Micro Pelton Turbine
Переглядів 1,781,828
3 роки томуCheck out KiwiCo.com/Tom50 for 50% off your first month of ANY crate!
Enjoy my videos? These are made possible due to help from my Patrons. Please consider supporting my efforts: / tomstanton
The resin printer is the Elegoo Mars 2 Pro and I was using the standard Elegoo clear resin. I was tempted to build a custom UV curing station, but ended up ordering the Elegoo Mercury Plus 2 in 1, which I definitely recommend as it makes the post processing far easier. As mentioned in the video, none of this was sponsored/provided by Elegoo, I just saw it all on Amazon Prime and thought I'd give it a go.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Other Equipment:
Main camera - amzn.to/2vlvlC6
Main lens - amzn.to/2gMrhru
Main tripod - amzn.to/2tqRjBt
Secondary Tripod - amzn.to/2t1NkMh
Microphone - amzn.to/2uuv9n0
Audio recorder - amzn.to/2v3mjcG
Banggood affiliate: www.banggood.com/?p=LT0710618...
Twitter: / tomstantonyt
3D Printer filament sponsored by 3D Printz UK: 3dprintz.co.uk/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@smartereveryday 3 роки тому
I love your channel and I’m here for air powered quad.
@bob_the_builder2815 3 роки тому
Collab?
@Deathington. 3 роки тому
Air powered 🚗 🚘
@JPLTF373 3 роки тому
Destin!
@gtboutdoors1588 3 роки тому
@@bob_the_builder2815 I could get behind that!
@Bhatakti_Hawas 3 роки тому
Hey Laminar Flow 👋👋
@JoelCreates 3 роки тому
I grew up with "Airhogs", my kid will grow up with "Tom Stanton Toys"
@subpoena. 3 роки тому
Haha
@trolly4233 3 роки тому
That’s actually a good idea for a toy company, I could see some of his ideas becoming actual products.
@MyHandleIsGood 3 роки тому
The only flying things I had were Fly Wheels and radio control helicopters.
@weatheranddarkness 3 роки тому
Been getting in to high performance RC motor gliders, it makes me want to source an airhog powerplant and build one with that.
@tomgvaughan 3 роки тому
I crashed my air hogs helicopter into a wall and it is now...... inactive
@DSLRguide 3 роки тому
dude you are so good at explaining things
@tafsirnahian669 3 роки тому
kinda strange finding you in this comment section.
@rokibulhaque3474 3 роки тому
Agreed
@PlasmaChannel 3 роки тому
Bet that turbine would be great at mincing tomatoes! Bet Integza could ship you off a few of those....though it may be hard for him to part with them.
@stocky9218 3 роки тому
Hello plasma channel
@PranshuTheGamer 3 роки тому
I agree
@power45118 3 роки тому
So what's the next move 🤔 a plasma thruster or something..?
@dodo3441 3 роки тому
I want someone to look at me like Tom looks at a bottle full of .... air.
@En_theo 3 роки тому
You need to have the same size and shape as the bottle... then maybe Tom will look at you that way
@worldpeace1822 3 роки тому
Get a girlfriend maybe she will get you spinning with a little blow?
@superdupergrover9857 3 роки тому
Get your sex changed to "bottle"
@mustangthekitten7765 3 роки тому
full of energy and re fillable and simple and expendable
@miranda.cooper 3 роки тому
"You have so much potential"
@integza 3 роки тому
Hello good Sir! Do you have a moment to talk about our lord and saviour NikolaTesla and his miraculous turbine?
@joajoajpedroj9253 3 роки тому
Caralho
@buzzmas8068 3 роки тому
0:43 *bonk*
@gEtar87 3 роки тому
I read this comment in italic.
@wildbill9863 3 роки тому
I volunteer to be your designated tomato killer I love the way they taste but in your honor i shall vanquish them
@svatsideas 3 роки тому
Oh, hi there tomato man! I wish you a good luck with that. :-)
@MIO9_sh 3 роки тому
7:25 For why the turbine-propeller contraption is more efficient than just spitting out the air, it is the same stuff as why turbofan engines with large fans in front is more efficient than turbojet with afterburner. The amount of force (thrust) produced is affected by 2 major factors, speed , and mass of air moved. By spitting out the air out of the nozzle, we get air on very high speed, but only a small amount of air is being ejected. However, as long as the turbine contraption converts energy good enough that it could push way more air down with slower speed that higher force can be achieved and thus more efficient.
