Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 22056 to 22105 Page 334 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22056 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22057 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22058 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22059 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Structural Flaw in US SBIR AWE Research

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22060 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22061 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22062 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22063 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22064 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22065 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22066 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22067 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22068 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22069 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22070 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22071 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22072 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22073 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22074 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: TwingTec in top 20 of over 800 at UAE Drones for Good Award

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22075 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: KitesForGood.com

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22076 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2017
Subject: Re: Dabiri's COTS VAWTs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22077 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2017
Subject: Re: Dabiri's COTS VAWTs

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22078 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Tethered-wings solar kites versus conventional "solar kites"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22079 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Gordon's current AWES concept

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22080 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22081 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22082 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Conserving Ecosystems Intact for Species Diversity by Megascale Kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22083 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22084 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22085 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22086 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Wing structuring studies by Paul Thedens

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22087 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Re: Wing structuring studies by Paul Thedens

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22088 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
Subject: Participants List Page

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22089 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Defining the "K-Sphere"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22090 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: "Pop-Tow" Soft-Kite Launch Method

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22091 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Mining kited tether complexes for energy and practical works

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22092 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: COET at FAU

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22093 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: "Pop-Tow" Soft-Kite Launch Method

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22094 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: COET at FAU

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22095 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: Sea-Anchor/Kite Combination (sea-anchoring state-of-the-art)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22096 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22097 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22098 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22099 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: BEV and BEC news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22100 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
Subject: Re: BEV and BEC news

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22101 From: dave santos Date: 3/1/2017
Subject: Applying Sailing Yacht Performance Data to Kite Sails

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22102 From: benhaiemp Date: 3/1/2017
Subject: Re: Soft vs Rigid Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22103 From: Joe Faust Date: 3/1/2017
Subject: The type "M" kite balloon handbook. October, 1919.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22104 From: dave santos Date: 3/2/2017
Subject: Re: Soft vs Rigid Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22105 From: dave santos Date: 3/2/2017
Subject: Re: The type "M" kite balloon handbook. October, 1919.




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22056 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Fabric Durability continues to advance toward Graphene Revolution. SkySails already claimed at AWEC 2011 that fabric durability was not an economic disadvantage compared to rigid wings, since fabric was already enjoyed the fastest estimated pay-back. "We'll just sell more wings", was what they concluded. The best soft-wing makers relentlessly adopt the best new fabrics and membranes without help from AWE. Our job is to harness the kites others are perfecting.

Its becoming clear even to non-experts that rigid-wing AWES kites are not even close to surviving to pay-back, much less dying of old age. Fabric is already the current AWES lifetime winner, and maybe still getting better faster than rigid-wing kiteplane flight-hour survival slowly grows. In kite use, fabric is good for a few thousand hours, including crashes, and rigid wings only last a few hours, with only one crash ending them.  Someday kiteplanes will be reliable enough, but not soon.

kPower has still not worn out a single power kite in ten years of trying. Even its oldest most-used kites still look good and fly as intended. Anyone can slap repair tape or super-glue on a torn kite and fly right back up. Here is TimE's overview of skilled kite and paraglider repair, with good technical insights-



On Friday, February 24, 2017 5:40 AM, "pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YSHOXKAasU : a plastic paraglider is possible. So a high lifetime plastic XF film kite should be also possible.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22057 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites

Thanks for the link. " The reason that repetitive creasing is bad, is because it will start to form cracks in the coatings on the fibers."

Supposing fibers are the lifetime problem. There is no fiber when a polymer is used.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22058 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)

Magenn founder is showing a rotor that is tri-lobe        (recall Peter A. Sharp tri-lobe airfoil)

 in a water turbine  with axis of rotation blunt to fluid flow: 

One "r" in that first word:  http://waterotor.com/   See site. 

The Company

Fred Ferguson

Ronald Sumner

Anthony Asterita

Mark Seguin

Michael Palmer

Thom Wolstenholme

Wesley George


water rotor electricity

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

I could see units being kited in water flows in order to get off the bottom of some scenes. 

Note: The design guides flow to the down-flow side of the tri-lobe foil while simultaneously blocking the flow from directly impacting the virtual up-flow side of the foil. 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22059 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Structural Flaw in US SBIR AWE Research
As the US SBIR program has begun to proliferate funding of AWE R&D projects, a major research-design flaw has become evident. SBIR  AWE research is divided across many US Government agencies (DoD, DOE, NSF, USDA, NASA, etc). There is no comprehensive  technical oversight or coordination. This is not all bad, in that the diversity of interests that isolated agencies serve enhances the diversity of approaches supported. But there is also wasteful duplication and greater risk of fraud and abuse.

In a more ideal scenario, US AWE research would still be diverse and inclusive, but closely-compared systematically. For example, eWind and AirLoom both aim to benefit American agriculture, both are SBIR funded, but from different departments (USDA and NSF), so they are managed redundantly, with no intended connection between research results. Both projects could claim mission success, with no direct way to tell which actually did better.

Joe and I seem to be the only analysts pondering SBIR AWE R&D as a whole, but from scanty public information. Fortunately, we already know most AWE players and have long followed them. Once again we are obliged to think about AWE as a "Manhattan Project without Walls" (to paraphrase Malreaux), working to draw what parallel lessons we can from scattered clues, as if AWE R&D were an integrated global effort. We are reaching out to the government managers across the entire set of agencies that have SBIR AWE projects, in the hope that broad research synergies can result that do not happen piece-meal. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22060 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Pierre,

As TimE notes, sailors have long known not to re-crease fabric when folding sails, and stuffing kites is the modern norm, so fold creases are not a current worry.

You seem to be confusing "plastic", "polymer", "fabric" and "membrane" ("thin-film"). All  modern kite fabrics are plastic/polymer and woven-fabric is standard, and membrane/film is more experimental, and still not yet proven superior.

As TimE reminds us, its UV performance that most drives durability, not some other factor,

daveS


On Friday, February 24, 2017 2:37 PM, "pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Thanks for the link. " The reason that repetitive creasing is bad, is because it will start to form cracks in the coatings on the fibers."
Supposing fibers are the lifetime problem. There is no fiber when a polymer is used.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22061 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
At last count, FredF has raised 33 million with various cross-axis rotor schemes. All have failed, but he's not done yet. This one looks like a Sharp Rotor to me. All such rotors share common long-known flaws- High return-side drag against the flow, high frontal drag due to a solid axis, greater mass for less power, etc. Fred will nevertheless probably succeed in making more millions from these rotors, as long as they continue to greatly impress naive investors.


On Friday, February 24, 2017 2:58 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Magenn founder is showing a rotor that is tri-lobe        (recall Peter A. Sharp tri-lobe airfoil)
 in a water turbine  with axis of rotation blunt to fluid flow: 
One "r" in that first word:  http://waterotor.com/   See site. 
The Company
Fred Ferguson
Ronald Sumner
Anthony Asterita
Mark Seguin
Michael Palmer
Thom Wolstenholme
Wesley George

water rotor electricity

==================
I could see units being kited in water flows in order to get off the bottom of some scenes. 
Note: The design guides flow to the down-flow side of the tri-lobe foil while simultaneously blocking the flow from directly impacting the virtual up-flow side of the foil. 



