Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Theoretical - Condenser - Design & Effect of Ambient PDF
Theoretical - Condenser - Design & Effect of Ambient PDF
A Thesis
Presented to
The Academic Faculty
By
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Approved:
____________________________________
S. V. Shelton, Chairman
____________________________________
P. V. Kadaba
____________________________________
A. V. Larson
Date Approved________________________
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work would not have been completed without the help and support of many
others. In particular, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Shelton, for his enthusiasm
for my scholastic, professional, and personal success. He has provided motivation and
insights that have been invaluable to this project and my sanity. I’d also like to thank
Monifa Wright and Shawn Klawunder for sharing their resources and discoveries.
I would never have made it this far without my parents who have unconditionally
career as a goat herder. This thesis is dedicated to my grandparents, Sol and Frieda
Gersen, who have been more concerned about my progress than anyone else.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I Introduction........................................................................................................ 1
Background ..................................................................................................................... 1
Considerations ................................................................................................................. 1
Past Work ........................................................................................................................ 2
Purpose............................................................................................................................ 4
Chapter II Residential Air Conditioning Systems.............................................................. 6
Refrigeration Cycle ......................................................................................................... 6
Air Conditioner Components .......................................................................................... 8
Compressor.................................................................................................................. 8
Condenser.................................................................................................................. 11
Condenser Fan........................................................................................................... 12
Expansion Valve ....................................................................................................... 13
Evaporator ................................................................................................................. 13
Evaporator Fan.......................................................................................................... 15
Coefficient of Performance ........................................................................................... 16
Seasonal COP................................................................................................................ 16
Chapter III Heat Exchangers............................................................................................ 20
Geometry....................................................................................................................... 20
NTU-Effectiveness Relations........................................................................................ 23
Refrigerant Side Models................................................................................................ 30
Single Phase Heat Transfer Coefficient .................................................................... 30
Condensation Heat Transfer Coefficient ................................................................... 33
Evaporative Heat Transfer Coefficient ..................................................................... 35
Pressure Drop in Straight Pipe .................................................................................. 36
Pressure Drop in Bends............................................................................................. 39
Air Side Models ............................................................................................................ 44
Heat Transfer Coefficient .......................................................................................... 44
Pressure Drop ............................................................................................................ 46
Chapter IV Optimization of Operating Parameters.......................................................... 52
Subcool and Seasonal Effects ....................................................................................... 54
Effect of Varying Air Velocity...................................................................................... 58
Effect on Cost Factor..................................................................................................... 60
Chapter V Effects of Geometry with Fixed Cost ............................................................. 62
Number of Rows ........................................................................................................... 64
Fin Pitch........................................................................................................................ 66
Tube Diameter............................................................................................................... 71
Tube Circuiting.............................................................................................................. 75
iv
Operating Costs............................................................................................................. 79
Chapter VI Effects of Geometry with Fixed Frontal Area............................................... 85
Number of Rows ........................................................................................................... 85
Fin Pitch........................................................................................................................ 90
Tube Diameter............................................................................................................... 92
Comparing Fixed Area to Fixed Cost ......................................................................... 101
Chapter VII Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................... 103
Appendix I Mass of Refrigerant in a Heat Exchanger Coil Undergoing Phase Change
............................................................................................................................. 106
v
LIST OF TABLES
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
vii
Figure 34. Air Velocity vs. Seasonal COP for Different Row Configurations with Fixed
Area ........................................................................................................................... 90
Figure 35. Variance of Optimal Air Velocity with Fin Pitch for Fixed Frontal Area....... 91
Figure 36. Condenser Allocation for Varying Fin Pitch at 83F........................................ 92
Figure 37. Variance of Optimal Air Velocity with Tube Diameter at Optimum Subcool
for Fixed Frontal Area............................................................................................... 93
Figure 38. Air Side Pressure Drop for Varying Tube Diameters at 83° F........................ 95
Figure 39. Compressor and Fan Power Trends vs. Tube Diameter at 83° F .................... 96
Figure 40. Operating Costs vs. Cost Factor for Different Geometry Factors ................... 98
Figure 41. Operating Costs For Different Tube Diameters and Circuiting at 83° F with
Fixed Area................................................................................................................. 99
Figure 42. Optimum Condenser Circuiting for Fixed Area at 83 F with Varying Rows 100
Figure 43. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Number of Rows ....... 101
Figure 44. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Fin Pitch.................... 102
Figure 45. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Tube Diameter........... 102
viii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Symbol Refers to
a Stanton number coefficient
a Ratio of transverse tube spacing to tube diameter
A Total heat transfer area
Ac Minimum free-flow cross sectional area
Af Total fin surface area
Afr Frontal area
Amin Minimum flow area
Ao Total airside heat transfer area, fins and tubes
AF Area Factor
b Stanton number coefficient
b Ratio of longitudinal tube spacing to tube diameter
Bθ Bend coefficient
BL Building Load
C Heat capacity
CF Cost Factor
CLF Cooling Load Factor
COP Coefficient of performance
cp Specific heat
cp,eff Effective specific heat
Cr Heat capacity ratio
Cz Average row correction factor
cz Individual row correction factor
D Tube Diameter
E& Electrical Power Demand
Eu Euler number
f Friction factor
ix
FP Fin Pitch
Fr Froude number
G Mass flux
gc Gravitational constant
h Enthalpy
h Heat transfer coefficient
H Heat exchanger height
j Colburn factor
JP j-factor parameter
k Conductivity
k Bend pressure coefficient
k1 Staggered array geometry factor
L Length
m Fin parameter
m Mass
m& Mass flow rate
n Blasius coefficient
NTU Number of transfer units
Nu Nusselt number
pr Reduced pressure
Pr Pressure ratio
PD Piston displacement
PLF Part load factor
Pr Prandtl number
Q& e Evaporator capacity
x
Rw Wall Resistance
R” Fouling factor
Re Reynolds number
SF Size Factor
St Stanton number
t Fin thickness
Tr Temperature ratio
tpc Tubes per circuit
U Overall heat transfer coefficient
v Specific volume
Va Air face velocity
W Heat exchanger width
wa Actual specific compressor work
ws Isentropic specific compressor work
W& com Compressor power
x Quality
Xl Longitudinal tube spacing (parallel to air flow)
Xt Transverse tube spacing (normal to air flow)
z Number of rows
z/D Equivalent length
β Fin parameter
χtt Lockhart-Martinelli parameter
∆h Enthalpy change
∆hlat Enthalpy change due to condensation
∆hsens Enthalpy change due to temperature change
∆Pa Air-side pressure drop
∆Pf Refrigerant side two-phase friction pressure drop
∆Pm Refrigerant side two phase momentum pressure drop
xi
ε Heat exchanger effectiveness
ε Roughness
φ Fin parameter
Γ2 Bend physical property coefficient
ϕ2 Two phase bend multiplier
λ Friction factor
µ Viscosity
ρ Density
ηc Compressor thermal efficiency
ηf Fan efficiency
ηs Surface efficiency
ηv Volumetric efficiency
ψ Fin parameter
#circ Number of parallel circuits
xii
SUMMARY
software for the detailed design of a finned-tube condenser heat exchanger coil in a
residential air-conditioning unit using the Engineering Equation Solver (EES) software.
