Yes. It also works with incompressible flows. I have yet to give mine a test with water. I want to build an acrylic window for it first, and ink the incoming water.
466 karma · joined March 11, 2007
I'm not sure that a Tesla Valve would be all that useful for tapping wave motion now that I think of it. It might not work. One way to think of it is to imagine using a one way ball valve. That has helped me in the past from ascribing too much magic or revolutionary nature to the Tesla Valve.
My current jet engine work does not include a Tesla Valve, though much of it is inspired by it. When I began, I imagined using a pulse jet, and attaching an axialy rotated tesla valve to the front of it, in order to replace the reed valves. I eventually moved away from pulsed combustion though. Too noisy and not the pressure levels I wanted.
2. Liquids and gases have different viscosity, so the Tesla Valve would be different for each fluid and flow regime. I am unfamiliar with this series-of-petals geometry you are remembering. However, it reminds me of this excellent work done on optimizing topology for different Reynolds numbers in Tesla Valves: http://www.senlin41.org/topology-optimization-of-tesla-type-...
3. One of the original intents of the valve was for Tesla's Bladeless Disc Turbine. In Tesla's time, materials were not what they are now, and thus valves with moving parts were not as reliable. Also, getting a valve that can close and open with high frequency is not always easy. The valvular conduit that Tesla designed was his solution to this problem.
Thanks for the book reference. I read "Wizard: The Life and Times of Nikola Tesla" But I hadn't seen this other book. I might pick it up.
You could make an array of them perpendicular to a plane. Perhaps, by etching them into silicon. On a macro scale, you could machine them with a CNC machine, or even with hand tools depending on your tolerances.
For sound, you energy density is rather low, so the material you wish to propel would have to be incredibly light. And you would probably have better luck trying to lift a plate of some super light material. The Tesla Valve is most useful as a device where you want to check the flow from moving one way.
Anywhere, where having a moving part is a pain in the butt, and you want a more robust system. When you're etching things into silicon, generally, you want to avoid have to make lots of tiny micromechanisms.
As a paddlewheel, it would probably not make sense to use the Tesla Valve. Turbines are well understood. If you want to make rotary motion, that's the way to go.
And if you already have a 3D printer, you can get the files free here: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:16919
If anyone is interested, there are some very cool no-moving-parts jets that aren't as well known as ramjets: The lockwood hiller pulsejet is a pulsejet that doesn't need reed valves. http://aardvark.co.nz/pjet/valveless.htm
The Gluhareff Pressure jet is also a neat example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluhareff_Pressure_Jet
I would never get angry if someone loaned one of my books to another person, so why would I get angry about someone pirating it. And if people had not loaned me many books, I would never have grown to love writing. It's just the case that the internet can loan many books to people easily (or so I see it).
The market is very fickle about what it likes. Effort spent fighting piracy should be spent on writing more books and promoting them. In the meantime, I would endorse piracy of a commercially failed book as a way of spreading my name.
It's obvious this person's book didn't fail in touching people, it just failed in inspiring them to buy. The solution to any writer's problem is to write more.
One, the moribund aerospace giants that are largely just making the same old rockets, entrenched in their job creation programs.
And two, the new space companies, which are making suborbital rocketplanes and cheap boosters. At present, they may not look impressive because of small steps they are taking, but you just have to look at Scaled's Space Ship Two to realize that radical innovation in their design is not dead.
This has been a long time coming, and there has been a dark age in aerospace.
If you are interested, in my view the seminal event in the new space industry was the Delta Clipper Program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X).
And now there are some really impressive companies trying to make space truly viable for everyone. Some of those companies are.
XCOR Aerospace: http://xcor.com/ Scaled Composites: http://scaled.com/ Masten: http://masten-space.com/ Armadillo: http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home
Aside from aerospace. While I agree that there have been game changers like the cell phone, I do agree with Kasparov that there is an atmosphere of risk aversion. For instance I don't see any daring research programs like when DARPA funded Engelbart's augment research that led to Human User Interface objects like the mouse. And that disturbs me. Often visionaries look very crazy or at best very hard to understand because they are operating out of the scope of our context. I don't see people having the patience for these visionaries. And the people who do claim to be visionaries seem to have very conservative imaginations.
The various reactions to canceling my account were interesting. Some people seemed almost angry. Some just wanted to make sure to get my email.
I developed anxiety and depression when I was in college. Part of that was a feeling I wasn't achieving anything of note, or learning anything worthwhile. I had thought undergraduate education would be a splendid ivory tower, but it turned out most of my peers did not prioritize a sense of adventurous learning or a delight in knowledge. I learned a mismatch between reality and expectations can drive you, but also cripple you if it is to great.
I think your decision to see a psychologist is a good one. I saw a psychiatrist and it helped me recover and develop a functioning and enjoyable life. Also, make sure it's a psychologist you work well with. Don't settle for one that you don't work well with.
Also, it is difficult to know if a decision will make us happy in advance. We can develop a feeling of knowing in advance, but it's not always there to guide us.
A lot of people will say, exercise, go to therapy, take a vacation. The thing to remember is that you are unique and your solutions will be unique. And that you are not alone. We all get lost.
I'll keep it going, what else influences how HN members have decided what type of companies to build?
* Paying kids to do school work
* Paying kids to create school work
* Paying kids to break up school work into easily solvable modules
* Paying kids to combine school work into more difficult modules
* Paying kids to run the school
* Paying kids to find holes in the school system
"What are you interested? Where?" is a question and doesn't answer what I get from the website. It doesn't necessarily give me a reason for being there.
"HeyKiki lets you connect with instructors and/or practice buddies for any of your interests," is not visible enough. I really had to look for it. If that's going to be the value proposition, then it needs to be brighter and larger.
Good luck with this site. I started a skill exchange that was similar to Heykiki a while ago. It was called Foobity. It was very difficult to get traction. Sites like these need a lot of users to start being useful. We tried to expand our userbase and accessibility by making a facebook app right when FB opened their platform, but even that didn't turn into lots of usage.
We also had a competitor whose name I can't remember. They had a more polished version of what we were trying to do, but even they faded into obscurity.
Something about this mode of getting people to connect is very difficult. Part of finding teachers and learning partners is that a system of actual payment of pupil-to-teacher insures commitment. And casual non-money interaction takes a bunch of other factors to connect.
Still, I think this is a good idea because anything that increases the chances of people coming together to enjoy learning and practice activities that fuel their passion is a good thing. I hope it is successful.
What licenses would people recommend for a service based software project like this? MIT? It would kind of be appropriate considering the inspiration.
Even if as your link says, that there are adverse responses by some people to creativity, there will be others who are receptive.
Along that path of creativity-inclined people is where I think my prize money will ultimately go.
The DARPA Network Prize, which inspired my job prize, is itself a testament to a desire for creativity.