← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · 6KILLER
Thread ID: 19273 | Posts: 2 | Started: 2005-07-25
2005-07-25 04:40 | User Profile
[img]http://www.motors.scotsman.com/pic/1912skob.jpg[/img] Could a steam engined Skoda Fabia become the low- pollution car of the future. [size=6][color=darkred]Skoda Fabia[/color][/size]
[size=4][url="http://www.iav.de/IAV_Internet/News/media/MTZpdf/zee_e.pdf"]http://www.iav.de/IAV_Internet/News/media/MTZpdf/zee_e.pdf[/url] [url="http://powerlab.mech.okayama-u.ac.jp/~esd/comodia2001/2-28.pdf"]http://powerlab.mech.okayama-u.ac.jp/~esd/comodia2001/2-28.pdf[/url] [/size][url="http://www.stanleysteamers.com/modern_steam.htm"]http://www.stanleysteamers.com/modern_steam.htm[/url]
2001 [color=#666666]Skoda steams ahead with low-pollution innovation
[/color]SKODA used to be famous for its steam-aged designs which were so archaic compared with rivals that they kept a whole generation of comedians in full-time employment taking the mick.
But now the Czech Republic manufacturer could be at the leading edge of a steam-powered revolution which could see petrol and diesel engines replaced with low-pollution puffers.
For a German engineering company has developed a new type of steam engine which is not only more efficient and less pollutive than traditional internal combustion engines, but can do without the traditional gearbox which adds weight and drinks fuel.
The new steam engine developed by Enginion has, according to New Scientist magazine, already passed early reliability tests after over 300 hours of intensive testing in a Skoda Fabia saloon - the equivalent of about 20,000 miles in normal use - without any problems.
Though steam engines have been around since the first petrol-engined car took to the roads in 1886 and have proved more than capable of providing enough power - the Stanley Steamer could lift its front wheels off the road during hard acceleration - steam propulsion lost out to petrol and diesel power about 50 years ago.
One of the main reasons for this was the rapid advances made in internal combustion technology to meet the needs of aircraft development which, of course, was funded by the military and owed little to free market economics.
Now engineers have begun to run a fresh eye over the possibilities of steam, great strides have been made to the stage where a small steam engine capable of propelling a motorcycle or even a small car could be in mass production within three years, with a full-sized car unit following soon after.
Unlike the traditional puffer type of steam engine used in trains and for industrial applications, the German developed Enginion unit is a rotary design similar in concept to a steam turbine used in a power station or ship.
It is also, in several respects, similar to the compact engine in the Wankel rotary unit used by NSU, now part of the Audi group, and Mazda, which plans to reintroduce the rotary engine next year.
Superheated steam passed through the rotors gives smooth and instant power from little more than tickover to engine speeds of 20,000 rpm and more, so doing away the need for a conventional transmission.
One of the main breakthroughs claimed by the German team is the use of high speed components which run without the need for lubricants.
The use of advanced composites and ceramics for the moving parts not only cuts down the bulk and complexity of the engine, but maximises the thermal efficiency of the engine.
And because the steam engine uses external combustion (the fuel is burned outside the engine rather than inside), there is a much wider choice of fuel. This can be virtually anything from the traditional fuels currently available at the pumps, to hydrogen, natural gas or even the agriculturally produced bio-fuels.
Another traditional drawback to the use of steam in road vehicles, the time needed to gather a head of steam in the boiler, has been overcome to the extent that the time needed from switching on the Enginion unit to moving off is about 20 seconds, or roughly the time it takes some diesel engines to be started from cold.
First use of the new engine will probably be as an auxiliary power unit, possibly in petrol electric hybrid cars with the six kilowatt engine used both for initial acceleration and to drive an electric motor to charge the carââ¬â¢s batteries.
THE inventors claim to have recently signed a huge order with one of the worldââ¬â¢s leading car makers to supply the new engine possibly for use as an auxiliary power unit.
But the return of steam as a mainstream source of power for the family car could take a little longer in spite of the success of the three-cylinder, two-stroke unit being tested in the Skoda Fabia.
"The automotive industry is very conservative," says Roger Waller, the chief engineer of the Swiss steam engine manufacturer DLM. "Thereââ¬â¢s been so much money poured into the development of the internal combustion engine that they donââ¬â¢t want to change."
Others, however, believe the time might be perfect for car-makers to consider new propulsion technologies as there is a large school of thought that the development of petrol engines is nearing the end of the road.
Most of the main breakthroughs in engine technologies over the last five years have been with diesel engines which, from being only about half as powerful as a petrol burning unit of the same size, are now virtually on a par and, in some respects, even more powerful and fuel efficient.
Both Toyota and Honda have successfully introduced commercially viable petrol/electric hybrid cars with the Prius and Insight respectively and even Ford, traditionally the most conservative of car makers, is building and selling the Think electrically-powered city car.
JIM DUNN Motoring Correspondent Wednesday, 19th December 2001 The Scotsman
[url="http://www.motors.scotsman.com/cfm/home/roadtests_specific.cfm?roadtestid=522"][size=2]http://www.motors.scotsman.com/cfm/home/roadtests_specific.cfm?roadtestid=522[/size][/url]
2005-08-16 17:21 | User Profile
[size=5][color=#800000]A FRESH VIEW OF THE STEAM CAR FOR TODAY[/color][/size]
[center]By: James D. Crank [/center]
[center]DOBLE STEAM MOTORS CORP.[/center]
[center]A GENERAL OVERVIEW[/center]
It is very strange today that a well designed steam engine is not considered as a potential alternate to the internal combustion engine.
There are some unique operational and environmental advantages of the steam car that continue to make it an attractive powerplant for motorcar propulsion. They will be examined later in this article.
We are never surprised that present day car manufacturers, so deeply committed to the internal combustion engine, ignore steam power. The question must also be asked why the automotive press seems to have totally forgotten all of the technical possibilities of the steam car and never mention this power system.
It seems as if the automotive enthusiast publications are suddenly and totally ignorant of the steamer and what constitutes a successful automotive steam powerplant. Do they no longer understand the principals and the advantages? Are they unwilling to be educated or to seek out lively sources of intelligent guidance? Even when the facts are generously and elegantly presented, they have been deliberately ignoring the steam car. This is a short sighted view.
