turbine vs engine

@krishthd-iE5MwO • Oct 26, 2024

Oct 26, 2024

1.5K

hi folks, check this out and give valuable or invaluble suggetions..

How about using a small turbine instead of an engine in a car to produce power.
The turbine shaft could be the crank shaft instead. the turbine can be run by a jet of water coming out of a compressor. this compressor is inturn powered by the car battery. How about it? I know the speed will not be much but will it really work?
give ur ideas please......😁😎

Like 0 Replies 24

Replies

Welcome, guest

Join CrazyEngineers to reply, ask questions, and participate in conversations.

CrazyEngineers powered by Jatra Community Platform

raj87verma88

@raj87verma88-ZpL2Wn • Jun 7, 2009

A lot of power would be needed to create a suitable head for the jet of water. And any way, a pump and nozzle arrangement would be better than a compressor.
0
raj87verma88

@raj87verma88-ZpL2Wn • Jun 7, 2009

Why not use an air turbine that works on an open cycle? Air is more compressible than water.
0
ashwinsraj

@ashwinsraj-hD0dhW • Jun 7, 2009

Do you think the compressor can generate enough torque..??
0
din_Power Engg

@din-power-engg-GyB0DZ • Jun 8, 2009

ya, obivousley it will work (but with a pump than a compressor), with some compromises with power, more maintaince cost, more complicated system of valves (since as we know, the valves which is going to handle water is not going to be as small as the present ones handling oil), Extra space for nozzle arrangement, more than 100% large fuel tank than current ones (because even to produce a moderate Power, we need more water to induce enough force on the shaft), the power to run a Pump (nearly 70% of power produced may required to run the pump, asking for more larger units to propel the vehicle itself), and more importantly the sound the system creates.

but, it has its own advantages like no fuel cost😁, much easier speed control system, no pollution etc..

conslusion: In future the need to develop this kind of engine may become inevitable with solutions to reduce the effect of above compromises.

P.S: the same thing applies to air also with pump replaced by compressor. But air doesnt need a fuel tank.
0
sauravgoswami

@sauravgoswami-UAfTlI • Jun 8, 2009

But with turbines we have to depend on external energies and natural source of energy is unpredictable,and turbines themselves dont generate power even in power houses generators are used to generate power,and engines are far more relaible than turbines as a power source!!
0
din_Power Engg

@din-power-engg-GyB0DZ • Jun 8, 2009

sauravgoswami
But with turbines we have to depend on external energies and natural source of energy is unpredictable,and turbines themselves dont generate power even in power houses generators are used to generate power,and engines are far more relaible than turbines as a power source!!
i understand you are a Electronis engg. The need is different here dude, in Power house we need to produce electricity, so generators are needed whose shaft is rotated by turbines, here we need only rotory motion to turn the wheel axle of a vehicle, which is well provided by turbines. so here turbine, instead of turning generator shaft turns wheel axle.

but, u have in point that natural sources are unpredictable and dependence on other engines.

0
Corvus

@corvus-xVfvAI • Jun 8, 2009

I didnt understand ur idea of making the turbine shaft a crankshaft..
0
din_Power Engg

@din-power-engg-GyB0DZ • Jun 9, 2009

I think it is possible that a Engine crank shaft can be replaced by a turbine shaft with little modificatios in its end arrangements of turbine shaft......it may be simple too since there shall be no need of complex forgings and special care in desiging the joints, which faciliatate in smootly converting the reciprocation to rotary as in the case of crankshaft. The only problem may with the special end arrangments in end as it is always tricky to avoid the mechanical losses associated in power transfer from a Turbile shaft to the end intended subject.
0
krishthd

@krishthd-iE5MwO • Jun 10, 2009

U r right there will be mechanical losses due to turbine being heavy and the jet losses as well. We can use a small and optimally heavy turbine for good KE of rotation. I know the system would be more heavy if we add on developments.
Can we use 2 jets one on the top and the other on the bottom of the turbine in opp. direction so that the speed of the turbine increases?
0
din_Power Engg

@din-power-engg-GyB0DZ • Jun 10, 2009

yes we can use ...but it serves the purpose only a little.....since if we are going to use two jets then then some more additional head is required to create the additional force which is to be created by the second jet....for this purpose we have to naturally increase the pump size or its power. ....again nearly the large chunk of the additional power that is produced will only be utilized by the power additional requirements of the pump....the two jet theory may be more efficient if we find a system which may compensate this additional head requirements........
0
Xunjie

@xunjie-umZmUP • Jun 13, 2009

Three reasons you can't replace an IC engine with a turbine:
1. IC engines are much more reliable and controllable than turbine.
2. The installation of a turbine(including pump&nozzle) is relatively complex and efficiency hence will not be as good as you expect.
3. Where does the batter power come from? By burning the diesel? If you want to use electrical power then the best solution is to use DC motor on the vehicle just like hybrid car nowadays
0
kashish0711

@kashish0711-H4bbxV • Jun 14, 2009

I cant go in technical details as its not my field
but it works
in fact there was a student in P.T.I.S. Tech-Fest who made a bike run of water. but with many problems.

1. The water made the vehicle unstable.

2. The water was compressed by some type of gas which needed to be refilled everyday. I forgot the name of the gas used (even though the gas was not very costly still proves problem).