@tausiftaha12 3 роки тому
Are these lyrics for a new song?
@MIO9_sh 3 роки тому
@@tausiftaha12 if you want to
@sachinminz90 3 роки тому
Yay! long story short surface area.
@qwertyboguss 2 роки тому
I've been told size doesn't matter..
@randomguydoes2901 Рік тому
Yup it'll be more efficient until the speed and aerodynamics of the propeller (turbulence etc) get in the way of achieving really high speeds for our theoretical aircraft. Is why we don't have supersonic prop planes, and also why we don't often use small jet engines to go slower (jet = less efficiency = more fuel needed = need a bigger, heavier plane to carry that fuel = it's now fast enough but definitely need to fly at a higher altitude to reduce wind resistance a bit, prop planes lose torque and are generally slow enough to be better off at lower altitudes)
@joepie221 3 роки тому
There is something about the slow motion footage of the water turbine at 1:56 that just screams STAGE 2. All that exhausted energy looks like it could be harnessed on another lower turbine rotating in the opposite direction. I always enjoy your videos. They make me think.
@scottdemoor49 3 роки тому
Adding a stator in combination with opposite direction rotor should greatly improve the final outcome. Ten years at G.E. making fuel controls tells me you're closer to a breakthrough than you realize.
@joepie221 3 роки тому
@@scottdemoor49 Naturally at some point in this process, the fuel, be it water or air, will loose its ability to produce power, but that immediate discharge from the cup is very focused and a lot of energy just waiting to be harnessed. I'm not a turbine guy, but I think its worth exploring if it doesn't add too much weight and defeat the application parameters.
@ThaJay 3 роки тому
The whole point was to make it shoot out of the cup at zero velocity so a second rotor would not do anything if it's set up properly
@Shop-Tech 3 роки тому
@@ThaJay Anything that can still shoot out of anything else still has velocity, or it would just fall to the earth. I think the point is to utilize the flow to its best potential, not waste 45% of it.
@ThaJay 3 роки тому
@@Shop-Tech Aren't you forgetting the rotational speed of the rotor itself? Standing next to the rotor the water seems to fall down although it shoots out pretty fast from the rotors perspective.
@psi4923 3 роки тому
Next video: Air powered air compresser
@ThisFinalHandle 3 роки тому
That's meta
@linecraftman3907 3 роки тому
That's just an APU of a jet engine
@felixleveille8441 3 роки тому
Perpetual air compresser 😂
@RealAndySkibba 3 роки тому
Check out the Useless Duck Company video from 6 or 8 years ago (been a while)
@sevret313 3 роки тому
If you took lower pressure air and compress it to higher pressure with less total energy, it might have some use.
@JosiGold1 3 роки тому
Casually whacking a "Telsa turbine interrupting integza"
@thechumpsbeendumped.7797 3 роки тому
Who was that?
@antonwestergaard5211 3 роки тому
@@thechumpsbeendumped.7797 integza
@thijslubberts8307 3 роки тому
@@thechumpsbeendumped.7797 integza, a great UKpostsr that hates tomatoes
@JosiGold1 3 роки тому
@@thijslubberts8307 an incredible description
@thechumpsbeendumped.7797 3 роки тому
Thanks, I didn’t recognise him so looked him up only to find I’m already a subscriber 🤷🏽♂️ I’m watching his 3D printed (Lily Impeller) vid now.
@doggo8046 3 роки тому
most people see an empty bottle optimists see a bottle of air tom stanton sees an engine powerful enough to power a plane
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
It is amazing what a powerful mind can do with everyday items. 👍
@Geewillickerz 2 роки тому
I think Mr. Stanton knows that the process of compressing air is only 10% efficient and as such a poor choice for fuel.
@DiyEcoProjects 3 роки тому
0:42 Integza! ~ cool bottle thwapping sound effect btw lol
@marcuspagel 3 роки тому
Integza: Tesla Turbine! Tom: *bop*
@westcheap 3 роки тому
bop
@ThomasScherfler 3 роки тому
This was hilarious..🤣
@nicholasroos3627 3 роки тому
On an unrelated note, people should check out Bop. A producer/artist with interesting music. Hope it to be a welcome distraction.
@welshdave5263 3 роки тому
I think I laughed at this a bit harder than I should.
