dougselsam | 2022-10-17 15:48:09 UTC | #521

OK I put this one in "news COVERAGE" rather than just "news" because what this article says (this new turbine design is "good") is WRONG - bad info.
This is a new one for me:  The article DOES NOT **MENTION** HOW IT WORKS.  All it does is make typical "Professor Crackpot" claims about how wonderful it is, without even a single clue as to how it (supposedly) works.

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/groundbreaking-motionless-wind-turbine

It's called "Aeromine", and it had me thinking of a theme song for this engineering fraud/disaster:  Ohh oh oh oh sweet Aeromine" (Guns & Roses Sweet Child o' Mine).

Now you might notice that I am "denunking" this turbine WITHOUT KNOWING A SINGLE DETAIL OF HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK!

How could I POSSIBLY throw THIS baby out with the bathwater WITHOUT KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT HOW IT 'WORKS"????

Well this might start giving you a clue of how I was able to confidently say "idiots idiots idiots" for 14 years and counting:

Once you get used to identifying "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome", you DON'T NEED TO KNOW ALL THE DETAILS TO JUST SAY "Yup, that's another one!"

I see no moving parts - it advertises no moving parts.
It targets building-mounting (which could work fine, but is nonetheless "Professor Crackpot" territory - the good professor is mysteriously attracted to building-mounted concepts...)

It claims "They can generate up to 100%" - 100% of what?  Does it beat the Betz coefficient?  No.  100% of a building's power needs.  **When used in combination with solar!!!**  What a meaningless claim!  How about telling us in Watts?  Give us the swept area and weight of the device so we can compare it to other wind energy devices?  No need for such inconvenient formalities from "Professor Crackpot"!

No, they just state, offhandedly, in the headline, that "This groundbreaking motionless wind turbine is 50% more efficient than regular turbines
They can generate renewable energy up to 100 percent."

If that is not a 100% "Professor Crackpot" claim, I don't know what is!

The article is written by a girl, by the way.  And it is nothing but fluff.  Not a single detail of how it actually works!  Just idle claims of alleged greatness - In a supposed "Engineering" publication! 

I think we've seen the design before in more detail from another, previous "Professor Crackpot Press-Release".  I think it uses airfoils to generate a vacuum that then pulls air through a small fan (turbine) through ducts.  One more dumb idea.

Now you guys have been exposed to this 'Professor Crackpot" press-release/headline stuff for long enough now to immediately recognize it when you see it, right?  I mean, like, nobody here could take this article the LEAST bit seriously, right?  And you SEE all of the "SYMPTOMS" of "The Professor Crackpot Syndrome" here now, right?

OK, well, maybe at least SOME of you can see what's going on here, right?
Hopefully MOST of you can see it???

So you can SEE by this point, that there really IS a "Professor Crackpot Syndrome", with known symptoms, as easy to identify as red spots identify chickenpox, right?

Well I hope this clears up the "mystery" of "How can Doug come in and immediately discard, out-of-hand, any apparently-nascent "superior" wind energy technology, as utter garbage, right out of the box, even without  knowing all the details?"

You SHOULD, by this point in time, be able to RULE THIS IDEA OUT with ONE QUICK LOOK, right?

Yet - look - there are a LOT of SERIOUS people BELIEVING in this utter garbage, right?  They've even got BASF supposedly salivating over a test unit on their roof.  Does BASF have a lot of "really smart people" onboard?  OF COURSE!  

And that is exactly how this stuff works:  It doesn't MATTER HOW HIGH YOUR IQ IS!!!  If YOU DON:T KNOW ABOUT WIND ENERGY, YOU COULD BE A GENIUS AND STILL FALL FOR 100% WRONG STORIES LIKE THIS!!

And how can I dismiss this idea out of hand so easily?  BECAUSE I'VE SEEN HUNDREDS OF DEVICES WITH THE SAME EXACT SYMPTOMS!  I'm not even going to list the symptoms again.  You don;t even need to see the picture or hear any details - just the claims made are ridiculous!  Half the price of solar - without any exposed working surfaces - without any noise - SURE!  If you don't know the symptoms by now, you just aren't paying attention.  

By the way, did you notice the spacing between rooftop turbines in their "rendering" of a huge logistics warehouse?  (A gigantic new logistics warehouse just like it was recently built near here, by the way)

Why the spaces between the turbines?  If they work so well, why would they leave spaces between them, rather than maximizing output by placing more turbines in the spaces between turbines?  Because they are IDIOTS!  COMPLETE, MORONIC, WORTHLESS-TO-THE-CAUSE **IDIOTS!!!**

 And YOU should be able, by now, to IDENTIFY WIND-IDIOTS AT A MERE GLANCE.  

I hope thjs explains how real wind people can so easily identify complete idiocy in wind energy design. promoted by "really smart" know-nothings!  
It does not MATTER how many "PhD's" they may have.  When it comes to wind energy: Idiots are idiots.  And MOST people ARE complete idiots when it comes to wind energy, sorry to say.  

But that is good, because by comparison it makes us "smart"!  Right?  Right???.....    :)

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-17 16:29:55 UTC | #522

Oh well, I guess it didn't do any good to pick the "category" of "news coverage" for my post on some "news coverage" regarding a NON-SOLUTION, nonetheless being touted as a "breakthrough" for wind energy.
Why has my thread already "closed", and my messsage "moved" to "Slow Chat"?  What IS "Slow Chat" anyway?  Chat for people who are too "slow" for a regular chat?  
Anyway, here is what I am noticing about "press coverage" in general:
Within the last year or so, there are several online daily publications with a "science" and "engineering flavor" (even if written by incompetent, cut-paste, compliant, unquestioning, press-release regurgitators).

Now here is the WEIRD part of this:
The above article appeared in "Interesting Engineering".  Maybe an hour later the same exact "news" is released by "New Atlas" (which had a different name previously).  
LINK TO OTHER ARTICLE (which I will not bother to read)
https://newatlas.com/energy/aeromine-rooftop-wind/

So THIS post IS ABOUT "Press Coverage" but has been arbitrarily  MOVED for unknown reasons to an ill-defined category of "SLOW CHAT" where know-nothings expose their ignorance on a daily basis.

More on the topic of "news releases":
I expect this same article to appear in three (3) more supposedly independent and unrelated online daily content "magazines"(?) with the next 2 days.  There seems to be a new central "decider" the picks which (totally false) stories the supposedly "independent" science and engineering websites will carry.  Either that, or they are all stuck for ideas and have started just reading and copying each other.  In any case, it is redundant nonsense that is often being promoted.  Not a single fact-checker in any of these supposed technologically astute publications knows their ass from a hole in the ground!  What a bunch of morons!   If you want to know what's wrong with the world, there are apparently no smart people left!  :O....

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-17 19:01:43 UTC | #523

[quote="dougselsam, post:522, topic:1610"]
Why has my thread already “closed”, and my messsage “moved” to “Slow Chat”?
[/quote]

Your topic had no relevance to ***Airborne*** Wind Energy. And if rants belong anywhere, it is preferentially here.

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-17 21:22:41 UTC | #524

OK Windy, just in case you haven't been paying attention, "Airborne Wind Energy", like it or not, is a SUBSET of Wind Energy, sharing many, if not most, aspects thereof.
And ONE MAJOR aspect they share has always been a constant and persistent influx of supposed "breakthroughs" that are not only NOT breakthroughs, they are actually NOTHING BUT LIES by people who do not understand the first thing about wind energy to begin with.
I think the people in this group started out saying "What is this guy (me) even talking about?"
Now I think many people here realize they are indeed  involved in a "field of dreams" which is often "The Land of the Lost" in the sense of literally tricking well-meaning people, from investors, to employees, with complete nonsense masquerading as "cutting edge technology".  In my opinion, talking a post specifically exposing "press coverage" verging on outright promotion, with ZERO diligence by the author, of a non-starter of a wind turbine design, is the EXACT sort of thing AWE people need to stay ahead of lest a similar situation affect them or the people they care about.  To me, it seems people running these forums do not really care about facts or improving wind energy, they just want to feel like they are somehow "in control" of a conversation, for whatever reason I do not know.  But you can get an idea of the general personality type from the one who was "banned" and yet still posting here.
Anyway, what "topic" it falls into I could care less, really, it is just more annoying behavior to see this sort of knee-jerk reaction to facts being presented.  This forum is about as interested in real facts as the last one.  Meaning "not at all."  In fact most people need to be beaten over the head with them for a few years nefore they can even admit there ARE any facts involved.  Really, it seems more about being part of some sort of "coverup" than anything else.  The magazines, the forums - it;s all just about keeping the lies going for more clicks and more readership.  Like "No!  You can't tell people how things really are!!!"  It's like you all want to live in a fantasy-world where any facts are just inconveniences to sweep under the rug to keep enjoying an continued diet of "all nonsense all the time".  Oh well, have fun!  :)

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-17 21:42:48 UTC | #525

And by the way if you read my post it is about "press coverage" of this turbine, more than the turbine itself.  And if you want to cal it "a rant" then maybe you think it is a good design, that the near-duplicate articles that mysteriously appeared an hour apart are accurate, and everything just is fine.  Sounds about right.  So why do you HAVE a "topic" of "press coverage" if a post specifically about press-coverage is moved from it?

What is YOUR opinion of this NEW phenomenon of multiple tech-news outlets all getting their "stories" from the same source, all publishing similar articles on the same exact topics within the same 2-3 day window, over and over again?

What is YOUR opinion of supposed technology "authors" who ask no questions and just cut-paste a dubious, lying press-release, pretending they "wrote" legitimate "articles" when they obviously did little-to-no research AND have no knowledge of the subject matter at hand?

What is YOUR opinion of mentions implying that this hunk-of-junk that probably can't make even 30 Watts in a strong wind is rated at 5-6 kiloWatts?  Do you think it's OK to tell such blatant lies to thousands or even millions of people?

Can you see any relevance to Airborne Wind Energy and the challenge of separating fact from fiction in **this** field?  Or do you think everything you've heard and read in AWE is true?

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-17 22:59:31 UTC | #526

[quote="dougselsam, post:525, topic:1610"]
What is YOUR opinion of this NEW phenomenon of multiple tech-news outlets all getting their “stories” from the same source, all publishing similar articles on the same exact topics within the same 2-3 day window, over and over again?

What is YOUR opinion of supposed technology “authors” who ask no questions and just cut-paste a dubious, lying press-release, pretending they “wrote” legitimate “articles” when they obviously did little-to-no research AND have no knowledge of the subject matter at hand?
[/quote]

It's not something I can change so I'm not interested. This forum is also not about the changing press landscape or how current press coverage is often flawed.

I suggest finding different reading material if you find what you are looking at now lacking. Maybe a sci-hub search could be interesting. 

The more interesting goal of the forum is to advance the field I think, posting links to press releases or press coverage doesn't help with that, and I don't think is interesting.



[quote="dougselsam, post:525, topic:1610"]
Can you see any relevance to Airborne Wind Energy and the challenge of separating fact from fiction in **this** field? Or do you think everything you’ve heard and read in AWE is true?
[/quote]
It's basic internet literacy to know not to trust everything you read online and if you're interested in a subject to do your own fact-checking. Anyone capable of advancing a field doesn't need to be constantly reminded of that, and as such your rants are too frequent at best.

...and for all your mention of facts, the comment I moved had more opinions than facts. You'd need to back up your opinions with evidence to have them have any value, and then better to leave out the opinions and let the evidence speak for itself. That's how you make a convincing piece of writing.

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-18 16:16:15 UTC | #527

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:526, topic:1610"]
…and for all your mention of facts, the comment I moved had more opinions than facts. You’d need to back up your opinions with evidence to have them have any value,
[/quote]

Windy I'm here to explain basic things to often clueless people.  With decades of designing, patenting, promoting, getting grants for, prototyping, testing, experimenting, manufacturing, repairing, and operating wind energy systems, what you may perceive as "opinions" ARE facts.  It's just that people who don't KNOW the facts see what look, to them, like "opinions".  Once you know what you're doing, your opinions are factual.

It turns out that we have explored the underlying "technology" behind this latest "roof-mounted magazine-article-miracle" that claims to be "50% more efficient" and what was it - 50% less expensive(?) etc. etc. etc. than regular wind turbines.

I did not realize that from the first article that was bereft of details, but the second article had more details and we could see it was the perforated "airfoils" using the lift suction to generate an airflow through ducting.  

Note:  There is a pre-existing wind turbine vacuum effect (from the 1930's I think - very old anyway) that is VASTLY superior to this method, yet it STILL got no traction.

I think one of the main lessons here, besides the obvious one that this "idea" is a bad idea, is that such "press coverage" is **meaningless** because the "authors" know nothing about the subject matter and are just regurgitating what they are told, without much, if any, analysis or independent assessment.

