In Reply to: Ok, so let's plug in the numbers I worked on yesterday posted by Commuteman on August 26, 2003 at 10:48:15:
Peter...For such a small temperature difference, won't the seebeck coeff be near zero? That would mean all the energy there is dissipated..
I ran calculations for energy introduced by piezoelectric effect, motor generator effects, and skin effect storage collapse effects, and found the easiest was to use energy in joules. I didn't post that info as Jon and I have disagreements on those effects, and I won't post the info while he's down and out..
So that would be 1.5e-7 times 5e-5, or 7.5e-12., 7.5 picojoules.
You used 1 mm squared, which is about #16 awg, 4.3 ohms per 1000 feet, 4.3 e-3 ohms/ft., 3 feet is 12.9 e-3 ohms, 1.3 e-2 ohms.
The resistive loss in the entire cable is IRR,
I is: 600 ohm, 30mv, is 3e-2/6e2, .5e-4, or, 5e-5 amps5e-5 * 1.3e-2 *1.3e-2 is 8.45e-9 watts
Times 5e-5 equals 42e-14, 4.2e-13 joules..
Hmmm that's not right, 7.5e-12 is larger than the cable loss..
Oh, wait a minute, the peltier loss has to be referred to the load dissipation, 600 ohms, 30mV.. so we don't care what the cable joule loss is..
Power=3e-2 volts times 5e-5 amps, , or 15e-7 watts, 1.5e-6 watts.
Energy dumped into the load per half cycle is.. 1.5e-6 times 1e-4, or 1.5e-10 joules (we are referring the loss per cycle, I assume only the front edge contributes to loss.
To be 120db down, the loss due to peltier(or anything else for that matter, needs to be about 1.5e-16 joules.
you calculated 7.5e-12 for peltier dissipation (I assume no return of energy here)..that is 5e4 larger than 120 db down..
Without accounting for energy return, the loss would be way too high for reason..It can't be that high..but I can't see the energy being returned very easily.
What are we calculating wrong?? Check mine, I'll check yours..
Should I be using the sqr of 120 db down, or 1000? That would make it 5e1, or 50 times larger than 120 db down?? That's at least within two orders of magnitude away from the measurements, but still on the high side..
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Ok, so let's plug in the numbers I worked on yesterday - jneutron 11:39:23 08/26/03 (57)
- I have to think this through; won't have time until late this afternoon - Commuteman 12:56:49 08/26/03 (56)
- AHA.. - jneutron 07:24:17 08/27/03 (55)
- And it just dawned on me.. - jneutron 07:49:41 08/27/03 (54)
- Rethinking this whole thing - Commuteman 09:12:55 08/27/03 (53)
- Hmmm. - jneutron 10:19:56 08/27/03 (52)
- So let's double check this..... - Commuteman 13:33:18 08/27/03 (50)
- Re: So let's double check this..... - jneutron 14:06:04 08/27/03 (49)
- that's why it seems to be disappearing into the noise.. - Commuteman 21:42:35 08/27/03 (48)
- Re: that's why it seems to be disappearing into the noise.. - jneutron 04:11:17 08/28/03 (47)
- I'm not sure I missed the point... - Commuteman 17:25:28 08/28/03 (46)
- calcs. - jneutron 04:09:38 08/29/03 (0)
- Re: I'm not sure I missed the point... - jneutron 18:43:57 08/28/03 (44)
- It goes to the other junction - Commuteman 08:46:25 08/29/03 (43)
- Re: It goes to the other junction - jneutron 08:58:31 08/29/03 (42)
- Meanwhile, back in the original discussion...... - Commuteman 13:15:41 09/03/03 (9)
- definitely.. - jneutron 14:14:47 09/03/03 (8)
- "sycophant"... - slope 12:33:44 09/04/03 (1)
- thanks..nt - jneutron 13:55:50 09/04/03 (0)
- Are they both consuming energy? - Commuteman 21:25:55 09/03/03 (5)
- Re: Are they both consuming energy? - jneutron 06:44:47 09/04/03 (4)
- Not so fast buddy..... - Commuteman 15:44:25 09/04/03 (3)
- Re: Not so fast buddy..... - jneutron 05:59:31 09/05/03 (2)
- I'm glad I'm not lifting that sheetrock, although we do need to do that kitchen... - Commuteman 09:39:05 09/05/03 (1)
- I couldn't afford the money I'd want to charge to do this stuff. - jneutron 10:18:06 09/05/03 (0)
- Re: It goes to the other junction - john curl 17:15:57 08/29/03 (31)
- Is that all you can add? Oh sure? - jneutron 17:12:10 08/31/03 (30)
- What is your problem? - Charles Hansen 19:57:17 08/31/03 (29)
- That "cheerleaders without facts" post here" - jneutron 14:09:24 09/01/03 (28)
- Wow, not only are you impolite... - Charles Hansen 14:35:13 09/01/03 (27)
- Wow...technical dialogue for a change.. - jneutron 14:53:49 09/02/03 (26)
- Oh, I forgot to add - jneutron 15:29:03 09/02/03 (0)
- I'm now placing you... - Charles Hansen 15:20:19 09/02/03 (24)
- Weak>> - robotk 04:26:39 09/03/03 (1)
- Re: Weak>> - jneutron 05:34:04 09/03/03 (0)
- Relax will ya. - Hafdef 17:53:19 09/02/03 (0)
- BFD....Personally, I think you're full of hot ayre.... - slope 15:56:02 09/02/03 (3)
- What is BFD?? - jneutron 05:31:50 09/03/03 (2)
- Re: What is BFD?? - LarryR 06:10:54 09/03/03 (1)
- Thanks Larry - jneutron 06:26:31 09/03/03 (0)
- Damn...off by about two minutes.. - jneutron 15:32:32 09/02/03 (16)
- Re: Damn...off by about two minutes.. - jon_banquer@yahoo.com 00:15:05 09/03/03 (1)
- Hi jonB - jneutron 05:53:22 09/03/03 (0)
- Re: Damn...off by about two minutes.. - john curl 00:13:38 09/03/03 (13)
- Oh Geeze, words from the cheap seats.. - jneutron 05:50:10 09/03/03 (12)
- Why do you even bother anymore? - kuribo 10:29:17 09/03/03 (10)
- How do you judge? - Commuteman 13:41:56 09/03/03 (6)
- Hmmm. - jneutron 14:58:45 09/03/03 (5)
- I'll go look for the posts, but am I wrong? - Commuteman 21:42:04 09/03/03 (4)
- btw... - jneutron 10:02:11 09/04/03 (2)
- Now that IS a pointless exercise....NT - Commuteman 10:18:09 09/04/03 (1)
- Perhaps.. - jneutron 11:09:34 09/04/03 (0)
- Re: I'll go look for the posts, but am I wrong? - jneutron 07:10:52 09/04/03 (0)
- Hi Kuribo - jneutron 11:44:52 09/03/03 (2)
- Re: Hi Kuribo - john curl 14:12:08 09/03/03 (1)
- Re: Hi Kuribo - jneutron 14:51:10 09/03/03 (0)
- Yah, I know...it's gnat, not knat...Doh!nt - jneutron 06:30:02 09/03/03 (0)
- double hmmmm. - jneutron 10:36:37 08/27/03 (0)