Efficiency of electrical heat vs. mechanical heating

AI Thread Summary
Electrical heating is generally more efficient than mechanical heating when it comes to heating water. An immersion heater transfers energy directly to the water through conduction, minimizing losses. In contrast, a mechanical whisk primarily generates kinetic energy, with most of the energy used to overcome friction rather than directly heating the water. While the whisk may initially stir the water evenly, the electric heater ultimately heats the water more effectively due to lower energy losses. Overall, the immersion heater is the superior choice for heating water quickly and efficiently.
Low-Q
Gold Member
Messages
283
Reaction score
9
I have a question about efficiency of electrical heating vs. mechanical heating.

Let me explain an example:

I have two containers with 1 litre of water each.
In one container I use a electric heater (electrical resistance) 1W.
In the other container I use an electric motor attached to a whisk where the motor use 1W to run the whisk.

Except for the efficiency of the electric motor: Which scenario will heat up the water to a given temperature first, given that the water in both initially is the same?

I ask because I assume that a electric heater (resistance) will radiate wavelength that is not absorbed by the water as well, while the mechanical work will cause friction in the water itself to be heated, and assume this is more efficient.

Any idea, or facts about this?

Vidar
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the vast majority of the mechanical work will be taken up by bulk motion of the fluid, not heat.
 
chill_factor said:
the vast majority of the mechanical work will be taken up by bulk motion of the fluid, not heat.
I understand that, but that motion is not loading the motor except for the period the fluid accelerates into that motion. This motion is kinetic energy that is conserved after acceleration, and do not require energy to sustain. However, the loss (friction) that wants to slow down the motion in the water require 1J/s. That is loss which will generate heat.
If this wasn't the case we put in energy that is not conserved (lost or destroied), and that is not possible. 1W from the whisk is required to fight friction - not to sustain motion.

Vidar
 
chill_factor said:
the vast majority of the mechanical work will be taken up by bulk motion of the fluid, not heat.
This isn't true: Low-Q is correct.

Once the fluid stops accelerating as it is being stirred -- which takes only a few seconds -- all of the energy goes toward combating friction and all goes toward generating heat.

The electric resistance heater (an immersion heater, right?) heats the water just fine because as an immersion heater, it heats due to conduction. So...

The immersion heater gets a little head start (a few seconds), then heats the water at the same rate as the stirrer, but the stirrer heats the water more evenly.
 
Yes, immersion heater is the right description. Thanks for the answer :-)

Vidar
 
well..u have already come to the conclusion..but i want to tell u from another perspective..
the energy conservation..both electrical appliances have same power requirement.if u study electrical heater..what ever the electrical energy is coming in is going out in the form of heat..from a resistance which is totaly surrounded by water(in conventional heaters) so loses are minimum..but in case of electrical motor..the loses are high..because there is a lot of friction in motors..in bearings,etc..due to which energy is lost ..so water will be heated more quickly by electrical heater.. thank you
 
I was using the Smith chart to determine the input impedance of a transmission line that has a reflection from the load. One can do this if one knows the characteristic impedance Zo, the degree of mismatch of the load ZL and the length of the transmission line in wavelengths. However, my question is: Consider the input impedance of a wave which appears back at the source after reflection from the load and has traveled for some fraction of a wavelength. The impedance of this wave as it...
Back
Top