Proell Effect

[Fool]

.

You sure add to what we say.

Merry Christmas.

.

[Tom Booth]

.

You sure add to what we say.

Merry Christmas.

.

Well, here is a portion of Matt's reference:

Have either of you actually read it?

Proell_effect_excerpt.jpg (339.56 KiB) Viewed 1604 times

Personally I don't agree with #3 that heat can somehow be used over and over.

Once the heat is converted to "work" and goes out as electricity, dispersed through the grid or whatever?

That ambient heat can be utilized 1 time and converted to work, maybe, but how do you recover and reuse heat that is now gone and flowing through wires as electricity, or on its way to outer space as light/radiation etc?

[matt brown]

Last summer, I began chasing an apparent anomaly between hot vs cold PP, not cold holes, ambient engines, or super Carnot schemes.

Essex vs 2 Stirlings_x.png (16.18 KiB) Viewed 1601 times

During my deep dive on gammas, Vincent's Essex led to this graphic which indicated that something was drastically awry with conventional SE. The blatant giveaway is Essex vs Stirling B where P and T values are identical (thus Wout and Win are identical) but V and m values are different (thus Qin is different). Anyone who couldn't grasp this without a calculator needs more thermo study or a new hobby (Stirling B Qin is 2x Essex Qin for same Wout !!!). My only question was merely where was all this 'extra' Stirling B Qin going ???

Ian-Hall T drop_1_F.png (28.4 KiB) Viewed 1601 times

By mid Aug, I was using some crude FEA (finite element analysis) with constant mass (m) elements which made for easy reading, but always was subject to errors due to crude RA (ratio analysis) and GA (graphical analysis). However, despite inherent limitations, I proceeded this way since I was familiar with this technique AND it allowed me to share this chase vs a bunch of math mumbo-jumbo. The interesting takeaway with this graphic is that both DP and PP volumes expand at the same rate, but I'm clueless whether this is inherent or just an outlier within these basic values. My usual gimmick is to sample some RA and GA results and then see if I can piece together a little equation.

The biggest shortcoming with this technique is obscuring details...notice how when vol A goes from 100cc in DP to 80cc in PP that (1) 100cc was first compressed to 66.6cc thru regen before (2) expanded from 66.6cc to 80cc in PP. Therefore by frame 2, vol A has compressed 1/3 thru regen before expanded 1/5 in PP. However, this is the summed 'net' effect or average for this entire element, not its sub elements. Nevertheless, despite lacking precision, it's clearly obvious that if PP is constant 300k during this expansion, then PP requires Qin from somewhere, either ambient backflow via heat sink or 'overflow' via regenerator. Remember, this all assumes Schmidt conditions where P is equal between DP and PP, so if P in PP fell below anticipated 300k than more DP gas could fill this 'void' until P equalizes. I never checked this validity (to bogged down with other stuff) but offhand think that P equalizes before any regen overflow could fill this PP "T gap".

[matt brown]

By the end of Aug, I was getting curious as to the quantifying this anomaly, so continued with my crude FEA where each PP element is considered isolated during expansion. Previously, I had taken Rauen's approach where he said that quality trumped quantity in initial stages...akin Kenny Rogers' Gambler song "there'll be time enough for counting when the day is done".

Ian-Hall T drop_1_F.png (28.4 KiB) Viewed 1598 times

In this graphic, P values are bogus (carryover from previous) and there's no attempt to show anything except what each PP element T would be during expansion when 'isolated'. These PP values could be easily averaged and the ideal missing Qin quantified, but I never bothered. Just remember, as per previous graphic, these elements are summed per element whereby actual ideal T values would be a tad lower. A-D vol are considered leaving DP at 450k to coincide entering PP at 300k, but I used vol E to show T in DP without Qin.

Qin must be entering PP from somewhere, otherwise things would become frosty fast.

Ian-Hall T drop_2_F.png (25.5 KiB) Viewed 1598 times

[matt brown]

Whoa, thanks for detailed response !!!

When PV=nRT is used plainly, simply, the assumption is that the values are consistent throughout the entire gas mass contained in the volume. If not consistent, an average is assumed, but that gives average pressure, temperature, and density throughout the volume.

I previously used constant mass elements, but this time I used constant volume elements. Constant mass is waaay more appropriate, but it takes much longer to 'graph'. Either way, I could only use element averages or this would take forever. I also used a mere 5 elements, but figured any valid pattern would show itself. Per previous post, I only verified 2 frames (can't count last frame), but these were inline expectations. I need to go back and check all 5 elements and then proceed to 10 elements (this actually is easier than previous constant mass elements).

Proell effect FEA.png (28.07 KiB) Viewed 1592 times

I whimped out via simple 300-600k values and full sweep from hot space, since only checking basic scheme. This might appear backwards, but all I did was to start by B density to obtain B mass and then run this B mass thru from A. So, for the first element, 33.3cc (which just happens to be my esoteric 33.3m) reduces in half thru regen before expanding 20% to 20cc. I did the same thing for D with the 3 elements as 1 chunk and then checked where previous B element would be inside D. So, in this manner, the adiabatic T drop of B is averaged into the adiabatic T drop of D, but I'm content, since this makes for a linear progression thru this sequence.

