[time-nuts] Thunderbolt stability and ambient temperature

J. Forster jfor at quik.com
Mon Jun 15 17:28:01 UTC 2009

Hey Guys,

For time and less effort you could likely cobble up a Hydrogen Maser and
be done with it. :=))



> Joseph M Gwinn wrote:
>> I was the one who originally rained on the use-water-in-a-bottle
>> approach.
>>  The response was that even a child could store water.  Well, that is
>> not
>> the common experience with water-cooled equipment, which always manages
>> to
>> require continual maintenance attention, so I went quiet, and listened
>> as
>> the subject was explored.
> But it isn't necessary to get this complicated.  You don't need moving
> parts,
> and I agree, you don't want to be piping the stuff around.
> The increasingly complex schemes are coming about because posters are
> trying to invent reasons why this is hard work.  They are ignoring the
> simple fact that small quantities of water can be easily stored for a
> whole
> lot of years.
> A couple of examples from my own life:  I live on well water.  If the
> electricity goes out, and it regularly does, I cannot pump the water to
> flush the toilets.  That goes over really well with my wife.  To avoid
> this problem I keep three 5 gallon plastic jugs of water in the basement.
> They sit there for very long periods of time, and are invariably full when
> I need them to force a manual flush.  Simple!
> Don't like plastic water jugs?  Ok, use a 5 gallon plastic paint pail.
> They
> are O-ring sealed, and will stay full of water for a decade or more
> without
> any attention.  I have one in my basement that I used for cooling water
> when
> I was soldering the plumbing in my house... 5 years ago.  It is open, with
> a lid just sitting on top.  The pale is still full of water.  Some
> evaporation
> has undoubtedly occurred, but not enough to matter.  Things would be much
> better if I bothered to snap the lid down... actually things would be much
> better if I bothered to dump the water and cleaned out the pail... I think
> I might.
> For me, processing a junk automobile engine so that I would A) want it
> in my house, and B) would be able to use it as a ballast is ridiculous.
> The stupid things cost $50 to $100 in the junk yard, and are a really
> inconvenient shape.  I'd much rather stack $50, or $100 worth of
> polyethylene
> chemical bottles full of water than mess with a junk engine.
>> It has become apparent from the issues and increasingly complex schemes
>> to
>> solving tose issues that keeping water in its place is not exactly
>> child's
>> play, and it seems to me that water is far more trouble and even expense
>> than simply getting a big hunk of scrap metal, unless one needs tons of
>> thermal mass.  If one needs fast thermal exchange with the air, drill
>> some
>> holes or use a set of thick plates with spacers, so the distance from
>> air
>> to the most remote part of the mass is no more than an inch or so.  Or,
>> use a big hunk of copper or aluminum.  Or both.
> Have you even looked at the price of copper lately?  It is so high that
> even the rich cannot afford to use it for flashing, gutters or roofs
> anymore!  And when you are all done, copper and aluminum cannot store the
> same amount of heat, pound-for-pound, as plain old dumb water.
>> If one needs tons of thermal mass plus rapid exchange with the air, use
>> brick checkerwork or a pebble bed, a standard industrial approach: <
> That can be a good way too.  How are you going to keep it dry and mold
> free?
> What about the ever present dust?
> -Chuck Harris
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

More information about the time-nuts mailing list