Great work, congratulations! Two facts i want to share with you: - the 2nd, 3th and 4th turbine in this video rotates slower because of the compressed air in the turbines before and the slower air flow - It is the most efficient device for transforming pressure energy into kinetic energy (>98%-99,9%)
A spinning disc or a turning axle does not mean that any work is being done. The disc or the axle must be loaded up with a resistive torque for work to be done. By cascading the turbines in series or parallel as at 5.12, would not necessarily increase the work done, because after the first turbine does work its energy in the airflow-out is much reduced (by the work it has done), and so decreases the available work done by the second turbine in series. Remember Work = Energy, so the Tesla Turbine does not create energy, it is merely a transducer that does work (available from its output shaft) that is obtained from the input energy of the fluid source (air pressure or water pressure).
and who doesn't love the thought off all things that rev hi screams of a signature hi pitch with plenty more on demand is just the perfect center price for a living room coffee table
Nice work! So excellent to be able to see what goes on inside the turbine! I think this is a FIRST EVER! Well done! What hardware/software did you use to make them? I presume they are 3D printed parts?
I believe Tesla would expect nothing less from us all to exercise the wonder full gifts he left at our ever so evolving fascination of electricity for pain and effortless free power to do what we need it for rather than holding it for ransom or harm the creatures that be!!
Great design. That RPM (and noise!) is incredible. with a more complex manifold system you may be able to achieve better results. To elaborate, what I mean is, if you begin with a hose->Y junction piece facing down stream of your current such as to re-enter the system, going into a 4 split, to each turbine. The output of the turbines is then re-directed to the auxiliary input/Y-piece connector, through, again, a four-to-one manifold, to mitigate some of the losses. you could introduce a purge-valve as well, before the Y-connector piece in-case not enough air is leaving the system. I believe this will help synchronize the speed of the turbines, while re-capturing a portion of the exhaust air. Lastly a 4-turbine series with a parallel/manifold system might produce the most torque. Not an engineer though, these are just my thinkings! Thanks for the very detailed content and exploded models! I have more question but don't wish to impose (why the two,two, turbine setup?). Cheers!... Edited: most silly typos.
very cool!.need to put 3 onto the pump at once with a planetary gear to get the rpm up. also air and liquids like different gaps /surface area for more efficiency.
you are doing the pump part wrong. you need to control the pressure of the the outlet of the pump thereby hindering cavitation to form, increasing preasure and letting the turbine to actually reach peak efficiency.
Thanks for sharing, great information! I would like to incorporate in front of new electric airplane design. Would have an air intake in the nose to direct and ram air into the Tesla Turbine. Would like to use for regenerative power back to battery bank and for providing electrical power to a/c systems while in flight. Sound like a practical application to you? Thanks again, TA.
When you connect the turbines in series, the tubes have to be shorters(short as possible) and straiters if you want to maximise the efficiency and in your demonstration, the pipe who connect the #2 and #3 turbines is to long and that's why it loose power and when you connect the 2 sides of the exhaust of the turbine to feed the next one, the pipes have to be twisted(not face to face) to create a air spiral movement, before entering the next turbine.
I see from your water turbine that it's still optimized for air. I would recommend widening the gap between the plates and adding more "blades" between the plates. Even better would be a small vacuum leak near the intake part of the water pump, to mix the water with airbubbles ... I'd speculate 80% water 20% air mixture could be good to push the water forward faster. And because of waters density, I would scale this pump up, to allow water to run more freely. In anycase you are not making enough power to get the centrifugal forces going it seems. (look how good it starts to work then the water runs out and the mixture is briefly 50/50 air/water).
Interesting idea, to lower the viscosity... But I'm not sure a water+air mixture would work all too well... for one, it's compressible, but also it doesn't mix very well, air and water. a less dense fluid might pump quicker, possibly. or be harder to pump... but water is abundant. I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any luck with an inline vacuum/venturi air injector. My gut tells me this may not be beneficial. Regarding the "blade" design on the plates, they could be inset, milled, but this would most likely involve more sophisticated milling, adding to cost. As per a different video I saw, as well as this vid, the airflow mechanics are largely "in-place" that is to say, from, what i gather the flow is determined by the roundness of the housing. What I wished to say though was, the other guy introduced a surface-roughness to the plates to aid in traction/friction. Though he was using hard drive platters to start with... But sandblasting the plates might be a cheap, effective solution, if degree of surface roughness is an important factor.
In order to make this usefull you need free pressurized air and convert the turbine into a generator while maintaining the tesla design. Air pressure could be acheived by placing sealed air filled bellows in low tide flood plain, anchored. As each high tide moves in , it compresses the air in the bellows which could be channelled to such turbine generators. High pressure air tanks could literally be used as a battery of stored air pressure (energy). Modifying the turbine into generator should not be too hard to do. (Mounting magnets into the edge of the turbine plates and having the outer case wired with field wires. If the turbine is made with large mass then the effects of a gyro would help it maintain speed while under load. Just a thoight.....
For the fourth turbine to spin i only need the previous (third turbines) inlet to be pluuged, the fourth turbines inlet should be plugged if there was a fifth turbine, does that make sense?
if you place two turbines in a parallel manner and they share same shaft, will the secondary turbine synchronize with the first to achieve more torque?
I think Tesla himself made a turbine with a 3 foot diameter and made some fantastic claims about it, unfotunately he went a bit crazy shortly after and never really finished perfecting the turbine. They are used a lot for pumping solids (wastewater treatment). In my newest video you will see that they can pump very easily.
Tesla’s largest turbine that he built and tested was 6ft in diameter. It was tested at the same time the 9-3/4 in diameter one was tested at the Edison plant. Charlie Solis who builds Tesla turbines has all the legal affidavits from the Tesla museum to show this too.
