Added: 4 years ago
From: gyroscopes
Views: 1,734,953
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (705)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Man nehme eine Turbine, blase Druckluft hinein, verbinde die Turbine mit einem Generator, lasse diesen Strom erzeugen, und schon leuchten die Glülämpchen.

    Und was soll daran jetzt so "Besonderes" sein!???

  • @MultiNewMedia Das Design der Turbine ist das besondere etwas.

  • @gyroscopes

    speak well!

  • @MultiNewMedia erst denken, dann posten.

  • @yerst2 Ich bin mit einer Kompresse Luftquelle im Moment. Aber ich plane mit Solarenergie obwohl ein Rankine Cycle-System. Die Tesla-Turbine ist, weil es spezielle Formen. Es ist einfacher zu gestalten und meiner Meinung nach zu machen. Es hat auch eine Reihe von Vorteilen gegenüber herkömmlichen Turbinen. Es hat auch einige Nachteile.

  • isn't that just one big blade?

  • @drawesome2000 Hmm. But the blade does not have a leading edge. it does not cut through the medium either. So no. Quite different.

  • It's awesome, yeah. And you did a hell of a job building it. But can it power the world?

  • @MakoRuu Hmm. But the blade does not have a leading edge. it does not cut through the medium either. So no. Quite different.

  • @gyroscopes Did you click on the wrong comment to reply to, my friend?

  • how about it is linked into an exhaust pipe on a car and it can produce electricity to charge a batterie.

  • did you set the inlet axis normal to the face of the turbine for ease of building and reducing chances of leak? i imagine since the air has to do a 90deg turn you’d be experiencing unnecessary pressure at the inlet corner. i recognize the air is going to have to take another sharp turn at the exit, but i suppose that’s unavoidable. cool build btw.

  • @BrickMuffin Yes thats basically what I did. It works and didn't seem be to a major diss-advantage.

  • wow

  • I made one of these using Hard Disc Drive platters and used the drive motor as a generator. It spun so fast the motor sh@t itself, after 30 seconds.

    @DidierDeluxe they do not work very well in reverse, even telsa admitted this, efficiency is greatly reduced by using it as a pump. ie. it captures kinetic energy from fluids extremely well which can then be converted into electricity but won't produce near as much kinetic energy when it is driven by a motor or other power source.

  • @wildwabbit74 I dont think rockets work well in reverse either, but then thats not what they are designed for.

    My beef with this is that the power in does not come close to power in+ losses, so whats the point?

  • @juzzlookin Firstly compared to what? The build cost is usually very good. Secondly I still think there is plenty of room for extra efficiency. There is also very few academic papers regarding the efficiency.

  • I want to maximize/capture water vortex energy via a falling spillway of water. Do you know the efficency of tesla's turbine vs modern day turbines like a Francis turbine? I like how you've embedded the turbine in plexaglass to contain and control air flow. I was wondering if there might be a way to float this type of devise in the vortex along with an alternator attached to it's back to make electricity? Would love to hear anyone's thoughts. Thank you.

  • What are the benefits of a bladeless turbine versus a blade turbine (turbo fan etc.)?

  • @kjaks Easy, cheap to build, low friction, low wear

  • Tesla was way ahead of his time, and not enough people know about him even though he did more than Edison.

  • Greath Serbian genius

  • I think was indicated by the previous commentator....you have to use a cheaper or free source of enery. The same priciples apply  Duh!

  • looks like you only need about a constant 35psi...this could be redesigned to run on free flowing water basically resulting in free energy...however I am unsure how much more psi you would need to run a larger generator

  • Does this work the other way around too?

    If you use electricity to power the turbine, will it generate air pressure at the other side?

  • @DidierDeluxe Yes it does.

  • @DidierDeluxe yes

  • that sounded strong

  • Why is it called the "telsa" turbine?

  • @Juefawn Tesla. After the man that invented it.

  • @gyroscopes Tesla had a really sad life, he did so much for the people and today most people dont even know who Nikola Tesla was...

  • @Juefawn Nickola Tesla to be exact. He also invented Tesla Coils, radio communication, and many other things. Also, I think HAARP was created from his plans.

