Bedini RPX Sideband Generator



Monero XMR

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Tesla's Magnificent Mechanical Oscillator Fluid Heat Engine

  1. #11
    Senior Member Tom C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Pacific Northwest
    if you subscribe to the thread you will get notifications daily.

    Tom C

    experimental Kits, chargers and solar trackers

  2. #12
    VI) More Fun Stuff with the Square Wooden Atmo-Engine

    A) Tweaking Piston Dimensions: In the second post, 'II) Components and Operation', it was mentioned that ".. the power Piston itself can be viewed as being composed of five equal width longitudinal sections (5N), with two circumferential grooves separating the end sections from the central section." While true, in actuality this is a somewhat limited view of convenience for while the dimensions of the mirror image pairs should match each other, i.e. A should be the same as A', and B should be the same as B', the A pair do not have to match either the B pair or the center section 'C'. From a functional perspective all that is really important is that each section performs its required valving action with the cylinder ports at the right time and in the correct sequence as the following graphic panel hopefully demonstrates.

    B) A Non-hydraulic Wooden Internal Compressor Design: In the fourth post, 'IV) The Tesla - Giffard Combine', it was mentioned that: "Normal mechanical compressors are separated from the pressure tank and treat the heat-of-compression, along with the increased pressure potential, as a waste product which is radiated away from the housing and pipes. Internal compression as the name implies, moves the act of compression inside the pressure vessel. While there are various ways this can be accomplished, for our purpose here we will focus on combining Tesla's Mechanical Oscillator with the venturi jet injector."

    It was further pointed out that the actual pressurization or compression of the ambient air was not directly done mechanically but rather by the pressurized fluid inside the pressure tank once the ambient air was drawn into the tank via the operation of the venturi injector. Here, first in a generic overview and then in an atmo adaptation, is offered a somewhat less elegant method devised for a low pressure wooden design but which could perhaps be modified to function in more robust devices.

    The following animation demonstrates one approach to applying this concept to a Magnificently Fun Square Wooden Atmo-Engine:

    __________________________________________________ ______________

    @ C. Kurtz 2014 This content is offered under CreativeCommons by sa-3.0

  3. #13
    A Magnificent Mechanical Oscillator Fluid Heat Engine based Story!

    A couple of years ago I came across Ted Chiang's excellent short story 'Exhalation' which told a tale of Lord Kelvin's heat death of the universe theory, in a science fiction setting. Being an adherent of Tesla's opposite view of things didn't interfere with my enjoyment of the story but it did motivate me to reply somehow to set the record straight as it were. Here is the result, a shameless fan fiction follow-up revolving around the Tesla-Giffard combine theories touted in this thread.

    Am not sure this forum is the correct place for a story, much less one of mine, but Aaron is such a push over at times I thought I'd give it a shot.. anyway, just in case pasting 36k words or so is a little much, instead of the whole thing here is a link, Inspiration, to the thing as a pdf - it's only 10 pages. I took a little literary license in places just for story purposes of course.. Probably the only people who might find it worth reading are those of you who have for whatever insane reason read through this thread and have gotten here - anyone else will most probably find it either sadly lacking or boring.. oh, well

    Ted Chiang offers his much better written story for free, and I would very strongly recommend reading 'Exhalation' first, as my story takes place in his universe. You can download it at: - Ted Chiang.html

    btw: I've never used this hosting site before, but did check its rating which is pretty good. If there are any problems with the download let me know.

    btw-II: Sometimes when I click on the link it just goes to the home page and not to the pdf. In that case you can run down the page and find a Download link, or just copy the following link and paste it in a new window:
    Last edited by ckurtz; 10-22-2015 at 10:56 PM. Reason: problems with the link

  4. #14
    VII) The Tesla-Coanda True Flight Levitator
    or, The Jetson's Levitating Family Car – Sort of

    Most of this was lifted from a longer paper I wrote a while back on prop design, and mainly focuses on the contributions of Henri Coanda. However, if you have time you might look up the airfoil driven GreenBird, which on March 26, 2009 at Ivanpah Dry Lake, set a wind power only land speed record of 126.2 mph in a 30 mph wind.

    Conventional thought has it that propellers provide thrust by pushing against the surrounding air, that is why when they were first used they were referred to as aerial screws. However, modern props are also airfoils which, like a wing, create lift, but in the direction of the craft's movement.

    Like other discussions in this thread this one at its heart, deals with Bernoulli's Principle, which basically says that the faster a fluid stream moves along a pathway, the lower its lateral pressure against its surrounding environment. That is the basis of how the Tesla-Giffard venturi jet injectors we discussed earlier are theoretically capable of creating self-running hydraulic engines. However, in this case we will be looking at spinning airfoils powered by those very same engines providing the low pressure frontal area by flinging encountered air molecules laterally off to the side, while the surrounding air mass provides the motive axial pushing power against the airfoil's non-rotating base.

    What this means is that there is very little or none of the prop blast which is associated with conventional prop designs. This is really close to true flight, as it is more along the lines of levitation than anything else we have devised.

    This method will allow for the realization of visions of vehicles that can hover next to a steep mountain side or building, while providing a stable platform for activities such as picking up your Chinese take out from the 20th floor drive through window.

    Muck, ice, snow drifts, fallen trees, etc. become inconsequential with true flight vehicles. Take off straight up or float along a few inches off the ground. Amble along like a snail or streak off faster than a commercial airliner. Hover as long as you like at any reasonable altitude, over fields of grain, flowers, or people and never worry about prop-wash thrashing everything behind and below.

    How does it work? Well, if you've read this far in this thread you are of course aware of the true nature of air pressure, right? Remember, all those crazy air molecules bashing each other in random insanity, such as what is going on right in your face at this very instant, yet you don't feel a thing and the whole air mass goes nowhere, except maybe sometimes as a cold draft down the back of your neck. That's it. Simple, yes?

    Okay, so you don't get it. That's okay, few got it back when Coanda first pointed it out. Think about a disc 40 inches in diameter (yes, metrics would make this much more logical, but, sorry..) Such a disc has a surface area close to 1,256 sq. in. - let's just call it 1,200 sq. in. for now. Okay, if you were a hover craft fan (pun intended) you could put a blower on it and a flexible bottom circumferential seal, and by boosting the pressure in the plenum by 5 lbs/sq. in. you could achieve a theoretical lift capability of 6,000 lbs!

    But it won't fly, you say. True, it can't - you lose that seal and down you go. It can cross bodies of water though, especially if you make it an inflatable, and there are some really nice designs for doing just that. But we want something that will levitate in the air, so onward and upward...

    Okay, so I hear you, you're saying: "Look, dummy, helicopters hover; so, use spinning blades!" Uggh... we want an air jeep that can hover right up against a cliff face with no down draft. Choppers blades are really long relative to their aircraft frames and won't let you get up close and personal, besides blowing everything below you away. However, you are half right, I'll give you that much. So, on to the second partner in this Tesla-Coanda True Flight combine:

    Henri Coanda was the guy after whom the Coanda Effect was named. However, while the Coanda Effect is well known in various circles today, his propulsion design based on the same concepts never gained acceptance - fated it seems to live on only in an obscure seldom remembered niche in aviation history.

    Here are a couple drawings from Henri's 1938 patent application for a 'Propelling Device'. Amusing, are they not? Like something out of a Mary Poppins' movie.

    Where are the blades for heaven's sake? Surely old Henri was pulling everyone's parachute…

    Actually, no, he wasn't. He was serious. Let's take a closer look to see if what is amusingly dismissed in establishment aviation circles actually points the way to a revolution in other not so straight laced aeronautical quarters.

    His device was activated by a pressurized gas (red arrows) flowing upwards along the axis and exiting through circumferential slots as a high speed flow over the convex shroud, creating a low pressure zone on the shroud's upper surface.

    At the same time, ambient air (black arrows) would be admitted as a low speed flow through a central opening and directed to the shroud's back surface. This more static mass would generate a higher pressure than that existing over the front surface engendering axial lift, or in this case: forward thrust without revolving blades.

    Here are some quotes to help you understand just what crazy Henri was thinking:

    "From the beginning, I wanted to do away with the limitations of current thinking - that a propeller was indispensable."

    "I believed a more effective motor (-) could be utilized by creating a vacuum in front of, or above the aircraft, into which the plane would be drawn. This is a natural phenomenon, demonstrated every time a tornado ravages the countryside."

