Andrew Johnston | 19/01/2011 15:53:08 |
![]() 7061 forum posts 719 photos | Les, Is it me, or is your link self-referencing? That could lead to infinite recursion. Regards, Andrew |
Les Jones 1 | 19/01/2011 16:16:48 |
2292 forum posts 159 photos | Hi Andrew, No it's not you it's me. I must have copied the link from the wrong tab before pasting it into the URL box. Hopefully this attempt will be correct. Sorry for the error (And for not checking that the link worked.) Les. |
Paul Horth | 19/01/2011 17:38:56 |
69 forum posts 18 photos | Gents,
Thank you all very much - i now have several references for high speed electric motors which I need to look into, to be driven by a turbine,
It will be no surprise to anyone that I do not plan to start making a turbine tomorrow! I will need to think a bit more about the design (thinking is cheap) then decide if I am ready to commit time and effort to actually cutting metal. If and when I do, I will be sure to report back to this forum. I have had a lot of help from here, just in a short time.
Les - I think that Dyson motor would have too much power for me. The impeller in Sir James's right hand looks to be the wrong shape for a steam turbine but I guess it coul be changed. One for bigger bys than me I think.
Paul |
PekkaNF | 19/01/2011 20:12:05 |
96 forum posts 12 photos | OT: I found a picture of the motor here: http://0.tqn.com/d/dogs/1/0/O/0/0/-/dyson-motor.jpg It's middle of this page: http://dogs.about.com/od/productreviews/fr/dysondc13animal.htm I would love to know details of the motor and the bearings, but it looks (completely off hand) to me a bit strange that the simple armature winding on the picture would be any good of frequency of the SR motor of quoted speed. EOT**** I found some comparison of different generator types used on (a LOT bigger) Microtrbines: http://www.electrodynamics.net/documents/electrodynamics_power_gen2002.pdf Casual look shows that layman is confronted with excitation problems and desingn complexities. This might make SR design less appealing. Is there any other alternative to produce a lttle electricity on turbine lookking structure? Turbines don't scale well. Anything in the domain of rotary piston or air vane motor? I have tought of cannibalizing a chep pencil grinder or a small die grinder. Or it really HAS to be TURBINE? Oh. dear! PekkaNF |
Ian S C | 20/01/2011 08:42:57 |
![]() 7468 forum posts 230 photos | I'v just been thinking, with a bit of work ,you could make an axial piston motor with a swash plate drive, it would outwardly look similar to a turbine, and be economical on steam, and have more power and lower revs., just taking PekkaNF's last statement,Or it really HAS to be TURBINE? Oh, dear! Ian S C |
Brian Baker 1 | 20/01/2011 13:22:18 |
![]() 229 forum posts 40 photos | I have read this topic contributions with interest, and hope that contributors will be interested in a photo of the turbo generator that has been fitted to my 7 1/4 gauge tank loco for some 20 years.
It uses a turbine cut into an 1 1/8 in diameter p/bronze disc, using an endmill to produce half moon shaped recesses. The jet of steam enters the turbine wheel on one side, and exits via the long slot on the top. Steam consumption is unnoticed, and appears minimal.
I used an expensive second hand swiss DC motor, having tried various cheaper ones, whose commutators gave up. I tried making the wound coil alternator type, but found it very critical with the gap between the rotating magnet, and the stator coil. running at high speed, I found the ball races moving in the aluminium casing, and after a few runs, it started to jam, doubtless due to my poor buliding technics.
The current set up runs at about 5 to 10000 r/min, and generates enough power to light 3 X 3 volt filament lamps, well enough to light the cab, the pressure gauge, and the water gauge.
Brian
Edited By Brian Baker 1 on 20/01/2011 13:26:40 Edited By Katy Purvis on 01/06/2015 11:32:45 |
Brian Baker 1 | 20/01/2011 13:26:01 |
![]() 229 forum posts 40 photos | Here is the photo
|
Paul Horth | 20/01/2011 17:29:34 |
69 forum posts 18 photos | Ian,
What attracts me about a turbine is the inherent simplicity, i.e. one moving part. The idea of making an axial piston swashplate engine, with three cylinders, valves, funny crank joints etc etc is rather more complex with umpteen smallmoving parts and does make me shiver. I can think of many problems with this, starting with the design.I don't actually need to make the electricity, you see. The turbine would just be a neat gadget like the one that Brian has shown. I'd still like to try an impulse wheel with through-flow passages, though. It would be parasitical on the traction engine boiler and the engine-driven pump.
