Open Source Ecology - User contributions [en]

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-27T02:11:51Z

Geoff:

Created a draft of a new site header, along with subheaders for each package. I've implemented them in the energy category page so you can get a feel for them and discuss before refactoring through other packages.
----
* I figured how do the tooltips and made a few changes to Site Header 2 and ProjectHdr Habitat templates to illustrate.
* Style notes (IMHO)
** Never use CAPS FOR EMPHASIS (= SHOUTING)
** Never use underlines for emphasis (= link)
** No need to repeat the word "package" in every link, just put "Packages:" before the list
----
Agreed. The particular styles were in place to try and distinguish the packages from the whole array of projects in the original header. By breaking it down into a clean package only header and then subheaders for the projects the styling can be cleaned up and it should be easier to see what's going on.

* I've modified the project header for habitat to include the site header directly, that way people only need to include the project header and the other one is included by default. Also removed the seemingly redundant "Packages" from the beginning of the package only content, as the site header above seems to qualify that enough. Check out [[:Category:Habitat]] to see if it's headed in an acceptable direction.
----
# I see where you're going and I think it's a big improvement over what is presently in the wiki.
# We've been talking about "site header" but it really isn't. A page like [[Evolve to freedom]] doesn't fit into any of the packages or projects. It really needs a header like: '''Main -> Vision -> Freedom'''. We might want a Sawmill category with a header like: '''Main -> Packages -> Habitat -> Sawmill'''.
# I think your latest example works well for a 2-level hierarchy, but not so well for 3 or 4 levels.
# I personally (and this is a matter of style, not acceptable vs. unacceptable) favor extreme minimalism as to headers. People come to a page to read the contents, not the header. I'd rather hide the information for other levels inside tooltips than make it visible all the time.
# Think about what I've said here. If you're happy with your current example, go ahead and implement it. If I've convinced you of the value of minimalism, let's see if we can simplify it first.
----
* I agree that there is a lot that doesn't fit under the current package arrangement. There certainly needs to be a way of tying those things back into the overall navigation scheme. I'm not attached to anything I've presented, I was just aware that change was required, and usually the best way to decide how that change should progress is to get in there and start changing things, or presenting examples of what change might look like. That way we get an idea of what will and wont work, and what other things need to be considering within the changes.
* Where to from this point?
** How can the whole be divided up into segments that will make sense to visitors, and keep the information arranged logically?
** Would it make sense to have two (or more) top level domains, e.g. Philosophy and Practicality, or something along those lines?
** There will be generic information (refer current [[:Category:Materials]] category) that is generically useful across different packages, and currently doesn't seem to placed firmly within a package. I think there are a few like this where they need to be drawn into one of the existing packages (flex industry for materials for e.g.) or consider creating new sections. Most of materials could go under a resource extraction and recycling project/package within flex industry.
** I like the idea of breadcrumb style headers. Are you also thinking we would be better doing away with any forward links?
*** '''Main -> Packages -> Habitat'''
*** rather than:
*** '''Main -> Packages -> Habitat: CEB, Living Machines, Modular Housing, Sawmill'''
** It would make sense to go with the former, as you'd only be seeing that header on the habitat category page anyway, but it will require some method of highlighting the main packages within the category page so they stand out from the crowd. Perhaps every package category page has an introduction that bullet points the primary projects and gives an idea of progress/state for each?
----
# At some point we will run out of ideas, and it will be time to start editing. I don't think we're there yet (we're still coming up with better and better ideas).
# I think there should be several top level categories, at least these
#* Factor e (the physical location)
#* Packages (I don't like the word, but I'm not sure what would be better)
#* Vision (I like this better than Philosophy, which suggests the academic discipline)
# It will be impossible to come up with a hierarchy of categories, in advance, which will work perfectly for all the current pages and whatever pages will be added in the future. Materials is a good example of this. We just have to make a good effort and expect to refactor it now and again.
#* Pages can have more than one category
#* There can be more than one way to navigate to a particular page (although the breadcrumb menu will show the one, "official" path)
# I'm OK with breadcrumbs only, and no forward links, on most pages, but I think that the category pages, Habitat for example, have to have the forward links somewhere on the page, and it might as well be in the header. The forward links need to be set off visually from the breadcrumbs, maybe on a second line.
----
* Packages is a difficult one to escape. They are also "domains" in a sense, but that loses the implication of being packages of tech solutions fitting within the particular domain. They are also "sub-systems" within the larger system of a community. I'm sure something will be suggested or come up along the way.
* Your vision vs philosophy argument makes sense. I guess all philosophical references can be tied back to the original vision, so the category wouldn't be exclusive of such things (eg an entry discussing the ethical treatment of animals and arguments for free-range would fit under OSA, but also ties back to the vision for the whole operation, so would appear in both categories.)
* I think the main thing to come up with at this stage is the skeleton of the category structure and general principles to guide a common theme for laying out the entries within categories. Enough to provide consistency across the pre-existing work as it's refactored, and to guide any new additions in future. If we say that all project specific documents should be tied back to the project category, rather than the package category for instance, then in addition to making navigation easier and reducing orphaned pages we also make any future refactoring easier. For example:
** Do we want documents about steam engines tied back to the Energy package category? If we went that way we would have an energy package category page with potentially thousands of disparate entries without any organisation. If on the other hand it was determined that project-specific pages tied directly to their project category only, as much as possible, then it keeps the package category clean with mostly project category links and the few documents directly pertaining to the package category itself. So documents about energy in general might link directly to the energy package category.
* Are the following examples on the right track for the different levels of organisation? The bit in parenths are forward links.
*# At top level: '''Main (Factor e | Packages | Vision | etc )'''
*# At second level on packages category page: '''Main -> Packages (Habitat | Agroecology | Energy | Flexible Industry | Transport | Other | etc )'''
*# At third/package level on habitat package category page: '''Main -> Packages -> Habitat (CEB Press | Sawmill | etc )'''
*# At fourth/project level on CEB Press category page: '''Main -> Packages -> Habitat -> CEB Press'''
*# For all documents under the CEB press category this last header would be used, obviously not meaning to be exclusive of subcategories.
----
# This is very good! Time to make some changes and see how it looks.
# I started to make some header templates for the Wiki category pages.
#* The first thing I noticed was that Wiki needs a top-level supercategory Other. Something like this has to be done.
#* I've added a [[Using header templates|page describing the header templates]].
# If you'd like to put together a top-down skeleton category structure, go ahead. I tend to think this needs to be approached from the bottom up.
----
* Going top down in that way would leave us in a world of pain I think. If we produce draft headers to allow anyone playing with refactoring to work through things, and just include the sections that are done from the bottom up into the existing headers when they are ready then there shouldn't be any issues with existing stuff becoming inaccessible.
* I'll go through one of the smaller packages and do some refactoring according to the new scheme later in the week. There are sure to be other issues picked up as the system is actually implemented.

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-22T00:33:01Z

Geoff:

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-21T00:03:32Z

Geoff:

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-20T02:42:26Z

Geoff:

Category:Habitat

2009-07-20T02:39:04Z

Geoff:

{{ProjectHdr Habitat}}

Things that help you live, like housing and sanitation.

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Template:ProjectHdr Habitat

2009-07-20T02:38:51Z

Geoff: Included site header 2 in package header, removed packages title from beginning of package specific header content.

{{Site Header 2}}
'''[[:Category:Habitat|Habitat Package]]''' -> '''[[CEB Press]]''' - '''[[Living Machines]]''' - '''[[Modular Housing Units]]''' - '''[[Sawmill]]'''
----

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-20T02:34:30Z

Geoff:

Talk:Wiki wish list

2009-07-17T01:03:33Z

Geoff: Created page with 'Created a draft of a new site header, along with subheaders for each package. I've implemented them in the energy category page so you can get a feel for them and discuss before ...'

Category:Energy

2009-07-17T01:01:19Z

Geoff: Edited category page to use the new site header and project subheader so we have a sample to work with.

{{Site Header 2}}
{{ProjectHdr Energy}}

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Wiki wish list

2009-07-17T00:56:34Z

Geoff: /* See also: */

= Categories needed =
= Pages needed =
* Using Templates
* Available Templates

= Refactoring needed =
= MediaWiki extensions needed =
* [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CategoryTree CategoryTree] allows the category structure to be seen in outline form

= Clean-up needed =
* various spam pages need to be removed: "buy Cialis..." etc.
* There are also MANY pages in Chinese characters, probably spam also.

= Templates needed =
* A more compact Site header template, showing just the packages, with a tooltip for each package showing the projects within the package
** Not sure if this can be done without [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Tooltip an extension]
** But the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Pipe_trick Pipe trick] might help

= See also: =
[[Category:Wiki]]
*[[Template:Site Header 2]]
*[[Template:ProjectHdr Habitat]] - Header for use within Habitat package pages
*[[Template:ProjectHdr OSA]] - Header for use within OSA package pages
*[[Template:ProjectHdr Energy]] - Header for use within Energy package pages
*[[Template:ProjectHdr FIP]] - Header for use within Flexible Industry package pages
*[[Template:ProjectHdr Transport]] - Header for use within Transport package pages

Template:ProjectHdr Energy

2009-07-17T00:54:20Z

Geoff:

