|
Posted by on June 17, 2005, 5:56 am
>>>It's essential for effective adiabatic cooling to maintain positive
>>>static pressure...
>>
>>I disagree. <snip>
>
>Ah, here's were experience takes precidence.
No. Here's where you change the subject :-)
>If you use the already-named Essick RotoBelt with a polyplastic
>endless belt of filter media, the filtration efficiency...
We doan need no steenkeeng polyplastic.
>>Removing the water vapor takes C cfm of exhaust air, where
>>P = 60C0.075(Wc-Wa) = 4.5C(0.012-0.0087) = 0.01485C, ie C = 67.3P
>>on an average 75.7 F July day in Sacramento. <snip>
>
>Trust me...
No thanks.
>...having worked in Sacramento more than a few times...swampies
>do NOT work effectively there on a typical delta summer's day!
They work a lot better at night, with 58.1 vs 93.2 F air.
If 1000(0.012-0.0087) = 0.24(T-80), T = 93.75. Not much margin.
>You cite the average, but the peak is what is of concern.
The peak requires AC or coolth storage, eg a slab.
>>With a 66.9 F average night temp, moving 100 cfm of outdoor air through
>>a 70 F house would provide about 100(70-66.9) = 310 Btu/h of cooling.
>>
>>Evaporating 0.01485x100 = 1.485 lb/h of water would provide another
>>1485 Btu/h, for a total of 1795 Btu/h, with A = 10x1.485/(1.033-0.0566)
>>= 32 ft^2 of floorslab, approximately. A 90 watt $55 Lasko 2155A 16"
>>2470 cfm window box fan could provide 44.3K Btu/h (3.7 tons) of cooling
>>with 36.7 pounds of water per hour evaporating from a 700 ft^2 slab. <snip>
>
>Nice theorheticals, but it won't work in practice. Neither will a
>portable swampie...
I disagree.
Nick
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap