the steamless steam engine

Discussion in 'Propulsion' started by Boston, Apr 30, 2009.

  1. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    Ive been working on finding an alternative and preferably carbon neutral propulsion system

    Stirling Powered Ships

    the sterling engine seems best suited to electrical generation
    so one possibility is to go back to the electric engine powered rather than steam power system but replace batteries as a storage device



     
  2. PAR
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 19,133
    Likes: 477, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3967
    Location: Eustis, FL

    PAR Yacht Designer/Builder

    There are displacement engines in service, but they have several problems which makes them difficult to apply in the marine propulsion environment.

    They would be great if you live in a geothermal active area, but have limited possibilities for us.
     
  3. Fanie
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 4,603
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2484
    Location: Colonial "Sick Africa"

    Fanie Fanie

    Hi B,

    The sterling engine is a very interesting case. It is the only engine that is >100% efficient.

    A friend of mine built a couple of them, they're in his lounge. Placing your hand on a surface starts it turning, just the heat.

    I think the problem on these is going to be the size of it to make enough power, and the heat exchange rate is limiting it.
    Size isn't everything, you know :D
     
  4. marshmat
    Joined: Apr 2005
    Posts: 4,127
    Likes: 148, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2043
    Location: Ontario

    marshmat Senior Member

    Not sure what you mean by ">100% efficient", Fanie. The Stirling cycle can theoretically reach the Carnot limit (efficiency = 1 - Tcold/Thot ).

    They make wonderful demonstation engines for the physics lab, and I've heard of them being used to power submarines. They're very quiet when running. There's a company called Whispergen that sells a combined heater/generator for boats and RVs based on a Stirling engine.

    They tend to be rather large and heavy for their power output. Definitely feasible if you have a convenient concentrated heat source (perhaps a huge solar dish, or a little nuclear reactor?).
     
  5. Fanie
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 4,603
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2484
    Location: Colonial "Sick Africa"

    Fanie Fanie

    Matt,

    Please allow me to first compliment you on such a beautiful picture in the faces to names thread :D
    http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/open-discussion/faces-names-22075-15.html#post271261

    If you've got a nuclear source you can make very efficiently high power using steam. The old days of the big block of lead to shield the radio active source is in the past. They can produce a much smaller and as safe a container if not better than the lead. So the mono sailers get their way now too :D

    The sterlings's handicap is their rather large and heavy for their limited power output. The biggest problem is probably the rate to heat and cool the gass. Engines require rapid movement to make effient work one can use, this seems to be the place where the sterling comes short.

    I think my friend said they use a special gass that has the properties to heat and cool fast, hence it start turning from body heat already. but you're going to have a hard time getting some real power from it.
     
  6. marshmat
    Joined: Apr 2005
    Posts: 4,127
    Likes: 148, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2043
    Location: Ontario

    marshmat Senior Member

    Fanie,
    May I ask what you've heard of as a replacement for lead shielding? I've spent a lot of time in the nuclear labs on campus in the last few years, and we'd love to have something better than lead.... toxic, expensive stuff that it its. But all the replacements we've found need to be much thicker, or else are tremendously expensive. The cancer centre uses ilmenite-blended concrete around their X-ray bunkers, and many nuclear plants do the same, but you need a lot of it- several metres thick in many cases.

    You're dead right about the Stirling engine's weight problem. No matter how you swing it, you can't get a huge pressure rise or a high angular velocity in these things, and so they end up being bulky, heavy brutes if you want a large power output. Still, being extremely quiet and efficient, they do have their uses... that Whispergen thing, for example.
     
  7. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    Im kinda in a hurry and there is a better video of this
    but this is the basic form or the ford engine that ran on the stirling principal
    it ran 170 hp and was designed as a car engine
    they shelved the idea in the seventies



    seems to me that power to weight may or may not work out advantageously I need some time to work out and present some equations
    but there would be significant advantages of such a system if it could be made to work

    steam engine boilers explode from time to time
    these things do not
    makes me kinda give em a second look

    I say problems are made to be solved
    so lets crunch some numbers and see what the possibilities are and arent
    Im late to a suprise party so gotta go
    but
    Ill post the equations later tonight and will try to resolve them over the next few days
    best
    B

    ps
    if a girl named Fanie tells you size isnt everything
    you might want to listen
     
  8. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    hmmmmm
    a suggestion was made on another page to look into Tesla turbines
    turns out they are steam or compressed air bladeless turbines easily constructed and with high efficiency with low cost
    might have to place them at the top of the consideration list as generator motors

    although a more complex engine the Stirling needs no steam to operate on it is ridiculously priced from Whispergen
    at about 20,000 for a 850 for the 800 watt model

    dam disappointing to see some fools trying to take advantage of the green movement by overpricing there gadgets like that

    although a representative of the company said the following in regards to the criticism as posed by another

     
  9. PAR
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 19,133
    Likes: 477, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3967
    Location: Eustis, FL

    PAR Yacht Designer/Builder

    They're not taking advantage (Wispergen). These systems were well above the more conventional systems long before it was "stylish" or profitable to be green.
     
  10. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    for $20,000 it had better dress nice and take me out to dinner

    after looking at the tesla turbines I think it might be more advantageous to consider the Stirling generator first
    it could easily be DIY and could use the same gen system as the vawt turbines first mentioned in one of the other threads
    that would keep the boiler out of the picture completely and keep the electrical components standardized throughout the vessel
    ist more complex to build than the T turbine but it eliminates the need for a boiler and it runs at slower rpm's which means less were and tear on associated components
     
  11. rasorinc
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 1,854
    Likes: 71, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 896
    Location: OREGON

    rasorinc Senior Member

    Bos, why don't you write Ford about their engine requesting the engineering material and data and tell them what your trying to do.(convert it for Marine use)
    Offer them a contract giving them some % if you are able to make a usuable end product. Ask for an engine. They have no use for them and if they might make a buck in the future, Why not? Just a Thought. PS be sure to build your frames out of Black Locust. Stan
     
  12. Fanie
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 4,603
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2484
    Location: Colonial "Sick Africa"

    Fanie Fanie

    Matt, I don't know any specifics, all I know is what one of the guys here told me confidentially that was involved in the nuclear source development, and that was some years ago already. The philamons are scared they are going to be sterilized (another white plot) so as far as I know there is no one doing any development here any more. SA was the leaders in nuclear development at some stage. Now I don't even know if the place still exist. All capable whites get kicked out of their jobs and replaced.

    Nuclear engines will be very economic to run. It's going to be one of the sustaiable energy sources of the future.
     
  13. Fanie
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 4,603
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2484
    Location: Colonial "Sick Africa"

    Fanie Fanie

    Did someone say Ford ? I thought those old boat anchors were banned long ago :D
     

    Attached Files:

  14. rasorinc
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 1,854
    Likes: 71, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 896
    Location: OREGON

    rasorinc Senior Member

    What I know is that the US took everything including studies, engineering and the rest was destroyed so nothing relating to Nuclear was left. Sort of like it was never there.
    Fanie, FORD stands for Figure On Repairs Daily
     

  15. Fanie
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 4,603
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2484
    Location: Colonial "Sick Africa"

    Fanie Fanie

    I thought it was First On the Rubbish Dump, then some smart *** came up with the argument that it was because it towed the Chevy there.
    Needless to say we're not friends any more :D

    You guys have nuclear driven ships. One of your war ships was here in SA a while back and that was nuclear driven. So was the russian sub the was here just prior to that. Probably a good thing they didn't get here at the same time... phew :D
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.