Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                       AWES4245to4295 Page 65 of 79.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4245 From: Dan Parker Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4246 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4247 From: Doug Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4248 From: Dan Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Interesting spin on a theme

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4249 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4250 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: David T. Barish

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4251 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4252 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4253 From: harry valentine Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4254 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4255 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4256 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4257 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4258 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4259 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: simplest control system

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4260 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4261 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4262 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Pacific Power Sails

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4263 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4264 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4265 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4266 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4267 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4268 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Is AWE Real? (Doug Rebutted)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4269 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4270 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4271 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4272 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4273 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: simplest control system

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4275 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4276 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: How to make a Kitelab Ducted Turbine APU (RAT)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4277 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4278 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4279 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4280 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4281 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Pacific Power Sails

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4282 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4283 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Clean Energy Project on World Community Grid BOINC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4284 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4285 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4286 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4287 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4288 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons (fabric note)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4289 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4290 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4291 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: New Journal from Drachen Foundation

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4292 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: l' aile d'eau

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4293 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Intertial Aerobatics by the Master

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4294 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: l' aile d'eau

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4295 From: Dan Parker Date: 9/23/2011
Subject: Re: Intertial Aerobatics by the Master



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4245 From: Dan Parker Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video
Hi Joe,
 
          I believe it's the capture rate Joe.
 
                                        Dan'l
 
To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: joefaust333@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 13:38:50 +0000
Subject: Re: [AWECS] 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

 

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Darin Selby <darin_selby@... wrote:
================= Partial answer:

Darin, the blades stay straight in actuality. The video process and the
feed of image on digital video somehow generates a virtual curving
during viewing. An expert on video and vision could probably give the
technical reason for the apparent curving.

JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4246 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: tensegrity tower
here's sorta like the one I promised Doug...it's like your twisted rope gen...(loved that video) just a wider medium than rope to bring down the torque.
 Also this sketch doesn't have the mid way steering wing points that I was on about.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4247 From: Doug Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video
Hi Darin:
Yes I know this video is a bit crude and does not demonstrate a very well-worked-out system. Quite primitive, Captain... (Spock) Note however that it is trying pretty hard to pull me up into the sky! And the wind was not even all that strong.

Oh the curved blades are an artifact of the line-by-line digital scan rate - i.e. cheap cameras.
(Sorry I forgot, the limited knowledge here...)
Cel phone cameras, and cheap digital cameras in general, usually make high-speed wind turbine blades look curved. Yup, there's another wind-energy basic fer ya...

I wonder if NASA knew that? I wonder if the (great and powerful) Wizard of Oz knew that? I wonder if God knew that? I wonder what would happen if God issued a press-release that he would start working on Airborne Wind Energy. Would we take even Him seriously at this point?
Sorry but I gotta have a little fun with this or it gets way too stupid. Stupid without a little fun is just too boring.

Also:
All cameras can freeze the motion, make the blades appear to spin slow when they are really running fast, make the blades appear to spin backwards, or alternate between backwards and forwards, etc.

Often we note that blades that are spinning so fast they are invisible to the naked eye appear stopped, or almost stopped, on video.
This is that "wagon wheel" effect you see in old westerns. It's a bit frustrating to see a motion picture look still, while the still pix show motion (blur), but it's common in wind energy, as you can see if you check Youtube for small wind turbine videos.

Also, if you increase the exposure time, you get an even nicer blade blur, where the blades appear to fan out wide and semi-transparent at the tips. In this way you can get GREAT wind turbine photos at sunset, whereby the low light level allows you to increase the exposure time without overexposure.

Steps in wind energy:
1) Learn the theory of operation
2) learn to run a turbine
3) learn to install a turbine
4) learn to photograph a turbine
5) learn to design a turbine
6) learn to repair a wind turbine
begin again at step 1

:)
Doug S.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4248 From: Dan Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Interesting spin on a theme
Interesting spin on a theme

https://www.technologyreview.com/energy/38564/?nlid=nldly&nld=2011-09-14

Dan'l

ps. I suppose it's a question of how do we define usable enery and it's overall impact upon the gestalt.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4249 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)
Doug,
 
Its strange you have such blindspots about NASA history, yet lecture the Agency in pompous tones.
 
Regarding NASA soft wing deliverables; the basic designs are from the 1950s and 60s. The pattern of commercial spinoff has proceeded in various booms: Hang gliders, ultralight powered aircraft, kite sports, and now AWE.
 
SkySails holds our power records with NASA derived parafoils delivering up to a couple of megawatts of bunker diesel replacement. These are now COTS products. FlyGen uses small parafoils to loft small flygens, as does KiteLab, which also lofts Energy Wings (TM) with NASA-bred wings. Ozone's new wing is clearly a refinement of Barrish's NASA work.. Even the LEI kite emerged from Rogallo's many experiments. Most AWE teams are using NASA derivatives.
 
Obererth's NASA legacy and AWE featuring Primer played only an indirect role in NASA kite deliverables, but its clear the Agency has an unmatched record of fundamental AWE creation that most of us build on each day. Hopefully your primer to NASA showed a keen appreciation of this legacy and competently explored the engineering strengths and weaknesses, so as to build on the greatness, rather than rant weakly under its shadow.
 
daveS
NASA Volunteer ;^)
 
Correction: I did not mean to imply that "old folks" were "worthless" except to fly to Mars with unhardened nads; rather that they would otherwise be faced with lesser employment, like greeters at Walmart. I am myself face old age, laughing til it hurts.
 