@@paulie1982 Tesla spent 10 years on R&D on the turbine and after a decade he patented 4-5 turbine improvement patents that everyone sleeps on. GB 186,082 (improved disc stack design), GB 186,083 (combustion + steam improved turbine design), GB 186,083 (combustion steam superheater), GB 174,544 (hybrid parsons + Tesla Turbine for elastic fluids), and lastly the parts of the Tesla turbine within the aerial apparatus patent U.S. patent 1,655,114. These were all patented after 1921.
Where the figures, the comparison of efficiency with traditional devices, how much increased resistance in the case of serial connection? But it turns out just a beautiful toy for big boys
I think that most of your performance problems on the pump side boils down to the incompressibility of liquids as versus gases. The whole idea of a turbine is to perform work to compress gases to be used elsewhere, as in improving volumetric efficiency in a heat engine, or to exploit the expansion of compressed gases like steam in order to do work. Cavitation may be relevant after incompressibility, but I dont think that is the big issue. Have yiu tested the efficiency of the tesla turbine in extracting work from falling water?
Es calari que trabaje en sistema a esta medida pero en un módulo de mayor escala no va a trabajar por que no hay rodamientos que aguanten esta cantidad de revoluciones lo cual es lo primero que hay que construir y luego el sistema de bombeo
Increasing the discs only has the effect of increasing the amount that’s flowed through. The pressure is dependent upon the disc tip speed, just like all centrifugal pumps.
If you can power array of Tesla turbine, that is not good design or setup. If you can pull aprox. 90% efficiency from first one, there is no place to put more than maybe one turbine on exit.
As the air travels a spiral path around and inward that means that every unit length of the air's path must have an adjacent path of air moving at a different velocity. How does the turbine avoid having the air lose energy due to interaction with adjacent paths? Also, forcing the fast moving path of air to suddenly make a 90-degree turn (the air has mass) to exit along the turbine axis must surely create outlet vortices which rob the overall efficiency. How did you calculate the efficiency of this model; I could understand measuring the electrical Watts output, so how do you determine power input to the turbine?
Ed Price They suggest in the other video that efficiency of 90 + % has been empirically verified. Your question makes me wonder about wear in a steam running device.
Efficiency in an electrical device can sometimes be >97% (such as a transformer), but mechanical systems just can't manage that. I remain skeptical of 90%, at least until I see a video of a rigorous and well-controlled demonstration. I once had the opportunity to evaluate a large demonstration model of an over-unity energy gadget. It was an elaborate combination of 16 parallel elements, each of which were driving and driven magnetic discs connected to DC motors. I looked at it and saw multiple frictional and flexural loss elements, but I was most interested in measuring power in to power out. The number indeed showed a power gain, until I noticed that the inventor was using a simple DVM to measure power output, first logging Voc and the Isc. When we measured true output power into any load impedance, by logging Vload and Iload simultaneously, the actual power efficiency was around 20% at best. Yes, most of the input energy went to warming components and stirring air around. Such a shame, as he had a beautiful animated web site that explained his over-unity device so well, and the model had so many cool spinning parts.
Seems to me the problem is on drive shaft sealing. Have You tried submerging the pump thus eliminating any seal fault air intake and either eliminating or confirming cavitation?
BUT ! ! ! How many pound feet of torque can you HARVEST from this apparatus ? Say , @ 50 PSI , what are the numbers within a load , NOT free wheeling ? Answer that , and I will see if I am impressed .
What is the output torque (useful energy) of this system? I've seen many demo's and all are able to be stopped quite easily with ones unprotected hand. That doesn't seem like a lot of useful work. Is it all being lost to friction? Could someone please do a comparative study between amount of energy in vs amount of energy out with one of these and a comparable bladed turbine?
I have a sneaky suspicion that the size and mass of the discs play an import role. How big would you say the turbine was that you came across? Any idea as to the disc dimensions and material? Also whole size and placement, this removes mass from the center. There are so many factors that will influence the final torque and velocity, most notably though, I imagine, is how "flywheel-like" are the wheels. I feel I'm going to have to try building one of these someday to try for myself. It's just crazy to think that this tech hasn't been all too popular for power generation for the past 100 years about, but then also not so, when you think about the systems in-place that benefit from the somewhat "de-facto" of energy production. The stake holders of Tesla's time and the slanderous campaigns against him. Also his falling out with (JP Morgan?) didn't help. Supposedly Tesla was requesting a lot of funding, but (possibly-incorrect-sited-party) didn't see the profitability of Tesla's ideas. I'm pretty sure it was JP... anyway, sad, that a genius inventor didn't live to see the genius of his creations realized by others. From the surprising application of his one-way, no moving parts valve in rocket engines, to a world connected with wireless devices that can fit into your pocket and connect everyone in the world. Not that I think it is quite in that manner that he may have imagined. After all, the man did indeed dream of pumping massive jolts of electricity into the earth, using the earth (mantle?) as a means of transmitting the power wirelessly across the world and making electricity freely available. Sorry for the wordy response, but if I remember correctly, he envisioned many such Tesla Towers stationed across the world. All harnessing gross amounts of electricity from the atmosphere, building up capacity and discharging it into the earth's sub-surface layer. I imagine, given the communication setup we have today, such a setup may render wireless communication dead, unless it doesn't interfere with the communications bandwidths used by public and govt, or possibly just contributes some background "static" of sorts that can filtered out of signals. Again though, this is widely untested/undocumented technology. I wish someone like Musk could, at the very least, if feasible, construct an experimental working Tesla tower. Seems only fitting, if you are to use the man's name, glory and fame. 6 years later, I know. Cheers. Thanks for leaving a comment!
