inter seasonal storage solar thermal

Solar thermal energy in all its forms: solar heating, hot water, choosing a solar collector, solar concentration, ovens and solar cookers, solar energy storage by heat buffer, solar pool, air conditioning and solar cold ..
Aid, counseling, fixtures and examples of achievements ...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28795
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5583




by Obamot » 08/12/15, 15:57

lilian07 wrote:Ok Obamot, we don't have the technical choice,

If, if, and they are vast but become reduced adapted to each case and according to each budget and sometimes not (HS if unsuitable.)

lilian07 wrote:the solution is imposed on us

Even a brilliant and innovative solution will impose itself on us, I don't see where the problem is: no, don't go against the laws of physics (gravity, thermodynamics of the masses, energetic thermodynamics etc);

lilian07 wrote:and we're just getting closer to the ideal

That yes it would be well, it is precisely the purpose of this thread, the purpose of the search for maximum size of eXergie ....

lilian07 wrote:with the risks of going in the wrong direction.

Precisely no, everything must converge to avoid going BEFORE, before investing in any structural work that would not work AFTER ....

lilian07 wrote:I'm just saying that forums in general and the experts in particular that you are allow you to follow an ideal path by being critical of the bad choices.

Then read Izentop's post above and a few others to read again ...
A "expert"can do nothing if then"the action does not follow"his humble opinion.

There is nothing on my part, the pretension to give an expert opinion, but without going so far, there are things that I do not feel. And my only message would be to say that it would be well not to spoil the chances that there would be that this is carried out in an optimal way. And this by all kinds of useless procrastination: what additional gain:
- to drill transversely VS vertically = not demonstrated (probably none);
- to reduce the drilling depth (which will drastically reduce the length of the circuit) = none (it would be better to have deeper wells which limit the impact to a multiplicity which would increase the surface area);
- lose the available storage capacity between 0m and -10m = none.
- to innovate with coils whereas the "U tube" model is proven and it also has more advantages = none.
- to take a risk of subsidence when one can very well do without this problem by drilling vertically = none.

lilian07 wrote:The architecture of the house is a constraint, the CAP is one

And quite precisely, why introduce constraints where it is not necessary, what gain = none. Even if heating with a heat pump is 2x less worse than heating otherwise, we are still in the "worst".

lilian07 wrote:the structure around the system is not so bad… .water network under low temperature slab…

This is indeed what the skilful VRP stuffing sells for the sale of PAC (which begins to look like this thread, with purely imaginary COPs, or in any case not reflecting the reality of 90% of cases of installation of PAC and which could make believe that it is an ideal solution.) it is less bad than less well in the worst.

lilian07 wrote:Let's go back to the project.

The main shortcoming of this project is that it seeks to make up for the consequences of an inappropriate decision (PAC) to minimize its impact. It is therefore badly crossed at the start. If in addition it is necessary to introduce a cascade of additional problems, that loses all its interest.

I have nothing against this project, I try to remain lucid and vigilant on the tracks explored. Because in principle what I'm looking for is: butter, butter money, milk, the milk jug, the cow and the milkmaid's daughter : Mrgreen: and that requires to be precise.
0 x
Christophe68
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 29
Registration: 27/06/15, 12:55
Location: Alsace




by Christophe68 » 08/12/15, 15:59

@Lilian
I read that you intended to use the drilling network in replacement of your existing installation.
You have to take into account the fact that with your existing system, you already have 500m² of solar collector on the surface.
With the vertical borehole network isolated on the surface, you will have to inject the totality calories you will get, otherwise you will get the exact opposite of the desired effect.
Your network will cool down.
You will therefore first need to estimate your thermal energy needs.
If I believe your indications from the first page, you consume 15MW / h / electric per year, which therefore makes with a COP of 4MW / h thermal.
Knowing that you can count on 0,5MW / h per year per m² of collector, you will therefore need to install 120m² before seeing any improvement. It is therefore unnecessary to replace your installation with a network of boreholes plus 60m² of sensor, but you can very well use it in complement.
Then if you resume my heat dissipation calculations, we come up with a cube of 10m on the side (same thing for a cylinder of 12m in diameter and 10m deep) in 10MW / h per year, after a few years, for an average dT 30 ° and a diffusion depth of 3m / year².
So you just need to add 20m² of sensor to have an average temperature of 40 °.
And adding 20m² of additional sensor the average temperature will further increase by 30 °, to reach 70 ° and suddenly you can turn the heat pump.
In my estimate, I took as a base a diffusion depth of 3m / year². For clay, it is necessary to take 5,61m / year² which gives losses much more important (from where my insistence to evaluate this parameter well).
We always fall back on this notion of minimum dimension.

