Stationary And Rotating Domains For 1 Kw Tesla Turbine Model
Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulation of a Model Wind Turbine. Of rotating and stationary domains. Passes each degree in 2 time steps. RESULTS: steady state CONCLUSION FUTURE WORK. The performance of the model turbine and wake formed by the rotor is predicted. The turbine has 3 blades of which I'm only modelling 1 and using periodicity about the rotation axis. 2 domains are being used: a stationary one and a rotating one which consists of a blade and hub (the rotating domain rotates anticlockwise when looking back towards the origin. The boundary conditions are: - a velocity inlet.
After seeing the new Roadster in the flesh at Thursday’s Tesla Semi unveiling, I’ve had a lot to think about. These are listed as “streetable track & competition” tires, which means they are legal to drive on a public road, but are focused on track performance and are not meant to be driven in wet conditions.
Stationary And Rotating Domains For 1 Kw Tesla Turbine Model Kit
This may be the reason some Roadster test rides experienced wheelspin during low-end acceleration, as there was a light sprinkle of rain during the event, and on a smooth and dusty runway this can make for a slippy experience. You can hear the wheelspin 5 seconds into.The numbers I talked about above refer to the size of the tires. The first number is the width of the tire in millimeters, the last number is the size of the rim in inches, and the middle number is the “aspect ratio” of the actual tire itself (bigger numbers = thicker tires, smaller = skinny “rubber band” tires). The width of the tires is of particular note, as 325/295 are very wide. The original Roadster had tires of 225/175, so the new tires are roughly 70% wider.
Excel cannot break link. Aug 14, 2015 - Upon repair, Excel should tell you more detail about what links had to be broken manually. You can either use the new sheet, or use the.
Combine this with the larger diameter of the rim-tire combo, and the “contact patch,” the amount of rubber which hits the road, is probably almost double what the original Roadster’s contact patch is.The reason for this is partially because the new Roadster is heavier than the original Roadster (heavier vehicles typically need larger tires and have larger contact patches), but primarily because the only way to get a sub-2-second 0-60 time is to have a whole lot of rubber in contact with the road. Since the only way power gets transferred into forward motion is by the friction of tires against the road, the more rubber you can have in contact with the road, and the stickier that rubber is, the more forward motion you get.Not only that, but the original Roadster is only rear-wheel drive, rather than all-wheel drive. This is why all-wheel drive cars tend to accelerate better than front- or rear-wheel drive cars, because they’re using all four tires to push the car forward, instead of just two (though the rear wheels do more of the work, since the car’s weight leans backwards upon acceleration).All of this can be seen in action in the case of the P100D Model S, which has roughly the same 0-60 time as it does 60-0 time. This means that for the entirety of the 0-60 acceleration period, the car is moving forward as quickly as the tires allow – the only way to make it go quicker would be to give it bigger tires or less weight, more power is superfluous when you are “traction-limited.”The downside to larger tires and more grip is that the car is less efficient than it would be with smaller tires, but I would still expect an MPGe rating somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 even despite that, and honestly, that’s not really the main point of this car now is it? The tires are also more expensive ($600 per tire on TireRack), but, again, it’s a hypercar.
That comes with the territory.Large tires also mean more grip for cornering, which will be necessary because the new Roadster seems like it will be significantly heavier than the original one. WeightThe original Roadster focused a lot on staying light weight.
The chassis was designed and manufactured in collaboration with Lotus Engineering. Lotus was started by legendary car designer Colin Chapman, whose philosophy is often summarized as “simplify, then add lightness.” The idea is that to make a car perform better, you don’t “add” more weight, more power, more tires, etc., you try to remove every bit of superfluous weight you can, because the lighter your car is, the better it will be in all aspects of vehicle performance.As a result, the whole car came in at 2,723lbs (1,235kg). This is very light – it’s heavier than similar light, two-seater convertible roadsters like the Lotus Elise and Mazda MX-5 due to the battery, but lighter than almost any production car available today, even hypercars like the LaFerrari (2766lbs/1255kg).
Though it could really benefit from the weight savings that a newer, more energy dense battery would provide – like the Roadster 3.0 battery update, only with the original 53kWh usable capacity and lighter, newer cells. The re-engineering required and low production number of the original Roadster make this an unlikely thing to happen, though.The weight of the car is probably going to be slightly rear-biased, as the tires in the rear are larger and the rear has two motors, with just one in the front.
The original Roadster also had heavily rear-biased weight because the battery was placed behind the seats, which helped a lot with traction to get the at-the-time-incredible sub-4 second 0-60 time.It’s unlikely that the new Roadster will manage anything close to the original Roadster’s weight. The aforementioned 200kWh battery will be heavy – very heavy. The current 100kWh pack in a Model S weighs more than 1,000lbs (453kg). Even with the next couple years of battery advancement, it seems likely to me that the pack alone will be close to 2,000lbs (907kg). Then add three electric motors, seats, a (probably aluminum) chassis, and a body which felt like it was made of either carbon fiber or fiberglass, and this car seems like it will be, at minimum, in the mid-high 3,000s or possibly above 4,000lbs (1814kg). The body is likely carbon fiber given the price – there were many carbon fiber accents in the prototype’s interior, see dash in picture below:That would be a lot heavier than the original Roadster, but it’s not out of line compared to other hypercars available today.
Most of them are in the 3,500lb range, and the Bugatti Chiron is 4,400lbs (1,996kg). Weight isn’t a big disadvantage in terms of straight-line top speed, as it’s easier to keep a lot of weight moving than to get it moving in the first place. But weight is a disadvantage when it comes to cornering ability and vehicle handling. HandlingThis is my one area of concern with the Roadster’s performance.
Weight is absolutely critical in terms of cornering ability, there is nothing more important. The more your car weighs, the harder it is to get to change directions, period. Cornering requires applying a force to change the car’s velocity vector (the direction and speed it’s moving), and the heavier that car is, the more force will be required to change that vector. So, the more “lightness” you can “add” to your car, the better it will turn.So from this perspective, the Roadster’s gigantic battery seems excessive. Such a huge battery is pretty important to reach the power levels which Tesla wanted to hit with this car, but this will cause a deficit in vehicle handling as compared to a smaller car.There are some ways to mitigate this though.
As mentioned earlier, the huge tires help a lot with any kind of grip. Having roughly twice the contact patch of the original Roadster means twice as much rubber on the road, which means twice as much friction, which means the tires can “push” twice as hard around the corner before losing grip.Another mitigating factor is the car’s center of gravity. A car with a high center of gravity will introduce more “roll” when going around a corner, which means the weight of the car will lean onto the tires on the outside of the turn. If there’s more weight on the outside tires, that means there’s less weight on the inside tires, and the inside tires are no longer going to be as effective in providing grip to help turn the car around the corner.A low center of gravity reduces roll, which means the inside tires stay stuck to the ground better, and in turn provide more grip. This is how the Model S tends to out-handle other vehicles of the same weight, because it has an exceptionally low center of gravity – about 17.5 inches.
The Tesla turbine is an original expander working on the principle of torque transmission by wall shear stress. The principle – demonstrated for air expanders at lab scale - has attractive features when applied to ORC expanders: it is suitable for handling limited flow rates (as is the case for machines in the range from 500 W to 5 kW), it can be developed to a reasonable size (rotor diameters between 0.1 and 0.3 m), with limited rotational speeds (from 1000 to 12000 rpm). The original concept is revisited, improving the stator layout (which is the main responsible for poor performance) and developing a modular design allowing to cover a wide power range, as well as to realize a perfectly sealed operation and including other fluid dynamics improvements. The flow model assumes complete real fluid behaviour, and includes several new concepts such as bladed channels for the stator and a detailed treatment of losses. Preliminary design sketches are presented and results discussed and evaluated. Several working fluids are considered, from refrigerants (R245fa, R134a, SES36) to hydrocarbons (n-Hexane, n-Pentane).
Previous article in issue. Next article in issue.