Well, I neglected to describe the size of this one. It's made from 8 in well casing. The water chamber is 9 ft long with a 2 in exit pipe that is about 6 ft long. It holds about 25 gal of water with 6 2 kW heating elements. So, this is not a starting point. Long ago, I wrote some instructions for making a small geyser from a juice can and some copper tubing, but I can't find them now. It requires soldering to seal the exit tube into the can lid. Pineapple juice cans last longer because they have a coating to protect from corrosion. The exit tube can be 1/4 in or 3/8 in copper about 3 ft long. It's also nice to have a funnel on top to catch most of the erupted water although the eruption will be much higher without a funnel. You have to catch the erupted water if you want to get a true cycle. Otherwise, you have to refill the system after each eruption. I think there are other people who have made small models more recently than I have, so maybe they'll chime in. Carlton Cross cross at bmi.net At 01:24 PM 9/9/2013, you wrote: >Have you got a detailed description of your set-up that could be >posted? Zayne's old enough now that we could attempt to have Webb >family driveway experiments, and this looks like a neat set-up if >you can compare overflowing/non-overflowing and vertical vs. horizontal. >Karen > >[] > > >On 9/8/2013 10:33 PM, Carlton Cross wrote: >>What you describe sounds like what I remember. Jeff may have >>something to add if my memory needs correction. (I haven't had >>time to dig up our old data.) >> >>There are many features of a geyser's plumbing that will affect the >>frequency of oscillation, the main ones being the combined volume >>of the bubbles, the mass of the water above the bubbles, and the >>size and friction of the passage leading to the surface. Smooth >>pipes that are cooled by the outside air are not very good models >>of geyser plumbing, but I think it's interesting that the behavior >>of the models can be seen in some natural geysers. I don't >>remember finding a geyser that displayed the rapid bouncing, but >>that is no surprise because the friction in a natural geyser tube >>is much greater than in a smooth pipe and the mass of the moving >>water is generally greater. As the friction increases, the >>frequency of oscillation will decrease; and, as the moving mass >>increases, the frequency will decrease. I can't think of any >>reason why a natural geyser would oscillate faster than the models. >> >>Carlton Cross >><mailto:cross at bmi.net>cross at bmi.net >> >>From: >><mailto:geysers-bounces at lists.wallawalla.edu>geysers-bounces at lists.wallawalla.edu >>[mailto:geysers-bounces at lists.wallawalla.edu] On Behalf Of Demetri Stoumbos >>Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2013 5:24 PM >>To: Geyser Observation Reports >>Subject: Re: [Geysers] Blog post about geyser mechanisms >> >>I find it interesting that your experiments produced two distinct >>patterns of water column bouncing. In my backyard modeling >>experiments, I have found that the system starts out with the >>"rapid" form of bouncing, and then progressively shifted to the >>"slow" form. I noticed this both in models which overflowed >>between eruptions, and those in which the water level naturally sat >>a little bit below overflow. As the eruption neared, the bouncing >>would decrease in bounces per second, increase in amplitude, and >>become more erratic. That is to say that a water level vs time >>graph would start out looking like a sinusoidal wave, but then the >>ordered nature of the curve would deteriorate as time went on as >>the water level stalled for split seconds or bounce around at peaks >>and troughs. Of course in the overflowing systems, the actual >>water level was constant at vent level, so I went off of how much >>water overflowed per unit time. In these systems, as the bouncing >>progressed to "slow" form and its amplitude grew during an >>interval, the low parts of the bouncing would become low enough >>that overflow would momentarily stop (think Depression or Oblong). >> >>I guess my end question is: did your models show an either/or >>pattern in relation to the two forms of bouncing, or did they start >>out with the "rapid" form, then at one point flip over to "slow" form? >> >>Demetri Stoumbos >> >>On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Carlton Cross >><<mailto:cross at bmi.net>cross at bmi.net> wrote: >>A quote from the below link, >> >>"There, after an eruption, more and more steam can accumulate >>between the surface of the water and the roof of the cavity, >>gradually building up pressure. When the pressure grows too high, >>the steam and water escape through the geyser's vertical shaft." >> >>and >> >>"They found that pressure builds up in a bubble trap there