The point being, just seeing an article about your shizzle on some website doesn't mean you have a good idea.  It just means some "author" doesn;t know any better, and a given proposal "sounds good" so it can generate views as "clickbait".

Participants here like Jason immediately start hypothesizing how the same effect might be used in an airborne system, making it highly relevant in peoples' minds at least, to AWE.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-24 17:40:26 UTC | #528

[quote="dougselsam, post:527, topic:1610"]
what you may perceive as “opinions” ARE facts.
[/quote]

Sure, to a degree. But:
[quote]
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEngineers/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules
Answers to technical questions must contain an explanation using engineering logic. Explanations and opinions must be supported by logic and evidence. In general, the more complex a question is, the more comprehensive your answer should be and the more sources you need to include. **In other words, good answers aren't good just because they are right — they are good because they explain**.
[/quote]

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

Freeflying | 2022-10-26 09:57:42 UTC | #529

Slow chats been busy? @Windy_Skies  is making good points @dougselsam. im being reminded of a engineering principle often joked about in workshops. Give a man some knowledge and he can make something? If that man then add to what he’s given? Then gives it to some who knows better? Progress is made! It doesn’t have to be the “right” solution?  as it just one of many solutions? Each with its own merits. Depends on how aware you are?  your starting point? what you learned as you went along. Even if you had a vague idea to begin with? There is a multitude option out there? Some even I’m yet to encounter or understand.  Understand relevance is key to success? More often than not? in my experience at least?  were often get swept on down stream and it takes  time to process the new surroundings.  It always a learning experience. 

Even when looking at the betz limit itself?  The wind itself is a object moving at velocity.  There is correlation to the mass its able to displace? in any give swept area?  I’ve see the brick wall argument? The airflow will not stop at a brick wall as it inclined to follow around it?  It’s why involutes are a great idea? As it turns the moving mass back in on itself. It is where e=mc2 can be used? Because the mass of the rotor/turbine itself could be equal to the mass of wind flowing over it? Or the mass of the wind can be greater than the mass of the rotor/turbine. Mass A is the wind at velocity 
Mass B is anything the wind encounters. The mass of any rotor would be critical in an involute design.  It just a question to, how you can make that available to produce electricity? Air itself is just a low density fluid. Third state of matter in only money? More like the forth these days. Condensates and plasmas Being the other two.  tai chi teaches you that you can take the opponents mass and redirected it. Often with very little input?  The same true when it comes to wind energy.  It why the design of Francis turbine has a high efficiency. When used in hydroelectric schemes.  

The reason I can imagine a lot if solutions is I don’t try to reinvent the wheel. I look at what we have already? Then see if it can be out to good use on other projects? Sure it got some blindsides. Like what don’t I know?  It takes a lot or reading, observations trials and error. Find a thousand way that doesn’t work? Only to find the one that does? 

Some times a fresh pair of eyes is all that need to spot what often overlooked or missed entirely. Maybe not up to everyone standards? But an expert in their own field no their less?  Better to know a single thing well than a million thing poorly? Tend to be the engineers way?  

Read the comments, I was like ok? It been busy in slow chat? 
The areomine it similar to a concept used in the 1800.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmus_Darwin
He made a horizontal windmill. Which was the potteries version of the aeromine.  So Principle it’s a very old concept. Just has a Modern spin on it. 

It not a dead loss. It just another way to extract energy from the wind. Just something else to consider?

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-26 16:28:48 UTC | #530

[quote="Freeflying, post:529, topic:1610"]
He made a horizontal windmill. Which was the potteries version of the aeromine. So Principle it’s a very old concept. Just has a Modern spin on it.
[/quote]

Yeah Jason, "Slow Chat" is for "slow" people, and it's been "busy" since "Windy" seems to have a knee-jerk instinct to shift posts from the topic where they belong to "slow chat".  It's mostly his way of feeling useful, pretending to have some influence on wind turbine design by, if he can't control peoples' speech outright, at least forcing their thoughts into a "topic" he feels puts the person making the post "in their place" - which has to be below his place in some way, to make him feel important.

I have not been here for a day or two, since I remembered if I "log out", I don't get the "reply" button, which saves me a lot of time since I always feel like I should set ignorant people straight in their thinking about wind energy, and there is so much ignorance here, but it is really a waste of my time.  I can't save everyone!

OK I checked your reference to the Darwin turbine.  I can only assume you are referring to this video: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJwF7cYuxKU
Of course it's that same guy - as usual.  That windmill is a typical newbie-non-starter of a design - instead of just building a windmill he builds an entire building - saving the need to aim!  Wow, what a concept.  Interesting how his video doesn;lt evn show the louvres openeing on the side where he blows the fan in.  And of course it culminates with a computer fan lighting an LED - a Dave Santos-esque "proof" that today's wind turbines have once again, been superseded!  

 You know what blows my mind about not only this guy "Darwin", but DaVinci as well?  By this time, wind power had been the main non-animal source of industrial power in Europe for 500 years.  The windmills were highly sophisticated and automated, using well-designed airfoils, incorporating automatic aim and of course overspeed protection to prevent damage from high winds.

Meanwhile, you have the big-name "geniuses" like "Duh-Vinci" promoting his non-starter of a "helicopter" in complete ignorance of the highly-developed machines for trading wind energy for shaft rotation: wind turbine rotors, all around him.  Yet "Duh-Vinci" could not be bothered to notice he probably walked right past working (sideways reverse) "helicopters" every day, while they operated right in front of his eyes.  Oh, and by the way, anyone who looks closely at his "battle tank" can see that turning the crank would have rotated the front wheels opposite to the rear wheels, so it would not have worked either.  

I liken Duh-Vinci's drawiings to stuff 6th-grade kids write in the margins of their schoolbooks when bored.  And the Mona Lisa - largely ignored for centuries - nobody even knew or cared about its location - until it was stolen, which made "the news" and suddenly "Duh-Vinci" was the world's greatest genius and his childish drawings of stuff that would not have even worked, and a painting of a not-so-attractive woman were endlessly celebrated.
Hmmm, so why was "Duh-Vinci" celebrated as such a genius?
Because he worked in weapons development, and changed history by inventing the semi-automatic firearm, which allowed peasants to shoot knights in armor, rendering their armor as just a lot of useless metal, setting the common people free from the tyranny of the kings.  

Nobody talks about that, but that was Duh-Vinci's actual most significant invention, and one that actually WORKED.  Back then, as now, technical people often found work in armament design.

The strange thing is the REAL geniuses of this age (and hundreds of years before) were the people who designed the working windmills (NOT just sketches of non-workable fantasies!).
The first question in my mind is, why do we never hear about the people who designed these working windmills with the highly-developed, high-speed airfoils?  Could it be that the windmill inventors did not come from influential families?  
Anyway, you may notice that this guy "Darwin"'s "windmill" did not even have a good-quality windmill rotor as its propeller!  No, he used single-surface, cloth "blades" comprising a high-solidity rotor.  Maybe he was the Dave Santos of his day.  Single-skin.  

In any event, this guy making the videos seems to have a fixation on using sheet-metal louvered HVAC vents from hardware stores for wind energy capture, and yes, he is pretty much a crackpot.  As usual, it's all about lighting an LED using a computer fan.  You can also power such a device by simply blowing through it with your breath.  As always, there are a million ways to make SOME electricity from the wind, at SOME cost.  The question is, do you have an actual IMPROVEMENT over existing, highly-refined wind turbines?  The same question applied 500 years ago!  It is actually pretty funny to think that wannabe innovators today are STILL this STUPID after 1000 years of wind turbine refinement - STILL saying THE SAME STUPID THINGS about wind energy!  Really pretty amazing when you stop and think about it.

Recently I was contacted by a guy who had watched one of my videos, and wanted me to check out his "wind energy improvement".  "Sure", I said.  Of course he had nothing but a pile of typical, long-disproven "Professor Crackpot" features, all combined into one neat self-defeating package that might be expected to return about 1/10th (one tenth) the energy of a regular wind turbine of the same size.  Of course his device also used about 10 times the material to sweep the same area, rendering it about 1% as effective, in total, compared to modern wind turbines.  

I tried to be very nice and gentle with how I worded my response to him, but  by now, you can probably imagine how he reacted:  He was PISSED!!!
He could not understand WHY I "could not understand" why his idea was "clearly superior"!  He explained that his device was better because it sucked air through itself... - a perpetual motion machine I guess, right?  The wind powers a rotor that then powers the wind?  Obviously it made no sense, but the only thing he knew was he was a genius and his idea was the next big thing in wind energy and how was it possible I couldn't understand how superior it was?  Sound familiar yet? 

Well I suggested he might want to read a book on wind turbine design so he would understand why his "idea" had many disproven features, but to him, dedicated to his own ignorance, that just sounded like a sarcastic put-down.  You see, these people cannot be reasoned with.  And they are everywhere.  Even the IDEA of learning ANYTHING about the subject matter they purport to have surpassed is anathema.  The idea that he should read a book on something!?!??!?  OGM how could I be so mean?!?!?!?

Anyway, your guy Darwin was an overweight dim-bulb know-nothing from an influential family - by the way did you know the "scientists" of that time were busy telling "ignorant" peasants that stones could not possibly fall from the sky?  Why?  Because, well, as "scientists", they had to overcome the "ignorance" of all the facts that surrounded them.  Facts they knew nothing about because they were comfortably sheltered from reality.

Today it goes on still.  Instead of "coming from a good family", today's crackpots are "anyone with an internet connection" - still coming up with the same worthless crap as the equally-ignorant people from 500 years ago.  Wow, progress!

And by the way, the Darwin turbine idea is almost exactly like other, similar "ducted buildings directing airflow from all directions to a small wind turbine" that we've seen here.  NOT really all that similar to the "Aeromine" device.  But very similar or really nearly identical to other crackpot designs we've seen here before.

You would think in 500 or 1000 years, peoples' ignorance would have evolved, but no, the song remains the same.  Nope, today, with fantastic working wind turbines all around us, people are STILL spewing the same ignorant crap!!!  Unbelievable.  Oh, and your mention of E=MC^2 : Wow, sounds like Dave Santos again - throwing scientific-sounding crapola against the wall, hoping something will randomly stick.  

I hate to break it to you one more time, but to make a difference in wind energy, it helps to know how it works.  And remember, out of 1000 "new" wind energy concepts, we're lucky if a single one is even relevant, let alone an improvement.

No, writing several long, long paragraphs filled with with poor grammar, bad spelling, and questionable reasoning, amidst mentio0ning a million distractions, does not change anything - doesn't make a difference.  Not in the least.  But nice to hear from you.  :)

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

Freeflying | 2022-10-26 18:06:21 UTC | #531

all very valid points made. 
I’m afraid you won’t be braking any glass here? I know I’ve go mountains to climb. Somewhat try to put my English in order?  I hope to the stars I’m not going to have to revise but any oh! 

Darwin’s design as show on Robert Murray smith channel. Just show the multitude of paths taken over the years. In his latest forays into Darwin’s design? he made a bigger one? I sat thinking about Darwin’s efforts. Going you know how it would work if the flaps were co-flow wings?  Yes it a lot of work. But do able if, you want to waste and afternoon or two on it? Just for the giggles of looks what I’ve built? Ive just made Lego’s version of a wind turbine?  

I totally agree it can be a crap shoot sometimes. it’s very nice to see what you guys get up to. It been epic, the two throwing going on. Lots of sabre rattling. Even seen you guys bits chunks out of one another. I just share something I come around to finding. Though it interesting? Doubt I’d be able to complete normally. The diversify and specify thing.  I had fun modelling a co- flow module this week past. 
https://youtu.be/XaAFXSXakE0
Its in section luckily for me the arrow points airflow out.  Based it off golf ball dimples.  Imagining the wings or fuselage made from it? Obviously testing can be done in cardboard. My next plan was tin cans, Just to test it out?  Essential its a flying box girder. It flew down the stairs quite nicely. Though it did have quite the drop rate. Yet so see if it can sustain flight with input? 
Doubt I be winning any awards soon?  It was just basic nets folded to form required shapes. Just something I was toying with. Maybe to build something sci-fi esq. 

As it goes for us brits? getting hold of bog rolls hard enough.  With all the changes we’re experiencing, who knows where next week will get us? I like to think moon and stars? Let not get my hope up yet! Three prime ministers in a year? Keep it up, we might just have an advent calendar of pm’s before Christmas? 

I just hope it just a phase? Though I doubt it somehow? 
I will chime in from time to time? Even in the slow lane?
All I can say Is I’m not dead yet? 

Glad you finally figured out who I was? though for some purposes I was hoping to keep it strictly to Freeflying, or on the drawing board?  Saves me getting stalked everywhere I go. Would be bad to have a pint and a rando goes nuts?  I get blue lighted to hospital for something?  Though sort of made my first name obvious. I live and learn. 

Glad to see you back😊

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-29 13:38:25 UTC | #532

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/a-floating-wind-platform-has-been-installed-in-spain-50-meters-into-the-water

https://youtu.be/3rp_0F8_5g4?t=47

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrmW9cA8LX0

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-29 14:59:25 UTC | #533

I guess if I were WindSkies I would flag this as "not pertaining to AWE" and either delete it, or move it to SLOW CHAT.  Oh wait, it IS in "Slow Chat".  Not sure why everyone else gets nitpicked about whether their shizzle pertains to AWE.  I guess it depends who it is, what rules are applied.  :)

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

Freeflying | 2022-10-29 19:10:58 UTC | #534

As everyone’s familiar with what rigs are?  Seeing what @Windy_Skies posted, an interesting example of an engineering fail. Though it has to be said? it lasted longer than most people would have thought. 
https://blog.railwaymuseum.org.uk/daddy-long-legs-a-weird-and-wonderful-railway/
If I recall correctly? Destroyed in a storm. I hope x1 wind got there sums right? It looks like it could blow over? 
https://www.x1wind.com/

It saying it down wind? Sure that’s going to put enormous stress on the single anchor point? And rip that steel like paper?  Don’t quote me here?  but the angular momentum going to cause that rig to turn towards the water. Spain can get lashing of hurricane force winds especially on the northern coast where you have the monster 120ft waves. The surfers Mecca is prime example. If I were a betting man? I reckon one good storm, and that’s going to be in the drink? Even if the do counter the rotation forces?  Canaries you get force 10 and 12 winds. @dougselsam i wouldn’t  worry too much. Unless they planning to go airborne if a hurricane? I think awes will be ok?! The question I have is, if it like and oil rig but for wind? Is is a semisubmersible? Followed by? Does it have dynamic stabilisation? Didn’t see windy mention it?

It a great development for deep waters.  will it withstand nature’s brutality? If awes was to go the rig route? As competitive as the market is? How long do you think it would survive out it storm force winds?

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

Rodread | 2022-10-29 20:19:09 UTC | #535

Daddy Long Legs
A seafront train with electric motor railway feet in 1890's   WOW.
OK we can do anything we like now.
That is cool.
As for the X1
If that's a downwind turbine... Single leg at the front...
Anyone see a problem with the animation?

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-30 15:46:45 UTC | #536

[quote="Rodread, post:535, topic:1610"]
Anyone see a problem with the animation?
[/quote]

If I can successfully wrap my eyeballs around it, looks like maybe the rotor was installed backwards?  Like they just used a previous rendering with insufficient modification?
Also, the conceptual line-drawing image of the wake vorticity in the air just rotates with the rotor but doesn't travel downwind...
I always wonder about the stability of such downwind passive aim.  It wants to use the thrust force of the rotor to keep it positioned downwind, but the sideways reactive force of the skewed downwind rotor, once offset to either side, would tend to make the position oscillate from side to side.  So would the aim be stable or would it oscillate?  If you imagine a disc on the end of a pole, like the head of a nail laying down on its side, allowed to pivot from the point of the nail, if the head were to travel a bit to the right, the wind would spill off to the left off the slanted head, pushing the head further to the right.  So you have the reactive sideways force working against the thrust tendency to simply push the rotor downwind.  Which force predominates?  Would the aim be stable, or would it oscillate from side to side, constantly changing its aim, like an oscillating fan?

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

aokholm | 2022-10-30 19:29:48 UTC | #537

I’m not completely sure, but I believe a saw a yaw motor mentioned in one of their patents.

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

PierreB | 2022-10-30 19:59:54 UTC | #538

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Te7ZWHy5RaA

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

dougselsam | 2022-10-30 23:44:57 UTC | #539

Come to think of it, I do have a two-rotor downwind turbine that's been running here for 10 years nonstop, and it aims well.  One thing most people don't know about regular upwind turbines is, once spinning into the wind, they tend to stay aimed into the wind, even without a tail or other guidance.  In that case I think it's the thrust spilling off to either side of a skewed rotor pushes the rotor back straight into the wind.

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

Freeflying | 2022-10-31 09:31:27 UTC | #540

An interesting solution? Especially because it counters the rotation forces. 
Does that mean that with the right anchors the tower can itself, be prevented from over rotating?  Would this work for both upwind and down wind? In my mind it like that safety latch on doors. in this case, in the opposite direction to prevailing winds. 

I’d imagine your going to need some extremely beefy anchors? Cables being 310mm diameter and up? In old English that about a 1ft in diameter. 
With that in mind? What is the risk of the line snapping under repeated loading?  

If you are taking slack lines into account? With various tidal range? Being able to operate in various weather conditions?  Id worried the moment a force 9 Gale blew through it wouldn’t end up on its back? 82km/h winds. 

The model also shows still conditions. I’m not all too sure how that will translate to open oceans?  As you do get?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave
Know to sink shipping for generations. How would that translate to a tower system?  Keep in mind you just spent a few million getting that far?  Then the beast of our oceans comes to wrench your plans?  If you got a whole farm? That going to be expensive and costly to fix? 

https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/how-do-wind-turbines-survive-severe-storms

Just something to consider as your designing a turbine? 
How do you stop its self destruction mode in adverse conditions? Something  mr @dougselsam always points out?  
If It does self destruct?  the environment clean up will be equally costly?
As it running cost and hiring a recovery vessel?  Easy 1000 man hours before you get started? That’s being conservative? 

Is the idea worth pursuing? Yes! but only in the sense of fore-planning for the time being?  If you can you may want to see if you can get it into a wave pool? May help recreate some conditions it will encounter in the open ocean? Just to see how it performs then? Help sometimes to have independent results?  Then cross reference to other studies into naval and marine engineering? Would give you a better platform to work from? 
Great start though! A good approach!  Using the wind to stabilise the tower. 
If you get the chance? take a look and hydrometer designs?  or the ship that’s called flip?
https://youtu.be/azZIcoPI_CU
Always wanted a go?  Would be awesome to see a turbine built this way? Good luck!

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

PierreB | 2022-10-31 10:44:35 UTC | #541

[quote="Freeflying, post:540, topic:1610"]
An interesting solution?
[/quote]

No, it is just for fun. This turbine cannot orient by itself.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-31 12:14:38 UTC | #542

So I'm thinking about this: you want to wind a tether on a winch from a **static** point some distance from the winch. One assumes that there is a maximum deflection from vertical (from perpendicular to the winch) that the tether could have and that this is influenced by the tether tension. What is this maximum deflection and what other notable characteristics does the tether deflection have? Perhaps one could also assume that the shape of the wound tether on the winch is not flat, but crowned. What is the shape of that crown and what angle do the side walls have?

This is very easy to test, so maybe someone has experience with this, or maybe there is some theory.

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

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

Rodread | 2022-10-31 14:41:34 UTC | #543

I don't understand what you're asking

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-10-31 16:03:16 UTC | #544

Different wording then: you've attached a tether around a cylinder, the tether then goes through a fixed pulley and attaches to a weight. By rotating the cylinder you can raise the weight.

I am interested in what shape the winding around the cylinder makes, most importantly how wide it is going to be. How wide it is going to be is I think a function of the tether deflection I talk about above and the distance of the pulley from the cylinder and possibly the weight of the weight.

I'd like to know this because I would like to know how close to the cylinder I can put the pulley, as the closer the better.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-01 19:19:34 UTC | #546

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:542, topic:1610"]
One assumes that there is a maximum deflection from vertical (from perpendicular to the winch) that the tether could have and that this is influenced by the tether tension.
[/quote]

This is a good text. It is for wire rope however and I don't like the very small 1.5 degrees fleet angle. Maybe for the more flexible tether you can get away with a bigger fleet angle, just like you can get away with smaller pulley sizes. IIRC minimum pulley diameter for wire ropes is something like 20 times wire diameter.

[quote]
https://www.willardsays.com/winches-blocks-wire-rope/winch-installation/

### FLEET ANGLE

is the angle between the tensioned cable as it extends from either end of the winch drum to the first sheave relative to a line that extends from the center of the drum to the first sheave. If the fleet angle exceeds about 1.5 degrees it is likely that the cable will not spool onto the drum in uniform layers—the cable will “pile up” on the drum. Improper cable spooling leads to “nesting.” The cable should wind onto the drum and fill it from end to end building layer on top of layer.

Nesting is the name for what happens when heavily tensioned cable knifes down through loosely wound or “piled up” underlying layers and wedges into place. Consequently the nested cable will not pay off the drum and must be freed by the frustrated operator.

![|774x426](https://www.willardsays.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WinchInstall2.jpg)

The fleet angle depends on two factors as shown on the above sketch—the width of the winch drum (W) and the distance between the drum and the first sheave (D). The chart below can be used as a guide to determine the minimum distance (D) that corresponds to a fleet angle that will not exceed 1.5 degrees for various winch drums (W). Distance (D) is a minimum. There is no limit to the maximum distance (D).

[/quote]

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-02 07:01:14 UTC | #550

17 posts were merged into an existing topic: [Questions about Moderation](/t/questions-about-moderation/1593/119)

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-09 23:16:40 UTC | #551

The trees were Straight yesterday, heavy cast metal outdoor furniture was standing up on concrete.  Then it got windy.  22-foot diameter 10 kW wind turbine on a 120-foot tower, set sideways (furled) nonetheless kept producing more than rated power, exceeding 400 rpm (over 300 mph blade speed), multiple inverter resets, trees now set at an angle, furniture everywhere upside-down, wind turbine on 120-foot tower still intact, generating as we speak.
![Wind Bent Tree|375x500](upload://hOoSc0VKwzj4zfBN5qJGRIcmJ0U.jpeg)
![Windy Day Lawn Furniture|666x500](upload://jxJDjsHcQUfEriwBWZcTgLMRNzj.jpeg)

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-10 14:48:12 UTC | #552

You might want to tie young trees to stakes when you plant them, if you now don't.

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-10 15:50:43 UTC | #553

Thanks Windy.  I have hundreds of trees, on several ranch properties, many tied to stakes and poles.  This particular trees is like 20 years old, and pretty big.   It was ripped right out of the ground.
![fallen pepper tree|375x500](upload://lV6q9O2fpucOEhVykkK6LT6M1cQ.jpeg)

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-15 21:57:52 UTC | #554

https://www.reddit.com/r/tech/comments/yv0p10/how_this_underwater_buoy_captures_the_oceans/

[quote]
I am actually doing research on this exact thing. This is not new whatsoever. People have been researching it for decades. The issue here lies with the frequency response of the buoy. Waves come and go in a nonlinear pattern, in order for the buoy to work efficiently it can only operate in a linear pattern. Sure, you could represent it with a non linear system but at that point it consumes more energy than it provides. My research actually is over how to combine the two systems to produce maximum energy over a variety of frequencies.
[/quote]

[quote]
I’m actually doing my PhD in a group that works on offshore wind and wave energy. The US government is actually investing billions into this style of renewable energy. I feel like the genie is already out of the bottle.

For instance https://arpa-e.energy.gov/technologies/programs/sharks
[/quote]

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-16 01:40:02 UTC | #555

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:554, topic:1610"]
I am actually doing research on this exact thing. This is not new whatsoever. People have been researching it for decades.
[/quote]

Yes I just saw a comment on wave energy projects citing the common adage, similar to fusion research, "It's been right around the corner for 50 years".  I surfed a lot for years in some pretty big waves.  Seems like a lot of power out there.  But by this point, whenever you hear about one more wave energy project, the first reaction is Oh no, not another one - good luck with that - these things never seem to work out.  The thing is, wave energy is NOT nuclear fusion.  It seems like it should be fairly straightforward to develop wave energy.  But it just never seems to happen.  Not sure if the power is just not there, or if it is one more case of "idiots, idiots, idiots"...   :)

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

AweEnthusiast | 2022-11-18 15:10:40 UTC | #556

Thanks to DaveS:

***"***

Filling a gap in AWE history:
The diagram at the bottom (after the video below) shows rigging details that we now can do far better.

[Kite Obelisk Project @ Cal-Tech EDU - YouTube]
Note starboard pilot does a kite jump at the end of video. Wild.


https://youtu.be/j6fVVUzRup8

THE RIGGING DETAILS
Fuzzy image from broken link icon but clear enough to read the lines-
![Obelisk lifted|516x500](upload://a7CSq0P6uCVnwumv4NdWvj6WKMQ.png)

**An important detail is that no one at Caltech actually believed Egyptians raised monuments by kites, that was a droll counterfactual lark to show kites *could have* done so**.