There are some 1200 watt electrical load tests done by a Tesla turbine builder. Like real actual electrical power outputs. They’re pretty new. I would suggest those for you. Also the same builder has a bunch of dyno tests for power and torque curves.
NICOLA TESLA ; Inventor ; Energia Elétrica infinita ; TURBINAS ; Novas Aplicações em Funcionamento Energia Infinita Ex : Turbina com R.P. M. De Até 100.000 por Minutos ; FANTÁSTICO Gostei Muito Bom ……………………………………
¡¿has anyone tried to use an auxiliary compresor (and normal grid electricity source) to initiate the system, and then use the turbines to charge a little system of compresors to create a loop?. maybe it's not posibble, can't understand the losses and pro/cons of an a idea like that.... why not use magnets in oposite facing to reduce friction in the axis?
Can this be turned into a Jet Engine or a Turbochager?And what is the effect of using rougher of dimpled discs or using a conical rather than a cilindrical motor? Also,your screw there gave me asome insights and doubts,what if the shaft itself was a screw?could that improve the turbine by having even more area for the boundary layer effect to work?If the exaust ports had a Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube between them and the next turbine,could the turbine benefit from having a colder or hotter air?
Okabe Rintarou+ Some good questions there, I was thinking about Turbo charger for a car too! I think cold air vs hot air should show a difference in rpms but you would need a large difference in temps
Charlie solis has a design for a correct tube aided Tesla turbine. It goes on the thermoelectric disc stack design that he came up with. Also showing real power and torque outputs with his Tesla turbine dyno tests. And real 1200watt electrical load runs too!
This may be a stupid question, but I’m asking anyway , would this be an example of an over unity system , if it was turning power coils being that you could set up a series of these ...
They are plenty strong. Charlie solis has done real torque and power output dyno tests along with real 1200 watt electrical load outputs. All at low rpm too.
+YTEngineer question please: if the so claimed 97% efficiency was reached, could you feed a second turbine with the exhaust from the first one, and still get as close as half the rpm as the first turbine? Either yours is not so perfect, or that 97% is not energy eficiency (or I am losing some point, that's why I ask...) I thought that such an efficient air machine must have a low speed and low pressure exhaust, thus having passed almost all the energy from the inlet to the machine, and resting only that 3% on the exhaust air. Again: am I wrong? Thank you very much!!!
DoNotPushHere Hi. I would think the problem is that these turbines are not so perfect. You are right though, if maximum efficiency was reached the air should be exiting the turbine at very low pressure - more research is needed on these turbines, they are the future :)
YTEngineer totally agree with your last sentence. I'm trying to make a free flight airplane with compressed air dentist turbine, but seems more challenging to make my own. Gotta try this type of turbine. I think that the specific material used for the plates is very concerning. I can't imagine teflon plates reaching such high rpm's but using higher boundary layer materials could lead to surface wear, and dust. The rough surface would end up smooth and closer to teflon-like and the resulting dust may damage the engine. I feel like the plates are like infinite number of tiny blades, but I would expect them to eventually rip pff the surface. What do you think? did you ever notice rpm drop on long used / old turbines? Thks again!
***** I know what you mean, but remember that sometimes industry finds something more efficient and do not apply it due to customer's loss of interest, money or other facts. As a mere example we all know it is better to obtain energy from renewable sources but there we are burning oil because it is simply cheaper for the main public.
Its easy to make something spin fast but how easy or difficult is it to stop. In other words if you had thick leather gloves on how easy would it be to stop the shaft spinning. As against a turbine with blades ?????
Charlie Solis’ turbines all have real power and torque outputs even at low rpm. Something everyone says can’t be done because “the Tesla turbine has to be spun fast to work.” He’s proving this to be pure myth.
To me these turbines are interesting to watch and are handy to demonstrate the boundary layer effect, but worthless to do any kind of work and completely unable to compete with any type of airfoil type turbine where the fluid actually pushes the blades. The torque on these has to be close to zero even at high rpms.
Robert Bell After writing that comment I found on Wikipedia that efficiency is measured trough power output. I don't really understand that now, I'm not an engineer, but Tesla was able to have a few hundred horsepowers from this turbine by changing the size and shape of the disks, and he had to slow it down to about 9-10k rpm. But I don't know, this is all questionable, maybe he lied. Many people couldn't replicate it later, and only got about 40% efficiency. The fact that this guy is connecting more turbines to the first one, on the same energy source, I guess, means that the efficiency is very low.
Horsepower is a function of torque x RPM. If it takes some stupendous number of RPM to achieve, say, 300 HP, then the device is extremely inefficient. The most efficient and cost effective method will always win out in the open market because money is at stake. And no one will tolerate losing money if they don't have to. The market is never wrong. If Tesla's turbines were viable they would have been in use by now.
@@robertbell525 you have to know how to design the Tesla turbine correctly for it to work and get actual torque. Charlie solis, who has a physics degree, builds real working Tesla turbines. That output real power and torque even at low RPMs. Everything everyone said about Tesla turbines being worthless is completely false.
could you run a car turbocharger off of this, if instead of a second tesla turbine, you used a compressor turbine? I will post an example of how turbochargers function, in case you are unaware.
in order to achive this speed of 6407 rpm, youd need to blow at 72.46kmph, and the size of it would have to be 6cm diameter, which looks about right, i mean , supposedly in the past i have blown on a matchbox planes propellor and it whurrls like fuck, if this is a legit working thing which seems to beeee, why not, set one up near a creek, create a small dam, use a old foot ball bladder , make a "thumper pump" to transfer water to other generator dams set up behind the 1st, so you have a chain of them, all equally filled and thusly making a creek a huge mother fucking power sausage(so it goes ==> water hits dam, builds up, goes thru generator slowly, dam keeps filling, instead of letting it over flow, a bladder pump is 3/4 way up the lil dam, rigged with a pipe ,to keep the next lil dam and genie evenely filled so that one gene dosnt run out of water somewhere down the track adn they all work in uni-sen (if thats even a correct word for this situation) , fuckd if i know
@@iEnergySupply What is the most efficient diameter size? I was reading that Tesla made a 100 Hp turbine way back in the day before Super alloys became a thing for Jet Turbine Blades. With todays Alloys at hand we should at least be able to build such a turbine, produce the same kind of power and expect a long life. We can get our hands on Nickel/Cobalt alloys and do that. Or do you prefer Carbon Fiber composites?
@@nicamarvin I will be testing carbon-fiber soon! Tesla later claimed 20 hp per pound of weight of the turbine. Right now we are going to test inconel end plates and 316l ss disks. Power goes up with rpm and size by several orders of magnitude.
@@nicamarvin They can all be 99.99% efficient under perfect conditions, with a dual stage turbine like I am building. Tesla claims 100% Scientists say it's impossible, but energy can't be created or destroyed so technically all energy transfer is 100% efficient. Not all machines transfer 100% of the energy to useful energy but the energy is converted 100% to another form of energy. Usually the energy loss is due to the heat energy that goes into useless power, but the turbine is a thermodynamic transformer so the heat energy loss can be recuperated to potentially make it 100% efficient.
Why can't concentrated sunlight steam driving Tesla turbines to generate electricity for every household? Is it because our Government hate Tesla turbine too noisy?
Charlie Solis’ tesla turbines output real power and torque even at low RPMs. They are getting used for making electrical generators for residential and district level combined power and heat systems.
Rpm = Rotation per minute - aka how fast turbine disc can spin within one minute. And in some tests with Tesla's design they were able to achieve over 80 000 rpms on a single turbine in very short time period... before she breaks due material ans structural damage caused by such enormus speed, because no current available metal can whitstand this kind of speed.
Again I don't see any labyrinth seals and the proper staging. You are letting a lot of the power past the ends disc with out the seals. So far i have not seen anyone make a real Tesla Turbine with the seals and the staging and people wonder why it's not reaching the efficiency claimed...
my guess is they don't produce enough torque to overcome enough electromagnetic friction to produce enough electricity to power the compressor. otherwise you would have an infinite energy device, which we all know is nonsense. however, bitchin to see it hit 52k rpm ^_^v
So, would the exhaust play a big role in this? How would you be able to make the exhaust come out one direction instead of 2? Would this play a big role in determining efficiency?
![Oasis - Oasis Live '25 [Official Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gol_JnuEtKM/mqdefault.jpg)
Great work, congratulations! Two facts i want to share with you:
- the 2nd, 3th and 4th turbine in this video rotates slower because of the compressed air in the turbines before and the slower air flow
- It is the most efficient device for transforming pressure energy into kinetic energy (>98%-99,9%)
might be my favourite turbomachine - so cool and fast
A spinning disc or a turning axle does not mean that any work is being done. The disc or the axle must be loaded up with a resistive torque for work to be done. By cascading the turbines in series or parallel as at 5.12, would not necessarily increase the work done, because after the first turbine does work its energy in the airflow-out is much reduced (by the work it has done), and so decreases the available work done by the second turbine in series. Remember Work = Energy, so the Tesla Turbine does not create energy, it is merely a transducer that does work (available from its output shaft) that is obtained from the input energy of the fluid source (air pressure or water pressure).
and who doesn't love the thought off all things that rev hi screams of a signature hi pitch with plenty more on demand is just the perfect center price for a living room coffee table
Nice work! So excellent to be able to see what goes on inside the turbine! I think this is a FIRST EVER! Well done! What hardware/software did you use to make them? I presume they are 3D printed parts?
I believe Tesla would expect nothing less from us all to exercise the wonder full gifts he left at our ever so evolving fascination of electricity for pain and effortless free power to do what we need it for rather than holding it for ransom or harm the creatures that be!!
Great design. That RPM (and noise!) is incredible. with a more complex manifold system you may be able to achieve better results. To elaborate, what I mean is, if you begin with a hose->Y junction piece facing down stream of your current such as to re-enter the system, going into a 4 split, to each turbine. The output of the turbines is then re-directed to the auxiliary input/Y-piece connector, through, again, a four-to-one manifold, to mitigate some of the losses. you could introduce a purge-valve as well, before the Y-connector piece in-case not enough air is leaving the system.
I believe this will help synchronize the speed of the turbines, while re-capturing a portion of the exhaust air.
Lastly a 4-turbine series with a parallel/manifold system might produce the most torque. Not an engineer though, these are just my thinkings! Thanks for the very detailed content and exploded models! I have more question but don't wish to impose (why the two,two, turbine setup?). Cheers!...
Edited: most silly typos.
very cool!.need to put 3 onto the pump at once with a planetary gear to get the rpm up. also air and liquids like different gaps /surface area for more efficiency.
Great point. Different spacing may be needed depending on "fluid" medium. This is something that could be simulated and optimized.
you are doing the pump part wrong. you need to control the pressure of the the outlet of the pump thereby hindering cavitation to form, increasing preasure and letting the turbine to actually reach peak efficiency.
Thanks for sharing, great information! I would like to incorporate in front of new electric airplane design. Would have an air intake in the nose to direct and ram air into the Tesla Turbine. Would like to use for regenerative power back to battery bank and for providing electrical power to a/c systems while in flight. Sound like a practical application to you? Thanks again, TA.
Ever come up with some plans?