One major problem with a stand-alone steam turbinewould beproviding an effectivewater pump, which would have to be driven through a massively reducing gear train. Even Prof Chaddock had problems, having to cut his own gears for this. He was trying to pump into a flash steam boiler at 500 psi though which is pretty damn ambitious.
Paul |
Joseph Noci | 20/01/2011 20:42:51 |
2 forum posts | Use one of the 3 phase brushless motors either from the RC helicopter or RC car racerworld. They are the 'in-runner' type, and esp the helicopter motors, will do up to 50 to 60000 RPM. The smaller T-Rex 'copter motors run from typically a 22 volt battery pack, and at 60000 rpm, ie, about 3000 RPM/volt. They are VERY efficient, and just as efficient as generators ( or rather, alternators) at 60000 RPM you will easily get 50volts at8 to 10amps from such a motor ( about 35mm diameter and 65mm long). Use 6 diodes to rectify and away you go. Although, I suspect that 500 watts is somewhat an overkill; in a steam turbine to deliver that power will be interesting...
There are lots of smaller motors in that type, down to around 80 to 100 watts as well.
The 'out-runner' type, where the outer case containing the magnets rotates, is not good for high speed, but great for high torque. In the 'in'runner', the inner rotor ( again, the magnets) rotates, and the outer plus windings is stationary.
Build the turbine first and see what is can deliver.
Ciao
Joe |
macmarch | 20/01/2011 21:41:03 |
147 forum posts 1 photos | As far as the bearings are concerned, perhaps someone here is familiar with the turbines used in model jets. I forget the manufactures name but the shaft spins in excess of 300,000 rpm.
ray |
macmarch | 20/01/2011 21:43:10 |
147 forum posts 1 photos | Just remembered, Shrecklin developed them. Like steam turbines they gulp fuel as fast as it can be poured in.
ray |
Ian S C | 21/01/2011 10:28:39 |
![]() 7468 forum posts 230 photos | Hi Paul, the idea was toung in cheek, but you must admit in would be a great bit of watch making. You could always go the other way, put a battery in the tender, and an electric motor in the casing. Personally I'd stick to a simple two pole rotating magnet alternator.
ray, I seem to have heard that they use ceramic bearings. Ian S C |
Paul Horth | 21/01/2011 10:46:57 |
69 forum posts 18 photos | OK Ian, sorry for being dumb! Not for the first time...
The thing is, some people are ambitious and talented enough to make what you suggested. Not me though.
Paul |
Richard Parsons | 21/01/2011 12:20:58 |
![]() 645 forum posts 33 photos |
What Mr Paul Horth really wants is to make a small simple machine which uses the waste and surplus steam to generate enough electrical power to provide light.He is talking that he needs of some 1 to 5 watts.Since the machinery he wishes to use is very small, in fact they are so small that they have dropped off the ‘bottom of the tables’.What do I mean?Most ‘engineering and physical algorithms used to make calculations contain ‘approximations’.These are usually derived by ignoring terms whose value is very small.I found that the efficiencies of a small turbines is very very small, so the requirement for an output of 1 to 5 watts could require an input of some 100 to 1000 times the required output value.Think about the ILMEC efficiencies where the winners’ efficiencies are of the order of 1 to 2% A workable small steam turbine generating a few milliwatts and powering small tungsten filament lights is fairly easy to build.Such a machine would be a rotor of the Stumpf type (with buckets end milled in to its periphery) or the DeLaval type used by Mr Jeggi which incorporates the magnets and bearings running on a stationary shaft The rotors Mr Horth wants to use are larger than those I used in my experiments. His is a 1.5” diam rotor and mine were from 0.75” to 1.25” diam.It is quite fun using a monotube boiler heated by two large butane burners and fed by a largish motor driven gear pump and a twin cylinder piston hand pump.In our conversations and letters Professor Chaddock’s work was leading towards the development of very small gas turbines.The modern approach is used by the successful gas turbines is different. I understand well Mr Bakers trials and tribulations.The blue and seized ball races, the nasty scream as gears failed, the destruction of the cases as a rotor disintegrates. So long as Mr Horth keeps the output requirements small (milliwatts) it can be done without the need for to high speeds, huge volumes of steam.The best thing is to make a rotor and casings and ‘suck it and see’.If the steam pressures are low you should be OK. Good Luck |
Paul Horth | 21/01/2011 13:27:24 |
69 forum posts 18 photos | Richard,
I agree with most of what you say. I would just note that Herr Jeggli has produced 4.5 watts from a rotor 30 mm in diameter running at 40000 rpm, and a boiler which fits inside a Gauge 1 loco and runs at 4 bar. So, it is possible to produce some watts without a huge amount of steam.
I would like, as you say, to make a small simple machine, but would hope to improve on the bucket-type impeller and thereby get a little more power, though I am sure that I cannot compete with the Jeggli turbine. For this I would expect to need a generator which would run in the range 20000 - 40000 rpm. I would not try to use a divergent DeLaval nozzle to get supersonic steam speed because I don't expect this velocity can be efficiently used in the simple wheel.
Paul
|
Keith Long | 21/01/2011 23:44:01 |
883 forum posts 11 photos | Not sure if it's been mentioned earlier but have a look at Tubal Cain's "Building Simple Steam Engines No 2". There's a simple turbine device with the wheel "pressed" out of copper sheet. It might just give some food for thought. Keith |
Richard Parsons | 22/01/2011 15:34:56 |
![]() 645 forum posts 33 photos |
The ‘Jeggli’ type DeLeval is not so difficult to make.Each blade is curved.The inner curve (on the inner edge of the blade) has a larger radius than the outer radius.I used to make two cutters by drilling a suitable bit of silver steel and then mill or file saw like teeth on the end to make a tiny hole saw.You set the thing up as shown in the attached crude drawing.As you will see most of the saw clears the metal blank The ‘outside hols saw’ is made similarly but has a smaller radius than the Inside saw. It cuts the outside radius of the blade.It will have to be made and set up by eye.However in the small sizes 20-40mm diameter the outside of the blade is not so important.
|
Terryd | 22/01/2011 16:17:14 |
![]() 1946 forum posts 179 photos | Hi Richard, I could engrave on the head of a small pin in 12pt font what I know about turbines. Could I just ask a question out of interest? Is the Stumpf type impeller you mention similar to the Pelton wheel used in water turbines? I hope I have the terms correct. Regards Terry Edited By Terryd on 22/01/2011 16:19:02 |
Werner Jeggli | 22/01/2011 19:44:04 |
28 forum posts 6 photos | Posted by Paul Horth on 21/01/2011 13:27:24: Richard, I agree with most of what you say. I would just note that Herr Jeggli has produced 4.5 watts from a rotor 30 mm in diameter running at 40000 rpm, and a boiler which fits inside a Gauge 1 loco and runs at 4 bar. So, it is possible to produce some watts without a huge amount of steam. I would like, as you say, to make a small simple machine, but would hope to improve on the bucket-type impeller and thereby get a little more power, though I am sure that I cannot compete with the Jeggli turbine. For this I would expect to need a generator which would run in the range 20000 - 40000 rpm. I would not try to use a divergent DeLaval nozzle to get supersonic steam speed because I don't expect this velocity can be efficiently used in the simple wheel. Paul Edited By Werner Jeggli on 22/01/2011 19:46:28 Edited By Werner Jeggli on 22/01/2011 19:47:46 |
Versaboss | 22/01/2011 22:23:53 |
512 forum posts 77 photos | Today the Feb. 2011 issue of EIM (dare to mention it here?) was in my letterbox. It contains the first of a picture story (no plans) of a Mr. Sheldrake, who built a (seemingly very successful, although the details are not out yet) flash steam hydroplane wit a turbine. Pictures show the turbine wheel (kind of asymmetric Stumpf type), the housing and the gearing (5:1). A very interesting article, I eagerly await the sequels. It seems that the record was 32 mph; possibly it is bettered now... Greeting, Hansrudolf |
Please login to post a reply.
Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!
Sign up to our newsletter and get a free digital issue.
You can unsubscribe at anytime. View our privacy policy at www.mortons.co.uk/privacy
You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.
Click THIS LINK for full contact details.
For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.