  • @flightmaster178 to be exact - it's Nikola...

  • @Juefawn You do realize if it wasn't for Tesla we wouldn't have things like Cell phones, Wifi and other wireless devices Ac and so much more. Tesla is an amazing man who we all owe for his amazing mind.

  • very ... noisy

  • If you can come up with a very efficient air compressing device you might be able to generate more power than it takes to power the air compressor. Maybe some Geothermal steam powering a couple big versions of this and you would have to watch your back for fear of assasination from Rockefellers goons.

  • @RavenMad101 That wouldn't work. It can't produce more energy than us used. You just need to use a cheap source of engery. Geothermal, solar etc.

  • @RavenMad101 What you're proposing is physically impossible (perpetual motion).

  • love this great vid

  • Are teslas patents and or ideas kept out of public view? To think they can build the LHC, but they cant or wont bring his ideas to life to help mankind/everyone, should be concidered to be a crime/treason against humanity..Maybe RON PAUL could change this pathetic shelving of positive world changing technology! To say you wont research teslas work and improve on his designs and make it available for all to use cause your oil stocks would go down and you would loose money can be concidered crime

  • Gyroscopes,hey what are some advantages in your mind for this particular Turbine,you know this is peculiar,because they are working on large bladed turbines,I would think it safer than the bladed turbines for producing electricity. I enjoyed your video,and hope that some one will pick this up for use,now and the future. I wonder if Siemans the german company that deals with this type of idea,have seen it. Anyway your video is interesting.

  • @TheCAZ9 Efficiency is not great yet (relatively little research compared to normal turbines). The efficiency is still improving. However I think it would be useful now as a small generator. It is compact, cheap, light. imagine a 1-2kw generator that cost £200, weighs only 1kg and is the size of half a shoe box.

  • Gyroscopes,hey what are some advantages in your mind for this particular Turbine,you know this is peculiar,because they are working on large bladed turbines,I would think it safer than the bladed turbines for producing electricity. I enjoyed your video,and hope that some one will pick this up for use,now and the future. I wonder if Siemans the german company that deals with this type of idea,have seen it. Anyway your video is interesting

  • I command you to give me your awsome contraption !

  • jet generator

  • and what's about efficient? poor!

  • @RobotN001 what would you say the efficiency is?

  • You know..al these gadgets are real pretty and all, but there not helping us. We need a motor that does not require an outside power source! Please get on it. Master Tesla was working on that to ya know.

  • @Dexxxter7780 This was doesn't.

  • @gyroscopes Say again?

  • @Dexxxter7780 It can run on solar power or flowing water. Depends what you mean by outside power source. I assumed you were talking about electric power to drive the air compressor.

  • @Dexxxter7780 What motor doesn't need a power source? A Perpetomobile perhaps.

  • @Dexxxter7780 This is a turbine not a motor! It generates electricity from movement, not the other way round.

  • @Dexxxter7780 @Dexxxter7780 Lol, that's imposible, energy and matter can NOT be created or destroyed, they only change, you can change matter for energy like Einstein demonstrated, but you can't make energy from nowhere... The only thing we can do is make more efficient machines like this one. If you're thinking about a perpetual motion machine...You'll be driven crazy by trying to find something that works like many others.

  • car2

  • Now if you just add solar generated steam to power it.

  • @truthseeker911david I'm doing that next.

  • Tesla - Serbian hero

    

  • I didnt get it

  • I think it's called Wind Turban Energy.

    Tesla keeps showing up as the genius of energy.

    And how many years ago was that? 100?

  • Wow! I wonder, if one could get it to run longer, perhaps it could replace a car engine?

  • @TheCryptidman no not really as they use thrust so would have to be rear engine and would struggle on air intake but adapt it to propel the wheels of a car such as a turboshaft turbine does on a helicopter rotar and replace your fuel tank with a pressurised air tank and bingo

  • Well it may not be feesable but i bet you had a blast making it . Thumbs up

    :From Tim

  • yup, it works!

  • still wondering how the weather is controlled ? idiots. LIKE

  • just a little question isnt this the same thing as a dynamo for a bicycle???

    i mean you use air i use my feet for cycling to turn my front wheel and so on ?????

