The "Duh" had nothing to do with wondering why the pipes aren't wrapped.
The "Duh" had to do with you telling us that some day you'll wrap the pipes and then saying "which are not wrapped". I'm pretty sure that most us knew that they weren't wrapped as soon as you told that some day you'll wrap them.
Not possible. It's *never* Obama's fault. Even when it is, it's George Bush's fault.
Because you have nothing in your quiver. You're wrong.
I've heard of people doing that. It's a very real help. I haven't done it, yet. But who can tell.
Considering that I'd been frozen in the wind chill pretty much all that day, I'm an easy target for a netpick.
At -20 a battery puts out about 1/4 of it's regular output. Not 100% sure of the fraction - but close.
Try answering the actual question, instead of avoiding it. The question was in which case are PIPE MORE LIKELY TO FREEZE? Scenario B is more likely to result in frozen pipes. And I've provided credible references that say so.
Why don't you just man up and admit that you were wrong when you said that "Wind chill has no effect on inanimate objects"?
Are you totally stupid? Does the temperature stay constant in your world? Or does it typically vary, very commonly going down overnight? Let's say it's 35F out at 6PM. Overnight the temp is going down to 20F. At 6AM it starts to rise and by 9AM, it's above freezing again. That is a very common occurrence. If the only effect on the pipes of windchill is how long it takes to freeze, then with a large windchill, in that drafty crawlspace or unheated cabing they may have enough time to freeze. Without that windchill, the pipes are less likely to HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO FREEZE. Good grief.
BTW, apparently you now agree that inanimate objects are affected by windchill. That's a start.
The Weather Channel, NOAA, Univ of Illinois, City of Rochester all say windchill has an effect on inanimate objects and the freezing of pipes:
Here, from the Weather Channel:
"Pipes in attics, crawl spaces and outside walls are all vulnerable to free zing, especially if there are cracks or openings that allow cold, outside a ir to flow across the pipes. Research at the University of Illinois has sho wn that â??wind chill,â?? the coolin g effect of air and wind that causes the human body to lose heat, can play a major role in accelerating ice blockage, and thus bursting, in water pipe s. "
From City of Rochester:
Now try thinking this through one step further. You agree that windchill can make pipes freeze sooner. So, it's very usual for the temp to drop below freezing overnight and then rise above freezing again in the morning. Let's say is 35F at 6PM and it's going to drop to a low of
20F overnight, before rising above freezing by 9AM. With a windchill of 0F, the pipes in that drafty crawspace may have enough time to freeze, while with no windchill they may not freeze. QED, windchill matters. On a night with a lower reported windchill number, the pipes are more likely to freeze. That is all that I, as well as the numerous references I've supplied are saying.And I'd take it even further. Without regard to time, some areas of a drafty crawlspace might NEVER make it to below freezing, depending on the windchill. The house is supply some warmth. With a high windchill number you have wind. That wind might be necessary to produce a steadystate temperature below freezing where the pipes are. Without it, the pipes might never make it below freezing even if it stays 20F outside forever. Now, you're gonna say "But it's the wind..." Sure it's the wind, but the wind is reflected in the windchill. If I tell you the windchill is
0F, the outside temp is 20F, you can even calculate the actual windspeed. It's a proxy for windspeed. Ergo, when asked which number matters, the outside temp of 10F or the windchill number of 0F in determining if pipes will freeze, clearly the windchill number does matter. That was the question, was it not?If your
That isn't all you've been saying. You told us that "windchill has no effect on inanimate objects" and you still won't admit that was flat out wrong.
The windchill is relative, because one more time, the lower the reported windchill, the higher the wind. Ergo, it's more likely the pipes will freeze with a lower reported windchill. Windchill is a proxy for windspeed.
And it's *not* just a matter of time. It's very common for people to be worried about whether pipes will freeze on a night where the temp goes significantly below zero. THAT was exactly the question posed by Stormin that started the thread. Now if windchill effects the amount of time it takes for pipes to freeze in a drafty crawlspace or an unheated cabing, then it follows that on nights where the temp drops below freezing overnight and then returns to above freezing at 9AM, with windchill the pipes may have enough time to freeze. With no windchill, they are less likely to have the time to freeze. Capiche? In one case you have frozen pipes, in the other with no windchill, you don't.
