Kite Networks

I’m going to have to query what you state in the last part @PierreB

There are many examples of network kites gaining stability by being strung out across their normal spanwise area like the above arch of windsurfers or


These arch forms are not very mobile, active or easy to simple relocate… but they do have some sort of utility

Yes, arches can be added to the “exception” of “rotating sets” I mentioned. So “rotating sets” and arches are no more exceptions. Perhaps we can try to see what kite networks require each kite to be (more or less) autonomous like these kite trains or kite groups I just mentioned, and others, and what kite networks require the contrary like arches, rotating sets, and others, and why. Multi-anchor for arches and some possible other kite networks may be a reason for this. We are far from knowing everything and having experienced everything about kite networks.

1 Like

Seems like we need to formalise a kite topology language.
Kite topology has been talked about - like the network paper for kite lab

But nothing has been formalised - Then again - do we need another unifying standard. xkcd says…
image

What XTML / md data would a device need to describe a kite network

*Anchors
number, layout, resistance, forces, connection points, portable, materials and mechanics …
*Tethers
number, layout, resistance, forces, connection points, bifurcations, pulleys, weak points, faired segments, abrasion resistant segments, materials and mechanics …
*kites
Span, Aero details, Mechanical Details, soft hard, Active passive, bridle layout, materials and mechanics …
*Environmental
ground, wind, altitude, wind shear, water table, season…