbine.

    Pierre Benhaïem 

     

     

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 566 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/22/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    Dave, you make a good point, and so does Joe.
    The problem, I think, is describing things with too tight a definition; sometimes using generalities or being vague is good.

    "tethered airfoils" is a good investor definition of a kite, but on the other hand I wouldn't emphasize the tether.

    "Airborne Wind Energy" (AWE) says it so well; I wish I owned it.

    Aerostat Wind Turbines is our company name, but AWT.com is taken, so names and definitions are tricky. I propose as an industry we do a few basic names and definitions and leave the rest to the makers.

    Lynn Potter
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 567 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    I think in choosing a name, we need to honor those attributes of words that impart emotional reactions, colloquial usage implications,  etc.  When one hears "turbine" what comes to mind? Certainly not the abstract generalizations that Joe applies in order to arrive at the fact that "everything is a turbine" (who wants to explain that to everyone that comes along).....no, it likely will create a mind set envisioning some kind of heavy piece of rotating machinery flying around (scary), and somehow being tethered (even if in fact the system in question is a vari-drogue yanking on a winch (unless we mean the winch, ie. "turbine",  is somehow being held down by the drogue using a tether :-)).

    We are looking for a "buzz phrase" that is:

     -  intuitively understandable,
     - friendly,
     - reasonably free of need to explain abstruse or over-generalization of definitions,
     - is easy to pronounce,
     - does not impart any negativity (even if to imply frivolity).

    just my 2 cents.....

    DaveL
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 568 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: AWECS Airborne Wind Energy Conversion System
    The title "AWE" of our yahoogroup is the field of our activity,and
    "AWECS" is the good Joe's expression to design AWE systems with
    (mechanical) conversion of the wind energy.

    Why?Because of both precision,neutrality (like a good law) and
    abstraction allowing more particular cases.

    Other expressions like "tethered airfoils","tethered turbine" design in
    excess objects to realize the concept,not the concept itself.So it is
    easy to find configurations which is off such a definition,and to find
    non precisions:

    "tethered airfoils" does not comprehend "Aerostat Systems" (on this
    point I correct my precedent post) and does not precise yes or no there
    is a mechanical conversion of energy;

    "tethered turbines" does not precise the aerial aspect:for an extreme
    case it would design a ground "tethered turbine" ;

    "flying Windmills" is correct for Magenn,Sky WindPower,but not for
    Kitegen or OrthoKitebunch;

    "Airborne wind turbine" (on this point I little correct my precedent
    post) can be not correct if it is considered that an oscillating motion
    does not make a continuous motion like an usual turbine.And "Turbine"
    designs an object.

    So AWES could design systems with (for example Kitegen) or without
    mechanical conversion (for example Skysails),and AWECS only systems with
    conversion (Kitegen but not Skysails).


    A good definition is a step for a good recognition from different
    administrations.

    All words of AWECS expression are into the same family and no one
    designs a particular object.

    Pierre Benhaïem
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 569 From: Dean Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    Hi Lynn,

    Do you have a picture of your Areostat?

    Dan'l

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 570 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered turbin
    Last name and first name(s) for AWE systems.

    AWECS would be a good general definition,could be the serious last
    name,but not the first name as DaveL wishes.

    Pierre Benhaïem
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 571 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
      It is seen clearly by some that the elemental kite flying (with its necessary parts of airfoil, bridle, tether, mooring, control system) in air or under water is itself a rotary engine, a true airborne (or waterborne) tethered turbine in its totality; that engineering text won't best sell AWECS, Lang purports. From that technical kite-system base,  tertiary turbines may be added or not in various ways aloft, inline, or on ground as particular systems develop. 
      
               However, just what terms to use in what setting? 
    Who is hearing what?
    Text is needed for various involved communities: Fit the audience's needs. What of the ten scales will the terms be used (micro, mini, toy, sport, nomadic, residential, commercial, utility, national, free-flight), as scale space will tend to alter some terms. The physicist working in micro flows in the medical community will use text different from the counter salesperson selling an AWECS at a toy-sport kite shoppe. The boat person using a trolling paravane for doing special tasks will have his or her language. The utilityAWE administrator managing hundreds of field AWECS workers will have a language fit to the purpose. Etc.
     
