Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                           AWES15752to15803 Page 210 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15752 From: dave santos Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWES-hold remotely operated shears, cutters, demolition devices,

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15753 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: How to safely scale Makani, Ampyx or AWE others

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15754 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: Lava flows

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15755 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWES-hold remotely operated shears, cutters, demolition devices,

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15756 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWE Disclosure: 600+ pages

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15757 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: "a kite"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15758 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: "a kite"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15759 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Comb

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15761 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Comb

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15762 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15763 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15764 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15765 From: Rod Read Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15766 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15767 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Man-or-Woman-Lifting History

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15768 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Designing AWES for Earth Gravity

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15769 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Fw: Designing AWES for Earth Gravity

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15770 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi", plus

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15771 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: AWES Topologies

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15773 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15774 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi",

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15775 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi",

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15776 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: AWES Topologies

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15777 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Kite reeling / new application

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15778 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Drone News Affects on AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15779 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15780 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15781 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15782 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Modular Blades for HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15783 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Kitebot nearing maiden flight milestone (construction photos link)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15784 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15785 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15786 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15787 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15788 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15789 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15790 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15791 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: spinning kite generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15792 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: isotropic self tensioning network node explained

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15793 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15794 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Frei Paul Otto

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15795 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: How might AWES be transport and crane service for conventional wind

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15796 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15797 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Paul E. Garber

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15798 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Tracking control with adaption of kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15799 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Double-LadderMill Mothra Kite-Arch

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15800 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: spinning kite generator

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15801 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: KAP using triangulation stabilised lift tethering

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15802 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Kite-Dog and Tennis-Ball Kite Launch Method

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15803 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Fwd: ISEC eNewsletter - October 2014



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15752 From: dave santos Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWES-hold remotely operated shears, cutters, demolition devices,
Doug does not understand how the Value Network honor system proposed actually works. Patent rules do not apply. Joe would not need to be the original inventor (lost to time). The only requirement is for decent folks to agree to share in commercial success voluntarily, by a fair and generous ethos recognizing who brought open value.

Lets say a large commercial success (
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15753 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: How to safely scale Makani, Ampyx or AWE others
Phew,
glad someone's excited.
Well, we're only on level one of that idea yet...
Can't wait to see what the next layers up will bring

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15754 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: Lava flows
Proposed: Lets formally free our Ope AWE CC+ IP for humanitarian applications.
Seconded


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15755 From: Rod Read Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWES-hold remotely operated shears, cutters, demolition devices,
I think you'll find my oldest son is already making a bucket of cash out of haircutting
https://www.justgiving.com/Findlay-Read/

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15756 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/27/2014
Subject: Re: AWE Disclosure: 600+ pages

It may not have been clear that a PDF was made with medium resolution:

AWEkPowerDisclosureIPasCC30ByDaveSantos.pdf 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15757 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: "a kite"

To finish the note:

2. "a kite" allows that the singular kite (having possible more than one wing)  may have more than one tether in the single kite (kite system). 

3. "a kite" allows that a singular kite (kite system) may have more than one anchor in the kite. 

So, when a designer or engineer or user or communicator or inventor is describing a kite system, it is recommended to specify how many tethers are involved in a kite, how many wings are in the kite, and how many anchors or resistive elements are involved in the kite.  

Similarly, in prose, when a kite is being included, one should be ready to have "a kite" or "a pilot kite" etc. to possible be a kite with multiple wing elements, multiple tethers, or multiple anchors. 

For those who have a different habit, they may still be understood. E.g. in writing about a kite that is a train kite, one will find that some writers will denote something like this: "our train kite has 72 kites on one line" wherein the singlur was used for the kite (kite system) while the wings in that singular kite were denoted as "kites" which is equivalent to tethered wings or wings in the one global kite: the kite in view that happens to be a train kite.   

Two-line single-winged kites are evident, e.g.   Also, two-lined tow-winged-stacked kites are evident as a type of kite.  

Alternativers and aberrations will persist. The urge is to avoid limiting an inventor when the inventor uses "a kite" while communicating about kite systems.  Extend to the possibility of coteries, clusters, trains, groups, trees, roots, domes, comes, arrays to be singular kite systems, that is, singular kite for the complex.

A zome kite is yet to be fully appreciated; allow a zome kite to be as simple or as complex as one might wish. 

~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15758 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: "a kite"
Correction, please:

"comes"  should have been:  "combs"

And in that same series, it was intended to include:  zomes

Thanks, 
~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15759 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Comb
Dave Santos seems to have introduced "comb topology" to express a kite farm consisting of multiple kites having isolated anchors and appearing from a distance as a comb.   However, there seems to be a good fit for "comb" to express other spaces in kite types.   This topic thread invites exploration of "comb" in kite types and in kiting actions.  Perhaps see "broom" as a type of comb; similarly for "brush."

Surely, this note is not the end of discussing comb topology in AWES.  Control? Mathematics of comb topologies and comb and broom kite systems? Combing the wind to gain energy to serve others? Zome combs? Higher-dimensional comb kites (beyond 1D,2D, 3D)?  Comparing the efficiency of comb arrangements? Reports of experiments with comb kites and kite farms using comb topology?  Kite farms consisting of multiple comb kites?  Comb AWES?  FFAWE brooms?    Rotary comb AWES?   Comb kites of varied types of teeth, various lengths of teeth? Fine-tooth kite combs? Sparse-toothed kite combs?  Integrated-toothed kite combs? Laterally-integrated-toothed kite combs? Proofs of costs of a specified kite comb?  How will comb kites compete in specified services against other kite-service topologies?   Elementary sport comb kites?  Micro AWES comb kites? Scientific literature having comb kites as subject?   Arch combs as base for hanging or flying WECs of other types?  Honeycomb net anchored to hold teeth each of which are kite trains? Keeping kite combs aloft during calm?    Stalks? Bristles? Teeth? Tooth?  Hybrid kite combs?  Density of teeth in kite comb?  Combing the skies for energy?  Use AWES to comb the soils for agricultural reasons or cleaning reasons or landscaping?   Use AWES to comb the oceans to fetch trash.  Use AWES to lift out land mines by fine-tooth soil combs?        ???

  • Different: combs depicted on kited-wing covers: Sample    Also, figurative kites might depict common combs.

~ JoeF    
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15761 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Comb

Example:


A kite type:

n-winged kite of arch-comb topology with m teeth where teeth are train kites of q wings


Then the count of wings is n=mq   where m, n, q are positive integers.  We neglect the empty comb kite.


~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15762 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
Eight basic AWES physics issues are treated below according to 2014 Open-AWE notions. Comments, corrections and extensions invited-

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

Q: What are the most fundamental physical parameters for an optimal AWES?

A: Power-to-mass ratio is the top efficiency parameter; weight carried aloft for flying, harvesting, and transmission is parasitic of available wind power. Capacity-density is efficiency over space and time in harvesting the total energy passing through the available "stream-tube" (crosswind airspace). Low-mass and velocity and dynamical factors like inherent flight stability (and dynamic stabilities of WECS components) are the foundation for critical safety and reliability.


Q. How big can a single-unit kite scale?

A. Due to the quasi 1D and 2D nature of "rag and string", the unit-kite scaling limit is not set by limits to materials or space, but by practical handling operations. Unit similarity cases include industrial trawl-nets and sports-field tarps, ranging near 10,000m2. A practical unit-kite might often be designed considerably smaller, but latticed unit-arrays allow almost unlimited scaling as a "metakite" made of "kixels" (unit-kite sails).


Q. Besides scaling well, why are kite lattices most conducive to increased AWES safety, reliability, and capacity intensity?

A: Many-connected units in lattices have enhanced topological stability. Single-point breaks within the lattice can be fail-safe events that do not result in breakaway. Units can operate in close proximity in dense-arrays. without interference. Lattice lines convey local state information and passively perform restorative actuation, as embodied-computation.


Q: What are the ultimate scaling limits to AWES?

A: There is no scaling limit imposed by the best available polymer (UHMPE). The natural practical limit in the vertical dimension is the lower stratosphere (where winds decline and air density falls below flyable level). In the horizontal dimension, the limit is the entire planetary atmosphere. Undersea AWES analogues (paravane = kite) have a comparable (slightly smaller) scale realm. Planetary-scale air and sea might someday work together as a geophysical kinetic energy resource producing tens of TW.


Q: Are rigid high-L/D wings better than lower-L/D soft-wings for AWE? 

A: Small rigid wings perform superbly, but do not scale. Soft-wing structure (SS or parafoil) scales greatly, and does not suffer too much from excess drag if scaled-up, because wind velocity does not grow along with scaling-up, keeping Re low enough to still perform well. The optimal engineering trade might be a large soft-wing lift basis to host many small-scale rigid-wing WECS units.


Q: What limits scaling up soft-HAWT rotating structures?

A: Gravitational distortion limits scaling, as mass grows faster than characteristic-dimension does, in scaling (while wind remains roughly constant). At some point (wind lull or shift) symmetry-breaking occurs, and the nominal round shape becomes increasingly unstable. The converse launching-mode of inflating and spinning up the chute is known difficult already. As the scaling limit of rotating soft-HAWT is neared in the 1G field, tacking wings moving on horizontal, vertical, or figure-of-eight paths are more robust and effective geometries.


Q: Why do kite-arch AWES scale better than single-anchor AWES?

A. Two anchors allows for a higher safety factor with less mass. A kite arch can span its full crosswind airspace plane to fill it with hosted dense WECS arrays (with crosswind motion), as a 2D lattice. Single anchor AWES support quasi-1D lattices at best (kite train), and cannot harvest their airspace effectively, since large-radius sweep is constrained by tether drag. A similarity case is the higher scaling limits of suspension bridges compared with towers.


Q: Why are isotropic kite-domes more scalable than kite-arches?

A: At the scale of a few kilometers, the practical speed of arch rotation cannot keep up with veering winds. An isotropic-dome only needs to tilt downwind to in veering wind. The motion-distance is much smaller and constrained to not grow beyond the altitude range of the structure. Isotropic kite array structure can in principle can fill space on the planetary scale.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15763 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
Leading FAQ post had the following statement:
" Single anchor AWES support quasi-1D lattices at best (kite train), and cannot harvest their airspace effectively, since large-radius sweep is constrained by tether drag."

Some countering of that statement is here provided:   In your Defensive Disclosure drawings, Set 2 (of 608 pages), there is recognition of pumping trains. Then we have some discussion of integrating those pumping trains aloft for aggregate stability. And we have noted ways to gather the pumping from such integrated trains to one generator site per significant kite-farm sector. And we have noted the possibility of having an area of multiple rows of such trains to well use land area, that is, in your terms probably then quasi-2D for the anchor pattern. The pumping trains saturate the 3D airspace. And we have noted that the pumping trains need not sweep except the sweep in place of their approximate angled stalk.  Such 3d filling seems to harvest airspace effectively.  
  
~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15764 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
I think this a case where my meaning was unclear, rather than the principle intended is false.

In flying trains with several Masters, the basic kite axiom often emerged, that if two trains (or common kites) can interfere, they will interfere, so trains need a lot of separation (see "Great Train-Wreck" post). We are not talking about train segments embedded in higher dimensional meshes here.

The "large-radius" limit refers to the fact that if a tall train is swept like a power-kite, the top kites at some point cannot sweep fast enough to harvest the whole kite window scope without a lot of wind capacity-bypass. Line drag is the major inherent (unavoidable) factor. Bottom kites can only sweep a small slice of crosswind airspace. 

Trains can harvest farmore of the frontal airspace than single kites, but arches and domes can harvest far more than trains, as the basic 4-dimensional geometry and topology predict.


On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 2:38 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15765 From: Rod Read Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
Q: What limits scaling up soft-HAWT rotating structures?

A: Gravitational distortion limits scaling, as mass grows faster than characteristic-dimension does, in scaling (while wind remains roughly constant). At some point (wind lull or shift) symmetry-breaking occurs, and the nominal round shape becomes increasingly unstable. The converse launching-mode of inflating and spinning up the chute is known difficult already. As the scaling limit of rotating soft-HAWT is neared in the 1G field, tacking wings moving on horizontal, vertical, or figure-of-eight paths are more robust and effective geometries.

Not convinced by the use of "increasingly" in this argument. Who has spun a chute to inflate? You're ignoring lattice and layered dome methods for scaling these arrangements, which can increase incorporation of favoured rigidised generation surfaces even on soft rim extents.

Q: Why do kite-arch AWES scale better than single-anchor AWES?

A. Two anchors allows for a higher safety factor with less mass. A kite arch can span its full crosswind airspace plane to fill it with hosted dense WECS arrays (with crosswind motion), as a 2D lattice. Single anchor AWES support quasi-1D lattices at best (kite train), and cannot harvest their airspace effectively, since large-radius sweep is constrained by tether drag. A similarity case is the higher scaling limits of suspension bridges compared with towers.

Single anchor kites can be used in easy implementations of isotropic mesh lifting structures. On a unit scale they are limited, yet on meshing they perform a group function which organically outgrows arches especially due to ease of handling.

Q: Why are isotropic kite-domes more scalable than kite-arches?

A: At the scale of a few kilometers, the practical speed of arch rotation cannot keep up with veering winds. An isotropic-dome only needs to tilt downwind to in veering wind. The motion-distance is much smaller and constrained to not grow beyond the altitude range of the structure. Isotropic kite array structure can in principle can fill space on the planetary scale.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15766 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
Rod asks: "Who has spun a chute to inflate?"  

Its the common challenge of serious kite enthusiasts to start up their large spinning crowns and bols (as "spin-chute" instances). The larger the diameter the harder it gets. I have even seen Ray Bohn futz this, and he's a kite master.

Gomberg- "...Learning the right "touch" for Crown inflation takes practice..."

Rod: Note that your habit of omitting quote-marks (see previous) makes it unduly hard to tell what is your added commentary and what is quoted (without having to reference original post). An ideal post can stand alone as useful info.


On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 3:14 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15767 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Re: Man-or-Woman-Lifting History

Circa 1967and following decade, Francis Rogallo and friends man-lifted many people with a train of some flexible wings, some single keeled and some double-keeled. His daughter Carol was the "most frequent flier". 

We used four different all-flexible

wings, each of about 300 square feet of

area that we made at home, with some help

from a dress manufacturer in Newport

News where we then lived . Two of the

wings were single-keel designs like the

Flexikite and two were twin-keel designs.

The materials were two-ounce rip-stop

nylon of red, white and blue.


 Ref: Kite Lines V1N3, letter to editor by FMR Fall, 1977, page 8.

However, from other sources, in 1962, FMR was kited by boat tow in tandem in Thomas H. Purcell, Jr. framed wing in the kite system; years after that he was kited again in a different Purcell kite FlightSail.

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15768 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Designing AWES for Earth Gravity
In an earlier AWES basic-physics post it was proposed that the nominal flight of rotating soft-kite HAWT structure is ultimately scale-limited by increasing distortion due to gravity (and gravity-related increase in launching difficulty). The indirect cause of the limits is that wind does not scale linearly with the turbine, so that there is less power per unit-mass. Kite arches and meshes are also performance impacted by scaling, but are "polarized" to the gravity loading vector (more surface optimally oriented for lift, plus large-scale wing-in-ground-effect), and are predicted to scale better.

This can be seen as "dimensionless wind" problem as well, where bigger AWES spinners need more wind to fly, but just cannot get high enough wind velocity to fly from "most probable wind". A small kite in-effect experiences more wind in the same absolute wind. A new dimensionless "Wind Number" (ratio of wind velocity to characteristic kite dimension) is being defined (we need to define the standard kite metrics for ratio calculations). Then the gravity constant (G), kite's mass-to-lift, etc. can be applied in a formal predictive model of the scaling limit identified.

This is a good introduction to the driving effect of gravity in evolution and engineering-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15769 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Fw: Designing AWES for Earth Gravity
Disclaimer: The web page referenced in the first post, for introduction to gravity and scaling law science in evolution and design, contains speculation about "reduced gravity" in the past that is not well-established (to solely explain why dinosaurs were so large). Other hypotheses on this point (small animals survive asteroid catastrophes better and evolve faster, etc.) are less controversial. The page came up top in search, and otherwise introduces gravity-driven scaling law adequately.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15770 From: dave santos Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi", plus
The Flexifoil was a revolutionary parafoil by Ray Merry and Andrew Jones; its still sold and still hot after almost forty years. Below is a link to the history. What Ray up to lately? He is thinking and working like PL and a few other savvy insiders on perfecting the parafoil pilot kite (see lower links). The growing UltraFoil line 9, 15, 30, ... of pilots are the finest in the world, and KAP folks in particular love them. These are pricey but superb quality wings, with unique performance refinements-


Notes: "Ultra-" prefix for AWES related products (like UltraTurbine) is a reserved KLG commercial TM. Ray is given open use for his obviously deserving kites (which was all along the best-of-breed intent for "Ultra-" products). This item mitigates Rod's complaint about Batzilla endorsement as a workable small pilot-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15771 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/28/2014
Subject: AWES Topologies
Aim of this topic to robustly describe AWES topologies. 
All are welcome to grow this topic thread. Others will 
summarize after extensive description effort has been made by the AWE community. 
There will be no ultimate end story on this topic, but a first level objective is to describe
what is known. When more comes to light, then summaries will be invited to be edited.

Start:
One anchor, one tether, one wing; the tether meets the wing in exactly one tie point (no bifurcating lines to form any more complex bridle); PTO: lift mass of the wing and tether during the flight period; produce default heat, noise, passive control from gusts, static electricity, light, electromagnetic noise, wear, elastic cycles, etc. Such default PTO may serve some practical purpose, but we need no rehearse such default PTO unless specific use is made of such energies (say radar marking of a air space was wanted, or visual air space marking).  A name might be given to this topology. 

?

~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15773 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Basic Physics of Emerging AWES Concepts FAQ
Apologies, there is a formatting difference in what we see. I guess gmail automatically displays quoted yahoo forum text as purple.

I did use "  " where it seemed necessary.

I should never have asked. I've spun daisy to inflate the wings / drivers. doh.   The chute part inflates with wind directed through it.

As for the more important matters of lattice arrangements and single line anchoring over node points. It is simple to implement, but I prefer the idea of using a multiple line steered kite, gaining feedback from a wheel / bearing aligned on the mesh node surface tangent plane.

I guess at the bearing point this is almost considered single line.
If a through axle on a small (rollerblade) wheel has a swivel on it's underside.
Bottom half of swivel connected to each node line at a set distance from the node.
The wheel part being connected to the node lines as the node.
The upper part of the axle is the bridle connector point.
The kite wants to naturally lift straight up. The angle between up and the axle is sensed.
Either
 from a small bar being set on the axle to pivot with the kite span relative to the axle with end lines leading to left and right lines from the bottom of the axle to induce balance in the kite away from node average.
or
sense the degree from vertical by feeling around the wheel with roller push cam swash plate type feedback to the steering lines.


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15774 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi",

Stacked FlexFoils

25 Flexifoil Stackers 6' by Paul Thody - Portsmouth 2008

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15775 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Merry and Jones (Legendary Kite-Hippy inventors of the "Flexi",
Ultrafoil 15 kite

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15776 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: AWES Topologies
​(correcting link, thanks)

The following folder will be modified in response to the discussion on topic in the 
AWE community and in this topic thread:  Topologies
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15777 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Kite reeling / new application
Cheap drill being used as winch motor for kite science app
http://publiclab.org/notes/natevw/5-3-2012/powered-string-winder-balloons

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15778 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Drone News Affects on AWE

Sampling: This morning in USA national CBS News TV featured police and FAA concern over the potential threat of weaponized drones. Commentary noted that the threat potential is huge. Response to the threat is underway. The news spot showed effective gunnery and effective intrusion to sensitive spaces. The notes included effective building impacting, biological threat, event disruption, and aircraft interference. The time was certainly not enough to spell out the myriad other ways that drones could disrupt a society by bad guys.


The response to the drone awareness will probably affect the regulation of kite systems and other AWES. 


This topic thread might collect notes and discussions over the drone realm's influence over AWE concerns.


NYPD Drone terrorism threat is serious concern for NYPD


~ JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15779 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?

Electrical-production AWE (e-AWE) contrasts with AWES that point dominantly to serve through non-electricity production.   How might sport e-AWE be encouraged?  We have already a slow flow of competition among professional research centers on e-AWE; we have yet to have interesting competitive fly-offs for the various down selects.  Aside of our AWE professional community could be a Sport e-AWE. 


Ideas and reports over the Sport e-AWE space are welcome to this topic thread. 


~JoeF  
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15780 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?
We could create AWE Cup Grand Prize* with definite criteria, like winning a large scale AE fly-off between contending designs. This is not a new idea; just closer to becoming true... Smaller competitions for student teams is already a feasible activity, since small AWES demos are cheap and easy to create.


* Prizes could be financed by Open-AWE license revenue; the tech progress resulting in turn helping perfect AWE.


On Wednesday, October 29, 2014 9:25 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15781 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: How to Spark Sport e-AWE?
Good!
1. Criteria ?    Scale?  Total mass?  Altitude?  Land-space?  Judging?
2. Bunny competitions ?
3. Sources of funds for prizes ?
4. Maybe AWEIA-AWEC merger taking on the search for funds for the prizes ...
5. Yes, the dance will tell of new moves! 
6. Safe, sane, and spectacular. 
7. Insurance world will play its game.  AKA, AMA, and the like?
8. Venues? Sponsors? Partners?  Benefits of  towns supporting events?
9. There is suspected to be people who are experts regarding competitions. 