@johnsherby9130 3 роки тому
Bonk
@IncroyablesExperiences 3 роки тому
The reason the turbine is more efficient is the power proportional to S*V³ while force to S*V². With the same power it's more force efficient to use a higher surface with smaller velocity. The greater surface (S) of the prop allows to reach a point where the propulsive air velocity (V) is just a bit higher than the "plane" velocity (here 0). To produce static thrust it's in theory possible to get an infinite force to watt ratio (force isn't energy) with an infinite propeller diameter. But the force to weight ratio would be awfull and impossible to run a plane because the max propulsive velocity would be near 0. Soo interesting (as always), thanks a lot! 100% pure engineering satisfaction! Keep going :D Favorite channel for 2 engineers
@grandmastergyorogyoro532 3 роки тому
What you said: technical stuff What I understood: hehe plane go vrom vroom.
@FledBurrito2826 3 роки тому
i like ru fuuny words macic man
@Rommmm 3 роки тому
Vous ici !
@FMHikari 3 роки тому
I like your funny words science man
@zachary3777 3 роки тому
I think you are right. That's why a helicopter rotor is much bigger than a propeller.
@MSI2k 3 роки тому
you know the content is incredible when all the big names of youtube are getting in line to drop a complement.
@taarek2021 3 роки тому
I've always admired the insane efficiency of this turbine, what a beautiful piece of engineering.
@prcvl 3 роки тому
The Integza Joke is so much more hilarious with his comment
@huaahhggg9507 3 роки тому
No it's not
@williamporreca3479 3 роки тому
Any engineering youtuber exists: Kiwi Co: Helo
@quartz9704 3 роки тому
Hello*
@mrchocolatebean8878 3 роки тому
well at least it's very educational
@rocketplane8862 3 роки тому
Fun fact: the turbine wheel you've created is called an "impulse turbine" and the devices that direct the flow into a gas turbine IRL are called "nozzles" even if they don't look quite as literal as what you've got going on here. If you want to increase efficiency and/or decrease mass, make the turbine inlets only as wide as or a little wider than the outlet of your nozzle.
@scablord9099 2 роки тому
Tom your channel is so awesome, I love how you explain things for more simple minded folks like myself. You'd be an amazing teacher. Keep it up mate love it!!
@pkramer962 3 роки тому
Air powered helicopter: beating air into submission with air.
@MyHandleIsGood 3 роки тому
Or better yet, air powered air compressor.
@WanderTheNomad 3 роки тому
*"I used the air to beat the air"*
@jim2725 3 роки тому
Integza: Tesla Turbine! Tom: B O N K
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
I love how you dive deep into one topic (like air-powered vehicles) and keep going on that topic until you have created what you think is the best possible mechanism. Thanks for another great video, - Eli Tennant
@Varue 3 роки тому
Hey Tom, I love your videos! I used to want to be an aeronautical engineer but the school was too hard for me and I found my passion elsewhere. Still, watching your videos fills me with joy at getting to see the engineering process. I would love to see another 3D printed airplane video. Something I've been thinking about is using a 3D printer to print parts that are ideal for printing (structurally) like the internal frame of an aircraft, but not the skin. This would help a lot with the weight and allow you to make quite magnificent models that require just a little extra work to get flying compared to a fully 3D-printed vehicle. Just some food for thought... I can't wait to see what you have for us next! Thank you so much!
@AlRoderick 3 роки тому
The thing with air is that it has to have some kinetic energy left, because it has to push other air out of the way to exit the turbine (Betz limit). Water would do the same if there wasn't a downstream drain under a dam.
@corentinoger 3 роки тому
You're right, I guess a water Pelton turbine would not work so well if it were itself under water. (still better than an underwater air turbine, the bubbles from the nozzle won't even reach it)
@oadka 3 роки тому
Nice info, thanks!
@ThreeBeeHDb 3 роки тому
@@corentinoger Even if we placed the nozzle for the air under the turbine?
@colin_deans 3 роки тому
Perhaps a mild vacuum would improve efficiency?
@JainZar1 3 роки тому
The Betz limit is also the reason why the ducted fan/turbine works better, as the less turbulent airflow at the blade allows more energy to be transferred to the mechanism and not be wasted into heat.
@kwarrtzorau7203 3 роки тому
7:20 By driving the propeller instead of using the nozzle directly, you're moving a larger mass of air at a lower velocity to get your impulse. Since kinetic energy goes with velocity squared, while momentum goes linearly with velocity, this gives you a greater total momentum in your reaction mass for the same kinetic energy, and thus you get more thrust.
@oadka 3 роки тому
And not to mention that he can get twice the force with the turbine than by just pushing due to the 180 degree change in flow direction in the turbine compared to just 90 degree effective change when the nozzle is used directly.
@wire3989 3 роки тому
Yeah! with a propeller It’s a higher bypass engine.
@mandernachluca3774 3 роки тому
You would have to explain that to me. Your impuls or momentum also goes squared with velocity. I=(V^2)*roh*A=V*Q Q being the massflow= V*roh*A A being the active surface area V being velocity I being impuls or momentum roh being the density of the working fluid (air) I think that the magic trick is the ratio between the coefficient of drag and the coeficient of lift of the propeller. Everything else should not contribute to higher efficiency and higher thrust. The total impuls of the compressed air is basically getting transformed from a high power low force, to a high force low power configuration. The max rpm of the prop should thereby limit the max velocity of the vehicle. Why is unclear to me, as turbinejet and rocket aircraft are only limited by there thrust wich is impulse, wich in tern should also applie here, but would make no sense anymore if it could.
@mandernachluca3774 3 роки тому
Never mind, took me about 2 minutes to find out, that the propeller pitch limits the rpm. To high of a pitch angle and your needed torque to turn the prop is to high, to low of a pitch angle and your propeller will overspeed or simple induce to much drag at higher speeds. You could also explain it with force vectors. As the pitch increases, so does the angle of the lift force vector compared to the normal vector parallel to the prop shaft. This in turn decreases the part of the velocity vector parallel to the normal vector, thereby reducing total thrust.
@linogoncalves1282 3 роки тому
came to read the comments for this one :D
@l0g1cb0mb 3 роки тому
I do so enjoy observing the engineers mind at work. inspiration for not only my own works, but for the next gen of makers and such, please continue the good works and the having a much fun doing it!
@emaglott 3 роки тому
excellent! great explanation of the pelton wheel. I often forget that air is a fluid too, just a lot less dense than water.
@bragapedro 3 роки тому
*casually _bonks_ integza away
@tafsirnahian669 3 роки тому
XD
@gafrers 3 роки тому
Bonking Integza for discovering Mr. Stanton's secret French origins. Another great enjoyable project
@cezarcatalin1406 3 роки тому
HON HON HON BAGUETTE LMAO
@sunderbans 3 роки тому
XD
@DasJWW 3 роки тому
Your videos really are amazing. I love the way you combinde Engineering and Physics while still kepping things simple :)
@nerdyengineer7943 2 роки тому
Tom, the turbine you ended up with is a simplified version of the "impulse" steam turbines from the early 20th century. For example, one such turbine was used for engine 3 on the Titanic. They are known for having a high power to weight ratio, though they are less efficient than turbines that use expansion. Love you channel!
@accuratealloys 3 роки тому
I didn’t know that there was a term for the spoon in the sink when I turn the faucet on and water is redirected all over my kitchen.
@dallynsr 3 роки тому
Shoot the spoon in your sink with a high-speed camera and post it in a video on UKposts.
@vintyprod 2 роки тому
teacher: why are you laughing my brain: pelton spoon
@francomaccaroni795 3 роки тому
those animations are game changing, congrats
@rymannphilippe 3 роки тому
I also think that the animation are fantastic. Does anybody know how this was made? Software?
@rymannphilippe 3 роки тому
I also think that the animation are fantastic. Does anybody know how this was made? Software?
@ikocheratcr 3 роки тому
@@rymannphilippe basic Blender can do this kind of things, without any addons.
@TomStantonEngineering 3 роки тому
I used Blender fluid simulations
@Made_In_Heavenn 3 роки тому
@@TomStantonEngineering um this is weird to ask but are you irish???
@rolandreynoso1392 3 роки тому
I think the reason why the turbine has more thrust than just the nozzle is due to the fact that the turbine powers a propeller. The propeller moves more overall air than just the nozzle. Basically it's the same reason why turbofans, especially the high bypass turbofans, are more efficient than turbojets.
@kaboom-zf2bl Рік тому
circumference ... and gear ratio ... both play with the output ..
@zhuzzir 3 роки тому
@tom stanton, u hv a nice house especially the lawn n surrounding area... Played it over n over whenever u r around n outside the house, its just beautiful...
@jbirdmax 3 роки тому
Love the Integza cameo at the beginning 😂 hella funny with the sound of the empty bottle smacking him away. 😂
@vinayakk2745 3 роки тому
Integza: tesla turbine Tom: and I took that personally
@NeuralEngin33r 3 роки тому
Jordan: that's when it became personal
@Ferrari255GTO 3 роки тому
It was at that moment that integza new, he f*cked up
@RyRy2057 3 роки тому
I had a pelton turbine obsession for a few weeks last year and im so glad this was recommended
@SirRelith 3 роки тому
Hey Tom, I just wanted to say, every time I see a new video by you I get soo excited! Thanks for all the great content my friend! :)
@UmarHamza 3 роки тому
This channel is underrated. Awesome content Tom.
