Body
Norm,
Super cool stuff in the works in that pic. OK maintaining the laminar
airflow then is paramount so positioning the shockwave as such or
maintaining the low pressure side of the funnels when coming close to
contact. Assuming the high pressure points are where the excess energy
is when cavitation occurs.
Now I am getting the gist it would seem Tesla may have been planning
planning to run his Boundary Layer turbine from Linde's liquid air!
Can the TT design be run properly from a vacuum source or only from a
pressure source? If not a vacuum source there could be a push pull
system with some other design studies...
I would love to find out how you overcame the inherent seal design and
all of your info on the TT. You mentioned a package you made was for
sale somewhere, where is this available again?
It's a blessing to have money at the proper time and place, sadly
nothing much likely came of all of the interesting things Lee purchased
other than more variables for his money raising ventures.
On 12/13/2018 9:25 AM, Norman Wootan [email protected] [EVGRAY] wrote:
>
>
> The gas flow is highly laminar. Have you ever seen a Lockheed 104,
> Star fighter loose a wing due to cavitation erosion! NaDa! Speaking
> of cavitation, back in 1956 through 1963, I ran the repair department
> for a large Marina. My into to cavitation was with boat propellers
> where I often saw lots of erosion. You have to understand your above
> question as to when and how micro vortex cavitation occurs. When a
> boat is operating at high speeds, the water flow is highly laminar.
> When in stall, high torque operation, there is huge cavitation.
> Example was shown to me by a large Contractor operating a big sand
> dredge in the Red River producing sand for the concrete and road
> construction folks. They had a 50 ton dredge barge in the river being
> moved around with a 25 HP Johnson outboard. The outboard was operated
> at about 3/4 throttle (4500 RPM, gear ratio of 12/21 = 1.75:1 = prop
> RPM of 2570 in a near stall configuration created a huge cavitation
> situation. 6 months of operating the aluminum props would eat away all
> the metal at the blade root near the hub. When the 4 bladed hard
> bronze work props came out, a lot of these problem went away for the 4
> blade design was more suited to this stall type of thrust. Observe
> and you will learn. Oh! Jim, mt business partner was into the
> carbon/carbon composite business so we designed our turbine disk out
> of glass smooth carbon composite which is 10X stronger than steel.
>
> I built several of the turbines, one of which I donated to the Tesla
> Museum at Colorado Springs back in 1995. It operated on liquid
> CO2,with heat ex changer to make regulated 120PSI gas driving the
> nozzles at the disk. It had a built in alternator to show the
> generation of electricity from gas flow. Was neat. Dennis Lee bought
> all of the Museum property at Bankruptcy Sale. $5,000 cash!
>
> My Tesla Turbine construction bench in my 5200 sq. ft. lab.
>
> On 12/13/2018 7:15 AM, Mick Jekyll [email protected] [EVGRAY] wrote:
>>
>> Norm, How is cavitation damage to the disks prevented?
>>
>> This shock wave action answers all the issues with the low torque of
>> all the non shockwave designs, very eye opening.
>>
>> Oh and I was half right, he already was specifying a variable nozzle
>> like the latest Porsche turbochargers. Interesting how their
>> turbolag is just about non existant now.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018, 7:22 AM Norman Wootan [email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]> [EVGRAY] <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Since I am a graduate of Embry Riddle Aeronautical University and
>> spent practically a life-time in Aeronautics, I tend to
>> understand the operation of this turbine as Nikola Tesla designed
>> it and not like the shade tree builders envision it. The
>> Schifrin Photography of super-sonic air flow over airfoils back
>> in the day of NACA before NASA. opened the door of understanding
>> just how Tesla's Turbine really worked.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_turbine
>>
>> Quote, A Tesla turbine consists of a set of smooth disks, with
>> nozzles <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nozzle> applying a moving
>> fluid to the edge of the disk.
>>
>> DeLeval nozzle designed to achieve sonic velocities and energy
>> conversion in throat choking. see diagram
>>
>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Nozzle_de_Laval_diagram.svg/250px-Nozzle_de_Laval_diagram.svg.png
>>
>> Red line is Temperature and Green line is pressure both are
>> called Potential Energy. The Blue line is Kinetic Energy and
>> with proper throat design for a given condition you can achieve a
>> near complete conversion of Energy from Potential to Kinetic.
>> The Tesla nozzle was tune-able to achieve these conditions.
