h a l f b a k e r yI think this would be a great thing to not do.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
What you can do is put water in the tank as heat ballast. The water soaks up and retains all the heat, leaving you to deal with thermal leakage through the tank walls at say200degC instead of say2,000degC. |
|
| |
[edit] of course having now actually read your post, I wonder why too I didn't think of putting the tanks one inside the other instead of putting raw water in with the compressed air. |
|
| |
If you don't let the heat "leak" that is generated during the compression, It is much more difficult to compress the gas; It will take many times more force to do the same task of compression. ( see : Boyle's law) |
|
| |
Why? The compresser is more efficient if the air is compressed with the lowest possible increase in temperature |
|
| |
Surely if the goal is to get the largest quantity of air into the smallest volume, the best way to go about it is to actively cool and liquefy the gas. |
|
| |
Because, depending on what the air is used for, it
will cool and lose pressure in the lines, cool and
deposit water in the lines, or cause heat damage to
the equipment being used. |
|
| |
Right, but there could be a delay between the
compress time and exposure of heat to the
compressed gas. (e.g. Flying toaster's idea) or in a
better controlled way: by using a coolant that is at
first in an insulated location, but then reaches the
tank to release heat. |
|
| |