This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Comparison of GLIMPS and HFAST Stirling Engine Code Predictions with Experimental Data
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Predictions from GLIMPS and HFAST design codes are compared with experimental data for the RE-1000 and SPRE free-piston Stifling engines. Engine performance and available power loss predictions are compared. Differences exist between GLIMPS and HFAST loss predictions. Both codes require engine-specific calibration to bring predictions and experimental data into agreement.
Topic
Citation
Geng, S. and Tew, R., "Comparison of GLIMPS and HFAST Stirling Engine Code Predictions with Experimental Data," SAE Technical Paper 929029, 1992, https://doi.org/10.4271/929029.Also In
References
- Schreiber J.G. Geng S.M. Lorenz G.V. “RE-1000 Free-Piston Stirling Engine Sensitivity Test Results,” NASA TM-88846 1986
- Cairelli J.E. “SPRE I Free-Piston Stirling Engine Testing at NASA Lewis Research Center,” NASA TM-100241 1987
- Corey J. “Standards and Nomenclature for Reporting of Stirling Engine Performance,” 24th IECEC 1989 5 2325 2329
- Gedeon D. “A Globally-Implicit Stirling Cycle Simulation,” 21st IECEC 1986 1 550 554
- Gedeon D. “GLIMPS version 4.0 User's Manual,” Gedeon Associates 16922 South Canaan Road, Athens, OH 45701 1992
- Huang S.C. “HFAST: A Harmonic Analysis Program for Stirling Cycles,” 27th IECEC , (number 92IECEC425) 1992
- Lee K.P. “A Simplistic Model of Cyclic Heat Transfer Phenomena in Closed Spaces,” 18th IECEC 1983 2 720 723