Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Disc Shape

Expand Messages
  • Chris Vintinner
    Would it be effective to change the cross section of the discs in a TT so that they had a larger cross-sectional area at the center, something like a diamond
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 15, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Would it be effective to change the cross section of the discs in a TT so that they had a larger cross-sectional area at the center, something like a diamond of eliptical cross section. That is to say that the area the fluid would be flowing through would be smaller and the velocity would therefor have to be faster maintaining a more ideal disc spacing for that fluid?  Has anyone else thought about this?     


      Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
    • Fred Sorenson
      I was thinking along exactly those lines in the context of two-phase flow. That was the thrust of my earlier musing about low-quality steam . I m still
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 15, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I was thinking along exactly those lines in the context of two-phase flow.

        That was the thrust of my earlier musing about "low-quality steam".

        I'm still struggling with the dynamics of exactly what happens when you extract energy (AKA "initiate condensation") from/in  a non-superheated  flow...

        Somehow I don't think the guy who says he is cascading a whole series of grazing-incidence stages has the whole picture.

        People tend to induce vortical flow for the express purpose of centrifugally SEPARATING gas and liquid/solid phases!  What happens when you DELIBERATELY set up a situation where the extraction of kinetic energy INDUCES condensation?

        I think the answer has something to do with drop size.

        When the internal energy of the fluid is reduced to the point that gas molecules start to stick together, it's a whole new ball game.  Still- local accretions, it seems to me, would be nudged towards a larger radius where they would encounter a relatively faster flow.  Would that not tend to differentially disassociate the larger clumps and thus smooth the density distribution?

        Getting back to your thought about radially varying the cross section of the flow in the TT...

        Yeah, I'm also wondering if you might want to manipulate the cross section so as to minimize the size distribution of the droplets.

        What would a truly ideal turbine do?

        In the case of a readily condensable working fluid, it seems to me that it would input gas of arbitrary superheat and exhaust a liquid at the temperature of the heat sink with just enough velocity to satisfy the mass flow at the input...

        That might not be optimum from an engineering standpoint, but it's hard to argue that that wouldn't describe the maximum-energy-extraction scenario...


        Chris Vintinner <keebler1785@...> wrote:
        Would it be effective to change the cross section of the discs in a TT so that they had a larger cross-sectional area at the center, something like a diamond of eliptical cross section. That is to say that the area the fluid would be flowing through would be smaller and the velocity would therefor have to be faster maintaining a more ideal disc spacing for that fluid?  Has anyone else thought about this?     

        Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.


        Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
      • Chris Vintinner
        What sort of applications are you looking at using low quality steam as apposed to some other superheated substance? Fred Sorenson wrote:
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 17, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          What sort of applications are you looking at using low quality steam as apposed to some other superheated substance?

          Fred Sorenson <sea2fresh@...> wrote:
          I was thinking along exactly those lines in the context of two-phase flow.

          That was the thrust of my earlier musing about "low-quality steam".

          I'm still struggling with the dynamics of exactly what happens when you extract energy (AKA "initiate condensation") from/in  a non-superheated  flow...

          Somehow I don't think the guy who says he is cascading a whole series of grazing-incidence stages has the whole picture.

          People tend to induce vortical flow for the express purpose of centrifugally SEPARATING gas and liquid/solid phases!  What happens when you DELIBERATELY set up a situation where the extraction of kinetic energy INDUCES condensation?

          I think the answer has something to do with drop size.

          When the internal energy of the fluid is reduced to the point that gas molecules start to stick together, it's a whole new ball game.  Still- local accretions, it seems to me, would be nudged towards a larger radius where they would encounter a relatively faster flow.  Would that not tend to differentially disassociate the larger clumps and thus smooth the density distribution?

          Getting back to your thought about radially varying the cross section of the flow in the TT...

          Yeah, I'm also wondering if you might want to manipulate the cross section so as to minimize the size distribution of the droplets.

          What would a truly ideal turbine do?

          In the case of a readily condensable working fluid, it seems to me that it would input gas of arbitrary superheat and exhaust a liquid at the temperature of the heat sink with just enough velocity to satisfy the mass flow at the input...

          That might not be optimum from an engineering standpoint, but it's hard to argue that that wouldn't describe the maximum-energy-extraction scenario...


          Chris Vintinner <keebler1785@...> wrote:
          Would it be effective to change the cross section of the discs in a TT so that they had a larger cross-sectional area at the center, something like a diamond of eliptical cross section. That is to say that the area the fluid would be flowing through would be smaller and the velocity would therefor have to be faster maintaining a more ideal disc spacing for that fluid?  Has anyone else thought about this?     

          Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.


          Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.


          Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
        • McGalliard, Frederick B
          ________________________________ From: Chris Vintinner [mailto:keebler1785@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:15 PM To:
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 17, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
             


            From: Chris Vintinner [mailto:keebler1785@...]
            Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:15 PM
            To: TeslaTurbine@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [TeslaTurbine] Disc Shape

            What sort of applications are you looking at using low quality steam as apposed to some other superheated substance?

             
            I thought it sounded like a solar application. Household sized. These usually do not run a lot of superheat.  
          • Fred Sorenson
            Picture two chambers separated by a pipe. In the left chamber heat and water are introduced and the water transitions to steam. In the right-hand chamber heat
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 30, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Picture two chambers separated by a pipe.

              In the left chamber heat and water are introduced and the water transitions to steam.  In the right-hand chamber heat is rejected, the steam is condensed, and liquid water is extracted.  Because of the huge expansion/contraction involved in the phase changes, the two processes going on simultaneously should result in a high-velocity flow of saturated steam in the connecting pipe.

              If no energy is extracted from the connecting flow, the heat rejected at the sink is equal to the energy supplied to the left chamber minus the usual parasitic cluster of viscous losses, etc.

              If, however, you run the (saturated) flow through a turbine- the shaft work extracted can ONLY come from a phase change in the steam.

              If you are running a conventional turbine you are looking at blade corrosion/erosion from the condensate and, ultimately, turbine failure.

              It seems to me that the Tesla turbine, which is comfortable with two-phase flow, would be the ideal modality for extracting energy from such a flow.  The more energy is extracted from the flow, the more it condenses- and the more it condenses, the less heat is rejected (wasted) at the sink.

              Indeed- without condensation, there wouldn't BE a flow!  Why not combine the turbine and condenser in one box that inputs vapor and outputs saturated liquid?

              Why water?  Why not!

              Your feed water could be brackish/sea water and the outputs would be shaft work, distilled water, and brine.  If the process heat comes from the sun, all you've done is simultaneously solve two of the biggest problems (water and energy shortages) that face our species today .  Not bad for a day's work!

              Once you have all the water you need- and the sun is still shining- and you happen to have some corn squeezins around...  Hmmm...

              Chris Vintinner <keebler1785@...> wrote:
              What sort of applications are you looking at using low quality steam as apposed to some other superheated substance?

              Fred Sorenson <sea2fresh@...> wrote:
              I was thinking along exactly those lines in the context of two-phase flow.

              That was the thrust of my earlier musing about "low-quality steam".

              I'm still struggling with the dynamics of exactly what happens when you extract energy (AKA "initiate condensation") from/in  a non-superheated  flow...

              Somehow I don't think the guy who says he is cascading a whole series of grazing-incidence stages has the whole picture.

              People tend to induce vortical flow for the express purpose of centrifugally SEPARATING gas and liquid/solid phases!  What happens when you DELIBERATELY set up a situation where the extraction of kinetic energy INDUCES condensation?

              I think the answer has something to do with drop size.

              When the internal energy of the fluid is reduced to the point that gas molecules start to stick together, it's a whole new ball game.  Still- local accretions, it seems to me, would be nudged towards a larger radius where they would encounter a relatively faster flow.  Would that not tend to differentially disassociate the larger clumps and thus smooth the density distribution?

              Getting back to your thought about radially varying the cross section of the flow in the TT...

              Yeah, I'm also wondering if you might want to manipulate the cross section so as to minimize the size distribution of the droplets.

              What would a truly ideal turbine do?

              In the case of a readily condensable working fluid, it seems to me that it would input gas of arbitrary superheat and exhaust a liquid at the temperature of the heat sink with just enough velocity to satisfy the mass flow at the input...

              That might not be optimum from an engineering standpoint, but it's hard to argue that that wouldn't describe the maximum-energy-extraction scenario...


              Chris Vintinner <keebler1785@...> wrote:
              Would it be effective to change the cross section of the discs in a TT so that they had a larger cross-sectional area at the center, something like a diamond of eliptical cross section. That is to say that the area the fluid would be flowing through would be smaller and the velocity would therefor have to be faster maintaining a more ideal disc spacing for that fluid?  Has anyone else thought about this?     


              Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
            • McGalliard, Frederick B
              ________________________________ From: Fred Sorenson [mailto:sea2fresh@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 5:55 PM To: TeslaTurbine@yahoogroups.com
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 1, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                 


                From: Fred Sorenson [mailto:sea2fresh@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 5:55 PM
                To: TeslaTurbine@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [TeslaTurbine] Disc Shape

                Picture two chambers separated by a pipe.

                In the left chamber heat and water are introduced and the water transitions to steam.  In the right-hand chamber heat is rejected, the steam is condensed, and liquid water is extracted.  Because of the huge expansion/contraction involved in the phase changes, the two processes going on simultaneously should result in a high-velocity flow of saturated steam in the connecting pipe.

                If no energy is extracted from the connecting flow, the heat rejected at the sink is equal to the energy supplied to the left chamber minus the usual parasitic cluster of viscous losses, etc.

                If, however, you run the (saturated) flow through a turbine- the shaft work extracted can ONLY come from a phase change in the steam.
                 
                The condensation/boiling temperature is a function of the pressure. If you transition to steam then go through a turbine, the condensation pressure will be lower and the condensation temp has to be lower. This makes the heat exchangers larger as well I think.
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.