Posted by danw2002 on 07/10/2011 1:43 AM
#37
MM, i am not going to go down this road, i agree that on a pure level, there is no loss of energy, it is converted...but there are many things going on here, like the internal resistance of the element to keep it from melting down. i will leave it at this, take two rocks, same mass/weight. one is just one big one, the other is made of or a matrix of 300 equally sized small rocks with air passages between them all, both masses are heated to 500f all the way though to the core of all. now pass air though both masses at the same volume and speed, which mass will release the heat to the passing air faster? like any thing that is manufactured, the reason that a single large element is not used is not purely size/cost it is as always many factors, and that is what it always comes down to. thanks for your insight, keeps us on our toes..
Quote
allenb wrote:
I once argued this same issue with Marshall over several posts and lost the argument.:|
Marshall is absolutely correct in his premise of watts in = watts out. Pretty much any configuration of element is forced to transfer its heat to the air otherwise the temperature of the element would continue to increase to the point of meltdown. In the case of the tubular stovetop element, the reason it's not used in most convection heating applications is that it's not economically practical, would be difficult to design around and the lag time mentioned before. Otherwise, there's no reason not to heat air with them.
Allen