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22062 From: dave santos Date: 2/24/2017
Subject: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
In sailing, the world speed record has traded back and forth between expensive complex super-boats and some little guy with a kite-board. A similar lack of clear winner exists between land yachts and kites. Yes, on one hand ther is a rigid wing-sail marvel called the Greenbird, clocked at 126mph-


On the other hand, kite buggies have hardly bothered to compete seriously, their records are set with ordinary racing gear, flown rather casually. Its quite telling that the old fun-kite record below (120mph) is in Greenbird's speed range, by the first-ever parafoil power kite to reach market (Flexifoil).

Its quite certain the land wind speed record could be taken by kite anytime someone seriously tries; with a custom aerofaired buggy rigged with thin-lines, the latest racing foil, the best flyer, and a superior location. The sail buggy would always need faster surface wind to compete, but also tend to be able to handle higher wind. In relatively lower wind, the kite-buggy will tend to dominate.

Similar performance relations hold between HAWT towers and AWES.

------------ non-manned kite speed record -----------

ifo.com-

On May 17, 1987, Troy Vickstrom piloted a speeding 10-foot (3.05-meter) Flexifoil across the beach in Lincoln City, Oregon. Documentation of the record came from the local police, who issued Vickstrom a traffic citation for exceeding the beach's posted speed limit of 20 miles (32.18 kilometers) per hour. The fastest speed attained by a flying kite was 120 miles (193 kilometers) per hour on September 22, 1989, by Pete DiGiacomo at Ocean City, Maryland.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22063 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
M. Santos there is confusion only about your reading way. Indeed in first you indicates advantages of flexible kites vs rigid kites but it is not the question. And now you are quibbling about polymer or fabric without trying to understand the problem. Please be more constructive in your remarks. Fabrics as known to induce a short lifetime. Perhaps it is not the case for polymers as some films have a long lifetime. Please avoiding arguing fabrics are polymers, it is not the subject and it is not interesting. Try to understand the problem before nitpicking. Thanks. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22064 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Pierre,

It is "constructive" to explain how kite "polymer fabrics" and "polymer membranes" are distinguished. I " understand the problem" like TimE does. You seem to be looking for plastic materials overlooked by the professional wing makers, as if progress in AWE depends on us in a polymer-search role rather than using the wonderful polymers that are standard.

Good luck finding something better than the best standard kite materials, if the current standard and the next rounds of improvement are not good enough.

daveS

Wikipedia-

"Polymers are of two types:
------------
Sample usage of "polymer fabrics"

------------
"Plastic" and synthetic organic polymer are pretty much the same thing-







On Saturday, February 25, 2017 7:25 AM, "pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
M. Santos there is confusion only about your reading way. Indeed in first you indicates advantages of flexible kites vs rigid kites but it is not the question. And now you are quibbling about polymer or fabric without trying to understand the problem. Please be more constructive in your remarks. Fabrics as known to induce a short lifetime. Perhaps it is not the case for polymers as some films have a long lifetime. Please avoiding arguing fabrics are polymers, it is not the subject and it is not interesting. Try to understand the problem before nitpicking. Thanks. 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22065 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Sailmakers carefully distinguish "fabric" as woven, and "membrane" as roll-formed, due to differing working methods, while architects specify "woven membrane" products like EPTE fabric linked below.

Yes, such usage is inconsistent, so we constantly disambiguate, like Gordon: " fabric-covered aircraft ... of rods or spars or bones with some kind of flexible fabric or skin or membrane"



On Saturday, February 25, 2017 8:32 AM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Pierre,

It is "constructive" to explain how kite "polymer fabrics" and "polymer membranes" are distinguished. I " understand the problem" like TimE does. You seem to be looking for plastic materials overlooked by the professional wing makers, as if progress in AWE depends on us in a polymer-search role rather than using the wonderful polymers that are standard.

Good luck finding something better than the best standard kite materials, if the current standard and the next rounds of improvement are not good enough.

daveS

Wikipedia-

"Polymers are of two types:
------------
Sample usage of "polymer fabrics"

------------
"Plastic" and synthetic organic polymer are pretty much the same thing-







On Saturday, February 25, 2017 7:25 AM, "pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
M. Santos there is confusion only about your reading way. Indeed in first you indicates advantages of flexible kites vs rigid kites but it is not the question. And now you are quibbling about polymer or fabric without trying to understand the problem. Please be more constructive in your remarks. Fabrics as known to induce a short lifetime. Perhaps it is not the case for polymers as some films have a long lifetime. Please avoiding arguing fabrics are polymers, it is not the subject and it is not interesting. Try to understand the problem before nitpicking. Thanks. 




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22066 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
Hi DaveS,
That's an interesting question. My answer is the wingsail cart would be much
faster. The reason is that is has extremely low drag, whereas a kite cart
will have very high drag due to the very high drag of the tether, since the
entire tether will need to move at over 120 mph. That means the kite will
have a lower lift to drag ratio than the wingsail, and that will limit how
close to the apparent wind that it can sail, and so limit its speed ratio.
And the speed ratio is critical for setting top speed records. So the kite
cart is very unlikely to be competitive with respect to top speed records on
land.
The higher wind speeds higher up don't matter much because the runs
of either kind of cart will use the highest wind speeds they can handle.
A kite cart will have less traction than a wingsail cart because the
kite will be acting to lift the cart. So it will experience a lot of
side-scrub at high speeds, thus increasing the overall friction and drag.
The kite also has to expend energy to keep itself up, and it may need to be
a heavier, stiff wing (like a wingsail) in order to have a low enough drag.
So that would be another source of lost driving force.
If necessary, the wingsail on the sail cart could be tipped away
from the wind slightly to create a down force to increase traction.
Over water, I would bet on a kite boat with hydrofoils that can
provide both high downforce and high side force.
Over ice, I would bet on the wingsail iceboat because it needs a
good grip on the ice to avoid scrubbing.
The facts you gave about kites are not clear, so could you clarify speeds
and whether you were talking about just a kite flying across the wind, but
not a traction kite actually pulling something?
The Makani kite, as I recall, can hit about 7 times the wind speed,
so in a 20 mph wind that would be 140 mph. But that speed would be much
lower if it had to drag its entire tether along at over 100 mph. Normally,
it only has to move the part of the tether right near the kite at that
speed, not the whole tether. Most of the drag comes from the outer 1/3 of
the tether, since drag is proportional to the square of the speed.
PeterS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22067 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
Hi JoeF and DaveS,
Joe, thanks for bringing this rotor to my attention. It is indeed a
modified Sharp Rotor that uses increased reverse camber at the trailing
edges in order to produce strong torque instead of high lift. This is what I
recommended to do in order to use a Sharp Rotor to produce high torque.
Although, the rotor does produce good lift near the leading edge of each of
the three sides, and that helps to increase the torque. They claim a 36%
efficiency, which is pretty good if true.
Where this rotor would do quite well is in shallow rivers and
streams, and used to directly drive a rotary water pump for irrigation. In
that capacity, it could be used instead of, or in addition to, building
dams. Enormous amounts of energy are contained in such rivers and streams
that can't be tapped by building dams due to the topography. His use of a
ramp in front of the rotor improves efficiency, and it would also help
protect the rotor from anchors or debris.
In the sea, used to produce electricity, it has serious drawbacks.
Mainly, it turns too slowly. The TSR is below 1. That requires a high
step-up ratio transmission which is likely to be unreliable, and very
difficult to service at the bottom of the sea. It would be better for it to
drive a hydraulic pump to produce high pressures, perhaps for water
desalination on shore. Or it might be used to compress air for storing it
deep in the sea in fabric bags.
I guess the Magenn guy, Fred Fergusen, apparently took my advice
when I told him about the Sharp Rotor.
Thanks also for the info about him.
Dave, some of your criticisms of this rotor are misplaced:
"This one looks like a Sharp Rotor to me. All such rotors share common
long-known flaws- High return-side drag against the flow, high frontal drag
due to a solid axis, greater mass for less power, etc. "
Those first two criticisms are valid, in most cases, for a rotor
that moves through a fluid medium to produce power, but not for a rotor that
is fixed in place like the WaterRotor. When a rotor is fixed in place, its
high drag doesn't matter. For example, the high drag of a Savonius rotor
used as a wind turbine doesn't matter. It has lots of limitations, but that
isn't one of them.
The greater mass for less power is a fair criticism for that rotor
used in air, but not necessarily in water where the mass flow of water is
800 times higher than wind. But it does require more mass than some other,
better, options when used in the sea.
Basically, this modified Sharp Rotor is a good substitute for a
Savonius rotor because the efficiency is higher and the torque is probably
smoother. But I would not recommend it for the use he is putting it to.
There are much better options in the sea. If used for pumping water from
shallow rivers and streams, it could be competitive. But that source of
energy is not currently a hot topic, so it would probably not have much
appeal to investors.
PeterS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22068 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Both flexible and rigid kites for AWES are studied for years. None are marketed. I guess polymers or fabrics (please avoiding sterile discussion of type: "fabrics can be polymers") used for AWES should have specific features allowing a far better lifetime. I share some data of my tests in previous messages. And by taking account of my tests of material and tests from others of plastic (please avoiding sterile discussion about what is a plastic, what is a polymer, links to Wikipedia being quite useless here) paraglider, all being related, I can guess that XF-film is better for flexible AWES.

 PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22069 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Searches to obtain a durable fabric for flexible power kites
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22070 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22071 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
Peter,

The sailcart wins in less realistic theoretic conditions, but proper consideration of realistic wind gradients gives a kite greater power up high to overcome relatively reduced tether drag down low, to win a realistic race. 

The steeper the wind gradient the more the kite wins despite its tether. In the most extreme natural scenario,  a cart could hook a kite into a tornado from a distance to get a cart going at  
Hi DaveS,
That's an interesting question. My answer is the wingsail cart would be much
faster. The reason is that is has extremely low drag, whereas a kite cart
will have very high drag due to the very high drag of the tether, since the
entire tether will need to move at over 120 mph. That means the kite will
have a lower lift to drag ratio than the wingsail, and that will limit how
close to the apparent wind that it can sail, and so limit its speed ratio.
And the speed ratio is critical for setting top speed records. So the kite
cart is very unlikely to be competitive with respect to top speed records on
land.
The higher wind speeds higher up don't matter much because the runs
of either kind of cart will use the highest wind speeds they can handle.
A kite cart will have less traction than a wingsail cart because the
kite will be acting to lift the cart. So it will experience a lot of
side-scrub at high speeds, thus increasing the overall friction and drag.
The kite also has to expend energy to keep itself up, and it may need to be
a heavier, stiff wing (like a wingsail) in order to have a low enough drag.
So that would be another source of lost driving force.
If necessary, the wingsail on the sail cart could be tipped away
from the wind slightly to create a down force to increase traction.
Over water, I would bet on a kite boat with hydrofoils that can
provide both high downforce and high side force.
Over ice, I would bet on the wingsail iceboat because it needs a
good grip on the ice to avoid scrubbing.
The facts you gave about kites are not clear, so could you clarify speeds
and whether you were talking about just a kite flying across the wind, but
not a traction kite actually pulling something?
The Makani kite, as I recall, can hit about 7 times the wind speed,
so in a 20 mph wind that would be 140 mph. But that speed would be much
lower if it had to drag its entire tether along at over 100 mph. Normally,
it only has to move the part of the tether right near the kite at that
speed, not the whole tether. Most of the drag comes from the outer 1/3 of
the tether, since drag is proportional to the square of the speed.
PeterS



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22072 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
Note that we track FredF as someone we know personally from HAWPcon09, who rakes in naive investment, and is hapless to engineer anything practical. We have followed him for decades, starting in the '80s LTA community, where he was regarded as a fake, but nevertheless raised 25million for a Magnus airship, and then moved into AWE, where he raked in 8million, to no effect. 

That leaves his underwater turbine. If he copied PeterS (or just hit on a similar form), it was not so much a worthy engineering selection as it was just another abusive investment scheme with poor prospects. There are many better underwater turbines we have covered.

Drag does matter greatly in AWES performance. A low drag coefficient  in return and recovery phases is essential, as well as to reduce the amount of lift needed for a decent tether-angle. This is why we do not expect cylindrical rotors in AWE, except as small novelties that do not compete with the small HAWT AWES in existence.


On Saturday, February 25, 2017 11:16 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22073 From: dave santos Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
More notes on how and why a kite cart can possibly beat a sail cart-

Moritz is the current primary claimant that tether-drag is the primary limiting factor in AWE, but the long-established counter-argument is that power-to-mass scaling-law is more primary, and non-dimensional tether-drag actually goes down by greater scale. A sail-cart, on the other hand, is hard pressed to scale up its mast compared to a scaled-up soft kite.

If one allows max speed-bursts to count over long sustained course speed, then a kite cart is favored for sling-shot bursts of speed a sail cart cannot summon.

Note that racing or record kitelines are far newer thinner and lower drag than avg working lines with extra thickness for wear-resistence and large safety factors. Recall Wayne German's ceramic Mach25 kite with tungsten tether. Yes, its enough tether-drag to glow like a light bulb filament, but nothing stops it from going so fast in principle. A cart on the surface might somehow be dragged by a space kite and tether dangled from orbit.

Less extreme conditions under which a kite-cart could go fastest, imagine hitching a faired cart to do touch-and-go by tether to a DS glider in its acceleration phase. Yes, cart drag would slow the DS glider looping, but a small enough streamlined cart to a large enough glider could still go a few hundred mph. How would a land cart find such a burst of kinetic energy as a kiteplane DSing a focused ridge wind gradient?

826 km/h
The highest speeds reported are by radio-controlled gliders at 513 mph (826 km/h).



On Saturday, February 25, 2017 12:10 PM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Peter,

The sailcart wins in less realistic theoretic conditions, but proper consideration of realistic wind gradients gives a kite greater power up high to overcome relatively reduced tether drag down low, to win a realistic race. 