**Dave Culp, having struggled to get kite power recognized as serious since the 1970s, when he pulled a small ship by kite across San Francisco Bay,** in defiance of the Oil Shock, was mortified no one would take the Obelisk feat seriously, that a few kilos of nylon lifted several tons of concrete. **Behold, the Engine of the Future in ancient-alien guise.**

Indeed, US Gov ignored **Dave Culp**. He ended his career doing ridiculously trivial research on parachute lines for the Army. To this day, DOE still prefers *anything but kites flown by specialist kite energy pros* to make power, but do fund inexperienced charlatans who correctly fill out the paperwork and jump thru any immaterial hoop to collect a fat check, for failing. **Dave Culp came to Austin in 2006, to woo me (Dave Santos) to work in kite energy, then trained me intensively to carry on his work.** DOE remains the biggest US impasse.

**"**

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-18 17:01:34 UTC | #557

[quote="AweEnthusiast, post:556, topic:1610"]
To this day, DOE still prefers *anything but kites flown by specialist kite energy pros* to make power
[/quote]

And who exactly could these "specialist kite energy pros" be?  How much energy are they generating by kites right now?  How much have they ever generated?  What makes them "pros"?  They make a living producing energy, using kites?

[quote="AweEnthusiast, post:556, topic:1610"]
but do fund inexperienced charlatans who correctly fill out the paperwork and jump thru any immaterial hoop to collect a fat check, for failing. 
[/quote]

It almost sounds like you are talking about "idiots, idiots, idiots"...
Yes there are certain requirements to be taken seriously in any endeavor.  For example, to be taken seriously in wind energy, significant levels of measured electrical output are key - if that does not happen, a project will not be taken seriously by any knowledgeable party.

And as I have long-lamented, there are a lot of hoops to jump through to get funding - but as Jesus of the bible is quoted therein to have advised, let the Romans keep their money - you don't need it.  

Anyone who really wants and really deserves funding can get it from many sources.  The question is whether funding-seekers have sufficient knowledge, skill, and follow-through to be worth funding from a chance-of-success standpoint.  

If someone not only has nothing compelling to offer, technologically, does not appear to understand the basics of wind energy, and has no track record of success, and is unable even to follow directions and fill out some paperwork accurately, they are unlikely to get funded - by anyone.  And why would they be?

Back to the Jesus thing:  If someone considers themself a "specialist kite energy pro" maybe they don't NEED funding from entrenched government bureaucracies.  Why would they let a slow-moving bureaucracy slow their rapid pace of advancement?  Then again, if they are NOT advancing, maybe they can sort-of "blame" it on such a slow-moving bureaucracy, as a substitute for making any progress or generating any significant amount of power, ever.  They probably don;t need funding to fail - they are perfectly capable of failing on their own - no funding needed!  :)

(By the way, I always thought the stone blocks could have been lifted by kites to build the pyramids.  Can't remember a time when I did not think of this.  I'm not talking about building a tower structure higher than an obelisk, and only then using a kite to provide a mere lifting force that could have been more easily provided by a few men pulling a rope, I'm talking about airlifting each block into place on the 400-foot-tall pyramids, using just a kite, no tower.)

That is a big problem with the circular firing squad and all the rest of the "kites to do physical work" enthusiasts:  They TALK about great works kites COULD achieve, but they NEVER DO IT.   You **never** see kites involved in timber extraction, excavation, moving water uphill - nothing.  It;s all BS from a bunch of lazy BS artists who are heavy on empty "talk", but nearly nonexistent on "action".

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-19 16:50:37 UTC | #558

I suppose if they were serious, they could easily build a scale model, put it in salt water, and see how well their idea actually works.  But wait for it "Nobody will take us seriously unless we build it at utility-scale"...
Of course - the next "symptom" of "The Syndrome"

Every time I see another attempt to place a ring generator at the outer periphery of blade-travel for any turbine, whether vertical or horizontal, I think of the Honeywell failed roof-mounted turbine with its slow-speed, high-solidity rotor. 
![image|690x388](upload://phmXYoAeSBbxH6UR3ctcKwMhi5V.jpeg)
 

It is amazing how the same common symptoms keep rearing up, like a game of "Whack-a Mole" - the mole (symptom) comes up out of its hole so you whack it, but it just pops up again from a different hole.  

If you try to tell any of these people they suffer from a well-recognized syndrome with defined symptoms, they can't grasp what you're talking about.  

I had a guy with a sketch of an archimedian screw in a tube with a peripheral ring generator, ask for my analysis and possible partnership.  It was painful to see his reaction as I tried to explain that his idea combined several known ill-advised and long-disproven "symptoms", that it was **a nice first try**, but he needed to get up to speed on how wind energy worked in order to improve it.  

He went berserk at the "nice try" diagnosis, dismayed that I could not understand the genius of his unassailable idea.  How could I not see that the archimedian tube would suck more air through itself, magically yielding a vastly increased output (like a perpetual motion machine?) and be such a huge improvement for wind energy?  

I tried to use the example of applying it to today;s utility-scale turbines at a 600-foot diameter and asked how much his tube might cost at 600 feet diameter and a half-mile long.  (???)

Well of course at that point he had to admit it might be better for smaller turbines, missing the entire point that I had only mentioned today's huge scale to illustrate the point that his design used way more material, equating to way more cost, than a regular turbine which, after 1000 years of development, uses comparatively very little material to sweep a huge area.

**It would not have even made sense to try to explain** how inefficient his backwards and inside-out design was, and there was no point in trying to explain any of the finer points regarding how turbines actually make power at high efficiency.  

Of course he was far far away from building even the most rudimentary prototype.  That;ls how he knew how much of a genius he was - no need to actually prove it - it was "obvious" from his sketch!

Like so many crackpots, he was allergic to facts, they would bounce off him like bullets bounce off Superman.  

His last communication to me promised to make a video showing the world what a terrible person I was.  At that point I was rolling on the ground laughing - as though this guy was EVER going to do ANYTHING but brag about what what he could not even comprehend was an idea that would use an order of magnitude more material to get an order of magnitude less power.  That;s two orders of magnitude of "terrible" - like literally 100 times worse than a regular turbine. 

It is all just SO PREDICTABLE - these people have nowhere to go but blame the experienced people for their own ignorance, trying to flip it over, as though **they** are the real authority and the experienced person just can't understand what makes their idea so great.  

Anyway, you've gotta appreciate the comedy.  Of course, it helps to understand wind energy, in order to get the joke.  :)

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

Freeflying | 2022-11-19 21:10:33 UTC | #559

Yep, I get the Honeywell hype. I got all excited about flashy new turbine nearly a decade back. Where is it now? The only part that is remotely interested now? is the stator ring! 
 
Going have to give top marks on picking out some of my old favourites. Just shows how bedazzled people are? when it comes to new shiny objects! 

Any others you wish to mention? Any more lost to the winds?

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

PierreB | 2022-11-20 00:19:58 UTC | #561

Hi Doug, the reason why you, @Freeflying, myself and a few others like Honeywell turbine despite everything, is that the worst wind turbine is even better than the best AWES. :)

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-20 01:44:46 UTC | #562

[quote="PierreB, post:561, topic:1610"]
you, @Freeflying, myself and a few others like Honeywell turbine
[/quote]

I really don't know of any Honeywell turbine in operation today.  Probably not designed for super-high winds which every location experiences at some point.  It is literally impossible for that design to be efficient.  I'm not aware of any decent output from them either - never heard anything good about one, from any knowledgeable wind person, ever.  The only person I've ever known to say anything good about them, which was already second-hand heresay, is about the worst source of bad information about wind energy I can think of.  Otherwise, never heard of one even working, nor do I know anyone who has ever even seen one.  I think probably only a very few were ever made.  Could be a collector's item by now, a candidate for a future *Professor Crackpot Museum of Bad Wind Energy Ideas*.  Either somebody talked some sense into Honeywell, or they realized how bad it was on their own.  Considering all the critical aviation components they produce, they don't need such a blemish on their reputation.  But it goes to show you, even supposedly "really smart people", if they don't KNOW about wind energy, will fall for all the typical beginner mistakes, because wind energy is non-intuitive until you really get it under your belt.  :)

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

Freeflying | 2022-11-20 04:58:58 UTC | #563

I know this might be a Segway a little? But came around in some god forsaken hour flipped on YouTube to find this? 
https://youtu.be/unEyynxkuZI
Considering that there were talks of co-flow jets? 
Do you know of anyone using an aerospike engine setup to generate electricity? Awes or otherwise? Had seen this and it reminded me of a few things. 
![image|516x344](upload://8UZ2HRSkiMfi1IDzFzktmO0zsd2.jpeg)
As far as I know awes haven’t gone down the aerospikie road? Though I could be easily wrong? It also reminds me a little of basking sharks
![image|440x463](upload://taB3XwikrmwL8vcm3fqoA5aqNin.jpeg)
& 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_dome
And all the fancy shaped ones? 
Even making think about topping a solar towers with one of these? 
Even bolting Honeywell ideas in? 
Expecting crackpot diagnosis? Though with your scope? Who knows?  What does @PierreB @Windy_Skies think?  As slow chat veterans? Anyone else wish to chime in? Feel free to do so!

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

AweEnthusiast | 2022-11-20 05:14:43 UTC | #564

[quote="dougselsam, post:557, topic:1610"]
And who exactly could these “specialist kite energy pros” be?
[/quote]

A response from Dave Santos:
Doug: "And who exactly could these “specialist kite energy pros” be?"

**"**

> Doug asks a good question, as these pro specialists are not known outside of their elite kite design circle. As true pro status requires payment for goods or services, so here are two such kite notables for Doug to learn about.
> 
> Obviously, Dave Culp, as noted here, is a first-class power kite legend, pulling a small ship already in the 70's, getting kites banned in America's Cup sailing as "unfair", and many other kite feats. Lifting a concrete monument by kite indeed requires specialized expertise armchair dreamers lack, and Culp was *paid*. Folks may confuse power v energy, but standing an obelisk up formally stores a bit of gravitational potential energy.
> 
> Dan Tracy is another sort of "specialist kite energy pro" that DOE NREL specifically rejected, but he pioneered a kite power ferry between Hawaiian Islands, and created the Pacific 40, the first AWES production run that *sold out*, one unit donated by kPower to the American Wind Power Center (Museum). These units charged batteries as a primary app.
> 
> A few more "specialist kite energy pros" could be cited, if Doug is still wanting to know who these rare folks are. On this Forum, Olivier and Roddy count, whatever Doug thinks about them being paid. DOE has not as a rule funded such folks.
> 
> Doug: It almost sounds like you are talking about “idiots, idiots, idiots”…"
> 
> Not exactly. Charlatans deserve scorn, but not our practitioner and scholarly experts in kites. Doug's "idiots" insult is too crude for successful AWE funding scammers. "Professional criminals" is closer to the mark.
**"**

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

PierreB | 2022-11-20 13:41:07 UTC | #565

I remember that kite specialists in general did not have a good opinion of AWE with energy kite. I know this from having officially presented the [FlygenKite](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txsTJl27cuo) (see the link below, in French language) at the 2012 Dieppe International Festival.

https://www.lemonde.fr/vous/article/2012/09/10/profusion-de-couleurs-au-dessus-de-dieppe_1758022_3238.html

> Ce sera aussi l'occasion de découvrir les dernières innovations, comme [le "Flygen Kite", ou l'"éolienne cerf-volant"](http://flygenkite.com/), prototype d'éolienne conçu par Pierre Benhaïem [...]

Translation:
It will also be an opportunity to discover the latest innovations, such as the "Flygen Kite", or the "kite wind turbine", prototype wind turbine designed by Pierre Benhaïem [...]

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-20 13:57:29 UTC | #566

[quote="AweEnthusiast, post:564, topic:1610"]
Doug’s “idiots” insult is too crude for successful AWE funding scammers. “Professional criminals” is closer to the mark.
[/quote]

Oh, sorry - that's a term from wind energy for inexperienced people promoting idiotic ways to **supposedly** improve wind energy.  
OK so it sounds like your "specialist kite **energy pros**" are defined as either people who have developed kites in the past, but **not any AWE systems**, or a few AWE people who have proceeded at a reasonable scale, with limited results, and therefore have not needed large amounts of funding.   It reminds me of "**advanced** kite networks", and you and John and Wayne trading made-up false credentials like "former Director of Research at Boeing" which was an outright falsehood, , or "President Pro-Tem of AWEIA" as though that was ever anything but your own internal back-and-forth within "the firing squad".  Building an online house-of-cards of supposed "credentials" that all started with Wayne as "former Director of Research at Boeing" when in fact he never even worked for Boeing at all.  Now it;s on to "Jalbert" so you can pretend to have invented a gliding kite, when again, that is simply not true.  You contacted the guy's living relatives.  More BS from DaveS.  More bragging ahead of any accomplishments, trying to take credit for something you have never done in all your years of online BSing.

