I was mulling over a solution to this last night in bed... (don't tell
the wife)
We want the rearward arches of UHMWPE to be stiff yet able to absorb
shock loading and gusts.
Arch lines setting downwind of the front arch should be steerable (in
and out of the ground circle) and playable (payed out /retracted)
relative to the leading front arch.
So between the ground circle and the front line foot.
above the ground circle track rider and below the foot line,
have a turntable component, on top of it mount spring and shock sets
(one for each tether) in a line,
(turntabled tethers in a line allow steering lift vector (upwind to
downwind tether azimouth relation))
each spring and shock set connecting to a block and tackle...
The tether for each downwind arch loadpath line is run through the block
and tackle and back to it's winch.

Gust and shock performance ... stability and steering can be
mechanically automatic yet dialled in too

Yes the whipple tree and branching down to kixels are essential for smoothing,

I think line damping is still quite a valid configuration option.

An airbourne network of line and sheet has it's particular response envelope. dependant on solidity, framework and materials.

Beyond that elastic capability, when a gust hits one side first, having spill control more elastic on the back than forward lines keeps a smoother sheet profile to the wind.

smoothing not sapping... the blocks and tackles can allow much slackening yet dampen stiffly. Surely these shocks are stronger than the normal anticipated driving load. surely that could be designed for as it would be close to the ground.

I think we want to describe a strong triangular web component above these shocks, where the front of the web connects to the front of an azimouth turntable and the rear catenary line lengths & controllers are on these shocks feeding the line through the web. With the front of the whole arch solidly shackled to the turntable.

Response optimisation as you said will be very important, surely stiffer kixel and line mesh systems will normally provide more optimal response based on an optimally trimmed shape.

The ultimate horror of snapping a front shackle would result in collapse of the arch form. I've drawn a further backmesh for breakaway component capture... think you'll like it.

I now have 16 channels of parameter control mapped from a MIDI mix board to my model... 16 more to go ...cool
Herselfs asleep on the couch I better go tend to real life again.
kites bah, I can think about other things now and again.

Have someone in your circle join Google Science Fair. 

Aiming to mine the airspace streamtube has been go-go worker Rod Read, 

Attachments :

[This is testing a method of posting an image via email of a captured image using Espacenet tool; I wlll see if it all shows in group-message space. ]

[The special image experiment resulted in an image not showing in the group-message view.  A modified image colorized by me is presented now.]

DaveS,

You point a real question concerning the lack of maximization of space for Makani. Such a lack can concern also all systems (reel or flygen) working crosswind (in Loyd's sense).

Here is an extract from Corwin:"

A list of wing performances:
Zeta = [power generated]/ (0.5*[air density]*[ambient wind speed]^3*[area of wing])

Wing
Modern wind turbine: Zeta = 5.5
Wing 7: Zeta = 8
Wing 4: Zeta = 5-6
Wing 3: Zeta = 3-4
Best textile wing at Makani: Zeta = 1-2"

"Modern wind turbine: Zeta = 5.5":a wind turbine sweeping 10,000 m² has roughly a global area of blades beeing 1000 m².It is obvious a Makani wing with the same potential will sweep far more and more than 10,000 m².So,like you point,the space is not maximized,and that before the important losses due to the length and the angle of tether according to different wind directions.

But it is the same if you take "Best textile wing at Makani: Zeta = 1-2",for example 1.375 : so efficiency of wind turbine is 4 times that of textile wing.Indeed you obtain a kite which area is 4000 m².It is yet more obvious such a kite will sweep far far more than 10,000 m².

The same swept area should be shared into several kite systems,but it is not easy.

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com  

Here is a link for a website and a forum about Unmanned Aerial Vehicles:

http://www.diydrones.com

 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

Fruitful link, PierreB; thank you. 

JoeF,

 

This website is about amateur Unmanned Aerial Vehicles,not for military or commercial use.Perhaps some electronic devices can be common,but if some searches are common,AWE community should precise to be against military use.

