|
> Ed Anderson wrote:
>> Q = m cp
DeltaT. Clearly shows that heat removal is proportional to BOTH mass flow
AND deltaT (as well as the specific heat but that is fixed by
nature). Yet, for some reason that I still don't understand, you
skeptics seem to fixate on the mass flow factor {:>) and ignore DeltaT as if
it were a factor you can do nothing about.
>>
> I think that is because you're reducing mass flow for the thick
rad.
> You could do the same for the thin rad, and end with the
same deltaT.
> To fairly compare the radiators, you have to fix the
airflow at the
> inlet and decide which option you can get to dump the
most heat into the
> air while offering the least drag.
Ok, good point!, I
agree. I think part of the problem is the way I framed
the question when I started out. I should have made it clearer than what I
was really looking for was which radiator gave me the best cooling system.
Then that probably requires coming up with a critera about what consitutes
"best", do we also need to factor in weight, size, cost, etc?? Don't know,
but ultimately we are interested first in cooling the engine - if the cooling
system does not do that then it doesn't matter thin, thick, fast, slow, low/high
drag, etc.
I understand your point about fixing the air
mass flow and then making the comparison based on that, but, my counter is - why
not base it on the amount of heat removed by the system rather than air
flow. We know that mass flow by itself is only part of the equation and
the real objective is to remove heat.
Clearly, with everybody taking
exception to my analysis/reasoning it raises the old question along the lines
".... either I'm the only sane one or....." {:>).
Guess I am going to have to sit down and
based on this discussion try some real numbers and sizes to make some
comparisons (along with the assumptions, assertations, etc) for a complete
cooling system and see where that leads me
Thanks for the input, Ernest. Gotta remember
to compare the same fruite {:>)
Ed
.
> Of course, out here in the real world it
doesn't work that way.
> Everything affects everything else, and we
have to design the whole
> system. We rely on generalities and
ROTs, and hope that we wind up with
> something that has a passing
aquaintence with "optimized". Most of us
> will settle for a not to
distant relative of "it works".
>
> --
> Homepage:
http://www.flyrotary.com/> Archive
and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|