AWES Scoring System

[PierreB]

@PierreB

a minimum of 100-200 m

Real high altitude winds are far higher. 100 m is already achieved with a small AWES that works: Kiwee.

@dougselsam

You run at a size you can, given your space.

@dougselsam

why say you are going to power X hundred homes in location Y by date Z, when you can;t even power one home now?

Because powering only one home is not a real possibility. Almost nobody has enough space to install an AWES system at home, and almost nobody understands the space problem associated with the permanent installation of an AWES system.

@dougselsam you are endless parroting the same false analysis. And you continue to be indignant about these “idiots, idiots, idiots” who would have been getting nowhere for 15 years, when you still haven’t understood that we’re talking about (relatively) high-altitude winds, whatever small or large AWES, and that this requires space.

If you want a low-flying AWES to power your home, it is preferable and much easier to install a conventional wind turbine mounted on a mast.

Otherwise, try answering my questions.

[dougselsam]

@PierreB

@dougselsam you are endless parroting the same false analysis. And you continue to be indignant about these “idiots, idiots, idiots” who would have been getting nowhere for 15 years, when you still haven’t understood that we’re talking about (relatively) high-altitude winds, whatever small or large AWES, and that this requires space.

I thought I DID answer your questions. What you are asking is like saying no rocketry experiments should be undertaken unless you can put a man on the moon. Yes everyone knows there is more wind up higher. The point is, there is useful wind at lower heights too, and if you have a workable concept, the lack of space is just an excuse.

if you don;t agree with my “idiots idiots idiots” analysis of 15 years ago, and counting, then at least acknowledge that so far, it’s been accurate, and I stand as one of the few real wind people involved in AWE who understood the challenge wind energy presents, as opposed to so many supposed clueless “experts” who thought it would just be easy. Other people THOUGHT they could see their future in wind energy. I saw what would happen much more accurately. Been there done that. The airborne aspect doesn’t change the fact that wind energy is not easily improved upon.

Right now I was just looking at an email advertisement for some high speed parafoil kites. Looking at the prices, trying to imagine how long they could last under hard use, I could just feel the money lost to simply replacing the kites over and over again.

Meanwhile, where’s the kite that can take off and land all by itself? People were too busy building big stuff to bother building stuff that just works. The big stuff crashes, and everyone gives up. Or they just give up without building anything.

[PierreB]

@dougselsam

if you don;t agree with my “idiots idiots idiots” analysis of 15 years ago, and counting, then at least acknowledge that so far, it’s been accurate

AWE hasn’t materialized in 15 years, but that in no way proves that your analysis is correct. It merely confirms an observation that everyone is making about AWE. There is no electricity bill from an AWES in 15 years: anyone can see that.

@dougselsam

I thought I DID answer your questions.

That’s not apparent from what I’m reading. Just vague, elusive things like “You run at a size you can, given your space.”

So, since we are on “AWES Scoring System” topic, I have a precise question:
For your home, do you prefer (for the same rated power and price):

1. to install a conventional wind turbine on a 10 m mast?

2. to install an AWES on a 10-20 m (or even more) long tether?

@dougselsam

if you have a workable concept, the lack of space is just an excuse.

Lack of space is one of the factors that transforms a “workable concept” into its opposite.

@dougselsam

What you are asking is like saying no rocketry experiments should be undertaken unless you can put a man on the moon.

And what you mean is something like to use a rocket to visit your neighbor.

[dougselsam]

@PierreB

AWE hasn’t materialized in 15 years, but that in no way proves that your analysis is correct. It merely confirms an observation that everyone is making about AWE. There is no electricity bill from an AWES in 15 years: anyone can see that.

Yeah, well, I said it immediately, 15 years ago, after the first “conference”, after experiencing who was there, and what they said. A whole bunch of nothing. Leading to “a million flies”.

@PierreB

And what you mean is something like to use a rocket to visit your neighbor.

For any use. Visit your neighbor with an explosive warhead, or maybe drop in some much-needed food or medicine. Maybe do weather experiments, take aerial photos, the list is endless.

It’s really amazing to me, how many excuses people can come up with, for not being able to come up with anything compelling in AWE.

And that well-deserved skepticism now extends to the whole VTOL multi-rotor drone/taxis, the main poster-childe of which is run by a former AWE person (JOBY). They have over 1000 employees, millions in funding, and yet, nothing in regular service to this day, just some really awkward-looking prototypes and a bunch of “reasons” why they can’t really do much of anything. Could you imagine having 1000 employees and you still can’t get anything going? OMG!!! I’m sure somebody has JOBY “scored” in some “scoring system”. Does it have any meaning? Or is it just more “categorizer” types with too much time on their hands?

[Windy_Skies]

Maybe one way to think about it; what are you looking at, is it a dolphin or a zebra or a sponge, let’s say wind energy systems are plants that harvest wing energy instead of sunlight. The goal is to gather a lot of rotational energy somewhere, probably fairly close to the ground, and do that with a minimum amount of materials.

The best we know of today are HAWTs. You can look at the drawbacks they have and try to mitigate them; have partly tensile blades that don’t experience so much bending moment and are downwind instead of upwind, and perhaps have shorter towers if you can get the blades to point upward somewhat. Maybe have the tower rotate, if it must have some height, so it can be made stronger, longer, in the direction the blades are pulling, and if that doesn’t have more drawbacks than benefits.

Let’s say your wind energy system gets more points the closer it is to that.

Then you can look at the individual elements: how brittle, aerodynamic, heavy, easy to make, durable, easy to control, environmentally friendly, are your blades or wings and tethers for example. Have you demonstrated continuous autonomous operation over several years and in all weather conditions or do you have a viable path to that. Are you an order of magnitude better in one way, probably LCOE, than the alternatives and not much worse in all the others?

One thing I can’t understand is why the AWE systems are all so expensive, though I haven’t looked closely at that so maybe I’m wrong. You have an inferior product and charge the same or more, I don’t know why you expect to sell any. Given that you have lower setup costs, a cheaper tower presumably, and can make shorter, presumably cheaper, wings to substitute longer blades and are saving some high percentage of materials.

Is it that everyone is trying to amortize their R&D and other costs that they shouldn’t be? Am I misinformed?

[ChristianH]

@dougselsam

It is very easy to demonstrate a wind energy device, assuming you have anything worth demonstrating.
It’s easy to have one running on a daily basis.
Assuming the machine is capable of regular operation,
or the people want to bother running it regularly.

Then what has stopped you, Doug?
What could ameliorate your qualms with the current situation? Why do we not see Doug’s technology on the grid, apologies if it is currently serving current communities.

[dougselsam]

@ChristianH

Why do we not see Doug’s technology on the grid?

My technology IS on the grid, in a small way. It’s out there spinning right now, as a matter of fact. I jujst drove by it - yup, spinning away~

Meanwhile, I have a lot of pressing issues in life lately, so have not been able to build and run new prototypes lately, however that could hopefully change. For one thing, I’ve been involved with some patents on floating offshore wind energy - they’ve been covered by the wind energy trade press - maybe you’ve read about them. I invented the floating foundation for a single turbine - does that count?

But I have a long history of producing and successfully testing multi-rotor research prototypes, manufacturing and shipping SuperTurbines, and have generally proven the concept as viable and potentially advantageous. I’ve had multiple useful, grid-tied energy-producing turbines, reliably feeding the grid for years on end. Anyone who invested in my stuff has been paid back with interest. No bankruptcies, no layoffs, no auctions - I’m still here - a survivor.

I’ve also watched almost every “small-wind” manufacturer fail, as solar went from $4/Watt to 40 cents/Watt. Expensive solar was the only thing keeping small-wind afloat. Turns out making sheets of melted glass got really cheap, and the panels can last 20 years, whereas turbines take a certain amount of material to sweep a given area, and tend to have maintenance issues that require attention or repair.

One reason is the sun never gets 10 times as strong, whereas wind can easily get 100 times as strong.