    "In 1932, when I was first experimenting with this circular effect, I was producing as high as six tons of lifting power per square yard above the wing."

    'The Coanda Story'
    by: Martin Caidin
    Magazine "Flying" May 1956

    Did you notice Henri was claiming 6 tons of lift from a disc a yard in diameter? And you thought my claim of 3 tons from a disc 40 inches in diameter with a 5 lb/sq. in. pressure differential was crazy. Well, maybe, but only by half compared to crazy Henri who was obviously pulling a 10+ lb/sq. in. differential.

    Okay, so why did I say you were half right about spinning blades when Henri's design doesn't use them? Well, actually it does, but in the compressor or blower section that provides the highly pressurized air blowing over the convex shroud. In other words his design separates the lift mechanism from the air pressurization mechanism. There are good reasons for doing that; however, if possible why not combine them and eliminate a lot of extra weight and machinery.

    How to make that possible? Okay, back to the lead genius in this combo:

    Before Henri Coanda there was of course, Nikola Tesla and his 1913 patent for 'Fluid Propulsion'. This and later patents focused on his blade-less disc designs. They could be used to extract energy from a fluid and function as a motor, or impart energy to a fluid and function as a pump / fan / compressor. Like Coanda's stationary convex shroud, each spinning disc has a central axial opening through which fluid enters or exits depending on which mode it is in.

    If the primary goal is to create Coanda's frontal low pressure zone, what better way than to use spinning centrifugal discs to simply move all that impinging air in front off to the sides? Remember, the faster it is moved off the less pressure it can exert on the discs. Set the spinning discs on top of a modified version of Coanda's non-rotating contoured shroud – one mod would be to eliminate the shroud's axial inlet hole. Design Tesla's discs so the Coanda Effect ensures their exhaust flows along the curve of the contoured shroud. Add an extended circumferential perforated baffle along the shroud's stationary base to help create a low turbulence zone in the interior chamber it creates below the base, which should be either flat or somewhat concave. The more static air captured here will exert a much higher pressure upward along the axis than the air being spun off the discs can exert downward – thus engendering axial lift. If some of you out there are beginning to stutter: “Sha.. shades of Schauberger!”, you'd be correct.

    The lifting and propulsion disc arrays in this iteration would be spun by electric motors. The electrical power supplied by Tesla-Giffard 'Magnificent Mechanical Oscillator' generator sets, probably through a battery or ultra capacitor bank.

    Little Cessnas and such can do 100 miles an hour with an absurdly small engine while getting phenomenal gas mileage because they don't have to fight ground friction. They are unaffected by road conditions, the slope or grade of a road, whether it is flooded, drifted over by sand, etc. Which tells us that for the perfect vehicle we want levitation; and in the Tesla-Coanda True Flight vehicle that is exactly what we'll have. Of course extreme gusty wind conditions are going to be an issue, but where there's a will there's a way.

    Again, this is all offered under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0, so have a great New Year and learn to Levitate!

  5. #15

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by taigameduaxe View Post
    What this means is that there is very little or none of the prop

    Pretty much.

    Modern propellers are generally airfoils which means their leading surfaces act like the upper surface of a wing, creating a very low pressure zone. The spinning bottom surface pushes against the air impinging against it, compressing it to a certain extent and creating a relatively higher pressure zone. This pressure imbalance creates the axial, or forward movement. However, the spinning bottom surface actually introduces an inherent limitation in the maximum pressure that can be created.

    The Tesla-Conada design basically splits the functions of modern prop design, increasing the effectiveness of the upper surface; and eliminating the spinning prop bottom surface by substituting a stationary base.

    Remember, on the average at standard conditions air molecules are moving at 500 meters per second. The speed of sound is around 350 meters per second because of the mean distance between air molecules and the oblique angles they collide at. This creates a zig-zag path instead of a straight line path for the sound wave which slows its straight line speed down to about 70%.

    If a prop was ever designed that could push air away at 350 meters per second, the energy requirements would be phenomenal. Coanda, like Schauberger, had the right idea, don't try brute force; instead set the conditions so Mother Nauture's Solar powered air molecules can do it for you.

  7. #17
    What this means is that there is very little or none of the prop blast which is associated with conventional prop designs. This is really close to true flight


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts