Actually, the article says that SOME rads perform better at low flow rates.
If you look at those graphs, on page 5, it's clear that some rads perform better at a lower flow rate, but they haven't been tested for even lower flow rates, so it's hard to tell.
Also on the same page, it's clear that the graphs, if extended, would show that some rads would do better, and some worse. The difference is very small though, and I think that it can be attributed to an error factor.
All in all, it seems clear that any rad is designed to be run for a specific flow rate (+/- 5%), and I'd very much like to hear from JimS about this.
JimS?
Athlonnerd, that's an amazing idea. I can't believe no one thought of it before. That fluid exchanger can be incorporated as an air trap, killing 2 birds with one stone, sort of speak. Clearly we needed to isolate the flow to the rad, from the flow to the block(s). Excellent suggestion... I'll get to work on an airtrap soon, knowing all this!
|