> I assume when you’re talking about a “steam engine” you are referring to a closed-loop recovery system which uses some “propellant” medium other than water...much like an automotive AC system, only in reverse.
No, Rock.
Closed-loop recovery engines require very large radiators, and are more prone to failures than open-cycle. For a compact car, they probably would be too big.
Open-cycle steam engines would be very simple, and could be adapted much more quickly than a closed-loop design.
Long-term, closed cycle would be the way to go. But if someone wants to sell a E-cat powered car next year - basically it would have to be open-cycle steam.
Why? A two or even three phase turbine wrings most of the heat and energy out. Open loop would be a problem such as steam engines had where they had to stop very often for “fuel”.
> Long-term, closed cycle would be the way to go. But if someone wants to sell a E-cat powered car next year - basically it would have to be open-cycle steam.
Alternatively, think of a sodium/sulfur battery electric car with a single 35Kw(t) E-cat battery warmer/self recharger, using a Stirling cycle for the generator.
That could be cost effective.
Why would it have to be a compact car?
Chug-a-chug-a Chug-a-chug-a whoo whoo whoo! "Can I blow the whistle dad?"
I remember talking to some old-technology ship turbine operator who spoke of bubbling the expended turbine gases through the condensed liquid in a sealed system, thus causing rapid (almost violent) condensation, and not just a low pressure side, but an actual negative pressure on the low side of the turbine.
The condensed liquid was then pumped back into the "boiler" for reheating.
Of course in a closed system, other coolants/refrigerants/propellants would likely be superior to water.