[[:Category:Energy|ENERGY PACKAGE]]: '''[[Pyrolysis Oil]]''' - '''[[Babington Burner]]''' - [[Solar Combined Heat Power System]] - [[Steam Engine Construction Set]] - [[Solar Turbine]] - [[Electric Motors/Generators]] - [[Inverters & Grid Intertie]] - [[Batteries]]

Template:ProjectHdr Transport

2009-07-17T00:53:54Z

Geoff: Created page with 'TRANSPORTATION PACKAGE: Open Source Car'

[[:Category:Transportation|TRANSPORTATION PACKAGE]]: [[Open Source Car]]

Template:ProjectHdr FIP

2009-07-17T00:53:27Z

Geoff: Created page with 'FLEXIBLE INDUSTRY PACKAGE: '''Lathe''' - '''Torch Table''' - Multimachine & Flex Fab - Plastic Extrusion & Molding - [[Meta...'

[[:Category:Flexible_Industry|FLEXIBLE INDUSTRY PACKAGE]]: '''[[Lathe]]''' - '''[[Torch Table]]''' - [[Multimachine & Flex Fab]] - [[Plastic Extrusion & Molding]] - [[Metal Casting and Extrusion]]

Template:ProjectHdr Energy

2009-07-17T00:53:09Z

Geoff: Created page with 'ENERGY PACKAGE: '''Pyrolysis Oil''' - '''Babington Burner''' - Solar_Combined_Heat_Power_System - Steam Engine Construction Set - [[So...'

[[:Category:Energy|ENERGY PACKAGE]]: '''[[Pyrolysis Oil]]''' - '''[[Babington Burner]]''' - [[Solar_Combined_Heat_Power_System]] - [[Steam Engine Construction Set]] - [[Solar Turbine]] - [[Electric Motors/Generators]] - [[Inverters & Grid Intertie]] - [[Batteries]]

Template:ProjectHdr OSA

2009-07-17T00:52:55Z

Geoff: Created page with 'AGROECOLOGY PACKAGE: '''LifeTrac Multi Purpose Tractor''' - '''MicroTrac''' - Agricultural Spader - Agricultural Microcombine - ...'

[[:Category:OSA|AGROECOLOGY PACKAGE]]: '''[[LifeTrac|LifeTrac Multi Purpose Tractor]]''' - '''[[MicroTrac]]''' - [[Agricultural Spader]] - [[Agricultural Microcombine]] - [[Hammer Mill]] - [[Well Drilling Rig]] - [[Organoponic Raised Bed Gardening]] - [[Orchard and Nursery]] - [[Modular Greenhouse Units]] - [[Bakery]] - [[Dairy]] - [[Energy Food Bars]] - [[Freeze Dried Fruit Powders]]

Template:ProjectHdr Habitat

2009-07-17T00:52:22Z

Geoff: Created page with 'HABITAT PACKAGE: '''CEB Press''' - '''Sawmill''' - Living Machines - Modular Housing Units'

[[:Category:Habitat|HABITAT PACKAGE]]: '''[[CEB Press]]''' - '''[[Sawmill]]''' - [[Living Machines]] - [[Modular Housing Units]]

Wiki wish list

2009-07-17T00:41:33Z

Geoff: /* See also: */

Template:Site Header 2

2009-07-17T00:41:22Z

Geoff: Initial draft of refactored site header

Talk:Using Categories

2009-07-16T00:08:04Z

Geoff: Created page with 'Great start on the wiki organisation documents! Some nuts and bolts issues with regard to categories and refactoring existing pages/categories: The site header is the main entr...'

Great start on the wiki organisation documents!

Some nuts and bolts issues with regard to categories and refactoring existing pages/categories:

The site header is the main entry point to the wiki. It is currently structured in the following way:

* Package Category
** Projects which are links directly to a page.

If we compare the [[Pyrolysis Oil]] project and the [[Solar_Combined_Heat_Power_System|Solar CHP]] projects as linked from the header, Pyrolysis links to a general page of information, whilst Solar CHP links to a development work template (DWT).

In refactoring each project should adhere to the same standards. One downside of the current approach is that there are lots of non-DWT documents full of information for each project that aren't directly or easily available. Not all projects currently have a DWT that I can see, and adding them in retrospect will need some refactoring no matter what approach is taken.

I guess ideally you'd want all of that supporting research linked from a DWT for the project, but it comes down to usage. What is the primary method of use of the wiki? Are people going to wade through the complete template in order to insert a link for an item they've just created containing subsidiary information for a particular project? Are they going to remember to do this? Are they going to go through the DWT to find further information?