The superheat, saturated, and subcool portions of the heat exchanger have been modeled
separately and in detail using appropriate pressure drop and heat transfer fundamental
equations for both the air-side and refrigerant-side of the heat exchangers. The study uses
accurate refrigerant property data for R-22, but can easily be modified to accommodate
other refrigerants. The cooling output and electrical input for the compressor and fans
have been calculated for various ambient temperature conditions. The compressor,
condenser fan, and evaporator components of the cycle are also modeled but in a more
global manner using thermal science laws. Ambient temperature weighting factors used
by the U.S. Department of Energy are used to determine the seasonal coefficient of
A base condenser model was arbitrarily chosen and design conditions were
established at 95° F. The operating parameters of condenser subcool and air face velocity
were examined over a wide range of ambient conditions to determine their effects on the
seasonal COP. It was determined that there is a range of subcools and face velocities
where the effects on the seasonal COP were negligible. The COP the system at an
xiii
ambient temperature of 83° F was nearly identical to the seasonal COP and could be used
The effects of changing the tube diameter, tube circuiting, number of rows, and
fin pitch have been investigated for both fixed cost and fixed frontal area. When the
parameters were varied from the base case individually, the changing the number of
circuits to 4 or changing the tube diameter to 1/2” gave the highest COP’s. It was
determined that tube diameter and tube circuiting should not be considered separately
because they both affect the refrigerant side pressure drop. When the cost or area was
fixed, the best tube diameter- circuiting configuration was 5 circuits of 5/16” tubing. In
both cases, 4 circuits of 3/8” tubing provided similar performance with better packaging.
In general, the COP will be the highest when the frontal area is maximized and
rows should only be added if there is a frontal area constraint. This is because of the
relationship between the air velocity, depth, and air-side pressure drop. When the cost is
fixed, fewer rows provide better performance. If the frontal area is constrained, adding
rows will increase the performance as long as the refrigerant side pressure drop does not
Changing the fin pitch had a relatively negligible effect on the seasonal COP.
The fan power increases as the number of fins increases, but the compressor power
decreases by about the same amount. If cost is fixed, fewer fins provide better
performance. When the area is restricted, more fins provide better performance.
xiv
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background
Refrigeration for personal comfort was first used in 1902. By 1997, 72% of all
American households had air-conditioning and 47% of all households were cooled with
central air i. According to the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI), 81% of
all new homes constructed were equipped with central air-conditioning in 1996. ii For a
single family, detached home, the amount of energy dedicated to air-conditioning can be
19% of energy costs, which includes both gas and electricity, or 310 dollars per year. It
also accounts for 32% of the total peak power demand of electricity in these homes. iii
Considerations
reasons. To start, there are many parameters that can be varied for each component. The
1
Even if a component is optimized for specific operating conditions, like inlet and outlet
with all other system components. To get a fair comparison among different designs,
operating conditions such as air velocity and refrigerant charge need be optimized for
each design. However, optimizing these parameters will affect the cooling capacity of
Past Work
Until recently, limited computing power and the complex relations for refrigerant
properties had restricted the system design process to experimental testing. In 1975,
James Propst performed a similar study on condenser performance. iv Because of the lack
of computing power, Propst used a simplified model that neglected the refrigerant
properties so the analysis is based on the performance of the air side only. Propst
developed his equations to be solved explicitly and did not depend on any refrigerant side
convective heat transfer coefficient, neglected pressure drops in the system, ignored the
models with accurate refrigerant properties. While manufacturers such as HeatCraft have
created proprietary models for their components, they are not available for general study
and the programs are limited to simulating the performance of the products they sell. The
analytical techniques and assumptions used to develop these models are not known.
2
Also, since most air-conditioner manufacturers outsource their components, the
components are not optimized in the context of the entire system. There have not been
very many recent developments in fundamental heat exchanger modeling. Recent studies
have focused on enhanced fin and wet coil modeling which are not pertinent to flat plate
condenser optimization. Most of the recent heat exchanger studies for air conditioning
applications have focused on the effects of enhanced fin and wet coils. These studies
have not integrated the heat exchanger models in a complete system. Several component
models were reviewed for this study and will be discussed in the chapters where the
In the past ten years, there have been a few studies that have used modern
computer simulation of a refrigeration cycle using R-12. The program requires the inlet
air properties, cooling load, heat exchanger working pressures and some compressor
properties, and COP, and the free compressor variables. Using the heat exchanger and
compressor characteristics, the program can also find the COP for off-design inlet air
systems focusing on the effects of different refrigerant mixtures. vi This program will
predict the system COP, compressor size, required heat exchanger areas, relevant
temperatures, pressures, and flows. Klein and Reindl have investigated the effects of heat
exchanger allocation between the evaporator and condenser on system performance. vii
The condenser and evaporator are modeled as counterflow heat exchangers, neglecting
3
the superheated and subcooled sections. They also assume the air-side heat transfer
coefficients and fan powers are equal for the condenser and evaporator. Chen et. al have
studied the effect of cooling load on COP using finite-time heat transfer analysis for
steady flow Carnot and Brayton refrigeration cycles. viii They later expanded this study to
Purpose
software for the detailed design of a finned-tube condenser heat exchanger coil in a
residential air-conditioning unit using the Engineering Equation Solver (EES) software.
The superheat, saturated, and subcool portions of the heat exchanger have been modeled
separately and in detail using appropriate pressure drop and fundamental heat transfer
equations for both the air-side and refrigerant-side of the heat exchangers. The study uses
accurate refrigerant property data for R-22, but can easily be modified to accommodate
other refrigerants. The compressor, condenser fan, and evaporator components of the
cycle are also separately modeled. The cooling output and electrical input for the
compressor and fans have been calculated for various ambient temperature conditions.
are used to determine the seasonal coefficient of performance (COP) of the system. The
seasonal COP is the figure-of-merit used to optimize the condenser face velocity, tube
4
diameter, fin spacing, tube circuiting, number of rows and refrigerant charge. Because
there are tradeoffs between capital and operating costs that must be considered if the
system is to succeed on the consumer market, non-dimensional cost and area factors have
made.
5
CHAPTER II
condenser can be attempted, it is necessary to understand how the air conditioning system
works. In this chapter, the overall refrigeration cycle, system components and coefficient
Refrigeration Cycle
Low pressure, superheated refrigerant vapor from the evaporator enters the
compressor (State 1) and leaves as high pressure, superheated vapor (State 2). This vapor
enters the condenser where heat is rejected to outdoor air that is forced over the
condenser coils. The refrigerant vapor is cooled to the saturation temperature (State 2a),
condensed to a liquid (State 2b), and cooled below the saturation point (State 3). The
high pressure liquid is forced through an expansion valve into the evaporator (State 4).
The pressure in the evaporator is much lower than the pressure in the condenser, so the
refrigerant enters the evaporator as a liquid-vapor mix at low temperature and pressure.
The refrigerant absorbs heat from warm indoor air that is blown over the evaporator coils.
The refrigerant is completely evaporated (State 4a) and heated above the saturation
6
temperature before entering the compressor. The indoor air is cooled and dehumidified
as it flows over the evaporator and returned to the living space. The refrigeration cycle is
Figure 2.