 

PierreB 
http://flygenkite.com

"...but neglects addressing any of many public technical critiques of their particular offshore jumbo aerobatic autonomous E-VTOL AWES architecture."Not quite:"We have a lot of work to do in the coming years to get our turbines ready for deployment at sea..."(Alden Woodrow).

 

Among floating turbines,tilted turbines are promising because of more lightness of anchoring,another promising technology being AWE, another possible technology being ASWES.

 

PierreB

http://wheelwind.com (ASWES,Airborne Seaborne Wind Energy System)

DaveS,

"You adopt a low standard in choosing to defend Makani's non-response to engineering critique."

Where?

 

PierreB 

This message is in two parts:one answering to DaveS,one to DamonVL.

 

DaveS,

 

"You adopt a low standard in choosing to defend Makani's non-response":where?Note that the second part can prove the contrary.

 

"Makani's non-response to engineering critique":please can you precise it?

"This marketing manager's gloss failed to settle any specific technical doubts ever raised about Makani's architecture."Is it the subject of the article?

 

"Makani simply never meets the higher standard." Is higher standard the result of an agreement concerning processes between AWE community?

 

"Thank you if you can directly answer any of the engineering critiques of Makani, rather than just tacitly support their consistent pattern of missing technical explanations":it is the reason why I ask the question directly to Makani in the second part of this message.But by taking account of some constraints for a startup,and also what the Forum says about Makani,I am not sure there will be an answer.

 

 

Dear DamonVL,

 

As you know Offshore has a great potential but also is difficult because of high constraints on materials,and that for all systems comprising AWE and conventional (here floating and above all tilting) wind turbines.

 

Alden Woodrow indicates:"We have a lot of work to do in the coming years to get our turbines ready for deployment at sea.."

 

But please can you provide some answers about expected specific problems or engineering critics?Regarding conductive tether,turbines, station,automated piloting,strengths on the wings,...?

 

With thanks,

 

 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

http://wheelwind.com   

Most of the known AWE players have been privately asked if they will participate in a major new funding round of coordinated R&D. Almost everyone polled is favorable (~95%), subject to specific details ensuring a fair and objective program. The few objections noted are venture contractual limitations or concerns about "social standards" (esp. checks on raw capitalism biz models, like "hype-driven" investment or military-profiteering).

There will be a lot of newly-funded detail engineering and test work to make sure every contender has a fair trial. A rather loose "peer" requirement to participate is to bring definite value to the collective effort, such as engineering expertise in an area of general interest, or in a particular concept under evaluation. Even ideas widely considered unpromising are to be given an impartial chance to produce the data required to settle controversy. 

This new R&D phase probably means the end-of-the-line for specific less-favored AWES architectures, but all who participate usefully in the vetting process will have a nice biz-merger option with winning concepts identified by third-party validation testing. 

Please step forward now if you have not been noticed yet, to get your AWE work or venture named in the prospectus drafts major investors are reviewing. If you are one of the well-known early players with a sound track-record, consider yourself pre-accepted, but please now define your intended participation in some detail.

New talent unknown to us enters the AWE sector daily. The presumption is that unannounced players will mostly be favorable to joining, as investment lightning strikes. Please share your opinions and suggestions about how to make this next AWE R&D phase a huge success.

For several months, Makani has not answered their phone, returned a call, nor replied to an e-mail. I assume they are out of business.
New wind technology companies can only hold on so long without a useful product. Still wondering what happened to you-know-who. I have little doubt they will begin producing drones. Look at Aerovironment - where is their wind turbine today? Deemed useless - a money-loser. What about all that hype? Logan airport etc.? What has their major product become? Wind energy is harder than space travel - we had a man on the moon before we had a windfarm. Add the flying aspect, and number of people who could make it happen can be counted on one hand.

One way: 

I recommend pasting your message in from a local text editor when you can.
Or at least copying what you have written before clicking send.
I have seen my message lost to yahoo servers several times.
Each more frustrating than the last.
Sent from my phone without copying..Fingers crossed

Months of no communication is no guarantee that business has ceased.
For example... Welcome back Doug.
Businesses are inherently weird creatures.
In business terms,
It's winter, they're hibernating.
Lent, They're fasting.
They could just be saving on the phone bill.

