"for two reasons:"... errr... the third reason was a "backup reason" Should either of the first two reasons be disqualified before competition, the third reason knows whole routine.
From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 10:20:07 -0600 Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple for two reasons: 1) the secondary flow rate was much higher than the primary, moving the equilibrium point closer to the hot side 2) the primary flow rate is unknown, and quite possible variable, moving the equilibrium point back and forth 3) the primary flow is sometimes steam, sometimes water, sometimes both. If the steam were to immediately condense in the brass fitting, it would impart the same energy as water at hundreds of degrees celsius, driving the equilibrium closer to the cold side. > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 17:09:53 +0100 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe > > > > > ----- Original Nachricht ---- > Von: Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > An: [email protected] > Datum: 08.12.2011 17:00 > Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe > > > [email protected] wrote: > > > > > How can you say this is incorrect? Do you know everything, great master? > > I can say that because Houkes knows what he is doing, other experts > > agree with him, and it has been my experience that the water temperature > > in a pipe dominates the surface temperature even when there is another > > pipe or hot body nearby. As for example, in a calorimeter where the > > inlet and outlet sensors are close, and both under insulation. Or in the > > tests I did last night. Air temperature and heat conducted by the pipe > > do not play much of a role. > > > > > > > There is symmetry, and so the temperature distribution must be > > symmetrical. > > > This is EASY to see. > > > > Evidently not. > > > If your experts dont see this simple fact, then they are not experts but > buggy calculation machines. > I have calculated many linear networks, by hand, 35 years ago, when computers > could not do this. > I know how to simplify a linear network. > > best, Peter >