lilian07 wrote:Another advantage that I see there, I solve the problem of the U which pollutes itself because in my holes with auger of 150 mm I send a PER / polyetylene exchanger in coil and no longer in U.

I don't understand your U problems.

lilian07 wrote:A technique which seems interesting to me because simpler in my case, only one well, some drilling at 45 ° (8 MAX),

Original idea which could work on condition of increasing the number of boreholes to constitute a sphere (ideal shape). Advantage: no need to insulate on top. Disadvantage: stiffness, because not obvious of drilling with auger and extensions from the bottom of a well.
We must remain pragmatic. It is easier to drill in good conditions from the surface. The aim is to carry out a viable project with a minimum of effort.

Now if your ambition is just to gain a COP point, I think you can get there without needing a new drilling network by spreading some pipes on the ground or under the roof to make a summary sensor and taking advantage of the variations temperature in winters (it can be 15 ° on sunny days).
When the temperature of your sensor is higher than the temperature of the cold source of your heat pump you circulate it to raise the earth in temperature.
We call it a "thermodynamic heat pump" (which doesn't mean much).
You can also build a large vertical radiator with a large fan always with the same idea. To see the aesthetic conditions and the noise.

dedeleco wrote:exactly as we simulate the heat pumps with software, without ever explaining the physics of why it took 500m2 for the heat pump of lilian07, !!

I was interested in the question precisely, as a computer scientist. But I came to the conclusion that it was economically hazardous to develop.
The purpose of the software is precisely to facilitate the work of the neophite by putting within its reach the realization of a project for which it will not make the effort to understand all the mechanisms (just read the posts of Obamot for be convinced).

dedeleco wrote:Huge quantities of fossil fuels are underground, more or less easy to recover, but capable of burning all the oxygen we breathe into CO2 and suffocating us !!

Yes, but fortunately only 0, x% are recoverable other than at the scraper. :)
It's already too much, you will tell me ...
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28795
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5583




by Obamot » 08/12/15, 16:26

Christophe68 Image

Basically he means the same thing as me but with other words, right? Image

All in all it therefore seems correct *, finally! It will have taken time!

Christophe68 wrote:You have to take into account the fact that with your existing system, you already have 500m² of solar collector on the surface.

Drafting error? Image Is it me or I didn't see that lilian07 "would have 500m² of solar collectors surface existing?" Image

Christophe68, especially with ZEROs and '1s', wrote:I don't understand your U problems as [...]computer scientist. But I came to the conclusion that [...]

If it was his job, would he understand?

Christophe68 wrote:(just read Obamot's posts to be convinced) ...

he he he he Image

Christophe68, who to think would need a real brain, wrote:We callle that's a "thermodynamic heat pump" (which doesn't mean much)

Can Christophe68 just explain to us how a CAP could be something other than a "thermodynamic system"? Image

* except for the capacities / sizing to be reviewed ... and too bad it is sometimes imbued(valid).
0 x
lilian07
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 15/11/15, 13:36
Location: Use
x 56