T
2b 2a
3
1
4 4a
7
Condenser
Expansion Compressor
Valve
1
Saturated Superheated
4 4a
Evaporator
Compressor
The purpose of the compressor is to increase the working pressure of the refrigerant.
Compressors fall into two general categories: positive displacement, which increase the
pressure of the vapor by reducing the volume, and dynamic, which convert angular
momentum into a pressure rise and transfer it to the vaporx . Scroll type, positive
considered for this study. The amount of specific work done by an ideal compressor can
ws ,com = (h2 s − h1 )
8
where: h = refrigerant enthalpy
For a non-ideal compressor, the actual amount of work required depends on the
efficiency.
ws ,com
wa ,com = = (h2 − h1 )
ηc
For a scroll type compressor, Klein has determined the thermal efficiency is related to the
Pcond
where: Pr = Pressure ratio Pr =
Pevap
Tsat , cond
Tr = Temperature ratio Tr =
Tsat ,evap
In his paper, Klein only considers the saturated sections of the heat exchangers.
Therefore, the coefficients in the compressor efficiency correlation are based on the
saturated temperatures rather than the actual inlet and outlet temperatures to the
9
compressor. Since pressure drops are included in the condenser model, the compressor
efficiency is based on the inlet saturation temperature and pressure in the condenser and
efficiency. The volumetric efficiency is the ratio of the mass of vapor that is compressed
to the mass of vapor that could be ideally compressed if the intake volume were equal to
the piston displacement and filled with evaporator exit state vapor. The volumetric
xii
efficiency can be found by
v
ηv = 1 − R in − 1
v out
The volumetric efficiency is used to determine the mass flow rate of the refrigerant
ηv PD
m& =
v out
10
Condenser
The condenser is a heat exchanger that rejects heat from the refrigerant to the
outside air. Heat exchangers come in many configurations, but finned-tube heat
exchangers are most common for residential air conditioning applications. Refrigerant
flows through the tubes and a fan forces air between the fins and over the tubes. The heat
exchangers used in this study will be the plate finned-tube type as shown in Figure 3.
superheated vapor and leaves as a sub-cooled liquid. The condenser can be separated
into three sections: superheated, saturated, and sub-cooled. The specific heat rejected
from each section can be found by evaluating the refrigerant enthalpies at the inlets and
outlets.
11
qcon, sh = h2 − h2 a
qcon, sat = h2 a − h2 b
qcon, sc = h2 b − h3
The heat transfer details on the air and refrigerant sides of the heat exchangers
Condenser Fan
Because natural convection will not produce sufficient airflow and heat transfer
over a reasonably sized condenser, a fan must be employed to keep the air moving.
Although the compressor uses the majority of the power consumed by the system, the fan
power must also be considered. The power required by the fan is directly related to the
air pressure drop across the condenser and the volume flow rate of the air.
The isentropic efficiency of the combined fan and motor is taken to be 65%. The air-side
12
Expansion Valve
The expansion valve is used to control the refrigerant flow through the system.
Under normal operating conditions, the thermo-static expansion valve opens and closes to
maintain a fixed superheat exiting the evaporator. In this study, that superheat will be
held at 10° F. Because the expansion valve is designed to pass a certain volume of
The vapor refrigerant backs up behind the valve and the condenser pressure increases
until the refrigerant vapor is condensed. When this happens, the expansion valve cannot
regulate the refrigerant superheat exiting the evaporator. Under this condition, it converts
from maintaining superheat to maintaining a saturated liquid leaving the condenser. The
energy equation shows that the enthalpy is constant across the expansion valve.
h3 = h4
Evaporator
The purpose of the evaporator is to transfer heat from the room air making the air
cooler and less humid. Because the refrigerant enters the evaporator in as a liquid-vapor
mix, it is only divided into saturated and superheated sections. The analysis for the
evaporator is nearly identical to that of the condenser, but some considerations must be
made for the dehumidification process. To keep the evaporator model simple, the coil is
assumed to be dry, so the air-side heat transfer coefficient is not affected, but the specific
heat is corrected to account for condensation. Because the air flowing over the
13
evaporator is cooled below the wet bulb temperature, some of the heat rejected by the air
results in condensing water out of the air rather than lowering the temperature. The total
enthalpy change of the air is the sum of the enthalpy change due to temperature drop, or
sensible heat, and the enthalpy change due to condensation, or latent heat.
As shown in Figure 4, using the specific heat for dry air will result in exit temperatures
that are too low. By using an effective specific heat, a more accurate exit temperature
can be obtained without the complications associated with using an air-water mixture.
∆ hsens
Enthalpy
Effective
Dry Air
Moist Air
∆ hlat
Temperature
14
Dividing the previous equation for enthalpy by the temperature change gives
By definition, the specific heat is the ratio of the sensible enthalpy change to the
∆hlat
c p , eff = c p +
∆T
The latent enthalpy accounts for about 25% of the total enthalpy change for air flowing
Evaporator Fan
Because the evaporator is not the focus of this study, introducing wet coils would
introduce unwelcome complications. In addition to affecting the heat transfer, wet coils
15
also affect the air-side pressure drop. Although there are correlations available to find the
pressure drop over wet coils, this is not the only issue. After the air flows over the
evaporator, it enters a series of ducts that return it to the inside living space. Because the
power required depends on the losses in the ducts which will change from case to case,
the default used by the Air-conditioning and Refrigeration Institute test standard of 365
Coefficient of Performance
system. It is the ratio of the heat absorbed by the evaporator to the amount of electrical
energy used by the mechanical components, i.e. the compressor and two fans.
Q& e
COP =
W& com + W& f ,con + W& f , evap
Seasonal COP
distribution of temperatures over the summer cooling season is roughly the same across
the country. However, in warmer, southern climates, there are more “cooling load
hours”, which are defined as the hours when the temperature is above 65 F, per year than
16
in cooler climates. In Atlanta, for example, the number of cooling load hours is
approximately 1300 hours per year, while it is only about 700 hours per year in
Cleveland, OH. Of these hours, the outside temperature will be between 80 F and 84 F
approximately 16.1% of the cooling season in either city. Table 1 shows the distribution
The COP changes with the outside air temperature and the overall COP, or
seasonal COP, for an air conditioner depends on the temperatures at which the appliance
runs over an entire year. According to the ANSI/ASHRAE standard, xvi the seasonal COP
17
∑ Q& (T )
8
e j
COPseas = j
∑ E& (T )
8
j
j
The adjusted evaporator capacity and adjusted electrical power demand are based on the
Q e (Tj ) = CLF ⋅ Q
& (T ) ⋅ n
ss j j
The part load factor takes into account system cycling. For this study, the system
18
cycling is neglected so the part load factor is equal to 1. The cooling load factor is
defined:
BL (Tj )
CLF = & BL (Tj ) ≤ Q& ss
Q ss (Tj )
& ss (TOD )
5j − 3 Q
BL (Tj ) =
TOD − 65 SF
where: TOD = outdoor design temperature in Fahrenheit (in this case 95° F)
SF = size factor
The size factor determines the amount of over or undersizing of the system and is 1 for
this study because the system designed to meet the requirements at 95° F.