The steeper the wind gradient the more the kite wins despite its tether. In the most extreme natural scenario,  a cart could hook a kite into a tornado from a distance to get a cart going at  
Hi DaveS,
That's an interesting question. My answer is the wingsail cart would be much
faster. The reason is that is has extremely low drag, whereas a kite cart
will have very high drag due to the very high drag of the tether, since the
entire tether will need to move at over 120 mph. That means the kite will
have a lower lift to drag ratio than the wingsail, and that will limit how
close to the apparent wind that it can sail, and so limit its speed ratio.
And the speed ratio is critical for setting top speed records. So the kite
cart is very unlikely to be competitive with respect to top speed records on
land.
The higher wind speeds higher up don't matter much because the runs
of either kind of cart will use the highest wind speeds they can handle.
A kite cart will have less traction than a wingsail cart because the
kite will be acting to lift the cart. So it will experience a lot of
side-scrub at high speeds, thus increasing the overall friction and drag.
The kite also has to expend energy to keep itself up, and it may need to be
a heavier, stiff wing (like a wingsail) in order to have a low enough drag.
So that would be another source of lost driving force.
If necessary, the wingsail on the sail cart could be tipped away
from the wind slightly to create a down force to increase traction.
Over water, I would bet on a kite boat with hydrofoils that can
provide both high downforce and high side force.
Over ice, I would bet on the wingsail iceboat because it needs a
good grip on the ice to avoid scrubbing.
The facts you gave about kites are not clear, so could you clarify speeds
and whether you were talking about just a kite flying across the wind, but
not a traction kite actually pulling something?
The Makani kite, as I recall, can hit about 7 times the wind speed,
so in a 20 mph wind that would be 140 mph. But that speed would be much
lower if it had to drag its entire tether along at over 100 mph. Normally,
it only has to move the part of the tether right near the kite at that
speed, not the whole tether. Most of the drag comes from the outer 1/3 of
the tether, since drag is proportional to the square of the speed.
PeterS





Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22074 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: TwingTec in top 20 of over 800 at UAE Drones for Good Award

http://dronesforgood.ae/finals/twingtec-wind-energy-20


http://dronesforgood.ae/award


http://dronesforgood.ae/finalists

Just occurred:


The launch and landing of TwingTec AWES offer the tethered powered-drone mode; 

then production mode is power-off and power production during the energy-kite mode of tethered flight. 

Event just occurred:

"The Finals of our year-long competition to find the best uses of drones to public services and improving people’s lives will take place at Dubai Internet City over February 17th and 18th, 2017."

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAE_Drones_for_Good

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22075 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/25/2017
Subject: KitesForGood.com

http://www.KitesForGood.com/


Kites for good!


What good task do you suggest for kites?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22076 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/26/2017
Subject: Re: Dabiri's COTS VAWTs
Attachments :

    Attached is my drawing of a 4 x 4 grid which is a scaled down version of a 3D Mothra.  A full scale system would have many more diagonal stays.  These stays will serve to keep the kites separated and stabilize the system. The energy generators would be non-crosswind turbine devices located close to the canopy of kites.  Power would be transmitted to the ground by means of rope drives which also act as the tethers.

    Here are some actual numbers of the system I propose:  Each kite is 3 x 5 m sled kite with 5 m linking lines to the neighboring kites.  The total area of these kites in a 10 by 10 grid would be 7125 sq. met.  If each of the 100 kites produces 10 KW at rated wind speed then the energy density of this 1 MW system would be 140 W/ sq. met.  This is better than 10 times the proposed Dabiri VAWT system.  If the area of the diagonal stay system is three times that if the grid, then the energy density is 46 W/sq. met.  This is still greater than the energy density of the Dabiri system. The diagonal stay area could be used for other purposes such as farming or grazing. This system can take advantage of more wind at altitude since the whole canopy can be sloped so that downwind kites and turbines see fresh air and are not affected by turbulence from the upstream units.   In summary, a non-crosswind system with linked lifter kites has an intrinsic higher energy density than an array of VAWT turbines. It is also much less expensive.

      @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22077 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/26/2017
    Subject: Re: Dabiri's COTS VAWTs

    http://www.energykitesystems.net/AWES/gordon_sp001.png

     


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <gordon_sp@yahoo.com version of a 3D Mothra.  A full scale system would have many more diagonal stays.  These stays will serve to keep the kites separated and stabilize the system. The energy generators would be non-crosswind turbine devices located close to the canopy of kites.  Power would be transmitted to the ground by means of rope drives which also act as the tethers.

    Here are some actual numbers of the system I propose:  Each kite is 3 x 5 m sled kite with 5 m linking lines to the neighboring kites.  The total area of these kites in a 10 by 10 grid would be 7125 sq. met.  If each of the 100 kites produces 10 KW at rated wind speed then the energy density of this 1 MW system would be 140 W/ sq. met.  This is better than 10 times the proposed Dabiri VAWT system.  If the area of the diagonal stay system is three times that if the grid, then the energy density is 46 W/sq. met.  This is still greater than the energy density of the Dabiri system. The diagonal stay area could be used for other purposes such as farming or grazing. This system can take advantage of more wind at altitude since the whole canopy can be sloped so that downwind kites and turbines see fresh air and are not affected by turbulence from the upstream units.   In summary, a non-crosswind system with linked lifter kites has an intrinsic higher energy density than an array of VAWT turbines. It is also much less expensive.

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22078 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Tethered-wings solar kites versus conventional "solar kites"
    Tethered-wings solar kites versus conventional "solar kites"

    "solar kites"  are often not technically kites, but integrated non-tethered solar-stream-sailing sails. 
    This note is to nudge the exploration of true kites for solar-space FFAWE.
     
    Consider two wings coupled by a tensioned tether; have those wings be solar sailed in such dynamic so each of the two wings resultingly are anchors to each other via the tether coupling. System rotation may be obtained. Differential effacement of solar stream on angle and area could be used to perturb the kite ( "kite" in J-Model for Kite where the two wings and the coupling tether set form the "kite" or "kite system").    

    Once playing with a two-wing "kite" with its single-tether tether set, then go further to have more tethers and more wings in the one "kite" in solar stream FFAWE. 

    Consider very-long tether true "kites" for the solar-stream "flying".   Consider how cross-wind flying in the solar stream is with some opportunities when true kites are deployed that are not available with the non-tethered conventional "solar kites". 

    Some of this note's topic has some prior mention in forum. 

    Also, we have had mention of  solar "kite" where the system's anchor is an asteroid of size tiny to size large; tethers to solar-streamed wings from the base rock invited various tasking. 

    ~ JoeF







    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22079 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Gordon's current AWES concept
    Hi Gordon,

    Breaking this topic out separately from JohnD's, noting that no wind-tower scheme is good close comparison with AWE (wind-towers are more proven capital investments and comparatively trouble-free, but operate in a inferior wind regime). Also, JohnD is our friend being singled-out  to present an AWES concept in a favorable light, when more standard comparisons are better.  You don't provide enough calculations to prove your claim well. Yours is a good start at array thinking, but its a very schematic approximation. 

    Some comments re: details- 

    Kixels are presumed to represent the largest practical units to handle, unless the developer is doing a small scale-model. 

    The flat overall shape is "hot" and will try to sweep. The trend in SS kites to create flatter wings with greater sweep capability.

    Your choice of WECS would need validating against all other options. Perhaps just tapping sweep-wobble might be best. 

    A small prototype without WECS would provide missing realism. Cutting away at a sheet of material to approximate the kixel array would speed up quick-and-dirty testing.

    A multi-tether array can be cross-routed at the surface, so that  when one side extends, the other retracts, but the wing stays flat, saving a lot of winching.

    The sharp LE will tend to tuck and "porpoise" and needs further development along the lines of other SS kites. Mothra LEs have an upturned nose and other SS kites have rounded LEs pressurized by the AoA.

    daveS


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22080 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
    Hi DaveS,
    Your analysis is incorrect. You ignored what I said. The rotor drag of the
    Waterotor does not matter due to the way that he is using it fixed to the
    ground. The rotor drag is transmitted to the ground. The drag of the bottom
    cups moving forward is greatly reduced by the ramp he places in front of the
    rotor. That is why he can get an efficiency of 36%, which is quite
    respectable. That's on a par with fixed-blade Darrieus rotors used in water
    or air. So if used in shallow rivers and streams, his Waterotor could be
    quite useful for pumping irrigation water. His Waterotor could have a small
    diameter so it could gather energy from very shallow streams where it could
    stretch across the stream. It would probably not kill fish or catch debris.
    And it probably wouldn't vibrate, which is a very serious concern for
    cross-flow water turbines. But I would want to verify that it doesn't
    vibrate.

    Your blanket dismissal of all such rotors for use as full-scale kites is
    just silly nonsense. There are some ways of using them that are potentially
    useful, and I have explained some of them.
    PeterS
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22081 From: Peter A. Sharp Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?

    Hi DaveS,

    Your analysis is incorrect. You ignored what I said about how both craft will use the maximum wind speed they can handle. The wingsail cart can handle a higher wind speed. So it will use that higher wind speed when that higher wind speed is available on the record course. The kite cart does not have the advantage of a higher wind speed. You are incorrectly assuming a race in the same wind, where a kite would have access to the faster wind up high. In that case, the kite would have the advantage. But that is not how top speed records are done. The craft do not race against each other using the same wind. They race against the clock. The sailwing cart has better traction, so it can handle a higher wind speed than the kite cart. It also has less drag, so it can point closer to its apparent wind and achieve a higher speed ratio. Higher wind speeds due to the wind gradient are not relevant in this case.

     

    There are ways to make kite carts and wingsail carts much faster and I discuss some of them as part of my Metatheory of Sailing. But not all are legitimate for setting top speed records. One simple way to make a kite cart go over 150 mph is to connect the kite reel to the wheels of the cart by using a clutch. Use a very long tether. The torque created by the wheels will wind in the kite at a high speed, At the same time, the cart is pulled forward by the kite at a very high speed that can be multiple times the speed of the kite relative to the ground. There is no inherent limit on the top speed of the cart. However, this type of kite cart is a "limited distance device". It can’t sustain that very high speed because it must let out the kite tether before it can make another high speed run. I show that it differs from true sailing craft that can sustain a high speed for an unlimited distance in a given wind condition. So it couldn’t set a top speed for sailing craft. But it could set a record for its own type of craft. It would be fast as hell.

     

    There is a way to increase the top speed of a wingsail cart, but it is very difficult to do from an engineering perspective and so it may never be done. It's too complicated to fully explain here. It involves circulating a row of wingsails aft while they are producing thrust, and circulating them toward the bow while they are horizontal and shielded from their apparent wind. It could add maybe another 20 mph to the top speed in the same wind speed, depending upon how fast it would be possible to circulate the wingsails.

     

    Something to keep in mind is that top speed sailing records cannot involve any stored energy. For example, a wingsail kite that dived to increase its speed would be using stored gravitational potential energy. Similarly, any kite that crossed the finish line at a lower altitude than when it crossed the starting line would be using stored energy.

    Top speed records tend to be based on sustained speed. For a kite cart, I would expect that the both the time of the kite and the cart would be measured over the course (probably 200 meters for the time trap) and the slowest time would be taken as the official time. It would be fun to have a different contest to see what the highest momentary speed could be, and set records.

     

    But please describe the technique you have in mind for creating a burst of speed for a kite cart. It might be a technique I am not aware of. Are you thinking of some sort of slingshot technique?

     

    Here is an idea for a fun drag race: Use your two kite on a Y tether that fly away from each other to create a pull on the bottom of the Y tether. Attach the bottom of the Y tether to a kite cart and see how fast it could cover a distance of 100 or 200 meters. Thrill ride!

     

    PeterS

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22082 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Conserving Ecosystems Intact for Species Diversity by Megascale Kite
    We have pondered geoengineering by means of kites many times, usually in a human context, like steering hurricanes clear of cities or bring rains to drought-stricken crops; or in a planetary context like cooling Earth's atmosphere as a whole. This note addresses preservation of collapsing natural ecosystems, like coral reefs and rainforests.

    If we hope to someday renew the Earth to its original paradisaical glory, there needs to be special preserves as life-boats for remnant ecosystems to abide in. Kites fundamentally redirect natural flow, either in air or water. Therefore, we can envision large enough kite arrays as able regionally control basic environmental parameters like temperature, insolation, wind, current, precipitation, and so on. 

    Take the case of coral reefs faced with mass extinction, primarily by warming water. We can't save them all, but perhaps we can save selected reefs by creating upwellings of cooler water from the deep. It may not be be so simple, but the basic idea is sound. A related idea is to upwell calcium carbonate sediment to de-acidify seawater. Similarly, rainforests in declining natural rainfall can have rain augmented by kites that act like mountains to capture water that would otherwise flyover. Many other ecosystems, like permafrost tundra, glacier-meltwater-fed rivers, and so on, could be protected. 

    In each case, special factors apply, and optimal kite systems can nudge conditions in the right direction (periodic optimal control) rather than a brute-force control approach. For example, an atmospheric river of rain or cooling ocean current might be steered from a great distance upstream, by a relatively small control-input, to have a major control-output effect downstream. In many cases, the precise timing and location of an input ("sensitivity to initial conditions") is what counts; its the Butterfly Effect put to use.

    However implausible kites may seem to the poorly informed, is there anything more promising to save the most species diversity through the wrenching changes of the next century and beyond? There are scientists trying to preserve natural genetic diversity by DNA sampling, conservation-zoos, and so on, that are far behind in capability to the possibility of preserving entire ecosystems intact.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22083 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Waterotor Energy Technologies, INC (W.E.T.)
    PeterS,

    If my analysis is incorrect, it falls to you soundly explain why such rotors have not advanced in the real world.

    One explanation that does not convince is the idea of a comprehensive failure of the engineering world to see merit in an idea that the likes of FredF raises millions by promoting.

    You may think excess drag has no impact here, not even to capital cost, but that's a hard opinion to prove. At least we agree that the slow angular load-velocity is a defect.

    Keep in mind your emotional conflict-of-interest in hoping the Sharp Rotor somehow prevails somewhere, and don't put undue hope in Fred making it happen,

    daveS


    On Monday, February 27, 2017 9:59 AM, "'Peter A. Sharp' sharpencil@sbcglobal.net [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Hi DaveS,
    Your analysis is incorrect. You ignored what I said. The rotor drag of the
    Waterotor does not matter due to the way that he is using it fixed to the
    ground. The rotor drag is transmitted to the ground. The drag of the bottom
    cups moving forward is greatly reduced by the ramp he places in front of the
    rotor. That is why he can get an efficiency of 36%, which is quite
    respectable. That's on a par with fixed-blade Darrieus rotors used in water
    or air. So if used in shallow rivers and streams, his Waterotor could be
    quite useful for pumping irrigation water. His Waterotor could have a small
    diameter so it could gather energy from very shallow streams where it could
    stretch across the stream. It would probably not kill fish or catch debris.
    And it probably wouldn't vibrate, which is a very serious concern for
    cross-flow water turbines. But I would want to verify that it doesn't
    vibrate.

    Your blanket dismissal of all such rotors for use as full-scale kites is
    just silly nonsense. There are some ways of using them that are potentially
    useful, and I have explained some of them.
    PeterS



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22084 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
    PeterS,

    Keep in mind my claim that a kite cart is inherently capable of a faster speed than a sail cart fairly does realistically presuppose a strong wind gradient with altitude, which is more realistic than theorizing no such wind gradient. This thought experiment does imagine both craft competing side-by-side in a realistic wind field.

    There are no quasi-official kite v. sail cart speed-record rules in this theoretic race, except as you invent them in order to favor the land cart, like ruling out the kite cart tapping a powerful realistic wind gradient. One good trick would be to have the kite cart shielded from the wind by terrain, with the kite above in the wind. You must keep inventing rules to rob the kite cart of theoretic victory. Surge speed of kites is seen in kitesurfing videos, by standard maneuvers. There is stored energy in all speed vehicles to account for, like Gibbs Energy.

    You also did not account for sailing rig heeling-moment as a limitation on sailing cart traction that a kite cart can avoid by having the kite pull just ahead of the CG,

    daveS


    On Monday, February 27, 2017 10:02 AM, "'Peter A. Sharp' sharpencil@sbcglobal.net [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Hi DaveS,
    Your analysis is incorrect. You ignored what I said about how both craft will use the maximum wind speed they can handle. The wingsail cart can handle a higher wind speed. So it will use that higher wind speed when that higher wind speed is available on the record course. The kite cart does not have the advantage of a higher wind speed. You are incorrectly assuming a race in the same wind, where a kite would have access to the faster wind up high. In that case, the kite would have the advantage. But that is not how top speed records are done. The craft do not race against each other using the same wind. They race against the clock. The sailwing cart has better traction, so it can handle a higher wind speed than the kite cart. It also has less drag, so it can point closer to its apparent wind and achieve a higher speed ratio. Higher wind speeds due to the wind gradient are not relevant in this case.
     
    There are ways to make kite carts and wingsail carts much faster and I discuss some of them as part of my Metatheory of Sailing. But not all are legitimate for setting top speed records. One simple way to make a kite cart go over 150 mph is to connect the kite reel to the wheels of the cart by using a clutch. Use a very long tether. The torque created by the wheels will wind in the kite at a high speed, At the same time, the cart is pulled forward by the kite at a very high speed that can be multiple times the speed of the kite relative to the ground. There is no inherent limit on the top speed of the cart. However, this type of kite cart is a "limited distance device". It can’t sustain that very high speed because it must let out the kite tether before it can make another high speed run. I show that it differs from true sailing craft that can sustain a high speed for an unlimited distance in a given wind condition. So it couldn’t set a top speed for sailing craft. But it could set a record for its own type of craft. It would be fast as hell.
     
    There is a way to increase the top speed of a wingsail cart, but it is very difficult to do from an engineering perspective and so it may never be done. It's too complicated to fully explain here. It involves circulating a row of wingsails aft while they are producing thrust, and circulating them toward the bow while they are horizontal and shielded from their apparent wind. It could add maybe another 20 mph to the top speed in the same wind speed, depending upon how fast it would be possible to circulate the wingsails.
     
    Something to keep in mind is that top speed sailing records cannot involve any stored energy. For example, a wingsail kite that dived to increase its speed would be using stored gravitational potential energy. Similarly, any kite that crossed the finish line at a lower altitude than when it crossed the starting line would be using stored energy.
    Top speed records tend to be based on sustained speed. For a kite cart, I would expect that the both the time of the kite and the cart would be measured over the course (probably 200 meters for the time trap) and the slowest time would be taken as the official time. It would be fun to have a different contest to see what the highest momentary speed could be, and set records.
     
    But please describe the technique you have in mind for creating a burst of speed for a kite cart. It might be a technique I am not aware of. Are you thinking of some sort of slingshot technique?
     
    Here is an idea for a fun drag race: Use your two kite on a Y tether that fly away from each other to create a pull on the bottom of the Y tether. Attach the bottom of the Y tether to a kite cart and see how fast it could cover a distance of 100 or 200 meters. Thrill ride!
     
    PeterS


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22085 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Wind Land Speed Record; Kite or Sail Cart, which is faster?
    Notes-

    -Regarding Gibbs Energy, the point is that a speed vehicle needs to store enough Zero-Point Energy (mass-velocity) to accelerate to its nominal speed, thereafter maintained by Gibbs Energy.

    -How fast a real cart can ever go is limited by its location on some specific cosmic surface. Considering only natural cart surfaces, a sailcart is limited to tapping flowing media near that surface, while a kite has the advantage of reaching farther to hitch to potentially faster flow.

    -A kite cart with super short tethers is closely comparable to a sail cart of a similarly good wing. The differences only clearly emerge as the tethers reach longer into sufficiently good gradient to pull ahead.

    -Under our most advanced kite theory, a sail cart is just a special case of kite-principle whose vital tensile tether forces are contained in the structure. Compression forces in rigid wing structure merely substitute for air-pressure compression forces of "pure" soft kite. Therefore, the sail cart is revealed as a sort of inherently short-line kite cart with inherent excess-mass.

    -PeterS asked about kite cart velocity surge modes. There are various bow-string, sling-shot, and crack-the-whip kite cart modes that a sail cart lacks, but could set absolute speed records, if the rules allow them.

    -How fast can a current theoretic tech kite go? Already about a quarter of light-speed in IEEE content, using beam propulsion on the light-kite surface-



    On Monday, February 27, 2017 12:23 PM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    PeterS,

    Keep in mind my claim that a kite cart is inherently capable of a faster speed than a sail cart fairly does realistically presuppose a strong wind gradient with altitude, which is more realistic than theorizing no such wind gradient. This thought experiment does imagine both craft competing side-by-side in a realistic wind field.

    There are no quasi-official kite v. sail cart speed-record rules in this theoretic race, except as you invent them in order to favor the land cart, like ruling out the kite cart tapping a powerful realistic wind gradient. One good trick would be to have the kite cart shielded from the wind by terrain, with the kite above in the wind. You must keep inventing rules to rob the kite cart of theoretic victory. Surge speed of kites is seen in kitesurfing videos, by standard maneuvers. There is stored energy in all speed vehicles to account for, like Gibbs Energy.

    You also did not account for sailing rig heeling-moment as a limitation on sailing cart traction that a kite cart can avoid by having the kite pull just ahead of the CG,

    daveS


    On Monday, February 27, 2017 10:02 AM, "'Peter A. Sharp' sharpencil@sbcglobal.net [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Hi DaveS,
    Your analysis is incorrect. You ignored what I said about how both craft will use the maximum wind speed they can handle. The wingsail cart can handle a higher wind speed. So it will use that higher wind speed when that higher wind speed is available on the record course. The kite cart does not have the advantage of a higher wind speed. You are incorrectly assuming a race in the same wind, where a kite would have access to the faster wind up high. In that case, the kite would have the advantage. But that is not how top speed records are done. The craft do not race against each other using the same wind. They race against the clock. The sailwing cart has better traction, so it can handle a higher wind speed than the kite cart. It also has less drag, so it can point closer to its apparent wind and achieve a higher speed ratio. Higher wind speeds due to the wind gradient are not relevant in this case.
     
    There are ways to make kite carts and wingsail carts much faster and I discuss some of them as part of my Metatheory of Sailing. But not all are legitimate for setting top speed records. One simple way to make a kite cart go over 150 mph is to connect the kite reel to the wheels of the cart by using a clutch. Use a very long tether. The torque created by the wheels will wind in the kite at a high speed, At the same time, the cart is pulled forward by the kite at a very high speed that can be multiple times the speed of the kite relative to the ground. There is no inherent limit on the top speed of the cart. However, this type of kite cart is a "limited distance device". It can’t sustain that very high speed because it must let out the kite tether before it can make another high speed run. I show that it differs from true sailing craft that can sustain a high speed for an unlimited distance in a given wind condition. So it couldn’t set a top speed for sailing craft. But it could set a record for its own type of craft. It would be fast as hell.
     
