Friction Steam Boiler

[rileydad48]

Jetijs...

The turbine may require the seal, but if I'm correct, I don't think the pump
will require it. The air or fluid enters from the center and is directed to circumferance of the housing.. so all sides of the discs act on the fluid.

You could make a seal by cutting a groove in the housing just above the center inlet, wide enough to install a flat circular piece of felt, coated with lithium grease. It should be thick enough to touch the blade, but not allow to much pressure on the blade. Just an Idea.
I was thinking of an O-ring, but that might be to much resistance against the blade.

Paul

[rileydad48]

Jetijs...
Sorry for any confussion... I mean a circular groove with a larger dia than the center opening..
Paul

[rileydad48]

something like this..

[Jetijs]

Paul, I have thought about this and this is exactly what I also came up with. Rubber O rings would act as a brake even if oiled. Felt rings is the way to go. Of course industrial labyrinth seals would be better, but for a small experimental model this will do just great. Thank you for idea and the picture
Jetijs

[little_old_lady]

Well if the latest calculations are accurate then this device is little more than a home heater/water heater. Even if we can improve the efficiency of the steam generation by 2x using oils instead of air to conduct heat into the water then this device will still not produce enough surplus energy to power a steam engine to run itself.

My goal is to be able to generate electricity without using gasoline, oil, propane, or natural gas. Solar and wind would cost $100K+ to setup enough to generate 30 KWH per day.

A 3HP motor with a traditional boiler will require about 20lbs of wood/hr or 500 lbs per day or about 3 cords per month. At $100-$125/cord this kind of power costs $300-$400/month at todays wood prices (or free if you have 80 acres of wood in your back yard and a strong back), or about 3-4x the cost of todays grid power. It would take 30 years at $300 to $400 per month to make solar a better alternative than wood + boiler + steam engine. Even longer if you factor in that the surplus heat can be used to give you hot water and heat your home (6 months per year). The months spent heating your home are essentially free electricity if you consider my normal heating bill is $300 per month.

Has anyone considered using a different boiler design than the "drip system" to see if we can get more steam out of this device? How much heat is radiating into the air instead of into water?

[everwiser]

Labyrinth seals are typically used to allow ventilation while preventing oil/water vapor and/or sloshed-around (like oiling systems that use a slinger disk) fluids from migrating out of whatever device they're used in. To my knowledge, they are not meant for pressurized systems without additional seals. By themselves, they do leak if used in pressurized systems.

[nonubbins]

Well if the latest calculations are accurate then this device is little more than a home heater/water heater. Even if we can improve the efficiency of the steam generation by 2x using oils instead of air to conduct heat into the water then this device will still not produce enough surplus energy to power a steam engine to run itself.

My goal is to be able to generate electricity without using gasoline, oil, propane, or natural gas. Solar and wind would cost $100K+ to setup enough to generate 30 KWH per day.

A 3HP motor with a traditional boiler will require about 20lbs of wood/hr or 500 lbs per day or about 3 cords per month. At $100-$125/cord this kind of power costs $300-$400/month at todays wood prices (or free if you have 80 acres of wood in your back yard and a strong back), or about 3-4x the cost of todays grid power. It would take 30 years at $300 to $400 per month to make solar a better alternative than wood + boiler + steam engine. Even longer if you factor in that the surplus heat can be used to give you hot water and heat your home (6 months per year). The months spent heating your home are essentially free electricity if you consider my normal heating bill is $300 per month.

Has anyone considered using a different boiler design than the "drip system" to see if we can get more steam out of this device? How much heat is radiating into the air instead of into water?

The drip system is brilliant because there is no water in the steam chamber to flash to steam.(safer)

If the original used 1 hp for 2 blocks, then the new design with a roller twice as large with 18 blocks would need 18 hp to run!!! This is why I had been pushing for a hot water system but have pretty much shelved that idea also. The 5 hp/5 pair design I talked about above would only put out about 32,500 btu. with a 5' roller. But it would give a 40F rise in a 100 gal per hour. Its a start but still borderline depending on the heat loss of your house. And just like the very expensive "green" cars they have been selling, the return on your money would be years and probably longer than the life of the equipment. Hence the term "boat anchor". Which is why I'll concentrate on a wood boiler. I can burn scraps, large chunks, pallets, straw bales, yard waste, chips, corn, used oil, fuel oil, and coal. It will completely gasify those things and burn clean. Maybe I should start a new thread!

PS: We are still waiting for the actual hp info on Lloyd's new design. He's turning it with something, what is he using?

