Digest

Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group. AWES7617to7666

Page 50 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7617	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7618	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7619	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7620	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Robert C.'s test video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7621	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomous AWES Architectures ///Re: [AWES] Re: Multi Altitude

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7622	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7623	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7624	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7625	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Optimum stroke

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7626	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomous AWES Architectures ///Re: [AWES] Re: Multi Altitude A

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7627	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Mothra Plans and Details

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7628	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7629	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7630	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Phased Radial Tethers ///Re: [AWES] Cheap Torque Over Distance (Kit

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7631	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Equalizing Tri-tether Static Loads //Re: [AWES] Cheap Torque Over D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7632	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7633	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Horizontal Kite Carousel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7634	From: harry valentine	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Horizontal Kite Carousel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7635	From: LPS	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: IMAGENS EM ALTA RESOLUCAO EM 3 DVD

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7636	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: IMAGENS EM ALTA RESOLUCAO EM 3 DVD

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7637	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7638	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Horizontal Kite Carousel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7639	From: dheverett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7640	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7641	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7642	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7643	From: David Lang	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7644	From: David Everett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7645	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7646	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7647	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7648	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7649	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7650	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7651	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Robert C.'s test video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7652	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7653	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7654	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7655	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7656	From: roderickjosephread	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7657	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7658	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7659	From: David Everett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7660	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Data Collection //Re: [AWES] Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Su

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7661	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7662	From: harry valentine	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7663	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7664	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Data Collection //Re: [AWES] Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Su

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7665	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7666	From: Doug	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7617	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

There are 3 tether points on the ground,
Each point allows the tether to run back to a central crank under the tripod.

As the mid-line kite spins, it influences radially in turn which tether point the kite set pulls on most.

Therefore the crank under the tripod is pulled round 120 degrees by each point in turn as the kite set spins.

It is passing torque down from above in a very neat manner.
I think one improvement would be more tether points to smooth out the ground response.

The tethering is sort of like wobbling a large plate on the ground ... if the plate had ratchet teeth / or a friction drive it could drive other wheels.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7618	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Would you have a diagram, or a description of the type of mechanical linkage accomplished?

TIA,

Bob

On 18-Oct-12, at 12:42 PM, dave santos wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7619	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Thanks, Rod. This is a conversion of torque to varying tension and back again. It is not much different than a scheme with two crankshafts connected with two or more rods. The high frequency short strokes will sap a lot of energy at greater distances.

Bob

On 18-Oct-12, at 12:50 PM, Rod Read wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7620	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Robert C.'s test video

Hey Robert:
Congratulations to anyone actually building and testing, by the way.
I was wondering, I'm not sure if I understand actually:
What is the ultimate concept you are pursuing? I mean how in general is your machine supposed to work? Sorry for not fully understanding.
:)
Doug

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7621	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomous AWES Architectures ///Re: [AWES] Re: Multi Altitude

Robert complains, "...you have released very little hard information about what you are doing [with high tech] other than

Mothra1 which appears to have no high tech components. "

Sorry for a lack of "hard information". Let VisVentis set the standard for that metric.

A quick review of KiteLab Group "high-tech" work-

NextGen aviation design: Open-Source METAR parser, TACO 1.0, AWES specialty avionics,

Experimental methods: videogrammetry, digital data-loggers, power electronics (metering, smoothing, etc), etc.

Theoretical: Embodied Field-Computing as superior to conventional digital controls for inherent stabilites; "Quantum Kiting".

Let me know if you have questions or trouble finding documentation on these and other KiteLab Group "high-tech" work products. Mothra1 is not as low-tech as you suggest, if an embodied field computing theoretic basis is allowed in your definition of "high-tech". Mothra tech would not exist at all without such advanced concepts to inspire its innovations. Don't be fooled: Mothra is itself a "high-tech component".

daveS

PS Please share your hard information regarding your "dancing pair or triplet" kite AWES concept.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7622	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

All that mechanical complexity is better achieved with electronics these
days. A computer controls the tension in each tether. Reels are better
than cranks which have a severally restricted stroke. Using the planet
as the compression member is a worthy idea. The trouble is that it
realises Pierre's fears of high land usage. Take-off and landing is
difficult.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7623	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Bob,

Joe should have several tri-tether diagrams archived or linked. A volunteer once did a really nice concept rendering.

Fortunately, high-frequency sapping is not a big problem in this concept space, as the frequency naturally falls with larger looping kites.

