Would a earlier stirling engine be possible and economic viable alternate history discussion 5 gases

#########

Second, Stirling engines, if properly designed, are usually more efficient than steam gas utility bill engines, that is they burn less fuel to do the same amount of work. This was especially true in the early days of both technologies, due to the rather astounding luck of the Rev. Robert Stirling in basing his designs on a closed cycle system that subsequent thermodynamic equations have confirmed as being probably as close to Carnot’s ideal heat engine as possible. This meant that his 1818 (or it could be 1827, I’ll have to check my notes) designs we’re achieving a 35-40% efficiency (that is, that percentage of the energy produced by the coal combustion was being successfully turned into useful work instead of waste heat) compared to the 3-6% of contemporary steam engines.

Third, Stirling engines have scaling issues. Stirling’s constant volume engines are constrained by an issue (I think it’s the heat exchanger grade 6 science electricity test, but don’t quote me on that) wherein the effectiveness decreases with size increases. The constant pressure engines that John electricity font Ericsson developed (yes, he of Monitor fame) got around this issue, but their power is constrained to their physical size; that is, making a more powerful engine requires linearly scaling up the size of the engine to match. Ericsson built an engine to power a paddle-wheel ship (modestly named Ericsson) in 1855. The pistons had a diameter of 14 feet, making them probably the largest pistons ever cast, yet the ship was still underpowered and probably would have required an even bigger engine had it not been sunk, raised, and outfitted with conventional steam engines gas in california that could deliver the required power without taking up all the space. This makes it unsuitable for heavy industry, however it is ideal for light cottage industry, where it is in fact used in many parts of the developing world today.

Fourth, everything above is good for the prompt, this isn’t. You really cannot develop a Stirling engine without tight manufacturing tolerances, ones that are non-existent prior to the 19th century. It works solely on tiny little voids between two surfaces and temperature changes are usually enough to make the metal expand and shrink a bit. Unless the designer and manufacturers know what they’re doing, it’s very easy to build an engine that seizes up or even tears itself apart.

Click to expand…I mean that you need a reference for a perfectly gas finder flat surface. You need measuring tools accurate to less than a millimeter. You need precise calculations of how much the metal in question is going to expand and contract under temperature changes. You need a pressure gauge, and that is only possible to make with understanding of what a vacuum is (and they were not believed to exist until 1643), and a system of reference for measuring pressure. There is also the issue that the first truly practical instruments for measuring pressure electricity video ks1 involve the careful suspension of a large quantity of mercury which, obviously, is very dangerous to work with. Same gas efficient cars 2012 issue with the thermometer that you need (although here you catch a break, the principles of one were known to the Ancients and Galileo built some very refined ones by the 1590’s, all you need is a temperature scale now since neither Fahrenheit or Celsius exist until the 18th Century). You need a way to cast or file something to a precise thickness (or otherwise a whole bunch of master craftsmen, and I mean leaders of guilds masters, who can patiently refine it to what is needed). And there’s probably more that I’m forgetting.

There is also the issue that you gas tax pretty much need the sum total of Enlightenment research into the natural sciences to even explain this thing or improve it. You need the ideal gas laws, the concept of latent and sensible heat (well, more the latter), potential and kinetic energy, and several other equations related to the properties of fluids.

It’s tough. There’s a reason why we call a period the Industrial Revolution. Prior to that period, there just was not enough scientific understanding and technological advancement to produce the power generation definition engines of industry. Then, suddenly, a critical mass was achieved to make a few early devices possible, that sparked further research, and more groundwork was done, and then things just took off from there – a self-sustaining virtuous cycle of science backing technology and technology encouraging science that continues to the present.