RE: Organic Rankine Cycle

RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/8/2011 9:10:00 PM)
quote: You have any idea what 480X240 looks like at 80" ? Actually yes I do and nobody said I have to watch it at that size. I don't even need it really. It was just an example of what would be possible. We don't NEED anything close to that to get by comfortably. We're used to wasting energy because as with every other thing humans consume, we're gluttons when we do it. I think 1500 is plenty, if not, I'll have 3 different ways to produce more and maybe more as time goes by, at least one more way. We'll find out though won't we. Hell I don't NEED any of those things. I could use and earth cooler for fresh food, along with canning, for longer storage. I could do without TV and every other electronic, i just don't want to. I've done it before on a few occasions when I've traveled cross country. I'll do it again, to realize my dream, if I have to.

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/8/2011 9:16:55 PM)
quote: absoption refrigeration ? Yes I have. Funny you should mention that because I've just now started to research it for the electric savings and air cooling possibilities.

Termyn8or -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 12:02:41 AM)
Remember KISS. That way you can just put the vessel which needs to be heated out in the sun. More sun, more cooling. Now with a Stirling or a Rankine to turn the fan blades, you got it licked. Then with a chemolumnescent light in a fridge, the only problem is that it wouldn't go out when you close the door. This will probably drive someone crazy. But for AC you need no light. I had a chance a long time ago to pick up a bunch of gas AC units from an old apartment building. I should have done it. I also have (or had) the Audel's on absoption refrigeration. As old as it is, it's pretty complicated. The ammonia gas is not the refrigerant, it's a vehicle in a way. At least I consider it complicated because I didn't get much into chemistry. But chemistry, which technically includes metallurgy is a part of electronics. Without batteries in the old days there would be no volts, therefore no amps, so ohms wouldn't mean a thing. But is elecricity kinetic energy ? Yes. Just how different is it to use a hydraulic pump and cylinder rather than a generator and a servomotor ? The answer is of course that hydraulics is better because the control mechanism is simpler. The way "we" are "taught" we are generally stuck in a certain paradigm. The age of specialization is holding us back. Notwithstanding all the politically and economically created blocks to true development of energy use etc., we still have that huge stumbling block. Heinlin said specialization is for insects. Behold the future. In that light, the past looks a bit better doesn't it. T^T

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 11:48:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: My total daily consumption with a remote purpose freezer, lights, TV, DVD player, satellite internet and a few odd and end devices will be lower than 1500 watts per day Why would you assume anything when it's written out for you. Because you cannot run anything on 1.5 kW/day. you're talking about less than one incandescent bulb. A freezer compressor will draw lots more than that in a single cycle much less all day long. Just for the sake of explaining how ludicrous this is 1500 watts at 120 volts is 12.5 amps, total consumed per day. or just slightly more than 80% of a 15 amp circuits maximum draw for 1 second. That LED projector draws 18 watts. that consumes 1500 watts in under 84 seconds with no lights, no freezer and no media player to feed into the projector.

Termyn8or -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 2:27:53 PM)
FR Ken, that was a big oops. Draw 18 watts for an hour you have consumed 18 watt hours. Anyway, for a minimalist existence I think a deep freeze would come in handy. If you pedal your Gilliganmobile into town and get a side of beef, or if you prefer go slay a moose or something, you'll need a way to store it. Not so bad in the winter, but most places do have a "summer". (OK, I'm northernhemispherocentic, shoot me) It's probably not easy to find a gas deepfreeze. That would be nice because all you would need is heat, and maybe enough electricity to run a small fan in it. However the majority of them are electric. Now the older ones pull more current, but do not run as long while the newer one pull les but run longer. Say an older one runs 25% of the time and pulls 7 amps. A newer one may only pull 4 amps but will run maybe 40% of the time. Which is more suited depends on your power source. The newer one will save a few watt hours of course, but it's not a drastic saving. Now this really doesn't matter much if you really like smoked and salt cured meat. That's how they did it in the old days. If you want some eletronic goodies, take my laptop for instance. A 17" wide screen (full keyboard too) and via the internet you can watch a whole lot of media. It needs 19 volts to charge. Of course that screws me in a car as I would have to build a DC to DC convertor, but with solar it's just a matter of a couple more cells. For good sound there is the option of headphones but there is another point. Of course my stereozilla causes a brownout on the eastern seaboard, but it doesn't have to be that way. To get twice as loud you need ten times the power. Bad for folks like me who are trying to crack the foundation of the house, but the reverse effect of this logarythmic response can be good for the watt pincher. With decent speakers, 3 watts per channel might be enough. In fact you would be surprised at just how loud 1 watt per channel is. For many years almost evey car stereo out there was actually about 2¾ watts per channel, with the "high power" units delivering 8.9 watts per channel into 8 ohms. Forget what the box says, as well as the salesman. Those are the numbers. Everything almost doubles when run into 4 ohms. Then a broadband modem and router are not going to run you more than 30 watts I would say. However you're not really off the grid if you have a landline phone (DSL/ASDL) or cable. That leaves satellite/cell. Last time I heard anything about it, it was about fifty bucks a month. I'm sure it's less now, but my buddy had it a few years ago. The tranciever plugged into his laptop and it was purported to work just about anywhere. However it must use cell towers because I just can't see a satellite uplink running off a PCMCIA slot. I could be wrong though because they come up with new things all the time. I remember this thing they built for overweight people. It was an exercycle connected to a generator which ran a TV. Want to watch TV ? Pedal ! Something like that might be worth a shot. Between you and my electric bill, I'm thinking just how far can this go ? Maybe someone should just start a thread called "Beyond Gilligan's Island". T^T

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 2:42:55 PM)
quote: Anyway, for a minimalist existence I think a deep freeze would come in handy. If you pedal your Gilliganmobile into town and get a side of beef, or if you prefer go slay a moose or something, you'll need a way to store it. Not so bad in the winter, but most places do have a "summer". (OK, I'm northernhemispherocentic, shoot me) Very funny but it doesn't have to be that drastic these days. [:D] http://store.sundancesolar.com/noname2.html As I stated earlier, a freezer's power consumption would be less relative to winters onset. quote: Then a broadband modem and router are not going to run you more than 30 watts I would say. However you're not really off the grid if you have a landline phone (DSL/ASDL) or cable. That leaves satellite/cell. Last time I heard anything about it, it was about fifty bucks a month. I'm sure it's less now, but my buddy had it a few years ago. The tranciever plugged into his laptop and it was purported to work just about anywhere. However it must use cell towers because I just can't see a satellite uplink running off a PCMCIA slot. I could be wrong though because they come up with new things all the time. All of that with the Satellite Receiver should run about 75 watt hours ran at around 2 or 3 hours a day. Not counting the laptop for the same amount of time.

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 4:48:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or FR Ken, that was a big oops. Draw 18 watts for an hour you have consumed 18 watt hours. It doesn't say W/hr or anything similiar. It uses 2 amps with a 9V supply. Watt is a per second measurement. Therefore it consumes 18 watts every second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 5:30:43 PM)
quote: It doesn't say W/hr or anything similiar. It uses 2 amps with a 9V supply. Watt is a per second measurement. Therefore it consumes 18 watts every second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt So how many total watt hours would a 23 watt compact fluorescent use in a 24 hour period? You seem like you know what you're talking about and I'm actually just learning.

outhere69 -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 5:32:02 PM)
He's right, Ken. Watts = Joules/sec. For energy, you use watt-hours, as seen below, from the same wiki page: For example, when a light bulb with a power rating of 100W is turned on for one hour, the energy used is 100 watt-hours (W•h), 0.1 kilowatt-hour, or 360 kJ. This same amount of energy would light a 40-watt bulb for 2.5 hours, or a 50-watt bulb for 2 hours. A power station would be rated in multiples of watts, but its annual energy sales would be in multiples of watt-hours. A kilowatt-hour is the amount of energy equivalent to a steady power of 1 kilowatt running for 1 hour, or 3.6 MJ. However, given the low temp of the stove and the low input from a solar array near the arctic circle (you're going to have to have a hell of an array, and you've got very little time to gather the light), it still sounds unrealistic. You could go to the Lehman's site and find propane fridges and such.

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 5:38:29 PM)
quote: low temp of the stove What's your idea of low temp, outhere?

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 6:03:00 PM)
Next I'll get told I can't boil water with a wood stove for showers either. :) Yes, I'm being a smartarse. [:D]

Icarys -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/9/2011 9:11:55 PM)
Here's the answer for the wood stove question since the person may not come back. http://www.ehow.com/facts_7884992_hot-can-wood-stoves.html

Termyn8or -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 12:14:19 AM)
"Watt is a per second measurement" You are soooo busted. A Watt is the product of one amp flowing through one ohm which requires one volt EMF to push; e.g. to cause to flow. There is nothing more in that formula. Hours brings in time. So it's no point, no penalty because both are guilty. Hours should have been specified first. Written forum, write. Telepathy does not work. Wanna get something done ? Keep fistfucking around and you'll always wanna get something done. That said, part of my now obsured point is that watt hours differ from amps. Nothing works without current. Not only is there a limitation in any system of the total Kwh it can deliver/strore/supply, there is also a limitation on how much current can be pulled at any given time. This runs into a bit more than wire size. Speak of huge capacitors all you have is about car batteries. They can only store a little. One farad is one ampere per one second, at one volt. So basically one farad boils down to one watt per second. What's more they don't last forever. Their performance is dependent on alot of things, and the chemicals get worn out after a while. Extreme currents during discharging or charging can also shorten their useful life. This almost sounds like a lead/acid would be better. At least you get a hell of alot more capacity. Remember a farad is only one watt for one second. T^T

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 5:26:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: It doesn't say W/hr or anything similiar. It uses 2 amps with a 9V supply. Watt is a per second measurement. Therefore it consumes 18 watts every second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt So how many total watt hours would a 23 watt compact fluorescent use in a 24 hour period? You seem like you know what you're talking about and I'm actually just learning. watt hours? 552 W/hr or about half a kW/hr. A watt/hour is a draw of one watt for one hour and is not the same thing as a simple watt.

