Performance Characteristics of a 1 kW Scale Kite-Powered System

David J. Olinger
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609 e-mail: olinger@wpi.edu

Jitendra. S. Goela
Optical and Ceramic Technologies, Dow Chemical Company, Marlboro, MA 01752 e-mail: jgoela@dow.com

A 1 kW scale kite-powered system that uses kites to convert wind energy into electrical energy has been studied to determine its performance characteristics and establish feasibility of steady-state operation. In this kite-powered system, a kite is connected to a tether that transmits the generated aerodynamic forces on the kite to a power conversion system on the ground. The ground-based power conversion system consists of a rocking arm coupled to a Sprag clutch, ywheel, and electrical generator. Governing equations describing the dynamical motion of the kite, tether, and power conversion mechanism were developed assuming an inexible, straight-line tether. A steady-state analysis of the kite aerodynamics was incorporated into the dynamical equations of the kite-powered system. The governing equations were solved numerically using a RungeKutta scheme to assess how performance parameters of the system such as output power, cycle time, and tether tension varied with wind speed, kite area, and aerodynamic characteristics of the kite. The results showed that a 1 kW scale system is feasible using the proposed design concept with a kite area of 25 m2 and wind speeds of 6 m/s. Preliminary efforts to build and test a working 1 kW scale kite-powered demonstrator are also reported. DOI: 10.1115/1.4002082 Keywords: wind energy, alternative energy, kite-powered system

Introduction

Wind turbines or windmills have traditionally been used to extract power from the wind. Tethered wind energy systems have been given less attention, especially in the past 2 decades, although several investigations were conducted in late 1970s, early 1980s 111, and more recently in 2000s 1214. In a tethered energy system, an aerodynamic body kite, parafoil, aircraft, parachute, or balloon is held aloft by the wind. In this study, a kite is connected to a exible tether, which is used to transmit generated aerodynamic forces to a power conversion system on the ground. In some proposed schemes, the power conversion also takes place on the aerodynamic body itself 15. Kite-powered systems have certain potential advantages over wind turbine systems. A main advantage is that kites can y at greater heights than those at which wind turbines operate. Some investigators have proposed ying kites at altitudes of several thousand feet 6,7. Wind speed increases with height in Earths boundary layer, and since wind power density is proportional to the cube of wind speed, the available wind power is greater for kites of equivalent area. Here, a wind turbine and kite are considered to be of equivalent area when the kite planform area equals the area swept by the turbine blades. Other potential advantages for kite-powered systems include reduced capital costs, simplicity in design and construction, and potential for use in regions with lower wind speeds. These advantages are particularly attractive in developing nations where offgrid, distributed power systems can reduce the need for large capital outlays associated with centralized power generation. Another advantage is reduced environmental impact. A kite-powered system would reduce visual pollution that often results when wind turbines are sited in attractive natural landscapes. Noise pollution and bird kill issues associated with wind turbines should also be reduced for kite systems because birds will be less likely to y into the tethers or kites due to the kites high elevation and relatively small area. In addition, injuries to birds from exible kites
Contributed by the Solar Energy Division of ASME for publication in the JOURSOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 6, 2009; nal manuscript received April 27, 2010; published online October 4, 2010. Assoc. Editor: Spyros Voutsinas.

NAL OF

and tethers should also be less compared with rigid blades. Disadvantages for kite-powered systems include kite control issues and the requirement of some type of buoyancy system to keep the kite aloft when wind velocity reduces to a low value or is zero. In this study, we consider a kite-powered system consisting of a large kite area 25 m2 as the aerodynamic body, a tether, and a power conversion system located on the ground, as shown in Fig. 1. The kite tether is attached to one end of the rocking arm so that the up-and-down motion of the kite is converted into an oscillating motion of the arm about the pivot point B. The oscillating motion of the arm is then converted into rotary motion of a ywheel through the use of a Sprag clutch mechanism, a retraction spring, and several reduction gears, as shown in Fig. 1a. The Sprag clutch essentially a rear bike hub mechanism engages the ywheel during kite ascent to allow generated power to raise the load weight. The Sprag clutch disengages during kite descent. The ywheel serves to smooth out rotation rate variations. Additional details of the power transmission system are provided in Sec. 2. Many previous studies of wind power systems focused on high altitude systems, often operating in the jet stream, capable of large-scale megawatt size power production 25. Studies have also appeared where kites operate in a yo-yo conguration and the energy is generated as the kites unroll the lines from reels during the power phase and electric motors, attached to the lines, winding the lines back on to the reels by spending a small amount of energy during the recovery phase 12,13. In the present work, the goals are more modest with a focus on smaller-scale power systems kilowatt size that could be used in developing nations or rural areas of developed nations. The initial studies of kitepowered systems at this smaller scale were conducted by Goela et al. 611. In particular, equations of motion that describe the dynamics of the kite during a power cycle were formulated 7. The steady-state solution of these equations were obtained for both the ascent and descent phases of kite motion by keeping the primary system variables such as kite velocity and tether inclination angles constant. Analytical expressions for power output, tether tension, and inclination angle were developed, and conditions for maximum power output were identied for particular NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-1

Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

Copyright 2010 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Fig. 1 The kite-powered system. a The system in the power conguration when the Sprag clutch and ywheel are engaged. In the idle conguration, the Sprag clutch and ywheel are disengaged, and the system splits into the two subsystems shown in b and c. The structure C in a consists of a constant radius RC arc that ensures that the tension force in the chain connecting gear G to point C always acts perpendicular to the rocking arm at point C.

cases. In addition, maximum power output was obtained when the kite moves in a cross-wind direction perpendicular to the wind conrming Loyds 1 results. Goela et al. 79 also performed preliminary wind tunnel studies of several kite models and theoretically studied wind loading effects on kite tethers. Matos et al. 15 also performed wind tunnel measurements on parafoil geometries and measured lift and drag coefcients over a range of wind speeds and angles of attack. While these investigations generally focused on the steady-state operation of kite-powered systems, Goela et al. 10,11 also developed and numerically solved the governing differential equations of motion for a kite-powered pump. Performance parameters such as output power, water-lifting capacity, and kite oscillation period as a function of kite elevation, kite weight, tether angle of inclination, and kite lift-to-drag ratio were determined. In this study, the theoretical maximum performance characteristics of a 1 kW scale kite-powered system appropriate for use in a developing nation are determined since losses and inefciencies in the tether and power transmission system have been neglected. These objectives are similar to the study of Goela et al. 10,11. However, the present kite-powered system is quite different and is 041009-2 / Vol. 132, NOVEMBER 2010

focused toward electrical power generation instead of a kitepowered pump designed to lift loads of water. Furthermore, the present power system uses a xed length tether versus a variable tether length in Refs. 10,11. In addition, a steady-state aerodynamic analysis of the kite lift and drag forces has been used and incorporated in the equations of motion of the kite. Other investigators 1214 also recently incorporated aerodynamic analyses into studies of kite-powered systems. Goela et al. 10,11 assumed a constant lift-to-drag ratio L / D = 6 during the ascent phase and an L / D = 2 during the descent phase of the kite. However, as a tethered kite moves in ascent or descent with varying velocity, the orientation of the relative local velocity vector, effective kite angle of attack, and resultant lift and drag forces Fig. 2 vary dynamically with time. This dynamic behavior can have a dramatic effect on the kite forces, its motion, and system performance parameters such as power output and tether tension, as shown in Sec. 4. In the general form, the dynamics of the kite-powered system is complex with the kite moving in three dimensions, and the tether prole changing continuously in a nonequilibrium condition as the kite moves. To accurately model the tether prole, it would be Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Fig. 2 Parameter denitions for the kite and tether

actual kite-powered system has four tethers, which will prevent kite pitching. This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes in detail the operation of the kite-powered system. In Sec. 3, the governing equations describing the dynamical motion of the kite, tether, rocking arm, and power transmission system are developed assuming an inexible, straight-line tether. The numerical scheme used to solve the dynamics equations is discussed. In Sec. 4, the solutions of the governing equations are provided to assess how performance parameters of the system such as output power, cycle time, and tether tension vary with wind speed, kite area, and aerodynamic characteristics of the kite. Finally, a summary of key results and a working kite-powered demonstrator are briey described in Sec. 5.

required to formulate and solve nonequilibrium wave propagation equations. This description is beyond the scope of this proof-ofconcept study as the objective here is to perform a simplied analysis aimed at obtaining a steady-state operation that will develop understanding and guide in producing a working model of the kite-powered system. Consequently, the following simplifying assumptions are made: 1 The analysis of kite energy system is based on steady-state aerodynamics, which means that dynamic inow effects are neglected. Dynamic inow here refers to local changes in the ow pattern, the kite effective angle of attack, and the resultant lift and drag forces due to unsteady aerodynamic effects in the ow. 2 The kite motion is restricted to the twodimensional x-z plane Fig. 2. This assumption will still be able to provide cross-wind kite motions, as described in Refs. 1,10,11. Disturbances wind gusts that could lead to instabilities in kite motion are also not considered here. 3 The kite tether is inexible and its prole is a straight-line. This assumption is valid when wtLt / Ft 1, where wt is the weight per unit length of the tether, and if aerodynamic forces on the kite tether are small compared with tether tension. Current kite lines weigh approximately 0.015 N/m, and Lt 375 m, Ft 100 N in our study, so that wtLt / Ft 0.058, which is small. The tether transmission efciency, eT, is set equal to 1, implying that the tether tension at the two ends kite and rocking arm, point A are equal. 4 The kite tethers weight, lift, and drag forces are neglected as they are small compared with corresponding parameters for kite. For a tether of diameter 2 mm and wind speed of about 6 m/s, the aerodynamic forces on the kite tether are small compared with the kite lift, drag, and tether tension 10,11. 5 The weight and moment of inertia of the gears, Sprag clutch, connecting chain, and drive chain in Fig. 1 are small compared with the weight and moment of inertia, respectively, of the ywheel and are also neglected. 6 A single kite tether is assumed. In a working kitepowered system, additional kite tethers may be needed to control the kite motion and change its angle of attack. 7 The effect of dynamics of components that would be used to vary the kites angle of attack are considered to be small and are not modeled in this study. 8 No pitching of the kite is allowed except at two specic times times 3 and 6 in Table 1 during a kite cycle. Although the present analysis is based on one kite tether, the

