Home Sign Up!

Browse Community Submit

All Art Craft Food Games Green Home Kids Life Music Offbeat Outdoors Pets Photo Ride Science Tech

Tin Can Stirling Engine

by PKM on October 20, 2010

Table of Contents

Tin Can Stirling Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Intro: Tin Can Stirling Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Step 1: Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Step 2: Bill of materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Step 3: Power piston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Step 4: Flywheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Step 5: Displacer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Step 6: Displacer cylinder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Step 7: Connecting rods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Step 8: Framework of the engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Step 9: First run! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Step 10: Design tweaks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Related Instructables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
Intro: Tin Can Stirling Engine
How I built a hot air engine almost entirely from junk. I've wanted to build one of these ever since discovering stirling engines in about 2003. Spending the weekend
making things in Steveastrouk's workshop gave me the opportunity to make the precision parts I'd need, and I knew most of the engine was going to be made of
improvised materials, so decided to see if I could make the entire thing out of scrap or unwanted materials.

If you aren't familiar with how Stirling engines work, there are plenty of resources online- the Wikipedia page is a good place to start.

Step 1: Design
The "core" of a gamma stirling engine of this design is a large cylinder that holds the displacer, connected to a smaller power cylinder providing the power strokes. I
decided to follow Darryl Boyd's "walking beam" design, where the power cylinder sticks out of the side of the dis[placer cylinder, because it suited the materials I had and
it looks cool :)

I found that an aluminium drinks can would fit neatly inside a steel soup can, so decided to use that for the displacer on the grounds of being cheap, light and easy to
work with. The steel soup can provides a sturdy body for the engine and also meant I could ake the bottom removable to allow maintenance.

I found some decking to use as the base, some 1" x 1/2" pine to use as supports for the moving parts, and a piece of 3/4" aluminium strip to use as the beam. The
engine is a messy combination of metric and imperial units- that's what happens when you use scrap materials!

Step 2: Bill of materials

Displacer cylinder

Two empty steel food cans, at least one with a tapering bottom

Displacer

An aluminium drink can that fits closely inside the soup can without touching the sides
Two thin metal discs (eg lids from food cans)

Power cylinder

Copper or brass pipe, as round as possible, around 40 - 50mm long

Power piston *

Flywheel

A low-friction ball bearing

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
A CD or other disc to use as the wheel
Pennies for weights

Beam

About 12" of metal or wood thick enough not to bend too much

Frame of engine

Thin wood (1" x 1/2" or larger) for supports, at least 24" (600mm) long
A piece of plank at least 12" long and 4" wide (300 x 100mm) for the base

Other

Thin brass tube 1/8" inside diameter and steel rod 1/8" diameter- about 12" of each (the precise measurement of these isn't as important as the rod being a snug sliding
fit inside the tube)
Wire coathanger
Two terminal blocks
JB Weld or other high temperature epoxy
Fast-setting epoxy (eg Araldite)

Necessary tools

Hacksaw
Power drill
Wood saw

Desirable tools

Rotary tool with grinding and cutoff bits

Step 3: Power piston

There are several ways of getting a power cylinder and piston for your stirling. At one end of the spectrum, you can buy graphite pistons and glass cylinders online. This
guarantees you will get good quality parts but feels a bit like cheating :) At the other end of the spectrum, you can attach a rubber membrane made of a piece of balloon
over the end of the cylinder, like scraptopower's engines. This is probably the easiest to make but limits travel and introduces friction.

Others have made pistons by casting JB Weld inside their chosen power cylinder. You can read more about that here- I didn't do this because I had the machined
piston/cylinder combo, but it seems to be quite a popular method.

The piston is a 20mm x 20mm solid cylinder with a 1/8" hole bored in one end. A short section of steel rod was glued into the hole, and a section of brass tube glued over
that. The end of the tube was flattened and drilled to 2.5mm to accept a conrod made of coathanger wire. In engine terms, this is the small-end bearing.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
Step 4: Flywheel
The flywheel is a wheel that I think came from a VCR. I used it because the bearing ran smoothly and the wheel looks quite nice as a flywheel :) The axle hole for the
bearing was conveniently almost exactly the size of the brass tubing I had, so that would work for an axle.

