Because the hardest part of designing a jet engine is the coupled turbine part. If you don't have spinning blades inside the jet stream, you can get much closer to stoichiometric, and not burn up. An electric impeller jet theoretically could have only one moving part, not including valves. That's a whole bunch of high-performance bearings and seals you don't need anymore. With an uncoupled impeller you also can "spool up" practically instantly. It essentially becomes impossible to flame out. That's just off the top of my head and I haven't watched the video yet.
Forget it. The generator, motor, and batteries are too heavy to fly and have terrible performance for aviation. And the simpler and cheaper a turbine is, generally the thirstier it is. So you save development and procurement costs only to raise your operating costs. Some rudimentary number crunching will tell you it’s a terrible idea. It’s like all these inventors forget that the engineers that designed existing aircraft are really, really smart. If hybrid propulsion was the way to go, they would have done it that way already.
Makes perfect sense. Electric motors are easier to control. Just look at a typical quadcopter drone. Also no need to waste fuel and time waiting for the engines to warm up. Just jump in and go. You only need a smallish battery pack for a few minutes flight.
Think of the electric part as a transmission. The ICE part can run at max on the power curve all the time while the electric motor can run at any speed >95% efficient all the way up. Electric motors work better for quadcopter configuration too, while ICE provides greater range.
Turbine Engines are just as expensive to maintain as well. Turbine engines are also incredibly reliable. I had an uncle who had a crop duster powered by a radial engine, he was always pulling all nighters to rebuild the engine so he could get his work done the next day. When he got it he quickly came to love his new turbo shaft powered crop duster, super reliable even if he did have to pay someone else to service it.
Those old radials had a time between overhauls of 500-600 hours. A PT6 turboprop can go 3,000 hours between overhauls, and in those 3,000 hours you never have to change the oil, never have to change the plugs, never have to do anything other than periodic inspections. They just run, and run, and run. They’re expensive to buy, expensive to run, and expensive to fix on the rare occasion they break, but they’re extremely dependable.
@@singleproppilot That 3,000 hour overhaul is the kicker through. From what I understand, for the most part it's an inspection where they disassemble the engine, and in the US it's not mandatory. Although you would be insane not to have it done. I saw a TH-cam video where some clown recommended not doing it because it was to expensive. It might have been on Mojogrips channel.
Yup battery powered planes exist now, small 2 pax props, but flight time is like 30 minutes, as batteries just don't have the necessary energy density, and their useful load is very small, ie two 170 pound standard people and no more. What could be interesting though is a turbine powered generator supplying power directly to multiple electric motors, for a super-stol or VTOL application.
3-D printed bearings high velocity and pressure...for a high speed turbine compressor that is also printed at the same time and is perfectly balanced in 18 hrs? Sounds a bit unbelievable to me...inconel printers must be pure magic?
It's one thing to print it making it reliable over the long term is a whole different story. These aren't close tolerance, forged parts that have been balanced and inspected. I certainly wouldn't risk my life on one.
A printed engine is not maintainable. One part fails and recycle the whole thing but if you get it right with air bearings and the advanced thermal management evident it could be a game changer.
The power has to come from somewhere, and batteries aren't even comparable to liquid fuels for energy density (Li-ion ~300W*H/kg, jet fuel 12,000W*H/kg) (yes that's a factor of 40/2.5%)
Hi, the microturbine you are showing at 4:10 is actually a joint effort, the Turbomachinery and Heat Transfer Laboratory of Technion-Israel Institute of Technology has been leading the multi-disciplinary turbomachinery design process in collaboration with PTC, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Izmir Katip Celebi University. Furthermore, EOS Systems helped to complete the digital thread through implementing the efficient process for additive manufacturing. Using Inconel 718 powder, the final geometric proof of concept demonstrators were printed by The Israel Institute of Materials Manufacturing Technologies, affiliated with Technion’s Research and Development Foundation, on EOS M290 and by EOS Systems on EOS M300 printer. In addition to that, 13 hour print time is extremely optimistic at this point.
I'm an engineer and ASE Tech with 25 years experience...do you just say EVs are cheaper to build and maintain? Uh...you are aware the batteries are included in the build cost per unit, right? You know...those energy storing devices that are hell on the environment to obtain the materials, maintain the battery pack, and to dispose of? You are aware of this, aren't you? Sarcasm aside, anyone that thinks any type of EV, with our current level of technology and most likely for the next three to four generations, will hold a candle to a petroleum fueled internal combustion engine is delusional. EVs are fine for a very small, niche market...but won't make the least dent when it comes to almost every aspect of vehicle propulsion...and they won't in any of our life times. I take nothing away from the innovation and power of an EV...but electric vehicles have way too many drawbacks and shortcomings with current technology. For an EV...build costs, operating costs, maintenance costs, and end-of-life disposal costs are astronomical compare to conventionally powered vehicles...which pollute exponentially less than an EV for any environmental wackos out there. Fact..research it.