Kite-Powered System

The kite-powered system consists of a kite, a tether, a rocking arm, and gear system, which converts the wind energy to rotational energy of the ywheel. The ywheel then powers an electrical generator and converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. To calculate power produced by this system, the electrical generator has been replaced with a load whose potential energy increases as the ywheel rotates in a counterclockwise direction Fig. 1a. A balanced rocking arm with identical lengths on each side of a central pivot, B is used. A counterweight, WCTR, is mounted on the rocking arm at point A. A chain attached to a spring is wound around the gear G and then its end is attached to the rocking arm at point C. The structure C in Fig. 1a consists of a constant radius RC arc that ensures that the tension in the chain connecting gear G to point C will always act perpendicular to the rocking arm at point C. The spring and counterweight, WCTR, are used to move the rocking arm down during the kite descent phase. A Sprag clutch essentially a rear bike hub mechanism is located between gears G and G2, which share a common axle. The Sprag clutch is used to disengage or engage gear G from gear G2, which is coupled to the ywheel through gear FG and a drive chain Fig. 1c. The rocking arm and gear power transmission system have two main congurations: 1 the power conguration in which the Sprag clutch and ywheel are engaged and the rocking arm moves up Fig. 1a. In this case, the rocking arm does work against counterweight, stretches the spring, stores energy in the ywheel, and increases the potential energy of the load. 2 The idle conguration in which the Sprag clutch and ywheel are disengaged and the rocking arm moves down Figs. 1b and 1c. In this case, the counterweight and spring do work on the rocking arm to move it down and the ywheel uses its stored energy to increase the potential energy of the load. To create the up-and-down motion of the kite, the geometric angle of attack of the kite with respect to the horizontal is varied between two distinct values: = asc and = dsc with asc dsc Fig. 2 and Table 1. The change in geometric angle of attack is assumed to occur linearly over a specied time period tAOA TC. In order to keep the analysis simple, the rotational

Table 1 Sequence of events during system cycle Time 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rocking arm position or movement point A Bottom Ascending Ascending Ascending Top Descending Sprag clutch Disengaged Engages Flywheel Engaged Disengages Flywheel Disengaged Disengaged System conguration Idle Power Power Idle Idle Idle Angle-of-attack

= asc = asc Shifts to = dsc = dsc = dsc Shifts to = dsc

Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-3

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

At time 3, where the rocking arm angle = dsc, the angle-ofattack mechanism shifts the geometric angle of attack of the kite to = dsc to reduce the kite lift. The lower dsc value decreases the lift on the kite, and slows the upward motion of the arm. At time 4 the Sprag clutch disengages from the ywheel G FRFG / RG2 and the ywheels angular velocity decreases Fig. 3b. At time 5, point A on the rocking arm reaches its maximum height and reverses direction due to the effect of the counterweight WCTR and the retraction spring. The gear G now rotates in a clockwise direction negative angular velocity values in Fig. 3b as the rocking arm moves downwards. As the rocking arm point A descends, the retraction spring maintains the tension in the chain connecting the rocking arm to gear G. In addition, the stored energy in ywheel continues to rotate gears G2 and FG in a counterclockwise direction and move the load weight upward. It is to be noted that in this study the kite dynamics and rocking arm motion are fully modeled as the rocking arm undergoes transition from an ascending motion to a descending motion at time 5. The maximum rocking arm angle approximately = 40 deg is not specied as a simulation input but is determined automatically from the solutions of the equations of motion. At time 6, where the rocking arm angle = asc, the angle-ofattack mechanism shifts the kites angle-of-attack to = asc. However, the momentum of the rocking arm continues to move the arm down until a minimum rocking arm angle is obtained at time 1. This completes the system cycle and the system starts all over again at time 1.

Governing Equations

Fig. 3 a Rocking arm motion versus time. b Angular velocities of the rocking arm, gear G, and the ywheel versus time.

dynamics of the kite, which would require consideration of the kite pitching moment about the aerodynamic center, are not modeled. Table 1, Fig. 1, and Fig. 3 provide the sequence of events that occur during a full cycle of the system. At time 1, point A on the end of the rocking arm is at its minimum height, and the Sprag clutch and ywheel are not engaged idle conguration. At time 1, = asc yields a higher lift force on the kite, which accelerates the rocking arm upward and rotates gear G in a counterclockwise direction. The angular velocity of the rocking arm and gear G increases until the Sprag clutch engages with the ywheel power conguration at time 2 Fig. 1a. This engagement occurs when

In this section, the governing differential equations of motion for the kite, rocking arm, and ywheel are developed. The primary system variables are dened in Figs. 1 and 2. Simplifying assumptions were discussed in Sec. 1. Figure 2 summarizes the forces and moments acting on the kite that result from the kite motion. The kite is restricted to twodimensional motion in the x-z plane. The kite moves with a velocity VK at angle with respect to the ground. The relative or local velocity VR at an angle of with respect to the ground results from a combination of the kite motion and the horizontal wind velocity, as shown in the velocity triangle in Fig. 2. The kite tether is oriented at angle with respect to the ground. The lift and drag forces FLK and FDK are oriented perpendicular and parallel to the VR vector, respectively. The force on the tether Ft is considered constant along the tether length since tether transmission losses due to tether prole are neglected. The wind velocity variation with height above the ground is specied by setting a reference wind velocity V0 at a reference height of z0 = 10 m and using V = V0

zkite z0

1/7

G =

RC RFG F R G R G2

from Ref. 16 where zkite = Lt sin is the elevation of the kite. The velocities V1 and V1A represent the kite velocities along the kite tether direction with respect to the stationary ground and point A end of rocking arm respectively. Likewise, the velocities V2 and V2A represent the kite velocities normal to the kite tether with respect to the stationary ground and point A, respectively. 3.1 Kite Dynamics. Governing equations for the kite dynamics are derived as follows. Taking moments of the kite drag, lift, and weight about point A at the end of the rocking arm, and dividing by the tether length yield WK dV2A 2WKV1AV2A = FDK sin + FLK cos + g dt gLt + WK cos And taking a force balance along the tether yields Transactions of the ASME 3

