Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- From: Bill Ward <bward@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 23:06:59 -0800
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 01:52:17 -0800, your dog wrote:
It depends on friction rather than reactive momentum transfer, causing
irreversibility and unavoidable loss of efficiency. It's good for some
specialized applications, but not where efficiency in important.
friction != inefficiency. Clutches are frictional too. All turbines have
losses. It being good for some specialized applications was exactly what I
figured. Do you know of any such specialized applications where you see
them?
Running as a pump, I understand they can handle unusual liquids without
clogging. IIRC, one of the applications was pumping water containing
live fish without harming them.
Friction is in fact equal to efficiency loss, as it represents
irreversibility. You can't heat a brake and get mechanical energy out.
Again, IIRC, the max theoretical efficiency of a tesla turbine is on the
order of 60%.
There are some heated discussions in the sci.energy.hydrogen archive
back around 1996-99. Just search for "tesla turbine".
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- From: your dog
- Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- References:
- Tesla Turbine (again)
- From: your dog
- Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- From: Bill Ward
- Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- From: your dog
- Tesla Turbine (again)
- Prev by Date: Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- Next by Date: Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- Previous by thread: Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- Next by thread: Re: Tesla Turbine (again)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|