When you connect the turbines in series, the tubes have to be shorters(short as possible) and straiters if you want to maximise the efficiency and in your demonstration, the pipe who connect the #2 and #3 turbines is to long and that's why it loose power and when you connect the 2 sides of the exhaust of the turbine to feed the next one, the pipes have to be twisted(not face to face) to create a air spiral movement, before entering the next turbine.
i think you can acheve 5 in series
I see from your water turbine that it's still optimized for air. I would recommend widening the gap between the plates and adding more "blades" between the plates. Even better would be a small vacuum leak near the intake part of the water pump, to mix the water with airbubbles ... I'd speculate 80% water 20% air mixture could be good to push the water forward faster. And because of waters density, I would scale this pump up, to allow water to run more freely. In anycase you are not making enough power to get the centrifugal forces going it seems. (look how good it starts to work then the water runs out and the mixture is briefly 50/50 air/water).
Interesting idea, to lower the viscosity... But I'm not sure a water+air mixture would work all too well... for one, it's compressible, but also it doesn't mix very well, air and water. a less dense fluid might pump quicker, possibly. or be harder to pump... but water is abundant. I'd be interested to know if anyone has had any luck with an inline vacuum/venturi air injector. My gut tells me this may not be beneficial.
Regarding the "blade" design on the plates, they could be inset, milled, but this would most likely involve more sophisticated milling, adding to cost. As per a different video I saw, as well as this vid, the airflow mechanics are largely "in-place" that is to say, from, what i gather the flow is determined by the roundness of the housing. What I wished to say though was, the other guy introduced a surface-roughness to the plates to aid in traction/friction. Though he was using hard drive platters to start with... But sandblasting the plates might be a cheap, effective solution, if degree of surface roughness is an important factor.
Has anyone thought of utilizing this design as the exhaust side of a turbocharger? It seems to be a very efficient method of capturing gas energy...
In order to make this usefull you need free pressurized air and convert the turbine into a generator while maintaining the tesla design.
Air pressure could be acheived by placing sealed air filled bellows in low tide flood plain, anchored. As each high tide moves in ,
it compresses the air in the bellows which could be channelled to such turbine generators. High pressure air tanks could literally be used as a battery of stored air pressure (energy).
Modifying the turbine into generator should not be too hard to do. (Mounting magnets into the edge of the turbine plates and having the outer case wired with field wires. If the turbine is made with large mass then the effects of a gyro would help it maintain speed while under load. Just a thoight.....
This guy made it into a generator, but he used water.
ruclips.net/video/eC4swOYYuTQ/видео.html
What exactly did you mean with the gyro?
In the four-turbine part, it seems to me you forgot to plug the fourth turbine's second air inlet, and that's why it didn't spin.
For the fourth turbine to spin i only need the previous (third turbines) inlet to be pluuged, the fourth turbines inlet should be plugged if there was a fifth turbine, does that make sense?
if you place two turbines in a parallel manner and they share same shaft, will the secondary turbine synchronize with the first to achieve more torque?
Yes, of course, because they share the same shaft.
you can have so much fun with these - what is the largest diameter Tesla turbine that has been made? are they used for many serious applications?
I think Tesla himself made a turbine with a 3 foot diameter and made some fantastic claims about it, unfotunately he went a bit crazy shortly after and never really finished perfecting the turbine. They are used a lot for pumping solids (wastewater treatment). In my newest video you will see that they can pump very easily.
Tesla’s largest turbine that he built and tested was 6ft in diameter. It was tested at the same time the 9-3/4 in diameter one was tested at the Edison plant. Charlie Solis who builds Tesla turbines has all the legal affidavits from the Tesla museum to show this too.
@@paulie1982 Tesla spent 10 years on R&D on the turbine and after a decade he patented 4-5 turbine improvement patents that everyone sleeps on. GB 186,082 (improved disc stack design), GB 186,083 (combustion + steam improved turbine design), GB 186,083 (combustion steam superheater), GB 174,544 (hybrid parsons + Tesla Turbine for elastic fluids), and lastly the parts of the Tesla turbine within the aerial apparatus patent U.S. patent 1,655,114. These were all patented after 1921.
The turbine as water pump doesn't look efficient. There seems to be less water pressure. But it looks great as a wind powered motor/turbine.
Where the figures, the comparison of efficiency with traditional devices, how much increased resistance in the case of serial connection? But it turns out just a beautiful toy for big boys
Does anyone apply Tesla turbines for anything useful? I keep seeing people playing with them but nobody shows video of them doing actual work.
Alfred Molison I wish I could incorporate it to something too.
I think that most of your performance problems on the pump side boils down to the incompressibility of liquids as versus gases. The whole idea of a turbine is to perform work to compress gases to be used elsewhere, as in improving volumetric efficiency in a heat engine, or to exploit the expansion of compressed gases like steam in order to do work. Cavitation may be relevant after incompressibility, but I dont think that is the big issue.
Have yiu tested the efficiency of the tesla turbine in extracting work from falling water?
you didnt prime the pump line, its not going to suck up the green water if you dont prime it, come in man, fluid dynamics
Es calari que trabaje en sistema a esta medida pero en un módulo de mayor escala no va a trabajar por que no hay rodamientos que aguanten esta cantidad de revoluciones lo cual es lo primero que hay que construir y luego el sistema de bombeo
Why not add a Tesla Valve as the "transfer hose" between turbines, would that not increase the flow efficiency of direction of the air?
Would increasing the number of discs increase the pressure of the air/water as it exits through the center ports?
Increasing the discs only has the effect of increasing the amount that’s flowed through. The pressure is dependent upon the disc tip speed, just like all centrifugal pumps.
How efficient is blowing air through a tube?
Apparently, very.
So then you can get rid of one of the top inlet ports if you only plan to be running the turbine one direction, correct?
