charge discharge, unwind rewind, load unload, lift drop, press release,
I guess until the set "yoyo devices" is defined we won't have a correct description for the machine specific complementary action involved.

What I am seeing as the Yo-Yo method is a bunch of Yo-yo's obfuscating any chance of elucidation. Much ado about nothing.
Today it's yo-yo's. Yesterday it was "phased arrays".
Reality: It is all Yo-yo's all the time.
yo
:)
Doug Selsam

Kitepower 2012     video   (re: November 2011 progress)

If you wanna use a patented technology, the patent holder would likely be happy to license its use. If the technology were advantageous, that would give you a leg up on the competition.
**************************************************************

I think it is silly that they still call it laddermill. It no longer resembles a ladder. I also wonder why they gave up on what they formerly called the laddermill, (named laddermill since it looked just like a ladder).
The fact that they still call it a laddermill is, to me, symptomatic of the general confusion in this field. As though nothing can possibly make sense, as though adding more confusion in terminology will mask the inherent confusion of having no idea what to do to get energy from the sky...

Interesting that they claim double the output of a skystream over a tower-mounted version. That is not, specifically, an accomplishment, per se.
Let me clarify:
There is no inherent upper limit of power output of a Skystream (or any other turbine) on a tower, if the wind is fast enough.
For example we truck-tested a 1000-Watt turbine, seeing 5000 Watts at over 40 mph - that would be normal. The question is: "How long can you extract that amount of power without burning out the stator?"

The power limit of any wind turbine is heating of the stator. The key factor is SUSTAINED output, with instantaneous output considered nearly meaningless by wind energy veterans. Yup the same bad news the veterans had for me a few years back. Instantaneous output is meaningless since a minute later your stator is smoking and blackened.

The answer is to add more iron and more copper - a larger alternator with thicker wires, that can handle the current and the heat it generates. As usual, "innovators" running into the same wall that wind energy has always faced: Making power is easy: a textbook exercise. Fine-tuning so it is still working the next day is the challenge.

Anyone can take a common component and temporarily drive it at twice its normal capacity. All they are really showing is showing that you can temporarily drive a generator twice as hard as it was designed for, which was already known. And they are showing fact that AWE is so ridiculously simple and can be achieved by mere shopping for working components and the judicious use of duct tape and baling wire, that it is far below the capability of people at MIT. I'd say it could almost be a high-school level project if they had the funding and space.

The Skystream is the product of year and years of fine-tuning the algorithm for overspeed protection - braking the skystream by strategically shorting out the generator to keep it somewhere between stall and lift when the winds get strong.
After all those years of work by NREL etc., many skystreams around here are non-operational. As I have pointed out many times to the deaf ears on this list, overspeed protection is not the main thing in wind energy, it is the ONLY thing.

All those years of work to keep the stator from burning out CAN be thrown out the window, and yes you could get twice the power for short bursts. You could do the exact same thing on a tower: disable the overspeed electronics and get more power in a strong wind.

Have a day!
:)
Doug Selsam

http://www.ctsciencefair.org/media/2011/04/FinalFairMediaRelease11.pdf

Competing as a Connecticut representative at the GENIUS Olympiad will be:

Kyle T. Ryan of Trumbull, a sophomore at Fairfield College Preparatory School in Fairfield
Project Title:

Autonomous Kite Wind Generator to Capture Troposhpere Winds.

 

========

6093 PS Autonomous Kite Wind Generator to Capture Troposphere Winds

Fairfield, Fairfield College Preparatory School, Teacher - Mrs. O'Reilly

Kyle T. Ryan, Trumbull 10

Awards: Honors = 2

• Computer Science Awards --- Senior High Finalist - Medallion, Acrylic Award

• eesmarts/CT Energy Efficiency Fund Future Sustainability Awards --- 3rd Place High School - $300 Cash and Trophy

• Goodrich ISR Awards for Excellence In Engineering --- Finalist - Engineering High School - CSF Medallion & Acrylic Award

• Northeast Utilities: Environmental Management --- Senior - $250 Scholarship, energy conservation and renewable energy sources

• GENIUS Olympiad --- GENIUS Olympiad Competition for HS student (s) and advisor - 1st Place HS Energy

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

NAME

: Kyle T. Ryan

SCHOOL

: Fairfield College Preparatory School, Fairfield, CT

TEACHER/MENTOR:

