Polysupers - Anypoint?

[lebouche]

Hi,
I'm wondering if I've asked this before but can't find details with the search function.
Is there any reason apart from weight to buy poly supers? I am on 14x12 so probably wouldn't use them to overwinter with.

 

[oliver90owner]

Your choice. I don't

 

[BeeJayBee]

Depends if you've got poly brood boxes or not.

If you've got poly brood boxes and put wooden supers on top the chances are the outside footprint will be different, leaving a horizontal ledge that rainwater can collect on.

 

[fatshark]

BeeJoyFul is correct that poly and wood don't always mix. However, if you get the Sweinty/Denrosa supers they are the same external footprint and fit perfectly. Or vice versa … i.e. poly broods and wooden supers.

A stack of poly supers make a serviceable honey warming cabinet when fitted with a 100W bulb and an insulated lid.

 

[user 6228]

Honey ripening requires heat lots of heat. By having supers that lose more heat you are making the bees job harder. A colony has to find the heat to evaporate 300 kg of water in a good season. The extra heat that you lose with wood has to come out of your honey yield

 

[Hivemaker.]

Low RH also helps a lot.

 

[Norfolk]

Hi,
I'm wondering if I've asked this before but can't find details with the search function.
Is there any reason apart from weight to buy poly supers? I am on 14x12 so probably wouldn't use them to overwinter with.

I would ask, is there any reason not to use them ?

 

[itma]

I would ask, is there any reason not to use them ?

Why NOT use them?

 

[oliver90owner]

Some calculations on this 300kg of water please, because I don't believe you.

Please define a 'good season' (not an exceptional one) and justify your calculations so we can see that they are not just the 'pie in the sky' figures grasped from 'thin (hot) air' claims that I think they are.

Also that extra claimed heat loss needs some justification, too. Delta-Ts will be somewhat different in the summer and might even mean substantial heat gains from direct insolation for some well placed colonies if timber were used in that summer period of May to early August, when most stores are accumulated by colonies other than those foraging on OSR?

So exactly how much extra heat is lost from timber boxes and how much water might need to be collected, for cooling purposes, in these super insulated plasic hives when there is a shortage of forage and high temperatures, as this also has an energy cost? Don't forget that hive ventilation also has a cost as this is one means of heat dissipation in the summer months. I don't think simple calculations are really apprpriate for most practical situations, but I look forward to yours.

A reply of any other kind will indicate, to other readers, that your claim is without foundation and cannot be substantiated.

 

[Swarm]

There is no reason to buy poly supers if you don't want to. I do have a few but they were part of a hive package and not purchased seperately. You can buy 'deal' wooden supers for less, which is what I do and use these with your poly broods.
There is no ledge that gathers rainwater, Paynes boxes have purpose built run offs. Swienty are the same external size as wooden units so a flush fit there. Possibly this may not be the case for BHS boxes.
Insulation is one thing but there are some wild claims which I don't think are substantiated, especially when some direct comparisons of harvests from mixed apiaries often show colonies in wood out performing those in poly.

 

[user 6228]

Some calculations on this 300kg of water please, because I don't believe you.

Please define a 'good season' (not an exceptional one) and justify your calculations so we can see that they are not just the 'pie in the sky' figures grasped from 'thin (hot) air' claims that I think they are.

Also that extra claimed heat loss needs some justification, too. Delta-Ts will be somewhat different in the summer and might even mean substantial heat gains from direct insolation for some well placed colonies if timber were used in that summer period of May to early August, when most stores are accumulated by colonies other than those foraging on OSR?

So exactly how much extra heat is lost from timber boxes and how much water might need to be collected, for cooling purposes, in these super insulated plasic hives when there is a shortage of forage and high temperatures, as this also has an energy cost? Don't forget that hive ventilation also has a cost as this is one means of heat dissipation in the summer months. I don't think simple calculations are really apprpriate for most practical situations, but I look forward to yours.

A reply of any other kind will indicate, to other readers, that your claim is without foundation and cannot be substantiated.

I go through this in my talks and have stood up in front about 240 people in person and faced their questions afterwards sometimes upto 2 hours and will do so again on Thursday.
I am in the process of writing a scientific paper of this subject that will be reviewed before publication. The detail will be published there and as you know i shouldnt publish that on the internet before it has been published in the journal.
I suggest you attend one of the talks and challenge me in person in front of an audience I will be glad to answer your questions. Perhaps you should ask DPearce4 if he is attending on thursday, and if he will check whether my answers are credible.Alternatively ask Skyhook.

 

[itma]

Is there any reason apart from weight to buy poly supers? I am on 14x12 so probably wouldn't use them to overwinter with.

Really, I think we need more info about your existing setup before considering how best it might be extended.

For the hobby beek, the £5 difference between a cheap deal super and a Paynes sale poly one isn't significant.
Similarly, the weight difference is minimal once the super is full.

However, if you have all-wood kit now, you'd probably also be wanting a poly roof, if going for 500mm square (external) poly boxes from Paynes or BHS. (Though as long as the top super is wood, it'll fit under a wooden roof - but where's the insulation advantage in that!)

But on the other hand, if you were buying 460 square (same as wood) poly boxes from CWJ, they fit under a wooden roof, are cheaper than cedar, and because they hold one less frame, they would be about 10% lighter even when full of honey!

There are so many possibilities that, without more to go on, replies are either going to be predictable prejudices, or rather long considerations of alternatives that may have nothing to do with your particular situation.

 

[Hivemaker.]

Some calculations on this 300kg of water please, because I don't believe you.
A reply of any other kind will indicate, to other readers, that your claim is without foundation and cannot be substantiated.

I go through this in my talks and have stood up in front about 240 people in person and faced their questions afterwards sometimes upto 2 hours and will do so again on Thursday.

Computer says no...

 

[user 6228]

Computer says no...

no what?

 

[oliver90owner]

Thank you, Derekm.

Your reply was "other", so we can all assume you are unable to substantiate your claim. Exactly as I expected.

You claim to have already told about 240 people but are not prepared to show your justification on the forum? Not too good an argument, I might suggest, using the excuse of an impending (when?) publication. Shirley, this simple calculation is but just a very minor part of it?

Was this 'about 240' at one time or in total? Your wording there was decidely unclear.

I have no intention of listening to any of your talk, but am really looking forward to closely scrutinising this imminent (?) paper. When will it be published and where?

I am pleased to say that I have to agree with you on one point - yes, it most certainly needs reviewing before publication.

Shirley, it cannot be such a secret that you cannot even reveal what you consider a 'good season' would be?

For the rest out there, I might suggest that you have conveniently forgotten about all the nectar collected for feeding larvae, that your good season is not the same as most people would accept as 'good' and have simplified your calculations beyond belief.

Perhaps DPearce4 should be asking these very pertinent questions at the forthcoming presentation and reporting back here. I may well PM him with a few simple

 

[itma]

...
I am in the process of writing a scientific paper of this subject that will be reviewed before publication. The detail will be published there and as you know i shouldnt publish that on the internet before it has been published in the journal.
...

Wrong Derek, he doesn't know about refraining from prior publication.
Or at least, he wants us to think that he doesn't know.

 

[user 6228]

RAB, Why dont work out how much nectar that takes to produce 60kg of honey (we managed 40kg and of course you are a better beekeeper) at say 20% nectar sugar concentration.
Now calculate the amount of water to be removed to get it to 80% sugar concentration. ( our bees managed 84%+). Call this amount of water W1
Calculate the amount of heat that required to evaporate it. Call this heat E1,
then amount of sugar equivalent to that heat and thus the amount of nectar required to evaporate it.
calculate the water vapour from the consumed sugars in ripening and the water content of the nectar consumed.
call this amount of water W2.

What answers do you get for E1, and for W1+W2?.

I trust you know the latent heat of water and the calorific value of sucrose ... you can take the thermal efficiency of the bees at 100% and that the bees doing the evaporation stay inside the hive.

Do it first assuming no thermal losses or gains.
Then make an estimate for thermal losses and see what difference it makes.
...

I'm not divulging anything about my thermal measurement of heat losses from hives on this forum except for the vague hand waving i have always done.

 

[oliver90owner]

Dear derek,

PRECISELY!

Lets just consider the supposed 300kg of water that is evaporated for that 60kg of honey. We will also use your bees final water content of 16% as that will favour your figure.

60kgs of honey at 16% water will contain (60kg x 84% ÷ 100%)kg solids. That is 50.4kg (calculated). Following so far? Not too difficult maths is it?