3. Water tank/apparatus doesn't get very strong as making it very strong would make the vehicle too heavy.

4. The inner parts were subjected to corrosion if not maintained properly.

5. Speed of the vehicle was max 35 kmph.

These were the problems which were easily observable but I didn't spend much time learning it coz I had to go in my own project stand.

maybe this concept needs some innovation for increasing efficiency. 😀
0
virus.niru18

@virusniru18-Zey0wT • Jun 14, 2009

can air compressors be used to compress air and eject it on the vanes of reaction or inmpulse turbines..? that would be simpler and much lighter.. but the only thing i'm curious bout is that will the ejected air have enough power to produce the torque? please help
the prime mover can be connected to the battery.. to run the compressor
0
gohm

@gohm-F3UUpP • Jun 15, 2009

Yes, there are several companies making and researching air run vehicles. The most prevelent being a French company. I think I posted about it in the past, try a search and see if you can find it.
0
virus.niru18

@virusniru18-Zey0wT • Jun 15, 2009

but still i think we can be a and think bout it and make some research
0
pramod.pal007

@pramodpal007-OOkSqd • Jul 6, 2009

the above idea is not bad, but seems practically impossible
0
Rohan_sK

@rohan-sk-7ZbDkK • Jul 6, 2009

The idea of using Water Jets to drive Turbine Blades doesnt seem so practical to me rightly as Dinesh pointed out. The reasons being :

1. The Power produced by the Water jets would not be enough to dirve an automobile, if the weight to power ratios are considered.

We may require more than one pump or as Dinesh rightly said, or have a pump with greater Power spec. This will add to the weight of the vehicle (load on car), cost of batteries, motor etc.

2. The size of the assembly would be quite large with all the componenets mounted along with the water tank.

3. Please note that in Electricity Generating Stations, the Turbines work on a VERY LARGE Water Head created naturally by the DAM. So there is no INPUT Power in question there to drive the Turbine itself.

And the ones in Aircrafts etc are GAS TUBINES which are again a type of IC Engine using combustion of fuels for Power generation.

This feature is not available in our car model. Plese note the Source issue here. We have to use an External power supply for the pump, which will add to Cost, Bulk, Mecahnical losses ( due to more moving componenets).

With all this would the idea be still feasible. Anyway, we can still think further and come up with something.
0
nany_mech

@nany-mech-RHcVWv • Jul 15, 2009

Hi guys, nice response and a very good way to provoke innovativeness.

Coming to topic turbine vs engine....

we can make use of a turbine instead of an engine but the only thing we have to bother about is that we have to carry a huge compressor at the back of our vehicle. The size of the compressor will directly indicate the amount of power we can get from the turbine shaft, so if you want to have more power the compression ratio should be large which means compressor should be big.

Secondly the medium which is being used for rotating turbine blades. Air is preferred to water but there are other gaseous mixtures that are really good compressible. The life of turbine blades will be affected by type of fluid we use.

Don't get dissappointed by these points, I appreciate you for having such an innovativeness.....

Don't drop on this project continue your work....i'll look forward for others response.😁
0
kashish0711

@kashish0711-H4bbxV • Jul 15, 2009

using water wont work, we need something better, maybe a gas which could be resused again and again, it may have a provision to add to it's reduced pressure in every new cycle.
hm... let me think more, will be back in a few days with more on this.
0
Rohan_sK

@rohan-sk-7ZbDkK • Jul 15, 2009

For the use of Compressed Air, it is evident that the size of the compressor will go on increasing with the higher value of Power at which driving the vehicle will be practical. So I think this increases the Weight to Power ratio which is Low on the Efficiency side.

Secondly, the suggested use of some other More Compressible Mixtures than Air, I think that More Compressiblity only means that these mixtures can be compressed to a much SMALLER VOLUME for the SAME PRESSURE.

It means that the VOLUMETRIC EFFICIENCY can be Greater with their use. But please note that it is NOT MERELY the Volumetric Efficiency which is helpful here, but the HIGHER POWER OUTPUT that is required. More Compressible mixture can be said to have greater Volumetric Efficiency but NOT the POWER OUTPUT, as for it we still require grater Pressure produced.

In this case we will either have to handle greater mass of the gas or higher tempreature. Both these parameters are unfavourable for the running of the vehicle under consideration as we have to then either implement something for better cooling, and both will add to the weight of the vehicle.

Also the mechanical loses due to more moving parts, and greater noise and vibrations will be an issue.

This is because here, the use of compressed air to drive the Turbine blades is suggested (instead of water). It would be different case if the compressed air were to be used to ignite fuel in an IC Engine cylinder.

Please correct me if I am wrong anywhere ( always open to learning).
0
EDDY

@eddy-yryTyp • Jul 16, 2009

Great idea man but what abt the cost factor
0
jhbalaji

@jhbalaji-AH60JJ • Jul 25, 2009

ashwinsraj
Do you think the compressor can generate enough torque..??
Hope you need pressurized air for that mate...
0
virus.niru18

@virusniru18-Zey0wT • Jul 27, 2009

jhbalaji
Hope you need pressurized air for that mate...
stop being so depressive bout it guys.. We can make it work..
0
jhbalaji

@jhbalaji-AH60JJ • Jul 28, 2009

virus.niru18
stop being so depressive bout it guys.. We can make it work..
What are you telling mate????
0