Mrs. O'Reilly

TITLE: Autonomous Kite Wind Generator to Capture Troposphere Winds

The quest for creating a revolutionary power generator with the potential to compete with fossil fuels starts with the wind. Modern wind turbines are extremely efficient, but have insurmountable limitations. The future of wind energy lies in the troposphere which modern turbines cannot reach. The most efficient part of a wind turbine is the tip of the blade which, in some cases, produces 75% of the power. Moreover, if the tower, hub, and inner blade are removed, the tip of the blade may resemble

a kite. Draw a tether to the ground, and the tip of the blade becomes a kite. Mount smaller turbines onto the kite, and power is generated. It will not only face the wind, but fly autonomously in a circular path. In this project, a kite power apparatus, as described, was built and tested. To ensure an orbital flight path, a robotic system was created to maneuver it in a circular motion. Two different power generators were explored: a traditional turbine and an experimental generator called a windbelt. This cost-effective generator is a nylon ribbon utilizing aeroelastic flutter. The wind induces ribbon vibration and produces electricity. The windbelt and turbine were attached to an aerodynamic sport kite under the control of the robotic system. Flying autonomously at ninety feet, the kite flew in a circular path mimicking the blade tip. In the experiment, an identical ground based setup was compared to the kite's output. Experimentation supported the mathematical model in that a 55 inch wingspan kite power generator in 10 miles per hour can produce greater than 100 watts of electricity at a fraction of the expense of modern wind turbines.

Up for glossary critique by group: 

Joe:
I've been wondering how long it would take for people to notice this general approach. It is interesting how many aspects of this patent have already been done in various ways, dating back many decades if not centuries.

I am continually impressed with your ability to dig up and archive these patents! I am not sure which is more impressive: The number of airborne wind energy patents, or your ability to dig them up!
:)

Doug Selsam

AWES glossary critique invited: 

Hi Doug,

If a layer of hexagonal mesh of tarp kixels was flow above a layer of hexagonal meshed steering cableway... where the steering points line up and connect to the centre of a radial slots arranged in the centre of the tarp kixel. Tensioning on the steering mesh ground tether points on the upwind of steering set, would allow a working 3D mega arch.

Sorry,
just realised this reply should not be under your title of polygonal cableway... unless the whole mesh of kites described can be persuaded to spin around above said cableway

I am strongly opposed to the introduction of unnecessary jargon. Any
idiot can think up a new word. We are completely inundated with new
words and it makes picking up new disciplines that much more difficult.
Adoption of new words should be strongly resisted until they have
thoroughly proved their worth. In the spirit of open source we need all
the help we can get developing AWE. Language barriers for new entrants
need to be dropped not raised. My 1 p worth.

Pixel:
unit element propeller in propeller array
Rixel:
unit element in rotor array
Hixel:
unit element in helicopter array
Gixel:
unit element in gyrocopter array
Dixel:
unit element of Darrieus array
Blutixel:
unit element of blue tarp array
Dogfoodbagixel:
unit element of dog food bag array

Words create no power.
Words are only words.
If mere words made power you would be the world's largest utility by now.
:)

Sorry Roderick but my post regarding heating of the stator was accurate information, and your reply shows that you have no experience in the field. In hundreds of machines I've never had a bearing fail for instance, and VanDer Walls forces?
I will extend my statement to all rotating electrical machinery, including motors. My statement is well-known. It's simple, basic information. It's truth is not modified by your demonstration of a broad vocabulary. Knowing lots of words is good but understanding their signifigance is more important. Having lots of ammunition is good but you also need to understand how to aim the gun and fire it.
To hit a target, aim, then shoot. All that goes on here is ammunition being discharged randomly. This could use up all the ammo before a target is ever hit.
A question for you and Dave S. to ponder:
Could someone build an AWE system without uttering a single word? Could it then possibly work? Is this physically possible, to have an AWE system without words?

Wixel? array of words that creates airborne wind energy?
:)

On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 19:18 -0700, dave santos wrote:
If you read my last post again you will see that I never said I disliked
the word kixel. It is the general trend of inventing words and acronyms
that needs to be moderated. Kids with low self esteem join gangs and
invent words unique to the gang in the false believe that it makes them
special. Some in this group are falling into the same ego-boosting
trap.

"hey look, aren't we special! We use a language no one else can
understand"

It is an illusion that alienates newcomers and we cannot afford to do
that.

Can't you see how wrong that is? What is the point in using a word
others do not understand? Good science is about accurate communication
of complex concepts. To do that everyone needs a clear definition of
every word. Sometimes it is worth abbreviating a commonly used phrase,
but there is a modern trend to invent new words and acronyms far too
quickly. Maybe one day the Oxford dictionary will list your new word.
What an ego boost! In the meantime beginners are put off by all the
jargon.