At the end of the video the 3D view of a single stage turbine looks really good, however, I really don’t think these turbines can be 3D printed and expect reliability, the main issues with single stage turbines is balancing of the compressor and turbine wheel, if not done properly this will cause all kinds of problems, like blown ball bearings and more, these turbines turn at about 100k to 125k rpm so the balancing is critical, also the fuel consumption is very high, I have a remote control jet with a 300 newton turbine and fuel consumption is about 1 gallon per 12min flight so I am not sure the single stage turbine is the answer if we are looking for reliability and lower fuel consumption.
Every 5 minutes I find a new "something" in TH-cam that will change the (make your pick} aviation industry, electric vehicles industry, oil industry, auto industry, bicycle industry, etc forever. None does. Now I can add yours to the list. Thak you.
1. NO battery meets the energy density of liquid fuels at weight. 2. Transferring the generation from an engine on the plane to somewhere on the electric network is only going to strain the network. 3. The energy density of vehicles would require a MASSIVE GINORMOUS supercalifragilistic build out to supply all the energy. 4. how long would it take to charge a plane with that much juice instead of pumping liquid into the tanks? Given all of that, it is about time someone started figuring out a way to generate power on board the plane, since it is going to need it when the battery goes dead.
In this setting I'm pretty sure "additive manufacturing" is a more formal way of saying "3d printing" so: "a turbo generator could be 3d printed if it's constructed through additive manufacturing" is circular.
They term was created to separate piddly little FDM and resin machines(3d printing) from the very large and expensive SLS metal machines(addidive manufacturing). Additive manufacturing has been around since the 80s in the form of standard FDM and resin machines but the terms were changed and 3d printing forked off of additive manufacturing in 2010 or so when the patents became public, and the general public got them in their homes. To put it into perspective, one of the the first commercially available FDM machines came out in the mid 90s, cant do everything a $100 dollar machine now could do, and cost well over $100k to own.
You can't print bearings in inconel and have them "last". You can't print machine ground finishes from any material. It takes a machine ground bearing to roll smoothly and last any amount of time.
As electric motors/alternators, inverters and batteries improve in all metrics, the simplicity and efficiency gains from optimizing engines for single-point operation using a battery to buffer demand will outweigh the diminishing drawbacks from taking the double-conversion with battery buffer path.
Marketing: "We need to placate insane eco-types and market an electric aircraft. Engineers: make it happen!" Engineers: "Here it is. The plane can fly 30 miles" Marketing: "Not good enough. No one will buy it. Make it better!" Engineers: "Let's put a Jet Fuel burning engine in it to power the electric motors and increase it's range." Marketing. "Perfect. We will call it eco-electric. Don't look at the carbon footprint..."
"XYZ" will change "ABC" forever! says the 10,000th video on youtube which is now 12 years old and clearly promoted by someone who knows nothing of physics or material science.
The usual eVTOL-BS. About as realistic as the rocket cars in 1950's Popular Mechanics. Dream on, just don't invest any of your money into these pipe dreams.
This video had good info, but the speaker destroyed his own credibility by mispronouncing a keyword over and over again. A turbin, which rhymes with pin and fin, is a kind of religious headware. Turbine rhymes with mine, fine, and line. Seriously, he came across as a smug loser because he kept screwing this up.
Pure BE aircraft are decades away because of poor energy density and the inflexibility of battery storage . Another factor that rarely gets mentioned is that conventional aircraft burn their fuel and so become lighter and more efficient. A BE aircraft will have to carry a full load of fuel for the duration of it's flight. This also means that a BE aircraft's maximum take off weight could only ever be the maximum safe landing weight, which limits the aircraft's carrying capability. There are other factors that would also limit their viability.
What do you do if the batteries catch fire? Have you ever seen how fast they burn? In a vehicle you may have time to get out but in the air.... no way. You will be incinerated before you hit the ground.
So running a turbine to charge batteries and run electric motors is efficient? A basic law of physics is that with each energy exchange power is lost. Let's face facts, electric powered aircraft are simply inefficient especially on heavy lift and long haul conditions.
Can’t see this working you need fuel for turbine plus a generator (these are heavy) the battery storage then electric engines. Not only is that a lot of weight but it is also many extra points of failure something you want to avoid in aviation. None of it will reduce emissions and before some smart arse says use hydrogen it has the lowest fuel density and the storage is pressurised. Modern helicopters are fairly efficient at converting fuel to lift.
Electric vehicles are cheap to build?.. buddy u name me one cheap electric vehical bc all the ones driving around i see are far more expensive then gas vehicles..
The most important selling point of fraudulent evtol companies is that they are "emission free". They would give up a substantial part of their grift and government support if thet claimed they will use an engine.
If you have to have a jet engine to charge the batteries for electric engines, or to power them for flight, it's a complete waste of energy and resources.