One option for overcoming some of these issues is to create project categories for each of the projects and link directly to those from the site header. Then, in the top of the category page for the project we place a link to the project's work template. The downside of this would be that the work template is even less likely to be updated unless a person specifically intends to do so. Upside is that all docs relating to a project are collected at the entry point to that project (sort of thinking along the lines of portals here.) The layout would look something like:

* Package Category
** Project Category
*** Specific link to Development Work Template for project.
*** All other documents and subcategories for project.

Another option would be to link direct to the DWT for a project, and at the top of that template include a link to a category specifically created for that project (so for eg Pyrolysis Oil will have an associated category "Cat Pyrolysis Oil")

* Package Category
** Project DWT
*** Specific link to project category

This option keeps the DWT at the top of the tree, but also allows a category of associated documents to be maintained.

Having a project category allows information to be roughed in, included with the appropriate project, and then enthusiastic maintainers can trawl through the category and work items back into the DWT where warranted, and as and when time permits.

Talk:Wiki instructions

2009-07-15T01:59:50Z

Geoff: Structure Discussion

Is it worth laying out a basic category structure and asking users to adhere to that? And perhaps pointing them to the special page for categories so they can see what already exists and try to include relevant information in pre-existing categories?

If the wiki grows the current state where there are 3 or 4 categories for steam, a dozen different fab categories etc etc, is only going to get worse and make rectifying the problem that much more difficult.

CAD (Computer Aided Design)

2009-07-08T13:13:28Z

Geoff: Moved to Flexible Industry category

=Programs=

Here are some open source options for CAD. Please add others if you know of any. We are looking for a cross platform program, preferably open source. We are using Linux so anything for a PC with linux should work ok. It would also be nice if it worked with our Mac OS X 10.3.9 laptops, and be cross platform for other collaborators, but this is not necessary.

'''[http://www.blender.org Blender]'''
* Blender is an open-source 3D animation software.
** Operating Systems: All major platforms.
** Works OK for basic 3d design and prototyping but only makes meshes. It is poorly suited for CAD use.

'''[http://CAELunix.org/ CAELinux]'''
* "Based on the open-source CAE softwares Salomé, Code_Aster, Code_Saturne and OpenFOAM , you can load your CAD geometry in Salomé and start partitionning and meshing your problem in just 5 minutes. Then you can simulate incredibly complex physics with the open-source FE & CFD solvers Code_Aster, Code-Saturne, OpenFOAM & Elmer: non-linear thermo-mechanics, coupled fluid-structure dynamics, seismic / non-linear explicit dynamics, contacts, visco-plasticity, fluid dynamics, heat exchange, convection heat transfer and radiation, electro-magnetcis in other words nearly all physics problem can be addressed with the integrated solvers!! Then reload your results files in post-processing applications like Salomé, GMSH, Visit, or Paraview to visualize your data in 3D."
** It can do CAD (Salome) but could be a little easier to use with more mouse control with widgets and hotkeys.
** Good candidate for CAD-CAE if nothing else is found.

'''[http://avocado-cad.sourceforge.net/ avoCADo]
** Evaluation pending.

'''[http://brlcad.org/ BRL-CAD]'''
* BRL-CAD is a powerful cross-platform open source solid modeling system that includes interactive geometry editing, high-performance ray-tracing for rendering and geometric analysis, image and signal-processing tools, a system performance analysis benchmark suite, libraries for robust geometric
representation, with more than 20 years of active development. Operating Systems: All major platforms.
** Evaluation pending.

'''[http://www.opencascade.org OpenCASCADE]'''
* Open CASCADE Technology is software development platform freely available in open source. It includes components for 3D surface and solid modeling, visualization, data exchange and rapid application development. Operating Systems: Linux, Sun Sparc, or Windows.
** Seems too 'clunky' without a better GUI.

=Collaboration Discussions=

==from Sam Rose==

Blender is OK for sketching. But, not good for CAD/CAM programming, as it draws in vectors, and not in constructive solid geometry, which is what is needed to give you the details of dimensions of what you are drawing.

OpenCascade does have CAD, and so does BRL-CAD. Much of the drawing done in both happens by way of command line input as opposed to computer mouse drawing. There is going to be a steep learning curve with any open source CAD (or even commercial CAD for that matter).

While OpenCascade seems easier to me, the consensus among people working in open design is http://brlcad.org/

What kind of computer are you going to be using (Mac, Linux?)

I would say that it would be more than worth the time invested to learn http://brlcad.org/ this will put tremendous power to design into your hands. documentation is here http://brlcad.org/wiki/Main_Page and http://gpwiki.org/index.php/BRL-CAD:Tutorials tutorials can help.

Also, get an IRC client and check yourself in to irc://irc.freenode.net/#brlcad if you run into questions you can ask the actual people that program it. Let them know who you are and your project and they will probably be interested in helping you. Mailing lists are here http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=105292 but I do not follow them so do not know if they are currently active.

