Bonjour,
Well here it is that it is heavy, it is aptly named I think, RIDER (and without complaint pfff).
So continue my research which for the moment are encouraging apart from the sound that it makes a rider, I find a video with two big piston parrallele, oulala it seems to have the couple but what hellish noise argggg.
But all right makes .
see you later
Stirling engine
-
- Grand Econologue
- posts: 1155
- Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
- Location: Britain BZH powaaa
- x 2
-
- Econologue expert
- posts: 4075
- Registration: 12/01/07, 08:18
- x 4
-
- Moderator
- posts: 79126
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 10974
Same remark as LeJuste, but in my opinion it's like the car at 2L / 100 ... you have to believe that there are "not enough demands" ...
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
-
- Moderator
- posts: 79126
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 10974
Ben saw the current industrial capabilities, a Stirling engine from 1 to mechanical 2kW could (should) not cost more than 1500-2000 € ...
And I aim high, compared to the price of small engines 4 time (you have seen generators 1er price ...)!
Only here, alternative engines, it is 120 years that we build industrially ... not stirling ...
What I mean is that mechanically speaking, a stirling engine is not so much more complicated to realize than an 4 conventional time of equivalent power!
What is missing is an industrial desire to do it which would mean ... that there is (still) no interesting market of the small engine Stirling (it is not the 5 or 6 interested on this forum who make a deal!) ...
And I aim high, compared to the price of small engines 4 time (you have seen generators 1er price ...)!
Only here, alternative engines, it is 120 years that we build industrially ... not stirling ...
What I mean is that mechanically speaking, a stirling engine is not so much more complicated to realize than an 4 conventional time of equivalent power!
What is missing is an industrial desire to do it which would mean ... that there is (still) no interesting market of the small engine Stirling (it is not the 5 or 6 interested on this forum who make a deal!) ...
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
-
- Grand Econologue
- posts: 1155
- Registration: 21/06/09, 01:02
- Location: Britain BZH powaaa
- x 2
End
read here everything can change
http://www.usinages.com/rider-ericsson- ... tml#343111
I started, could try a rapprochement for people who are interested no, it's the opportunity I think .
see you
read here everything can change
http://www.usinages.com/rider-ericsson- ... tml#343111
I started, could try a rapprochement for people who are interested no, it's the opportunity I think .
see you
0 x
- chatelot16
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6960
- Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
- Location: Angouleme
- x 264
a stirling is simpler to manufacture than a gasoline engine, but is much less powerful at equal weight
so to do the same power you have to make bigger heavier so more expensive
explanation: it is the cylinder that makes the power of a gasoline engine: it is an internal combustion, the heat is produced instantly at the right place and can be rotated at high speed
with the stirling it is an external combustion: it is necessary to allow time to heat to cross the walls to heat the volume: the bigger the cylinder capacity it has to turn slowly: it must be much bigger than a gasoline engine to have the same power ... it is not the cylinder that determines the power but the wall surface
I have some solution to improve the performance by replacing the big cylinder that we see in genreral by a multitude of small cylinder ... it's better but does not make a miracle
big question: how many people are really interested in a good stirling from 2 KW to 5000 euro?
or by a smaller kind 500 W has 2000 euro?
I think there is a way to make cheaper in large series, but to start it will pay well the price of manufacturing in small quantities
so to do the same power you have to make bigger heavier so more expensive
explanation: it is the cylinder that makes the power of a gasoline engine: it is an internal combustion, the heat is produced instantly at the right place and can be rotated at high speed
with the stirling it is an external combustion: it is necessary to allow time to heat to cross the walls to heat the volume: the bigger the cylinder capacity it has to turn slowly: it must be much bigger than a gasoline engine to have the same power ... it is not the cylinder that determines the power but the wall surface
I have some solution to improve the performance by replacing the big cylinder that we see in genreral by a multitude of small cylinder ... it's better but does not make a miracle
big question: how many people are really interested in a good stirling from 2 KW to 5000 euro?
or by a smaller kind 500 W has 2000 euro?
