From: legg@nospam.magma.ca   
      
   On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 02:00:42 -0000 (UTC), Wu Ming  wrote:   
      
   >legg  wrote:   
   >> For 'efficiency' in this case, the dominating factor is   
   >> heat lost from the object, not rates or patterns of input.   
   >>   
   >> Layers of insulation, lowering the external skin temperature   
   >> will produce the best efficiency, regardless of the   
   >> temperature within the container.   
   >>   
   >> RL   
   >>   
   >   
   >We need hot water within seconds. We need it at boiling point for tea and   
   >also sanitation. The latter more for old mental habit than real threat I   
   >think. So a kettle with instant heating capability won’t do. We need a   
   >reservoir of water at almost boiling point readily available.   
   >   
   >Kettle has insulation already. Possibly because of the 6 hrs delay option.   
   >I won’t add more insulation to it.   
   >   
   >If mass and insulation aren’t further optimizable what is left is   
   >temperature. We don’t use hot water form the kettle all the time. Hours   
   >pass by without any use.   
   >   
   >98° is the operating temperature. I can temporarily lower it to 90°, 80° or   
   >60° for the lengthy periods we don’t expect the need for water at 98°. Or   
   >let it fall for six hours straight. Is it worth it? Will try estimate using   
   >the producer’s data I discovered yesterday. Fallback options are measuring   
   >heat loss over time with a meat thermometer. Or directly measuring energy   
   >required at the plug.   
      
   For every square cm of outer surface area you will lose 1mW for every   
   degree C external surface temperature rise. +-10%.   
      
   This power loss is supplied by input power.   
      
   More losses occur through conduction of connecting pipes or wiring.   
      
   RL   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)