Most people do not realize that the entire field of grid-tied “small-wind” amounts to essentially a single manufacturer, with all the rules written around their products, lest the regulating small-wind bureaucrats have nothing to regulate. There are a couple of other minor brands out there that regularly go bankrupt and change hands, sometimes get a new name, but are generally too expensive and prone to failure, bringing the question of where to even get parts or repair info when yours goes down?

One reason for the low number of small wind installations has to do with the obvious fact that almost nobody has a suitable location - acres of open land in an area with strong winds. That’s not just some new thing affecting AWE, that’s the reality of wind energy. Windfarm areas tend to be less inhabitable, harsh environments, far from population centers. Just one more simple fact AWE people seemed to have no clue about.

What I have NOT been doing is
raising tons of money for dubious stories of future success,
hiring large numbers of innocent newbies only to lay them off when the stories get stale,
renting office space to house a bloated “work”-force of paper-pushers,
making huge empty promises that never lead anywhere…

[ChristianH]

The high costs do initially seem funny. Afterall all AWES is attempting to do is replace a pole/ mast with a flying wing? And that’s simple /s.

I was in these forums ten years ago before I left to focus real problems I saw in AWES, largely the control issues. Fortunately these solutions can be used outside of AWES as well as support AWES.

I’ve realized there are a lot of sensored controls…(especially for automatic land/launch) also the peak forces can instantly become 30x the minimum forces. So gearing has to be effectively as strong as a tractor yet as fast as a racecar.

Often times we are dealing with rotating loads so that is another mechanical consideration/constraint.

We effectively have to control a marionette puppet in the sky. The system requires sensors to know the position of its components, as well as automatically “roost” during luls in wind. Fair amount of compute involved in this as well. This really would be suitable for AI as it’s similar to a living being who’s food does not come from the sun, or food, but the wind.

[ChristianH]

@dougselsam

I invented the floating foundation for a single turbine - does that count?

Yes, the foundation or “grounding” of any Traction or AWES system is imparitive… those issues need to get solved, along with an automatic land/launch… Along with actually interfacing with the grid.

@dougselsam

But I have a long history of producing and successfully testing multi-rotor research prototypes, manufacturing and shipping SuperTurbines, and have generally proven the concept as viable and potentially advantageous. I’ve had multiple useful, grid-tied energy-producing turbines, reliably feeding the grid for years on end. Anyone who invested in my stuff has been paid back with interest. No bankruptcies, no layoffs, no auctions - I’m still here - a survivor.

We need details to how you are interfaced to the grid, How many kW hours have you provided? General details would be nice.
What exactly inhibiting you from growth, Have you gone as far as you can with AWES?

@dougselsam

Windfarm areas tend to be less inhabitable, harsh environments, far from population centers. Just one more simple fact AWE people seemed to have no clue about.

Another reason why automatic systems are a must.

[Windy_Skies]

@ChristianH

We effectively have to control a marionette puppet in the sky. The system requires sensors to know the position of its components, as well as automatically “roost” during luls in wind. Fair amount of compute involved in this as well.

All of that does not explain the price. After you’ve developed it the software is free and the cost of computing power and sensors is trivial.

@ChristianH

This really would be suitable for AI as it’s similar to a living being who’s food does not come from the sun, or food, but the wind.

Yes, or generative design, or whatever the right term is for putting a plant into a windy simulation and trying to get it to spin a generator.

[ChristianH]

Youre right, those are cheap after they have been developed… But you have to know what to research/ develop and how it fits in the system. Are you using tension sensors? are you using accelerometer data? Is there a camera? How does all this information interact? Are their latency issues with bluetooth or RC connections? Does that cause noise in the data? In designing a system you cannot create the body without considerations to the brain and vise versa… And educating that system thereafter is an entirely different matter.

The associated complexity is where the price comes from, (This wouldn’t be the case if we just used a pole/mast like for traditional wind). The real cost of eliminating the support structure is computational or mechanical complexity. The experiments and R & D take so much time/money.

We need specialized transmissions for these widely variable loads. Also we need know what sensors are necessary to make the system self aware of it’s position in a dynamic environment, There must be a decision tree for every contingency so a program can follow it. We do this naturally as humans… but it’s a pain to teach a robot.

[PierreB]

@dougselsam

My technology IS on the grid, in a small way.

Among SuperTurbine ™, Twin is likely on the grid, but it is not an AWES.

I don’t think it’s the same for Sky Serpent which is an AWES. By the way, the Popular Science article dates from 2008. It’s 2023: with this AWES you enter the 15-year club.

In a way, this answers my question about what you would install in your home: surely not an AWES, even yours, because it takes up too much space with the changes in wind direction (even flying at low altitude), and because of the difficult control hence an unattainable viability. Forget the AWES that you build in your garage to power your home.

[Windy_Skies]

@ChristianH

The experiments and R & D take so much time/money.

That isn’t your customer’s problem. They only see an inferior product that isn’t priced like an inferior product. Then when you go out of business the next player can just copy the things you did right and hopefully do some more things right and not go out of business that quickly.

While you are starting and some considerable time after that, you just have to eat your R&D costs and price your products like the inferior prototypes, or pathfinders, that they are. Thereafter they really should be cheaper, as that was the whole reason you started the endeavor.

[ChristianH]

@Windy_Skies

That isn’t your customer’s problem.

Correct. It is a persistent AWES problem.

@Windy_Skies

Then when you go out of business the next player can just copy the things you did right and hopefully do some more things right and not go out of business that quickly.

This is how technology works, we stand on the backs of giants… hopefully those giants have some IP, but nevertheless, this pattern has been going on in over 20 years of AWES… and to what end? Perhaps a change of approach is necessary.

I understand what you are saying about R&D costs, but are few completely automated systems… this proves there hasnt been enough work done in those areas of the field that NEED innovation (better innovation)

[dougselsam]

@ChristianH

Have you gone as far as you can with AWES?

No, I have plenty of ideas and enthusiasm, thanks for asking.

[dougselsam]

@PierreB

In a way, this answers my question about what you would install in your home: surely not an AWES, even yours, because it takes up too much space with the changes in wind direction (even flying at low altitude), and because of the difficult control hence an unattainable viability. Forget the AWES that you build in your garage to power your home.

Pierre, this takes me back to the analogy of the blind men describing a nonexistent elephant.
It really depends what such a system consists of.
Maybe not something anyone expects.

[PierreB]

@dougselsam

Pierre, this takes me back to the analogy of the blind men describing a nonexistent elephant.
It really depends what such a system consists of.

My question and my answer were precise (between Twin (not AWES) and Sky Serpent (AWES)). I quote again:

@PierreB

Among SuperTurbine ™, Twin is likely on the grid, but it is not an AWES.

I don’t think it’s the same for Sky Serpent which is an AWES. By the way, the Popular Science article dates from 2008. It’s 2023: with this AWES you enter the 15-year club.

In a way, this answers my question about what you would install in your home: surely not an AWES, even yours, because it takes up too much space with the changes in wind direction (even flying at low altitude), and because of the difficult control hence an unattainable viability. Forget the AWES that you build in your garage to power your home.

[dougselsam]

@PierreB

Forget the AWES that you build in your garage to power your home.

Yeah, sure, convince people you can power hundreds or thousands of homes, while maintaining that it is impossible to power a single home. Sounds like what got AWE where it is today. Maybe it would be better for you to work on a “scoring system”. Yeah, that’s it! Scoring!!!

[PierreB]

@dougselsam

it is impossible to power a single home.

I agree. You can power your home with the twin or a regular wind turbine (not AWES), but you cannot with Sky Serpent (AWES) in spite of you see it since 15 years, excepted if it is an invisible elephant.

@dougselsam

Maybe it would be better for you to work on a “scoring system”. Yeah, that’s it! Scoring!!!

Sure, and you should rate both AWES and airports when the flying machines will take off from your home.

[ChristianH]

Doug does NOT have an AWES serving electrical power to the grid. I have a suggestion:

@dougselsam

Use an inverter.