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

Re: [AirborneWindEnergy] Urban Wind Energy (UWE).

Expand Messages
  • dave santos
    Urban AWE is a huge win as that is where the biggest loads are. Darin s idea of darrieus beads along cables substantially overcomes single turbine scaling
    Message 1 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009
      Urban AWE is a huge win as that is where the biggest loads are. Darin's idea of darrieus beads along cables substantially overcomes single turbine scaling limits. Twist is not a problem if power conducting tag-lines run orthogonally to the ground. But there is much more power available for Urban AWE.
       
      URBAN HAWP
       
      Cristina & Ken identified New York & Tokyo as prime polar jet-stream HAWP locations & Mexico City as a tropical jet stream opportunity. A gigascale AWE string tripod (tri-tether or multi-line cone) could fly in the jet-stream over a metropolis. What a spectacular collective adventure.
       
      As described in earlier posts, a generator/motor reel & each tether base can feed power to a grid as the apex array shifts back & forth across the wind between any two crosswind legs. In calm the apex array tows in a circle. Each generator could be itself gigawatt scale (the current biggest), far beyond flygen scale, & ring a city just as existing power plants do. In many cases existing plant locations will serve & hybrid generation can leverage generators & grid infrastructure.
       
      Launching an urban AWE array can be a sequence of pilot lines flown up by pilot kites or "conventional" aircraft. Full rigging would be hauled up in stages & sail area added by popping large wings like the Gigafly parafoil from packs. The launch process would take about half a day. Killing the array would be fast, a sequence of kill lines & reeling in. Each leg can part & tow down to its base on a small wing without landing on population. Or the tripod cables, in a standard calm every few days, might land on cradles on structures or terrain.
       
      The hazards are manageable as redundant layers of safety are possible. Modular apex arrays tolerate turbulence & single point failures. Multiple lines reduce runaway uncertainty & allow much greater infill v. single point AWE with its large sweep requirements. Simplicity & low mass construction is a basic aviation safety-critical condition. High altitude & slow descent rate buys time for the rig to fail-soft. There would typically be about an hour before the stuff floats down (1-2m per sec) in a shut-down emergency. An apex array might even cutaway whole & fly to a new location, perhaps towed.
       
      Some very cool jobs would be created. Maintaining the rig aloft will require the services of highly technical "sky monkeys" who would need oxygen & zip along the lines like Spiderman & even base-jump home from work in skydiving "bat-suits". At first there would be many heroic situations & populations would be riveted. 
       
      All of these ideas are easily played with on a modest scale with cheap COTs elements, KiteLab style. Scaled up experiments can be debugged in remote locations.
       
      COOPIP
       
       


      --- On Fri, 10/16/09, benhaiemp <pierre.benhaiem@...> wrote:

      From: benhaiemp <pierre.benhaiem@...>
      Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Urban Wind Energy (UWE).
      To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 12:26 PM

       
      A subject extending TEWP subject.What are possibilities for AWE as UWE?
      Here is the first installed UWE in France (Calais),by WindWall ,Dutch company.The structure of this horizontal axis of type Darrieus is next to Darrieus between buildings  which the great difference is no specific supports at the two ends of axis (supports are houses themselves), and its place between two houses (or mounts,as schown on TEWP topic). 
      Urban Wind Energy  schows different UWE.
      Pierre Benhaïem

    • Darin Selby
      The efficiency of the H-Darrieus is greater than the traditional egg-beater -shaped Darrieus. The H-Darrieus has it s lift wing on a vertical axis. From
      Message 2 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009
      The efficiency of the "H-Darrieus" is greater than the traditional "egg-beater"-shaped Darrieus.  The H-Darrieus has it's lift wing on a vertical axis.  From tip to tip of this blade wing, it is the same distance from the center.  This gives it much more leverage, which then translates into torque to spin the generator.  

      The traditional Darrieus, with with its curved blades, loses a lot of leverage as the blades taper back in toward the center.  Here is an H-Darrieus model that one can buy, and in a wonderfully-decentralized way, make just about all the electricity that they would need to run a household.

