A question for the unenlightened...
Naj,
I could have asked this personally. But just in case someone else wants to know the same thing, I'm asking it openly:
Without concern for condensation, what's the lowest temperatures that this (evaporative) method of cooling is capable of achieving?
I'm not concerned about condensation, because my equipment is already prepared for it. So that's not something that needs to be discussed here. I simply want to know how to best maximize the performance of a bong to the lowest temperatures physically possible.
If you can, please list the components individually that need to be changed. Either in configuration, or their size.
Thanks!
Shingoshi
Another one of my questions, without enough details given...
Hey Naj,
I was asking if there were relative changes that could be made. Like would any of the following be true:
1.) Increasing the rate of evaporated fluid, lowers the temperatures.
2.) Increasing the force of vacuum (by lowering pressures), will increase the rate of evaporated fluid.
I need to stop here and explain something. We are using different techniques to evaporate our fluids. I'm using a vacuum. While you were using aeration (by forcing air into or across the fluid) to evaporate it. They are not the same.
A.) Vacuums will rely solely on the ability of the fluid to evaporate, and it's rate of evaporation.
B.) Aeration relies on the ability of a gas to release and entrain the vapor of a fluid (by blowing through or across it) and causing that fluid to evaporate.
The difference here being that for a vacuum, no additional gas is added to the fluid. While aeration adds an additional gas to the fluid. The temperature and humidity of the gas is then influential in it's ability to cause evaporation.
Continuing from above:
3.) Increasing the wick's surface area (by using a larger wick, or multiple wicks), increases the volume of water evaporated.
4.) Increasing the air flow (either by percolation or vacuum) increases the volume of vapor that can be removed in any interval of time.
5.) The material of the wick must be selected for it's ability to not only absorb liquid, but also it's ability to release the liquid contained.
Ok. Granted these may turn out to be very technical questions which have numerous variables not easily determined. Once again, I'm guilty of turning this into a science experiment. Guilty as charged!
Shingoshi
The difference between really sucking, or being full of hot air...
All jokes aside. People don't typically BLOW through bongs. It is customary practice to SUCK through them. Based on that fact, I chose to use a vacuum rather than any form of aeration for percolation. I think the choice to vacuum instead of aerate is further substantiated by the efficiency of pulling (vacuuming) air through, rather than blowing (aeration) through the fins of a radiator.
Just saying...
Shingoshi
For the points you missed...
Quote:
1.) I'm missing something...what gas is added?
Answer: About the gas, I meant air. I think you're blowing air across the surface of your wicks. And you're drawing that air from outside of the system. The system is not enclosed.
Quote:
2.) Personally, I don't see drawing moisture laden air over electrical devices as the wiser choice. Pushing the air eliminates exposing the electrical device to high humidity, condensation, misting, etc.....
Answer: You are to some extent creating vapor to be released into the environment. If I'm correct, this system is not enclosed. Meaning that vapor has to escape somewhere. I think you were channeling (exhausting) that vapor laden air outside of the immediate environment. Your point of entry for the "gas" I was speaking of, is where your fans are connected to the system. That's your point of introduction.
In my system, the entire loop is sealed. No vapor can escape anywhere, because it's drawn back into the loop. That's the benefit of using an eductor. It not only creates the vapor for evaporation, it also sucks that vapor back into the fluid flow itself.
Since the vacuum chamber is isolated from the rest of the system by means of a capillary tube, only the liquid in the vacuum chamber itself is subjected to the vacuum. Additional liquid is drawn into the vacuum chamber to replenish what has been removed as vapor, by means of a capillary tube. The capillary tube is connected from the chamber to a point just below the maximum liquid level in the system so as not to flood the vacuum chamber.
All of this means that there is never any possibility of moisture escaping. All of the circuitry is safe, only benefiting from the vacuum-produced evaporation cycle. And all of this occurs and fits inside of a Pelican 1780 Transport case.
I hope that clears up your questions.
Shingoshi
And if money were really no object...
We could both benefit from the addition of technology like this:
http://www.mpi-ultrasonics.com/tubul...-transduc.html
I got this idea from those ultrasonic humidifiers that are on the market. And they're CHEAP!!
Because the main function of evaporation can be enhanced by a more aggressive level of cavitation in the liquid. Without cavitation occurring within the liquid, we are both depending primarily on how much vapor can be released from the surface. However, if you do something as simple as dropping an ultrasonic probe into the liquid, cavitation then occurs within the full volume of the liquid, and not just on it's surface.
The result is that cavitation produces the vapor, while the vacuum is responsible for moving that vapor away from the chamber. That's what I'm thinking of doing. You could pretty much do the same thing without modification of your existing system. You only need to drop the probe into your bong.
Shingoshi
I just learned something new...
And I think it applies directly to this conversation:
Quote:
Vaporization and evaporation however, are not entirely the same processes. For example, substances like caesium, francium, gallium, bromine, rubidium and mercury may vaporize, but they do not evaporate as such.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporation
So let's compare now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporization
Ok. From reading this it seems while we're both using vapor for cooling, you're using evaporation, while I'm using a form of boiling (with cavitation by vacuum being the producer).
Quote:
Boiling is a phase transition from the liquid phase to gas phase that occurs at or above the temperature the boiling temperature. Note boiling occurs below the surface.
I think this page best summarizes how our two systems differ:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling
Your system depends on surface activity. While my system depends on volumetric activity, by boilng.
I just got from this that in your case, using a wick with very coarse surface structure, increases the amount of surface area to generate evaporation. So fluffy towels are better than more smooth towels, in your case. I should also point out from earlier research, that blowing air through the towel produces more vapor than just blowing air across the towel. In which case, the thicker the wick the more liquid is evaporated.
This is also why I've thought about using the filters intended for these housings. They come in different materials for different functions. Choosing a filter with the coarsest surface and the deepest fluff, would cause more vapor to be released from them.
Imagine doing this in your case. Take a pvc tube and perforate it (with many holes). Mount the tubular wicks over the tube. Maybe taping off the ends of the wicks (to the tubes), now blow air through the tube so that it passes through the wicks. You will have increased the efficiency of your system without much effort to speak of.
And there's one other thing I should mention. I won't have the concern about bacteria in my system that you're now faced with. Because there's no air in my system to breed bacteria. My system is completely closed.
Shingoshi
Thank you for not showing me the same degree of respect...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Naja002
Shingoshi, theory always works out great in theoryland. But often times doesn't work out so well in realityland. So, why don't you step out of theoryland and into realityland? Once realityland starts kicking you in the teeth time and time again, maybe....just maybe ....you'll start learning how to appreciate things for their utter raw simplicity.
Your comments speak loudly. I don't think anyone can believe you didn't intend to be insulting. But you can keep believing this is all theory, and not practical methods that can be simply applied by anyone. There's nothing theoretical about dropping an ultrasonic transducer in a tank of liquid.
Congratulations.
This might have worked even better...
I found this on Cabela's. This fan has a shroud built into it. And I'm sure it has the air-flow you or anyone else would want for this purpose.
Here's the link. I can't post an image that is javascript.
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/te...questid=127255
Ok. Maybe that's not as large as I thought it was. I'll keep looking. I was thinking about a way for you to direct all of your air into your tubing.
Shingoshi
Maybe you could use an adapter...
I thought about you as quick as I saw them!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Naja002
That's actually a nice find, but it's 12V. I explained above why I chose to go with 110V. It also doesn't offer much of a description on it's specs, but it could probably be undervolted.
I forgot that you wanted to use AC. But I think a simple AC adapter would work very well. Most importantly though, would be to find one of these for larger tubes. I think you're using tubes larger than 4" diameter. So if you could find larger fans, that would be better. There has to be more than one company that makes these.
Shingoshi
You could consider this also...
Your wicks can be rotated...
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraso...ir_Humidifiers
* Drum style: A pipe brings water directly to a reservoir (a pan) attached to the furnace. The water level in the pan is controlled by a float valve, similar to a small toilet tank float. The wick is typically a foam pad mounted on a drum and attached to a small motor; hot air enters the drum at one end and is forced to leave through the sides of the drum. When the hygrostat calls for humidity,
the motor is turned on causing the drum to rotate slowly through the pan of water and preventing the foam pad from drying out.
Advantages include:
* Low cost
* Inexpensive maintenance (drum-style pads are cheap and readily available)[citation needed]
Disadvantages include:
* Requirement for frequent (approximately monthly) inspections of cleanliness and pad condition
* Water evaporation even when humidification is not required (due to the pan of water which remains exposed to a high velocity air stream)
* Mold growth in the pan full of water (this problem is exacerbated by the large quantity of air, inevitably carrying mold spores, passing through the humidifier whether in use or not).
On that same link, you will see something there about disk humidifiers. I'm thinking of using the high-speed of inexpensive handheld grinders to my advantage. Think of a blender running at the speed of 10,000 RPM grinder! Now if that's not enough MIST, what else would be?
Shingoshi
Edit: Just for fun, look at this:
http://www.mainlandmart.com/humidify.html