Also, http://avocado-cad.wiki.sourceforge.net/Tutorial_CoffeeMug avaCADo is a very simple one that is based more on drawing (although with scant documentation). Yet, some evalution (using Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex 8.10) shows that it is capable of doing some pretty complex solid geometry operations (without all of the command line interface). Worth a try, and it runs on Mac too.

[[Image:revolve.jpg]]

----
Marcin says:

From a cursory view, AcoCADo appears to be best. We are looking for a simple drawing tool that has robust visualization features a la doing prototyping on the computer screen rather than in physical space, like Jeremy did on Sawmill wiki page with Blender. The goal is: if you can draw a design, you can see the details of how things fit together, and you can draw up a BOM and fabrication procedure for that. We're talking about basic modeling before one goes out to buy supplies.

This is what we need badly right now for the OS movement in general.

==Nick==

Personally if I am going to go to the trouble of doing a model I'd like the program to have the capability of automatically putting out 2D manufacturing drawings and a BOM. This greatly streamlines the development process. I'm not certain if either of those two programs can do that?

==From Chad==

To respond to your request for open-source CAD, see/explore the following links for an assortment of packages:

http://forums.biorust.com/3d-modelling/666-free-3d-modellers.html
http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html
http://www.le-boite.com/minos.htm
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuScience#Engineering%20Sciences
http://avocado-cad.sourceforge.net/

If none found through those links suit your fancy, you may have to settle with a closed-source app for now - see the following:

CoCreate PE: http://www.ptc.com/offers/tryout/pe2.htm
Alibre Design Xpress: http://www.alibre.com/products/xpress/xpress_for_all.asp

An excellent repository of FREE 3D models in numerous formats, hosted by Solidworks (a closed-source suite) - just register with a valid email and you can download any of the models available in a plethora of different file formats:

http://www.3dcontentcentral.com

Open-source CAE - computational fluid dynamics, finite element analysis, electromagnetics, etc...a little farther down the line in product development, but you can bookmark it for now:

CAELinux: http://www.caelinux.com/CMS/

=Development Discussions=

Sam:

Marcin, as we discussed in email: use BRL-CAD for actual CAD drawings. Blender is good for sketches, but BRL-CAD, or other solid geomtery modeling is needed for translation of designs to CAM. Perhaps more development of BRL-CAD is needed, or training for those using it. There is a learning curve for sure, but it is worth learning. Worth the time investment. Also, perhaps if we can build a set of stakeholders, we can raise some funds and get several developers involved in adding drawing capability to BRL-CAD or other solid geo model CAD, like OpenCascade (BRL-CAD developers are very receptive to supporting this type of development).

Also, it is worth comparing [[RepRap]] with http://fabathome.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page there is a consensus among some that fab@home is more robust/usable than RepRap. However, by the same token, RepRap could probably be made to be much better with some development. One of the problems with Fab@home is the software, which only runs on Windows http://fabathome.org/wiki/index.php?title=Fab@Home:Model_1_Software Fab@home seems to be a superior design, so it could be worthwhile to put some time and money towards development of open source, cross platform software to run it. This is something that I could look at developing this year.

Also, on the software front, progress is being made on http://heybryan.org/mediawiki/index.php/Skdb

Marcin:

Sam and Nick, it is a good idea to be proactive as the project unfolds, and consider paying for open source development of the necessary, cross-platform solution - after we evalutate all options fully and then define our needs clearly. Please put the evaluation and needs info at

http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=CAD_%28Computer_Aided_Design%29

=Computer Aided Engineering (CAE)=

==Programs==

*[http://www.freebyte.com/cad/fea.htm List of CAE programs]
*[http://www.visualfea.com/download_1.htm VisualFEA] - VisualFEA is an innovative program for finite element analysis, which is an advanced technique to solve and analyze physical problems arising in many fields of science and engineering.

=Landscaping CAD=
We are looking for an open source landscaping CAD program to help with collaborative permaculture design.

