basic chemistry questions for tegger

1. if i have a 5l radiator/coolant system full of hard water, and that
hard water has a carbonate content of 200mg/l, how much dry carbonate
would i be left with if i boil that water completely away?

2. if i distribute that carbonate over a surface area of 2m^2, how thick
will that layer be? [use a density of 2.0g/cm^3.]

3. how many liters of water do i need to boil dry to deposit this
surface up to a thickness of 0.3mm?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 10/26/2011 04:18 PM, jim beam wrote:
> 1. if i have a 5l radiator/coolant system full of hard water, and that
> hard water has a carbonate content of 200mg/l, how much dry carbonate
> would i be left with if i boil that water completely away?
>
> 2. if i distribute that carbonate over a surface area of 2m^2, how thick
> will that layer be? [use a density of 2.0g/cm^3.]
>
> 3. how many liters of water do i need to boil dry to deposit this
> surface up to a thickness of 0.3mm?
>
>

since tegger's sulking, i guess i need to do this myself.

1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.

2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.

3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.


it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.

antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.

as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
where it's cooler, the radiator.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim beam wrote:

> On 10/26/2011 04:18 PM, jim beam wrote:
>> 1. if i have a 5l radiator/coolant system full of hard water, and that
>> hard water has a carbonate content of 200mg/l, how much dry carbonate
>> would i be left with if i boil that water completely away?
>>
>> 2. if i distribute that carbonate over a surface area of 2m^2, how thick
>> will that layer be? [use a density of 2.0g/cm^3.]
>>
>> 3. how many liters of water do i need to boil dry to deposit this
>> surface up to a thickness of 0.3mm?
>>
>>
>
> since tegger's sulking, i guess i need to do this myself.
>
> 1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
> 5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.
>
> 2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
> 2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.
>
> 3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
> gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.
>
>
> it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
> accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
> illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
> tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
> the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.
>
> antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
> increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
> passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
> coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
> solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
> range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
> passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.
>
> as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
> of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
> decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
> or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
> material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
> where it's cooler, the radiator.

You have made an error, how does it feel

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim beam > wrote:

>
>1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
>5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.
>
>2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
>2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.
>
>3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
>gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.
>
>
>it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
>accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
>illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
>tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
>the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.
>
>antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
>increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
>passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
>coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
>solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
>range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
>passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.
>
>as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
>of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
>decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
>or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
>material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
>where it's cooler, the radiator.

Thanks for that detail.
Confirms why I just use tap water for my radiator.
It's not "hard" water here.
Once while traveling I was in Gila Bend, Arizona.
The tap water there reeked of something, maybe sulphur.
I'd probably use distilled water there, but I'll never find out.
Good.
I'd add that minerals deposit without boiling, as seen in galvanized
pipe, especially at joints. I surmise because the water slows and
changes direction there. Placers essentially.
But as you've pointed out, the amount of matter that can precipitate
from "normal" tap water is practically insignificant.

Also add I never had a radiator clog or lose heat transfer capability
to the point I noticed it, and I don't bother changing coolant
except every 5 years, when I do hoses and thermostat.
That's for my "highway" cars. So that's about 50k miles.
I've driven my "local" cars up to 13 years without touching the
coolant at all.
Never change brake fluid either, and never had to replace a caliper or
MC.
These are Chevys.
Not recommending anything, just saying.

--Vic

On 10/28/2011 07:27 PM, Bret wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>
>> On 10/26/2011 04:18 PM, jim beam wrote:
>>> 1. if i have a 5l radiator/coolant system full of hard water, and that
>>> hard water has a carbonate content of 200mg/l, how much dry carbonate
>>> would i be left with if i boil that water completely away?
>>>
>>> 2. if i distribute that carbonate over a surface area of 2m^2, how thick
>>> will that layer be? [use a density of 2.0g/cm^3.]
>>>
>>> 3. how many liters of water do i need to boil dry to deposit this
>>> surface up to a thickness of 0.3mm?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> since tegger's sulking, i guess i need to do this myself.
>>
>> 1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
>> 5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.
>>
>> 2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
>> 2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.
>>
>> 3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
>> gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.
>>
>>
>> it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
>> accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
>> illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
>> tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
>> the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.
>>
>> antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
>> increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
>> passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
>> coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
>> solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
>> range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
>> passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.
>>
>> as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
>> of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
>> decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
>> or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
>> material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
>> where it's cooler, the radiator.
>
> You have made an error, how does it feel

i dunno - how does it feel to be hiding behind mommy's skirts by not
substantiating your allegation?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 10/28/2011 07:52 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim > wrote:
>
>>
>> 1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
>> 5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.
>>
>> 2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
>> 2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.
>>
>> 3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
>> gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.
>>
>>
>> it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
>> accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
>> illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
>> tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
>> the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.
>>
>> antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
>> increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
>> passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
>> coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
>> solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
>> range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
>> passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.
>>
>> as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
>> of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
>> decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
>> or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
>> material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
>> where it's cooler, the radiator.
>
> Thanks for that detail.
> Confirms why I just use tap water for my radiator.
> It's not "hard" water here.
> Once while traveling I was in Gila Bend, Arizona.
> The tap water there reeked of something, maybe sulphur.
> I'd probably use distilled water there, but I'll never find out.
> Good.
> I'd add that minerals deposit without boiling, as seen in galvanized
> pipe, especially at joints. I surmise because the water slows and
> changes direction there. Placers essentially.

it's not so much flow, it's more that there's all kinds of things like
precipitation nucleation going on there.


> But as you've pointed out, the amount of matter that can precipitate
> from "normal" tap water is practically insignificant.

right. you can see huge precipitation in domestic water pipes. after
decades of use and countless thousands of gallons of water. the coolant
system on your car, unless you have an untenably large leak, sees maybe
a couple of liters a year.


>
> Also add I never had a radiator clog or lose heat transfer capability
> to the point I noticed it, and I don't bother changing coolant
> except every 5 years, when I do hoses and thermostat.
> That's for my "highway" cars. So that's about 50k miles.
> I've driven my "local" cars up to 13 years without touching the
> coolant at all.

there's no point changing hoses every 5 years. unless you've got some
really low grade junk on there. most hoses are good for 10, and are not
really mileage sensitive.


> Never change brake fluid either, and never had to replace a caliper or
> MC.

you've painted yourself into a corner on that one. if you find yourself
on a long steep grade with a full load, you could well have a serious
braking problem because fluid that old will be well out of spec for
moisture content, and thus boiling point - you should change the fluid.
but, while you might think yourself lucky for not having had a
problem, but i guarantee you now will if you do ever change the fluid
because the seals will slowly start to shrink back to their former
unworn size and thus start to leak.

check out the wikipedia page for some info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_fluid

[it's one of the few wikipedia pages that doesn't suck too bad - mainly
because big chinks of it are pretty much verbatim plagiarized from the
bosch automotive handbook!]


> These are Chevys.
> Not recommending anything, just saying.
>
> --Vic

refocus your hose changing energies [and money] into a regular brake
fluid changing schedule. many modern vehicles will successfully gravity
bleed if you're doing it yourself and aren't a shop trying to turn
around as many units as possible.


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:42:35 -0700, jim beam > wrote:

>On 10/28/2011 07:52 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim > wrote:
>>

>> I'd add that minerals deposit without boiling, as seen in galvanized
>> pipe, especially at joints. I surmise because the water slows and
>> changes direction there. Placers essentially.
>
>it's not so much flow, it's more that there's all kinds of things like
>precipitation nucleation going on there.
>

No sense complicating it. Elbows, T's, and unions get clogged at 4-5
times the rate of straight pipe. That's all a plumber has to know.
>
>> But as you've pointed out, the amount of matter that can precipitate
>> from "normal" tap water is practically insignificant.
>
>right. you can see huge precipitation in domestic water pipes. after
>decades of use and countless thousands of gallons of water. the coolant
>system on your car, unless you have an untenably large leak, sees maybe
>a couple of liters a year.
>

I never have to add water to my cars unless there's a leak.
A properly operating cooling system doesn't pop the cap.

>
>there's no point changing hoses every 5 years. unless you've got some
>really low grade junk on there. most hoses are good for 10, and are not
>really mileage sensitive.
>

Sure they are. They're pressurized when the car is at temp.
5 years might be excessive, but that's about the time I do it, because
that's when I do a flush and change the thermostat.
Just get the "feeling" it's time.
I'd feel real stupid if I popped a hose while on vacation in Florida.

