20 times more efficient. New invented JET turbine with 2P shaped blades

[ImUrtastyflava]

please please please tell me what this generator!

i need that!!

[homskoult]

the cross section of the blades is grossly unfair for gathering quantifiable data. Are you another Indian discovering something that has been around for a hundred years.

[TheTonchev]

@homskoult

The shown turbine is not to scale and not to right shape. It is a conceptual model only.

[1crazyfocker]

and i am repeating too, its a simple number that every one who ever truely has a patent pending gets..and ppl will choice for them selfs about your videos. its a number lets have it

[TheTonchev]

@1crazyfocker

I am waiting your video facts only - no more words

[1crazyfocker]

so a bogus link, its a simple task the patnet number, and by your test it is 20x better, but its not a real comparison, think what you want. hell any one see this can tell that compairing one with 5 times the working surfice is going to be more efficant. I am sure its more effenicant but its no where close to 20times. i bet the reason you are useing such uneven compairisons is because you know its on like 5% or 10% better. just show facts, and a simple patent number scared i think

[TheTonchev]

@1crazyfocker

I am waiting your video facts only - no more words

[1crazyfocker]

@TheTonchev what video facts? your the one who from what i can tell is unlawfully saying patent pending with out giving the number.

[1crazyfocker]

cont

plus thats a prop not a turbine meaning its made to convert rotional energy into trust ie wind, not take wind and turn it into rotinal energy. basicly you claims are false, well missleading, it is 20x better then what you tested against just not a real comparison. I do like your idea tho dont get me wrong, just pointed out a flaw. what is your pat pend number? you know its unlawful to claim pat pend if you dont have a pat pend #?

[1crazyfocker]

couple questions, why not show a true comparison? when comparing fan,blades,turbines,ect. its the working surface area that matters not the length or R that matters. not saying its a bad idea, just saying its not 20 times better then a true comparison. thats like comparing a car to an RC then stating that an ICE is better then an electric motor. it looks like your idea has 10x the working surface area as the other prop. -cont

[smrterthenu]

why not take all the computer fans and put a ring around them and put gears on the ring around them so that all the computer fans are connected when one turns they all turn? more effecient and with a small breeze it catches a bigger area with more push because of alot of fan space

[1foxtrot70]

Excellent design! I like the side by side comparison of the two designs, it leaves no doubt about the efficiencies. Hats off to you.

[UnconventionalDice]

Your units-less explanation is somewhat suspicious...

[TheTonchev]

@UnconventionalDice

you can see the multmeters

[jameasun]

All I am seeing is more surface area from the first blade to the second. Sorry I am not seeing the point of this vid

[TheTonchev]

@jameasun

yes

[TheTonchev]

Yes. Of course. But each prop blade tip designed as not end triple blade. End less blade avoids tip blade energy losses. Blades formed JET channels. JET forcers augmented blade rotation. Over all result is 20 times more efficient prop at low wind speed. It is result is not because additional blade area only. It is well known that low area blades are not self starting at low wind speeds. In the same conditions new invented blade/prop operates very efficient by full load.

[1crazyfocker]

@TheTonchev

'tip blade energy losses" are not really an issue with wind power (turn wind power into rotional power) its an issue with props (turning rotional power into trust or wind energy) you should make a blade with the same working surface area and then conpare the two. I understand what you are trying to prove you are just going about it the wrong way.

[TheTonchev]

@1crazyfocker

The showed is a fact. Please upload your tests. If not I will consider you as a bad man.

See some of my patents as official publications at

[1crazyfocker]

@TheTonchev you can think what ever you want, I am not the one running "test" so unevenly, you want me to do your test for you? you only did this test just so yo can bost of bigger numbers, which is fasle and says a lot about you, then when asked for the patent number you give a broken link. its simple its a number just type it out. you do that and i might just do w real compairison test.

[TheTonchev]

@1crazyfocker

I am repeating.

The shown is a fact.

No matter your ' empty' words

I and others are accepting only facts here. .

You can find my patents in all free patents data base/

Please send your patents as a numbers as example.

[TheTonchev]

Respond to this video...

See some of my patents as official publications at v3(dot)espacenet(dot)com/ tag: tonchev as inventor

[ludiagsm]

higher area higher speed it is logic