      The H-Darrieus is a self starter, as well. The egg-beater design isn't. It requires an electric motor to get it up to speed each time it is started. 

      With this "H" design, combined with a few solar panels and a re-thinking of how to efficiently utilize the electricity that is made, could even include a small around-town electric vehicle, as well.       http://www.carbonconcepts.co.uk/windpower/windturbine.htm


      To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
      From: pierre.benhaiem@...
      Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:26:15 +0000
      Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Urban Wind Energy (UWE).

       

      A subject extending TEWP subject.What are possibilities for AWE as UWE?
      Here is the first installed UWE in France (Calais),by WindWall ,Dutch company.The structure of this horizontal axis of type Darrieus is next to Darrieus between buildings  which the great difference is no specific supports at the two ends of axis (supports are houses themselves), and its place between two houses (or mounts,as schown on TEWP topic). 
      Urban Wind Energy  schows different UWE.
      Pierre Benhaïem
      OrthoKiteBunch  



      Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
    • Joe Faust
      [JoeF: urban wind energy, urbanWE, urban AWE, urbanAWE, urban wind power, urbanWP, TEWP, TEAWECS. Distinguish between airborne wind energy
      Message 3 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009

        [JoeF:     urban wind energy, urbanWE, urban AWE, urbanAWE, urban wind power, urbanWP, TEWP, TEAWECS.      Distinguish between airborne wind energy conversion systems and the various species of terrain-enhanced wind energy conversion systems. Some TEWP are airborne devices that sustain themselves; some are airborne at calm and also upon wind reaction; some become airborne under wind while resting on ground in calm; etc.]

        A subject extending TEWP
        subject.    What are possibilities for AWE as UWE?

        Here is the first installed UWE in France (Calais), by WindWall, Dutch company. The structure of this horizontal axis of type Darrieus is next to Darrieus between buildings  which the great difference is no specific supports at the two ends of axis (supports are houses themselves), and its place between two houses (or mounts, as shown on TEWP topic). 

        Urban Wind Energy  shows different UWE.

        Pierre Benhaïem
        OrthoKiteBunch 

        [JoeF:  The title is very interesting. Of course nonAWE solutions in urbanWP have niche-application importance that is being broadly developed.   However, there remains the question of urbanAWECS where the systems are sustained by interaction with the air via buoyancy or aerodynamics with wind or a combination of both. There are innovations occurring in urbanWP in nonAWE as well as urbanAWE. Of course, during the development of AWE in any environment, there well may be hybrid schemes that remain interesting to AWE developers and nonAWE wind power developers. It is neat that centers of innovation are occurring in both nonAWE and AWE. EnergyKiteSystems has a core focus on kite- and kytoon-involved wind energy conversion systems; this focus is advantaged by studying the boundaries of the airborne focus.  That is, keeping the airborne focus while looking at near-AWE systems has proven to be beneficial to the AWE aims. For instance, consider the Darrieus beads of Darin Selby that could be kited in several ways fully airborne; consider the Selsam multi-rotors in their non-AWE formats and their airborne formats; consider the Dan Parker SpiralAirfoil in both the non-AWE and the AWE schemes. Lofting by kite systems all kinds of turbines are the eye of many AWECS developers. ]

        Cheers, 
        JoeF

      • Joe Faust
        ... wrote:[... H-Darrieus] DarinS and all, Some comment toward AWE H-Darrieus A category of airborne H-Darrieus is as yet barely explored; the ground-hugging
        Message 4 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009

          --- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Darin Selby <darin_selby@...> wrote:
          [... H-Darrieus]

          DarinS and all, 

          Some comment toward AWE H-Darrieus
          A category of airborne H-Darrieus is as yet barely explored; the ground-hugging or building-hugging H-Darrieus or terrain-enhanced non-tensionally-lofted H-Darrieus are getting attention for deserved niche applications in the rural, urban, and sea spaces. There is yet a definite AWE opportunity for H-Darrieus where kites and kytoons supply airborne tensional towering to support tensionally the vertical-axis H-Darrieus. There may even be some interesting combinations of boom solutions where left and right TipBoom system with lifters and eightPath driving kites support an H-Darrieus. Not to leave out a morphing of Magenn from blimpy to inflated H-Darrieus horizontalized for Magnus-effect assets. Surely others may find airborne solutions for variable-pitch H-Darrieus.
          Joy
          JoeF
        • benhaiemp
          How UWE become Urban AWE,or UAWE. Several devices and several locations as indicated on precedent messages and prospectives. -Adaptation of Darin s Darrieus
          Message 5 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009

            How UWE become Urban AWE,or UAWE.