19
CHAPTER III
HEAT EXCHANGERS
Because this study focuses on optimizing the condenser geometry and operating
conditions, the characteristics of heat exchangers must be explored more thoroughly than
other components. In this chapter, the heat transfer and pressure drop models specifically
related to plate finned heat exchangers will be discussed. Plate finned heat exchangers
are made up of in-line or staggered tube bundles that are held in place by continuous,
rectangular fins. For this study, staggered, copper tubes are coupled with aluminum fins.
Geometry
parameters of the heat exchangers used in this study. The term “tubes per circuit” is the
number of parallel passages the refrigerant mass flow rate is divided among. If the mass
flow rate is 100 lbm/hr and there is one tube per circuit, 100 lbm/ hr of refrigerant will
pass through that tube. If there are 2 tubes per circuit, then 50 lbm/hr of refrigerant will
flow through each tube. The number of parallel circuits is used to determine the number
of tubes in each row. The number of rows refers to the number of tube rows in the
direction normal to air flow. If the number of parallel circuits is set to 12, and the
number of tubes per circuit is 2, then there will be a total of 24 tubes in each row. The fin
20
pitch is the number of fins per unit length along the axial direction of the tubes. These
parameters and the overall dimensions of the heat exchanger are illustrated in Figure 5
and Figure 6. The model used to determine the air-side heat transfer coefficient depends
on the layout of the tubes, but not on the temperature of the refrigerant which would be
affected by circuiting. The only factors pertinent to the refrigerant side models affected
by the circuiting are the mass flow rate in each tube and the length associated with each
circuit. The layout in Figure 6 meets the requirements of the models and is easy to
conceptualize.
21
Figure 5. General Heat Exchanger Dimensions
22
Figure 6. Layout of Heat Exchanger Geometry Parameters
NTU-Effectiveness Relations
For any heat exchanger, the total heat rejected from the hot fluid, in this case,
refrigerant, to the cold fluid, air, is dependent on the heat exchanger effectiveness and the
Q = ε Cmin (Th , i − Tc ,i )
23
where: ε = effectiveness
Cmin = smaller of heat capacities Ch and Cc
Th,i = inlet temperature of hot fluid
Tc,i = inlet temperature of cold fluid
The heat capacity, C, the extensive equivalent of the specific heat, determines the
C = m cp
where: m = mass
cp = specific heat
The amount of air flowing over each section of the condenser is assumed to be
proportional to the tube length associated with that section. For example:
ma , sat Lsat
=
ma ,tot Ltot
The effectiveness is the ratio of the actual amount of heat transferred to the
Q&
ε=
Q& max
24
The equations used to determine the effectiveness depend on the temperature
distribution within each fluid and on the paths of the fluids as heat transfer takes place, ie.
refrigerant mass flow is separated into a number of tubes and does not mix. As the air
flows through the fins, the plates prevent mixing and air at one end of the heat exchanger
will not necessarily be the same temperature as air at the other end. For a cross-flow heat
exchanger with both fluids unmixed, the effectiveness can be related to the number of
1
{ [ ] }
ε = 1 − exp ( NTU )0 .22 exp − Cr ( NTU )0 .78 −1
Cr
Cmin
Cr =
Cmax
In the saturated portion of the condenser, the heat capacity on the refrigerant side
approaches infinity and the heat capacity ratio goes to zero. When Cr=0, the
25
ε = 1 − exp (− NTU )
UA
NTU =
Cmin
The overall heat transfer coefficient, U, takes into consideration total thermal
resistance to heat transfer between two fluids. Even though the convective heat transfer
coefficients may be different on the air and refrigerant sides of the heat exchanger, the
UA product is the same on either side. This is because all of the heat taken from the
1 1 1
= =
UA U r Ar U a Aa
Taking all of the thermal resistances into account produces the following
26
1 1 R′′f , a R′f′ ,r 1
= + + Rw + +
UA η s , a ha Aa η s , a Aa ηs ,r Ar η s , r hr Ar
Since there are no fins on the refrigerant side of the tubes, the refrigerant side surface
efficiency is 1. Neglecting the wall resistance, Rw, and the fouling factors, R”, the overall
−1
1 1
UA = +
η s , a ha Aa hr Ar
The methods for finding the heat transfer coefficients will be discussed later in
this chapter. To find the overall surface efficiency for a finned tube heat exchanger, it is
first necessary to determine the efficiency of the fins alone. The total air side surface
(1 − η )
Af
ηs = 1 − f
Ao
27
The fin efficiency, ηf, for a circular fin is a function of m, re and φ.
tanh (mreφ )
ηf =
(mre φ )
For a plate fin heat exchanger with multiple rows of staggered tubes, the plates
28
Schmidt xvii analyzed hexagonal fins and determined that they could be treated like
circular fins by replacing the outer radius of the fin with an equivalent radius. The
= 1.27ψ (β − 0.3)1 2
re
r
Xt
ψ =
2r
12
1 2 X t2
β= X L +
Xt 4
Once the equivalent radius has been determined, the equations for standard
circular fins can be used. For the fins in this study, the length is much greater than the
29
12
2h
m = a
kt
r r
φ = e − 1 1 + 0.35 ln e
r r
To find the single phase heat transfer coefficient, the standard heat transfer
equations and the experimental work of Kays and London were considered. For constant
surface heat flux in the laminar regime, the Nusselt number is a constant.
Nu=4.36
In the turbulent region, the Dittus-Boelter equation holds for fully developed flow in
circular tubes with moderate temperature differences. For refrigerant cooling in the
30
NuD = 0.023 Re 0D. 8 Pr 0 .3
This equation has been confirmed by experimental data for the range:
ReD ≥ 10,000
L/D ≥ 10
In the subcooled portion of the condenser, the temperature difference at the inlet
and exit is usually less than 20°F, but in the superheated portion, the inlet and exit
temperature can vary by as much as 90°F. The temperature differential between the air
flowing over the tubes and, as a result, the inner surface of the tubes and the refrigerant is
also much greater. Under these conditions, the Dittus-Boelter equation does not produce
an accurate value for the heat transfer coefficient. Sieder and Tate xviii have developed a
correlation equation for large property variations based on the mean fluid temperature
31
µ
0.14
µs
D
where: µ = viscosity
( )m = evaluated at mean fluid temperature
( )s = evaluated at surface
The viscosity µs is evaluated at the surface and all other properties are evaluated at the
Kays and London use empirical data taken from a variety of refrigerants in
circular tubes under different conditions. Unlike the other correlations, Kays and London
have established equations in the transition region. The heat transfer coefficient was
related to the Stanton number, St. The Stanton number is defined by the following:
h
St =
G cp
St Pr 2 3 = a Re b
32
Laminar Re < 3,500 a=1.10647
b=-0.78992
In the laminar and early transition regions, the Kays and London heat transfer
coefficient is lower than the others, but is it is higher in the turbulent region. The Dittus-
Boelter and Sieder and Tate equations assume that the pipe is smooth which would
explain this result. Because the Kays and London relation is based on data taken from
heat exchangers similar to those studied here and because transitional flow has been
Baronxix were considered for this study. Pate xx showed that the results of Shah and the
results of Traviss et al. were not significantly different, however, Traviss’ model only
applies to annular flow regime while Shah’s relation is good in all flow regimes.