between >>geyser eruptions, just as in the Russian study." >> >>I haven't had time to locate and read the referenced sources, but >>I think it's important to note that pressure build-up is not what >>causes an eruption. Also, the Cross driveway experiments have >>produced geyser models that demonstrate eruptions from an entirely >>vertical system with no places for trapping steam. Pressure gages >>along the water column show clearly that the pressure everywhere >>decreases continuously once the eruption has started. The >>temperature also drops because the steam carries heat out of the >>system. Eruptions in a vertical system were not noticeably >>different from those of a horizontal system. >> >>The static pressure within a fluid system is determined by the >>depth below the surface. When you dive into water, you feel >>greater pressure as you go deeper. It doesn't matter whether >>you're in a chamber with vapor or not. In a horizontal chamber, >>the static pressure will be determined by the pressure at the >>chamber exit to the surface, and the pressure at the exit will be >>determined by the depth below the surface. As a geyser system >>fills after an eruption, the depth of the water increases until the >>start of overflow. After that, the temperature will increase, but >>not the static pressure. >> >>Steam within a horizontal chamber will displace water from the >>chamber. That water must exit through whatever passage leads to >>the surface where overflow will occur. Hence, the effective depth >>of the water above the chamber will not change and the static >>pressure will NOT increase. >> >>Once a geyser system has reached overflow, it can and does continue >>to heat, and, at some point, a small section of upward-moving water >>will rise until it reaches a place where the static pressure is low >>enough for the water to boil and produce steam. The expansion of >>the steam will displace water from that region, and, >>simultaneously, the steam bubbles will begin to rise. As the >>bubbles rise in the water column, the static pressure at all points >>below the bubbles will decrease because water with bubbles weighs >>less than water without bubbles. Finally, when the pressure drops, >>the boiling point drops and more water will boil which produces >>more bubbles which allows more water to boil, etc. The system has >>gone unstable and the expanding steam will begin to rush toward the >>surface exit - an eruption. >> >>So far, I have talked only about the static pressure which is >>determined by the depth within the system. There are, of course, >>dynamic pressure changes related to water movement. Once steam has >>accumulated within a chamber or the water column, the whole column >>can bounce up and down because the steam below is >>compressible. When the column rises, the steam expands and the >>pressure drops eventually to the point where the upward motion will >>decrease, possibly until it stops and then begins to fall. The >>downward motion will compress the steam below and the pressure will >>rise, possibly causing the steam to condense into water. When the >>pressure is finally great enough to stop the downward motion, >>expansion can begin again, pushing the water upward. >> >>Our driveway experiments clearly produced two forms, rapid and >>slow, of a bouncing water column as the system neared an >>eruption. In the rapid form, there was only slight movement of the >>water at about one cycle per second with no overflow. The slow >>form was more like a series of overflow surges separated by many seconds. >> >>Carlton Cross >><mailto:cross at bmi.net>cross at bmi.net >> >> >> >> >>At 07:38 PM 9/7/2013, you wrote: >>Thinking this might interest some gazers who do not read geological >>magazines or journals, I'll send along the URL to a post I just put >>up about some interesting new studies on geysers: >><<http://www.yellowstonetreasures.com/author-blog/>http://www.yellowstonetreasures.com/author-blog/>http://www.yellowstonetreasures.com/author-blog/ >> >> >>Happy geyser gazing to those of you who get to enjoy the late season! >> >>Janet Chapple >>_______________________________________________ >>Geysers mailing list >><mailto:Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Geysers mailing list >><mailto:Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu >> >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Geysers mailing list >><mailto:Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu >> > > >_______________________________________________ >Geysers mailing list >Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 66ff0ae.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 54774 bytes Desc: not available URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20130909/8d51f2df/attachment.jpg>