  • @iceboxonly1 Can't really see how it is like a bicycle dynamo. It more like a turbocharger for a car.

    In basic terms it will take a flow of water, steam, air, gas and turn it into mechanical power which can then be turned into electrical power.

  • I liked the pa- NYEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR­MMMMM

  • so pretty simple

  • So, it's not really bladeless, since the disks form stacked together for the "negative" of a blade shape. So basically the blades are in the shape of the air passing through the disks. It could be more efficient if the combined weight of the disks is less than the weight of the blades that would fit in the holes. Also according to Tesla, this design reduces the inefficiency caused by turbulence of a bladed turbine. Have you measured the efficiency yet?

  • @Nomoreidsleft About 10% on this one. Early days for me yet. 50% should be possible.

  • do you know what the rpm's were on that it was hauling ass and didn't break apart nice engineering 

  • i want one lol. idk why, but i do

  • If this system was adapted for vehicle and combined with modern day electric systems found in cars like the Chevy Volt or the Tesla Roadster, if they used the accelerator of a normal car as a sort of air flow regulator into the system, do you think it could work?

  • jeezus, I guess I am just one clueless individual. I'm sure this is awesome, guess I should of listened in school. Good luck with your ventures.

  • Nice job. It ran well at only 40 psi.

  • I love how everyone these days tries to be clever by pointing out that the energy used to produce the energy that drives these units cancels out the benefits of the energy generated in the end.

    It's amazing to me that people simply cannot see beyond the obvious. If you had pumped air into the compressor with a hand pump, or used wind power to drive the air into the compressor (or indeed a million other "natural" methods), I bet nobody would have anything clever to say about that...

  • @2000jago Agreed. 

  • @2000jago yeah, no kidding.....energy sources in these instances are merely for demonstration purposes--stand-ins for full-scale applications such as, for example, a Tesla turbine within a dam to generate electricity just as the extant turbines now do. :P

  • @2000jago yes so the wind turbines produce electric which is used to put air into compressors which is used to fuel a turbine. oh look renewable energy that doesnt speed up the earths natural cycle

  • What's the advantage(future possibilities) of having this system if you have to use electricity to fill your air compressor? Seems like air compressors draw a lot of energy.

  • @pgfracing Trying thinking about it when, water, steam, rankine cycle or even combustion is used. Not when testing with just a air compressor.

  • @pgfracing Think a bit!

    If you Use It in an Hybrid Car, like a Civic Hybrid, when the exhaust gases of the gasoline engine pass trough this turbine, it will generate Energy that can recharge the electric motor!

  • TESLA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • what kind of power was used to fill the compressor with air?

  • @brian50g It is a electric compressor.

  • one word "damn"

  • Excelente trabajo. Felicitaciones espero que vayas a una mayor escala.. Good Bye

  • Well done. So far only 95 idiots who work for the petroleum industry have seen this.

  • @BenZeneProject Explain?

  • @gyroscopes re:95 dislikes. It was a drunken attempt at humor. Sorry if you work for the petroleum industry- I'm not a fan of big oil.

    I think your design is excellent. Do you have plans to build a larger one?

  • @BenZeneProject I don't have any links to the petroleum industry. I do plan to a larger one but I'm still improving the design.

  • what RPM did you reach?

  • Why don't they use this in powerplants for the steam turbines ? to make energy more expensive ?

  • @TheKaos90 They are not feasible for large powerplants. Steam turbines are at around 90% efficiency. However they are practical epinion for small scale power generation or where the initial cost needs to be low.

    In these cases I believe they should be an order of magnitude cheaper.

  • @gyroscopes Please check your facts! Show me a steam turbine that operates at 90% efficiency.

  • @xpannn Combined Heat and Power Guidelines. (n.d.). Retrieved 1 28, 2011, from New Jersey Combined Heat and Power: njchp.rutgers.edu/files/Steam_­Turbines.pdf

    (1996). Efficiency. In H. P. Bloch, & S. P. Murari, Stream Turbines - Design, Applications and Rerating (pp. 220-224). New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • @gyroscopes Hello, I don't want to be a bother but I am an engineer so I must make this point clear - the PDF you've provided states on the bottom of the fourth page that steam turbines are generally 40-50% efficient - and I'm familiar with Block books. I doubt that textbook states otherwise.

  • @gyroscopes btw, if you're citing isentropic efficiency, that is NOT the same thing as turbine efficiency!!!!!

  • yep isotropic. Do you understand were I'm coming from? Basically were return on investment allows.

    e.g. small scale generators, emergency generators, portable generators etc

  • @gyroscopes Thanks for clearing that up. :) Sorry to be a bother - it was my misunderstanding

  • @xpannn I could have been clearer. No worries. Sorry for any confusion.

  • @gyroscopes 0.o...

    xpannn u just got schooled. :P

  • Try this with water and an upscaling gear. hydrro is well equiped to do this.

  • @007bond66 At which University?

  • @007bond66 Fair point. Should have said many aspects of AC systems. I made the edison invented light bulbs mistake.

  • Are there any plans for these on the internet?

    I realize you sell these, but they're not suitable for exhaust gases, which is what I'd like to try and use one for. :)

  • @joffeloff What exhaust gases do you intend to use? What temp?

  • @gyroscopes Using them on a model diesel engine - exhaust gas temperatures I can only guess, but at the least 300-400 celsius.

  • @joffeloff Well it maybe ok. I would suggest checking the temp. You will need cool the generator. But it may well work. Do you also know the flow rate in CFM that you would like to use?

  • I understand the facination with this but unless its better than a regular turbine whats the big deal? If it was I would think that engineers would be using it in systems.

    Adding machines used to be totally mechanical,(no semiconductors) but do we want to still build and use them?

  • @Texmurphy51 It is about the 10th of the cost to design and build, requires less maintence, is quieter and the performance is improving.

    When the adding machines were mechanical some people once said that electronic adding machines were not that good, because if they were all the manufacturers would be making them.

    Truth is...The best technology is often not the technology we are using for all sorts of reasons.

  • @gyroscopes Your attempt to turn the statement of "non use" makes no sense because they are now used everywhere & we would not go back to mechanical. Just as turbines would not go back to inefficient (20% vs 30% for blade turbines), Tesla turbines no matter how cheap they are. The proof is, again, they are not being used. If they had a practical use they industry would have them. Its a demo of an idea but thats about it.

  • @Texmurphy51 I was linking the tesla turbine to electronic adding machines. You simply can't say something is rubbish because no one is making it yet. If everyone thought like that no technology progress would occur.

    Technology need to be fit for purpose. Lets look at the efficiency a bit more. Would you pay £100 extra to have your car gain an extra 1 mpg? what about £1000? what about £100,000

    There becomes a point when you will never get back you return on investment.

  • @gyroscopes So in a power station they are happy to spend millions on a slightly more efficient turbine. Simply because they will get there money back over time.

    Now lets look at a portable backup petrol or diesel generator. A national DIY chain sells a 2kw version for £200. It weighs 20kg and isn't that compact. A normal mass produced turbine with self start cost over £1000. Yet a Tesla turbine version could be made for under £100 (sold for £200). Weigh 3kg and be a tenth of size.

  • @gyroscopes Your comparison to mpg is off. I am talking about 20% for the Tesla vs 40% for conventional. Energy is EXPENSIVE. its not just a matter of 1 mpg. How much is an engine worth that woudl DOUBLE your gas mileage? Your calculator analogy is wrong also. the elec calculator was better but not used cause of expense. Tesla is cheaper but not used because of efficiency.

  • @Texmurphy51 Lets agree to disagree regarding analogy for now.

    Where did you get the 20% and 40% efficiency numbers from?

  • @gyroscopes Wikipedia & other tests show 20%. Teslas original est were incorrect because of torque measurments. Claims of 90% eff are part of the "Tesla Legends" just as the claim that he was generating "Free Power" with his machines.

    Power plant turbines are 40%, look it up anywhere.

  • @Texmurphy51 Well Prof. Rice’s work showed an efficiency of 36% with plenty of areas of improvement.

    He concluded that

    “Tesla-type Turbomachinery should be considered in applications in

    which conventional machines are inadequate. This includes

    applications for small shaft power, or the use of

    very viscous fluid or of non-Newtonian fluids...."