    • Deep engineering designers, original-AWECS manufacturers
    • Buyers
    • Users
    • Operators, repairers, technicians, constructors, installers
    • Investors
    • Sellers, dealers, promoters
    • Patent examiners, inspectors, and lawyers, and the patentees
    • Lawyers, judges, legals, insurance-company litigators
    • Airspace-control community
    • Public newspaper editor, magazine editors, headline wordsmiths
    • Educators, authors, clarity-seeking students

    These communities need terms that fit their flow, culture, language modes. That a simple kite is itself for a design engineer may be be seen as a flying tethered rotary engine capturing wind's kinetic energy and converting it immediately to mechanical energy to be then further converted or not to other uses ....is not fit text for the buyer-investor-seller community.  

    The struggle to get terms has some positive side effects affecting even the deep design. The rich discussion is gifting insights.   Out of the cloud of terms will come assets that the emerging industry will use to carry out its effort. Successful systems well sold and effectively served will be able to set the temperature  language in the open public market.  News releases from the AWE community will help to guide the text in some of the communities above listed; but newspaper headline designers will still do their special take on things.

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 572 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Clean Technology Conference and Expo 2010. Time for tethered tur
    Dean,
    Nothing produced, just CAD and conceptual drawings.
    Lynn

    ---- Dean <spiralairfoil@hotmail.com Do you have a picture of your Areostat?
    Dan'l
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 573 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    Pierre Benhaïem urges getting to some "first name" or front name to represent to the public our emerging industry.

    For behind-the-veil secondary name, he likes for the in-the-know-designing-manufacturing community the inclusionary AWECS (airborne wind energy conversion systems).  

    But a public buzz term is sought for fronting the industry--one that will attract investors and encourage buyers to make commitment.
    What could such a term be?

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 574 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Soaring Wind Turbine

    United States Patent Application        20080116315
    Kind Code A1
    Ron Wayne Hamburg May 22, 2008


    See document 8 pages:


    Soaring wind turbine  

    My summary:
    Method for tethered-turbine system: Kytoons hold HAWT bladed turbines, gearbox, and generator. Gained mechanical energy from of the kite energy system is converted aloft to electricity and sent via conductive tether to groundstation for load choices. 

    I like Ron's buzz title phrase used in his patent application:  Soaring wind turbine.

    JoeF

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 575 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Misc on names
    Maybe it is sufficient to simply set us apart from the conventional turbine wind power world, and not get into implementation details or abstractions. For instance, just as the word "alternative" has been used through the years to set off an activity from the more conventionally mainline counterparts (to wit: alternative music, alternative life style, etc, etc), maybe we should simply be "Alternative Wind Power", and let the details speak for each particular incarnation, which of course would NOT be like the ground turbines.

    When folks ask me about what I am doing, I usually tell them I am pursuing "alternative wind power", and when they ask me what that is, I don't launch into a discussion about "everything being a turbine", rather, I just give them a few examples, which is what they really want anyway.

    DaveL


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 576 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    Airborne Wind Energy


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 577 From: Dave Culp Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: AWECS Airborne Wind Energy Conversion System
    I am fully in agreement, first with Dave Lang; second with Pierre Benhaïem.

    Dave Culp
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 578 From: Dave Lang Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    regarding the "Airborne" interpretation of (AWE) wind energy, it might be construed as just a fancy name for "energy borne by the air", which of course, "we all know is harvested with those big ground turbines" :-/ .

    For me at least, the term "Alternative" speaks for setting us apart.....and if you've tried to get ARPA-E or NIST, or NREL's attention, that may not be good thing :-)

    DaveL


    At 9:47 AM -0800 11/23/09, Dave Culp wrote:
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 579 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: FF-AWE Jet-stream Sailors
    Jet-stream sailors  are getting ready for adventures across continents. They will be using two unpowered tether-coupled kites; the kites will appear in various forms; one may look like a sailplane; the other might look like a paraglider; but each designer will modify how his or her kites appear to the general public. Some will have a human in both kites. Some will have a human in just one of the two coupled kites; prototypes might be unmanned radio-controlled while the skill of maintaining the dynamic soaring machine aloft. 