>
>> Never change brake fluid either, and never had to replace a caliper or
>> MC.
>
>you've painted yourself into a corner on that one. if you find yourself
>on a long steep grade with a full load, you could well have a serious
>braking problem because fluid that old will be well out of spec for
>moisture content, and thus boiling point - you should change the fluid.
> but, while you might think yourself lucky for not having had a
>problem, but i guarantee you now will if you do ever change the fluid
>because the seals will slowly start to shrink back to their former
>unworn size and thus start to leak.
>
>check out the wikipedia page for some info:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_fluid
>
>[it's one of the few wikipedia pages that doesn't suck too bad - mainly
>because big chinks of it are pretty much verbatim plagiarized from the
>bosch automotive handbook!]
>
>
>> These are Chevys.
>> Not recommending anything, just saying.
>>
>> --Vic
>
>refocus your hose changing energies [and money] into a regular brake
>fluid changing schedule. many modern vehicles will successfully gravity
>bleed if you're doing it yourself and aren't a shop trying to turn
>around as many units as possible.

No way. That seems to be mostly a Honda fetish.
GM has no maintenance schedule for brake fluid, and I have *never* had
a brake failure.
I know, I know. I've read all about how important it is to change
brake fluid.
So I don't tell anybody not to do it.
Now I won't change mine for sure, since you told me it's too late.

--Vic

On 10/28/2011 10:17 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:42:35 -0700, jim > wrote:
>
>> On 10/28/2011 07:52 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
>>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim > wrote:
>>>
>
>>> I'd add that minerals deposit without boiling, as seen in galvanized
>>> pipe, especially at joints. I surmise because the water slows and
>>> changes direction there. Placers essentially.
>>
>> it's not so much flow, it's more that there's all kinds of things like
>> precipitation nucleation going on there.
>>
>
> No sense complicating it. Elbows, T's, and unions get clogged at 4-5
> times the rate of straight pipe. That's all a plumber has to know.
>>
>>> But as you've pointed out, the amount of matter that can precipitate
>>> from "normal" tap water is practically insignificant.
>>
>> right. you can see huge precipitation in domestic water pipes. after
>> decades of use and countless thousands of gallons of water. the coolant
>> system on your car, unless you have an untenably large leak, sees maybe
>> a couple of liters a year.
>>
>
> I never have to add water to my cars unless there's a leak.
> A properly operating cooling system doesn't pop the cap.
>
>>
>> there's no point changing hoses every 5 years. unless you've got some
>> really low grade junk on there. most hoses are good for 10, and are not
>> really mileage sensitive.
>>
>
> Sure they are. They're pressurized when the car is at temp.
> 5 years might be excessive, but that's about the time I do it, because
> that's when I do a flush and change the thermostat.
> Just get the "feeling" it's time.
> I'd feel real stupid if I popped a hose while on vacation in Florida.
>
>>
>>> Never change brake fluid either, and never had to replace a caliper or
>>> MC.
>>
>> you've painted yourself into a corner on that one. if you find yourself
>> on a long steep grade with a full load, you could well have a serious
>> braking problem because fluid that old will be well out of spec for
>> moisture content, and thus boiling point - you should change the fluid.
>> but, while you might think yourself lucky for not having had a
>> problem, but i guarantee you now will if you do ever change the fluid
>> because the seals will slowly start to shrink back to their former
>> unworn size and thus start to leak.
>>
>> check out the wikipedia page for some info:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_fluid
>>
>> [it's one of the few wikipedia pages that doesn't suck too bad - mainly
>> because big chinks of it are pretty much verbatim plagiarized from the
>> bosch automotive handbook!]
>>
>>
>>> These are Chevys.
>>> Not recommending anything, just saying.
>>>
>>> --Vic
>>
>> refocus your hose changing energies [and money] into a regular brake
>> fluid changing schedule. many modern vehicles will successfully gravity
>> bleed if you're doing it yourself and aren't a shop trying to turn
>> around as many units as possible.
>
> No way. That seems to be mostly a Honda fetish.
> GM has no maintenance schedule for brake fluid,

that's because they don't intend the first owner to keep the car that
long, and the second owner, they couldn't care less about. [frod
/invented/ that game btw - g.m. are simply copying.]

the technical necessity to change brake fluid due to its hygroscopic
nature, moisture absorption and boiling point depression to below
service working temperatures is incontrovertible so there is no
technical reason for g.m. to disregard fluid maintenance. the reason is
100% some management m.b.a. having done the math on the cost of lawsuits
being less than the cost of having dealers do maintenance. iow,
customer deaths are just a financial statistic, not an ethical obstacle.