by lilian07 » 08/12/15, 18:11

Ok, we have a computer scientist, a physicist and a construction technician, it's great !!!
I think Christophe68 means that the horizontal network of the heat pump is indirectly a solar collector ... indeed at this depth it quickly depletes the earth's calorie buffer which is only recharged by outside input, rain ... sun ... otherwise it's a mistake on his part ...
To return to the project, with your expertise, I know that you do not like this term but far from me the idea of ​​being teasing… Me personally I really consider you as experts why?
Because most humans on this planet do not absorb a tenth of your knowledge in this specific area.
Most heating professionals do not grasp half of your knowledge… ..you are therefore in the category of experts (it is only my case…)
I resume the objective of my project: the desired effect !!!
I wish to try in the installation of solar collector for the alternative heating of the house, to obtain an inter seasonal storage (self built) and to hope by shaving me in the morning found a solution envisageable simply by the greatest number.
Christophe68 evoked several technical tracks which challenge me:
"With the network of vertical boreholes isolated on the surface, you will have to inject all the calories that you will draw, otherwise you will obtain the exact opposite of the desired effect. "
Actually I had misunderstood the fact that I have to isolate above the well capture by drilling and that is a problem that can exclude the PAC collection area which also makes the use of the PAC in Plan B. However, the well and the pseudo-horizontal boreholes solve this problem.
- to reduce the drilling depth (which will drastically reduce the length of the circuit) = none (it would be better to have deeper wells which limit the impact to a multiplicity which would increase the surface area);
I think it is important that we agree on the depth, because it is subject to discussion… for me the theory (I appeal to deldeco) should give us the optimum but I still think that following the diffusion length it is useless to descend too low because for the blow, the realization of drilling lower is always more delicate, unless to reduce the number of hole significantly.

- to innovate with coils whereas the "U tube" model is proven and it also has more advantages = none.
Indeed, we must not take any risk by innovating, the calculations should give us a feasibility otherwise we will stay in already realized and functional cases.
- to take a risk of subsidence when one can very well do without this problem by drilling vertically = none.
For pseudo horizontal drilling, I have to try in beta test on a hole (the future will tell us), because it is not certain that a horizontal method dividing the number of drilling by 10 and allowing better grasp the phenomena inside while doing without surface insulation is counterproductive.
However, it is obvious that drilling at the bottom of a hole is more delicate than vertical drilling on the surface.
Way of improvement: The bottom chamber may be wider if necessary in order to free up more maneuverability (it's just one more bucket stroke…).
I suppose that a thermal auger in pseudo horizontal drilling will be easier to evacuate the earth.
The concept of the well and pseudo horizontal drilling is only a quick concept which allows me to use my means without investing in a complex drilling rig to implement (I think that making a lot of vertical holes takes a lot of time). Now if you have to drill vertically I will make a hydraulic drill with the backhoe. (Reasonable cost) However, I will try some Christmas drill stuff.
I see another advantage to horizontal drilling, small borrows in the garden and once at the bottom of the well you can always use the neighbors' basement, excluding themselves from surface constraints. (which is not my case since I have very little surface constraint except that I will perhaps go under the floor of the cows which graze nearby…

Regarding solar collectors: I am not stopped on a surface, if I have to put 100 m2 then I will put 100 m2 but perhaps in 2 steps after an analysis of the capacities of the buffer. And then these solar collectors, winter will necessarily give me calories that I will necessarily couple to the low temperature secondary network of the heat pump (35 °) the management of the network is already existing. It will simply reduce my ecological footprint but with an entirely autonomous system. For me, storage is only a bonus which is a feat that can make us dream of a universal solution because the energy of summer is by definition lost for winter.
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28795
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5583




by Obamot » 08/12/15, 19:36

lilian07 wrote:I think Christophe68 means that the horizontal network of the heat pump is indirectly a solar collector ... indeed at this depth it quickly depletes the earth's calorie buffer which is only recharged by outside input, rain ... sun ... otherwise it's a mistake on his part ...

If we admit this type of abuse, we quickly classify PACs in the category of renewable energies somewhere (it's always nuclear)
If we admit that, it would even consider all geothermal energy as solar energy, but this is abuse.
No, it is a question of recovering heat from the ground, the correct term is therefore geothermal:

Wikipedia wrote:geothermal also means [...] geothermal energy from the energy of the Earth which is converted into heat

Three types of geothermal energy are determined: that of shallow, medium and great depth.

By the way, if so, he says "surface solar collector":
1) they are not sensors "solar";
2) they are not in "surface"(but buried UNDER the surface);
3) they are in fact nothing solar since they walk at night and in overcast weather ... If this were the case stricto sensu, they would not pick up at night.

