Having failed to progress in mathematics past college algebra, I am hard pressed
to ascertain the answers to the following questions:

If the coolant was pumped uphill and stayed there, and the pump continued to
pump, wouldn't something near the front of the van eventually burst and make a
mess? And, based on the original poster's assumption that the water pump has to
work relatively hard to pump coolant uphill, would it do less real work if the
van were constantly driven downhill?

These are questions for which a differential equation appears unequal to the
task.

Dan
'87 Westfalia, with optional, down-slope-optimized cooling system (parked on a
hill)
'82 Adventurewagen, with hardly any cooling system at all
'75 Porsche 914, same as above

"John D. Stepto" wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Gunnings <ngunn@landmarknet.net>
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 1:24 PM
> Subject: Weep No More For Me
>
> >
> >One of the weakest links in the waterboxer design is
> >the is the constant strain on the waterpump to push coolant uphill to the
> >front radiator.
>
> Actually, the pump is straining to push coolant uphill because the coolant
> turns around and goes back down hill and pulls the equal amount back up.
> Its a closed system and energy potential (mass x gravity x height) is almost
> equal at the pump. If the coolant was pumped uphill and stayed there,  then
> the work done by the pump would be the the (mass the coolant moved) x
> gravity x (the height from the pump to the top of the coolant level).  Of
> coarse, the level is constantly changing and you would end up with a simple
> differential equation.
>
> Is it Friday yet?
>
> John

--
Dan
__________________________________________________
Dan Schmitz - Genentech Automation Engineering
djs@gene.com (650) 225-6119
__________________________________________________

"I'll so offend to make offense a skill
Redeeming time when men least think I will"

W. Shakespeare
Henry IV, Part 1