analysis of the gpu-3

stirling engine
based on the review paper by timoumi
et al,
design and performance optimization
of gpu-3 stirling engines
energy 33 (2008), page 1100
and the book by dr. israel urieli,
stirling cycle machine analysis
dave kopp eee @ nd 2008
(stirling cycle machine analysis)
these 25kW electric solar stirling engines have
been measured at >30% system efficiency
the modular design allows slow, steady
construction

(partnership, sandia national lab and stirling power systems)
motivation
motivation
the ideal stirling engine can provide
maximum thermal efficiency from a given
temperature difference
j
MAX
=
T
H
T
L
T
H
withT
L
=300K
T
H
=500Kj
MAX
=40%
T
H
=1000Kj
MAX
=70%
http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~urieli/stirling/isothermal/Schm_summary.html
in a nutshell
energy density: stirling engines operate independent of their heat source,
and may be driven by a variety of sources, including solar concentrating
(~1kW/m^2), coal (30MJ/kg), etc.
efficiency: 30% is currently achievable at 25kW; much higher efficiencies
are predicted in maturing technology or large temperature differences
~ the (theoretical) efficiency of the gpu-3 has been significantly improved in
the model discussed in this paper ~
comparison for solar heat power generation:
stirling engines currently operate at around the 31% theoretically possible
efficiency for a silicon solar cell [http://www.sandia.gov/news/resources/releases/2008/solargrid.html]
stirling engines are planned to replace thermoelectrics by nasa in space
applications to cut fuel by a factor of four [http://books.google.com/books?
id=V84ZHMmdNmYC&pg=PA509&lpg=PA509&dq=stirling+rtg+nasa&source=web&ots=9ZrTpAXW-
Z&sig=SRqq-6XWeSHdgpEVBE8QRDqfAE4&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result]
how it works: see next slide
(1) heat air, causing gas to
expand and push on the
piston/flywheel ... doing
more work by pressure
than consumed in step (3).
(2) transfer hot gas
through regenerator to
cold space. heat is
transferred to the
regenerator, precooling
the gas. gas pressure
drops.
(3) piston/flywheel
compresses cooling gas,
consuming less work
against pressure than
produced in step (1).
(4) transfer cold gas
through regenerator
to hot space. heat
is transferred from
the regenerator,
preheating the gas.
gas pressure rises.
stirling cycle
(note: the regenerator is not drawn)
http://www.physics.sfasu.edu/astro/courses/egr112/StirlingEngine/StrilingEngineSpring2004.mpg
IDEAL CYCLE
e: expansion space, heated
c: compression space, cooled
heat in=

pdV
e
=

Q
e

heat out=

pdV
c
=

Q
c

work out=

p dV
e
+

p dV
c
=

Q
e

Q
c

efficiency=

p dV
e
+

pdV
c

pdV
e
rough estimate for current engines:
power=0.15p
avg
V
swept
f
displacer
piston
(wikipedia:stirling engines)
a rhombic drive forces the
desired volume variations
Ve = expansion space volume
Vc= compression space volume
(stirling cycle machine analysis)
(stirling cycle machine analysis)
model inputs
more model inputs
parameter value
Thot (K) 288
Tcold (K) 977
f (Hz) 41.72
mean p (MPa) 4.13
gas helium
typical
energy
flow
diagram
(stirling cycle
machine analysis)
energy losses in model
(typ % of heat input)
1.viscous drag in heat exchangers
2.internal conduction from hot to cold (3%-12%)
3.regenerator inefficiency (5%-9%)
4.heat absorbed by displacer in hot area is transported to a cold
region, causing convection (shuttle loss) (2%-6%)
5.irreversible work done to compress gas (0.8%-5%)
1.at high heat transfer coefficients, gas enthalpy transfer past
the displacer becomes more important than shuttle loss
2.seal leakage can be substantial in the hot areas because good
seals can be difficult to make at very high temperatures.
not analyzed:
cutting losses in gpu-3 model ...
theory:
efficiency increased
from 39% to 51%!
power rose by 20%!
decreasing thermal conductivity of regenerator matrix reduces conduction losses
increasing regenerator heat capacity increases regenerator effectiveness
decreasing regenerator porosity to about 65% reduces external conduction losses and
improves energy exchange in the regenerator, although continued reduction stops working entirely
increasing the regenerator temperature gradient increases desirable heat exchange E
between regenerator and gas faster than it increases loss
optimizing working gas mass. maximum efficiency requires less total working gas mass
than does maximum power (in this engine, 0.8g give 40% efficiency; power increases with mass)
paper recommendations: how to improve the GPU-3
efficiency increased from 39% to 51%!
power rose by 20%!
item model optim
regenerator porosity 65.50%
regenerator length (cm) 2.1
regenerator diameter (m) 2.4
working gas mass (g) 1.15
exchanger piston conductivity W/(m K) 1.2
exchanger piston area (sq cm) 38.6
exchanger piston stroke (cm) 4.7
loss 1. drag in heat exhangers
cause of drag:
back pressure in exchanger due to friction in narrow tubes.

Q=(A p)

V
cause of back pressure:
gas adhering to, or vibrating against, the tube wall area
wall shear stress
1/ 2jv
2
= f
fanning
( wall shear stress)( wall area)
(pressure dropA p)(cross sectional area)
=1
moody diagram for friction factor f
A p= f (1/ 2jv
2
)
(
A
wall
A
cross section
)
Re=jv d / j
j=viscosity
(
m
m

p
i
p
e

r
o
u
g
h
n
e
s
s
)
/
(
m
m

p
i
p
e

h
y
d

d
i
a
m
e
t
e
r
)

Q=(A p)

V
lost power
(http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/moody-diagram-d_618.html)
loss 2. conduction losses

Q=
AT
R
th
thermal resistance R
th
=
L
k A
cause of loss:
metal surfaces, with high thermal conductivity k, allow rapid transport of heat
(1) heat air, causing gas to
expand and push on the
piston/flywheel ... doing
more work by pressure
than consumed in step (3).
(2) transfer hot gas
through regenerator to
cold space. heat is
transferred to the
regenerator, precooling
the gas.
gas pressure drops.
(3) piston/flywheel
compresses cooling gas,
consuming less work
against pressure than
produced in step (1).
(4) transfer cold gas
through regenerator
to hot space. heat
is transferred from
the regenerator,
preheating the gas.
gas pressure rises.
3. regenerator function
loss 3. regenerator performance
(

Q)
loss
(

Q)
into regenerator
=(1E)
design for high effectiveness E
E=1 if:
(1) the excess heat of the hot gas that does not do useful work transfers to the regenerator, and
(2) no excess heat is lost in the cooling load, and
(3) all of the excess heat is transferred back to the gas as it moves through the regenerator to the heater.
E=0 if:
(1) all excess heat transferred from the regenerator is lost, or
(2) no excess heat is transferred to the regenerator, or
(3) there is no regenerator
E
(
1+
h A
wall
AT
c
p

mAT
)
1
h, the effective
total heat transfer
coefficient, is
complicated.
4. shuttle loss
cause: displacer picks up heat and
transports it to a cold region, wasting some
upon mixing
phenomenological model:

Q
loss
=0.4 k
pist
AT
d
disp
s
dist
2
g
ring
L
disp
thermal conductivity of piston
annular gap between
displacer and cylinder
displacer length
displacer stroke
displacer diameter
expansion space
temp compression
space temp
5. gas hysteresis loss
cause: a real gas, when compressed or
expanded, dissipates a small amount of
work
derivation: begin with jc
p
T
t
=k

2
T
y
2
+
p
t
, and substitute
p=j RT and =c
p
/ c
v
. assume sinusoidal volume variations
V=V
mean
+AV sin(ot ). The heat loss over the cycle is

Q=
1
2n

kA
|
T
y

wall
dt which is linearized and
simplifed to give the result.

W
loss
=
.
1
32
o
3
(1) p
mean
T
wall
k
th
(
AV
V
mean
)
2
A
wall
cp/cv
model
ideal gas T=PV / Rm
linear temperature change in regenerators slope=AT / Length
heat transfer by convection

Q=hAAT
regenerators have calculable effectiveness E
mass moves a power

Q=

mc
p
T
the total gas mass is fixed
heat Q from the source either becomes work W, moves to the cold sink, or escapes
work per cycle = (heat in - loss to sink - loss to exterior)
power is work times frequency
efficiency is work output over heat input
decreasing thermal conductivity of regenerator matrix reduces conduction losses
increasing regenerator heat capacity increases regenerator effectiveness
decreasing regenerator porosity to about 65% reduces external conduction losses and
improves energy exchange in the regenerator, although continued reduction stops working entirely
increasing the regenerator temperature gradient increases desirable heat exchange E
between regenerator and gas faster than it increases loss
optimizing working gas mass. maximum efficiency requires less total working gas mass
than does maximum power (in this engine, 0.8g give 40% efficiency; power increases with mass)
paper recommendations: how to improve the GPU-3
efficiency increased from 39% to 51%!
power rose by 20%!
item model optim
regenerator porosity 65.50%
regenerator length (cm) 2.1
regenerator diameter (m) 2.4
working gas mass (g) 1.15
exchanger piston conductivity W/(m K) 1.2
exchanger piston area (sq cm) 38.6
exchanger piston stroke (cm) 4.7
model outputs: efficiency of the
gpu-3
efficiency calculations
experimental 0.35
0.38
0.53
timoumi model
urielli model
my model (based on urieli http://www.ent.ohiou.edu/~urieli/)
available at my website
http://nd.edu/~dkopp/main/clean/stirling/stirlingMatlab.zip
solar engines:
(1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUrB7KRvxUk
(2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tugshxuh-f0
more videos