The insulated water containers boxes must all be identical. Fabricating from aerogel seems like asking for trouble if off-the-shelf Styrofoam is adequate and it looks like it may be.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:05 PM, DJ Cravens <[email protected]> wrote: > You may want to look at aerogel insulation > Search ebay for aspen aerogel insulation > or the pourable kind from United Nuclear if you just want to have a hot > sample without the water heating. > > > D2 > > ------------------------------ > Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 15:50:52 -0600 > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley Arpa-E startup project reloaded! vote for for 10 > days.. hurry up > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > > OK that quick guess arithmetic was interesting enough to motivate me to > look into the real numbers: > > http://www.mrboxonline.com/8x6x7-styrofoam-coolers-p-6787.html > > 10 of those cost $55.50 > They're 1.5in thick > They're 8"x6"x7" inside > They're 9.5"x7.5"x8.5" outside > Surface area 2*(9.5*7.5+9.5*8.5+7.5*8.5)in^2 = 431.5 in^2 > > Redoing the arithmetic: > > 431.5in^2*.033W/(m*deltaK)*2deltaK/1.5in?W > ([{(431.5 * [inch^2]) * (0.033 * watt)} / {meter * deltaK}] * [2 * deltaK]) / > (1.5 * inch) ? watt > = 0.4822444 W > > That looks good. > > A distribution with 9 control data points and 1 experimental data point > providing 2 degrees C signal for only a half watt. > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:31 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > Quick arithmetic: > > 1m^2*.033W/(m*deltaK)*2deltaK/2in?W <http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/> > ([{(1 * [meter^2]) * (0.033 * watt)} / {meter * deltaK}] * [2 * deltaK]) / (2 > * inch) ? watt > = 1.2992126 W > > > That's for styrofoam 2 inches thick and a cooler with total surface area of > 1m^2 and a 2 degree Kelvin temperature difference with ambient. > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:23 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hmm.... perhaps but one would think that if the water containers were > covered Styrofoam coolers, the temperature differences might accumulate > sufficiently to render the signal -- particularly given the distribution > represented by the numerous control containers -- quite significant. > > Admittedly, I haven't done the arithmetic. > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: > > James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > > > A properly designed Seebeck is a lot more than that. > > > With an infinite COP all that's necessary is a room with a bunch of > similar pots of water, one of which has the infinite COP device in it. > > > With only one watt I do not think that would work well. Background changes > in temperature would swamp the effect of the 1 W heat source. That was the > problem with the open-air Arata demonstration and others like it I have > seen. > > I am not saying it wouldn't work at all, but the data would be noisy and > people would wonder if it wasn't the effect of the HVAC currents of air > blowing on one dish and not the other, or what-have-you. > > With ~10 W in a small device your method would work. > > - Jed > > > > >
