Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Rants & Opinion - Diaries - Our Products
Latest crackpot scheme (of mine)... | 17 comments (17 topical, editorial)
Re: Latest crackpot scheme (of mine)... (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Mon Nov 19th, 2007 at 12:40:52 PM MST
(User Info)

Except you want as much hot water as you can make, not 50,000l of luke-warm water that you can't really use. By putting it back into the same tank you're letting the cold mix with the hot to some degree.

If you put the cold into the bottom and the hot into the top (with the plumbing aimed horizontally to avoid vertical stirring) the degree of mixing is minimal.  Without heat below / cold above to drive convection it takes literally decades for water to mix a vertical inch by diffusion.

Drop into the chemistry building of a major university.  You're likely to find a demo of this:  A vertical glass tube full of water in a closed display case (to keep the temperature changes slow), with a few crystals of potassium iodide at the bottom to color it and a marked scale giving the dates of the level of coloration (or a set of such tubes side-by-side, a new one installed every few years with the initial color level at a given height.)  I know there's one of these in the chemistry building of the University of Michigan, and it's one of those classics that's likely to be replicated in most colleges.  Gives you a real feeling for the glacial speed of diffusion versus other forms of mixing - which is a significant issue in the dynamics of chemical reactions.

Heat travels faster by conduction.  But you're still talking months, not minutes, to make a dent on temperature equalization.  You're interested in hours, and you're just fine at that timescale.

Also worth thinking about is the surface area differences. With one tank the water is always contact with the whole tank, leaking the heat into the ground.

Which is a fantastic insulator as well as a helpful storage medium.  Your main concerns are vertical conduction by the tank wall and heat transfer to/from ground water if you have significant underground flow.  The former is a small but non-trivial issue with a metal tank.  With a fiberglass or poly tank vertical conduction is not a significant issue either.  The latter is a problem regardless of whether you bury one tank or two.

I suspect you'll actually be ahead to use a single tank with vertical stratification due to heat storage in the ground around it tending to help you out rather than fight you.

Also:  A single tank has the advantage that it is always full of water at roughly the same density as the ground around it.  This reinforces it against collapse.

[ Parent ]



Re: Latest crackpot scheme (of mine)... (3.00 / 0) (#16)
by feral air on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 at 03:44:14 PM MST
(User Info)

If you put the cold into the bottom and the hot into the top (with the plumbing aimed horizontally to avoid vertical stirring) the degree of mixing is minimal.  Without heat below / cold above to drive convection it takes literally decades for water to mix a vertical inch by diffusion.

Yup. My pond (which I've been mentally comparing this against) holds about 18k gallons by mid-summer and that's pretty obvious if you dip a foot in. The top 6" is nice and warm but below that it's shrink-your-twig'n'berries cold. Even after the kids go swimming(=mixing) there's not a noticeable change in temp...I think I was splitting hairs.

One thing that could be tough is aiming the pipes horizontally. Most of the tankers I've seen have the port in the bottom (the center of a wall if it's vertical). Most normal people wouldn't want to try punching holes in the tanker so they'd have to route the pipes in through the existing port and around the inside of the tank....the hot pipe will be in contact with some cooler water and some convection will occur.

Mixing doesn't matter if you can heat the whole tank though and at this size it may not matter anyway. When you get right down to it, that's a lot of water.

Heat travels faster by conduction.  But you're still talking months, not minutes, to make a dent on temperature equalization.  You're interested in hours, and you're just fine at that timescale.

Why hours? I thought the idea was to build up the (majority of the) heat over the summer for use in the winter, which means you're storing it for months. If that's not the case then why is there so much water in the system? Maybe there's a misunderstanding on my part.

Which is a fantastic insulator as well as a helpful storage medium.  Your main concerns are vertical conduction by the tank wall and heat transfer to/from ground water if you have significant underground flow.  The former is a small but non-trivial issue with a metal tank. With a fiberglass or poly tank vertical conduction is not a significant issue either.

Except in the winter it's more likely that your tank is surrounded by water if it's at any kind of depth. Placing it vertically should reduce the wall-loss but it's still a lot of surface area. I've never seen a fiberglass or poly milk tanker, always stainless steel. Either way the "head" (where you lose most of your heat) would be the same size if the tank(s) are vertical.

I suspect you'll actually be ahead to use a single tank with vertical stratification due to heat storage in the ground around it tending to help you out rather than fight you.

Now that I've given it more thought, 1 tank would be better. If you had a bunch of air hanging out above your hot water you'd lose heat to the air...convection. The problem I was trying to fix (that wasn't much of a problem) rears its head in my half-baked 2-tank alternative. Way to go, self!

That said, I don't think you want the tank in contact with the ground at all. You'd want to insulate the heck out of it because any loss to the ground is most likely a permanent loss (since it's winter). Sorry for meddling...take it easy

[ Parent ]



Re: Latest crackpot scheme (of mine)... (3.00 / 0) (#17)
by DamonHD (d@hd.org) on Tue Nov 20th, 2007 at 03:54:38 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.earth.org.uk/

Hi,

Yes, the aim of the large seasonal store is to capture heat in summer and withdraw it in winter.

If I go more than (say) 10m down I'm below the surface of the Thames river not so far away as the crow might amble.  Indeed the Thames is still tidal a little way beyond us.

I'm guessing that the ground 10m+ down will therefore be permanently saturated.

My further guess is that if that water doesn't move then the tank(s) could be smaller and uninsulated and the water/ground will add to the thermal mass and stay around to have its heat pumped out in the winter.  Maybe like this if I've understood it correctly:

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=747&storycode=3097129&c=2&encCode=000000 00013b6439

However, if there is movement of the groundwater then I think the tanks have to be insulated to the hilt and protected against seepage to prevent the heat being carried away.

Rgds

Damon

[ Parent ]



Latest crackpot scheme (of mine)... | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 editorial)

Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board
· Old Otherpower Board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2003 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!