One can clearly see the engagement of the Sprag clutch and ywheel at time 2 in Fig. 3b, which shows the angular velocity as function of time of rocking arm, gear G, and ywheel during a single cycle of the rocking arm. The rate of change of the angular velocity decreases suddenly since the rocking arm must now overcome additional inertia of the ywheel and load weight. When the Sprag clutch and ywheel are engaged, gears G, G2, FG, and the ywheel all rotate in a counterclockwise direction Fig. 1a and the load weight moves upward. 041009-4 / Vol. 132, NOVEMBER 2010

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

2 W KV 2 WK dV1A A = FDK cos + + FLK sin + WK sin + g dt gLt

IF

dF = dt

= FFGRFG WLOADRF =

F CR G RFG WLOADRF R G2 11

Ft

In the above equation, the tethers moment of inertia, lift, and drag are neglected as discussed in Sec. 1 earlier. In Eq. 3, on the left-hand side, the respective terms are due to the inertial and Coriolis acceleration of the kite and the tether, while on the righthand side the respective terms are due to the kite drag, lift, and weight. In Eq. 4 from left, we have terms due to kite inertia, drag, lift, weight, and centrifugal acceleration, and the tether tension. The Coriolis term in Eq. 3 and inertia term in Eq. 4 drop out since, in the present case, the tether length Lt is constant so that V1A = 0. The kite lift and drag forces FLK, FDK are calculated assuming that the kite is modeled as a nite length wing in the spanwise direction with a thin airfoil section. Assuming a linear lift coefcient curve below airfoil stall angle, the lift coefcient is given by 17,18 CL = a0 L=0 a0 1+ AR 5

The above two equations apply when the system is in the power conguration. The following equations are used in Eq. 11: R C = R G G = R G G2 = R G RFG F R G2 12 13

FCRGG = FG2RG2G2 = FFGRFGF

Here, FFG = FG2 is the tension in the tight drive chain between gears G2 and FG, and FC is the tension in the chain from the rocking arm to gear G. The tension in the loose following chain between gears G2 and FG is assumed to be negligible. By eliminating the tension force FC between the two moment balances in Eqs. 10 and 11, and using Eqs. 12 and 13 and VA = RA, an equation for the linear acceleration of point A is obtained. The moments of inertia of the rocking arm around the pivot B, and the ywheel are given by IAD =
2 1 WDA2RA2 WCTRRCTR + 12 g g 2 1 W FR F 2 g

14 15

where L=0 is the angle of attack at which zero lift occurs on the kite. The kite drag coefcient is calculated using C D = C D0 +
2 CL ARe0

IF =

from nite wing theory 17,18 where CD0 is a parasitic drag coefcient that introduces viscous effects into the drag calculation, and e0 is an Oswald efciency factor that accounts for dragdue-to-lift effects and wing tip vortex effects from nonelliptic shaped wings. The lift-to-drag ratio L / D, which also varies with time during the kite motion, is given by CL / CD. The pitching moment about the kite aerodynamic center is not included in the model since this moment cannot be transferred through the tether to the system on the ground. The pitching moment would need to be included if the rotational dynamics of the kite between angles = asc and = dsc were modeled. The time-varying lift and drag on the kite are then given by
2 FLK = 2 VR C LA K
1

The Sprag clutch in the power transmission mechanism can either be engaged or disengaged see Table 1. It is disengaged idle conguration when G RFG / RG2F in which case IF = Wload = 0 in Eqs. 10 and 11. While disengaged the ywheel angular velocity is determined through IF dF = WLOADRF dt 16

When the Sprag clutch is engaged power conguration, G FRFG / RG2, and IF, Wload are set to their specied input values in Eq. 10 and 11, and F = GRG2 / RFG. In addition, the following kinematic equation is required: d VA = dt RA 17

and
2 FDK = 2 VR C DA K
1

In addition, we require the differential equation d V 2A = dt Lt 9

Equations 3, 9, 10, 16, and 17 are the ve rst-order equations describing the motion of the kite, tether, rocking arm, and power transmission gear system. The initial conditions for the ve rst-order differential equations at t = 0 are VA = 0, V2A = 0, = 25 deg, = 70 deg, and F = 0. The differential equations are solved for VA, V2A, , , and F as functions of time using a RungeKutta scheme in a MATLAB algorithm. Studies were conducted to ensure that the numerical results were independent of initial conditions and numerical time step t. Once these ve primary variables are determined at each time step with t = 0.002 s the following equations are used in order to calculate other important system parameters: V1 = VA sin + V2 = VA cos + V2A 18 19 20 21

3.2 Rocking Arm and Power Mechanism Dynamics. To model the motion of the rocking arm, a moment balance about the pivot point B in Fig. 1 is applied d = IAD dt

