It will interesting to see what the future has to offer regarding automobile powering. Maybe the Stirling design is a non starter for the first generation of vehicles, but may come on strong later. My crystal ball is cloudy at the moment, but I usually expect to see the simplest solution to be the one that gets the race started.
I wonder if a small turbine drive for each wheel that is centrally controlled might be the solution. Each power unit could then be quite small and easy to handle in manufacturing. All wheel drive of this type should be an excellent sales feature as well. We need to think out of the box as much as possible as we ponder the overall system design. What would the vort think of having a GPS system on board that is sent data about the traffic flow at the current location? The vehicle thus throttles back the LENR device to have the power required for the existing conditions. Perhaps in this manner there would not be a major problem with dumping excess heat. Of course a hydraulic or steam powered fan could be used for the heat dumping at stops. Or consider a steam storage tank that is sized to store the carefully metered amount of steam required for the traffic and immediate needs. I think that the total traffic system might be utilized as we proceed with these new products to make them perform much better than existing concepts. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Robert Lynn <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Feb 6, 2012 7:56 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stirling engine used as a reactor OK Ignore the fuel price. In work that has been done on exhaust heat recovery (where the heat is effectively free and temps 4-600 degrees C) for trucks and cars Rankine is popular (eg BMW with steam), and Brayton too (many trucks and ships use turbocompounding, recovering power from the turbine of a turbocharger, F1 will as well from next year), but I have never seen anyone try to use Stirling. If you just look at the weight of a hybrid car LENR engine; stirling vs rankine vs brayton turbine the stirling is by far the heaviest, has the lowest operating speed (so bigger generator, belt or gearbox required), has a large number of high tolerance components, is made from high cost materials, has known issues with reliability, needs very large radiators, and needs a system for re-compressing leaked hydrogen. Which do you think will end up being cheapest to put in a car? I couldn't pick between Brayton and Rankine: Brayton (recuperated or not) probably has lower efficiency (10-20%), with lower density working fluid for heat transfer meaning large heat exchangers with large pressure differentials (ie big and heavy), very high bearing speeds a hassle, but no condenser required. Rankine, small, light, dense high pressure working fluid = compact boiler and engine (turbine or reciprocating), good efficiency (15-25%), but likely a large condenser. But what I am very sure of is that it won't be Stirling, even if it can manage 35% efficiency, it simple misses on too many other cost, weight and size factors.
