cyclone engine
Posted by Harry Schoell
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 10:11AM |
Admin Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 531 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 01:25PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
HI Pat
Hp is hp It is first calculated with a PV diagram then with rpm. We are rating the 330 at 3600rpm like the 100hp engine. the stanleys had tremendous torque at start but were limited by the rpm. 5252 is equal torque to hp. Long cutoff was a limiting factor in the rpm because of valve flow. The Cyclone starts off with a long cutoff then shortens the cutoff and changes timing as the rpm increasess.It less cubic inches than the stanley but operates at a higher pressure with more cylinders. This gives a better torque average.
Harry
Hp is hp It is first calculated with a PV diagram then with rpm. We are rating the 330 at 3600rpm like the 100hp engine. the stanleys had tremendous torque at start but were limited by the rpm. 5252 is equal torque to hp. Long cutoff was a limiting factor in the rpm because of valve flow. The Cyclone starts off with a long cutoff then shortens the cutoff and changes timing as the rpm increasess.It less cubic inches than the stanley but operates at a higher pressure with more cylinders. This gives a better torque average.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 02:54PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 03:56PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Andy
Agree with you. The Stanley record holder was running on reserve and would not been able to maintaine that 127mph speed for any length of time. Of course the boiler was the limiting factor. We are rating heat exchanger at full output. George Nutz did a full analise and made some minor changes. He said "The heat transfer efficiency of this unit is very high with a fuel input of 952,000 BTU/HR and 843000 BTU/HR transfered to the working fluid is 88.5 thermal efficency, very rare for such a small unit with such high heat input rates...it appears highly advanced and more efficent than any other heat transfer units I have studied and there is a bonus as not needing to go to the cost of utilizing finned tubing."
Harry
Agree with you. The Stanley record holder was running on reserve and would not been able to maintaine that 127mph speed for any length of time. Of course the boiler was the limiting factor. We are rating heat exchanger at full output. George Nutz did a full analise and made some minor changes. He said "The heat transfer efficiency of this unit is very high with a fuel input of 952,000 BTU/HR and 843000 BTU/HR transfered to the working fluid is 88.5 thermal efficency, very rare for such a small unit with such high heat input rates...it appears highly advanced and more efficent than any other heat transfer units I have studied and there is a bonus as not needing to go to the cost of utilizing finned tubing."
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 08:26PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 14 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 06, 2007 09:01PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 318 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 07, 2007 09:33AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Graham,
The condencer cooling air is engine driven. The combustion air is electrical. At the present we are experimenting on the duct work to lower the combustion air back pressure. at the pressent the 2cyl eng is operating at 5.8 amp 12v which is 2amp more than it needs because of the blowers used.
Harry
The condencer cooling air is engine driven. The combustion air is electrical. At the present we are experimenting on the duct work to lower the combustion air back pressure. at the pressent the 2cyl eng is operating at 5.8 amp 12v which is 2amp more than it needs because of the blowers used.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 07, 2007 05:58PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 180 |
Hello Harry
I was curious if you have current interest from the chainsaw group (Homelite, Poulan, etc) or the outdoor equipment folk like MTD. I think the large-chainsaw market for the pro loggers could be a good place to start, since large logger-type saws are a relatively small market, but a low-noise, low-emission saw would be an easy sell in Oregon or California. Since two-strokes are the kiss of death in tough air quality areas, I would expect the cash to develop and market this would be much easier to find compared to the auto field. How do you have your prototypes made currently? Do you have your own shop or farm it out?
Tom
I was curious if you have current interest from the chainsaw group (Homelite, Poulan, etc) or the outdoor equipment folk like MTD. I think the large-chainsaw market for the pro loggers could be a good place to start, since large logger-type saws are a relatively small market, but a low-noise, low-emission saw would be an easy sell in Oregon or California. Since two-strokes are the kiss of death in tough air quality areas, I would expect the cash to develop and market this would be much easier to find compared to the auto field. How do you have your prototypes made currently? Do you have your own shop or farm it out?
Tom
|
Re: cyclone engine August 08, 2007 10:02AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Tom
some of the machining we contract out to machine shops where we have a long relation ship with. All of the design and testing is done in house however we some times use other consulting enginers. Chain saws sounds like anouther good option. We have a lot of calls on different applications from miniture 80watt generators to trains to 4000hp generators. cars will proably be the last one. They would rather add on more contraptions than fix the problem at the begining. We are talking to them though. It has taken them a hundred years to learn what they have and they donnot want to start learning over. Younger engineers have more interest than somewone retireing. We have to get over " that is just a steam engine." The older systems have a result.. we have a modern design with new materials and that changes things.
Harrry
some of the machining we contract out to machine shops where we have a long relation ship with. All of the design and testing is done in house however we some times use other consulting enginers. Chain saws sounds like anouther good option. We have a lot of calls on different applications from miniture 80watt generators to trains to 4000hp generators. cars will proably be the last one. They would rather add on more contraptions than fix the problem at the begining. We are talking to them though. It has taken them a hundred years to learn what they have and they donnot want to start learning over. Younger engineers have more interest than somewone retireing. We have to get over " that is just a steam engine." The older systems have a result.. we have a modern design with new materials and that changes things.
Harrry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 09:42AM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 14 |
Harry,
You perceived where I was heading in my question about output and I can quickly see an application, ala the Canadian Electric conversions, in which one of your units is re-charging a battery system that is primary motive power. If one combines the latest batteries with your latest fuel efficient power plants--. Cordially, Graham
You perceived where I was heading in my question about output and I can quickly see an application, ala the Canadian Electric conversions, in which one of your units is re-charging a battery system that is primary motive power. If one combines the latest batteries with your latest fuel efficient power plants--. Cordially, Graham
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 10:56AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Graham,
When having an engine that has maximum torque at start it is not necessary to go to an electric motor system as it would be a loss in this case. the charger would take a 20% loss then the motor would be anouther 20% loss plus the added cost of the system and the batteries plus extra weight. The cyclone as well as most other steam engines it uses little fuel when not moving. According to Marks a diesel electric train will drop to 26% efficency. Would like to Know what the miles per gallon of a steam car would be to a gas car in traffic driving. Jim could it be better in a Doble in high traffic conditions compared to anouther IC car of the same weight. I have only seen highway miles. Efficency is a four letter word COST. Some of the new diesels are falling down on this. Maintainance and costs are going up on these trucks.
Harry
When having an engine that has maximum torque at start it is not necessary to go to an electric motor system as it would be a loss in this case. the charger would take a 20% loss then the motor would be anouther 20% loss plus the added cost of the system and the batteries plus extra weight. The cyclone as well as most other steam engines it uses little fuel when not moving. According to Marks a diesel electric train will drop to 26% efficency. Would like to Know what the miles per gallon of a steam car would be to a gas car in traffic driving. Jim could it be better in a Doble in high traffic conditions compared to anouther IC car of the same weight. I have only seen highway miles. Efficency is a four letter word COST. Some of the new diesels are falling down on this. Maintainance and costs are going up on these trucks.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 12:24PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 12:45PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 03:44PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
Harry,
Just remember that the Series E and F Doble boilers were really big and heavy units.
A new updated one with extended surface tubing and better firing is going to be a lot smaller and probably will come on and off a bit quicker and more often.
No real numbers, who keeps records? I am happy that the damn thing works and I get home in it.
Absolutely great tag line in a Robin Williams movie I watched Sunday. "Politicians are like baby diapers, they should be changed often and for the same reason."
Jim
Just remember that the Series E and F Doble boilers were really big and heavy units.
A new updated one with extended surface tubing and better firing is going to be a lot smaller and probably will come on and off a bit quicker and more often.
No real numbers, who keeps records? I am happy that the damn thing works and I get home in it.
Absolutely great tag line in a Robin Williams movie I watched Sunday. "Politicians are like baby diapers, they should be changed often and for the same reason."
Jim
|
Re: cyclone engine August 13, 2007 04:06PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 14, 2007 10:20AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,441 |
Harry,
The steam generator I have designed for the sports car is fixed, as far as the general characteristics are concerned. If it is the Jag, then it has to be large in diameter and not so long. If it is the Corvette than I have more underhood depth to play with; but that is only a packaging situation to deal with. But; it does influence the firebox volume.
What I am searching for now, is some rear engined kit car, the JAG XK220 or something like that. I really want the powerplant behind the cockpit if I can.
The design parameters are:
2500 lbs/hr at full 20" draft from a booster. 1500 psig at 900°F.
The Lamont design.
Post mix vaporizing burner patterned after the French burner for the Coats car and the I.H. railcar. A long deep firebox is desired.
Concentric coils. All finned tubing except for the Lamont coil.
Two parallel circuits in the economizer and boiling area.
Superheater controlled by a normalizer.
Combustion air preheat by stack gasses and an air jacket around the firebox area.
The final configuration all depends on what host chassis is available and fits the
need.
Jim
The steam generator I have designed for the sports car is fixed, as far as the general characteristics are concerned. If it is the Jag, then it has to be large in diameter and not so long. If it is the Corvette than I have more underhood depth to play with; but that is only a packaging situation to deal with. But; it does influence the firebox volume.
What I am searching for now, is some rear engined kit car, the JAG XK220 or something like that. I really want the powerplant behind the cockpit if I can.
The design parameters are:
2500 lbs/hr at full 20" draft from a booster. 1500 psig at 900°F.
The Lamont design.
Post mix vaporizing burner patterned after the French burner for the Coats car and the I.H. railcar. A long deep firebox is desired.
Concentric coils. All finned tubing except for the Lamont coil.
Two parallel circuits in the economizer and boiling area.
Superheater controlled by a normalizer.
Combustion air preheat by stack gasses and an air jacket around the firebox area.
The final configuration all depends on what host chassis is available and fits the
need.
Jim
|
Re: cyclone engine August 14, 2007 11:06AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 14, 2007 07:00PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,268 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 15, 2007 10:37AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Bill.
Using multipal small boillers I think will scale in unit steps. Two will generate twice the steam. Three, three times the steam etc.
This aproach has several advantages:
If one burns out a tube or has some other failure. It can be taken out and you can continue on the rest. Replacement cost of a single unit can be fairly low.
I am using a $30 postage stamp size micro computer for a controler. They have networking ability making it easy to do ganged control.
They can be ganged to produce almost any amount of steam required.
Using a ganged aproach makes it easer to fit them into tight spaces.
Andy
Using multipal small boillers I think will scale in unit steps. Two will generate twice the steam. Three, three times the steam etc.
This aproach has several advantages:
If one burns out a tube or has some other failure. It can be taken out and you can continue on the rest. Replacement cost of a single unit can be fairly low.
I am using a $30 postage stamp size micro computer for a controler. They have networking ability making it easy to do ganged control.
They can be ganged to produce almost any amount of steam required.
Using a ganged aproach makes it easer to fit them into tight spaces.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 10:34AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,268 |
Good thought Andy,
I havn't given the boiler aspect much thought in my design since I have been mostly concetrating on the engine. The finished design is planned to be a two boiler affair with a Lamont main boiler and a monotube high pressure boiler later for a first high pressure stage (after the medium pressure stage is proven out) I am trying to get an idea of the weight and size though of the Lamont for 700 lbs/HR.
I much like Harrys boiler design using six parallel tubes in the boiler and think it could also be adapted to the Lamont coil to make a more compact boiler. Peter Brow is also working on a compact boiler design but havn't heard much from him about it lately. It's "Top Secret" so can't say anything about it.
Best, ----- Bill G.
I havn't given the boiler aspect much thought in my design since I have been mostly concetrating on the engine. The finished design is planned to be a two boiler affair with a Lamont main boiler and a monotube high pressure boiler later for a first high pressure stage (after the medium pressure stage is proven out) I am trying to get an idea of the weight and size though of the Lamont for 700 lbs/HR.
I much like Harrys boiler design using six parallel tubes in the boiler and think it could also be adapted to the Lamont coil to make a more compact boiler. Peter Brow is also working on a compact boiler design but havn't heard much from him about it lately. It's "Top Secret" so can't say anything about it.
Best, ----- Bill G.
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 11:20AM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Bill,
I think adding a Lamont stage would increase the size and weight.George Nutz a great proponent of the Lamont analized the Cyclone and said it was the best he had analized at 88.5% eff. and the smallest for the output. of course this was after some slight modifications. It has 12 parellel tubes. It is 27" in dia x 8" high including the combustion chamber and insulation. this for the 100hp engine
Harry
I think adding a Lamont stage would increase the size and weight.George Nutz a great proponent of the Lamont analized the Cyclone and said it was the best he had analized at 88.5% eff. and the smallest for the output. of course this was after some slight modifications. It has 12 parellel tubes. It is 27" in dia x 8" high including the combustion chamber and insulation. this for the 100hp engine
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 03:20PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Harry.
Is that mesured 85.5% efficiency?
From what I have studied. Boilers have a varing efficiency. A variable fired boiler varies with the firing rate. As firing rate increases, efficiency drops.
An on/off controled boiler varies very little.