In other cases, high-frequency losses are managed by increasing static line tension. Transmission efficiencies at high frequencies on a tight UHMWPE tether is a fascinating open subject,

daveS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7624	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Robert,

Three pulleys, two swivels, and a single crank is hardly too mechanically complex (a bicycle is more complex).

The triangle footprint is only about 1/5 of the total altitude, so "Pierre's fears" do not apply here.

Take-off and landing is easy, not "difficult"- In a lull, the looping kite stops looping before landing. The sled kite pilot-lifter self-relaunches when wind returns, and the rest relaunches as well (launch cascade).

If computers are as essential as you claim, why are these KiteLab machines working? Are you not stalled for lack of being able to make computers work as you require?

daveS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7625	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Optimum stroke

as far as you know...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7626	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomous AWES Architectures ///Re: [AWES] Re: Multi Altitude A

I have found it hard lately to document every last knot and the reasoning behind it... however

I covet the Mothra designs in a most un-wholesome way.

Go on show us yer kit too Dave S.

Good close up, high def internet photo style rigging detail. phwoooaaarrrrr

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7627	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Mothra Plans and Details

Rod,

Mothra was built directly from the single sheet plan drawing shared directly to you months ago. Joe hosted it somewhere as well. The basic Kixel method is essential, and well covered in the single-tarp Mothra predecessors. Another key is to never knot the main loadpaths, but prusik or lash onto them, to maintain the full rated rope strength,

Ed will soon post lots of detail shots of the anchors, fittings, knots, etc.. He informs us that he has designed and built a mini-Mothra, and is testing it in New Mexico; so we await those details too, when he gets back to Texas.

Don't be afraid to rig your own tarp variants, while you wait for the delayed information,

daveS

PS Robert needs to rewatch that Dutch wind professor video you found explaining the role for multi-blades in places like Aeromotors and turbofan engines. Multi-blades in AWE is not the "newbie fallacy", dismissing them a-priori is. Can you find the link again?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7628	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

Roberts reply is not totally bonkers... especially as you scale up.

Take the case where 3 or more standard reel in / pull out generators are spread over a large area.

Each reeler gen has a tether the same length.

Each tether is pulled up into the air by the same swivel.

above the swivel a single fixed length tether leads to a controller which permanently sweeps a powerful kite across the wind.

Whichever way the wind blows...

As the kite sweeps left across the wind, the topmost tether tension vector pulls on the reeler on the right, whilst the reeler on the left reels in. The other reeler (upwind, in a three reeler system) stays at a constant length, allowing the power to be generated in left then right reelers....

That sounds kinda good... because

you don't really take up a huge land area...

It's only line and reelers, the line can be pulled tight between the reelers as the wind drops,making a star plan topology. The kite can steer itself down.

hmmm

Rod Read

15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878

http://kitepowercoop.org

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7629	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Cheap Torque Over Distance (KiteLab Ilwaco 2008)

It's not as good as I made out... The upwind tether still has to hold most of the tension. Therefore you don't get maximum energy out

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7630	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Phased Radial Tethers ///Re: [AWES] Cheap Torque Over Distance (Kit

Roddy wrote- "Roberts reply is not totally bonkers... especially as you scale up."

Great synergy; as we scale up, Robert will seem less bonkers. Me too :)

Seriously, you bring up a very powerful AWES idea- a tri-tether rig with a reel-motor/gen at each anchor. Note that you can tow the kite part in circles during calm, as well as launch and land inside the triangle, and generate by wind from any direction.

Regarding scaling- We run out of "sky" in the vertical dimension (wind by altitude) before exhausting the scaling potential of radial tethers.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7631	From: dave santos	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Equalizing Tri-tether Static Loads //Re: [AWES] Cheap Torque Over D

Rod,

The upwind tether simply relaxes as needed to match static loads with the others. Its mostly needed to keep the crank input reliably vectored in a leading phase to keep the crosswind legs working hard.

Note that in the first demo (no multi reelgen anchors) the center crank-generator workcell is allowed to move toward the windward pulley, to relax its static loading and keep the geometry correct. One can also relax the pulley on a lanyard or track. With reelgens, the relaxing is done by equalizing servo-reels,

daveS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7632	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

See Windlift testing - 12 sq. m. wing where kite is 12 m² and wind is 10 m/s,power being something like 5 kW during power stroke.

PierreB

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7633	From: Doug	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Horizontal Kite Carousel

A guy named Right-On John just called me. He's excited to have solved the energy crisis with a new type of turbine called wingdrivers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eholJ1DvYfU
I immediately recognized it as the horizontal version of a kite carousel, with the lower solidity (fewer kites) I saw recommended.

He's looking to make a few megawatts - basically take over the industry, and was figuring that 20 SuperAlternators would make a MegaWatt. I mentioned it might take more like 500 of them, which was disappointing, but not a show-stopper. This could be a sale of 20 or so alternators to start, I am told.

I'm sure some closed-minded tight-ass wind-energy expert would say this is just a low-strength, high-solidity rotor with no overspeed protection, that will quickly rip apart in a strong wind, and whose spars could be formed into more effective blades with a fraction of the rotor solidity, that would truly spin fast, and generate lots of power, but we know better.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7634	From: harry valentine	Date: 10/18/2012
Subject: Re: Horizontal Kite Carousel

Nice to see computer generated simulation on youtube

Better to see working scale prototype generating a few watts

Astounding the to see the full-size real McCoy generating Megawatts at competitive prices.

Harry

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: doug@selsam.com
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:42:23 +0000
Subject: [AWES] Horizontal Kite Carousel

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7635	From: LPS	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: IMAGENS EM ALTA RESOLUCAO EM 3 DVD

IMAGENS EM ALTA RESOLUÇÃO EM 3 DVD - MAIS UM LANÇAMENTO LOUCOS POR SITE, FEITO ESPECIALMENTE PARA VOCÊ!

PACOTE EXCLUSIVO, VOCÊ NUNCA VIU ALGO IGUAL E DE TAMANHA QUALIDADE!

Se você procura por imagens em alta resolução, com qualidade digital, a Loucos por Site tem um pacote ideal.

São 7.380 imagens separadas por categoria, selecionadas uma-a-uma para que o aproveitamento do produto seja 100% garantido. Além das imagens convencionais, uma pasta com 100 mega-posters, exclusivos Loucos por site, e 61.000 vetores de placas de sinalização e Logomarcas Famosas, todo esse conteúdo em 3 DVD personalizados.

-Aviões e foguetes -Balões, bolas e esferas -Pontes e faróis -Ambientes -Animais -Estradas de todo o mundo -Quadros de artistas renomados -Chamas e fogos de artifício -Pratos e bebidas -Texturas e imagens abstratas -Trens e estações -Estádios de todo o mundo -Vetores de placas de sinalização -Vetores de logomarcas -100 mega-posters

Veja alguns modelos em nosso site clicando aqui

Além disso, atualizações do pacote gratuitas, via download

Tudo isso por apenas R$ 99,00 - e você pode pagar em até 12x nos cartões ou transferência Bradesco/ Itaú / Caixa

Adquira já clicando aqui

Um abraço,
Loucos Por Site - Loucos pela satisfação!
11-2815-1363

-Confira também em nosso site , pacote de sites prontos editáveis, vídeos para edição e serviços de criação e divulgação de sites.
Para ser removido de nossa base clique aqui

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7636	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: IMAGENS EM ALTA RESOLUCAO EM 3 DVD

Sorry about that. The "approve" and "reject" buttons moved between finger twitches. We have been getting a flood of spam from Brazil.

Bob Stuart

On 18-Oct-12, at 12:31 PM, LPS wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7637	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

I'd estimate 12 sq m of blade would be a 100-foot diameter rotor that would yield 200 kW steady-state

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7638	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Horizontal Kite Carousel

this is a video, not a simulation

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7639	From: dheverett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Hello,

I just discovered your site. I've always been very interested in autonomous flight, and now I'm very interested in AWE technology. I'm an embedded real-time software engineer with experience in autonomous vehicles. My father was Lou Everett, who flew the Ryan Flex Wing, as well as other experimental aircraft. (He was killed at Edwards in 1965.)

I'm interested in finding out how I can become involved.

Best regards,

David Everett
deverett@interon.com
www.linkedin.com/in/davidheverett
www.facebook.com/dave.everett

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7640	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Welcome, David.

Joe Faust usually does the welcomes, and I'm sure he will be delighted to meet you when he returns to cyberspace. We seem to be trending toward the inherent stability of many small, linked kites, rather than artificial intelligence to deal with gusts. However, there is probably a lot of room for intelligently managing a field of kites, using information about the wind in real time. AI can tweak many aspects, from trim tabs, to synchronizing motor/generators reeling kite lines. You will know best which projects can use your help, or if you'd prefer a novel proposal of your own. My constant advice is to integrate generation with storage, usually by using kites to replenish hydro power reservoirs. Your marine experience should apply to many coastal situations, where a high demand for power is combined with high resistance to "visual pollution" from standard wind turbines, and expensive real estate.

Bob Stuart

On 19-Oct-12, at 8:55 AM, dheverett wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7641	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Welcome David,

Your skills could well be useful for the project I am doing at
visventis.org. Please have a look. The details about what we need are
not posted yet. Please also excuse me while I quickly correct Bob's
misconception. Hopefully we can have some interesting discussions later.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7642	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Welcome David Everett,

Wow, your Dad was a real pro, right up there with Chuck Yeager and the first astronauts. Your Dad's case, as the first human to fly a powered Rogallo wing, makes him a particular hero to us. Our top AWE guy, Joe Faust, was USHGA #5, but your Dad had that honor beat by far. Those were adventurous times, and tragedy stalked the airfields. Joe and i witnessed many pioneering aviation fatalities, and such scars do not go away. My airline pilot Dad was an airshow daredevil of that era who just barely escaped death before my eyes. You were less lucky, and we deeply sympathize.

We are entering another round of very dangerous aviation R&D and the stakes are as high as ever. There is a grave risk to naive AWE developers who underestimate the forces involved, and discount the endless ways things can go wrong. Besides the energy app, we dream of a new "wind-powered aviation", and some of us are seriously preparing to be test-pilots of astounding fabric and string flying structures potentially larger and more powerful that anything with wings before. For example, aerospace colleagues led by an astronaut friend (Wubbo Ockels) at TUDelft are planning a demonstration of a giant "Flying Plaza" kite-based architectural structure, with the classic mix of "right-stuff" boldness and inherent risk. We have been testing a cheap 300m2 wing made from 50 tarps and rope, and its clearly able to lift big payloads high, but its essential we keep the safety issue at the fore, and not repeat the pattern of fatalities that dogged early and extreme-sport aviation.

Your formidable technical software background seems ideal for helping architect our utility-scale application software environment. By way of introduction to the Forum, your experience spans major technical programming languages, OOP design, realtime OS programming, communications protocols, and advanced embedded control systems, including in the most demanding ocean-science applications; a hostile environment comparable to what a robust autonomous flight system will must endure over its lifecycle.

We have undertaken to integrate AWE into the NextGen Airspace system, due by 2025. The tasks range from validating new flight controls, and integrating existing avionics, for FAA certification of specific systems, to creating broad common interfaces to the shared airspace system*. Its a huge scope of work, so visionary system architects are urgently needed to map out a serious program that will ultimately involve thousands of talented engineers.

Thanks for joining the AWES R&D field as an early pioneer,

daveS

* A METAR automated weather data parser and kite farm control interface is a first modular software project, via Github.

Note: Due to an excess of "Davids" we follow a shorthand convention of "DaveX", so you would be "DavidE" or "DaveE". For examples, "DaveL" is a retired NASA/Boeing/Etc. scientist, tops in tether-dynamics, and "DaveC" is a legendary developer of large ship-kites.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7643	From: David Lang	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

David, a couple of points.

Welcome to the group; please don't be offended by the posts of certain un-ruly members :-)

1. Due to the number of Dave(s) and/or David(s) on this list, I suggest you adopt a name such as "DavidE" to disambiguate posts that often gets a little confusing.

Existing nomenclatures are:

Dave (defaults to Dave Culp)

DaveS (Santos)

DaveL (Lang…posting this response)

etc.

2. BTW, I knew of your father Lou by way of some research I had done on Ryan's Rogallo wing craft. Sorry to hear of his untimely demise as a result of advancing cutting edge experimental craft.

regards

DaveL

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7644	From: David Everett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Thanks Bob. Fascinating stuff...I'm still taking it all in.

Dave

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7645	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Welcome David Everett,

Your experience as embedded software engineering will be precious for all AWE schemes _ excepted for some small manually piloted AWE _ ,but at various levels of tasks.Indeed crosswind flygens (generator aloft) or reel-out/in (generator at ground) require complete autonomous control from launching and recovering to kite paths.There are also other schemes favoring inherent stability and flight from kite(s) configuration.There are also rotor and multirotor-based schemes with or without ground (or sea) support.You can see details on http://aweia.org .

AWE being a complex field with numerous aspects,variants and applications Joe Faust records in the appearing datas in

http://energykitesystems.net ,the unanimity on all the subjects,comprising the choice of the scheme,cannot be at present acquired.For example as alternative in the difficult problem of storage I see two lighter possibilities:

-First (technical and economic) plan:support of the huge development of the electric car,according to the implementation of a complex of electric vehicles in closed grid not connected to the general electricity grid,what allows a productive bypassing of the problem of wind irregularity and its difficult management for the general grid.So a synergy between the concerned branches of industry would aim at mutualizing the R&D.

