home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.energy
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!eos!aio!zaphod!mancus
- From: mancus@zaphod.JSC.NASA.GOV (Keith Mancus/MDSSC)
- Subject: Re: Info on the GM SE-101 Steam Car
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.144031.26435@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
- Sender: news@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (USENET News System)
- Organization: nasa-jsc
- References: <1992Nov13.123426.11872@bsu-ucs> <1992Nov13.223911.25528@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> <1992Nov16.212013.11971@bsu-ucs>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:40:31 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <1992Nov16.212013.11971@bsu-ucs>, 01crmeyer@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (Craig Meyer) writes:
- >> Questions that your material might be able to answer:
- >> -Why did they use a piston steam engine instead of a geared-down turbine?
- >> Gearing problems? Cost of the turbine?
-
- >Would a geared-down turbine be damaged with a gear change? This could be fixed
- >with an infinietly-variable transmission.
-
- Would we even need a variable transmission? How wide a range of RPM's
- keep turbines happy? Because of the gearing ratio, low-end torque would
- not matter.
-
- >Would a turbine be bigger and/or heavier? You'd think it'd be cheaper, since
- >they're so simple.
- >Are c200 hp steam turbines currently made? How big are the things?
-
- Turbines have never been mass-produced like recips, so they're more
- expensive. I remember the jet engine in the single-place BD-5 jet was
- costing something like $100K for what was essentially a 100 HP engine.
- (Of course, you cannot directly compare jet thrust with recip HP.)
- I won't try to guess what turbines would cost if mass-produced, but
- they would certainly be much cheaper than today.
-
- --
- Keith Mancus <mancus@cheers.jsc.nasa.gov> |
- N5WVR |
- "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live |
- in Hell." -General Sheridan |
-