Roddy:
Remove the cloth and extra lines, and then remove most of the wood, and you have a thin airfoil that weighs less and performs way better. Then remove most of the airfoils too, because unknown to you now, yes, Virginia, extra blades DO get in each others' way.

I imagine, instead of removing wood from my 2x4 to make a lightweight, 10-foot diameter blade, adding a few yards of strong cloth, adding lines, and leaving all the wood there, since the resulting high torque might require more strength to avoid breakage...

I guess if I wanted to stage a ridiculous experiment showing how NOT to do wind energy, I could take a perfectly good-performing turbine, remove the blades, add a bunch of struts with cloth sails, and then see what happens next. But I pretty much already know: The rotor would never turn fast enough to get a decent amount of power from the generator, and you'd need to add a gearbox or a bigger generator, assuming the rotor was even capable of delivering the same power as before, which it's not, due to its higher solidity, which means higher wake vorticity, which means lost power. Dang, all them pesky facts from the world of wind energy again... I don't blame you if your eyes glaze over. (Why do I bother?)

I know when I started thinking about wind energy and my backpack helicopter idea as a kid, sure, it was all about cloth - soft and fuzzy, safe and friendly, unlikely to break your face open if it hit you, I'd think about my fantasy of a backpack helicopter, and it had blades of cloth stretched over frames. The rotors went slow, so my mind could envision the motion better. Slow and soft - that felt better, safer, more reassuring. I imagined myself dropping silently into little hidden meadows in the mountains, supported by slowly-spinning cloth sails - so much easier than hiking!

I'd stop and think, though, of all the helicopters and gyrocopters I could think of, and none of them had cloth blades. Hmmmm. Things that make you say Hmmmm. (like technology pioneers suddenly dying at age 38) The developing grown-up part of my brain had to grudgingly acknowledge that, though I loved hang-gliding, and my nice and soft, user-friendly Eipper/Rogallo high-solidity hang-gliding rig had not killed me, and I had built and sold paper kites, and sailed boats with cloth sails for my whole life, I could not find a single working helicopter or gyrocopter with cloth blades. Hmmmmm.

So, being a big boy by that time, I told myself that, however much I liked the safe and friendly idea of soft cloth rotors, I had better acknowledge that my backpack helicopter would probably end up having high-speed hard blades, if it were ever actually developed, since obviously the "been-there, done-that" evidence all around me was undeniable.

That inner grown-up further acknowledged that probably the cloth blade thing had been tried, since anyone would prefer soft, safe, and friendly cloth, over a 200 mph wooden baseball bat hitting you in the head.

As a toddler I tried to fly, using a cloth diaper as a superman cape, and later I jumped off the house with a cloth parachute that didn't work. Yes I believed in cloth too. Though I also remember sitting in a little plastic tub with a piece of wood with a nail through it serving as my propeller, pulling a string to spin the prop, and launching myself off a swing-set too, no cloth involved. Boom. Ouch.

Oh well, again, my developing inner adult had warned me that if a little yellow plastic washtub could really work as an airplane, I would see kids in plastic washtubs flying overhead, instead of the airplanes I was imitating. And of course that inner adult knew that a rectangular piece of wood could not work as a propeller. But that didn't stop me from trying. Heck at age 5, I had time on my hands!

Funny how I can remember all this like it was yesterday, from even fitting into a small yellow plastic washtub, to my inner conversation where I acknowledged that my cloth sail helicopter blades would have to go the way of Hardy Boys novels and those little rubber bugs they sell in glass-dome vending machines at the entrances to Supermarkets - or am I dating myself? Umm basically what I am saying is when wind energy and aviation "grew up", they adopted hard wiid blades for the kinetic energy exchange with an open flow and I suggest we at least acknowledge that before pushing too hard in favor of cloth blades for wind turbines.

