3 Simple Ways to
Share What You Make

With Instructables you can share what you make with the world — and tap into an ever-growing community of creative experts.

PhotosPhotos

Share one or more photos of a project, recipe, or whatever you've made, quickly and easily.

Step by StepStep-By-Step

Share your step-by-step photos with text instructions of what you made so others can do it too!

VideoVideo

Share your how-to video. You'll need your embed code from a video site such as YouTube.

First Detailed View of the Tesla Turbine

First Detailed View of the Tesla Turbine
Working Tesla Turbine
Pulse combustion has been one of the most exciting new technologies considered for the Sea Bird. It is important that each system and design be put to the test to ensure it is truly as effective as we want it to be. These tests not only tell us what, if any, changes need to be made, but reassure us that we are on the right path to refitting the Sea Bird.

Pulse Combustion in a Working Environment
After the hot rotor section was fully assembled, we attached it to the turbine nozzle of the pulse combustor to test operation. The combustor performed properly, however, the rotor was slow to self start and could not achieve more than about 25rpm's. Problems were created by the small size of the 1.5" x 3" rectangular tube, which lowered the amount of gas between plates in the Tesla turbine. A majority of the gas wound up around the discs, leaving through the hot rotor case without supplying any power to the turbine.
30 comments
Mar 19, 2012. 10:57 AMgreenaura888 says:
I wasn't going to post this because I thought it hadn't been thought of, but further down the posts there is a suggestion to eliminate the exhaust ports in the disks and evacuate the gases through the shaft.

More disk surface extracts more work from the heat which would necessitate smaller exhaust area.

High Heat in used more, low heat out will be reduced.
Feb 8, 2012. 12:28 PMunclejoe says:
The design of Tesla's turbine is, I believe, based on a continuous flow rather than pulse.
Perhaps using a Gluhareff type engine as input to the turbine then directing the exhaust from the turbine to the intake of the Gluhareff jet might make things smoother?
Aug 29, 2011. 5:18 PMrimar2000 says:
I think that basically the pulse jet motors are resonant. Then you can't put anything at the input neither the output because that decress drastically the efficience.

Good project. Can you explain how do you made the Tesla turbine?
Aug 31, 2011. 5:53 AMrimar2000 says:
Years ago I have an idea: why not use the pop-pop principle of work, applied to pulse jets engine? All designs I have seen of pulse jet (PDE too), include valves, or inlet tube. I think it can use the same tube for inlet and outlet (as the pop-pop do). This reduces a bit the efficience, but the balance is positive, (as the pop-pop do).

Maybe a day I could made a test, but I have not so means or resources for it. Basically, a place where I can do A LOT OF AWFUL NOISE.
Sep 1, 2011. 5:51 AMrimar2000 says:
I not explained well, and not fluent in English, in addition. My idea is to remove the air intake (not fuel) valves, and that the engine take it directly from the tailpipe. Each explosion is a sudden increase in pressure, followed by a pronounced vacuum, produced by the exit of the burnt gases. This vacuum fills again with air the combustion chamber.

Air valves are a huge headache because of the great thermal stress to which they are subjected. Moreover, even if well designed, are an important obstacle to airflow. My proposal changes one problem for another, but much smaller. The engine would be far much simpler, almost silly, lightweight, easy to build and very very cheap.

Anyway, I think it can't be used for another purpose than propel. If you add anything at air inlet or outlet, it does not work.

I mentioned the pop-pop engine because it works in a similar way, and despite the apparent neutralization of forces, is very effective.

I hope you can understand, sorry for my clumsy English.
Nov 13, 2011. 6:05 PMostlandr says:
If I recall correctly, Telsa designed a one-way valve with no moving parts. It's in his patents online. If that could be made to work for a PDE, it might eliminate the mechanical air valves. Then a blower connected to the Turbine could maintain the intake airflow. Of course the next step is continuous combustion, creating the previously mentioned radial-flow gas turbine using the Tesla design.
Sep 2, 2011. 9:36 AMrimar2000 says:
Great! Glad that my idea is not so far fetched, and that is not only shared by you but you're doing the tests I would like to do for years.

