Post: #91

THANK YOU MR. FIXIT

1. CAN YOU ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS POSTED

2. PROVIDE SOME LINKS

T/Y

GL

Post: #92

GREY LENSMAN  Wrote:

SEADOG

NOPE

NO NEED FOR A CLUTCH AT ALL.

WHY DOES THE VIDEO REFER TO MAGNETS?

CLUE FOR YOU.

GL

There could be multiple reasons.

Not having played the video.

If it is plugged in to an external power source the magnets could be propulsion.

If not, it could create power. However it doesn't seem set up for generating power.

I could be wrong.

Post: #93

Dire_effects  Wrote:

There could be multiple reasons.

Not having played the video.

If it is plugged in to an external power source the magnets could be propulsion.

If not, it could create power. However it doesn't seem set up for generating power.

I could be wrong.

neodymium magnets could generate a simple A.C. field, but the design he has loses energy potential from the plates (CD's) acting as resistive barrier since they are "dielectric" polymers (do not conduct electricity)...

Good insulators, but since the only material that can conduct or is electrically affected is the bio organic dies used in most recordable's, it's chancy and will not produce enough energy for more the a few light bulbs before the dang thing self destructs..

Interesting prototype design, but only good for proof of concepts, and it will require some significant alterations to be of use..

The polymers he is using were not designed for high speed operations, and if he intends to "float" the dang thing on a cushion of fluid, he better take into account the avenue that Tesla discovered which was the problem with surface tension of the fluids..

If the gap is greater then the gap of the surface tension of the fluid being used, the drop in power output is phenomenally higher then when it is taken into account, because you are now fighting friction loads...

Anyway..

Good concept.. but needs some work...

Post: #94

LoP Guest  Wrote:

Dire_effects  Wrote:

There could be multiple reasons.

Not having played the video.

If it is plugged in to an external power source the magnets could be propulsion.

If not, it could create power. However it doesn't seem set up for generating power.

I could be wrong.

neodymium magnets could generate a simple A.C. field, but the design he has loses energy potential from the plates (CD's) acting as resistive barrier since they are "dielectric" polymers (do not conduct electricity)...

Good insulators, but since the only material that can conduct or is electrically affected is the bio organic dies used in most recordable's, it's chancy and will not produce enough energy for more the a few light bulbs before the dang thing self destructs..

Interesting prototype design, but only good for proof of concepts, and it will require some significant alterations to be of use..

The polymers he is using were not designed for high speed operations, and if he intends to "float" the dang thing on a cushion of fluid, he better take into account the avenue that Tesla discovered which was the problem with surface tension of the fluids..

If the gap is greater then the gap of the surface tension of the fluid being used, the drop in power output is phenomenally higher then when it is taken into account, because you are now fighting friction loads...

Anyway..

Good concept.. but needs some work...

Shark skin.
It has some friction reducing properties, rough surface trapping water molecules in pockets and creating super low friction areas just away from the surface.
Racing yachts have used this tech for 20 years. Swimmers also have the racing suits now, very similar situations in reducing friction.

Post: #95

I've researched a little more into this Tesla Turbine design, and the "only' simple thing about it, is the actual flat plates themselves...

Tesla Has "Three" Major Turbine designs, of which "EVERYONE" that I can find a video or pictures of, are not using the actual Tesla designs "at all"...

They are making useless toys, which cannot be relied upon to achieve the 95 to 97% efficiency ratios that Tesla talked about..

Why?..

Well first off, some nimrod out there, made a set of plates, with small ejection holes lined up to each other, slapped it in a box, and called it a "Tesla Turbine", you-tubed the hell out of it (spammed it in other words) and all of sudden we have an entire group of people working from a failed model...

It's disgusting IMO, and a disservice to Tesla's "Intentions" for the turbine itself..

I have copies of the three original Patents of Tesla's for the bladeless turbine "system's"..

They are Patent Numbers : 1,061,142 (Fluid Propulsion), 1,061,206 (Turbine, which BTW is the one people are so hooked on, but fail to build properly), and 1,329,559 (Valvular Conduit)..

Patent number 1,061,206 (Turbine) is the most "attempted" replicated design, HOWEVER...

They fail to build the casing and central blade exhaust/intake port properly..

