rankine

It says that, but the flow inside the can will be three-dimensional and not well modeled by the Rankine vortex.

It's the same way binary geothermal power works, with the Organic Rankine Cycle.

The Rankine cycle thermodynamics prevent this from having an 80% efficiency.

Find a favorable choice of vapor for a heat pump / Organic Rankine Cycle (possibly dual-loop) to boost the temp to 150C for the radiator.

Phase change systems like steam engines follow the Rankine cycle, which cannot reach as high an efficiency as systems like this which follow the Carnot cycle.

But Fahrenheit aligns well with Rankine without fractions (unlike Celsius).

And no, the Rankine velocity profile is nowhere zero.

Especially the coverage of Rankine who always fascinated me!

Does anyone actually use the Rankine scale?

Fahrenheit is just an offset Rankine scale.

Yup, Seebeck is incredibly inefficient, as for RTG's in space I think they would rather use a Rankine cycle but that would be prohibitively too heavy to launch.

I don't care about steam conversion efficiency as much as I care that steam Rankine cycle engines are a solved problem so there is no more technological advancement.

According to that website, because they form a "Rankine vortex" in the beverage itself, the carbonation is not disturbed.

To use an analogy, turbine designers no longer need to know the values in the "steam tables", but they do need to know efficient geometries and trade-offs among them when designing any Rankine cycle to meet power, torque, and Reynolds regimes.

The 'Rankine vortex' is a simple model for a vortex in which the centre is in solid body rotation and the rest is a free, irrotational* vortex.

That, however, is since almost all our plants use the Carnot/Rankine cycle heat engine.

A far easier method was to add 459.67 to the Fahrenheit values converting them to degrees Rankine, then just take the natural log.