==Programs==

[[Category:Fab]]
[[Category:Flexible Industry]]

Category:Edible Forest Gardens

2009-07-08T13:11:56Z

Geoff: Set page as subcategory of OSA

[[Category:OSA]]

Edible Forest Sources

2009-07-08T13:11:11Z

Geoff: Moved to Edible Forest Gardens from Edible Forest to remove category duplication

http://www.oly-wa.us/Terra/Sansone.php

[[Category:Edible Forest Gardens]][[Category:OSA]]

Aluminum from Clay

2009-07-08T12:58:45Z

Geoff: Added to materials category

http://knowledge-storage.com/science/34-science/46-aluminium

[[Category:Aluminum from Clay]]
[[Category:Materials]]

Template:Site header

2009-07-08T12:58:33Z

Geoff: Added category for materials

[[:Category:Habitat|HABITAT PACKAGE]]: '''[[CEB Press]]''' - '''[[Sawmill]]''' - [[Living Machines]] - [[Modular Housing Units]] |
[[:Category:OSA|AGROECOLOGY PACKAGE]]: '''[[LifeTrac|LifeTrac Multi Purpose Tractor]]''' - '''[[MicroTrac]]''' - [[Agricultural Spader]] - [[Agricultural Microcombine]] - [[Hammer Mill]] - [[Well Drilling Rig]] - [[Organoponic Raised Bed Gardening]] - [[Orchard and Nursery]] - [[Modular Greenhouse Units]] - [[Bakery]] - [[Dairy]] - [[Energy Food Bars]] - [[Freeze Dried Fruit Powders]] |
[[:Category:Energy|ENERGY PACKAGE]]: '''[[Pyrolysis Oil]]''' - '''[[Babington Burner]]''' - [[Solar_Combined_Heat_Power_System]] - [[Steam Engine Construction Set]] - [[Solar Turbine]] - [[Electric Motors/Generators]] - [[Inverters & Grid Intertie]] - [[Batteries]] |
[[:Category:Flexible_Industry|FLEXIBLE INDUSTRY PACKAGE]]: '''[[Lathe]]''' - '''[[Torch Table]]''' - [[Multimachine & Flex Fab]] - [[Plastic Extrusion & Molding]] - [[Metal Casting and Extrusion]] |
[[:Category:Transportation|TRANSPORTATION PACKAGE]]: [[Open Source Car]] |
[[:Category:Materials|MATERIALS]]
----------------

Category:OSA

2009-07-08T12:39:27Z

Geoff: Added site header

{{Site header}}

[[Open Source Agroecology]] ([[OSA]])

[[Permaculture]] and technology for ecology.

Includes replicable, open source, optimized agricultural techniques and the replicable, open source technology needed to implement advanced permacultural techniques.

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Category:Transportation

2009-07-08T12:38:42Z

Geoff: Added site header

{{Site header}}

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Category:Habitat

2009-07-08T12:38:03Z

Geoff: Added site header.

{{Site header}}

Things that help you live, like housing and sanitation.

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Category:Flexible Industry

2009-07-08T12:37:42Z

Geoff: Added site header and provided link to page on Fab Lab.

{{Site header}}
See [[Open Source Fab Lab]] for details on that aspect of the Flexible Industry Package that was once linked to via the package link in the site header.

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Template:Site header

2009-07-08T12:30:14Z

Geoff: Updated package titles to point to category pages, altered formatting to make packages stand out.

Category:Energy

2009-07-07T03:28:49Z

Geoff: Added site header to category page

{{Site header}}

[[Category:Global Village Construction Set]]

Category:Solar Turbine

2009-07-07T03:19:54Z

Geoff: Added subcategory to Energy category.

=Introduction=

This page is a collection of all entries related to the OSE Solar Power Generator. This was formerly known as the Solar Turbine project, because we were exploring a Tesla turbine as a possible heat engine choice for solar concentrator power generation. We have since switched to the steam engine as the heat engine of choice.

[[Category:Energy]]

Category:Steam engine

2009-07-07T03:19:31Z

Geoff:

A steam engine is an external combustion engine that can use multiple unrefined fuel sources.

We plan to use a [[babington burner]] to burn [[pyrolysis oil]] to generate steam.

[[Category:Energy]]

Category:Babington Burner

2009-07-07T03:15:35Z

Geoff: Added subcategory to Energy category

A [[babington burner]] can burn unrefined oil.

We plan to use [[Pyrolysis Oil]] from local biomass.

[[Category:Energy]]

Biochemicals from Pyrolysis

2009-07-07T03:12:48Z

Geoff: Included links to Alcohol book, included page within Pyrolysis Oil category

Syngas from biomass gasification may contain ''hundreds'' of different biochemical substances. Some of these can be quite valuable and therefore simply using the syngas only for energy (e.g. if burned in a [http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=Babington_Burner Babington Burner]) may be wasteful . Depending on the amount of syngas produced, it may be worthwhile to separate out the complex biochemicals from simpler components (incl. methane, carbon monoxide, hydrogen). The spectrum of biochemicals varies with feedstock and conditions, such as gasifier temperature, duration, pressure etc. One major component from the dry distillation of wood is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetic_acid acetic acid], which has many applications and can even be used as an [http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=Vinegar_as_herbicide organic herbicide].

After gasification, the syngas is first cooled down for distillation ("gas-to-liquid"). As coolants, water or external air may be used. Simple, low-tech, open-source methods of separation are needed. Biological methods for catalysis of CO and H to ethanol are being developed at large scale (e.g. [http://www.coskata.com/ Coskata]), which turn the various syngas components into ethanol using a bioreactor. This demonstrates a useful principle: distillation products are further processed using (micro-)biological means. Methanol is another useful and frequent component. Upgrading to biodiesel is possible but may not be practical. The big question is: can this be scaled DOWN to village-scale ? If so, the products (incl. [http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=Biochar biochar] from pyrolysis) may become important sources of revenue for the resilient community. Being able to create a large number of different potential products with a ''single'' separation mechanism would be significant in terms of autonomy and resilience.

==Possible Applications==
* organic acids (e.g. formic acid, acetic acid)
* Sugars, Flavors
* Pharmaceuticals
* Bioplastics
* Wood preservative [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.07.011]
* Fibers, Resins, Dyes
* Adhesives

==Possible Feedstocks==
* various kinds of biomass (corn stalks, straw, wood, leaf litter, algae)
* manure incl. [http://www.humanurehandbook.com/ humanure]
* animal waste, bones

==Important questions==
* will it scale down ?
* which feedstocks produce which biochemicals in reasonable quantity ?
* gasifier design / pyrolysis conditons etc.
* distillation and separation of products; one extraction method is using methanol as a solvent [http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=13769264]
* further processing of products

==Links==
* Enerkem [http://www.enerkem.com]
* Alcohol, Its Production, Properties, Chemistry, And Industrial Applications by Charles Simmonds - Chapter on Methyl Alcohol [http://chestofbooks.com/food/beverages/Alcohol-Properties/Chapter-IV-Methyl-Alcohol-Its-Production-And-Properties.html]
** Section on Production Of Methyl Alcohol, also covering byproducts [http://chestofbooks.com/food/beverages/Alcohol-Properties/Production.html]
** Section on Rectification Of Methyl Alcohol [http://chestofbooks.com/food/beverages/Alcohol-Properties/Rectification.html]

[[Category:Pyrolysis Oil]]

Category:Pyrolysis Oil

2009-07-07T03:11:24Z

Geoff: Placed Pyrolysis Oil category within Energy category

[[Pyrolysis Oil]] is an unrefined oil made from local biomass.
[[Category:Energy]]

Biochemicals from Pyrolysis

2009-07-07T03:04:51Z

Geoff:

Talk:Support Open Source Ecology

2009-04-15T05:58:27Z

Geoff: Blanked the page

True Fans

2009-03-30T02:43:35Z

Geoff: /* True Fans */

=Introduction=

True Fans are supporters of the [http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=458 1000 True Fans - 1000 Global Villages campaign ]. Here you can read why people have joined the campaign, as a motivation for you to join if you're not already signed up.

=True Fans=

[[Category:1000 Squared]]

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Benjamin Kaplin'''
I'm a mechanical engineering student, and I support the OSE because a completed Open Source Village kit would represent several orders of magnitude of improvement over existing projects to improve living conditions around the globe with technology. I grew up reading Stephenson, and one of the most powerful images in his book Diamond Age is The Seed, a nanotechnology McGuffin that one of the main characters devotes his life to that would take the control of production and self-determination out of the hands of the McCorporations and put it into the hands of revolutionaries and the impoverished.
Needless to say, nanotech is still several decades away from that dream, and contributing to the True Fans campaign helps a realistic Seed program without pulling me away from my studies.
|[[Image:0213090948.jpg|thumb|Benjamin Kaplin]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Marcin Jakubowski''', opensourceecology at gmail dot com, marcin_ose on Skype
I started the campaign because I have observed how little of humanity's true potential has been tapped. Everyone slaves their life away to a system that is crumbling at the seams. I believe that we can all reach absolute prosperity and evolve to freedom - by becoming skilled and productive [[Integrated Humans]], and by helping anyyone else to do the same. History has shown that this is a general formula for lasting prosperity. As long as we're wise, it should be trivial to get beyond the economics of scarcity. We need to show the world how to build the world's first, replicable, open source global village - so anyone who wants to can evolve to freedom.
|[[Image:marcin.jpg|thumb|Marcin Jakubowski]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Jeremy Mason''', jeremymaso at gmail dot com
I am supporting OSE because I want to someday replicate Factor e Farm and help everyone evolve to freedom. I am on-site at Factor e, my first project is the sawmill.
|[[image:jeremy.jpg|thumb|Jeremy Mason]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Scott Akridge'''
As I get older I'm more and more interested in helping people. A couple weeks back I enlisted the help of a friend to help in developing a CEB press when I began doing research and found www.openfarmtech.org with the open source CEB press. I continued looking for more information but kept coming back to this site for more info and learned more about the project and found I wanted to get involved. I started by becoming a member and donating $10 a month with plans to build the CEB press and build a couple structures then make the effort a cooperative. After reading more I've decided to also build a sawmill, assuming I can recruit some help. I think this is a great project and am excited to be a part of it in a small way.
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Toby Martin'''
I support OSE because...
* It's an intelligent and direct effort to address some of the most serious problems we face as individuals and as a society.
* It's one of the most interesting and creative projects I've ever heard of.
* I see no reason in principle that it can't improve people's lives.
* It's actually happening.
|[[Image:TF2.jpg|thumb|Toby Martin]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Lucas González''', imagina (dot) canarias at gmail dot com
I support OSE because both the model and the elements add some important missing pieces to what I perceive is going on.
* I think it's important to have local possibilities for water, food and energy everywhere. Not just at the household level but more importantly at the village or more aggregated levels. Even if you end up buying stuff from elsewhere, it's best if that happens by choice, not by necessity. It was not by choice when things were local by default and it's not by choice now that things are global by default.
* The whole process of open sharing of ideas, processes, know-how is intriguing and, at the very least, extremely fun to watch. (I really wish I had more time to join in myself, but I'm doing things that need doing. So I translate, tell others, and chip in with a little cash, less than what others spend in smoking. My choice.)
* I'm particularly interested in some items for specific locations. Energy for water in sunny places is a must. Shelter and water collection systems. You name it.
* Do we really know how far and how fast this can go? I think there's bound to be a catalitic process so that more and more technologies will come out openly, in an exciting incarnation of the Stone Soup story. So I want to help keep the fire going.
* It really looks like this can be done, should be done, will be done in 2 years. Less than 2 years now. The whole world now has a sense of urgency, I feel. I'd like to see what we can do after this. But the time is ripe for this, now.
* It's interesting to note how open content gives us a sense of ownership. Many have felt that with software. I want to see that with hardware.
|no image yet
|}

'''Joseph Zarr''', joseph.zarr@gmail.com [[Image:DSC_0169.JPG|thumb|Joseph Zarr]]

I am an anthropologist, a farmer, and a permaculturist by training. I support OSE because, well, let's be frank: This is arguably the coolest project on the planet. I am most attracted to Factor E Farm and OSE because of the overall themes of personal improvement (via daily spiritual and physical discipline - in whatever forms a person deems appropriate), human production, and an intertwined personal and community growth. We must collaboratively market the ownership of our futures.

"For less than the price of one coffee per week, for less than the price of one first class stamp per day, you can help change the world. Subscribe!"

As our resource pool dwindles globally, largely due to corporate theft and errant industrial practices, we will have to produce locally and 'in-source'. With a dwindling petroleum base, our dream of cheap energy will disappear. These are simple facts. We must invest human energies in locally-based solutions. We must ignore our propagandized 'reality' and create a meaningful existence together.
With drastically increasing populations (estimated 70 million per year), we must teach ourselves the merits of collaboration, co-housing, and SHARING. My opinion is the era of individualized ownership is archaic and ill-advised. Only by sharing and producing what we actually need, and sharing what we already have (be it skills, books, resources etc.), will we experience the next stage of cultural progress. Hopefully, in the not so distant future our children's hands will not deform due to excessive playing of video games but, rather, they will callous, strengthen and scar due to meaningful labor and a 'hands-on' reality; i.e. literacy, numeracy, production = freedom. The only debts we owe are to ourselves and our community. Let's pay up.

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Josef Davies-Coates'''
I'm founder United Diversity and co-founder of The Open Co-op and support this project because of all the many many VERY cool projects I follow, this is perhaps the most inspiring and important. I can't think of a better way I could possibly spend my money.
|[[Image:|thumb|Josef Davies-Coates]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Reto Stauss''', reto.stauss(at)gmail.com, rstauss on Skype

I am mainly attracted by the momentum this projects develops. And of course because it is not talking but doing. My hope is that inspires my own little project (actually it already did): [http://manufakturingruendung.ch/en open source goods produced by small, agile manufactories]. Lucas, Joseph, sign your points.
|[[Image:Reto.jpg|thumb|Reto Stauss]]
|}

{| style="width:100%"
|-valign="top"
| '''Geoff Capper''', geoff (at) floodstreetfarmlet.net
I am supporting OSE because it is showing us that it is possible to regain control over the complex systems that to an extent have come to rule our lives. We can build our own machinery, we can build our own future, we can be free. The activity at Factor e Farm is truly inspiring, and I hope to use many of the products building up our own small farm, which may hopefully inspire others locally.
|
|}