Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. A question of efficiency?

A question of efficiency?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questiondiscussion
40 Posts 23 Posters 3 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Ben Breeg

    John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

    I think taking a shower would be bette

    I've got four daughters who absolutely must have, without fail, at least 3 baths a week. Bloody teenagers! They can't shower (their words, not mine) because they can't get their hair wet unless they're washing it which they do separately. :doh: :confused:

    I am the Breeg, goo goo g'joob Aici zace un om despre care nu sestie prea mult

    D Offline
    D Offline
    Dan Neely
    wrote on last edited by
    #29

    If they're anything like my sisters were at that age, the baths use less water than a shower would; so stop complaining. :laugh:

    3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B Ben Breeg

      So there I was, sitting in the bath contemplating the meaning of life when it occurred to me which is the more efficient? Let me elaborate. In our house, the hot water needs are served by an 'on demand' gas boiler. This boiler has a dial which allows setting the hot water temperature. This temperature adjustment is achieved by altering the volume of gas to the burners. The same temperature adjustment can be achieved by altering the flow of water through the taps. I.e, turn the tap down, the water gets hotter because of the water flow reduction. So, here comes the question: which is more economical and energy efficient to fill a bath? A. Turn the temperature up on the boiler (thus increasing the volume of gas burnt) but more water enters the bath so the boiler doesn't need to be on as long. B. Reduce the water temperature on the boiler (thus reducing the gas flow) and then reduce the flow of water at the tap so the water passes the burner slower and thus heats up more but takes longer to fill the bath and hence the burner is on longer albeit not burning as much gas per given moment in time. C. They are the same. D. Who gives a s**t. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts.

      I am the Breeg, goo goo g'joob Aici zace un om despre care nu sestie prea mult

      A Offline
      A Offline
      AspDotNetDev
      wrote on last edited by
      #30

      Skinny dip at the nearest lake or, preferably, hot spring (true story: a guy actually got full on naked and used body wash to clean off in front of me and a friend at a hot spring).

      [

      S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

      ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

      C D 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • A AspDotNetDev

        Skinny dip at the nearest lake or, preferably, hot spring (true story: a guy actually got full on naked and used body wash to clean off in front of me and a friend at a hot spring).

        [

        S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

        ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

        C Offline
        C Offline
        Chris Trelawny Ross
        wrote on last edited by
        #31

        And you stayed around to watch? :omg:

        A 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • C Chris Trelawny Ross

          And you stayed around to watch? :omg:

          A Offline
          A Offline
          AspDotNetDev
          wrote on last edited by
          #32

          Nope, I stayed to soak and avert my eyes.

          [

          S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

          ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • A AspDotNetDev

            Skinny dip at the nearest lake or, preferably, hot spring (true story: a guy actually got full on naked and used body wash to clean off in front of me and a friend at a hot spring).

            [

            S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

            ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

            D Offline
            D Offline
            Dan Neely
            wrote on last edited by
            #33

            Euros are as casual about nudity/etc as Americans are about violence; those of us on both sides of the Atlantic are idiots for trying to think we can make the other go away by pretending it doesn't exist. :rolleyes:

            3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

            A 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D Dan Neely

              Euros are as casual about nudity/etc as Americans are about violence; those of us on both sides of the Atlantic are idiots for trying to think we can make the other go away by pretending it doesn't exist. :rolleyes:

              3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

              A Offline
              A Offline
              AspDotNetDev
              wrote on last edited by
              #34

              Me: *punches naked dude in the face* Naked Dude: Why'd you do that!? Me: I'm a violent American, you casually nude European! Yep, I can see how that would happen. :rolleyes:

              [

              S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

              ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

              D 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • A AspDotNetDev

                Me: *punches naked dude in the face* Naked Dude: Why'd you do that!? Me: I'm a violent American, you casually nude European! Yep, I can see how that would happen. :rolleyes:

                [

                S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

                ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

                D Offline
                D Offline
                Dan Neely
                wrote on last edited by
                #35

                You'd better hope they decide it's cheaper to fine you his medical bills and deport you than to put you on trial because that defense would go over like a lead balloon. PS For some reason I never got a reply notice for this post....

                3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

                A 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • D Dan Neely

                  You'd better hope they decide it's cheaper to fine you his medical bills and deport you than to put you on trial because that defense would go over like a lead balloon. PS For some reason I never got a reply notice for this post....

                  3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

                  A Offline
                  A Offline
                  AspDotNetDev
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #36

                  Dan Neely wrote:

                  deport you

                  They would deport me from the US to the US? :confused:

                  Dan Neely wrote:

                  For some reason I never got a reply notice for this post

                  Did you uncheck "Send me an e-mail if someone replies to this message" on your post?

                  [

                  S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

                  ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • A AspDotNetDev

                    Dan Neely wrote:

                    deport you

                    They would deport me from the US to the US? :confused:

                    Dan Neely wrote:

                    For some reason I never got a reply notice for this post

                    Did you uncheck "Send me an e-mail if someone replies to this message" on your post?

                    [

                    S<T>::f(U) // Out of line.

                    ](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8yk3t00s(v=vs.71).aspx)

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    Dan Neely
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #37

                    It was checked and I got a notice for this one on time, must've been hamstergremlins

                    3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • B Ben Breeg

                      So there I was, sitting in the bath contemplating the meaning of life when it occurred to me which is the more efficient? Let me elaborate. In our house, the hot water needs are served by an 'on demand' gas boiler. This boiler has a dial which allows setting the hot water temperature. This temperature adjustment is achieved by altering the volume of gas to the burners. The same temperature adjustment can be achieved by altering the flow of water through the taps. I.e, turn the tap down, the water gets hotter because of the water flow reduction. So, here comes the question: which is more economical and energy efficient to fill a bath? A. Turn the temperature up on the boiler (thus increasing the volume of gas burnt) but more water enters the bath so the boiler doesn't need to be on as long. B. Reduce the water temperature on the boiler (thus reducing the gas flow) and then reduce the flow of water at the tap so the water passes the burner slower and thus heats up more but takes longer to fill the bath and hence the burner is on longer albeit not burning as much gas per given moment in time. C. They are the same. D. Who gives a s**t. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts.

                      I am the Breeg, goo goo g'joob Aici zace un om despre care nu sestie prea mult

                      P Offline
                      P Offline
                      PIEBALDconsult
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #38

                      Bathe with a hot friend. Two birds... yeah, two birds. :thumbsup:

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B Ben Breeg

                        OriginalGriff wrote:

                        The only way to be sure, is to check your meter, fill the bath to a marked depth, measure the temperature, and then repeat for each different variable.

                        Do you know what, that's a bloody good idea. See, I knew you guys would come up with the goods.

                        I am the Breeg, goo goo g'joob Aici zace un om despre care nu sestie prea mult

                        R Offline
                        R Offline
                        Rob Grainger
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #39

                        I think option E is the least efficient of all... E. Keep refilling bath to marked level varying parameters, ...

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • B Ben Breeg

                          So there I was, sitting in the bath contemplating the meaning of life when it occurred to me which is the more efficient? Let me elaborate. In our house, the hot water needs are served by an 'on demand' gas boiler. This boiler has a dial which allows setting the hot water temperature. This temperature adjustment is achieved by altering the volume of gas to the burners. The same temperature adjustment can be achieved by altering the flow of water through the taps. I.e, turn the tap down, the water gets hotter because of the water flow reduction. So, here comes the question: which is more economical and energy efficient to fill a bath? A. Turn the temperature up on the boiler (thus increasing the volume of gas burnt) but more water enters the bath so the boiler doesn't need to be on as long. B. Reduce the water temperature on the boiler (thus reducing the gas flow) and then reduce the flow of water at the tap so the water passes the burner slower and thus heats up more but takes longer to fill the bath and hence the burner is on longer albeit not burning as much gas per given moment in time. C. They are the same. D. Who gives a s**t. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts.

                          I am the Breeg, goo goo g'joob Aici zace un om despre care nu sestie prea mult

                          P Offline
                          P Offline
                          pgrmdave
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #40

                          I'd imagine B is more efficient, as it would seem to me that for the same volume of gas you'd be able to extract more heat from it and into the water.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups