When lightning approaches it is almost certain that all kites
will have to be pulled out of the sky. This sensor illustrates
that it will be possible to automate the task.

https://tindie.com/TAUTIC/as3935-lightning-sensor-board/

Robert.

Does this summary mean that Mothra is suffering from flutter?

On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 11:39 -0700, dave santos wrote:
Water jets. Computer vision plus robotic hose to sprays birds
approaching vulnerable areas.

Just in case anyone still thinks lighter than air (LTA) AWE has a
commercial future here is another problem. Helium shortage.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19676639

I have met Welton and think he is over-playing the dangers. We will
always be able to distil He from air - it will just cost more.

Robert.

Knowing exactly where kites are is critical for full automation. Here
are some ideas that could help.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18633917

On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 09:47 +0200, Pierre BENHAIEM wrote:
Pierre, you have said this before but the AWE designs I envisage
absolutely do not have this problem. The first thing to do is to use a
groundgen so that the kite has minimal weight. The second is to ensure
there are 2 or more tethers. If 1 breaks the kite is designed to
immediately de-power and the remaining tether/s can be used to pull the
kite into its docking station. Because the kite is light its free-fall
velocity is low so pulling it in before it falls to the ground will not
be a problem. Proper design of the winch will even retract the broken
tether ends before they hit the ground in the wrong place. Dyneema is
light so it free-fall velocity is low enough to do this. It also has low
snap-back so when it breaks it does not create a major hazard like steel
ropes do.

If the groundgen is mounted on a raised platform the only land used by
the AWES is a few m2 occupied by the legs of the platform. Imagine a
groundgen built on the 1st level of the Eiffel Tower. The land under the
Tower is well used.

Robert.

On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 13:04 -0700, dave santos wrote:
At last!


My news is that Visventis has moved from Reworks to Makespace. It is
looking like it will be a more useful and helpful venue so I am
cautiously optimistic that progress will accelerate. Arranging the move
consumed huge amounts of my time and there is still much work to be done
preparing the new space.

Robert.

Last week I went to a talk by someone whose job it is to research the
big picture of renewable energy. He has done some consulting work for
the pension companies because they want to invest in the next big thing
and they know little about renewable energy. They used to invest heavily
in government bonds and the like but all the old assurances and
practices are starting to look rather dodgy. There are huge pots of
money to be invested so it might be possible to tempt them to dip their
toes in the water of AWE investment to start learning about the
industry. Insurance companies are probably also in a similar position.

A distinction needs to be made between donations and investments. Olly
and I would be reluctant to accept investment in Visventis right now
because it would put too much pressure on us to look for quick routes to
profit. We need donations on the basis that donors will learn about AWE
and we are aiming to help the disadvantaged first.

Robert.

Methane has half as much lift as helium and is the major part of natural gas. Hydrogen has slightly more lift than helium.

Perhaps warmed humid air (LTA compound gas)  ...

The wing holding the heated humid air might be insulated with:

I see they are in tune with Lang's croquet wicket for launch consideration: 

Joe and John asked me "How to do AWE".
Here's how:
You need at least one power extraction unit for open flow.
After 3000 years of trying many possibilities, the standard apparatus for this is known as a rotor or propeller.

You need at least one lift unit that elevates the power unit.
A lift unit could be a kite, balloon, blimp, gyrocopter, etc.
A lift unit and a power unit can be the same propeller, or they can be different.
The gen can be at the rotor or at the ground or in between.

I brought a simple demo version of a working AWE system to the first AWE conference in Oroville, in case there was any doubt that airborne propellers spinning a generator could work. Makani/Joby and "Pacific whatever" with the little red sled-kite with two propellers have done it, so you know it works.

AWE is about as simple as anything gets, now that the requisite components have become so advanced over the past 100 years. In many ways it seems potentially simpler than a tower-mounted turbine.

Besides these "off-the-shelf" ways, I can think of about 20 more advanced approaches, some related, others unheard of, that should logically work, and some seem like they might work exceedingly well.

A few of the approaches I read of on here seem like they could have a kernel of the beginnings of something that could work too. The carousel approach goes back to the basic vertical-axis base outlined in US 6616402. I guess one might look at a ball bearing as a circular track.

The carousel or circular railroad with sails is one of the oldest wind energy ideas, featured in the text I started with in the 1970's called "Wind Machines" published by (I think it was) Sperry(?) funded by some dang gubmint grant.

And of course anyone with a pulsating, reciprocating cycle, ought to apply it to a pulsating, reciprocating load, such as a well pump. The fact that there are a million existing water-pumping wind energy installations, perfected 150 years ago, with no changes til now, all operated by rotary, rather than reciprocating wind machines, yet with a reciprocating load, would seem to be a dream in low-hanging fruit for the reciprocating-cycle backward-thinking, regressive-minded technologically-inbred fruitcakes, however, as simple as this application might seem, it represents an (unwanted) reality - a real, actual AWE application, begging to be exploited, with no built-in excuses (though people specializing in excuses will always find as many as they need) but with the challenges of actually making it work. No amount of internet posting will make such a machine work.
Nope, you'd need to9 get out on the far and make it happen. Might even need a welder.

The fact that the people talk-talk-talking about their reciprocating-cycle flapping kites ignore an existing reciprocating-cycle application, already wind-powered, and begging for new paradigm after 150 years of lifting water, is typical of the all-talk format for would-be innovators. Somehow they prefer to remain forever in the land of the hypothetical or the unworkable, grasping at endless excuses why they never even target a working system (it cannot be scaled down from at least 10 MegaWatts etc.), fixated on aspects like how much sand a half-buried kite can inadvertently dump while launching, as though that is AWE. My dog can do that when it gets up too, and my dog is not AWE either - yet, but we're working on it.
;)
Doug Selsam

Document 

Try acoustics. Something that makes a sound like a raptor bird is pretty effective and I would think lighter weight.

Batlite simple surface canopy wing in test: 

Has these ideas been tested before?
Are they unworkable nonsense?

for every kite steered by two lines
I believe there is a simple mechanical steering device which can keep it repeatedly swinging back and forth across the wind window

Idea 1
(mostly works to one side of wind window)
control device in front of kite.
A single tether ends in a ring, freely running on a semi circular bifurcator track, the ends of the track join with a bar, below the bar hangs a counterweight with a lifting shape offset to one side.
At one side of the window, the semicircular track and counterweight combine to steer the kite back toward centre, by the time the kite is at the centre of the wind window the counterweight/lifter is already tending to steer the kite back....
Could this work? Or ever be at rest if wind is going past?
If so would pulling the tether to one side or a steering tweak restart everything?

Idea 2
steering from behind with a drogue.
A drogue is normally used to keep a kite (like a sled) stable. However if... The back lines are linked, and
The drogue is offset to one side of the back lines, and, Inside the drogue a miniature spinning kite winds a crank to pull the drogue to the other side of the back lines, once there the crank release is triggered sending the drogue back to the other side.


Idea 3
steering from behind with a lifting drogue.
A line connects the steering points at the back of a kite. On this line, two pulley wheels held by a triangular plate, freely run. At the back of the triangular plate a pivot point connects through to a cam arm plate below. The cam plate is long, parallel with the triangular plate, it reaches forward in front of the steering line traveller.
The travel of the cam plate is limited by the triangular plate.
At the front of the cam shaped plate is the tether to the lifting drogue.
Imagine what happens as this goes to the side of the wind window,
The traveller pulleys drop down to the windward side, but the force of the lifting drogue pulls the cam to the upwind side, thus the drogue pulls the traveller to the .... yeah not sure yet on this idea 3 but

all probably worth a try

There are probably more ways to automate kite control than there are patents for spark arrestors and girders combined.  Many things can work; the fun is in finding the simple, elegant, robust solution.  I think that in general, the signal to switch directions should come from a sudden flip-flop, rather than a gradual accumulation, or a timed-delay device.  An angle-of-attack sensor vane could trip a control tab, and away you go.  There are probably also ways to automate a figure 8, with each state leading to the next - one gyro might make it easy.  A small kite should be able to steer a large array.

I re-started tonight by looking at the evolution of cartilaginous fish skeletons

I have a hard time placing this anywhere on the coolness scale.  Having only studied engineering with any intensity, I offer the following edits, to illustrate what I understood:

WWEA Secretariat via bounce.secureserver.net

4:14 AM (2 hours ago)

to noreply-news
World Wind Capacity has crossed 250 Gigawatt

- 16,5 GW of new installations in the first half of 2012, after 18,4 GW in 2011
- Worldwide wind capacity has reached 254 GW, 273 GW expected for full year
- Slowdown in China leads to global decrease, additional uncertainties in several key markets

cover_hyr12Bonn (WWEA) â€" The worldwide wind capacity reached 254’000 MW by the end of June 2012, out of which 16’546 MW were added in the first six months of 2012. This increase represents 10 % less than in the first half of 2011, when 18’405 MW were added.
The global wind capacity grew by 7% within six months (2% less than the same period in 2011) and by 16,4 % on an annual basis (mid-2012 compared with mid-2011). In comparison, the annual growth rate in 2011 was 20,3 %.

Prof. He Dexin, WWEA President: “Wind technology has become a pillar of the electricity supply scheme of many countries â€" just recently, Denmark announced a world record wind power share of 28 % in the country's electricity supply. This success of wind power has become possible because of wise supportive policies by governments on the one hand and because of innovation and cost reduction by the wind industry on the other hand. Today, wind power can compete with any other source of energy, without causing environmental problems. WWEA calls on all governments not to reduce but to strengthen their efforts so that more investment in wind power can be done.”

Stefan Gsänger, WWEA Secretary General: “The wind industry, without doubt, is currently in a difficult situation. Political uncertainties in some of the key markets, namely in the USA, Spain and India, are major matters of concern. At the same time, China has reached its maximum speed of installing new wind farms, although the Chinese market still continues to be much bigger than any other country. However, this leads to strong pressure on Chinese manufacturers and will further increase pressure on wind turbine prices worldwide. More countries should now make use of the low cost of wind power and implement the technology as fast as possible.”

Thanks, Doug Selsam. 

You might like the solution (I guess I would call it an Isosceles Trapezoid) the WPI Kite Power Project came up with some time ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NKyAlrbTU98#t=50s

Also Pauli Rautakopri from Tampere University of Technology does research on the topic and ran a great presentation about "Stable Lying Eight Orbits For Kites" on AWEC2011:

http://www.awec2011.com/pauli-rautakorpi-tampere-u-o-t/

hth
/cb

Japan might be first. 

The part from AWE is...

Short term scenario:HAWT goes towards huge rotors,today diameter being 160 m,tomorrow 250 m and more,maybe until 500 m with new methods and materials.So to be sustainable for massive production AWE should approach a reliable and complete management for a range of altitudes from 100 to 500 m,that before HAWT.Else harnessing jet-stream if they are really powerful.Else limiting to tiny niches.

Long term scenario:existing aviation is replaced by tethered aviation after really big climatic problem or complete depletion of fossil reserves...

PierreB

http://flygenkite.com

 

Included in topic, perhaps:

I've seen this illustration before, and I just don't think it looks realistic without some taco stands on the ridge tops, and billboards on the cities.

Hey Dave S.:
You have been advocating flapping kites for AWE. Others have been pursuing kite-reeling in and out.
All supposedly to advance AWE, or get a working system going.

I was trying to make a helpful suggestion:
If you really think your reciprocating, flapping, or return-path device is worth pursuing, your main missing link will be converting that reciprocating motion to electricity.

So, going on the theme that AWE, as we define it, can include applications besides generating electricity, I thought I would point out, as Wayne German did once, that water wells for agriculture use just such a reciprocating action.

So my suggestion for those large teams who have been spending millions on reciprocating AWE systems, that there is a ready application for their work.

In your case, I don't think you have demonstrated anything powerful enough to run such a real-world pump, but others have.
Yes if I had nothing else to do I might try it, as you say. Who knows I may get to it, but I have a long list of higher priority machines to build. Still it seems compelling - a real application sitting, waiting...

But I'm not the one advocating the pulsating systems in the first place am I? All I'm pointing out is a ready application for water pumping.
It seems easier than building a special train track up the side of a mountain as Joe F. has suggested - maybe just a little easier to do TODAY.

Of course the astute reader will already know, the LAST thing you want to know about is anything useful you could build, anything that would work. That might get in the way of your endless fun and "advanced theoretical work" in quantum bose-einstein condensate states!

Dave you know what I think is funny? When someone asks me: "Do you think Dave S. is onto something?". The one time someone asked me that I realized that person also would never make any headway, ever.

Sorry to suggest a real-world application for your nonsense. I know you are not interested. Dave S., YOU are the one promoting a video of your tarps lifting up with sand falling off (and what else would anyone expect the sand to do?) citing the falling sand as AWE.

Pointing out that an arch of tarps "could lift all my turbines" is interesting. I guess that is a subset of the obvious fact that any kite of a suitable size can lift as many turbines as it can lift.

You still have not explained why such a ground-tethered arch is better than any other kite configuration. Or why your arch is better than all the other arches on the web. I don't remember hearing any specific advantages - just that it's your latest fixation, and somehow is supposed to be a huge step forward in AWE.
I really think I should ignore most everything you post on here. Seems like a waste of time.
OK gotta go - seeya.
:)

DaveS,

 

For example low "Energy Conversion Performance" involves more material working,so less global safety.So to build a correct model,incrementations between categories are needed.Else an AWES with zero point for its "Energy Conversion Performance" would be promising if its other categories are rated at maximum.

 

PierreB