-Second (political and economic,for whole wind energy) plan:indexation of the electricity price on projected meteorological.When strong winds are announced the users can plan to put on their equipments such as the washing machine in the reduced rate...

Your marine experience is also important because the future development of the wind energy will be offshore or farshore (at least for my opinion).

Regards,

Pierre Benhaïem (from France,where from the rather heavy forms of language)

http://wheelwind.com

http://flygenkite.com

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7646	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Bob Stuart wrote:

Robert replied:

"Where did you get that idea from? I have just been saying the exact
opposite, and have yet to see a convincing counter argument."

Robert,

The question of AWES engineering "high-complexity" v. "low-complexity" has been a core topic of the Forum since well before you joined, so its hard for you to see the seeming trend in our circle that Bob reports. In recent years we have seen several inexperienced high-complexity players stall in the famous quagmire of aerospace R&D complexity, while the KIS aerospace veterans make convincing progress with modest effort and resources. That you "have yet to see a convincing counter argument" is the natural result of being unfamiliar with the many counter-arguments posed. Its probably a good time to review them, and you can frame rebuttals as we go.

Lets start with the factual argument that almost all historic and existing aviation platforms are founded on default inherent flight stabilities, and the few inherently unstable platforms that depend on constant active control are far more costly, less reliable, and less flexible. If you can convincingly reason that this "similarity-analysis pattern" does not apply to AWE, you would be reversing the trend,

daveS

PS Even with Supervised Control of partial automation, with an FAA-mandated PIC (Pilot-In-Control), there is still a huge job developing computer-based AWES tools. We all know full robotic autonomy will someday catch up, its just taking a deserved beating at the moment.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7647	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Dave S.,

I guess I was disappointed that Bob implied that my recent efforts to
moderate the historic trend had been futile. Low complexity may be ahead
at KiteLab but I have not noticed that trend among the efforts in
Europe. To be clear, I do not see the high/low complexity debate being
nearly as clear-cut as the fly/ground gen debate. We probably agree that
work still needs to be done on both approaches.

I have been in the group nearly 2 years and have also read many of the
posts from before then as well. The historic trend towards few
disagreeing with linked kite arrays being best was certainly apparent to
me. It was one of the motivations to speak up more. Just because I do
not totally agree with all you say does not mean I lack understanding.

Yesterday you asked,
"Are you not stalled for lack of being able to make computers work as
you require?"

The answer is an emphatic no. Visventis is stalled because arranging
somewhere to work on the tiny budget we have has been frustratingly
slow. The new space is still being sorted out and could take several
months yet. Hopefully our rig will get reels and a generator by the end
of Winter next year. The electronics and computer control will then be
finished off in time for tests in the Spring.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7648	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

1) EVERY conventional wind turbine has a 'power curve' - wind industry standard metric.
It is a plot of power (W) vs wind speed (m/s), showing the 'rated' wind speed and 'rated' power.

2) When a customer walks into a shop, and says "hey, I like the look of that wind turbine ..."
What's the first question ? - What's the second question ? - The salesperson looks at the power curve, and asks what the avg wind speed is at the site, and reads off the power.

3) All of the information required to estimate ROI and COE is now at hand using the above equations.

avg wind speed @ customer site
'rated' power @ 'rated' wind speed
system cost

4) The customer suddenly notices a kite based system in the shop, "hey, what's that, how does it compare with the other one ..."
The salesperson says ...

Feel free to change customer to government agency etc

---------------------------------------------------

DaveS - don't worry, you're not alone, lack of data collection is the norm.

---------------------------------------------------

Rod - this forum seems to consist of theorists and developers (sometimes a bit of both). Grand schemes start small.

---------------------------------------------------

Pierre - nice link to windlift video - saw the website and there's a system called model 8
12kW (net) @10m/s with 40m2 kite, approx 100-
Benchmark WindLift Model 8

price = $50k (guess)
rated wind speed = 10m/s
rated output power = 12kW
(2) = 2592W
(1) = 43.2 MWh/year
save = $8640/year (3)
Payback = 5.8 years (3)
unit cost = $0.12/kWh (4)

for comparison @ 10kW

Benchmark Bergey Excel 10 horizontal axis wind turbine

price = $50k
rated wind speed = 11m/s
rated output power = 8.9kW
(2) = 1444W
(1) = 24.1 MWh/year
save = $4820/year (3)
Payback = 10.4 years (3)
unit cost = $0.21/kWh (4)

Derek

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7649	From: Bob Stuart	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Now that we can buy whole R/C helicopters for twenty bucks, there may be a new opportunity for micro-managing individual kites, and AI seems to be doing well at autonomous units behaving properly in a flock.