Expect some shape shifting.
The chrysalis is swelling and a metamorphosed re-emergence is due.

I doubt they're all excitedly writing secret valentines cards to wing 8.

Hi Roddy
Well I only know so many ways to try and get in contact with a company.
I go to their website and click on "contact" and get a phone number and an e-mail.
I mean, if they don't answer their phone once for 1/3 of a year (4 months), well one might begin to wonder if anyone is home.

If they can't answer a single e-mail in that same period of time, it looks more like "the lights are on but nobody's home".
If I ask people like P.J who ostensibly has her finger on the pulse of AWE and all she can tell me is "no they never answer their phone" and has no better number to call...

If Joe F. and the whole crew here, including our fearless leader in Nigeria, have any contacts with Makani, maybe we could find a way to at least see if there is a pulse, or if anyone is willing to speak on their behalf.

I mean I guess I could try linked-in etc. but...
I can scarcely make a career of trying to contact a company that doesn't want to be contacted!
Frankfurterly, I'm still wondering what happened to my friend Corwin. Last time we sat together he seemed perfectly healthy.
I can certainly respect the fact that maybe the shock left nobody wanting to chit-chat for a month or two at least. But if nobody can contact the company by any means, for any reason, in perpetuity, and nobody is going to explain what happened to Corwin forever, I see it as just one more reason to realize that all the happy talk is just as meaningless as it has always been in the field of improved types of wind turbines, which after so many years, seems to offer endless hope yet little in the way of results.

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

I havn't check if this is just robot speak... but I remember getting a quick reply from them on twitter before...
checking twitter this morning got this...

1. Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   “We have engineered out the common causes of accidents.” Airline Industry at Its Safest Since the Dawn of the Jet Age http://nyti.ms/WVSZOG 

   View summary
2. 12 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   RT @pauleche: traditional wind is going for increased capacity factor (a la @makanipower), and so wind is getting cheap http://www.technologyreview.com/news/510481/novel-designs-are-taking-wind-power-to-the-next-level/ â€¦

   View summary
3. 9 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   Our Chief Engineer, Damon Vander Lind, spoke @TEDxEmbryriddle about how to make new tech while learning from old tech http://ow.ly/hyXug 

   View media
4. 9 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   We (& Natel) host East Bay Green Corridor & @CAGoBiz: Can the State Help Grow Your Cleantech Business? http://greencorridortownhall.eventbrite.com/  via @eastbayeda

   Expand
5. 9 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   The Advantages and Challenges of Offshore Wind: Business Team Lead Alden Woodrow explains why… http://goo.gl/fb/V6JTz 

   Expand
6. 8 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   The Advantages and Challenges of Offshore Wind http://wp.me/p1Mlox-QY 

   View media
7. 8 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   Kenneth Jensen’s Notebook: Controls Team Lead, Kenny Jensen opens up his notebook for our… http://goo.gl/fb/yjWJh 

   Expand
8. 7 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   Kenneth Jensen's Notebook http://wp.me/p1Mlox-Rc 

   View media
9. 2 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

   Discover Magazine: Photo editor Rebecca Horne curated a set of photos of Makani technology… http://goo.gl/fb/CEvfB 

   Expand
10. 1 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

    A Makani photo gallery on @DiscoverMag was curated very nicely by Rebecca Horne. http://ow.ly/hlyNn 

    Expand
11. 1 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

    Discover Magazine http://wp.me/p1Mlox-QO 

    View media
12. 1 Feb Makani Power ‏@makanipower

    Indeed we do. RT @aldenwoodrow: Every now and then I

Damon makes a few interesting small disclosures, including seeming confirmation of a Makini flying-wing crash conjectured on the Forum a few years ago.