If you can power array of Tesla turbine, that is not good design or setup. If you can pull aprox. 90% efficiency from first one, there is no place to put more than maybe one turbine on exit.
you can control of speed by making control of the air get into the turbine
As the air travels a spiral path around and inward that means that every unit length of the air's path must have an adjacent path of air moving at a different velocity. How does the turbine avoid having the air lose energy due to interaction with adjacent paths? Also, forcing the fast moving path of air to suddenly make a 90-degree turn (the air has mass) to exit along the turbine axis must surely create outlet vortices which rob the overall efficiency. How did you calculate the efficiency of this model; I could understand measuring the electrical Watts output, so how do you determine power input to the turbine?
Ed Price They suggest in the other video that efficiency of 90 + % has been empirically verified. Your question makes me wonder about wear in a steam running device.
Efficiency in an electrical device can sometimes be >97% (such as a transformer), but mechanical systems just can't manage that. I remain skeptical of 90%, at least until I see a video of a rigorous and well-controlled demonstration. I once had the opportunity to evaluate a large demonstration model of an over-unity energy gadget. It was an elaborate combination of 16 parallel elements, each of which were driving and driven magnetic discs connected to DC motors. I looked at it and saw multiple frictional and flexural loss elements, but I was most interested in measuring power in to power out. The number indeed showed a power gain, until I noticed that the inventor was using a simple DVM to measure power output, first logging Voc and the Isc. When we measured true output power into any load impedance, by logging Vload and Iload simultaneously, the actual power efficiency was around 20% at best. Yes, most of the input energy went to warming components and stirring air around. Such a shame, as he had a beautiful animated web site that explained his over-unity device so well, and the model had so many cool spinning parts.
i finaly understood it, thanks
If you put that in a airplane and added fuel and a combustion chamber with the trust cone thingy it would be scary as hell
Seems to me the problem is on drive shaft sealing. Have You tried submerging the pump thus eliminating any seal fault air intake and either eliminating or confirming cavitation?
BUT ! ! ! How many pound feet of torque can you HARVEST from this apparatus ? Say , @ 50 PSI , what are the numbers within a load , NOT free wheeling ? Answer that , and I will see if I am impressed .
Add load let us see rotate efficiently
Can u use this aplacation to steam drive a fan highoutput fan
cold, fish go troughs the turbine unharmed. in Canada we use a lot of hydro power and we try not to hard the fish
What is the output torque (useful energy) of this system? I've seen many demo's and all are able to be stopped quite easily with ones unprotected hand. That doesn't seem like a lot of useful work. Is it all being lost to friction? Could someone please do a comparative study between amount of energy in vs amount of energy out with one of these and a comparable bladed turbine?
I have a sneaky suspicion that the size and mass of the discs play an import role. How big would you say the turbine was that you came across? Any idea as to the disc dimensions and material? Also whole size and placement, this removes mass from the center. There are so many factors that will influence the final torque and velocity, most notably though, I imagine, is how "flywheel-like" are the wheels. I feel I'm going to have to try building one of these someday to try for myself. It's just crazy to think that this tech hasn't been all too popular for power generation for the past 100 years about, but then also not so, when you think about the systems in-place that benefit from the somewhat "de-facto" of energy production. The stake holders of Tesla's time and the slanderous campaigns against him. Also his falling out with (JP Morgan?) didn't help. Supposedly Tesla was requesting a lot of funding, but (possibly-incorrect-sited-party) didn't see the profitability of Tesla's ideas. I'm pretty sure it was JP... anyway, sad, that a genius inventor didn't live to see the genius of his creations realized by others. From the surprising application of his one-way, no moving parts valve in rocket engines, to a world connected with wireless devices that can fit into your pocket and connect everyone in the world. Not that I think it is quite in that manner that he may have imagined. After all, the man did indeed dream of pumping massive jolts of electricity into the earth, using the earth (mantle?) as a means of transmitting the power wirelessly across the world and making electricity freely available. Sorry for the wordy response, but if I remember correctly, he envisioned many such Tesla Towers stationed across the world. All harnessing gross amounts of electricity from the atmosphere, building up capacity and discharging it into the earth's sub-surface layer. I imagine, given the communication setup we have today, such a setup may render wireless communication dead, unless it doesn't interfere with the communications bandwidths used by public and govt, or possibly just contributes some background "static" of sorts that can filtered out of signals. Again though, this is widely untested/undocumented technology. I wish someone like Musk could, at the very least, if feasible, construct an experimental working Tesla tower. Seems only fitting, if you are to use the man's name, glory and fame. 6 years later, I know. Cheers. Thanks for leaving a comment!
There are some 1200 watt electrical load tests done by a Tesla turbine builder. Like real actual electrical power outputs. They’re pretty new. I would suggest those for you. Also the same builder has a bunch of dyno tests for power and torque curves.
Charlie Solis is the name.
won't air get out of the second air input though, you don't seem to be plugging it up
I have a question, what is the state of air at the outlet(in terms of pressure increase or decrease, also the direction of air at outlet ) ?
Bagaimana dengan tenaga ,d banding dengan type turbine yg ada sudu sudu nya untuk memutar kan beban
NICOLA TESLA ; Inventor ; Energia Elétrica infinita ; TURBINAS ; Novas Aplicações em Funcionamento Energia Infinita Ex : Turbina com R.P. M. De Até 100.000 por Minutos ; FANTÁSTICO Gostei Muito Bom ……………………………………
¡¿has anyone tried to use an auxiliary compresor (and normal grid electricity source) to initiate the system, and then use the turbines to charge a little system of compresors to create a loop?. maybe it's not posibble, can't understand the losses and pro/cons of an a idea like that.... why not use magnets in oposite facing to reduce friction in the axis?