In my humble opinion, calling hypothetical-yet-undefined configurations of kites as "advanced" is just a symptom of how you operate:  Congratulating yourself ahead of any fact, celebrating future  results with no actual results to celebrate, trying to bullshit your way to perceived success on the internet, without ever actually doing anything noteworthy.  A typical example of the often-found absurdity of social media.  One more big-talker with nothing behind it, like the Wizard of Oz "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"  

Out of the whole list, I'd say Dan Tracy could actually fit the definition of an "energy pro" of any kind.  Technically, he has sold a few of his devices.  I like them.  They represent the most simple and obvious method of wind energy using a kite, which nobody else has bothered to pursue, probably because they couldn't get a patent on such a simple idea.  So I guess Makani and Skysails do not fit, because they're not on your list of low-output favorites who have just barely gotten anything to work, maybe still running model-air[plane propellers backwards as a substitute for rotors? 
The kite-reelers at Makani were not "kite energy pros" because even though, as individuals, the personnel were getting paid to make energy using a kite, but they are not on your list of favorite small-players or non-players.  The kite-reelers I guess don't count, right?  Skysails supposedly sold a few systems, but it seems nobody is using them, so they don;t count.  Seems to me that the definition of "kite energy pros" is anyone who daveS favors, **even if they've never flown a kite!**
Big talk. no evidence - what else can anyone say?

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

AweEnthusiast | 2022-11-20 17:52:16 UTC | #567

[quote="dougselsam, post:566, topic:1610"]
Seems to me that the definition of “kite energy pros” is anyone who daveS favors, **even if they’ve never flown a kite!**
[/quote]

Santos: True, because it's my opinion being requested. The Wright Brothers had never made and flown an airplane before doing so. DOE's historic roots are scientists who had never built an A-Bomb, and so on.

Doug has a lazy habit of misremembering and mangling quotes that he is helpless to cite by original documentary source (place, date), for the purpose of agitated ad hominem attacks.

Wayne German clearly was the figure who emerged from Boeing's Flight Research Insititute as the public voice of AWE, that met at Boeing MoF, Tacoma. He was respected by the likes of fellow FRI members, Paul MacCready and Bert Rutan. Beyond mere "directors", these are gods of flight. Let Doug claim this does not count as honorable, that DOE never properly supported Wayne and his noble circle because they had not already done AWE. Wayne has flown power kites. I taught Wayne to fly kites on Hood River, where kitesurfing was born, as invented by Boeing's Billy Roeseler and his son Corey.

If any SuperTurbine is in regular use today, Doug is on a par with Honeywell, whose turbine stands among a hundred or so outside of the American Wind Power Center Museum. Not only do I see it every time I visit, but I also know the curators that struggle to maintain it. We especially love fringe oddball turbines. Doug should donate an ST to fly alongside Honywell's.

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-20 19:29:26 UTC | #568

[quote="AweEnthusiast, post:564, topic:1610"]
these pro specialists are not known outside of their elite kite design circle.
[/quote]

Circular firing squad.  Wayne never worked at Boeing.  I always have at least one grid-tied SuperTurbine operating here.  one has been operating continuously for approx. 10 years now and is still spinning.
Yes I figured you'd tell us you've seen a Honeywell turbine at the wind energy museaum you have so often mentioned when defending the Honeywell turbine as "a good turbine."  I had already said the only person who I have ever heard defend it was about the worst source of wind energy information I've ever known.  You claimed the guy running the museum, Coy Harris, was your distant relative, who you now say struggles to keep the Honeywell turbine running?  Or maybe more likely it is not running at all?  As usual, all you've got to offer is name-dropping, saying you know people, citing false credentials, and broken promises of impending success, like the Jalbert-bragging that started a half-year ago, and which I will assume no power has been generated, or other progress with the cloth triangles.  Extrapolate to 2030, and it sounds like 7-8 more years of empty talk to match the last 14 - you are 2/3 of the way to your 2030 target for commercialized AWE, and you have yet to participate in any of it.

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-20 19:38:23 UTC | #569

Hello Jason - every wind turbine blades and aircraft wing uses what has been called "The Coanda Effect" (named after Africa's largest and deadliest snake, the Coanda) since that is the effect that keeps the flow attached to the vacuum side of the blades, providing the vacuum that pulls the blades along.

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

AweEnthusiast | 2022-11-21 04:09:50 UTC | #570

Santos:
"
Doug, Note here I classify the Honeywell as I do the ST, as a "fringe oddball turbine", never as “a good turbine.” You make false quotes up to suit biases, lacking accurate recollection of what was written and publicly archived, then make excuses for never being able to produce the original quote, like all the "idiots" easily do.

The Great Coy Harris is now retired, and new Windmill Curators carry on in his tradition as a "real wind person". Surely no one before Coy worked on so many kinds of turbines, lovingly restoring most of them, from a centuries-old wooden windmill to a modern large-scale HAWT, and everything in-between. Coy and I are related via DC Harris, a great uncle of mine. We are pioneer stock of Texoma, the Comancheria, true "children of the wind".

This place is a "home" to me. Wind folks of all kinds are "family".
"

![1668973446643blob|222x357](upload://cNXvmQMh3Oj5loiHCL8agHnlfoF.png)

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-21 14:21:04 UTC | #571

[quote="AweEnthusiast, post:570, topic:1610"]
You make false quotes up to suit biases, lacking accurate recollection of what was written and publicly archived, then make excuses for never being able to produce the original quote
[/quote]

Dave:  I'm only going to read the first paragraph of your post.  If there was ONE THING firmly established in the old forum, it was the FACT that you continually issue false statements.  The issue, with Joe being **the sole arbiter of all things**, became not a question of your falsehoods, which was firmly established, but **a technicality** of **whether you were **intentionally** lying, or simply mistaken**.  That became Joe's feeble fallback position regarding your posts. It is a common problem with people who continually issue false statements, such as politicians:  The question is often "Are they intentionally lying or are they just that stupid"?  Joe would take the position that we could not PROVE you INTENTIONALLY made false statements.
Now you, after recently accusing me of "ad hominem attacks", (like a little kid trying to "tell the teacher", hoping you can "out-technicality" me) you issue yet another false statement denying a previous false statement.  Now it is a lie about a previous mistaken statement.  But we can;t "prove" your memory is intact, right?  So we can;t truly say with 100% certainty that you are lying - you might just be mistaken. 
I will say this, because I REMEMBER YOUR EXACT WORDS, WHICH I ACTUALLY QUOTED:  You **explicitly stated** that the Honeywell debacle was **"a good turbine"**.  Supposedly as told to you by Coy Harris.  The reason?  You don't know anything about wind turbine design, and so you fell for it like other know-nothing idiots, which includes the "authors" who regurgitate laying press-releases as "articles"...
Now we're onto another subject, WHETHER YOU **EVER SAID** IT WAS A GOOD TURBINE.  YES YOU DID.  Your exact words included "is a good turbine", describing the Honeywell turbine.  But in your passage, above, you just made an EXACT, 100% FALSE STATEMENT.  Is it "a lie"?  I don't even care.  It makes no difference.   It is just one more false statement, denying EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID, WORD FOR WORD.  Personally, I do not think it is productive wasting any more time responding to your incessant nonsense.  Why don't you do what you said you would do half a year ago and show us how much power your collection of cloth triangles can make pulling trains up the sides of an open pit?  When will we witness this latest absurdity?  (As though a train is just some cheap item anyone could easily add to a wind energy system).   Note to the rest of the class:  Please do not take my lack of responding to Santos, in the future, as an indication that I have no response.  It is not that I HAVE NO response, it is that there is NO POINT WASTING MY TIME OR ATTENTION TO ANSWER more false statements.  It is more sensible to simply ignore them.  My time and attention are valuable, not to be squandered any more than they already have been responding to nonsense and lies from the same old source.  Have a McDay.  :)

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-22 05:16:35 UTC | #572

[quote="kitefreak, post:13, topic:446"]
 Only expert kite flyers can currently reliably fly kites.
[/quote]

OK I'm thinking "I could reliably fly kites when I was 8 years old" - 
or how about 
"Anyone could reliably fly a kite - you could always rely on them getting stuck in a tree and then someone's dad would have to untangle the string"

[quote="kitefreak, post:13, topic:446"]
 Doug simply lacks realistic patience for kite automation to develop within the wonderful R&D community. None of them are “idiots”.
[/quote]

I'm thinking:  "NONE of them?  Are you SURE?"

And now kPower's coup-de-grace of 2019 - stand back world:
[quote="kitefreak, post:13, topic:446"]
the most versatile night-flying advertising is digital projection on a suitable kite. Projection mapping on 3D figure kites will be a fantastic spectacle. kPower is developing kite concepts along these lines
[/quote]

So funny, I was lamenting the lack of meaningful activity on my favorite chat group website, so I decided to click on "unread messages" and the first message I saw was Dave Santos, and the second sentence was about me, and something I "simply lack".  What are the chances of that?  Anyway, I was glad to read that "kPower" is (was in 2019) **developing digital projection mapping on 3D figure kites for nighttime advertising.**  I see this message that first tries to cut me down (that's OK, I can take it!  :)), then brags about yet another kite breakthrough that kPower "is working on",from 3.5 years ago, so I was curious to see the results after all this time.  

I know when daveS says he is working on something, he is serious and reliable, so you can be sure he will quickly share his characteristically amazing results, but I guess I must have missed his amazing results this time.

Hey DaveS, where can I see a video of your (kPower's) digital projection mapping on a 3D figure kite that you were working on?  Oh wow, I can't wait to see it.  This is gonna be great!  OK come on now, the suspense is killing me.  Where can we see this kPower breakthrough, today?  Thanks in advance!  (Oh boy, I'm so excited!)   :)

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

Rodread | 2022-11-22 07:56:04 UTC | #573

Hmmm
laser projection onto materials...
https://youtu.be/yFprzIGSGpM
This kid is awesome but
do check the warning at around 7min what happens when it's shone on fabric too long

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

PierreB | 2022-11-22 16:12:40 UTC | #574

[quote="dougselsam, post:568, topic:1610"]
I always have at least one grid-tied SuperTurbine operating here. one has been operating continuously for approx. 10 years now and is still spinning.
[/quote]

In the Twin range or similar with [more rotors than two](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MEuvR7GbUc), rather than the Serpentine range, right?

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-22 17:25:01 UTC | #575

[quote="PierreB, post:574, topic:1610"]
In the Twin range or similar with [more rotors than two](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MEuvR7GbUc), rather than the Serpentine range, right?
[/quote]

Hi Pierre:  The Serpentine Prototype and the California Energy Commission Prototype, now on a relatively low stationary mount, have been run occasionally for demo purposes over the years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MEuvR7GbUc
  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOGqURa1a8g&t=2s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddliyfspmr4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0hrH8sBgeU&t=7s

The SuperTwins(TM) at a 10-foot diameter, have been run for years at 3 of my test sites, including here.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zxML4lFbFw&t=5s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47NWMpWWkFY&t=6s

Paul Gipe ran an 8-foot-diameter early version in Tehachapi for a year, calling it "the most powerful turbine he has ever tested". 
 
A long demo with eight (8) 46" diameter rotors on a tubular Chromoly steel driveshaft ran very smoothly at high speed, unloaded, but the generator was an induction motor that was not connected to anything, but if it held together unloaded (going very fast) in high winds, that was a good sign:
  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r2Si2Czpf4

We used the same generator on another demo unit that had many many 5-foot diameter rotors, for a demo for a film crew that flew in to do a video on us.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P55HfnGR6kQ&t=5s

The "5-Star" turbine with 5 rotors, each sporting 5 thin blades, which tilted back flat for overspeed protection, ran into a battery-charging (grid tied system with batteries) for months at one of our test sites, producing high power:
Here is a video of it producing 4 kW:  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20S5Gu-ZbfI

4 kW is really too much power for the alternators we currently manufacture in-house, so this 5-star turbine, which was able to produce well over 4 kW at a 5-foot diameter (unheard of in wind energy) eventually burned out its alternator in sustained high winds at one of our test sites.  Needs adjustment to reduce high-wind power output.

An earlier 5-Star Turbine featuring a thinner-stator version of our in-house-built alternator, nonetheless exceeded 5000 Watts in truck testing a couple of times
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA6YVWYyRvc&t=26s

including as a demo for NREL at a Windpower trade show at Staples Center in Los Angeles: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exjjMm_h8r4&t=1s

This implies that the thicker-stator version could logically hit 7000-8000 Watts, but in reality, such high outputs will eventually burn out a generator of that size, so further adjustments for overspeed protection are needed if we wanted to produce and sell such a machine.  

Now really, very few customers would have sites with such high sustained winds to burn out the generator, but for people in a good wind resource, and they are the ones you really have to focus on, it needs more work to reduce the output in extreme winds.  Nonetheless, the concept as a whole is quite viable, and could easily be scaled up, both in length, and by multiple units mounted side-by-side.