This time the Makani Wing 7 flight-mode shell game (integration by deceptive video editing) is successfully presented to a hall full of aerospace students, supporting Randi's Thesis; that scientists are easily fooled by simple conjuring tricks. As far as is known, Makani has never flown a kite plane doing all modes in a single session (as poor Corwin confessed under pressure). Nevertheless, the large M600 is being claimed to be in direct active development, and for its size will be a major feat to just lift off, never mind flying aerobatically for weeks without crashing,

On the positive side, there is a great value to us all in exciting the Embry-Riddle students about AWE-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLy13wlclns&feature=youtu.be

This is a reminder to early AWES designers of the importance of aeronautical simplicity and inherent safety. While a complex AWES prototype can be an impressive one-of-a-kind tech-sculpture to easily fool the public and mislead careless investors, it will be hard pressed to compete with "low complexity" kite systems in meeting standard aviation requirements for economic real-world use.

Keep-It-Simple (KIS) is the golden principle to avoid many critical failure-modes entirely. Consider that even the advanced reliability and maintenance design protocols linked below still "suffer from not [adequately considering] combined failures [nor] typically include software and human interaction considerations. [They] usually provide an optimistic estimate of reliability." (US FAA). 

Premature excessive complexity is a technical nightmare-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMECA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Logistics_Support


"Perfection is when there is nothing left to remove" Saint-Exupery

Beside downwind tilting wind turbines having not an airborne component,some upwind tilting wind turbines as projects have an airborne component.Among them:ASWES ; and also Tilting Windmills Can Save Fortunes - Aalborg University where the rotor is held by wind force against gravity,this turbine working a little like Segway PT ,with electronic analysis of balancing.

So these two projects are links between conventional turbines and AWE and could be called "Airborne Tilting Wind Turbine"  (ATWT) .

Possible advantages over conventional turbines:lightness,less strengths on the structure,scalability;over AWE: maximization of space,avoiding challenge of automated crosswind or static or oscillating flight.So ATWT can be a promising way. 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

BHWE Bundesverband Höhenwindenergie i.G.  *

Yeah all the companies purporting to pursue AWE will end up failing at AWE and become UAV companies instead. Not that hard to figure out. That may explain some things.

I guess it's inevitable that people will slowly start to get a clue toward a clue...

Yeah they are making a better wind turbine.
Like Honeywell.
Like NASA.
Like Aerovironment.
But...
They don't answer their phone
They don't answer their e-mail
Their main guy is dead.
And we still have no explanation for that.
I'll give them a snowball's chance in hell of coming up with a viable product that can deliver an economic return.
Prediction:
If the company survives they will transition to drones like Aerovironment did. Maybe that was the idea.
OK Dave S. since you seem to have the answer to everything, what living person can I contact at Makani and how? That's a pretty simple question, right?
:)
Thanks in advance.
P.S. Wow really, a press release? I guess press release and progress both share the same first 2 letters... other than that they seem unrelated.
If I had a nickel for every "press-release-improvement" in wind energy, I'd have a few hundred bucks by now! And still no improvements! Example: Whale bumps... Caused by chafing of the thighs?

I am afraid that it comes true,concerning at least crosswind kite systems. 

 

PierreB

DaveS,

 

"The main challenge for AWES is automated control": that concerns means of control for FlygenKite,not the general context in AWE.

Crosswind motion (Loyd's way) is the best mean to draw the maximum of kite's potential,but also to increase land and space used in huge proportions.Mothra has a high ratio force/weight and cost and can be promising by combinating it with turbines as conversion system.If no,the amplitude of Mothra's motion can be not enough to generate maximized production by groundgen,excepted if a crosswind motion (Loyd's way) can be implemented.

 

My idea after first searches about tilting wind turbines are far promising for some and some reasons I mention on a recent post.And among them some airborne component can exist.Note:on all systems electronic control is needed,even for conventional wind turbine,even for passive control (take-off and recovering needs automated decision for them).We are in the world both of electronic and lightness.

 

PierreB                                                                                                                                                                                    

 

To direct R&D in AWE perhaps some answers from the following question is needed:What could make AWE that cannot make conventional wind turbines?

1) Utility-scale.

a) Crosswind AWE are expected to fly under 2000 ft (600 m).Current wind turbines reach 600 ft.There are some projects for 1000 ft.Now expected efficiency (by unity of swept area,and far more by unity of space used) of existing wind turbines is 2 or 3 times crosswind AWE.So roughly one can consider power from AWE in 2000 ft equal to the power of wind turbine in 1000 ft. Morever farshore the advantage of high altitude is reduced.

Advantage over conventional turbines:far less materials.But new forms of tilting turbines can have also this advantage. Morever contrainsts and strengths on moving wings can cut down this advantage, due to limited lifetime. 

Disadvantages (besides reliability) offshore and onshore:needed safety zone under tethers without ship or without house. Makani says on its website"The operational area of an AWT is a hemisphere with the tether mount located in the center and a radius the length of the tether. In a farm, AWTs will be spaced a distance of one tether length apart in a hexagonal pattern." So for one unity operational area is far higher, but it is true for a kite-farm there is a balancing with conventional wind turbines since the length of the tether is the needed space between conventional wind turbines.It is true also more the farm is big more there is balancing of the worked zone.

But there is one possibility for crosswind AWE where the safety zone under tethers is not (or less) needed:above forests.

b) Jet-stream;here of course AWE cannot be competed by conventional turbines,but the resource is subject to controversy.

2) Remote locations,replacing diesel generator:good possibilities for AWE in some specific conditions.

So,concerning utility-scale a precise economic study will allow seeing real possibilities,but before it,the answers to the initial question (What could make AWE that cannot make conventional wind turbines?)could be: crosswind (and other) AWE above canopy;and for jet-stream.

 

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

http://wheelwind.com  

    

 

In fact,for crosswind (and other) AWES, "above forests" shlould concern only applications like for remote locations,not as massive utility-scale system being able to destroy the forest.

For local-scales lianas could be used as anchoring in the canopy.

Other point:safety zone due to tethers should not,or less,concern like-aerostat AWES.

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com  

A major cable-failure news story. Besides an initial gear failure, the second failure, a tow line parting, probably had a worn damaged line to blame. Sure to be an interesting back-story (what unlucky combination of causes led to the failures, including economic decay in Mobile). A possible cause for extra delay; to fully clear the heavy broken cable from the ship, to avoid fouling risk.

A modern low-stretch UHMWPE hawser would more likely have done the job without incident, with better inspectability than the steel-core nylon-braid described here (a low-cost combination better suited for static-load apps like halyards). A pure nylon line dangerously snaps like rubber, if it fails under load, so nylon was not the primary load material. Regular wire rope stretches less, and is visible for inspection, but any exposed burrs can badly slash a worker, so nylon-braid was mostly just a protective cover for the rather obsolete steel tow line.


LA Times, Feb 14

Stranded Carnival ship delayed hours by tugboat problems
"...The Triumph, carrying 3,143 passengers and 1,086 crew, was being towed into Mobile by four tugboats stationed around the ship until about 1 p.m. Thursday, when a tow gear on the lead tug boat broke. A fifth tug officials had kept on standby was attached to the Triumph with a tow line that broke shortly afterward.
“The ship was dead still and you've got a 9,000-ton tug pulling on it — it probably just gave,” said Jimmy Lyons, chief executive of the Alabama State Port Authority.
Lyons said the tow line is 5 to 6 inches wide, made of wire rope and nylon, and the tow gear is steel welded to the back of the tug.
Officials replaced the line and, the ship set sail again at about 2 p.m., Thornton said.
As of 3 p.m., the Triumph had entered the Mobile shipping channel and was expected to dock in seven to 10 hours, Thornton said.
“We did lose time with the two tugboat issues,” he said.
Arriving after dark, possibly in the wee hours Friday, was not a concern, both men said.
“We don’t expect any particular difficulties docking at night,” he said. “We have tugs in place now, so if there is another tow line problem we could put that in place.”
Lyons said that if another line breaks when the Triumph is in the shipping channel, which is too narrow for it to turn around, the tugs will still keep it moving. He said winds, currents, tides and other conditions were all favorable..."