h a l f b a k e r y
Not just a think tank. An entire army of think.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
| Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Turbine engines, especially Tesla turbines, are ideal for hybrid systems because they create good power for their size and run most efficiently at consistant high RPMs.
Nikola Tesla first thought of using one of his boundary disc turbines (see link), along with an AC generator and motor, in a car
nearly 100 years ago.
The turbine would be kept somewhere over 10,000 RPM, producing about as much HP as a normal car engine. A generator, batteries, motors, etc. would work with it much like a conventional hybrid car.
The turbine would probably only drive the wheels directly at highway speeds, or with highly reduced gearing, in order to take advantage of the turbine's power band.
The Tesla Turbine Engine
http://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Tesla_turbine
Wikipedia article about the engine [rasberry re-tart, Jun 21 2005]
My Turbine Hybrid build
http://www.facebook...=4fb9f&id=658132013
Progress on my Capstone/ACPropulsion build. [rihilleman, Nov 30 2007]
Short name, e.g., Bob's Coffee
Destination URL.
E.g., http://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
It's a great idea, but Volvo came out with a constant-output turbine concept about eight years ago. Bladed turbine, but that's the only significant difference. Baked. |
|
| |
It is much simplier to build a serial hybrid. Produce electricity with the Turbine at a constant RPM and load (best for efficiency and emissions), then let the much more torque flexible Emotor provide the drive. |
|
| |
10,000 RPM is on the low side of the scale. Most of the larger systems spin in the 20K range, and capstones spins at 96K. This is part of the drive problem... |
|
| |
[rihilleman]: from what i've read, a series hybrid is only most efficient around town. once on the open road there are too many conversion losses. better to use something like the toyota hsd, where it can act in both series and/or parallel modes. |
|
| |
although, i suppose if the losses could be reduced enough using something like a tesla turbine or a stirling engine in combination with some other low-grade-heat scavenging system, and really efficient electronics, the series hybrid may win out due to its simplicity. |
|
| |
what have your real-world tests shown? |
|
| |
Petroleum stores massive amounts of energy as chemical potential. Every effort is made to reduce the impact of a collision (an inevitable event) on the release of this chemical potential energy. |
|
| |
The containment chamber necessary for the containment of kinetic energy, as found in flywheels spinning in excess of 20K rpm, is possible but expensive, and lays the finger of blame squarely on the manufacturers' shoulders. Something most manufacturers don't like to entertain. Plausible denaibility is responsible for more technological devolution than you can shake a stick at. |
|
| |
Nuclear power stores several orders of magnitude more energy than chemical potential energy, or kinetic energy, ever will. It is not considered a good power source for the public, for containment reasons. |
|
| |
[rihilleman], do you have any more information on your project? I'm curious to know more about it. |
|
| |
[4whom], the idea is to have a turbine engine powered by burning fuel, not by energy stored in flywheels. I doubt that a small turbine spinning at 20,000 rpm would have much more inertial energy than a large piston engine. |
|
| |