3 ms·
Very cool stuff, regardless of how it turns out. It claims 'good' energy density and 40% roundtrip efficiency. How does its energy density compare to existing
by eximius 6y ago
Very cool stuff, regardless of how it turns out.
It claims 'good' energy density and 40% roundtrip efficiency.
How does its energy density compare to existing liquid fuels?
Naturally, I'm wondering what an iron powder fueled internal combustion engine would look like!
- londons_explore 6y agoIron powder probably wouldnt work in an internal combustion engine - wear on engine components would be too high. Instead it works well I. Big open furnaces where you extract the energy via superheated steam.
- eximius 6y agoAnd it would be difficult to 'aerosolize' the powder injection into the combustion chamber and all sorts of problems. It would take a fundamentally different design. But it's still a fun thought :)
- Tade0 6y agoHow does its energy density compare to existing liquid fuels? Diesel engines have a thermodynamic efficiency of ~42% in optimal conditions - usually it's less. Large marine units approach 50%, but the fuel they use is only technically liquid. EDIT: I just noticed you were asking about density, not efficiency. I suspect it's much less than liquid fuels, which derive most of their energy from burning the hydrogen in them.
- BlueTemplar 6y agoI don't see how an iron powdered internal combustion engine – where the fuel is usually a liquid and the waste is a gas – could possibly work. We do have a lot of experience with steam engines though, but AFAIK they're much harder to miniaturize to be able to fit in a car ?