rubber compounds

On 2/28/2018 8:25 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:22:40 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/28/2018 6:13 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 17:50:00 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

It's like that in any artificial atmosphere
environment, such as space capsules,
submarines, and well insulated houses.

OK, then I'm safe as this building is poorly
insulated everywhere and in spots not insulated
at all.

Sorry, bad choice of words. Instead of insulated, I should have said
ventilated. A really well insulated house should not have any air
leaks, where cold air from the outside can leak in, and warm air from
the inside leak out.

The room where I am right now is the
best insulated place. Still I have three
power oil radiators yet temperature is only
18.0C/22% with -8C outside.

26C temperature differential between outside and inside. Yeah, that's
quite good insulation, depending on how much energy you're putting
into heating the room. My house is a "summer vacation home" which
leaks badly and is poorly insulated. Air leaks everywhere, no
insulation in the floor, ceiling or roof. Typical is 10C differential
with the wood burner setup for best efficiency and 20C when I have it
running like a blast furnace. I considered improving the insulation
and leakage situation, but it's cheaper to just burn more firewood.

I used the opposite strategy. When we moved into this house, decades
ago, I was sure it was inefficient. I immediately invested lots of time
and a fair amount of money in sealing against infiltration and adding
insulation. I graphed our natural gas usage for years and was very
pleased to see the curve descend markedly.

About eight years ago, we did a small addition to the house, and
switched from the ancient primitive gas furnace to a high efficiency
model. Our gas use is now about 1/3 of what it was when we started. I
think the weatherproofing was the best investment I could have made.

We do have a fireplace, but it too was terribly inefficient, as almost
all are. Not long after we moved in I added glass doors, an outside air
intake, a blower grate, etc. That changed the fireplace from ineffective
to capable of driving us out of the room. The living room can get up to
80 degrees Fahrenheit with a big fire. But we rarely burn wood these
days. I'm not fond of slogging outside to carry the stuff in.

Someone once write that a fireplace is a very good source of heat as
it warms one twice. Once when you chop the wood for the fireplace and
once more when you burn the wood :-)

In my miserable experiences with cutting wood for heat, a
big iron or steel cookstove gives a better return for effort
than a fireplace. In Wisconsin anyway. YMMV.

p.s. minus 8C is not all that cold (+17F). Uncomfortable but
probably not deadly cold. At minus 10~20F you burn a LOT of
wood for heat which means a LOT of time cutting wood.


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 20:37:53 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/28/2018 8:25 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:22:40 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/28/2018 6:13 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 17:50:00 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

It's like that in any artificial atmosphere
environment, such as space capsules,
submarines, and well insulated houses.

OK, then I'm safe as this building is poorly
insulated everywhere and in spots not insulated
at all.

Sorry, bad choice of words. Instead of insulated, I should have said
ventilated. A really well insulated house should not have any air
leaks, where cold air from the outside can leak in, and warm air from
the inside leak out.

The room where I am right now is the
best insulated place. Still I have three
power oil radiators yet temperature is only
18.0C/22% with -8C outside.

26C temperature differential between outside and inside. Yeah, that's
quite good insulation, depending on how much energy you're putting
into heating the room. My house is a "summer vacation home" which
leaks badly and is poorly insulated. Air leaks everywhere, no
insulation in the floor, ceiling or roof. Typical is 10C differential
with the wood burner setup for best efficiency and 20C when I have it
running like a blast furnace. I considered improving the insulation
and leakage situation, but it's cheaper to just burn more firewood.

I used the opposite strategy. When we moved into this house, decades
ago, I was sure it was inefficient. I immediately invested lots of time
and a fair amount of money in sealing against infiltration and adding
insulation. I graphed our natural gas usage for years and was very
pleased to see the curve descend markedly.

About eight years ago, we did a small addition to the house, and
switched from the ancient primitive gas furnace to a high efficiency
model. Our gas use is now about 1/3 of what it was when we started. I
think the weatherproofing was the best investment I could have made.

We do have a fireplace, but it too was terribly inefficient, as almost
all are. Not long after we moved in I added glass doors, an outside air
intake, a blower grate, etc. That changed the fireplace from ineffective
to capable of driving us out of the room. The living room can get up to
80 degrees Fahrenheit with a big fire. But we rarely burn wood these
days. I'm not fond of slogging outside to carry the stuff in.

Someone once write that a fireplace is a very good source of heat as
it warms one twice. Once when you chop the wood for the fireplace and
once more when you burn the wood :-)

In my miserable experiences with cutting wood for heat, a
big iron or steel cookstove gives a better return for effort
than a fireplace. In Wisconsin anyway. YMMV.

p.s. minus 8C is not all that cold (+17F). Uncomfortable but
probably not deadly cold. At minus 10~20F you burn a LOT of
wood for heat which means a LOT of time cutting wood.

A friend, who had a house in town, built a "Mountain Cabin" and raved
about the clean air, scent of the trees, and all the usual city folk
raves when they go to the mountains. In fact he liked it so much that
he decided to spend the winter there.

I asked him about the heating system and he told me, in some detail,
about the fireplace. I told him that if he was going to heat the cabin
through the winter with a fireplace he needed a lot of wood.

It turned out that his "plenty of wood" lasted for only a couple of
months but luckily a warm spell came along and he was able to get out
to the main roads and back to the "town house" and since then he
hasn't made mention of wintering in the mountains :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

AMuzi wrote:

In my miserable experiences with cutting wood
for heat, a big iron or steel cookstove gives
a better return for effort than a fireplace.
In Wisconsin anyway. YMMV.

p.s. minus 8C is not all that cold (+17F).
Uncomfortable but probably not deadly cold.
At minus 10~20F you burn a LOT of wood for
heat which means a LOT of time cutting wood.

-8C isn't cold as long as you move, or do
manual things with logs or big things like
that. If you fiddle with small tools and keys
tho it can be very unpleasant quickly.

As for firewood it is virtually impossible to
be cold while chopping, which is great fun and
relaxing/empowering body&mind. Boxers do it
prior to the title fight to build up
fitness/testosterone/confidence.

Equally true is that it (wood) burns rather
quickly. Nowadays I hear there are stoves that
are more economic and radiate heat in another
way than the old solutions, but I guess there
is no getting around a lot of wood is needed
every day.

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

John B. wrote:

Someone once write that a fireplace is a very
good source of heat as it warms one twice.
Once when you chop the wood for the fireplace
and once more when you burn the wood :-)

When you feel totally miserable and weak and
think it'll take like two hours to get wood,
get a fire, get the glow, get the sausages out
of the package, no I'm just kidding, to do two
sausages, you think "it'll take two hours to do
and two minutes to eat, it isn't worth it".
But it always is and afterwards you feel silly
to have been that pathetic only two hours
ago

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:59:07 +0100, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

26C temperature differential between outside
and inside. Yeah, that's quite good
insulation, depending on how much energy
you're putting into heating the room.

Well, it sure doesn't feel warm and everything
I touch is/feels cold. Now its 17.5C/22% with
-9C outside.

Feeling cold or condensation on an inside wall is a sure sign of
insufficient insulation. It's much like a refrigerator, where
inadequate insulation is easily detected by the surface being rather
colder than the ambient air. If you have money, you might want to
invest in an IR camera, probably from FLIR, and look for leaks. I'm
cheap, so I have one of these:
https://www.blackanddecker.com/product-repository/products/2015/02/01/03/14/tld100
which will detect a 1F, 5F, or 10 degree temperature difference from a
reference temperature which changes the color of the illuminating
target LED:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=TLD100
About $35. I've been playing with it and a digital camera and
"painting" the 3 color LED while moving the color spot around the
room. Sorry, no photos yet. Anyway, it should help you find any
leaks. However, if the entire wall is one big thermal leak, there's
not much that can be done.

I have two oil filled radiators that are 1500W
by the windows, and one 525W under the bed.

You obviously live in a colder climate than central California
(Monterey Bay area).

My wood burner:
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/home/slides/wood-burner.html
The pot on the stove boils off some water to increase indoor humidity.
I can usually tell if the water has boiled off because my mouth and
nose dry out.

My firewood "processing" equipment:
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/chainsaw/slides/chain-saws-02.html
I also fix chain saws on the side for friends, neighbors, and extra
cash. However, the last few years, I've gotten busy and lazy and
purchased my firewood. $300/cord for 16" super-dry (2 years) oak and
madrone. I usually burn 1.5 to 2 cords per year.

I fired up the Bendix Psychron 566 psychrometer and made some
measurements:
Dry Wet RH
Outdoors, just before rain. 10.0 9.5 93.9%
Near wood burner. 15.5 11.0 57.1%
Near wood burner (4 hr later) 18.5 11.5 41.3%
Downstairs shop, not heated. 9.5 6.5 64.4%

Humidity calculator. Atmospheric pressure is currently 30.15 in.
http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/humid.htm

The rather high 93.9% RH outside is thanks to a small storm that just
drifted inland. The definition of rain is when the air can't hold any
more water and unloads the excess onto the ground, usually due to a
drop in temperature after sunset. In other words:
rain = 100% humidity

The 57.1% near the wood burner is actually higher than usual because I
also have dinner cooking in the adjacent kitchen. The combination of
boiling water from both the tea pot on the wood burner, and the
kitchen causes the high RH. After dinner, and after I allowing the
water to boil away, the RH dropped to 41.3%. If it wasn't raining
outside, and the house didn't leak air as badly, it would probably
drop even lower.

It took about 1 minute to make each of these measurements using the
motorized psychrometer. If I tried to do it with a capacitive sensor
found in most home weather stations, it would have probably taken 30
mins or longer.

Stay tuned to this thread for yet another exciting topic drift.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I fired up the Bendix Psychron 566 psychrometer and made some
measurements:
Dry Wet RH
Outdoors, just before rain. 10.0 9.5 93.9%
Near wood burner. 15.5 11.0 57.1%
Near wood burner (4 hr later) 18.5 11.5 41.3%
Downstairs shop, not heated. 9.5 6.5 64.4%

It took about 1 minute to make each of these measurements using the
motorized psychrometer. If I tried to do it with a capacitive sensor
found in most home weather stations, it would have probably taken 30
mins or longer.

Stay tuned to this thread for yet another exciting topic drift.

SCNR:
Wanna comment on the theory about modern lower-mass (iirc) sensors in
weather stations contributing to measuring higher global temperatures?

On 2/28/2018 9:37 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:22:40 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:


We do have a fireplace, but it too was terribly inefficient, as almost
all are. Not long after we moved in I added glass doors, an outside air
intake, a blower grate, etc. That changed the fireplace from ineffective
to capable of driving us out of the room. The living room can get up to
80 degrees Fahrenheit with a big fire. But we rarely burn wood these
days. I'm not fond of slogging outside to carry the stuff in.


In my miserable experiences with cutting wood for heat, a big iron or
steel cookstove gives a better return for effort than a fireplace. In
Wisconsin anyway. YMMV.

An ordinary fireplace is usually a net loss for heating. To prevent
smoke pouring into the room, lots of room air has to be sucked up the
chimney along with the smoke and most of the heat. That lost room air
gets replaced by frigid outside air seeping in all around the house.
This amounts to a convective loss that's far bigger than the radiant
heat gain from the fire itself - although that radiant heat does feel nice.

Containing the fire in a stove allows much less intake of room air, and
may give a lot more surface area for radiant heating.

In our living room, we kept the fireplace (vs. stove) look both for
aesthetics and because it's a tiny room. But all the combustion air
comes from a box around a basement window, piped in through the ash
cleanout pit. The glass doors allow that to work. And the chimney damper
is easily actuated by a couple chains. It controls the air flow, thus
the size of the blaze.