>>
>> In Fig 4 Tesla depicted the tune-able DeLeval throat to achieve
>> the sonic velocities needed to drive the disk with shock wave
>> adhesion.
>>
>> For super high efficiencies, the Tesla Turbine must be operated
>> with a condense-able fluid, water to steam back to water. My
>> condenser operated at around 40 degrees F. (partial vacuum). My
>> operating fluid was Refrigerant R-113 which gave me a vapor
>> density greater than air and was condense-able below the boiling
>> point of 117 degree F.
>>
>> This turbine can also be applied to condensing plants operating
>> with high vacuum. In such a case, owing to the very great
>> expansion ratio, the exhaust mixture will be at a relatively low
>> temperature and suitable for admission to the condenser.
>>
>> On 12/12/2018 2:54 PM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>
>>> Mick, Tesla knew DeLeval and since Allis Chalmers, Millwakee,WI
>>> was already employing the nozzles in their commercial turbines,
>>> he went to them to build his Turbines and test them.
>>>
>>> https://www.autoevolution.com/news/nikola-tesla-s-revolutionary-engine-still-lies-untouched-here-s-how-it-works-112254.html
>>>
>>> The Turbine tested by Con Edison, NY 200 HP
>>>
>>> The Allis-Chalmers version, 1 0f 3 built. 500 HP
>>>
>>> On 12/12/2018 9:12 AM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Mick, WRONG on your ideas regarding the Tesla Turbine operating
>>>> principles. In my presentation at the Steven Elswick, Tesla
>>>> Tech Conference, 2016, I went into great detail as to the
>>>> operating principles of Teslas' Turbine which is nothing like
>>>> you see, so called experts claiming. (Reason why I wanted Doug
>>>> to Post the DVD on YouTube). First of all, to achieve the
>>>> fantastic efficiencies that Tesla got was to understand super
>>>> sonic shock waves that adhere to the smooth disk boundary
>>>> layer. DeLeval developed the nozzle for rockets to achieve the
>>>> thrust needed for flight which was quickly picked up on by
>>>> Robert Goddard. A properly designed Tesla Turbine has DeLeval
>>>> nozzles which operate at about 1400 ft./sec. velocities which
>>>> is just above super sonic velocity. A short distance from the
>>>> nozzle the driving gases transition to sub-sonic velocity
>>>> forming a transition shock wave which imparts the full kinetic
>>>> energy of the gases to the moving disk. Remember that you are
>>>> converting POTENTIAL ENERGY (high pressure gas in steam chest)
>>>> into KINETIC ENERGY super sonic gas flow. NO ONE understands
>>>> this basic principle. Steven Elswick, Tesla Tech has my DVD
>>>> for sale.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> enter image description here
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_engine_nozzle
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Laval_nozzle
>>>>
>>>> Do some reading and understand the terminology such as CHOKED
>>>> FLOW to achieve super-sonic velocities.
>>>> Mick, It is all in your basic research and understanding.
>>>>
>>>> On 12/11/2018 5:05 PM, Mick Jekyll [email protected]
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> [EVGRAY] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Norman,
>>>>> Fantastic projects you have been involved with. Have had many
>>>>> mental exercises in advances to the boundary layer turbine.
>>>>> One of which is a more parabolic funnel type core with
>>>>> graduated sized disks and the variable nozzle addition
>>>>> similar to the latest Porsche turbochargers that overcome
>>>>> turbo lag. Also variable disk spacing would be trick but more
>>>>> to go wrong. So in essence a bit of Schauberger thrown in with
>>>>> Tesla for good measure. A tad bit more complex. Sounds as if
>>>>> you have had similar thoughts and already engineered something
>>>>> from both camps of thought.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 11, 2018 9:39 AM, "Norman Wootan [email protected]
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> [EVGRAY]" <[email protected]
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When Looking back into the 20 plus years of files,
>>>>> documentation, e-mail and Keely Net BBS dialog files,it
>>>>> would be a crying shame for all of this valuable and
>>>>> informative data to be lost. I have decided to post,
>>>>> incrementally a lot of information onto this group site
>>>>> for your research use if you choose. In retrospect, I
>>>>> have realized that many folks out there have stolen ideas,
>>>>> Patents etc. from those of us that have given information
>>>>> freely as did Tesla and even Hector. I have always tried
>>>>> to share knowledge for the benefit of all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Norman L. Wootan
>>>>>
>>>>> 13723 Lynndale Loop
>>>>>
>>>>> Abbeville, LA 70510
>>>>>
>>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> (214)907-0010
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Time line development of Technologies related to “VES”
>>>>> Green Energy Systems
>>>>>
>>>>> The “Implosion Vortex Reactor” (IVR) was the starting
>>>>> block of technology for the VES program.
