Tracing the conversation at AYRS:
Dave Culp daveculp@gmail.com [ayrs] <ayrs@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19828 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/12/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Saving the World |
Dave Culp was replying to the following post: ============================================= dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [ayrs] <ayrs@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19829 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/12/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
Doug Selsam replies to some of CB's questions: ======================================
CB: "An honest question: How far has that road lead you?"
Doug S.: *** It is not one road, it is all roads, and they all lead to the same place.
Doug S.:
*** Just as JoeF has noticed a continually misspelled word in the
forum, I have noticed the word "led" repeatedly misspelled as
"lead". Plant and Page would be rolling over in their
graves! :)
CB:
"Did you ever test any "tensegrity" configuration? I have seen your
central shaft and central tether systems - but are there any
experiences on the "tensegrity" side that you could share?"
Doug S.:
*** As a start, all structures are tensegrity. A steel bar is
tensegrity. The ease of being dented is how "tensile strength" of
metals is measured. The ability of any material to withstand
compression is actually by virtue of its tensile strength. The
old-posing-as-new notion of "tensegrity" often devolves into misplaced
hero-worship and "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome". It's often
not so much about a new way of building things, as promoting odd,
unusual, and often inadvisable structures, superseded thousands of
years ago, to supposedly replace better-engineered structures that are
ALREADY tensegrity-based. Basket-weaving, primitive huts, and
modern wood-framed homes are ALL examples of "tensegrity". Even
suspension bridges are not a new or recent idea, but rather an ancient
practice.
Here's a story to illustrate: I had a roommate
many years ago who had purchased property in Belize. He announced
his intention to build a dome-house there, because:
1)
A dome had the best ratio of volume/surface area, supposedly
unappreciated by the illiterate,unwashed masses practicing architecture
for the past couple thousand years.
2)
One could purchase special galvanized steel hardware fittings to make
connecting the struts of a dome exterior frame easier and stronger!
As someone who happened to be making a living framing roofs at the time, I let him know:
a)
Houses are framed around the traffic patterns of humans. We stand
vertically, so walls are vertical to allow us to walk past them without
having to crawl or bend over. A dome would have a lot of unusable
space, or less-usable space. It's an awkward configuration;
b) Roofs are framed to have the proper pitch for drainage of rain or snow, with the pitch depending on local climate;
c)
The total volume/surface area of a regular framed house already
approximates a dome - there is very little to be gained trying to make
it a teeny bit more dome-like.
d)
Regular framing with triangles made of rafters and ceiling joists, or
using premanufactured trusses where the bottom chord serves as ceiling
joists, place the ceiling joists or bottom chord of the truss under
tension - regular house-framing is ALREADY a tensegrity structure, just
most people are unaware of it.
e)
Regular framing is already held together by premade galvanized steel
hardware, even more so since earthquake survival became part of
building codes. ("really?" he asked...)
f)
Most homes, since prehistoric times, were framed as either round-roof
domes or an elongated version. Today's framing methods retain the
best aspects of the original dome configuration, but with improved
ergonomics, buildability, weatherability, and structural integrity, and
are in fact use far MORE "tensegrity" than a dome, based on ceiling
framing members in tension.
g)
The dome-home concept is seldom pursued these days, since it was never
an improvement, but rather a giant step backwards. Dome roofs
these days are relegated mostly to sports stadiums, due more to the
already-rounded peripheral wall layout. Note though, that these
peripheral walls are still vertical - the dome is usually just the
roof, not the walls.
But
of course, simple facts are somehow beyond consideration when the good
professor is "on a roll", presenting old problems solved thousands of
years ago, as new and unappreciated principles never before encountered.
So
in summary I would say tensegrity has many useful aspects, but it's not
a new principle and it's not magic. All structures are tensegrity
structures at some level.
CB:
"Just checking if the road I am travelling has been traveled before and
if there are any potholes or roadblocks you could tell me about
:) /cb"
Doug S.:
*** I'll answer that with a "yes" then a "no thanks". But I will
point out: it is easy to see where that road leads... :)
~ Doug Selsam
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19830 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/12/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
Doug
failed to answer any of Christof's questions directly, but blew lots of
off-topic smoke instead; nor is he talking about tensegrity as defined
in engineering. The actual answers are that Doug is not known to
advanced his concept at all for many years, nor is he known to ever
have applied tensegrity rigging as defined by Fuller, nor is he able to
cite known disadvantages in his patented wind schemes (like faster
multi-rotors springing from a slower Darrieus VAWT that would only add
drag). He maybe able to correct non-technical typo spelling errors, but
he thought Loyd in AWE had two Ls, and even tried to correct us to that
effect.
If
all roads really had led to the old ST patent, standard power kites
would not be totally predominant in all working applications, from
sports to energy-research. Doug claimed GE was interested the ST, but
no one was surprised this road went nowhere.
On Saturday, March 12, 2016 8:24 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Doug Selsam replies to some of CB's questions: ======================================
CB: "An honest question: How far has that road lead you?"
Doug S.: *** It is not one road, it is all roads, and they all lead to the same place.
Doug S.:
*** Just as JoeF has noticed a continually misspelled word in the
forum, I have noticed the word "led" repeatedly misspelled as
"lead". Plant and Page would be rolling over in their
graves! :)
CB:
"Did you ever test any "tensegrity" configuration? I have seen your
central shaft and central tether systems - but are there any
experiences on the "tensegrity" side that you could share?"
Doug S.:
*** As a start, all structures are tensegrity. A steel bar is
tensegrity. The ease of being dented is how "tensile strength" of
metals is measured. The ability of any material to withstand
compression is actually by virtue of its tensile strength. The
old-posing-as-new notion of "tensegrity" often devolves into misplaced
hero-worship and "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome". It's often
not so much about a new way of building things, as promoting odd,
unusual, and often inadvisable structures, superseded thousands of
years ago, to supposedly replace better-engineered structures that are
ALREADY tensegrity-based. Basket-weaving, primitive huts, and
modern wood-framed homes are ALL examples of "tensegrity". Even
suspension bridges are not a new or recent idea, but rather an ancient
practice.
Here's a story to
illustrate: I had a roommate many years ago who had purchased
property in Belize. He announced his intention to build a
dome-house there, because:
1)
A dome had the best ratio of volume/surface area, supposedly
unappreciated by the illiterate,unwashed masses practicing architecture
for the past couple thousand years.
2)
One could purchase special galvanized steel hardware fittings to make
connecting the struts of a dome exterior frame easier and stronger!
As someone who happened to be making a living framing roofs at the time, I let him know:
a)
Houses are framed around the traffic patterns of humans. We stand
vertically, so walls are vertical to allow us to walk past them without
having to crawl or bend over. A dome would have a lot of unusable
space, or less-usable space. It's an awkward configuration;
b) Roofs are framed to have the proper pitch for drainage of rain or snow, with the pitch depending on local climate;
c)
The total volume/surface area of a regular framed house already
approximates a dome - there is very little to be gained trying to make
it a teeny bit more dome-like.
d)
Regular framing with triangles made of rafters and ceiling joists, or
using premanufactured trusses where the bottom chord serves as ceiling
joists, place the ceiling joists or bottom chord of the truss under
tension - regular house-framing is ALREADY a tensegrity structure, just
most people are unaware of it.
e)
Regular framing is already held together by premade galvanized steel
hardware, even more so since earthquake survival became part of
building codes. ("really?" he asked...)
f)
Most homes, since prehistoric times, were framed as either round-roof
domes or an elongated version. Today's framing methods retain the
best aspects of the original dome configuration, but with improved
ergonomics, buildability, weatherability, and structural integrity, and
are in fact use far MORE "tensegrity" than a dome, based on ceiling
framing members in tension.
g)
The dome-home concept is seldom pursued these days, since it was never
an improvement, but rather a giant step backwards. Dome roofs
these days are relegated mostly to sports stadiums, due more to the
already-rounded peripheral wall layout. Note though, that these
peripheral walls are still vertical - the dome is usually just the
roof, not the walls.