 

From: Doug <doug@selsam.com  
OK Dave S.:
You are now the spokesman for NASA.
Where are the stated deliverables?
All I'm asking is for people to do what they say they will do.
Where do we find the deliverables?
:)
Thanks
Doug
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4250 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: David T. Barish

Barish, David T. Barish,     [misspelling useful in robust search: Barrish ]  
( Born: 10 July, 1921, in Passaic, New Jersey. Died: 15 December, in New York, aged 88.)  
David Theodore Barish,  strong search "David Barish"    
(note: Not all patents by David are below)

Some give Barish fatherhood for paragliding. Some give Barish "invention" of paraglider.  However, he was not first to know the reality of gliding L/D parawing devices and not the first to leave the ground under the lift of a gliding sail or chute. But his timely work and actions became significant for the sport use of gliding kite systems.  The World ParaGliding Association has five sectors of membership; one is called the gratitude Barish membership sector.

JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4251 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
you know... it's probably better to replace the tower with a set of linked inflated long thin bladders and sleeves...
bit more wind resistance but
better power transmission to diameter & complexity ratio
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4252 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
Roderick,
 
There are problems with ideas like a giant Tensegrity Tower. Any rigid structure grows in mass at the cube of size, therefore there is a strict scaling limit to rigid structure for flight use, as excess weight is "toxic" to general performance. Jumbo jets are already close to a practical size limit, with high cost and construction challenges closely related to "cubic mass scaling penalty".
 
Our kites operate in flight regimes where weight and operability is even more critical than airliners. The practical limit for kite spar length is quite low, a few tens of meters. The optimal performance spar size may even just be about 10m, especially if human handling is involved and robustness required. This scaling limit may be as strongly enforced by reality as silicon boule diameter has limited solar cell size. Therefore, the only "common" tensegrities that can truly scale is either a *lot* of small sticks, or using the Earth's surface as the "spreader".
 
An exception is a pressurized volume enclosed by a membrane. Here the airbeam allows somewhat greater scales, but at some cost to maintainability, reliability, etc.. In response, kiters have developed special ram-air airbeams (sled and parafoil) and many large soft kites "inflated" by wind pressure on the faces. These are not classic Bucky tensegrity towers, but the deep principle is there.
 
The conclusion is increasingly clear, that large-scale AWECS will depend on methods close to the classic kiter's reality, where rigid spars are avoided in order to scale greatly. The ideal scaling strategy is to make giant AWE with just string and rag, which is lately becoming practical. Nothing prevents incorporating many small rigid bits, as secondary structure. Expect numerous small rigid AWECS like Ampyx's or Makni's to be hosted by vast soft airborne infrastructure.
 
daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4253 From: harry valentine Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
Ingenious theory .  .   .  absolutely brilliant .  .  .  .  how soon before we see the scale model in operation?


Harry

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: rod.read@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:17:01 +0000
Subject: [AWECS] tensegrity tower

 

here's sorta like the one I promised Doug...it's like your twisted rope gen...(loved that video) just a wider medium than rope to bring down the torque.
 Also this sketch doesn't have the mid way steering wing points that I was on about.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4254 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
What keeps those curved members shaped like that?  Tensegrity stuff is all straight lines.

The mighty Campagnolo used to sell parts with a 60 degree curve in each of 5 thin struts that rendered them almost entirely decorative, but they "looked right" and got themselves hauled along on many Tours de France.

Bob Stuart
On 20-Sep-11, at 10:17 AM, roderickjosephread wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4255 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video
Doug, I was only joking about the curved blades.  Your work is  amazing, and because you are actually getting out there and really doing some revolutionary things, organizations like NASA, as of yet, just don't really get that.  They're still stuck back in the tried and tested single prop windmill paradigm.  

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: doug@selsam.com
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:41:21 +0000
Subject: Re: [AWECS] 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

 
Hi Darin:
Yes I know this video is a bit crude and does not demonstrate a very well-worked-out system. Quite primitive, Captain... (Spock) Note however that it is trying pretty hard to pull me up into the sky! And the wind was not even all that strong.

Oh the curved blades are an artifact of the line-by-line digital scan rate - i.e. cheap cameras.
(Sorry I forgot, the limited knowledge here...)
Cel phone cameras, and cheap digital cameras in general, usually make high-speed wind turbine blades look curved. Yup, there's another wind-energy basic fer ya...

I wonder if NASA knew that? I wonder if the (great and powerful) Wizard of Oz knew that? I wonder if God knew that? I wonder what would happen if God issued a press-release that he would start working on Airborne Wind Energy. Would we take even Him seriously at this point?
Sorry but I gotta have a little fun with this or it gets way too stupid. Stupid without a little fun is just too boring.

Also:
All cameras can freeze the motion, make the blades appear to spin slow when they are really running fast, make the blades appear to spin backwards, or alternate between backwards and forwards, etc.

Often we note that blades that are spinning so fast they are invisible to the naked eye appear stopped, or almost stopped, on video.
This is that "wagon wheel" effect you see in old westerns. It's a bit frustrating to see a motion picture look still, while the still pix show motion (blur), but it's common in wind energy, as you can see if you check Youtube for small wind turbine videos.

Also, if you increase the exposure time, you get an even nicer blade blur, where the blades appear to fan out wide and semi-transparent at the tips. In this way you can get GREAT wind turbine photos at sunset, whereby the low light level allows you to increase the exposure time without overexposure.