            Several devices and several locations as indicated on precedent messages and prospectives.

            -Adaptation of Darin's Darrieus (good consonance;;)if correct).

            -Dave's Tether-Tripod could be anchored on the top of several existent or non yet existent buildings with adequate disposition,and with advantage of non limitation of size.

            -Add:much AWE could be installed on a roof without limitation of swept area to the size of the site (at the contrary of UWE):Kitegen,Laddermill,Tipping-Boom,OrthoKiteBunch...

            The esthetic of AWE also must be considered;so town planning and AWE should be joint at the conception.

            The morphing of MARS (Magenn) with Darrieus rotor seems interesting.However Magenn does not seem  pursue it.Two or three years ago I made a part of two blades for a small H-Darrieus (CNC  polystyren cutting is used for mockups of planes and can realize all profiles) and an UFO kite in polystyrene next to Savonius type.UFO flew at an angle of 30°  with Magnus effect,but no perceptible Magnus effect was observed with Darrieus blades.

            Note:in a precedent message (classification) with my hypotethic definitions of cyclic AWE,Laddermill don't be one.So it is not obvious to give such a definition.

            Pierre Benhaïem

            OrthoKiteBunch 

             

          • Joe Faust
            Pierre, A very fat bladed H-Darrieus may give some Magnus effect. Then I add a quick drawing to indicate tensional towering of H-Darrieus: liftedHDarrieus
            Message 6 of 13 , Oct 16, 2009

              Pierre,

                   A very fat bladed H-Darrieus may give some Magnus effect.

              Then I add a quick drawing to indicate tensional towering of H-Darrieus:

               liftedHDarrieus

              In similar lift support, the efficient horizontal-axis turbines that are now dominant in hard-ground-hugging towers may find a home higher in the sky tensionally towered.

              JoeF

            • benhaiemp
              Joe, Very explicit drawings. In the first,Magnus effect works towards one side (so a torsion drop tube is needed);in the second Magnus effect works upward (so
              Message 7 of 13 , Oct 17, 2009
                Joe,

                Very explicit drawings.

                In the first,Magnus effect works towards one side (so a torsion drop
                tube is needed);in the second Magnus effect works upward (so no torsion
                drop tube).

                My blades and UFO roughly were realized.

                However it is possible that there is much more drag (10/1 or more) than
                Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.The configuration seems different from
                a Savonius turbine or similar (3/1).
                It would be interesting to improve Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.

                Pierre Benhaïem
              • Darin Selby
                Doug Selsam, who is part of this forum, has put together quite a humorous page, comparing everything to his multi-rotor superturbine . In the comparison, he
                Message 8 of 13 , Oct 17, 2009
                  Doug Selsam, who is part of this forum, has put together quite a humorous page, comparing everything to his multi-rotor "superturbine".  In the comparison, he speaks of the Magenn as well, and its very poor efficiency.  

                  The H-Darrieus-style rotor
                  is about the only one he doesn't mention.  He says that the main problem with the "egg-beater"-style Darrieus rotor is that it is not self starting.


                  To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                  From: pierre.benhaiem@...
                  Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:13:05 +0000
                  Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Urban Wind Energy (UWE).

                   

                  How UWE become Urban AWE,or UAWE.
                  Several devices and several locations as indicated on precedent messages and prospectives.
                  -Adaptation of Darin's Darrieus (good consonance;;)if correct).
                  -Dave's Tether-Tripod could be anchored on the top of several existent or non yet existent buildings with adequate disposition, and with advantage of non limitation of size.
                  -Add:much AWE could be installed on a roof without limitation of swept area to the size of the site (at the contrary of UWE):Kitegen, Laddermill, Tipping-Boom, OrthoKiteBunch. ..
                  The esthetic of AWE also must be considered;so town planning and AWE should be joint at the conception.
                  The morphing of MARS (Magenn) with Darrieus rotor seems interesting. However Magenn does not seem  pursue it.Two or three years ago I made a part of two blades for a small H-Darrieus (CNC  polystyren cutting is used for mockups of planes and can realize all profiles) and an UFO kite in polystyrene next to Savonius type.UFO flew at an angle of 30°  with Magnus effect,but no perceptible Magnus effect was observed with Darrieus blades.
                  Note:in a precedent message (classification) with my hypotethic definitions of cyclic AWE,Laddermill don't be one.So it is not obvious to give such a definition.
                  Pierre Benhaïem
                  OrthoKiteBunch 
                   



                  Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it now.
                • Darin Selby
                  Joe, that is a really nice drawing that you made so quickly. What is the program that you use to do this? Is it a digital touch-pad? To:
                  Message 9 of 13 , Oct 17, 2009
                    Joe, that is a really nice drawing that you made so quickly.  What is the program that you use to do this?  Is it a digital touch-pad?   


                    To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                    From: joefaust333@...
                    Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:58:18 +0000
                    Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Re: a variable pitch H-Darrieus design

                     

                    Pierre,
                         A very fat bladed H-Darrieus may give some Magnus effect.
                    Then I add a quick drawing to indicate tensional towering of H-Darrieus:
                     liftedHDarrieus
                    In similar lift support, the efficient horizontal-axis turbines that are now dominant in hard-ground- hugging towers may find a home higher in the sky tensionally towered.
                    JoeF



                    Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
                  • Darin Selby
                    What is the maximum theoretical efficiency that a designer can expect from his wind turbine? Page 22-28 on this e-book Wind Energy
                    Message 10 of 13 , Oct 17, 2009
                      "What is the maximum theoretical efficiency that a designer can expect from his wind turbine?"  Page 22-28 on this e-book "Wind Energy" link:

                      http://books.google.com/books?id=ICTB1wdFzOoC&pg=PP1&dq='wind+energy"+"Sathyajith+Mathew"&ei=UgbaSq-dMYbekwTu9-WZAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false 


                      To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                      From: pierre.benhaiem@...
                      Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:12:49 +0000
                      Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Urban Wind Energy (UWE).

                       

                      Joe,

                      Very explicit drawings.

                      In the first,Magnus effect works towards one side (so a torsion drop
                      tube is needed);in the second Magnus effect works upward (so no torsion
                      drop tube).

                      My blades and UFO roughly were realized.

                      However it is possible that there is much more drag (10/1 or more) than
                      Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.The configuration seems different from
                      a Savonius turbine or similar (3/1).
                      It would be interesting to improve Magnus effect on Darrieus turbine.

                      Pierre Benhaïem




                      Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
                    • Darin Selby
                      Joe, I really like what you ve come up with in that latest drawing. How about two H-Darrieus s that Contra-spin to cancel the torque? Have the generator
                      Message 11 of 13 , Oct 17, 2009
                        Joe, I really like what you've come up with in that latest drawing.  How about two H-Darrieus's that "Contra-spin" to cancel the torque?  Have the generator in-between, and then a dual-conductive tether to the ground.  http://www.magenn.com/ has got all of the tether stuff worked out to a tee.


                        To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
                        From: joefaust333@...
                        Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:58:18 +0000
                        Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Re: a variable pitch H-Darrieus design

                         

                        Pierre,
                             A very fat bladed H-Darrieus may give some Magnus effect.
                        Then I add a quick drawing to indicate tensional towering of H-Darrieus:
                         liftedHDarrieus
                        In similar lift support, the efficient horizontal-axis turbines that are now dominant in hard-ground- hugging towers may find a home higher in the sky tensionally towered.
                        JoeF



                        Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
                      • Joe Faust
                        Filing change. http://energykitesystems.net/0/JoeFaust/AWE/liftedHDarrieus.jpg
                        Message 12 of 13 , Oct 21, 2010
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.