Timeline for Is there a way to fill Tank 2 from Tank 1 through Gravity alone?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 2018 at 10:37 | history | edited | Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 383 characters in body
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 9:15 | comment | added | John Doisneau | No, I just mean the worst case would be to have only one drop of water "fill" the input every minute... | |
| Jul 4, 2013 at 22:32 | comment | added | John Doisneau | And given that the input is not "under water" how does it change the system's behaviour? | |
| Jul 2, 2013 at 14:27 | history | edited | Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 40 characters in body
|
| Jul 2, 2013 at 14:17 | comment | added | mart | comment to point 2: head is the difference between the higher water surface and the lower one, provided there's a continous, filled pipe between them. It does not matter wether the outflow tank 1 is connectetd at the top or bottom, the head will be the same (as long as the pipe is filled) | |
| Jul 1, 2013 at 3:25 | comment | added | Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir | @JohnDoisneau: Instead of making it a pressure-based pump, why don't you increase the "head"? Also, you could but the ending of the pipe at Tank 2 at its base, to increase the value of the "head". | |
| Jun 30, 2013 at 22:39 | comment | added | John Doisneau | Thank you dimension10. Both tanks must be full of water. I have continued reading about fluid dynamics applied to gravity-based water distribution systems and also found out that I probably experienced backflow because of air blocks in the several land ondulations leading to Tank 2. Since my head variable is small, to ensure my system works all the time, I may transform it into a pressure-based one, switching the water source point to the bottom of Tank 1, and using an automated valve at Tank 2! | |
| Jun 30, 2013 at 14:20 | history | answered | Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir | CC BY-SA 3.0 |