    The entire machine is a free-flight wind-energy conversion systems or dynamic-soaring bi-kite aircraft operating in a fresh new way. The system is technically a bi-turbine with each kite using the same kite part in the coupling tether; the rotary engines couple rotate at least about the center of rotation at the opposing mooring point of the opposite kite.  The dynamics are not really new, but the practical achievement of manned flight in these systems will be new.  A toy kite dragging a resistive toy boat across a lake holds a demonstration of the physics involved. Names connected with these efforts: Richard Miller (Without Visible Means of Support, published in 1967), Joe Faust , Wayne German, Dave Culp, Dave Santos, Dale C. Kramer, Taras Kiceniuk, Gary Osoba, and others.   This activity is part of tethered aviation and AWECS; one term for the category of activity is FF-AWE or FF-AWECS with "FF" standing for "free-flight."   These systems may be scaled from tiny to huge. And these systems may be designed not just to travel across continents but to so operate that some mining of energy can occur during flight session which mined mechanical energy could be converted to laser or microwave and beamed to other aircraft or to receiving ground stations.

    Dale C. Kramer competes in sailplane soaring contest. He runs the WindMapperPro business for High Altitude Wind Analysis.

    Dale has been detailing many paths for his experiments and eventual trials. Hundreds of days of winds have been examined that show world record free-flight distance records could be set using the FF-AWE method. Onboard he has envisioned auxiliary AWECS for cooling and charging onboard batteries for use in sustained powered flight, if needed. He wondered why he was at the AWECS  HAWP 3009 conference; it was my pleasure to conect dots between soaring editor Richard Miller, my own advance on the FF-AWECS in publishing, Wayne German's pointed talk advance of same, and his patent; his doing are right on target for AWECS, as the system has potential for gaining more-than sustainable energies, energy that could be converted and sent to other aircraft or groundstations via laser or microwave power beaming.  At conference he admitted that the Malay kite in the patent application drawing was for fun, as other kite forms will be used; he opined that kiting two of his Lazair ultralight might do the job.   For Dale C. Kramer  full patent application 5 pages, click here, or click image:

    Send your online note now on this topic!

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 580 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/23/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    On EIA - Energy Glossary - W - (link to ARPA-E),see "WECS":"...to power machinery and to operate an electrical generator"."WECS" is also in EnergyKiteSystems glossary."AWECS" only adds a precision:"A" can be "Airborne" or "Alternative". 

    Another more attractive term will be probably connected to the effective realization of an "AWECS".

    Pierre Benhaïem

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 581 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    The term "Airborne Wind Energy" has been quickly understood by the hundreds of people I've used it with. Just as important, it encompasses succinctly the entire range of devices we're all working on regardless of harvesting method.

    - Dimitri
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 582 From: dougselsam Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power
    I was at a conference recently.
    It was called "High Altitude Wind Power".
    That encompassed:
    Traction Kites for transportation
    Primitive drag-based atmospherically-buoyant turbines
    Kites spinning ground-based spools
    Flying rotors supporting onboard generator
    Flying rotors spinning ground-based gen via rotating tether
    Terrain-enabled wind power systems (easily miles high using mountains)

    All these systems have 1 thing in common:
    All utilize a tension-based coupling with earth, rather than compression (& tension)-based towers. "Tension" is not such a friendly-sounding word though, and using that word would confuse and perhaps alienate the masses.
    The word "turbine" denotes rotation "tur" = turn = rotating
    Many designs here do not use circular rotation, or rotation at all.

    So I think if you want to include Dave Culp's traction kites and the kites with spools, you should stick with the most generic term already used:
    High Altitude Wind Power
    It was already used because it encompasses the most concepts.
    Most people can understand it.
    It has a good sound to it.
    Nothing scary,
    and it obviously refers to higher winds available in the sky
    SkyWindPower might be a good name for the group but it is already taken ;)
    Other terms discussed represent subsets of "High Altitude Wind Power".
    Too much time spent on words = paralysis by analysis
    I do not believe any adjustment of terminology is necessary.
    "High Altitude Wind Power" is easily understood by all.
    It covers anything above today's groundhuggers (another good term).
    Doug Selsam
    Doug@Selsam.com


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 583 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    I fully concurr. 100%
    JohnO


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 584 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power
    Doug,
    I consider high altitude as being over 5k AGL, most of the wind power ideas in the group are not up to that alt., hence I suggest the more generic "Airborne" AWE.
    Lynn
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 585 From: spacecannon@san.rr.com Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term?
    I second Dimitri:
    Let's stray away from the term Alternative Energy.