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 5:31:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or "Watt is a per second measurement" You are soooo busted. A Watt is the product of one amp flowing through one ohm which requires one volt EMF to push; e.g. to cause to flow. There is nothing more in that formula. Hours brings in time. So it's no point, no penalty because both are guilty. Hours should have been specified first. Written forum, write. Telepathy does not work. Wanna get something done ? Keep fistfucking around and you'll always wanna get something done. No. you are forgetting what an amp is. An ampere represents a set quantity of electricty flowing past a fixed point in one second. Voltage is strictly a timeless measurement but Ampere is timed so when you get watts by V*A the resulting unit is per second. Also note that a non electrical definition of watt is one joule per second.

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 5:38:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Here's the answer for the wood stove question since the person may not come back. http://www.ehow.com/facts_7884992_hot-can-wood-stoves.html It's pretty irrelevant how hot the fire in the stove gets. What matters is what you need to do with it. How many cubic feet do you need to heat, to what temp versus what outside temp, how well insulated is the structure and how many BTU's does the stove produce. Then you'll have an idea how much energy you can run into a heat exchanger to run a heat engine (if you're really thinking a wood fired stove it will be a lot less than you think).

Termyn8or -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 5:50:28 AM)
This is getting ridiculous. An ampere is not called an amp/second or a Joule/second or anything. It's an amp. Of course there is no such thing as a volt/second except when it comes to slewing rate/bandwith or things like that. But there is such a thing as an amp/second, it would equal one watt/second at one volt. Like with gravitational constant. 32 feet per second per second. You leave out the second "per second" and it does not mean the same thing. As I said that should have been stated all along. The time factor is already included in the ampere plain and simple. Get an amp to flow for one second or a half an amp to flow for two seconds. The second "per second" is what defines the unit. There has got to be something better to argue about around here. T^T

samboct -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 5:59:15 AM)
In a somewhat pedantic point- not quite Ken... If you're talking about running energy into a heat exchanger to produce electricity- a small volume at high temperature beats a large volume at low temperature assuming energy equivalence. Sidi Carnot is chuckling..... In terms of practical energy storage- there are a few ideas that come to mind. Probably the most straightforward is a marine deep discharge lead acid battery. You will need to make sure that they're insulated and they probably crap out in 5 years or so. If they freeze-you're cooked. (or frozen) so you'll probably have to make sure that they have some active heating. Wild ass idea....Data centers used to use flywheels for energy storage. The footprint is much smaller than lead acids, I suspect they're more reliable as well but I don't know about temperature extremes. The trick would be to find a bicycle generator that could actually supply enough power to get one running- but actually, I'll bet they ran off 110 V AC. The other trick- finding one within your budget but since businesses go under, maybe some of these things went for pennies on the dollar. They're also more efficient than lead acids- i.e. put energy in, you get most of it back out. The roundtrip efficiency of lead acids is I think around 70% or so. Lithiums do much better- their efficiency is in the 90% range, but again, you've got temperature issues. Sam

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 6:03:44 AM)
units of measure are often derived from other units. Especially in the metric system. For instance standard gravity is defined as gravity that in vacuum accelerates an object 32 feet/second^2. When you use Gn in place of the feet per second squared value it doesn't change that the unit is still a timed unit. In this particular instance watt is defined, officially, as 1 joule per second. it is also in electrical applications derived by voltage, timeless unit of charge, multiplied by ampere, timed unit of electron flow. Therefore watt is a timed unit. You're used to shorthanding watt/hour as watt but they are distinct things. And in the cases discussed by me I've been very careful to use them correctly.

DomKen -> RE: Organic Rankine Cycle (5/10/2011 6:07:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct In a somewhat pedantic point- not quite Ken... If you're talking about running energy into a heat exchanger to produce electricity- a small volume at high temperature beats a large volume at low temperature assuming energy equivalence. Sidi Carnot is chuckling..... But he isn't using the stove simply as the heat source for a external combustion engine but as a means of heating the structure, which I assumed was its primary job. Therefore what matters isn't how hot the stove gets but how much of that heat can be siphoned off into a heat engine without the inhabitant freezing.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875