@the_washingmachine1295 3 роки тому
Underrated, but I really appreciate that it's growing and how it's growing
@pilotofjet 3 роки тому
Your nozzle only is not designed to extract all the potential energy stored in the pressure. In order to improve its thrust you might have to design a convergent-divergent nozzle made to accelerate the flow as much as possible for the ambiant pressure (an adapted nozzle) At 4 bars of pressure you are effectively in the range of pressure ratio where you can have supersonic flow exiting a carefully designed Con-Di nozzle. In order to design your nozzle you might have to explore different throat areas as a trade-off between max thrust and how long it lasts. then you can go on calculating the adapted exit area using some isentropic compressible flow relations. If you wanna go all out you'll also need to find the optimal nozzle shape which is a whole other story but described in some compressible flow books.
@Dilongparadoxus 3 роки тому
That's a good idea, and i definitely think tom should try it out! However, you still wouldn't get as much thrust out of the jet nozzle as you get out of the propeller. A jet is most efficient when the exhaust velocity is relatively close to the speed of the surrounding air. That's why fighter jets use afterburning low-bypass engines with high exhaust velocity to go fast, airliners use high-bypass engines with high mass flow at relatively lower speed, and even slower planes use turboprops.
@elliottpray8915 2 роки тому
I just want to give you a thanks 😊 ounce I found out about your UKposts channel your videos encouraged me to become an engineer for toys (remote controls specifically) so thank you so much
@JahBushi 2 роки тому
what a brilliant walkthrough of the principles
@nonowords7857 3 роки тому
I love the relationship between Tom and Integza 😂
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
They have very similar channels but quite different personalities.
@veggeubbe8054 3 роки тому
I'd say the reason for the nozzles low efficiency was the fact that the equation for kinetic energy states that kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared. So using a large prop to accelerate much air a little gives higher thrust then accelerating a little air a lot
@luelou8464 3 роки тому
Pretty sure that is it. Force is mass flow rate multiplied by velocity change, power is mass flow rate multiplied by velocity squared. If you quadruple the flow rate, then with the same power you'd get half the velocity, which works out to double the force.
@thomasmiddlebrooke1012 3 роки тому
Which is basically the same conclusion that the Wrights came to when selecting the design for the Flyer's props. The went with two, slower spinning props instead of one fast one for that exact reason.
@GigsVT 3 роки тому
also why rockets have bell nozzles
@StarWarsTherapy 3 роки тому
@@luelou8464 great explanation! For those wanting to see the relationship: F = ma = mv/t P = Fv = mv^2/t v = sqrt(Pt/m) Showing that velocity has an inverse relationship to flow rate. Aka as mass per time increases, velocity decreases.
@benjaminmiller3620 3 роки тому
@@GigsVT Actually no. Bell nozzles are there to collimate the plasma. In the converging section, the particles are moving rapidly in random directions. (High pressure & High heat.) The expanding section the plasma is forced to expand backward, exchanging pressure/heat for velocity. In a perfectly calibrated bell, the exhaust leaves at the same pressure as the atmosphere. If it's under-expanded, it will expand outward in all directions and that energy is lost.
@NeoIsrafil 3 роки тому
Genius design for the turbine! Love it!
@rusinsr 3 роки тому
Resin printers are indeed awesome. Cool that you designed your own turbine that performed so much better :D
@AntBangBang 3 роки тому
The change from pelton to your own air turbine was just brilliant! What a difference.
@lukasskymuh5910 3 роки тому
The idea is not new, it is called axial turbine.
@dadsfriendlyrobotcompany 3 роки тому
Tom needs to come up with a more efficient and elegant version of the AirHogs, call it the AirGazelle
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
That would be great! 💯
@popparock6506 3 роки тому
keep building/inventing! love your creative approach and explanations!
@elkeno 2 роки тому
Fantastic. Great work. Thank you for sharing!
@msachin4885 3 роки тому
it's hard to overstate just how underrated of a channel you are.
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
True. I am sure if he does his research and keeps putting out great videos like this one of them will break out.
