Aerostatic or Aerodynamic is only types I'm interested in. I cannot afford aerodynamic foil bearings at this stage. I can afford aerostatic porous carbon media air bearings but there is no off the shelf bearing I can use without a complete redesign and lots of money spent. It will be cheaper to manufacture a custom set. I am just having a little difficulty locating some graphite/carbon with the correct porosity properties. I am told that this material is produces in Japan and Korea mainly for this type of graphite. The original patent states "nearly frictionless bearings" and this is what I must have to replicate it.
I don't know a whole lot about air bearings, but why carbon? It's non-contact, right? Can't you use any stiff, porous material? I'd think there would be a whole lot of cheaper, better options than carbon. I assume you want your porosity carefully controlled, right? Something like straight radial holes throughout? Otherwise, I imagine your air bearing support would be completely irregular. So something like filter media would be out. (this kind of thing: https://www.mcmaster.com/porous-carbon/porous-conductive-carbon/ ) My first inclination is to get something metal, and have it radially 'drilled' on an EDM machine. Barring that, see what kind of minimum pore size you can get from a high-end 3D printer and have them printed. My non-expert 2 cents
This is the type of bearing I am trying to replicate. Although I am trying to use just one thrust face which will sit almost against the rotor with around 4 micron tolerance. This is the recommended setup by OAV. They use a 0.0007" / 17 micron axle / bearing gap and <16RMS axle. The other side will sit up against the housing. I checked out the link your provided. Thanks. I emailed McMaster Carr to see what they say. Ideally I need 3/4" / 19mm x 4" / 100mm round bar or block. I was aware of the many different porosities. The air bearing companies are very secretive about their material understandably.
The technology has already been third party validated so interesting idea, you are not the first to make false accusations. Truth is this is a real frictionless heat engine unlike the theoretical frictionless piston heat engine that Sadi Carnot theorised for the 2nd law of thermodynamics. So it is accepted that a heat pump can harness nature to provide a COP of >1.0 At the moment it isn't accepted that a heat engine can do the same if the design is frictionless. Once a bunch of respected mechanical engineers witness this with their own eyes, hopefully you are one of them, we can put this to bed.
Well, you've attempted to explain how it works - and you've been demonstrably incorrect. You've also promised compelling evidence of function. It's been a long time. So far, evidence = 0. I'm going to take all of this as conclusive, over some mysterious 3rd party validation we have no information about. Unless you manage to come up with something better than the last 75 pages of failed attempts, that is.
. I would be very interested to know what materials and approach you would have used to run this turbine at 35k RPM. Thanks in advance.
It's been a long time since I posted that, so I don't recall the design I was talking about, exactly. But 35k RPM at nearly no torque? I dunno. Try aluminum or mild steel and go from there. There is no functional friction between the shaft and bearing anyway. the bearing is what the bearing is, regardless of the material of the fabricated parts.
For THE LOVE OF GOD, ALLAH, BUDDAH, MOHAMMAD, Whoever floats your boat!! Test this damn tesla as an air pump and tell us your results. All this blah f*ing blah - all talk, no show.