M B = FtRA cos + /2 FCRC KxRC

= tan1

V2 V1

RA RD WBA cos + WDB cos WCTRRCTR cos 2 2 10 and a second moment balance about the ywheel center point F. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

2 VK = V2 1 + V2 2 + 2VVK cos VR = V2 + VK

= tan1

VK sin V VK cos

22 23

NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-5

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

3.3 Power Output. The average power output of the system is determined using PK = WLOADzLOAD
24

Results

+ zLOAD

42

TC

24

T4 T2 where zLOAD 24 = T RFFt and zLOAD 42 = T RFFt are 2 4 the elevation changes of the load weight during the engaged and disengaged segments Table 1 of the system cycle, and TC is the time period for 1 cycle of the system. The power output is averaged over approximately 15 system cycles at times after initial transients have died out. Energy balances were conducted over a full cycle of the system to validate the power output results. This study conrmed that each of the following average power calculations for the kite, pivot B, and gear G in Eqs. 2527, respectively matched the average power output given in Eq. 24.

In Table 2, the input parameters for a baseline run of the numerical simulation are presented. An AK = 25 m2 kite with an aspect ratio of AR = 4 and a cambered airfoil L=0 = 4 deg, ying at an elevation of Lt = 375 m, with a nominal design wind speed of V0 = 6 m / s at an elevation of z0 = 10 m is studied. The load and counterweight are set to WLOAD = 80 N and WCTR = 300 N, respectively. Kites of AK = 25 m2 and aspect ratio AR = 4 are commercially available. Also, several smaller kites could be stacked above each other in series on a single set of tether lines to achieve the required kite area. Kites of this size can be own at an elevation of 375 m. Startup issues such as initial uncoiling of the tether lines and the elevation of the kite to the required height will be considered in future publications. A Class 4 wind of speed V0 = 6 m / s has been modeled here. Gear mechanisms, their radii,

1 PK = TC 1 PB = TC
TC 0

FV
0 t A

TC

t K

cos t

25

F R cos + /2t F R
0 TC C G G t

26

1 PG = TC

27

In addition, the instantaneous power can be determined by calculating PKt = FtVK cos PLOADt = WLOADRFF for the kite or load. A nondimensional power coefcient is given by CP = P 0.5 V 3A K 30 28 29

Power coefcients will be correlated against the normalized load weight given by
= WLOAD

WLOAD 0.5 V 2A

31
K

Table 2 Input parameters for baseline run AK = 25 m2 AR = 4 a0 = 2 1/rad b = 10. m CD0 = 0.1 c = 2.5 m eo = 0.9 g = 9.81 m / s2 IAD = 244.2 kg m2 IF = 0.924 kg m2 K = 10 N / m Lt = 375 m RA = 2.5 m RC = 2.5 m RCTR = 2.5 m Re= 1.0 106 RF = 0.2 m RFG = 0.025 m RG = 0.05 m RG2 = 0.05 m V0 = 6 m / s WBA = 125 N WCTR = 300 N WDB = 125 N WF = 462 N WK = 55 N WLOAD = 80 N z0 = 10 m asc = 20 deg dsc = 20 deg L=0 = 4 deg t = 0.002 s tAOA = 0.25 s asc = 25 deg dsc = 25 deg = 1.21 kg / m3

Fig. 4 Time variation of rocking arm and power mechanism parameters. a , F, and . b Ft. c PKt and PLOADt.

041009-6 / Vol. 132, NOVEMBER 2010

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

and various input weights are selected based on their corresponding parts in the demonstrator system described in Sec. 5. 4.1 System Dynamics. Figure 4 presents the time variation of several rocking arm and power mechanism parameters. In Fig. 4a the stable, periodic oscillation of the rocking arm angle is observed with a period of approximately 3.0 s. The system reaches the stable oscillation approximately 15 s after the kite is set in motion. The angular velocity of the arm is about 1.0 rad/s as the arm ascends and the ywheel is engaged. The ywheel angular velocity averages approximately 65 rad/s. In Fig. 4b, the variation of kite tether tension with time is presented. Tether tensions of approximately 2000 N and 100 N are observed during the ascent and descent phases of the arm. Peak tether tensions reach approximately 2500 N at time 6. This analysis assumes a single kite tether; however, in actual kite-powered systems, up to four tethers may be used in order to control the kite motion. This reduces peak tether tensions to approximately 500 N