But
of course, simple facts are somehow beyond consideration when the good
professor is "on a roll", presenting old problems solved thousands of
years ago, as new and unappreciated principles never before encountered.
So
in summary I would say tensegrity has many useful aspects, but it's not
a new principle and it's not magic. All structures are tensegrity
structures at some level.
CB:
"Just checking if the road I am travelling has been traveled before and
if there are any potholes or roadblocks you could tell me about
:) /cb"
Doug S.:
*** I'll answer that with a "yes" then a "no thanks". But I will
point out: it is easy to see where that road leads... :)
~ Doug Selsam
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19832 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/13/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Saving the World |
Tracing the key conversation from AYRS: ============================================== Dave Santos replied to Dave Culp:
Thanks,
Dave, especially for mentioning Keith Stuart. I did not know he had
studied scaling up his ideas. Can anyone point to his detailed concept?
Also important mention is Joe Hadzicki, inventor of the Rev kite and
proponent of a crosswind kite cableway towed by a giant kite-buggy
[Lang, 2004, Drachen Journal]. We are seeing good agreement by several
top experts. The Golden Age of Sail set the standing records for
windpower stuck in surface wind. Upper wind accessible by kites is
several times stronger. Vast soft-kites free of spar-mass in the better
wind should set proportionally higher new power records.
A
2MW rating is SkySails' marketing claim. I give them the benefit of the
doubt since relatively high parafoil L/D enables more sweep; then the
actual supplier, North Sails NZ, is top notch; and when pressed,
a WECS marketer can always invokes the wind velocity required to
validate a rated power claim. In a fair comparison with an OL, a high
SkySails wind velocity presumption inherits. A strongly built OL could
in fact rate as impressively as stated in the right blow, never mind
what it actually did on a normal day. Who can believe getting a 12m
yacht on a plane, as an OL did, is doable by just a few hundred horse
power? Well maybe the Cup yacht was mostly surfing waves for
quasi-motorboat performance, and the kite banned from racing for only
an illusion of fearsome power.
Both
ship-kite companies are confident they can scale further. SkySails has
claimed to have a 600m kite in the pipeline, and surely North could
build it. As a single-skin of comparable mass, an OL would scale
bigger. The practical limit may be how well a kite can be handled on
the ground and launched without damage, not how big a kite can fly. We
know a kite of any size is easily killed by releasing primary tension
to its LE lines, and retaining it by a TE kill line.
A
few other notes- We know from power kiting that parafoils and NPWs of
comparable mass, the former double-skin and sweeping more, but the
latter single-skin bigger by area, are after all rather equivalent in
power. The single-skin "rag" is the poor man's kite wing, far simpler
in construction and about half the price, and the higher drag is fully
effective traction on downwind points-of-sail. The theoretic kite ideal
is to work pure structural polymer aloft at its full working load, with
no excess flying mass to rob energy at 10W per kg in 1g. High
load-velocity is key, but the wing choice trade-off is once again
pretty even, between a finer wing flying faster, or a gruntier wing
with a step-up transmission even as simple as tri-tethers set by
rigger's angles. The load sees more or less the same power at its
nominal velocity. ~Dave Santos
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19833 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/13/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
Found quote from the thesis of Candice Jordan https://cjordanportfolio.wordpress.com/thesis-paper/
"Architect
R. Buckminster Fuller would have viewed the discovery for this
namesake molecule as a way to ‘ephemeralize’ design. Fuller coined and
defined this term ephemeralize as referring to the process of using
less material while designing more. One such way of reducing the mass
of a structure, according to Fuller, is to start eliminating the amount
or volume of compression members and utilize many more tensile
elements. The word ‘tensegrity’(fig.13,
14) which Fuller invented, is defined as “a contraction of a tensional
integrity, a structure the shape of which is guaranteed by the
tensional behaviors of the system, and not by the compressional
behaviors.” He later states that essentially “All structures are
tensegrity structures from the solar system to the atom.” In some of
Fuller’s last works, he predicts that the barest tensile wires that
will be used in design will be those of chemical bonds. 32" |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19834 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/13/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
Bucky
anticipated Doug's point that all matter is tensegrity in the strictest
sense, while also clearly defining the macroscopic engineered rigging
approach, as unambiguously embodied in endless iconic tensegrity
sculptural and architectural structures. The tensegrity class we call a
"torque ladder" for AWES transmission should be taken to cover many
similar variations in our circle, from Harburg to Beaupoil.
On Sunday, March 13, 2016 9:21 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Found quote from the thesis of Candice Jordanhttps://cjordanportfolio.wordpress.com/thesis-paper/
"Architect
R. Buckminster Fuller would have viewed the discovery for this
namesake molecule as a way to ‘ephemeralize’ design. Fuller coined and
defined this term ephemeralize as referring to the process of using
less material while designing more. One such way of reducing the mass
of a structure, according to Fuller, is to start eliminating the amount
or volume of compression members and utilize many more tensile
elements. The word ‘tensegrity’(fig.13,
14) which Fuller invented, is defined as “a contraction of a tensional
integrity, a structure the shape of which is guaranteed by the
tensional behaviors of the system, and not by the compressional
behaviors.” He later states that essentially “All structures are
tensegrity structures from the solar system to the atom.” In some of
Fuller’s last works, he predicts that the barest tensile wires that
will be used in design will be those of chemical bonds. 32"
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19835 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/14/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
Doug Selsam comments on topic: =========================================
"Talk to your doctor."
This
message is powered by a 10 kW wind energy system lofted by a guyed
lattice tower. The lattice tower itself is tensegrity-based, the
struts making up the lattice are themselves compression/tension
members, and the guy wires add a third layer of tensegrity. (Of
course the steel towers of utility-scale windfarms also use tensegrity,
since in a strong wind one side of the tubular steel tower is under
tension.)
The
roof over my head is based on 50-foot-long trusses manufactured from
2x4's. A 50-foot span using 2x4's??? Only due to the
miracle of tensegrity! The lower chord is under (drumroll
please)... tension! The multi-MegaWatt sailing ships of
yesteryear? Tensegrity! Masts and booms as
compression members, ropes and sails under tension.
It's
easy to see that "tensegrity" enjoyed wide usage long before it was
given a new name. But nobody bothers to call any of these
long-understood engineering applications "tensegrity". They just
call it "engineering". Or "craftsmanship" (yawn). What's
the difference between such mundane, boring uses for tensegrity, with
millennia of use, and the sexy "new" tensegrity from the Art Deco
era? It's about a cult of personality and unexpected engineering
"magic" tricks, or rather "parlor tricks", easy to explain, but with a
surprising, striking appearance. Nobody is interested in
what makes boring roof trusses, or antique sailboats of past centuries
strong, and everyone can see why a radio tower cannot fall because of
guy wires. But a tower that seems to magically "float" in the
air? That can be promoted as a new style of engineering!
Look! A magic trick! Tensegrity! Who knew??? My
take is the name "tensegrity" attracts the bearded, bowtie-wearing,
recumbent-bicycle-riding crowd, susceptible to "breakthrough"
solution-in-search-of-a- problem ideas like 3-wheeled cars, wankel
engines, Darrieus wind turbines, axial-flux generators, and homes
shaped like flying saucers. In short, the whole thing is about
gimmicks - long-understood engineering principles applied in
seemingly-slightly-new (usually old and superseded) ways, perhaps
slightly less efficient than the standard ways, but not enough less
efficient for the diehard fans to really notice. Regarding
buckyballs, buckytubes, graphenes, and fullerenes in general, I recall
my first organic chemistry class in the mid-1970's. (I had been
to Expo-67 in Canada, and visited the U.S. Pavillion which was a giant
glass-panel buckyball.) We were learning about aromatic
hydrocarbons based on 6-carbon benzene rings. Seeing that the 5-
and 6-carbon rings could be linked together, and that sheets of such
rings already made up the low-cost graphite in our pencils, I proposed
to the professor that carbon atoms should be considered as a new
micro-engineering material, where tubes, sheets, enclosed spaces such
as spheres, and pretty much any shape could be made from linked carbon
atoms, if only we could find a way to link the specific carbon atoms in
the exact way required to build the shapes. I
asked if this most-obvious idea might not be under development, since
it was hard for me to believe every first-year organic chemistry
student, let alone professors and chemical engineers, could not be
thinking the same thing. Unfortunately the professor did not seem
to grasp the significance of what I was trying to say. He had no
comment, really. Same
response from an aerospace-engineering / fluid-mechanics professor
years later, when I ran the SuperTurbine(R) concept by him. These
professors were more about the curriculum in the textbooks, and solving
and grading homework problems and tests, than thinking about the NEXT
step, considering what is already known, in science and engineering. It
made me realize, as advanced as we like to think we are at any given
moment, there are always new things to invent. Professors may not
do it, but somebody will, and that somebody is whoever decides they are
going to do it.
