From: LatticeStructures
[latticestructures@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2007 6:26
PM
To: Phil Hamling
Subject: Re: L&L .pdf
Phil,
I've finally had a chance to actually look over the numbers. You
know a lot more about this than I, but here's what I've figured out so far.
Page 1 lists this modified JD-18X with the element watt density at 12 or
13w/sq.in? (it's hard to read) with less stretch.
On page 2 he's got more
stretch, but the watt density shoots to 17w/sq.in.
It seems that either way
the elements are still going to burn faster.
From what I understand,
Kanthal's recommendations are not to be past 9w/sq. in.
Skutt, for
example, sometimes exceeds that.
Their best designs are @5-6w/sq.in., while their worst are in the 12-15w/sq.in.
range.
L&L's can typically be over, what... 20w/sq.in.? I should
ask Steve what the watt density on a typical JD230 with APM's would be.
Perhaps Dwight's kiln could serve as a model for
that.
~jesse.
On 9/4/07, LatticeStructures <latticestructures@gmail.com>
wrote:
Steve
is talking about running 3 rows of element holders where there's normally two,
and using APM's in series. I have little doubt that the kiln will soar,
but wanted your opinion.
I am, of course, worried about the cost (of
what will be essentially a small kiln), when running three sections of three
rows at the price he charges. As soon as I respond to the .pdf he sent,
he'll draw up a $ quote. During our conversation, he mentioned that he
hadn't heard back from you on the quote he gave for APM's. I only
offered an "uh-huh...".
~jesse.
cell: 608.333.9840
--
Jesse W. Hull, "LatticeStructures™"
Email: latticestructures@gmail.com
Web: www.latticestructures.com
--
Jesse W. Hull,
"LatticeStructures™"
Email: latticestructures@gmail.com
Web:
www.latticestructures.com