=====
Prize sources: 
1. "Open-AWE license revenue" ~ds, prior post
2. Donations  [[I offer $100 to some polished contest, pending firming of such contest.]]
3. Billionaires seeing AWE rightly would probably beg to fund a well-stated competition prize portfolio. 
4. Foundations could be approached. 
5. Retired aviation persons wanting an important foot in new aviation energy sector might play. 
6. DSM would profit by playing big in this space. Nearly every step in the competition action would involve purchase of their lines. 
7. Ground-based generator corporations stand to gain by participation. 
8. Wing manufacturers could gather and dance on this matter. 
9. Advertising space revenues: paper, signs, kite cover, publication space, mentions, ...

~ JoeF


 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15782 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Modular Blades for HAWT

Modular Blades for HAWT


Consider modular blades for any HAWT scale in conventional wind or in AWES. 


Yet, some special attention is being given to modular blades while mitigating challenges with long one-piece blades.  Article: 

Windpower Engineering - October 2014
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15783 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Kitebot nearing maiden flight milestone (construction photos link)
Nice photos of Kitebot prototyping process, which JeremyC advances in limited spare time (working full-time as a programmer). The machine must be more or less complete now, so we await real news soon. JeremyC was the one who classified open-AWE as "low-complexity" oriented, in stark comparison with high-profile high-complexity AWES concepts (like Makani's)-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15784 From: dave santos Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
With planetary exploration as the official motive, this NASA R&D niche also informs high-altitude AWE research. The parafoil may be the future workhorse of the Jet Stream, and these tests would be the flying start-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15785 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
​NASA site is having a challenge with that site. 
Meanwhile, here a page on topic: 
https://flightopportunities.nasa.gov/media/technology/66/pentachart.pdf​

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15786 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15787 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
http://www.ae.gatech.edu/pdfs/ParafoilBleedAirControl_March2012.pdf

Slits
Article:  A New Way to Control Parafoils
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15788 From: Rod Read Date: 10/29/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT
Yeah, You'd think supporters of free 3d development tools like sketchup would release even a rudimentary toy model of their AWE designs on their own design sharing platform...surely? You know to promote, develop and educate...Yet who doesn't do even that? You are kidding me ... No not them. answers on a postcard.

Imagine modularly adding wings to a MKwing7 ... eugh... instead we should have a toy MKwing7 to twist, bend, squash, stretch and array modularly into a proper power looping regime.

I have a nice new sketch on how we can increase diameters on subsequent levels being fed into a "bottle" shape whilst live taking power and changing tether counts whilst using these wings.... It would be nice to have them to play with...more drawing then.thanks
Did we mention it was massively scalable and would benefit anyone with serious AWE interests yet?
Especially because it was and should be open because it sets new standards over existing products.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878


O
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15789 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
Nice control systems, just a shame about the flying. Better landing flares please tech. (Was it on auto?)
These kites would be handy transducers for converting high speed swoop to tug or torque.

Parafoil control is closely analogous to the lift function required of isotropic mesh kixels. Where we want them to be inherently "capture avoiding"... e.g. rigged to steer single line tension to match the averaged vector away from it's tethering*...  rigged to pull flat to the plane of the constructed arch and into wind at the point of tethering.

My son (5yr old at time) did this with a servo on a lifter kite.
I'm going to propose some methods to achieve the above aims using several versions of a "rod through node average induced vector steering guide system for isotropic mesh kixels" Or RTNAIVSGSFIMK for short :)

More to follow all cc4.0 nc by sa patentalike yet more open source hardware

(*tethering = single line payload in the example shown)

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15790 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: NASA Stratospheric Parafoil Research
The bleed air parafoil system described shows that it uses open source hardware tech already. XBEE pro shield is an open source hardware communications device.
The advantages brought of small form factor are significant for active hot parafoils...
yet I still think when it comes to pure lift and sit still in the sky kites, a hardware solution will be better... especially if you want to fly solidly over a loch* for months. Advantage of less charge equipment mass needed and better landing in the loch without electronics.

a stow bag / drogue for each kixel slightly heavy in water and a small bladder may make lochs ideal storage and test sites for mesh kites.
cc4.0 nc by sa



*you call these lakes probably

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15791 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: spinning kite generator
A wee flash of green led has it.

Barrilete generador, Generator kite, Papalote generador, "Generalete"

http://youtu.be/HatnLiJdypw

Well done Juan Diego

Prof Myriam Oller, Prof Mario Thevenon, Prof Esteban Szgety, Prof Gabriel Perez all credited too.


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15792 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: isotropic self tensioning network node explained
http://youtu.be/P8_QYxEdF3E


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15793 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT
Following is reply from Doug Selsam: 

 Modular blades have been in actual production for several years now, in fact I talked to the company just yesterday.  The author of this article may be unaware of them.  Did not read the whole article - were they mentioned?
:)   ~ Doug Selsam
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15794 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Frei Paul Otto
In his works are items for AWE: 
AWE community is welcome to post Frei Otto AWE-related matters for study and discussion. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15795 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: How might AWES be transport and crane service for conventional wind
Instead of rail and trucks, instead of conventional cranes for installation of convention utility-scale blades and nacelles, 
set up AWES and transport the blades; then on the site, use the AWES to place the nacelle and blades on tower. 
That is the least the younger brother could do for the conventional sister!  Or combine regular methods with AWES.
Someone will do the maths for cost efficiency.  Jobs for AWES operators!   Forget the regular cranes in many instances;
just set anchors and lift those parts smartly to precise position.   Another way for AWES to serve!

