Talk:Thermoacoustic heat engine

--- efficency compared to traditional methods?

environmental impact?

ɴ== tube ==

there is some T shaped tube you can blow into that cools off one end while heatin the other. i forget what it's called. uses a vortex, sort of like acoustic refridgeration? - Omegatron 14:30, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

That'll be a vortex tube: see http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/16/vortex.htm. We should have an article on this, if we don't already. It sounds like it might be a realisation of Maxwell's Demon - amazing! --Heron 14:49, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * It's not. :-)  That's what the article I was reading was about. - Omegatron 15:08, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

Oh, all right. I just got that impression from the article I referred to, which said that one of the names of the device was "Maxwell's Demon". I guess whoever gave it that name was wrong. --Heron 20:09, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Well it sort of is, but the demon doesn't work for free... - Omegatron 18:57, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

frequency
"but is said to be inaudible outside the refrigerator."


 * I would assume it would also be infrasonic. - Omegatron 19:03, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

The example project linked to (which is a quick, coherent read, by the way) had a resonance frequency of 385 Hz, which is audible, and somewhat above what you would usually think of as "bass". Breakpoint (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Internal decibel level
The internal decibel level used and the comparison to the level at which humans experience pain is a little misleading, although both statements are true.

An article on the BBC News site, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2543085.stm, states that this level of noise can only be created within the chamber containing pressurized gas (helium in the Penn State model), so were there ever to be a breach, there wouldn't be the risk of a harmfully loud noise that is somewhat implied in the current Wiki article.

Penn State?
In the Penn State part, it says it will be released in 2004...that was a few years ago. Mike6271 02:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Events
The second paragraph of this section is clearly an advertisement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Assbackward (talk • contribs) 16:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, reads like an advertisement or political environmental activism.98.165.6.225 (talk) 10:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I see lots of advertising in this section. I'm cutting out everything about sponsors, and I'll think about whether what's left is worth keeping. I don't think the link to the Ben & Jerry's video is acceptable: it spends a lot more time promoting the effort than explaining the refrigeration method.  I'm cutting that out too.Dfeuer (talk) 00:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Beep dee be deebie
"Lamina Flow"? I presume this is supposed to be laminar flow. Can somebody confirm & fix? TREKphiler  hit me ♠  21:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Confirmed. Its Laminar (from Laminar flow). Not named after Sir Robert Lamina - who heard wrong (see his reference). The talk was by James Senft author of "An Introduction to Stirling Engines" and not Jim Senft. But the mistake stuck in various places, mostly on youtube, presumably following the online article quoted, and this entry in the wikipedia. I'll correct it. פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed it during cleanup since I found no decent peer reviewed article for reference. If you find one please add it back. DrunkSquirrel (talk) 01:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

News?
2 million dollars in 2007... research started in 2004...

um, sorry if I'm waking anybody up, but its mid 2010! Any news? פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 17:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Article name
This article should be renamed from 'Thermoacoustic hot air engine' to 'Thermoacoustic heat engine' as that is the correct name for these type of devices. I unfortunately do not know how to change the name of an article. I suppose a new article will have to be made and the contents moved to it? FRidh (talk) 09:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Renamed. DrunkSquirrel (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Redundancy with article Thermoacoustics
The article on Thermoacoustics explains so much about this phenomenon better than this article. I really wonder whether they shouldn't be joined or at least refer to one another. I'll add a reference, but in the end one of both should vanish. Ger Hanssen (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2014 (UTC)