Matt has drawn up a very good beginners demonstration of how it works in one example.

Indeed, only a beginner's model which is a work in progress.

All this to get a little better modeling than the Schmidt Cycle. Not worth our worry here. Any hysteresis/Proell effect will be minimal. If beneficial, the engine will be slightly better than modeled. If detrimental, more likely, it will be slightly worse than modeled. Either way it will e slightly closer to the Car not Limit, or slightly worse. Most likely worse. Sorry nature is a cruel beast.

Being colder than Tc means heat will flow into the gas through the cold plate, making the cold side of the regenerator hotter. Meaning the gas in the cold area eventually will not ever be as cold as the cold plate. Like trying to use the force of friction to make friction lower

There's a horde of issues at play here with the major issue being that regen T gradient must coincide both blows. Simply assuming that a sliding gradient will suffice as per Vuilleumier patent is a slippery slope (he grossly glosses over T vs Q). The best thing I see (so far) it that the adiabatic expansion rate between both hot and cold spaces remains uniform, but is this a hallmark or just a freaky coincide of my starting values ???

[Fool]

.

I find it odd that regenerator modeling seems to place the change in temperature all the way to Th and Tc.

It just seems that for a real regenerator, it won't quite get to Th, nor Tc. Meaning as effects go the inefficiency will be dominant.

[Tom Booth]

The blind leading the blind.

[Fool]

.

That explains why you looking into a mirror won't help. See no evil. Or perhaps no reflection.

.

[matt brown]

Strange that you two seem to be now trying to claim priority of discovery on a "free energy", "perpetual motion", second law violation type phenomenon after all the time you both have spent in here arguing (with me) against exactly that.

I suppose next you'll imagine you have "invented" Tesla's "cold hole" / "Self-Acting-Engine" and then wonder why Tom Booth thinks he knows anything at all about the subject you two have "discovered" for the first time.

What a couple of clowns.

I saw this coming months ago...

Bozo.png (30.03 KiB) Viewed 1533 times

Tom - among other things, you're suffering from a terminal case of NDH (not developed here). Your big ego is one thing, your big mouth is another, but your endless attacks on anything and anybody that doesn't align with your current agenda exposes just a little man hiding behind a keyboard (common online issue). If any "self-refrigeration" exists then it must be "proven" via logic, not your hand-waving with one hand while your other hand is in your pants...

[Tom Booth]

I very much doubt you ever heard of the Proell effect before my mentioning it in here for the first time in the entire history of this forum.

Suddenly you are coopting it for your own use.

I noticed you often pretend to be looking for or seeking some "free energy" or "Carnot Limit" violation or loophole, but it is always just a diversion or red herring. Always trying but always failing, on purpose.

At the same time you attack actual examples like the Proell effect as a "scam', or run the topic off the rails, like you appear to be doing here.

Whatever your up to on this thread it's sure to be nothing more than a load of crap as always with you. A waste of time and forum bandwidth.

[VincentG]

Matt, per your latest graphics, I'm struggling to see how the hot side volume is "expanding" and reducing Tmax while its volume is shrinking graphically. The cold side is easy to visualize as its volume is expanding graphically.

[Fool]

.

The book by WR Martini · 1983 , "Stirling Engine Design Manual", called it hysteresis. By calling it hysteresis, seems to indicate it opposes the operation of the engine. I can't remember when I got a copy of the book, but read it as soon as I got it, and remember the point, some time between 2000 and 2010.

VincentG, I assume the effect on the hot side is an equal and opposite direction similar to the cold side. The two at the very best would cancel each other. That would be similar to compressing and expanding a spring, or adiabatic bounce.

The two probably would both oppose engine motion and both would separately be detrimental to engine power output, as friction does moving a block up or down an inclined plane, opposes motion.



The following link has more information on the gas pressures and temperatures during a Stirling cycle:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_cycle

The following is one of the graphs presented there. The red, green, blue, and orange fatter lines are modifications I put in to point out certain areas for descriptions below.

Temperature_vs_angle (1).png (9.11 KiB) Viewed 1479 times

The following effects are all caused by a lag in heat moving into or out of the gas fast enough. The non perfect heat exchanger effect of each, hot and cold.

The red zone is the period where any compression effect has pushed the tiny amount of gas left in the hot space over Th. Possibly called hot zone Proell Effect, or hysteresis. It is detrimental because it is a small amount of gas hotter than Th during the compression process. It requires more work input. This is a smaller effect because it is happening to a smaller amount of gas. Most is in the cold zone during compression, and ∆T above Th is smaller

The green zone is the period where any expansion effect has pulled the larger amount of gas displaced into the hot space below Th. This produces normal heating during engine expansion. It is close to but not exactly isothermal. It is detrimental because more power output would happen if it stayed at Th, hotter. I don't know if this was mentioned by Proell. It is hysteresis. The effect is larger than the red zone, because most of the gas is in the hot zone, and the ∆T below Th is larger.


The blue zone is the period where any expansion effect has pulled the tiny amount of gas left in the cold space under Tc. Possibly called cold zone Proell Effect, or hysteresis. It is detrimental because it is a small amount of gas colder than Tc during the expansion process. It produces less work output. This is a small effect because it is happening to a smaller amount of gas. Most is in the hot zone during expansion, and ∆T below Tc is smaller.

The orange zone is the period where any compression effect has pushed the larger amount of gas displaced into the cold space above Tc. This produces normal cooling during engine compression. It is close to but not exactly isothermal. It is detrimental because more power input is needed than if it stayed at Tc, colder. I don't know if this was mentioned by Proell. It is hysteresis. The effect is larger than the blue zone, because most of the gas is in the cold zone and the ∆T above Tc is larger.

.

[Tom Booth]

.

The book by WR Martini · 1983 , "Stirling Engine Design Manual", called it hysteresis. By calling it hysteresis, seems to indicate it opposes the operation of the engine. I can't remember when I got a copy of the book, but read it as soon as I got it, and remember the point, some time between 2000 and 2010.

VincentG, I assume the effect on the hot side is an equal and opposite direction similar to the cold side. The two at the very best would cancel each other. That would be similar to compressing and expanding a spring, or adiabatic bounce.

The two probably would both oppose engine motion and both would separately be detrimental to engine power output, as friction does moving a block up or down an inclined plane, opposes motion.



The following link has more information on the gas pressures and temperatures during a Stirling cycle:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_cycle

The following is one of the graphs presented there. The red, green, blue, and orange larger lines are modifications I put in to point out certain areas for descriptions below.

Temperature_vs_angle (1).png

The following effects are all caused by a lag in heat moving into or out of the gas fast enough. The non perfect effect of each, hot or cold, heat exchanger.

The red zone is the period where any compression effect has pushed the tiny amount of gas left in the hot space over Th. Possibly called hot zone Proell Effect, or hysteresis. It is detrimental because it is a small amount of gas hotter than Th during the compression process. It requires more work input. This is a small effect because it is happening to a smaller amount of gas. Most is in the cold zone during compression, and ∆T above Th is smaller

The green zone is the period where any expansion effect has pulled the larger amount of gas displaced into the hot space below Th. This produces normal heating during engine expansion. It is close to but not exactly isothermal. It is detrimental because more power out would happen if it stayed at Th, hotter. I don't know if this was mentioned by Proell. It is hysteresis. The effect is larger than the red zone, because most of the gas is in the hot zone and the ∆T below Th is larger.


The blue zone is the period where any expansion effect has pulled the tiny amount of gas left in the cold space under Tc. Possibly called cold zone Proell Effect, or hysteresis. It is detrimental because it is a small amount of gas colder than Tc during the expansion process. It produces less work output. This is a small effect because it is happening to a smaller amount of gas. Most is in the hot zone during expansion, and ∆T below Tc is smaller.

The orange zone is the period where any compression effect has pushed the larger amount of gas displaced into the cold space above Tc. This produces normal cooling during engine compression. It is close to but not exactly isothermal. It is detrimental because more power input is needed than if it stayed at Tc, hotter. I don't know if this was mentioned by Proell. It is hysteresis. The effect is larger than the blue zone, because most of the gas is in the cold zone and the ∆T above Tc is larger.

.

Fool, as usual your description or interpretation of that chart is completely nonsensical, upside down and backwards.

Nearly everything you say above is completely and, transparently wrong, which should be obvious to anyone unfortunate enough to stumble across your disinformation/idiotic drivel.

Just for a small sampling:

Fool wrote:
"The red zone is the period where any compression effect has pushed the tiny amount of gas left in the hot space over Th"

Temperature_vs_angle (1).png (9.11 KiB) Viewed 1472 times

Anyone who knows anything about Stirling engines with any common sense at all would know that when the temperature is the highest is when the air is all in the hot zone or on the hot side, not a "tiny amount of gas left in the hot space".

Likewise, with the remainder of your clueless, ridiculous comments.

[Fool]

.

The air is not in the hot zone during compress. You can't get that straight, and you can't get the first characteristic of a gas straight.

Fool, as usual your description or interpretation of that chart is completely nonsensical, upside down and backwards.

The following graphic says you are wrong:

Particle_mass_plot.png (10.95 KiB) Viewed 1465 times

From 100° to 200° the gas is in the cold space, out of the hot space, during compression, as I've described.

.

[matt brown]

You guys need to slow down and study your graphics carefully then choose your description carefully.

The wavey line graphic Fool posted is from Uriei's site and is solely meant to show that for common SE, most of the gas never leaves the regenerator.

The previous graphic with Fool markups is meant to show...the Proell effect, but doesn't list it as such. Go to wiki link and read the text underneath this graphic which leaves out that this is constant volume regen. This whole 'compression' vs 'expansion' buzz is rather fuzzy since from hot to cold space there's an initial compression (thru regen) followed by an expansion while from cold to hot space there's an initial expansion (thru regen) followed by a compression.