428:
simplicity (no valve in piston). The disadvantages are that a heavier flywheel may be needed and that energy is lost through waste heat. 2) A vacuum condenser can remove spent steam from the cylinder. This can add efficiency at the expense of greater mechanical complexity. A vacuum condenser may not be appropriate for a small engine. 3) A valve in the piston allows the return stroke of the piston to pump used steam from the cylinder. This eliminates the need for a vacuum condenser but adds a precision moving part to a complicated piston design. The engine described uses 3) as the most economical approach.
271:
practice. It appears to have been designed by someone unskilled in steam engine design and thermodynamics and it makes many decisions from a basis of ignorance. Particularly it seems to operate as an engine with no expansion, using some incompressible fluid. It entirely ignores (as Stumpf had such a deep understanding of) the effects of expansion in the steam and the conversion of heat energy into pressure energy.
412:
The inlet valve (not the piston valve) is a "sprung bash valve". The benefit of this is that large solenoid current is not required to open the inlet valve against high pressure steam. The mechanical energy needed to bash open the inlet valve (force X travel) is only about 0.03% of engine power. This
400:
and demonstrated it at Simon Fraser
University. In the current effort, he has recreated the uniflow steam engine, the development of which was stopped by the advent of steam turbines and diesel engines. Gelbart is not in business and his efforts are not product prototypes. The motivation for the work
427:
There are three methods of handling spent steam in a uniflow engine. 1) The engine can adiabatically recompress spent steam at TDC to convert mechanical energy (stored in the flywheel) back into heat, some of which is lost though the insulation around the cylinder head. The advantage is mechanical
373:
in wikipedia; you can put virtually anything in a patent, and the patent office will rubber stamp it. They're not reliable; there's no editorial or refereeing in patents, the patent office just check nobody has patented it before. They can only be sources to prove what was patented, and when. They
344:
engine. If this was decent quality OR, this would be published as someone's MSc thesis or whatever and this article could then at least reference that. As it is, we've a dubious invention supported by nothing else other than this article. That's textbook OR and just exactly what we're not here to
270:
I'm seeing no independent sources for the engine described above. I'm seeing almost nothing (outside this article) that meet the standard of well-presented OR by the team itself, such as would be in a technical paper. Overall I find this engine simplistic and far from an improvement over previous
401:
is to preserve important historical technologies that have otherwise been forgotten. The nature of this work on forgotten technologies means there are few references to be cited. The
Knowledge article is an attempt to document forgotten historical knowledge before it is lost again.
469:. As it seems to go nowhere in meeting them, then deletion will happen. I'm not calling for it, I doubt that the names on this page known for their interest in steam engines will be keen to remove it either, but as soon as one of the teenagers sees it, it'll be gone.
395:
The uniflow engine primarily the work of Dan
Gelbart, a well known retired engineer who specializes in ressurecting obsolete and forgotten technologies. He has worked to restore Galileo's optical instruments in Italy. He reburbished (rebuilt) the very first
204:
So far as I can tell the article is a spam-like advertisement for a patent. The work described is OR and there are no reliable sources other than the original patents, which are not reliable sources for notability, and so the article does not show
442:
Editor Andy
Dingley says: "Particularly it seems to operate as an engine with no expansion, using some incompressible fluid." This is a misunderstanding. The engine operates on expanding steam. No incompressible fluid is used.
173:
406:
The electromechanically-actuated inlet valve is logical progression for steam engine control, previously patented. Note that an electromechanically-actuated inlet valve does not require complicated valve gear (cam shafts,
437:
piston is an economical choice to avoid steam leaks and cylinder wear. The Invar alloy is not intrinsically expensive; only low demand makes the price high. An Invar piston can be cast and machined, just like an aluminum
261:
It abandons the recompression of exhaust steam when approaching TDC. This is an advantage of the Stumpf uniflow engine. The authors here appear not to appreciate the thermodynamics of either engine.
167:
126:
322:
as it appears to be reporting on a US patent, as indicated by the talk-space item on the main page. It certainly needs tagging for improvement, but not in my view deletion.
285:
99:
94:
103:
300:
86:
133:
238:
Are there any references here, especially independent ones, that discuss the AUSE engine in particular, as opposed to being about uniflow engines in general?
274:
I'm in no rush to be a deletionist, but if this appeared at AfD, I'd have no basis for arguing to keep it. Andy
Dingley (talk) 11:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
484:
The question of whether it works or not is interesting, but simply irrelevant to WP. This isn't an academic journal, it doesn't care. You can describe a
258:
It doesn't use a condenser on the exhaust, because it doesn't need one. (I don't believe the authors understand why this isn't an advantage)
188:
155:
478:
266:
Although it's not a key part of the design, the piston is made of Invar. At this point I stop believing its technical credibility.
545:
531:
508:
455:
383:
354:
331:
307:
292:
218:
149:
68:
17:
145:
374:
don't show anything about notability; for that we need something in books and refereed papers, there's none of that here.
90:
195:
82:
74:
564:
245:
It is a novel engine. It is a new invention by one particular team. If it isn't, then it belongs in the existing
40:
461:
This wiki article will inevitably be deleted because it fails the basic tests of a wiki article – in particular
527:
327:
161:
504:
350:
255:
It has a void within the piston, controlled by a sprung bash valve. (I don't believe the benefit of this)
560:
379:
304:
289:
214:
36:
451:
447:
246:
523:
181:
418:
The uniflow engine actually does use a condenser on the exhaust. However, the condenser is not a
323:
499:
As to the engine details, then I remain unconvinced, but that's too much detail for the moment.
500:
485:
366:
346:
206:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
559:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
375:
210:
542:
59:
519:
391:
Note from author: Below are responses to the above comments on this uniflow engine.
53:
474:
466:
319:
120:
493:
470:
462:
52:. Consensus and strength of argument indicate that this invention doesn't meet
397:
522:. Requires multiple reliable independent sources that discuss the topic. --
541:- Patents and self-published sources do not establish notability. ~
241:
So far I'm seeing a novel engine put forward as a notable subject:
434:
553:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
481:, as something to work on with a view to obtaining such sources.
252:
It uses a single electromechanically-actuated inlet valve.
477:. I would suggest saving a draft of this in userspace at
116:
112:
108:
180:
490:
provided that some other source has also discussed it
446:
I hope the editors will not delete this article. --
422:
condenser, which is more expensive and complicated.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
567:). No further edits should be made to this page.
340:Where's the patent? I can't see one related to
286:list of Technology-related deletion discussions
479:User:Guy Immega/Advanced Uniflow Steam Engine
194:
8:
318:-- This may be a bad article, but it is not
301:list of History-related deletion discussions
299:Note: This debate has been included in the
284:Note: This debate has been included in the
231:My past talk comments, and similar concerns:
298:
283:
223:
369:. Patents are not reliable sources for
226:
413:is much less that standard valve gear.
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
546:23:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
532:04:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
509:11:54, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
492:, water-fuelled snake oil is
456:23:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
384:23:18, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
355:21:55, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
332:21:35, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
308:15:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
293:15:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
219:13:47, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
83:Advanced Uniflow Steam Engine
75:Advanced Uniflow Steam Engine
69:18:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
584:
556:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
247:uniflow steam engine
48:The result was
486:water-fuelled car
310:
295:
279:
278:
67:
575:
558:
305:Northamerica1000
290:Northamerica1000
224:
199:
198:
184:
136:
124:
106:
66:
64:
57:
34:
583:
582:
578:
577:
576:
574:
573:
572:
571:
565:deletion review
554:
280:
232:
141:
132:
97:
81:
78:
60:
58:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
581:
579:
570:
569:
549:
548:
535:
534:
524:Green Cardamom
512:
511:
497:
496:per WP policy.
482:
440:
439:
430:
429:
424:
423:
415:
414:
409:
408:
403:
402:
389:
388:
387:
386:
360:
359:
358:
357:
335:
334:
312:
311:
296:
277:
276:
268:
267:
263:
262:
259:
256:
253:
250:
234:
233:
227:
222:
209:of the topic.
202:
201:
138:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
580:
568:
566:
562:
557:
551:
550:
547:
544:
540:
537:
536:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
514:
513:
510:
506:
502:
498:
495:
491:
487:
483:
480:
476:
472:
468:
464:
460:
459:
458:
457:
453:
449:
444:
436:
432:
431:
426:
425:
421:
417:
416:
411:
410:
405:
404:
399:
394:
393:
392:
385:
381:
377:
372:
368:
364:
363:
362:
361:
356:
352:
348:
343:
339:
338:
337:
336:
333:
329:
325:
324:Peterkingiron
321:
317:
314:
313:
309:
306:
302:
297:
294:
291:
287:
282:
281:
275:
272:
265:
264:
260:
257:
254:
251:
248:
244:
243:
242:
239:
236:
235:
230:
225:
221:
220:
216:
212:
208:
197:
193:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
147:
144:
143:Find sources:
139:
135:
131:
128:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
76:
73:
71:
70:
65:
63:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
555:
552:
538:
515:
501:Andy Dingley
489:
445:
441:
419:
390:
370:
347:Andy Dingley
341:
315:
273:
269:
240:
237:
228:
203:
191:
185:
177:
170:
164:
158:
152:
142:
129:
61:
49:
47:
31:
28:
376:GliderMaven
211:GliderMaven
168:free images
494:WP:Notable
488:here and,
448:Guy Immega
398:ruby laser
371:notability
367:WP:PATENTS
207:notability
62:Sandstein
561:talk page
316:Weak keep
37:talk page
563:or in a
365:No, see
249:article.
127:View log
39:or in a
438:piston.
229:Comment
174:WP refs
162:scholar
100:protect
95:history
539:Delete
520:WP:GNG
518:fails
516:Delete
420:vacuum
146:Google
104:delete
54:WP:GNG
50:delete
475:WP:RS
467:WP:RS
435:Invar
407:etc).
320:WP:OR
189:JSTOR
150:books
134:Stats
121:views
113:watch
109:links
16:<
543:KvnG
528:talk
505:talk
473:and
471:WP:N
465:and
463:WP:N
452:talk
380:talk
351:talk
345:do.
342:this
328:talk
215:talk
182:FENS
156:news
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
433:An
196:TWL
125:– (
530:)
507:)
454:)
382:)
353:)
330:)
303:.
288:.
217:)
176:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
56:.
526:(
503:(
450:(
378:(
349:(
326:(
213:(
200:)
192:·
186:·
178:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
153:·
148:(
140:(
137:)
130:·
123:)
85:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.