> and I have *never* had
> a brake failure.
> I know, I know. I've read all about how important it is to change
> brake fluid.
> So I don't tell anybody not to do it.
> Now I won't change mine for sure, since you told me it's too late.

too late to save your seals, but not too late to have a braking system
that can save your life - that's a couple of hours and at most a couple
of hundies to replace the master cylinder well invested in my book.


>
> --Vic


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

Depending on how hard that water is, it can cause a lot of problems for
home plumbing systems, car radiators too.About 15 years ago I had my old
iron water pipes replaced with plastic plumbing.

In a 'different vein', depending on what some people eat, (fried
foods/fatty foods) their plumbing (veins) gets clogged up too.Have you
ever donated blood plasma before? I have, many times.Some of those
people's blood plasma in the plastic containers, you can see stuff
floating around in there.My blood plasma didn't have anything floating
around in my blood plasma containers.If you visit a hospital clinic,
they can show you some photos of what fried foods/fatty foods do to the
inside of those blood veins.That crap leads to heart attacks too.
cuhulin

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:21:56 -0700, jim beam wrote:

> On 10/28/2011 07:27 PM, Bret wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:50:10 -0700, jim beam wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/26/2011 04:18 PM, jim beam wrote:
>>>> 1. if i have a 5l radiator/coolant system full of hard water, and that
>>>> hard water has a carbonate content of 200mg/l, how much dry carbonate
>>>> would i be left with if i boil that water completely away?
>>>>
>>>> 2. if i distribute that carbonate over a surface area of 2m^2, how thick
>>>> will that layer be? [use a density of 2.0g/cm^3.]
>>>>
>>>> 3. how many liters of water do i need to boil dry to deposit this
>>>> surface up to a thickness of 0.3mm?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> since tegger's sulking, i guess i need to do this myself.
>>>
>>> 1: with solute content of 200mg/l [which is very hard water indeed btw],
>>> 5 liters will give 1.000g of carbonate.
>>>
>>> 2: 1.000g over 2m^2 = 0.500g/m^2, or 0.00005g/cm^2. at a density of
>>> 2.0g/cm^3 that gives a thickness of 0.0001cm, or 1 micron.
>>>
>>> 3: at the rate of 0.0001cm/liter, you'd have to boil 3,000l [~793
>>> gallons] of water to accumulate 0.3mm depth of carbonate scale.
>>>
>>>
>>> it's a legitimate question to wonder where the hard "rock" that
>>> accumulates in radiators comes from. but the above hopefully
>>> illustrates that only a small proportion of it can come from using hard
>>> tap-water. instead, the majority comes from corrosion product within
>>> the engine and cooling system itself, and from decay of the antifreeze.
>>>
>>> antifreeze contains salts and corrosion agents that protect by rapidly
>>> increasing the initial corrosion rate in the system to build up a
>>> passive layer. that passive layer exists in equilibrium with the
>>> coolant chemistry to prevent further corrosion for as long as the
>>> solution remains within its intended range. if diluted out of that
>>> range, or if other chemicals are introduced, equilibrium is upset,
>>> passivation can cease and non-passive corrosion starts again.
>>>
>>> as to why we see a lot of it accumulate in the radiator, the solubility
>>> of a lot of these compounds increases with elevated temperatures, and
>>> decreases with decreasing temperature. just like the solubility of salt
>>> or sugar in water increases with temperature. thus we see dissolved
>>> material transported form the heat source, the engine, precipitating
>>> where it's cooler, the radiator.
>>
>> You have made an error, how does it feel
>
> i dunno - how does it feel to be hiding behind mommy's skirts by not
> substantiating your allegation?

I thought it would be more constructive for you to find your own error.