Steps in wind energy:
1) Learn the theory of operation
2) learn to run a turbine
3) learn to install a turbine
4) learn to photograph a turbine
5) learn to design a turbine
6) learn to repair a wind turbine
begin again at step 1

:)
Doug S.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4256 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )
Bob,
 
I see those curves too. We must be androids; these are video scan artifacts from rocking at computers. Seriously, there are no straight lines in warped space-time. Bucky's classic tensegrity was a neoplatonic idealization; an optimal strut must have some curve to match its acceleration field.
 
Please allow a defense of Campagnolo. Curves in bike struts serve for more than just for decoration. Tapered curves tune the dynamic feel of the bike; lowering, filtering, and damping harmonics. They can give a bit of spring-energy return during the pedal cycle, an ergometric effect similar to ovoid chain-rings. A perfectly straight and rigid frame would have no compliance, no give to buffer shock-loads to rims, bearings, and human anatomy, causing those parts to need beefing-up, negating "shortest path" weight savings. A cheetah or greyhound has no straight lines. The classic tapered and bent front bike fork (~60 degrees) is not about to give way to a straight tube. Nor is decoration to be denied. Many a champion depends on intimidating and superstitious display for a sports-psychology edge.
 
Campagnolo is actually in play as a potential partner for small-scale AWECS evolved from bike components. Italy has a number of new initiatives in small AWE R&D to soon announce, with connections to legendary design centers, a New Italian Renaissance, if you will,
 
daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4257 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )
Just replace the straight poles with curved poles?

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:26:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [AWECS] tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )

 

Bob,
 
I see those curves too. We must be androids; these are video scan artifacts from rocking at computers. Seriously, there are no straight lines in warped space-time. Bucky's classic tensegrity was a neoplatonic idealization; an optimal strut must have some curve to match its acceleration field.
 
Please allow a defense of Campagnolo. Curves in bike struts serve for more than just for decoration. Tapered curves tune the dynamic feel of the bike; lowering, filtering, and damping harmonics. They can give a bit of spring-energy return during the pedal cycle, an ergometric effect similar to ovoid chain-rings. A perfectly straight and rigid frame would have no compliance, no give to buffer shock-loads to rims, bearings, and human anatomy, causing those parts to need beefing-up, negating "shortest path" weight savings. A cheetah or greyhound has no straight lines. The classic tapered and bent front bike fork (~60 degrees) is not about to give way to a straight tube. Nor is decoration to be denied. Many a champion depends on intimidating and superstitious display for a sports-psychology edge.
 
Campagnolo is actually in play as a potential partner for small-scale AWECS evolved from bike components. Italy has a number of new initiatives in small AWE R&D to soon announce, with connections to legendary design centers, a New Italian Renaissance, if you will,
 
daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4258 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )
Dave you rock.
but you probably flex as well.

wait till you see my in dougnut launcher sketch...
it says it's the simplest... and you'll pick me up on this ... a wire and lever from a centre puller to each flier control arm would be simpler

sorry

I will not mention tensegrity without authority evermore
I will not mention tensegrity without authority evermore
I will not mention tensegrity without authority evermore
rod
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4259 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: simplest control system
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4260 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/20/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )
Hi Dave,

You have to get up pretty early to teach me about the interaction of flex and human powered vehicles.  www.microship.com/bobstuart/article1.html  I'm also aware of the Z crank and other ways to add some spring to the cycle, and the special coaching needed to use it effectively, but it never got popular.  Anyway, Campy didn't make frames, they made cranksets, for racing bikes where people sweat bullets over drive line compactness to increase rigidity.  On their lightest version of the chain rings, the milling had removed all but the struts I refer to.  All they could do is help keep the arms of the heavy cast spider the right distance apart.  

Just to be clear, we are dismissing the curves in the video as being technological illusions, but arguing against noticeably curved members in a Tensegrity construction.  

BTW, when Bucky was first trying to assemble a tensegrity structure, he gave up, and decided it was a lost cause theoretically.  However, his shop helper persisted until it was complex enough to stabilize.  Presumably, a robot could assemble the struts to lines being payed out.  

Best,
Bob

On 20-Sep-11, at 4:26 PM, dave santos wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4261 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower (Campi defended ;^) )
I'd prefer robots do it.
you'd sweat buckets of bullets by hand otherwise... especially as it will all be rotating and transferring energy...

Lets stick to joining stacks of rigid inflated sleeves.

the bent blade illusion is a product of the frame scanning rate and the speed of movement of the blades... by the time you read the next line of pixels the data has changed.

They are good and fast those blades well done.

There was a question on my drawing orientation... Its a cut through one side of doughnut ring... with a wee pictorial effort showing the bladder and control mount webbing continuing round in the ring... get it?

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/OXpvTOHY7lPNYpXYM2c73g?feat=directlink

It's a handy way to show the kite control mechanism.... which should be best having an outboard going AoA control. It's in a newer drawing
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4262 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Pacific Power Sails
Very nice.
Of course I'd say add more rotors...
:)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4263 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)
Dave S.
Are you saying the recently-stated NASA AWE deliverables have not been delivered?
I'm really trying to stick to the topic.
Please do not change the subject in any way.
Doug S.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4264 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video
Darin:
Oh I did not realize you were kidding about the curved blades.
I could joke back about a new magical material or perhaps a time-warp...

I WISH our nation's shining knight on the white moon-landing horse could come riding in like the cavalry and make everything suddenly work out.
All I know is I've seen press-releases for 10 years now from every company and agency under the sun announcing some new breakthrough in wind energy and have learned all you gotta say is "NO YOU'RE NOT!" and you will be right every time.
None of them have done ANYTHING.

There is NO FIELD more full of lies and outright scams, from the very highest levels no less!

(wind is invisible - you can say ANYTHING and people will believe it!)

Look at Honeywell's joke of a building-mounted turbine...
Look at Kleiner-Perkins' FloDesign...
an endless string of lies from every direction, with nothing of substance emerging ever!

All these idiots can do is agglomerate all the known misguided concepts into a single machine that is always worse than even an average status-quo turbine. They don't even understand that making things simpler is the goal - they think making things more complicated and violating known principles of using less material to get more power that have been worked out for literally, at this point, thousands of years!

I predicted they would do NOTHING with that $100,000k.
Multiply NOTHING by 10x and you can see that a million would still get you nowhere.
And similarly, multiply NOTHING by 100 times, or a thousand times, and 10 million or 100 million would similarly be flushed down the drain, with probably a few more press-releases showing pix of Magenn, some worldwide "fly-jets-to-a-conference" activity, a few big-money wasted grants, then it would fizzle out.

I am as disappointed as anyone.
I'm the biggest fan of "Team America"...
Just seems that we have a team of bench-sitters at best, and more accurately, audience-members, for the most part.

Imagine if your favorite sports team sat around in the grandstands and never even got on the field, yet talked endless of an impending winning season!

The worst thing about it is we've become SO DUMBED DOWN that not only can they say ANYTHING, but we've got a memory of about 2 weeks, and there's not 1 person in 1000 who will remember what they said even a few months ago and ask:

"OK you SAID (in that giant press-release) you would do X, so where is X?"
How complicated is that?
What is controversial about that?

It's time "we the people" called these empty pronouncements of nothingness, at our mutual expense, out on the carpet. We sit there and take lie after lie, press-release after press-release, and kid ourselves that "something is being done", while we are, in reality, just paying people to sit around and do nothing. NOTHING!

It's harmful for us, since we are given false hope and delay, while having to foot the bill, and it's harmful for them since they might be forced to do something useful if we did not pay them to do nothing!

Sorry if I am hurting anyones' feelings temporarily but I am not gonna sit here and read 10 more years of empty press-releases and lies without standing up and at least making a note of what I see.

Doug S.

PS this group is my most fun thing on the web but geez I gotta get stuff built instead of blogging! :)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4265 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)
Doug,
 
Your request is confusing, as the answer seems already stated. The most recently cited AWE deliverable was Oberth's Primer, clearly "delivered". NASA's unmatched soft-wing deliverables were definitely delivered decades ago. Your AWE Primer was flawed by omissions and delivered late; an "also-ran" for NASA's Primer files.
 
It a formidable challenge, but don't give up rivaling Oberth in informing NASA about aerospace and AWE, as you are still breathing and learning. Like Oberth, ride the wave of global R&D, create a classic, make us proud,
 
daveS

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4266 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
Yeah there ya go.
I'm glad to see someone agrees with what I delineated in U.S. Patent 6616402.
They next key is to give all those struts airfoil profiles so they can help provide rotation via the Darrieus principle. Again, this is all found in U.S. 6616402.
:)
Doug S.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4267 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
Yup, inflate the struts. Use helium or Hydrogen etc. Give theinflated struts blade profiles. Inflate the blades too.
It's all in U.S. Patent 6616402.
Thanks for your support for this idea.
Hey I know, maybe NASA can build one!
:)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4268 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Is AWE Real? (Doug Rebutted)
While AWE is really progressing nicely, Doug periodically insists the AWE field is all falseness, that nothing has been accomplished, that everyone of us an incompetent liar. Fortunately, Doug is quite isolated in delusional exaggeration; unable to convincingly substantiate his pessimism.
 
More thoughtful observers, like Professor Cristina Archer, NASA's Dave North, or aerospace veteran Dave Lang, look at the same field, at the unmatched upper-wind resource and the many hard-working AWE scientists and engineers, and come to a far more reasonable conclusion that the field is quite real, and the gradual ramp-up of progress is what can be reasonably expected in the real world.
 
Doug is tolerated in his extreme (but entertaining) views, and cannot claim to be censored in sharing them. His critique does apply to a minority in our community who do make exaggerated claims and never show convincing working prototypes. We should all bring such bad actors to account. On the other hand, Doug is quite unfair to honest AWE work with his crude tar-brush. One has only to review the best work, and ideally witness or replicate it, to see how badly mistaken Doug is.
 
In truth, as an R&D community, we are making fantastic progress in advancing the art of AWE.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4269 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video
Honeywell's joke of a building-mounted turbine...  adding these google IMAGE searches gives your words deeper meaning.


To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: doug@selsam.com
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:40:06 +0000
Subject: Re: [AWECS] 21-rotor kite-suspended wind turbine video

 
Darin:
Oh I did not realize you were kidding about the curved blades.
I could joke back about a new magical material or perhaps a time-warp...

I WISH our nation's shining knight on the white moon-landing horse could come riding in like the cavalry and make everything suddenly work out.
All I know is I've seen press-releases for 10 years now from every company and agency under the sun announcing some new breakthrough in wind energy and have learned all you gotta say is "NO YOU'RE NOT!" and you will be right every time.
None of them have done ANYTHING.

There is NO FIELD more full of lies and outright scams, from the very highest levels no less!

(wind is invisible - you can say ANYTHING and people will believe it!)