@MrMinimum24 3 роки тому
Our Engine Legend is Back 😎
@justindtackett 2 роки тому
You just reminded me of my Airhog I loved playing with when I was in grade school. Ahh pneumatic piston engines.
@vallemuller5594 2 роки тому
This is anti clickbait, the title and thumbnail are kinda boring but the video is soo fascinating and well made. Great job
@LazerLord10 3 роки тому
hmmm... is it less efficient because the air has a 'venturi' effect where it wastes energy by accelerating air that's on either side of the nozzle? If that's the case, a dutch on the input to the turbine could be helpful.
@gameonyolo1 3 роки тому
No it's the same reason that commercial airplane engines get better. Idk but something about more mass means more efficient
@miron__ 3 роки тому
Maybe its to do with impedance matching?
@randomneko9 3 роки тому
Honestly I thought it had something to do with the air pushing directly against something. I am not educated on this, I'm just an IT field tech, so this is purely guessing. But my thought is that the jet of air alone is only acting on the nozzle. The energy is lost rather quickly into the surrounding area and only transfers energy to the nozzle as it exits. If you put something in the way of the escaping air now it has to transfer its energy to the object in front of the nozzle too. I bet a simple flat bladed wheel will still produce greater thrust than the nozzle could do on its own.
@John-bu8zx 3 роки тому
I think almost all of the thrust is lost on the nozzle due to the shape of the nozzle. Not made for harnessing the thrust created, just an inefficient choke.
@tis_ace 3 роки тому
Well I think that a de laval nozzle would beat everything
@dylego4138 3 роки тому
Great vid as always Tom. It is very interesting on how you could make so much thrust from such a simple mechanism👍
@filthylucreonyoutube 3 роки тому
What I see in this gentleman's videos is the clear and present difference between _making_ and _engineering._
@jackallread 3 роки тому
Thanks Tom, as always, well done and very informative!
@JKTCGMV13 3 роки тому
That whack of Integza was so smooth
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
I am not sure what he was trying to say by it but it was funny. 😄
@willgaj_8353 3 роки тому
You're personal motivation / drive is incredible to me.
@user-qo3hb7wo6t 3 роки тому
很好的視頻。
@clivelee4279 3 роки тому
Most interesting, concise and to the point, almost too brief, well done.
@sk8pkl 3 роки тому
You could also make pulsed "valve" or distributor system that delivers the pressurre only at the best time. Thanks for sharing! Very clear explanations here.
@Avetho 3 роки тому
Oddly enough this reminds me of a video a while back from a youtuber called Stratzenblitz, in a game called KSP he built a flying aircraft carrier, and it only had 12 jet engines for thrust which was magnitudes lower than required to lift its runway sized bulk off the ground, but since he directed the jet engine exhausts at these absolutely massive turbine rotors made from dozens of wing surfaces, the jet exhaust made the giant rotors spin, and it could lift its couple hundred tons and oniboard aircrafts off the ground. So I believe the propeller is more efficient than the direct nozzle since the nozzle functions up to a high velocity whereas the propeller has a very low maximum airspeed. It can be thought of as gear ratios in a car as well, a car can move more weight in a lower gear at the cost of a low top speed.
@PKMartin 3 роки тому
KSP can be tricked into breaking conservation of momentum. The thing you're describing sounds like it's possible (using engines to spin a big rotor producing more thrust than using the same engines as jets) but just because it's possible in KSP doesn't mean it's possible in real life. There's also a glitch where you move fuel from one end of a spinning space station to the other and it creates momentum out of nowhere because the fluid dynamic model isn't detailed enough.
@Avetho 3 роки тому
@@PKMartin I get what you're staying, and it makes sense since in KSP the force exerted on a part due to the engine exhaust is very static in nature only varying with throttle output (there is no kinetic energy loss from gas billowing out the clearly open sides), but the theory behind it is somewhat sound. Its not conservation of momentum being broken in this case since the jet engines at full throttle which can fly reliably over Mach 2 (686m/s) are exerting force on the turbines which can propel the huge helicarrier at maybe 40m/s through the air if I'm being generous and gravity is disabled, so the thrust is all in the direction of motion. Its trading off airspeed for more static thrust, similar to how jet engines that are very high bypass (huge fan diameter) are used in subsonic heavy aircraft whereas low bypass are used in supersonic aircraft. Its all about the airspeed in the end. High lift coefficient and low airspeed, or low lift coefficient and high airspeed? That's the tradeoff between jets and large jet-powered rotor blades. On another note, its always really fun to break KSP's physics engines for fun and profit lol, the beautiful wonderful Kraken Drive XD
@taiiat0 3 роки тому
@@Avetho definitely my favorite BS propulsion device in KSP was the Wing lift exploit - a ball of blades that flails around to reach nigh infinite Velocity without any actual propulsion of its own. 👌😂🤣
@Avetho 3 роки тому
@@taiiat0 Oh gosh that thing was amazing, its like string theory made manifest on a macro scale, if I recall it stretches out on the launchpad and when it's sufficiently slinkied downwards it wobbles like some ungodly eldritch abomination and explodes itself so hard the root part goes flying at Mach 500 or something insane XD
@nonowords7857 3 роки тому
You're finally back! Glad to have you back buddy. Have been waiting patiently for a while now.
