New Cheap Rugged Turbine

[[email protected]]

A new turbine has been announced which is claimed to have unprecedented
low cost and ruggedness:

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/291175/New+twist+on+turbines.htm

http://www.swri.edu/4org/d18/mechflu/planteng/gasturb/radflow.htm

How significant is this announcement? How low-cost is low-cost? How
rugged is rugged?
What is the tradeoff to this design? Lower energy efficiency?

What new applications will it enable or make practical? Turbine
lawn-mowers? Turbine-powered bicycles? New personal aircraft? Moller
SkyCar? Helmet-mounted turbine helicopter blades? ;)

Comments plz?

(Btw, just as an aside -- what is a 'nanotechnology gas turbine'
anyway? Is that one of those experimental dime-sized turbines etched
from a silicon wafer that can be used to power a laptop or PDA?)

[Charlie Springer]

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:56:21 -0700, wrote
(in article . com>):

> (Btw, just as an aside -- what is a 'nanotechnology gas turbine'
> anyway? Is that one of those experimental dime-sized turbines etched
> from a silicon wafer that can be used to power a laptop or PDA?)

If it is really nano-tech then it is more like the diameter of a human hair.
I have seen some talk about nano-tech turbines as a power source for
electronics instead of a battery.

It looks pretty cool and I can see the simplicity of design as far as making
something spin, but I wonder how many parts you add to get a turboshaft?

However, close scrutiny reveals that this large disk shaped motor is
obviously based on ancient Germanic vortex discoid propulsion!

-- Charlie Springer

[Chad Irby]

In article . com>,
wrote:

> A new turbine has been announced which is claimed to have unprecedented
> low cost and ruggedness:
>
> http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/291175/New+twist+on+turbines.htm
>
> http://www.swri.edu/4org/d18/mechflu/planteng/gasturb/radflow.htm
>
> How significant is this announcement? How low-cost is low-cost? How
> rugged is rugged?
> What is the tradeoff to this design? Lower energy efficiency?

You might note that "fuel efficient" was the one phrase they didn't
manage to use in either article.

> What new applications will it enable or make practical? Turbine
> lawn-mowers? Turbine-powered bicycles? New personal aircraft? Moller
> SkyCar? Helmet-mounted turbine helicopter blades? ;)

Probably a lot of things, but I wouldn't hold out for a very long-range
transport application.

--
I don't have a lifestyle.
I have a lifeCSS.

[Dikkie Dik]

wrote:
> A new turbine has been announced which is claimed to have unprecedented
> low cost and ruggedness:
>
> http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/291175/New+twist+on+turbines.htm
>
> http://www.swri.edu/4org/d18/mechflu/planteng/gasturb/radflow.htm
>
> How significant is this announcement? How low-cost is low-cost? How
> rugged is rugged?
> What is the tradeoff to this design? Lower energy efficiency?

I like the idea, although I wonder how the turbine works. Does it work,
like spinning fireworks, by slinging the air in a radial way? In that
case, it is probably less effective than a conventional turbine. Also,
the combustion part seems a bit "wasted area" to me (I know you need
combustion, but you would rather not have placed it on the disc). I
think you run into trouble with this design if you make it too large,
for both rotating-mass reasons and turbine earodynamical reasons.
Still, combining all the rotating parts of a jet engine into one is
something brilliant.

> What new applications will it enable or make practical? Turbine
> lawn-mowers? Turbine-powered bicycles? New personal aircraft? Moller
> SkyCar? Helmet-mounted turbine helicopter blades? ;)

One of the first applications that springs to mind is model aircraft.
Simplicity is very important there and fuel efficiency comes second. You
could build real turbine model helicopters for a reasonable price.

>
> Comments plz?
>
> (Btw, just as an aside -- what is a 'nanotechnology gas turbine'
> anyway? Is that one of those experimental dime-sized turbines etched
> from a silicon wafer that can be used to power a laptop or PDA?)
>

I do not know what the engine will do at extremely low Reynolds numbers,
although I think you can construct the disc in such a fashion that the
flow has no choice but to "follow the lines". I don't have a the
faintest idea how effective it would be at a sub-milimeter scale.

You could build tiny maintenance robots with it (to revise or check a
conventional turbine ;) ), but I'm afraid the military would be
interested first to build deadly bugs.

Best regards

[Peter Stickney]

Dikkie Dik wrote:

> wrote:
>> A new turbine has been announced which is claimed to have
>> unprecedented low cost and ruggedness:
>>
>>
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/291175/New+twist+on+turbines.htm
>>
>> http://www.swri.edu/4org/d18/mechflu/planteng/gasturb/radflow.htm
>>
>> How significant is this announcement? How low-cost is low-cost? How
>> rugged is rugged?
>> What is the tradeoff to this design? Lower energy efficiency?
>
> I like the idea, although I wonder how the turbine works. Does it
> work, like spinning fireworks, by slinging the air in a radial way?
> In that case, it is probably less effective than a conventional
> turbine. Also, the combustion part seems a bit "wasted area" to me
> (I know you need combustion, but you would rather not have placed it
> on the disc). I think you run into trouble with this design if you
> make it too large, for both rotating-mass reasons and turbine
> earodynamical reasons. Still, combining all the rotating parts of a
> jet engine into one is something brilliant.

It's a radial inflow turbine - basically a centrifugal compressor
running backwards. von Ohain's original jet engine prototype used a
similar arrangement. But it worked so well that it was dropped like
a radioactive potato.
(See, in this case, the Germans _sere_ first!)

>
>> What new applications will it enable or make practical? Turbine
>> lawn-mowers? Turbine-powered bicycles? New personal aircraft?
>> Moller SkyCar? Helmet-mounted turbine helicopter blades? ;)
>
> One of the first applications that springs to mind is model
> aircraft. Simplicity is very important there and fuel efficiency
> comes second. You could build real turbine model helicopters for a
> reasonable price.

Other than the Gee-Whiz factor, what would be the advantage? Model
engines are so small that there won't be much, if any, weight
savings, (Most of the weight will be the engine carcase and you're
going to need a heftier gearbox), it'll be expensive, and who knows
how long it will last?

>> Comments plz?
>>
>> (Btw, just as an aside -- what is a 'nanotechnology gas turbine'
>> anyway? Is that one of those experimental dime-sized turbines
>> etched from a silicon wafer that can be used to power a laptop or
>> PDA?)

Basically. Feed it a few drops of alcohol, and off you go. Well -
once you can get a reasonable amount of power from it. We're not
there yet.


--
Pete Stickney
Java Man knew nothing about coffee.