Two Tiny Gas Turbines 202
Turbines are in the news this morning. bobtheimpossible writes to point out a BBC article on a Swiss turbine that runs at half a million RPM and generates 100 watts. It's the size of a matchbook. And af_robot alerts us to an even more diminuitive gas turbine on a chip, developed at MIT, that generates 10 watts — plenty for portable electronics — and should run 10 times as long as a battery of comparable weight and cost. A commercial version is 3 to 5 years away.
Warning (Score:2, Interesting)
gyroscope? (Score:3, Interesting)
Dupe with no more info (Score:5, Interesting)
Actuallly should be pretty tough (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd hate to see one of these things throw off a blade while it's powering your iPod on the subway, though.
Power generation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Power generation (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the future might be in portable power and backup devices - having a refillable, continuous 7-15kW power supply in a breadbox. With the right gear ratios, it could put out sinusoidal 60hz power for AC backup, though synchronizing the signals and preventing drift across the array would be a task in itself.
Reversal of use (Score:3, Interesting)
None have run yet? (Score:2, Interesting)
Material fatigue? (Score:3, Interesting)
Would you buy one? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd like to see more work on battery technology and more pervasive conductive surfaces so every place I set my laptop and cell phone down helps charge it.
Re:Uncontained turbine failure = bad Ju Ju (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you ever seen the results of a *contained* failure? A while back, as the Boeing 777 was just coming into commercial use, PBS ran a long special (or maybe a series of episodes, I forget) about the plane. They showed how they wrapped the engine in some kind of special kevlar blanket, then tested it by shooting something into a fully spun-up engine.
The outsides of the engine (the whole chamber) sort of bulged out maybe 6-12", then compressed back down to normal size. And that was it. It looked like something out of a cartoon, where (say) Bugs Bunny might swallow a lit stick of dynamite, then his stomach would bulge suddenly as it exploded, then he'd burp out a small puff smoke and be done with it. Really very cool, actually.
Anyway, I'd expect they could do something similar with this, too. Plus, even though it's spinning faster, the mass of the spinning parts is probably pretty infinitessimal, so even a total catastrophic failure at 1 million RPM might not be cause for concern. (as compared to the mass of the fan blades in a massive jet engine).
Does it twist your arm? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Article close to pure crapola! (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyway - who cares? Efficiency in small devices is MEANINGLESS. What matters is power and energy density by volume and weight. This has both in spades.
Batteries are incredibly efficient, but you need to generate the power to charge them somehow. They also (generally) have very poor power and energy density by weight and volume. Supercaps are great with power density and some press releases claim enormous increases in energy density but we haven't seen it yet.
These turbines are shrunken versions of proven technology. It seems very credible and promising. At small sizes and high RPM things like air bearings work BETTER. And those RPM records are for large rotating masses. These are tiny and easy to hold together. Translate 500k RPM into a linear m/s measure for a cm diameter turbine and you'll understand better. The edge doesn't even break the sound barrier (though it does approach it).
house droid power? (Score:2, Interesting)
http://store.irobot.com/product/index.jsp?product
6000C past temp limit of combustion gases (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, the scramjet is the ultimate exercize in drinking from the firehose. A normal turbo or ram jet engine has a diffuser to slow the incoming airstream to some managable subsonic value, burn fuel, and drive the turbines. Trouble is that if you are going fast enough, the diffuser gives you so much compression and inlet temperature that nothing burns -- if you go much above the flame temperature of your fuel, your combustion gases (mainly water vapor for the hydrogen-powered NASP) disassociate back into hydrogen and oxygen.
The trick to the scramjet is to only slow the incoming airstream a little bit, somehow burn fuel in a supersonic airstream, and expand the burnt gases to get more thrust than the drag created by this arrangement.
I am not a physical chemist, but I would bet that 6000 C is past the disassociation temperature of combustion of whatever fuel and air, and you are not going to operate a gas turbine at 6000 C inlet temperature regardless of what miracle materials.
Furthermore, efficient use of a 6000 C turbine inlet temperature requires very high pressure ratios -- doubt you get that in miniature.
100 watts of output power sounds goofy -- that is of the same range of my gas engine weedwacker that generates a lot of heat and burns through a good amount of fuel.