Talk:Brayton cycle

Engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Talk[edit]

Should the information on this page be moved to Gas turbine?? Pud 8 June 04, 8:58 PST

Barber?[edit]

"by Barber in 1791"

No mention or link about this person. Why not?

found it. I will include it. http://www.turbomachine.com/history/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericg33 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Internal Fire By Lyle Cummins pages 52,53 and 54 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imotorhead64 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Efficiency[edit]

Some typical and maximum efficiency levels would be useful. Tobyw 12:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the formula of the efficiency of an ideal Brayton cycle should be changed from:

$\eta =1-{\frac {T_{1}}{T_{2}}}=1-\left({\frac {P_{1}}{P_{2}}}\right)^{(\gamma -1)/\gamma }$

to:

$\eta =1-{\frac {Qin}{Qout}}=1-\left({\frac {P_{1}}{P_{2}}}\right)^{(\gamma -1)/\gamma }$

in order to avoid confusion between the efficiency of Carnot's cycle ( $\eta =1-{\frac {T_{1}}{T_{2}}}$ ) and to eliminate any undesired reference to the points of the diagram, being that "T1" looks like the temperature of point 1 and so on. Am I wrong? Ciao --Simone Buralli (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're right. Go ahead and change it. I just read the page and I thought it was wrong and that T1 and T2 DID refer to the figures above them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.207.26.69 (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2012‎

Ideal Brayton Cycle[edit]

It's been a little while since my Heat Transfer and Thermal Fluid Systems classes, but I think that "compression ratio" is incorrect. "Pressure ratio," which is used in most of this article, is the correct term. Compression ratio is a ratio of volumes, while pressure ratio is a ratio of pressures. I don't have my books handy to confirm this, but hopefully someone will take a look at this and make the correction if necessary.

The illustration[edit]

If I am not completely mistaken, the work output of the turbine is proportional to the area that is enclosed by the cycle diagrams. Consequently, the enclosed areas in both cycles diagrams should be of the same size. If this statement is correct, I think it will be nice to visualize this in the figure, e.g. by shading those areas and writing "W" or "Work out" into them.

Another issue: Does anyone know, whether the diagrams can also be used to derive a statement with respect to the efficiency of the turbine?Tomeasy (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improve efficiency with an intercooler[edit]

I thought that with an intercooler the Brayton cycle has a worse thermal efficiency. Could this afirmation be checked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.250.177.40 (talk) 17:30, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jet engine?[edit]

The jet engine is an internal combustion engine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.171.132 (talk) 04:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

do you have some reason you don't think the point between the compressor and expander is internal to the engine?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.57.184 (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2011

Solar/Biodiesel?[edit]

What's this got to do with it? This should be removed from the article, it's simply just annoying and a waste of time for people looking for information about the cycle. If they want to know something about biodiesel or solar, they would look for it under other keywords. Looks like some commercial ad for www.solhyco.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.185.54 (talk) 14:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have extracted the information about the hybrid solar system from the heading "Model" and inserted it in a new sub-section: Brayton cycle#Solar Brayton cycle. Dolphin (t) 21:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regenerator/Recuperator[edit]

A recuperator and a regenerator are essentially the same thing as far as this article is concerned (the only difference being in how they transfer heat from the exhaust to the compressed gas, which is not covered here). Considering that the recuperator section is pretty much just a repetition of the regenerator's section, I recommend it be either deleted or have both sections rewritten into a single, comprehensive section.

I agree, I was pretty confused what the difference were the way it is worded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.200.204.101 (talk) 23:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Curious[edit]

The article has

In general, increasing the compression ratio is the most direct way to increase the overall power output of a Brayton system.[10]

Leaving aside the obvious point that the most direct way is to open the tap and burn more fuel, the sad fact is that figure 2 of the article shows that in some cases increasing the pressure ratio reduces the power output.

What does reference [10], Lichty, actually say, please?

109.145.107.154 (talk) 23:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brayton cycle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Constant pressure?[edit]

"The Brayton cycle is a thermodynamic cycle named after George Brayton that describes the workings of a constant-pressure heat engine."

This is currently the first sentence of the lede. I do not understand why reference is made to "constant-pressure". Isn't compression an indispensible step in a Brayton cycle? Compression is synonymous to an increase of pressure ... Tomeasy_{T C} 14:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The Rankine cycle is similar and it avoids any statement that it is a constant-pressure cycle. I will have a look at some relevant sources to see how Brayton can be described more accurately. Dolphin (t) 22:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have erased the reference to a “constant-pressure heat engine”.

”Engineering Thermodynamics Work and Heat Transfer” by Rogers & Mayhew (1957) makes the point in Chapter 12 that the principal difference between the Rankine cycle and the Brayton cycle is that Rankine is a vapour power cycle (steam) whereas Brayton is a gas power cycle (air or the exhaust from an internal combustion engine.) Nowhere do Rogers & Mayhew suggest that the Rankine or Brayton cycles can be described as constant-pressure cycles. Dolphin (t) 23:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into this and correcting the part. Tomeasy_{T C} 22:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CO2 test rig fed power to grid[edit]

Not sure if this is notable, but practical proof of concept. “We’ve Got The Power” — Sandia Technology Test Delivers Electricity To The Grid CleanTechnica David Woodward (talk) 08:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is notable. A Brayton Cycle using CO2 is being developed as a high-efficiency alternative to steam turbines in commercial electric power generation, taking advantage of higher input temperatures. I'll try to add it to the page, although there is, at the moment, no logical place to list current or future uses. Hops Splurt (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]