I've also noticed it tried many times over the years and it never work. Dave S.' favorite turbine, the laughingstock of Honeywell that consumer reports says would take thousands of years to pay for itself exactly as I had warned (to no avail) is just one more example of a turbine that had cloth sails. Well, they had tyo get rid of the cloth sails to get it to be as good as it is now, which is still, apparently, terrible. I guess. I will take Consumer Reports word for it at this point - there is no limit to the amount of time a wind energy person can spend trying to correct false impressions about wind energy. But gosh I better stop soon - I must have other important things to do!

Meanwhile, during the last few hours I've watched many reporters on TV warning us of "the worst storm in history", except of course they are reporting this from a few feet away from some medium-sized surf, with all sorts of people walking by wearing shorts and happily waving. Hey guys, if the storm is so bad, why are you 10 feet from the ocean, smiling and having fun?

They were acknowledging that it no longer even technically qualified as a hurricane, but noted that that the weather service was still calling it one anyway. Hmmmmm. Now why would that be? Well, think of all the people who love for you to be panicked, desperate to be "saved", with your eyes glued to the screen. It looks to me like this "worst storm in history" is blowing over with little consequence. Regardless, we all know from long experience that storms are George Bush's fault.

So,  if I were to say, Pish on Doug's need for attention,
would that be the proper use?
Dan'l             ..... Fair question.

"the sound used to attract wild birds"

That was a very long winded way of saying

Hey Dave S.:
Thanks for that opinion. I'm having a little fun with the PhD thing. Humor can be a helpful ingerdient sometimes. What else can you do when someone announces such credentials while ignoring actual knowledge? It's like someone calling themselves a priest and they don't know the books of the bible. Ignorance is ignorance, and introducing a surprise of ignorance while promoting it as new advanced knowledge is counterproductive for all.

Go back and tell us more about the Honeywell turbine. Why don't you do this: Document ALL the bad ideas ever introduced in wind energy. Then accumulate a list of how many PhD's are involved. Then determine which simple, well-known by wind workers with a high-school education rules they broke in order to fail. Sorry, but an idiot promoting false information, even (especially) if sporting a PhD, is dangerous to everyones' wallet.

Dave S. let me just tell you: anyone who KNOWS anything about wind energy, AND has a PhD, agrees with everything I say, because they probably wrote one of the books I get all this stuff from! The rest are nothing but troublemakers like you, from outside the world of wind energy, promoting false information resulting in products like the overweight, overpriced, low-productive Honeywell turbine.

Why do you defend the Honeywell turbine? Literally there are two reasons:
1) People with wind energy experience think it sucks, so you, assuming everyone with knowledge in the industry is ignorant, assume that must mean it's good.
2) You take a look at all those blades and read the hype, and are unable to discern that, in toto, the statements about the machine contradict each other, as well as well-known, VERY basic wind energy reality.

People who know what they're doing take one look at the thing on paper and list all the problems it has without ever seeing it run! It's symptomatic! It's like a doctor takes a look at you with a red, sore throat and prescribes antibiotics! He doesn't even need to think about it - it's called a "no-brainer"!

If someone with a PhD knows nothing about a new field AND sees people are already onto the PhD Emperor's Clothes possibilities, maybe they will spare us their added ignorance. Call it like it is. If they have a clue, they know what I mean and know it doesn't apply to them. Study history: authority figures that are wrong can be a main factor slowing progress.

I think you should get one. A PhD that is.
:)

I received the following video forwarded from Joe F.:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_6Rt_lCClQ

Interesting that this talk show host, with a fake name, takes the typical liberties with the facts to create his own story, likely missing the main point. Sure, make up your name, AND your story. People will never know the difference.

Well he starts with noting that our friend was involved in wind power. He then extrapolates that he is a vegan, with no meat for the last 20 years, doesn't smoke, etc.

The fact that he was involved in a new and very special aspect of wind energy is barely acknowledged, though that is one of the main facts of the story.

Mind you we have not heard of a cause yet. That would seem to be the other main fact of the story.

The two main facts:
1) A pioneer in a new type of energy
2) suddenly died at a young age, (with no explanation?)
Or is there? We haven't heard. Buried in ignorance once again.

An apparently healthy lifestyle is a factor of note, but not the main story. Sure, let's ignore the main story and focus on peripheral details.

