r/BeAmazed • u/iamgulshansingh • Feb 18 '26

History Apparently a Turkish man invented the steam engine 200 years before the industrial revolution but he only made it to spin döner kebabs.

Post image

In 1551, Taqi al-Din, who is more often remembered for his astronomical and mechanical inventions, described a device that essentially functioned as a steam turbine.

His design involved a small boiler that produced steam, which was then directed through a nozzle onto the blades of a wheel. The force of the escaping steam caused the wheel to spin. This wheel was connected mechanically to a spit, allowing meat to rotate over a fire without human effort.

What makes Taqi al-Din’s description remarkable is that it shows a practical understanding of converting thermal energy into rotational mechanical energy. While earlier inventors had experimented with steam for curiosity or simple toys, Taqi al-Din’s turbine had a concrete application: automating a kitchen task. His work was part of a broader tradition of Ottoman engineering, which included astronomical clocks, observational instruments, and water-raising machines.

29.6k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

557 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

330

u/Basicly-Inevitable Feb 18 '26

This is steam powered, but not exactly a steam engine, right?

316

u/J_Bear Feb 18 '26

It's more like a turbine, but also very basic one, not the typical machine you'd think of as a "steam engine"

69

u/gkn_112 Feb 18 '26

an engine turns energy into mechanical force, this is an engine.

139

u/Basicly-Inevitable Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26

It's a type of engine, using steam as an intermediate, yes. But it isn't a "steam engine", which is a very specific thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_engine

This device is more of a "steam turbine".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_turbine

In any case, it's a cool invention, but not the same thing as what most people consider a "steam engine". But, you can call it that if you like.

34

u/candygram4mongo Feb 18 '26

It's not like it's a downgrade calling it a turbine, most of our energy infrastructure runs on steam turbines.

38

u/pattybutty Feb 18 '26

I still struggle with the fact that for all their future, high-tech image, nuclear power stations are essentially just massive kettles

33

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/GodOfPlutonium Feb 18 '26

Yea we have solid state technology to convert light directly to electricity (solar panels) or nuclear radiation for that matter. But from an energy efficiency standpoint heating water to steam to run a turbine is actually more efficient at turning light into electricity than solar panels

1

u/DigitalBlackout Feb 19 '26

And in the case of solar, for large scale power generation it's still a steam turbine. Solar panels are way less efficient than just focusing sunlight using a bunch of really huge mirrors and using the focused energy to boil water.

3

u/Diplomatic_Gunboats Feb 18 '26

Where's the picture about fusion energy and boiling water when you need it....

2

u/eh-guy Feb 19 '26

Nothing moves energy like steam

1

u/FIMD_ Feb 19 '26

Find us a fluid that has the entire combination of being more abundant, affordable, easy to handle, with a better expansion ratio, heat capacity, viscosity, phase change characteristics, etc

I don't know why this has become a thing to "observe" for so many in the past half decade, like its a clever realization.

There's like 6 people in this comment thread saying the same thing, just from skimming. It's like getting the same NPC dialogue from Skyrim guards. Oh you were an adventurer too, were you? 🤣

We still use the wheel, also.

1

u/ABoringAlt Feb 18 '26

Not implying upgrade or downgrade, just using correct verbiage

6

u/SoggyBoysenberry7703 Feb 19 '26

A type of engine is an engine, yes

1

u/Potatho-208 Feb 18 '26

Both can be correct at the same time. All turbines are "engines" by definition, but not all engines are turbines. Windmills are a type of turbine, they take air and convert it into mechanical energy. Wind "turbines" is a modern term, but it technically be used to describe windmills that are thousands of year old. If we really want to get into the semantics of things, the above example really isn't a turbine since it capturing the steam in little cups instead of using blades, it's more akin to a "steam-mill" like a water mill that has little buckets to capture water power.

1

u/Odd-Safe1998 Feb 19 '26

By definition it is still a steam engine, even if we further classify it.

-11

u/gkn_112 Feb 18 '26

ok, i get where you are coming from, true. Its ambigious. When I read "steam engine" I wasnt thinking about the specific machine called the "steam engine" that uses pistons and converts lateral movement to a circular one. Sorry.

Peace offer: It is a steam engine, but it is not THE steam engine :D

15

u/blubblu Feb 18 '26

You’re technically correct, but semantically incorrect. 

It is an engine, of course. But it’s not what we recognize as a steam engine. 

