Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Airbourne Wind Power: Airbus

Expand Messages
  • Doug
    This is a cut-and-paste from a real wind energy discussion group (where people like us are met with raised eyebrows, and most of our postings would be
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 5 7:26 AM
      This is a cut-and-paste from a "real" wind energy discussion group (where people like us are met with raised eyebrows, and most of our postings would be censored for promoting "a pet theory"):
      Quote:
      It is now one year ago Sully landed his Airbus in the Hudson River. It
      makes an old small wind freak glad to know, that with engine power gone the hydraulics of ailerons etc. was driven by a "Ram Air Turbine" RAT. You can see one here
      http://www.airliners.net/photo/Airbus-A320-216/1475556/L/

      Small wind turbines has been used in planes for ages.

      Claus

      WINDMISSION Co.
      Claus Nybroe, Architect MAA
      Stenbankevej 6, 5771 Stenstrup, Denmark
      VAT: DK 11271448
      http://www.windmission.dk
      Tel. +45 3698 1778
      +45 5194 4438 (mobile)
    • harry valentine
      The Ram Air Turbine works above a certain inlet speed. Several makers of small wind turbines are hoping to duplicate the effect with lower velocity wind
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 5 9:58 AM
        The Ram Air Turbine works above a certain inlet speed. Several makers of small wind turbines are hoping to duplicate the effect with lower velocity wind entering the turbine . . . the gently expanding area of the exhaust duct is crucial under such conditions.
         
        Perhaps is somebody properly designs the duct outlet behind the turbine, ram air may work on small wind turbines . . . perhaps they may be able to attach wings or kites to the ductwork, or even a balloon to keep the concept airborne. 
         
         
        Harry

         

        To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
        From: doug@...
        Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:26:30 +0000
        Subject: [AWECS] Airbourne Wind Power: Airbus

         
        This is a cut-and-paste from a "real" wind energy discussion group (where people like us are met with raised eyebrows, and most of our postings would be censored for promoting "a pet theory"):
        Quote:
        It is now one year ago Sully landed his Airbus in the Hudson River. It
        makes an old small wind freak glad to know, that with engine power gone the hydraulics of ailerons etc. was driven by a "Ram Air Turbine" RAT. You can see one here
        http://www.airliner s.net/photo/ Airbus-A320- 216/1475556/ L/

        Small wind turbines has been used in planes for ages.

        Claus

        WINDMISSION Co.
        Claus Nybroe, Architect MAA
        Stenbankevej 6, 5771 Stenstrup, Denmark
        VAT: DK 11271448
        http://www.windmiss ion.dk
        Tel. +45 3698 1778
        +45 5194 4438 (mobile)




        IM on the go with Messenger on your phone. Try now.
      • harry valentine
        Many years ago there was a commercial jet in Canada that acquired the nickname of the Gimli Glider . The refueling crew at Montreal were unfamiliar with the
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 7 3:51 PM
          Many years ago there was a commercial jet in Canada that acquired the nickname of "the Gimli Glider". The refueling crew at Montreal were unfamiliar with the new aircraft and put too little fuel into the tank (possibly at Montreal). The plane was headed to Vancouver. It ran out of fuel over Manitoba.
           
          The pilot glided the plane to a one time military airbase at Gimli, Manitoba (he knew the airport as he had once been a military pilot). The ram-air turbine kicked in at 150 to 200-mi/hr and provided the necessary hydraulic pressure to enable the pilot to safely land the plane at the airport.
           
          It may be possible to attach wings. kites, kytoons or balloons to the duct system of the ram-air-turbine concept intended to operate as a high-altitude, airborne wind turbine. An inventor in the UK developed wings that contain rotors on a transverse-axis . . . to maintain the boundary layer on the upper surface of the wing at extreme angles of attack . . . the airplane can actually hover. Such a wing concept may be applicable to high-altitude wind power conversion . . . it may be possible to use wind energy to drive the transversly mounted Magnus rotors.
           
           
          Harry
           

          To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
          From: doug@...
          Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:26:30 +0000
          Subject: [AWECS] Airbourne Wind Power: Airbus

           
          This is a cut-and-paste from a "real" wind energy discussion group (where people like us are met with raised eyebrows, and most of our postings would be censored for promoting "a pet theory"):
          Quote:
          It is now one year ago Sully landed his Airbus in the Hudson River. It
          makes an old small wind freak glad to know, that with engine power gone the hydraulics of ailerons etc. was driven by a "Ram Air Turbine" RAT. You can see one here
          http://www.airliner s.net/photo/ Airbus-A320- 216/1475556/ L/

          Small wind turbines has been used in planes for ages.

          Claus

          WINDMISSION Co.
          Claus Nybroe, Architect MAA
          Stenbankevej 6, 5771 Stenstrup, Denmark
          VAT: DK 11271448
          http://www.windmiss ion.dk
          Tel. +45 3698 1778
          +45 5194 4438 (mobile)




          IM on the go with Messenger on your phone. Try now.
        • dave santos
          Thanks for the bug report, Theo, the graded tether issue was wrongly put. My experience with graded tethers relates to kite trains where each segment is
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 8 3:27 PM
            Thanks for the bug report, Theo, the graded tether issue was wrongly put. My experience with graded tethers relates to kite trains where each segment is joined by a tri-swivel to which a lifter kite is added; fishing lines are often rigged similarly. Trains do hold absolute altitude records & will likely be workhorses of effective scaled up HAWP. The current FAA fifty foot signal requirement suggests the use of lifters as markers so all AWECS may be trains. The lighter tether with altitude assumption holds for trains.
             
            TRUE, a single kite in steady flight must see more pull at the kite than at the anchor, but i am struck by how close DaveL's simulation puts the two readings. My bones tell me that a tether for a dancing/sweeping kite may see the highest transient forces at a non-compliant fixed anchor than at the naturally compliant kite (especially with "snubber" leader or elastic aft bridling). A springy boom or elastic section at the ground is desirable to handle these transients.
             
            Other reasons that heavier line lower may pay is if the extended line drags on the surface sometimes, or is worked by winches more, or if cheaper thicker line in slower lower air gives a cost advantage. Intial pilot lifting (& retirement) in slow low-altitude wind & tether hot-swapping are further complications of this question.
             
             


            From: Theo Schmidt <theosch06@...>
            To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tue, March 2, 2010 1:24:59 AM
            Subject: [AWECS] Re: Tether Art & Science Overview

             

            Dave Santos wrote:

            > A graded tether made up of stronger lower sections & thinner upper sections, often with swivels in between, can out-perform a long monotether.
            Shouldn't the stronger sections be aloft where the kite is? A long line
            has considerable weight which is supported between the kite and the
            ground. As the angle at the kite is more vertical than the angle at the
            ground attachment point, I gather that the force is greater at the kite
            side than at the ground side. Am I correct?

            Cheers, Theo Schmidt


          • Dave Lang
            ... Attach point Compliance is not the issue here.....what is the issue, is how Newton sees the distributed parameters of a particular case playing out,
            Message 5 of 16 , Mar 8 4:04 PM
              Re: [AWECS] Re: Tether Art & Science Overview
              TRUE, a single kite in steady flight must see more pull at the kite than at the anchor, but i am struck by how close DaveL's simulation puts the two readings. My bones tell me that a tether for a dancing/sweeping kite may see the highest transient forces at a non-compliant fixed anchor than at the naturally compliant kite (especially with "snubber" leader or elastic aft bridling). A springy boom or elastic section at the ground is desirable to handle these transients.

              "Attach point Compliance" is not the issue here.....what is the issue, is how  Newton sees the distributed parameters of a particular case playing out, namely:

              - line density,
              - line drag,
              - wind environment profile,
              - length of line deployed.

              All these parameters will speak for conflicting results at one time or the other as to where the tension is greatest along the line. I long ago gave up trying to understand anything but the "simplest tether problems" with my "bones"....the field is rife with non-intuitive results.

              Yea, the idea of a different type line near the ground could be useful, especially if one is winch-ing a lot on a line :-)

              DaveL



              ,
            • Bob Stuart
              Where do tethers break? High or Low? Bob the Simpleton
              Message 6 of 16 , Mar 8 4:23 PM
                Where do tethers break?  High or Low?

                Bob the Simpleton

                On 08/03/2010 5:27 PM, dave santos wrote:
                 
                Thanks for the bug report, Theo, the graded tether issue was wrongly put. My experience with graded tethers relates to kite trains where each segment is joined by a tri-swivel to which a lifter kite is added; fishing lines are often rigged similarly. Trains do hold absolute altitude records & will likely be workhorses of effective scaled up HAWP. The current FAA fifty foot signal requirement suggests the use of lifters as markers so all AWECS may be trains. The lighter tether with altitude assumption holds for trains.
                 
                TRUE, a single kite in steady flight must see more pull at the kite than at the anchor, but i am struck by how close DaveL's simulation puts the two readings. My bones tell me that a tether for a dancing/sweeping kite may see the highest transient forces at a non-compliant fixed anchor than at the naturally compliant kite (especially with "snubber" leader or elastic aft bridling). A springy boom or elastic section at the ground is desirable to handle these transients.
                 
                Other reasons that heavier line lower may pay is if the extended line drags on the surface sometimes, or is worked by winches more, or if cheaper thicker line in slower lower air gives a cost advantage. Intial pilot lifting (& retirement) in slow low-altitude wind & tether hot-swapping are further complications of this question.
                 
                 


                From: Theo Schmidt <theosch06@yahoo. de>
                To: AirborneWindEnergy@ yahoogroups. com
                Sent: Tue, March 2, 2010 1:24:59 AM
                Subject: [AWECS] Re: Tether Art & Science Overview

                 

                Dave Santos wrote:
                > A graded tether made up of stronger lower sections & thinner upper sections, often with swivels in between, can out-perform a long monotether.
                Shouldn't the stronger sections be aloft where the kite is? A long line
                has considerable weight which is supported between the kite and the
                ground. As the angle at the kite is more vertical than the angle at the
                ground attachment point, I gather that the force is greater at the kite
                side than at the ground side. Am I correct?

