View Single Post
Old 03-19-10, 02:55 PM   #9
bennelson
Home-Wrecker
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 546
Thanks: 3
Thanked 165 Times in 96 Posts
Default

I moved on to test the "box of water approach".

I was able to get some really high temperatures going through the water panel with the copper pipe wrapped around the steel tank, but that actually isn't a good thing - it means heat wasn't transferring well INTO the tank.

I would imagine that with the copper completely submerged in water, it should get excellent heat transfer. I unwound the copper pipe from the steel tank, and found a large plastic tub. I wound the copper small enough to fit down into the tub, and then filled it with water. The tub didn't have any volume markings on it, but I think it is between 10 and 15 gallons.



Once I got water flowing through the panel again, I stuck my arm into the frigid bucket of water to feel the copper. The pipe had a gentle warmness to it. I also noticed that right where the pipe came into the water, it was very warm, but the output end was almost the same temperature as the bucket water. That means that almost all the heat is being transferred to the water in the bucket.



It is mostly cloudy today, so I am not expecting to get too much out of this system right now. Also, please note that since I am currently planning a glycol closed-loop system, a second loop of pipe would go into the "box of water". One would be for the glycol, and the other would be for the household water going to the water heater.

This would be considered a "dual-wall" heat exchanger, so no problems with contamination in case of a leak. However, plain water should act as an excellent heat exchange medium, especially if both loops are copper pipe.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bennelson is offline   Reply With Quote