Steam Engine Discussion

General Discussion
#21

Mark, After re-reading the posts I see that you did not get much of what you asked for. Twenty years ago I messed around with some small mono tube boilers ( homebrews) I still have the last one in my shop. The pictured unit has fifty feet of half in tube for a coil. The pump is a hypro good to about 700 psi, it takes about 3/4 hp to run the pump, The shell is SS and I used propane fuel. You would need a fire box or some kind of a rocket stove may work. For a steam engine you may want to look a reworked Wankel rotary.
Go for it Mark
Dave

mono.jpg542×1024 93 KB

mono2.jpg743×1024 123 KB


hypor.jpg683×1024 105 KB

1 Like
#22

MarkG you missed the point completly.
Ken Boaks British made engine is a converted diesel internal combustion engine. Shame the US EPA made importing these and many other good simple old timers illeagal into the USofA anymore. I sold mine off. No way to reliably get parts anymore. Everything wears and needs repairing.
The Marathon engine, the Honda CHP engine could also be woodgas fuel converted in one afternoon also. Just like any methane/propane set up engine.
Woodgas IS bio-mass.
Charcoal gas is biomass.
US and EU spec fuelwood pellets are biomass.
US/Canadian and EU spec heating fuel woodchips are biomass.
I full expect with the intense European interest and now growing use in commercial fuelwood pellets in thier in home heating systems that out of Italy, Poland, the Chech Republic, Romania or the Unkraine someone will bring to market a small CHP external combustion engine based system offered that fuels with EU spec fuelwood pellets.

One NZ company is betting on a CHP Stirling cycle engine. Takes metal killing delta T’s to operate these if comparably small to IC piston engines.

The Germans and the Japanese and US companies are commited to doing this home CHP with internal combustion piston engines. California CARB certification of the Marathon and Freewatt/Ecowill systems show thier commitment to home CHP IC piston engines.

The Real in the World actual Users will be the ones again to say which of these three systems survives and will be the long term winner. And it will be manufacturing, operating and maintences costs that prove out the winner. These ARE efficiency numbers too.
Honda puts more piston IC engines on the face of the planet annually than anyone else.
That is where my last two engines purchased money and effort now gets commited.

This rest is just, “could of”, “would of”, “should of”. . . . never generate an actual real kilowatt used talk.

Pictures and actual commited developement work is what counts here on the DOW.
You really want to sell an idea, a concept here then you need to be burning through some actual biomass to prove your talk like KenB does. Ken is real. And puts it up real.
Like I do.
Like DousieR, MattR, ArvidO, and just about any other person posting here right down to one of the newest active members KeonKL does.
If you want your efforts to taken as real and relevent then you have to make yourself real and relevent. Talk is cheap and will be valued as such.
Cheerleading others on to do your actual developement work and Internet researching with no commitent from you at all except for key punching is better done with personal emails and personal websites.

Anyone wanting some actual in use/been used modern small steam systems work representing decades, and actual lifes works read here thoroughly:
http://kimmelsteam.com
Over 130 system critiqued and pictured here by modern steam enthusiast Tom Kimmel. He has layed out lots of time, money, years and effort in real paper and bent and formed even destoyed metals to collect up and put out this information trove. Use it for gain and he does aske for a site support donation.

Washington State Steve Unruh

#23

Steve, I expected the conversation to reach this point. It seems you missed my point completely. My only purpose here is to encourage people to consider another way to make use of scarce resources (i.e. biomass) that can be more efficient. I suppose the only hope in bringing back small scale steam is for a lot of money to get thrown at it.

1 Like
#24

I composed a reply and changed my mind content to let Steve speak for me but what the hell. From reading all the posts I think you are sold on steam and steam alone. There is nothing wrong with that and good luck to you. The problem seems to be that you are trying to convert a group that has a great solution that uses existing cheap available technology to buy into a plan that may or may not work will cost a fortune and will reward you with insignificant increases in efficiency… maybe. I would prefer to work on recapturing heat from my working system…The only part I agree with is matching generator to load and DC charging. You might check out the microcogen group they talk a lot about that end of things
Best regards, David Baillie

1 Like
#25

Thank you David Baillie for the courteous reply. It seems misunderstandings are easy to foster here despite an effort toward clarity. I’m actually very excited about future developments in small scale wood gas engine systems. I think there is a lot of potential there for many applications.

My efforts here were pretty much doomed to fail. I was prepared for it. I don’t disagree with most of the arguments made by Mr. Unruh. He’s mostly right. Period. The fact is that the existing infrastructure supports internal combustion, so small scale steam is not a practical alternative. I knew this going into the discussion. Still, the physics says clearly that it can be superior for combined heat and power with biomass fuel, and in all respects. Yeah, it’s unrealistic to expect individuals with limited resources to pursue it. However, if more people had a better understanding of steam power, then this would make it more likely for interesting developments to take place in unlikely places. That was really my purpose in starting this discussion: education. People who think they understand steam power generally do not. Thanks again David.

1 Like
#26

David,

I agree with your last statements. Just like I posted originally, steam has lots of potential and I look forward to Cyclone and other companies pushing the development forward. They have the capital and resources to pursue it. At the personal level there’s very little I can do to further this goal, so I’m content to wait and see, and in the meantime work with woodgas in ICE engines.

BTW, thanks for the details on the Cyclone’s inner workings. It is an amazing project, and it seems very close to fruition. Their WHE is almost exactly what you have described, and will be commercially available sometime next year… barring further delays. (Also thanks for the Bourque engine link, thats some good reading.)

If/when we can get our hands on the Mark V, the acceleration and fuel economy will far surpass every effort with stock gasoline engines on woodgas.

1 Like
#27

Mark. If I was disrespectful in my efficiency comments I am sorry. I am not a native english user so things may have different sound in English than in Norwegian. My point was along the same lines as SteveU. If your producing 1 kW, it’s perhaps better to spend a few hours of chopping wood to fuel a woodgas system that CAN be built in resonable time, rather than to chase efficiency in a (massive) technology development project that may turn into nothing.

Craft, engine, I have no additional info, I belive the use some type of CFC-type working fluid.

I have my background in mechanical engineering, 5 years in college and over 15 years as an engineer in various types of engineering (electronics, municipal, offshore oil and gas). The most impressive thing about Wayne Keith and the woodgassers on this forum (myself NOT included, I am a lurker) is that they actually get something built that works. Based on my experience as a design engineer, I must say that deveolping something like the WK system, building it basically in a field!!! , and then using it for years in day to day operations, is off the chart in resourcefulness. I am extremly impressed! Steam I belive is much more difficult to get to a practical level in a DIY-setteting.

Keep up the good work people!

2 Likes
#28

Mark,

Thank you for your patience and perseverance. There are sometimes people with different ideas that come here to “sell” them, and will leave thinking we are narrow-minded, and write us off as such. You haven’t, and we appreciate it.

You will also find that many here are of the same mindset of the Jeffersonian intellectual agrarian of the 18th and early 19th centuries. If supper was cooked, animals fed and secure for the night, and the kids had warm, dry beds to sleep in, then no one was much concerned about lost efficiencies. As for me, I’m not willing to sweat another 80% to gain back the lost 20%.

1 Like
#29

Magne, I perceived no disrespect at all sir. I thank you for the link on the Craft engine. I’m happy to learn of another small scale rankine cycle engine, especially one with so many resources directed at it. Your mentioning the use of a refrigerant is congruent with the low temperature of 400F listed for the working fluid. I suspected so based on that temperature, but without evidence I was unwilling to go there. The higher mean effective pressure should improve efficiency all else equal.

Steam would definitely be more difficult to get to a practical level mainly because the single most important component (the expander) has to be developed. However, you’ve seen some of the talent displayed on this site. If the people here had a better understanding of steam power, then someone might get motivated to put their tools and talent to work on it… then who knows what’s possible. The particular configuration that I believe would be optimal is a low power system that operates more or less continually, and I believe it can be made to be unattended beyond the occasion fuel loading and ash clean out. This would optimize the use of the heat while also minimizing energy conversion losses in electricity generation. I have doubts about a wood gas engine system being able to do this, but I’m convinced that a very slow moving piston steam engine can do it… and heat recovery would be inherently simpler… just gotta get the efficiency up.

Yeah, I’m highly impressed with what Mr. Keith does. The ingenuity he displays impresses me more than anything. That chunker of his, for example, is a brilliant example. Simple and functional. Making the most of what you have. On that note, looks like we’ll just keep making the most of the gas engine until/if modern piston steam engines come along. :wink:

1 Like
#30

Thanks Alex. Again, I know what’s up… but I’m a teacher at heart (and training). I do believe steam can be superior, but yeah… we’re not there yet.

1 Like
#31

Dave Bloom, I missed your post. Looks like a fun project you had there. I once constructed a similar system, but shut it down midstream once I realized (1) more money than I was willing to spend was required to continue, and (2) conceded that it really wasn’t going to result in anything useful anyway. The practical side of me won out. The main problem in my case was not having a suitable expander to meet the required efficiency. You mentioned a Wankel. That has no hope of passing muster. I believe a compounded piston engine with reheat and heat regeneration is the best prospect mainly because it can see high efficiency with very limited steam temperatures, and it can operate at very low speeds. Another possible configuration is a high compression uniflow that adds a reheat similar to what Cyclone is doing. This approach could allow higher efficiency without exposing the steam inlet valve and steam generator tubing to excessive temperatures… and without resorting to compounding. Still, without getting away from oil lubrication there will likely be problems.

1 Like
#32

Good Morning All

AdminChris I am now asking you to transfer this self-declared Discussion topic out of the actual small engine USERS section into the General DISCUSSION area where as a discussion topic it should have been posted up originally.

Everyone has now had a chance to say their peace and have last words.

Of course with your personal Steam power interest be up to you whether you set up a sparate site sub-section for alternatives woodgassed fueled engines talking.
Not having to Host that I can most cheerfully ignore speculative engines talk there and just do-it, get-it-done with proven fielded IC piston engines.
I caution you though that many of us grayhairs with decades of watching others fritter away millions and millions of our Gov’mints Public dollars, and millions and millions of private developement dollars on “better ways”; and many of the younger new practical DOer fellows here will be putting up and using more woodfuel kW’s of shaft, electrical and heat into real use existance over this single LaborDay Holiday weekend than all of the combined 100’s of millions of dollars in GEEK Gov’mint, University and Investor developement companies combined. Ha! They take Holidays off! We need, and use power daily. And we will be doing this with less than even one million dollars in combined personal build-ups by Doing it Today, Real and Relevent with internal combustion piston engines.

I can go to many places on the Internet and read never, ever processed any actual fuelwood; never gasified this fuelwood; and never made this woodfuel gas into a single useable killowatt of shaft power talk, talk, talking heads talking.
ONLY here on the DOW are the people actually Doing this Today, Real and Relevent.

As assigned section Host I’d do the transfer myself but unfamiliar wading through the process I might lose it and that would be most disrepecful for all who have posted up on this topic. I sure would not want my real in the world used CHP systems links and real in used steam systems link to be lost.

Thank you
Small Engine USERS section Host Steve Unruh

1 Like
#33

Hi Steve, I’ve moved it. There won’t be a woodgas steam section until I see some woodgas steam users. Personal interest plays no factor here.

1 Like
#34

Thanks everyone for your thoughts. Steve, thanks for the sarcasm (just subtle and witty enough to be worthy of laughter despite its inappropriate use, ;-). Happy wood gassing all.

1 Like
#35

Mark - i too believe stream is the future, but as it’s been said - today is what needs to be looked at now, tomorrow is for stream… the aim now is to get people into systems that can help them become independent of the grid, by the best system which fits their need. I love the IDEA of geo for heat, solar with wind for lighting and bio as the startup (first step) that is phased into the back up system as the other systems are build.

one thing that may help is if you research the following - back in the mid 80’s there was a 107 ft flex film solar panel. This panel used a 1/2 pound of two metals plus a catalyst that’s was heated by the reflection of the sun off the film thru a large convex lens that can concentrate the sun’s rays onto a small area, heating up the area and thus resulting in a reaction which work to heat the halogen gas… this system could be used to make power, heat, cook and freeze up to 1000 gallons of seawater a day!

my point of saying this is simple - that information could be used to improve both IC and stream systems…

I thank all of you for your work and wish each the best

1 Like
#36

Here is a video about making Hydrogen from sunlight developed by a University here in Australia. Sadly the development of seems to have stalled, the technology works it is just reducing the cost of mass producing it. I have heard them say 30 square kilometres of these panels would provide ALL of Australia’s energy needs including all uses of oil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kJqsDh8cs0

1 Like
#37

Mark reminds me of Tom Sawyer getting other kids to do the whitewashing of the fence for him but to his credit he didn’t get steamed up when called on it.

1 Like
#38

yes Gary you’re on the right trail - the system I remember used half pound of Titanium Oxide, half pound of Magnesium Oxide in a canister that had halogen gas flow thru it - there was a catalyst used but not stated… the flex film was used due to cost, the inventor wished that the system be used in third world nations for water desalination by freezing - that small 107 sqft system could freeze 1,000 gallon per day — when used for home power, it used a halogen gas stove to cook, run a gen, and on and on… a bad ass system! the last thing I know of him - is that he had a small air conditioner and refrigerator unit designed for poor nations based on his past work. I believe that system used with salts as heat sinks could work very well. Could cool the oceans of the world.

a system like this is needed now…

would love to know if anyone would like to invest into a woodgas system that would be an great leap forward… not a cheap system but one that would take woodgas to production a the world markets…

1 Like
#39

Hi Marshall,

That sounds like a different invention, the one shown in the video makes Hydrogen with a Titanium Dioxide catalyst. Some confuse it with using electricity and electrolysis, This system does not make electricity, just water directly converted to Hydrogen.

1 Like
#40

I have not posted on this forum since first starting this thread many years ago. I find that my perspectives have changed little. I still believe a properly designed small steam engine system can be objectively superior to a small wood gas engine system. Scale and application are important considerations. I’m considering a small system suitable for off grid residential combined heat and power.

So, I started a project a couple years back to assemble a small scale steam engine system. I have to work slowly as my resources are very limited. I’m currently testing a monotube steam generator that shows good performance. I’ve operated it up to 1200 psig and 1000F so far. But the expanders I have planned will be limited to 500 psig and no more than about 800F.

The steam generator is part of a rig designed to test different expanders (all will be variants of single-acting uniflow). It includes a feed pump, steam generator (with propane burner), oil pump, condenser, crankcase, and crankshaft load. I am using propane for convenience. But I previously assembled and tested a small wood gasification furnace that showed good results (high temperature, clean burn, and precise control over a range of roughly 15,000 BTU/hr up to about 50,000 BTU/hr). It used wood chips and wood chunks up to about 2" across.

I will be testing the steam generator over the next couple of months before I start assembling the first expander. There is no timeline as my time and other resources are so limited. Also, I can’t provide specifics about the project. But I will note that my steam generator design was extraordinarily simple to assemble - and it was LOW cost. The most expensive part by far was the 1/4" 316SS tubing coil that I used to form the heat exchanger.

So far, my designs have proven out. I can only hope one of the expander designs prove out as well. But if it does, then I have high confidence I will be able to assemble a fully functional prototype steam power plant. Note the design goals for my system include low cost with minimal fabrication (I am repurposing existing mass produced components were practical), compact and portable (the entire system mounts to a roll cage with casters - about the size and weight of a typical 5 KW portable gas genset including furnace), and mechanical simplicity with ease in repairs.

Goal is 18-20% cycle efficiency (i.e. meaning 18-20% of the energy added to the feed water to make steam is converted to shaft work) and 90% efficiency in the steam generator - so 16-18% brake thermal efficiency with 2-3 shaft hp. Oh, and I also have a good diesel/waste oil burner design I will eventually try out.

If those on the forum have sincere interest, then I will share any material progress.

8 Likes