DaveS,

 

"We have seem many millions wasted by undeserving and even dishonest AWE promoters". This type of sentence,taken on your last "Open Questions...",is a way to throw the depreciation on vague bases:it is what Dave Culp called" yellow journalism ".In this sense "public systematic questioning of AWE players" (out of technical considerations,like I precise in my precedent message) deserves AWE players and so our forum.

 

PierreB 

 

(some corrections of my precedent message)

DaveS,

 

"We have seem many millions wasted by undeserving and even dishonest AWE promoters". This type of sentence,taken on your last "Open Questions..." (I underline the word " dishonest "),is a way to throw the depreciation on vague bases:it is what Dave Culp called" yellow journalism ".In this sense "public systematic questioning of AWE players" (out of technical considerations,like I precise in my precedent message) harms AWE players and so our forum.

 

PierreB

Many other pages in snapshot in time are available as you visit one of the following:

• 2006 snapshots of Magenn web in archive:
• http://web.archive.org/web/20051221045046/http://www.magenn.com/about.php 
• http://web.archive.org/web/20060101021433/http://www.magenn.com/investment.php 
• http://web.archive.org/web/20060110082009/http://www.magenn.com/products.php 
• http://web.archive.org/web/20060104034656/http://www.magenn.com/environmentalConcerns.php 

DaveS,

 

"So, Pierre, was the Magenn Timaz Project an honest claim or not? ".

 

Have you any documents (for example some register from the Major of Timaz,as real or not real project),any sources (like for an article for Wikipedia)?

 

PierreB

DaveS,

 

Where is the proof Magenn Timaz project did not exist?The following sentence from AWEC?

Concerning "The Airborne Wind Energy Consortium unites the stakeholders of the industry into a single, focused voice.":it can be exact for me since I am not (yet) a company or a cooperative;it can be also inexact,but this sentence can be taken in the context of "mission" not yet completely accomplished.I do not see any proof of dishonesty.

 

When we accuse, it is necessary to bring the proof.

 

PierreB 

DaveS,

"Joby Energy is another AWEC founder-company that was systematically questioned on the public Forum, in just the manner you are opposed to."

I said the contrary on a recent post:"technical debate comprising technical disagreement, yes...".

PierreB

When it gets too bright, the iris shuts down the area of light transmitted through the lens to the pupil. The narrower passage of light now has less damaging energy, a narrower circle of confusion / greater depth of field.

  What Rod ? relevance please?

Can a Daisy ring be made more flexible in diameter?..., e.g. So that not only do the "kite blades" spill wind, decreasing their TSR, but also The top ring itself which the kites are mounted onto reduces diameter in stronger wind. Thus hopefully affecting stability (by the relation of the generating surfaces diameter to their tether ring distance) and returning a more constant power by entering a smoother "survival" profile...

I reckon there's two or three ways to go about this... maybe more... maybe they'll be feasible with enough fiddling.

1: flexy ring method, This method can probably be discounted for massive scales as it involves an actual ring with all the usual compressive forces therein. With ring to hub tethers set between Daisy style kite blades around the ring... a front to back sine wave deformation could be imparted to the ring  reducing it's diameter.The kites are already spilling wind so this compression reduces overall profile further... would need to be arrayed for scalling

2 :  With 3 ring components. (a)An upwind, ground based, tension controlling ring (complex but feasible), (b) a slip constrictor ring and (c) a flown rope ring with a cuff.   

Imagine a cross between An  elastically realised laddermill slung under a taught Mothra / A Daisy construction but with the top ring being a rope with webbing cuff. The kites being pulled into position to set inside the ring. It needs a Mothra large enough to tension an elastic mesh with as many pulleys as necessary to make the rope path smooth enough to spin. Pulled taught by a Mothra, this rope band and cuff are tilting into wind. The band has internal tensioning, a central knot and running eye points.  The tilting band has lift.

The slip constrictor ring fits around the outside of the tilted band tethering and can be pulled from the ground toward the centre of the tilting band. Kite blade lines can be run through eyes in the constrictor ring, through the constrictor ring and through the cuff ring.

With all of the tensioning control and drive chain linking being mounted on the bottom ring.

3: another non scaling version of #1) The outer ring is made of inter connecting tubes (tent poles and cuffs) the tubes want to push each other apart elastically from within, whilst extra tethering tension would have the ring contract... The ring is made of alternate double ended hub rods and push rods. The tether entering the centre of the hub rod pulls hard to retract the push rods.. whilst either an internal spring or elastic at the the double ended cuff rod tried to pull the push rod out on a track  ...

Any more ideas on how to actively scale a ring of kites without horrendous weight implication?

Please feel free to slate this if you think it's gibber.

Actually with solution #2...
if the whole of the front face components other than pulleys are elastic...
When gusts or greater winds come...
Can the mothra uniformly release it's elastic mesh front?
or can the mothra decrease it's front face area?
or both?
That sounds simpler.

