well, generally correct as long as its resticted to water/radiator
surface area contact, but there is no means of indefinitely faster water
flow through the engine just because you remove the thermostate. A) you
should fit a blanking sleeve, to slow it down a bit, B) the water flow
is restricted by the water pump capacity. This in turn is restricted by
the flow through the engine and cylinder head. And I think you make a
fault if you think a smaller opening would slow down the speed, in fact,
it slows down the flow but not the speed, which increases. compare it to
a sweezed water hose, lower or equal flow, higher speed. So. I won't
bore you with going into laminar and turbulent flow theories to extend
the thread.
Gernot
> ----------
> From: Andrew Dixon[SMTP:adixon@loudoun.com]
> Reply To: Andrew Dixon
> Sent: Friday, May 15, 1998 10:54 AM
> To: triumphs@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Overheating fixed
>
>
> >From practical experience I have to agree with this line of
> reasoning.
> My other hobby is brewing beer and one of the steps is to lower the
> temperature of the wort as quickly as possible before pitching the
> yeast. I
> used to use an immersion chiller, a coil of copper tubing immersed in
> the
> wort connected to the tap (faucet) with water running through it. If
> I let the
> water run fast, it was still cool at the outlet and the wort took
> forever to cool
> down, while if I slowed down the flow of water it was hot enough at
> the outlet
> that I couldn't hold my hand under it and it sped up the cooling
> process. Still
> a terrible waste of water though.
> Now, having said that, maybe there's some magic in a closed system
> that
> turns my observation on its head.
> Andy
>
> On 05/15/98 12:09 AM Joe Curry said...
> >
> >John,
> >One thing that often gets lost in this conversation, is that while
> >removing the thermostat often makes the temperature gauge read lower.
>
> >But does this mean that the engine is cooler? Or maybe the water is
> >cooler. If the water is moving faster through the engine and doesn't
> >pick up as much heat, it would appear by the gauge that the engine is
> >cooler when in fact it may not be.
> >
> >In my very humble opinion, the thermostat should never be removed
> from
> a
> >car during normal operation. Surely those engineers know more than I
> >do.
> >
> >Joe Curry
> >
> >John Cowan wrote:
> >>
> >> With all due respect to Trevor: Saying it don't make it so. Far
> from
> >> being debunked, the assertion that there is an optimum flow rate
> for
> >> maximum heat transfer out the radiator has received ample backup on
>
> the
> >> list. This thread resumes each year about the time the trees begin
> to
> bud
> >> and people are as passionate in their support of their analyses as
> they
> are
> >> support of their religious beliefs.
> >> I have been meaning to go to the local engineering college and
> look
> up
> >> "the radiator problem", which surely appears as a homework
> assignment
> or on
> >> Heat Transfer midterms hundreds of time each year. Stay tuned.
> >> John Cowan
> >>
> >> At 03:51 PM 5/13/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> >(Richard Triplett) wrote:
> >> >> (1)Don't remove the thermostat in an attempt to prevent
> overheating,
> >> >> because the thermostat does several things; it maintains the
> engine
> at its
> >> >> most efficient temperature, slows flow of water through radiator
> to
> ensure
> >> >> heat dissipation (if water flows too fast, heat transfer will be
> reduced),
> >> >
> >> > Although the thermostat has it's purpose, the "flowing too fast"
> >> >myth has been debunked many times on this list. It has no basis
> >> >in science.
> >> >
> >> > Refer to the archives for the meat of the discussion.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Trevor Boicey, Ottawa, Canada.
> >> >tboicey@brit.ca, http://www.brit.ca/~tboicey/
> >> >[ Seeking some miscellaneous MG parts, see the list on the web
> page...
> ]
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >--
> >"If you can't excel with talent, triumph with effort."
> >
> > -- Dave Weinbaum in National Enquirer
>
|