|
Post by jeff on May 15, 2016 22:09:49 GMT
Constructional Design of an Entropic Wall With Circulating Water Inside Authors Michele Trancossi www.academia.edu/24952729/Michele_Trancossi_Constructal_Design_of_an_Entropic_Wall_With_Circulating_Water_InsideEssentially, this could be considered radiant heating and cooling. Using a circulatory system to carry solar heat-gain away from the walls, decks, even solar panels, could significantly reduce the cooling requirements, especially in the Summer. The concept is akin to a very cheap heat-pump, in that it can transfer heat both ways, efficiently and automatically, with one pump. In my case, since I'm planning a ship-like hull, I could even use the bottom of the hull as the radiant surface to eliminate solar heat gain, and to collect heat from the water, to moderate Winter temps, as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2016 3:22:45 GMT
You may wanna rethink using the bottom of the hull as a heat exchanger: corrosion rates skyrocket when you add heat to a metal hull. Non-metal hulls may be unaffected.
I was thinking of using coroplast plastic panels as heat exchangers in various places. But there's two gotchas with them: nothing is guaranteed to stick and seal to them, and they will rot in UV light. Just the same, some people are using them in solar thermal panels to collect winter heat.
|
|
|
Post by jeff on May 16, 2016 4:50:04 GMT
Embed coils of Pex, just like in radiant heat flooring, and transfer it through embedded Pex in the hull, since I'm planning ferrocement-like construction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2016 0:56:41 GMT
Just a think: if you 3D print the hull, or the relavant parts, you could include the water channel voids in the print instructions, so instead of it costing you to embed plumbing, it will save you on hull material. I admit i have not thought past that, like the ramifications of huge temperature changes, or pressures, void collapses due to impact, dissolving the hull material with bad thermal fluids, etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by thebastidge on Sept 23, 2016 19:31:56 GMT
3-d printing around voids has a lot of pitfalls as well (geddit?)
Seriously- it's difficult to do with quality consistency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 3:14:03 GMT
The thing about geopoly, as i understand it, is that it atomically bonds to old geopoly as well as the fresh pour bonds to itself. If the top of the void was printed on a convex mold, as the hull printer made the bottom of the void, and the top of the void was set over the bottom of the void, voila, clean fluid tunnels thru the hull?
|
|
|
Post by jeff on Oct 1, 2016 2:56:59 GMT
Problem with Geopolymer, at least what I've tried and what I've read, it is too runny, until a certain point in the cure, whick is why most folks use molds.
|
|
|
Post by thebastidge on Oct 2, 2016 17:45:11 GMT
My point is that additive 3D construction around voids doesn't work very well. Bonding is only one issue, another major issue is slump.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 4:51:48 GMT
I thought i fixed the slump issue with the pre-made top of the tube void being already hardened, and set in place for the printer to continue the hull around and atop it.
|
|
|
Post by thebastidge on Oct 5, 2016 17:50:56 GMT
If the top of the void was printed on a convex mold, as the hull printer made the bottom of the void, and the top of the void was set over the bottom of the void, voila, clean fluid tunnels thru the hull? I missed that part. It does increase the cost and the manual intervention, which negates a good part of the benefit of 3D printing... Might work though.
|
|
|
Post by jeff on Jul 22, 2018 23:38:16 GMT
|
|