Permit me to offer some advice on titling videos: NEVER use the word "Will" when talking about our futures! There a lot of reasons people may -- or may not -- adopt the technologies you talk about, and you can't be sure which technologies actually get adopted until after they have been adopted. People adopt different technologies for different reasons. If they can adapt a new technology to their needs and it doesn't conflict with their mutually constructed social realities, adopting usually takes place pretty easily. If adoption requires adaptation of both technical AND social practices, things become trickier. That said, it's good to know that hybrid electric air vehicles are becoming more viable with new intentions. Keep up the good work letting people know about emerging possibilities!
*Our AI computer system now running at our office come up with a Pulse jet design that can be printed in metal but it has 40 baffles. Its crazy looking. No human could have thought of this!!!*
Fuel tank become lighter as fuel is used. Batteries do not become lighter as charge is used. An empty fuel tank adds minimal weight to an air vehicle. An empty battery adds as much as a full one.
сомнительная эта вся история с центробежными нагнетателями и напечатанными камерами сгорания . Форма лопаток древняя как мамонты . ВЫ лучше сделайте видео как на дизельном моторе 2.7 объема, коленвал ломается пополам в Ланд Ровере от знакопеременных нагрузок , потому что какой то потомок флибустьеров технологические базы не совместил . Недоверие к вашим инженерным решениям весьма высоки .
From a material perspective, it's an intriguing approach, but somewhat challenging because additively 3D-printed metals have very high internal stress. To eliminate this stress, numerous heat treatments are required, causing the component to distort and expand. Consequently, this distortion and expansion must be considered in the design, so that when the residual stresses are relieved during later heat treatment, the component attains the correct dimensions. The difficulty lies not only in ensuring the component has low residual stresses but also that it is sufficiently rigid, hard, and capable of withstanding high temperatures. For instance, austenitic steel is suitable for higher temperatures, or one might opt for titanium or alloys that can handle such conditions. However, these materials pose challenges in additive manufacturing, making it a significant problem to 3D print large heat-resistant parts or highly stressed components, such as turbine blades.
Union Pacific used some gas turbine electric locomotives in the 50's until the early 60's. Due to various problems they discontinued their use but information is available on line about them. The concept is similar to what is being presented here.
General Aviation (anything under 12,600 lbs) urgently needs a new, inexpensive ($150k) turbine engine in the 300 to 450 SHP category that can burn from diesel, Kero, Petrol.....that can also be retro fitted to old airframes.
Thank You!!! This is all Exciting!!! but Imagine Ancient Lemuria, and piezo electric quartz crystal nodule engines, and magnetic levitation vehicles/craft.
Making comparisons between a hybrid driven vehicle and an electric one makes no sense. Let's compare it to a non-hybrid vehicle. Does the hybrid system use less fuel or not??
This arrangement has multiple advantages. With a small battery pack you can use more power for take offs and maneuvers, while the power plant is turned to provide baseline power for cruise and basic flight operations. You can also have as many motors as you want for your design with no need for complicated and heavy gearing. The 3d printing process is also good for certain components, but really the only way to lower the cost of turbines is to build a lot of them and iterate the design process. The mass production of efficient turbine engines would best be done for automotive hybrids, but current laws and cafe standards make that an impossibility. The government is only good at one thing, and it ain't public welfare... quite the opposite in fact.
i can see this in 1man quadcopters. they can serve the same purpose as micro helicopters (herding cattle or powerline inspections) but are much much easier and less tiring to fly. also much smaller package to store.
Yes! Quite the Opposite!!! When you speak of "The Government" and they would be against me, except for a different reason!!! I'd see magnetic levitation craft/vehicles that had piezo electric quartz crystal nodules in place of where the motor would be, and leave all the fossil fuel in the ground. Empress Mary of Temple Lemuria (Lost).
Printed bearings? Bwahahahaha... I'll grant you can make pockets that will accept a bearing or seal, but printing them? Pull the other one. Some post-machining to get accurate, smooth surfaces is absolutely necessary, and flow-honing of the turbine parts will both prevent shedding of particles which could damage downstream parts, and improve the efficiency of the air flow. Don't trust press release hype.
With all these technologies that will 'change aviation forever', I wonder which one will come out on top. I am willing to bet my retirement 99% of these world changers will lezd to nothing and we'll still be bused around in a320 and 737 variants in 100 years.
Printing a turbine including all the bearings sounds not believable, fanblades, fanwheels or housings, ok but ballbearings ? Super high precision, and smooth surfaces looking at the imagery you have in the video that’s no way near the requirements…. It looks rough and coarse on the printed surfaces
Hey this young guy looks and sound like my oldest son 20 yrs ago LoL. Yes there are hybred (turbine / generator ) garbage trucks( constantly braking and accelerating) which are already being retrofitted. In US. The brskes last longer too with the regerating elect unit
You don't belive the range claims of evtol companies do you? They can't even stay up long enough to show 5 straight minutes of flight. Is there any evidence other than words they can go 150 miles without any added payload?
Tech-washing at its finest. Here's your revenue comment. But, it still needs to be said that this kind of tech-washing is no better than green-washing and is no better than fossil-fuel washing. And I know that this is tech-washing from RR
The biggest problem with trying to make electric planes is the fact that they weigh the same at both takeoff and landing. Fuel-powered planes have a far greater takeoff weight than landing weight. As they fly and burn fuel, they get lighter. Batteries will never get lighter, sacrificing cargo capacity for landing, not to mention range and efficiency.
Now we need water batteries for our cars I and my buddy Travis wood built one in 2009 he put it in a holy Grail jeep the car even ran on water Travis disappeared from school mid year im not joking myself and Travis were going to make a air battery after spring break
Seriously?!? EVs ruin everything! Beginning with your thinking. The weight of fuel is diminishes over flight time while batteries weight jest as much at landing as at takeoff. EV aircraft are at best a novely that will never work on a large scale and will never have the payload or range. We are already seeing major auto companies getting out of the EV biz and washing their hands of it. We know that the logistics of manufacture and support of EV land vehicles are unobtainable! Then there's the safety factor. EV fires are happening WAY MORE then being reported. And if you're on board with bringing that level of stoopid and foolishness into the air then please let me sell you a bridge AND an airport in the swamps of Florida. Trust me, it's a really nice bridge and an excellent airport.
And don't even get me started on the concept of 3D printing an engine. It's excellent for models and making patterns and non-working examples but there is no way you're going to build an engine that I would ever fly with.
You just need two stroke diesel with 60% thermal efficiency (average turbine comes with 30%). Turbines are great for long distance, high altitude commercial planes. But for short-mid range, low altitude - VFR... fuel efficient diesel, run on veggie oil... beats everything,
There will be one massive problem with micro-turbines: "ITAR restrictions" Yeap, you red correctly. These small suckers are soo good that you can easily put them into a missile or drone. I think this will be the biggest roadblock for that type of technology to take off on the civilian sector... Casing point, 10-15 years ago, P&W decided to invest into a new mini-turbofan as it seemed like the market for Mini-jets was about to take off... What stopped it? Government restrictions on that tech as it could be retrofitted onto a drone/missile with ease...
I got an idea. Get rid of the batteries and electric motors and just have the turbine drive the propeller or fan directly. Duh…
Because the hardest part of designing a jet engine is the coupled turbine part.
If you don't have spinning blades inside the jet stream, you can get much closer to stoichiometric, and not burn up.
An electric impeller jet theoretically could have only one moving part, not including valves. That's a whole bunch of high-performance bearings and seals you don't need anymore.
With an uncoupled impeller you also can "spool up" practically instantly. It essentially becomes impossible to flame out.
That's just off the top of my head and I haven't watched the video yet.
Forget it. The generator, motor, and batteries are too heavy to fly and have terrible performance for aviation. And the simpler and cheaper a turbine is, generally the thirstier it is. So you save development and procurement costs only to raise your operating costs. Some rudimentary number crunching will tell you it’s a terrible idea. It’s like all these inventors forget that the engineers that designed existing aircraft are really, really smart. If hybrid propulsion was the way to go, they would have done it that way already.
@@singleproppilot cool story bro
Makes perfect sense. Electric motors are easier to control. Just look at a typical quadcopter drone.
Also no need to waste fuel and time waiting for the engines to warm up. Just jump in and go. You only need a smallish battery pack for a few minutes flight.
Think of the electric part as a transmission. The ICE part can run at max on the power curve all the time while the electric motor can run at any speed >95% efficient all the way up.
Electric motors work better for quadcopter configuration too, while ICE provides greater range.
Turbine Engines are just as expensive to maintain as well. Turbine engines are also incredibly reliable. I had an uncle who had a crop duster powered by a radial engine, he was always pulling all nighters to rebuild the engine so he could get his work done the next day. When he got it he quickly came to love his new turbo shaft powered crop duster, super reliable even if he did have to pay someone else to service it.
We could get into this and spend all night talking about it but this does depend on design and how well they are maintained.
Gas turbines are extremely reliable and very low maintenance.
Those old radials had a time between overhauls of 500-600 hours. A PT6 turboprop can go 3,000 hours between overhauls, and in those 3,000 hours you never have to change the oil, never have to change the plugs, never have to do anything other than periodic inspections. They just run, and run, and run. They’re expensive to buy, expensive to run, and expensive to fix on the rare occasion they break, but they’re extremely dependable.
@@singleproppilot That 3,000 hour overhaul is the kicker through. From what I understand, for the most part it's an inspection where they disassemble the engine, and in the US it's not mandatory. Although you would be insane not to have it done. I saw a TH-cam video where some clown recommended not doing it because it was to expensive. It might have been on Mojogrips channel.
Turbo shaft or did you mean turboprop?
All pie in the sky, a sci-fi fantasy at the moment. A fuel tank gets lighter with time, a battery is a brick when full or empty.
BINGO! The battery VTOL fanboys can't figure this out.
Battery VTOL is not a planet saver. Just another toy for the wealthy.
Yup battery powered planes exist now, small 2 pax props, but flight time is like 30 minutes, as batteries just don't have the necessary energy density, and their useful load is very small, ie two 170 pound standard people and no more.
What could be interesting though is a turbine powered generator supplying power directly to multiple electric motors, for a super-stol or VTOL application.
3-D printed bearings high velocity and pressure...for a high speed turbine compressor that is also printed at the same time and is perfectly balanced in 18 hrs?
Sounds a bit unbelievable to me...inconel printers must be pure magic?
It's one thing to print it making it reliable over the long term is a whole different story. These aren't close tolerance, forged parts that have been balanced and inspected. I certainly wouldn't risk my life on one.
A printed engine is not maintainable. One part fails and recycle the whole thing but if you get it right with air bearings and the advanced thermal management evident it could be a game changer.
The power has to come from somewhere, and batteries aren't even comparable to liquid fuels for energy density (Li-ion ~300W*H/kg, jet fuel 12,000W*H/kg) (yes that's a factor of 40/2.5%)
Hi,
the microturbine you are showing at 4:10 is actually a joint effort, the Turbomachinery and Heat Transfer Laboratory of Technion-Israel Institute of Technology has been leading the multi-disciplinary turbomachinery design process in collaboration with PTC, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Izmir Katip Celebi University.
Furthermore, EOS Systems helped to complete the digital thread through implementing the efficient process for additive manufacturing.
Using Inconel 718 powder, the final geometric proof of concept demonstrators were printed by The Israel Institute of Materials Manufacturing Technologies, affiliated with Technion’s Research and Development Foundation, on EOS M290 and by EOS Systems on EOS M300 printer.
In addition to that, 13 hour print time is extremely optimistic at this point.
So why not skipp that electricity thing and go full jet?
I'm an engineer and ASE Tech with 25 years experience...do you just say EVs are cheaper to build and maintain? Uh...you are aware the batteries are included in the build cost per unit, right? You know...those energy storing devices that are hell on the environment to obtain the materials, maintain the battery pack, and to dispose of? You are aware of this, aren't you?
Sarcasm aside, anyone that thinks any type of EV, with our current level of technology and most likely for the next three to four generations, will hold a candle to a petroleum fueled internal combustion engine is delusional. EVs are fine for a very small, niche market...but won't make the least dent when it comes to almost every aspect of vehicle propulsion...and they won't in any of our life times.
I take nothing away from the innovation and power of an EV...but electric vehicles have way too many drawbacks and shortcomings with current technology. For an EV...build costs, operating costs, maintenance costs, and end-of-life disposal costs are astronomical compare to conventionally powered vehicles...which pollute exponentially less than an EV for any environmental wackos out there. Fact..research it.
At the end of the video the 3D view of a single stage turbine looks really good, however, I really don’t think these turbines can be 3D printed and expect reliability, the main issues with single stage turbines is balancing of the compressor and turbine wheel, if not done properly this will cause all kinds of problems, like blown ball bearings and more, these turbines turn at about 100k to 125k rpm so the balancing is critical, also the fuel consumption is very high, I have a remote control jet with a 300 newton turbine and fuel consumption is about 1 gallon per 12min flight so I am not sure the single stage turbine is the answer if we are looking for reliability and lower fuel consumption.
yeah, I doubt you can make a quality ball bearing from a 3d printer.
They are dreaming and as far as a 'new engine', Frank Whittle would certainly recognise it.
Every airliner has a turbo generator in its backside, it's called an APU.
Every 5 minutes I find a new "something" in TH-cam that will change the (make your pick} aviation industry, electric vehicles industry, oil industry, auto industry, bicycle industry, etc forever.
None does. Now I can add yours to the list.
Thak you.
Remember Graphine? Peperidge Farm remembers. It was supposed to change everything 20 years ago.
And will change the world too :)
This video was really informative and interesting, kudos. I felt like crying with joy but didn't because there was no emotional story involved.
1. NO battery meets the energy density of liquid fuels at weight. 2. Transferring the generation from an engine on the plane to somewhere on the electric network is only going to strain the network. 3. The energy density of vehicles would require a MASSIVE GINORMOUS supercalifragilistic build out to supply all the energy. 4. how long would it take to charge a plane with that much juice instead of pumping liquid into the tanks?
Given all of that, it is about time someone started figuring out a way to generate power on board the plane, since it is going to need it when the battery goes dead.
Very expensive and very heavy don't seem like a good combination for aviation use?
4:51 its is energy density unit, not power.
