Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
There has been some mention of the Stirling engine and here is what I have so you all don't think it's some new savior technology:
The Stirling Cycle is,as is the Erricson Cycle,given a theoretical enthalpy efficiency,as the Carnot Cycle,80%.
In 1955,GM Research Labs were investigating the engine.
In 1973,with the Arab Oil Embargo and 'energy-crisis,' interest was renewed.
GM,Ford,Philips Research Laboratories,Holland,and NASA were all doing R&D with it.
When crude prices fell,so did interest for some.Ford quit it after umpteen millions of dollars spent on it.
GM had achieved BSFCs of 0.418-0.358 pounds/Bhp-hr ( 39% enthalpy efficiency ).
|
Does that 80% theoretical efficiency account for inefficiencies of combustion or is that just for converting the heat energy into motion?
Much of the inefficiency of a gasoline engine comes from the need to get rid of waste heat (through exhaust and coolant). If you are using combustion of a fuel to power the Stirling engine, you will have to consider that also. I suspect that's why GM's testing was only around 39% efficient.
As project to learn how to use the tools in the machine shop, I built a Stirling engine in college many years ago. I still have it somewhere...