Tesla designed it, so that the "outer disk walls" on opposite outer sides of the final layered disk's themselves, was "sealed" from the actual participation in the process.. "which makes absolutely common mechanical and logical sense" since in order to channel the greatest potential of the air/gas (liquid is possible but not as efficient in this design) you have to have a sealed chamber form the exhaust, to funnel the full potential of the energy across the blades themselves, and the center port, has to be large enough, to account for a "low pressure" environment, so that the air/gas traveling from the high pressure zone (intake port) will travel rapidly and with as little impedance, toward the low pressure zone..

In reality, this is why the exhaust ports on the sides of the Design of Tesla's Patent No. 1,061,206 (Turbine) are so large in diameter..

He has two circular "runway" channels to account for any type of air/gas leaks trying to reach the exhaust port and (primarily) to relieve as much "near surface" contact as possible..

In the Patent, it actually states that the exhaust is sealed (as are the shaft ports) by an old technology still used today called "labyrinth packing", which is used by steam turbines and many other devices as a seal that does not need to make contact with the opposite moving item to form a "seal"..

In his design, you "should" be able to see a correlation between the outer opposite blades, and the need to seal the "central chamber" from the air/gas injection port..

It's no wonder "all" models fail miserably when it comes to actually being able to be put under a real "load", because you are losing a tremendous amount of energy potential along the outer surface of the opposing disk's, as energy always seeks the "weakest link", and that would be along the outer disk's to the exhaust port(s)..

They are BUILT WRONG!!!...

You can't just drill holes near the center of the plates, and call it "good", it will not perform properly, if their is not enough of a "low pressure" zone to gain enough torque potential...

This "really" make me wonder if this kind of crap was not on purpose to throw innovators off the beaten track..

If you want to build one for "liquids" that is Patent number: 1,061,142 (Fluid Propulsion)

If You want to build one for air/gas/steam (steam is near gaseous state BTW), that would be Patent Number: 1,061,206 (Turbine)

AND

If You want to actually build a working Tesla Turbine "Motor" (with accepted modification in the injection chambers, which have nothing to do with the actual inner workings of the Turbine itself), that would be Patent Number: 1,329,559 (Valvular Conduit[)

BTW

I Am in the process of building Patent Number 1,329,559 (Valvular Conduit), based upon the references in his patent to the "application" of the Turbine as a "motor"... The Valvular Conduit design, is for "pulsed-valveless" one-way valve operations (even says it fails when the pressure is constant and of low volume, Tesla sure was more honest then most innovators I know)..

But back then, he had no access to "Fuel injector" technologies, so I can upstage the Valvular Conduit in this case, for Motor applications, while remaining faithful to the original Tesla Turbine design itself..

Oh yeah.. One other thing...

In Patent Number: 1,329,559 (Valvular Conduit), Tesla says the following: "being representative of a prime mover of my invention, termed “mechanical oscillator”, with which it is practicable to vibrate a system of considerable weight many thousand times per minute. (Remember the incident when Tesla almost shook apart an entire steel building going up?..

Seems Tesla seeded his Patents with references to future and past inventions, not just with words, but with actual "diagrams" as well..

That man was burned so many times, that I figure he figured out a way to still get it to Johnny 'Q' Public, right under the governments noses...

Post: #96

GREAT UPDATE

GL

Post: #97

Because of the fast forum slide it did (what's the matter, can't handle a truth?...)

Post: #98

What I find interesting about his designs (Tesla"s and beyond the above mentioned fallacy in those who attempt to make it and stop short at just the flat plates themselves), is that his designs for a Turbine motor, predates Jet engines...

I've come up with a more modern version of his design, self contained, and can be synchronized with others as modules, with a "far" greater load/pressure capacity then the prototype he came up with and originally patented..

It is "STILL" a Tesla Turbine, because it is still a bladeless turbine, but with some important lessons we have learned along the way integrated since his original work which involves fluid dynamics...

I'll post further on this when I have a video of the model working (Single "plate" design for proof of concept)....

Cheers!!..

Post: #99

THANKS

LOOK FORWARD TO IT.

GL

Post: #100

IT DOES NOT TAKE MICH TO NOTICE THAT THE J.P. MORGAN SHILLS ARE STILL ON THE RUN AND DENIGRATING TESLA AT EVERY TURN.

WHY DO THEY FEEL THE NEED TO DO THAT?

ONE THING OVERLOOKED IS THAT HIS BASIC STUFF, SUCH AS THE DISC TURBINE IS SO SIMPLE, SO EFFICIENT AND SO EASY TO MAKE FOR A MULTITUDE OF APPLICATIONS.

GL