Don't worry, it is in progress. I suspect you won't like it because it
will be biased towards what I think will work. It will talk about kite
arrays, but not kixels.

Still listening, but update on entry, so far:

Doug,

Since we're still sorting this listing... I bagsy a big up ... looking back in the forum you'll probably find "Rod Read first suggested machine array addressing of kites in the same way VGA screen elements are addressed in computer displays."

woop wooop

In ordering a mega array of kixels,

We aim to fine tune the flight characteristics of every single kixel

A chunk (serial or parallel) of data addressing the line tension vector / tension profile for EVERY kixel needs to be broken down to be interpreted by the specific tension controller for Every kixel tether...

Therefore a kixel addressing scheme may appear thus...
kixA1W25%E4%S33%N4%kixA2W25%E4%S33%N4%kixA3W26%E4%S33%N4%
kixB1W25%E4%S33%N4%kixB2W25%E4%S33%N4%kixB3W26%E4%S33%N4%

This is a very simple array of 3x2 kixels.
The kixel A1 has West line tensioner at 25% East at nominal 4% South at 33% North at nominal 4%. This suggests a Nor Nor East wind direction, where the South and West kixel corners are held lower to provide AoA.
Note this may also be the emergency pull down addressing signal in a South Westerly wind.

Dave S,
Any chance you could present a few pictures of that rigging so as I can build an accurate tarp array model?

On Sat, 2012-04-07 at 09:38 -0700, dave santos wrote:
Others doing something wrong does not make it right. New words are
sometimes justified but too often it is just ego massage.

A name is different from a word. We did consider calling it the
Cambridge something or other but that would have been misleading.
Cambridge only happens to be where we are making the first prototype.
The intention has always been to be a global open source project making
the cheapest functional AWES we can envisage.

It acknowledges the partial Italian heritage of the founders and their
ideas.

The profuse invention of new jargon did indeed cause many to delay their
adoption of computers, and it continues to be a problem. That is why I
bothered to reply when Joe invited critique. It is a global trend that
needs to be resisted. Language does change and adapt but we need to work
to maintain as much stability as possible. It is a good thing Joe did
not invite critique on one of the more lame words suggested here. We
would then have a truly useless word embedded in AWES culture.

On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 09:02 -0700, dave santos wrote:
Starting from the days when Google was new and hardly known, I tested
different search engines to see how they all performed. Google nearly
always produced the best results the quickest. Like Microsoft, it
managed to stay just a little better than the competition. Not perfect,
in fact often far from it, but good enough to be the choice of busy
executives.

They appear to have learned that product development is even harder than
software development. Maybe there is a lesson there for those who so
fear the introduction of complex software to control robust AWE systems.

wixel
Wing element pixel
restricted to rectangular arrays?
rectangular arrays of working elements is a very old concept
The ones I've seen first include a rectangular array of rotors - forgot the patent number.
*wise steps to AWE: take what is known to work and use it;
*dumb step to AWE: promote what is known not to work, while building nothing...
*poor step to AWE: argue about vocabulary and invent new words
*poorest step to AWE: argue about whether one should be doing poor step above.

Dave S.:
I understand by your answer that you have no experience in wind energy, but the overspeed thing is something that must be addressed continually in real time. Taking down a system every time strong winds threaten would eliminate too much productive output time.
Your system must hang in there and adjust itself between what is a very productive wind one second, and a damaging gale the next. It must react almost instantaneously. The method by which it reacts will determine its overall major category as a wind turbine.
Driving any turbine to a few times its normal output is as simple as putting that turbine into a slightly higher-than-rated windspeed with overspeed protection disabled. The result is quite predictable as evidenced by the stack of about 30 burnt stators I have here. 30 burnt stators and no failed bearings even if we removed the seals and let 'em run in the dust for years with no oil...
?
:)
Doug S.

Nixels:
Let's NOT use "pixels".
Topic: WECS solidity
Timeline: 3000 years
100% solidity: 3000 years ago
modern WECS solidity: about 2%
pixels imply a high solidity
high solidity WECS thinking belongs to the technology preceding Christ
Maybe you think today is a good day to resurrect it?
Whether you are talking about a helicopter, airplane, wind turbine working surfaces, they all operate on high lift, high speed, and low solidity compared to the working area.
Maboomba!
:)

Kixels may be set in a an AWES array system that has net low solidity (even, say 2%) or have net solidity of 100%. 

http://flykite.en.alibaba.com/product/528097680-213199329/power_kite.html 



---