I initially tried gluing a short piece of brass tubing to the surface of the wheel to act as a crank, but the glue bond between the metal surfaces was weak and kept
breaking. Drilling a small hole into the wheel and gluing a piece of coathanger wire into that made a much stronger crank. A piece of wood with a short section of brass
tubing fixed into a hole drilled through it provided a support for the flywheel.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
Step 5: Displacer
The displacer is a section cut from an aluminium beer can, with lids taken from other cans glued over the ends to make a flat-ended cylinder. This made the displacer air-
tight, so to avoid the risk of it pressurising and exploding in the engine I made a small "breather" hole with a needle. The top end plate was drilled in the middle and a
section of steel rod glued into it. The steel rod I had is a sliding fit in the brass tubing, which offers low friction but an almost airtight seal, so was ideal for the displacer
rod seal.

The length of the displacer is important- it should take up about two thirds of the space inside the cylinder. I worked out how far the crank on my engine was going to
move (the "throw", about 20mm), and subtracted that from the length of the displacer cylinder (90mm) to find the largest size the displacer could be (70mm).

I actually glued the rod into the displacer with it inside the engine once I had assembled the displacer cylinder to make sure the two lined up- if everything was measured
with sufficient precision this would be unnecessary. I used JB Weld for this join as fast-setting epoxies tend to soften at high temperatures.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
Step 6: Displacer cylinder
To make the displacer cylinder, I cut the bottom off a can with a can opener which removes the entire end of the can. I then cut the bottom two inches off another can of
the same size with a tapered end, which I could force into the first can to form an airtight seal, but which could be removed if I needed access to the inside of the cylinder
later.

The top of the displacer cylinder was drilled in the centre and a section of brass tubing glued in with JB Weld to form the displacer rod seal. A hole large enough to
accommodate the power cylinder was cut into the side using a rotary tool and the power cylinder glued in.

When assembled, a short section of brass tube was glued onto the end of the displacer rod, flattened and drilled like the power piston to provide a joint for the beam
conrod.
I also cut out the bottom of a tuna can and glued that around the top of the displacer cylinder to use as a water jacket for cooling, but this was actually less effective than
plain air cooling, and developed a leak that was letting water into the cylinder so I removed it.

Image Notes Image Notes

1. Cut-off end of a tapered can 1. Can end forced into open end of another can to provide removable bottom

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Image Notes Image Notes
1. Small hole on top of displacer cylinder for displacer rod 1. Large hole cut into side of displacer cylinder to fit brass power cylinder

Image Notes Image Notes

1. The brass tube is glued to the cylinder, the steel rod is free to slide up and 1. Removable bottom
down inside it. A drop of oil helps lubricate this joint and reduces air leakage. 2. Glued-in power cylinder
2. Hinge for connecting rod to attach displacer to beam 3. Water jacket for cooling- abandoned because it didn't work well and leaked
constantly
4. Displacer connecting rod- make sure the displacer is in the cylinder before
you assemble it!

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
Step 7: Connecting rods
The conrods are made of coathanger wire. Where a joint is only required to rotate a small amount these are simply 90 degree bends in the wire fit into 2.5mm holes, with
a dab of hot glue on the end to keep the wire in place. Where the conrods make a continuously rotating joint (where the power piston and beam conrods attach to the
crank on the flywheel) these were made of drilled brass pieces from a section of "terminal block" electrical connector.

These are a very convenient size and shape to join the end of a piece of wire perpendicularly to another piece. One of the screws was removed and a hole drilled
sideways all the way through the brass, and the other screw used to clamp the end of the conrod in the connector. I got this idea from reukpower's Coke Can Stirling
Instructable.

The conrods all have a Z-shaped bend in the middle which allows for length adjustment by tweaking the bends.

