Stirling engine

[bidouille23]

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

[the middle]

Hello Bidouille,
It's been 10 years that I and others are looking for a cheap little stirling ...
Broc of viol, nothing.
Yet, I have rarely seen negative reviews on this baby.
Demand for this engine, there is yet ...

[Christophe]

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" ...

[Gaston]

Or that it is too expensive to manufacture

The car at 2l / 100 which costs 50 000 €, there is always so much demand

the fair has made it clear: a little stirling cheap

[Christophe]

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!) ...

[bidouille23]

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

[chatelot16]

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

[dedeleco]

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.

[chatelot16]

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

[dedeleco]

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.