inter seasonal storage solar thermal

[lilian07]

now that i have some tools i will realize and add columns of readability and make 2,3 simulations .... by varying parameters, the inclination of the sensors, the number of sensors .... to reduce the storage without ignoring it because the objective is to store the free energy lost .....
By sizing we see more clearly and then it is more concrete ....
I put sensor values ​​less efficient than the trade because auto built in the end.

Next week after work, I will start the parameter measurements and carry out some sensors ... without forgetting a small drilling and a small excavation.

I will then tackle the sizing of storage with your help .... according to the theses carried out, it appears that inter-seasonal storage can vary in yield from 25 to 40%

At the end of the calculations as precise as possible, without looking for partial differential equations ... I will apply the principle of Bomb A with its uncertainties in numerical simulation .....
This principle well known to the farmer and his common sense, the principle of robustness .... so I will size my sensors up to + 20% compared to the theory and my storage well will be realized by taking into account only a reduced yield of the latter, say 15 to 20% in the long term .....

Here's wishing you a good evening and a good Sunday for what's left.

[Obamot]

I just said it

Let's wait for the results of the polls (we may finally know the room for maneuver, 3 or 4 polls to close a perimeter).

AND DEEPEST BORING / CORE DRILLING POSSIBLE, minimum -12m.

Nothing urgent for the rest, we don't know where we're going, calculations on what?

[lilian07]

Obamot said:

As already said, you have to be humble and not think that you are going to re-invent the wheel => there are the laws of physics => starting from there we may have new ideas, it is very good if they are "compatible" with said laws, if we deviate from them ... I repeat, apart from the idea of ​​genius and which leads to an optimal mix, 99% of the time it is not us who decide , but the technical solutions which are imposed on us .... At one point we agreed that taking again the principles which already worked was a good idea, then this wishful thinking was lost in "the avalanche of ideas ", that's not how you make a good project, but since that's none of my business, it's up to whoever has these" ideas "to assume. I am not saying that we should not go and dig here and there for "economical" materials that suck (on the contrary). But it is the general approach that is wrong. (Well that's my opinion.) For me it only makes sense if there is a gain compared to a previous system, and there I see everything from gardening tarpaulin to bubble wrap packaging in going through bentonite, it's really all and nothing and rather NOTHING as a gain. ....

Well, you are right ... at the beginning I thought it was necessary to send a 200l probe at 5m to warm the earth with 20m2 of sensors and recover thousands of kwh ....

Today physics and criticism lead us to constantly correct ....
Example: the exploration of all the sensors and materials that come in all directions are, on the one hand, materials already used by the various auto manufacturers, except a few exotic ones ... but I think that nothing should be overlooked.
Sweeping wide is not necessarily going in the wrong direction, sometimes and you know it is by carrying out an experiment that we discover other more interesting things .... we are simply in the exploratory phase with the knowledge that we belong, but I notice one thing is that we have pieces of know-how that can lead us to a realistic project and therefore achievable ....

I agree if the project is out of reach it will not be realized ... it is the desired end effect that counts and without viable concept no reaching the target ....

[Obamot]

I have not yet decided on all these points !!! (drilling depth, method, sensors, we cannot go out of order).

No more than it is possible to deduce anything from it as it is, necessarily, the plow is there but the slightest ox (finally if ^^)

But sorry, that doesn't mean striking and spooky shortcuts that will lead to nothing.

When you have no prerequisites, you don't know where to go and that's normal, doesn't that mean that you can clear everything? Is this where humility can help ???

You have to practice the so-called funnel method. The hard part is knowing what to validate.

Do we start with drilling / core drilling / drilling?
To know the gap on which "we" can count (calculate) thoughtful speculation! >>>

What else !!!

[dedeleco]

You have to start with simple little real to test simple cheap!
500m2 of sensors at 10 € / m2 measured and validated before in winter by tests on one m2, not optimal, but not expensive on 500m2 will heat in winter without storage for more than a week !!

So after doing a real test storage model over a few days and a small dimension to measure !!

[Flytox Moderation]

[Kenny-k]

[Flytox Moderation]

[dedeleco]

I did not buy for 5000 € this same complete machine 96V for 739 € on the right corner in large numbers in stock:
http://www.leboncoin.fr/bricolage/851202134.htm

[Flytox Moderation]

[lilian07]

Yes I confirm attention with the wind turbines, I have tested its machines a lot 10 years ago now ... I had auto built from A to Z a three blade of 4m in diameter, 12m high and we must be careful with many things at the same time .... especially not to make tests by multiplying the risks ..... first risk the electric shock, 2nd the moving elements and last the height ..... it is necessary to take precautions for each risk and never associate 2 ....
It's sometimes very annoying and we tend to cut corners ...

[lilian07]

Dede I will try to find a moment today to simulate the different hypotheses with different catchment area.

See how the need evolves.

I do not think that it is necessary to carry out 500 m2, the optimum must certainly be between a given surface, a small storage and if I superimpose a cost it will make 3 equations to solve.

That's not bad. I will therefore continue by making a modified Excel table adapted to my situation.

Obviously already I am on a stocker with less than 30 realistic boreholes ... therefore drilling if it remains below 25m deep remains feasible with simple means (drilling with auger if the layer of marl does not appear in the meantime. ..)

For the next week I will try a manual drilling (auger) at 10m +/- 2m vertical (80mm in diameter inside a trench then according to the difficulty modified on the auger (welding of a drill bit to couple this last with the 1500 W hole auger).
I keep my test of horizontal drilling in case there is an explosion in the number of vertical holes.
I measure diffusivity in the workshop
I realize temperature and composition of the earth + density ...

[Obamot]

[Flytox Moderation]