[Gasification] Fw: Underwater gasification?

[Rolf Uhle]

But it must have a big volume of pressureproof vessel inside the hull.
And if I calculate it right, the Humphrey pump delivers some 260
net kW. No idea how high it's efficiency is, shure not 100 %!
Neither how efficient a jet propulsion like this could be.
 But even 260 kW are not much for a big ship with a huge vessel inside.
ICE's compress the air much more and have a higher energy density.
Sometimes beauty and virtue don't go the same way !

Rolf

Am Donnerstag, 26. Mai 2011 17:13:30 schrieb Henri Naths:
> ps
>  I think the beauty of the a Humphrey-inspired water jet is that it would
>  have relatively no moving parts so it's weight to  power ratio of

>  efficiency is better than that of other engines overcoming the friction
>  losses of a conventional water jet engine (as per water ski) H.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Henri Naths
> To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
> Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 8:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gasification] Underwater gasification?
> 
> 
> Hi Daniel,and list
> <  I don't think it would be an efficient means of low speed marine
>  propulsion though; it would suffer from low propulsive efficiency because
>  the jet velocity would be too high.> Have you considered the propulsion
>  end of a jet ski or a Jet Boat in your analysis . True the efficiency is
>  slightly lower than a straight prop boat but it is expelling a relatively
>  small stream of water at a high velocity. I hear what you are saying about
>  the jet engines  but as I previously pointed out in a post , water has 700
>  times the density than that of  air so you have to factor that in the
>  formula. Thanks
> Henri
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Daniel Chisholm
>   To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
>   Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 5:51 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Gasification] Underwater gasification?
> 
> 
>   A Humphrey-inspired water jet is an interesting idea.
> 
> 
>   FWIW I don't think it would be an efficient means of low speed marine
>  propulsion though; it would suffer from low propulsive efficiency because
>  the jet velocity would be too high.  The efficiency of a reaction engine
>  (which is something that generates thrust by accelerating and expelling
>  mass - a very broad category that includes not just jet and rocket engines
>  but also propellers on aircraft and ships) depends on the speed at which
>  the mass is expelled.  Accelerating a small mass to a large speed, is not
>  as efficient as accelerating a larger mass to a lesser speed.  If you look
>  at aircraft jet engines today (high bypass ratio turbofans) you will
>  notice that they are much larger in diameter than the jet engines of the
>  1950s (turbojets) - this is why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> 
> 
>   _______________________________________________
>   Gasification mailing list
> 
>   to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>   Gasification at bioenergylists.org
> 
>   to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>  
>  http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioene
> rgylists.org
> 
>   for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:
>   http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
> 
> 
> 
>   __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>  signature database 6155 (20110526) __________
> 
>   The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
>   http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>  signature database 6155 (20110526) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
>