Any thermal rise before the blower must come from something else than the blower.
The friction of air along a thermometer works like the wind-chill factor. Thats why one should use an optical thermometer pointing to a small surface with almost no friction.
The recent paper refers to an old calibration curve for the blower. If the blower has been changed, that would no longer be valid.
Of course. But a new calibration curve would be valid. Mizuno makes a new curve every time he starts a series of tests.
It may be that a graph illustrating some aspect of a calibration is from a previous set of tests. I don't know about that. I think I saw some of these graphs a while ago, but perhaps they just looked similar.
Of course. But a new calibration curve would be valid. Mizuno makes a new curve every time he starts a series of tests.
It may be that a graph illustrating some aspect of a calibration is from a previous set of tests. I don't know about that. I think I saw some of these graphs a while ago, but perhaps they just looked similar.
The problem with this is that it makes mistakes (a spreadsheet used with the wrong cal curve) very easy, and difficult to detect. Especially because the results do not state which fan type is used.
The friction of air along a thermometer works like the wind-chill factor. Thats why one should use an optical thermometer pointing to a small surface with almost no friction.
That is a good idea, possible, and needs testing. If it is true then there will be a wind speed dependent temperature uplift which is different for output and input RTDs.
However, I think this is maybe wrong because the blower before and after speeds are different, due to different sized airways - so would expect friction-induced uplift in these two to be different. Anyway it can fairly easily be checked.