And I'd also note that it's not just a matter of time. In a drafty crawlspace under a heated house, in some cases, with no reported windchill, the pipes might never freeze, even if it stays 20F outside forever, while with a big windchill reported, they may very well freeze. Why? With the big windchill the wind may be necessary to drop the steady state temperature below freezing where the pipes are.
freezing, especially if there are cracks or openings that allow cold, outs ide air to flow across the pipes. Research at the University of Illinois ha s shown that ?wind chill,?? the cooling effect of air and w ind that causes the human body to lose heat, can play a major role in accel erating ice blockage, and thus bursting, in water pipes."
ATER%20PIPES.pdf
The one example you provided, NOAA proved you wrong. They clearly said flat out that wind chill has an effect on inanimate objects and they even said water pipes. Time to take off those rose colored glasses and read what's there, instead of what you want to make believe.
As for impeaching the internet, that canard won't fly. There isn't one source called "the internet". I gave you NOAA, Weather Channel, City of Rochester, etc, not some kook websites.
When you resort to name calling it shows you lack of understanding of issues. Sorry you had to sink so low and lose respect of others. That puts me out of this now as I'm not going to wallow in the mud with you.
But you still have refused to answer about the 35 degree temperature and
20 degree windchill. IT WON'T FREEZE
Back about 40 years ago, I had a Karmann Ghia and not a lot of money. I'd take the battery out every night and bring it in the house, put it back in the morning. Did that most of January one year
Wind chill has no effect on inanimate objects! Period. It's just a number in a chart -- nothing more.
Wind can have an effect on inanimate objects. A number in a chart cannot have an effect on an inanimate object. Period.
You need to understand the fundamental difference between "wind" (moving air) and "wind chill" (a composite index -- not air, just a number).
See my other reply.
You call me stupid when you ask questions like that?
Get real! No one has said it would (though under the right circumstances, water will freeze when the ambient air is above "freezing"). The *fact* is that windchill also affects inanimate objects. The numbers quoted by the newz are for *bare* *human* skin but the effect is relevant to all objects.
Trader keeps using specific numbers for wind chill. The numbers don't apply to inanimate objects. Wind does carry heat away faster then when there is no wind. No one is disputing that fact.
If Trader's windchill had the same effect on inanimate objects, then a
35 degree temperature with a 20 degree windchill could freeze pipes.Windchill is a "feel" and can have a value assigned to it. Wind affects the rate of cooling If windchill was the same for humans, animas and inanimate objects, then pipes woujld freeze anyh time the windchill go below 32. Since they do not, yhou can condlude they are not affected.
Wind---yes Windchill---NO
Some people just refuse to see the difference
Don't take my word for it
With the bitterly cold air dominating our local news today, the phrase ?wind chill factor? is getting a great deal of well-deserved attention. Some people are asking what it really means and when we started using it.
Before World War II, two scientists working in Antarctica first developed the idea and coined the phrase. Paul Allman Siple and Charles Passel based it on the cooling rate of a bottle of water that was suspended above their hut. They developed a formula and made a chart that was later released and became widely used in the 1970s. Then in
2001, the National Weather Service updated the formula used to calculate the wind chill. That updated version is what we use today.The idea behind the wind chill factor is to give people an idea of just how quickly the cold temperatures mixed with the wind will affect humans and animals alike. Frostbite and hypothermia are real dangers from bitter cold, and the wind chill factor helps determine the level of danger we face.
The formula takes into account the temperature and winds at five feet above ground level, the average height of an adult?s face, which is presumably the most exposed part of the body on a cold day. According to the National Weather Service, it also ?incorporates heat transfer theory, heat loss from the body to its surroundings, during cold and breezy/windy days.? The National Weather Service Windchill Chart states that at a wind chill of about -19º, frost bite can occur in thirty minutes. Of course, below that temperature, the colder it is, the faster frostbite will happen.
