[HN Gopher] Building Nikola Tesla's Bladeless Turbine [video]
___________________________________________________________________
Building Nikola Tesla's Bladeless Turbine [video]
Author : xbmcuser
Score : 116 points
Date : 2023-07-31 16:37 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| rpz wrote:
| Some great Tesla turbine builds on this channel. This is my
| favorite channel for anything Tesla turbine related
| https://www.youtube.com/@iEnergySupply
| detourdog wrote:
| definitely a lot of great builds but they desperately need an
| editor and should drop the big promises.
| fudged71 wrote:
| Integza is one of the few channels where I will watch every
| single video and be both educated and entertained regardless of
| the subject matter.
| Torkel wrote:
| It's so fun to watch these builder-youtubers develop over time.
|
| If they just keep on releasing videos and building stuff, even
| if they are not so skilled in the beginning eventually they
| become really skilled! It really shows that practice yields
| mastery.
|
| Tom Stanton is another on my list.
| echelon wrote:
| > It really shows that practice yields mastery.
|
| 100% true, but I'd like to change the word "practice" to
| "interested and intentional pursuit".
|
| Practice is rigid and structured. You can be told to practice
| piano for years, but you may never become great at it.
|
| When you find something you love, you drill into it yourself.
| Vertically, horizontally. It absorbs you. Expertise accrues
| through playful exploration and repetition.
|
| That's not to say you don't have to drill certain things.
| Professional piano players, professional athletes,
| professional gamers -- they all wind up doing "boring" drills
| of the same moves. But the craft isn't all technical all the
| time, and the endurance to withstand drills is greatly
| enhanced when you're hooked on playing.
| piyh wrote:
| Alpha Phoenix is up there too.
| mandeepj wrote:
| Thanks! You both gave me a new goal to reach.
| carapace wrote:
| When I was a kid this thing was legendary, most people had never
| heard of it and most of those who had thought it was a hoax. An
| engine with one moving part...
|
| The only place that had actual information on it was an obscure
| service that advertised in the classified ads section in the back
| of Popular Science, Rex Research:
| http://www.rexresearch.com/1index.htm
|
| It's wild to see videos about it today.
|
| (Also, check Rex Research for other cool obscure tech. Much of it
| is crackpot, of course, but some of it is not. E.g. the vaneless
| ion wind generator, a wind-to-electricity generator with _no_
| moving parts.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaneless_ion_wind_generator There's
| more...)
| TheDudeMan wrote:
| So what's the actual reason no one uses this type of turbine?
|
| The video frustratingly says, "People think it's inefficient.
| It's not." End of story.
| detourdog wrote:
| depends who you ask. If you watch these characters they come
| and go. They often argue with each other. Charlie is the latest
| and certainly the least ridiculous.
|
| The best argument might be that current manufacturing
| techniques have caught withe requirements.
|
| I plan to build one.
| [deleted]
| loarabia wrote:
| I think we do use this turbine but with thicker liquids and in
| reverse as a pump -- maybe it was in oil or some of the
| chemical industries?
| jecel wrote:
| Tesla invented this because he wasn't happy that cavitation was
| reducing the life of bladed turbines.
| contingencies wrote:
| A plastics injection molding mechanical designer in China
| told me rotational blades are the hands down most irritating
| thing to try to injection mold because conventional tolerance
| factors that are very well suited to the production of most
| other products will often result in imbalance, noise,
| vibration, wear and failure in rapidly rotating bodies.
| nico wrote:
| It seems like while the turbine works great, the rpm output is
| too high, with too little torque, and you loose most of the
| gains when gearing it down, which is also difficult to do
|
| That's what I've read, haven't built one
| greensh wrote:
| Lesics (another Youtube channel) argues that current turbines
| are already 90% efficient. For Tesla Turbines to reach the
| same efficency it needs to spin in really high rpm (maybe 50
| 000), which makes it impossible to built disks for it. Those
| disks would have to be 2-3 meters in diameters for industrial
| applications and couldn't withstand the forces.
| tetha wrote:
| This wouldn't surprise me.
|
| Modern turbines are very, very optimized, because they are
| used in systems like power plants. Here, every fraction of
| a percent of efficiency is massive. Hence, modern turbines
| are optimized as much as many, many smart people can do.
| This in turn means, even if Tesla just designed something
| pretty efficient many years back (which would be really
| impressive), it just loses in modern, industrial
| applications.
|
| Like, people have been looking at better ways to generate
| electricity from nuclear or fusion reactors. But current
| steam and steam turbine systems have been optimized so hard
| and far, it's extremely challenging to find anything better
| than just heating water and jamming it through a turbine.
| Because current steam turbine systems are just that good.
|
| It reminds me of the recent thread about hypothetical
| usages of the recently discovered and not yet confirmed
| room temperature super conductor. So many people are just
| arguing that a potential material that was discovered 2 or
| 3 months ago would be worse than silicon based electronics
| we've been optimizing for 40 - 50 years, or steel-based
| long range transfer we've been optimizing for longer.
| pg_bot wrote:
| I think the limiting factor on this type of turbine is the
| material you use to make the disks. As the disks get bigger the
| rotational stresses increase. To be practical the stress
| induced would need to be below the ultimate tensile strength of
| the material. Since these turbines need to spin at extremely
| high rpms and need to be fairly large to be efficient, there's
| no practical material that they can be made of.
| regularfry wrote:
| Given that the point he makes is that they've got high torque
| at low RPMs and that's what makes them interesting, I'm not
| sure that's relevant here. Frustratingly it doesn't go into
| any more details than that.
| Animats wrote:
| Watch about 1 minute starting at 03:00 and you'll see all the
| useful content.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Get sponsorblock, it does this for you.
| ctenb wrote:
| Narrator: "I know Charlie seems like your average Nikola Tesla
| fanboy, but he's not (...)". Not sure what part he is referring
| to that he is not, but we're definitely seeing some Nikola Tesla
| fanboyism there, looking at the live size Tesla poster and the
| man himself which looks like a Tesla replica :D Cool video.
| tgv wrote:
| Interesting. I do doubt the statement that dirt (he even
| mentioned rocks) won't hurt the system.
| soligern wrote:
| Anything that has any sort of deposit will turn that thing into
| a monolithic cylinder in no time.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-31 23:01 UTC)