Chrysler had several turbine projects dating back all the way to 1954. The biggest problem was exhaust heat. They 1200+ degree temps had a tendency to actually set asphalt on fire (although regenrators helped cut the heat down to half that, paper near the exhaust -would- burst into flame). You have to run combustion turbines at high speeds (2,000 - 25,000+ RPM compared to lower-speed steam/air turbines) to get any kind of torque or effeiciency from them, and at such speeds vibrations are a real problem. (http://www.turbinecar.com/turbine.htm , http://www.allpar.com/mopar/turbine.html) Andrei -- as an FYI -- it will be damn near impossible for you to fabricate the components you'll need for the turbine that can handle the stress and the speeds, as well as maintaining precision weighting of each individual blade to avoid vibration that will blow it apart. Bear in mind also that you'll have to plan for centripital lengthening and deformation of the blades at those speeds, as well as with the heat and combustion pressures. You're also going to need to work with expensive, exotic alloys to have success at these speeds. If anything, you're probably going to have to find a way to adapter impeller blades from a very small jet, which are expensive, hard to find, and also only about 1/8 of the length you'd need for a combustion turbine. There's a reason you don't see combustion turbines used very often. I don't know of a single consumer or industrial use for these engines. Nonetheless, if you do end up giving it a shot, I'd love to hear more about what worked and didn't work for ya'! A better, more workable solution was developed by a man named Lear, of Lear Jet fame. His Lear Vapordyne was a steam turbine using captive Freon for steam. He entered the Vapordyne in the Indy 500 in 1969, but was banned because they could never figure out how to classify his "displacement". The real reason was, he could finish the entire race on one tank of fuel -- and that fuel could be anything from vegetable oil to diesel to alcohol. (http://lear-archives.com/learmotors.htm , http://www.exford.co.uk/Steam/Latest.htm) My thoughts on the matter, and to which I have done some amount of research, is to make a hybrid turbine-electric. Much like diesel-electric locomotives generate electricity from Diesel turbines and then power the wheels with electric motors (eliminating the need for comlex clutches and gearing), I'd like to use a R-134a boiler/generator combo to power GM's powerful electric truck motors -- basically electric forklift motors modified for higher-speed usage. At 50 lbs and 200 HP each direct drive, they are oodles of power for the money and weight. It would be -VERY- easy to mount these motors directly to the rear axles, completely eliminating the engine & transmission. The boiler/generator combo would actually only need to be about the size of two milk crates -- and would be extremely light in comparison. All of the items needed to do a conversion of this type are off-the-shelf components. I'd probably choose a CNG boiler for weight/emissions/value/ ease of use. Remember this is a steam turbine and not a combustion turbine -- there are plenty of these around. But, since I haven't even gotten off of my butt in the last two months to do anything to the car as-is, I doubt I would get to it anytime soon. In any event, if handled properly by computer or mechanical controls, steam provides an immense amount of motive power from very little energy. Given the right conditions, you can run the boiler at only about 150 degrees and derive a huge amount of power -- immense energy from temperatures where water wouldn't even boil. -Dave VIN #05927 -----Original Message----- From: timnagin [mailto:timnagin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 11:42 AM To: DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Video WasRe: [DMCForum] Stuck in the doldrums.... Andrei, If memory serves, Chrysler experimented back in the sixties with a few turbine powered cars. They actually built a few and handed them over to a chosen few in the general public to have them tested in a real world environment. Can you imagine the liability of doing this today? If I remember correctly the cars were very efficient but there was a problem with cost to manufacture or a safety issue with the turbine. I am really not sure. Dave Stragand may be a better source on this if you are interested in more information. Greg -----Original Message----- From: Andrei Cular [mailto:acular@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:27 AM To: DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Video WasRe: [DMCForum] Stuck in the doldrums.... I was kind of thinking about trying a turbine powered D. The DOT find of frowns on shooting frames out of the back of a car, but a turbine if you could figgure out how to make a small enough transmission to handle the power. Somewhere I have plans to build a small turbine, maybe 24" long.. Andrei To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/RN.GAA/HliolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN