Steam powered cars

[spock1]

Why not?Think there is a future with steam powered vehicles?
A high pressure steam boiler should be highly efficient and provide a vehicle with a long range.

http://matt-rock.newsvine.com/_news/2011/05/16/6653212-what-ever-happened-to-the-steam-powered-car

 

[cchase]

You still have to generate the steam.

 

[mechtech2]

100% torque at 'idle' would be interesting!

 

[A_Harman]

Because Internal Combustion engines are more efficient than steam engines.

 

[Boomer]

Amazing how we rediscover the old technologies, ie 100% torque at zero rpm. It is what gave steam locomotives their incredible pulling power. But even back in the day, nobody could make a steam locomotive as efficient as diesel-electric. PRR even tried steam turbine locomotives and the engines at the end were runninbg very high boiler pressures (400+psi). External combustion engines have the benefit that they can burn a greater variety of fuels (wood, coal, propane, oil, etc)but in today's pollution control environment, I am afraid you'd be stuck with propane and efficiency goes out the window.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: spock1
Why not?Think there is a future with steam powered vehicles?
A high pressure steam boiler should be highly efficient and provide a vehicle with a long range.

http://matt-rock.newsvine.com/_news/2011/05/16/6653212-what-ever-happened-to-the-steam-powered-car


The level of scientific discourse in that opinion piece by Matt Rock is almost on a par with 6th grade science class. He doesn't even realize that steam is just the working fluid in a steam engine, and not the power source. Fuel has to be burned to boil the water to push the pistons and turn the wheels. Heat losses in the boiler and steam trunking are the reason that steam engines are not as efficient as IC engines. The efficiency of diesel engines are what killed steam after hundreds of years of primacy in marine and rail propulsion.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Ive been thinking about external combustion engines for a while. they have more fuel flexibility and could probably be made very efficient with some refinement. Interesting to follow their development over the next decade.

 

[Eddie]

It was diesel electric which killed steam. Electric motors also generate maximum torque at zero rpm.

 

[Quest]

Originally Posted By: Eddie
It was diesel electric which killed steam. Electric motors also generate maximum torque at zero rpm.


Yup! That's the final answer to the steam locomotive's demise.

Q.

 

[KrisZ]

Steam would make a nice hybrid and would increase engine efficiency by capturing a lot of heat generated that is otherwise lost. But the high pressure boiler would pose a problem during accidents.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Quest
Originally Posted By: Eddie
It was diesel electric which killed steam. Electric motors also generate maximum torque at zero rpm.


Yup! That's the final answer to the steam locomotive's demise.

Q.


Actually, it was the maintenance costs that killed the steam locomotive. The power could be made either way but the steam locomotives required huge maintenance to run. The diesel-electrics by comparison, needed nothing.

 

[Chris142]

With a steam powered car you would have to stop every 20 miles and throw more coal in the box.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Steam would make a nice hybrid and would increase engine efficiency by capturing a lot of heat generated that is otherwise lost. But the high pressure boiler would pose a problem during accidents.


The high pressure need not be a problem if the 'Boiler' is a coiled tube.

Wasted heat from an internal combustion engine could be used to heat water and generate steam, OR the the hot exhaust gas could be used to power a turbine.
This is the case if you have an engine with a turbo Charger. Exhaust gas powers a turbine that powers a compressor (supercharger)

Perhaps a more interesting Hybrid, is when the internal combustion engine is used as a Gas generator for a Gas turbine, Providing (possibly) the best of both worlds??

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Because Internal Combustion engines are more efficient than steam engines.


The ones that I work on are 40% efficient, and the new crop are 50%

 

[Shannow]

There were heaps of steam trials (including by Ford, and some Oz universties) due to the 1970s crisis...and they all got pretty good mileage and range, using the motor fuels at the time (first step was always to trial them on gas/kero before working out less tractible fuels.

Start up on an Oz prototype with stainless coil extremeley high pressure (for the day and application) had a ready to burn rubber time of less than a minute.

As the engines are reversible, you get as many forward "gears" as backward.

Ford had some really cool stirling prototypes.

Steam should not be judged on 100psi loco systems with 5 tonnes of water heating to the boil and shovel stoking.

A big part of the demise of the steam loco was that they could drop the fireman (shoveller)...then they dropped the guard

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Chris142
With a steam powered car you would have to stop every 20 miles and throw more coal in the box.

Had a great day a few years ago, shovelling coal on a local tourist steamer...even turn of the last century in industry they had mechanical "stokers"

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: expat
Wasted heat from an internal combustion engine could be used to heat water and generate steam, OR the the hot exhaust gas could be used to power a turbine.
This is the case if you have an engine with a turbo Charger. Exhaust gas powers a turbine that powers a compressor (supercharger)

Perhaps a more interesting Hybrid, is when the internal combustion engine is used as a Gas generator for a Gas turbine, Providing (possibly) the best of both worlds??


Turbo compounding has been used for a while (Mitsubishi had a system that used the exhaust to drive the generator, and an electriclaly driven supercharger), as has Brayton cycle with reciprocating combustor been used on planes.

Gas turbines have had HRSG (Heat Recovery Steam Generator) fitted to them for ages, to power a steam turbine and get over 60% thermal efficiencies, and the "Cheng" cycle throws the steam back through the gas turbine to massively increase shaft power, when you've got lots of available good water.

Cummins are likely to have a steam recovery set on their OTR rigs in the next few years, which will increase efficiency by around 20% (relative, i.e. 20% of 25%...which is massive really)

 

[Kestas]

Originally Posted By: expat
Wasted heat from an internal combustion engine could be used to heat water and generate steam.

That's the whole premise with water injection in engines.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: Kestas
Originally Posted By: expat
Wasted heat from an internal combustion engine could be used to heat water and generate steam.

That's the whole premise with water injection in engines.


No, it's not.

 

[sleddriver]

Quote:
I'm a satirist, a musician, an audio engineer, a writer, and my love for both pizza and Coca Cola is extraordinary.

I'm the drummer of the band Letters of Last Resort, an avid writer, and a proud liberal columnist. From 1998 to 2001, I was a DJ at WHRW 90.5 FM in Binghamton, where I also conceptualized and co-founded the Radio Theatre department, and served as its first department director. I also directed and co-starred in a television program for BTV, and wrote for Binghamton University's campus paper, "Pipe Dream." Since then, I've been involved in video game development, music, and opinion writing.

In June of 2011 I became a full-time satirist, taking up the title of "Chief of Staff" for the political satire website www.pardonthepundit.com
It would appear the young-hipster dude Matt Rock never bothered to take physics, chemistry, engineering, thermodynamics, etc. etc. etc.

Talk about "Pipe Dream's".......