  • @Texmurphy51 "...There is

    some reason to believe that multiple-disk turbomachines

    can operate with abrasive two-phase flow mixtures with

    less erosion of material from the rotor. For that reason

    they should be further investigated for applications to produce

    power from geothermal steam and particle laden

    industrial gas flows...."

  • @Texmurphy51 Now power plants in use today have a turbine isentropic efficiency of upto 90% (typically

    40% to 90%). I can provided lots of references in text books to this.

    I found a good link here that shows my argument here very well

    njchp.rutgers.edu/files/Steam_­Turbines.pdf

    System 1 is a 500kw system, has a 50% isentropic turbine efficiency and cost $459000 to install.

    System 3 is 15000kw system, has a 90% isentropic turbine efficiency and cost of $5235000 to install.

  • @gyroscopes theres also a minimum point of efficiency where you wont get return either. There are other spendings ontop of the cost of turbine, if the income from output doesnt cover spendings inefficient machine wont do no matter how cheap it is.

  • @VarykGerai I agree.

  • Don't know why they call it bladeless when it has so many blades inside.

  • @mryellow123 A blade is defined as having a cutting edge. A Tesla turbine has no blades (no cutting edges like on a fan). Instead it has disks.

  • Im considering a Jean Pain type Composter heater to produce hot water and catalyze a biogasifier. So I will have methane gas.... question is if I store it compressed could I get energy back out that will significantly replenish the energy it took to compress it by putting a tesla turbin in line of the main feed line to say the home that would burn the methane for heat cooking etc.?

  • @coachgeo It is possible. The problem is the tesla turbine on its own does not have a combustion chamber and the tesla turbine needs to be checked to see all parts can accept the heat.

  • Merry Christmas Y'ol!

  • What diameter discs, cfm, psi, would I need to create 75kW of usable current? Is there a calculations converter/chart I could reference?

  • @dablackitalian It is a little more complex than that. That is a bit like saying what size car engine do you need to produce 100hp.

  • @gyroscopes Touché. Maybe I should have asked a different question. How can I build or find a Tesla turbine capable of a 75kW draw? How can I begin to research such a creation? I live in NYC and have no access to a shop. I just have my computer and my willingness to ask a potentially stupid question.

  • @dablackitalian Well in order to work out how much energy is going into the Tesla turbine you first need to know the medium going in e.g. air, water, steam, a gas. Then you need to know the pressure and the volume going in. Once I know that I know the energy going into the turbine and can design the turbine.

    The medium can make a big difference.

  • @gyroscopes The medium of compressed air would peak at 3100cfm and 40psi. I expect the temperature to be around 250-degrees Fahrenheit. Should I make an effort to cool the air? I'm trying to learn everything without going to school (because it's expensive) and some things are easier learned by asking questions, ya know?

  • @dablackitalian 250F is fine. 3100CFM at 40psi is about 250kw in kinetic energy. Your turbine needs to be about 25% efficient to get 75kw out. The pipe going to the turbine is going to be 3-4 inches. Rotational speed of the turbine will be slow because of the low pressure. The disk diameter and number of disks is up to the designer of the turbine. But if it was me I would be looking at a turbine a couple of feet across with whaterver number of disks needed to consume that flowrate.

  • I think discovered would be a better term than invented.

  • wow 

  • do you know how fast them disks are spinning when at maximum speed?

  • Tesla, great Serbian hero.

  • it has 60 what?

  • Creeped the hell out of me as it started... o.O

  • While it is kinda neat, it seems like a lot of work and expense to produce a very inefficient machine. The amount of electricity needed to pump up the compressor tank would have probably ran the 3 little light bulbs for 10 or 100 times longer.

  • @clintonearlwalker Yes but this is the first. I'm now on the 3 rd version with many prototypes inbetween. I'm getting better and better results. Give someone a chance.

  • @gyroscopes What are u trying to do? Are these little engines just a hobby, or are u trying to produce a viable generator operating on some type of alternate energy source?

  • @clintonearlwalker Experimenting with the technology. Allowing others to see the technology. And next year I would like to make combustion version and a rankine cycle version.

  • @gyroscopes That looks a bit beyond me. I've seen vids of Sterling engines on YT. Rankine cycle?? Never even heard of it, I'm not a mechanical engineer. Anyway, good luck, Cheers!!

  • @clintonearlwalker yeah i can't see any application for this either. of course you can generate energy from compressed air, but it's a lot more efficient just to use the energy needed to compress it directly.

  • @jwallbanger I'm using compressed air to show it working. You can use whatever medium you want. It can run from solar power for example.

  • @gyroscopes how could it run from solar power? i've never heard of a solar turbine, nor can i even imagine how that would work. please explain i'm really curious now.

  • @jwallbanger Rankine Cycle using R410 or R134a or similar gases.

  • what does the air run off of?

  • @fudgedogbannana Air in this example is supplied by a compressor

  • The cut outs from the discs seem to leave you with relatively little actual disc material. Is this for a particular reason?

    Intuition would suggest that allowing the air to escape too soon would reduce the efficiency and the holes would want to be closer to the spindle. Plus removing a lot of material will make the discs less stiff.

    Was just wondering if you've experimented with different cut-out patterns and come to this design by trial and improvement or if this is just a pattern you chose.

  • sounds tank

  • Have you considered using solar tubes to create the steam that would power the turbine? Solar tubes aren't as efficient as a dish in turning solar energy into heat, but they do have their advantages: such as being less sensitive to direction and having potential for much higher volume flow for the heated fluid.

  • @ZWILD1 Yes will be working on the next.

  • cool!

  • Interesting

  • this specific turbine would be more efficient if there was less friction between his moving parts.

  • @sirreal2u1 English.

  • Tesla one of the unsung heroes of the past. A genius of such high order most of his experiments are legendary.

  • all that yacking so we can get a 2 second demo. not impressed.

  • Have anyone try to use tesla turbine power by Direct combusion from Biomass like pellet (or wood chip) with a air compressor -> pressurized burner with mechanical pellet feeder and then finnaly -> Tessla Turbine.

  • @Nissearne12 Yes it has been done. I seen some studies burning solid. Quite successful.

  • @gyroscopes I have read about the tesla turbine could handle wood exhoust gases without damage compered with the regular blade turbin get unballanced in a few houre of run with direct combustion of wood because the blade will be contaminated and coated with calium from wood exhust gases.

  • @Nissearne12 & gyroscopes:

    I am not sure it would be the best for that. This turbine produces mechanical energy from the mechanical energy available in the compressed air's fluid flow and pressure drop, while most of the energy produced from "direct combustion" would be in heat. Another type of turbine might be better which is intended to take advantage of heat energy as well.

  • Hello. I'm impressed about the Tesla turbine, but i do not its principles, i need your help, can you give me an information regarding to this. How its disk sizes, efficiency and speed produced can be calculated?

  • Tesla is from my countrey! He was a little bit excentric and craisy, he also had some Ideas for perpetomobile, but nothing from that. I love Nikola Tesla! He is my idol, and

    he is most responsible percon for today's world (better world)

  • do you think that this would work in a go kart?

  • I saw the plans for one like this years ago in a magazine. Instead of compressed air it ran on steam pressure.

  • Looks like it was fun to make but completely worthless in the scheme of things --especially when you start talking about solar powering. We use electricity MOST at night, and our methods of storing electricity suck. Fun little high school experiment --I hope that's all it was.

  • @therealfactor It can be used with water (although I've yet to try). It also can be used to with combustor (again yet to try but may have a go some day). With regard to getting power at night via heat that is more tricky but as long as there is a larger enough temperature difference it is possible. Probably impratical though.

    Anyway my point I don't think it should be limited solar or any other method. It is a

    mechanical device not a compelete solution.

  • Same noice of a jet engine! :) I like it.

  • Noisy li'l bugger.

  • Thanks for the Tesla patent data Interesting considering nanotechnology nowadays

  • Powering a compressor to power 2 bulbs....I dont get it. This just has to be inefficient...

  • @AnselmoFanZero Next version is closed loop for Rankine Cycle applications. Including solar power.

  • @gyroscopes

    Cool...but I still dont get it. Converting solar energy into electricity makes more sense then convertin it to blowin air.