The one that has been running for 10 years here is a spring-loaded, tilting Firefly with just two (2) downwind rotors at a 3-foot diameter.  It is still running to this day into a small grid-tie inverter. 

Anyway, we've tested a lot of versions here over the years, and sold a few SuperTwins, including to Europe.  

I feel like we've barely scratched the surface of the possibilities and I am hoping to get back into wind energy more, as time left from running my ranch properties allows - did not even renew our ski passes this year.

Our latest wind energy project was to once again replace our 10 kW Bergey turbine on a 120-foot tower that powers this facility.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq_C2WBPpyM

This is our third (3rd) one.  The last one burned out due to installer error leaving one of 3  power wires unconnected but just contacting its terminal.  It started making a buzzing noise that the manufacturer insisted was "normal" so when the wire eventually fell away from its terminal, the turbine went into a very loud single-phase operation, and the furling cable was broken as they all did before someone found a solution to that, just as Bergey stopped producing that model anyway, but with no way to shut it down, it burned out its alternator.  The good news is I got a used one from a neighbor who got the government to buy him a new one because they had to move his for an Army Corps of Engineers drainage project, so now I have two, one to rebuild with a new (used) stator, if I can manage to successfully remove the old stator - it is a big generator that weighs a half-ton.

There are lots more videos and lots more testing that has taken place.

OK gotta go now.  Time to go work out, then cook some breakfast.  :)

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

PierreB | 2022-11-22 17:53:37 UTC | #576

[quote="dougselsam, post:575, topic:1610"]
4 kW is really too much power for the alternators we currently manufacture in-house, so this 5-star turbine, which was able to produce well over 4 kW at a 5-foot diameter (unheard of in wind energy) eventually burned out its alternator in sustained high winds at one of our test sites.
[/quote]

Quite impressive. Do you remember the weight (with and without the generator) of the 5-star, and the wind speed (I guess about 13 m/s)? 

Concerning Serpentine, I thought that it was indeed for the demonstrations.

You could use this post to present your company.

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-22 18:20:47 UTC | #577

[quote="PierreB, post:576, topic:1610"]
Do you remember the weight (with and without the generator) of the 5-star, and the wind speed (I guess about 13 m/s)?
[/quote]

Hi Pierre:  The generator was a thin-stator version, probably 25 lbs or so for the generator alone - our thicker version weights 35 lbs, but could be made **much** lighter.  The rest of the turbine included a minimal steel frame and thin-wall steel driveshaft, with cast-iron bearing assemblies supporting the driveshaft, so while relatively lightweight for a fixed-mount turbine, that exact configuration would be heavier than necessary for an airborne application.

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

Freeflying | 2022-11-25 18:05:19 UTC | #578

https://youtube.com/@psv62
There a few things here that might interest a few of you? 
Maglev toy and a distinctive looking impeller turbine. Randomly popped into my feed. Don’t know how well it would scale? But something you can toy with? Looked a lot like a Francis turbine? 
https://youtu.be/-7ZudDHCSgM
Enjoy?

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-26 04:11:09 UTC | #579

Wow, the only new post in a few days.  
Nothing new in AWE I guess, Huh?
The moment my eyeballs saw the blue thing, in less than 1 second, my mind knew who had posted this.
How many volts something can make is irrelevant.  All the beginners like to measure Volts, as though Volts alone tells you anything... 
You can walk on carpet on a dry day and get what, a few thousand volts when you touch a doorknob?  Someone should make a generator using carpet, shoe soles, and doorknobs! :)

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

tallakt | 2022-11-26 10:35:33 UTC | #580

[quote="Freeflying, post:578, topic:1610"]
But something you can toy with?
[/quote]

Its kind of neatly done, but I am «surprised» that someone would put so much work into a concept so far from state of the art understanding of efficient wind energy production. As it stands it would fall more in the «arts» category than «wind energy»

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

Freeflying | 2022-11-26 12:38:46 UTC | #581

@dougselsam what an interesting mod suggestions? A wind powered vandergraph generator? They are looking at ways to generate electricity without magnets? Rubber and polyester in a TENG set up? Would just need pickups and your away. Pantograph perhaps? @tallakt well if wind energy can have some class to it? The sure an arts inspired turbine is not new. There are plenty’s out there. I was just looking at it for components and assembly angle. How big can you make one? What would be optimal diameter in this case?  I’m looking at this being nesting in a far bigger shroud?

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

tallakt | 2022-11-26 17:21:12 UTC | #582

[quote="Freeflying, post:581, topic:1610"]
@tallakt well if wind energy can have some cl
[/quote]

Maybe you will find others who are triggered by this design, but for me its just not very compelling to improve on a poor starting point. For arts I prefer the more serious stuff, paintings, music, dance, theatre etc.

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

Rodread | 2022-11-26 17:52:33 UTC | #583

Yeah, that turbine design could learn  lot more from art.
It's too solid...The blades are too close...

**“Space is the Breath of Art”**

Frank Lloyd Wright

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-27 01:54:28 UTC | #584

[quote="Freeflying, post:581, topic:1610"]
A wind powered vandergraph generator? They are looking at ways to generate electricity without magnets?
[/quote]

The original windfarm turbines in the 1980's used simple (Tesla-invented) induction motors - no magnets.  Overspeed protection was stall-control by the limited RPM range - the wind gets too fast the blade automatically stall due to a too-high angle of attack.

Regarding the VanDerGraff generator, I think it should be done!  How hard could it be?  Then you run a wire up it and attach a key at the low end, put on a Benjamin Franklin costume with a wig and everything and do demos'.  Tell people they can experience getting struck by lightning, and luckily, there is a VanDerGraff generator "just in case there is no lightning" - the show muc go on!  "OK now just touch this key..."    :)

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

Freeflying | 2022-11-27 08:40:33 UTC | #585

Yep, I like your thinking.  Though I’d lean Into, “look what Thor left behind”? Shocking!  he could’ve clean up after himself? Ben Franklin certainly would be a fun opportunity. The weird and wild world of flying sparks. 

Tesla induction motor looks like it going to be a Sunday good read.  If I recall? usually these type of motors have the crab claws set up. where the flux is shifted between pins. Often know as universal motors/ alternators. Working on switch reluctance. A good choice for micro generation. Parts are easy to come by.  Scrap washing machine or an old automotive workshop. Van der Graff  generator could be part of the design with incorporated induction motor? Just depends on the drive belts?  Worth a go? Added bonus is anywhere in that drive belt can generate electricity. Which some parts can be used to excite the coils.  Not not sure if you can get a 1 Tesla field coil for wind?  I know they have a multiple Tesla field strengths for tokamak and stellarator. As far as things go the strength of the magnetic field is key. Could help with the scale of thing?  Taking your basic design to previously unreachable highs. All thanks to wind power van der graffs.  Given half a chance it’s skate/trolley wheels and polycotton belts. All while dressed as historical figures?  Neat idea!

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-27 21:31:56 UTC | #586

https://github.com/OpenFAST/openfast This might have wind turbine airfoil data.


https://forum.openscad.org/UIUC-Airfoil-Coordinates-Database-td20264.html
[quote]
Hi,

I set up a page that displays the [UIUC](http://m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/ads/coord_database.html) Airfoil Coordinates Database:
http://chaaawa.com/airfoils/
[/quote]

http://airfoiltools.com/airfoil/naca4digit

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-29 16:58:54 UTC | #587

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2019.0118 A chordwise offset of the wing-pitch axis enhances rotational aerodynamic forces on insect wings: a numerical study

Michael Dickinson (CalTech) 1: How Flies Fly: Lift
Michael Dickinson (CalTech) 2: How Flies Fly: Power
Michael Dickinson (CalTech) 3: How Flies Fly: Control

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQI9yZX8HzM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqJazF-RHV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv5vDW59hbY

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-29 20:13:40 UTC | #588

Nice:  A biologist tries to explain "lift".  His "Bernoulli" explanation is long discredited as not sufficient even to explain lift from a bird or airplane wing.  There is just not enough lift generated for flight by the mere difference in transit time from top to bottom, and that includes the fact that the air flows back, over the top, much faster than the wing's forward motion.
I only watched the first video - one could waste all day listening to this crapola.  I hope to do a video on the correct reason wings fly, which I understand, but which "nobody has figured out yet" according to "authorities" such as ***Scientific American***:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-one-can-explain-why-planes-stay-in-the-air/

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-29 21:03:16 UTC | #589

[quote="dougselsam, post:588, topic:1610"]
Nice: A biologist tries to explain “lift”.
[/quote]

He has studied and has done experiments on how insects fly for the last three decades. This is an excellent talk. He gives short and very clear overviews of the relevant theories applicable to his research and shows the results of his and others' experiments. He shows high speed footage, force measurements, and nice simulations of results. His research has furthered our understanding of insect flight with the help of novel experimental setups. I recommend watching the full video, and the others too.

The bit on leading edge vortices being important for rotors and insect flight but quickly dissipating in translational motion was new to me, for example.

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

tallakt | 2022-11-29 22:28:07 UTC | #590

Wow I havent seen that openscad foil database. Curious if it works with my bladegen code…

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

dougselsam | 2022-11-30 03:09:42 UTC | #591

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:589, topic:1610"]
This is an excellent talk. He gives short and very clear overviews of the relevant theories applicable to his research and shows the results of his and others’ experiments.
[/quote]

Oh yeah, I was paying attention - some nice stuff.  Only thing is, like I saw David Attenborough do in another video about pterosaurs, he just recites the Bernoulli myth that "the reason" for lift is faster air on the top surface.  That has been debunked since forever.  Calculations alone show that air velocity alone cannot produce sufficient low pressure to explain the amount of lift generated by an airfoil.  This is the problem with "science":  Outdated wrong explanations live on, enjoying habitual and unquestioning "legitimacy", while in reality, with wings being used all over the world for over a century, "science" still can't explain how they work.   This is funny, and it leaves the door wide open for people who CAN explain how it works to do so.  Aside from that, of course I could watch that sort of stuff all day, but have other things to do.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-11-30 21:23:53 UTC | #592

Not related to your comment, but clicking through the references gets you here for example: https://m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/uiuc_lsat_airfoilsTested.html and then test data and commentary for the SG6040 airfoil, which I noticed is thicker than most of the rest: https://m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/uiuc_lsat/Low-Speed-Airfoil-Data-V3.pdf

For AWE I guess the sailplane airfoils make most sense to look into, or perhaps the thicker ones for their strength.

[quote]
SG6040, SG6041, SG6042, & SG6043 Over the last 12 years a considerable number of airfoils have been developed for HAWTs. For example, the advanced NREL airfoils such as the S822/S823 documented in Volume 1 and 2 provide both aerodynamic and structural advantages as compared with the myriad of aircraft airfoils adapted for wind turbine use. There are, however, only a limited number of wind-turbine airfoils designed exclusively for wind turbines with small blades. To fill this niche, a total of four airfoils were designed for use on 1 − 5 kW rated power wind turbines.

During this design effort, the focus was to create a series of airfoils that could be used along the entire span of small variable-speed wind turbine blades. Considering the low operating Reynolds number and beneficial centrifugal stiffening effects of small HAWTs, the thickness of the primary airfoils (SG6041, SG6042, and SG6043) for use at the 75% blade station was fixed at 10%. Additionally, a 16% root airfoil (SG6040) was designed to accommodate possible large root bending moments and large blade-stiffness requirements. Several other design constraints were imposed on both the primary and root airfoils. The primary airfoils were designed to achieve as high an L/D as possible for 0.6 ≤ Cl ≤ 1.2 with 250,000 ≤ Re ≤ 500,000. The root airfoil was designed to operate at Cl = 1.1 for Re = 200,000 making it suitable for use over the inboard 30% of the blade. For all four of these airfoils, it was desired to keep drag near the design lift coefficient as low as possible. However, owing to the high design Cl’s, the shallow upper-surface pressure gradients needed to produce low drag lead to aft-loaded airfoils. As a consequence, the SG6040 — SG6043 series of airfoils have fairly high pitching moments (−0.08 < Cm,c/4 < −0.14).

Concentrating on baseline airfoil performance, penalties owing to off-design conditions are relatively small except for Re ≤ 100,000 where laminar separation effects cause large increases in drag. Such performance penalties, however, are typical of most low Reynolds number airfoils. As indicated in Fig. 4.8, the new airfoils produce L/D’s that equal or exceed those of previously existing low Reynolds number airfoils applicable to HAWTs. 
[/quote]

For designing your own wind turbine blades, which I was looking into, QBlade seems to make sense. That does allow importing of .dat files: [Optimized Wind Turbine Blade Design using QBlade](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj3bz8E0duA).

[3D Printed Wind Turbine Blade Design - YouTube Playlist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV3RIh7CrM0&list=PL-G2KllxqYo_Vwz4qac-2K-y4XRWgg15w)

[importing .dat files into QBlade](https://sourceforge.net/p/qblade/discussion/1195932/thread/bdecf954/)

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-01 01:46:01 UTC | #593

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:592, topic:1610"]
For AWE I guess the sailplane airfoils make most sense to look into
[/quote]

Or slope soaring / racing airfoils. Browsing https://m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/ads/coord_database.html and then searching for Jochen for example gives this:

http://www.f3f.eu/index.php/modelle/virage/itemlist/user/410-marioperner
[quote]
Auf RC-Network wird im Laufe der nächsten Woche die Entstehungsgeschichte des F3f-Modells "V-JX" in Form eines mehrteiligen Berichts veröffentlicht werden.

Die aerodynamische Auslegung des V-JX stammt von Jochen Günzel. Er hat bereits Anfang 2020 mit der Entwicklung eines modernen Profilstraks für F3f begonnen und alles in einem umfangreichen Bericht zusammengefasst. Die Profildaten sind öffentlich verfügbar, was in weiterer Folge dann auch für den V-JX gelten wird.
Die praktische Umsetzung angefangen beim CAD, über das Fräsen der Formen bis hin zum eigentlichen Bau des Modells war mein Part und folgt dann im Bericht nach Jochens Teil.

Entwicklung des Profilstraks "JX-GS": https://www.rc-network.de/threads/entwicklung-eines-f3f-profils.787618/

Entwicklung des Modells "V-JX": https://www.rc-network.de/threads/projekt-v-jx.11886149/#post-12197805

Profilstrak "JX-GS": https://www.rc-network.de/threads/entwicklung-eines-f3f-profils.787618/page-7#post-11919778
[/quote]

[quote]
* F3F, a class of competition for radio-controlled model gliders, administered by the [Fédération Aéronautique International](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A9d%C3%A9ration_A%C3%A9ronautique_Internationale). The competition involves flying 10 consecutive laps of a 100m course as fast as possible. The course is laid out on the side of a hill with the wind blowing onto it. Hence the informal name of F3F: 'slope racing'.
[/quote]

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-01 14:18:02 UTC | #594

It is indeed interesting to survey the gamut of airfoil choices that abound from every direction.  However you may also be familiar with the term "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic".  Or maybe a discussion of what music the band should play as the Titanic sinks.  In my limited experience, getting too far off intro the weeds in such details as a specific choice of airfoils is best reserved for fine-tuning a system that is known to work well, rather than something to fixate on when trying to develop a configuration that simply works well.  If it looks like an airfoil, walks like an airfoil, quacks like an airfoil, and, hopefully, flies like an airfoil, it will probably work fine for whatever you are working on.  Just sayin'...  :)

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-01 16:43:04 UTC | #595

   https://youtu.be/k3WQPFSDuvI?t=799

These projects are discussed in the above: 

https://www.magpie-ports.eu/magpie-project/

https://www.currentdirect.eu/the-project/

The Magpie project includes a blue-water electrical charging buoy and an autonomous electrical barge for example. Current Direct is about large swappable batteries for ships.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-01 16:49:59 UTC | #596

EDP Atlantic Mission | The Full Story https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH4VQmyVky8

Turn on cc.

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

tallakt | 2022-12-01 22:16:53 UTC | #597

[quote="dougselsam, post:594, topic:1610"]
If it looks like an airfoil, walks like an airfoil, quacks like an airfoil, and, hopefully, flies like an airfoil, it will probably work fine for whatever you are working on. Just sayin’… :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Yes I totally agree. Airfoils is probably the wrong place to start, but: Some AWE groups are looking into multifoil wings, and these are complex machines that do require going somewhat in depth to get decent performance. But for as long as a larger single foil wing is sufficient, it should be the first choice

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

Rodread | 2022-12-02 09:17:31 UTC | #598

All good arguments but
Meh, Just let the massive parameter set brains of computers do the designing for us instead
![Screenshot 2022-12-02 091232|690x242](upload://3DGH9VLOJdqSFBcQlLUzkzocAHD.jpeg)
![Screenshot 2022-12-02 091200|690x228](upload://cyUNZcxV3jrGNKtwS1zz8hteMhW.jpeg)
![Screenshot 2022-12-02 091127|690x273](upload://pDAf7BOgJCghVKgWD6nuuvzOWbp.jpeg)
![Screenshot 2022-12-02 091048|690x239](upload://5x4P6cPuhKBbHKuat78H9h1U0Yc.jpeg)
I don't think it came up with anything new but - still cool
Also 
Thanks for the How flies fly videos... (Wow) Rotors are definitely better   was my reading of it.
Oh and yes you can see from my search box I went for the fancy new 3d printer -yay- it's fast

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-02 16:30:14 UTC | #599

[quote="tallakt, post:597, topic:1610"]
Yes I totally agree. Airfoils is probably the wrong place to start,
[/quote]
The main determining factor for power from a given wind turbine rotor is blade length (which determines swept area).  I'll give you some inside info on blades:
1) If your choice of airfoils offers less lift, then it will slow the air going through the rotor less, increasing the airflow speed, which will then bring more power to the rotor.  This means if you get a wind turbine rotor anywhere "in the ballpark" of being a decent rotor, it will self-adjust toward the sweet-spot of energy capture.
2) If your rotor has a higher solidity (wider blades/excessive chord), then you don't need a high lift airfoil, because you have more airfoil out there than necessary, so a lower-lift, more streamlined airfoil (that offers less drag) will actually be a better choice.
So, really, once you know what you're doing (which most people don't) if you like the look of your airfoil, it is probably a good choice.  If it looks pretty, it should work pretty well.
It does help to look at a few hundred airfoils, but after than, you should be familiar with what look offers what attributes, so just make one that looks nice to you and it will work great.
Twist and taper are also important parameters.  Neither are absolutely necessary for decent performance though.  The old 10 kW Bergey turbine here uses pultruded blades with a constant pitch and chord, no twist or taper, and it works well, but gets noisy at high speeds with a way-too-wide and too-steep airfoil at the tip, but again, if you get it "in the ballpark" the machine will self-adjust to extract good power.

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-02 16:52:55 UTC | #600

[quote="Windy_Skies, post:589, topic:1610"]
He has studied and has done experiments on how insects fly for the last three decades. This is an excellent talk. He gives short and very clear overviews of the relevant theories applicable to his research and shows the results of his and others’ experiments. He shows high speed footage, force measurements, and nice simulations of results. His research has furthered our understanding of insect flight with the help of novel experimental setups. I recommend watching the full video, and the others too.

The bit on leading edge vortices being important for rotors and insect flight but quickly dissipating in translational motion was new to me, for example.
[/quote]

OK but if he starts out blithely mentioning the discredited Bernoulli explanation for lift, as a reflexive starting point, how much does he really understand about any sort of lift?  The leading edge vortex version of lift was mentioned by, of all people, Dave Santos, a few years back, explaining the lift of delta kites and supersonic fighter jets at high angles of attack.  So this might be good information, but it might also only be a partially-correct explanation.  It reminds me of cheap balsa-wood model airplanes with completely thin, planar wings - they seem to fly just fine.  I'm guessing they are so light for the comparatively large amount of surface area that they fly just fine due to low loading of an "airfoil", at such a low angle of attack, that doesn't even need an airfoil shape to function.  That is similar to a wind turbine blade with high solidity (large chord length or large number of blades) not needing a high camber, thick airfoil to get good performance.

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-02 17:30:08 UTC | #601

[quote="Rodread, post:598, topic:1610"]
Thanks for the How flies fly videos… (Wow) Rotors are definitely better was my reading of it.
[/quote]
This is why AWE remains at a perpetual standstill:  Rather than everyone simply knowing how great rotors are after thousands of years of refinement, they think they "discover" the better qualities of a rotor from watching some guy guess at how insect wings work, when the low Reynolds numbers insect wings operate in makes them almost irrelevant to wind energy.  Or they try to force their kites to fly in a circle, wasting huge amounts of energy in the process, then just give up on wind energy.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-06 08:47:09 UTC | #602

[quote="Rodread, post:598, topic:1610"]
I don’t think it came up with anything new but - still cool
[/quote]

Here is a time-stamped link on it writing code for example. I would also definitely use it to do first research on a topic as a sort of untrustworthy encyclopedia to get me started. Your prompts were perhaps a bit broad.


   https://youtu.be/Luz82RG5PqA?t=2227

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

Rodread | 2022-12-03 12:36:42 UTC | #603

Or if you want to apply it to AWES work...
Can you suggest C++ code to control a motor using VESC in position control mode based on the rotational position of a networked ESP32 with an IMU

Sure! Here is an example of how you can control a motor using VESC in position control mode based on the rotational position of a networked ESP32 with an IMU:

Copy code

```
#include "VescUart.h"
#include "esp32-hal-i2c.h"
#include "MPU6050.h"

// Create an instance of the VESC UART library
VescUart UART;

// Create an instance of the MPU6050 library
MPU6050 accelgyro;

// Set the I2C address of the ESP32
#define I2C_ADDRESS 0x68

// Set the communication parameters for the VESC
#define VESC_UART_BAUD 115200
#define VESC_UART_PORT UART_NUM_1

// Set the target position for the motor
#define TARGET_POSITION 0.5

void setup() {
  // Initialize the I2C bus
  Wire.begin(I2C_SDA, I2C_SCL);

  // Initialize the VESC UART connection
  UART.begin(VESC_UART_BAUD, VESC_UART_PORT);

  // Initialize the IMU
  accelgyro.initialize();
}

void loop() {
  // Read the current rotational position of the ESP32 from the IMU
  int16_t ax, ay, az;
  int16_t gx, gy, gz;
  accelgyro.getMotion6(&ax, &ay, &az, &gx, &gy, &gz);

  // Set the target position of the motor based on the ESP32's current rotational position
  UART.set_duty_cycle(TARGET_POSITION);
}
```

This code uses the `VescUart` library to control the VESC and the `MPU6050` library to read the rotational position of the ESP32 from the IMU. The motor will be set to the target position based on the ESP32's current rotational position.

Not a bad start
This is kinda the opposite of slow chat

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

Freeflying | 2022-12-05 15:09:11 UTC | #604

Ok, after a few enquires. Speaking to these guys 
https://e-magnetsuk.com/ about customer magnets.
I might just be able to get the magnets I want made as a custom? 
What to know if you guys know of other suppliers?  That do 16-18mm dia. Spherical or oval magnets? I just got qoute £50 for 10 custom magnets. however? they did mention its cheaper in bulk 100-250 pieces bulk prices would be something similar?   As I can be a blind in the procurement of such items any suggestions?

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-05 17:31:08 UTC | #605

[quote="Freeflying, post:604, topic:1610"]
I might just be able to get the magnets I want made as a custom?
[/quote]

No. Apparently they have or are able to source the magnets you're looking for. I think the price you were quoted is reasonable. There are cheaper websites though, although I don't know if those carry spherical magnets.

You should invest some time into learning Fusion 360 or SketchUp or something so you can better visualize for yourself and communicate to others what you'd like to make.

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-06 08:50:58 UTC | #606

https://github.com/features/copilot
[quote]
Spend less time creating boilerplate and repetitive code patterns, and more time on what matters: building great software. Write a comment describing the logic you want and GitHub Copilot will immediately suggest code to implement the solution.
[/quote]

https://personal.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadRain.html

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

Freeflying | 2022-12-06 14:46:45 UTC | #607

Nice suggestion, though mainly using Tinkercad. As for achieving something might want to dig through early posts. To a certain proposed generator?   Usually using tubes and coils and fluid magnets. 

Got much to consider. Going forward the biggest one is shatter and impact  resistant magnets.  If I go the solid route?  There is an demo over on my Yt.    Just try to find the best suppliers. To I can assemble for a test run?  Atm its air core windings/ slinky type windings?  But it finding suppliers.  I can get most of what I want from diy shops. Just the specialist bits is another story? 

Goggle not the best friend in that regards.  Sometimes best to stick my neck out and ask the big boys how it done? What I don’t like about coil shopping is the fail to mention internal dia. Outside is well documented however internal dia. Not so much?  

As reasons for putting up one magnet supplier was to see how many the Awes members know of?  I don’t think the customer magnets are out of reach? But always looking for the best price?  As it goes trying to get the best value for money, to get the most out of each component and sub assemblies.  So far the  £500 target looks to be on track.  Might even have multiple units?  If what the guy was say was true? If I drop £100 on the magnets? I will get enough bulk to make the first 10.  Hdpe tube is cheap enough. Plus connectors. Plus whatever coil supply I can find? With the remaining budget?  I don’t suspect miracles?  But all pointer welcome?

