Fwd: Balloons and Kites for photography

[Mathew Lippincott]

I wanted to forward on this discussion on kite development I just had with Phil Tuggle.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aerial Lens LLC <aeria...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: Balloons and Kites for photography
To: Mathew Lippincott <mat...@publiclab.org>
Cc: Liz Barry <eba...@gmail.com>

Hi, Mathew and Liz -

Thanks for the great information and links! Much appreciated.

I was not very clear on what I was up to; the mention of "balloon" actually muddied the water of what I am working on with very good progress to this point.  To clarify (?), the essence of the shape of the lifting body being worked on is most similar to a lenticular balloon -- very similar in many respects to the Stingray built by the European Prospective Concepts company.

See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndnbnrgNSEM , and
here: http://www.prospective-concepts.ch/pdf/projekte/stingray_en.pdf

That is where the similarity ends. While balloons of course have a slight differential pressure from the outside air to maintain shape, what I am doing is to create the shape by using a minimal number of small composite rods flexed into - and captured by - the shape of the aircraft. I wish I could provide a better illustration, but please take a look at the attached sketches.

Here is the key idea of the structure: Because this lifting body is to be launched into moving air, the passing air itself fully develops the shape of the craft. If you take a look at almost any tethered device supported by moving air (for simplicity, think of a flowform or any large kite), we all agree it is the moving air that keeps it aloft and of course provides lift. Conventional kites, however, tend to work with both these dynamics AND by "spilling air" in a sort of controlled manner. Indeed, some kites are considered very unstable and inappropriate for KAP because they tend to cycle abruptly from gathering and spilling air, while others, like a "becotized" Flowform spill very evenly and consistently.  That is what I am trying to emulate with a lifting body that is the ultimate in allowing the wind to pass by smoothly, by not gathering air at all - so there is nothing to spill.

Now, why and how would you NOT use helium for that pressure differential to keep the shape of the device (Hey, to shorten the term, lets just call it something like "Aerokite," since it is heavier than air and aerostat would not apply)? The reasons are many, but I would begin by saying helium is EXPENSIVE and hard to transport. Most KAPers like to travel light and spend little. So this design would be foldable yet contain springy rod elements that retain their shape. A common example of this is the large portable reflectors that photographers use in the field; these are simply twisted into a smaller shape when traveling.  If an "aerokite" could use the same mode - returning to shape - then the breeze could complete the job when tethered in the sky. Such a method would not require the reliability and complexity of airtight seams.

At least, that's the theory and the basic idea. I have only done it with trash bag material and light piano wire so far, but things look very promising.

I hope this makes things a little more clear at the risk of unintentionally insulting you - you are both probably far brighter than me, but I try.  Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks -

Phil Tuggle
BE SEEN...GET SOLD!
Aerial Lens LLC - "When Your Images and Tours STAND OUT, Your Properties SELL FASTER ! "
Sumter, SC
803.464.8349

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Mathew Lippincott <mat...@publiclab.org> wrote:

hi Phil!

I'm active on the KAP forums as MathewL, I'm not a huge poster but I try to check in frequently.

I've been interested in building a wind-stabilized sub 6' (I.E. FAA exempt) balloon for 7 years now, and have extensively researched the topic, the current technologies, and designs. All my progress has been halted for roughly 36 months because I don't have the abilty to build prototypes.

There are two basic problems:

1) The size requirement (and tricky surface-area to volume issues) makes a lot of large-scale designs like the Dart, or a traditional tethered "blimp-type" aerostat impossible.  the working designs are all lenticular (lens shaped), and have a very limited amount of spare lift.

2) the wind stresses on any material seams is significant, and a strong material with  with helium-tight seals must be created.  This makes even prototyping rather difficult. cheap aerostats are RF-welded on $12,000 machines out of PVC, which is heavy and not really the best gas barrier.  expensive ones are sewn from ripstop and carefully coated in a thin film of urethane using equipment I also don't have access to.  Neither of these technologies results in a particularly affordable device, and neither results in a very good sub-6ft balloon.

My interest is in building a super-cheap, very light-weight balloon out of thin-film plastics.  I think it is doable. but the wind stresses, and need for gas-tight materials mean that my DIY sealing techniques with irons and bag sealers can't make gas-tight seals that survive a beating in the wind.  I've gotten really good at plastic balloon making (I made 4 solar hot air balloons this summer with great seals), but I can't make this type of balloon.

Where I'm at is i want to make this balloon:
http://publiclab.org/notes/mathew/4-13-2012/arthur-w-mears-kite-balloon-archetype-kingfisher-skystar

and I think I'd have to make my own jig, becuase there's just no commercial equipment for this:
http://publiclab.org/notes/mathew/5-18-2012/making-balloon-making-jig

To be frank, our rubber balloons are pretty good.  our kites are pretty good.  making a single device to cover a broader wind range is hard to justify, given the effort and capital expense.  over the last year I've sent two emails and in-person tracked down different people from ecological packaging companies, inquiring as to whether I could maybe get some sort of creative residency to use their bag making machines.  tepid response in person, nothing by e-mail.  they probably think I'm crazy.

all the best,
Mathew

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Liz Barry <eba...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Phil, 

Great to hear from you! I'm copying Mathew Lippincott, Public Lab's truly weird lighter-than-air sculptor / hardware designer. The interesting kite/balloon hybrid ideas have been coming from him, and he is into historical research on patents and stuff. 

Mathew, see Phil's question here about sources for other inventors working on kite/balloon hybrids:

So, why am I writing to you? Seeing your contributions on the Public Labs regarding the "Dart" and other hybrids, I was hoping you might share a few of your sources on the web. Yes, I see where folks may annotate ideas but not to the point where the actual autors may be found. It would be helpful to know who exactly has contributed to the little hybrid balloon body of knowledge. I hope I said that right.

Phil, in the long term i suggest you join the grassrootsmapping list, find it here: publiclab.org/lists. We work together on public lists to reduce individual email burden, so we would like to continue this conversation with you on the grassrootsmapping list. 

CHEERS

Liz

--

@lizbarry

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Aerial Lens LLC <aeria...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Elizabeth (I hope you are the very same LIZ found on the Public Labs pages - rather difficult to find contact info there) -

My name is Phil, and I am a long-time photographer and kite-flier engaged in kite aerial photography (KAP -- as found in the fabulous and enlightening pages of  http://arch.ced.berkeley.edu/kap/discuss/index.php?p=/discussions). Like many in my group of world-wide enthusiasts, I am always curious about news ways to create images from above.

That said, I have been researching for some time to create a stable platform for slight-to-moderate winds which would utilize a hybrid of a lifting body and kite in a balloon-like structure. I say balloon-like because of shape only; I believe a volume body can be preformed using lightweight composites to take on a balloon shape, but retain the dynamics of a kite. So....I saw yours and other (Mathew?) posts under the "Public Lab" when searching the web and was intrigued by the findings there.

As a little background on the truly VAST subject of KAP (see for yourself with our 1500 posters and thousands of threads), we typically use very stable kites to lift both automated and non automated camera rigs to create beautiful images in the 100 to 400-foot range of heights. We use very large kites ranging from deltas to Rokakku's to flowforms to doperos. It is just plain enjoyable. We even have dablers in small UAV "drones" and pole/mast photographers chiming in. We are all always looking for ways to improve our main methods - kites. So I am in the process of creating a lifting body design that will function as a kite but spill air a little more smoothly than a kite might do.

So, why am I writing to you? Seeing your contributions on the Public Labs regarding the "Dart" and other hybrids, I was hoping you might share a few of your sources on the web. Yes, I see where folks may annotate ideas but not to the point where the actual autors may be found. It would be helpful to know who exactly has contributed to the little hybrid balloon body of knowledge. I hope I said that right.

Anyway, I really appreciate that you have contributed so much to environmental concerns and hope you can check out - and join in - our fun persuit of KAP as well. If you have any links I may check out, please let me know, with my sincere thanks.

Thanks and all the best -

Phil

Phil Tuggle
Sumter, SC

--

Mathew Lippincott

publiclab.org

503 852 1669

--

Mathew Lippincott

publiclab.org

503 852 1669