3 ms·
Technically radiation cooling is 100% efficient. And remarkably effective, you can cool an inert object to the temperature of the CMBR (4K) without doing anythi
by MadnessASAP 10mo ago
Technically radiation cooling is 100% efficient. And remarkably effective, you can cool an inert object to the temperature of the CMBR (4K) without doing anything at all. However it is rather slow and works best if there's no nearby planets or stars.
Fun fact though, make your radiator hotter and you can dump just as much if not more energy then you would typically via convective cooling. At 1400C (just below the melting point of steel) you can shed 450kW of heat per square meter, all you need is a really fancy heat pump!
- wat10000 10mo agoHow much power would a square meter at 1400C shed from convection?
- baobrien 10mo agoNot much in space; There's almost no matter to convect!
- fsh 10mo agoA sports car radiator has about that size and dumps 1 MW without boiling the coolant.
- alextingle 10mo agoA car's "radiator" doesn't actually lose heat by radiation though. It conducts heat to the air rushing through it. That's absolutely nothing like a radiator in a vacuum.
- fsh 10mo agoThat's the point. Forced air cooling is way more efficient than radiative cooling.
- tsimionescu 10mo agoThe question was about comparing the 1400KW of radiative cooling to how much convective coolig you could get from the same radiator on Earth.
- MadnessASAP 10mo agoI dont have firm numbers for you since it would depend on environmental conditions. As an educated guess though, I would say a fucking shit ton. You wouldn't want to be anywhere near the damn thing.
- fsh 10mo agoYour hypothetical liquid metal heat pump would have a Carnot efficiency of only 25%.