At best or could admit the word hybrid. A Canadian well is not a "solar captor", sorry: abuse of language.
It is therefore a quadruple error.

Sorry if I did not understand because it is so wrong!

Thanks for the compliment, but let's be modest.

I resume the objective of my project: the desired effect !!!
I wish to try in the installation of solar collector for the alternative heating of the house, to obtain an inter seasonal storage (self built) and to hope by shaving me in the morning found a solution envisageable simply by the greatest number.

This is indeed the whole point of the discussion. Even if we are not the only ones to have thought about it and as such, I do not see why we should systematically (or in any case very often) reject the opinion of "experts" (whether they express themselves urbi or orbi ...)

Christophe68 evoked several technical tracks which challenge me:
"With the network of vertical boreholes isolated on the surface, you will have to inject all the calories that you will draw, otherwise you will obtain the exact opposite of the desired effect. "

Actually I had misunderstood the fact that I have to isolate above the well capture by drilling and that is a problem that can exclude the PAC collection area which also makes the use of the PAC in Plan B.

Yes, but that's not why he said that. And I share his opinion.

However, the well and the pseudo-horizontal drilling resolve this problem.

It is an affirmation which engages only its author ^^

- to reduce the drilling depth (which will drastically reduce the length of the circuit) = none (it would be better to have deeper wells which limit the impact to a multiplicity which would increase the surface area);

I think it is important that we agree on the depth, because it is subject to discussion…

We have to take back the system made by Dark Landing, because they have top flight engineers, paid for it, who quantified, calculated and implemented their babies and therefore they know why they did it like that. It is therefore a sum of expertise that it is worth exploiting!
If they stopped at -35 meters, it is because it is an optimal depth for surface storage (as already said before, to gain 1 ° C, they would have had to descend between -60m / -90m) and there it gives you an excellent ratio to understand why there is every interest in respecting this. This especially as you do not benefit from their sunshine, point which can be compensated (but to calculate) by the fact that when there is sunshine, it will be more intense than in Canada most of the time (and especially that winter is much shorter, so there is less need to heat buildings, but you should not sell the bear skin before you kill it ...)


for me the theory (I use deldeco) should give us the optimum but I still think that depending on the length of diffusion it is useless to go too low because suddenly, the realization of drilling lower is always more delicate , unless you reduce the number of holes significantly.

-35m is very little for drilling! Especially in soft ground (if indeed it is soft on this thickness ...). And you have to aim low because as long as you don't know what's underneath, you won't be able to know what should be done. But if it falls on hard at a certain depth, it could be interesting, because storing in hard may take longer to "load" but it will also take longer to "unload" ... and c ' this is what counts if we count on this question of "phase shift" ... The answer in relation to the request will also be shorter. That's why if we plan to reduce the 2,5km distance in clay, that's not a very good idea! They take full advantage of the fact that they are on "hard" (but I could be wrong ...)

- to innovate with coils whereas the "U tube" model is proven and it also has more advantages = none.
Indeed, we must not take any risk by innovating, the calculations should give us a feasibility otherwise we will stay in already realized and functional cases.

hey hey

- to take a risk of subsidence when one can very well do without this problem by drilling vertically = none.
For pseudo horizontal drilling, I have to try in beta test on a hole (the future will tell us),

In this case it will be necessary to do the tests at -10m because otherwise there is not enough mass above for it to sag.

because it is not certain that a horizontal method dividing the number of drilling by 10 and making it possible to better apprehend the phenomena inside while doing without an insulation on the surface is counterproductive.

As long as we are not at -2'000m we cannot do without surface insulation (and in my humble opinion, we need something "on"). And as long as we are not sure of the opposite calculations in support, we do not go ...

However, it is obvious that drilling at the bottom of a hole is more delicate than vertical drilling on the surface.
Way of improvement: The bottom chamber may be wider if necessary in order to free up more maneuverability (it's just one more bucket stroke…).

Ok, I'm going to leave now with an innovative solution, a sort of mix between what they have done in Canada, the technical means available, the configuration of your premises and what you are ready to do as work (capacity and will). ..