In this setting I'm pretty sure "additive manufacturing" is a more formal way of saying "3d printing" so: "a turbo generator could be 3d printed if it's constructed through additive manufacturing" is circular.
They term was created to separate piddly little FDM and resin machines(3d printing) from the very large and expensive SLS metal machines(addidive manufacturing). Additive manufacturing has been around since the 80s in the form of standard FDM and resin machines but the terms were changed and 3d printing forked off of additive manufacturing in 2010 or so when the patents became public, and the general public got them in their homes.
To put it into perspective, one of the the first commercially available FDM machines came out in the mid 90s, cant do everything a $100 dollar machine now could do, and cost well over $100k to own.
You can't print bearings in inconel and have them "last". You can't print machine ground finishes from any material. It takes a machine ground bearing to roll smoothly and last any amount of time.
Damn - I wish there was a "print inconel upgrade kit" for my Ender 3. I could do some cool stuff.
I need this kit as well heh
Inconel in PLA ?
I'm sure enough of us ask eSun, they'll do it :)
Might have to bake out the PLA to leave the metal behind.
As electric motors/alternators, inverters and batteries improve in all metrics, the simplicity and efficiency gains from optimizing engines for single-point operation using a battery to buffer demand will outweigh the diminishing drawbacks from taking the double-conversion with battery buffer path.
But we are not there yet!
@cionntsaile1606 Simplicity? What is he talking about
Only people gaining any thing are the manufacturers
Hybirds stink !
Interesting concept but look at what is happening against petrol fuel vehicules. . .Ever heard ofm SEG by John Searl in the late 1950's ? ?
Marketing: "We need to placate insane eco-types and market an electric aircraft. Engineers: make it happen!"
Engineers: "Here it is. The plane can fly 30 miles"
Marketing: "Not good enough. No one will buy it. Make it better!"
Engineers: "Let's put a Jet Fuel burning engine in it to power the electric motors and increase it's range."
Marketing. "Perfect. We will call it eco-electric. Don't look at the carbon footprint..."
buzzwords bingo: 3d printing, check. AI: check. Electric vehicle: check. I stopped there.
"XYZ" will change "ABC" forever! says the 10,000th video on youtube which is now 12 years old and clearly promoted by someone who knows nothing of physics or material science.
The usual eVTOL-BS. About as realistic as the rocket cars in 1950's Popular Mechanics. Dream on, just don't invest any of your money into these pipe dreams.
This video had good info, but the speaker destroyed his own credibility by mispronouncing a keyword over and over again. A turbin, which rhymes with pin and fin, is a kind of religious headware. Turbine rhymes with mine, fine, and line. Seriously, he came across as a smug loser because he kept screwing this up.
Pure BE aircraft are decades away because of poor energy density and the inflexibility of battery storage . Another factor that rarely gets mentioned is that conventional aircraft burn their fuel and so become lighter and more efficient. A BE aircraft will have to carry a full load of fuel for the duration of it's flight. This also means that a BE aircraft's maximum take off weight could only ever be the maximum safe landing weight, which limits the aircraft's carrying capability. There are other factors that would also limit their viability.
What do you do if the batteries catch fire? Have you ever seen how fast they burn? In a vehicle you may have time to get out but in the air.... no way. You will be incinerated before you hit the ground.
So running a turbine to charge batteries and run electric motors is efficient? A basic law of physics is that with each energy exchange power is lost. Let's face facts, electric powered aircraft are simply inefficient especially on heavy lift and long haul conditions.
More moving parts equals more points of failure. Not good when relying on power is a matter of life and death.
Can’t see this working you need fuel for turbine plus a generator (these are heavy) the battery storage then electric engines. Not only is that a lot of weight but it is also many extra points of failure something you want to avoid in aviation.
None of it will reduce emissions and before some smart arse says use hydrogen it has the lowest fuel density and the storage is pressurised.
Modern helicopters are fairly efficient at converting fuel to lift.
I wouldnt trust an electric aircraft. In this case, you have 2 systems that can fail. Twice the liability, without any additional benefit.
Words like "exponentially" are over used. Your credibility is lost. I'm gone.
Electric vehicles are cheap to build?.. buddy u name me one cheap electric vehical bc all the ones driving around i see are far more expensive then gas vehicles..
The most important selling point of fraudulent evtol companies is that they are "emission free". They would give up a substantial part of their grift and government support if thet claimed they will use an engine.
If you have to have a jet engine to charge the batteries for electric engines, or to power them for flight, it's a complete waste of energy and resources.
There are a lot of 'concepts' but no commercial products. Most of the schemes are there to fleece investors not make a viable eproduct.'
How long is 900 miles?
burn fuel to charge batteries == losses ...
Turban-based generators? They use those in India, right?
Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes!
"... three-fold the range [sic] ..." -- "triple"!
Aww, electric aircraft are discovering the APU.
As For land and sea vehicles I can see the benefits but not for flight use!
Good luck with midflight battery fire .
Turbine vs. Turban. 2 very different things.
what is the need, instead of one engine, you get two and many wires
3d printed bearings in place sounds dubious.
Permit me to offer some advice on titling videos: NEVER use the word "Will" when talking about our futures! There a lot of reasons people may -- or may not -- adopt the technologies you talk about, and you can't be sure which technologies actually get adopted until after they have been adopted. People adopt different technologies for different reasons. If they can adapt a new technology to their needs and it doesn't conflict with their mutually constructed social realities, adopting usually takes place pretty easily. If adoption requires adaptation of both technical AND social practices, things become trickier.
That said, it's good to know that hybrid electric air vehicles are becoming more viable with new intentions. Keep up the good work letting people know about emerging possibilities!
*Our AI computer system now running at our office come up with a Pulse jet design that can be printed in metal but it has 40 baffles. Its crazy looking. No human could have thought of this!!!*
Fuel tank become lighter as fuel is used. Batteries do not become lighter as charge is used. An empty fuel tank adds minimal weight to an air vehicle. An empty battery adds as much as a full one.
сомнительная эта вся история с центробежными нагнетателями и напечатанными камерами сгорания . Форма лопаток древняя как мамонты . ВЫ лучше сделайте видео как на дизельном моторе 2.7 объема, коленвал ломается пополам в Ланд Ровере от знакопеременных нагрузок , потому что какой то потомок флибустьеров технологические базы не совместил . Недоверие к вашим инженерным решениям весьма высоки .
COTS turbines are using metal printer everywhere they can right now
Click bait title. Poor video.
From a material perspective, it's an intriguing approach, but somewhat challenging because additively 3D-printed metals have very high internal stress. To eliminate this stress, numerous heat treatments are required, causing the component to distort and expand. Consequently, this distortion and expansion must be considered in the design, so that when the residual stresses are relieved during later heat treatment, the component attains the correct dimensions. The difficulty lies not only in ensuring the component has low residual stresses but also that it is sufficiently rigid, hard, and capable of withstanding high temperatures. For instance, austenitic steel is suitable for higher temperatures, or one might opt for titanium or alloys that can handle such conditions. However, these materials pose challenges in additive manufacturing, making it a significant problem to 3D print large heat-resistant parts or highly stressed components, such as turbine blades.
There will never be a battery plane.
What a joke Payload is useless
Great video!
Union Pacific used some gas turbine electric locomotives in the 50's until the early 60's. Due to various problems they discontinued their use but information is available on line about them. The concept is similar to what is being presented here.
General Aviation (anything under 12,600 lbs) urgently needs a new, inexpensive ($150k) turbine engine in the 300 to 450 SHP category that can burn from diesel, Kero, Petrol.....that can also be retro fitted to old airframes.
I only see these working with machined and balanced rotary components for now, I can see that maybe 70% of the surrounding structure being 3d printed.
low at 60 times!!!
Thank You!!! This is all Exciting!!! but Imagine Ancient Lemuria, and piezo electric quartz crystal nodule engines, and magnetic levitation vehicles/craft.
Making comparisons between a hybrid driven vehicle and an electric one makes no sense. Let's compare it to a non-hybrid vehicle. Does the hybrid system use less fuel or not??
I call bullshit
This arrangement has multiple advantages. With a small battery pack you can use more power for take offs and maneuvers, while the power plant is turned to provide baseline power for cruise and basic flight operations. You can also have as many motors as you want for your design with no need for complicated and heavy gearing. The 3d printing process is also good for certain components, but really the only way to lower the cost of turbines is to build a lot of them and iterate the design process. The mass production of efficient turbine engines would best be done for automotive hybrids, but current laws and cafe standards make that an impossibility. The government is only good at one thing, and it ain't public welfare... quite the opposite in fact.
They can't be that efficient if the can't meet emission standards.
@@filonin2 Efficiency requires high temperatures, low NOx emission requires low temperatures of combustion.
i can see this in 1man quadcopters. they can serve the same purpose as micro helicopters (herding cattle or powerline inspections) but are much much easier and less tiring to fly. also much smaller package to store.
Yes! Quite the Opposite!!! When you speak of "The Government" and they would be against me, except for a different reason!!! I'd see magnetic levitation craft/vehicles that had piezo electric quartz crystal nodules in place of where the motor would be, and leave all the fossil fuel in the ground. Empress Mary of Temple Lemuria (Lost).
Nothing says inovation like using animation.
Printed bearings? Bwahahahaha... I'll grant you can make pockets that will accept a bearing or seal, but printing them? Pull the other one. Some post-machining to get accurate, smooth surfaces is absolutely necessary, and flow-honing of the turbine parts will both prevent shedding of particles which could damage downstream parts, and improve the efficiency of the air flow. Don't trust press release hype.