per kite tether, which is well below the tensile strength of many available kite tethers. However, the sudden changes in tether tension imply that a fatigue analysis on the tethers and structure will need to be considered as part of future system design. Instantaneous power produced by the kite Eq. 25 and load weight Eq. 24 are presented in Fig. 4c. The kite curve shows a positive net power output since the positive power produced during the kite ascent is greater than the negative power output during descent. The load weight power curve shows how the ywheel stores and distributes energy to maintain a positive power output throughout the cycle. Figure 4c also shows that the desired 1 kW power level is obtainable with the kite-powered system under study. Figure 5 presents the time variation of several kite parameters. The tether angle oscillates around a mean of 70 deg. Goela 7 showed that the tether prole can be considered as a rigid, straight line for tether inclination angles of 70 deg and tether lengths of Lt = 375 m, justifying the assumption in this study. The sudden changes in the kite motion angle in Fig. 5a are consistent with the kite motion in the x-z plane, as shown in Fig. 5c. This gure presents kite locations relative to the rotating arm axis, point B for times after initial transients have died out. Figure 5c clearly shows the highly periodic, stable motion of the kite during a power cycle. Figure 5a also presents the time variation of the effective angle of attack eff of the kite, which varies between eff 10 deg during times 2-4 and eff 2 deg during times 4-2. These values are well within the linear range of lift coefcient, Eq. 5, for typical airfoils. This validates use of the linear aerodynamic theory. The rapid transients in kite motion angle and effective angle of attack eff of the kite suggest that dynamic inow effects need to be included in subsequent, more detailed analysis. A reduced frequency c / TC V 0.08 can be calV = 10 m / s, which is within culated based on c = 2.5 m, TC = 3 s, the range where dynamic inow becomes important. As discussed in Sec. 1, modeling of dynamic inow effects is beyond the scope of this proof-of-concept study. These effects may lead to instabilities in the kite motion, which will be studied in future analysis. The kite lift-to-drag ratio, L / D, is shown in Fig. 5b. This ratio varies between values of 5 and 2 during times 2-4 and 4-2, respectively. These values are close to L / D values assumed by Goela et al. 10,11. Figure 5b also presents velocities VK and VR, which reach peak values of approximately 5 m/s and 15 m/s, respectively. The corresponding average wind velocity at the kite elevation for this case is approximately 10 m/s from Eq. 2, showing that the kite motion signicantly increases local relative

Fig. 5 Time variation of kite parameters. a , , and eff. b VR, VK, and L / D. c Kite position showing stable oscillation. The kite position is shown for times after initial transients have died out. The numbered times are dened in Table 1 and Fig. 3.

Fig. 6 Power coefcient versus wind velocity

Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-7

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

wind velocities and resultant forces on the kite. The Reynolds number based on kite chord length and V0 is 1.0 106 for the baseline run; however, the local Reynolds number based on VR varies with time over a range of 8.0 105 Re 2.5 106 for the V0 = 6 m / s case given the changes in local relative wind velocity in Fig. 5b. 4.2 Variation in Design Parameters. In this section the variation in average power output with various system design parameters is studied. Unless otherwise specied, the system values for the baseline run of Table 2 were used. In Fig. 6, the effect of wind velocity on normalized power output is presented. The shape of the power curve resembles that of conventional wind turbines. Peak power coefcients occur for 5 V0 6 m / s, e.g., from class 2 to class 4 winds. Figure 7 presents the power coefcients as a function of both , and average ywheel angular normalized load weight, WLOAD F, for three different wind velocities: V0 = 5, 6, and 7 velocity, m/s with tether length held constant. The three velocities studied constitute class 2, 4, and 6 winds, respectively. Higher wind speeds produce more power as expected but also produce a higher value of power coefcient for most load weights selected. The ywheel angular velocity is inversely dependent on the specied magnitude of the load weight. For wind velocity, V0 = 6 and 7 m/s, the power coefcient curves peak with normalized load in the 0.08, and with the average ywheel anrange of 0.06 WLOAD

Fig. 8 Effect of kite area on power output. a Power coefcient versus normalized load weight. b Power coefcient ver = 9.96 m / s. sus average ywheel angular velocity. V

Fig. 7 Effect of wind velocity on power output. a Power coefcient versus normalized load weight. b Power coefcient = 8.31, 9.96, 11.6 versus average ywheel angular velocity. V m/s for V0 = 5.0, 6.0, 7.0 m/s cases, respectively.

gular velocity in the range of 5070 rad/s. These results show that kite-powered system loads can be optimized to achieve efcient performance for specied system operating parameters. Figure 8 shows the variation of normalized power with kite area and average ywheel angular velocity. For these calculations, when the kite area was varied, the kite weight was also correspondingly scaled. The power coefcient curves show a small variation with different size kites, which indicates that the average power from the kite system will scale with kite area through Eq. 30. To further understand the variations in power levels with load weight, a study of cycle, engagement 2-4 and disengagement 4-2 times was conducted. The system values for the baseline run of Table 2 were used. As shown in Fig. 9, the cycle time for the system varies by a small amount around TC = 3.0 s as the load weight varies. However, the time T24 during which the Sprag clutch and ywheel are engaged increases with increasing load 0.06, the duty weight. Near the optimum conditions at WLOAD cycle is approximately 50% since T24 T42. Figure 10 shows the effect of variation in the counterweight on normalized output power. Average power levels generally increase with decreasing counterweight as expected since less of the generated power from the kite is used to lift the counterweight at the rocking arm end. The relatively minor variation in power levels suggests that the system can operate over a wide range of counterweight values. In Figs. 11 and 12, the effects of variations in different kite parameters on power coefcient are presented. Figure 11 shows that increasing the camber of the kite airfoil increases the power output quite dramatically as expected. Figure 12 shows the effect Transactions of the ASME

041009-8 / Vol. 132, NOVEMBER 2010

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Fig. 9 System period TC, engagement time T24, and disengagement time T42 versus normalized load for the baseline run of Table 2.

of kite aspect ratio. Higher aspect ratio kites yield higher output power due to decreased wing tip vortex effects and induced drag. Relatively small changes in camber and aspect ratio result in signicant changes in power coefcient levels. These results suggest that optimization of the kite airfoil and wing planform shape should benet system performance. This optimization analysis will be the subject of another study in the future.

