|
Posted by PipeDown on August 9, 2005, 11:46 pm
>
>> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>> Or, just take the recommendations that the manufacturer put into
>>> developing the best combination of time and temperature and air flow.
>>
>> I doubt that the manufacturer considered electric consumption when
>> preparing the user manuals. More likely they focused on convenience.
>
> How do you think they get the energy star ratings?? Power consumption is
> a very important item for them.
>
The low temp setting is intended for protecting delicate clothing not saving
energy. If the savings were significant enough to make a difference, you
can be assured the manufacturer would have bragged about it in the marketing
literature.
More than likely, the normal (high setting) dries the clothes more
efficiently. My reasoning, it takes the same amount of heat (or energy, in
joules) to vaporize a fixed amount of water regardless of the rate at which
you do it. If you use the low setting, the motor will need to run longer,
thus offsetting the balance in favor of the high setting.
On the other hand, the increased volume of air used in the longer (low temp)
setting may offset the loss of energy contributed by the heater by taking it
from the atmosphere instead. Both settings may be very similar in the end.
Additional offsets can be concieved to account for weather, clothing density
and fabric type, load size and cloth surface area. You can get very nit
picky and still conclude the two settings are close enough not to worry
about.
Select the setting based on the clothes you are putting in and nothing else.
Only a few controlled experiments will answer this sufficiently
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap