cyclone engine
Posted by Harry Schoell
|
Re: cyclone engine February 12, 2008 03:32PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
HI Bill
The rings are working great. Just a peek ring is not the total answer as it is a total system not just one material. Jim Has been of emence help as there is no substute for experence ,and he will not put his name on wild claims. Yes the calculated efficency numbers are higher, however caution must be excerised and only true tested data be published as such, The theroetical is still the theroetical and is used for calculations and goals.
Harry
The rings are working great. Just a peek ring is not the total answer as it is a total system not just one material. Jim Has been of emence help as there is no substute for experence ,and he will not put his name on wild claims. Yes the calculated efficency numbers are higher, however caution must be excerised and only true tested data be published as such, The theroetical is still the theroetical and is used for calculations and goals.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine February 12, 2008 07:20PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Jim,
-"if it is done right and the Cyclone, to my mind, is the only one that shows great promise."
-"Congress has taken the simplistic approach, focusing on mileage, since they cannot comprehend the scope of the car propulsion problem."
As a matter of fact, most people in general, tend to do this Jim. Unless your at the advanced engineering level, you cannot see the symetry between the rest of the car and the propulsion system. By the way, I am knowledgable of all phases of construction, for what I do, I do my own 3d cad work, then develope the process to make parts with my machine tools, then send it off the the CNC guys.
-"The Cyclone can burn pure bio fuel oils now and as clean as possible. Low firebox pressure and long term fuel particle residence time in the burner eliminates most pollution. Using secondary air keeps the flame temperature below 2300°F and eliminates NOX. The steamer can be cleaner than any other fuel burning engine."
-"The Diesel, while a nice engine, has serious soot and NOX problems that only one very expensive exhaust system can help."
Jim, again, I agree with what your saying there. You dont need a fancy Catalectic convertor exhaust system, if your using external-combustion.
-"When Harry does his dyno runs and proves the endurance and technical success of the Cyclone, then I am putting one in a sports car and sending it all over to the "Green" car shows and anywhere else that would benefit his company."
Dynotest's are everything. You really dont know what you actually have until you run them. Even with my concept engine, i use a hydralic pump to load the engine conditions, such as throttling. I gennerally see psi's to 800 hydralic at 2.4gpm, with engine speeds in the range of 500rpm +- 50rpm .
Andy,
-"Mainly you are not restricted by geometry with electronics."
I agree. And if you saw the solid state (mosfet) arrays that im working with, you would think they were for radar circuits. There is 0% arking at the switching points. I eliminate back-voltage as best I can with my inductor.
By the way, everybodys is going to have to cut me some slack, Ive been brainstorming a new patent for the past 7 days, thats why I have been overly sensitive lately.
Harry,
Im sure, it would be no big deal, to hook up one of those 8kw belt driven generators to one of your running prototype engines. Plug in 8 of those 500watt halagen bulbs into that, see what happens, its only a 4000watt load. I have attached a couple of pictures of what im talking about with the genny.
Jeremy
-"if it is done right and the Cyclone, to my mind, is the only one that shows great promise."
-"Congress has taken the simplistic approach, focusing on mileage, since they cannot comprehend the scope of the car propulsion problem."
As a matter of fact, most people in general, tend to do this Jim. Unless your at the advanced engineering level, you cannot see the symetry between the rest of the car and the propulsion system. By the way, I am knowledgable of all phases of construction, for what I do, I do my own 3d cad work, then develope the process to make parts with my machine tools, then send it off the the CNC guys.
-"The Cyclone can burn pure bio fuel oils now and as clean as possible. Low firebox pressure and long term fuel particle residence time in the burner eliminates most pollution. Using secondary air keeps the flame temperature below 2300°F and eliminates NOX. The steamer can be cleaner than any other fuel burning engine."
-"The Diesel, while a nice engine, has serious soot and NOX problems that only one very expensive exhaust system can help."
Jim, again, I agree with what your saying there. You dont need a fancy Catalectic convertor exhaust system, if your using external-combustion.
-"When Harry does his dyno runs and proves the endurance and technical success of the Cyclone, then I am putting one in a sports car and sending it all over to the "Green" car shows and anywhere else that would benefit his company."
Dynotest's are everything. You really dont know what you actually have until you run them. Even with my concept engine, i use a hydralic pump to load the engine conditions, such as throttling. I gennerally see psi's to 800 hydralic at 2.4gpm, with engine speeds in the range of 500rpm +- 50rpm .
Andy,
-"Mainly you are not restricted by geometry with electronics."
I agree. And if you saw the solid state (mosfet) arrays that im working with, you would think they were for radar circuits. There is 0% arking at the switching points. I eliminate back-voltage as best I can with my inductor.
By the way, everybodys is going to have to cut me some slack, Ive been brainstorming a new patent for the past 7 days, thats why I have been overly sensitive lately.
Harry,
Im sure, it would be no big deal, to hook up one of those 8kw belt driven generators to one of your running prototype engines. Plug in 8 of those 500watt halagen bulbs into that, see what happens, its only a 4000watt load. I have attached a couple of pictures of what im talking about with the genny.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 12, 2008 07:26PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
|
Re: cyclone engine February 12, 2008 08:15PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
There was something that Ben in Maine said,
Its from a while back, He described this room with a crystal chandelier suspended over a lathe. This guy that was working with that lathe, stated that the lamp fixture gave the best lighting conditions, for him, when working with that lathe.
Anyway its stuck in my head right now, putting a smile on my face. Since I have a DRO with 3 digits behind the decimal point, accuracy on the read out.
Jeremy
Its from a while back, He described this room with a crystal chandelier suspended over a lathe. This guy that was working with that lathe, stated that the lamp fixture gave the best lighting conditions, for him, when working with that lathe.
Anyway its stuck in my head right now, putting a smile on my face. Since I have a DRO with 3 digits behind the decimal point, accuracy on the read out.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 13, 2008 10:27AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
Andy,
Look, there is only one thing that can open the door for the Cyclone engine being used in automobiles. Success being seen in some other field first.
Harry is absolutely right in choosing to go with lawnmower type engines at first, a much needed and much easier goal. This gives the Cyclone a grand first exposure.
Then worry about using it in cars.
Do we or do we not get free of imported oil, and do we or do we not do our best to eliminate CO2? If global warming is such a hazard to the human race, and I now think it is, then someone has to do something about providing an engine for the automobile that uses pure bio-fuel oils and drastically reduces CO2. E-85 alcohol is a bad joke and politically driven.
Detroit is not going to look at the steam engine until they finally realize that for cars, light trucks and in particular large interstate trucks, something besides the Diesel has to be available. Their soot and NOX problems are very severe and simply inherent in that engine.
In reality, they have to have their noses pushed into seeing that the Rankine cycle engine can do the job, they are not going to do that on their own. That I know for a solid fact. How can they competently investigate an engine they know nothing about, and right now, don't even want to know?
Now, if and when the Cyclone is well proven to be able to do the job, then some car maker is going to investigate it. The one in the most serious financial peril.
Debating whether or not it meets some efficiency goal right now is irrelevant. Let him do his dyno runs, then discuss what came out of it.
I accept Harry's numbers just because another member of his Board, and long time very accomplished engineer friend of mine, also agrees with what he says. Both of us are worse than people from Missouri, we want to see it in person or be able to verify the numbers from the collected data. To date, the Cyclone shows great promise and both of us want to help all we can.
Since the rest is all talk and no hardware, I am backing Harry, if for no other reason than that he has actually done it for real. I also like his approach.
Anyone who makes statements that are false, and also goes public with them, is committing suicide. He will be found out and then vilified. I refer to many of the old "Clean Air Car" projects that produced no running cars that could be used, in spite of all the hot air and promises, AND the contrived and wildly extrapolated claims they made. The old; "Now if we do this, then this is going to happen." Guess what, it did not happen in those experiments. Steamers are one very tough engineering problem to do correctly. Many of us know that already. Sure, something can wobble around the parking lot dripping water all over the place; but that is NOT a modern steam car. It is an interesting toy to play with and fun for the builder. To get serious, it takes cubic money.
Also, no responsible engine developer is ever going to publicly release his experimental data. He will repeat the test runs over and over, and then be cautious and downgrade it a bit, just to be reliable. Then say something.
The thing that really bothers me is this new Congressional mandate. If enforced, it is going to almost ruin the American car industry, because of the more than unsatisfactory vehicles made to satisfy that mandate. The alternatives, like hydrogen, fuel cells and hybrids, are simply nothing more than publicity stunts and very costly placebos. To be charitable, call them stepping stones. Yes, they work; but can you afford them? In point of fact, can Detroit ever afford to completely go to one of these systems? Would they even bet the farm on any one of them and risk everything?
Right now, the new Diesels and the Rankine cycle are the only power sources I can think of that will not only make the U.S. oil free; but reduce CO2. The Diesel is here now; but with terrible NOX and soot problems that are very costly to contain.
The gasoline engine is now burdened with so much ancillary hardware and electronics, that I for one cannot see it getting much better. What else can one do to that engine? How many Band-Aids can one slap on the engine before it becomes just not commercially viable any more?
The Rankine cycle is facing a terrible battle to ever get Detroit to even admit it could be an answer. Past failed work has soured them to a fair-thee-well. They just do not have the background or technical expertise to even honestly and competently review the engine.
The fuel source people are stepping up to solve that problem, now it remains for the engine developers to also do the same.
When Harry gets his dynos, then all the speculation about what he has done and is doing, will be put to rest. Full dyno testing for endurance and proving the technical gains are the absolute key and more than just necessary. They will verify the success of the Cyclone, or point to where more development is required.
No one ever hit the bulls eye on the first try.
From an long background with steam cars, I consider the Cyclone as the only real Rankine cycle system that can possibly work and be competitive. Harry has single handed dragged the steamer out of the 19th century and into the 21st century.
Jim
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2008 04:38PM by James D. Crank.
Look, there is only one thing that can open the door for the Cyclone engine being used in automobiles. Success being seen in some other field first.
Harry is absolutely right in choosing to go with lawnmower type engines at first, a much needed and much easier goal. This gives the Cyclone a grand first exposure.
Then worry about using it in cars.
Do we or do we not get free of imported oil, and do we or do we not do our best to eliminate CO2? If global warming is such a hazard to the human race, and I now think it is, then someone has to do something about providing an engine for the automobile that uses pure bio-fuel oils and drastically reduces CO2. E-85 alcohol is a bad joke and politically driven.
Detroit is not going to look at the steam engine until they finally realize that for cars, light trucks and in particular large interstate trucks, something besides the Diesel has to be available. Their soot and NOX problems are very severe and simply inherent in that engine.
In reality, they have to have their noses pushed into seeing that the Rankine cycle engine can do the job, they are not going to do that on their own. That I know for a solid fact. How can they competently investigate an engine they know nothing about, and right now, don't even want to know?
Now, if and when the Cyclone is well proven to be able to do the job, then some car maker is going to investigate it. The one in the most serious financial peril.
Debating whether or not it meets some efficiency goal right now is irrelevant. Let him do his dyno runs, then discuss what came out of it.
I accept Harry's numbers just because another member of his Board, and long time very accomplished engineer friend of mine, also agrees with what he says. Both of us are worse than people from Missouri, we want to see it in person or be able to verify the numbers from the collected data. To date, the Cyclone shows great promise and both of us want to help all we can.
Since the rest is all talk and no hardware, I am backing Harry, if for no other reason than that he has actually done it for real. I also like his approach.
Anyone who makes statements that are false, and also goes public with them, is committing suicide. He will be found out and then vilified. I refer to many of the old "Clean Air Car" projects that produced no running cars that could be used, in spite of all the hot air and promises, AND the contrived and wildly extrapolated claims they made. The old; "Now if we do this, then this is going to happen." Guess what, it did not happen in those experiments. Steamers are one very tough engineering problem to do correctly. Many of us know that already. Sure, something can wobble around the parking lot dripping water all over the place; but that is NOT a modern steam car. It is an interesting toy to play with and fun for the builder. To get serious, it takes cubic money.
Also, no responsible engine developer is ever going to publicly release his experimental data. He will repeat the test runs over and over, and then be cautious and downgrade it a bit, just to be reliable. Then say something.
The thing that really bothers me is this new Congressional mandate. If enforced, it is going to almost ruin the American car industry, because of the more than unsatisfactory vehicles made to satisfy that mandate. The alternatives, like hydrogen, fuel cells and hybrids, are simply nothing more than publicity stunts and very costly placebos. To be charitable, call them stepping stones. Yes, they work; but can you afford them? In point of fact, can Detroit ever afford to completely go to one of these systems? Would they even bet the farm on any one of them and risk everything?
Right now, the new Diesels and the Rankine cycle are the only power sources I can think of that will not only make the U.S. oil free; but reduce CO2. The Diesel is here now; but with terrible NOX and soot problems that are very costly to contain.
The gasoline engine is now burdened with so much ancillary hardware and electronics, that I for one cannot see it getting much better. What else can one do to that engine? How many Band-Aids can one slap on the engine before it becomes just not commercially viable any more?
The Rankine cycle is facing a terrible battle to ever get Detroit to even admit it could be an answer. Past failed work has soured them to a fair-thee-well. They just do not have the background or technical expertise to even honestly and competently review the engine.
The fuel source people are stepping up to solve that problem, now it remains for the engine developers to also do the same.
When Harry gets his dynos, then all the speculation about what he has done and is doing, will be put to rest. Full dyno testing for endurance and proving the technical gains are the absolute key and more than just necessary. They will verify the success of the Cyclone, or point to where more development is required.
No one ever hit the bulls eye on the first try.
From an long background with steam cars, I consider the Cyclone as the only real Rankine cycle system that can possibly work and be competitive. Harry has single handed dragged the steamer out of the 19th century and into the 21st century.
Jim
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2008 04:38PM by James D. Crank.
|
Re: cyclone engine February 13, 2008 03:51PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Jim
I hope Harry succeeds. I just would like to see some testing so we know how well it really is working. From some of the cycles I have worked out the engine is close enough to that number that with all the heat recovery it should be close when you figure in boiler efficiency of 85%. So 23% efficiency is not out of reason from what I know of Harry's engine.
The only thing that I have a concern about is power range. When you use throttling you have to use a partial expansion to allow room to throttle. The expansion ratio pretty much determines the engine efficiency. You can throttle from max pressure down to the point where you start over expanding below exhaust pressure. And the efficiency will be fairly constant. The lower the expansion ratio the more power range you get from throttling. With throttling, power range and efficiency are at odds with each other.
Andy
I hope Harry succeeds. I just would like to see some testing so we know how well it really is working. From some of the cycles I have worked out the engine is close enough to that number that with all the heat recovery it should be close when you figure in boiler efficiency of 85%. So 23% efficiency is not out of reason from what I know of Harry's engine.
The only thing that I have a concern about is power range. When you use throttling you have to use a partial expansion to allow room to throttle. The expansion ratio pretty much determines the engine efficiency. You can throttle from max pressure down to the point where you start over expanding below exhaust pressure. And the efficiency will be fairly constant. The lower the expansion ratio the more power range you get from throttling. With throttling, power range and efficiency are at odds with each other.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 13, 2008 04:43PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
|
Re: cyclone engine February 13, 2008 05:48PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Jim
Yes most do know about varing cutoff. But I think keeping expansion fairly constant by varing clearance along with cutoff pushing expansion to the highest pritical limit will get the most power range and highest efficiency. But then that wont work all that well with a uniflow engine as the exhaust close is fixed and varing clearance will varing compresion ratio. But you run into speed problems with a single stage of expansion. With a high expansion ratio you quickly run into a limit of how fast you can open and close a valve. And the cutoff being short gives you control problems as resoloution has to be so vary fine.
Maybe I'm confused but I thoought there was variable valve lift to effect throtling in his engine. So that it has variable cutoff and throttling.
Andy
Yes most do know about varing cutoff. But I think keeping expansion fairly constant by varing clearance along with cutoff pushing expansion to the highest pritical limit will get the most power range and highest efficiency. But then that wont work all that well with a uniflow engine as the exhaust close is fixed and varing clearance will varing compresion ratio. But you run into speed problems with a single stage of expansion. With a high expansion ratio you quickly run into a limit of how fast you can open and close a valve. And the cutoff being short gives you control problems as resoloution has to be so vary fine.
Maybe I'm confused but I thoought there was variable valve lift to effect throtling in his engine. So that it has variable cutoff and throttling.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 13, 2008 07:51PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Andy,
-"Maybe I'm confused but I thought there was variable valve lift to effect throttling in his engine. So that it has variable cutoff and throttling."
Harry's engine uses variable timming to effect cutoff. I asked Harry that same question, in a phone conversation with him. I must admit that concept of timming advance and retard, of cutoff adjustment, perplexes me. I guess its a world that I just havn't stepped into, just yet.
I have the capability of using the variable lift and timming adjustment to effect cutoff duration. But...
All of my current prototype engine's do infact, feature fixed timming, generally set to 30% downward piston travel from top-dead,after 1% downward piston travel on a power stroke. I would say the fixed cutoff setting is moderate to mild.
Since the timming setting is fixed, I can effectively throttle my engine's thru the variable lift, during the cycle interval. This how I throttle with a 'fixed' timming advance and duration setting.
Like I thought of saying earlier,
This stuff is like comparing apples to oranges.
Jeremy
-"Maybe I'm confused but I thought there was variable valve lift to effect throttling in his engine. So that it has variable cutoff and throttling."
Harry's engine uses variable timming to effect cutoff. I asked Harry that same question, in a phone conversation with him. I must admit that concept of timming advance and retard, of cutoff adjustment, perplexes me. I guess its a world that I just havn't stepped into, just yet.
I have the capability of using the variable lift and timming adjustment to effect cutoff duration. But...
All of my current prototype engine's do infact, feature fixed timming, generally set to 30% downward piston travel from top-dead,after 1% downward piston travel on a power stroke. I would say the fixed cutoff setting is moderate to mild.
Since the timming setting is fixed, I can effectively throttle my engine's thru the variable lift, during the cycle interval. This how I throttle with a 'fixed' timming advance and duration setting.
Like I thought of saying earlier,
This stuff is like comparing apples to oranges.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 14, 2008 03:58PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
Jeremy,
Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur. The faster the engine runs, the earlier, within reason, the intake valve should open.
The point that I was taught, is to have full admission going on just as soon as the piston has passed actual TDC, the crankshaft is only a degree or so past TDC. Otherwise you are first filling the void. This also influences the expansion ratio.
I have seen this demonstrated in the lab at Beslers. At high engine speed, you could actually see on the scope, a little dip at the end of the compression curve. Then when the timing was altered, this little dip disappeared.
Like all other engine developments, it's all in the details.
Jim
Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur. The faster the engine runs, the earlier, within reason, the intake valve should open.
The point that I was taught, is to have full admission going on just as soon as the piston has passed actual TDC, the crankshaft is only a degree or so past TDC. Otherwise you are first filling the void. This also influences the expansion ratio.
I have seen this demonstrated in the lab at Beslers. At high engine speed, you could actually see on the scope, a little dip at the end of the compression curve. Then when the timing was altered, this little dip disappeared.
Like all other engine developments, it's all in the details.
Jim
|
Re: cyclone engine February 14, 2008 06:27PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Jim,
-"Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur. The faster the engine runs, the earlier, within reason, the intake valve should open. "
Yes, but intake valve timing is fixed on IC engines.
It should do that,
but it dosen't. The timing setting on the camshaft is fixed by the timing chain index. And spark advance is independant of that.
Now, I have worked on several IC engines both V 6cyl and 8cyl (Nissan) that feature a VTC (Variable Timing Camshaft actuator)sprocket with the daul overhead camshafts. So ive seen it work for IC engines. But a good old 460 Ford will blow the doors of that, and its cam timing is fixed.
-"have full admission going on just as soon as the piston has passed actual TDC,"
This exactly what im doing by starting the duration of injection @1% of downward stroke on a power stroke or 1 degree ATDC, the duration is actually a total of, 27.5% downward stroke. Im not sure of exactly what that translates into, with reference to crankshaft degrees on a four cycle engine, atleast in terms of admission duration per single downward piston stroke.
When I think of actual cutoff in any steam engine I think in terms of admission relative to the percentage of a single downward piston stroke, wheither its two stroke(so to speak) or four stroke. When duration is controlled in reference to admission cutoff, I can easily grasp how actual power can be managed, by lenthening or shortening cutoff duration. But I feel actual valve timing advance is just iceing on the cake, unless you intend to run the engine over 4000rpm.
Now, with the Cyclone engine, it may run at 12,000 rpm's I really dont know, but if this is the case, gearing down from those speeds does provide a 3-to-1 mechanical advantage, providing actual engine volumetric efficiency is targeted at those engine (crankshaft) operating speeds(12k rpm).
_"Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur."
Jim, it seems like Andy is always harping on this to me as well. But on the other hand, I can maintain a so-called 'instant' injection event, using electro-magnetism. With the timing settings that im using, I only want to maintain peak torque at or below 4000rpm. Duration is independant of open and close time events. Of course a pressure has to be maintained to keep up with event-speed to achieve sufficient flow thru the arpature, during the event.
_"I have seen this demonstrated in the lab at Beslers. At high engine speed, you could actually see on the scope, a little dip at the end of the compression curve. Then when the timing was altered, this little dip disappeared."
I think that is very significant, Ben has brought up something simular before. But it had to do with water injection and a 4stoke IC engine.
Jeremy
-"Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur. The faster the engine runs, the earlier, within reason, the intake valve should open. "
Yes, but intake valve timing is fixed on IC engines.
It should do that,
but it dosen't. The timing setting on the camshaft is fixed by the timing chain index. And spark advance is independant of that.
Now, I have worked on several IC engines both V 6cyl and 8cyl (Nissan) that feature a VTC (Variable Timing Camshaft actuator)sprocket with the daul overhead camshafts. So ive seen it work for IC engines. But a good old 460 Ford will blow the doors of that, and its cam timing is fixed.
-"have full admission going on just as soon as the piston has passed actual TDC,"
This exactly what im doing by starting the duration of injection @1% of downward stroke on a power stroke or 1 degree ATDC, the duration is actually a total of, 27.5% downward stroke. Im not sure of exactly what that translates into, with reference to crankshaft degrees on a four cycle engine, atleast in terms of admission duration per single downward piston stroke.
When I think of actual cutoff in any steam engine I think in terms of admission relative to the percentage of a single downward piston stroke, wheither its two stroke(so to speak) or four stroke. When duration is controlled in reference to admission cutoff, I can easily grasp how actual power can be managed, by lenthening or shortening cutoff duration. But I feel actual valve timing advance is just iceing on the cake, unless you intend to run the engine over 4000rpm.
Now, with the Cyclone engine, it may run at 12,000 rpm's I really dont know, but if this is the case, gearing down from those speeds does provide a 3-to-1 mechanical advantage, providing actual engine volumetric efficiency is targeted at those engine (crankshaft) operating speeds(12k rpm).
_"Just like an IC engine and its ignition, it takes time for the intake event (firing in the IC engine) to occur."
Jim, it seems like Andy is always harping on this to me as well. But on the other hand, I can maintain a so-called 'instant' injection event, using electro-magnetism. With the timing settings that im using, I only want to maintain peak torque at or below 4000rpm. Duration is independant of open and close time events. Of course a pressure has to be maintained to keep up with event-speed to achieve sufficient flow thru the arpature, during the event.
_"I have seen this demonstrated in the lab at Beslers. At high engine speed, you could actually see on the scope, a little dip at the end of the compression curve. Then when the timing was altered, this little dip disappeared."
I think that is very significant, Ben has brought up something simular before. But it had to do with water injection and a 4stoke IC engine.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 15, 2008 10:07AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
Jeremy,
Read it again. What I said was that the inlet valve timing on a steam engine should behave similar to the ignition timing of a gas engine.
When the engine is running fast, it still takes time for the inlet event to take place, so it is necessary to slightly advance the actual opening of the inlet valve a bit before actual TDC. Not much; but the only way to actually determine this is to use a pressure transducer and a scope to watch the actual event. Then change the timing to get it right.
You don't want any dip in the compression pressure at the end of that event before the steam starts entering the cylinder. This influences the total expansion.
The thing one wants is for the inlet event to take place as soon after actual TDC on the crankshaft as possible.
It the engine is to run at some 1500 rpm, this is not all that important; but if it is to run at some 3,000 rpm or more, then it is quite important.
No matter what, it still takes time for the flow of steam to start and the faster the engine runs the more compensation you have to provide.
It may appear to be frosting on the cake; but these little details are what goes into a good steam engine design vs. an ordinary one.
Peak torque is totally dependent on the actual BMEP in the cylinder for the entire stroke of the piston. The bore-stroke ratio also influences this.
Be careful about magnetic inlet valves. Dobles tried this once and it worked just fine until the coils got hot. The resistance went up, the gauss strength went down and it finally just quit working. Heat conduction into the coil was the culprit.
Jim
Read it again. What I said was that the inlet valve timing on a steam engine should behave similar to the ignition timing of a gas engine.
When the engine is running fast, it still takes time for the inlet event to take place, so it is necessary to slightly advance the actual opening of the inlet valve a bit before actual TDC. Not much; but the only way to actually determine this is to use a pressure transducer and a scope to watch the actual event. Then change the timing to get it right.
You don't want any dip in the compression pressure at the end of that event before the steam starts entering the cylinder. This influences the total expansion.
The thing one wants is for the inlet event to take place as soon after actual TDC on the crankshaft as possible.
It the engine is to run at some 1500 rpm, this is not all that important; but if it is to run at some 3,000 rpm or more, then it is quite important.
No matter what, it still takes time for the flow of steam to start and the faster the engine runs the more compensation you have to provide.
It may appear to be frosting on the cake; but these little details are what goes into a good steam engine design vs. an ordinary one.
Peak torque is totally dependent on the actual BMEP in the cylinder for the entire stroke of the piston. The bore-stroke ratio also influences this.
Be careful about magnetic inlet valves. Dobles tried this once and it worked just fine until the coils got hot. The resistance went up, the gauss strength went down and it finally just quit working. Heat conduction into the coil was the culprit.
Jim
|
Re: cyclone engine February 15, 2008 11:46AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
HI Andy,
I have never made any hard efficency claims,no matter how hard I have been proded. We have real runing engines not cartoon ones. I never asked money from any one but built it on my own money until I got varification from thermo experts from F.A.U. I still did not ask for money as my friends voluntered and I have a good reputation. Cartoon engines always work. When you go through 50 different fuel injectors 5 different head designs many pistons and ring designs and materials. A normal test run is about an hour on a daily basis to gather data, mostly all thermal. Progress has been very positive, and were are gaining a lot of data so when more engines are designed we only have to go to our book and no how to do it. I do what I say, and four years ago I laid out a program of what we were doing and it is happening. At the present time this data is private between us and our licencies.
Harry
I have never made any hard efficency claims,no matter how hard I have been proded. We have real runing engines not cartoon ones. I never asked money from any one but built it on my own money until I got varification from thermo experts from F.A.U. I still did not ask for money as my friends voluntered and I have a good reputation. Cartoon engines always work. When you go through 50 different fuel injectors 5 different head designs many pistons and ring designs and materials. A normal test run is about an hour on a daily basis to gather data, mostly all thermal. Progress has been very positive, and were are gaining a lot of data so when more engines are designed we only have to go to our book and no how to do it. I do what I say, and four years ago I laid out a program of what we were doing and it is happening. At the present time this data is private between us and our licencies.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine February 15, 2008 11:51AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,268 |
Hi Guys,
I think also that, in the end, for efficiency, the flow dynamics through the inlet valves need approach that of a good IC piston engine. I know that the extreme pressures in a steam engine do not easily allow for this, consequently the tiny inlet valves seen in most steam engines. The higher the inlet pressure the harder the valve mechanics become, and hence the smaller the valves become.
High steam pressures do allow a lot more steam to enter past a small valve than the much lower air pressures do for air in an IC engine. Still the small inlet openings found in most steam engines will take a toll on the constant pressure process, and if bad valve dynamics dictate long opening and closing times, then wire drawing is taking place throughout the inlet valve cycle. It's all those trade-offs all over again.
For maximum efficiency, steam has to flow just like air. Not easy to do. The inlet duration time in a steam engine at 30% cutoff is 1/5 or less the inlet duration time of an IC engine. Demanded also is that the valve full open to full close duration is much much less. And by the way, totally variable cutoff and advance would be nice.
Best, ------- Bill G.
I think also that, in the end, for efficiency, the flow dynamics through the inlet valves need approach that of a good IC piston engine. I know that the extreme pressures in a steam engine do not easily allow for this, consequently the tiny inlet valves seen in most steam engines. The higher the inlet pressure the harder the valve mechanics become, and hence the smaller the valves become.
High steam pressures do allow a lot more steam to enter past a small valve than the much lower air pressures do for air in an IC engine. Still the small inlet openings found in most steam engines will take a toll on the constant pressure process, and if bad valve dynamics dictate long opening and closing times, then wire drawing is taking place throughout the inlet valve cycle. It's all those trade-offs all over again.
For maximum efficiency, steam has to flow just like air. Not easy to do. The inlet duration time in a steam engine at 30% cutoff is 1/5 or less the inlet duration time of an IC engine. Demanded also is that the valve full open to full close duration is much much less. And by the way, totally variable cutoff and advance would be nice.
Best, ------- Bill G.
|
Re: cyclone engine February 15, 2008 08:24PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
I like that.
-"If the engine is to run at some 1500 rpm, this is not all that important; but if it is to run at some 3,000 rpm or more, then it is quite important.
No matter what, it still takes time for the flow of steam to start and the faster the engine runs the more compensation you have to provide.
It may appear to be frosting on the cake; but these little details are what goes into a good steam engine design vs. an ordinary one."
This is why im here, Jim.
I hope to hear, that your still working on the LSR project that Harrys attempting.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 16, 2008 10:28AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
HI Jeremy
The LSR car is being built and designed bu Chuk Williams, of course Jim and others will be putting in input. Chuk attended the advisory board meeting as the car was one of the topics of descusion. Cyclone will be supplying the engine and a few other parts. It would be appreciated if some of you folks would help Chuk in his indever. A lot of people talk about it , he is doing it. Send him some money and be part of the team. We would like to do a project,it is diffulct alone so get on a team.
