AMI: call for interest on "energy storage"

Heating, insulation, ventilation, VMC, cooling ... short thermal comfort. Insulation, wood energy, heat pumps but also electricity, gas or oil, VMC ... Help in choosing and implementation, problem solving, optimization, tips and tricks ...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 09/05/11, 18:52

.... it had not escaped me that it was YOU who spoke of this, without further details, here:
dedeleco wrote:
Obamot wrote:
dedeleco wrote: [...] Finally one can store under ground without stirring this ground of origin with drilling every 2m and if necessary by injecting under periphery under pressure of the fluids like cement, or other special to seal the pores of the ground.
Storage must be at more from 3m to 6m according to the ground.

This type of storage is used and functional at point at: dlsc.ca/
[...] it's just clear "than a storage of -3 to -6m", is not applicable in some cases, such as old buildings, poorly insulated etc. We must be more careful in assertions! [...]

small error, because it is the minimum depth required


THU is soft focus and make mistakes, huh? : Mrgreen:

https://www.econologie.com/forums/post201992.html#201992
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 09/05/11, 22:44

I had written precisely:
storage is more than 3m to 6m depending on the soil.

which means that the storage starts at a depth of more than 3 to 6m, which descends to a depth allowing a storage volume fixed by the heat to be stored, i.e. more than 1000m3, i.e. at least 1000m3 which must be increased strongly to store the energy necessary to heat old houses in winter.
but it's very different from the sentence:
a storage of -3 to -6m

which means that storage takes place from -3 to -6m and no more.

"more than" does not mean "at" this location exactly as a "3" storey building is not at all the same as a "more than 3" storey building, with 3,4,5,6, and more of possible floors,
or a meeting at more than 5h (it is also possible later at 6h 7h 8h) is very different from meeting at 5h (battery at this time) !!


This is very important, because the not enough deep heat is lost rising to the surface by this diffusion.

In addition for old houses it is not advisable to heat under their foundations, which will be destabilized, as in great drought.
So store in the garden, away from the old house, or under the street.

This is what I plan to do at home, away from home, if I find a way to drill inexpensively deep with extensions, because then the number of boreholes and the storage volume is not limited, except the time necessary to drill.
Next, with inexpensive solar thermal collectors, there is no limit to the heat stored in summer.
And the result is then formidable in terms of perpetual renewable heating without consumption, without pollution, CO2, nuclear or heat pump wear, on old houses.
So you have to solve the difficulties that can make it more difficult, especially drilling to make it not more expensive than the sensors.
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 10/05/11, 00:17

... te ... te ... te

Anyway it's not enough! : Lol:

Before embarking on titanic work, why not try out a model ... By putting:

- the same type of soil as at the intended location;
- the mass of "effective" earth + that corresponding to your "insulation buffer";
- the planned containment / isolation;
- at the depth that you consider sufficient;
- with small temperature sensors.

And by simply making a warm enough warm water circuit, which you will interrupt when the temperature has stabilized at ~ 22C (not even need solar collectors to do that) ...

And you will see how long it will stay at temperature, which will allow you to validate your calculations ...!
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 10/05/11, 02:40

The reduced model respecting the law of diffusion scale distance squared on time = constant will work on and avoid calculations to convince !!
One day instead of 4 months (or 100 days) gives a diffusion distance 10 times smaller (m become dm) or 30cm to 60cm and a side size 10 times smaller cube of 1m and cube storage volume of 1m3, 1000 weaker, with a "borehole" or pipe every 20cm and one day instead of one year.
We can do faster, 10 ^ 2 times smaller and 100 ^ 2 times shorter in time, either m become cm, or cube 10 cm on the side, 4 months becomes 864s = 14minutes24s and "drillings" every 2cm of fine tubes or copper wires 1 to 2mm isolated over 3 to 6cm from 13cm to 16cm long !!
Humanly easy !!
And lots of thermocouple thermometers or diodes in it.
You have to heat half the time and cool the other half the drill wires.
It will be necessary to heat the surface of this soil as in summer with a lamp and to cool as in winter with air !!
The circulation of water in the tubes does not follow at all this law of scale of the diffusion: pressure drops power 4 (5-1) much stronger and therefore it is more difficult to heat the fine pipes.

It all depends on the nature of the soil, plant humus of topsoil or dense clay without humus, hard rock, 10 times more diffusive.
It is even a means of measuring the diffusion constant.
given the variability of the soils, precise simulation is hardly necessary.

If that can convince and in particular specify the losses between summer and winter over a large number of years.

But before, the only problem is to be able to drill cheap !!!
Much more difficult to achieve. a motor auger and the drills are not very usual in hiring and very expensive.
A perforator with long extension and small diameter drill, 15 to 20mm in diameter is a possible solution.
Simulating what does not pose a problem, is not essential, since the source of summer sun is an energy which believes like the surface of cheap sensors put in the sun (black pipes under plastic) !!
Even if we lose a lot, with enough sensors, there will remain.
If the boreholes are not expensive, like the sensors, then by increasing their number we are sure to achieve it.

My motivation is simplicity in production and price.
0 x
Aumicron
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 387
Registration: 16/09/09, 16:43
Location: Bordeaux




by Aumicron » 10/05/11, 09:18

dedeleco wrote:In addition for old houses it is not advisable to heat under their foundations, which will be destabilized, as in great drought.