But before that, regarding the hypothesis of digging a well at -10m I would like to know very precisely what diameter would you expect to make this hole? (This is very important for my proposal)

The concept of the well and pseudo horizontal drilling is only a quick concept that allows me to use my means

This is what I understood.

without investing in a complex drill to implement (I think that making a lot of vertical holes takes a lot of time).

It depends: a) on what's underneath; b) efficiency and know-how c) equipment. d) the time available.
But a priori no, Dedeleco has already given links on the time taken by these boreholes. (But I have a plan b)

Now if you have to drill vertically I will make a hydraulic drill with the backhoe. (Reasonable cost) However, I will try some Christmas drill stuff.

I think it may be necessary to do both, I will explain this later.

I see another advantage to horizontal drilling, small borrows in the garden and once at the bottom of the well we can always use neighbors' basement, exclude surface constraints. (which is not my case since I have very little surface constraint except that I may go under the floor of the cows grazing nearby…

I don't think it is legally allowed ^^
And probably won't be necessary. Besides, vertical drilling does not solve this problem?

Regarding solar collectors: I am not stopped on a surface, if I have to put 100 m2 then I will put 100 m2 but perhaps in 2 steps after an analysis of the capacities of the buffer. And then these solar collectors, winter will necessarily give me calories that I will necessarily couple to the low temperature secondary network of the heat pump (35 °) the management of the network is already existing. It will simply reduce my ecological footprint but with an entirely autonomous system. For me, storage is only a bonus which is a feat that can make us dream of a universal solution because the energy of summer is by definition lost for winter.

Or, to see ...
0 x
lilian07
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 15/11/15, 13:36
Location: Use
x 56




by lilian07 » 08/12/15, 20:58

I made a diagram above it can not be sufficiently explicit, the central well will be 1m in diameter (concrete nozzle) but it was only an approximate idea because simply achievable.

Question: Why is it absolutely necessary to insulate a surface when we are not insulating elsewhere? I must have missed something ....

Another advantage to this type of implementation is that the well, if there is a surprise, can always be used to store the water collected further upstream (around 100m from the PAC source resurgent source network all year round. ), water to supply the house (WC, swimming pool, garden in summer ...) but also be used to gain COP on the heat pump possibly (I would like to point out that this is just an opportunity in the event of failure storage but I gradually feel that the CAP can limit failure in the event of an error on our part or rather of imponderables) ....
It is a shame not to be able to do this project below the horizontal catchment because decidedly there were only advantages in the event of experimental failures.

By analyzing the stream land next to it on a steep slope 30% and 50m from the potential storage we can notice that around 20m from the ground level we fall on a marly layer and it is no longer the same problem if we realize several boreholes at -35m.

To return to the engineers who thought its -35m I think it is a set of caclul coupled with an analysis of the environment which gave them this -35m and I also think that if we could apply this same analysis locally we will find a completely different depth ..... maybe even with deviations of a ratio of 2 ....

I can't wait to see Obamot's proposal on its type of storage ....
0 x
User avatar
plasmanu
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2847
Registration: 21/11/04, 06:05
Location: The 07170 Lavilledieu viaduct
x 180




by plasmanu » 08/12/15, 22:06

lilian07 wrote:Hello,
...
For plasmanu .... do not shave anything with the bulldozer..there are always things to do with what is left..our stones are eternal !!!


obviously ... thanks for the advice


edited once at 06:34 am page 9

Image

but I get bored a little alone at home with my pussy.
1 bit cold with the neighboring Marseille hunter.
off work therefore not allowed to go out of the day except for medical reasons (there are timetables to be observed)
I have to do a little exercise for my hip, osteosynthesis of the pelvis, it cracks a chouilla and if it rains I feel it, but it is always good weather fortunately.

And I soon but kid for the week of the new year, I have to make a target in hay for the 3 bows and the crossbow.
The 03/02 the twins are 14 years old and I did not buy the gift: scooters (thing like that) I missed two matra elec at 250 €, otherwise 4weather 2.5l / 100 max
I have to take care of 1 little ... the holes: later

edited a second time at 06:35 am page 9
: Mrgreen:
...
..
.
: Mrgreen:
continued from page 9
...
I will digitize everything in 3D to have a more global overview.
Number the large stones
Aim the winch on the trailer
repair the quad (backward problem)
Image
make a pulley chandelier over 2.5m with telescopic roller
Image
Image
the courtyard is on one level ...