My apologies for the turbulence,

Bob Stuart

On 19-Oct-12, at 3:50 PM, Robert Copcutt wrote:

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7650	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Next year!

The Isle of Lewis is in Europe too.

I have a budget solution for automated overwind protection.

It's going to take me about an hour and a half to apply in total...(shopping not included it takes 1/4 hour to get to town)

A stick with a hole, a hinge and some bungy.

I'm going to extend my driving kite outer tethering point from the metal hoop.

let the kites fill more naturally.

Probably don't really need the hinge. I'm just using the stick and string for the first test.

I suppose that's kinda a binary system ... Will I use a stick or a bit of string today?

go wild use em both.

Rod Read

15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878

http://kitepowercoop.org

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7651	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Robert C.'s test video

Doug,

We use an ordinary kite of a size to suit the weather. At the moment we
only have 4 line kits so we tie-off the de-power lines right at the
kite. The 2 tethers run through 2 pulleys on the steering bar. The
steering bar is supported on a pivot so that the pilot only needs to
apply the steering force with his arms. From the pulleys the tethers run
to reels. For the moment both reels will be locked together. The reels
are mounted on a long horizontal support with the pilot seated on the
other end. It is all on our website along with photos of what has been
made so far. I hope that helps.

The next stage of development I had proposed was very similar to what
NASA seem to be doing. The difference is I would use 3 lines so that the
angle of attack and flight path of the kite can be precisely controlled
at all times. It allows very quick rewinding of the tethers if the kite
can turned to face into the wind. Three independently controlled tethers
also allows us to fly a much more aerodynamic kite.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7652	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Good point Bob,

r/c helicopter swarming / array control

it's what I had in mind when I did this drawing.

http://youtu.be/uJYzdwHNATI

Rod Read

15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878

http://kitepowercoop.org

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7653	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Rod,

Thanks for the offer. I will add a new post to the Visventis web site as
soon as I can detailing some next steps. What we will probably both find
useful fairly soon is a MPPT type controller (maximum power point
tracking). It gets the generator turning at the optimum speed to suit
the wind strength.

I am trying to go easy on everyone. My focus is on getting real AWECS
out there generating power asap so sometimes the limitations of text
only forums take their toll.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7654	From: Rod Read	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Welcome Dave E

I am sure your father would be proud and honoured that you follow an interest in AWE.

As for software, tech etc...

Most of the solutions here involve kites...(light things in tension tethered to the ground)

It's desperate for tether mounted vibration analysis

I used to be an electronics engineer, I'm a dad, house-husband and AWE person now.

Rod Read

15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878

http://kitepowercoop.org

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7655	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Robert wrote- "Low complexity may be ahead at KiteLab but I have not noticed that trend among the efforts in

Europe. "

Robert,

Take a closer look.

KiteLab Group has many key European partners in its DNA, especially because of a general lower-complexity trend in EU AWES R&D compared to the US. EU is far more groundgen oriented than the US flygen epicenter (Makani, Joby, SkyWindpower, Altaeros, Magenn). Are there any EU flygen players?

Groundgen is inherently lower-complexity compared to flygen, since in principle only "rag and string" is needed aloft. The most complex architecture of all is Makani's jumbo composite autonomous aerobatic E-VTOL AWES. No EU program has ever stuck its neck out with such an incredibly complex requirement.

You did not address the "first point" made in my last post in favor of Low Complexity" (KIS), but its good news that VisVentis is not stalled in solving high-complexity AWES design. We eagerly await your results,

daveS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7656	From: roderickjosephread	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Thanks Robert,
So an MPPT controller for an AWES ...
is going to have to take a lot of input data
learn what is good for generating power whilst staying safe
apply and monitor the real and predicted changes

cor it's an ask but not impossible
I started a list of AWE parameters a while back
This was the start of the list and it went on loads... http://kitepowercoop.org/images/3d-designs/design%20pics/export/parameters.jpg

I'm sure it can be whittled down and made relevant to each system.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7657	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Derek,

http://www.kitegen.com/en/kiteblog-2/
are forecasting 20 €/MWh.

For significant investments the process is rather more involved than
your 3 steps below suggest. My web page
http://copcutt.me.uk/WindDistribution.html
links to a spreadsheet that goes to the next level of accuracy.

Many turbines do not reach predicted generation levels because of
turbulence. To get the optimum power out of any WECS (wind energy
conversion system) the generator has to be turning at the optimum speed.
If the wind speed or direction is changing faster than the system can
adapt a lot of energy is lost.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7658	From: Robert Copcutt	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

As a first step I was considering something far simpler. Some MPPT
controllers simply change the speed of the generator and watch how the
power changes. If it increases they simply follow that direction until
power starts dropping again. Delays between making the change and
receiving accurate response data can make things difficult so I favour
building in more intelligence. If the controller knows how big the kite
is it can make a fair approximation of what speed should suit what
generator current.

Robert.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7659	From: David Everett	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Hey thanks everyone for your kind welcomes and words about my father. (Not long ago I posted a short video on youtube and facebood showing the Flex Wing flying at Brown Field: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHNRW669m1U

I need to spend some time digesting this stuff; fascinating. I have some questions, but I think I'll spend some time snooping around before I ask.

Thanks again,

DavidE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7660	From: dave santos	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Data Collection //Re: [AWES] Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Su

Derek,

When you state- "lack of data collection is the norm", you are not talking about the top AWE players. This is not a normal social community; it really is highly science and data-driven. A more accurate statement is-"Obsessive data collection is the norm." "Test, test, test" is our mantra. Foundational data-collection and data-based progress has been quite swift, in my opinion.

These days theorists have many new data-sets available to settle (or pose) many interesting questions. You also have a world of scaling-law data (both engineering and economic) to inform your calculation design. Sorry if it now takes a while to locate the best specialized AWES data for your intended purpose.

That said, some of the data needed for your results to be highly predictive are uncollectable (like data about future energy market pricing). Perhaps you really meant "lack of data (in key narrow areas) is the norm". This admitted lack is not so much a motivation for "worry" as it is the ongoing call to continue collecting data to fill specific remaining gaps in our knowledge,

daveS

PS AWES operations research is a key area of current and pending data collection.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7661	From: Doug	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Open Invitation to Participate in Collective AWES R&D

Hi Dave:
I've been working on getting wind turbines to fly for a few years now in the course of inventing and manufacturing wind turbines in general.

I had Popular Science Invention of the Year 2008 for the Sky Serpent, a flying turbine with 25 rotors, and a couple of Discovery Channel videos under my belt.

My stuff is patented around the world (ouch).
I've got a few great concepts, one of which specifically could use your expertise.

Don't listen to the rest of these guys - they're all nuts, except Roddy, Robert Copcutt, and of course Joe Faust, who has the patience to put up with the whole lot of us.
:)))
Doug Selsam
Doug@Selsam.com
714-749-3909

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7662	From: harry valentine	Date: 10/19/2012
Subject: Re: Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Low complexity is essential to gaining a market for low-power AWE technology. Installations of between 500-watts and 10kW could serve homes in rural areas around the world.

Most future power projections indicate an increased demand for electric power . . . . a very large percentage of future generating capacity will go into cities. While solar PV power and building mounted wind generators may provide a small percentage of subsidy-free future urban electric power, AWE technology may not be welcome in big cities.

There is definitely a market for AWE technology outside of big cities, serving mostly private homes and farms. I expect the market to move toward a very basic and straightforward AWE technology . . . . something overly complex could discourage potential customers.

Harry

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:25:15 -0700
Subject: Re: [AWES] Autonomy v. Supervised Control

Robert wrote- "Low complexity may be ahead at KiteLab but I have not noticed that trend among the efforts in

Europe. "

Robert,

Take a closer look.

daveS

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7663	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Robert

1) It is that simple. The 'power curve' is a plot of power vs avg wind speed.
see http://www.wind-power-program.com/mean_power_calculation.htm
System development has to baseline the data collected. this is done using the anemometer.
The real power generated by a system is measured each second, as is the wind speed.
Over a period of time, many readings are taken (raw data), and these are averaged into wind speed bins.
A standard 'power curve' is created using this data.
The distribution calcs have already been done, when you look at the power curve.
The type of analysis (Weibull etc) is normally specified on the power curve.
The salesperson just reads the power value from the power curve - nothing else required.

2) Kitegen - yes they are possibly the furthest forward with current AWE technology. A major 'player' one might say.

Lets look at the data :
The site says 200 off stems (3MW each) producing a total of 600MW.
predicted unit cost = 20euro/MWh = $0.026/kWh = 2.6c/kWh
$1.7billion investment.

For reference, Windlift says that their system generates 35kW and produces 12kW (net) power,
taking the whole cycle into account.
So lets use this real data -
Kitegen max energy produced per year = 200 stems * 3MW * 34% * 8766 hours in a year
= 1.79TWh/year
income for year = 1.79G * $0.026 = $46.5 million
Payback = $1.7 billion / $46.5 million
= 36.6 years

This assumes no downtime, or failures and operating at rated power all of the time for all 200 stems.
Bear in mind that there is currently one prototype system @3MW,
and there is no data for the kWh it produced last year,
but we can say with complete certainty that it was below year 1 of the 36 year payback time.

Derek

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7664	From: dcsoftstuff	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Data Collection //Re: [AWES] Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Su

DaveS

It's the responsibility of each 'player' to publish data (real and predicted) - including assumptions.
The data must conform to a standard, this already exists for conventional wind turbines.
Comparisons can then be made, there will be winners and losers, just like in the current market.

If a 'player' has a product that is so much better than the conventional competition, wouldn't they publish the real data.

Yet, we can not find this data - are they shy ?

Do you think there could be a link between the lack of investment in AWE, and the lack of proof of concept, because there's no published data to prove it ?

If an investor sees a good thing - they invest.

Start publishing, and the investment comes ...

Derek

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7665	From: Pierre BENHAIEM	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: ROI/COE Skystream 3.7 vs Selsam Supertwin 2kW vs TU Delft Kite 2

Derek,

By taking account of capacity factor (for example 40 to 50 % for AWE,but only 20% to 30% for conventional wind energy) the estimation yet drops,the wind not being always 10 or 15 m/s.

Crosswind Kite Power - Home pages of ESAT gives elements for calculation.The simplified formula is (1/2) (2/27)(kite area in m²)(cubic wind speed)(air density,generally 1.2)(coef of Lift)(Lift/Drag² [kite speed regarding wind speed]) without taking account of losses (time and energy of generator as motor) during recovering phase,without taking account of losses in efficiency due to the irregularity of power within the window of flight (according to my trials and after reading of curves from Makani,Windlift,and others,losses in efficiency are at least 50%).Windlift's videos are excellent because you can hear the variations of sound during both power and partial recovering phases.In some of my videos the variations of power are shown with lighting:see on

http://youtu.be/RE3GEEDd0AI . Kites are very good collectors (ratio swept area/weight being very high) but weak converters compared with a rotor.

You must also add replacement of kites due to wear and UV,and also the area of land/sea use,by far higher than for wind towers due to the length of tether for all wind directions,and generally reliability requirements.

So AWE is a field with huge possibilities but also much work to make.If kites are chosen for massive production,kites must be both efficient (L/D more than 6),light and UV-resistant.If flygens are chosen,electric tether must be...By soon maybe some commercial niches will be possible,but for massive production it is another story.

A great advantage of AWE is its possible implementation even farshore due to the low moment from loads in tether.For conventional wind energy steps towards great unities for less sea/land use are also a problem,and dismantling after use is expensive.

So my idea is when ROI from AWE will be higher than ROI from existing wind energy,at least for some applications,the market of AWE can open.Another idea is the combination of AWE with ground/sea support.

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

http://wheelwind.com

Group: AirborneWindEnergy	Message: 7666	From: Doug	Date: 10/20/2012
Subject: Re: control systems

Nice to see another buzzword from the art of wind energy here, after a couple more years of jibber-jabber. I was amazed after the first year or so when someone mentioned "Betz". Now we have stumbled across the term "MPPT". That's two (2) buzzwords from real wind energy in 3 years!

You'd be surprised how bad you can mismatch an MPPT program with a turbine and still get decent results. The amazing thing is if you get it in the ballpark, the turbine will magically adjust and they still work together OK.

I've been a dealer for SMA WindyBOY MPPT inverter, which requires additional band-aid circuitry to protect it from overvoltage, then I found a bigger one made in USA at a Windpower 2011 in L.A., but that company went bust and got bought by a friend of mine Mike Bergey who is keeping them as an in-house component as far as he knows at this point.

I have a new MPPT inverter just in, from a new supplier. It purports to solve all the problems the other (designed for solar) inverters have. Still waiting for some strong winds.

Another "ABC's of wind energy" brand new basic fact for the newbies:
The simplest thing is an induction motor directly connected to the grid, as most windfarms used for decades, and many still do.