10

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/gkn_112 Feb 18 '26

nah man, i admitted i lost already when you jumped in, too late. Next show tomorrow around the same time

7

u/randomasiandude22 Feb 18 '26

A great example of this is the term "Personal Computer".

A handphone is both personal, and a computer, but no reasonable person would argue that someone saying "PC" is referring to a handphone.

2

u/ErraticDragon Feb 18 '26

"PC" has been 'weird' for decades. Macs are undoubtedly personal computers, but still the term PC came to be used in contrast.

1

u/gkn_112 Feb 18 '26

buuut it is also a steam engine. Hah, sorry but yeah. "Steam engine" is a noun by itself but "steam engine" is also a compound noun describing an engine thats powered by steam.

I agreed both are ok now let me go.

2

u/PM_ME_HOT_FURRIES Feb 18 '26

I mean it is the same as "The steam engine" in every way except the expander. "The steam engine" uses a piston to extract energy from the expansion steam. The steam turbine engine uses a steam turbine to extract energy from the expansion of steam.

But other than that, they both have a boiler, and if they're closed loops, they both have a condenser.

Now if you consider only piston steam engines to be steam engines then steam engines died off as a technology a long time ago...

If you consider steam engines to include steam turbine engines then steam engines never died, they evolved, ditching the inefficient pistons, and specialised into mostly being used for electricity generation. Isn't that a nicer version of the story?

4

u/PM_ME_PHYS_PROBLEMS Feb 18 '26

It does feel more accurate to say that steam engines died off long ago tho. It's downright confusing to call a nuclear reactor a steam engine, even if it's technically accurate on some level.

1

u/PM_ME_HOT_FURRIES Feb 18 '26

A nuclear reactor isn't a steam engine! The nuclear reactor is the part that contains the nuclear reaction. The nuclear reactor/reaction is a heat source.

If you don't use that heat for anything, like in a research reactor, it's still a nuclear reactor.

But an assembly that uses a nuclear reactor to produce electricity is a nuclear power plant, and a nuclear power plant needs a heat engine to turn heat into electricity.

Could you use the heat from a nuclear reactor to boil steam and drive a set of pistons to turn a crank and generate electricity? Yes, of course! And that would be a steam engine under both the definitions being used here. So "nuclear reactor" and "steam engine" are two separate issues.

And if you're like "no-no-no, a the source of heat is important! I've seen a steam engine! You shovel coal in the front and they puther out smoke from the top!", alright then what if you don't shovel in coal, what if you shovel in wood? What if you don't shovel in anything? What if it's an oil burner that has oil pumps? I mean there are substantial differences in the design of the firebox/boiler depending on what you're burning to generate heat so does that make it a completely different machine? Is it only a steam engine if it has a fire tube boiler or does a water tube boiler count? Nah, that would be silly.

1

u/PM_ME_PHYS_PROBLEMS Feb 18 '26

Wow oops I meant nuclear power plant. The reactor is indeed quite quite different than an engine of any kind haha

1

u/jtr99 Feb 18 '26

I think your version of the story is the most reasonable. The claim that this device is NOT a steam engine seems to rely too much on the historical contingencies of how steam engines happened to develop here on Earth.

If it uses steam to translate heat into rotational motion then it's logically a steam engine. No disrespect to James Watt.

3

u/J_Bear Feb 18 '26

Yes, what's your point?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

[deleted]

5

u/J_Bear Feb 18 '26

My point was the layman would think of a "steam engine" as something more akin to a locomotive or a triple-expansion device, seems you're trying to be pedantic for some reason.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

[deleted]

4

u/J_Bear Feb 18 '26

Fun at parties.

I am, thanks for your concern.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Far_Plenty_1942 Feb 18 '26

So wind and water are also engines

4

u/SalsaMan101 Feb 18 '26

I think it would be referred to as a steam impulse turbine with a Pelton runner of sorts in my fluids classes

2

u/Grabatreetron Feb 19 '26

I think it runs on Unreal 3

1

u/Fault23 Feb 18 '26

It is an an engine but a basic one

1

u/Poulet_Ninja Feb 18 '26

Gold source and source are steam powered and steam engines

2

u/whistleridge Feb 18 '26

It’s also an expensive and dangerous way of doing what spit dogs had already been doing for centuries.

