Quote:
Originally posted by bigben2k
... The rad should perform almost the same, regardless of the flow rate.
However, gmat seems to think that rads in parallel is bad... It seems to me that it doesn't matter what the flow rate is through each rad (for heat dissipation purposes), but it does matter for flow rate purposes. So parallel good? gmat?
|
I think that duals rads would be a redundancy, and not necessarily the most efficient. As Cova pointed out, the rads most of us use are able to dissipate more heat than we put out. So splitting the flow to go to two rads would decrease flow rate, which according to the above statements, flow rate is most important.
I think that the idea(s) that low pressure is good for rads and high for the wb came from a number of things. But basically, the idea that pressure is directly related to flow rate. It's not. Pressure is related to mass or volume, and flow rate to velocity (if I understand it right). So in this case, pressure is a misnomer for flow rate. Now to rationalize it, slower flow rate in the rad gives more time for the water to cool, and faster flow rate in the WB removes the heated coolant faster from the WB replacing it with cooler water. Once the system has reached equilibrium, the rad changes roles. It goes from cooling the water to maintaining the temperature level of the entire system (yes this is still cooling, but not in the same sense). So, now the important thing is to get the cooler coolant to the WB and move the hot coolant out of there, needing flow rate.