And tell me, do air molecules have more or less kinetic energy when heated?
And tell me, do air molecules have more or less kinetic energy when heated?
Usually ~100c difference, but as high as 160c difference. The bigger the difference the better the spool characteristics, partly why huge fart can exhausts improve response, bigger pressure drop post turbine, and what happens when the pressure drops like dubstep bass? Bigger temp reduction.
Stop spreading rubbish please. Just stop. Please read up on the Brayton cycle. Start from there then branch outwards. Also read some other thermodynamics topics.. enthalpy.. entropy. Stagnation pressures and such. Read about the volcity diagrams and rotating machine etc..Chene_Mostert wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 11:36A Turbo charger is not a gas turbine.wuzak wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 11:29It may come as a shock to you, Wikipedia may be wrong!Chene_Mostert wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 10:29A Turbo charger is not a Heat turbine, no combustion takes place inside a Turbo charger.
"In normally aspirated piston engines, intake gases are "pushed" into the engine by atmospheric pressure filling the volumetric void caused by the downward stroke of the piston[14][15] (which creates a low-pressure area), similar to drawing liquid using a syringe. The amount of air actually inspired, compared to the theoretical amount if the engine could maintain atmospheric pressure, is called volumetric efficiency.[16] The objective of a turbocharger is to improve an engine's volumetric efficiency by increasing density of the intake gas (usually air) allowing more power per engine cycle.
The turbocharger's compressor draws in ambient air and compresses it before it enters into the intake manifold at increased pressure.[17] This results in a greater mass of air entering the cylinders on each intake stroke. The power needed to spin the centrifugal compressor is derived from the kinetic energy of the engine's exhaust gases.[18]"
ηT = Actual turbine work/Isentropic turbine work
= wa/ws
wa and ws can be obtained from the energy balance of the turbine. Usually the kinetic and potential energies associated with a process through a turbine is negligible compared with the enthalpy change of the process. In this case, the energy balance of the turbine is reduced to
http://www.ecourses.ou.edu/ebook/thermo ... 060502.gif
The isentropic efficiency of turbine can then be written as
ηT = (h2a - h1)/(h2s - h1)
where
h1 = enthalpy at the inlet
h2a = enthalpy of actual process at the exit
h2s = enthalpy of isentropic process at the exit
http://www.ecourses.ou.edu/cgi-bin/eboo ... age=theory
It is a bit of a clue that turbines are studied in thermodynamics.
It can be spun with air, water. All you need is a moving media acting on the turbine blades. ( kinetic energy)
No...Joe ruled that out a few sentences before your quote. Most likely Mario Illen has pointed out something obvious to Honda that will be fixedFW17 wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 15:04???Joe Saward:
The Japanese have long had a tendency to work alone, without too much foreign involvement and it seems that the recent crisis has convinced them that they need to be a little more broad-minded and adopt a more international approach, as Nissan has done, for example, in its partnership with Renault. The public does not mind from where technology comes. The car industry is filled with quiet alliances that save huge sums of money by buying the technology of others and using it under your own brand. I would suggest that we will see a significant leap forward in Honda F1 engine performance after the summer break, allowing the company to end the season on a high note… You can read between the lines on the rest.
Honda and Mercedes have a deal?
In 2024, Illien will be 75 years old.Macklaren wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 21:16If Mclaren was smart, they'd bring him back into the fold on a permanent retainer with one eye on developing their own engine by 2024.
A Turbocharger is a simple mechanical device working on exactly the same principle as a water wheel. I suggest you get your hands on a unit. Feel it, smell it, lick it and appreciate its simplicity, then you will realise that you are trying way too hard to sound clever on old basic automotive technology.PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 17:37Stop spreading rubbish please. Just stop. Please read up on the Brayton cycle. Start from there then branch outwards. Also read some other thermodynamics topics.. enthalpy.. entropy. Stagnation pressures and such. Read about the volcity diagrams and rotating machine etc..Chene_Mostert wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 11:36A Turbo charger is not a gas turbine.wuzak wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 11:29
It may come as a shock to you, Wikipedia may be wrong!
ηT = Actual turbine work/Isentropic turbine work
= wa/ws
wa and ws can be obtained from the energy balance of the turbine. Usually the kinetic and potential energies associated with a process through a turbine is negligible compared with the enthalpy change of the process. In this case, the energy balance of the turbine is reduced to
http://www.ecourses.ou.edu/ebook/thermo ... 060502.gif
The isentropic efficiency of turbine can then be written as
ηT = (h2a - h1)/(h2s - h1)
where
h1 = enthalpy at the inlet
h2a = enthalpy of actual process at the exit
h2s = enthalpy of isentropic process at the exit
http://www.ecourses.ou.edu/cgi-bin/eboo ... age=theory
It is a bit of a clue that turbines are studied in thermodynamics.
It can be spun with air, water. All you need is a moving media acting on the turbine blades. ( kinetic energy)
A turbo charger can be taken pretty much isolated parts of a gas turbine (turbine and compressor). (If it is not a gas turbine then what else is it?!) The equations are interchangeable.
And no..spining a tubocharger with water doesn't make it gas turbine any more.. thats a water wheel. haha
Why so many people insist about mclaren engine? I dont know if they know something very important that mclaren dont know
If they had a spare half a billion pounds, too. Engine development costs at this level are absolutely insane.Macklaren wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 21:16If Mclaren was smart, they'd bring him back into the fold on a permanent retainer with one eye on developing their own engine by 2024.
No pressure drop, no temperature drop, so... only a change in velocity?Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 20:33regarding the supposed unimpeachable applicability here of the so-called laws of thermodynamics, consider that .....
16000 'Turbocompound' aircraft engines gained at takeoff from recovery turbines 18 hp mechanically added to every 100 hp 'piston' crankshaft power
without any drop in the mean exhaust pressure across the turbines and apparently without any temperature drop across the turbines
(the exhaust plume post-turbine was white hot from atmospheric combustion of fuel carried across in the exhaust by the very rich mixture used)
and free of cost in terms of extra fuel consumption
all this free recovered power came from the exhaust 'pulses' of high velocity/high pressure in the exhaust stream
this was a few years after the UK Govt bought a race-winning Norton motorcycle to investigate its volumetric efficiency that 'science' said was impossible
Stupid question time: why is this the case? What drives the cost here? I will go ahead and speculate that it might have something to do with the iterative nature of R&D which can be massively upscaled in this context. Then you get to exotic material and cutting-edge design costs & low quantity boutique manufacturing & associated high-cost expertise.mwillems wrote: ↑12 Apr 2017, 21:33If they had a spare half a billion pounds, too. Engine development costs at this level are absolutely insane.