@mastprani 3 роки тому
Hey Tom! It's always enlighting to watch your videos. Loved this one specially. I believe the efficiency of your air turbine can be still increased. What of the turbine and the feeding nozzle is placed within an casing, to avoid the loss of air pressure when the air hits the propeller. And with an opening behind the air can exit from the turbine assembly.
@WhatDadIsUpTo 3 роки тому
I build small engines as a hobby and I use compressed air to operate them. I have found using a caged small brass spur gear is quite effective with a tiny outlet and high-pressure air running a worm gear against a helically-cut down-gear.
@tim3576 3 роки тому
I wonder how the second design (enclosed blades) would perform with a water stream 🤔
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
That would be an interesting test to add to the next video.
@rougenaxela 3 роки тому
7:13 Regarding the nozzle only having .34 newtons of thrust on it's own, I'm curious to what degree an engine bell could increase that.
@fg8557 3 роки тому
By exactly 0% as long as the inner diameter is too large to reach supersonic velocities. Even then, a conical nozzle can reach up to 95% efficiency. Bell nozzles are only really needed in rockets, as they can be built shorter than other geometries for the same expansion ratio
@tanyesil 3 роки тому
@@fg8557 so what if he got supersonic how much can that benefit?
@zuthalsoraniz6764 3 роки тому
Since the pressure ratio is at least initially high enough for flow to be choked, exhaust velocity then can be taken to be equal to the speed of sound, or ~340 m/s. Assuming the 6.9 bar is gauge pressure, and expansion is to 1 bar of pressure, with a starting temperature of 293 K an ideal nozzle would be able to get ~520 m/s of exhaust velocity, or about a 50% improvement. However, the nozzle would drop off efficiency fast, especially as a constant expansion ratio nozzle would either have to seriously underexpand the flow at the beginning, or end up severely overexpanding it at the end as pressure drops, and both are bad for efficiency.
@The7humpwump 3 роки тому
@@fg8557 aero spike would probably work better than just a nozzle and bell.
@Aetius90 3 роки тому
You can improve your turbine by change the turbine configuration. Check for centrifugal turbine and blade design (they are in function of air flow angle and speed). You might also want a stator stage before rotors.
@SpectrumDIY 3 роки тому
Great explanation, I was just looking at this turbine in another video. I really enjoyed the video, cheers.
@crackedemerald4930 3 роки тому
Broke: pelton turbine Woke: spinny spoony
@dominicrichardson5546 3 роки тому
A Collab with integza would be brilliant, no idea what you guys would make tho
@michiganengineer8621 3 роки тому
That is a very, _VERY_ scary thought!
@dmfman123 3 роки тому
Brill vid, explained simply enough that I actually understand all of it! Thanks 👍🏻
@SkillfulMan 3 роки тому
nice work , love your data analysis
@djrrmml7514 3 роки тому
Just imagine what could achieved with a 300bar carbon paintball tank
@honkhonk8009 3 роки тому
With a shit ton of dry ice in it.
@djrrmml7514 3 роки тому
@@honkhonk8009 beter off then with liquid co2
@Timestamp_Guy 3 роки тому
That would be really heavy. I think 2 L bottles are about ideal for power to weight ratio. a carbon tank would definitely hold enough air to last a lot longer, though.
@djrrmml7514 3 роки тому
@@Timestamp_Guy hence "carbon tank" 0,25L carbon tankt weights 280grams and contains 75 liter of air 2 liter pet weights 60 grams and only contains 8 liters of air at 4 bar. Weight is increased by a factor of 5 however the amount of energy stored is increased by a factor of 10.
@RealAndySkibba 3 роки тому
Misread this as "Peloton" turbine and was confused why no stationary bicycle was present.