I'd like to know the main story. (Or would I?) I guess we have to be careful what we wish for. Is anyone else interested in the rest of the story?

Surfed every day? Ever jumped into cold water? The ocean up there is cold. I surfed for many years in Huntington Beach, hundreds of miles to the South, and it was pretty cold water most of the time even there. You often needed a wetsuit. In the winter it would be under 60 degrees. Hard to jump into, it make you ache after a while. Could that be a factor?

Anyway, I think we should know more. If anyone knows, please share.
Thanks.

I am writing to express, not only our condolences on the part of all of
us at KiteGen, at Corwin Hardham’s passing, but moreover, my own
heartfelt sadness at having lost, in such an absurd manner, (and at an
age in which it is tragically absurd to take leave of this world,) a
most valid adversary in our joint challenge to introduce the technology
and possibilities of high altitude wind energy to the world.

Corwin and I shared a holistic view regarding energy production,
regarding the far reaching economic implications of HAWE, the
possibilities it offers for greater social equality, the ‘mission’ to
bear witness and spread the word. I believe that I have also shared the
cardiac risk, implicit in the effort to explain to our fellow men, the
important reasons that have guided the efforts of both of our companies.

Every moment in which each of us dedicated time, with passion and
enthusiasm to make known the reason for our work; we made ourselves
vulnerable often to devastating reactions, on the part of individuals
unable to grasp the fundamentals of our intents and technologies, no
matter how eloquent and specific our didactic approach has been.

These disconcerting and anguish provoking events suck enormous amounts
of energy, literally months and years of one’s life from the grand total
of a person’s existence on this earth.

Corwin was perhaps more generous than myself, in the use of his energy
and has so prematurely exhausted the vitality allotted to him. At times,
there are not words to express such a loss.

Massimo Ippolito KiteGen
Research S.r.l.

Massimo,

 

Long life and success for Makani,KiteGen and their CEO,and also for other leaders and players in AWE.

 

PierreB

Attachments :

DaveS,

It is not so important if KiteGen patents are or are not blocking.In first what is important is a marketable AWES.In second it is possible to block with only author's rights in some legislations.Often you see on websites the mention "in case of commercialization...".Sharing searches is one thing,and generally patents do not prevent from it.Marketing is another thing.

PierreB

http://wheelwind.com

http://flygenkite.com

As a sad side irony it is DaveS that is blocking, preferring blogging.

DaveS,

 

"Should be be replaced as CEO, if he is failing to serve the best interests of his many small investors?",by you?

 

Are _ not only technical _ repeated questionings against Makani,now KiteGen the better way for union in AWE community?

 

Asking is answering...

 

 

PierreB 

Pierre:
Thanks for that inflatable SuperTurbine(R) shaft, just one more of a thousand possibilities. I got burned out of drawing them all before I filed the patent. I think Makani has filed for a patent on this particular style of SuperTurbine, or did I just dream I saw that patent, a few months ago?
Doug S.

On fat shafts: 

Or we could just let some turbine expert like Rolls Royce (nice initials) develop massive systems slaking the greed of corporate and city demands. The standard system product ratios can be used for rural and poor scenarios,... whilst we make sure there is enough prior knowledge to have basic systems available to rural or poor.

I'd be quite happy to see massive kite systems deployed worldwide based loosely on my designs as soon as possible... As long as they are greenish, they're worthwhile. It's very unlikely I can scale that kind of business in as quick a time as the R&D knowledge gets shared.

Yes recompense would be lovely ... Seeing my designs work is a joy.

Thing is UK IP is so poorly defended from corporates I'm screwed... Check these stories out..

http://social.tidaltoday.com/technology-engineering/intellectual-property-has-it-been-tug-war-keep-your-tidal-idea-safe?utm_source=E-Brief%2BTidalToday%2B3010&utm_medium=E-Brief%2BTidalToday%2B3010&utm_campaign=2189

http://www.severn-tidal.com/info.html

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, dave santos <santos137@...