Finally, we will see if I have 5 minutes in 2016.
Not that it is f ... to make holes, it's a convict thing like breaking stones to the ground, you have to be too stupid ... : Idea:

I have that to ask in 2016 spring for the beautiful days when we can tinker outside!
(edit 3rd time 22:48 pm continued on page 9: it is a wine tank to be filled with hot water and it is centered right under the house in the center below the cellar at the bottom)
Image
meanwhile it's tidying up
Image


And it’s urgent for the cellar to reconnect this:
it is placed on a 40 cm pile of small basalt stones, on a loose pallet edit 6: 22h58 it is for the cold spring water, and the decanter, not to heat the basalt with the coil in front: it will annoy me ... to pour a slab on the basalt. eh ...
Image
and I stuck the power cable of the terrace under the pile of wood, and elec board is behind difficult to access
edit 22h52: it is an SMA 3000w inverter for my 3200w PV for the EDF 3000w buyout contract
I'm on the protection side

Image
and I have 2 concrete mixers to use edit 5: 22pm it's 56v electric, neither thermal nor three-phase
Image
Image
0 x
"Not to see Evil, not to hear Evil, not to speak Evil" 3 little monkeys Mizaru
Christophe68
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 29
Registration: 27/06/15, 12:55
Location: Alsace




by Christophe68 » 08/12/15, 23:01

lilian07 wrote:I think Christophe68 means that the horizontal network of the heat pump is indirectly a solar collector ... indeed at this depth it quickly depletes the earth's calorie buffer which is only recharged by outside input, rain ... sun ... otherwise it's a mistake on his part ...

What I wanted to say is that in the case of a horizontal heat pump, the surface can be considered as a solar collector whose average temperature in static is 10 °.
Unlike a heat pump fed by a vertical borehole whose temperature will go down indefinitely (but more and more slowly).
A good way to check this would be to place a good thermal insulator (rock wool) on the surface of the ground used by the heat pump. The soil temperature will then drop indefinitely.

In the case of the well with horizontal star drilling, there is no need to insulate on the surface, because it is the thick layer of earth which serves as insulation. But the configuration remains the same as in the case of vertical drilling. The temperature will go down indefinitely if you don't inject more calories than it pumps.
The other problem with your configuration is that it looks like a disk. So your heat will leak on both sides of the disc and you will not be able to recover it. It is essential to create a volume (sphere).

For the location, it must be separated from that of your existing installation so as not to interfere. These are two different works which must be completed.

As for the U, we generally use a configuration with four pipes (two U) because it is the best compromise. But you can put 6 or 8, it is not annoying, except that it is more expensive for a minimal gain. Your coiled hose system also works as long as you don't space it out too much. But it will cost you more (central pipe).

If you want to innovate, you can add an additional pipe in each borehole, with a plug and small holes along it to make a taste and keep the soil moist near the boreholes, to improve thermal conductance.

lilian07 wrote:Question: Why is it absolutely necessary to insulate a surface when we are not insulating elsewhere? I must have missed something ....

Because the earth also serves as a thermal accumulator and insulation. We must take the time to reread the thread, especially the post where I did the digital demonstration with the two examples.

lilian07 wrote:To return to the engineers who thought its -35m I think it is a set of caclul coupled with an analysis of the environment which gave them this -35m and I also think that if we could apply this same analysis locally we will find a completely different depth ..... maybe even with deviations of a ratio of 2 ....


Dimensions are conditioned by needs. If they had had to supply a village of 400 houses, they would have taken a cylinder 70m in diameter and height.
If they had had to supply a village of 3200 houses, they would have taken a cylinder of 140m in diameter and height, etc ...
0 x
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 08/12/15, 23:27

Hello,
lilian07 wrote:
"
It is true that it is certainly not by trying to make fourrier transforms that we will be able to obtain much more than the "technical popularizations" of dedelco "I like drunk guys" to understand the diffusion .... "
Furthermore it's a perfectly exact simulation, used even for reactor cores where the stuffed neutrons darken in all directions, tap on the uranium nuclei by breaking them, which gives 2 new neutrons in place of the first, if they are slow, knock on the nuclei moderators (graphite, hydrogen) while slowing down, and die after 8 minutes if they have survived all of this !!

