Condensation-Induced Water Hammer

[Vortex]

Research shows Condensation-Induced Water Hammer (CIWH)
can produce 1000+ psi events with low pressure steam.

An example of CIWH creates 30 HP (22 kilowatts) from a device less
than 8" long by 3" in diameter with no moving parts. It mixes steam,
air and water to create this power. This device ran on 4 bar (58.8 psi)
steam, but the research might indicate any psi steam will create this effect.
See image, rough dimensions listed below.

What are the break even parameters in this energy equation using
the simplest water turbine at 60% system efficiency?

If steam at any pressure can move water at 100, 200, ? psi
could one extract more energy out than put in?
Create a device with a 1" inlet and a 3/8" outlet.

Additonal ref. see near the bottom of the web page
Condensation Induced Waterhammer vs.
Conventional "Steam Flow" Driven Waterhammer

The device has roughly: 2.35" water inlet, 1.4" steam inlet,
1.07" inner diameter water restriction where the
air is mixed and 0.93" water outlet. I have more diamen

I tried to crunch the numbers myself but I kept getting tripped up.
Randy

[Peter Lindemann]

Awesome...

Randy,

Thanks for starting this thread. I had never heard of this phenomena before. It seems quite powerful.

Peter

[byjoveoldchap]

10 to 100 times more powerful

Research shows Condensation-Induced Water Hammer (CIWH)
can produce 1000+ psi events with low pressure steam.

I tried to crunch the numbers myself but I kept getting tripped up.
Randy

Wow! - Never heard of this Vortex, I think you may have found a really interesting and powerful potential for doing work, if it can be reproduced easily.

"High pressure steam in contact with subcooled condensate is dangerous. It's a recipe for Condensation Induced Waterhammer. The sidebar (See sidebar near bottom page) explains why this type event is 10 to 100 times more powerful that conventional "steam flow" driven waterhammer."

As this steam/water-hammer effect is interesting you Vortex, You may also be interested in a simple gravity pump that will pump water uphill a truly substantial amount with no power other than gravity. It works on the normal cold water-hammer effect, but this is all so similar mechanically it could help you understand the operation easier?

Hydraulic Ram Pumps

A hydraulic ram (or water ram) pump is a simple, motorless device for pumping water at low flow rates. It uses the energy of flowing water to lift water from a stream, pond, or spring to an elevated storage tank or to a discharge point. It is suitable for use where small quantities of water are required and power supplies are limited, such as for household, garden, or livestock water supply. A hydraulic ram pump is useful where the water source flows constantly and the usable fall from the water source to the pump location is at least 3 feet.

link

[Vortex]

Hi, Peter
Thank you for reading my post.

Randy,
Thanks for starting this thread. I had never heard of this phenomena before. It seems quite powerful.
Peter

I thought a device like this has great potential to
allow water to be used to extract work from steam.

It's proven to produce lots of power.

There is very little info on it or it's just hard to track down.
Study has been concerned with "closed" pipe system.

I am thinking this device it would pair up with the Friction Steam system well.

My thoughts were to transfer unfriendly steam energy to the more friendly
to use water, for work extraction.

This could be a simple system,
a rectangular closed pvc tube with water turbine(s) or
even maybe an open circular tank.
Depending upon the output, even water wheels might work.

Easy duplication of a safe to use device is key.
Creation of a device is first.
How could one safely measure/guesstimate the water output
from a prototype device using only a straight 1" pvc pipe and 1/4" steam pipe to start with?

Steam Bad, Water Good
Randy

[Vortex]

Wow! - Never heard of this Vortex, I think you may have found a really interesting and powerful potential for doing work, if it can be reproduced easily.

Yes, I hope a device can be duplicated by all easily to create the "power" effect safely.

"High pressure steam in contact with subcooled condensate is dangerous. It's a recipe for Condensation Induced Waterhammer. The sidebar (See sidebar near bottom page) explains why this type event is 10 to 100 times more powerful that conventional "steam flow" driven waterhammer."

Trapping this effect in a closed pipe can be very dangerous. !!! Open pipes only.

It works on the normal cold water-hammer effect, but this is all so similar mechanically it could help you understand the operation easier?

Hydraulic Ram Pumps

The "hammering" is not wanted. Hammering means to strike something. Do not wish to hammer anything. It's the sudden condensation of the steam which sucks the water in to replace the vacuum created. This is the effect wanted, to move the water using the 1600:1 vacuum.(volume of steam to volume of water).

Yes, the ram pump is a neat way to move water.
The spiral pump and bubble pump (no moving parts!) are lower tech than a ram pump, less complex, but all require a moving source of water. Each pump has it's own pros and cons. One must remember there are "old" ways, before electric power, to move water.

Randy

[byjoveoldchap]

This is the effect wanted, to move the water using the 1600:1 vacuum

It's the sudden condensation of the steam which sucks the water in to replace the vacuum created. This is the effect wanted, to move the water using the 1600:1 vacuum.(volume of steam to volume of water).

Randy

Okay Randy, I've taken another look and understand better what you mean.
Two thoughts have come to mind over the past couple of hours.

I have always thought that a steam piston-powered engine could work better in reverse, i.e. injecting steam into cool/cold cylinder and then the condensing action would pull the piston up into a decreasing cylinder area, rather than having to push against the piston as the cylinder area increases. I know that the better steam engines used triple expansion cycles/cylinders which extracted more energy from the exhausted steam, but I cannot remember ever seeing one use the condensation of steam to work as I suggest. The problem would be keeping the cylinder cool enough to condense the steam effectively, but boy would that produce some HOT water for central heating purposes!

If the cylinder/s were upside down it could be immersed in a 'cooling tank' and using fins as per motorcycle engine would help dissipate the heat from cylinder and maximise hot water production. It would seem logical that a large bore, single cylinder engine would use low volume and low pressure steam, [as per the friction log idea], and be able to turn a substantial load on its shaft, such as a generator as per normal steam powered engines. The other interesting aspect of this is that no steam pressure as such, is reqd to force the piston to turn the crankshaft, the normal valve timing would suck the steam into the cylinder, as it does in a 4 stroke engine. ~ A kettle would suffice for small tests!

The unknown area to me is whether this condensing action would be enough to work continuosly and do useful work? But if only a fraction of that 1600:1 ratio can be used...?

~~~
The other thing that occured to me with regard to using condensing steam for power, is so simple its crazy. But I'm sure you won't find an easier way to do simple tests!

Do you remember the old pop-pop boats?

"The key is to have a very small passageway heated to boiling temperature, then introducing water into it. The water boils almost instantaneously ("flashes"), creating a lot of steam pressure in the small space. The expansion of the water into steam is then turned into mechanical motion -- by a cylinder in a machine such as a Stanley Steamer automobile, or by simple Newtonian action/reaction in the case of the pop-pop boat."

What is a "pop-pop" boat?

I hope these thoughts encourage others to experiment?
By Jove!

[Vortex]

jove,

The unknown area to me is whether this condensing action would be enough to work continuosly and do useful work? But if only a fraction of that 1600:1 ratio can be used...?

I understand the enough part.. it would not use any more steam than
that required for a steam engine to run.
With water there are only two factors: flow and head.
The pressure or water head should make up for lack of volume of water being moved. As any part of the steam begins to condense that increase the flow of much colder water around it creating vortexes which condenses it more. The steam would be a thin stream and should condense 100%.

The other thing that occured to me with regard to using condensing steam for power, is so simple its crazy.

What I like best is no moving parts, low tech.
Simple things are best, except simple things can be hard to make work sometimes. I don't believe this is going to be that hard.

But I'm sure you won't find an easier way to do simple tests!

Correct, only steam can provide the answers.

Get steam some how, without building full blown boiler,
make a prototype, test it.
Unknown is how to measure the output of the prototype.
Measurements would be nice to determine if one prototype
is better than another.

Using the water, not the steam, to extract the work, doubles efficiency.
That's the CRAZY part !!

efficiencies:
steam turbine, around 35%
steam engine, around 30%
undershot water wheel, up to 25%
overshot water wheel, up to 75%
center water wheel, up to 45%
water turbine up to 80+%

I'm thinking about how I'm going to create the steam.
It would be nice to be able to scale it up also.

Randy

[Peter Lindemann]

James Watt Steam Engine

Hi Guys,

Guess what? The very first "practical steam engine" designed by James Watt forced steam at atmospheric pressure into a chamber, closed the chamber and sprayed water into it. The rapid condensation sucked the power piston down, creating the power stroke of the engine. Here is one citation: History of the Steam Engine - James Watt and there are many others.

The idea of moving a fluid with the condensation stroke is the main efficiency improvement here. The piston and crank are terribly inefficient for transferring power.

I think these ideas have a lot of potential.

Peter

[byjoveoldchap]

James Watt ~ Improved Steam Engine

Hi Guys,

Guess what? The very first "practical steam engine" designed by James Watt forced steam at atmospheric pressure into a chamber, closed the chamber and sprayed water into it. The rapid condensation sucked the power piston down, creating the power stroke of the engine.

The idea of moving a fluid with the condensation stroke is the main efficiency improvement here. The piston and crank are terribly inefficient for transferring power.

Peter

James Watt thought... "If the steam was condensed in a separate vessel from the cylinder, it would be quite possible to keep the condensing vessel COOL and the cylinder HOT at the same time. The next morning Watt built a prototype and found that it worked. He added other improvements and built his now famous improved steam engine."

Well, how strange is that? Thanks Peter, you've enlightened me, thankyou!

So why did they choose to use boilers and very high pressure steam, when James Watt proved it worked at zero or atmospheric pressure?

Peter, I think one of the the real benefits of using steam-condensation with this idea is that the steam does not require forcing into the cylinder, it has nothing to push against and it could even be drawn in by the vacuum created as the piston travels down the cylinder? The work is provided by the steam condensing and isn't that very much like collecting the BEMF from the collapse of a coil?

Also the piston and crankshaft transmit the 'oscillations' of the engine to a heavy flywheel which smooths them out and stores this energy. It is the flywheel which enables a petrol or diesel engine to work by using the stored energy to compress the gasses prior to ignition.

Peter and Vortex, please realise that I am not trying to tell you what you already know, but I am simply aware that others will read these posts and my explanations may help in their understanding of ideas that we share?

Vortex, I am not forgetting your initial idea and purpose of this post, but I am sure that these basic thoughts of an efficient design will lead us to where we can utilise the exhausted steam for the purpose you suggested. Just imagine if we can add your additional power system to a simple design that is very efficient.

One final note:

I haven't thought this out in detail, but a normal 4-stroke engine works like this
- INDUCTION - COMPRESSION - IGNITION - EXHAUST -

To work in this application we would ONLY want
- INDUCTION - CONDENSATION - INDUCTION - CONDENSATION -

this means it would have TWICE as many power strokes per cycle...!

By Jove!

[byjoveoldchap]

How To Get Steam, WITHOUT Building a Full-Blown Boiler

Get steam some how, without building full blown boiler, make a prototype, test it.

I'm thinking about how I'm going to create the steam.

Randy

Hi Randy,

The easiest way I can imagine is to use a steam powered wallpaper-stripper!

These will generate more than enough steam for trials. I don't think you will need much pressure to test the theory out. Some types use a car radiator pressure cap as a combined filler and pressure release valve, so you can change the pressure cap if reqd..

Plastic pipe would be the easiest material to build a test device. Using a 'swept tee', (see picture below) would be a good way to start construction. I have no idea where you live, but in the UK we use 32mm and 40mm for sink and bath water waste pipework. It is very cheap, easy to cut and work with and the solvent type allows strong bonding to assorted fittings using a solvent-type adhesive which virtually welds the fittings together. There is also 15mm and other sizes up to 120mm and beyond.

Only ONE major problem to be aware of - It is NOT designed for steam temperatures!

However, if you use copper pipe to deliver the steam into the mixing chamber, I think it may work.

I am sure I could assemble the copper pipework as reqd.

If this fits in with your ideas, let me know and I will locate the parts and build a few to test out along with any suggestions/designs you wish to try out.

jove,

What I like best is no moving parts, low tech.

Simple things are best, except simple things can be hard to make work sometimes. I don't believe this is going to be that hard.

Randy

Well Randy, I can't think of anything simpler, can you?

By Jove!

[Vortex]

Jove,

The easiest way I can imagine is to use a steam powered wallpaper-stripper!
These will generate more than enough steam for trials. I don't think you will need much pressure to test the theory out. Some types use a car radiator pressure cap as a combined filler and pressure release valve, so you can change the pressure cap if reqd..

I wasn't wanting to rent something (rush testing) or buy used (limited use),
but it seems about the only way in the short run to get anything done.
Your idea is better anything I had looked at so far.
I'm still thinking I might be able to pull this off with just tubing, look at
image.
I don't care if some back pressure causes pulsing at this point in the testing.
A little as 1 psi, 2.31 feet (water head) in a couple of gallon container would
keep back steam being created in a 1/4" copper tubing I would think.
Path of least resistance would be up the tube not back into the container.
Heating would occur near water level of the container, but in the tubing.
That's a idea I've been pondering over and have not tested out yet.

Only ONE major problem to be aware of - It is NOT designed for steam temperatures!

No worries yet. The device is WATER COOLED... remember!
It's the implosion factor or vacuum that's of concern. But hey, it should be
kinda hard to get hurt by an implosion that happens underwater.


If you do any of these tests,
this is, if not now might be later, very dangerous!.
Could/can/should cause extreme psi.

However, if you use copper pipe to deliver the steam into the mixing chamber, I think it may work.
I am sure I could assemble the copper pipework as reqd.
If this fits in with your ideas, let me know and I will locate the parts and build a few to test out along with any suggestions/designs you wish to try out.

We want this to be done safely, but to what extent or extreme is unknown.
Curious if injecting steam into water without any device would you see
steam Bubbles?? With pure steam, I think you shouldn't ..
Ah, but if there be air mixed within the steam you would see bubbles.

We need to Baby step these tests, they should go pretty quick.
Sizes of tubing depends upon the pressure and volume of the steam


Too big is best at first. For oh, big time guessing here, 10 psi and less,
1/4" copper tube centered in a 1" pipe could be
too small / restricted for an initial test.
Bigger is always better until it becomes known what is to be expected.
Any kind of tube for the outer tube would work at first, it might even
collapse and that would be cool. The outlet of the copper tubing
should be at back from the outlet end about 1/2"..

Oh Oh. I have an image with measurements...

The initial test should just use a straight piece of pvc pipe. .. If air is
being sucked into the inlet, bend it downward into the water. If any volume
is being moved, Then flare out the inlet using a paint stripper or stove and needle nose pliers.

Insulating the inlet steam tubing wouldn't hurt with just about anything
to keep the cold water off the tubing.

That's what I've been thinking about
Randy

[byjoveoldchap]

The Steam-Powered Rocket Project...!!!

Jove,

I'm still thinking I might be able to pull this off with just tubing, look at
image.

That's a idea I've been pondering over and have not tested out yet.

Curious if injecting steam into water without any device would you see
steam Bubbles?? With pure steam, I think you shouldn't ..
Ah, but if there be air mixed within the steam you would see bubbles.

We need to Baby step these tests, they should go pretty quick.
Sizes of tubing depends upon the pressure and volume of the steam

The outlet of the copper tubing
should be at back from the outlet end about 1/2"..

Oh Oh. I have an image with measurements...

The initial test should just use a straight piece of pvc pipe.
Insulating the inlet steam tubing wouldn't hurt with just about anything
to keep the cold water off the tubing.

That's what I've been thinking about
Randy

Okay Randy, you seem to have a greater understanding of the operation principles and a good engineering background? I'm trying to suggest we focus in our individual areas with this and combine the efforts.

I have some plumbing/heating/gas experience plus metalwork, fabrication etc.. Model making was a great hobby of mine and I still enjoy challenges. Steam has always fascinated me so this project really interests me.

I have enough plastic and copper pipework, fittings and spares to build something quickly, all I need is a better understanding of the specific effects caused by the device you have highlighted so I can understand the mechanics precisely.

I also have a couple of steam wallpaper strippers that I have saved for experimenting with steam heating ideas that I have. Another option which you may have, or can locate easier is a steam pressure cooker. Either way, they are not hard to build.

I am thinking about some really simple ways to test this out and observe the action clearly. As you say, rubber tubing will do just to get a taste of what happens and go from there.

I don't want to replicate exactly the design as per diagram, but use my own mind to determine a simple way to get the effect and utilise it.

~~~
Now, do you have any further suggestions before I launch the first Steam-Powered Rocket into orbit?

You think I'm joking?

Take a look at this... Steam-Powered Balloons and Steam Airships

The guy behind this is amazing and a bit crazy, but what a challenge!
The Flying Kettle Project.


By Jove!

[Vortex]

Okay Randy, you seem to have a greater understanding of the operation principles and a good engineering background? I'm trying to suggest we focus in our individual areas with this and combine the efforts.

Understanding ? it's more about water being sucked into a vacuum created by the condensing steam then about trying to create a Venturi effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Though the venturi effect plays a role when we start shaping and constricting the device beyond a straight tubing. A device should work, somewhat, with compressed air but with out the powerful 1:1600 leveraged vacuum of condensing steam, which is a wrinkle in fabric of knowing what will happen. One design that works better than another with air should be better with steam also .. but!?
Operation principles and a good engineering background? ah, zero engineering background .. The equations / numbers I'm not qualified to use.
I can only claim to have good problem solving qualifications and background.

Yes combine efforts is good .. I'm without a steam source yet.
I don't know if or when I'll be able to do any testing.

I have some plumbing/heating/gas experience plus metalwork, fabrication etc.. Model making was a great hobby of mine and I still enjoy challenges. Steam has always fascinated me so this project really interests me.

Steam is a nasty and scary thing. Respect must be given and caution taken.
It goes both ways 1:1600 or 1600:1, pressure and vacuum changes are very sudden ... One or the Other and it isn't a slow reaction.
That's why getting beyond using a steam stripper / pressure cooker requires a full blown "system"/boiler.

I have enough plastic and copper pipework, fittings and spares to build something quickly, all I need is a better understanding of the specific effects caused by the device you have highlighted so I can understand the mechanics precisely.

Hydraulic horsepower = Flow Rate(US gal/min) * Pressure(psi) / 1714
HP = (F x P)/1714
Water equation: Power = Force * Velocity
Power in watts, Force in psi (water head) and Velocity (or flow) in liters per second.
W = H x F

Water head or Hydraulic head: 2.31 feet of water height is 1 psi. We are looking to condense steam
to obtain psi and flow.

The mechanics can be reproduced using a driving fluid of air, water, steam,etc. It's just the steam has a 1 to 1600 condensation leverage
over using air or water. The psi of air and water matters. The psi when
using steam is a smaller factor due to we have the leverage of condensation
working for us. There is the question of: "As steam psi increases how does that effect the output psi of the water?"


It's like a Siphon, Siphon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia action in that a
low pressure is created that sucks in the water.
It's the Venturi effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A paint sprayer sucks up the paint using air as the driving fluid.
A the device connected to a water faucet and used to empty a water bed using water as the driving fluid.


First learn what sticking the steam sprayer into a bucket of water does.
That will show you what forces and reactions to expect from "your" steam
source. Nozzles (reducers, reduction in pipe size) will increase pressures.
Expansion of the pipe will lower the pressures, a tee off a larger pipe would
allow a reduced flow and vent the rest of the steam away from the test device.
Strap down your sprayer to prevent kick back when the trigger is opened.
You don't want to be out of control during testing.

You are going to need something a little wider than just a bucket.
Something a foot across at least, wider would be better. We only need
a few inches deep for testing I would think.

I am thinking about some really simple ways to test this out and observe the action clearly. As you say, rubber tubing will do just to get a taste of what happens and go from there.

Yep, slow steps. build upon experiences.

I don't want to replicate exactly the design as per diagram, but use my own mind to determine a simple way to get the effect and utilise it.

Oh, no. The goal isn't to reproduce that device. That's only a
reference of what works using 58.8 psi steam to create 30 HP.
Reference for what to try or work towards adding to a device.
That kind of HP isn't the goal.
Only reproduce the "mechanics" as you put it, of moving the water.
Learn the parameters and ratios. Learn what increases flow.
I believe the psi or head in "water speak", the output psi of water is the goal.
Turbines are like supercharged water wheels, liking higher PSI.
The high PSI can always be converted / downgraded to move larger volumes of water as needed for a water wheel.

Any water device could be used to extract work, it's a matter of level of
degrees: cost, tech, materials, ease of construction, complexity, SIZE! , etc.

Water wheels are low tech and simple but are larger and
add the need for a water pump(s).
Turbines are higher tech, more complex but could be configured without the need for a water pump(s).

A Pelton wheel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is ideal
but a perpelor turbine Kaplan turbine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia much simpler to use and create.

Simplest of all, if found to work, would be a circular
tank with a horizontal water wheel in the middle, no water pumps. The configuration of the system is like this, but without the gravity force
Gravitational Vortex Power Plant is Safe for Fish : TreeHugger

Now, do you have any further suggestions before I launch the first Steam-Powered Rocket into orbit?

10, 9, 8, 7, 6, ah ah, 5, 4, 3, 2, did I figure to buy milk?, 1
Go for it. Be careful.
About the other, keep the steam and boiler on the ground.

Randy

[byjoveoldchap]

I have put the Steam Rocket on the back burner for now

Vortex, I will be reading up on this and may put something together once I have grasped the process more fully.

PS - I have put the Steam Rocket on the back burner for now

[Vortex]

I looked at a wallpaper stripper. I was thinking there was some psi behind that steam. Whoops. You might have to combine both of those strippers together into one tube to get some psi behind the steam. Stick the hose of one into a bucket. It probably will not appear to do anything. The steam will condense as soon as it touches the water without some pressure to penetrate the water. I was so concerned about potential dangers, I didn't think of the least dangerous case. I just realized this ah point as I watched my steam creation happening. My idea does function as I thought it would. It feeds water into the tubes for continuous steam creation. The steam is at atmospheric pressure or a little better as it has little explosions of steam. I'm using a small woodgas stove for heat and that doesn't allow for ease of use. I will obtain a burner to hookup to the disposable propane tank I purchase the other day .. thinking I needed a storage area to build pressure or something for my steam. Getting water into the tank.. whatever, I blew that idea off. 1/4" tubing just might be too dang big for the kind of steam I'm trying to create, using propane as the heat source.