If an approach is not fruitful, at some point, the results will begin to bear out that fact. A million other factors could be blamed.
I was not able to read the whole post - too long and complicated - WOW again... enough to put one to sleep. A million words can be written in analysis, yet without promising results, it's all pretty much meaningless.

Lider Maximo against Leader Massimo...

 

PierreB

Intended video link: 

Doug,

I have not seen any patent from Makani on this subject.Perhaps inflatable shaft for Superturbine (R) has been described.If no now patents only about it (excepted for further developments) are not possible _ because its possible present disclosure on 10/30/2012 _ in almost all world legislations in the world,excepted in USA allowing a one year delay for filling an application,in spite of recent changement of legislation favoring the first applicant instead the first inventor.Towards shared experiments,and why not shared patent? 

Inflatable Tensairity (R) shaft Superturbine (R) could have some applications in home scale. For high scale problems can be as following:strong momentum in the top, Magnus effect pushing the tower on one side,needed straightness...But why not trying it?Home installations as first step towards HAWE?

Indeed AWE is not exactly the same field that HAWE.Completely AWES are tethered kite-based and/or aerostat-based.But light airborne structures with support on the ground or by sea can be also a solution,if no the solution.

So I look towards all directions,comprising other forms of Superturbine (R),but thinking it is a good thing even if a single solution is retained.

PierreB

http://wheelwind.com  

 

Gosh, I'd always dismissed the notion of an inflated shaft on a kite due to windage, but the Magnus effect does open up some possibilities, at least.  It could be in interesting interaction, perhaps reversing the shaft rotation on each sweep.

The general proportions of standard windmills have clearly
stabilized, while economies of scale have steadily increased their
size. This has gotten them into higher wind, and reduced on-site
labor costs, despite the compounding inefficiency of long, slender
cantilever structures. The current economies of scale match well
with the production rates in composite shops.
Has anyone looked into the cost of replacing a big turbine on a tall
tower with an array of many tiny ones with the same aggregate
output? All the production could be highly automated, and cooling
problems go away. If the economics look at all interesting, they
would apply even more to flygen kites.

Bob Stuart

Is it possible to obtain both a rather fat shaft in Tensairity (R) to hold the end into a favourably bent position during rest position _ allowing passive put in power position _ ,and a rather thin shaft to avoid too strong windage?

PierreB

Key related page for BHL: 

Despite the clean taught profiles , a sleek modern sail is devilishly complex, and yes way better than it's predecessors...

The multiple layers of woven fibres are exquisitely set to match form to loading

Mothra was a brilliant example of simplifying structure. In optimised designs, the loadpath becomes part of an elegant structure, internal to the surface of the kite.

That makes him the Italian Jimi Hendrix of Wind Energy.

US 7847426
Is Makani's latest patent.
It was file by Pater Lynnm Saul Griffith, and Corwin Hardham.
It is the latest patent for Makani,
It is the latest patent for a SuperTurbine(R)

Attachments :

I found it!

 

Makani's latest patents was file by Vender Lind Damon.

Joined US 7847426 where all figures show exactly Superturbine ' main features but with only one rotor (only one rotor is also an embodiment from Serpentine'patent).The claim 1 is claming an inflatable shaft and well known other elements. 

 

Fig.5 enters also Superturbine (R)' features,but with a variation where each tip blade has a propeller,like Pacific Power Sail but inflatable shaft replaces tether and two guys are implemented.

 

The claims 7 describes blades providing some lift to the inflatable.It could be also a possibility for Superturbine (5) if that works.

 

In my recent application for a patent FR1202233 (publication by soon on 11/23/2012,see espacenet datas) the rotor is held both by sea and set of tethers or tilted mast,allowing greater dimensions.

 

On all AWE devices with ground support the rotor is tilted upwind,the tower being downwind,since in offshore projects and some realizations the rotor is tilted downwind,the tower being also downwind. 

 

PierreB  

http://wheelwind.com  

there you go eh...

There is already a patent for a fabric that has wind turbines integrated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kitepatents/message/960

Supporting the welcome post about Nature Technology Systems (NTS)

In side note about "no tether" or "all wing" two-anchor system,