There must be some engineers on this forum, help.

Home Model Engine Machinist Forum

Help Support Home Model Engine Machinist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Loose nut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
366
Reaction score
2
Many years ago I built the "Schreckling FD3 64" miniature gas turbine, this picture is of not mine but is the same design and in it there was a shrouded centripetal compressor impeller that was made out of R/C aircraft grade plywood reinforced with carbon fiber "twine" and crazy glue. It was not very efficient but the design would work (rated at 75000 RPM's) if built according to the prints and many R/C aircraft have been flown with them, more so in Europe than in NA.

fd364.jpg


I have been researching newer design which all use the non-shrouded impellers out of turbo chargers for the compressor and was wondering if an idea that I had for a fabricated impeller would work. I don't have a CNC mill or lost wax investment casting equipment so those methods are out hence the "idea".

If the center, curved, portion is machined on a lathe, I have the specs and dimensions for the impeller in question and slot's where cut in it for the blades to be epoxied in place (this in it self would not hold against the forces involved and it would be torn apart) and then reinforced in the same manner as the plywood impeller of the earlier version to hold the blades onto the main part of the impeller, would this hold together.

In the earlier version it worked because of the carbon fiber/crazy glue reinforcing "rings", which will not expand with the centripetal force (fiberglass and even Kevlar will expand and cause a failure), that where put into the impeller. If these where put on the fabed impeller in the same manner it would seem to me to be doable if the engine was held to a similar rating. The newer designs with turbo impeller and inconell turbine rotors can run up to as much as 140000 RPM's and 2 or 3 times as much thrust but I'm not as interest in that as much as being able to produce an engine with all the parts, less the bearings, made by me.

Yes I could buy an impeller but where would the fun be in that. Plus the difficulty in finding the one that you need, suppliers for these in the home built turbine area have a habit of disappearing leaving a design without a source of parts.

If there are any injunears out there, would it work??? ??? ???
 
I work as a tooling design engineer and as Pat stated anything with high RPM I would not mess with unless you do the calculations for it and also follow all machining techniques and hold all surface finishes to the correct speck then there is material selection and then grain direction and the list goes on.
I have see what happens with just the wrong surface finish on a high speed impeller when it gives up not a pretty picture.
 
Buying an impeller would be a lot more fun than picking the parts of an exploded one out of your face. At 140,000 RPM there are some enormous forces and I, for one, would not want to be anywhere around something going that fast held together with glue.
 
That very same turbine you mention, if memory serves me, had such little margin of error that it is now considered an unsafe design and the homemade turbine group refuse to talk about or support it. I dont know if it is still allowed at any sanctioned flying fields anymore.
Used turbochargers appear to be the preferred source of homebrew compressor wheels these days.
 
Agree with the above.

As a certificated engineer - my advice is DONT.

140000 rpm and home made shouldn't appear in the same line - they are as far apart as I'd like to be far away from anyone trying this.

Do you have a bunker ?

Be afraid - be very afraid.

Jeez - I hate rain on anyone's parade - but those kind of rpm's need design testing and materials engineering galore - scary stuff.

Ken
 
Boy you guys just aren't any fun, oh all right, I'll see if I can find the right one to buy.
 
As a computer support tech in a public High school, I had at least 3 incedents of CD's exploding in new(at the time) Dell Desktop computers. The CD's were from a remedial reading program, and came in sets of about 10 CD's. The drives, IIRC, were 52x.
There were 6 sets of CD's in use, 5 for students, one for the teacher. The cd's were heavily used. I contacted the software company, and they refused to believe 'their' CD's had exploded, and would not provide free replacements.
Students reported they went off like shotgun blasts. As the Dell Desktops were still under warranty at the time, I got Dell to replace the destroyed drives. Fortunately, no one was injured, just really cautious about using the CD's. I had to replace all 6 sets after about 18 months, as the centers were developing radial cracks, presumeably from heavy use. I wound up copying all the CD's to a file server and using a virtual CD-Rom to 'Mount' them. At the time, the 'Virtual CD' application was a newly developed freeware.

Chuck in E. TN
 
I have to agree with Ken on this - as an engineer with many years work on large industrial gas turbines, I find it is difficult to get the inexperienced to understand just how much energy is involved in high speed rotating machinery.

I have watched many of the utube videos of home made gas turbines and have to wonder just how many people have been injured, or worse, by these things - you tend not to get many videos of the failures.

If you are determined to try this, at the very least, run it in a steel re enforced container, and stand well away - prob about 100m!

Ian
 
what's you take on the mythbuster's video though?

It would seem to me that they need an accurate non wobbling high speed spindle to do this correctly -- not the setup they used.
 