    There is a way to increase the top speed of a wingsail cart, but it is very difficult to do from an engineering perspective and so it may never be done. It's too complicated to fully explain here. It involves circulating a row of wingsails aft while they are producing thrust, and circulating them toward the bow while they are horizontal and shielded from their apparent wind. It could add maybe another 20 mph to the top speed in the same wind speed, depending upon how fast it would be possible to circulate the wingsails.
     
    Something to keep in mind is that top speed sailing records cannot involve any stored energy. For example, a wingsail kite that dived to increase its speed would be using stored gravitational potential energy. Similarly, any kite that crossed the finish line at a lower altitude than when it crossed the starting line would be using stored energy.
    Top speed records tend to be based on sustained speed. For a kite cart, I would expect that the both the time of the kite and the cart would be measured over the course (probably 200 meters for the time trap) and the slowest time would be taken as the official time. It would be fun to have a different contest to see what the highest momentary speed could be, and set records.
     
    But please describe the technique you have in mind for creating a burst of speed for a kite cart. It might be a technique I am not aware of. Are you thinking of some sort of slingshot technique?
     
    Here is an idea for a fun drag race: Use your two kite on a Y tether that fly away from each other to create a pull on the bottom of the Y tether. Attach the bottom of the Y tether to a kite cart and see how fast it could cover a distance of 100 or 200 meters. Thrill ride!
     
    PeterS




    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22086 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Wing structuring studies by Paul Thedens
    It is a PDF document. 

    Paul Thedens      | PDF | Presentation
    =======================================
    Paul is one of the 14  in the AWESCO project. 
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22087 From: dave santos Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Re: Wing structuring studies by Paul Thedens
    This is a keenly awaited track from AWESCO, since SkySails is its most impressive AWE player. PaulT's starting PDF lays out initial assumptions nicely, with new leads to follow up, but is not yet the final result, which is hoped will expand parafoil engineering well beyond 1000m2 (beyond primitive Osborne, Lynn and Megafly cases).

    We should get a useful numeric model of a fractal load-path topology to base maximal kixel units on. A key kPower concept has long been to take ship-kites*, either KiteShip or SkySails best (North Sails* NZ) and make metamaterial mega-arrays of them strung along vast rope-loadpath networks.

    Paul is helping define AWE at its grandest scale for his PhD, so we wish him great success.

    ------------
    * North Sails also figured in US AWE, passing down its sweet old Bay Area loft to KiteShip shortly before Makani also landed nearby (Alameda Island). In effect, Paul is in effect also working for North, as the most-probable wing-builder.





    On Monday, February 27, 2017 1:33 PM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    It is a PDF document. 

    Paul Thedens      | PDF | Presentation
    =======================================
    Paul is one of the 14  in the AWESCO project. 


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22088 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/27/2017
    Subject: Participants List Page
    Participants List page has received some simplification. 
    Visit the new page and get a glimpse of the changing featured AWE entity/person. 

    Ever requests for the files:
    [ ] Corrections?
    [ ] Additions?
    [ ] Notices of confirmed deaths?
    [ ] Items to link by an individual's name in the INDIVIDUALS file. 
    [ ] Confirmed "out-of-business" links. 
    [ ] New entities or persons or projects that are contributing to AWE.

    TIA
    JoeF



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22089 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Defining the "K-Sphere"
    "K-Matter" (kite-matter, kmatter) is an aviation metamaterial made of latticed kite elements. Primitive cases of k-matter include traditional kite stacks, trains, and arches, and recent cases add theoretic 3D superpolymer networks. K-matter harvests energy from wind gradients to maintain flight and power applications like electric grids and Aerotecture. The AWES Forum has defined many plausible parameters of kmatter, including the possibility of planet-wide deployment. We have worked out how the uneven distribution of kinetic energy of wind can be shared across calm zones to maintain overall perpetual flight, and many other basic capabilities, like transport, and geoengineering.

    This post is to define the full planetary deployment of kmatter as a "K-Sphere" (or ksphere, KS, etc). Ksphere thinking is inspired particularly by megascale engineering concepts like the Space-Elevator and Dyson Sphere. A perfected ksphere would reverse ecological disaster and ultimately create a vast "Utopian" space for future civilization to thrive, allowing Earth's surface to regenerate a natural biome. Compared to space-based civilization, ksphere will be comparatively low-tech and cheap, but similarly bold and fantastic. Already, kmatter is a revolutionary DIY engineering realm on the critical path to ksphere, with imagination and kite expertise as the primary qualifications.

    ---------





    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22090 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: "Pop-Tow" Soft-Kite Launch Method
    A natural tow launching method in hobby and sport kiting is to lay the kite on its back away from the flyer, and a quick smooth pull peels the kite up, progressively inflating it, and it launches. The tow phase is typically quite short before the kite catches wind and flies up on its own. This is a workable method to launch quite large power kites. if a suitable short-pull input is supplied. Compare the short stroke tow proportion with HG/PG tow-launch by winching, where long tows are used. There is a dimensionless number here, the ratio of tow length to kite dimensions. We are talking about a soft-kite dimensionless short-pull tow launch method of high utility, so lets give it a working name; "Pop-Tow".

    Consider a giant (km scale) kite-farm kite pop-towed up in place. With a bit of breeze, it could easily pop to 2000ft, fully filling the airspace within a field 4000ft across. It would be able to jump above common surface inversion calm. Likely, a lifter-layer would be pop-towed up first, and WECS layers hauled up after lifter-layer flight is established. This adds a new, faster, cascaded launch method (the old cascade launch starts with small kites long-pull winch-towed into good wind, and larger kites hauled up in stages).

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22091 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Mining kited tether complexes for energy and practical works
    Kites have their tether sets. Explore the tether members of a kite system for PTO or practical good works. 

    Kites for Good (SM)  brings forward the tether realm space as site for PTO or practical good works. 

    This topic thread could trace conversations over such tether realm.  Kited tethers would have their associated main set of lifting wings. Explore the tether sector of kSphere for special opportunities to do good. 
    ====================================================

    Start: 
    Consider kited tethers that are
    • saturated with photovoltaic converters. 
    • dynamically strained with an eye to piezoelectric effect PTO.
    • looped and rotated to drive ground generators or pumps
    • longitudinally oscillated for the purpose of cutting.
    • a series of rotor turbines as tether complex for flygen or groundgen. 
    • collectors of atmospheric moisture with draining down the tether complex. 
    • fetchers of objects or persons from trees, lines, buildings, utility wires, towers, ...
    • holders of to-be-dropped objects or persons.
    • ...?


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22092 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: COET at FAU

    "The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has designated the Center for Ocean Energy Technology (COET) at Florida Atlantic University as a national center for ocean energy research and development.  The new Southeast National Marine Renewable Energy Center (SNMREC) at FAU joins centers in the Pacific Northwest and Hawaii that also work to advance the operational readiness of ocean energy technologies. DOE will fund the SNMREC to undertake research and development of technologies capable of generating renewable energy from ocean currents and ocean thermal energy."




    [[An aside:  At FAU:   Art Kite  is the name of the interim Vice President for Financial Affairs at FAU]] 



    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22093 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: "Pop-Tow" Soft-Kite Launch Method
    Notes-

    - Counter-case: Osborne's giant parafoil belly-launched for lack of a tugging capability; a fatally dangerous expedient. Belly launch tends to fold the kite, as aft bridles tension first, and the kite fires up less predictably.

