There's been a bit of a pause here while I get to grips with DraftSight and repair a precision valve grinding machine.
Hi Jason,
You mentioned that I needed a burner with enough heat output (BTU). Roughly what heat output in BTU or kilowatts would I need? I've found a supplier of heating wire and components designed for furnaces and so I could make a simple small electric furnace by arranging the heating wire inside a structure of dry fire bricks. If I use one phase and one heating element I can have 3 kilowatts of heat but using all 3 phases, a high current supply and more heating elements can give me significantly more if necessary. An electric furnace has the advantage that I don't have to buy or design a burner and I don't lose heat in the flue gases. (NB – the way of building a furnace I've outlined is inherently dangerous with risk of electrocution, fire, explosion, etc. and I'm in no way recommending it.)
Hi Michael,
I'm designing this engine at the same time as the rebuild of a knackered S50 which is giving me a lot of interesting experience – at the moment workshop time is a bit of a problem since the workshop I have access to closes at 6pm sharp and I'm seldom out of work before then. I'm also having to buy all the tooling with delivery times of a week or two on most things. This means that, unfortunately, I have to do more planning than I'd like.
Yes – most of what I'm doing is completely pointless for a tepid fog engine. If I can make an engine which runs on tepid fog or compressed air my next step would be to build or buy a better boiler and see how the engine performed with higher pressure and superheating.
Yes – talking about efficiency of a single expansion engine is dubious – but if I can make a single expansion engine that runs well it opens the way to making a double or triple expansion engine at some time inthe future. (The single expansion engine I'm designing looks suspiciously like part of a design for a larger double expansion engine…)
Having said that, the Stuart Sirius was only single expansion and apparently achieved good efficiency (can anyone cite any figures to prove or disprove this?).
The big problem is information – Greenlys and John's PDF book based on postings on paddle ducks **LINK** are so-far the only useful books I've found. Other books I've bough have been next to useless. I'm very grateful to people on here for providing more accurate information.
Yes – the laws of thermodynamics are – unfortunately – very clear – lowering the temperature of the output of the engine is more important than increasing the temperature of the input. If I can build a piston valve engine then building a wet air pump and condenser so that the engine can exhaust into a partial vacuum should be possible in the future (though not now!). Despite the laws of thermodynamics, piston valve engines were used extensively on locomotives where the exhaust was via the funnel and no condenser and vacuum system was present.
Turbines are much more efficient – but with them comes the end of the age of reciprocating steam engines – though a thermal power station using turbines is still woefully inefficient. (At much lower temperatures, turbine liquefiers replaced reciprocating liquefiers for medium to large scale helium liquification but in closed loop cryogenic systems I think reciprocating engines are still used.)
Will