Skip to search.

(*) Scheduled Maintenance: We are undertaking some essential, but extensive maintenance to improve Yahoo! Calendar. Your Group Calendar is being migrated to a much improved version of Yahoo! Calendar. During the maintenance period, you may not have access to your Groups Calendar. We sincerely apologize for this inconvenience. Your Groups Calendar is in great shape and we are working to have it available again as quickly as possible - Yahoo! Groups & Yahoo! Calendar Team

AirborneWindEnergy · AWES

Group Information

  • Members: 126
  • Category: Energy
  • Founded: Mar 13, 2009
  • Language: English
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Hear how Yahoo! Groups has changed the lives of others. Take me there.
Click here for the latest updates on Groups Message search

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Nomenclature   Message List  
Reply Message #657 of 6433 |
It seems so obvious--but then again, everybody else's must seem so to themselves, too.  ;-)

Airborne = Borne by the air = Supported via aerodynamic forces.**

A windmill on a tower is not aerodynamically supported. A Selsam turbine stack supported at both ends from mountain tops is not aerodynamically supported. These are not AWE devices. Now, tilt the turbine back, add a tail and it becomes an auto-gyro, supporting some/much/all of its mass; NOW it's aerodynamically supported. It's AWE.

Kites are AWE, autogyros are AWE, two-kite systems are AWE. Magenn is AWE, so long as some portion of its lift is aerodynamic (it is). Turbines, whether made of carbon fiber, sailcloth or banana leaves--if wholly supported by towers, buildings, blimps or by elephants holding hands in a chorus line--are not AWE. Defining AWE does not rely on altitude (above sea level, above the ground or the above the local constabulary) Altitude is not an integral part of the nomenclature of what we do. It is important, but only internally.

Selsam systems are sometimes AWE and sometimes not. Doesn't diminish these systems' value whether or not they're  AWE; it's just sometimes yes, sometimes no. OutLeader and SkySails are definitely AWE--they are aerodynamically supported; deliver their power as tension over distance divided by time (hmmm, sounds like "power" to me), rather than as electricity, or potential energy (as in head of water = pumped hydro). Doesn't matter. AWE = aerodynamically supported; the form of power delivered is ancillary.

Second bit of nomenclature; "Kites have strings." AWE includes tethered structures, and does not include free-flying structures. I don't care if the tether is a torsion tube or a bit of string; I don't care of the tether leads to the earth, or to a moving ship, or to a second kite--if it's aerodynamically supported and flies from a tether, it's AWE.

My 2 cents,

Dave Culp

** In my universe, AWE does not include aerostatic lift-supported devices, but only if 100% aerostatic--systems such as Magenn are AWE, because at least a portion of their support is aerodynamic--and they fly from tethers. I won't argue this however; if the consensus says "aerostatic" = "airborne" = "AWE,"  I won't quibble.


Wed Dec 2, 2009 10:33 pm

dave_culp
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

Message #657 of 6433 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

It seems so obvious--but then again, everybody else's must seem so to themselves, too. ;-) Airborne = Borne by the air = Supported via aerodynamic forces.** A...
Dave Culp
dave_culp Offline Send Email
Dec 2, 2009
10:43 pm

this is what i've been thinking all along! dean jordan nabx.net jordanairkites.com jordanairkites.blogspot.com/ aoxomoxoa...
dean jordan
deanjordan@... Send Email
Dec 2, 2009
11:29 pm

Dave C.: There is a wind turbine company in the Reno/Lake Tahoe area that was called "Appropriate Energy", now called "Synergy". Their turbine is...
dougselsam Offline Send Email Dec 3, 2009
7:19 pm

After hearing all the arguments from all directions either for more inclusiveness, or for less inclusiveness (in schemes, altitude-classification, etc, etc),...
Dave Lang
lamedang Offline Send Email
Dec 4, 2009
2:13 am

I agree Lynn...
spacecannon@...
spacecannon... Offline Send Email
Dec 4, 2009
2:58 am

Another approach: For thousands of years the power of the wind has been converted to mechanical energy by people around the globe using tethered devices flown...
Joe Faust
joe_f_90032 Offline Send Email
Dec 4, 2009
3:23 am

Joe, before you become too enamored with your abstractions and justifications for terming kites as "conventional power", and all the rest as "alternative", I...
Dave Lang
lamedang Offline Send Email
Dec 4, 2009
4:50 am

Before we leave the matter, let's check out two other factors in this matter: The kite gave birth to the process that let the turbine blades evolve; the kite...
Joe Faust
joe_f_90032 Offline Send Email
Dec 4, 2009
4:59 am

... <mailto:AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com> , Dave Lang <SeattleDL@...> wrote: in short, ... Yes, TWECS as a set of solutions is probably the best...
Joe Faust
joe_f_90032 Offline Send Email
Dec 6, 2009
12:03 am

Alternative Wind Energy is all of us, and excludes tower wind turbines because they are the conventional. Lynn...
spacecannon@...
spacecannon... Offline Send Email
Dec 6, 2009
1:20 am

The word "Alternative" has become so ubiquitous as to be ignored by the reader's eye. Also the word "Alternative" is already used to denote the broader set of...
dougselsam Offline Send Email Dec 6, 2009
3:16 pm
Advanced

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines NEW - Help