Image Notes
1. Use screw to clamp connecting rod in this end
2. Drill through both sides here to form the "bearing" for the crank

Image Notes
1. S-bend in conrods allows easy length adjustment
2. Wire "hooks" through drilled holes work fine for joints which don't rotate
much
3. Small drop of hot glue stops connecting rods from falling out of hinges

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Image Notes
1. Brass terminal blocks are used for bearings on the crank which undergoes
continuous rotation

Step 8: Framework of the engine

Before building anything I drew a diagram and worked out the necessary dimensions of the engine so that nothing would collide, then dry fit all the pieces before cutting
and gluing. The base is made from a piece of scrap decking. The beam is a 250mm section of aluminium strip with a hole drilled for a pivot in the middle and two smaller
holes near the ends to accept the conrods. The beam support and engine support were made of more pine, screwed into the base.

Despite working out all the dimensions beforehand, my apparent inability to drill a hole straight through a piece of wood coupled with my cheap wobbly power drill
resulted in a certain amount of trial and error being applied to the placement of the engine parts.

Image Notes
1. 12" piece of decking plank
2. Aluminium strip (of unknown provenance)

Step 9: First run!

In case the video embed doesn't work, the first run video is here on YouTube.

Step 10: Design tweaks

After the engine had run successfully, I addressed some of the issues that had become apparent. The flywheel support wasn't in quite the right place, so the piston
conron was running at an angle creating excessive friction on the crank. The flywheel itself wasn't really heavy enough to sustain rotation of the engine, so I added the
CD and pennies to give it more momentum. The beam and flywheel tended to wobble on their mounts slightly so I added some spacers on their axles to keep them in
place better.

After all these mods, the engine runs more reliably than any fuel source I have to test it with :) It will run at approximately 150-200rpm on a decent candle flame, and has
run at nearly 500rpm when I accidentally overheated it slightly with a large meths burner. The engine is mechanically sound at that speed- my concern is the displacer
overheating and the epoxy that keeps it attached to the rod failing.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Image Notes Image Notes
1. Pennies glued to the back of the flywheel to increase angular momentum 1. The engine looking moody and steampunk-ish (except for the CD)

Related Instructables

Tin can LTD

My Second Stirling engine Stirling My second My first working Coke Can
Stirling Engine (video) by generator Stirling engine Stirling Engine Stirling engine
(video) by scraptopower powering radio generator, (video) by (video) by
demonstration. produces Profanisaurus scraptopower
Profanisaurus around 50mw
(video) by
scraptopower (video) by
scraptopower

Comments
50 comments Add Comment view all 78 comments

zazenergy says: Feb 24, 2011. 4:34 PM REPLY

That's very cool! Thanks for sharing :)

Mudbud says: Feb 24, 2011. 5:30 PM REPLY

Wow, definitely one of the nicest Stirling engines on instructables :) Awesome job.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Phil B says: Feb 24, 2011. 6:15 PM REPLY
Thank you for a very nice Instructable. Stirling engines are interesting, and I would like to learn more about them. Your Instructable provided some
information I have not seen in others on a Stirling engine. You also have some very clever adaptations of common items. I had the thought that layering
three or four CDs would probably also give you more mass for the flywheel.

Dr Qui says: Feb 24, 2011. 7:09 PM REPLY

Oh very nice indeed. Hats off to you sir (stands back, nods and lights pipe) 5 stars.

Get it entered in the 3rd Epilog Challenge.

I am in the process of gathering parts to built a large sterling something like this to run off my wood stove, I have my second VCR just ready to crack open to
see what goodies are inside.

My solenoid beam engine is a practice piece before I attempt to build a flash aluminium sterling.

Can you post any info more info or links to the design as this looks exactly the kind of design i have been looking for, I really like walking beams.

Eye Poker says: Feb 24, 2011. 9:06 PM REPLY

Now just add a fresnel lens and you can generate enough power to take over the world.

jam BD says: Feb 25, 2011. 5:52 AM REPLY

Interesting approach with an added cross beam. Very good ible.

rimar2000 says: Feb 25, 2011. 7:16 AM REPLY

Very nice Stirling motor!

steveastrouk says: Feb 27, 2011. 7:43 AM REPLY

Nice job

askjerry says: Feb 27, 2011. 8:31 AM REPLY

It doesn't matter how you built it, the details are not important to me. I just like the mix of techno-hillbilly-steampunk that sort of works. It makes this ka-chunk
noise that is both annoying and kool at the same time... the kind of thing that gives you great pleasure and annoys the family cat.

Two thumbs up!

Jerry

79spitfire says: Feb 27, 2011. 9:25 AM REPLY

That is soo cool!

Biotele says: Feb 27, 2011. 12:49 PM REPLY

harddisks make excellent flywheels.

Biotele says: Feb 27, 2011. 12:51 PM REPLY

video please. Can you calculate power and efficiency?

alexsparrow says: Feb 27, 2011. 2:14 PM REPLY

that thing runs hecka fast

alexsparrow says: Feb 27, 2011. 2:16 PM REPLY

try using some silicon caulking instead of the epoxy- let me know how it turns out

komodoboyx5 says: Mar 4, 2011. 6:29 PM REPLY

Just realize that this power source it a very viable power source.

After all, it's simplicity provides a very simple source of power and makes it very efficient.

Hobby to you or not, theres great possibilities in this machine.

I'm sure the wheel was just pushed around for giggles and grins before someone realized they could use that thing.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 PKM says: Mar 5, 2011. 4:03 AM REPLY
It is beautifully simple, yes, but (in this scale) not really efficient or viable.

The temperature a stirling engine runs at determines how much of the heat you put in gets converted to work output- its efficiency. For a commercial
solar-powered engine, that might be 25%, but for the low temperature engines that run from the heat of someone's hand it's below 1%.

The useful output of an engine like this might be enough to run a few LEDs or a radio but it's never going to power your house. There are more efficient,
less junky engines around which can produce useful amounts of power but they need a machine shop to build and a wood stove or large solar dish to
power them, not a few candles.

h3x_your_nightmare says: Mar 10, 2011. 5:00 AM REPLY

you should put some oil on joints and on the pistons! you can minimise the friction in this way ;)

PKM says: Mar 10, 2011. 5:55 AM REPLY

I did actually consider that, but the piston is machined with such a smooth surface and such a tight fit that oil actually increases the friction. The forces
involved are small and the piston has quite a large area, so the drag of the film of oil tends to slow the engine down.

I do oil the crank bearings and the sliding displacer rod- it's possible I hadn't done that when I recorded the video, but it doesn't squeak as much now.

PKM says: Mar 10, 2011. 5:58 AM REPLY

The video doesn't show it running that fast- what you don't see is it stalling just after the end of the video because that's about as slowly as it will run :)

That was only running on one candle, though. Heating it with a small cup of meths, it will run at several revolutions per second- it might go faster but I'm
afraid to let it run that fast in case something gets damaged in the process. I'll take a video of it running fast and post it in the comments when I have
time.

PKM says: Mar 10, 2011. 6:07 AM REPLY

I'll post a few more videos when I have time to take them. I'm not sure of the power, but I hooked up the flywheel pulley to a motor running as a generator
and it would just about light up one LED :(

I think it was overheating at the time- with better cooling and a more suitable generator I figure I could get perhaps one or two hundred milliwatts out of it.

Efficiency is pretty poor, I think an average candle puts out something like a hundred watts of heat so we are talking about something like 0.1%. Not
great!

wiinick says: Mar 15, 2011. 4:37 PM REPLY

Video pleeeeaaaassseeeee

pfred2 says: Feb 25, 2011. 7:29 AM REPLY

I did a school report on these when I was in 7th grade back in the 70s. Since then I've always still been a bit intrigued by them. I've seen examples that can
run on the warmth of the palm of someone's hand holding them! Yours is neat for different reasons of course.

juanvi says: Feb 27, 2011. 6:42 AM REPLY

really can they run from the heat of someone hand?? I'll love if you could show me one that does that..thanks for the info anyways!

Hebinho says: Feb 27, 2011. 7:35 AM REPLY

Hi juanvi,
just go to YouTube and search for KS90 and you will see some nice examples!
They also start running when the upper surface of the displacer cylinder is being heated by just letting the sun shine on it!
But they are a bit difficult to align and when building one, you have to avoid everthing which could cause some unneeded friction.

pfred2 says: Feb 27, 2011. 8:13 AM REPLY

When I was there they seemed to be rather commonplace items today. Stirling engines are at best a curiosity though.

Vengence says: Feb 27, 2011. 6:33 PM REPLY

Wrong. Currently they're more efficient than solar cells. They can be up to 40% efficient(not the type in this instrucable though). The company
Stirling Energy Systems Inc. has been contracted to build a solar farm in California...

Hebinho says: Feb 28, 2011. 4:34 AM

First of all we should distinguish between "toy" or "demonstartion" stirling engines and real serious stirling engines! Scottsdale's Sterling Energy Sys
Inc. is running the "Suncatcher" which has a mirror dish of 11.5 m diameter and produces 25 kW of eletric power at an efficiency of 31.25 % (world r
in 2008), while solar cells rarely are getting beyond 15 %!

Europe has a lot of CHPs (Combined Heat and Power plants) installed, using biomass to generate heat and electrical energy in housing areas, base
stirling engines. Of course these engines by no way can be compared to the ones you will find at instructables.com, but these are real hitech produc
running 30,000 hours and more needing only a small amount of maintenance.
There are small CHPs (15 kW heat and 3 kW electrical energy), just take a look at
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/project/Projects/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showFile&rep=laymanReport&fil=LIFE99_ENV_D_000452_LAYM

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Hungary based FlexEnergy is builing a generator (38 kW output) running on landfill gas (methane) only.

Now you can continue to state "...Stirling engines are at best a curiosity though..."

pfred2 says: Feb 28, 2011. 6:

Thank you for allowing me to continue stating the obvious. A few obscure projects referenced does not make you right. There is likely more stea
engines still in operation than Stirling engines today.

A 40kW diesel generator isn't newsworthy, its a pallet item.

http://www.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=isch:1&&sa=X&ei=s7FrTY7PPIO88gaU4LyQCw&ved=0CC8QBSgA&q=40+kW+die

About 153,000 results ...

I think we need to distinguish between fantasy and reality but that's just me.

Vengence says: Feb 28, 2011. 6:41 PM REPLY

[pfred2: A few obscure projects referenced does not make you right. ]
Yes, it most certainly does. It's called proof, and it's not an opinion. You have been proven wrong.

[pfred2: There is likely more steam piston engines still in operation than Stirling engines today. ]
Of course there is. Steam is still one of the most efficient and most powerful systems there is. If there wasn't a problem with steam
production and storage we'd still be using them in our cars. You're not making a case for yourself. How exactly do you think
nuclear power plants work? That's right...steam...

[pfred2: I think we need to distinguish between fantasy and reality but that's just me. ]
I guess the sources that Hebinho mentioned are fantasy and not reality? I don't think "we" need to distinquish between fantasy
and reality, I think just "you" do.

You may now continue to post opinion...

pfred2 says: Feb 28, 2011. 9:02 PM REPLY

You just keep on believing that efficient equals practical. As an example fusion is amazingly efficient, just not very practical.
Nuclear power plants do not use pistons except to raise and lower the control rods. But yes turbines are fairly efficient, and
practical as well.

No I'm not making a case with you! Because you are an unreasonable individual.

I'm supposed to accept a few sources but it is OK for you to ignore the overwhelming number I present? At this point I really
don't care what you think.

Vengence says: Feb 28, 2011. 11:30 PM REPLY

[pfred2: As an example fusion is amazingly efficient, just not very practical. ]
Fusion isn't even done at a stable level yet. Once fusion reactors are perfected it will be extremely practical and will take
the place of current nuclear reactors. You're still wrong in your example.

[I'm supposed to accept a few sources but it is OK for you to ignore the overwhelming number I present? ]
Overwhelming number of what? You have produced zero evidence that "stirling engines are at best a curiosity".

pfred2 says:
Sure it is it, just takes more power to operate than can be gotten from it. If fusion reactor engineering impossibilities are ever ove
pennies from heaven on that day!

Here are 153,000 examples

http://www.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=isch:1&&sa=X&ei=s7FrTY7PPIO88gaU4LyQCw&ved=0CC8QBSgA

That took all of a tenth of a second for our favorite search engine to cough up but you conveniently choose to ignore. Go argue s
with like extra terrestrials or the Easter Bunny. That ought to be a good one, least you'll have baskets pretty soon as proof!

komodoboyx5 says: Mar 4, 2011. 6:16 PM REPLY

you're also ignoring the fact that diesel is a non-renewable resource. The sun will burn on for many, many, many,
many, many, many, many more days. In fact, by the time the sun does burn out, we'll have found more suns to
juice for energy.

& Don't argue the stupid position of proposing ethanol, that would require energy to make energy, wasting time &
power.

pfred2 says: Mar 5, 2011. 8:02 AM REPLY

I'm not the one arguing.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Vengence says: Mar 3, 2011. 4:36 AM REPLY
[pfred2: Sure it is it, just takes more power to operate than can be gotten from it. ]
No, it's not. You're basically saying so in the latter part of your statement. Will you ever stop being
wrong(Apparently not)? It's not supposed to take a continual energy feed to keep the reaction going. It's only
supposed to take energy to start the reaction, and it should keep going for as long as it's stable. You understand
what stable means right? ITER is expected to produce a minimum stable reaction of 480 seconds but could be as
much as 1,000 seconds, producing 5(on the low end) to 10(on the high end) times as much energy as was needed
to start the reaction.

[pfred2: That took all of a tenth of a second for our favorite search engine to cough up but you conveniently choose
to ignore. ]
You posted the same exact useless link again? That's proving that stirling engines are a curiosity how?(I'll give you
a hint: it's not) With the national average for diesel being $3.716 per gallon and some places as high as $3.964, tell
me again which one you think is actually more practical? Do you have to keep paying the sun to receive and
convert it's energy? A link to diesel generators proves nothing about stirling engines. You'd have to be delusional to
think the diesel generator is more practical.

pfred2 says: Mar 3, 2011. 5:05 PM REPLY

What vessel besides magnetic do you propose plasma be contained in? It's not like you can put something a
million degrees into your coffee cup you know?

You just choose not to see the relationship. They pointed out one example of a 37kW generator I pointed out
153,000 of similar in just one other technology. Now if diesel wasn't more practical then how come there are so
many more examples?

SydAndy says: Mar 6, 2011. 6:01 PM REPLY

pointing out existing examples means nothing about the future.

By the same example 100 years ago you would be saying coal powered steam engines were the only
solution earth ever needs, claiming petrol engines were a fad.

100 years before that, you would be mocking anyone even thinking anything but a horse could move a cart.

You would probably also be saying that since 90% of carts were drawn by horses, that those carrying
heavier loads which required bullocks to pull them should be regarded as imaginary?

pfred2 says: Mar 6, 2011. 8:37 PM REPLY

Maybe what you say would be true if Stirling engines hadn't been around almost 200 years already.

Hebinho says: Mar 7, 2011. 4:05 AM REPLY

And for how long the wheel has been around before becoming ball bearings ....?

pfred2 says: Mar 7, 2011. 7:35 AM REPLY

That explains your problem. You have axles in your bearings!

Vengence says: Mar 5, 2011. 5:57 AM REPLY

[pfred2: What vessel besides magnetic do you propose plasma be contained in? It's not like you can put
something a million degrees into your coffee cup you know? ]
It's starting to seem like when you're wrong on one part of a subject you try to bring the attention to a
different part, hoping you'll eventually be right about something. Don't change the subject. Where's your
proof/argument that current fusion reactors are stable(self sustaining for a significant period of time)? Is this
you conceding defeat?

[pfred2: Now if diesel wasn't more practical then how come there are so many more examples? ]
How about I answer your question with more questions? If diesel is more practical, why are there more
gasoline engines on the road today? Why are hybrids just now being sold when the technology necessary
to develope them has been around for at least 30 years?
The reasons are political, not reasons of practicality...

pfred2 says: Mar 5, 2011. 8:15 AM REPLY

I thought we were talking about generators in the 37kW range and there diesels are more more
prevalent than gasoline ones. Though you can get plenty of gasoline generators in that range as well!
Stating more facts that defeat a baseless argument is hardly conceding defeat. In court it would be
called a preponderance of evidence actually. Though I suppose your only hope is that I am wrong about
something eventually. Nice try, better luck next time. Hybrids are being sold now for the simple
economic facts that enough fools believe in enough nonsense to shell out enough money for them.
Nothing more.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 Vengence says: Mar 12, 2011. 4:23 AM REPLY
Looks like I've decimated this debate. Sorry, couldn't help but rub it in your face. }B^P

pfred2 says: Mar 12, 2011. 2:03 PM REPLY

If by decimate you mean kill one in ten you over estimate your success. Now if I was your
legion commander I'd have you, and all of your cohort annihilated. Sorry, I couldn't help
pointing out once again you know nothing.

Vengence says: Mar 13, 2011. 4:50 AM REPLY

Translation: "Nu uh".
LMAO
Yep. Every single topic, every argument shot down and decimated. All you can say is nu
uh but take an entire paragraph to do so. Sorry, couldn't help pointing out you take so
long to say so little.

pfred2 says: Mar 13, 2011. 6:41 AM REPLY

While you may have been arguing your nonsense all of this time I was just pointing
out widely known facts. You're obviously a coward who made up this "Vengence"
account merely to attack me being as you've done nothing else with it as all. Another
easily discernible FACT! So Vengeance really is mine. Uh huh.

Vengence says: Mar 14, 2011. 12:41 AM REPLY

[pfred2: While you may have been arguing your nonsense all of this time I was
just pointing out widely known facts. ]
Your lack of intelligence is overwhelming. You've been spewing out nothing but
opinion, and the only useless fact you did point out helped your argument in no
way what so ever. You might as well have pointed out that light bulbs exist. It
would have the same relevance.

[pfred2: You're obviously a coward who made up this "Vengence" account merely
to attack me being as you've done nothing else with it as all. Another easily
discernible FACT! ]
Like I said, the idiocy is overwhelming. You still don't seem to know what facts
are, and you're still just wrong. Are you ever right about anything in life? The real
fact is you can't even do something as simple as count. You do know Sep 24,
2007 comes way before Apr 14, 2009 right? Of course you don't; that was the
point I was making.
Decimated.

pfred2 says: Mar 14, 2011. 9:48 AM REPLY

How this site is formatted I did not notice you had more than 2 comments
beyond the ranting you've done in this thread. But viewing them all now I see
you're always that way. You must also excuse my difficulty reading white text
on a white background. Fact is you're really not worth looking at too closely.
The less I know about you the better off I am!

Decimate

to select by lot and kill every tenth person of.

to take a tenth of or from.

Like I said you're being a bit too optimistic. The only point you have is the one
on top of your head.

Vengence says: Mar 14, 2011. 11:14 PM REPLY

[pfred2: You must also excuse my difficulty reading white text on a white
background. ]
White on white? Not only can you not count, you don't know your colors.
It's white on orange. Is there something wrong with your computer too?
Way to use the obsolete definition of decimate. In fact, I'm sure the word
decimate has never been used in that context, only decimatus. The first
definition from dictionary.com
1. to destroy a great number or proportion of:
Also from wiktionary.org
http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/
 The Cambridge Guide to English Usage states that the nonspecific use of
this word to mean devastate or severely reduce the numbers of is
‘nowadays the commonest use of the word in both British and American
English, and it’s registered without comment in modern dictionaries.’ It
also advises against using numbers with the term, as ‘They are
redundant where it means “reduce by one tenth,” and where it doesn't
they confound the arithmetic.’The 23 occurrences of decimate in the
British National Corpus — compare decimates, decimated, and decimating
— almost all clearly accord with the nonspecific sense. The only
references to the historical sense are two complaints about modern
usage and its critics. Neither of these actually uses the term to mean
"reduce by one-tenth".
You're seriously never right. That must be frustrating to you.
Even in your definition, that was AFTER the battle was already won. He
would kill 10% more people as a lesson to the opponents; which I guess
still fits well with what I'm doing now.
Decimated yet again.

pfred2 says: Mar 15, 2011. 12:40 PM REPLY

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don't_be_a_dick

view all 78 comments

http://www.instructables.com/id/Tin-Can-Stirling-Engine/