Conclusions

The performance characteristics of a 1 kW scale kite-powered system appropriate for sustainable development in an impoverished nation were determined. The kite-powered system consists of a large kite, a tether, and a ground-based energy conversion mechanism. Governing equations describing the dynamical motion of the kite, tether, rocking arm, and power transmission system were developed assuming an inexible, straight-line tether. A steady-state, aerodynamic analysis using linear aerodynamic theory was used to account for the variation in lift and drag coefcients with angle of attack. The governing equations were solved numerically using a RungeKutta scheme.

The effect of various system variables such as wind velocity, load weight, and various kite parameters area, airfoil camber, and aspect ratio on the theoretical maximum power output was determined. The results showed that a 1 kW scale system is feasible using the proposed design concept with a kite area of 25 m2 and wind speeds of 6 m/s based on theoretical maximum performance characteristics. The system inefciencies pertaining to the tether and power conversion mechanism were not included in the above calculations. If an overall system efciency of 60% or higher is assumed, the results showed that 1 kW power can still be obtained using a kite area of 25 m2 and wind speeds of V0 = 7 m / s since the average power levels reached approximately 1800 W for these conditions. The present study has provided a proof-of-concept analysis of a 1 kW scale kite-powered system. Extension of this work in the future will include conducting wind tunnel test on scale-models of various kite geometries with the aim of obtaining lift and drag data over a range of Reynolds numbers. These data will then be incorporated into the dynamical equations of motion of the kite energy system to study the power variations with Reynolds number. An analysis of instabilities and transient behavior due to sudden changes in wind speed is another area for future work.

Fig. 10 Effect of counterweight on power output. Power coef = 9.96 m / s. cient versus normalized load weight. V

Fig. 11 Effect of kite airfoil camber on power output. Power = 9.96 m / s. coefcient versus normalized load weight. V

Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-9

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

energy captured by the system into direct-current dc electricity. The output from the generator is stored in eight Deka/MK AGM storage batteries with 12 V potential and 32.5 A h capacity per battery. When alternating-current ac electricity is needed, a Xantrex Trace 3624 inverter converts the dc electricity stored in the batteries. A Morningstar Tristar TS-60 charge controller guards against overcharging of the batteries while monitoring storage levels. The electrical system is not modeled in the present study. The kite-powered system has undergone initial eld testing and generated electrical power for a short period of time. In future work, it is planned to compare model predictions from the present study with eld measurements from the demonstrator.

Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully acknowledge the work of the following WPI undergraduate students on various aspects of kite power: G. Baldwin, P. Bertoli, M. Blouin, Jr., R. Buckley, C. Coschen, M. DeCuir, M. Hurgin, B. Isabella, T. LaLonde, E. Lovejoy, J. Rodden, M. Sangemano, N. Simone, and N. Urko. They also thank A. Ghezzi for teaching us about high performance kites, and D. Perkins for his support of our project. This work was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Fourth Annual P3 Award Program P3: People, Prosperity, and the Planet, the Dow Chemical Co., and Heifer Internationals Overlook Farm Learning Center.

Fig. 12 Effect of kite aspect ratio on power output. Power co = 9.96 m / s. efcient versus normalized load weight. V

Before closing, work performed at Worcester Polytechnic Institute WPI to design and construct a working kite-powered demonstrator Fig. 13 is briey discussed below. This system was developed by the 2 authors of this study and 14 other undergraduate students in design projects over the past few years. The geometrical parameters of the system closely approximate the corresponding parameters for the baseline run Table 2 in the present study. The system uses a Peter Lynn Guerilla kite of 10 m2 size. This kite has four tethers. Two are attached to the leading edge of the kite and transmit the tether tension to the power mechanism on the ground. The other two tethers are connected to the trailing edge of the kite and allow for control of the kites angle of attack in addition to transmitting tether tension. A simple angle-of-attack change mechanism, based on a sliding weight attached to the rocking arm, was designed. The sliding weight pulls or releases the tethers connected to kite trailing edges to change the kites geometric angle of attack between asc and dsc. A second mechanism based on a four-bar linkage controls the roll motion of the kite. A power conversion mechanism, consisting of an aluminum rocking arm, Sprag clutch and spring adapted from a rowing machine, power transmission gears and chains, and a ywheel, is housed within a wooden support structure Fig. 13. The power conversion mechanism is similar to the mechanism modeled in the present study. An electrical system Fig. 13 was also designed and constructed. A WindBlue model 512 permanent magnetic generator attached to axle FG in Fig. 1 converts the mechanical

Nomenclature
AK AR a0 b c CD C D0 CL CP eo eT FC FDK FFG F G2 FLK Ft g IAD IF K L/D Lt P Pt RA RC Re RCTR RF RFG RG R G2 T24 T42 TC t V kite area kite aspect ratio 2D lift curve slope for kite= 2 1/rad wing span of kite chord length of kite total drag coefcient of kite parasitic drag coefcient of kite lift coefcient of kite power coefcient Oswald efciency factor tether tension transmission efciency tension force in chain from rocking arm to gear G drag force on kite tension in tight drive chain on gear FG tension in tight drive chain on gear G2 lift force on kite tether tension gravitational acceleration moment of inertia of rocking arm moment of inertia of ywheel retraction spring constant CL / CD = lift-to-drag ratio tether length average power output instantaneous power output half-length of rocking arm radius from pivot to chain attachment point kite Reynolds number based on chord radius of counterweight radius of ywheel pitch radius of gear FG pitch radius of gear G pitch radius of gear G2 ywheel engagement time each cycle ywheel disengagement time each cycle time period of system oscillation time s horizontal wind velocity at elevation zkite Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 13 The kite-powered demonstrator. The rocking arm structure, kite, power conversion system, battery bank, and electrical system are shown.

