Would a earlier Stirling Engine be possible and economic viable?

The Stirling engine is a low pressure steam engine, would it be possible to create it early and would it be economic viable? I was wondering whether it was possible to create it in the 16-17th century, maybe using copper.
 
You could make it, but the lack of cheap coal, decenteralized nature of production, and the fact the infastructure (legal and physical) to trigger a market revolution would make the milk not worth the price of the cow.
 

Md139115

Banned
First, the Stirling engine is not a steam engine. It doesn’t boil water or use water vapor at all. It is an air engine, in that it works off the heating and cooling of air and the corresponding change in pressure or volume (depending on variant) that causes.

Second, Stirling engines, if properly designed, are usually more efficient than steam engines, that is they burn less fuel to do the same amount of work. This was especially true in the early days of both technologies, due to the rather astounding luck of the Rev. Robert Stirling in basing his designs on a closed cycle system that subsequent thermodynamic equations have confirmed as being probably as close to Carnot’s ideal heat engine as possible. This meant that his 1818 (or it could be 1827, I’ll have to check my notes) designs we’re achieving a 35-40% efficiency (that is, that percentage of the energy produced by the coal combustion was being successfully turned into useful work instead of waste heat) compared to the 3-6% of contemporary steam engines.

Third, Stirling engines have scaling issues. Stirling’s constant volume engines are constrained by an issue (I think it’s the heat exchanger, but don’t quote me on that) wherein the effectiveness decreases with size increases. The constant pressure engines that John Ericsson developed (yes, he of Monitor fame) got around this issue, but their power is constrained to their physical size; that is, making a more powerful engine requires linearly scaling up the size of the engine to match. Ericsson built an engine to power a paddle-wheel ship (modestly named Ericsson) in 1855. The pistons had a diameter of 14 feet, making them probably the largest pistons ever cast, yet the ship was still underpowered and probably would have required an even bigger engine had it not been sunk, raised, and outfitted with conventional steam engines that could deliver the required power without taking up all the space. This makes it unsuitable for heavy industry, however it is ideal for light cottage industry, where it is in fact used in many parts of the developing world today.

Fourth, everything above is good for the prompt, this isn’t. You really cannot develop a Stirling engine without tight manufacturing tolerances, ones that are non-existent prior to the 19th century. It works solely on tiny little voids between two surfaces and temperature changes are usually enough to make the metal expand and shrink a bit. Unless the designer and manufacturers know what they’re doing, it’s very easy to build an engine that seizes up or even tears itself apart.

So, economically viable, probably yes. Possible without earlier precision instruments? Not really, no.
 
Given that an Aeolipile engine was devised in ancient Greece, I think that it would be possible, but would have the same result. A simple novelty for the rich and eccentric rather than being used to full effect. Given the resources required for production, running and maintenance, and the relative lack at this time, it might only speed up industrialisation marginally.
 
Thanks people, I found the answers interesting, through I must admit I didn't like them. Through @Md139115 I have a question, what do mean with precision instruments?
 

Md139115

Banned
Thanks people, I found the answers interesting, through I must admit I didn't like them. Through @Md139115 I have a question, what do mean with precision instruments?

I mean that you need a reference for a perfectly flat surface. You need measuring tools accurate to less than a millimeter. You need precise calculations of how much the metal in question is going to expand and contract under temperature changes. You need a pressure gauge, and that is only possible to make with understanding of what a vacuum is (and they were not believed to exist until 1643), and a system of reference for measuring pressure. There is also the issue that the first truly practical instruments for measuring pressure involve the careful suspension of a large quantity of mercury which, obviously, is very dangerous to work with. Same issue with the thermometer that you need (although here you catch a break, the principles of one were known to the Ancients and Galileo built some very refined ones by the 1590’s, all you need is a temperature scale now since neither Fahrenheit or Celsius exist until the 18th Century). You need a way to cast or file something to a precise thickness (or otherwise a whole bunch of master craftsmen, and I mean leaders of guilds masters, who can patiently refine it to what is needed). And there’s probably more that I’m forgetting.

There is also the issue that you pretty much need the sum total of Enlightenment research into the natural sciences to even explain this thing or improve it. You need the ideal gas laws, the concept of latent and sensible heat (well, more the latter), potential and kinetic energy, and several other equations related to the properties of fluids.


It’s tough. There’s a reason why we call a period the Industrial Revolution. Prior to that period, there just was not enough scientific understanding and technological advancement to produce the engines of industry. Then, suddenly, a critical mass was achieved to make a few early devices possible, that sparked further research, and more groundwork was done, and then things just took off from there - a self-sustaining virtuous cycle of science backing technology and technology encouraging science that continues to the present.
 

Md139115

Banned
Also you need a standard reference measurement implemented across the entire industry. So that the jigs and tools used to make these engines are the same and not unique to each specific Craftsman.

Absolutely, standardized weights and measures are critical.
 
Make a tray of reflective material, with a cross section of a parabola. Run a copper tube through it, and cover the tray with a fresnel lens. This would be stationary, and well suited to sunny areas. That's pretty complicated work to get to good production quality, and might need a bigger state to accomplish. And you are going to kill some folks with steam accidents.

So what do you want the steam engine for? It's probably useful for mechanical power in areas with few rivers. Well, if you get good at drawing copper into wire, and get some ideas about magnetism you can have electrical current.

Maybe Isabella and Alfonso have a long and fruitful marriage, Iberia is united, and stays out of the Hapsburg's continental escapades. With no mental trauma, Isabella doesn't blame her problems on God's displeasure at the Sephardim, Portugal's culture spreads to Spain and religious minority persecution abates. Her sister Joanna liked Protestants apparently, maybe Alfonso and Isabella welcome protestant craftsmen fleeing northern strife. If Iberia's economy develops, maybe it implements a kinder gentler administration of New Spain, with criollo settler colonization occurring in the NE of modern day Mexico, and Texas.
 
(although here you catch a break, the principles of one were known to the Ancients and Galileo built some very refined ones by the 1590’s, all you need is a temperature scale now since neither Fahrenheit or Celsius exist until the 18th Century).
I'm guessing fractions of hot and damn hot won't work?
:p
 

Md139115

Banned
I'm guessing fractions of hot and damn hot won't work?
:p

:coldsweat:

Nope. Although I would love to see Charles’s Law try to be formulated in such a world.

“We can thus demonstrate that as temperature increases, the volume increases in linear relation, such that when quality X of gas at pleasantly warm is heated to holy **** that’s HOT, the volume occupied by the gas has increased by 600%.”
 
Honestly if it could be build and with copper, I would say Sweden (and Norway to lesser degree) would be a natural place for it to come in widespread use. It have a large forest which could be used for fuel and large deposits of coppers.
 

Md139115

Banned
Honestly if it could be build and with copper, I would say Sweden (and Norway to lesser degree) would be a natural place for it to come in widespread use. It have a large forest which could be used for fuel and large deposits of coppers.

Well Ericsson’s first model was designed and built in Sweden and used resinous pine shavings as a fuel, so it would be reasonable.

Unfortunately for Ericsson, he took it to Britain, couldn’t find pine shavings, substituted coal, and his device all but melted in front of the scientists he was demonstrating it to.
 
Well Ericsson’s first model was designed and built in Sweden and used resinous pine shavings as a fuel, so it would be reasonable.

Unfortunately for Ericsson, he took it to Britain, couldn’t find pine shavings, substituted coal, and his device all but melted in front of the scientists he was demonstrating it to.

If we could see the earlier creation of precision instrument (could we see people like Tycho Brahe or Ole Roemer develop it?) maybe we could see some experiments. The main problem is use, the Swedes and Norwegians have plenty of firewood, but they also have access to cheap water power. Denmark on the other hand lack both. As such for the Swedes or Norwegians to begin using such a engine, it pretty much have to go directly to mobile devices (likely boats), which the motor will likely lack power to be used on.
 
Top