At 08:24 AM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote:
Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax.
Arrggh. Classified with Krivit! Ah, well, even a stopped clock is
right twice a day. This is once for me, I still get to be right once more....
Do you believe a cork will float on stream saturated with water
vapor? Thinking about it sorta makes the saturated steam theory look
stupid, doesn't it?
Depends on the "steam quality." On dry steam, of course not, the
density is too low. But 100% wet steam is, in fact, pure liquid
water, so a cork would float on it. Very wet steam, though, probably
isn't stable, the water droplets will coalesce and fall. There is a
semantic issue here....
Next stupid question?
Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see
if it will float over a boiling pot of water.
Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it,
because it won't float, because the steam coming off a pot of boiling
water will probably be well under 5% wet.
Craig seems to think that I consider wet steam a big problem here. I
don't. I think the steam is probably no more than a few percent wet,
by mass percentage, it's a huge red herring, Krivit fell for this.
The elephant in the living room is overflow water, which will be at
the boiling point, but which will not have vaporized, leading to a
miscalculation of power on the idea that this water was vaporized,
when it wasn't.
Rossi's steam is very dry by the wet-steam-argument standards.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
<<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:
At 09:29 PM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Well, Rossi is changing the power when he twiddles the controls.
Maybe he is trying to keep it stable. But anyway if it overflows I
am pretty sure he turns up the power.
How does he know when it overflows? You've been assuming that the
temperature will drop. No. Not unless boiling ceases.
Did Craig's questions relate somehow to the response he quoted?