Can this be turned into a Jet Engine or a Turbochager?And what is the effect of using rougher of dimpled discs or using a conical rather than a cilindrical motor?
Also,your screw there gave me asome insights and doubts,what if the shaft itself was a screw?could that improve the turbine by having even more area for the boundary layer effect to work?If the exaust ports had a Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube between them and the next turbine,could the turbine benefit from having a colder or hotter air?
Okabe Rintarou+ Some good questions there, I was thinking about Turbo charger for a car too! I think cold air vs hot air should show a difference in rpms but you would need a large difference in temps
Charlie solis has a design for a correct tube aided Tesla turbine. It goes on the thermoelectric disc stack design that he came up with. Also showing real power and torque outputs with his Tesla turbine dyno tests. And real 1200watt electrical load runs too!
How much hotter is the exhaust air than the inlet air ?
Also, what sort of torque is developed at 50 psi ?
This may be a stupid question, but I’m asking anyway , would this be an example of an over unity system , if it was turning power coils being that you could set up a series of these ...
No. No system is an example of an over unity system because they cannot exist.
great demo , what i am really curios about is how strong are they ?
+Leo TechTips Indeed. How much speed/torque increase are we going to see from these, compared to other pumps?
They are plenty strong. Charlie solis has done real torque and power output dyno tests along with real 1200 watt electrical load outputs. All at low rpm too.
Would work with water only instead air ?
What about efficiency? Did you measure it?
can we reverse the process, so using the turbine to pump air or water?
I do not see electricity
Is this engine working with water pressure and without electricity؟
+YTEngineer question please: if the so claimed 97% efficiency was reached, could you feed a second turbine with the exhaust from the first one, and still get as close as half the rpm as the first turbine? Either yours is not so perfect, or that 97% is not energy eficiency (or I am losing some point, that's why I ask...)
I thought that such an efficient air machine must have a low speed and low pressure exhaust, thus having passed almost all the energy from the inlet to the machine, and resting only that 3% on the exhaust air. Again: am I wrong? Thank you very much!!!
DoNotPushHere Hi. I would think the problem is that these turbines are not so perfect. You are right though, if maximum efficiency was reached the air should be exiting the turbine at very low pressure - more research is needed on these turbines, they are the future :)
YTEngineer
totally agree with your last sentence. I'm trying to make a free flight airplane with compressed air dentist turbine, but seems more challenging to make my own. Gotta try this type of turbine. I think that the specific material used for the plates is very concerning. I can't imagine teflon plates reaching such high rpm's but using higher boundary layer materials could lead to surface wear, and dust. The rough surface would end up smooth and closer to teflon-like and the resulting dust may damage the engine. I feel like the plates are like infinite number of tiny blades, but I would expect them to eventually rip pff the surface. What do you think? did you ever notice rpm drop on long used / old turbines? Thks again!
*****
I know what you mean, but remember that sometimes industry finds something more efficient and do not apply it due to customer's loss of interest, money or other facts. As a mere example we all know it is better to obtain energy from renewable sources but there we are burning oil because it is simply cheaper for the main public.
That is how the jet engine work using hardly any fuel. The running turbine even sounds the same as a jet engine wake up world.
Makes sense.
Can u make me one that can rotate like that I would like 2 because I am trying to make a turbopump for a liquid rocket engine.
Thank you
Interesting as always!
Its easy to make something spin fast but how easy or difficult is it to stop. In other words if you had thick leather gloves on how easy would it be to stop the shaft spinning. As against a turbine with blades ?????
Charlie Solis’ turbines all have real power and torque outputs even at low rpm. Something everyone says can’t be done because “the Tesla turbine has to be spun fast to work.” He’s proving this to be pure myth.
a good turbo for engines.....
To me these turbines are interesting to watch and are handy to demonstrate the boundary layer effect, but worthless to do any kind of work and completely unable to compete with any type of airfoil type turbine where the fluid actually pushes the blades. The torque on these has to be close to zero even at high rpms.
Isn't it's efficiency 98% or something?
It may be, but if all it can do is spin, and not produce any usable torque, what good is it?
Robert Bell After writing that comment I found on Wikipedia that efficiency is measured trough power output. I don't really understand that now, I'm not an engineer, but Tesla was able to have a few hundred horsepowers from this turbine by changing the size and shape of the disks, and he had to slow it down to about 9-10k rpm. But I don't know, this is all questionable, maybe he lied. Many people couldn't replicate it later, and only got about 40% efficiency.
The fact that this guy is connecting more turbines to the first one, on the same energy source, I guess, means that the efficiency is very low.
Horsepower is a function of torque x RPM. If it takes some stupendous number of RPM to achieve, say, 300 HP, then the device is extremely inefficient. The most efficient and cost effective method will always win out in the open market because money is at stake. And no one will tolerate losing money if they don't have to. The market is never wrong. If Tesla's turbines were viable they would have been in use by now.
@@robertbell525 you have to know how to design the Tesla turbine correctly for it to work and get actual torque. Charlie solis, who has a physics degree, builds real working Tesla turbines. That output real power and torque even at low RPMs. Everything everyone said about Tesla turbines being worthless is completely false.
Is there any relavance for finding jobs doing a PhD studying this turbine?
could you run a car turbocharger off of this, if instead of a second tesla turbine, you used a compressor turbine? I will post an example of how turbochargers function, in case you are unaware.
Charlie Solis’ tesla turbines are being designed to be used as turbocompressors and turbojet engines.
What do they practically do with them,
is it not possible to put a vacuum on the other intake to give it more torque if 1 is sucking and the other blowing?
Sucking and blowing at the same time is the pinnacle in engineering, isn't it?