    Lynn

    PS:
    Did everyone here the news last night about the four scientists erasing data and the Washington Post exposing them "saying global warming is a hoax." This morning the stockmarket experts are saying to "pull your money out of Alternative energy stocks." This will make it harder for us to find funding with investors.

    ======================
    Moderator here:
    http://www.altenergystocks.com/
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28456.html
    Full Coverage
    Climate Hoax: The U.S. Chamber's "Reversal"
    http://www.newstin.com/rel/us/en-010-019296432
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 586 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 11/24/2009
    Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power
    I agree with Lynn.
    "High Altitude" is somewhere my systems will never go.

    - Dimitri

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 587 From: dave santos Date: 11/25/2009
    Subject: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS
    Attachments :
      The Gigafly Parafoil is around 200 ft WS , over 10,000 sq. feet in area, deploys at altitude from a pack, & is steered by servos.
       
      Its an early AWE high-COTS opportunity in the 10 MW range. As detailed in earlier posts, a string tripod of winch/gens can tap crosswind sweep power & keep the wing aloft in lulls. A small onboard shrouded turbine can power the servos. Tether deployment is an open question: Unreeling during climb or aerial docking are options.
       
      Suspended from three terrain prominences, a tri-tethered Gigafly may be easily handled without aircraft or aerial docking, simply raised from the ground by the tether centerpoint & flown up from there. Such sites are golden & fairly common. Multi-Gigaflys could be harnessed to one tri-tether for a utility scale solution. Gigafly COTS favors rapid AWE development.
       
      In the attached image, note the right-toggle turning input that forms the symmetrical wing into a helical turbine blade form, suggestive of future asymmetric versions for kite-looping. Also note the many risers required for scaling up for least mass aloft.
       
       
      COOIP

        @@attachment@@
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 588 From: Bob Stuart Date: 11/25/2009
      Subject: Re: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS [1 Attachment]
      For a century, bicycle wheels were built for least mass.  Now, they are a compromise to reduce wind resistance and give a better performance overall.

      Bob Stuart




      On 25-Nov-09, at 5:09 PM, dave santos wrote:


      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 589 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Re: Front term? High Altitude Wind Power
      Airbourne connotes "supported by the air". That would (could often) rule out terrain-enabled wind energy and other schemes that may or may not be actually supported by the air, though they extract energy from way way high in the air.
      Airborne wind energy could apply to one brand of tower-mounted turbine that tilts upward from a hinge at the top in strong winds, going into a gyrocopter mode as a means of furling.
      I think High Altitude is most easily understood.
      It seems that one problem with finding a name that fits everybody is there is overlap and leakage into other technologies.
      I'm going where the most power per dollar spent can be found, and can't see changing the technology to fit a definition.
      We are almost at the point of might as well just include Michael Laine and the space elevator folks since we are just all interested in a thousand whacky and a few not-so whacky yet far-out inventions and possibilities. OK let's hang windmills from satellites and they are not airbourne though they be flying. Use the electricity to power ion thrusters to keep the satellite aloft.
      I still think the original name worked.
      Maboomba.
      Doug Selsam

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 590 From: dave santos Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Re: Gigafly Parafoil as Airborne Wind Energy COTS
      Bob,
       
      Closest analogy to Gigafly is how Ferris Wheel is built like bike wheel in order to scale to hundreds of feet. Spokes are still good enough to rule bike wheel market & make a fine ride.
       
      At equivalent capital cost, a bigger slower many-riser wing may out-power a smaller faster few-riser hard wing, with eased control needs & earlier availibility. NPW v. hot parafoil by cost is good comparison. Gigafly's riser drag can be reduced by arch or tree bridling aggregating loads from shortened risers.
       
      ds
       
       

      ---
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 591 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates
      History of Wind Energy (as far as we know):
      3000 years ago:
      Sailboats traveled downwind and were rowed back upwind (drag machines with oscillating cycle including return path that uses power rather than producing power)
      Similarly, wind turbines utilized cloth sails that traveled downwind by drag, shielded (Middle East) or folded back (China) on the upwind cycle; Tip speed was always below wind speed.
      Rotors were characterized by 100% solidity with regard to swept area.

      2000 years ago:
      Sailboats began to travel ACROSS the wind, leading to the use of at least some lift. Sails became triangular: wider at the root), boats could sail in any direction, defining the relative angle of attack mostly by their own speed. Windmills (Greek islands) featured a circle of such triangular sails, ALWAYS traveling ACROSS the wind, always producing power, with no retraction cycle (CIRCULAR path ACROSS wind). Rotors featured only about 25% - 50% solidity, yet swept the entire circle due to high blade speed. This was the entry into rotating turbomachinery.

      1000 years ago:
      Blades featured permanently-shaped airfoils. Travel remained at its most efficient path: 100% across the wind at all times. Tip speed increased to 3-4 times wind speed. Rotor solidity dropped further to perhaps 10% of swept area. Cloth was used in the blades, but only to form a surface over a frame that shaped the airfoils. (note this was 900 years before "science" had a "theory" of lift. Official "Science" played no role, mired in almost complete ignorance at the time (denying meteorites for example). Windmill operators faced high thrust loading on the rotors and fires were common when winds picked up and overspeed protections could not catch the rotor before it went into runaway mode (I know, most people here have no idea what rotor runaway mode is, but it means the rotor is making too much power due to the cubic power law of wind, the machine is incapable of absorbing that much power, can no longer slow the rotor, and the machine goes out of control. Overspeed is THE MAIN problem in wind turbine design, not even on most "inventors'" radar screens, since they will only experience overspeed after they figure out how to make power in the first place) Fires were common as the wood/oil bearings burst into flame.
      Note: Duh-Vinci still tried for a 100% solidity rotor in his "helicopter" despite low-solidity high-speed lift-based wind turbine rotors with blades having been the main industrial power of Europe for 500 years. We know now his helicopter was ill-advised due to high solidity and no airfoils. Kind of like his tank with counter-rotating wheels (could not work) many of his diagrams remind me of doodles in the margins of bored junior high-school students' notebooks. but I digress...

      100 years ago:
      Wind turbines were coupled to electric generators, which produce power responsive to RPM squared. Thus there was no longer any excuse to maintain any more solidity than necessary to run the rotor at a tip speed ratio as high as possible, while remaining significantly below Mach 1 to avoid excessive noise. Cloth was abandoned for blades, unless impregnated with resin as part of a composite, due to aerodynamic, strength, wear, and weathering considerations.

      Ask yourself where your technology is on this spectrum:

      Magenn has a drag-based machine featuring a useless return path that uses energy - this is 3000-year-old thinking.

      I heard a guy from Makani speak at the conference: He said they were starting to think a circular path for their cloth kites was a good idea. The circular path for sails is 3000 years old. A circular path for cloth sails across the wind is 2000 years old. How long before they "think up" connecting 2 or more blades at the center of the rotation? How much longer before they realize cloth is too fragile for their ever-increasing speeds? How long before their sails going in circled have evolved and hardened into full-blown rotors (propellers)? Maybe they can then do a merger with SkyWIndPower which is already based on 20th century thinking?

      I've heard it mentioned in a talk at the conference that traveling ACROSS the wind might be a good idea. This is 2000-year-old information.

      Most wind energy inventors tend to repeat the entire history of wind energy on a microcosm scale. This is fractal, like the Mandelbrot set: You see the same patterns over and over, slightly different, at all scales, and it never ends.

      20-30 years ago, a company tried looped sails traveling across the wind in Tehachapi in a ground-hugging mode. It didn't work out - wouldn't hold together.

      To this day no serious wind turbine in production or for sale uses cloth sails. The ones that have tried cloth sails have found that the sun and wind quickly tear them to shreds. Getting them to hold their shape at appreciable fractions of mach 1 becomes almost impossible. And the large area of cloth sails is not needed for high-speed, low-solidity (efficient) rotors, but instead precludes such high-efficiecy, high-speed rotors. Gyrocopters use solid blades instead of cloth sails because....[ ]?.

      To this day, no drag-base turbine is any sort of contender for power production, and certainly are never used commercially except perhaps for a few orphan applications where extremely low power might suffice.

      It is interesting to think that because one wants to take wind energy into the sky, they can suddenly ignore 3000 years of learning. People who want to mount turbines on rooftops think that way too. Of course they always start with drag-based vertical-axis machines, with a shielded or folding return path, true to the Mandelbrot routine, retrenching to the 3000-year-old mindset, completely ignorant of all that has been learned in the meantime.

      The fact that their upwind/downwind sails had long-ago evolved into propellers was completely lost on them, and still is to this day.
      There are probably 100 new people deciding they will create an "improved" wind turbine using the 3000-year-old technology they "just thought up" every day.

      We in wind energy deal with this endlessly. There is nothing in wind energy so pathetic or disturbing as the kicking/screaming/accusatory resistance of these people when any semblance of reality is discussed. Yet like the Mandelbrot set, it never really changes that much, no matter where you go. The same patterns repeat endlessly. That's just the way it is, I guess. We've learned to move on and only deal with true contenders, lest we be endlessly mired in futile attempts to overcome persistent and repetitive ignorance. This is probably true of most fields: you have the experienced outlook of the seemingly-jaded veterans, and the innocent assessment (often misguided or incorrect) of the teeming throngs, based on their casual observations and idle musings.
      Happy Turkey Day!
      Gotta go snow-skiing now here in Los Angeles, CA. They opened Oct. 10 this year due to the persistent cold weather.
      :)
      Seeya!
      Doug Selsam
      http://www.flyingwindturbine.com
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 592 From: dougselsam Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Re: Cleaning the Well- Vaporware
      Hi Dave:
      I think I asked for some data such as a power curve, not just a list of brand-names. We in wind energy are used to asking 1 question for any WECS: What's the power curve? or Show us some data.
      Also: What are the economics of your machine? What are the O & M costs? At what price can you deliver power long term?
      But it starts with a simple "Show us an operating system and let us see the power meter".
      Usually the answer includes "We will have data soon to back up our projections", punctuated with a bit of name-calling implying that the learned are suddenly ignorant and vice-versa.
      Behind the scenes, the "inventors" are usually busy finding reasons to delay minor formalities such as including a generator (why add a generator when we already KNOW we're making so much power? Do we want to spoil our comfortable illusion by adding a generator? Heavens no!)
      We're used to it - it repeats like the Mandelbrot set. We have to ignore it after a while or be driven nuts responding to it.
      All in all it's been found that it is more effective to build it first, then demo what you have, than to talk ahead of your data. If your theory is solid, usually a small-scale demo will suffice. Wind energy technology is model-dependent, and juxtaposes data with economics.
      Doug Selsam
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 593 From: dave santos Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Re: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates
      Doug,
       
      The predilection by smart AWE researchers for membranes comes from kite culture where lowest weight & safety drives success. The modern NPW, sled, & parafoil kites are successfully performing power functions in many sports & practical applications with no competition from hard wings. Only modern soft wings seem to truly scale. Osborne, the industrial sewing teacher, made a 17,000 sq ft parafoil, the largest & possibly most powerful wing ever, in a gym with two sewing machines & some kids.
       
      Those who reason from tower-based wind energy easily miss these lessons of modern history.
       
      daveS
       
       


       

      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 594 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Anyone may edit this wiki
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Altitude_Wind_Power

      YOU may edit the wiki for the world.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 595 From: Bob Stuart Date: 11/26/2009
      Subject: Re: Lessons learned (by some) in wind energy, with dates
      Bucky Fuller was a great fan (no pun intended) of tension structures,
      and as long as the shapes are reasonably efficient, there's no reason
      not to scale them up. There is plenty of experience with material
      suitable for inflated stadium roofs, and as long as care is taken to
      prevent flutter, there seems no reason not to run it at high speed.
      Aircraft only give up on fabric surfaces around 400 MPH, and that's
      just thin doped canvas.

      There is some amazing work being done in making racing boat sails
      using unidirectional tapes over a full-size mold. A modular effort
      such as a flexifoil should not be too hard to manufacture in large
      scale with fine detailing.

      Bob Stuart