>>>>>
>>>>> Due to my visit with Jim, in his home in CA. in the
>>>>> summer of 2001 searching for an “ultra high temp.” ceramic
>>>>> material, his intense interest was “tweaked” in this
>>>>> technology!
>>>>>
>>>>> I digress here: In 1980, I was developing the methodology
>>>>> for making hydrogen gas from basic carbon and water in a
>>>>> unique type of reactor vessel. In 1994, I machined and
>>>>> assembled the first prototype 304 stainless “Implosion
>>>>> Vortex Reactor”. Was not able to arouse any interest in
>>>>> the technology here in the US. An Investor Group in
>>>>> Berlin GE invited Me in 2001 to fly to Berlin and do a
>>>>> formal presentation of the technology at which time the
>>>>> Patent process was begun and funding for the project was
>>>>> set up. I went to Carson City NV. And set up the necessary
>>>>> Wells Fargo account and Incorporation for the funding to
>>>>> proceed. A 5200 sq. ft. Research lab was constructed on
>>>>> my 52 acre farm at Hubbard, TX for the purpose of
>>>>> prototype development. I was in weekly contact with Jim
>>>>> due to his interest in the Project. In 2005, the Project
>>>>> was funded ($1.5 million) by GAZPROM, Russia being
>>>>> represented by Her Deitsmar. My prototype development was
>>>>> funded at the $250,000 level. While I was machining out
>>>>> the two prototypes (one from 6061 aluminum to develop the
>>>>> CAD specs and drawings, and the second working, “proof of
>>>>> concept reactor” from 310 stainless steel) Jim asked me to
>>>>> assist him in the construction of a Vapor Infusion Furnace
>>>>> at Carbondale, IL so that he could produce a needed
>>>>> densified ceramic reactor unit! I have provided you in
>>>>> previous documentation the background info on this Program
>>>>> at SICU. In which we had a working agreement with the
>>>>> University. In the spring of 2006, at the “Proof of
>>>>> concept” test of stainless IVR attended by 6 Engineers and
>>>>> Investor representatives from Europe it was learned that
>>>>> John MacAllen Funding and Project coordinator has
>>>>> misappropriated $1.2 million of the Project funds. He had
>>>>> moved to the US from Berlin, GE and purchased a home and
>>>>> yacht in Florida of which we had a satellite photo of home
>>>>> and boat in the slip. GAZPROM, Russia took legal action
>>>>> against MacAllen and took possession of both prototypes
>>>>> and Patent Rights. See: both Euro and U.S. Patents. In
>>>>> the spring of 2006, Jim and I agreed to pursue the IVR
>>>>> technology using the JEP Patent Process to Patent around
>>>>> my basic patents. Jim had the technology to produce the
>>>>> required densified ceramics so as to operate the IVR at
>>>>> the optimum thermal environment. It was our intention to
>>>>> build out our version of the “Implosion Vortex Reactor” at
>>>>> the envisioned Victorville, CA Lab Complex when the
>>>>> project was adequately funded. To that end, Jim was
>>>>> working his heart out! Since I designed the IVR and wrote
>>>>> the Patents, I left a lot of the “technology” undisclosed
>>>>> so as to have the latitude for the JEP Patent Process
>>>>> which Jim wanted to do with our Patent Attorney. Jim gave
>>>>> me the big “atta boy” for having the forsight and thinking
>>>>> ahead! I have a complete historical book of the whole
>>>>> Project with all the Contact Letters with both US
>>>>> Government and Industrial Investors. I hand delivered a
>>>>> complete set of these documents to the George Bush Western
>>>>> Whitehouse at Crawford, TX for our President to review.