Harry
The LSR car is being built and designed bu Chuk Williams, of course Jim and others will be putting in input. Chuk attended the advisory board meeting as the car was one of the topics of descusion. Cyclone will be supplying the engine and a few other parts. It would be appreciated if some of you folks would help Chuk in his indever. A lot of people talk about it , he is doing it. Send him some money and be part of the team. We would like to do a project,it is diffulct alone so get on a team.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine February 16, 2008 02:07PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Harry,
-"It would be appreciated if some of you folks would help Chuk in his indever. A lot of people talk about it , he is doing it. Send him some money and be part of the team. We would like to do a project,it is diffulct alone so get on a team."
Is there a direct link to an application form, If so please advise. I think this is a worthwhile endeaver.
Something like the SACA membership application. Ive printed one of these out, filled it out, and am going to send it out this week in the mail. Ive been meaning to do this for awhile, put im going for 3 years to start out with the club.
Also, I want to say that the SACA forum, here, is really great, its totally free for anyone to participate, I think its one of the really great technical forums that are out there on the net.
Jim,
-"Be careful about magnetic inlet valves. Dobles tried this once and it worked just fine until the coils got hot. The resistance went up, the gauss strength went down and it finally just quit working. Heat conduction into the coil was the culprit."
I have attached a picture from at least 4 years ago, I cant say much more about it, for now.
Best to all
Jeremy
-"It would be appreciated if some of you folks would help Chuk in his indever. A lot of people talk about it , he is doing it. Send him some money and be part of the team. We would like to do a project,it is diffulct alone so get on a team."
Is there a direct link to an application form, If so please advise. I think this is a worthwhile endeaver.
Something like the SACA membership application. Ive printed one of these out, filled it out, and am going to send it out this week in the mail. Ive been meaning to do this for awhile, put im going for 3 years to start out with the club.
Also, I want to say that the SACA forum, here, is really great, its totally free for anyone to participate, I think its one of the really great technical forums that are out there on the net.
Jim,
-"Be careful about magnetic inlet valves. Dobles tried this once and it worked just fine until the coils got hot. The resistance went up, the gauss strength went down and it finally just quit working. Heat conduction into the coil was the culprit."
I have attached a picture from at least 4 years ago, I cant say much more about it, for now.
Best to all
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine February 18, 2008 11:26PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 336 |
Jeremy--
I would like to thank you for your vote of confidence and your support
for the LSR Project. At the present time, we don't have the USLSR site up and
running-so we're not set up to receive support/funds via the internet. The site
will be up and running in the near future, and there will be a simple, straighforward method of contributing to the Project at that time. We have had
several direct ("here's some $$ for the LSR Project"
contributions from individuals already, so things are looking promising!!
At the moment, I'm still working on the design of the LSR streamliner,
and it's looking good...and fast....
Cheers--Chuk Williams **USLSR Project**
|
Re: cyclone engine March 14, 2008 06:23PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Harry
I have been thinking about super-critical steam, or how to explain that there is a phase change above the supercritical pressure. And the point I didn't get across is the defining characteristic difference between a gas and a liquid.
Answer: Compressibility.
A liquid is a non-compressible fluid while a gas (steam) is compressible.
My point is that at 3200 PSI and 1100F you have a gas. Not a liquid. Dropping the pressure results in expansion. If it were a liquid dropping the pressure would not result in expansion. Part or all would flash into steam and then expand.
If we look at the density at 3200 PSIA. The saturated liquid density is 22.36 lb/ft^3. The saturated vapor density is 17.65 lb/ft^3 and at 1100F the density is 3.88 lb/ft^3
The gas at 1100F has 112.7 times the compressibility of the saturated liquid at 3200 PSIA. That is the volume change at 1100F for 1 PSI change is 112.7 times as great.
The thing is that at 3200 PSIA the phase change only results in a 27% increase in volume. The vapor continues to increase in volume as it is heated to that 1100F. The saturated specific volume of the vapor is 1.27 times the liquids. And the low enthalpy change from liquid to gas state, of 56.1 BTU/lb, probably occurs in a very short length of tube. And the small volume change of 1.27 doesn’t result in large bubbles.
Compare that to 1000 PSIA an 800F
3200 PSIA 1.27 increase in volume to liquid with 56.1 BTU/lb input
1000 PSIA 20.65 increase in volume change with 650.39 BTU/lb input
I agree with you logic of using high pressure. The above illistartes the differance in the evaporation zone length between 1000 PSIA and 3200 PSIA. When you figure in the velocity change differance etc. There is great advantage in operatoring at high pressure control wise.
Above the critical pressure there is no temperature where both the liquid and gas state can coexist. There is simply a point where it becomes a compressible fluid.
I support you effort. The problem is that it is all over the web that, the Cyclone engine operates super critical and that super critical steam acts like a liquid. That is just not the case. At 3200 PSIA you are not even super critical. That’s below the super critical pressure. And even at super critical there a difference between the liquid state and gas state. Gas is compressible and liquid is not.
I just think you should not be calling it super critical or that it acts like a liquid.
Andy
I have been thinking about super-critical steam, or how to explain that there is a phase change above the supercritical pressure. And the point I didn't get across is the defining characteristic difference between a gas and a liquid.
Answer: Compressibility.
A liquid is a non-compressible fluid while a gas (steam) is compressible.
My point is that at 3200 PSI and 1100F you have a gas. Not a liquid. Dropping the pressure results in expansion. If it were a liquid dropping the pressure would not result in expansion. Part or all would flash into steam and then expand.
If we look at the density at 3200 PSIA. The saturated liquid density is 22.36 lb/ft^3. The saturated vapor density is 17.65 lb/ft^3 and at 1100F the density is 3.88 lb/ft^3
The gas at 1100F has 112.7 times the compressibility of the saturated liquid at 3200 PSIA. That is the volume change at 1100F for 1 PSI change is 112.7 times as great.
The thing is that at 3200 PSIA the phase change only results in a 27% increase in volume. The vapor continues to increase in volume as it is heated to that 1100F. The saturated specific volume of the vapor is 1.27 times the liquids. And the low enthalpy change from liquid to gas state, of 56.1 BTU/lb, probably occurs in a very short length of tube. And the small volume change of 1.27 doesn’t result in large bubbles.
Compare that to 1000 PSIA an 800F
3200 PSIA 1.27 increase in volume to liquid with 56.1 BTU/lb input
1000 PSIA 20.65 increase in volume change with 650.39 BTU/lb input
I agree with you logic of using high pressure. The above illistartes the differance in the evaporation zone length between 1000 PSIA and 3200 PSIA. When you figure in the velocity change differance etc. There is great advantage in operatoring at high pressure control wise.
Above the critical pressure there is no temperature where both the liquid and gas state can coexist. There is simply a point where it becomes a compressible fluid.
I support you effort. The problem is that it is all over the web that, the Cyclone engine operates super critical and that super critical steam acts like a liquid. That is just not the case. At 3200 PSIA you are not even super critical. That’s below the super critical pressure. And even at super critical there a difference between the liquid state and gas state. Gas is compressible and liquid is not.
I just think you should not be calling it super critical or that it acts like a liquid.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine March 15, 2008 12:57AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Andy,
"I have been thinking about super-critical steam, or how to explain that there is a phase change above the supercritical pressure."
"Answer: Compressibility."
No,no, sorry
The answer is elasticity...
Be sure, that you have done some actual exprimenting, before you step into such a 'proposed' set of variables,
For example-
[hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu]
[www.mdpi.org]
[web.mit.edu]
Harry tells me the the 'D-cycle' is the exact same thing as a four cycle flash steam engine cycle. Quite frankly, I believe the 'D-cycle' explains water-injection into a 4-cycle IC engine.
Jeremy
EDIT-
[hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu]
just in case the reader did not follow thru on that first link 'entropy'-
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/2008 01:02AM by Jeremy Holmes.
"I have been thinking about super-critical steam, or how to explain that there is a phase change above the supercritical pressure."
"Answer: Compressibility."
No,no, sorry
The answer is elasticity...
Be sure, that you have done some actual exprimenting, before you step into such a 'proposed' set of variables,
For example-
[hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu]
[www.mdpi.org]
[web.mit.edu]
Harry tells me the the 'D-cycle' is the exact same thing as a four cycle flash steam engine cycle. Quite frankly, I believe the 'D-cycle' explains water-injection into a 4-cycle IC engine.
Jeremy
EDIT-
[hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu]
just in case the reader did not follow thru on that first link 'entropy'-
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/2008 01:02AM by Jeremy Holmes.
|
Re: cyclone engine March 15, 2008 10:39AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Andy
If you look back you will remember that I refered to supercritical as a fluid and explaned it as such. Super critical does start at 3205. I think a simple explanation is the reverse of ice. Ice expands with an increse in volume but a lowering of density. of course ice stops. The pressure of ice expansion is huge.
We will be operating obove the super critical pressure and adiquite super heat for complete expansion. Of course you would imagine we would have tested upper limits. We do.
Jeremy
I don't know how your engine relates exactly to the D cycle, It is however two cycle. The patents are long past and I have had conversations with the inventor as his name is one of the references on our patent. He did say what he was doing was far removed from what he was doing. Thay had to put in some references.
Did you look into some of this technoligy? Still waiting for your visit.
Harry
If you look back you will remember that I refered to supercritical as a fluid and explaned it as such. Super critical does start at 3205. I think a simple explanation is the reverse of ice. Ice expands with an increse in volume but a lowering of density. of course ice stops. The pressure of ice expansion is huge.
We will be operating obove the super critical pressure and adiquite super heat for complete expansion. Of course you would imagine we would have tested upper limits. We do.
Jeremy
I don't know how your engine relates exactly to the D cycle, It is however two cycle. The patents are long past and I have had conversations with the inventor as his name is one of the references on our patent. He did say what he was doing was far removed from what he was doing. Thay had to put in some references.
Did you look into some of this technoligy? Still waiting for your visit.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine March 17, 2008 10:06AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Harry.
Even above the critical pressure there is a gas and liquid state. It depends on the temperature. The things you state about controlling problems of past monotube boilers is right on. It is the vaporization zone on the lower pressure monotube boilers that causes control problems. Even operatoring close to the critical pressure at 3200 PSIA you have reduced the vaporization expansion to 1.27. Compared to one operatoring at 1000 PSIA, having a vaporization expansion of 20.65, your vaporization zone is minimal. Above the critical pressure there is no vaporization expansion. There is a transition from a liquid to gas. I am not sure one could say there is a specific temperature the change takes place. But I can find the center point of the density slop change by taking the second order derivative of the density with respect to temperature and solving for the 0. The max/min of the first order derivative d(d)/dT. Using that method to find the saturation line works below and above the critical pressure. I posted a mathcad work sheet before that illustrated that method. Below the critical pressure it solves for the saturation line and agrees exactly with it. It continues right on up past the critical pressure.
The compressibility follows the same line as well. At 1200F at 4000 PSIA you would have super heated steam. It would is well into the compressible range. As you heat the liquid its compressibility is very small and doesn't change much with temperature until you reach the saturation temperature. Below the critical point there is step change in compressibility as it changes into vapor. Increasing the temperature further the compressibility increases at a much greater rate with temperature. As you approach the critical pressure the compressibility difference decreases. At the critical pressure and above there is just a gradual continuous change in compressibility as you cross the state change line (A continuation of the saturation line).
Andy
Even above the critical pressure there is a gas and liquid state. It depends on the temperature. The things you state about controlling problems of past monotube boilers is right on. It is the vaporization zone on the lower pressure monotube boilers that causes control problems. Even operatoring close to the critical pressure at 3200 PSIA you have reduced the vaporization expansion to 1.27. Compared to one operatoring at 1000 PSIA, having a vaporization expansion of 20.65, your vaporization zone is minimal. Above the critical pressure there is no vaporization expansion. There is a transition from a liquid to gas. I am not sure one could say there is a specific temperature the change takes place. But I can find the center point of the density slop change by taking the second order derivative of the density with respect to temperature and solving for the 0. The max/min of the first order derivative d(d)/dT. Using that method to find the saturation line works below and above the critical pressure. I posted a mathcad work sheet before that illustrated that method. Below the critical pressure it solves for the saturation line and agrees exactly with it. It continues right on up past the critical pressure.
The compressibility follows the same line as well. At 1200F at 4000 PSIA you would have super heated steam. It would is well into the compressible range. As you heat the liquid its compressibility is very small and doesn't change much with temperature until you reach the saturation temperature. Below the critical point there is step change in compressibility as it changes into vapor. Increasing the temperature further the compressibility increases at a much greater rate with temperature. As you approach the critical pressure the compressibility difference decreases. At the critical pressure and above there is just a gradual continuous change in compressibility as you cross the state change line (A continuation of the saturation line).
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine March 17, 2008 11:22AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi jeremy.
None of thoes have anything to do with what I am talking about. I am working with the state of the substance that is deturmined by it's properties. At a given state point the properties are always the same. Generally it only two properties to deturmin a state point. For example given the specific volume and entropy you can find it's temperature, pressure, enthalpy and quality. Look at your steam tables. For a given temperature and pressure you can find the specific volume, entropy and enthalpy.
That explanation of a reverasable and non-reversable process is confusing. In that it leads one to beleave that the entropy of a substance is independent of it's other state properties. It is not.
The relation dS = dQ/T is the defination of entropy. Put another way:
dS/dQ = 1/T.
The above reall shows the relation of entropy to enthalpy. It simply states that the rate of change of entropy with respect to enthalpy os a substance is inversly proportional to it's temperature.
For exmple if you mix equal parts water at 100F and 200F you wind up with water at 150.087F The enthalpy is the sum of the enthalpies. The change in specific entropy from 200F to 150.087F is 0.079 while the change from 100F to 150.087 is 0.086. The mixing has resulted in an entropy increase of 0.003. The defination of entropy expresses that there is always an increase in entropy when a system of different temperatures reaches equalibram. Basicly the temperatures average out. They will eventally all have the same temperature. But the change from higher temperatures will have less entropy change then thoes that increase in temperature. The 1/T rule. There is always a net gain of entropy in the unverse.
During that mixing process 50.029 BTU/lbs transfered from the 200F water to the 100F water. The higher temp water losses less entrupy from the downward 50.029 enthalpy change then the low temp water gains from the same enthalpy upward change. So as we use up the potential energy between a high temp supply and a low temperature sink there is an over all increase in entropy.
I am aware if the relation of entropy to chaos.
There is no rule that entropy must always increass during a process. A process is not a system. Expansion is a process. An isentropic expansion is simply an expansion where no heat transfer occures. dQ = 0, therfore dS = 0. In the lab an isentropic expasion can be done with some specilized equipment. Very highly inslated expansion chambers etc, In a real engine there is always some heat transfer and thus a gain of entropy. For entropy of a substance to change there has to be some heat transfer. dQ != 0; dQ can come from many places. Internal friction in the gas for example.
Some people have stated that entropy must increase during expansion in the engine. So at start up when the engine is cold. Do you think the entropy of the steam during expansion increasses. I doubt it. A lot of heat is being transfered to the cylander walls. The entropy of the steam is decreassing. Looking at the whole though. The cylander gains more entropy then the steam losses for a net gain of intropy of the wall steam system.
Andy
None of thoes have anything to do with what I am talking about. I am working with the state of the substance that is deturmined by it's properties. At a given state point the properties are always the same. Generally it only two properties to deturmin a state point. For example given the specific volume and entropy you can find it's temperature, pressure, enthalpy and quality. Look at your steam tables. For a given temperature and pressure you can find the specific volume, entropy and enthalpy.
That explanation of a reverasable and non-reversable process is confusing. In that it leads one to beleave that the entropy of a substance is independent of it's other state properties. It is not.
The relation dS = dQ/T is the defination of entropy. Put another way:
dS/dQ = 1/T.
The above reall shows the relation of entropy to enthalpy. It simply states that the rate of change of entropy with respect to enthalpy os a substance is inversly proportional to it's temperature.
For exmple if you mix equal parts water at 100F and 200F you wind up with water at 150.087F The enthalpy is the sum of the enthalpies. The change in specific entropy from 200F to 150.087F is 0.079 while the change from 100F to 150.087 is 0.086. The mixing has resulted in an entropy increase of 0.003. The defination of entropy expresses that there is always an increase in entropy when a system of different temperatures reaches equalibram. Basicly the temperatures average out. They will eventally all have the same temperature. But the change from higher temperatures will have less entropy change then thoes that increase in temperature. The 1/T rule. There is always a net gain of entropy in the unverse.
During that mixing process 50.029 BTU/lbs transfered from the 200F water to the 100F water. The higher temp water losses less entrupy from the downward 50.029 enthalpy change then the low temp water gains from the same enthalpy upward change. So as we use up the potential energy between a high temp supply and a low temperature sink there is an over all increase in entropy.
I am aware if the relation of entropy to chaos.
There is no rule that entropy must always increass during a process. A process is not a system. Expansion is a process. An isentropic expansion is simply an expansion where no heat transfer occures. dQ = 0, therfore dS = 0. In the lab an isentropic expasion can be done with some specilized equipment. Very highly inslated expansion chambers etc, In a real engine there is always some heat transfer and thus a gain of entropy. For entropy of a substance to change there has to be some heat transfer. dQ != 0; dQ can come from many places. Internal friction in the gas for example.
Some people have stated that entropy must increase during expansion in the engine. So at start up when the engine is cold. Do you think the entropy of the steam during expansion increasses. I doubt it. A lot of heat is being transfered to the cylander walls. The entropy of the steam is decreassing. Looking at the whole though. The cylander gains more entropy then the steam losses for a net gain of intropy of the wall steam system.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine March 17, 2008 07:51PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Hi Andy,
"None of thoes have anything to do with what I am talking about."
Andy, that's exactly why I brought them up[the links].
Its my opinion, that you are not centering, on the true factor of what 'exactly' make's the power, before/within/beyond the power-stroke.
As an example, factor how 'so-called-wire drawing' factors in. That's correct, its a disconected-feature of the event, that yeilds possible maximum[working] pressure in the cylinder. Let alone how to interperate such a thing, thru an pressure-transducer rigged into a scope, under no-laod conditions or driving a DYNO.
Take the minumum clearance factor into account, such as the williams eng uses. If Jim says that a small positive pressure 'blip' occured on the scope readings;[with change of angular-settings] to me, this would illustrate the isentopic componet for a compression factor, which is considered independant, of what caused, the actual measured spike. Its just nothing more than a componet within the total equilibrium of the system in motion. Depending on timing, entropy can catch up to its-self.
-edit- changed grammer above please re-read-
I just want to say, that I always negated heat-loss, before I factored these equations. Then I became a member here, its significantly changed my thinking with relation to the complex steam engine designs. Andy, I really cannot disagree with alot of your points.
Harry,
I honestly think that its is possible for your engine to reach '50% carnot efficiency' in its actual prototype form.[under some operating conditions] Since you are woring with super-critical release pressures, at your injection point/stroke, it makes sense, that with such a large temp-offset from admission-point to exhuasting, that it should be, just as plain as day, to anyone, familar with this stuff, that you could have such'carnot-efficiency'. Obviously this could not occur under [all] operating conditions.
I'm going to visit, im going to visit, Harry. I have not called, but I will, Im very encouraged by George's recommendation/comment here, in this thread. I believe, that I will be impressed.
Talk to you soon.
Jeremy
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2008 07:57PM by Jeremy Holmes.
"None of thoes have anything to do with what I am talking about."
Andy, that's exactly why I brought them up[the links].
Its my opinion, that you are not centering, on the true factor of what 'exactly' make's the power, before/within/beyond the power-stroke.
As an example, factor how 'so-called-wire drawing' factors in. That's correct, its a disconected-feature of the event, that yeilds possible maximum[working] pressure in the cylinder. Let alone how to interperate such a thing, thru an pressure-transducer rigged into a scope, under no-laod conditions or driving a DYNO.
Take the minumum clearance factor into account, such as the williams eng uses. If Jim says that a small positive pressure 'blip' occured on the scope readings;[with change of angular-settings] to me, this would illustrate the isentopic componet for a compression factor, which is considered independant, of what caused, the actual measured spike. Its just nothing more than a componet within the total equilibrium of the system in motion. Depending on timing, entropy can catch up to its-self.
-edit- changed grammer above please re-read-
I just want to say, that I always negated heat-loss, before I factored these equations. Then I became a member here, its significantly changed my thinking with relation to the complex steam engine designs. Andy, I really cannot disagree with alot of your points.
Harry,
I honestly think that its is possible for your engine to reach '50% carnot efficiency' in its actual prototype form.[under some operating conditions] Since you are woring with super-critical release pressures, at your injection point/stroke, it makes sense, that with such a large temp-offset from admission-point to exhuasting, that it should be, just as plain as day, to anyone, familar with this stuff, that you could have such'carnot-efficiency'. Obviously this could not occur under [all] operating conditions.
I'm going to visit, im going to visit, Harry. I have not called, but I will, Im very encouraged by George's recommendation/comment here, in this thread. I believe, that I will be impressed.
Talk to you soon.
Jeremy
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2008 07:57PM by Jeremy Holmes.
|
Re: cyclone engine March 17, 2008 09:14PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
Andy,
Im going around and around with this discussion/dialog with you, in my mind. Perhaps, Im trying to bring something into the light.
Entropy-
This is the only thermodynamic 'constant' that can deal with 'rejected heat' and 'heat loss' simultaneously.(yet specifiys them as separeate componets)(this has 'way more' to do with, working with super-critical working fluids, than you may realize).
When entering the world, of watching a/your engine run, with a (psi)transducer mounted in communication with the piston chamber, there's alot of stuff that you can encounter, watching the output on a oscilloscope, connected to such a transducer. Sometime's it can, make you scratch your head and state, what the hell is that?...
Im just saying, when you observe any engine running this way, mine included,[with a scope and transducer] it can give great insight to things that one never considered. Its a 'quantum leap' when compared from theory. although in dyno testing, all types of different stuff starts to happen.
Such as, the more that one loads any engine, the exhausting temp will rise when compared to no-load conditions.
Mitty Plummer, a professor at UNT taught me this. I studied his SAE paper[it was about some sort of expander] and interacted with him thru email, this when on for a couple weeks, years ago. Really cool guy. He worked on the LN2 car for the university.
Jeremy
Im going around and around with this discussion/dialog with you, in my mind. Perhaps, Im trying to bring something into the light.
Entropy-
This is the only thermodynamic 'constant' that can deal with 'rejected heat' and 'heat loss' simultaneously.(yet specifiys them as separeate componets)(this has 'way more' to do with, working with super-critical working fluids, than you may realize).
When entering the world, of watching a/your engine run, with a (psi)transducer mounted in communication with the piston chamber, there's alot of stuff that you can encounter, watching the output on a oscilloscope, connected to such a transducer. Sometime's it can, make you scratch your head and state, what the hell is that?...
Im just saying, when you observe any engine running this way, mine included,[with a scope and transducer] it can give great insight to things that one never considered. Its a 'quantum leap' when compared from theory. although in dyno testing, all types of different stuff starts to happen.
Such as, the more that one loads any engine, the exhausting temp will rise when compared to no-load conditions.
Mitty Plummer, a professor at UNT taught me this. I studied his SAE paper[it was about some sort of expander] and interacted with him thru email, this when on for a couple weeks, years ago. Really cool guy. He worked on the LN2 car for the university.
Jeremy
|
Re: cyclone engine March 18, 2008 11:59AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Jeremy
I origionally was trying to explain a bit about the properties of water at and above the super-criticl pressure.
A liquid is considered uncompressable. But it can be compressed a bit.
If for exmple we compare the specific volume of water at 1 atmosphere (14.696PSIA) 70F [0.01604916 ft^/lb] the water at 3500 PSIA 70F [0.015880074] you see the volume changes slightly. A 1.05% change. Now instead if you rase the temperature to 1200F you get a 99.62% change.
Definately a differance between gas and liquid state. I am ataching a MathCad work sheet that calculated the above. There are 3 pages:
Page 1 calsulates the volume change between 14.696 PSIA(1 atmosphere) and 3500 PSIA (super critical pressure) for liquid at constante temperature 70F and gas at 1200F described above. Calculated also are a constante entropy and constant enthalpy volume change.
On each page there two sets of four state points calculated, Pt1 Pt2 Pt3 and Pt4. The first set is calculated at T1 and the second at T2. Above T1 = 70F and T2 = 1200F. Pt1 is calculated at P1,T1 Pt2 is calculated at P2,T1 for looking at the constant temperature change T2 from P1 to P2. Pt3 is calculated at P2 and constant entropy (s) from P1. P4 is a constant enthalpy change P1 to P2. The volume changes Lt Ls and Lh are calculated. T1 is chose to be a liquid state. The second set of points are then calculated at T2 chose to be in the gas state. and Gt, Gs and Gh gas volumme change ar calculated.
Page 1: T1 = 70F T2 = 1200F P1 = 14.696 and P2 = 3500
Page 2: T1 = 70F T2 = 1200F P1 = 3400 and P2 = 3500
Page 3: T1 = 625F T2 = 750F P1 = 3400 and P2 = 3500
One each page:
Lt = liquid constante temperature volume change
Gt = gas constante temperaturevolume change
Ls = liquid constante entropy volume change
Gs = gas constante entropy volume change
Lh = liquid constante enthalpy volume change
Gh = gas constante enthalpy volume change
At the bottom of each page the relative gas/liquid volume change ratio are calculated: Gt/Lt, Gs/Ls and Gh/Lh
In every case there is greater then 10 times the expanson for the gas state then the liquid state. The minum calculated is page three T1 to T2 a 125 degree differance and 100 PSI pressure change 3400 PSIA to 3500 PSIA has the gas at 750F having an expansion 14.1 times the liquid at 625F.
On the first page the isentropic change failed due to temperature going out of range.
Andy
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2008 12:05PM by Andy.
I origionally was trying to explain a bit about the properties of water at and above the super-criticl pressure.
A liquid is considered uncompressable. But it can be compressed a bit.
If for exmple we compare the specific volume of water at 1 atmosphere (14.696PSIA) 70F [0.01604916 ft^/lb] the water at 3500 PSIA 70F [0.015880074] you see the volume changes slightly. A 1.05% change. Now instead if you rase the temperature to 1200F you get a 99.62% change.
Definately a differance between gas and liquid state. I am ataching a MathCad work sheet that calculated the above. There are 3 pages:
Page 1 calsulates the volume change between 14.696 PSIA(1 atmosphere) and 3500 PSIA (super critical pressure) for liquid at constante temperature 70F and gas at 1200F described above. Calculated also are a constante entropy and constant enthalpy volume change.
On each page there two sets of four state points calculated, Pt1 Pt2 Pt3 and Pt4. The first set is calculated at T1 and the second at T2. Above T1 = 70F and T2 = 1200F. Pt1 is calculated at P1,T1 Pt2 is calculated at P2,T1 for looking at the constant temperature change T2 from P1 to P2. Pt3 is calculated at P2 and constant entropy (s) from P1. P4 is a constant enthalpy change P1 to P2. The volume changes Lt Ls and Lh are calculated. T1 is chose to be a liquid state. The second set of points are then calculated at T2 chose to be in the gas state. and Gt, Gs and Gh gas volumme change ar calculated.
Page 1: T1 = 70F T2 = 1200F P1 = 14.696 and P2 = 3500
Page 2: T1 = 70F T2 = 1200F P1 = 3400 and P2 = 3500
Page 3: T1 = 625F T2 = 750F P1 = 3400 and P2 = 3500
One each page:
Lt = liquid constante temperature volume change
Gt = gas constante temperaturevolume change
Ls = liquid constante entropy volume change
Gs = gas constante entropy volume change
Lh = liquid constante enthalpy volume change
Gh = gas constante enthalpy volume change
At the bottom of each page the relative gas/liquid volume change ratio are calculated: Gt/Lt, Gs/Ls and Gh/Lh
In every case there is greater then 10 times the expanson for the gas state then the liquid state. The minum calculated is page three T1 to T2 a 125 degree differance and 100 PSI pressure change 3400 PSIA to 3500 PSIA has the gas at 750F having an expansion 14.1 times the liquid at 625F.
On the first page the isentropic change failed due to temperature going out of range.
Andy
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2008 12:05PM by Andy.
|
Re: cyclone engine March 20, 2008 01:04PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
|
Re: cyclone engine March 20, 2008 02:02PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,519 |
|
Re: cyclone engine April 09, 2008 03:08PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
|
Re: cyclone engine April 20, 2008 07:17PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 180 |
Hi Harry
It was neat to see your display at the SAE congress in Detroit. I got a real kick seeing the double takes when "It's a steam engine" came into the conversations. I tried to steer some of the college kids your way; it would do them good to see that not everything new is fuel cells or hybrids.
I spoke to my brother the ceramics engineer about your need for high temp refractories. Lockheed has gotten out of that business, and it turns out the Space Shuttle tiles are not very durable. Makes sense, they only have to take the heat for about half an hour. He recommended three companies to talk to: Zircoa, Aremco and Zircar. They all have websites and are always looking for new applications. Some of their commercial items could fit well with boiler fireboxes. He said the real trick is to make sure your outputs match up with your inputs. No matter how good your refractories are, if you put too much heat in, sooner or later the heat will flow through and your housing will start glowing, a real bad sign.
Tom
It was neat to see your display at the SAE congress in Detroit. I got a real kick seeing the double takes when "It's a steam engine" came into the conversations. I tried to steer some of the college kids your way; it would do them good to see that not everything new is fuel cells or hybrids.
I spoke to my brother the ceramics engineer about your need for high temp refractories. Lockheed has gotten out of that business, and it turns out the Space Shuttle tiles are not very durable. Makes sense, they only have to take the heat for about half an hour. He recommended three companies to talk to: Zircoa, Aremco and Zircar. They all have websites and are always looking for new applications. Some of their commercial items could fit well with boiler fireboxes. He said the real trick is to make sure your outputs match up with your inputs. No matter how good your refractories are, if you put too much heat in, sooner or later the heat will flow through and your housing will start glowing, a real bad sign.
Tom
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.
All files from this thread
