Posted by crispin.proctor on April 28, 2008, 4:20 am
Hi Folks,
I have a two part question and wonder if anyone can shed some light.
I have built a dog kennel which I want to warm using solar energy.
Basically, I am going to have a black panel on the roof which heats
the air in the cavity. I then want to store this heat. What is the
best / cost effective method of storing this heat.
The heat will be pumped down into a store below the kennel.
So far, I have thought of iron (rust will be a problem and expense), I
have read of crushed glass and pea pebbles. Obviously anything used
should allow air to pass through it to allow for even(ish) heating.
At night, I may or may not reverse the process to extract the heat. If
not, I will merely let it dissipate thought the floor of the kennel.
I have seen this used in greenhouses and everyone seems to say
different things.
Anyone know where I could get a 50 Gallon drum of Mercury from? :)
Finally, thermal conductivity is the ability of a substance to conduct
heat. Is this related to it's ability to store heat? For example,
copper would be great at extracting the heat from the heated air.
Would it store it well or not? Assuming the sink is well insulated
from the surrounding ground.
TIA
Cheers,
Crispin
Posted by Robert Scott on April 28, 2008, 7:38 am
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 01:20:42 -0700 (PDT), crispin.proctor@gmail.com wrote:
>...Finally, thermal conductivity is the ability of a substance to conduct
>heat. Is this related to it's ability to store heat? For example,
>copper would be great at extracting the heat from the heated air.
>Would it store it well or not? ...
Thermal conductivity (the inverse of the "R" value) and the ability to store
heat (called "specific heat") are two separate parameters. For cost-effective
heat storage you want a material that is cheap. Although copper is very good at
conducting heat, you would need a prohibitive amount of copper to actually store
a significant amount of heat in it. Better look at stones or water. Water is
better in storing heat in a given volume, but stones are easier to deal with,
and store only slightly less heat per a given volume.
Robert Scott
Ypsilanti, Michigan
Posted by nicksanspam on April 28, 2008, 11:10 am
>... Water is better in storing heat in a given volume, but stones are easier
>to deal with, and store only slightly less heat per a given volume.
That's true for large values of "slightly," eg 25 vs 62 Btu/h-F-ft^3 :-)
Nick
Posted by Robert Scott on April 28, 2008, 11:00 am
On 28 Apr 2008 11:10:02 -0400, nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
>>... Water is better in storing heat in a given volume, but stones are easier
>>to deal with, and store only slightly less heat per a given volume.
>That's true for large values of "slightly," eg 25 vs 62 Btu/h-F-ft^3 :-)
I stand corrected. So you studied theoretical math too, eh?
Robert Scott
Ypsilanti, Michigan
Posted by Morris Dovey on April 28, 2008, 7:44 am
crispin.proctor@gmail.com wrote:
> Anyone know where I could get a 50 Gallon drum of Mercury from? :)
Are you sure you wouldn't rather use depleted uranium? ;-)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
>heat. Is this related to it's ability to store heat? For example,
>copper would be great at extracting the heat from the heated air.
>Would it store it well or not? ...