the Quasiturbine
-
- I posted 500 messages!
- posts: 749
- Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
- Location: Brussels
the Quasiturbine
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try
This one still exists and holds the road :
http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/
and deserves to be used.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Quasiturbine
Among an innumerable collection of dreamers even crazy, like this one:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory: ... _Mechanism
.
http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/
and deserves to be used.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Quasiturbine
Among an innumerable collection of dreamers even crazy, like this one:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory: ... _Mechanism
.
0 x
-
- Moderator
- posts: 79121
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 10973
A small debate on the quasiturbine: https://www.econologie.com/forums/quasit ... t5287.html
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
the quasi turbine can not work effectively in terms of kinematics and therefore effective. Its limitation to the tire, by not taking into account the leaks related to the lack of tightness, the lubrication make that from its beginning the quasiturbine has never been used in thermal. This is another flop, despite the technical and intellectual interest that this represents.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
- chatelot16
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6960
- Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
- Location: Angouleme
- x 264
it's really the principle why make it simple when you can do complicated!
how to have a seal with all these joints
if you really want a rotary engine there is the wankel engine with a rigid piston in one piece, much simpler
but to make a powerful heat engine requires a combustion chamber as compact as possible to not lose heat by the wall: the conventional cylinder is close to the optimum ... the chamber of the wankel has surface too, loses too much heat, and gives a poor performance ... the quasi turbine will be worse
in air compressor it is the opposite: it is desirable to dissipate heat during compression, so the large surface of the rotating system becomes an advantage .... but there is other rotary compressor easier to manufacture than this quasi turbine which I do not see the interest
how to have a seal with all these joints
if you really want a rotary engine there is the wankel engine with a rigid piston in one piece, much simpler
but to make a powerful heat engine requires a combustion chamber as compact as possible to not lose heat by the wall: the conventional cylinder is close to the optimum ... the chamber of the wankel has surface too, loses too much heat, and gives a poor performance ... the quasi turbine will be worse
in air compressor it is the opposite: it is desirable to dissipate heat during compression, so the large surface of the rotating system becomes an advantage .... but there is other rotary compressor easier to manufacture than this quasi turbine which I do not see the interest
0 x
chatelot hello
Here again it is not really the case. Indeed it is the active surface of the piston that determines the power of thrust and therefore of heat loss. We must therefore compare wankel or traditional pistons of the same active surface. On the other hand the classic piston sees increase the surface of heat loss in descending it is therefore the lateral surfaces that must be compared and the difference must not be major, to see the advantage of wankel and quasi. Who wants to calculate it?
Not really! its main advantage (in nine) is to have a better sealing than the other systems usually proposed. Not insignificant advantage when the compression increases and the quasiturbine is utopian in that sense.but to make a powerful heat engine requires a combustion chamber as compact as possible to not lose heat by the wall: the conventional cylinder is close to the optimum ...
the wankel chamber has surfaced too much, loses too much heat, and gives poor performance
Here again it is not really the case. Indeed it is the active surface of the piston that determines the power of thrust and therefore of heat loss. We must therefore compare wankel or traditional pistons of the same active surface. On the other hand the classic piston sees increase the surface of heat loss in descending it is therefore the lateral surfaces that must be compared and the difference must not be major, to see the advantage of wankel and quasi. Who wants to calculate it?
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
-
- Similar topics
- Replies
- views
- Last message
-
- 28 Replies
- 39877 views
-
Last message by Remundo
View the latest post
25/12/12, 17:34A subject posted in the forum : special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction
Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 212 guests