h a l f b a k e r yOh yeah? Well, eureka too.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
A Turbo impeller engine would be very efficient. Basically a
small jet engine would have a manifold behind it. Inside the
manifold would be an impeller, or type pf paddle wheel.
When the thrust of the engine hits the paddle it would spin
the paddle. The paddle could be connected to the drivetrain
through a chain or gears that are outdside of the manifold.
There would have to be a waste gate or blow-off valve in
between the jet engine and impeller inside the manifold to
prevent damage if the impeller were to get jammed some how.
After the exaust from the jet pushes the impeller, it would be
expelled through a tail pipe-maybe 6 inches in diameter.
- Enrique
[link]
|
| |
Um, can we say "BAKED"? It's called a "turboshaft" engine. They've been around almost as long as turbojet engines. They are very efficient when compared to a similar size internal combustion engine, but only when run at a fairly constant RPM. Frequent changes in speed cause large internal temperature swings, which are not good for the engine. |
|
| |
There is a truck manufacturer in Europe that uses a small turboshaft engine to power a generator and charge batteries in a truck (a big hybrid). It's reported to be much more efficient than an equally-capable diesel truck, but battery tech still makes it break-even in the long run. |
|
| |
Such a system wouldn't really be well-suited to the stop-and-go driving that a normal car faces, where the engine can stop and start as required without major impact on performance. Treatment like that would lead to an early (and expensive) replacement for a turbine engine. |
|
| |
Good idea, but already well-baked. (google is your friend.) |
|
| |
Such a system in a stationary set-up (allowing more heavy batteries) would be promising, surely, to generate, say, electricity. Perhaps the waste heat could also be utilised (see my suggestion under 'alternative steam engine'). RobertT |
|
| |
The other problem with turbines is the heat created. There was an indy car that used a turbine engine one time in indy racing history; the car was amazing but lost due to a technical difficutly and was ban from the track due to heat complaints from other drivers. |
|
| |
[Rob-T] google gas turbine powerstations. There's lots of 'em. Good steam plant is more efficient from a calorific standpoint. GT's are usually used for smaller plant, for remote locations where long service intervals are ok, or for reserve capacity, because they can be spooled up quicker than steam plant. Steam plant is constant maintenance. |
|
| |
Waste heat is generally used in HRSG's (Heat recovery steam generators). once again, google. |
|
| |
Please use google people, these are all baked ideas. |
|
| |
I won't bone this 'cause it's a bloody good idea, but sadly, very very baked. See all those M1 abrams tanks the yanks are rolling around iraq in? they are powered by gas turbine engines; as with all of their helicopters. Same goes for most of their navy, other than the carriers, which use nuclear steam plant. |
|
| |