    - Tow trucks without winches can do pop-tows (and long tows if line can be laid out fully with towing space remaining).


    On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 12:14 PM, "dave santos santos137@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    A natural tow launching method in hobby and sport kiting is to lay the kite on its back away from the flyer, and a quick smooth pull peels the kite up, progressively inflating it, and it launches. The tow phase is typically quite short before the kite catches wind and flies up on its own. This is a workable method to launch quite large power kites. if a suitable short-pull input is supplied. Compare the short stroke tow proportion with HG/PG tow-launch by winching, where long tows are used. There is a dimensionless number here, the ratio of tow length to kite dimensions. We are talking about a soft-kite dimensionless short-pull tow launch method of high utility, so lets give it a working name; "Pop-Tow".

    Consider a giant (km scale) kite-farm kite pop-towed up in place. With a bit of breeze, it could easily pop to 2000ft, fully filling the airspace within a field 4000ft across. It would be able to jump above common surface inversion calm. Likely, a lifter-layer would be pop-towed up first, and WECS layers hauled up after lifter-layer flight is established. This adds a new, faster, cascaded launch method (the old cascade launch starts with small kites long-pull winch-towed into good wind, and larger kites hauled up in stages).

    Open-AWE_IP-Cloud


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22094 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: COET at FAU

    A diagram of a proposed marine renewable energy project involving experimental marine turbines.

    A diagram of a proposed marine renewable energy project involving experimental marine turbines.
    IMAGE: SOUTHEAST NATIONAL MARINE RENEWABLE ENERGY CENTER

    Generic single-rotor non-commercial kited flygen paravane in artwork by SNMREC. 

    See related page:  http://coet.fau.edu/projects/experimental-ocean-current-turbine.html

     

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22095 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: Sea-Anchor/Kite Combination (sea-anchoring state-of-the-art)
    Michael Grant Seibert

    • ==
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22096 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22097 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22098 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: Installing Gulf Stream paravanes

    John H. Robson    http://www.gulfstreamturbine.com/    

    US 6531788  

    and

    US7291936 


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22099 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: BEV and BEC news
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22100 From: dave santos Date: 2/28/2017
    Subject: Re: BEV and BEC news
    Toone and Danielson hopefully learned from ARPA-E's failure in AWE, where Makani was sole funding recipient, as if Google somehow needed a public subsidy, and as if Makani was actually on track. Leading small players like SkyMill were entirely passed over, and withered. Heaven help us if BEV AWE is to be run like ARPA-E AWE, down to the same managers. Unlike ARPA-E, limited to US players, BEV faces a far more diverse AWE pool from all over the world, and Makani does not seem to be in the running. The news source is incidental confirmation is that BEV is being directed from Seattle. AWE players in that region are organizing outreach to BEV, on behalf of global AWE community inclusion, in the name of AWEIA. We are counting down 90 days to a detailed submission of a major AWE R&D plan. Please join us if you are not already working on some part of it. There is much activity behind the scenes to report soon...


    On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:33 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22101 From: dave santos Date: 3/1/2017
    Subject: Applying Sailing Yacht Performance Data to Kite Sails

    With Kite Sailing as an intermediate case, Sailing Yachts provide abundant data to study fundamental theoretic performance of soft-kite AWES at various wind velocities and L/Ds, including how a "suite" of sails covers more conditions, just like a kite "quiver", and how a larger sail of less L/D can beat a smaller more expensive sail of higher L/D. Marchaj is the modern classic treatment of Sailing performance-


    These typical polar charts from here and there give a general picture of sailing data that enables soft-kite performance analytics in the absence of specific data. This is the sort of data that led Naval Architect and Ship Kite Pioneer, Dave Culp, to develop the OL ship kite starting from yacht spinnakers as a model-




    Related image

    Image result for maxi sails rigging

    Related image


    Related image
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22102 From: benhaiemp Date: 3/1/2017
    Subject: Re: Soft vs Rigid Wings

    There are studies of scalability of flexible kites, comprising https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Guilhem_Bles/publication/262003372_High_tensile_stress_on_fabrics_of_giant_kites_Beyond_the_sea_project/links/0f3175363939cb617d000000.pdf?inViewer=0&pdfJsDownload=0&origin=publication_detail , or http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-642-39965-7_31#page-1.

    Both studies explain that weight/m² fabrics increase faster than kite area due to stress requirement in the fabric. For example when the kite is 1000 m²  the weight/m² fabrics is about 3 times the weight/m² fabrics for a 100 m kite. So on can deduce the same when the kite is 10000 m² in regard to a 1000 m² kite.  

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22103 From: Joe Faust Date: 3/1/2017
    Subject: The type "M" kite balloon handbook. October, 1919.


    The type "M" kite balloon handbook
    United States. 
    Navy Dept. Bureau of Construction and Repair
    October, 1919
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22104 From: dave santos Date: 3/2/2017
    Subject: Re: Soft vs Rigid Wings
    Some review-

    -Storm Dunker is a domain expert specifically in double-skin parafoils, including parachutes, which are heavier due to opening-shock resistance. "Beyond the Sea" study covers an LEI Kites, which have relatively heavy 3D tubes. These are intermediate kite classes in square-cube scaling spectrum between SingleSkin kite and rigid wing flygen.

    -KiteShip's OL design suffers least-of-all under square-cube scaling, being the simplest most quasi-2D wing. Mothra Construction is based on OL, but making the loadpaths of rope and using kixels to meet ground-handling scaling limit.

    -There are few favorable factors in kite scaling: A larger kite flies in stronger higher wind, in constant dimensionless proportions, in the same wind field with gradient. Entrained and contained volume of air around and in a kite aggregate cubic-volume lift-forces (a large kite tends to "balloon" better). Scaled-up bridlelines have less drag-to-cross-section.

    -The most toxic AWES scaling factors are rigid-spars, generators/transformers/conductors, and all other mass that is not "wing"

    -For the ultimate giant SS kite or SS Bolonkin Dome, the theoretic scaling limit is not material mass, not the limits of superpolymer like UHMWPE and ultimately Graphene, but the ~10km thinness of the troposphere

    -A kite quiver best scales big: larger lighter kites for lighter air, "bloopers", and smaller heavier built 'storm-kites".

    -Conclusion: Kite mega-scale design and operation is demanding but not impossible. At the very least, we can array ship-kites along rope-loadpath networks in large numbers on km scale.


    On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 9:08 PM, "pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    Both studies explain that weight/m² fabrics increase faster than kite area due to stress requirement in the fabric. For example when the kite is 1000 m²  the weight/m² fabrics is about 3 times the weight/m² fabrics for a 100 m kite. So on can deduce the same when the kite is 10000 m² in regard to a 1000 m² kite.  


    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 22105 From: dave santos Date: 3/2/2017
    Subject: Re: The type "M" kite balloon handbook. October, 1919.
    This rare historic document proves Jalbert is not the inventor of the "kite-balloon" concept, as often attributed* (he did name the class- "Kytoon", designed variants, but above all, invented the parafoil).

    * Wikipedia gives the conventional misrepresentation of kite-balloon priority-





    On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 9:09 PM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  


    The type "M" kite balloon handbook
    United States. 
    Navy Dept. Bureau of Construction and Repair
    October, 1919