Hola, soy de argentina, porque no compartis los planos para los pibes que inician esta ciencia.. saludos
Very Cool!
Can they be used as a water turbine? so instead of being powered by air, powered by water?
Any pressurized fluid can turn them
Very good
J Gomez. You need to change the spacing as by working on boundary layers, it's dependent on viscosity, which is higher in water than air
in order to achive this speed of 6407 rpm, youd need to blow at 72.46kmph, and the size of it would have to be 6cm diameter, which looks about right, i mean , supposedly in the past i have blown on a matchbox planes propellor and it whurrls like fuck, if this is a legit working thing which seems to beeee, why not, set one up near a creek, create a small dam, use a old foot ball bladder , make a "thumper pump" to transfer water to other generator dams set up behind the 1st, so you have a chain of them, all equally filled and thusly making a creek a huge mother fucking power sausage(so it goes ==> water hits dam, builds up, goes thru generator slowly, dam keeps filling, instead of letting it over flow, a bladder pump is 3/4 way up the lil dam, rigged with a pipe ,to keep the next lil dam and genie evenely filled so that one gene dosnt run out of water somewhere down the track adn they all work in uni-sen (if thats even a correct word for this situation) , fuckd if i know
They all need to have a common shaft!!!!! Then you would see something amazing!
how many turbines can be linked with a common shaft?
@@nicamarvin As many as you like, although it becomes impractical after a while, a larger diameter should be used if space isn't an issue.
@@iEnergySupply What is the most efficient diameter size? I was reading that Tesla made a 100 Hp turbine way back in the day before Super alloys became a thing for Jet Turbine Blades. With todays Alloys at hand we should at least be able to build such a turbine, produce the same kind of power and expect a long life. We can get our hands on Nickel/Cobalt alloys and do that. Or do you prefer Carbon Fiber composites?
@@nicamarvin I will be testing carbon-fiber soon! Tesla later claimed 20 hp per pound of weight of the turbine. Right now we are going to test inconel end plates and 316l ss disks. Power goes up with rpm and size by several orders of magnitude.
@@nicamarvin They can all be 99.99% efficient under perfect conditions, with a dual stage turbine like I am building. Tesla claims 100% Scientists say it's impossible, but energy can't be created or destroyed so technically all energy transfer is 100% efficient. Not all machines transfer 100% of the energy to useful energy but the energy is converted 100% to another form of energy. Usually the energy loss is due to the heat energy that goes into useless power, but the turbine is a thermodynamic transformer so the heat energy loss can be recuperated to potentially make it 100% efficient.
Is it an air pump or a motor?
Fine work.
Thanx x sharing… : )
Why can't concentrated sunlight steam driving Tesla turbines to generate electricity for every household? Is it because our Government hate Tesla turbine too noisy?
nice. and lets see a test when that turbine has to actually do something... maybe turn an electric dynamo...
Charlie Solis’ tesla turbines are actually used to turn generator and output real electrical power. 1200watts was the latest test.
can you design such thing on order
Any practical uses?
Charlie Solis’ tesla turbines output real power and torque even at low RPMs. They are getting used for making electrical generators for residential and district level combined power and heat systems.
so can you use this to siphon gas
can u please share the cad file
a real load test would be novel so far you have avery inefficient self priming pump
Dyson?
I simply love this. Im such a nerd
what is RPM?
Rpm = Rotation per minute - aka how fast turbine disc can spin within one minute.
And in some tests with Tesla's design they were able to achieve over 80 000 rpms on a single turbine in very short time period... before she breaks due material ans structural damage caused by such enormus speed, because no current available metal can whitstand this kind of speed.
Again I don't see any labyrinth seals and the proper staging. You are letting a lot of the power past the ends disc with out the seals. So far i have not seen anyone make a real Tesla Turbine with the seals and the staging and people wonder why it's not reaching the efficiency claimed...
my guess is they don't produce enough torque to overcome enough electromagnetic friction to produce enough electricity to power the compressor. otherwise you would have an infinite energy device, which we all know is nonsense. however, bitchin to see it hit 52k rpm ^_^v
What about Heat transfert loss?
What heat? At present time the gas engine loses over 50% of its power. So even if this had 20% loss it's still better than any fossil fuel system.
I got advertisements after watching the video for 7 seconds…
Why didn't the 4th turbine spin?
+tate normandin The other turbines had taken all of the power from the air .
TheEscapist PrisonCreator++
Cool 😎
So how does this tech help the planet?
+Michael Zietlow I believe it's a similar design to the pumps used in hydroelectric power stations
+Bobby Engel, not at all. As far as I know, most efficient and reliable and used water turbine is Pelton.
Would this work on an air intake system with a vehicle?
so where can I get one?
kelly coleman From EpicPhysics.com
+YTEngineer can you put it under a load of some sort? RPM is not a fair comparison otherwise.
+AdolphusOfBlood Yes, it can also generate electricity ruclips.net/video/dfyWB4XuATM/видео.html
YTEngineer
its a fact chicks dig it as well
How come once you get them all spun up you cant just hook the last one into the first one for the air source.
Because that would break the laws of physics.
YTEngineer Laws are made to be broken. Otherwise we never advance in science :)
+Nativtexan2 Laws are made to be broken but very few have broken the laws of physics, just ask anyone on crystal meth that thought they could fly.
also pls contact me for the next projekt and I render some nice videos for u from that model this shit looks horrible
zdravo ja sam iz srbije i ovo ti je fini test ali suvise mali dovod tecnosti da bi imala veci protok,ostalo je ok pozdrav
So, would the exhaust play a big role in this? How would you be able to make the exhaust come out one direction instead of 2? Would this play a big role in determining efficiency?