Well I was too young to grow
much of a beard, never liked wearing bowties, and didn't have a lisp or
use a pocket-protector. Heck I couldn't even operate a
sliderule! I told people like my Yale-educated engineer father
that sliderules would be obsolete as soon as calculators got a little
more mainstream, which of course resulted in much scoffing. So I
went on, thinking I might someday, armed with a futuristic calculator
(that today is available at the 99-cent store) promote some of my
private engineering ideas, beard or no beard, and probably without a
bowtie. Well
it is harder without a beard and bowtie, but darn it, I've gotta stick
to my principles ya know. So there you have it - my take on
tensegrity. Or is it a dental disorder, caused by clenching due
to stress? (Get it? "Tense?"... "Grit?"...) Talk to your
doctor! I'll bet if I had a Dymaxion car today it would be worth
a lot of money! :))) ~ Doug Selsam
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19836 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/14/2016 |
| Subject: Gandhian Award for Kite Energy |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19837 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/14/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Open Tensegrity Shafts: Mechanical power transmission using ultr |
While
it seems Doug is posting on-topic, his misunderstanding of Buckminster
Fuller's tensegrity rigging design is so basic that he only imagines he
understands it. He is posting about his latest technical blind-spot and
habitual professor-envy more than the actual topic (AWES torque ladders
as tensegrity transmissions).
The
UTexas AE dept has long had a tensegrity sculpture out in front of the
building. How is it so easily distinguished by any freshman from Doug's
conventional trusses? The steel compression members of rigged
tensegrity do not touch, as they spaced part by steel tensile cables. A
torque-ladder is a variant whose compression members do not touch, but
also depends on kite tension.
Bucky
was of course a legendary professor. Over many years Doug consistently
targets the professor class for unsupported and undeserved ridicule, as
an unhelpful idee fixe. In AWE, our professors have been wonderful
contributors of engineering vision that we could not do without.
=============== Bucky as professor par excellence-
"During
the 1940s he began to teach and lecture at universities, including
Harvard and MIT, and in the late 1950s he became a professor at
Southern Illinois University (SIU), where he and his wife lived in a
geodesic dome when he was in residence. In 1972 he was named World
Fellow in Residence to a consortium of universities in Philadelphia,
including the University of Pennsylvania. He retained his connection
with both SIU and the University of Pennsylvania until his death. "
quote form-
On Monday, March 14, 2016 6:37 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Doug Selsam comments on topic: =========================================
"Talk to your doctor."
This
message is powered by a 10 kW wind energy system lofted by a guyed
lattice tower. The lattice tower itself is tensegrity-based, the
struts making up the lattice are themselves compression/tension
members, and the guy wires add a third layer of tensegrity. (Of
course the steel towers of utility-scale windfarms also use tensegrity,
since in a strong wind one side of the tubular steel tower is under
tension.)
The
roof over my head is based on 50-foot-long trusses manufactured from
2x4's. A 50-foot span using 2x4's??? Only due to the
miracle of tensegrity! The lower chord is under (drumroll
please)... tension! The multi-MegaWatt sailing ships of
yesteryear? Tensegrity! Masts and booms as
compression members, ropes and sails under tension.
It's
easy to see that "tensegrity" enjoyed wide usage long before it was
given a new name. But nobody bothers to call any of these
long-understood engineering applications "tensegrity". They just
call it "engineering". Or "craftsmanship" (yawn).
I
asked if this most-obvious idea might not be under development, since
it was hard for me to believe every first-year organic chemistry
student, let alone professors and chemical engineers, could not be
thinking the same thing. Unfortunately the professor did not seem
to grasp the significance of what I was trying to say. He had no
comment, really.
Same
response from an aerospace-engineering / fluid-mechanics professor
years later, when I ran the SuperTurbine(R) concept by him. These
professors were more about the curriculum in the textbooks, and solving
and grading homework problems and tests, than thinking about the NEXT
step, considering what is already known, in science and engineering.
It
made me realize, as advanced as we like to think we are at any given
moment, there are always new things to invent. Professors may not
do it, but somebody will, and that somebody is whoever decides they are
going to do it.
Well
I was too young to grow much of a beard, never liked wearing bowties,
and didn't have a lisp or use a pocket-protector. Heck I couldn't
even operate a sliderule! I told people like my Yale-educated
engineer father that sliderules would be obsolete as soon as
calculators got a little more mainstream, which of course resulted in
much scoffing. So I went on, thinking I might someday, armed with
a futuristic calculator (that today is available at the 99-cent store)
promote some of my private engineering ideas, beard or no beard, and
probably without a bowtie.
Well
it is harder without a beard and bowtie, but darn it, I've gotta stick
to my principles ya know. So there you have it - my take on
tensegrity. Or is it a dental disorder, caused by clenching due
to stress? (Get it? "Tense?"... "Grit?"...) Talk to your
doctor! I'll bet if I had a Dymaxion car today it would be worth
a lot of money! :))) ~ Doug Selsam
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19838 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/14/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Gandhian Award for Kite Energy |
for full paper: HIGH ALTITUDE WIND TECHNOLOGY USING KITE-A
REVOLUTION IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
PROJECT REFERENCE NUMBER: 38S0599
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19839 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/14/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Gandhian Award for Kite Energy |
Terrific school project by a human diamond-in-the-rough. The kid has prophetic vision-
"HIGH ALTITUDE...KITE-A
REVOLUTION IN RENEWABLE ENERGY"
"...the small playing kite...will be the
future of India."
On Monday, March 14, 2016 9:10 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
for full paper: HIGH ALTITUDE WIND TECHNOLOGY USING KITE-A
REVOLUTION IN RENEWABLE ENERGY
PROJECT REFERENCE NUMBER: 38S0599
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19840 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/15/2016 |
| Subject: AWESCO formally launches; open questions remain |
AWESCO
is tweeted to be up-and running. The AWE research program is funded in
large part by public money, but was founded within the exclusionary
stealth-venture-driven Dutch-German circle that took root as Wubbo
passed. These days we can't even get a consensus go-ahead from these
key insiders on any issue, not even to once-again host an (overdue) US
conference. The insiders are the AWEC, BHWE, HWN500, TUDelft-centered
clique that took over the global conference process in 2013, willfully
excluding AWEIA, and accepting submission boycott, while favoring close
venture partners. TUDelft is a public university whose AWE R&D
clearly has been captured by a private venture-capitalist ethos. Open
inclusion of all players in open conference planning was the original
prevailing norm (Chico 2009 and Lueven 2011).
Its
in-character for TUDelft these days that we currently only get an
AWESCO group photo with some new faces, rather than answers to standing
historic questions about just how and why AWESCO selection process so
narrowly selected within a close social circle, with many EU national
merit players simply uninvited (ten Dutch-German funded members, but
none form Italy, France, England, Spain, etc).
Commercially
distorted research results seem likely from the stark conflict-of
interest between premature AWES architectural down-selects by the
socially favored ventures, and the cold scientific judgement required
to falsify many excessive marketing claims. Disruptive Open-AWE
architectures (like airborne lattices and even Wubbo's SpiderMill), are
not known to play any role whatsoever in this group's venture-selected
scientific research scope. Lead researchers, Roland and Moritz (Cc:ed),
could easily answer the open questions, but continue unresponsive.
The
appropriate Open-AWE response is to continue to challenge all powerful
AWE insiders (like GoogleX) to justify (or at least fully publicly
document) ongoing exclusionary patterns in R&D. TUDelf's secret
complaint process is neither appropriate nor effective in a dawning age
of knowledge transparency. Open-AWE must present conceptual balance to
whatever AWESCO research biases naturally emerge from Northern EU AWE
stealth-capitalism and provincialism. AWE is too urgent a societal
quest to allow petty venture-capitalism to dictate public scientific
research, in secret. Open-AWE provides a better model.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19841 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/15/2016 |
| Subject: Kite Strings within Modern String Theories |
Its
been unclear if the physics of our kite strings is integral with modern
string theories in physics. It turns out that kite string physics are
in fact encompassed by string theories, so we can look for and expect
many fertile cross-interpretations between the two specialist domains.
A similar fundamental identity with sonic relativity and macroscopic
phonon QM is also growing in our understanding. Discussions with
theoretical physicists at SXSW supported these emerging
interpretations, which have not always been welcomed in AWE theoretics.
This
link goes right to the status of ordinary string in string physics,
where the same Pythagorean monochord we have used as a kite-string
analog is accepted as fully string-theoretic. If you like the clear yet
rigorous treatment, go to the beginning of this fine string-physics
tutorial and enjoy-
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19842 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/15/2016 |
| Subject: good smartphone robotics webpage for DIY AWE |
Android
is of course just the most common phone OS at present, and the general
idea is that cheap used smartphones can be networked into
super-powerful AWES prototype systems, with powerful processing,
streaming video, gps and compass data, bluetooth periferals, USB and
audio-jack power and data, wifi LAN, global Net access, and so on...
Freelance
phone wonks could support by phone itself our experimentalist AWE
endusers to plug and play pre-configured custom systems express
shipped. No longer does it take large corporations to set up such
enterprise-class services, its a mom-and-pop sci-fi world. Here
UCIrvine cognitive computation geeks find the smartphone far more apt
than traditional embedded controllers for their intentionally neurotic
robots-
The full paper is behind a wall, but avionics and phones are sure to merge in coming years-
|
| |
| | | |
| STRaND-1: Use of a $500 Smartphone as the Central Avion...Kenyon, S, Bridges, CP, Liddle, D, Dyer, R, Parsons, J, Feltham, D, Taylor, R, Mellor, D, Schofield, A and Linehan, R
(2011)
STRaND-1: Use of a $500 Smartphone... |
| | Preview by Yahoo |
|
|
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19843 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/15/2016 |
| Subject: 20+ Billionaires to fund AWE R&D (Breakthrough Energy Coalition) |
A looming AWE R&D tsunami-
Some background-
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19844 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/15/2016 |
| Subject: Bill Gates AWE comments to New York Times (Feb 23) |
|
Context: "...What we’re planning now is
the first five years. And the spending will somewhat grow over the
years, because we’ll have more companies that are at a later stage. We
are going to look at all the companies that are out there, because
there are a few that have promising technologies, but they’re in a
place where getting financing is a little bit difficult. So we’re not
just going to do start-up companies. We may find a few that are at the
stage where getting $50 million or even $100 million would be valuable.
And then over the five years, we’ll fully invest money, and then, like
most venture funds, we would turn around and say to the investors, hey,
if you’re happy with this, yes, we’ll do another fund..."
================
AWE-related quotes- "...Within wind, you’ve got high [altitude] wind that only a little bit’s been done in...
...High wind is another one where the challenges are, to some degree,
control and materials challenges. This is the golden age of actually
rationally designing materials, whether it’s for tensile strength or
for catalytic capabilities. And if you can look at that area and say,
okay scientists, here’s what we need, then you can stimulate a lot of
good work. And for us it’s a little bit like what we do at the
foundation where we take a disease problem and then we try and make
sure the scientists who might — even if they don’t know the disease —
have some tool that would help stimulate them to get involved...
...Well, I definitely think we need to take the dreams, like for air
capture of CO2, and get those out there and make it concrete. You know,
or high wind. I mean super-high altitude, the jet stream, which is a
very constant source, and a large source. But it’s just very difficult
to design that system. Get people thinking about those things and
realize, hey, we need some inventions, and draw young people in..." |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19845 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/16/2016 |
| Subject: Carbon Farming enhancement by Kites |
Carbon
Farming is the trending concept of growing more biomass to sequester
atmospheric carbon from CO2. The problem limiting the idea is that
existing agriculture already occupies the best land and water
resources, so there does not seem to be a ready way to vastly expand
plant growth. Researchers seem stuck looking for plants that thrive in
semi-desert climates where land is available, but plants are all
relatively slow-growing by limited water. What is needed is to create
newly-watered agricultural land on the scale of a large country. Ground
water is simply not renewable enough, since aquifers soon pump dry.
Kites
are a promising means to make carbon farming work in deserts by
bringing down water. Many deserts have lots of water passing overhead
in the form of clouds, but these are so high that rain falls and
evaporates before reaching the surface. Much of this water simply
passes over land and back to sea, where it came from. Kites can harvest
this water, much like high mountains do, and direct it to carbon
farming projects. With enhanced watering, carbon farming become the
major solution hoped-
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19846 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/16/2016 |
| Subject: arch as a laddermill platform |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19847 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/16/2016 |
| Subject: Review of the Kite's unique capability to do direct work |
Kites
are a ready source of direct mechanical power from wind. With all other
major modern power sources, work is done by converting energy first,
and then using that converted energy to do work. Oil is chemical energy
of oxidation to move engines, wind turbines convert kinetic energy to
electricity, nuclear fission heats steam, solar panels make electricity
or heat, and so on. A fairly unique aspect of kites is that they are
ideal to do direct work by wind power, with no intervening conversion
steps*. While the aerodynamic aspect is a source of thermodynamic loss,
even most of the aero-drag is useful traction-force, and the transfer
of forces in tethers is nearly 100% efficient. Many power sources hide
large inefficiencies, for example, the energetic cost to extract fossil
fuel is omitted from the calculation of IC engine efficiency, which is
not so great even by itself.
Kites
can in principle directly do many large jobs that we have only just
started to imagine. Building up dikes with kite dredges to protect
coastal cities was one idea explored in past postings. Another was
pumped hydropower, where kites recycle water back up into a reservoir
to maintain water levels and hydropower capacity. Milling of industrial
materials was another huge application for kites. These jobs today
either go undone, or get done by polluting means, and underlie the grim
calculus of unsustainability without kites. With kites displacing
polluting energy on a vast scale, by direct work, it seems we might yet
secure a decent future from the jaws of global catastrophe.
----------------
*Once
dominant examples of direct power were water- and wind-mills, sailing
ships, drifting with currents, and solar evaporation. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19848 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/16/2016 |
| Subject: "High-Wind" as first celeb-promoted AWE buzzword |
What
AWE gives us is a distinctly superior wind resource; more powerful,
more constant, and higher than wind towers reach; but what to call it?
We have seen many naming-variants of the upper-wind resource come and
go- high-altitude-wind, upper-wind, highest-wind, etc. All were
weak semantically, but now Bill Gates has dubbed our realm "High-Wind",
and its the most clear concise term yet. Why didn't we think of it? The
dude is already making a mark, and may even unfold as a very hands-on
AWE developer; one of us.
It
did not exactly catch-on, but Udo's "Wind Drone" coinage was a nice
try. A similar linguistic chore has been to name the new aerospace
field of vast crystalline arrangements of kite sails and string. These
are new theoretic forms of metamaterial at megascale, so "megametamat"
comes to mind, maybe no better than "airborne lattices" (or "polymer
airborne lattices" (PAL. polyairlat, etc)). "KiteMatter" is perhaps too
broad. Suggestions welcomed. A good name catches fire by viral buzz.