License: CC+ by Joe Faust; IP entered to AWES IP Pool of  kPower, Inc., which contact for contracts, service, ...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15796 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: Modular Blades for HAWT
Classic Dutch Windmill blades are modular assemblies, with routine replacement of smaller parts over time.

The potential advantages of AWES compared to modern mega-blade transport limits include giant fabric wings that can be packed into standard trucking (<50ft trailers), and megascale AWES can in-principle be flown on-site (AWES-as-Aviation principle).

Mothra kite arch designs are inherently modular, hosting many standard kixel modules along rope-loadpaths, overcoming previous operational scaling limits to non-modular kite units. This school of scalable modular Open AWE thinking emerged here on the AWES Forum. Iso kite lattices will be the ultimate triumph of kite modularity, as they eventually reach full scale well beyond Mothra arches.


On Thursday, October 30, 2014 7:45 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15797 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Paul E. Garber

The AWE legacy of Paul Edward Garber is invited to be explored in this topic thread. 

Start in general format:

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22Paul+Edward+Garber   


Include open questions. 


[ ] Is his book in or out of copyright: Kite & Kiteflying, 1931, Boy Scouts of America, 53 pages ? 

Answer#1:  Probably still in copyright, as a 70-yr post-death test is far from completed.  

It is hoped that the publisher will put the book online.  Libraries in USA: World Cat seems to show just 10 instances. 


=====

The following PDF has a couple of bits of interest on Paul E. Garber. 

http://www.scoutstuff.org/media/content/docs/pdfs/BePrepared_Vol_4_No_6.pdf

1. BSA pamphlet No. 3146  "Kites"  may be out of print.  1931.   Is that pamphlet the same or not of the above-mentioned "book"?

Such applies kites and kite flying to the education of boy scouts. 

2. 

====

Sample application of kite system to practical works: 

Target Kite   http://www.google.com/patents/US2388478   

Target Kite by Paul E. Garber, significant site:  http://robroy.dyndns.info/targetkites/

Training video: http://youtu.be/riZfcNoXLO8

v

===
Building and Flying Model Aircraft, Paul E. Garber.    Circa 1928, his book was significantly marketed. 
How much such publishing may root many who are now working in AWE?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15798 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Tracking control with adaption of kites

J. H. Baayen and W. J. Ockels, "Tracking control with adaption of kites," IET Control Theory and Applications, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182–191, 2012.

Copy online: 

On the left side of page there are choice of how one wants to read the paper: 

Tracking control with adaption of kites : Jorn H. Baayen : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15799 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Double-LadderMill Mothra Kite-Arch
AWES Forum discussion had previously arrived at a LadderMill variant bent crosswind much like Ohashi made his kite trains bend down into arches. This change corresponded to Wayne's "vertical blinds" intuition. The ladder kixels (soft sails not kiteplanes) would tack back forth crosswind, pumping a groundgen, rather than running in a continuous loop (to avoid bypassing wings through the PTO). This was an increasingly optimal power basis, but the means of launching and landing were disregarded. It was not yet a complete design concept, until now.

A Double-LadderMill Mothra Kite-Arch is proposed to fill the flight-mode gaps and provide other advantages. All the capabilities shown for large arches, including rigging and rotation methods, can be applied to Crosswind Laddermill design. The novel arch would consist of two pumping laddermills set side-by-side crosswind joined at the tops by a mothra control-actuation center section (the control-"nose"). 

The hybrid arch would therefore launch and land just as nicely as static-kixel mothras have been shown to operate. Two laddermill side loops allow staggering pumping reversal phases, for smoother driving. Maintenance and repair can be done one-side-at-a-time, with less supply disruption. Kinetic energy from multiple embedded laddermills can be transmitted by rope-driving to a single central groundgen.

Crosswind laddermills can be embedded in large numbers in large 3D kite lattices (like mighty mitochondria in atmospheric cytoplasm), to scale AWES beyond single arches.

CC+ 4.0 BY NC+ SA
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15800 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Re: spinning kite generator
Add Argentina to the long AWES R&D country list.

As basic, modest, and marginal as this small hack was, it had some academic input and did manage to "give a green light" to DIY AWE :)

 


On Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:41 AM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15801 From: Rod Read Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: KAP using triangulation stabilised lift tethering
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15802 From: dave santos Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Kite-Dog and Tennis-Ball Kite Launch Method
Yesterday was mostly dead calm at the Port of Ilwaco (after sustained 60+mph winds days before) so I was not flying a kite while walking the dog, but throwing a tennis ball (with an atlatl) for the dog to chase. A passing fisherman suggested the dog could tow-launch a kite into wind aloft, which is a quite plausible method, watching the dog race away at 30mph to wherever the ball was thrown.

There are many ways to rig kite-dog and kite, but my first assisted launch test will tow the kite from a pulley on the back of the dog's harness, with the line doubled back to me holding a pay-out reel. I'll be able to throw the ball upwind and provide just the right drag as the dog runs, for maximum altitude gain.

I expect the dog-towed kite can reach an height somewhat more than the distance the tennis ball rollls. The dodgy bit is releasing the hound from the system while maintaining the altitude gained. One more fisherman might solve the problem.

