@Rodread this reminds me of something…
Indeed, it looks like (non airborne) Daisy on a mast, also suggested by @gordon_sp on:
Crikey, it’s got a bit of a wobble on.
It doesnt look like daisy, rather skyserpent
As usual, almost every “new” wind turbine configuration is really just a resurrection, throwback, or “reinvention” of some pre-existing ancient design. Anyone with basic wind turbine knowledge would immediately recognize this design as a light-duty version of the old Gedser turbine from about 63 years ago:
Wikipedia article on the Gedser Turbine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedser_wind_turbine#/media/File:Gedsermøllens_vinger.jpg
I would have favored the same rotor-with-guy-wires type of structure, but somehow it was abandoned early on, after a few iterations. Not sure exactly why. It might be instructive to find out why the rotating wires were discontinued. Maybe shopping bags and tumbleweeds got caught in the wires? Too much tether drag? Too ugly? Not elegant? Too cave-man? Unnecessarily complicated? Flocks of birds hanging out on the wires? It is reminiscent of aviation, where old airplanes, homebuilts, cheap hang-gliders and ultralights, etc. use lots of exterior guy wires, while modern airplanes, let alone their propellers, and refined sailplanes, seldom if ever show guy wires.
To answer Pierre’s question, yes, of course tower-supported versions of SuperTurbine™ are in my list of turbines invented, built, run, sold, data taken, etc.
This 3 kW tower-mounted version of SuperTurbine™ was funded by The California Energy Commission:
Except I added a couple of extra rotors and it made 6 kW.
Here are more patented versions that constitute large arrays of rotors, building mounts, buildings as concentrators, terrain-supported, canyon-spans, etc.
These SuperTwins™ easily make about 2 kW using about 6 pounds of blade material:
And here we have a Sky Serpent stretched between two towers, one of which has a SuperTwin™:
The smaller rotors on the long driveshaft are running so fast you can’t see the blades, but sometimes hear the blades momentarily fluttering, making a “wrrrap” sound.
Of course, the driving force behind SuperTurbine™ is the cube-square law, where more smaller rotors can sweep the same area as a single larger rotor, while using less total blade material, to yield a higher RPM, dispensing with the need for a gearbox. Obviously I’ve invented a lot more types of turbine than I’ve built.
I already thought about this as a good way to progress AWE. Unfortunately the dimensions we use at Kitemill make this difficult or impossible to implement. I think for smaller scale the idea is very sound, and I am looking forward to see how Kite-X can take advantage of the tower. (I did not communicate with Kite-X so I have no credit for coming up with this. Probably several others have thought the same thing also)
If the tower can be lighter for example by being articulated at the base so as not to undergo the cantilever effect, that could be a progress for AWE.
As I understand, this tower is only for securing against crashes to ground and provide smooth wind. Not as part of a finished design
Nah. I think the rotor was separate. The tower is for the tethered kite I think
The tower is for the tethered kite, sure. But as they built also a rotor…
KiteX seem very focused on that design right now.
Might need a lot of control to run in a more stable pattern.
And scaling so many rigid parts… I thought we were trying to stop that.
Think I’ve only published power/airborne weight ratio (the weight of the massive Daisy ground station would sink that number a long way)
Though novel I dont like this design much. Its basically a helicopter rotor with the swashplate mounted on the blades. I think there are better designs for such rotors out there. Also computer controlled helicopter rotor pitch control has been done. Anyways, sorry KiteX for being harsh, hope as usual that Im wrong.
Is that what this is? I haven’t noticed cyclic pitch control. Isn’t neccessary if they keep the hawt design, is it? Or do you think they are working towards having a self-lifting rotor?
I believe it will have cyclic pitch control in the sense that the tail and elevator is stable in pitch. I am not sure where they are heading with this design. Perhaps they will add tethers later?