In the pdf where you show the velocity triangles the relative velocity w5,1 does not align with any profile but then in the excel file the plot seems correct, it creates a bit of confusion in the flow of the video. About the turbine: the loading given the deltabeta of around 12 deg will be very low for a turbine blade even if you optimized it for a completely axial outlet, I imagine that's why the blade profiles are so thin, but still turbines usually operates way more loaded than that, check out some smith diagrams and see where you are, keep track also of characteristical non-dimensional parameters such as the reaction degree etc..., from the graphs representing the pressure drops it seems that the turbine have a very high reaction degree, and while it is good for efficiency it is detrimental for the work done. Last thing, it is convenient to have a column in the excel with enthalpy and entropy to quickly check power and energy balances (you can add loading criterions to that in order to calculate the expected efficiency of compressor and turbine and ultimately make sure the turbine can drive the compressor), you can easily do that with something like coolprop which is free and open source and has excel addon, else you can do that manually in excel with NASA polynomials by building your own fluid mixture before and after the combustion
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
In the pdf where you show the velocity triangles the relative velocity w5,1 does not align with any profile but then in the excel file the plot seems correct, it creates a bit of confusion in the flow of the video. About the turbine: the loading given the deltabeta of around 12 deg will be very low for a turbine blade even if you optimized it for a completely axial outlet, I imagine that's why the blade profiles are so thin, but still turbines usually operates way more loaded than that, check out some smith diagrams and see where you are, keep track also of characteristical non-dimensional parameters such as the reaction degree etc..., from the graphs representing the pressure drops it seems that the turbine have a very high reaction degree, and while it is good for efficiency it is detrimental for the work done. Last thing, it is convenient to have a column in the excel with enthalpy and entropy to quickly check power and energy balances (you can add loading criterions to that in order to calculate the expected efficiency of compressor and turbine and ultimately make sure the turbine can drive the compressor), you can easily do that with something like coolprop which is free and open source and has excel addon, else you can do that manually in excel with NASA polynomials by building your own fluid mixture before and after the combustion
Ich fände es sehr nett, wenn Du das Excelsheet für die Designberechnungen freigeben würdest und vielleicht eine erweiterte Legende noch einpflegst.
Did you compare your result with a conventional jet engine?