Another idea is to make the dog "stay", then call it from upwind. The kite would start on a cradle-stand and a pay-out reel with the drag set, mounted on the dog, would pay-out when the dog is called. The dog would come to the caller to present the kite flying at altitude.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 15803 From: Joe Faust Date: 10/30/2014
Subject: Fwd: ISEC eNewsletter - October 2014

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: ISEC <newsletters@isec.org
Having trouble viewing this email? Click here


The official newsletter of the International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC)

 

Our mission statement:

"...ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity..."
ISEC e-Newsletterwww.isec.org
October 2014
In This Issue
The President's Corner
Conference Mini-Workshop
New Space Elevator Competition Announced
Dynamics Simulation Benchmarking
Why Space Elevators?
What is ISEC?
ISEC Corporate Sponsors
Visit ISEC on the Web
Follow ISEC!
Quick Links
Dear Friend,

 

Welcome to the October, 2014 edition of the ISEC eNewsletter.

 

In this issue's President's Corner, ISEC President Dr. Peter Swan discusses recent space-elevator related events, announces the 2014/15 ISEC Themes and future directions of the space elevator community.

There is a summary of one of the mini-workshops held at the 2014 ISEC Space Elevator Conference and announcement regarding benchmarking of Space Elevator Simulation tools (and a request for help).

We also learn about a new space elevator competition being planned for 2015 and see the latest installment in the column "Why Space Elevators?"

 

And please don't forget to LIKE US on Facebook, FOLLOW US on Twitter and enjoy the photos and videos that we've posted on Flickr and YouTube - all under our Social Identity of ISECdotORG.

 

Thank you! 

 

ISEC
The President's Corner

The last two-month period was very exciting and active.  First, there was the yearly International Space Elevator Conference where the history committee's oral history program kicked off with an insight into the space community by Leonard David.  In addition, there were three mini-workshops and many excellent presentations.  During the Board Meeting, the 2015 themes were chosen:
  • Status and projection of CNT tensile strength
  • Design Considerations for the Marine Node
Then there was the International Astronautical Congress with three members of the ISEC Board of Directors presenting five papers.  In addition, a new International Academy of Astronautics study entitled "Road to the Space Elevator Era" was initiated.  This will be lead by Akira Tsuchida with Drs. Raitt and Swan supporting.

Please remember, all these activities are achieved through volunteer efforts.  Consider which topic is most exciting to you and jump right in by going to the ISEC website and signing up.

"Keep Climbing my Friends!"  Pete Swan

Conference Mini-Workshop

A summary report of the Marine Node workshop

Developing concepts and proposals for Space Elevator development

Conducted at the International Space Elevator Conference
23 August 2014

Peter A. Swan
October 2014

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

Introduction

The preliminary meeting of the ISEC Marine Node team was conducted as a mini-workshop at the 2014 Space Elevator Conference in Seattle.  We had a fantastic discussion on the development of the Marine Node, identifying and exploring multiple topics that are essential for making progress on this key element of a space elevator system.

Marine Node Overview

Dr. Peter Swan, acting as workshop leader, presented the following graphic for the Marine Node.



 The image shows two Marine Nodes, each consisting of a single Floating Operations Platform. The platform in the foreground is shown with a support vessel alongside. The Marine Node may also include an additional Facilities Support Platform. Another key element, the port facilities to support the node, is not shown.

Workshop participants discussed five parameters of proposed locations: ocean currents, sea water status and makeup, sea floor geology and seismology, and weather conditions.  Obviously, these are just some of the parameters of interest.  Attendees also participated in a brainstorming process to develop new concepts and ideas for the Marine Node.

Workshop Goals and Processes

The goal of the mini-workshop was to develop a description of the Marine Node and show how to move towards operations, driving innovations in node design and lowering development risk.
  1. Define the Problem.  The questions presented to the workshop participants included these:
    • Where should the Marine Node be located?
    • How many platforms should be provided for each node?
    • What are the characteristics and requirements of the tether connection?
    • What resources are required to meet the throughput goals of the node?
    • What are the security concerns for the node?
    • What businesses can operate at the node?
  2. Build on the Marine Node baseline.  Over the last few years, there have been multiple solutions proposed to the problem of how to develop a space elevator Earth anchor, including these:
    • Dr. Edwards' baseline: Single tether, middle of Pacific, oil rig, laser powered
    • IAA baseline: Multiple sites with paired tethers and solar-powered climbers
    • Keith Henson's proposal: Marine nodes 8° south of the equator, angled tethers
    • Japanese proposal: Floating tunnel to island-based surface node, 100 MT tethers
    3. The team looked at these proposals and considered the positive and negative aspects of each to enable progress forward.
  3. Make specific proposals.  The following discussion notes are the product that the team developed in the mini-workshop. They comprise three elements:
    • Definition of functional needs to be fulfilled by Marine Node.
    • Presentation of multiple solutions to the needs.
    • Description of the "best" solutions available today or in the future.  This set of descriptions should enable future designers to leverage our comparisons and understand our engineering trades.
Discussion notes