In 1985 a special steam racing car set the world's land speed record for steam cars at the Bonneville salt flats in Utah. It broke the longest standing automotive speed record, that of the Stanley racer at Ormond Beach Florida in 1906. The automotive press completely ignored the setting of this new record, with the single exception of an article in [u]Autoweek[/u] some seven years later, hardly apropos.
At the prestigious Pebble Beach Concours in 1997, a large display of steam cars was organized and presented. The public crowded around the cars and asked hundreds of intelligent questions and the air buzzed with their interest; but the automotive press, usually attracted to such a display of unusual automobiles, demonstrated total disdain and avoided them. Not one word of this singular event, nor were any photographs printed in the major U.S. enthusiast publications.
What an important event this was, with vehicles dated back to 1884 and ending with six Doble steam cars from the 1920's, the largest display of Doble cars ever assembled. Surely the press recognized the names of Stanley, White, Locomobile and Doble. Cars came from all over the United States and from England to participate. It was the largest and most important and complete representation of vintage steam cars ever assembled anywhere and showed, with beautifully restored examples, the history of the steam car in America. The quality of this presentation was noteworthy.
Were the members of the press afraid that their total lack of knowledge might show if they wrote a paragraph or two? Did they not even trust their ability to publish a picture with a caption? Seeing the interest of the general public, they could not have simply considered the steam car to be some quaint anachronism to be laughed at and ignored. The enthusiastic participants returned home to a total media vacuum.
The media shamed themselves and their subjects.
For decades the automotive manufacturers have not been able to, for a moment, step back from their century of tight-ranked bias against any alternatives to the internal combustion engine. When they do appear to try, they have amply demonstrated in both word and deed that they have lost the technical competence to evaluate, design, construct, or even intelligently discuss a viable steam power system. With such a background, is it any surprise that they are unwilling to even consider an investigation of this approach again today?
The effort needed to modify their infrastructure and to educate the support industries required to back up a new steam car would be a daunting task. Where would they find the knowledgeable engineering staff to design the cars, then develop them through experience thus gained, and also find the technical depth to support such vehicles? All of this would be needed for even the limited production of such a vehicle. The automotive industry has even lost the ability to search out and recognize competent consulting to accomplish these focused efforts. The most they will even say is that the steamer is a dead issue, or worse, a non-issue. They are totally wrong.
For unfortunately, the very special engineering knowledge demanded to produce a really good modern steam car is today, only in the hands of a very few people who have devoted their lives to the investigation of the steam car and it's technology, that have thoroughly researched the past work, have real hands on experience with the examples from the past and present, and so learned from them, and who also have the knowledge to assimilate this past work and apply what is useful to the new editions. They also know what to discard.
The most sound technical approach cannot simply be to slap some old steam car technology with a new coat of paint, or a different body, and foist it off as a modern development, for it most certainly is not that by any means. Such an approach does not advance the technology of the steam car, nor show much credibility.
Designing and building a new modern steam car worthy of the name does not mean starting from ground zero. It does, however, mean a dedicated systems approach and the development of a complete, integrated, flexible and safe design.
It means building on the past successes and knowing of the earlier failures and not making them all over again. This is unfortunately almost a lost skill today.
This task can and should be taken up.
Even amongst those experienced in operating and designing steam cars, the knowledge of what was done before and what has to be done today, and how to effectively do it, is almost a lost resource. One point which is made by all, is that the systems engineering of such a powerplant is the most vital and critical task to be addressed. For if the system is not balanced in function and performance, it will be held down to the performance level of the least effective link in the chain.
How can this scarce expertise be brought together and the experience be put to the best effect? Will it be some single individual or perhaps a group of two or three who will join to design and construct a really successful modern steam car? The answer seems to be that it will be just that sort of collaboration. No one experienced in the art will agree that any major auto manufacturer is capable of such an effort.
The important data on steam car developments since 1930 has not really been professionally archived at all and what little remains, is fragmented and almost completely absent for researchers who are looking at the steam car for the first time. Most data banks are in private hands and are thereby not available for public investigation. Even the location of these private libraries is not known to outside investigators. The serious steam car fraternity is a tightly knit bunch and not prone to advertisement.
This segment of automotive technology is today almost unknown; but that is a fact.
What does exist concerning the competent design of the modern steam car is in the hands of the dedicated few. Very few!
In past decades, and in response to the clean air hysteria that stared in 1958, several major automotive companies have tried to design and either themselves make a working steam car, or to have engaged consulting companies that professed to have the knowledge to do the job. In all cases, save for the Besler Corporation effort for General Motors with the SE-124 in 1969, total failure was the result. The criteria being a vehicle that can be driven on public roads with the same confidence as a modern gas car.
Their pure academic approach was no key to success, much practical working knowledge of these interesting vehicles is demanded, and that is certainly not gleaned from any textbook. These earlier attempts lacked any practical experience, often substituting ego and governmental/management posturing for knowledge.
The California Steam Bus program faired a little better, with the Broebeck bus in service for quite a while with good public acceptance and acceptable technical success. It was, however, based solely on old Doble technology with scant improvement over that then forty year old technology. However it worked and the bus was successful and that approach was all that was called for in that program.
What was not realized, during the environmental hysteria in the 1958-1985 period, was that the so called experts, retained for their academic credentials, and who were paid some really heavy fees for their alleged competence, were really in the government grant business, not the alternate energy or steam car business.
This same fraud is actively practiced to this day with electric cars and their elusive magic batteries.
The State and Federal government agencies that sponsored steam car research had even poorer expertise in placing funds, or to also offer realistic guidelines or experienced consultation that would result in success. Generally asking for results on such short timetables that they were the least likely to result in success.
This situation is again being demonstrated now in the absurd dictates of the California Air Resources Board with their mandate that electric cars will be sold in California in substantial quantity by the year 2003. This solely to generate political favor and to offer a placebo to the environmental harpies.
When contemplating this ludicrous directive, they deliberately relied on contrived data, generated both internally and externally, to support the false assumption that there is a satisfactory, cost effective battery that will give the electric the range, long service life, and performance demanded to make such cars useful to the average motorist who might purchase one. There is no such thing, it is Alice in Wonderland.