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-06 16:38:32 UTC | #608

Hi Jason:  There are so many magnet suppliers out there it boggles the mind.  Most are in China, Hong Kong, etc., and most are happy to make a custom design for you, but it's always good to see if something already in production would fit your requirements.  If you decide on a supplier, there is no need to get into CAD as long as you can articulate the dimensions in an understandable way.  A rough sketch with dimensions should suffice.  They will make their own CAD model or otherwise put your design into production.  The key is just to make your requirements understandable.

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

Freeflying | 2022-12-06 21:08:34 UTC | #609

Thanks, 
While the thought crossed my mind? liquid magnets I reminded of and experiment using molten sodium salt.  Where they were conducting experiments it the earth core?  I was wondering if in some small scale this could be conducted in reverse? To generate electricity? Usually a polarised fluid? 
https://youtu.be/rAYW9n8i-C4
Uncertain how adaptable for awes this would be? But as far as I understand it they can generate vast quantities of electricity?  Just by mimicking magnetohydrodynamic property found in the core of planets.  It must be possible to build a torus that does that?  The thing is finding the right sort of polarised fluid that can operate at low temperatures? Overcoming the need for thermal coating, Temperature control system and many other bulk components? 
My general thinking is something with a ion density strong enough the generate electricity when passing coils?  Just depends on the metal solution used? And respective charges? My brain thinkings magnesium lithium and phosphorus mix up something?  Chlorine an fluorine get mentioned a lot as ion compounds.just depends of the mix? Magnesium chloride and fluoride are good ionic compounds. I know phosphorus is quite active due to the electron shells. As phosphate, it forms the spine to dna. Lithium is in high demand in ion batteries. as far I know lithium salt make easy soluble solution.  So it would just be a case of working out which solution is best?

It should be easy enough to work out find the melting point of HDPE pipe and work back from that?  I be happy to outsource where required?  Just have a small royalty. Per unit sold. I know it possible to part source and build. For me it knowing the market? If I can find a stable a reliable supplier?  Then a manufacturing hub? Who can do the bits I struggle with?  I reckon there might be a whole other industry waiting? Things can be done under license. Just something I’m extremely fresh too. It like head to the big city to the biggest sweets and treats shop and being spoiled for choice? 

Basic specs: 
2500mm dia. ring assembly. But really it can be made to any length. 
Obvious the internal bore of the pipe will govern magnet size and fluid volume? 
Coils:
Must slide on and off? So internal dia. Can’t be smaller than the pipes bore. It why a continuous slinky might work? But find the manufacturer that does that? In require sizes so far has been a challenge? Then coils length and spacing on galileos ratio. 
Leaving open to be connected in series or parallel. 
In my case looking at 25mm internal dia. With a coil thickness of 10mm. (however design is completely adaptable to available materials) Flat wound air cores should do the trick? Even looked at hifi coils? Then it respective connectors that match pipe bore. Ideally would love to use the coils as connectors? Makes the design far easier to assemble and ship.  I know of about 3 suppliers uk? I usually go with the one that has the least stringent cookies policy? The ones that allowed you to determine your cookie preference? As long as I can get the parts the rest is easy?  Then it can go into production no problem. Then It just working from the shadows pulling strings if and when required?  Initial hurdle. If anyone of the companies can do custom orders? Even better! 

I was half hope to source for as near by as I can? I suspect that many of the bit migh already come from China one way or another? Not to say a British firm wouldn’t be able to do it in their own?  Often if it getting from source that the hardest part?  Sign post are always a welcome sight. 

Local industry support my kind of thing. You thing the country that help aid the industry revolution would have something left?  Something easy to get in contact with?  The few have rung are quite good to get along with. The the coils are going to be a challenge all in themselves. Might just have to bulk up?  As previously mentioned first 10 Will be the challenge before throwing it out there?  Pointer are most welcome.

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-07 03:48:03 UTC | #610

Hi Jason - I forgot to mention pretty much all supermagnet suppliers are in some version of China.  Anyone else is probably a reseller of Chinese-produced magnets.  We have a company here in Mountain Pass, California (on the way to Las Vegas) called MP materials, that produces 15% of all rare earth concentrate in the world, but they ship it to China for refining and making magnets.  It's a sad situation, but a main byproduct or really an unwanted adulterant is radioactive thorium, and rare earths are notoriously messy and toxic to refine, so we let the Chinese handle it, but that means we're dependent on them.  It is considered to be a problem and we always hear talk of bringing the industry of producing supermagnets here, but it never happens.

I was involved in sales of audio equipment - mostly speakers.  We used to carry *Acoustic Studio Monitors*, and they claimed to incorporate technology from the U.S. Space Program, which was called "ferrofluid", which I think was just some liquid with suspended magnetic particles.  Anyway we always used to joke about the claim that they speakers were so great because of the space program.  I think there are some Youtube videos about tricks with ferrofluid.  
When manufacturing my generators, I formerly used an expensive aerospace adhesive, with a limited shelf life, to glue the magnets in place on the rotor.  Well, one day my adhesive had gone bad and I thought: "Why not just use JB-Weld?"  JB-Weld is epoxy with suspended microscopic iron or steel particles in it.  It's interesting to see how it slowly flows around magnets like it has a life of its own.  But my observation is you are looking at so many possibilities, I think maybe you are casting your net a little too wide.  At some point you have to get to a point where you are dealing with "knowns" and maybe one or two unknowns, but not **all** unknowns.  Anyway with regard to magnets, chances are very high that any local supplier offering custom shapes to your design will be ordering them from China, just basically acting as a middleman.  Not that there is anything wrong with that - could be an easy way to get magnets made.  To bad you are not here.  I have boxes and boxes of supermagnets of all shapes and sizes.  I need to get busy and churn out some more whacky wind devices!

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

Freeflying | 2022-12-07 10:42:29 UTC | #611

Casting my own magnets? Well there an idea! I have some steel shot but need a easy way to magnetise it? Jb weld in iron filling might do the job? An engineer favourite that jb weld. Love world over by model makers. I brought a ton of steel shot a while back never got round to making the bearings. The 4.5mm 1500 balls. Were £6 from the gun shop. I’d have to check but the bigger shot Think it’s 12-15mm? though I can’t remember exactly might of been 12mm?  Iron filling are easy enough to acquire so Is jb weld from screw fix. Kingfisher group. Which also owns b&q over here. 
I would ask how much it would cost to ship them magnets from the sunny coast?  Just need to be 16-18mm dia. If you have them great? Spherical and oval are good. Just need to fit into the arc or the tube once assembled the oval magnets must be able to flow the bends in the tube. Happy to strike a deal in P.M. as it gets the bird of the ground. Don’t need many’s pieces just enough to get things started? My thinking is batches of 5-10 pieces going around the raceway? Don’t mind either way might get back hold of e-magnetics? Just to see what the bulk price is like?  

I have a look a ferrofuid speaker on yt. As for the fluid magnets or ionic solution? I agree baby steps. One thing at a time, I had a mid to where such devices could end up? Draupnir or halo?  I wouldn’t be surprised if nasa would use it as a stablizer or a means of generation electricity out in the dear yonder of the black abyss.  As long as it rotates? Magnetohydrodynamic forces are observed?  It can be a leap up kardashev  scale? once built? that would be top SPAWES. Earth orbital rings prehaps?  With straying to far towards the Sifi end? Astra porta? Or star travel? Based on quantum entanglement?  Any distance?  any time?  As the sciences goes? 

Would love to have a crack at it? But I know it something that can’t be achieved alone. Yes and I did just propose a starship with a molten core capable of jumping through space time?  As always baby steps and leave a little for someone else to follow up on?  If you like to send me the magnets?cool! Don’t forget to p.m first?

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-07 14:38:31 UTC | #612

Earth to Jason:
You are now too far out in orbit, and your instructions are to land immediately!  Here on the surface, we'll prepare for splashdown!  Godspeed on your re-entry!  :)

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

Rodread | 2022-12-07 21:49:59 UTC | #613

American support for AWES
https://twitter.com/housesciencegop/status/1600588606573318146?s=20&t=5Kv2s2tEFDfetja2t07h7Q

Wind energy is an important part of an all of the above U.S. energy strategy. Yesterday, 
@TXRandy14
 and 
@RepBowman
 introduced the #bipartisan Airborne Wind Energy Research and Development Act to accelerate airborne wind energy generation.

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

PierreB | 2022-12-08 08:15:13 UTC | #614

https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/airborne_wind_energy_research_and_development_act.pdf

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/9432/all-info

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

Freeflying | 2022-12-08 09:10:51 UTC | #615

Hello! ground control, orders received and understood! Just going to have to sling shot round a comet and make way way home. It pretty in the outer solar system. where? the ice twinkles like diamonds! I will suspend the hunt for major Tom. Might not need to make a splash down? if the quantum teleporter works!  Things been on the fritz for week! I have plenty of disassociate samples the lab can toy with. Even some funky new hyper matter.  Only a few hundred particles. It seems like matter anti matter reactions might be able to harmonise? 

Should be home in a single manoeuvre.  Provided I’m not lost in the next asteroid storm. Ort cloud very pretty shame to turn back? But hey oh it the way to go!

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-12 20:38:04 UTC | #616

https://www.zmescience.com/science/the-uk-is-about-to-open-its-first-coal-mine-in-30-years/

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

Rodread | 2022-12-12 21:09:21 UTC | #617

Don't give us the UK chat when shit like this happens
Not a F*****g hope that S%%t like this would get permitting North of Hadrians wall.
Anyone for Brexit darling
Don't dare try to help me with my anger issues
I'm quite happy with my triggering

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

tallakt | 2022-12-12 22:02:23 UTC | #618

[quote="Rodread, post:617, topic:1610"]
Don’t give us the UK chat when shit like this happens
[/quote]

Yeah in these times it is hard for Europeans to cope with the abrupt change in available fossile fuels. Im not going to spend any effort to put down any short term efforts to cope. Of course I would rather see renewable. I am sure the UK will get there soon. 

Also coming from across the pond after four (?) years of Trump reign, putting down a single coal plant seems a bit novel to me… what you don’t have your own bad conciounces over there?

I know Norway isnt exactly trailblazing sustainable climate change either. Lets rather focus on what we can do than what is done wrong

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-13 04:42:43 UTC | #619

As of 2020, 350 coal-fired power plants are under construction. They include seven in South Korea, 13 in Japan, 52 in India, and 184 in China with the rest underway in other parts of the world.

China is also [building and financing](https://www.npr.org/2019/04/29/716347646/why-is-china-placing-a-global-bet-on-coal) hundreds of other coal-fired power plants in countries such as Turkey, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Egypt, and Bangladesh.

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-13 05:38:07 UTC | #620

https://www.powermag.com/u-s-officials-set-to-announce-fusion-energy-breakthrough/?oly_enc_id=1327J1654290F1P

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

tallakt | 2022-12-13 07:08:25 UTC | #621

[quote="dougselsam, post:619, topic:1610"]
As of 2020, 350 coal-fired power plants are under construction
[/quote]

Are you then insinuating that this is a problem? That would mean we are converging in our world view…

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-13 12:31:43 UTC | #622

[quote="dougselsam, post:620, topic:1610"]
u-s-officials-set-to-announce-fusion-energy-breakthrough
[/quote]

### Former fusion scientist on why we won't have fusion power by 2040
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JurplDfPi3U

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

Windy_Skies | 2022-12-13 13:26:07 UTC | #623

Towards the end this also talks about the growth and success of Zipline.

### Drone Delivery Was Supposed to be the Future. What Went Wrong?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-M98KLgaUU

### Zipline - This delivery tech is “the closest thing to teleportation” | Freethink
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aOF3CKYYrk


### A day at a Zipline Distribution Center
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmAR0VMMSKE

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

dougselsam | 2022-12-13 15:40:01 UTC | #624

Hi Windy:
  I must have missed the Zipline part, but I've never had faith in the old-fashioned Tokamak approach.  It seems like a lot of trouble, just to boil water to run a steam engine.  My favored approach is this one from Helion, which runs more like an electromagnetic diesel engine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GJtGpvE1sQ
Meanwhile, coal, being technically the greenest energy source, seems to be expanding worldwide.  Turns out "green" (more vegetation) is not really what anyone meant, since more CO2 is the essential greening ingredient.  We're trying to make sure the Earth remains in an ice-age, as that is responsible for our emergence.

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

PierreB | 2022-12-13 17:27:34 UTC | #625

And to think that some time ago France was the leader in civil nuclear power. From protest to protest (always the same ones) since Superphénix, in a context of abandoning its industries, France finally gave up its leadership by lowering its nuclear percentage, which is still significant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superph%C3%A9nix

For those interested in greenhouse gas emission limits, nuclear energy is incomparable, except for hydroelectricity which is naturally limited by the presence of mountains (see Norway and Quebec). 
https://app.electricitymaps.com/zone/FR

(gCO₂eq/kWh) France 144 g; Denmark West 457 g; Germany 683 g...

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