Right. That 50.4kg (calculated - remember here I am not rounding as I would not normally do the whole calculation in such simple steps)started of as a solution containg 75% water. Agreed?

More fairly basic maths. The total mass of nectar would have been 201.6kg (calculated) n'est ce pas? Sacre bleu! Nowhere even near 300kg. OK I'll show how I arrived at that

50.4kg x 4 = 201.6kg

or alternatively, more properly from a mathematical viewpoint (but the same result), but with the calculation expressed correctly:

50.4kg x 100% ÷ 25% = 201.6kg

Let's round this value up to 202kg then sutract the 60kg of honey it contains (this will calculate the amount of water that has to be evapoared from 202kg nectar to produce 60kg honey). OOPS, BY NOW YOU WILL BE REALISING THAT FIGURE IS NOWHERE NEAR THE 300kg YOU WERE WRITING ABOUT IN YOUR POST. GOOD ENNIT!?!? Let's do the maths for completion.

202kg - 60kg = 142kg

Please feel free to check my maths - I am not perfect - but you now have some explaining to do, about where that other 158kg of water, that needs to be evaporated by your reckoning, comes from. Yes, your provisional paper will most certainly need reviewing before publication!!! I do look forward to closely scrutinising, if it ever materialises.

Oops, posted before I had finished!

I won't be bothering to go any further with the bluster (smoke screen) in you post. I have already shown you too much of how to do basic maths calculations, shown your premise of 300kg water evaporated (on your supplied data) to be rather OTT and demonstrated that anything you throw out on this forum is quite likely to be total rubbish.

I don't need to go any further.

Second edit: not that it makes so much difference but I note you have changed the nectar sugar content from 25% to 20%? It will make the water evaporated a little more, but who really cares!

 

[victor meldrew]

Shirley this thread has become a mutual ego trip with insult and counter insult eclipsing any sensible debate .
I say ego trip because your liturgical jousting could be conducted via the PM SERVICE ON BOARD! .
Like the man said "All the world is a stage and each and everyone of us are players"
VM



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[user 6228]

Dear derek,

PRECISELY!

Lets just consider the supposed 300kg of water that is evaporated for that 60kg of honey. We will also use your bees final water content of 16% as that will favour your figure.

60kgs of honey at 16% water will contain (60kg x 84% ÷ 100%)kg solids. That is 50.4kg (calculated). Following so far? Not too difficult maths is it?

Right. That 50.4kg (calculated - remember here I am not rounding as I would not normally do the whole calculation in such simple steps)started of as a solution containg 75% water. Agreed?

More fairly basic maths. The total mass of nectar would have been 201.6kg (calculated) n'est ce pas? Sacre bleu! Nowhere even near 300kg. OK I'll show how I arrived at that

50.4kg x 4 = 201.6kg

or alternatively, more properly from a mathematical viewpoint (but the same result), but with the calculation expressed correctly:

50.4kg x 100% ÷ 25% = 201.6kg

Let's round this value up to 202kg then sutract the 60kg of honey it contains (this will calculate the amount of water that has to be evapoared from 202kg nectar to produce 60kg honey). OOPS, BY NOW YOU WILL BE REALISING THAT FIGURE IS NOWHERE NEAR THE 300kg YOU WERE WRITING ABOUT IN YOUR POST. GOOD ENNIT!?!? Let's do the maths for completion.

202kg - 60kg = 142kg

Please feel free to check my maths - I am not perfect - but you now have some explaining to do, about where that other 158kg of water, that needs to be evaporated by your reckoning, comes from. Yes, your provisional paper will most certainly need reviewing before publication!!! I do look forward to closely scrutinising, if it ever materialises.

Oops, posted before I had finished!

I won't be bothering to go any further with the bluster (smoke screen) in you post. I have already shown you too much of how to do basic maths calculations, shown your premise of 300kg water evaporated (on your supplied data) to be rather OTT and demonstrated that anything you throw out on this forum is quite likely to be total rubbish.

I don't need to go any further.

Second edit: not that it makes so much difference but I note you have changed the nectar sugar content from 25% to 20%? It will make the water evaporated a little more, but who really cares!

you have only done first part... please complete the rest of the exercise with the corrected information.