JohnO,

 

Concerning "The Airborne Wind Energy Consortium unites the stakeholders of the industry into a single, focused voice."

 

Yes,KiteGen,Tu Delft KitePower,KiteLab,Selsam,Honeywell and many other...are not within Airborne Wind Energy Consortium.But it does not prove dishonesty.Everyone acts in one's own interest.Besides AWEConsortium' website seems to not be updated.

 

It is possible there was a dispute between AWEC and AWEIA (as founder of AWEIA you can know it better),but AWEC and AWEIA have different goals and ways.For AWEC:startups,conferences.For AWEIA,paticipative industry,knowledge with internet and the forum with no environmental impact,evolutive drafts.AWEIA can be proud of it.

 

On the forum to accuse systematically (out of technical considerations) other AWE actors (not only within AWEC) is counterproductive.

 

Look at the title of present post:"AWEC dishonesty?".After such a title is it really possible to wish welcome to AWEC for a better collaboration between AWEC and AWEIA?

 

PierreB

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

He he he - Sphincter - one more great band name!
One more great professor crackpot wind energy concept!

"Yah you see I vas sitting zere und zen I fahted - - zat, I said, ees en-ah-gy. Ureka, a "cutting" new veend en-ah-gy cone-cept! - Yahhhh!"

Let's try sphincterbines on a tower first and see how they pan out.
Would a sphincterbine festooned with whale bumps be inspired by hemorrhoids? What a funny spelling. And why are they not called asteroids anyway?

I can picture a pink, pulsating, sphincterbine now, puckering and unpuckering up there for all to enjoy! Forget the energy, this is going to be worth the sheer entertainment value!
:)
Doug S.
Festooning the landscape and sky, with pink puckering sphincterbines!
Pucker up!

No mention of them because nobody pays attention to them. Why would anyone in a serious article about wind energy start talking about all the goofy ideas that don't work? The thing that makes them goofy is that nobody who knows what they're doing would give them a second thought. A plague of liars does NOT characterize the wind turbine design field. They just THINK they do. The real players are too busy to even notice them.
And of course, as you know very well Dave S., there is really only one significant improvement in wind energy this century, and that is the Superturbine! he he he!

It goes beyond dishonesty. It is about sheer stupidity.
I'm surprised, since it's called "Mars", that NASA didn't jump on it like they did by crafting an AWE website featuring a blimp lifting a wind turbine on Mars. Last I knew, Mars had almost no atmosphere to support such a blimp/turbine combo... To me, honestly, it seems like an idea that could only appeal to an idiot! Kind of like a "lunar wind turbine" projects we used to joke about... OK, admittedly only "my opinion" (after passing high school physics). Should someone conduct an analysis to determine whether a rendering of a blimp lifting a wind turbine on Mars is dishonest?

At this point, is it really all you have left to keep talking about whether Magenn was dishonest? Is that as obvious as pointing out that Helen Keller had some sensory issues?

It's not just Magenn that's dishonest. Magenn was just so simple even another complete idiot was able to spot it.

What about the more subtle, possible dishonesty going on today?
What about million-dollar kite-reeling systems that have not shown, as a first step, that if they had an unlimited pulling force available for free, whether it would pencil out to try to produce utility-scale electricity intermittently, using a winch?

I have seen no evidence that a winch is available with the cost and longevity, compared to power, that could ever make 4-cent electricity, even if the computer-guided kite part were free! This is a far cry from extracting a bit of juice back from an existing (already paid-for, indoor) winch in an elevator system. So maybe all the reeling systems are JUST as much of a lie as Magenn, just not as easy to analyze and spot for an educated bystander.

I seem to remember Dave S. stating in no uncertain terms that a flapping bose-einsten something-or-other was going to revolutionize airborne wind energy. Was that another Magennesque lie? Does AWE have a new word now?

Maybe we need a Magennesque Mannequin - a flying, rotating, Sta-Puf Marshmallow Man!

Have a beautiful day!
:)
Doug S.

Ah come on,
Seriously you can call a company JOBY... and that's not toilet humour at it's highest somehow? for crying out loud...
and then you think a sphicter-turbine has some sort of potty mouth value?
worlds gone mad

Kites also seem suitable particularly for impact drills, where they can be used.  

Sorry, that's only scottish slang.  I'd only ever heard it from my parents, and Billy Connolly.

Bob, don't deny it.
my wife's a doctor and she told me everyone does a joby.

I've seen shale drilled using a hollow pile-driver tip.  For deep holes, this might be augmented with a staged lift for the debris.  The intermittent pull of a kite might also be employed on deep-well pumps.

Nice detail work. They are moving toward KULeuven's Rotating-Arm launch and land (but i did not notice video evidence of this).

Its hard to imagine such extreme safety and reliability claims, as Aympx makes, can be validated for at least a decade. Extremely low Airspace Streamtube and Land-Footprint efficiency of this AWES down-select is also evident (even if the power-to-weight is pretty good). But its great for them to make a kiteplane credible effort. How do they charge the onboard batteries?

