Bong! Bong! Bong! --56K Warning!

[liguhy]

How good would a bong function in a high humid, high heat environment? I live in N.E. Kansas so our weather is rather extreme (hot summers, cold winters)

[Naja002]

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 sure, IIRC it's about 15 degrees, but I don't recall whether that's F or C. I was seeing~12 degrees below ambient when the humidity was around 45%. But keep in mind that I wasn't using "lab quality" equipment to read temps and humidity.

If you can, please list the components individually that need to be changed. Either in configuration, or their size.

I don't really understand the question. Components that need to be changed for what goal? Lower temps?

How good would a bong function in a high humid, high heat environment? I live in N.E. Kansas so our weather is rather extreme (hot summers, cold winters)

The higher the humidity the lower the performance. It's hard to put moisture into moisture laden air. The higher the ambient temp the smaller the delta and the less performance again. But none of that means you can't still get temps better than standard liquid cooling. Even when humidity was high (70-90%) I was still getting temps just below ambient.

[Shingoshi]

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

[Shingoshi]

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

[Naja002]

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.

It should, but like anything else--you'll reach a point of diminishing returns.


2.) Increasing the force of vacuum (by lowering pressures), will increase the rate of evaporated fluid.

Don't know. Not sure what you mean by "vacuum". If you mean the slight decrease in pressure by drawing the air through, than the answer would be the same as above in my eyes.

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.


I'm missing something...what gas is added?

Continuing from above:
3.) Increasing the wick's surface area (by using a larger wick, or multiple wicks), increases the volume of water evaporated.

All else equal--Yes.

4.) Increasing the air flow (either by percolation or vacuum) increases the volume of vapor that can be removed in any interval of time.

Yes. Agreed, but only to a point. See #1.

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.

There show be sufficient flow, so that this is really not an issue.

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

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.

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.....


Just saying...
Shingoshi

Inside quote^^^^^


Any relation to Rube Goldberg?

[Shingoshi]

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.

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

[Naja002]

So, are we back to the Absorption/Einstein refrigerator?

Bongs are cooling towers. The term "Bong" is slang based on it's appearance. It's an evaporative cooler. Same principles as the various cooling towers used world wide in industry, government, etc.

[Shingoshi]

So, are we back to the Absorption/Einstein refrigerator?

Bongs are cooling towers. The term "Bong" is slang based on it's appearance. It's an evaporative cooler. Same principles as the various cooling towers used world wide in industry, government, etc.

No, I'm not invoking Absorption/Einstein here. My system is purely an evaporative cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evapora...rative_cooling
If you're asking because of my mentioning of a capillary tube, the tube only serves the purpose of replenishing the evaporated liquid. That's how I'm able to keep my loop closed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bong
The word bong is an adaptation of the Thai word baung (Thai: บ้อง /bɔːŋ/)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_pipe_percolator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrubber
A bong functions as a gas scrubber. The gas in question being smoke.

I made sure to look up bong in Wikipedia. It's not an issue of appearance, it's an issue of function. The word bong is originally from Asian (Thai) language and their usage. The "baung" came from Thailand. The principle has been adapted several times. We have dewars from the original concept.

The benefit of using a bong, is to cool the smoke passing through it. But if you're not introducing a gas (air or smoke for percolation) into the vessel that the vacuum occurs in, only the liquid is evaporated. If that vacuum is produced by the by the suction of an eductor (as is the case in my system), that vapor is pulled into the stream of the liquid (which powers the eductor), where it is reabsorbed. In the process, the liquid is also cooled.

In my system, it would be like the user of the bong not only inhaling through it, but then exhaling into. Now in human terms, that can't be done, since we need fresh oxygen. But for a cooling system, it's not a problem.

Shingoshi

I just thought of something else. But I will post it in my own thread shortly. It uses the concept of a vortex tube applied to a liquid.
http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.ph...2&postcount=29

[Naja002]

Shingoshi, The term "Bong" in this case is just a slang term based on it's appearance. That's all. There is no p-e-r-c-o-l-a-t-i-o-n going on here. No scrubbing either. It's just a simple, inexpensive, highly effective evaporative cooler.

[Shingoshi]

There's no percolation. I tried to edit my other posts. But when you had already quoted them, I didn't feel it right to change them, giving the appearance that you may have misquoted me. That was just me attempting to be respectful.

And no, you're not using percolation. I used the incorrect term. You are using aeration, by blowing air over the wicks containing the fluid to be evaporated. I keep trying to use the most correct language, but sometimes I do fail.