I think there is a way to make cheaper in large series, but to start it will pay well the price of manufacturing in small quantities
0 x
Strongly agree, the slow thermal diffusion limits the Sterlings in yield, which explains the helium or the hydrogen (dangerous, but 3,3 times more in distance D = 160 to 190 mm2 / s) and the use of stacks finely divided, because the diffuse air of 4mm in 1s (D = 19mm2 / s) and therefore so fast, it takes dimensions as square root of time, 10 times smaller for 1 / 100 second, 0,4mm actually 300 Hertz because there is the factor Pi = 3,14 in the period formula on Pi, in the root of D).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusivit%C3%A9_thermique
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conduction_thermique
So it is essential to divide finely, without necessarily putting a multitude of pistons, finely divided heat exchangers, stacks, may be sufficient, such as thermoacoustics, which by wave, impedance granted, compensate dead volumes, if well designed. (similar to microwaves, but not simple in comprehension)
We must be able to combine thermoacoustics, and Stirling to have the advantages of each and to reduce the inconvenience, with displacer piston and work fast, remaining simple.
In very low temperature cryogenics, this is commercially expensive, even at NASA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusivit%C3%A9_thermique
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conduction_thermique
So it is essential to divide finely, without necessarily putting a multitude of pistons, finely divided heat exchangers, stacks, may be sufficient, such as thermoacoustics, which by wave, impedance granted, compensate dead volumes, if well designed. (similar to microwaves, but not simple in comprehension)
We must be able to combine thermoacoustics, and Stirling to have the advantages of each and to reduce the inconvenience, with displacer piston and work fast, remaining simple.
In very low temperature cryogenics, this is commercially expensive, even at NASA.
0 x
- chatelot16
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6960
- Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
- Location: Angouleme
- x 264
these idea of thermoacoustics pushed me forward in the classic stirling!
until now my idea was to make cylinders of small diameter (about 20 mm) to be able to turn at a better speed
imitating the thermoacoustics with heating and cooling at each end of the regenerator, I can do it with much finer tubes, and turn the engine much faster, with piston in one piece, and not the multitude of small piston and displacer in all the tube of my previous version
with enough thin tube ca ca turn at the speed I want, why not 3000t / mn for a 2000W, or 10000t / mn for a smaller
this evolution considerably reduces the price of my stirling project
until now my idea was to make cylinders of small diameter (about 20 mm) to be able to turn at a better speed
imitating the thermoacoustics with heating and cooling at each end of the regenerator, I can do it with much finer tubes, and turn the engine much faster, with piston in one piece, and not the multitude of small piston and displacer in all the tube of my previous version
with enough thin tube ca ca turn at the speed I want, why not 3000t / mn for a 2000W, or 10000t / mn for a smaller
this evolution considerably reduces the price of my stirling project
0 x
It is necessary to think about high frequency according to articles and numerous patents on the thermoacoustics of which I indicated some on thermoacoustic.
A good old classic piston, with good inertia, is not necessary at high frequency, piezo or electromagnetic can work, to convert into electricity, as well.
In any case, it will be with piston converter, at this frequency a thermoacoustic operation in the stack, with the same physics, that it is useful to assimilate well for a good performance.
The progressive wave operation, in a ring system is as well, and piston or sensor in auxiliary, with impedance adapter.
A good old classic piston, with good inertia, is not necessary at high frequency, piezo or electromagnetic can work, to convert into electricity, as well.
In any case, it will be with piston converter, at this frequency a thermoacoustic operation in the stack, with the same physics, that it is useful to assimilate well for a good performance.
The progressive wave operation, in a ring system is as well, and piston or sensor in auxiliary, with impedance adapter.
0 x
-
- Similar topics
- Replies
- views
- Last message
-
- 106 Replies
- 30604 views
-
Last message by Exnihiloest
View the latest post
07/04/21, 22:05A subject posted in the forum : Science and Technology
-
- 4 Replies
- 5904 views
-
Last message by netshaman
View the latest post
11/06/15, 21:13A subject posted in the forum : Science and Technology
-
- 17 Replies
- 33936 views
-
Last message by Christophe
View the latest post
05/06/16, 01:01A subject posted in the forum : Science and Technology
-
- 2 Replies
- 4251 views
-
Last message by Flytox
View the latest post
02/03/08, 23:24A subject posted in the forum : Science and Technology
Back to "Science and Technology"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 136 guests