From the teams at separate tables, discussions developed observations, ideas, proposals, and preliminary conclusions in several areas:
  1. Loading due to tether
    1. The tether anchor must counteract an upward force of less than 500 tons.
    2. High Stage One provides 25,000 tons of down-force.
    3. For the case of an off-equator tether (4 to 8 degrees south) the tether will be roughly 20 degrees from vertical, leading to significant transverse forces of about 100 tons.
    4. Fuel for marine thrusters required for station keeping at surface node, but not for high stage one
    5. The logistics stream from tether base to main base of operations
      1. The team considered ports in Hawaii, South America and Panama
      2. Distance from port:
        1. Locating the platforms 200 miles from a major port is considered practical
        2. A position 1,000 km west of Galapagos would be more difficult to support
        3. Food, fuel are significant components of the consumables requirements
        4. several tugs will be needed
        5. Docking facilities will be required at the platforms
        6. Emergency/medical response
          1. For the more distant platform locations, for example 1,000 km west of the Galapagos, only a few helicopters exist with sufficient range to reach major medical facilities.
            1. E.g., the AH-56A, Mi-26, V-22, etc.
            2. Should we rely on Navy carrier groups for medical and evacuation?
            3. Sufficient on-site medical could be developed - it is scalable from existing offshore operations.
            4. Moving the platform in case of storm, orbital debris, etc.
              1. It may be necessary to move the tether platform as much as 50 miles.
              2. A 100-ton tug would be sufficient to provide the necessary movement.
              3. How quickly could the base be moved?  Assuming base is moored to sea floor, a few hours to drop moorings and get underway. A 100-ton tug could move the platform at a speed of 2-3 knots.  With integrated submarine propulsion, a speed of 10 knots may be possible.
              4. Movement available at top of High Stage One is 20 - 30 km.
              5. An off-equator platform could be moved by reeling the tether in or out.
              6. Seismic loading from sea floor.
                1. There is little seismic activity at nominal location and sea floor depth of 8,000 ft.
                2. Additional features and functions
                  1. Tether terminus
                  2. Tether/FOP Dynamics
                  3. Likely new OGVs (Cruise Ships?)
                  4. Greater storage capacity (climbers and payloads)
                  5. Larger numbers of operations and support personnel
                  6. Keep-out zone (safety and security)
                  7. Greater movement capability, possibly faster
                  8. Larger operations center
                  9. More in-depth weather (and ocean) monitoring/sensing
                  10. Climber mating equipment
                  11. Greater power generation (4 MW for climber)
                  12. Power cord handling equipment
                  13. Climber refurb facilities
                  14. 16 MT per day throughput
                  15. 48 MT storage - preparation
                  16. 48 MT storage - waiting movement
                  17. Climber Repair Modules - storage and preparation
                  18. Communications Node
                    19. Summary Statement

                    The mini-workshop defined and discussed many potential problems and solutions for the space elevator Marine Node.  The conference attendees became actively involved in the discussions and ideas flowed freely, achieving progress in the conceptual development of the Marine Node.
                  New Space Elevator Competition Announced

                  Details are very sketchy, but the good folks who ran the previous EUSPEC (European Space Elevator Challenge) have announced a new competition for 2015.  From their webpage:

                  "The next European Space Elevator Challenge will take place in 2015!

                  We are currently in the planning phase of EUSPEC 2015. Details regarding competition dates, rule book and team registration will be announced shortly on this website and on our Facebook page. Stay tuned!"

                  Details will be posted on the ISEC website and future issues of this eNewsletter as they become available.
                  Dynamics Simulation Benchmarking

                  Following the 2014 conference an ISEC team decided to undertake a benchmark study of Space Elevator dynamic simulation tools at present in use worldwide.  This study will compare analysis results for one or more test cases and help future researchers get started.

                  To move forward with this work we are requesting your help.  If you have access to a dynamics simulation tool and are able to contribute your time we will ask you to run one or more simulations using your Space Elevator model and supply us with the results : we are not asking for a copy of your model or software.  In return we will supply you with a report comparing your results with those of other analysts, and of course will acknowledge your help when this report is published in 2015 : detailed results in this report will be made anonymous.

                  If you are interested in assisting with this project please send an email to peter.robinson@isec.org : we will then supply more details and some questions about your analysis tool.  We hope to be able to supply data for the first model run in early 2015.
                  What is ISEC?

                  The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is the result of a coming-together of many leading figures and organizations who have worked long and hard over many years to promote the concept of a Space Elevator.  With organizational members in the United States, Europe and Japan and individual members from around the world, ISEC's goal is nothing less than to get a Space Elevator built.

                  Our Mission Statement says it all:

                  "ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity"

                  Each year we adopt a theme which we use to focus our activities for that year.  For 2009-2010, our theme was Space Debris Mitigation - Space Elevator Survivability.  For 2010-2011 our theme was Research and thought targeted towards the goal of a 30 MYuri tether.  For 2011-2012, our theme was Operating and Maintaining a Space Elevator.  For 2012-2013, our theme was Tether Climbers and for 2013-2014, our theme is Architecture & Roadmaps.

                  If you agree that building a Space Elevator should be a priority for all of us and you want to help make this happen, please Join Us !  Benefits include eNewsletters (such as this one), the ISEC Journal CLIMB and other items listed on our Join page.

                  Come and join us and help make the future happen!

                  The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is a registered 501c3 charitable organization (EIN 80-0302896)
                  Thank you, Corporate Sponsors !

                  The lifeblood of any organization such as ours is the support we receive from our members - and we thank them all.  We especially want to thank our Corporate Sponsors who have contributed funds and resources to ISEC at a higher level.



                  Visit ISEC on the Web
                    
                  Visit our website at www.isec.org.  There you can join learn more about what is happening in the Space Elevator community and what is being done to advance the concept of a Space Elevator.  Please consider joining ISEC - we foster research and sponsor Space Elevator-related causes, but to do so takes money.  Your contributions are crucial to our success.  Thank you!

                  If this newsletter has been forwarded to you, you can also sign up to be on our mailing list so you don't miss a thing!
                  Follow ISECdotORG on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter and YouTube!


                   

                   

                   

                   
                  Forward email



                  This email was sent to joefaust333@gmail.com by newsletters@isec.org |  


                  ISEC | 709A N Shoreline Blvd | Mountain View | CA | 94043