You might have heard all the hype surrounding the Green Bay vs. San Francisco game yesterday. Last week, some meteorologists were predicting the wind chill would be colder than the famed Ice Bowl of 1967. In fact, that forecast did not pan out, partially because in the 1960s, they were still using the older formula, which caused the calculations to be colder than they should have been. By the old index, the wind chill for the Ice Bowl was -47º. By the new index, it was a warmer -36. Also, the actual temperature in Green Bay yesterday was not nearly as cold as was feared by some late last week.
Read more here:
Not quite the same:
But it is *still* windchill. The fact is that the numbers posted in the NEWZ only are estimates for bare human skin, so if you're going to play the pedantic pete role, it's not accurate for even dogs (a rather animate object).
Wrong. He's never said anything *close* to that.
WRONG. You're lying, now.
Wrong. It *IS* windchill. Wind is moving air. It has nothing to do with temperature, real or imagined.
You can't even get it straight.
I *certainly* don't because you're *WRONG*.
Windchill and Wind Chill Factor are different things. One is a specific formula (or table, really). The other is an effect.
AND IS NOT any different for animate or inanimate objects. A dog will have a different correction than a human. If you're talking about a specific table, so be it. That is *not* windchill. Windchill is more general.
Utterly irrelevant.
No shit. This has been most of the problem here. Terminology must be properly used.
You are getting closer and at least realized there is wind and the Wind Chill factor.
Now, the is a rapper named Windschill, but the dictionary does not have that as one word like trader is making up.
I understand the issue perfectly well. So does NOAA, Weather Channel, University of Illinois, etc. They agree with my position.
When you keep droning on about windchill when the outside temperature is above freezing and the question was about a night where the outside temp will drop to 0F with a windchill of 0F, what do you expect?
That
I have answered it, but apparently you can't read:
Ed: "Yes, but they won't freeze if the air temperature is 33 degrees and the wind chill is 20. See the difference?
Trader: "Yes I do. But continuing to use cases where the temp is above freezing doesn't show that the lower the reported windchill, the more likely pipes in a drafty crawlspace or an unheated cabin are to freeze when the temps are well below freezing. Again the qustion posed wasn't about 35F. It was about a day with 0F actual,
-10F windchill. "
No one here has argued that water pipes can freeze without the actual temp being below 32F. No one is arguing that. I never said otherwise. So, what about it. It has nothing to do with the fact that windchill has an effect on whether pipes will freeze overnight in the case that was posed: 0F, windchill -10F.
So, yeah, after enough of that, and then accusing me of not answering your question, when I did, I get annoyed.
Now you're lying and just digging your hole deeper. I put a brick that's 75F outside in air that's 20F. So, it cools just as fast with a windchill of -10F as it does if the windchill is
20F? Are you that dumb?
You really are dumber than a brick. From NOAA:
"While exposure to low wind chills can be life threatening to both humans a nd animals alike, the only effect that wind chill has on inanimate objects, such as vehicles, is that it shortens the time that it takes the object to cool to the actual air temperature (it cannot cool the object down below t hat temperature)."
Shortening the time it takes to cool is most definitely an effect, idiot.
Windchill is a number. Windspeed is a number too. You need to learn that just because something is a composite number, does not determine if it has an effect on something or not. Ask the NOAA, Univ of Illinois, Weather Channel, etc. Your argument is like saying that the reported UV in dex, because it's a derived number, has no effect on increased risk of skin cancer, chlorine diminishing in pools, etc. Good grief.
Non-response to the core of the issue noted.
to freezing, especially if there are cracks or openings that allow cold, o utside air to flow across the pipes. Research at the University of Illinois has shown that ?wind chill,?? the cooling effect of air an d wind that causes the human body to lose heat, can play a major role in ac celerating ice blockage, and thus bursting, in water pipes."
20WATER%20PIPES.pdfNon-response noted again.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.