I watched that particular Mythbusters episode - I don't think a "wobbly" spindle was the cause - at some point harmonics set in - introducing a vertical wobble / bend in the disk - which went from bad to worse to BANG ! in short order.

It shows how many imponderables you are dealing with - and just how rapidly things go from nominal to BANG!.

The highest I've gone to with industrial machinery that I designed was 60000 rpm for testing the arming machanism on 40mm (Arnold Schwazenegger "Ill open that") rounds - gave me more headaches than I care to remember.

With my other hobby - slotcars - I had a 120000rpm motor blow in my hand - its only tiny but I still spent about an hour with tweezers removing bits of copper wire and laminations from my hand.

Loosenut - sorry to be a wet blanket - but as Boatmadman suggested if you must try it expect frequent failure and much experimentation to be the norm - and you need to be well remote from it during testing in a suitable "bunker".

When Frank Whittle lit off his first (radial flow) gas turbine - it "ran away" because of fuel pooling in the flame tubes - he shut off the fuel but the revs kept going up - everyone except Whittle fled - he stood there rooted to the spot - fortunately the fuel burned off before it blew up but the engine went well past its design limits.

Off topic - the Rolls Royce Trent 900 that blew up on the super jumbo was probably caused (they are being very tight lipped about it) by a hydraulic oil leak (ruptured pipe) causing a fire - yeah in the fire tubes - the engine used it as fuel - went into catastrophic overrev and the #2 turbine disk blew apart (somethings got to give) - the extra rotary energy defeated the designed and tested Kevlar casing. Bits of engine severed fuel, hydraulic and electrical lines in the wing.

I don't care how they mince their words - that engine blew up - they're calling it an "engine malfunction due to a fire caused by a hydraulic oil leak" - pretty creative huh !

If you read the whole story you will see just how lucky - thanks to the skill of the 5 - yes 5 - pilots on board (training at the time) - the plane could easilly have been lost.
http://www.aerosocietychannel.com/aerospace-insight/2010/12/exclusive-qantas-qf32-flight-from-the-cockpit/

Rotary energy is a mean SOB.

 
If you want to get a feel for the energy involved, you can calculate the linear velocity of the blade tips using the following:

V = (2*pi*r)T where v is velocity, r is radius if the tip, T is time for 1 rotation (seconds).

In case you dont know, the tangential velocity is the speed at which a blade would travel in a straight line if it became disconnected from the rotor.

Out of interest, the turbines I work with, the rotor tip speed is just subsonic, and with a tip radius of up to 2m and blades weighing up to 20kg or so, you can imagine the mess if one lets go!

Ian
 
ttrikalin said:
what's you take on the mythbuster's video though?

It would seem to me that they need an accurate non wobbling high speed spindle to do this correctly -- not the setup they used.

The more differentiated the mind the less likely to reach agreement. As a youngin into cars once ran up an old 283 Chevy in first gear till she sounded sweet, normal street racing, till the time it went BOOM. Flywheel at 6k+ came apart, still got all my toes but it was an awakening as to what can go wrong in a hurry. Silly thing even shot a piece up through the dash and took out the windshield.

Mythbusters does tend to keep things simple, hopefully with enough emphasis upon the results to keep young chucker heads safe. But then again. . .

Robert
 
Ken I said:
Loosenut - sorry to be a wet blanket - but as Boatmadman suggested if you must try it expect frequent failure and much experimentation to be the norm - and you need to be well remote from it during testing in a suitable "bunker".

I had planned on using a piece of 10" sch 80 pipe (.5" wall) as a test cell with the engine running inside of it. That should easily contain any radial shrapnel and I would definitely not be next to it.

If I do go with this method it is just a "what if" experiment and I expect a possible catastrophic failure. Making a new engine with a different type of impeller is not a big deal, just part of the hobby.

I did not plan on running it at any more then low RPM'S any way, using Stainless Steel for the turbine rotor instead of Inconel limits the speed and power output drastically.

Thanks for the advise.
 
Loose Nut,
I'm suprised that I'm the first to mention this. On the Home Shop Machinist's web site and on the "Networking" forum, First post, There's a thread about building turbine wheels. The balancing for high rpm use has yet to be addressed. BUT!!!!, While I have no experience with home built turbine wheels I personally think a turbocharger impeller is the best/only way to go. Furthermore I run turbocharged equipment at work on a daily basis and have for over 30 years. Due to all of the unknowns that a used turbocharger impeller has been subjected to while in service plus the unknowns after it's been removed from service I'd strongly recomend buying a brand new impeller from a recognised U.S. manufacturer of turbochargers. Model jet turbine rpms are NOT a trivial matter. You have been warned.

Pete
 
Back
Top