                Cheers, Theo Schmidt


              • harry valentine
                Tether would break at the weakest point for the stress at that point. The upper section of tether would carry the weight of the lower sections of tether.
                Message 7 of 16 , Mar 8 6:53 PM
                  Tether would break at the weakest point for the stress at that point. The upper section of tether would carry the weight of the lower sections of tether. Placing balloons, kites or kytoon at regular intervals along the tether could allow these buoyant and flying structures to carry portions of the weight . . .  that approach would be crucial for AWE technologies that generate electric power using airborne generators . . . the weight of the conductive lineor tether along with the tensile stress on it would be horrendous.
                   
                   
                  Harry
                   

                  To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                  From: bobstuart@...
                  Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:23:07 -0600
                  Subject: Re: [AWECS] Re: Tether Art & Science Overview

                   
                  Where do tethers break?  High or Low?

                  Bob the Simpleton

                  On 08/03/2010 5:27 PM, dave santos wrote:
                   
                  Thanks for the bug report, Theo, the graded tether issue was wrongly put. My experience with graded tethers relates to kite trains where each segment is joined by a tri-swivel to which a lifter kite is added; fishing lines are often rigged similarly. Trains do hold absolute altitude records & will likely be workhorses of effective scaled up HAWP. The current FAA fifty foot signal requirement suggests the use of lifters as markers so all AWECS may be trains. The lighter tether with altitude assumption holds for trains.
                   
                  TRUE, a single kite in steady flight must see more pull at the kite than at the anchor, but i am struck by how close DaveL's simulation puts the two readings. My bones tell me that a tether for a dancing/sweeping kite may see the highest transient forces at a non-compliant fixed anchor than at the naturally compliant kite (especially with "snubber" leader or elastic aft bridling). A springy boom or elastic section at the ground is desirable to handle these transients.
                   
                  Other reasons that heavier line lower may pay is if the extended line drags on the surface sometimes, or is worked by winches more, or if cheaper thicker line in slower lower air gives a cost advantage. Intial pilot lifting (& retirement) in slow low-altitude wind & tether hot-swapping are further complications of this question.
                   
                   
                  .



                  Don’t miss a beat Get Messenger on your phone
                • dave santos
                  DaveL (& Bob), Bones tell me was a provocation. The sensible explanation is that application domain experts get pre-formal insights. My lazy numerics is
                  Message 8 of 16 , Mar 10 7:33 PM
                    DaveL (& Bob),
                     
                    "Bones tell me" was a provocation. The sensible explanation is that application domain experts get pre-formal insights. My lazy numerics is outstripped by thousands of hours of close empirical observation of every sort of kite situation, flying several sessions a day most days (towing in zero wind). This is the secret of Dean Jordan's Japanese kite master: "All flying is good".
                     
                    Bob's fine question; where do kitelines break? Anywhere they want ;^) The most common break is indeed at the kite, but this is the weakest link of the tether as normally tied around a narrow radius fitting, concentrating stess on outside fibers. Line off a capstan is not so stressed. Line at the "top" of the reel & closest to the kite sees more flight time, UV, & handling wear/tear & should be cut shorter periodically, recruiting fresh line just as anglers manage fishing line. A permanent thicker leader section at the kite is best rigging practice. Proper inspection (automated acoustic, bones say) catches critical damage that can occur anywhere on a line.
                     
                    The clincher logic to "stronger tether below" may be minimizing failure consequence. Losing the tip of a tapered kite system (or lizard tail) is far less danger & loss. A runaway kite with its long tether broken at the ground & dragging will sustain flight & mayhem for vast distances, whereas a runway that parts its tether high generally glides in circles or flutters down within roughly five times altitude (after Bondestam).
                     
                    daveS
                     
                     


                    From: Dave Lang <SeattleDL@...>
                    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: dave santos <santos137@...>
                    Sent: Mon, March 8, 2010 6:04:45 PM
                    Subject: Re: [AWECS] Re: Tether Art & Science Overview

                    TRUE, a single kite in steady flight must see more pull at the kite than at the anchor, but i am struck by how close DaveL's simulation puts the two readings. My bones tell me that a tether for a dancing/sweeping kite may see the highest transient forces at a non-compliant fixed anchor than at the naturally compliant kite (especially with "snubber" leader or elastic aft bridling). A springy boom or elastic section at the ground is desirable to handle these transients.

                    "Attach point Compliance" is not the issue here.....what is the issue, is how  Newton sees the distributed parameters of a particular case playing out, namely:

                    - line density,
                    - line drag,
                    - wind environment profile,
                    - length of line deployed.

                    All these parameters will speak for conflicting results at one time or the other as to where the tension is greatest along the line. I long ago gave up trying to understand anything but the "simplest tether problems" with my "bones"....the field is rife with non-intuitive results.

                    Yea, the idea of a different type line near the ground could be useful, especially if one is winch-ing a lot on a line :-)

                    DaveL



                    ,


                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.