[rickoff]

You are quite right, everwiser but pressure will not be a problem in a Tesla turbine or pump. In either case, pressure remains low at the central portion of the discs. For example, a Tesla pump would be used to pump unpressurized water (or any other fluid, or air) from a reservoir by drawing the fluid in at the center of the discs. The high pressure of the outflow in a Tesla pump is caused by the centrifugal force of the rotating discs, which continually flings the liquid outward at high speed. In a Tesla prime mover turbine, pressurized air, gas, steam, or liquid is fed in at the outer periphery of the discs, and the pressure drops as it nears the center of the discs where it is then exhausted. You may remember that the 200 hp Tesla turbine used a feed of 125 psi saturated steam, and that the exhaust fell to 2 or 3 psi.

[rickoff]

A note to littleoldlady and nonubbins:

"Well if the latest calculations are accurate then this device is little more than a home heater/water heater. Even if we can improve the efficiency of the steam generation by 2x using oils instead of air to conduct heat into the water then this device will still not produce enough surplus energy to power a steam engine to run itself." - littleold lady

What in the world are you talking about? Lloyd Tanner gave us his test results in post #181, and I crunched the numbers in post #184 to prove that a 10 hp Green Steam Engine could in fact be operated continuously with 600 degree superheated steam at a pressure of 50 psi, and with a reserve capacity of 38.81 liters per minute. You really need to go back and read the facts, instead of posting disinformation based upon what may seem logical to you. Furthermore, the Green Steam Machine was used only as an example, because I knew the displacement and operating characteristics, and could therefore compute the volume of steam required to operate it at 1800 rpm. And still further, your assumption that Lloyd's original rotor design could not possibly produce enough steam pressure to operate a steam engine is fatally flawed. Lloyd tested his original design at 565F degrees with an operating pressure of more than 200 psi.

Also, all this talk of using 20 lbs of wood per hour to run a boiler has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, other than to show how superbly effective Lloyd's device is when compared to a wood fired boiler. Why would anyone in their right mind opt to use 20 lbs of wood per hour when the same amount, when used in Lloyd's device, could last 36 times longer? And suggesting that we should look for a better way to create steam than with Lloyd's drip system is pure nonsense. Even nonubbins can appreciate the brilliance of Lloyd's drip system, although many of his other conclusions are incorrect. Regarding some of those incorrect conclusions:

"If the original used 1 hp for 2 blocks, then the new design with a roller twice as large with 18 blocks would need 18 hp to run!!!" - nonubbins

Total rubbish. It may seem logical to you that if 1 hp was needed for the 5" rotor design with 2 blocks, that 9 hp might be needed for a 5" roller using 18 blocks, and 18 hp if the roller diameter is increased to 10". This is not necessarily the case, however. Lloyd chose to use a 1 hp motor to drive the 5" friction rotor because it did the job quite nicely with no overheating. The actual power required to turn the shaft is probably half that amount, and is the power factor we should be more concerned with when considering how much steam engine power might be required to turn the friction roller. Also, what makes you think that a roller of twice the diameter will require twice the power to rotate it? Are you figuring that it will be twice as heavy as a 5" diameter roller? It certainly doesn't need to be. It should be remembered that the 5" diameter material that Lloyd used for his original rotor, and first roller design, was very heavy and quite thick walled, having a center bore of just 1.625 inches. Lloyd used this because it was some material that he scavenged inexpensively at a local scrapyard. The 10" x 36" roller now being used does not need to weigh more than the same length of the nearly solid material used previously, so there is absolutely no reason to assume that it will require twice the horsepower to rotate it. One thing that you did correctly mention is that the surface speed of the 10" diameter roller will be effectively doubled from that of a 5" roller, and this is important to remember, because it means that without the need of increasing drive horsepower, we could cut the drive engine speed in half (900 rpm) and obtain the same frictional heat that was available with a 5" roller at 1800 rpm. And by cutting the drive speed in half, we cut steam consumption in half, which makes a self-runner all the more possible.

Your remark that the discussion concerning the use of a Tesla turbine with Lloyd's device was seemingly brought in "to save the day" has no merit and was offensive to me, as I am sure it was to others here. As I noted above, in response to "littleoldlady," we already proved that operating a 10 hp Green Steam Engine was theoretically quite possible. But the Green Steam Engine was never suggested as being the ultimate steam powered prime mover for Lloyd's device. It is only natural that we should discuss other options, such as the Tesla Turbine, that may work out even better. I believe that the Tesla Turbine will in fact provide results that are far superior to the Green Steam Engine. I will demonstrate the mathematics of a direct comparison in my next post.

I really didn't appreciate your assertion that Lloyd's friction device should be relegated to use as a boat anchor. You are overstepping the boundaries of both common sense and decency in making such statements, and are therefore skating on very thin ice here. I, and a great many others here, are very grateful that Lloyd Tanner has been willing to freely share his knowledge and experience with us, and will not tolerate attempts to sabotage this thread by those who would slander the inventor or the invention, and offer little but disinformation to confuse readers. Keep in mind that the purpose of this thread is to provide good information to persons interested in replicating and utilizing Lloyd's device. Any posts not conforming to those factors is neither appreciated nor welcomed here. You obviously have no interest in pursuing a replication of this device, so it makes no sense that you keep coming back unless your intention is to be disruptive, and I do suspect that this is your motivation. I would highly recommend to you that you either delete your offending posts, or at least edit out the offensive and disinformative parts from them. If you disregard what I am saying, or reply in such a way that further offends me, or any other of this thread's participants, I will not hesitate to demand that Energetic Forum admin bar you from any further participation. I suggest that you move on to subjects and threads that you genuinely are interested in, if in fact there really are any. And by the way - you don't need to start a wood gassification thread, as you have suggested that you might do. There are already two threads here devoted to that subject, and they can be found here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/30296-post1.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/33565-post1.html


To anyone considering participation and posting in this thread: Please keep in mind the purpose and subject matter of this thread, and keep your posts on track, courteous, and respectful. We will do our best to keep you well informed, and to answer all genuine inquiries.

Thank you,

Rick

[rileydad48]

Rick....
Way to go... I like your style... I doubt whether I could have been so tolerant... Believe me.. you are not the only one who saw a hidden agenda in their posts... Maybe now we can get on with the work at hand..!!!!

Paul...

[Jetijs]

Hi guys,
I found this video very interesting. Its about a friction welder. Amazing how much heat friction can make
YouTube - Handmade Friction Welder

[everwiser]

You are quite right, everwiser but pressure will not be a problem in a Tesla turbine or pump. In either case, pressure remains low at the central portion of the discs. For example, a Tesla pump would be used to pump unpressurized water (or any other fluid, or air) from a reservoir by drawing the fluid in at the center of the discs. The high pressure of the outflow in a Tesla pump is caused by the centrifugal force of the rotating discs, which continually flings the liquid outward at high speed. In a Tesla prime mover turbine, pressurized air, gas, steam, or liquid is fed in at the outer periphery of the discs, and the pressure drops as it nears the center of the discs where it is then exhausted. You may remember that the 200 hp Tesla turbine used a feed of 125 psi saturated steam, and that the exhaust fell to 2 or 3 psi.

No problem Rick. My main point was that a labyrinth won't stop pressurized systems from leaking.

Being that efficiency is the name of the game, any loss of heat, pressure, or fluid is a loss that will have a negative impact on the overall efficiency rating. Of course, depending on the application it may be negligible or maybe it will be less than the drag of a lip seal on a shaft but, either way, it needs to be taken into consideration.

[Jetijs]

I decided better to make the motor version of the turbine rather than pump.
The turbine casing is ready and I got the felt. Now I only need to machine the shaft and two bearing holders and we are done




Thanks,
Jetijs

[rileydad48]

Jetijs....
Nice.. very nice... should give you some very good result... let us know..

Paul

[rileydad48]

Hi everyone ...
A question... Measuring RPM'S loaded and unloaded, intake and exhaust pressures is fairly easy.. but how would one go about establishing a HP rating for Tesla's motor.. As a somewhat educated guess, I chose to use a 12" turbine to use with my self-runner design. I chose that size based on the 200hp working model. But truthfully, I don't know.. I really think Tanner's Boiler
will supply more than enough heat and pressure to make it turn, even shortened to the 18" roller that I planned. I was thinking pressure some where around 80-100 psi ( can be regulated to increase or decrease the rpms) If I were to use an electric motor to turn the 8" by 18" roller, I'm pretty sure 2hp would work. The self runner idea also turns a 48vdc, 6Hp motor/gennerator.. to utilies the whole potential of Tanner's Design.. My question is this.. am I over powered or under powered?? Any thoughts, suggestion?? any Calculation?? Or is this gonna be a build it and see.. project... which in itself will be interesting and fun..

Thanks...
Paul