The point is you're still using a form of evaporation. And that's not the issue. I was simply making a performance comparison between aeration and vacuums for the generation of vapor. Let me try once more to be precise.

In a process of aeration, the gas (in this case air) must be able to carry the vapor produced from the wicks. And in doing so, you're also dependent on the vapor threshold of the gas (threshold=the amount of vapor the gas can hold). Meaning you can't vaporize more liquid from the wicks than the gas/air can support. That's not the case for vapor created from a vacuum.

The vacuum delivers the highest efficiency, because the effect of evaporation is determined by nothing other than the degree of suction the vacuum is operating at. The stronger the vacuum, the higher the rate of evaporation. Since there is no gas introduced into the system, there is no limitation invoked by the inability of a gas to contain the vapor.

Shingoshi

[Shingoshi]

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

[Shingoshi]

And I think it applies directly to this conversation:

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).

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

[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.

[Shingoshi]

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.

[Naja002]

The point was--give up all the mental masturbation and actually DO something. What's stopping you? Roll up your sleeves, get your hands dirty and actually DO something. "Knowledge" is very limited without E-x-p-e-r-i-e-n-c-e, so put your theory together and make it happen.

[Shingoshi]

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

[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.

[Shingoshi]

I thought about you as quick as I saw them!

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

[Naja002]

I thought about you as quick as I saw them!

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

1) I was using 4" PVC

2) They are 12V.

3) They would have increased the cost of this project to 150%.

[Shingoshi]

Would the price of the (Attwood Turbo In-line Blower) fans cost 150% more? Or does that include the cost of 12v/AC adapters?

Would the CFM airflow of these fans be less than the airflow you have actually going into the system? Since these fans would direct all of their flow into the system, you also need to take into account the differences in performance between the two types of fans. You've already admitted that the existing fans are inefficient.

(existing airflow)/cost = cost of existing airflow (CFM|CFH)
(prospective airflow)/cost = cost of prospective airflow (CFM|CFH)
I looked for the specs here, but couldn't find any.
http://www.attwoodmarine.com/store/product/Turbo-4000
Bad news! These fans are patented, just like the Mazzei Injectors.

But like I said, you could look for fans like these that were meant to run on AC. That would eliminate any trouble you see here.

Shingoshi

[Naja002]

Would the price of the (Attwood Turbo In-line Blower) fans cost 150% more? Or does that include the cost of 12v/AC adapters?

With the AC adapter the fan cost would be ~350%.

Would the CFM airflow of these fans be less than the airflow you have actually going into the system?

I don't know what the CFM of those fans are. I pointed that out above.

Since these fans would direct all of their flow into the system, you also need to take into account the differences in performance between the two types of fans. You've already admitted that the existing fans are inefficient.

I had to resolve misting issues, so I don't see how I've already admitted what you claim.

(existing airflow)/cost = cost of existing airflow (CFM|CFH)
(prospective airflow)/cost = cost of prospective airflow (CFM|CFH)

More isn't always better....

But like I said, you could look for fans like these that were meant to run on AC. That would eliminate any trouble you see here.

Shingoshi

Right. I'm no longer using these bongs. I've moved on....




Here's our buddy Shingoshi in all of his Glory....

[Shingoshi]

Again I was unclear by being unspecific. The efficiency of the fans I was referring to, related to your need to build a shroud around the fans to direct their flow into the tubing. But since the fans aren't axial blowers, some of that flow is lost to the rear of the fan also.

I think the best solution would be to take two or more Scythe Kaze Maru fans and stack them, with their flow headed into your tubing. Stacking the fans would automatically create a shroud (from their being stacked). In fact, three Scythes (per tube) stacked in this manner would be good. Something like this is done in 1U servers, where the fans in them are also stacked. Granted, some of them use counter-rotating fans. But you would nonetheless benefit from them.

Ok. I missed the point here again! You want AC current fans. That being the case, see if you can find AC fans like the ones mentioned. Just make sure they're the right size, and that you can stack them. That will create the axial flow you need for your system. Or even better yet, get an old power supply to drive the Scythe fans.

Shingoshi

[Shingoshi]

Your wicks can be rotated...

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

[Shingoshi]

Right. I'm no longer using these bongs. I've moved on....

I completely missed this comment!
So do you consider this project dead then?
Even so, someone else may get ideas from this.

Shingoshi

[Shingoshi]

But I just had to share this. This could be too cool, and have many more uses than considered at first look. Check this out!
http://www.ecrater.com/product.php?pid=2509487
Simply do a search for "electric superchargers" and see what you come up with.

Shingoshi