Peter: Thanks for taking time to RAISE the SNR! What can we conclude from your analysis? Well, at first reading, it seems reasonable, so it is at least helpful and might swing the 'accuracy meter' a little over to Rossi's favor, however, I don't think its conclusive. But that seems to be the norm in this case, that the only conclusive thing we can conclude from what facts we do have, is that nothing is conclusive!
I APPLAUD your efforts here since what you did is EXACTLY what this discussion group is for... tomorrow you could run some more test cases with this software and come to the opposite conclusion, which I would also applaud! It's unfortunate that some people on this list just don't understand that... -Mark -----Original Message----- From: Peter Heckert [mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de] Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 12:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 6 Oct Rossi test heat exchanger model Yes, I do now think, the heat exchanger should do it in the horizontal orientation. I tested this as follows: I downloaded and installed the heatexchanger calculation software from SWEP. It is unregistered and in demo mode. Registering is free bust must be approved, so I have none. In this mode the application supports only water-water applications, so far I found. So I inserted the primary water flow multiplied by 5, this gives about the thermal energy of the steam. Under this conditions I get secondary delta_t of 5° and the difference between primary out and secondary in is about 0.5 degrees. Lewan reported about 1 degree. So if this exchanger can do it with water, then it should also be able to do it with the equivalent energy in steam. Apparently horizontal orientation is not a problem here. BTW, the difference between primary out and secondary in was about 1 degrees in Lewans report. If the primary delta_t was 100° then this means, the energetic efficiency of the heatexchanger was 99 %. This is pretty good and is probably because this exchanger is designed for higher flow rates. Best, Peter