Whenever I read a wonderful post from Plasmanu, I tremble and I pray so that it is not yet a misfortune, with all its bazaars and its hyperactivity by getting up too early !!

Obamot does not seem very constructive for the problem. First he does not read in-depth scientific articles on the subject which were essential for dlsc.ca and are also crucial to avoid errors !!
Thus, by voluntary incompetence, he comes out, strung like pearls of the inconsistencies that pollute this serious and difficult project.

I will read better these scientific articles to answer the solution envisaged by lilian07 with its 12T which improves the possibilities !!

I will find the studies on the U-shaped exchanger and also on the spirals for PAC, that I had read too quickly, without motivation !!

Laplace equivalent to Fourier at a dimension, is not enough because at 3dim the partial differential equation ends either with full of triple integrals, or simulations with a program among the armada of existing programs to simulate, or the simulation with stuffed guys, simple but exact , but a little slow, but not really tiring for the brain!

Obamot should do such a drunk guy program who advance as much as they retreat !!

Then he would understand better !!

The L = 35m come out of the simple analysis (which Obamot refuses to read and assimilate) for dlsc.ca of the needs in kWh / year of the 52 houses, the need to have L = D higher as much as possible in Delta diffusion in a volume as close as possible to the sphere L = D !!
L can be smaller if lower needs !!
Above by isolating inexpensively we decrease losses a little, but over 4 months it is not much (too linear in time) and Obamot is invited to calculate this gain !!
0 x
Thiazolinones neuro toxic to avoid them being everywhere, madness, killing at least ppm, bacteria and your neurons, which multiplies Alzheimer !!
The bees disappear pesticide, Roundup, and are killing us slowly. http://www.pollinis.org/petitions/petit ... noides.php
dedeleco
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9211
Registration: 16/01/10, 01:19
x 10




by dedeleco » 09/12/15, 01:31

Obamot wrote:You just added one more constraint / unknown (the blow of the coil) when precisely it would have to be reduced ...

The coil is not a bad idea in itself insofar as it suggests a greater volume distribution of contact of the block crossed, but which adds another problem, that of the loss of diffusion by contact, which is necessary. precisely to avoid: or else what would need for example (and remains to be invented) would be a water-soluble sheath, so that in the end the clay is found directly in contact with the tube ...! We can invent ANYTHING! If we wanted to find the most minimalist solution possible, it would be to slide a tube which heats to 1'000 ° C and which "bakes" the clay on contact by then making it play the role of sheath supporting the transport of the fluid ... we can also make a terracotta sheath that we insert into the borehole and which will ensure optimal contact with the clay (among other crazy ideas), etc ... But the coil I do not believe too much, unless you run bentonite in the wells afterwards (I had already thought about it but I gave up because of the cost of the operation!)


Still misunderstandings, and salads to explain, that the term "contact diffusion" has no meaning, terracotta is a good insulator, thermal contact can be good and sufficient with a little packed clay, and extra heavy bentonite for butchering what makes its price is for deep wells under pressure that must be blocked at all costs before the oil explosion !!
"used to curtail drilling fluid invasion by its propensity for aiding in the formation of mud cake."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentonite
http://www.passionbassin.com/bento.php
What especially blocks long-term it is the thermal capacity of the soil about 12kWh / m3, more than the thermal contact and I invite Obamot to calculate instead of going out of unnecessary complications and inconsistent sentences.
0 x
Thiazolinones neuro toxic to avoid them being everywhere, madness, killing at least ppm, bacteria and your neurons, which multiplies Alzheimer !!

The bees disappear pesticide, Roundup, and are killing us slowly. http://www.pollinis.org/petitions/petit ... noides.php

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Solar thermal: solar collectors CESI, heating, hot water, stoves and solar cookers"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 40 guests