Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered
good designs are simple designs, quite true in testing
|
Agreed. The less work, the less likelihood of up-f**ks. Perhaps the most important thing I learned from college. Er, other than learning how to drink entire bottles of rum in a sitting. Second most important, perhaps.
Quote:
see no point in attempting to characterize the rad tube/fin profile surface temp,
no way to use the info and too prone to mounting induced variability
|
Well, you need some way to separate the heat transfer coefficients between air and radiator and water and radiator. This is the simplest way I can think of to try that. You're quite right that variability will be a pain, though. Obviously the temperature will change significantly depending on how far the water has traveled on the other side. Not sure what to answer to that except running replicates.
Quote:
rads respond quickly and assessing equilibrium and valid mean values can be a real chore
|
Again, can't you just run replicates and analyze the data later to figure out an average and standard deviation for what you're trying to find?
Quote:
then one has to figure out how to 'dump' the heated air so as not to jack up the amb temp
|
Ooh, that's a very good point. Ambient temp really changes that much in your testing lab? If so, you can still measure delta-Ts to figure out what you're trying to do, but the fact you're trying to test a dynamic system does indeed make for a pain in the ass.
Alchemy