It is not hard to understand that, if one is depending on a research contract with the C.A.R.B. for his livelihood, one had better adhere to the proscribed political agenda, or the research funds will be terminated instantly.
Their captive "Experts" and the entrepreneurs that rushed to the public hog trough provided contrived and false data to support the pandering political ambitions of the California Air Resources Board.
When an electric car can deliver 150 miles of range at reasonable expressway speeds at full power, have an overall efficiency of 20%, not their present miserable efficiency, and do it in cold winter weather, then they can come to the table.
There is another negative aspect to the pure electric car development that was deliberately buried and not mentioned in detail. Where was the energy to recharge the batteries to come from, assuming that large quantities of the car buying public actually purchased these cars?
The East Coast is already subject to power grid shortages, and brownouts of serious magnitude. The West Coast is now experienced its first major rolling blackout situations this year, caused by lack of generating capacity, a criminally faulty deregulation scheme by the Sacramento lawmakers and corporate collusion and greed of an astonishing magnitude. One must also include the heavy contributions of cash to the people involved in making policy in Sacramento. It is called payola.
Certainly their refusal to totally abandon this means of automotive propulsion is a typical political face saving gambit. We can probably also rest assured that the pure electric car is a dead issue, thanks to this manufactured "Energy Crisis."
While the ecology/safety fascists are trying their best to destroy nuclear power, tear down the dams that produce clean electrical power and remove any fossil fuel burning power sources, the demand for electricity mounts day by day. This is an ongoing situation that will not diminish in the future. It will only get worse.
The thought of tens of thousands of electric cars in New York City or San Francisco, or Los Angeles, being plugged in at 6:00 PM, as the commuters arrived home, is too serious to make light of.
Where do these electric car zealots think the power comes from, an Electric Fairy that hides in the wall plug?
Where is the safe infrastructure to handle the vast quantities of lead, and other toxic materials, that an active electric car program would generate from spent batteries? That problem was never adequately addressed, it was deliberately buried.
General Motors produced the EV-1 and Honda made a nice little conversion of the Civic model with an advanced battery in reply to this electric car mandate.
The GM EV-1 costs some $265,000 plus each to make and the Honda was somewhere around $85,000 plus to produce, according to informed sources.
Actual vehicle costs were so high that the cars could only be leased and not actually purchased. Public acceptance was a dismal failure, with the exception of a few narcissistic exhibitionists and posturing Hollywood celebrities who used the EV-1 for personal grandstanding advertisement.
General Motors and Honda had the good business sense to finally shut down this costly electric car endeavor and get out of the pure electric car field. One cannot operate a profitable business by continually subsidizing the cost of such a foolish endeavor on the scale demanded by the Air Resources Board.
On February 23, 2001, General Motors finally mustered the courage to sue the California Air Resources Board to end this absurd electric car mandate.
It will remain to be seen if the other automotive companies show the same courage and join G. M. in ending this costly and ill-conceived experiment. It will also be
Interesting to watch this legal battle to see if there are any courts of law that will show common sense and not pander to the Sacramento lunatics.
The California Air Resources Board should rightfully be sued out of existence.
Never have so few people wrecked such havoc on any specific industry. For most unfortunately, other states use the C.A.R.B. as their shining example.
A similar situation also applies to the substitution of alcohol for the present MTBE that is poisoning the water in California and is rapidly spreading elsewhere.
With or without government requirements, alcohol is an energy intensive fuel to produce, delivers less milage per gallon, that is corrosive, anhydrous, has very poor cold weather starting ability, and hot starting vapor locking problems.
The production of large quantities of alcohol also requires massive government farm subsidies to make it anywhere near economically feasible. Left to the open market, alcohol is a loser as a motor fuel.
It has been proven over and over that the new versions of reformulated gasoline are perfectly capable of dealing with the smog problem without any oxygenated additive. Only politics and beholden government officials stand in the way of this sensible solution.
Compressed natural gas is another losing proposition. Once highly touted as a savior of the environment, the program is now in total disarray and falling to pieces from a terminal lack of practicality, let alone a vast fuel supply network. It is not capable of offering any range that makes sense, especially for interstate trucking; but that is the exact approach these zealots are presently taking in Washington and Sacramento. Again, it must be government subsidized to even exist in the real world.
Another example of contrived data by the E.P.A. and C.A.R.B being used and applied by ignorant self serving government agencies, to the detriment of the pocket book of the American motorist. Political payoffs also enter into this decision.
The present twittering about hybrid cars is only a sugarcoated attempt to satisfy the howling mob of environmental fascists, who are hell-bent to see that everyone conforms to their viewpoints. They are true fascists at heart and they have been likened to a watermelon, green on the outside and red on the inside.
Hybrid power systems offer no real advantage except in the minds of the politicians. A good modern heavily supercharged Diesel engine would be a most satisfactory answer for the mid term power needs of the automobile.
Although technically workable in limited applications, the hybrid is not cost effective when compared to the straightforward internal combustion engine, unless subsidized by the automobile manufacturers.
Fuel cells, the present darling of the politicians, are a complex and highly fragile and sophisticated power source that, while they do work, would be a disaster in the hands of the average motorist. They are simply not cost effective.
Still, the automotive industry provides lip service to these concepts, seeing from experience how far the actual vehicle strays from public acceptance; but doomed to repeat it over and over again.
In spite of the Diesel engine showing the best fuel economy and long life in hard service of any internal combustion engine, the Federal agencies and the always publicity seeking California Air Resources Board are now attacking the very power plant that offers the greatest medium term solution to both the oil consumption of the motorcar and the environmental concerns about air pollution.
They are again using false and contrived data, scare tactics, concerning the exhaust soot problem of a minor number of badly maintained city busses and interstate trucks, to try to bury the only really efficient internal combustion engine that is immediately applicable to the automobile. A simple soot trap eliminates this minor point completely, as does competent maintenance. The Diesel also is readily adaptable to using renewable resource fuels like vegetable oils, a fact that is deliberately being hidden in these pronouncements.
These political parasites should be shown up as the fools and liars they are.
Against this backdrop, why would anyone try to introduce the steam car into the modern automotive world. There are good reasons to do just that.
There are advantages, and, there are of course, disadvantages.
Ecology.
The burner in a steam car, when properly designed, can be, and has been, as environmentally clean as the 2001 model gasoline powered cars. This, without any form of special pollution reducing gadgetry, none at all, it is inherent in the modern burner design.
The paramount advantage is that the fuel particle is burned at almost atmospheric pressure, bringing the oxides of nitrogen down to the lowest possible level, if actually present at all. The residence time of that fuel particle in the burner is long, resulting in complete combustion. The unburned hydrocarbons can be non-existant. This has been proven over and over again.
Yes, there is CO2 produced. That occurs when any carbon based fuel is burned and one cannot trick Mother Nature.
If one wanted to concentrate solely on the oxides of nitrogen and CO2 issue, consider the vast number of jet airplanes that burn huge quantities of fuel and happily inject their exhausts high into the atmosphere. Try that one as a pollution problem should you be worried about the so-called global warming issue!
The fuel for a modern steam car can be any light liquid that can be delivered to the burner; petroleum derived fuels, vegetable oils, fuel oil derived from coal, any combustible liquid fuel. No additives are needed nor are they wanted, with the possible exception of fungus inhibitors, the burners work very well on a cheaper straight run fuel. Pure kerosene is an excellent fuel for the steam car.
The statement, by the uninformed, has often been made that the steam car is horribly inefficient and burns vast amounts of fuel. Yes, the old antique steamers were none too efficient, nor in that early era did they have to be; but with a well developed steam powerplant, fuel mileage is now quite good, when compared to an equivalent performance gasoline car, and the steamer will burn a much cheaper fuel than any other mobile powerplant.
There is another nice feature of a steam-powered vehicle, which has not often been mentioned, even by the enthusiasts for the steamer. When puttering along in traffic the burner has little work to do, as no real power is demanded from the engine. The burner is shut off most of the time while in stop and go traffic.
When sitting at a signal light, the burner is off. The residual steam pressure is maintained in the steam generator and starts the car instantly, the burner then coming on when pressure drops below a proscribed limit. The burner cycle then starts all over again, maintaining pressure and temperature. Fuel mileage in town driving is excellent. The steamer does not just sit there idling and wasting fuel and causing pollution.
Some thirty years ago, a team in Texas designed and built a steam powerplant for installation into a Volkswagen Squareback station wagon, and it all fit in the original engine compartment, save for the condenser. This operational steamer delivered over 23 miles per gallon, the same as the original smog equipment strangled VW engine. Enough said on that subject.
Operational Characteristics.
Here is where the steam car really shines.
The steam engine develops maximum torque at minimal revolutions, right from the start, therefore, no clutch or transmission is needed. This torque is not inconsequential either. The simple Stanley 20 HP two cylinder engine develops at maximum, some 640 lbs/ft of torque. The legendary Doble at maximum pressure develops 2200 lbs/ft of torque on the crankshaft. These levels can not be matched by anything in any normal automobile, plus, the engines just loaf along at highway speeds. Their gear ratios between the engine crankshafts and the axle shafts is usually 1-1/2 to one, bringing silent and vibrationless operation, and also delivering extremely long engine life.
This massive torque produces high acceleration rates, not easily equaled by their contemporary gasoline engined cousins. Their performance is exemplary.
The only driver input is the throttle position and whether the car is to be driven forward or backward. No other driver decision is required in the later steam cars.
The control of the power system has been fully automatic since 1907 in the better makes of steam cars, notably the White. Today, the driver of such a modern steam car would only need turn on the key switch and moments later drive away.
The car takes care of itself in all respects of steam pressure and temperature. You could simply ignore it.
This does not also imply that some highly complex multi computer system is demanded, such complication and expense is not needed nor wanted. Simple relay logic controls are well developed and have been used for the past seventy five years in steam cars with complete success.
Microprocessors and limited computer control systems can be applied to the steam car to provide totally automatic operation and complete operational safety if really desired; but it would be a minimal involvement. There is no need to incorporate some complex computer controlled system, when a much simpler version will perform all the necessary functions with reliability.
The water in a steam car will freeze and there is no really practical substitute for water as the working fluid, although many have tried to find an alternate.
This is a problem that has to be addressed, if the steamer were to be produced for general public use; but not for a specialized vehicle.
The steam car's hardware is not presently commonly available. It must be specially designed and constructed for the most part if a modern steam car is to be an actuality.
However, it is well within the province of any well-equipped shop to turn out the necessary hardware. The machining operations are generic to the trade.
What has to have detailed and skilled attention paid to it, is the refinement of the design concept that will produce an efficient and compact engine. This work is under way presently and already shows, via detailed thermodynamic and mechanical analysis, that a highly efficient main engine can be designed and constructed today that would elevate the technology of the steam car to more than just acceptable levels. The engine is the most crucial component that needs high-level development.
Some of the other needed components are presently off-the-shelf hardware that can be used with excellent results, with little or no modification.
The main concern is excellence in the engine design. That is the key component that will require the most work. For upon this engine efficiency depends the size of the steam generator, the amount of fuel burned, the water feed pump capacity and, most critically, the area of the condenser. The modern steam car must certainly be a balanced and integrated design, and the engine is the key item upon which all else is based.
The steamer is not receptive to "bean counter" mentality. It must be not only very high quality; but made in a precise and sturdy fashion. Constructed as cheaply as possible would certainly doom any attempt to re-introduce the steam car.
So, the bottom line is the one most often asked question: "If the steam car is so good, why doesn't someone make one today".
For the present time, trying to introduce the modern steamer as a substitute for the regular family car is not wise and as a business venture, would not succeed.
The modern steam car, while capable of giving excellent operational satisfaction, does require specialized maintenance, and this in turn requires a vast infrastructure by the manufacturer.
Knowing the general motoring public's penchant for ignoring their vehicles servicing demands until something simply quits working, the steam car would not find itself in sympathetic hands, as a general rule. They do demand a degree of skilled maintenance and do not suffer casual servicing when the mood strikes.
While the maintenance of the steam car is not wildly complex, nor difficult, it certainly is different and well beyond the present capability of any automotive service organization or garage mechanic. There is presently, absolutely no skilled service network that could even begin to understand or maintain a steam car on a nation wide basis, or even local for that matter.
This would have to be developed and the people specially trained. This same lack also applies to the spare parts requirements. A complete and qualified nation wide service and parts organization would have to be set up and staffed to care for the steamer, should it be introduced even as a limited venture.
This does not even begin to address the subject of who would invest the capital to make such a car on a large scale.
It would be foolish to suggest that General Motors, Daimler-Chrysler or Ford would undertake the manufacturing of such a vehicle on a commercial scale.
There are, however, two areas of automotive production where the modern steam car could be introduced with grand success.
1) [u]The specialized sports car market.[/u]
There is a steady and reasonable market for the exotic, powerful and technically advanced personal or sports G.T. automobile. Extreme performance, high cost, very limited availability, highly advanced engineering, exclusivity; all serve to provide this market with high profile and delicious status symbols. In this world lives the Ferrari, McClaren, Porsche Turbo, Mercedes Benz, Jaguar, Aston Martin and other top end vehicles.
These owners think nothing of spending $100,000.00 to $500,000.00 plus for their cars, nor of the effort of keenly maintaining them at specialized facilities.
This is seen as the entry point for the modern steam car, a vehicle that fits this specific market very well. This could well be a viable business opportunity.
2) [u]The heavy trucking market.[/u]
The powerplants for heavy trucks has historically been a large and powerful Diesel engine, coupled to a multi speed transmission. It has been and is serving well. Here the high starting torque, power output, and multi-fuel capability of the steam engine could provide a viable alternative.
The recent attacks on the trucking industries use of these large Diesel engines by the various miss-informed government agencies, in their usual short sighted manner, do not begin to offer any workable and economically viable alternative to the Diesel. Their proposed alternatives are simply ludicrous and certainly highlight the abysmal ignorance of automotive systems by the various government environmental agencies, the E.P.A. and the California Air Resources Board.
The steam engine could provide just the alternative power system that is needed. Certainly the underhood area and chassis space of a big Peterbilt, or other brand, offers more than sufficient room for a powerful steam system that would provide the motive power for these large trucks.
Such a vehicle would be an excellent entrance platform for the steam power plant.
This modern steam car will be re-introduced not by the automotive industry; but by some individuals, as a private venture.
While it is certainly possible that some enlightened major automotive firm could wish to take a long and hard look at the modern steamer, it is thought that only a small private venture will provide the initial success.
What these developers will be have to avoid, is any connection with the herd of vulture capitalists and the dot com world of highly speculative stock. The usual battles with greedy investors and flaky management types must be avoided if success is to be the outcome. Also to be avoided are any wild publicity claims and premature press releases of any nature. Discrete silence is necessary until there really is something to show in public.
Private capital and a tiny team of knowledgeable and skilled engineers that fully grasp the implications of the steam system will be the ones to develop this vehicle.
[indent][indent]THE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE MODERN STEAM CAR.
[/indent][/indent]It would be instructive to now generally describe the hardware that could make up the modern steam car. Or, at least, offer some food for thought.
While the evolution of system components and applicable outside technology that would be useful is always an ongoing thing, there are some developments of late that offer the level of operational safety and convenience needed.
The Steam Generator.
There is no possible way that some of the technology of the old vintage steam cars would ever be useful today. The fire tube boiler of the Stanley, the pre-mix vaporizing burners of the White, Stanley, or any other old steam car, would be useless today. Weight, safety, fire hazard, steam up time, or other operational problems would mitigate against ever considering the re-introduction of such hardware. What was acceptable in 1908 is certainly not so in this day and age.
What is to be used is the once through, forced circulation monotube, or "Flash" steam generator, or modifications of that basic concept.
Developed for automotive use first by Leon Serpollet in the decades before 1900, then perfected to a high level in the White steam car, and further improved by the Doble brothers, the monotube offers almost instant starting, safety, light weight and good efficiency.
The basic monotube steam generator is simply a long length of steel tubing, arranged in either flat spirally wound coils, or concentric helical coils, to name only two configurations, all connected in series. The water enters one end and superheated steam issues from the other end. This sounds simple; but there are pitfalls.
While the construction of this fast steaming "flash" generator is fairly simple, the control of the steam pressure and especially the temperature, is not a simple task.
While this steam generator has been used most successfully in the past, it is very sensitive to being fed just the right amount of water and fire at the right time. It has the habit of being very susceptible to tube burnout and uncontrolled steam conditions.
The water flow must be controlled so as to generate the right amount of steam demanded by the engine, no matter what the load requirement is at the time, while at the same time maintaining a controlled steam temperature and pressure. Preventing overheating of the steam generator coils and maintaining a precise steam temperature requires a sophisticated control system that is deadly reliable and very fast acting.
This was accomplished over seventy five years ago by the Doble Corporation; but there are situations where it is possible to damage the steam generator by overheating it and perhaps burning out one or more of the coils. This cannot be tolerated in a modern steam car. A high degree of operator expertise and involvement is demanded by the vintage steam car, a situation that must be eliminated in any modern design. Total ease of operation is most desired.
While maintaining the precise steam outlet conditions in a well maintained monotube has most certainly been accomplished, it would be most advantageous if there were some steam generator design that would eliminate the problems attendant to the monotube generator, while still offering its light weight, fast startup, total safety, ease of control and absolute reliability.
Fortunately a design concept is available that fulfills all these requirements, the Lamont. Like so many items that will be needed to make up the compliment of the modern steam car, this particular one was invented many years ago, and with rare exception, was totally ignored by all the steam car builders of the 20th century, save for the Endurance and French-Coats proposals. Unfortunately for steam car history, the very advanced French-Coats design was not known to even progress to the prototype stage, sadly not into any known production. Even information on this fascinating automobile powerplant is almost totally unknown.
The Lamont style steam generator is a modification of the classic monotube that very neatly sidesteps the earlier problems. It offers the best potential to be the steam generator of choice.
The thermodynamic analysis of a Lamont design that was to be equal in output to the last Doble Series F automotive steam generator showed that it offered a size reduction and tubing inventory reduction of almost one half and complete operational safety from burnout and overheating, without any complex control system.
The control problems of the classic monotube Doble type steam generator are totally eliminated and the only two controls needed are the steam pressure shutoff of the burner when the desired pressure is obtained, and a water level control of the inventory of the small steam separator/drum. Nothing else is needed, a vast simplification over the more common Doble type of steam generator.
The Lamont design also easily accommodates a variable firing rate from cruising speed demands to maximum power for passing and hill climbing. The Lamont can be forced to extreme output levels with complete safety.
The Burner.
The classical steam cars of the early part of the century used a form of burner that vaporized the pressurized fuel in a pipe directly over the fire, then blew the fuel vapor into a venturi through nozzles where it mixed with air and then burned the mixture on a slotted cast iron grate.
This type of burner, while fiercely hot, was plagued with backfires, the need for a constantly burning pilot light to keep the vaporizer hot, clogging of the vaporizer from carbon and sometimes spectacular fires outside the housing. The Stanley and White cars used this form of burner throughout their production lives.
Visualize a big Coleman camping stove, exactly the same principal.
It cannot be considered for use in a modern car.
The Doble car, plus a few others of the period, used a carburetor to mix the fuel and air together, then burned the mixture in a firebox. Ignition was effected by an electric spark plug. This form of burner was invented by the Doble brothers for their Doble-Detroit steam car of 1916-18, a singular major improvement.
It was a remarkable breakthrough for the car's owner, as no longer would he have to preheat the pilot light with a blowtorch and coax it into operation first, then wait until it heated the main fuel vaporizer, then stand around while that got hot enough to get the main burner into operation and then finally start making steam.
The Doble burner used an electrically driven air blower to force the mixture into the burner, with electric spark ignition, and this invention made the starting drill for the steam car as easy as starting a gasoline car. Just turn on the key and snap on the burner switch - a remarkable achievement in 1916.
Alternatives to this Doble burner were used in later models of their automobiles, a pressure atomizing nozzle to atomize the fuel in place of the carburetor. This was a modification to the Doble steam cars that was done in the 1930's in order to be able to burn Diesel fuel oil, which the original carburetor burners would not easily atomize.
Most attempts to make a modern steam car use some form of this atomizing burner.
Today, there must be a concentrated effort to make the steam car burner as clean as possible, especially during startup. This is a paramount requirement.
While the Doble style, white flame, atomizing burner can be made to run in a clean fashion, the startup has a tendency to pollute, unless a stepped fuel flow system in used, now adding some complication that ought to be avoided. Great care must be taken here in the design to insure a super clean startup procedure. However, this has been done with success by later steam car developers.
This burner design certainly can be considered for a modern car.
One other burner concept is seen as offering clean burning right from startup, plus have the ability to be operated at varying output levels. The blue flame pre-mix vaporizing burner.
This form can also use a carburetor or an atomizing nozzle for mixing the fuel with the air stream. This ability would give a programmed startup low fuel flow condition for pollution control.
The mixture burns with an intensely hot blue flame. Consider the old GI one man stove of WW-II, and the present camping and backpack stoves - the same principal, although much more sophisticated and a lot larger.
This burner concept has been used before in steam cars and steam railcars with great success. Such a burner also is rather small and easy to package in the steam generator coil stack.
This is the burner of choice for development for the modern steam car.
The Engine Design.
The double acting reciprocating steam engine has historically been the one type that saw the most usage. It can be powerful, rugged and long lived.
The single acting engine has also been used; but is cursed with the problem of the steam leaking by the piston rings and contaminating the crankcase oil. Some form of separator must be employed to remove the water from the lubricating oil.
In considering the use of a reciprocating steam engine today in a modern vehicle, the packaging of a double acting engine becomes a serious problem. They are physically large and hard to incorporate into a modern chassis, if a decent power output is wanted.
The reciprocating engine also has some serious thermal disadvantages that make it very hard to achieve a really high engine efficiency. This is the one area where great effort must be applied for the modern steam car development to succeed, should this form of engine be considered.
There is one other aspect that demands serious attention when deciding to use a reciprocating steam engine in a modern automobile, their requirement for introducing steam cylinder oil into the steam line for lubrication of the piston rings and the valves. Historically, this has been one of the most onerous maintenance problems attendant to the vintage steamer.
This oil must be totally removed from the engine exhaust steam, or it contaminates the interior of the steam generator tubing, coats the inside of the condenser surfaces, drastically reducing their efficiency, and winds up in the water storage tank. A most messy and continuing maintenance problem.
In the White and Doble monotube steam generators, it also forms carbon which seriously hampers the heat transfer and is often the cause of tube burnout. Removing it is a difficult and troublesome task.
There are possibilities of using some type of graphite composite piston rings, which need no cylinder oil, and also using this material for the piston valve rings, unless poppet valves are used. High wear rates would be a concern in using graphite piston rings. This subject requires serious investigation; but has considerable potential for successful development.
What ever the methodology used, the elimination of steam cylinder oil would be a major order of magnitude improvement in an automotive steam engine - perhaps the single most important item for drastically improving the maintenance situation with steam cars.
The measure of steam engine efficiency all comes down to one thing; how much water must be evaporated per hour per horsepower of output. The old Stanley was lucky to be able to achieve 20 lbs/hp/hr at best, often showing over a 30 lb. water rate. The White and the Doble both used two stage expansion, compounding, and they could and did show water rates of 12-14 lb/hp/hr. Dobles also constructed one three stage expansion engine and it showed a water rate of 7 lbs/hp/hr; but had operational problems that were never addressed by the firm, as the engine was abandoned and never developed and the parts were scrapped.
Doble also started to design a four stage quadruple expansion engine for a client; but it was never constructed and the project was abandoned. The projected water rate was thought to be able to approach 4 lbs/hp/hr.
This water rate business drastically impacts on the rest of the entire system. The more water that has to be turned into superheated steam, the larger the steam generator needs to be, the larger the water pump must be to supply the demand and the bigger the fire to produce the heat to boil the water. The worst aspect is the larger the condenser area has to be in order to change the spent steam back into water. None of the old steamers were capable of condensing all their steam under all conditions, they just simply could not carry large enough condensers.
What is really needed, is an engine design that will give a very high expansion ratio, small package size, reliability and ease and cost effectiveness of manufacturing.
This all comes down to achieving the lowest possible water rate. The design goal is less than 8 lb/hp/hr.
Achieving this requires the minimum thermal losses from radiation, losses from thermal conduction into things like the crankcase, internal leakage past piston rings, and serious flow losses through valves and porting, and yet high output from a small package for ease of installation.
There are three usable engine candidates for consideration for this new steam car.
[u]The Double-Acting Reciprocating Engine.[/u]
This is hard to package, has some serious thermal losses from the hot incoming steam passing through a port that has just been used to vent the cooler exhaust steam, losses from porting and valve flow, and other problems that make it less than desirable under all conditions. The unaflow concept with balanced poppet inlet valves definitely serves to minimize some of these problems.
There is also the steam leakage past the valve and piston rings at slow speed and high power demand, such as climbing hills, that mitigate against this engine. Dobles determined that a piston valve ring would leak six pounds of steam per hour per inch of circumference. They used many rings on their engineââ¬â¢s pistons to try to minimize this leakage, bringing along more friction losses. This is a serious problem.
It is still a good engine concept and worthy of development; but there is a final barrier of the combined losses that make it not the ultimate design.
The single acting engine goes along with the double acting, only adding the necessity of getting the leaked steam/water out of the crankcase.
Unfortunately, the reciprocating engine is the one that most steam car developers and enthusiasts know about and they tend to stay with it, they do not seem to want to stretch their learning envelope to even study potential alternate candidates. This will narrow down the number of people who have the engineering potential to succeed with a modern steam car. One needs a completely open mind.
[u]The Turbine[/u].
The steam turbine is often suggested for use in a modern automobile; but to use one introduces some real problems.
It is a high speed device and requires a well designed gearbox to take the turbineââ¬â¢s high speed and reduce it to something usable in an automotive driveline.
It also is most inefficient when operated off the design speed. However, it is probable that some combination of turbine types, employing mulitstaging could indeed broaden the efficient speed range.
The latest introduction of a high torque constantly variable transmission for light duty truck use, has provided the exact form of transmission that would make the steam turbine usable.
What it does offer is the smallest, lightest and simplest possible prime mover and if the off-speed efficiency can be improved by clever designing, then the turbine has good potential. The fact that it does not require any internal lubrication in the form of injected cylinder oil, is a serious reason enough to take a good hard look at the turbine.
It will require massive analysis and very good designing; but it should be given this treatment and not abandoned at first glance.
[u]The Wankel Rotary Engine.[/u]
This engine has very interesting possibilities if given sufficient development. It does offer a powerful package in a small volume and mechanical simplicity and good balance. It is an expensive engine to have to construct from scratch; but not if one started with a production Mazda Wankel 13-B or three rotor 20-B basic engine.
As a gasoline engine with a turbocharger added, it is capable of very high power output, high torque and a reasonable speed range. The racing activities of the Mazda Corporation has produced seal materials that withstand full power output for long periods. After all, they did win the 1991 LeMans 24 hour race with a Wankel engine. This four rotor engine developed over 700 HP and over 450 lb/ft of torque while being highly turbocharged. This shows that the modern Wankel engine with available racing seals and strengthened hub and rotor gears works at a very high BMEP, actually higher than would be needed in a steam car application. This special racing hardware is easily available off the shelf, making the development of a steam conversion a relatively easier matter than if one had to develop special hardware from scratch in order to make it survive while giving high power and massive torque.
Case distortion due to the high steam temperature would also require careful analysis. The Mazda rotary engine when used in racing has a reputation of fatal distortion problems if allowed to severely overheat. One may observe the rather large oil cooling radiators used in such cars. However, analysis of the heat distribution and modification of the clearances used, could provide a solution, as the ultimate temperature when used as a steam expander is considerably below what would be reached in an I.C. engine with failed oil cooling. There are also good material changes that would benefit the use of the Wankel engine as a steam expander. This appears to be an easily solvable design problem.
If converted to steam, it requires a good inlet valve design that would work at one-third output shaft speed. Again, a double-seated balanced poppet valve is ideal.
However, being a positive displacement design, the output shaft speed can be kept to under 4,000 RPM and permit a more normal cam operated inlet valve, while still delivering optimum power for the displacement.
The rotor in the Wankel engine turns at one third the speed of the output shaft. In one aspect, this is a very good thing in that the apex seal rubbing speed is only one third what it would be if it ran at shaft speed.
Several investigators have proposed that the Wankel engine be used with two inlet valves and two exhaust ports per working chamber. If one examines a dismantled Mazda 13-B engine, it will be seen that to use the maximum chamber volume for expansion, the inlet and exhaust ports would be slightly in excess of 180ð apart. This indicates that trying to incorporate two inlet and exhaust ports would by necessity either reduce the working volume, or cause some serious timing overlap that would let the incoming steam rush directly out of the exhaust port. Both of these conditions would seriously reduce the potential expansion ratio and thus lower the final water rate. This is not acceptable for obtaining the highest efficiency that the Wankel is capable of delivering.
[indent][indent]The possibility exists that the Wankel can be made as an occulting engine
and thus eliminate any mechanically operated inlet valve.
[/indent][/indent]The torque output would be very high for this form of engine, it would operate at modest speeds and be silent and being very well balanced and smooth running.
The present aluminum rotor housings that are used in the gasoline engine version of the Wankel should be changed to ductile iron for thermal and seal wear improvement with steam. The rotor's internal oil cooling system would have to be blocked off. Thermal barrier coatings of the rotor's working surfaces would help minimize heat transfer losses. The Wankel will also require injection of cylinder oil for long seal life, just like the piston ring lubrication need in the reciprocating engine, although less than what is required by an equal output reciprocating engine.
The Wankel does show some inherent problem areas that would hinder it from offering the highest possible efficiency as a steam engine. The surface to volume ratio is very high, giving some heat losses from both radiation and conduction, plus the most injurious problem, that of the hot steam passing over rotor and housing surfaces that had just seen the colder steam from the previous expansion cycle. This is the same problem that plagues the double acting and single acting counterflow steam engines. Again, thermal barrier coatings and good overall insulation would minimize these losses.
The potential exists to compound the production three rotor Mazda Wankel engine. Using one rotor for the high pressure stage and the remaining two in parallel as the second stage of expansion. This would necessitate some transfer valve system.
All this notwithstanding, the Wankel is worthy of very serious consideration, for itââ¬â¢s size and weight and power output make it a very attractive expander for a modern steam automobile.
Informed development could provide important improvements to the Wankel when used as a steam expander.
[u]The Lysholm Expander[/u].
This is a development of a special form of helical screw compressor that was originally thought of in terms of use as a compressor for gas turbines. While not successful in that specific application, it has virtually taken over in the commercial air compressor market.
It is also the supercharger of choice for the vehicles so equipped and it is rapidly becoming the most preferred supercharger design available. Only corporate inertia and the unwillingness to pay licensing fees has retarded itââ¬â¢s universal use in American automobiles. Lower power required to drive it, high compression ratios, superb efficiency, and mechanical simplicity are all desirable features and the Lysholm exhibits them all.
The Lysholm has been used successfully as a steam expander; but showed problem areas. However, it has not been applied to high pressure and high temperature steam use. This is precisely the analysis work that is now ongoing in the United States.
It offers one thing that none of the other positive displacement steam engines provide - almost complete adiabatic expansion. Hot at the inlet end and cold at the exhaust end with no mixing of the exhaust steam with the hot incoming steam.
The Lysholm also can be configured for steam expansion ratios from three or four to one, up to eight to one. It also is a very small physical package, smaller than the automatic transmission in a modern automobile. It also tolerates water in the steam, which no piston engine will do under any circumstances. This indicates that expansion can continue into the wet steam region.
It does not require any valve mechanism, only the inlet throttle valve. This means an engine with a total of two moving parts - a significant advantage.
As an air compressor it was always superior in efficiency when compared to any other compressor. Even early on it its development, commercial units showed over 87% efficiency. Today, with CNC machining to give tight and close tolerances, it gives over 94% efficiency. This also translates directly to the unit being operated backwards as a steam expander.
With the superior machining technology available today, the internal leakage along the rotors and the circumferencial leakage may possibly be reduced to an acceptable rate, although very demanding and costly development would be required.
However, to achieve minimum leakage and high efficiency, the single stage Lysholm needs to be run at very high speeds, between 20,000 and 30,000 RPM. This means a very precise and well made speed reduction gearbox and also means that it could be noisy, and there could certainly be reliability problems.
As a compressor, the Lysholm is being made with the two rotors driving each other and also with them not being in contact via the use of synchronizing gears between the rotors. Both versions are in commercial production in high quantity as air compressors. The basic design and manufacturing technology is already present.
This means that if the geared rotor version is chosen, and the tolerances can be kept to an absolute minimum, no internal cylinder oil would be used. This is a major leap forward for a modern steam car engine design.
An alternate is the possibility of using some carbon-ceramic composite material for the rotors, and if the wear and coefficient of friction proved to be very low, the non geared version with one rotor driving the other could be contemplated. This would certainly greatly assist in minimizing the axial leakage.
The Lysholm expander offers an interesting possibility for being a successful engine concept for the modern steam car, if given sufficient development. The thermal and mechanical analysis is now well towards the point where it shows that the Lysholm could be a potential choice as the engine for the new steam car. Although, such analysis also showed that high rotational speeds are necessary and some very sophisticated bearing and shaft seal technology would have to be developed to make it a success.
[indent][indent]The leak rate along and across the rotors rises as the speed slows down,
[/indent][/indent]demanding high rotational speeds. This aspect can be a real barrier to the application of the Lysholm as a vehicle steam expander using high pressure and high superheat steam. The Lysholm demands very extensive cost analysis and development before it is chosen as the prime expander for a modern steam car.
Design analysis has shown that to be effective, the Lysholm expander requires three stages of expansion in order to produce a respectable water rate. And, with the three stages running at different speeds. This means a very costly and noisy gearbox and some real problems in packaging such an expander in a modern chassis.
The analysis also showed that a single stage Lysholm has a leak rate of about 40% at startup, not an acceptable rate at all. Three stages are required to recover this otherwise wasted steam.
The Lysholm is particularly attractive as a lower pressure and temperature steam expander for boats and for constant speed use. It is effective with low-pressure wet steam.
While offering potential as an automotive steam engine, the Lysholm would demand a long and costly development program that may or may not show superiority. It is not the expander of choice for this first modern steam car development project.
The Lysholm and the Wankel are the positive displacement engine configurations offering potential for development, with the Wankel emerging, after long and detailed analysis, as the expander of choice. The turbine is the other candidate that, if designed with great care, could be a successful prime mover.
There are other considerations that will be taken up as the design of this new steam vehicle powerplant progresses.
Whether to drive all the hotel and parasitic loads from the main engine, or from an auxiliary engine is one question. A simple energy balance calculation already shows that the separately driven auxiliary unit is potentially more energy efficient, as long as the auxiliary engine is designed for maximum efficiency.
It also provides air conditioning, power steering and electrical power while the vehicle is standing, not a situation to be ignored. However, it does add serious added complication, therefore a detailed tradeoff study must be done with extreme care.
The technology to produce a superior modern steam car is already available from a few individual sources. Refinement and adaptation are now required to prove the design concepts, leading to development hardware. Finally leading to a complete modern steam automobile with excellent results.
It is a most difficult engineering project; but one that if done correctly, can result in a well balanced and good running vehicle with superb performance.
It does offer a reasonable alternative to the electric car, the hybrid, fuel cells, and to the use of natural gas, alcohol and hydrogen conversions of the internal combustion engine for road vehicle usage. All of which demand massive government subsidizing to be even considered. They are not cost effective if the producing company depends on the profit margin to succeed in business and not be dependent on government subsidies to survive.
The modern steam car is a viable alternative and should be vigorously pursued.
[url="http://www.stanleysteamers.com/modern_steam.htm"]http://www.stanleysteamers.com/modern_steam.htm[/url]