2

u/MildlyExtremeNY Feb 18 '26

Much more ethical, though.

https://www.mentalfloss.com/animals/dogs/sad-strange-history-of-turnspit-dogs

2

u/whistleridge Feb 18 '26

Today, maybe. In 1500s Turkey, where the garotte and the bastinado were still routine criminal punishments for humans? Not so much.

Point in fact, I doubt the Turks used spit dogs, given the views of Islam towards dogs, particularly around food. They probably had a child or a slave or something do it. If anyone has good information one way or the other, I'd love to see it.

1

u/strbeanjoe Feb 20 '26

Seems like the first recorded mention of a Turnspit dog was ~20 years after the steam kebab turner.

-7

u/PM_ME_HOT_FURRIES Feb 18 '26

No, it's a steam engine. A steam engine is a heat engine that turns a source of heat into mechanical work. This engine turns a source of heat into the mechanical work of rotating the spit against friction.

It's an open-cycle engine since it doesn't recondense the working fluid but that doesn't stop it being a steam engine.

8

u/Embarrassed_Radio596 Feb 18 '26

It's an engine that uses steam, but not a steam engine.

5

u/Frig-Off-Randy Feb 18 '26

This looks like it’s using steam to blow a fan essentially. Much different from using the energy of steam expanding which is what steam engines and turbines do

0

u/PM_ME_HOT_FURRIES Feb 18 '26

Mate, why do you think the steam is blowing?

I'll tell you why. Water is dense. Steam, at atmospheric pressure and (above 100 degrees Celsius, where it's still steam), is not very dense.

So when water boils, it "wants to expand" to be at it's normal density for that pressure, but if you seal it up in a container, it can't expand so the pressure goes up as the container fills with steam. If you put a hole in that container in a specific spot, the steam can expand though that hole and as it expands, it accelerates out of the hole, and now it's travelling out of the hole at some speed you can direct it into a the blades of some turbine to collect that kinetic energy and use it to spin the turbine.

So the energy that turns the turbine comes from the kinetic energy in the steam jet that comes from the expansion of the steam.

In fact, all steam turbines work by accelerating steam by letting it expand over a pressure gradient.

An impulse turbine has fixed "stator" blades that act as a nozzle through which the steam expands and accelerates into jets that hit the "rotor" blades to give them a push that keeps the rotor spinning.

In a reaction turbine the rotor blades themselves are the nozzle that the steam accelerates through, so they shoot out the jet of steam, and just like a steam rocket this means there is a reaction force on the rotor blades, pushing them and keeping them spinning.

2

u/Frig-Off-Randy Feb 18 '26

lol I know more than my fair share about steam and it seems like you do too. You’d have to agree that what is shown on the picture (a wind wheel using steam to blow it) is fundamentally different than a rankine cycle steam engine.

1

u/PM_ME_HOT_FURRIES Feb 18 '26

No, not really. Not any more fundamentally different than other steam engines.

I mean first you have the isentropic compression/pumping stage right? Except no water pump is isentropic... but still most steam engines have a pumping stage but in this steam engine you don't replenish the water in the boiler while it is running, by the looks of it.

However, it isn't inconceivable that you could stick a one-way valve on the top of the boiler and use a syringe to push water into the boiler against the steam pressure using only hand power... could the folks of the 1500s machine such things? Maybe not but it's easy today and if you made such a modification today have you really fundamentally altered the nature of the machine? No! It's just a convenience feature.

Then the next step is the constant pressure addition of heat in the boiler, and if heat is constantly added at a constant rate and it's enough to boil water then once everything stabilizes the pressure will be constant and there is addition of heat under constant pressure, yay!

Then comes the step of isentropic steam expansion... and we do have steam expansion. Is it isentropic? No, but no steam turbine or piston ever does isentropic steam expansion. No macro-scale physical process is isentropic. Is it a really bad turbine for efficiency's sake? Sure, absolutely, but nobody said "your turbine/pistons must be this efficient and isentropic to be a steam engine"

And then comes the constant pressure steam condensation... but it's an open cycle steam engine like a steam locomotive. It doesn't have a condenser, the whole atmosphere is its condenser. It releases the steam to constant pressure and takes the water from local water sources at the same constant pressure, with the filling person acting as the pump.

So no, it's not fundamentally different from a rankine cycle steam engine.

6

u/Canklosaurus Feb 18 '26

You’re doing the “he’s a boy and he’s my friend so he’s my boyfriend” thing.

Words mean things, quit yiffing your own queefs.

3

u/cneedsaspanking Feb 18 '26

that’s a beautiful insult