To check. I don't think we should confuse soil heating with drought. Underfloor heating should not affect the humidity of the ground.

On the other hand, to avoid runoff it is certainly better to put a membrane on the surface as in the Montana experiment. So the risk should be almost zero.
0 x
To argue.
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 10/05/11, 13:29

dedeleco wrote:The reduced model respecting the law of diffusion scale distance squared over time = constant will work for sure et will avoid calculations to convince !!

But before, the only problem is to be able to drill cheap !!!

Whatever happens, it is not clear how the achievement of a proto could avoid calculations, and vice versa)?!
(But congratulations on considering doing it).

It's almost as if Airbus wanted to market a revolutionary hydrogen powered aircraft, just requiring only tanks filled with water and they said:
A prototype will certainly fly and avoid calculations to be convinced ...

- But before, the only problem is to be able to find cheap water.


: Cheesy:
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 10/05/11, 14:44

It's almost as if Airbus wanted to market a revolutionary hydrogen powered aircraft, just requiring only tanks filled with water and they said:
- A prototype will certainly fly and avoid calculations to be convinced ...
- But before, the only problem is to be able to find cheap water !!!


Not at all
because it has been working elsewhere for a very long time, using a well-known basic phenomenon: the diffusion of heat, respecting all known and established physical laws.
There are almost 2000 years the Romans and others kept ice easily from winter to summer in large underground rooms with very thick walls (meters) which used this property of diffusion of cold (or heat) slowing down as the square root of time for have ice cream in summer, by storing a large volume (10m by cube)!
They didn't need calculations (no computer) but they knew that the bigger and bigger it is underground the longer it is kept !!
My argument is strictly the same and the calculations seem to me hardly more essential, if the price of an increase in size remains reasonable for a personal achievement.


This works for:
http://www.dlsc.ca/DLSC_Brochure_f.pdf
http://www.dlsc.ca
with this very old elementary principle !!
This works in the caves by modifying the variations of external T.
it works very well in houses with thick walls, several meters, like castles (6m) which are never too cold nor too hot. (it is enough to preheat their interior all summer at 25 ° C, 30 ° C with solar thermal collectors, to be warm in winter (walls and roof over 6m thick, because of limestone or granite).
This is verified in bunkers with meters of earth on it, with the heat of summer arriving months late and preserved (phase shift over months):
Christophe had reported a case on econology after visiting such a bunker !!

So nothing revolutionary, nor excess energy, and the only problem is the lack of assimilation and understanding of the diffusion of heat by most people, who then do not believe it.
So, for them, it looks like a conjuring trick, supernatural, yet using only the well known natural physical possibilities !!!

So nothing to do with incredible supernatural energy, at all, but at the limit, an appearance of conjuring trick, very rudimentary, without the slightest manipulation !!.

Drilling has no problem with www.dlsc.ca

For me, because I don't want to spend more on it than a boiler or a heat pump.
And above all the price of drilling is excessive, while I am sure that their price can be greatly reduced, by reducing their diameter and simple methods.

Anyway some on econology got there for their well for not a round and patience:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post161910.html#161910
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post161981.html#161981
with different means to combine, drill tube, karcher, etc.

There are perforators and the most difficult is to find extension rods of small diameter to go deep, because most of the time it is used at low depth in fences or masonry.
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 10/05/11, 15:03

... you are someone very determined, but you shouldn't hang in your tracks for so little ...

The mistake would be to start by considering only one shallow storage solution as the only possible alternative.

What will you do if the performance of your prototype did not correspond exactly to theoretical calculations ... in any case you would have prematurely developed a drilling "solution" for nothing! And that would not be: nor very "Simple nor economical"...

It's very reckless! Because the difficulty is to reproduce / reunite "Favorable conditions" (cf the bunker keeps its heat, yes but why and how to do it and install it ...) as long as you don't have them ...

It seems to me that if you really want one "Simplicity in construction and price", until you have "The validation it takes we should not put the cart before the horse. Any R&D department would validate with a prototype first, then would choose the storage solution "Who's doing well" then.

So if you want to get started, at least start by making a plan of your prototype.
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 10/05/11, 15:32

What limits are drilling, while the more we do, the greater the storage volume, and the more we will keep a high proportion !!

So it is necessary to resolve inexpensive drilling first !!
So the first prototype is to do a first drilling !!
In PACA region not cold (instead of replacing a PACA) but fairly solid rock problem.


Underfloor heating should not affect the humidity of the ground.

Considering the immense number of houses with insufficient foundations which have had crack problems with droughts, I am very wary and the humidity vapor migrates from hot to cold, by heating the ground, via cracks, humidity migrates from hot to cold slowly and can destabilize the foundations !!

So be extremely wary of underfloor heating under old houses !!! !!
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 10/05/11, 16:10

: Cheesy: : Cheesy: : Cheesy: ha, ha, ha ... Could it be obstinacy ...!

My faith, if you refuse the validation of the theory as an elementary prerequisite (which is more for an old construction ..!), You are certain to have big surprises in practice. At least remember that you have been warned. I do not know of an R&D department which would save on tests by launching itself headlong into a project driven by the desire to find a "Economical technical solution" - however not necessarily required a priori - and under the impulse of a conviction inspired by the only "personal will" ...
0 x

Back to "Heating, insulation, ventilation, VMC, cooling ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 394 guests