Look at Honeywell's joke of a building-mounted turbine...
Look at Kleiner-Perkins' FloDesign...
an endless string of lies from every direction, with nothing of substance emerging ever!

All these idiots can do is agglomerate all the known misguided concepts into a single machine that is always worse than even an average status-quo turbine. They don't even understand that making things simpler is the goal - they think making things more complicated and violating known principles of using less material to get more power that have been worked out for literally, at this point, thousands of years!

I predicted they would do NOTHING with that $100,000k.
Multiply NOTHING by 10x and you can see that a million would still get you nowhere.
And similarly, multiply NOTHING by 100 times, or a thousand times, and 10 million or 100 million would similarly be flushed down the drain, with probably a few more press-releases showing pix of Magenn, some worldwide "fly-jets-to-a-conference" activity, a few big-money wasted grants, then it would fizzle out.

I am as disappointed as anyone.
I'm the biggest fan of "Team America"...
Just seems that we have a team of bench-sitters at best, and more accurately, audience-members, for the most part.

Imagine if your favorite sports team sat around in the grandstands and never even got on the field, yet talked endless of an impending winning season!

The worst thing about it is we've become SO DUMBED DOWN that not only can they say ANYTHING, but we've got a memory of about 2 weeks, and there's not 1 person in 1000 who will remember what they said even a few months ago and ask:

"OK you SAID (in that giant press-release) you would do X, so where is X?"
How complicated is that?
What is controversial about that?

It's time "we the people" called these empty pronouncements of nothingness, at our mutual expense, out on the carpet. We sit there and take lie after lie, press-release after press-release, and kid ourselves that "something is being done", while we are, in reality, just paying people to sit around and do nothing. NOTHING!

It's harmful for us, since we are given false hope and delay, while having to foot the bill, and it's harmful for them since they might be forced to do something useful if we did not pay them to do nothing!

Sorry if I am hurting anyones' feelings temporarily but I am not gonna sit here and read 10 more years of empty press-releases and lies without standing up and at least making a note of what I see.

Doug S.

PS this group is my most fun thing on the web but geez I gotta get stuff built instead of blogging! :)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4270 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: tensegrity tower
Have you looked at your patent in PatentGenius?  Nice how they have all the drawings set up together.  Freepatentsonline is just so yesterday.

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: doug@selsam.com
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:03:29 +0000
Subject: [AWECS] Re: tensegrity tower

 
Yup, inflate the struts. Use helium or Hydrogen etc. Give theinflated struts blade profiles. Inflate the blades too.
It's all in U.S. Patent 6616402.
Thanks for your support for this idea.
Hey I know, maybe NASA can build one!
:)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4271 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons
Honeywell makes the extraordinary claim that its ducted rooftop turbine is the lowest cost per kWh in that power class. The machine seems well certified by standards bodies. Much of the claimed advantage is in the desirable generator geometry. What if all this superiority is true?!
 
I like both naked and shrouded/ducted fans, according to operational needs and flight envelope. Lets see if AWE anti-duct partisans can produce the cons to convince the world duct designs are a "joke"-
 
 
Pros-
 
Shrouded blades have less potential to foul with kitelines (KiteLab APUs)
 
A duct can act as a ring wing (Alteros, etc)
 
A duct can land on its outer surface (common)
 
A ring wing can hold lifting gas (Alteros, etc)
 
A duct can house an ultra-wide diameter generator (Honeywell)
 
Ducted fans excel in high performance windspeeds (airliner example)
 
Ducts mitigate noise (Honeywell)
 
Ducts allow lower cut-in windspeed (Honeywell)
 
Ducts capture breakaway blades (airliner)
 
Ducts reduce induced drag of blade tips (wingtip-dam principle)
 
Ducted designs are more visible to air traffic (visual solidity)
 
Ducted designs may offer birds better avoidance chances (conjecture)
 
Ducts support efficient multi-stage decompression (compare with compressors and SuperTurbine multi-stage)
 
Ducts can easier limit over-speed (conjecture)
 
Ducts can handle a wider wind range (conjecture)
 
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4272 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons
What is the best time to fly a duct-style generator kite?   

At the quack of dawn, of course.

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:02:04 -0700
Subject: [AWECS] Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons

 

Honeywell makes the extraordinary claim that its ducted rooftop turbine is the lowest cost per kWh in that power class. The machine seems well certified by standards bodies. Much of the claimed advantage is in the desirable generator geometry. What if all this superiority is true?!
 
I like both naked and shrouded/ducted fans, according to operational needs and flight envelope. Lets see if AWE anti-duct partisans can produce the cons to convince the world duct designs are a "joke"-
 
 
Pros-
 
Shrouded blades have less potential to foul with kitelines (KiteLab APUs)
 
A duct can act as a ring wing (Alteros, etc)
 
A duct can land on its outer surface (common)
 
A ring wing can hold lifting gas (Alteros, etc)
 
A duct can house an ultra-wide diameter generator (Honeywell)
 
Ducted fans excel in high performance windspeeds (airliner example)
 
Ducts mitigate noise (Honeywell)
 
Ducts allow lower cut-in windspeed (Honeywell)
 
Ducts capture breakaway blades (airliner)
 
Ducts reduce induced drag of blade tips (wingtip-dam principle)
 
Ducted designs are more visible to air traffic (visual solidity)
 
Ducted designs may offer birds better avoidance chances (conjecture)
 
Ducts support efficient multi-stage decompression (compare with compressors and SuperTurbine multi-stage)
 
Ducts can easier limit over-speed (conjecture)
 
Ducts can handle a wider wind range (conjecture)
 
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4273 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: simplest control system
I can only apologise for my continued inappropriate blurting out... wish I could blame it on youth.

I can redraw it with about 60% less rigid component.

gotta love a bit of string.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4275 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: sciscors
Another spinner idea...

Has anyone ever cut a paraglider in half,
taken the LHS 2,3,4+ times,
tied what were the mid way lines to an inner ring / webbing loop,
inner ring fluted down to an inflated tube beam going down...
loosely tied a hoola hoop around the tube to simultaneously pull down on all wing tips.


imagine a palm tree for this description, with loads of spider line coming to a hoop round the tree.

now jump on the hoop when the hurricane comes and twist the coconuts out of the ground....

ok I don't know where the coconuts come in, but mother nature is usually right and trees need wind to form strong internal cell structures... our beam probably has to be multi cellular internally.

ah the coconuts are probably other fun uses of our tower like selling antenna mount space to media companies.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4276 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: How to make a Kitelab Ducted Turbine APU (RAT)
Groundgen systems need Auxiliary Power Units (APU) to power signal lights, at a minimum, and potentially to power actuation, sensing, and other applications at altitude. These power requirements are a small fraction of rated power, and wind is the obvious source of aux power, so a small wind driven APU make great sense. A traditional aviation method is the Ram Air Turbine  (RAT). Especially with kites, a housed aux turbine is the most practical solution to avoid mishaps.
 
To make a KiteLab style RAT find a suitable DC fan first, like a computer muffin fan or personal battery operated fan. The best such fans for this use have unswept symmetrical foils whose camber can be oriented for good turbine operation.
 
Next wade through a plastic recycling cache and fit the lightest possible duct as closely as practical to the fan. You may even find a fancy venturi shape. Mount the fan securely in the tube. Make provision for the RAT to be securely mounted in an AWECS or hung in stable flight (with fins) (commonly as a Nav Marker).
 
Connect contacts to a suitable voltage regulator, upconverter, etc.. The simplest circuit is a diode/capacitor combo connected to a battery or other load.
 
Photos of such AWE APUs are part of a pending KiteLab mass-disclosure soon. Expect RATs to find a large market as AWE APUs.
 
coolIP
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4277 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note
Sir, you have me confused with the originator of that "smear" of your beloved windmill.  I only shared what I found on a Google IMAGE search about the topic.  Making a VISUAL for myself and others, YOU INCLUDED, to peruse and get a deeper appreciation of where DOUG was coming from.  It sounds as if you want to make me out to be the bad guy, the hippie who can't get his shit together to straighten up and fly right, eh?  I do appreciate your encouragement in that direction, but not the elitist approach of censorship of my way of sharing, and LIGHTENING UP the air in this dreary forum!  If I get chastised every time I make a witty and REVEALING pun,  than that's what this forum becomes.  And, please, no more secretive emails to me that excludes others from reading your posts to me.  Thanks.


Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:02:18 -0700
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Subject: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note
To: darin_selby@hotmail.com
CC: bobstuart@sasktel.net; joefaust333@gmail.com; hardensoftintl@yahoo.com

Darin,
 
Please do better than the crude "quack" insult about ducted turbines. Provide sincere technical argument. Better patent browsing is also poorly on-topic. Did you not understand the recent moderator critique about setting a higher professional standard with your posts?
 
Even if the Honeywell turbine was truly as bad as you smeared it, its not AWE, is it? Retort the certifications while relating it to AWE usage and impress us all.
 
You have been openly challenged to contribute some tangible progress in AWE, actual working prototypes, after years of paper schemes. In particular, you try to make a simple Gorlov AWE demo to beat KiteLab's RATs, to avoid your quack insult in boomerang mode. 
 
daveS
 
PS Note to Bob- Campy long made complete bikes. I collected Campy frames for reuse in HPV as a BikesNotBombs director in the late 90s. The thin-wall steel construction was incredible.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4278 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note
Darin,
 
It badly misses the point to force on the public moderator complaints about weak (~humor) posts with no technical content. True, us hippies truly don't like the secrecy, but this was about personal netiquette, so it was posted to the moderators, to balance the need to keep posts informative (and privacy) with openness. If only we could expose hidden AWE knowledge instead!
 
You are not a bad guy for trying to make funny (a bad comedian maybe). Any of us errs by posting off-topic fluff to over a hundred addresses. When stuck in chat mode, we especially tax the busiest AWE professionals. The initial moderator complaint (not public yet, *sigh*) worried that the list would die if it ever became just a chat room. You are not making the Forum sunny launching a soap opera unrelated to AWE knowledge.
 
Note that JohnO and Roderick provided you some feedback to be sensitive to. Note that Doug already does a great job of presenting his concepts, but could use help answering open technical questions. Sorry if i thought you where still promoting airborne Gorlov Turbines, but lets still hope to see some working DIY machines like those you draw. To think this list is "dreary" is clearly to have missed the many wonderful technical disclosures over the years, and ongoingly. Please try to add to that sort of value,
 
Peace,
 
daveS
 
PS You don't need to Cc: list members an extra copy. Also, the "Sir!" shtick is mine (i stole it from Dr. Johnson) ;^)

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4279 From: Darin Selby Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note
Please do not send any more secretive emails.  Post them to the group and talk to me that way, or not at all.  Thank you.

To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:20:06 -0700
Subject: [AWECS] Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note

 

Darin,
 
It badly misses the point to force on the public moderator complaints about weak (~humor) posts with no technical content. True, us hippies truly don't like the secrecy, but this was about personal netiquette, so it was posted to the moderators, to balance the need to keep posts informative (and privacy) with openness. If only we could expose hidden AWE knowledge instead!
 
You are not a bad guy for trying to make funny (a bad comedian maybe). Any of us errs by posting off-topic fluff to over a hundred addresses. When stuck in chat mode, we especially tax the busiest AWE professionals. The initial moderator complaint (not public yet, *sigh*) worried that the list would die if it ever became just a chat room. You are not making the Forum sunny launching a soap opera unrelated to AWE knowledge.
 
Note that JohnO and Roderick provided you some feedback to be sensitive to. Note that Doug already does a great job of presenting his concepts, but could use help answering open technical questions. Sorry if i thought you where still promoting airborne Gorlov Turbines, but lets still hope to see some working DIY machines like those you draw. To think this list is "dreary" is clearly to have missed the many wonderful technical disclosures over the years, and ongoingly. Please try to add to that sort of value,
 
Peace,
 
daveS
 
PS You don't need to Cc: list members an extra copy. Also, the "Sir!" shtick is mine (i stole it from Dr. Johnson) ;^)

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4280 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Gorlov Progress? Moderator Note
Darin,
 
Please post moderator netiquette messges yourself, no one is stopping you.
 
They are not secret, but they are not on-topic enough for me to post them,
 
daveS

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4281 From: Doug Date: 9/21/2011
Subject: Re: Pacific Power Sails
Nice idea here, and I like how the drawing turns into a real flying machine. I wonder what Dan Tracy and Pacific Power Sails could do with $100,000. Something tells me they would have something flying that worked. Glad to see they have a product for sale already too.

Too bad nobody in charge of giving out money for cutting edge clean energy technology knows the best people to fund. The talkers get the dough while the do'ers continue on a shoestring, nobody knows, and the public would care if they even knew, but simple facts don't make it thru to them. Who could imagine of all those hundreds of millions spent on "clean energy research", almost none becomes even a prototype, and instead our revered agencies squander it all so routinely they think nothing of it. Those in charge of the clean energy purse strings crave complication, endless yet incomplete analysis, inaction, and nurturing the idea that nothing truly new will ever work, or can ever work, so why even try.

They could get 100 times more research using 1/10th the money if they just gave it to the right people, without a lot of paperwork, so those right people could concentrate on building and testing.

Doug Selsam
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4282 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors
Ok ...
I,ve put a drawing to this effect in the photos folder... t's still waiting for approval.

Bonus News!!! its 100% String and Rags

Question: The arm reach is not very far from the axis and it's fabric not stiff wing.... Do

the cost advantages of cheap cloth flying slower close to the axis multiplied by stacking torques

out weigh

fewer zippier super tech costly blades ?



As I see the drawing it's power controllable, (4 pink central lines pulling and releasing pink ring)stackable, lifts, Can be launched with a sled (like Doug's blade spinner... This would require a swivel and would be my only concession to steel up high)It delivers torque and control to the bottom.

Should I build this... the disk spinner or both? or mix them?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4283 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Clean Energy Project on World Community Grid BOINC
I volunteer some of my spare CPU cycles for a group called
The Clean Energy Project:
http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/research/cep2/overview.do

I'm going to try find out a wee bit more just now about the possibility of creating a distributed computer modelling environment for AWE testing.

Anyone clued up as to what testing platform you may want run, models you want tested, or model evolution algorithms?

Having looked, I don't think anyone has done this yet. Do you know better? Please share.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4284 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors
Another design first and patent to mother nature...
Anyone else think that the new Ozone XXLite looks the same as a mushroom from underneath? All those wee web gills are beautiful.

feel some sketches coming on...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4285 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Primer to NASA (deliverables)
Dave S.:
I'm really puzzled.
I asked you to stick to the topic.
The topic was the RECENT announcement from NASA and their stated deliverables.
I'm asking where to find THOSE deliverables.
I'm trying to understand what you are saying here.
You seem to be citing something from 20 years ago or something.
I'm not asking about an effort from 20 years ago.
I'm asking about NOW.
I'm trying to stay on topic here.
I'm asking about where to find the stated deliverables from the recently announced effort.
Where can we find the stated deliverables from the highly-publicized recent NASA AWE effort?
I'm not even saying they don't exist: either they do or they don't, and no opinion, even mine, has any bearing on that.
I am asking a simple factual question of where to find those stated deliverables. I hope that's clear.
Thanks
:)
Doug S.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4286 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors
This guy Roderick has the mind of a real inventor.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4287 From: Doug Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons
I thought the "quack of dawn" joke was funny.

Ducted turbines have proven over the years to be a poor use of material. Building-mounted turbines have had poor success, witness Aerovironment stopped promoting theirs.
http://www.wind-works.org/SmallTurbines/AerovironmentsAVX1000RooftopTurbinesatLoganAirport.html

If the duct is also a kite that could change.
the main reason ducted turbines don't pencil out is, as usual, high winds: The duct must be constructed to withstand hurricane-level winds.
That usually means heavy fiberglass construction.

Now bear in mind that after 3000 years of turbine evolution, starting with 100% solidity rotors, the blades' solidity has been reduced to about 2% of the disc, while efficiency approaches the Betz theoretical maximum.

A duct or shroud, while increasing the flow thru the rotor, uses many times the material of simply lengthening the blades to that same diameter. Lengthening the blades captures the same extra power as the duct, using far less material, taking a small fraction of the fiberglass that the shroud required. The end result is that despite 100 Professor Crackpot attempts, NO ducted design has ever been commercially successful. In other words, the ROTOR is ALREADY the most efficient way to get power from a given circle. In wind energy, less is more.

Vortec went bankrupt after wasting $20 million dollars:
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/vortec.html

The Honeywell turbine used a bicycle-wheel-type rotor, with cloth "blades" hanging from the spokes, til they slowly figured out that this was a losing hippie junkyard concept from the 1970's. They've improved it some, now, by using real blades. (slowly throwing out the concepts that differentiated it and were supposed to be so great)

To perfect it they'd use a central generator, eliminate the shroud, and reduce the number of blades to get to the well-known best rotor solidity of 2-3%. In other words, they would eliminate every aspect that makes it different from the status quo.

Whatever they claim, I'd be inclined toward some healthy skepticism. Taking "press-release" performance claims literally has a poor history in wind energy.

I DO think though that a kite as a duct could work, but then you're back at handling those hurricane-force winds. To even use a kite is to not be acknowledging one of the main things learned over the years in wind energy: systems that last must be incredibly strong, nothing made of cloth has ever stood the test of time in wind energy. Believe me if the industry could get by on mere cloth blades they'd be doing it. As it turns out, the cloth must be many layers and impregnated with resin, and even then it has a finite lifetime and requires repairs at some point.

:)
Doug S.
quack quack quack

(note to self: imagine all the time on the web redirected toward building and testing...)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4288 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: Ducted Turbines for AWE- Pros and Cons (fabric note)
Doug,
 
You are right that ducted turbines like Honeywell's will not scale for AWE, due to excess mass. The configuration will serve well in small APU roles. We must await final confirmation or debunking of Honeywell performance claims. I thought Darin's humor was lame, but the posting complaint was about lack of AWE content. AWE Forum Moderation consistently tries to maintain high information posting value as its highest goal.
 
You changed the topic to fabric without changing the Subject Line-
 
In summary, this issue resembles how the fine linen handkerchief lost its market to the disposable tissue. Rigid wings will require a highly optimal design to kill the fabric kite. Meanwhile they need a kite to hold them up, just as your own demos show.
 
Sailboats still use fabric sails. Fabric covered airplanes continue to give long life and many traditional windmills, centuries-old, continue to labor with cloth sails. New fabrics are being validated for indefinite lifespans in architectural use. My latest case finding of long kite life is Ray Bethel, the greatest kite flier in history, whose Kestrel stunt kites (made by my old friend Joel Sholtz) continue to fly in good shape after almost 20 years of intensive worldwide kite showmanship, for thousands of hours. Ray flies these same three kites in formation ballet all day long, day after day, just as the recent week-long WSIKF event witnessed.
 
daveS

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4289 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors
Aww thanks Doug,

mad scientist flying a Delorian is my dream job.

now if invention is the subjet / thread of this post... two more on the way.

a fluted double ring linked with extensible multi mini kite stacks on guide lines arrayed around between the rings.

and one like the seed spinner but with top retraction strings rung through to the bottom extension strings on a loop and maybe a wider outer on the control point.

starting to sound more like a disorganised obsessive more on the adhd spectrum than the autistic one.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4290 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: sciscors
Replying again (disorganised) to inspire invention in others:

As I entered Aberdeen University Engineering Dept., under a large concrete dome, a probably classic quote to the effect:

"Engineering is ART applying Science"

Glad you like my ARTwork, but I have yet to build anything slung below an amazing megascale arch network.

That science reality deserves application.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4291 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: New Journal from Drachen Foundation
Here is a window to behold the highest Kite Gods. Especially study Peter Lynn's World's Largest Kite (WLK) report, but don't miss all the other goodies.
 
"(The WLK) flies like nothing I 've ever flown before...an almost vertical immovable rock in the sky for hours on end."
 
Oh Joy!
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4292 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: l' aile d'eau

The file is in French and 36 MB.    PDF format allows easy navigation and enlargements.
Much to discuss from the high quality presentation.
Succinct images.

http://www.augredelair.fr/joomla/recits/luc_armant/ailedeau.pdf  
l' aile d'eau  by Luc Armant

Related and from SeaGlider site.

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4293 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Intertial Aerobatics by the Master
Since we cannot avoid flying mass we must master it. Many AWECs will be based on inertial flight dynamics.
 
I remember Bob Hoover's classic airshow act well... he flew an ordinary Piper Aero Commander when i saw him-
 

Stopped engine aerobatics

youtube.comFeb 6, 2006 - 3 min - Uploaded by skoey
old documentary featuring a WW2 veterant and a twin engine aircraft ... aviation aerobatics ...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4294 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2011
Subject: Re: l' aile d'eau
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 4295 From: Dan Parker Date: 9/23/2011
Subject: Re: Intertial Aerobatics by the Master
Beautiful!
 
To: airbornewindenergy@yahoogroups.com
From: santos137@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 17:19:08 -0700
Subject: [AWECS] Intertial Aerobatics by the Master

 
Since we cannot avoid flying mass we must master it. Many AWECs will be based on inertial flight dynamics.
 
I remember Bob Hoover's classic airshow act well... he flew an ordinary Piper Aero Commander when i saw him-
 

Stopped engine aerobatics

youtube.comFeb 6, 2006 - 3 min - Uploaded by skoey
old documentary featuring a WW2 veterant and a twin engine aircraft ... aviation aerobatics ...