I wish the blower grate were quieter, but fixing that is too far down my
project list.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:23:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I fired up the Bendix Psychron 566 psychrometer and made some
measurements:
Dry Wet RH
Outdoors, just before rain. 10.0 9.5 93.9%
Near wood burner. 15.5 11.0 57.1%
Near wood burner (4 hr later) 18.5 11.5 41.3%
Downstairs shop, not heated. 9.5 6.5 64.4%

It took about 1 minute to make each of these measurements using the
motorized psychrometer. If I tried to do it with a capacitive sensor
found in most home weather stations, it would have probably taken 30
mins or longer.

Stay tuned to this thread for yet another exciting topic drift.

SCNR:
Wanna comment on the theory about modern lower-mass (iirc) sensors in
weather stations contributing to measuring higher global temperatures?

No, but I have a few observations, theories, and guesses:
1. All discussions eventually drift to a global warming discussion.
Everything we do, buy, or use affects global warming.
2. The energy consumed by manufacturing and transporting energy
saving devices sold to combat global warming is more than those
devices can produce.
3. Home weather stations are reasonably accurate. However, none of
the buyers of home weather stations know anything about siting (where
to locate a weather station). Therefore, all home weather stations
are horribly inaccurate. Seen any 10 meter high poles for anemometers
in any residential installations?
https://www.acurite.com/learn/installation/acurite-sensor-siting
4. Nobody calibrates home weather stations. Select your home area on
Wundermap and notice the wide variations in literally every
measurement:
https://www.wunderground.com/wundermap
5. Weather forecasting is inaccurate and closely related to magic.
However, by massaging the data, climate forecasting has become
increasingly more accurate and is somehow related to science.
6. Etc...

The thermal mass of most sensors doesn't really have a huge effect on
overall measurements. Temperature, atmospheric pressure, humidity,
and rain gauges change slowly enough that any thermal lag caused by a
sensor mass change would be averaged over the sampling period.
Certainly, there's no skew towards warming as none of these sensors
dissipate any power. The same number of picowatts dissipated in a
sensor would result in higher temperatures, but that's not the way
most sensors work. They simply don't dissipate any heat.

On the other foot, wind direction and speed indicators require a fast
response time. To obtain accurate gust and direction indications,
they need to respond quickly to changes. However, these sensors also
do not dissipate any heat, and are therefore not going to change their
readings with size.

A better accusation is the change in the reflectivity of the paint
used in Stevenson shields used to house weather stations.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/14/a-typical-day-in-the-stevenson-screen-paint-test/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/29/aging-weather-stations-contribute-to-high-temperature-records/

Work beckons... more topic drift later, if you can stand it.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 2/28/2018 11:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

My firewood "processing" equipment:
http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/chainsaw/slides/chain-saws-02.html
I also fix chain saws on the side for friends, neighbors, and extra
cash...

Stay tuned to this thread for yet another exciting topic drift.

With all those chainsaws, I can't wait to hear about your juggling skills!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 3/1/2018 12:15 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

4. Nobody calibrates home weather stations. Select your home area on
Wundermap and notice the wide variations in literally every
measurement:
https://www.wunderground.com/wundermap

I'd love to calibrate, but I doubt it's possible.

Probably 15 or 20 years ago, for Christmas I was given a basic Oregon
Scientific weather unit with a remote, radio-linked thermometer. That
went on the outside north wall of the house and gave obviously better
readings than the analog unit on the south side of the house, even
though the latter is under the porch roof.

But last year, the Oregon Scientific started overestimating the
temperature by something like 50 degrees. (But it was just as confident
as ever, down to a tenth of a degree!)

I did all the electronic resets, I opened the remote looking for
problems, I looked for calibration info online, etc. All failed. And I
couldn't find replacement units online.

So now there's a good old analog thermometer mounted outside a north
side window.

The Di2 analogy is left as an exercise for the reader. ;-)

--
- Frank Krygowski