Karagin
12/18/02 03:37 PM
68.21.149.172
|
Hydrogyen fuel cells...
Check out this site...
http://www.fuelcells.org/
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
12/18/02 05:15 PM
65.32.249.205
|
Cool stuff. I stumbled over this today while trying to look up Praxair's laser cladding facilities (Praxair is the hydrogen suppliers for these gizmos).
http://www.fuelcellstore.com/products/coleman/airgen.html
Imagine: a $6000 UPS for your computer that lasts not minutes, but hours or days. Fits under your desk and comes with its own wheels (good, because it's over 100lbs). AND you can buy it on-line. Kids, swipe mom and dad's credit cards now and you can have one for Christmas!
Though for some reason I have this picture of a big lightning strike detonating the hydrogen tank hooked up to it.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Bob_Richter
12/19/02 01:25 PM
4.35.174.250
|
Yes, HFC's are cool.
Not that this isn't just a little Off-Topic, or anything.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Karagin
12/19/02 02:22 PM
68.21.149.172
|
So do you thing something like this would work in BT?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
NathanKell
12/19/02 03:35 PM
67.86.58.8
|
I thought this was included under the "ICE" label (using FASA's wonderful penchant for applicable terms)--ISTR reading, in the fluff of some scout car or something, that it had an electric motor powered by fuel cells.
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson |
Karagin
12/19/02 03:57 PM
68.21.149.139
|
Might be...but I was thinking along the lines of something lighter then the current IC Engines that BT has...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
12/19/02 03:59 PM
68.21.149.139
|
Actually Mr. Ricther the idea was to get folks to suggest ways of using the Hydrogyen Fuel Cells in Battletech, so it's on topic since the post's goal was to generate interest in new tech.
I am sorry that you missed that or could not draw that conclusion.
Do have a nice day and thank you for point out what you did even though it was not correct.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
12/19/02 06:00 PM
65.32.249.205
|
Yes, in one of several ways.
1) ICEs may cover fuel cells already, though fuel cells don't actually involve combustion.
2) Fuel cells may be so closely comparable to ICEs in mass that you can just treat them as ICEs.
3) Fuel cells may be used for small civilian "electric" vehicles mentioned in MW3 RPG, but don't scale up well to mech- and combat-vehicle applications.
4) Fuel cells may be significantly heavier than ICEs [1] and likely have lower power densities than BT's Wunderbatteries it uses for personal energy weapons, and therefore are obsolete in virtually all applications.
[1] Just comparing motor to motor, fuel cells are significantly heavier than ICEs today on a watt-for-watt, horsepower-for-horsepower basis. Even mass inefficient marine diesels will outperform them. A gas turbine...well, a gas turbine the size of the Coleman Airgen can generate several hundred kilowatts/horsepower to the Airgen's single kilowatt. When you add in fuel tankage and transmission, fuel cells will narrow the gap, probably enough to overtake the clunkier diesels and common automobile engines. But a high strung gas turbine or turbocharged piston engine will remain ahead of the fuel cell, even noting their ravenous fuel demands.
In short, it's up to the individual GM/gaming group. You can really argue 31st Century fuel cells however you want: lighter than ICEs (I'd argue against, but that's me), equal to ICEs (saves rules headaches - treat them as an existing engine type), heavier than ICEs (no fun).
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Cray
12/19/02 06:02 PM
65.32.249.205
|
In reply to:
I am sorry that you missed that or could not draw that conclusion
I missed the point (initially), too, hence my post of the Airgen. Now that I see what you're after...well, I gave an on-topic post elsewhere.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Karagin
12/19/02 07:38 PM
68.21.149.52
|
Actually your Airgen was a good addtional point to add to the HFC topic and I think both topics would be intersting to see in BT terms or at least an attempt made on that part.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
12/19/02 07:42 PM
68.21.149.52
|
Excellent points and you do bring up some interesting ideas. And one that really may need addressing, are the IC engines of BT piston or some form of Turbine style or a hybrid of the two?
Here is something to toss around, how a hybrid ICE and HFC type of motor?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
12/19/02 08:20 PM
65.32.249.205
|
In reply to:
And one that really may need addressing, are the IC engines of BT piston or some form of Turbine style or a hybrid of the two?
Yes. And Wankel rotary engines, and other more exoticness in combustion technology. The engines were left as vaguely described as "internal combustion engines," so I suspect the writers were hedging their bets against future advances in IC technology. If they had pinned down ICEs as turbines, someone would argue piston engines should be available and get special benefits - smaller IR signature, higher audio signature, lighter due to lower fuel requirements, etc. If they were described as piston engines, then someone would argue a turbine should be available and be lighter (because turbines do generate more horsepower per kilo) and quieter.
In reply to:
Here is something to toss around, how a hybrid ICE and HFC type of motor?
That's an unusual combination. Usually it's battery/ICE or battery/fuel cell. Anyway, for BT, it's more or less same situation as plain fuel cells: if you want benefits of some sort, name them. You can make arguments either way.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Karagin
12/19/02 10:52 PM
68.21.149.124
|
Thanks!
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/20/02 08:21 AM
4.35.174.250
|
...where all the hostility in this relationship comes from. 
A Hydrogen Fuel Cell is nothing on a Fusion Reactor, and may eventually be comparable to an ICE engine (which it is not presently.)
Unless you want to make highly combustible "Green Tanks", I can't honestly imagine where you'd use these in Battletech.
And here I thought you weren't responding to my posts.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Karagin
12/20/02 11:57 AM
68.21.149.25
|
Mr. Ricther, I am not responding to your post, I am trying to prevent you from turning a posting into a flame war.
If you fail to see that I am sorry and if you fail to understand that well I can't help you there.
So I hope that clears up any misunderstandings you have and please don't bother replying since it won't get a responce.
Do have a nice day.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/21/02 07:52 AM
4.35.174.250
|
>>>Mr. Ricther, I am not responding to your post,<<<
Yes you are.
>>>I am trying to prevent you from turning a posting into a flame war. <<<
Actually, it looks like you're trying to start a flame war.
After all, it takes two to tango.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|