Friction Heater

[Gabriel]

Hello everyone,

I was not sure where to post this so it ended up here. Not to many Friction builders out there

This is my build on a Friction heater, have a look and feel free to put your 2 cents worth into it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbuZRn9duYE

Thank you
Gabriel

[Chet K]

Gabriel
Good looking build too..

A question to the Measurement men?

We have two gallons of oil
We have a heat over time figure that this unit is providing as it runs.
We have an input power measurement.

why play with boxes? shouldn't we just jump to a two gallon bottle of "same" oil with resistor of appropriate value?

Gabriel I know you said that the input power goes down as the oil temp goes up,are we talking a "big" difference?

Perhaps a quick data sheet ? [ Motor size ,oil capacity, temp at operating window ,input power at same.. etc]

Even if we need to run "hot tests" [bring the resistive vessel up to temp first then do a run]

??
Thx
Chet
Later......

[PhysicsProf]

Welcome, Gabriel,
You have built a very intriguing device.  Now come the quantitative measurements!

Chet raises a good point -- we can get a good handle on the heat output Q based on the temp. rise of the operating fluid itself --

Gabriel
Good looking build too..

A question to the Measurement men?

We have two gallons of oil
We have a heat over time figure that this unit is providing as it runs.
We have an input power measurement.

why play with boxes? shouldn't we just jump to a two gallon bottle of "same" oil with resistor of appropriate value?

Thx
Chet
Later......

Pls see attached. The heat output Q is directly related to the temp. rise of the operating fluid itself based on the equation

Q = C(specific heat) * Mass (of fluid) * Delta-Temp

Then I looked up specific heat values for OILS, your operating fluid.  For mineral oil and vegetable oil, we find C = 1.67.
Caveat -- there may be some temperature dependence, for example for light oil C increases from 1.8 to 2.3 as temp of the oil rises from 60 F to 300F. 

Thus, we wish to CALIBRATE the "oil calorimeter" as suggested by Chet -- using a resistive heater and measuring the electrical power input and at the same time, the temp rise in the oil.  We can then turn the equation around to get C, WHEN the vessel is well-insulated we should get a reasonable measure and calibration:

C(specific heat) ~ Electrical input energy/( Mass (of fluid) * Delta-Temp )

Further, the temp rise of the oil in this oil calorimeter can be directly compared with the temp rise of the SAME QUANTITY of oil when using the Gabriel spinning-disk device.  This makes a nice test!

[PhysicsProf]

PS -- I volunteer to do/help with such measurements.  I have several temperature probes, including thermocouple probes.  It is important to stir the fluid before taking temp measurements, and it would be best to insert the probe directly into the fluid when taking temp measurements.

[ion]

Yes, you can measure an identical oil filled container with a resistor as heating device and "control", however this will not be exactly the same and will not include the heat dissipation and radiation of the driving motor, which must also be accounted for.

The motor driven container will have a lot of steel plates taking up oil space, which will have a different specific heat than the oil only control container. To overcome this, the system must be allowed to soak, transient measurements will not yield accurate results.

You must be very careful with such measurements, as the motor moving parts (internal fan and shaft) will produce some local turbulence and forced convection that will skew data.

There is also the emissivity problem, both containers should be painted flat black with a high temperature paint so that they radiate in a similar manner.

If you can quantify all of this you may get reasonable data.

Best to build a test chamber simulating a small room, with known insulation qualities. This tests the entire device and will take into account radiative, convective, and motor dissipation. This is ultimately how the device will be used, as a room heater, although I'm sure if it pans out there are a multitude of uses

Operating such a chamber outdoors can be problematic unless wind chill and solar effects are taken into account.

[PhysicsProf]

I agree:

...

Best to build a test chamber simulating a small room, with known insulation qualities. This tests the entire device and will take into account radiative, convective, and motor dissipation. This is ultimately how the device will be used, as a room heater, although I'm sure if it pans out there are a multitude of uses

Operating such a chamber outdoors can be problematic unless wind chill and solar effects are taken into account.

[Gabriel]

When I first built this heater I could see it being used for water heating, cooking, and room heating even some power generation with I have tested and done in my shop.
LOL... my wife used it as a candle warmer at one time and I have to say it made the our house smell really nice I still like the idea of drafting off the power with Peltier generator.
I could make this heater in such a way that it is only made for this Peltier. The heater would be only 12" thick and 12" square  on top and bottom.  with 2' sq. ft. to lay the generators on a person could make around 340 watts of power. @ .34KWh for 24 hours = 8.16KWh and 365.25 days a year that's 2980.44KWh for the year and you would still be using this for heating as well. Now I know that is not much but it is better then just letting it go to waist. I would be easy to setup and make practical.
Like I said I have already done it and it works. 

[ion]

Gabriel:

I have no doubt at all your device works i.e. it puts at an amount of heat at the minimum equal to the input power.

What we need to determine, and the purpose of this forum is to research whether the known laws of physics have been superceded in some way with this device.

If so then you may possibly be selected for a Nobel Prize for having given humanity a new source of renewable energy, and we are here to support you in this.

But first we are here to help you make a firm determination if there is any form of overunity involved with this approach, and rigorous testing is required using many different methods.

You have many friends here to lend you their expertise. Your own expertise as a designer, machinist and metal fabricator is without question.

Now the devil is in the details.

If this device is "break even" with an ordinary resistive heater, then the winner is without question. Resistive heaters have many thousands of hours of use before the element or thermostat regulator wears out, are routinely designed to meet safety approvals and do not cause fire or explosion (no contained flammables) when used properly and are relatively quiet in operation.

Jumping through regulatory hurdles is a difficult task. (I have been there, done it,  often not easily).

Note that the cheap oil filled radiator style heaters on the market must use specially limited heaters to prevent explosion should the thermostat or high limit safety should fail. You will need to include a thermal high limit safety switch on your device in addition to a thermostat regulator. Soundproofing will also need to be considered e.g. how do you make the device quiet enough to be used in a bedroom without trapping the heat in the acoustic insulation?

If used as a central heating plant some of these issues are moot.

First things first, lets do the testing then we can work on the details.

Kind regards...ION

[Paul-R]

A question to the Measurement men?

We have two gallons of oil
We have a heat over time figure that this unit is providing as it runs.
We have an input power measurement.

Chet:
Do you remember a spreadsheet that I wrote for the Peter Daysh Davey thread?
(It may have been for those odd people who think one can tune a beer can to
resonate at 50hz). I cannot find it.

If it can be found, it will do here. The problem is identical.

[Chet K]

Paul
Yes I do remember ,very nice info sheet!
Last time I saw those Odd folks tuning beer cans they were floating down stream holding onto the empty beer cooler with tears in their eyes,
I also noticed they had odd patches of baldness on their heads ,apparently from ripping their own  hair out whilst trying to tune beer cans to 50 hz...........

GeeeZ everybody knows they resonate at 203.8606752 hz [I think its right on the can warning labe l!:.}

Very sad indeed
Thx
Chet

[Paul-R]

Paul
Yes I do remember ,very nice info sheet!

But where is it? Can you send me a link to it? With very small alteration,
it could be posted on this thread and be useful.

[Paul-R]

But where is it? Can you send me a link to it? With very small alteration,
it could be posted on this thread and be useful.

I have found it.

This version expects people to use a wattmeter to determine watts in (at Row 24)
like this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Green-Energy-Monitor-Esocket-Electricity/dp/B007XS2L6I
rather than by measuring volts, amps and time - since they are cheap and easy to use. (The
spreadsheet can be modded if anyone asks).

[ion]

Your spreadsheet does not take into account power factor.

Multiplying Volts times Amps does not give you Watts if the power factor is less than unity.

Most of the meters such as Kill A Watt compute power factor for true power reading in Watts.

Otherwise OK but I have not examined it in depth yet.

[Paul-R]

Your spreadsheet does not take into account power factor.

We are talking about the stuff that comes out of your socket on the skirting board.

It isn't rocket science and neither do we need results correct to three decimal places.

[ion]

We are talking about the stuff that comes out of your socket on the skirting board.

It isn't rocket science and neither do we need results correct to three decimal places.

Paul;

If you can tolerate a 27% error and consider this type of error to be off by 3 decimal places, then I know where you are coming from.

I just measured my compressor motor. Using Amps  times Volts method, I get 12.4 x 115.7 = 1434.7 Watts

The power factor measured 0.73 and the real Watts measured 1047 or 27% less than Amps x Volts

Interesting to see you have no problem with this much error in your readings.

The motor on my compressor is a Dayton 2 pole rated at 1/2 HP @3450 RPM, 9.8 Amps, 115 V nameplate.

With over 1 kW input and 1/2 HP shaft output, can anyone guess where the rest of the power went? 

This is why it is essential to include the motor dissipation when testing friction heaters.

[Paul-R]

I just measured my compressor motor...

We aren't talking about inductive devices like motors. We are talking about
what comes out of a cable that you might plug into your wall socket. The
worst case scenario does not matter.

There are certain people who like to put people off with complexities.


First, we need to know if the COP exceeds 1
Secondly, if so, we need to know if it is in the range 1 - 2 or possibly 8 - 12.

If the former is so, then extra care needs to be taken to get an accurate position.

if the latter, who cares if the COP is 8 or 12. The project will get the green light
either way.

[muDped]

First, we need to know if the COP exceeds 1

Aye, that is a worthy goal.  But how does one
make that determination without careful and
accurate measurements?

[Paul-R]

Aye, that is a worthy goal.  But how does one
make that determination without careful and
accurate measurements?

Easy.

We are not trying the determine the atomic weight of some substance.

We use straightforward and unfancy methods to get a result.
If the result is COP=8, then we know the COP exceeds 1.
Job done.

If the result is COP= 1.07, then we have to resort to the methods
that Ion suggests.

Why go through those hoops unnecessarily? 

[muDped]

If there was some likelihood that the COP could
far exceed unity then that approach would make
perfect sense.  But what are the odds that the
observed performance will even exceed unity?

I suppose we'll have to wait until some numbers
are forthcoming.  In the meantime we can hope. 

[Paul-R]

If there was some likelihood that the COP could
far exceed unity...

If i were to be asked for a guess, I would suggest that the result may end
up as either COP=0.85 or COP=6.

i.e. either the process is governed by simple traditional physics, then I would
expect 15% losses to creep in somehow.

If the process has some ingredient of energy being drawin in somehow or
other, then, in principle, there is no saying how much wil be drawn in,
i.e. possibly quite a lot.

The most important thing is not to discourage people with technobabble
that may not be necessary.

[ion]

As far as I understand, Gabriels friction heater is driven by a motor, which will have a roughly 25 % inductive component.

One must also consider the heat loss and inefficiency of the motor which can be up to 50% of motor input power depending on the type of motor and where on the torque curve it is operated.

With this in mind and considering the heat loss of the motor, I am merely stating that these factors need to be considered when measuring system utility.

With such a wide guess on the possible COP, how could one possibly be mistaken?

If this is technobable, I will say no more. I understand clearly what the respondent is trying to convey.

[poynt99]

Most reading here know you are not speaking technobabble ION.

Keep stating the facts and issues! 

As you were sir!