(Please Don’t) Build a Jet Engine from a Toilet Paper Holder

colin

Turbo charger Jet Engines have long been considered one of the holy grails of backyard engineering. This is with good reason – they’re hard to build, and even harder to run. Many a turbo has met an untimely end from a hot start or oil starvation. [Colin Furze] however, makes it look easy. [Colin] is a proponent of crazy hacks – we’ve featured him before for his land speed record holding baby carriage, and his pulse jet powered tea kettle.

In his latest video set, [Colin] takes a toilet brush holder, a toilet paper roll holder, a few plumbing fittings, and of course a small turbocharger from the scrap yard. Somehow he converts all of this into a working jet engine. The notable thing here is that there is no welding. Some of the joints are held together with nothing more than duct tape.

Calling this a working jet engine is not really an overstatement. As every backyard jet jockey knows, the first goal of DIY jets (aside from not hurting yourself) is self-sustaining. Turbines are spun up with air hoses, vacuums, or leaf blowers. The trick is to turn the fuel on, remove the air source, and have the turbine continue spinning under its own power. Once this happens, your engine is performing the same “Suck, Squeeze, Bang, Blow” combustion process an F-18 or a 747 uses.

All this doesn’t mean the engine can do anything useful beyond keep itself running. This is where the second goal of backyard jet engines come in – thrust. You need a usable amount of thrust before you can strap that engine to a go-cart and go cruising around the neighborhood.

[Colin’s] jet is built and tested over a two video set. the first outlines how to build it, and the second shows the jet running. As a safety note, [Colin] has hinted in the YouTube comments that there will be a third video in the series showing how he had an incident with a gas leak, and it led to him being put “out of action for a week”. Needless to say – don’t try this particular engine build at home.

[Thanks James!]

Comments

  1. Gladys says:

    That was fun! But the lack of protective gear is scary. :)

    What fuel did he use?

  2. Bitflusher says:

    Way to go mr. mad scientist!

  3. aztraph says:

    you gotta love this idiot for trying the stuff you shouldn’t attempt indoors

  4. lloyd says:

    Not even wearing some thick gloves or goggles!

  5. Adam says:

    At least tuck your tie in!

  6. tissit says:

    Eh? Suck, squeeze, bang, blow is the Otto cycle. Jet engines don’t have separate cucled steps.

    • cyberteque says:

      you beat me to it!

    • barry99705 says:

      They do, it’s just a continuous cycle. Sucked into the intake, Squeezed in the compressor section, Banged in the combustion section, Blown out the exhaust section. That’s how they teach in in AF tech school.

    • Phrewfuf says:

      Diesel Engines also do SSBB, the only difference is diesel fuel igniting by itself due to the temperature and pressure, while Otto engines need spark plugs. Two-stroke engines also do SSBB. And, obviously, jet engines also do SSBB. The different stages are just actually happening in different parts of the engine, while Diesels, Ottos and two-strokes do all four in the same part, the cylinder.

      There is no other way to make something move continuously by combustion without SSBB.

      • Greenaum says:

        ‘cept rocket engines. Sorry, HAD to point it out. First pedantic rocket-mentioning reply!

      • Richard says:

        However Diesel, petrol (Otto) and jet (Brayton-Joule) cycles have subtle differences which thermodynamic set them apart. Namely, the diesel ant the Joule cycle have constant pressure heat addition where as the otto cycle is isochoric, which is one of the main reasons otto is less efficient but produces more power than the diesel. The Diesel and the otto both do constant volume heat rejection whereas the Joule does isobaric which is why gas turbines are more efficient than both Diesel and Otto as they leave significant energy in the exhaust stream. That is why both the power and efficiency of a Otto/Diesel engine can be improved by fitting a turbo. Finally the Rankine (steam) cycle beats the lot in terms of getting close to the maximum Carnot efficiency with its constant temperature heat addition and rejection, hence power stations.

  7. mojojoe says:

    The second video was a bit inconclusive. Did it work?

    • DainBramage1991 says:

      He only stated it about a half-dozen times during the video:

      “It works!!!”

      • mojojoe says:

        Ah yes I see now. The doggystyle slap-slap dance is indeed the traditional way to record successful turbine operation.

        I think the vast majority of hack-video producers out there could take some notes from the production style here. Don’t linger on details, keep a good pace and get to the good stuff. Generally I wouldn’t watch an 11 minute video without skipping at least some of it, but this held me.

        Could anyone explain what the benefit of this type of combustion chamber is over, say, a fuel rail riddled with smaller holes?

        • Adam Fabio says:

          mojojoe – Check out colin’s other recent videos. His BBQ turbojet build is much more traditional, and he dedicates an entire video to the math side of things.

  8. Did it work?! Yes it worked awesomely!!! Keep the madness going. That was absolutely awesome!

  9. Bobby says:

    Oh the drama…I kept waiting for the thing to go pop in his face…entertaining, yes. A skill I don’t have, yes. Still, a dumb ass mo fo, hell yeah! Dude, it’s not a matter of if, only a matter of when…

    • oodain says:

      death, in general, is a matter of when not if.

      anything is a matter of chance vs. time and i am not so sure his chances of getting hurt are greater than your common man.

      • pfd says:

        It really wasn’t very dangerous was it? All the scary bits were in the turbine itself, which was salvaged. As cool and significant as this build is, a decent metaphor for it would be salvaging a car engine, then attaching scrap-made fuel, oil, combustion, and exhaust systems to it.

        If the turbine itself was fine, then the rest of this was not significantly more dangerous than a propane grill. Kinda funny to think about that.

        • Johan G says:

          I have to agree. All the moving parts are in the salvaged turbo, leaving the tricky parts pretty much to the combustion chamber. Also pretty much all the risks are contained by the turbo.

          Also the use of gaseous fuel lessens the risk of burning fuel squirting around if anything goes wrong. I have memories from when me and my brothers tested out melting aluminium in a home made furnace and turned on the fuel flow in a kerosene blowtorch a bit too early into the pre-heating. Good thing we had (to some degree) anticipated the risk and turned it on away from anything flammable as it acted more like a small flame thrower before it got hot enough to properly evaporate and burn the kerosene.

  10. camerin says:

    that man is bat shit insane, I would hang out with him.

  11. Dra says:

    I loathe this man. His youtube channel is full of NOTHING but people doing moronically dangerous things with absolutely zero safety precautions. It’s a question of chance he hasn’t gotten someone killed yet, and it’s a matter of time.

    Does he obviously have interesting skills that I lack? sure. Does he seriously lack the basic common sense you should expect of a pre-pubecent child? Also yes.

    • daler says:

      Get this: some people accept a greater level or risk than others. Tell me, who (aside from himself, and his adult friends who choose to attend his “moronically dangerous” stunts) is going to suffer when something goes wrong?

    • fajensen says:

      “Dangerous”, “Moron”, “Zero Safety Precautions” – Why we watch YouTube in the first place, to regain the faith in there being a better world. Because here “In Real Life” we have “Elf & Safety” keeping the Morons in the gene pool long enough for them to be promoted into Management …

  12. Hirudinea says:

    This is definitely not your bog standard jet!

  13. not as uptight says:

    loved it. F safety, it’s overrated! YOLO

  14. Chris says:

    Top Man!

  15. Oh, that look of simultaneous look of happiness, hopefulness, and a dash of desperation is amazing. Loving the Safety Tie™ as well.

  16. HackJack says:

    I have a feeling this (brilliant) guy won’t last very long…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s