Heat issues and wall thickness
-
KurtHuhn
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5326
- Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 8:00 pm
- Location: United States/Rhode Island
At this point, I think we're into the realm of pure physics. This is one of those areas where scientific calculations will hold fast.
My opinion, such as it is, is that, if you design a pipe with an understanding of fluid and thermal dynamics, you won't have any (or very many) problems. That includes keeping an eye on cant, wall thickness, bowl diameter, etc.
How's that for a useless post?
My opinion, such as it is, is that, if you design a pipe with an understanding of fluid and thermal dynamics, you won't have any (or very many) problems. That includes keeping an eye on cant, wall thickness, bowl diameter, etc.
How's that for a useless post?
It's a wonderfuly useless post! :thumb:KurtHuhn wrote:At this point, I think we're into the realm of pure physics. This is one of those areas where scientific calculations will hold fast.
My opinion, such as it is, is that, if you design a pipe with an understanding of fluid and thermal dynamics, you won't have any (or very many) problems. That includes keeping an eye on cant, wall thickness, bowl diameter, etc.
How's that for a useless post?
So who's going to come on here and tell us the laws of thermo-dynamics that come into play here?
Well, I think what Random wrote was pretty much dead on. I believe the first law of thermodynamics says if tou put somthing hit next to somthing cool, the heat will move from the hot to the cool until the two objects are in equilibrium. ScoJo is really the expert here, but I think he smells flame. You know what the say, where there's heat, theres fire. Hhehehehehe...okokok, that was pretty lame.
I think the contraversial question is which pipe smokes better, the one with the thin walls and hot bowl, or the one with the thick walls and cooler bowl? I tink I'm in the thinner wall camp myself. I guess it depends on the difusivity of briar, lucite and vulcanite and air.
What combination would produce the coolest smoke. Here's a thought too, at what temperature does the smoke provide the best flavor? Are the elements that we taste affected by heat? And if so, how? Are our taste buds affected by heat? What is their optimal range?
Too much fun!!!!
I think the contraversial question is which pipe smokes better, the one with the thin walls and hot bowl, or the one with the thick walls and cooler bowl? I tink I'm in the thinner wall camp myself. I guess it depends on the difusivity of briar, lucite and vulcanite and air.
What combination would produce the coolest smoke. Here's a thought too, at what temperature does the smoke provide the best flavor? Are the elements that we taste affected by heat? And if so, how? Are our taste buds affected by heat? What is their optimal range?
Too much fun!!!!
[/quote]What combination would produce the coolest smoke. Here's a thought too, at what temperature does the smoke provide the best flavor? Are the elements that we taste affected by heat? And if so, how? Are our taste buds affected by heat? What is their optimal range?
This is from Mark Tinsky's web site:
"I think a great factor in tobacco tasting good is temperature. Many people talk about Canadians smoking cool. As an experiment a few years back I made sort of a water pipe without the water. I used a briar free standing bowl connected to a three foot tube that I fitted over a regular bit. It smoked cool, very cool, but tasted lousy. Kind of like cold pizza tastes. Tobacco needs some heat to bring out its flavor. Too much or too little and its untastable. I' ve never heard any studies done on this but I would bet there is a certain temperature envelope where tobacco tastes the best. I think this is why I prefer smoking indoors where I can control the airflow into the pipe better."
Rad
What combination would produce the coolest smoke. Here's a thought too, at what temperature does the smoke provide the best flavor? Are the elements that we taste affected by heat? And if so, how? Are our taste buds affected by heat? What is their optimal range?RadDavis wrote:
[/quote]
This is from Mark Tinsky's web site:
"I think a great factor in tobacco tasting good is temperature. Many people talk about Canadians smoking cool. As an experiment a few years back I made sort of a water pipe without the water. I used a briar free standing bowl connected to a three foot tube that I fitted over a regular bit. It smoked cool, very cool, but tasted lousy. Kind of like cold pizza tastes. Tobacco needs some heat to bring out its flavor. Too much or too little and its untastable. I' ve never heard any studies done on this but I would bet there is a certain temperature envelope where tobacco tastes the best. I think this is why I prefer smoking indoors where I can control the airflow into the pipe better."
Rad
Hmm... that's interesting. BUT I like cold pizza!
I'll start the first pipe line for people who like cold pizza!
awwwww Scott I was waiting for you to jump in on thisScoJo wrote:Oh no - I'm not getting into this one again...
John
www.crosbypipes.com
www.crosbypipes.com
LOL. Okay, I started to craft something on heat transfer in pipe smoking in response to this thread (I can't stay away from this kind of thing), but the post quickly got really long, I had trouble writing equations in plain text that one could make sense of, and I found myself wishing I could draw a picture to help explain what I was thinking. So I chucked the whole thing. Maybe on my lunch break tomorrow I will try putting something into MS Word or something where I can use the equation editor and maybe draw a picture or two.
If anyone here is even remotely interested in something like this, let me know (I doubt folks really even care to see something like this, but I thought I would ask). Otherwise I probably won't bother (oh who am I kidding - otherwise I'll probably do it for the hell of it for myself).
I think the best way to do this would be to treat the tobacco as something like a uniform porous or fibrous medium (I'm familiar with mass transfer in a Darcy type of medium, I would assume that heat transfer could be analogously (is that a word?) looked at) (he says, ending his sentence in a preposition - hey, I is an engineer). I'd start out by treating this as a 1-D problem (neglecting the curvature of the bowl wall).
If anyone here is even remotely interested in something like this, let me know (I doubt folks really even care to see something like this, but I thought I would ask). Otherwise I probably won't bother (oh who am I kidding - otherwise I'll probably do it for the hell of it for myself).
I think the best way to do this would be to treat the tobacco as something like a uniform porous or fibrous medium (I'm familiar with mass transfer in a Darcy type of medium, I would assume that heat transfer could be analogously (is that a word?) looked at) (he says, ending his sentence in a preposition - hey, I is an engineer). I'd start out by treating this as a 1-D problem (neglecting the curvature of the bowl wall).
Hey, come to think of it, if you treated the tobacco as a uniform medium, you could then have the thermal conductivity of that medium be a function of how tight or loose the tobacco was packed...
...aw dammit...
Hey, maybe there is a morbidly curious pipe maker out there willing to trade pipe making lessons for heat transfer lessons?
...aw dammit...
Hey, maybe there is a morbidly curious pipe maker out there willing to trade pipe making lessons for heat transfer lessons?
You KNOW I want to see it Scott!
Way cool on the conductivity as a function of density! How cool is that! I think I have some figures on the difusivity of wood
OHH! I found it!
Here ya go. Maybe this will help Scott.
Conductivity of wood = 0.0001
In the fiber direction dry wood conducts heat 2.5 times faster than in the transverse direction. This ratio for wet wood is only 1.5, because water equalizes the difference. Considering the transverse directions, wood conducts heat somewhat faster radially due to rays then tangentially, but the dense latewood bands may compensate or overcompensate the effect of the rays. The ratio of radial to tangential conductivity is 1.3 - 0.9 depending on the volume of ray tissue and on early late wood contrast.
_______Rho =200 kg/m3__Rho=400 kg/m3__Rho =600 kg/m3__Rho =800 kg/m3
u=10%____1.89E-07____1.56E-07____1.42E-07____1.36E-07
u=20%____1.75E-07____1.47E-07____1.36E-07____1.33E-07
u=30%____1.64E-07____1.39E-07____1.31E-07____1.28E-07
u=50%____1.50E-07____1.31E-07____1.22E-07____1.19E-07
u=100%___1.44E-07____1.14E-07____1.06E-07
------- Table 1: Diffusivity of wood [m2/s] at different moisture and density level [2].
Erica Arborea has a janka hardness of about 1000. Which translated into a density of roughly 450kg/m^3
Tooo much fun buddy!
Way cool on the conductivity as a function of density! How cool is that! I think I have some figures on the difusivity of wood
OHH! I found it!
Here ya go. Maybe this will help Scott.
Conductivity of wood = 0.0001
In the fiber direction dry wood conducts heat 2.5 times faster than in the transverse direction. This ratio for wet wood is only 1.5, because water equalizes the difference. Considering the transverse directions, wood conducts heat somewhat faster radially due to rays then tangentially, but the dense latewood bands may compensate or overcompensate the effect of the rays. The ratio of radial to tangential conductivity is 1.3 - 0.9 depending on the volume of ray tissue and on early late wood contrast.
_______Rho =200 kg/m3__Rho=400 kg/m3__Rho =600 kg/m3__Rho =800 kg/m3
u=10%____1.89E-07____1.56E-07____1.42E-07____1.36E-07
u=20%____1.75E-07____1.47E-07____1.36E-07____1.33E-07
u=30%____1.64E-07____1.39E-07____1.31E-07____1.28E-07
u=50%____1.50E-07____1.31E-07____1.22E-07____1.19E-07
u=100%___1.44E-07____1.14E-07____1.06E-07
------- Table 1: Diffusivity of wood [m2/s] at different moisture and density level [2].
Erica Arborea has a janka hardness of about 1000. Which translated into a density of roughly 450kg/m^3
Tooo much fun buddy!