High-Wind has suddenly gone viral by a top-celeb boost, and its a good
technical term as well.
Broad technological progress only proceeds at our ability to talk about it clearly, by word-making as necessary. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19849 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/16/2016 |
| Subject: Gates on AWE in 2010, with Ken Caldeira |
Apparently,
one of the downsides of being Bill Gates is no one reads your blog. So
here he is over five years ago, riffing with an open mind on AWE,
but with Ken Caldeira, in grand buffo form, fretting it might take
magic, wrongly invoking tether mass as a critical limit, and warning
AWE maybe under a sort of 1% curse, by removing energy from the
overheated atmosphere (rather than more like a 1% offset). To Bill's
credit, he's certainly not buying Ken's befuddled fatalism these days.
Yes, Ken, while conductors are heavy, they are dispensible, and rag and
string animated by wind is magic :)
========== Blown Off
What About Wind?| January 23, 2010 Energy
sources that provide power without producing CO2 are critical to
addressing the challenge of global warming. The book Sustainable Energy
– without the hot air prompted me to ask climate researcher Ken
Caldeira what the prospects are for generating power from wind in the
upper atmosphere. He talks about every renewable form of energy I know of except for high wind. He does a really good job of looking at the potential size of contributions from different things like geothermal and others. I
wonder if he didn’t include high wind because it is viewed as so
difficult and unlikely to work or if the contribution potential is so
small. I remember you mentioned some start-ups in the high wind area. I wonder if there has been any progress in their work. I
guess it is the physics of getting the kites to stay up even in storms
and low wind combined with the problem of bringing the power down that
is hard. Ken Caldeira: I have spoken with several people in several companies and they all seem to think different things are the main impediment. My
understanding is that one of the big impediments is tether mass, and
there are big tradeoffs with mass of the conductor and insulation
versus how high up you can go. It might be that we would require
something nearly magical to make such systems really work economically. (Everything else you mention is also a concern.) I
would say that this is one area in which the size of the investment
compared to the size of potential return is tiny, especially when
compared with investments such as fusion power. We
recently did a study on steadiness and availability of high altitude
winds. The conclusion is that there is a huge amount of power available
but that it still is too unsteady to provide base load power without
continental (or global?) scale distribution systems, back-up power, or
unbelievable amounts of storage. The
other thing we should recall is that if we were to meet future power
demand by this source exclusively, we must intercept more than 1% of
natural flows. I think when we get above a 1% change in a natural
system, we need to be concerned about large scale unintended
consequences. Remember, global warming is basically a 1% problem – 1%
warming of our 288 K planetary temperature. (That is one reason why
solar is so attractive – with solar we are talking about capturing 0.01
% of the energy that hits the ground.) Become a Gates Notes Insider for ac |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19850 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Laddermill Experiment Documentation |
I searched forum a bit and think we might not have posted this video: The Laddermill Explained
|
| |
| The Laddermill Explained This
video shows the Laddermill wind power plant that is developed by the
ASSET institute of Delft University of Technology. With CGI and actual
footag... |
| | | Preview by Yahoo |
| Thanks to Doug Selsam for sending a note that had the link to the video. We have in this topic explained some evolution of uses of the term "laddermill" which see.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19851 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Jet Stream AWE? |
Its
a long-recurring topic in AWE to question if the Jet Stream is suited
for AWE use. Bill Gates has not followed our in-depth community
discussion, so his invoking of the Jet Stream is poorly informed, but
it does give cause for review here.
In
past years we followed intense academic controversy between Max Planck
Institute [Miller et al] and Cristina and Ken, who first formally
analysed the AWE Jet Stream topic. MPI warned that the resource is too
limited and vulnerable to tap, but Cristina and Ken countered strongly
with supporting data, and Miller is not known to have rebutted back.
The general consensus in AWE is that the Jet Stream is a huge resource
that is not menaced by exploitation, since winds far lower are already
plenty to solve civilization's energy needs. In fact, jet travel taps
the Jet Stream for tailwinds for decades now, and this is probably
better than using more fuel.
Another
AWES technical side-debate [Near Zero] has been whether we can even tap
the Jet Stream, with Saul Griffith convinced we can't, but others sure
we can, by validated concepts like kite-trains which already reached
Jet Stream altitudes over a century ago, and also IFO fleets able to
soar untethered to large Jet Stream windshears that would enable epic
DSing.
Expect
Jet Stream controversy to recur and refine in future discussion, but
not be a game-changing issue until perhaps some powerful scheme
actually threatens.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19852 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Laddermill Experiment Documentation |
Note
that TUDelft briefly tried to carry over the "LadderMill" name to other
architectures, like a generic trademark, but backed down, and now the
term once again defines only ladderlike AWES like Doug and Wubbo
explored. Advances were proposed by KiteLab in the form of horizontal
laddermills, and kPower recently proposed laddermill kite units would
best not circulate, but merely dip-and-pull along the loop, staying in
their own work zones.
This
"LadderMill Experiment" referenced here is not a canonical laddermill,
but instead reflects TUDelft's confused naming around 2010.
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 7:17 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
I searched forum a bit and think we might not have posted this video:
The Laddermill Explained
|
| |
| The Laddermill Explained This
video shows the Laddermill wind power plant that is developed by the
ASSET institute of Delft University of Technology. With CGI and actual
footag... |
| | | Preview by Yahoo |
|
Thanks to Doug Selsam for sending a note that had the link to the video.We have in this topic explained some evolution of uses of the term "laddermill" which see.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19853 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Hour+ interview in 2012 with Roland Schmehl |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19854 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Are AWE rigid-wings hitting-the-wall? Are soft-kites the AWE Unicorn |
There
are a dozen or so top AWE projects based on rigid-wings that are
supposed to be reporting milestones, but are silent. They are now in a
safety critical valley where a crash of a high-mass high-velocity
prototype can kill a bystander or business scheme. Overoptimistic
control assumptions now face judgement day. Earnest engineers are
burnt-out by stress and exhaustion (Corwin even died). Even when
rigid-wing technology finally matures, it will remain scale-limited far
below conventional wind turbine units. This is what hitting-the-wall
means.
Meanwhile, in the soft-kite AWE space, its mostly flying lollipops and unicorns...
Its a reasonable business idea that AWE contains unicorns. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19855 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: James May and Wubbo as AWE video gold |
Joe's
video-link to old TUDelft video did seem to contain details we had
overlooked. The next video up was James May, a top engineering-science
media presenter and all-around character, doing a great segment with
Wubbo in 2010 for the BBC, well worth going back to see. This is also a
fine video to sample for the AWE Documentary, to recreate Wubbo's
much-missed presence.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19856 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Wubbo Ockels song by JohnWayneShotMe |
Wubbo's
complex legacy as AWE's first major evangelist includes many fine
cultural connections, not just his particle physics PhD work, astronaut
background, and professorial mentoring. I recall his glee in sharing a
quirky little art-film in the evening mix of the 2011 Leuven
conference, and his closely-related enthusiasm to promote a Happy
Energy creative movement. He did not just believe in AWE as a unique
technocratic panacea that some would miltarize if paid to, but that AWE
could power a better civilization all-around. He stated as best as I
can recall, "We do not seek to tap high altitude energy because we are
forced to, but because we want to. We aim high because we are free to
choose."
Here
is song devoted to Wubbo that will someday, no doubt, be covered at
AWEfests, another AWE cultural-engineering concept he first proposed-
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19857 |
From: Joe Faust |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Claim into public domain re: TWTAK |
Legend: TW :: tumble wing TWTAK :: tumble wing traverse (to wind) arch kite
The primary purpose of this post is to extend a specific claim into public domain
for use in any kite-system sector. My search has not shown priority of
identical art in patents or in practical published arts; of course, such priority surfaced would be welcome.
So, if the technical arrangement is novel, then I now place such into
free public domain; anyone may do with it whatever they wish without
attribution or royalty in any sphere of action or production privately
or commercially.
Key claim placed into public domain, if novel: Have soft arch load line as the axle for a tumble wing set
(or rotor blade set) in arch kite of two wide-spread anchors (which
anchors may be other aerial systems or sub-kite or dominant kite
systems or other aircraft or watercraft). Keep the arch load line
integral (unless niche purpose calls for segmented load line). Have in
the wing elements' bearings (from low-friction fairlead, say torus
plastic or ceramic bead, or other type of bearing (either low friction
or desired drag for niche generation purposes); bearing may be as
simple as a hole in the wing's body). This arrangement allows
many toy, sport, artistic, educational, and industrial solutions. A
host of detail challenges open when forcing the soft arch load line to
remain integral while exploring various types of operations for various
purposes. Failure modes and limitations form interesting spaces.
Scaling challenges. PTO challenges. Included in the claim and
technology may be surface treatments of the load line for the bearing
function, e.g.: appliques, sleeves, paints, lubricants, chemical
bondings, surfacing, etc. , e.g. Teflon sleeve.
Cousin non-identical tech in the literature: == Turboplane kite: but axle is not soft, is cantilevered, is not soft arched. ==
Rotary wings of tumble-wing sort: Axles are rigid and not soft lined.
These have been noted as potential units swiveled into arch loading
configurations. Axels may be airbeamed: AWES Magenn fits here.
Omnidea AWES fits here. == Rotary blades set on tensed line for advertising purposes; the wing elements have been flags or full rotary devices. == Multiple rotors set on non-soft axle with and without such axle being rotated.
Joseph Patrick Faust, aka joef, joefaust March 17, 2016 County of Los Angeles, California Signature here is intended. St. Patrick's Day |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19858 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: LadderMill 2.0 |
Over
the years we have come to understand how kite wings with line grabbers
can resolve old problems with LadderMills, of how to pass wings at top
and bottom, and the slow down-side phase sapping power. It turns out
that passing wings is not necessary, and the wing return phase can be a
fast dive down the up-side, greatly boosting wing up-time. With the
loop held static and the grabbers engaged, this is simply a classic
kite train. It could tow up from its base and/or the kiteplanes might
come-and-go freely from a nearby airfield. With many wings each working
their portion of loop, its the smooth LadderMill power always intended.
KiteLab
Ilwaco tested a crude laddermill over five years ago, with the design
issues noted. Testing an updated LadderMill 2.0, based on the new
thinking, seems worthwhile. The LadderMill might yet serve more or less
as Wubbo envisioned, as a towering urban presence with high power
output.
Open-AWE_IP-Cloud |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19859 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: MIT-Malaysian Kite Curriculum for K-12 (includes AWE) |
A
superb introductory video to kite science, from exotic Malaysia,
perhaps where kites were first invented. Good integration of ancient
tradition, core science, fine animation, and didactic power. It
finishes with Makani mentioned, which is not even the most curious
subtext in this culturally complex presentation. Bravo to MIT for
highlighting this fine Asian tigerware:
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19860 |
From: Baptiste Labat |
Date: 3/17/2016 |
| Subject: Online 2D kite simulator |
Please test, use, improve or report any problem here or on github.
++
Baptiste |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19861 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/18/2016 |
| Subject: Conference in October 2017 |
Dear Airborne Wind Energy Researchers, we decided that the EU Network AWESCO will organize an AWEC conference in October 2017 in Freiburg, and I am in charge of it. We have checked available rooms and still have two options: Oct 5-6 orOct 10-11, 2017. 1) In order to maximize participation, please indicate your availability for the two dates on the doodle http://doodle.com/poll/ nv5sg83turw2wffz (doodle before Friday, March 18, 2016) 2) Please reserve both options in your calendar already. Best regards, Moritz --
Prof. Dr. Moritz Diehl
Systems Control and Optimization Laboratory Department of Microsystems Engineering (IMTEK) and Department of Mathematics University of Freiburg
Georges-Koehler-Allee 102
79110 Freiburg, Germany
+49-761-203-67852 (office)
+49-152-22928584 (mobile)
+49-761-203-67849 (secretary Christine Paasch) +49-761-203-67885 (fax) Email: moritz.diehl@imtek.uni- freiburg.de
Home | syscop
==================================== Unfortunately the email notice was received at Upper Windpower on March 18, 2016. Maybe Doodle will still function today. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19862 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/18/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Conference in October 2017 |
Dear Moritz,
Thanks
for the AWESCO 2017 conference announcement, but note the major
confusion spread last year by AWEC, via PJ, that your conference would
be this year. Therefore, the provisional plan to have a 2016 American
AWE conference in Seattle, at the Museum of Flight (who indicated
written willingness last year), was put on hold, pending knowing your
plans. It seems AWEC/PJ is not coordinating effectively
with AWESCO, causing US conferences to be lost year-after-year, in
favor of multiple Northern EU conferences.
Please
help us know what went wrong with AWEC-AWESCO liaison and the AWE world
conference planning process, which used to be transparent, and
alternated continents (but became opaque and EU-centric once AWEC came
under EU directors RichardR and GuidoL). AWEC inquiries lately simply
go unanswered, so its unclear if anyone is even active). At this rate,
when will there ever be a Southern EU conference? All regions have
merit on offer, and a far more diverse group signed your 2011 manifesto
to the EU Parliament than you represent now.
AWESCO's
starting limitations in regional and social diversity echo the
prevailing Northern-EU-conferences-only pattern. Its not clear by what
fair and objective process AWESCO could decline to include so many EU
academic peers (no representation at all by southern countries), and
only allowed Makani as token overseas participation. Was there a scored
peer-process for this result?
AWESCO
badly needs to correct its gross social imbalance somehow, for the sake
of scientific objectivity. Perhaps this can be done by documenting and
answering outside technical critique of AWESCO insider-venture
marketing claims and academic AWES architectural biases, if not
actually funding such input. A lot of serious engineering critique goes
unaddressed by those academic players with close relationships to
specific venture interests. Consciously or not, conference planners
have been suppressing a healthy culture of AWE engineering debate.
Thanks
for understanding just how AWEC-insider conference planning has
unfairly excluded and divided sectors of our global community. Maybe
now a years-overdue US conference can *finally* be planned for Spring
2017 (if there is no conflict with EU conference-planning).
All the best,
dave santos
kPower CTO AWEIA Founding Circle
On Friday, March 18, 2016 10:08 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Dear Airborne Wind Energy Researchers, we decided that the EU Network AWESCO will organize an AWEC conference in October 2017 in Freiburg, and I am in charge of it. We have checked available rooms and still have two options: Oct 5-6 orOct 10-11, 2017. 1) In order to maximize participation, please indicate your availability for the two dates on the doodle (doodle before Friday, March 18, 2016) 2) Please reserve both options in your calendar already. Best regards, Moritz --
Prof. Dr. Moritz Diehl
Systems Control and Optimization Laboratory Department of Microsystems Engineering (IMTEK) and Department of Mathematics
==================================== Unfortunately the email notice was received at Upper Windpower on March 18, 2016. Maybe Doodle will still function today.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19863 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/18/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Online 2D kite simulator |
Hi Baptiste,
You have made a nice start to the vast challenge of comprehensively modeling kites.
Some
pet requests are high-altitude metrics and power read-outs (total
power, minimum power to sustain flight, and net power available to
harvest). As for a strategic direction to develop your
simulation, consider supporting multiple kites to simulate kite trains,
and adding pumping oscillation modes at the normal mode frequencies for
a given kite L
and v. Two open design cases come to mind that this tool expansion
could support; a modern high-altitude kite train, and Laddermill 2.0
. You need not add the 3rd spatial dimension yet to get
significant results.
I
enjoyed your servo control-bar project, with its quick rough
prototyping style. That's how to cover far more experimental ground
than prematurely-polished AWES hardware allows. Recalling Nante's
Giants; its about time they should fly giant kites, no? Please consider
asking Jen-Luc Courcoult, of Royal de Luxe, if kite experts could help
plan a kite-themed event, perhaps in the US. Pocock's original 10m tall
wood-and-linen pear-top kite design could be made in their workshop,
and would harmonize with existing figures.
Cheers,
daveS
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:21 PM, "Baptiste Labat
baptiste.labat@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]"
<AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Please test, use, improve or report any problem here or on github.
++
Baptiste
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19864 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/18/2016 |
| Subject: The case for fusion and AWE R&D compared |
Re:
Bill Gate's 2010 Blog, where Ken Caldeira is trying to convince Bill
that fusion is a better civilizational energy bet than AWE
R&D. Its just not an either-or choice. In fact, all kinds
of R&D get funded, to cover all technological bets, and energy
R&D remains a tiny blimp in the world's economic activity.
So
which technology is leading the race to save the world? One would have
to be expert in both fields to say, and Ken never did that homework.
Yes, AWE has its problems to solve, but so does fusion. The 2002
opinion of the Office of Technology Assessment
at the German Bundestag (report 75) rings true over a decade later, and
the required billions are flowing in the R&D pipeline-
"The R&D process required will take several decades and
promotional funding on a large scale. In the almost 50-year history of fusion
research, the difficulties in developing a fusion power plant were repearedly
underestimated, with the result that the horizon for implementation had to be
pushed further and further into the future, becoming in effect a »moving target«."
At
least AWE has pulled ahead of fusion in max power demos (100kW electric
and 2MW traction), despite being a hundred billion behind in funding.
The world needs both energy sources on the same urgent timeframe. Both
are best, together. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19866 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/19/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Corwin Hardham (1974 - 2012) |
Our forum is not the place to
determine private medical facts about persons. We miss those who used
to be in our midst active on kite systems.
Year
2012 article announced: "Corwin Hardham, founder and CEO of airborne
wind energy company Makani Power, died unexpectedly this week at age
38."
Another article: "The Alameda County
Coroner’s Office determined Hardham’s cause of death to be cardiac
insufficiency, Makani’s website says."
Having
not further facts about Corwin, one would be speculating about his life
and medical conditions. People have speculated.
People probably will continue to speculate. Extensive
speculating does not necessarily produce facts. Speculating may
suggest avenues to follow in search of facts. Speculation may have
redeeming values, but should not stand for facts. Belief is another
matter that may be based on facts, logic, speculation, non-facts,
non-realities, extrapolations from experiences or feeling, estimation,
etc. Belief should not stand for fact. Fact - Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia
Fact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A
fact is something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The
usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability—that is, whether it
can be demonstrated to correspond to experience. Standard reference
works are often used to check facts. Scientific facts are verified
... ~ JoeF
Thanks to Doug Selsam to remind me to post this meditation.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19867 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/19/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Corwin Hardham (1974 - 2012) |
Corwin is best remembered as kite-jumping over a great white shark the week before he left us. Those
of us who actually knew Corwin miss him the most, and most care about
resolving the tragic mystery, which really should have been prevented
somehow. There is nothing wrong with surviving friends and family needing to know what happened.
Doug
at first even seemed to think there might have been foul play; which if
true, would not recommend silence. I am convinced that over-work and
stress were prime causes of death, a risk well-known in Japan (as
Karoshi), and because I finally came to know Corwin well in his last
year (having first met the exteneded Makani circle in the founding
year). I agree that private medical information with no bearing on AWE
industry safety should be respected, but the Corwin's Coroner's report
suggests no private cause.
The
engineering precautionary principle requires facing the possibility of
specific work risk, with no contradiction to Corwin's memory. He was,
after all, an engineer's engineer, and this is an engineering forum.
AWE workplace fatigue should have heightened awareness going forward,
given the round-the-clock kitefarm operations to come; especially in Corwin's memory.
Wubbo is a similarly tragic loss to us; but he got to live a full life. Corwin was just a kid...
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 9:24 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19868 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Claim into public domain re: TWTAK |
The
TumbleWing principle is a powerful DS mode that Joe has adapted to AWES
use by setting it as an arch kite structure. A key DS glider
characteristic is strong penetration by combined low-drag,
high-velocity, and inertial mass. The tumblewing can be very low drag
as pure wing supported only by wingtips, and therefore support
high-velocity looping flight. The required mass to carry through the
cycle might be a suitable flygen turbine-on-a-wing, with each wingtip a
separate high-voltage conductor. The tumblewing can also pump
powerfully against its constraining lines to do direct mechanical work,
and also reverse-pumped in lulls.
Its
a curious horizontal-axis turbine, with its axis crosswind. A VAWT has
a crosswind axis, but without the wind gradient and gravity working
together for higher performance far beyond its crude Magnus-effect
Savonius wing UFO kite ancestors. The Prism FlipWing is an intermediate
design; a hot flat wing that loops tightly rather than just spinning in
place at high drag like a Savonius.
Giant
soft-wing tumblewings are feasible, with inertial ballast mass (maybe
dumpable water) added at the center. Joe's tumblewing is a flying
horizontal version of LeBreque's (Sp?) ballasted wing turbines. I will
try to make both rigid and soft kite versions to show basic operation.
This animation shows the tumblewing loop cycle, but the looping would be more circular-
Note
that we sometimes invoke minimal open-AWE moral rights only to admonish
against evil misuse, with no limitations on otherwise reasonable use.
This is a general presumption for most shared AWES Forum content.
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:56 PM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com
[AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Legend: TW :: tumble wing TWTAK :: tumble wing traverse (to wind) arch kite
The primary purpose of this post is to extend a specific claim into public domain
for use in any kite-system sector. My search has not shown priority of
identical art in patents or in practical published arts; of course, such priority surfaced would be welcome.
So, if the technical arrangement is novel, then I now place such into
free public domain; anyone may do with it whatever they wish without
attribution or royalty in any sphere of action or production privately
or commercially.
Key claim placed into public domain, if novel: Have soft arch load line as the axle for a tumble wing set
(or rotor blade set) in arch kite of two wide-spread anchors (which
anchors may be other aerial systems or sub-kite or dominant kite
systems or other aircraft or watercraft). Keep the arch load line
integral (unless niche purpose calls for segmented load line). Have in
the wing elements' bearings (from low-friction fairlead, say torus
plastic or ceramic bead, or other type of bearing (either low friction
or desired drag for niche generation purposes); bearing may be as
simple as a hole in the wing's body). This arrangement allows
many toy, sport, artistic, educational, and industrial solutions. A
host of detail challenges open when forcing the soft arch load line to
remain integral while exploring various types of operations for various
purposes. Failure modes and limitations form interesting spaces.
Scaling challenges. PTO challenges. Included in the claim and
technology may be surface treatments of the load line for the bearing
function, e.g.: appliques, sleeves, paints, lubricants, chemical
bondings, surfacing, etc. , e.g. Teflon sleeve.
Cousin non-identical tech in the literature: == Turboplane kite: but axle is not soft, is cantilevered, is not soft arched. ==
Rotary wings of tumble-wing sort: Axles are rigid and not soft lined.
These have been noted as potential units swiveled into arch loading
configurations. Axels may be airbeamed: AWES Magenn fits here.
Omnidea AWES fits here. == Rotary blades set on tensed line for advertising purposes; the wing elements have been flags or full rotary devices. == Multiple rotors set on non-soft axle with and without such axle being rotated.
Joseph Patrick Faust, aka joef, joefaust March 17, 2016 County of Los Angeles, California Signature here is intended. St. Patrick's Day
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19869 |
From: stephane |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: En route pour de nouvelles aventures 4 etoiles... |
Bonjour à tous,
Je
change de route après 16 ans d’aventures et travailler à la maintenance
de l’un des plus beaux joyaux de la Côte d’Azur : l’hotel restaurant 4
étoiles la Voile d’Or : http://www.lavoiledor.fr
Je
poursuivrai mes engagements sur 2 projets actuels en Octobre, dont ma
traversée vers la Corse avec le Voilier des airs Aerosail : film
Discovery channel qui explique bien le projet :
Je
tiens à saluer mon équipe, les bénévoles, les centaines
d’entreprises, les Journalistes, photographes, cameraman, ingénieurs,
techniciens, amis, Etats et une partie du service publique ... avec qui
nous avons fait plusieurs fois le tour de la planète médiatique via des
milliers d’articles de presse, image tv , web..
Parmi nos plus beaux succès :
-
Premiere mondiale avec le vol en solo du Voilier des air en 2007
et la poursuite de nos recherches et mise au point. -
La mise au point actuelle de notre pédalo rapide sur Hydrofoil ( en
cours de recherche..nous cherchons encore des investisseurs pour un
beau marché economique a prendre ) - La restauration en cours de notre Navire Aeroceanographique : http://www.aeroceanographe.com/ . dont je salue le soutien actif de nos charpentiers du PEP 06..
Pour
ceux qui souhaitent me soutenir et défendre à mes cotés le droit à
l’innovation j’ invite les journalistes à suivre l’affaire Horus au TGI
de Nice et de combattre avec moi la grande arnaque du milieu
de l’innovation, organisée pour les grands groupes industriels,
par les politiques en contournant le pouvoir des administrations
via des associations « labellisées » les fameux
pôles de compétitivité. Pôles
qui ont un pouvoir de decision hors norme pour determiner qui aura
droit aux financements publiques destinés aux petites PME mais qui au
final iront dans la poche des plus gros par un jeu subtile du fameux
label.. Un détournement "legal"
d'argent publique pour favoriser la concurrence déloyale et abattre la
creation des petites entreprises en France pour satisfaire l’avidité
des grand groupes.
à bientôt et merci de votre soutien à vous tous pour ces belles années et celles à venir !
L’Amiral Aeroceanaute 8 étoiles, 2 ailes, une coque, 1 foil, 1 ballon , 2 pédales et 3 pains au chocolat
Stephane Rousson tel : 0033(0)603838276
Stephane Rousson tel : 0033(0)603838276
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19870 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Claim into public domain re: TWTAK |
http://www.energykitesystems.net/FlexorEnergy/index.htmlSpelling: David Labrecque Notice
that one URL we had for some of his message is not currently serving
his content. Look to the other URL listed on our page about his
venture.
Note: There may still be
need for careful clarifications over categories that face various
arrangements where tethered wings flip, rotate, tumble, ...
Notice how David's focus has him going strongly for
longitudinal changes in wing to tug roots alternatingly; he notes: "I've
been interested in the kite approach for many years now. Since the
AeroFlexor extracts longitudinal motion, I can't think of a way to use
it effectively as a kite. If one adds a fixed frame, weight becomes a
problem. If one adds a second kite or balloon, horizontal lift and drag
forces, may require the top kite to be significantly larger than the
energy gathering middle kite. My experience and calculations indicate
an AeroFlexor that leans backwards does not self start and the area
that is exposed to the wind is reduced. It seems as though the
Aeroflexor design is better suited to land-based rather than kite-based
applications. This may be why I can't find a specific kite design that
utilizes an AeroFlexor longitudinal energy extraction approach, but
please keep me informed if you or your members find one."
One
may note kited wings pulling oscillatingly at roots or anchors shows up
in many schemes, even in the common reeling PTO method where the tether
is pulled one way and then relaxed (even wound in greatly)... followed
by a repeat. Short and long strokes occur in various
schemes. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19871 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Corwin Hardham (1974 - 2012) |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19872 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: Fairlead Matters |
Topic: Fairlead Matters for AWES We
have had several mentions in forum, but this topic thread may be
long-term place for special fairlead notes, discussion, challenges,
purposes, failure modes, supply, design, etc. for all AWES scales from
tiny to huge. ======================================================================== Sometimes fairlead may double as bearings for rotating lines or shafts. Fairlead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
================================================================ Image set for start tease: http://tinyurl.com/FairleadImages
================================================================ When we have a fairlead note, just use forum online search tool to find this topic. Thanks. =================================================================
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19873 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/20/2016 |
| Subject: Kite Pop Culture (origin of "go fly a kite" and "world on a piece of |
A
strong underlying cultural dimension is seen in AWE progress, as the
kite slowly becomes core techne in our time. This instance is early
Bing (1939), and its the obvious musical ancestor of Lets go Fly a Kite
in Disney's Mary Poppins, including a logical link to Solar ("make
friends with the sky"), a sage nod to ancient Asian folk belief that
kites can carry away bad luck, and a even a clear echo of Pocock's
kite-royale thesis-
Go Fly a Kite
by Burke/Monaco
Go fly a kite and tie your troubles to the tail
They'll be blown away by a merry gale,
Go fly a kite and toss your worries to the wind
And they won't come back, they'll be too chagrined.
Go on make friends with the sky
Have a talk with the sun
It's the bright way to live, if you'll pardon the pun
Go fly a kite and you'll imagine you're a king
Cause you've got your world on a piece of string
| |  | Bing Sings "Go Fly a Kite" Bing Crosby and a bunch of kiddies (also known as Larry Earl and His Singing Newsboys) perform "Go Fly a Kite" i... |
| | |
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19874 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/21/2016 |
| Subject: Application of an Automated Kite System for Ship Propulsion and Powe |
Content
behind the Springer AWE paywall mostly gets overlooked. The
abstract brings to mind that the EU predilection for reeling downwind,
with a long return cycle, is not as efficient as pure crosswind travel
[Hadzicki 2004, kPower 2013]. This has lately emerged as a major
differentiation between EU and US schools, of how best to harness
ship-kites, which are the most powerful AWES WECS by far-
| |
| Application of an Automated Kite System for Ship Propulsion and Power SkySails develops and markets large automated towing kite systems for the propulsion of ships and for energy gen... |
| | |
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19875 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/21/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Fairlead Matters |
In
our growing understanding of kite practice, particularly the
fundamental art of anchoring, the fairlead-anchor is seen as a basic
element, as the dynamic interface between sky and earth. As we further
develop complex rigging designs aloft, fairleads are the means to route
load motion around angles, especially by fairlead-pulleys.
On Sunday, March 20, 2016 6:57 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Topic: Fairlead Matters for AWES We
have had several mentions in forum, but this topic thread may be
long-term place for special fairlead notes, discussion, challenges,
purposes, failure modes, supply, design, etc. for all AWES scales from
tiny to huge. ======================================================================== Sometimes fairlead may double as bearings for rotating lines or shafts. ================================================================ Image set for start tease:
================================================================ When we have a fairlead note, just use forum online search tool to find this topic. Thanks. =================================================================
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19876 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/21/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Kite Pop Culture (origin of "go fly a kite" and "world on a piec |
|
Bing flying a child as the wing of his kite system; Bing as anchor; arm tendons as tether. |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19877 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 3/21/2016 |
| Subject: Re: Fairlead Matters |
|
Have a long run of a tether or load
line; at various states of wind, loading, and connected vibrations, the
long run may set up various patterns of oscillations with waves and
harmonics that are disturbing by some appraisal. Installing fairleads
in the mid section of the long run (even adjustable-position
installations), one may tune the waves and harmonics to fit a purpose
or damp destruction. Installation of a fairlead may be on a wing, a
lateral line, from a ground anchor, or from a kited or balloon element.
A fairlead might be held fixed or be a feeder of special motions to
some primary line.
========================================================== |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 19878 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 3/21/2016 |
| Subject: Ampyx Press Coverage |
A
burst of news and claims, including exciting word of a 12m 250kW
prototype that should be flying by now. Ampyx faces a huge
challenge as its now pushed overseas by regulatory pressures inherent
to scaling up its high-mass high-velocity AWES architecture. It has a
giant-leap 2MW concept in the pipe, in expectation of markets where no
one lives. What exactly is Ampyx's launching-landing solution?
| Future Power Technology Magazine |
| |
|
|
| | | |