041009-10 / Vol. 132, NOVEMBER 2010

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 V VA VK VR

V0 V1 V 1A V2 V 2A wt WBA WCTR WDB WF WK WLOAD WLOAD zkite z0

asc dsc
zLOAD 24 zLOAD 42 asc dsc

eff L=0 x t tAOA

C average wind velocity at kite= 1 / TCT 0 Vt velocity of end of rotating arm point A kite velocity with respect to the ground local relative wind velocity with respect to ground reference horizontal wind velocity at elevation z0 velocity of kite along tether with respect to ground velocity of kite along tether with respect to point A velocity of kite normal to tether with respect to ground velocity of kite normal to tether with respect to point A tether weight per unit length weight of rotating arm: pivot B to point A counterweight weight of rotating arm pivot B to point D weight of ywheel weight of kite weight of load normalized load weight= WLOAD / 0.5V2AK kite elevation reference elevation geometric angle of attack of kite with respect to ground geometric angle of attack of kite during ascent geometric angle of attack of kite during descent effective angle of attack of kite, eff = kite angle of attack for zero lift angle of kite motion with respect to horizontal retraction spring deection numerical time step time period for angle of attack change elevation change of load weight: engaged elevation change of load weight: disengaged angle of rotating arm rotating arm angle for asc rotating arm angle for dsc angle of kite tether with respect to horizontal angle of local velocity vector with respect to horizontal air density

angular velocity of rotating arm F angular velocity of ywheel F average angular velocity of C flywheel= 1 / TCT 0 F t FG angular velocity of gear FG G angular velocity of gear G G2 angular velocity of gear G2

References
1 Loyd, M. L., 1980, Crosswind Kite Power, J. Energy, 43, pp. 106111. 2 Fletcher, C. A. J., and Roberts, B. W., 1979, Electricity Generation from Jet Stream Winds, J. Energy, 3, pp. 241249. 3 Fletcher, C. A. J., Honan, A. J., and Sappupo, J. S., 1983, Aerodynamic Platform Comparison for Jet Stream Electricity Generation, J. Energy, 7, pp. 1724. 4 Fletcher, C. A. J., 1983, On the Rotary Wing Concept for Jet Stream Electricity Generation, J. Energy, 7, pp. 9092. 5 Riegler, G., Riedler, W., and Harvath, E., 1983, Transformation of Wind Energy by a High Altitude Power Plant, J. Energy, 7, pp. 9294. 6 Goela, J. S., 1979, Wind Power Through Kites, Mech. Eng. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., 42, pp. 4243. 7 Goela, J. S., 1983, Project Report II on Wind Energy Conversion Through Kites, IIT Kanpur DST Project Report No. DST/MEJSG/81-84/26/2. 8 Varma, S. K., and Goela, J. S., 1982, Effect of Wind Loading on the Design of a Kite Tether, J. Energy, 65, pp. 342343. 9 Goela, J. S., Somu, N., Abedinzadeh, R., and Vijaykumar, R., 1985, Wind Loading Effects on a Catenary, J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 21, pp. 235 249. 10 Goela, J. S., Vijaykumar, R., and Zimmermann, R. H., 1986, Performance Characteristics of a Kite-Powered Pump, ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 108, pp. 188193. 11 Goela, J. S., 1984, Final Report on Wind Energy Conversion Through Kites, IIT Kanpur DST Project Report No. DST/MEJSG/81-84/26/2. 12 Canale, M., Fagiano, L., Ippolito, M., and Milanese, M., 2006 Control of Tethered Airfoils for a New Class of Wind Energy Generator, Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference Decision and Control, San Diego, CA, pp. 4020 4026. 13 Canale, M., Fagiano, L., and Milanese, M., 2007, Power Kites for Wind Energy Generation, IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 27, pp. 2538. 14 Williams, P., Lansdorp, B., and Ockels, W., 2008, Optimal Crosswind Towing and Power Generation With Tethered Kites, J. Guid. Control Dyn., 311, pp. 8193. 15 Matos, C., Mahalingam, R., Ottinger, G., Klapper, J., Funk, R., and Komerath, N., 1998, Wind Tunnel Measurements of Parafoil Geometry and Aerodynamics, 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, NV, AIAA Paper No. 98-0606. 16 White, F. M., 2008, Fluid Mechanics, 6th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, Chap. 9, pp. 421429. 17 Kuethe, A. M., and Chou, C. Y., 1998, Foundations of Aerodynamics: Bases of Aerodynamic Design, 5th ed., Wiley, New York, Chap. 6, pp. 169210. 18 Anderson, J. D., 2007, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, Chap. 5, pp. 391463.

Journal of Solar Energy Engineering

NOVEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 041009-11

Downloaded From: http://solarenergyengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 08/16/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms