David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> I followed the link and was not able to locate any significant test data > to conclude anything of importance. Most of the information appeared to be > associated with the old test of October 6, 2011 which may or may not be > relevant. > You are right. I got that mixed up. The longer paragraph I quoted was from 2011. The 1 MW, 36 cubic meter per day flow, 60 deg C return temperature, and 10% being arbitrarily subtracted were some of the same numbers I got, but not that paragraph. Anyway, I am sure this is the same data and configuration I analyzed. - Jed