With all these technologies that will 'change aviation forever', I wonder which one will come out on top. I am willing to bet my retirement 99% of these world changers will lezd to nothing and we'll still be bused around in a320 and 737 variants in 100 years.
No it won’t.
Printing a turbine including all the bearings sounds not believable, fanblades, fanwheels or housings, ok but ballbearings ? Super high precision, and smooth surfaces looking at the imagery you have in the video that’s no way near the requirements…. It looks rough and coarse on the printed surfaces
Hey this young guy looks and sound like my oldest son 20 yrs ago LoL. Yes there are hybred (turbine / generator ) garbage trucks( constantly braking and accelerating) which are already being retrofitted. In US. The brskes last longer too with the regerating elect unit
Exaggerated headline. Please correct. Suggest changing "will" to "may" or "could".
You don't belive the range claims of evtol companies do you? They can't even stay up long enough to show 5 straight minutes of flight. Is there any evidence other than words they can go 150 miles without any added payload?
Tech-washing at its finest. Here's your revenue comment. But, it still needs to be said that this kind of tech-washing is no better than green-washing and is no better than fossil-fuel washing. And I know that this is tech-washing from RR
I worked on petrol auxiliary power units some years ago. The problem wasn't engine or generator, but the electronics required for power modulation
Seems to be that way since 1850.
The biggest problem with trying to make electric planes is the fact that they weigh the same at both takeoff and landing. Fuel-powered planes have a far greater takeoff weight than landing weight. As they fly and burn fuel, they get lighter. Batteries will never get lighter, sacrificing cargo capacity for landing, not to mention range and efficiency.
Interesting how they used a CAD printer of an overly complicated muffler & called it a Jet Engine as its click bait.
MAN I wish I could live another 25yrs just to see what amazing shit thats going to happen in science and manufacturing 😮
Now we need water batteries for our cars I and my buddy Travis wood built one in 2009 he put it in a holy Grail jeep the car even ran on water Travis disappeared from school mid year im not joking myself and Travis were going to make a air battery after spring break
Yeah, Volvo built a turbine hybrid car in the 80's (presented 92 as the ECC) so this is hardly "new tech"
Battery powered vehicles are not cost effective all the automakers are slashing production
For commercial aviation a hybrid propelling system is total unfitting: far too heavy and even useless
Electric in cities, the jet engine generator for between cities. Cost would be huge, but would ease certification
What do I think? Well, to coin an old phrase, “TALK IS CHEAP “.
Just had a nice bowl of Raisin Bran Crunch.
No mention so far of "zero-point" has everybody gone to sleep? Is toroidal theory that far away?
With the way people drive I don’t want to see everyone having access to their own personal flying transportation
Video should include comma, fullstop, and question mark.
They will use it to power a 1 megawatt laser pulse cannon on a ai airborne robotic attack platform.
Electric cars are not cheaper to build or maintain, that is an outright lie. a new battery costs nearly as much as the new car.
good lord i have never seen someone get so many things wrong in under a minute
Seriously?!?
EVs ruin everything!
Beginning with your thinking.
The weight of fuel is diminishes over flight time while batteries weight jest as much at landing as at takeoff.
EV aircraft are at best a novely that will never work on a large scale and will never have the payload or range.
We are already seeing major auto companies getting out of the EV biz and washing their hands of it. We know that the logistics of manufacture and support of EV land vehicles are unobtainable! Then there's the safety factor. EV fires are happening WAY MORE then being reported.
And if you're on board with bringing that level of stoopid and foolishness into the air then please let me sell you a bridge AND an airport in the swamps of Florida.
Trust me, it's a really nice bridge and an excellent airport.
And don't even get me started on the concept of 3D printing an engine.
It's excellent for models and making patterns and non-working examples but there is no way you're going to build an engine that I would ever fly with.
The more complicated you make it the more people need to die to get it to work properly
This is a great Science Fiction Story idea! I'm a writer.
This was one of my Day Dreams twenty five years ago. cool...
You just need two stroke diesel with 60% thermal efficiency (average turbine comes with 30%). Turbines are great for long distance, high altitude commercial planes. But for short-mid range, low altitude - VFR... fuel efficient diesel, run on veggie oil... beats everything,
ah yes the electric airplane. with the batteries charged by a gas turbine. got it
Warum will man so ein Unsinn bauen? Der gesamtwirkungsgrad ist viel kleiner als bei konventionell angetriebenen . Das Gewicht ist größer.
There will be one massive problem with micro-turbines: "ITAR restrictions"
Yeap, you red correctly.
These small suckers are soo good that you can easily put them into a missile or drone.
I think this will be the biggest roadblock for that type of technology to take off on the civilian sector...
Casing point, 10-15 years ago, P&W decided to invest into a new mini-turbofan as it seemed like the market for Mini-jets was about to take off...
What stopped it?
Government restrictions on that tech as it could be retrofitted onto a drone/missile with ease...
So a hydrocarbon-powered electric airplane. :|