The guy in the video is Richard, whose 2011 promise to reform AWEC, as its President, has clearly not been met yet either... but we hope and wait.

http://www.ampyxpower.com/PowerPlane.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VASTPw3fYCY&feature=plcp

A traditional pile-driver drops a weight from a short height onto the pile. Its a sort of small moving tower structure that holds the pile and guides the hammer-mass. Its often suspended from a crane to move it about.

To drive a pile-driver by kite can be done by guying or otherwise holding firm the tower-top so that the kite can pull sideways from there (over a roller) to haul the weight up. A second method is to run the haul-rope back down to the ground, and let the kite pull from that point.

A special requirement is to quick-release the hammer mass without perturbing the kite. An optimal kite pile-driver may therefore require a mechanical buffer stage, to isolate the kite from the "negative spike". The power kite can also in principle serve to move and erect the pile-driver. 

Competing with all sorts of diesel equipment may be a higher-profit niche role for kites than competing with (non carbon off-set) utility-rate power. 

CC BY NC SA

http://phys.org/news/2013-03-ultra-light-aerogel.html 

http://www.whatsonsanya.com/news-26351-zhejiang-university-develops-world-s-lightest-material-carbon-aerogel.html 

A kite system can drive it's own piles. Then lift and erect a taller platform to tether from.

I think if you waste any more time trying to figure out if "The Professor" is truly a "Crackpot", you will have wasted your whole life away proving nothing except what wind people already know:

There is an endless parade of idiots claiming that existing wind energy is not viable, and that their solution will fix everything.
Most of these would-be innovators never got up to speed on what is known, and what they offer is usually long-disproven. In fact most of their claims make no sense whatsoever if scrutinized.

Dave S. get it through your head:
If you analyze 1000 wind energy "improvements" you'll be lucky if one is valid. Almost ALL are invalid. Almost ALL can be called either lies or mistakes, or the result of lack of understanding.

In other words, the entire landscape of improvements in wind energy is almost 100% lies. The industry ignores them except in the rare instance that an improvement actually emerges. Most of the time, the lies are easy to spot. No laborious analysis is necessary, just a working knowledge of what works and what sorts of things don't work.

Any person who understands wind energy could analyze why Magenn was a lie in less than one second! I am not exaggerating. It can be analyzed and disproven far faster than the words could be spoken to explain the analysis. I'd say it could be analyzed and disproven in about 1/2 second, but of course putting it into words would take far longer.

Now that, to me, is bizarre - to see people putting millions of dollars into something that can be easily disproven in 1/2 second!
It is an amazing level of ignorance that is difficult to fathom. Anything that powerful might be our best natural resource! Can we find a way to make power from ignorance? Well maybe not, but it sure can generate a lot of cash!

What do you think you are, Detective Columbo? Yes Magenn was a lie. Are you still trying to convince yourself? I agree, it is bizarre to see SO MANY lies, packed like sardines, into an imagined cloak of credibility....

They will ALL be essentially lies, or misunderstandings, until you get one that works! This is not that complicated. If it works, it works, if not it was another lie. Most don't work so most are lies. Nothing new.

You might go back and check out your own past statements and predictions of success and tally how many have come true thus far.
:)
Doug S.

Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....
Magenn is dumb. Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....
Yup they are really dumb. dumn dumb dumb. And they are liars. Dumb liars. (and probably enjoying a nice vacation with all that money) And their dumb lie was still the main defining image for AWE last I saw, on the Airborne website and all. duhhhhh from day 1. duh.

Imagine now that YOU understand how DUMB Magenn is, how RIDICULOUS the whole thing has looked from day 1 to people with experience in wind energy!

hey Dave S. The idea that any serious player would even ASSOCIATE themselves with such a ripoff is absurd. The idea that you are still talking about them means you are stuck in neutral yourself with nothing better to do. And the fact that I am analyzing YOU, analyzing Magenn makes ME the stupidest of all! Duhhhhh to me - I just realized. OMG I gotta stop. OK I am done. (no really!) :)

If you are in the mode to debunk...
Why not get a snapshot of whatever the NASA team has accomplished by now? Hold THEIR feet to the fire for while. To me, Magenn is too easy to pick on. They had no existing credibility. Picking apart Magenn is like a prizefighter being put into the ring with a newborn baby - there is not even a basis for a contest! There is NOTHING THERE! Go pick on NASA. That would be a bigger challenge and probably much more fun!

:)
Doug S.

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

" And their dumb lie was still the main defining image for AWE last I saw, on the Airborne website and all."

 

That is a problem for AWE.

 

PierreB

By compiling Doug's remarks, of DaveS and others, mine, we arrive at a
surprising interrogation for the only forum on Airborne Wind Energy:is
AWE advantageously workable for an industrial use?

PierreB