>>>>> The same docs were provided to DOE, Newt Gingrich and
>>>>> Senator Byrd of WVA. This will give you a great deal of
>>>>> insight into the IVR portion of our “VES” Program!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Next! The “Implosion Vortex Turbine” our “Prime Mover”(my
>>>>> vastly improved Tesla Turbine)
>>>>>
>>>>> To be continued in next message:
>>>>>
>>>>> Time line development of Technologies related to “VES”
>>>>> Green Energy Systems
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the second Technology for the “VES” Project: The
>>>>> Implosion Vortex Turbine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since back in the early 70’s I have been an “avid”
>>>>> Researcher in the Technology of Nikola Tesla. I have
>>>>> everything that has ever been written by or about this
>>>>> “genius”. Of very special interest was his Boundary Layer
>>>>> Turbine which he patented in 1913. After doing extensive
>>>>> research into this very efficient turbine unit I quickly
>>>>> came to the conclusion that all that were writing about or
>>>>> researching this device did not fully understand just how
>>>>> it worked for Tesla was very “shrewd” in writing his
>>>>> patents and never divulged all of the technology! I went
>>>>> to the very “top” internet sites and publications
>>>>> regarding the subject turbine and found that no one had a
>>>>> “clue’ as to how it really was intended to work at the
>>>>> “super high thermal conversion” figures. Bendix Corp.
>>>>> tested a 500HP version of this turbine being operated on
>>>>> steam and was astounded with the results. This turbine was
>>>>> abandoned early due to the lack of the proper metallurgy
>>>>> needed in the runners (disk) which had the needed stress
>>>>> modulus. Due to my background and Degree in the
>>>>> Aeronautical Discipline I fully understood just how the
>>>>> Boundary Layer Effect was utilized by Tesla to achieve the
>>>>> phenomenal thermal efficiency. In 1994, same shop that I
>>>>> machined the IVR unit; I built a museum quality Tesla
>>>>> Turbine to demonstrate the technology. I filed with the
>>>>> US Patent office the Patent Disclosure of a new very
>>>>> unique new hub design that eliminated all the labyrinth
>>>>> seal design of Tesla and booster the operational
>>>>> efficiency and simplified the construction of said
>>>>> turbine. At the International Tesla Conference, Colorado
>>>>> Springs, 1995, I donated this Tesla Turbine along with the
>>>>> Patent Disclosure to the museum and it went on display and
>>>>> was demonstrated to all museum visitors.
>>>>>
>>>>> After Jim and I addressed the IVR under “VES” his next
>>>>> question was “Norm, how are we going to utilize the
>>>>> thermal output of the IVR for power generation”? My
>>>>> answer, Tesla Boundary Layer Turbine, to which Jim said,
>>>>> “Please educate me for I have not heard of this before”.
>>>>> I sent to Jim all the documentation and drawings along
>>>>> with stress analytical formulas for the high speed disk
>>>>> utilized in the turbine. Since this turbine operates at
>>>>> such high speeds, Jim quickly showed me the stress
>>>>> calculations for runners (disk) that he would produce in
>>>>> carbon/carbon composite that would successfully operate in
>>>>> the required environment and would be impervious to
>>>>> erosion and could be surface finished at the micron
>>>>> level. I laid out in “Flow block” diagrams, the operation
>>>>> of the Boundary layer Turbine utilizing a high density
>>>>> refrigerant that had the operational characteristics we
>>>>> needed for a low pressure, low temperature very efficient
>>>>> turbine. To achieve the “off the charts” thermal
>>>>> efficiency, advanced Mechanical Vapor Recompression (MVR)
>>>>> Industrial Heat pumping technology will be incorporated
>>>>> into the System. We are able to achieve a very
>>>>> conservative COP of 20:1 Energy in vs. thermal output.
>>>>> This is totally achievable in the modern Heat pump
>>>>> Technology! (MVR) Heat Pump technology will be address in
>>>>> next segment. Our system is a huge shift from the current
>>>>> steam turbines which all operate at very high pressures
>>>>> and very high temperatures so as to maximize the
>>>>> extraction or conversion of thermal energy into mechanical
>>>>> energy to drive the generators (really alternators).
>>>>> “Carnot’ cycle” or method of calculating system thermal
>>>>> efficiency. Our System operates at relatively low
>>>>> pressures and temperatures vastly simplifying design,
>>>>> fabrication and operation and practically eliminates most
>>>>> maintenance requirements. Both Jim and I have all the
>>>>> documentation of this System in our files! This is a
>>>>> unique System approach to be prototyped and Patent Apply
>>>>> for at the Victorville Facility.
>>>>>
>>>>> No one has put together the “blocks” for such a System
>>>>> that has such very high performance and efficiency.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Next segment: MVR
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>