: : "Ian Johnston" wrote in : message news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-5dn6t5CP0rrM@localhost...
: > So what do you think the definition of "internal" is in this case?
: > Hint: it includes the phrase "system boundary".
: Are you trying to suggest that an IC engine will function if you : remove the fuel system, even a hot air engine is more than a piston : and cylinder...
No. You really don't know much about thermodynamics, do you?
Ian
piston
Read the thread moron, and stop trying to troll.
So HTF can you say that the engine I cited isn't a Griffin engine!
outside
So rather than having a delivering power every second stroke it delivers it every third stroke ? Hum, sound very efficient - Not. Or are you still confusing your strokes and phases, if so the cited URL is doing much the same....
How simple do you want it Jerry ?
Forget the geometry. Doesn't matter if the firebox is "insside" or "outside" the boiler.
Forget the topology. You can heat it here, or heat it there - doesn't matter.
All that matters is the thermodynamics. If the working fluid is the output of combustion or reaction, then it's IC. If the working fluid is separate, then it's EC.
Steam engine EC Hot air engine (Stirling) EC Nuclear reactor EC Whitehead steam torpedo IC Swiss steam engines powered by overhead electricity supply EC
Diesel / Petrol / Otto cycle etc. IC Gas turbine IC Some other (hydrogen peroxide) steam torpedoes IC
cylinders
longer
doesn't
fluid is
But according to the Grimy Troll, if the heat source is internal, (which it is in a railway steam engine because the whole is a mass[1]) it makes it an IC engine - I know it's not, you know it's not but the Grimy Troll seems to think it is by definition, he did not specify where the combustion takes place - just that it's internal top the engine mass.
[1] the thing stops being a working locomotive if any one part is relocated.
Because it wasn't made by Samuel Griffin of Bath.
Maybe it's exactly the same cycle - but I want to find out what this unusual locally-made engine was about and no Ducati is ever going to tell me that.
Yes. Actually twice as often, because the Griffin had double-acting pistons.
Why should that affect efficiency ? We're interested in specific fuel burn, not frequency of power strokes.
You simply don't *understand* basic physics, do you?
I'm betting you got, at most, 3 CSEs in the 60s, and they were probably general studies, domestic science and, possibly, typing.
IMHFO, if there's anything worse than ignorance then it's stupidity. Ignorance can be admitted, recognised and cured with education. Unfortunately, stupidity can't, and that's what you seem to have a terminal case of.
Thrash around all you like picking specious holes in the arguments of your betters who know what they are talking about. It doesn't change the fact that you've taken and tried to defend a ridiculous position, and you're rightly getting ridiculed for it. How can you back out now without losing face?
Looking back, I see that your ego needs to snap back immediately at every post that's critical of you, even those that are offering useful advice - could you but see it.
So do so, please don't disappoint me...
It depends on the meaning of "internal". it means internal to the thermodynamic cycle, not just "inside a box".
PS - typo in my other post - a Whitehead locomotive torpedo is external combustion.
: But according to the Grimy Troll, if the heat source is internal, : (which it is in a railway steam engine because the whole is a : mass[1]) it makes it an IC engine
No. You're just projecting your own misunderstanding of the word "internal" onto what he wrote.
Anyway, isn't your usual one week visit to this newsgroup up now?
Ian
: > No. You really don't know much about thermodynamics, do you?
: Read the thread moron, and stop trying to troll.
Oooooh. Get her.
Ian
In article , ":::Jerry::::" writes
That all seems very sensible and logical. I'm surprised we haven't heard more about it. Any idea how old the principle is? (Apologies if it's on the site and I've missed it).
The thing won't work well without a boiler, it is designed to work with a boiler, anyway a car engine without a fuel system is just a lump of metal................
You are a trolling idiot, you arte implying that an IC engine will work without a fuel supply !....
piston
Another idiot who thinks an IC engine doesn't need a fuel supply by the looks of things, clue, without a fuel supply the cylinders and pistons are just lumps of what ever they are made from....
Well, yes, an engine can be very fuel efficient - it might not have the power to remove the skin off a rice pudding though....
It may or may not be great thermodynamally, but IMHO mechanically it is somewhat problematical.
Ron Robinson
In article , R.N. Robinson writes
Why?
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember ":::Jerry::::" saying something like:
No, now repeat after me.... The whole frigging thing is the 'lo - co- mot-ive'
You can follow that with your finger as you pronounce it.
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember ":::Jerry::::" saying something like:
Jerry, it's really quite simple. If you drop a bollock, just admit you're wrong. Easy, done and forgotten and we get on with the next argument.
Why, if I had tuppence for every time I've seen someone argue to the death about something they're wrong about, I'd have umm....1/6d by now.
The whole frigging thing is the engine, were is the crank-shaft (if it has one) on a railway steam locomotive. You seem to think that cylinders and pistons alone are the engine, you are wrong, as usual.
I suggest you go and find a clue, you utterly ignorant little moron troll.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.