I want you to succeed.
Nov 11, 2011. 6:13 PMostlandr says:
Think about exhausting your Tesla turbine through a hollow shaft instead of holes in the plates. I have a working proof-of-concept prototype on my kitchen table right now. You get more surface area for the same number of discs. I also use the spacers (washers currently) at the edge, which make it technically a hybrid impulse/boundary layer turbine.
Also, why abuse your Tesla machine by burning stuff in it? A steam boiler is old tech, but a modern hybrid boiler with automated controls will let you burn virtually anything combustible to fuel Seabird. Use waste heat from the condenser and exhaust to preheat the combustion air, and you can run very high controlled temps in your boiler, which means clean exhaust.
I also plan to work on an integrated turbine/generator, with the turbine case as the stator and ALNICO magnets as the spacer washers on the turbine.
Aug 29, 2011. 1:54 PMlemonie says:
For what reasons did you decide that this type of turbine was best suited to the application?
For example, is there any precedent for "Tesla turbine"-driven marine vessels (or anything else)?

L
Aug 30, 2011. 10:36 PMlemonie says:

OK, the turbine best suits your hot-gas source. Have you any idea of the combined thermal efficiency of this set-up?

L
Aug 31, 2011. 11:35 PMlemonie says:

40% overall isn't that bad, but 97% on the generator sounds rather too good(?).
I'd go with 80% for an electrical generator.
Interesting though, a lot of people just talk about using these things, you do right by building one and testing it.

L
Sep 1, 2011. 12:54 PMlemonie says:

It's interesting, more performance data would be nice - keep posting updates.

L
Sep 3, 2011. 12:45 AMlemonie says:

You burned your thumb, it's nasty like that (done it) - wear rubber-gloves next time.

L
Aug 29, 2011. 11:30 AMKiteman says:
So, you're trying to use the exhaust of a pulse jet or Reynst pot to generate electricity?

I don't think that will work so well, since disrupting the exhaust flow can cause back pressure- waves that mess up the combustion.

Personally, to generate electricity from the wide range of fuels that a Reynst pot can utilise, I would use the temperature difference between the pot and the sea to run a stirling-cycle engine to drive a generator.

Aug 31, 2011. 12:49 AMKiteman says:
You're testing on apples with a plan to run on oranges!

Rockets and PDEs are completely different beasts, working on very different principals. The rocket will give a constant stream of high-pressure exhaust. Restraining it through the plates of a Tesla turbine does not change the combustion conditions within the rocket.

As you have already noted, pulse detonation is a resonance process - air and fuel mix and detonate in pulses, the frequency of which are a combined result of the physical dimensions of the jet, and the speed at which the fuel burns. A large part of pulse jet design has to focus on the exhaust nozzle, getting it just right to match the exit gasses to leave the combustion chamber completely before they start to contract. If contraction starts a moment to early, the engine will starve itself of oxygen. A moment too late, and it will not retain enough heat to ignite the next pulse.

Obstructions in the gas-flow, even if they are outside the jet, unconnected to the exhaust, can cause back-pressure waves that wreck the resonance, break up the surprisingly-fragile toroidal vortices that mix the fuel vapour with the incoming air. I would bet actual money that your poor efficiency is not due to the throat of the jet, but because you have connected it to the Tesla.

Get your man Luis Mendonca to compare how easy it is to run the jet with and without the Tesla connected.

Actually, have you run the turbine from a jet at all? I see drawings of the turbine, I see photos of the turbine. I see drawings of one kind of pulse jet, and I see a single photo that might show a totally different kind of pulse jet (this one), but I don't see a photo that obviously shows jet and turbine connected, and I certainly don't see a video of it happening.

Luis' turbine design is odd as well - a single plate?  Why did he remove the others?  Tesla turbine efficiency relies on the interaction of moving fluids and the surface of the plates - more plates = more surface = better turbine.

And why does he say that burning propane and natural gas produced no "pollution gas"?  Has he not heard of CO2? Does he not know that water vapour is a pollutant?

---------------------------------------

I wish you luck in your wider plans, but I do not hold much hope for this particular part of it.

However, I also hope to be proven wrong, and look forward to seeing videos of it running successfully.


Aug 29, 2011. 4:08 PMPS118 says:
I'd like to start out with a
WOOT!
Followed closely with a
DETAILS PLEASE!!!

Pro

Get More Out of Instructables

Already have an Account?

close

All Steps Viewing
View all steps of an Instructable on the same page when you're a Pro Member.

Upgrade to Pro today!
4
Followers
1
Author:seabirdadventure(Sea Bird Adventure)
Kris Land a San Diego Based Technology Entrepreneur has entered into a purchase agreement to purchase the Sea Bird. The Sea Bird is a commercial fishing vessel, originally created as an Army Ship.