> All this is moving further and further away from Bill
> Jepson's KIS.
> -- Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
>
> Paul,
> From your comment you obviously "got" my idea. The idea here
> is a
> proof of concept ULTRA SIMPLE idea using NO Turbocharger, only
> an axial flow turbine. Accepting that the system would only
> be optomized
> at one RPM and altitude and being happy if it didn't mess up
> the rest.
> Just concidering the turbine as an exhaust restriction the
> rest of
> the time.
> On another front here, why would it be advantagous to be in
> line with
> your turbocharger with your power turbine? They are
> independent shafts.
> A very short connector from the TC's outflow on a
> turbocharged machine
> is desireable, but otherwise who cares? The idea here is almost
> stooopidly
> simple. The paddlewheel in the millrace type of thing. ANY
power
> recovered
> is a bonus and you can get by with a much simpler muffler.
> Since we
> would
> normally run the engine up to at least cruise RPM static before
> takeoff you
> would always be recovering some of the exhaust hp. Think of
> it as a
> "magic
> muffler." Paul you found a great cutaway of an axial flow
> turbine, which
> I lost.
> Do you still have it? This could be done on a normally
> aspirated engine,
> in fact
> it would be easier that way.
> Bill Jepson
>
> Is this it?
>
> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor
>
> No Paul,
> Though the drawing you have there is helpful you had an actual
> physicalexample. A cut away in the metal so to speak. It may
> have been combinned
> with the photos of the Senica (sic) turbo compound diesel.
> Bill
>
>
> Senica does not ring a bell. I need some key words. I have
> upwards of
> 100,000
> files. You mean Scania?
>
> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
>
> Yes Paul that is what I meant. That isn't the picture I was
> hoping for
> though.
> I'll see if I can find it and post it to you. Thanks for the
efforts.
> Bill
>
Hi Paul and group,
This link sell different parts for bottoming engines. Il it
could help
you guys
http://www.bowmanpower.co.uk/
Marc J.
NexusMustang
Hi Paul and all
I thought one of the benefits of a electrical generator connected to a
turbo shaft (save the efficiency losses associated with convertion to
electrical and then back to machanical) might be doing away with the
wastegate to govern turbine rpm and instead adjusting the load on the
genertor elecrically thereby governing the rpm of the turbine.
Just thinking
Steve Izett
Perth West Aust
Glasair SII RG Renesis
A couple of problems. We are dealing with at least 30 HP here.
30 HP is 23 KW. One HP is equal to 746 watts.
A 23 Kw alternator is a big and heavy alternator. At 12 volts that
is 1916 amps!!!! That is a lot of amps. At 36 volts it is still
638 amps. The solid state components necessary to deal with 638 amp
alternating current are real expensive.
If we fed that into a 36 volt electric motor that would be a big
and heavy electric motor. A starter motor is about 3 HP for a short
period of time until it over heats.
Now every time you convert mechanical HP to electric
HP there is some loss.
Lets say the eff. of the alternator is 85% and
the eff. of the motor is 85%. The over all eff. of the system is
85% times 85% is 68%. We are throwing away 32% of our 30 HP or
9.6 HP and we are now down to 20.4 HP net.
It is best to stick to mechanical HP when ever possible.
Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.
Thanks Paul
Steve Izett
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2007 All world wide rights reserved.