@Ox4C4A 3 роки тому
Another wonderful demo of how many mechanical problems can be boiled down to impedance matching.
@kitemanmusic 3 роки тому
Great experimentation! Thank goodness for 3D printing.
@ButterBallTheOpossum 3 роки тому
When you're washing dishes and rinse off a spoon. 1:38
@justhard3r443 3 роки тому
I love the part when you smack Integza
@totheknee 2 роки тому
Tom does the best ad placement. It was actually relevant to the content.
@flaplaya 3 роки тому
I'm blown away. I never in a million years thought any more thrust could be made than just the air nozzle itself. Seems efficiency would go down. This is some game changing content.
@tuck1726 2 роки тому
Angular momentum helps as well, but by proposal is the air having the same buoyancy when not compressed as surrounding air means force has to be used to displace air it's traveling through. The turbine does not experience this as much because it's not traveling as far and you could add a cone around nozzle such that the air that's deflected goes around it creating vacuum at novel. I would suggest a gas that is less buoyant than air and camering turbine where air goes downward then extending blade such that the air escapes when turbine moves up hill.
@tuck1726 2 роки тому
Also the diffusion of air outwards from nozel exerts energy outward that's wasted from not going downward
@tanjiro3285 3 роки тому
Why we have 3 blades in turbines and two blades in Quadcopter and 30+ blades in laptop cpu cooling fan,which gives the best lift please test coz I dont have a 3d printer. I love your teaching 😍
@SteveEh 3 роки тому
If you are a fan of fans you'll like Major Hardware's Fan blade showdown, he tests user submission fan blades. Some pretty interesting designs.
@sh4dy832 3 роки тому
More blades = trading lower efficiency for higher thrust, if I'm not mistaken.
@dfgdfg_ 3 роки тому
Oooh, look at you with the fluid dynamics 😂
@djprogramer973 3 роки тому
Excellent work man 0_0 I never really expect much from your air powered projects but damn did this one have progression.
@ReviewMarineProducts 3 роки тому
Good work, and well explained. Thanks, Tom.
@Bhavesh_g20 3 роки тому
Tom: creates turbines from pressurised bottles Me: cant get a small amount of pressure in the bottle
@MakerBrain 3 роки тому
Sometimes it is the simple things that are the hardest to accomplish. 🤔
@Mgis90 3 роки тому
Tom: has thousands of coins worth of stuff laying around, some of them used only for one purpose :D 💁♂️
@JazofNotcompaqt 3 роки тому
"You need to take into consideration the pressure as it flows around the turbine" AgentJayZ has entered the chat
@mattrumbattrum9952 3 роки тому
the setup you did to show the newtons of just the air blowing down can be increased by placing it inside of a cylinder to create an air drag through larger tube
@davidwilkie9551 3 роки тому
Excellent demonstrations
@samuelkemp4557 3 роки тому
Have you considered a centrifugal turbine design like in a turbocharger?
@BRUXXUS 3 роки тому
I was also thinking about that during this video.
@ANSARY2222 3 роки тому
That Integza moment killed me LOL
@cevdetgz4126 Рік тому
You just invented an axial gas turbine starting from a water turbine! Man you're a genius. Seriously, nice explanation of impuls, speeds, momentum, power etc. Maybe a visualisation using vectors can show how simple it actually is to design turbines.
@minerharry Рік тому
The bottle hitting integza made SUCH a satisfying sound
@gfdtjkitsxn7775 3 роки тому
Love the vids tom
@sayethwe8683 3 роки тому
aren't these normally used for more massive and viscous fluids? Is it possible that you lose some efficiency to backflow of the air as well, 'robbing' momentum from the incoming air stream?
@da54177 3 роки тому
Did you watch the whole video?
@DeathToMockingBirds 3 роки тому
Nice! I'd love to see if your final desing works well with water as well. I guess there's a bit different physics involved, because of surface tension and different inertia. The goal would be to have a funnel that direct water from a stream or river into a nozzle, and to test your new pelton turbine design, to see how much electricity you can produce. If it's a good amount, I guess you can sell it to preppers for good money.
@lt.grenadegod1171 3 роки тому
Dude, you might be the one youtuber that people watch till the end. Man keep up the good work. Love your vids ❤️
Just Have a Think
Переглядів 758 тис.
Brick Experiment Channel
Переглядів 41 млн
Amway Home Goodies
Переглядів 27 млн
MirMaxTV
Переглядів 12 тис.
Thebox - о технике и гаджетах
Переглядів 38 тис.