_____
Bill. I have talked to several who tried small multipath once through boilers. They had no end of problems getting even flow through all the paths. Can't remember just who they were though. Was at the SACA meets. But then it could just have been a problem with the implementation/design.
One problem is that we are working on a mobil application. The initia could complicate the problem of getting even flow.
Andy
Is that mesured 85.5% efficiency?
From what I have studied. Boilers have a varing efficiency. A variable fired boiler varies with the firing rate. As firing rate increases, efficiency drops.
An on/off controled boiler varies very little.
_____
Bill. I have talked to several who tried small multipath once through boilers. They had no end of problems getting even flow through all the paths. Can't remember just who they were though. Was at the SACA meets. But then it could just have been a problem with the implementation/design.
One problem is that we are working on a mobil application. The initia could complicate the problem of getting even flow.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 03:48PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 835 |
Hi Andy'
It is an on/ off controller constant temp constant pressure. We have what we call a splitter valve that ballances the flow to all tubes.
"The heat transfer efficency of this unit is very high with a fuel input of 952,000 BTU/HR fuel input and 843,000BTU/hr trasfered to the working fluid is 88.5% thermal efficiency. very rare for such a small unit with such high heat input rates." George Nutz.
This constant operation keeps down the stresses that would occour from variable fireing rates. The total analysis is much to long to include here.
Harry
It is an on/ off controller constant temp constant pressure. We have what we call a splitter valve that ballances the flow to all tubes.
"The heat transfer efficency of this unit is very high with a fuel input of 952,000 BTU/HR fuel input and 843,000BTU/hr trasfered to the working fluid is 88.5% thermal efficiency. very rare for such a small unit with such high heat input rates." George Nutz.
This constant operation keeps down the stresses that would occour from variable fireing rates. The total analysis is much to long to include here.
Harry
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 04:56PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Harry.
I didn't get into the details. On/Off control or variable firing both provide variable steaming rates. As long as you have varing loads you have varing steaming rates. Variable steaming rates with an on/off control would have more heating/cooling stresses.
At low power the burner is switching on and off, heating and cooling, causing mechanical stress due to expansion/contraction of the metel. A variable firing rate would only vary slightly around the firing rate required to mataintain the steaming rate required.
So yes I agree that "constant operation keeps down the stresses" but constant operation is not the same as on/off fire controle. Variable firing would be constant for a given load and less stressful.
S.E.S. did some detailed efficiency studies on boilers. There was a paper on there tests. There boiler showed quite a range of efficiency depending on the firing rate. It was a smothe curve though. At low firing rate it got very high efficiency.
It is complicated to figure what works best when we have radiant heating, turblant flow convection and posable laminar flow convecion heat transfers.
In an on/off control you basicly have a constant combustion gas flow rate. So the effiiency is basicly dependent on the temperature differance between the combustion gas and the tubes. Efficiency would fluctuate a bit as the fire comes on and off. With the fire off the tubes cool down. So when the fire comes on again you have higher heat transfer that decreasses as the tubes heat up. So the longer the fire is off the higher the average heat transfer and efficiency. An on/off control would vary a bit with steaming rate. Tt should should be small and close to liner relation. The data I saw on on/off controled boilers does have an almost stright line efficiency with varng firing rates.
With variable firing you have varing combustion gas flow rates. At low firing rate you have low gas flow rates giving more time for heat transfer. As you ramp up the firing rate the combustion gas flow rate increasses and has less time for heat transfer and efficiency decreases. Across amner to turblant flow switch you should see an increase in efficency as tublant flow has better heat transfer. But you stll have the time factor reducng heat transfr time.
Andy
I didn't get into the details. On/Off control or variable firing both provide variable steaming rates. As long as you have varing loads you have varing steaming rates. Variable steaming rates with an on/off control would have more heating/cooling stresses.
At low power the burner is switching on and off, heating and cooling, causing mechanical stress due to expansion/contraction of the metel. A variable firing rate would only vary slightly around the firing rate required to mataintain the steaming rate required.
So yes I agree that "constant operation keeps down the stresses" but constant operation is not the same as on/off fire controle. Variable firing would be constant for a given load and less stressful.
S.E.S. did some detailed efficiency studies on boilers. There was a paper on there tests. There boiler showed quite a range of efficiency depending on the firing rate. It was a smothe curve though. At low firing rate it got very high efficiency.
It is complicated to figure what works best when we have radiant heating, turblant flow convection and posable laminar flow convecion heat transfers.
In an on/off control you basicly have a constant combustion gas flow rate. So the effiiency is basicly dependent on the temperature differance between the combustion gas and the tubes. Efficiency would fluctuate a bit as the fire comes on and off. With the fire off the tubes cool down. So when the fire comes on again you have higher heat transfer that decreasses as the tubes heat up. So the longer the fire is off the higher the average heat transfer and efficiency. An on/off control would vary a bit with steaming rate. Tt should should be small and close to liner relation. The data I saw on on/off controled boilers does have an almost stright line efficiency with varng firing rates.
With variable firing you have varing combustion gas flow rates. At low firing rate you have low gas flow rates giving more time for heat transfer. As you ramp up the firing rate the combustion gas flow rate increasses and has less time for heat transfer and efficiency decreases. Across amner to turblant flow switch you should see an increase in efficency as tublant flow has better heat transfer. But you stll have the time factor reducng heat transfr time.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 04:57PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,771 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 05:27PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 05:51PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,771 |
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 06:46PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Rolly
I made a small test combustion chamber. Mine is simular to Harry's. It is an outside fired inword flow. The test proved interesting. No tubes. Just the donut or tire shaped combustion chamber. one side open. I couldn't run it hard enough to get any flame to come out of the fire box. It was a small test unit I reged up only about 9" to 10" OD. 1.3" width, Tangentially fired. I was using compressed air and propain for the test. Emptied a 2 lb tank an about 5 min. I was limited by the tank freazing up.
Andy
I made a small test combustion chamber. Mine is simular to Harry's. It is an outside fired inword flow. The test proved interesting. No tubes. Just the donut or tire shaped combustion chamber. one side open. I couldn't run it hard enough to get any flame to come out of the fire box. It was a small test unit I reged up only about 9" to 10" OD. 1.3" width, Tangentially fired. I was using compressed air and propain for the test. Emptied a 2 lb tank an about 5 min. I was limited by the tank freazing up.
Andy
|
Re: cyclone engine August 16, 2007 08:21PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,771 |
Hi Andy
I have done many tests using oil. The Derr combustion chamber has two cubic feet of volume, enough for 8 gal of oil or 14 gal of gas. My biggest problem was not enough air. I could not find an inexpensive 12V motor to fit the space available. I finally found one to burn 6 gal of oil. I should have changed every thing over to 24V, lots of motors of all sizes available and alternators as well.
My other combustion chamber is only 15 inches in diameter and 8 inches high. I built it for my marine boiler.
Hear are a few early test photos. The top view of the combustion chamber with the half moon shaped SS in the center was used but not the deflector shown at the top.
Rolly
I have done many tests using oil. The Derr combustion chamber has two cubic feet of volume, enough for 8 gal of oil or 14 gal of gas. My biggest problem was not enough air. I could not find an inexpensive 12V motor to fit the space available. I finally found one to burn 6 gal of oil. I should have changed every thing over to 24V, lots of motors of all sizes available and alternators as well.
My other combustion chamber is only 15 inches in diameter and 8 inches high. I built it for my marine boiler.
Hear are a few early test photos. The top view of the combustion chamber with the half moon shaped SS in the center was used but not the deflector shown at the top.
Rolly
|
Re: cyclone engine August 17, 2007 12:23PM |
Registered: 19 years ago Posts: 1,038 |
Hi Rolly.
Sorry I havn't any photos. I rendered a drawing to show the fire box. Hard to get lighting etc, to be able to see the thing. Anyway. Here is the firebox iner shell. My fire box is a composit made of ceramic firebox cement and stainless steel screen wire. It is covered on the outside with Kaowool not shown in the rendering. The test was done with the Kaowool etc.
Air will be the problem with mine as well. In my test I used compresed air from my shop compresser. I doubt a fan blower can delever any were near as much air. The test was a stress test for durability. It held up well. After firing I droped from it from 3 to 6 feet onto a concreat floor.
Andy
Sorry I havn't any photos. I rendered a drawing to show the fire box. Hard to get lighting etc, to be able to see the thing. Anyway. Here is the firebox iner shell. My fire box is a composit made of ceramic firebox cement and stainless steel screen wire. It is covered on the outside with Kaowool not shown in the rendering. The test was done with the Kaowool etc.
Air will be the problem with mine as well. In my test I used compresed air from my shop compresser. I doubt a fan blower can delever any were near as much air. The test was a stress test for durability. It held up well. After firing I droped from it from 3 to 6 feet onto a concreat floor.
Andy
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.
All files from this thread