Traviss’ model also requires an iterative scheme while Shah’s method is very easy to use.
It is a simple dimensionless correlation which has been verified over a large variety of
experimental data. This model has a mean deviation of about 15% and has been verified
33
for many different condensing fluids, tube sizes and tube orientations. For any given
By integrating the two-phase heat transfer coefficient over the length, the mean
L2 3.8x 0. 76 (1 − x )0 .04
hL
( )
( L2 − L1 ) ∫L1
hTPM = − +
0. 8
1 x dL
pr0 .38
If the quality varies linearly with length which is consistent with constant heat
(1 − x )1 .8
x2
hL 3.8 x1 .76 0.04 x 2 .76
hTPM = − + 0 .38 −
( x 2 − x1 ) 1.8 pr 1 . 76 2 . 76 x1
34
For complete condensation, that is x varies from 1 to 0, the mean two-phase heat
2.09
hTPM = h L 0.55 + 0. 38
pr
The expression for the average evaporative two-phase heat transfer coefficient is
between the wall and the fluid along the length of the pipe.
0. 8 0. 4 0 .375 0. 075
k G µ l Cpl ρl µv x − xi
hevap = (0.0186875) 0l .2 e
µl ρv µl − x i0. 325
0 .325
D kl xe
35
Pressure Drop in Straight Pipe
The pressure drop in the superheated and subcooled portions of the condenser can be
f G2L
∆p =
ρ
The friction factor, f, for circular pipe depends on the Reynolds number where the
64
f = Re < 2,000
Re D
1 ε D 2.51
12
= −2 log 10 + 12
Re > 2,000
f 3.7 Re D f
For two-phase flow, the pressure drop calculation is substantially more complicated.
Hiller describes the method of Lockhart and Martinelli. The total two-phase pressure
36
dP dP dP dP
= + +
dz dz f dz g dz m
G2
− v
ρv
0.2
dP µv
( 0.09) [1 + 2.85χtt0.523 ]
2
=
dz f gc D Gv D
G 2 dx ρv ρ
13
ρv
23
dP
=− 2 x + ( 1 − 2 x ) + (1 − 2 x ) − 2(1 − x ) v
dz m g c ρv dz ρl ρl ρl
Unfortunately, it is very difficult to predict the variation of quality with length, dx/dz so a
linear profile is assumed for simplicity, which is consistent with constant heat transfer per
unit length. The gravitational pressure drop for horizontal tubes is zero. Hiller xxii
integrates the pressure differential over the change in quality for the frictional and
momentum losses. The frictional pressure drop in the two-phase region is reduced to
37
[
∆Pf = − C 2 0.357 x 2 .8 + 2C3 (0.429 − 0.141x − 0.0288 x 2 )x 2 .33 + C 32 (0.538 − 0.329 x ) x1 .86 ] xe
xi
where:
µ
0 .0523
ρv
0 . 262
C3 = 2.85 l
µv ρl
0.09 µv G1 .8
C2 =
C1 g c ρv D1.2
xe − xi
C1 =
L
xe
G2 ρ ρv
13
ρ
23
ρ ρv
13
ρ
23
∆Pm = 1 + − − v x 2 − 2 v − − v x
v
ρv gc l ρ ρl ρl ρ l ρl ρl
xi
The total pressure drop is just the sum of the momentum and frictional pressure drops.
38
Pressure Drop in Bends
The pressure drop in bends is found by assigning an equivalent length to each bend
based on the flow diameter and the bend radius. For two-phase flow, the method for
finding the pressure drop in bends based on Chisolm xxiii is used. The pressure drop is
calculated for liquid-only flow and correction factors are applied to determine the
approximate two-phase pressure drop. The method predicts the pressure drops for two-
phase flow in horizontal bends rather than the inclined bends found in a typical
accurately predicted and pressure gradients due to elevation changes are negligible
compared to friction pressure losses, so the horizontal bend model should be sufficient.
Since the bends are not finned and do not have air flowing over them, the heat transfer
The first step in computing the pressure drop is to determine the equivalent length of
the bend. The equivalent length is a function of the relative radius, rr.
rb
rr =
Di
39
Chisolm uses the correlation by Beij to determine the equivalent length, z/D. Typical
equivalent length between 12 and 15 for 90° bends. The equivalent length for a 180°
return bend is about twice that of a 90° bend. For this analysis, the equivalent length of
the return bend will be taken as 26. The single-phase pressure drop on a bend can be
evaluated by substituting the equivalent length for the straight pipe length in the standard
λ G2 z
− ∆p b =
2 ρ D e
−2
6.9 ε D 1 .11
λ = − 1.8 log +
Re 3 . 7
For drawn copper pipes, the pipe roughness is taken to be 0.000005 ft. For two-phase
flow, the pressure drop in a bend is the product of the bend pressure drop for liquid only
40
∆p b ,TP = ∆pb ,lo ϕb2,lo
[
ϕb2,lo = 1 + (Γb2 − 1) Bθ x ( 2 − n ) 2 (1 − x )
( 2− n) 2
+ x ( 2− n) ]
ρ µ
n
Γ = l v
2
b
ρv µl
λ
ln Lo
λvo
n=
µ
ln l
µv
41
The friction factors, λlo and λvo , are found using Haaland’s approximation. In these
cases, one assumes all of the mass is flowing as either a liquid or a vapor so the mass flux
G used to find the Reynolds number will be the same, but the viscosity will depend on the
refrigerant state.
λ
ln Lo
λvo
n=
µ
ln l
µv
[ ]
k b , 90 °
Bθ = 1 + B90° − 1
kb θ
2.2
B90° = 1 +
k b ,90 ° (2 + R D)
42
The recovery downstream of bends greater than 90° is assumed to be the same as 90°
bends. The pressure coefficient for a 90° bend, k b,90°, is used for convenience where
z
k b ,90° = λ
D e
Assuming homogeneous two-phase flow, the friction factor for two-phase flow is found
using the same Haaland’s approximation, but the Reynolds number is based on the two-
phase viscosity.
GD
Re =
µTP
µTP = µv x + (1 − x ) µ l
In the case of 180° bends, the kb,180° is approximately twice k b,90° so B180° reduces to
[
B180 ° = 0.5 1 + B90° ]
43
Air Side Models
The work of Rich and McQuiston were used to evaluate the air-side convective heat
transfer coefficient for a plate fin heat exchanger with multiple rows of staggered tubes.
The condenser coils are assumed to be dry. The heat transfer coefficient is based on the
j = St Pr 2 3
Substituting the appropriate values for the Stanton number gives this relationship for the
j c p Gmax
ha =
Pr 2 3
m& air
Gmax =
Amin
44
where: W = width of heat exchanger
FP = fin pitch
H = height of heat exchanger
tpc = tubes per circuit
#circ = number of parallel circuits
McQuiston found the j-factor for a 4 row finned-tube heat exchanger to fit a linear model
j 4 = 0.2675 JP + 1.325 × 10 −6
and
−0 .15
Ao
JP = Re − 0. 4
At
D
The Reynolds number is based on the outside diameter of the tubes, Do , and the
maximum mass flux Gmax. The heat transfer coefficient for heat exchangers with four or
jn 1 − 1280 n Re −L1.2
=
j4 1 − ( 1280)( 4) Re −L1.2
45
ReL is based on the row spacing.
Gmax X L
Re L =
µ
Pressure Drop
The work of Richxxv concludes that the air side pressure drop can be separated into
two components: the pressure drop due to the tubes and the pressure drop due to the fins.
∆p tot = ∆pt + ∆p f
2
Gmax A f
∆p f = f f v m
2 Ac
46
In experimental tests, Rich found that the friction factor depends on the Reynolds
number, but is independent of fin spacing. For fin spacing between 3 and 14 fins per
−0 .5
f f = 1.70 Re l
where the Reynolds number is based on the transverse (in the direction of air flow) tube
spacing.
GX l
Re l =
µ
To find the pressure drop over the tubes, the relationships developed by Zukauskas and
Ulinskas xxvi are used. The pressure drop over the banks of plain tubes is:
G2
∆p t = Eu c z
2ρ
47
Euc = k1 C z Eu
The Euler number is related to the tube friction factor and depends on the
Reynolds number and the tube geometry. For staggered, equilateral triangle banks with
many rows, the Euler number is related to the Reynolds number by a fourth order inverse
power series.
r s t u
Eu = q + + 2 + 3 +
Re Re Re Re 4
The coefficients, q, r, s, t, and u are dependent on the parameter a, the ratio of the
transverse tube spacing to tube diameter, and the Reynolds number. The coefficients for
distinct values of a determined by Zukauskas and Ulinskas from experimental data are
summarized in Table 2.
48
a Reynolds number q r s t u
1.25 3< Re < 103 0.795 0.247 x 0.335 x -0.155 x 0.241 x 104
103 103 104
103< Re < 2 x 106 0.245 0.339 x -0.984 x 0.132 x -0.599 x
104 107 1011 1013
1.5 3< Re < 103 0.683 0.111 x 103 -0.973 x 0.426 x 103 -0.574 x 103
102
103< Re < 106 0.203 0.248 x -0.758 x 0.104 x 1011 -0.482 x
104 107 1013
2.0 7< Re < 102 0.713 0.448 x -0.126 x -0.582 x 0
102 103 103
102< Re < 104 0.343 0.303 x -0.717 x 0.88 x 107 -0.38 x 109
103 105
104< Re < 2 x 106 0.162 0.181 x 0.792 x -0.165 x 0.872 x
104 108 1013 1016
2.5 102< Re < 5 x 103 0.33 0.989 x -0.148 x 0.192 x 107 0.862 x 108
102 105
5 x 103< Re < 2 x 0.119 0.849 x -0.507 x 0.251 x -0.463 x
106 104 108 1012 1015
Table 2. Euler number coefficients for inverse power series
For non-equilateral triangle tube bank arrays, the staggered array geometry factor k 1 ,
must be used as a correction. The staggered array geometry factor is dependent on the
Reynolds number, a and b, the ratio of tube spacing in the direction normal to the air flow
and the tube diameter. The equations for k 1 are found in Table 3.
49
Re (a/b) k1
102 1.25 < a/b < 3.5 0 . 48
k 1 = 0.93
a
b
103 0.5 < a/b <1.2 −0. 048
k 1 =
a
b
1.25 < a/b < 3.5 0. 284
k 1 = 0.951
a
b
104 0.45 < a/b < 3.5 0.708 0.55 0.113
k 1 = 1.28 − + −
(a b ) (a b ) (a b )3
2
If the tube bank as a small number of transverse rows, the average row correction
factor, Cz, must be applied because the pressure drop over the first few rows will be
different than the pressure drop over the rest of the rows. Cz is the average of the
1 z
Cz = ∑ cz
z z =1
50
The equations for the individual row correction factors are given in Table 4.
Re z* cz
10 <3 0.18
c z = 1.065 −
z − 0.297
102 <4 3.497
c z = 1.798 −
z + 1.273
103 <3 0.411
c z = 1.149 −
z − 0.412
104 <3 0.269
c z = 0.924 −
z + 0.143
>105 <4 1.467
c z = 0.62 −
z + 0.667
* For values greater than z, cz =1
Since the relations are given for discrete values of the a or the Reynolds number, linear
interpolation will be used to estimate the values of Eu, k1 , and cz when the conditions are
51
CHAPTER IV
When comparing the performance of air conditioning systems, it is not valid to assert
that one condenser geometry is better than another if the operating conditions are not
optimized for each configuration. The operating parameters considered for this study are
refrigerant charge and air face velocity over the condenser. Because the performance of
95° F to provide a fair basis for comparison. These conditions are summarized in Table
5.
To see the effects the operating parameters have on the seasonal COP, a base case
condenser and evaporator coil pair typical for this application was selected. All of the
characteristics of the condenser and all but the width of the evaporator were specified.
52
Dimension Condenser Evaporator
Tube spacing (in x in) 1.25 x 1.083 1.00 x 0.625
Tube inner diameter (in) 0.349 0.349
Tube outer diameter (in) 0.375 0.375
Frontal area (ft2 ) 7.5 n/a
Finned width (ft) 3 n/a
Finned height (ft) 2.5 1.5
Depth (in) 3.25 2.5
Fin pitch (fin/ in) 12 12
# rows 3 4
# circuits 12 9
Tubes per circuit 2 2
Table 6. Base Case Condenser and Evaporator Characteristics
The evaporator frontal area depends on the design conditions and is virtually
constant for different air velocities and refrigerant charges. The refrigerant charges are
specified by the number of degrees subcool, Tsc, in the condenser at the design
conditions.
53
4
3.5
2.5
Tsc=5
Tsc=10
2
Tsc=15
Tsc=20
1.5
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Air Velocity (ft/s)
The refrigerant charge is the mass of refrigerant in the system necessary to provide a
specified amount of subcool in the condenser at the design conditions. The relationship
between the specified subcool and refrigerant system mass is demonstrated in Table 7 for
Degrees Mass of
Subcool Refrigerant
@ 95° F in System
(°F) (lbm)
5 3.50
10 4.38
15 5.49
20 6.45
Table 7. Mass of Refrigerant in Air-Conditioner for Different Subcool Specifications
54
The effects of a fixed refrigerant charge must be considered with varying ambient
temperature. As the outdoor air temperature drops, the condensing temperature also
drops and the enthalpy of the refrigerant entering the evaporator is lower. This means
that the inlet quality is lower and more of the refrigerant in the evaporator is in the liquid
state. Since the total mass of refrigerant in the system is held constant, the mass of the
refrigerant in the evaporator increases and the mass of refrigerant in the condenser
decreases as the ambient outdoor temperature decreases. When the mass of the
refrigerant in the condenser drops, the volume fraction of the condenser that is filled with
vapor must increase. If the mass of refrigerant in the condenser drops to the point where
the refrigerant is not completely condensed when it enters the valve, the valve goes wide
open and cannot maintain a fixed superheat in the condenser. Since a negligible amount
of vapor can pass through the expansion valve orifice, a saturated state is forced at the
valve entrance and the subcool in the condenser will be fixed at zero. The superheat in
the evaporator then varies from the specified 10° F. This condition occurs at higher and
shown in Figure 9.
55
25
Tsc=5
20
Tsc=10
15 Tsc=20
10
0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Ambient Temperature (F)
.
Because the seasonal COP depends on the performance of the system over a range of
temperature, it is important that the refrigerant charge is high enough to ensure there be
subcool in the condenser at the lower temperatures. When the subcool disappears, the
superheat in the evaporator increases leading to lower density vapor at the compressor
inlet. This lower density vapor causes the mass flow rate to drop significantly, lowering
56
425 33000
420 32500
EvaporatorCapacity
415 32000
Subcool = 0 31500
410
(Btu/hr)
31000
405
30500
400
30000
395 29500
390 29000
385 28500
50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Ambient Temperature (F)
Figure 10. Effect of Ambient Temperature on Evaporator Capacity and Mass Flow Rate
The optimum refrigerant charge will be different for each ambient temperature,
but the COP will remain relatively constant at every temperature as long as the subcool is
specified between 10° F and 15° F at 95° F ambient. In the range of 5-20° subcool, the
seasonal COP is within 0.5% of the COP at 83° F ambient. The trends in COP over the
season and at different ambient temperatures are plotted over a range of subcools in
Figure 11.
57
4.2
4.1
Seasonal
3.9 Tamb=77
COP
Tamb=82
3.8 Tamb=83
Tamb=87
3.7
3.6
3.5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Subcool @ 95F
As expected, for a fixed amount of subcool at 95°, there is an air velocity that
produces the highest seasonal COP. The COP varies exhibits a maximum with the air
velocity for any subcool as shown in Figure 12. For subcools ranging from 5° to 20°, the
optimum air velocity is somewhere between 7 ft/s and 10 ft/s. In this range, the seasonal
COP is insensitive to the air velocity; for any refrigerant charge, it varies by less than 1%.
58
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.6 Tsc=5
Tsc=10
Tsc=15
3.5 Tsc=20
Seasonal COP
3.4
3.3
3.2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Air Velocity (ft/s)
Figure 12. Effect of Air Velocity on Seasonal COP for Different Subcool Conditions
Because the seasonal COP varies so little with air velocity, it is difficult to
pinpoint the optimum air velocity for each subcool within more than ±0.1 ft/sec. In
practice, this is acceptable because the air speed cannot be specified to a such high
tolerance.
Since the fan work increases proportionally with the cube of the velocity, it does
not initially make sense that the COP would not be affected. However, in this range, as
the fan work is increasing, the compressor work is decreasing by roughly the same
amount, as demonstrated in Figure 13. As the air velocity increases, the condensing
temperature decreases, and the inlet enthalpy to the evaporator also decreases. When this
59
happens, the mass flow rate of refrigerant needed to maintain the design evaporator
capacity drops decreasing the compressor work. Since condensing temperature of the
refrigerant cannot be lower than the air inlet temperature, there is a minimum compressor
work. As the air velocity increases beyond the optimum range, the fan work will grow
exponentially and the decrease in compressor work does not compensate for it.
Work (BTU/hr)
Compressor
Condenser Fan
Total
Figure 13. Effect of Air Velocity on Compressor and Condenser Fan Work
Changing the air velocity and refrigerant charge will slightly affect the cost of the
system because different compressors or fans should be used for different heat
exchangers. This would involve cost studies of compressors and fans which is outside
60
the scope of this study. They will be excluded from the cost factor calculation, but the
61
CHAPTER V
When designing a heat exchanger for maximum system COP, the two most
important constraints are the cost of the exchanger and the amount of frontal area it takes
up. It is not possible to keep both the frontal area and cost constant while only varying
one geometry factor, but simultaneously changing more than one variable would make it
difficult to determine the effect each variable has on the system. To examine the tradeoffs
between frontal area and cost, cases with fixed cost and fixed frontal area were
considered.
To compare the relative frontal area of each condenser configuration, the area
factor parameter is defined as the ratio of the frontal area of the test configuration to the
Frontal Area
AF =
Frontal Areabase
A similar factor, the cost factor, is used to compare the cost of condenser-
evaporator configurations:
62
Cost
CF =
Costbase
The cost of the heat exchanger is largely determined by the cost of the materials xxvii so the
Cost = (VolC u ,c o n + VolCu , evap ) ρCu CostCu + (Vol Al , con + Vol Alevap
, ) ρ Al Cost Al
The heat exchanger cost factor of the base configuration is $35.88. Although the piston
displacement will change slightly for each configuration, it varies from the base case by
no more than 3% under most conditions, so the cost variations of the compressor will be
ignored.
63
Number of Rows
Although altering any geometry factor will change the frontal area of the
condenser with the cost factor fixed, it is easiest to conceptualize this by changing the
number of rows. For these tests, the height of the condenser will remain fixed, but the
width is free to change. Intuitively, a heat exchanger with no bends and the largest
4.15
44..1150 4.10
4.05
Fixed Parameters
Fin Pitch =12 fpi
33..9950 3.90
3.85
33..8850
Seasonal 3.80
3.75 COP
33..7750 3.70
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
0 0.5 1 1.5N2
um 2
.
berofR5
ow
s 3 3
.
5 4 4
.
5 Number of Rows
Figure 14. Number of Rows vs. Seasonal COP with Fixed Cost
As the number of rows increases, the number of bends also increases. Obviously,
fewer bends in the tubing means less frictional losses and less compressor work. By
64
having the air only flow over one row of tubing, the temperature differential between the
air and the refrigerant is kept to a maximum, decreasing the refrigerant mass flow rate
and compressor work. The refrigerant side pressure drop and compressor power as
6700 30
6600 25
Compressor Power (Btu/hr)
Compressor
6400 15
Power
R22
6300 10
Pressure
Drop
6200 5
6100 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Number of Rows
Figure 15. Number of Rows vs. Compressor Power and Refrigerant Pressure Drop
While this is the main cause for the COP increase, the fan power also decreases as
with the number of rows. The pressure drop will go down as the depth of the air passage,
which is controlled by the number of rows, decreases. For larger number of rows, the
optimal air velocity is higher. This coupled with the increased pressure drop causes the
fan power to nearly double from 1-row to 4-rows as shown in Figure 16. However, if the
65
0.007 400
300
0.005
0.002
100
0.001
50
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Number of Rows
Figure 16. Rows vs. Air Side Pressure Drop and Fan Power for Fixed Cost at 83 F
Fin Pitch
Keeping the cost factor and all design parameters except the frontal area the same
as the base case, the model was run for fin pitches between 8 and 14 fins per inch (fpi).
The maximum seasonal COP’s and area factors based on fin spacing are summarized in
Table 9 and shown graphically in Figure 17. Based on these results, the fin spacing has
almost no effect on the seasonal COP or the optimal operating conditions. As seen in
Figure 18, the optimum velocity, for every fin pitch is between 8.5 and 9.5 ft/sec. This
that the seasonal COP varies shows an optimum with fin pitch, but the variation is
marginal.
66
Fin Pitch Seasonal Area
(fpi) COP Factor
8 3.839 1.258
10 3.856 1.114
12 3.862 1.000
14 3.860 0.906
Table 9. COP’s and Area Factors Based on Fin Pitch
E
feO
ctpoifm
F
ium
nP
iO
tp
ch
o
nS e
a
s
o
na
lC
OP
a
t
Optimum Operating Conditions
3.865
3
.3 8
6
5
3.860
e
r
a
ti
gCo
di
to
ns
.3.8
6
0
Seasonal COP
3.855
8
5
3.850 Fixed Parameters
3
.3 8
5
0
3.845 # Rows = 3
Tube Diameter = 3/8”
.3 8
4
5
Seasonal COP
3.840
Tubes/ Circuit = 2
.3.8
4
0
3.835
6 8 10 12 14 16
8
3
56810121416 Fin Pitch (fins/in)
Figure 17. Seasonal COP’s for Different Fin Pitches at Optimum Operating Conditions with Fixed
Cost
67
3.87
3.86
3.85
Figure 18. Effect of Fin Pitch on Seasonal COP at Different Air Velocities
The maximum COP will occur when fin spacing is increased just before the point
where the airside pressure drop causes the fan work to increase faster than the compressor
work is decreasing, in this case, 12 fins per inch. As long as the operating conditions are
kept in the recommended range of 10-15 degrees subcool and 7-10 ft/sec air face
velocity, the maximum and minimum seasonal COP’s will only differ by about 1.6%.
The maximum occurs with 12 fins per inch, 8.8 ft/sec air face velocity and 10 F subcool.
The minimum occurs with 8 fins per inch, 10-ft/sec air face velocity, and 15 F subcool.
Although the fin spacing does not dramatically affect the COP, it does affect the
packaging size. If a more compact heat exchanger is desired, increasing the fin pitch will
68
10
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Fin Pitch (fins/in)
As the fin pitch increases, the pressure drop across the fins also increases as seen
in Figure 20. This figure is based on operation at 77° F, but the trends are the same at
any temperature. As the fin pitch goes from 8 to 14, the pressure drop increases by
nearly 40%, and the fan power by about 13%. The compressor work decreases to offset
the fan power as shown in Figure 21. The optimum will occur when the increase in fan
69
5.0E-03
4.0E-03
3.0E-03
2.0E-03
1.0E-03
0.0E+00
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Fin Pitch (fins/inch)
6350 350
6300 300
6250 250
Compressor
Fan
6200 200
6150 150
6100 100
6 8 10 12 14 16
Fin Pitch (fins/ inch)
70
Tube Diameter
For condenser circuiting, custom copper tubing is usually used. xxix The air side
heat transfer and pressure drop correlations are only valid for outer diameters between
5/16” and 5/8”, so only tubing in this range is considered. For this study, the tube sizes
were taken from AAON Heating and Refrigeration Products specifications. The smallest
wall thickness for a given outside diameter is used. The properties of the tubing tested
are summarized in Table 10. All other geometry factors will be the same as the base
case.
Compared to fin spacing, the seasonal COP varies considerably with the tube
diameter. As shown in Figure 22, 1/2” tubing produces the highest seasonal COP- 3.4%
higher than the base case. Although this is not terribly dramatic, using 5/16” or 5/8”
tubing will significantly hurt the COP. Seasonal COP’s and area factors for each tube
71
4.00
3.90
3.80
3.60
3.50
3.40
Fixed Parameters
3.30 # Rows = 3
Fin Pitch =12 fpi
3.20
Tubes / Circuit = 2
3.10
3.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Outer Tube Diameter (in)
Unlike the changing circuiting or fin spacing, changing the tube diameter has a
fairly significant effect on the optimal operating conditions. Both the optimum air
velocity and refrigerant charge show an optimum with respect to tube size, as illustrated
by Figure 23. As previously discussed, the seasonal COP is relatively insensitive to the
72
air velocity and refrigerant charge within about ± 25% of the optimum for 3/8” tubes.
12 18
16
10
Optimum Air Velocity (ft/sec)
14
10
Velocity
6
Subcool
8
4 6
4
2
2
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Outer Tube Diameter (in)
At the optimum operating conditions for each configuration, the amount of the
condenser allocated to the superheated region increases steadily as the tube size
increases. This is due to the lower velocity in the larger tubes providing a lower heat
transfer coefficient. The allocation for the saturated section is significantly lower and the
allocation for the subcooled section is significantly higher for the 5/16” tube than for the
other tubes, as shown in Figure 24. This is probably because the refrigerant side pressure
drop decreases exponentially as the tube size increases as seen in Figure 25.
Surprisingly, the pressure drop over the saturated section follows the same trends as the
73
total pressure drop even though the amount of tube dedicated to this region is
0.8
0.7
Condenser Allocation
0.6
0.5 Superheated
0.4 Saturated
0.3 Subcooled
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Tube Diameter (in)
74
45
40
35
Pressure Drop (psi)
30 Superheated
25 Saturated
20 Subcooled
15 Total
10
5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Tube Diameter (in)
Figure 25. Refrigerant Side Pressure Drop vs. Tube Diameter at 83F
Tube Circuiting
It is easy to get a fair comparison of how the tube circuiting affects the system
performance because changing the number of tubes per circuit does not affect the cost
factor or the frontal area of the condenser. The number of rows, tube diameter, tube
spacing, and fin spacing were held constant at the values for the base case. The number
of circuits was varied to keep the height to width ratio nearly constant as the circuiting
changed. The condenser configurations considered for this study are summarized in
Table 12. Each configuration was tested with air velocities between 7 and 11.5 ft/s and
75
Tubes/ # Condense
Circuit Circuits r
Width
(ft)
2 12 3.0
3 8 3.0
4 6 3.0
5 5 2.9
Table 12. Condenser Configurations for Circuiting Analysis
As with air velocity and refrigerant charge, there is a range of circuiting where the
seasonal COP is relatively insensitive to the number of tubes per circuit. The maximum
seasonal COP, based on the optimum operating conditions for each configuration, is
shown in Figure 26. The COP is the highest when the refrigerant flow is divided among
four tubes. Although the COP for this configuration is 6% higher than the COP of the
base case, it is only about 0.5% higher than the one with three tubes per circuit and about
0.3% higher than the one with five tubes per circuit. The COP’s are listed in Table 13.
76
4.15
4.10
4.05
Seasonal COP
4.00
3.80
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tubes Per Circuit
The gains in COP with increased flow passages can be attributed to the reduction
in required compressor work due to the change in pressure drop. The refrigerant side
pressure drop decreases exponentially as the number of tubes per circuit increases, as
shown in Figure 27. However, as the tubes per circuit increases, the mass flow rate per
77
25.0
20.0
Pressure Drop (psi)
15.0
Total
Bends
Straight Pipe
10.0
5.0
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tubes per Circuit
Although the total pressure drop decreases, the percentage of the pressure drop
attributable to bends increases significantly as the tubes per circuit increases. This is
78
Operating Costs
By looking at how the COP varies with each parameter, one can decide how best
to utilize the allotted area to produce the lowest operating costs. The operating cost is
inversely proportional to the COP. Changing the tube circuiting decreases the operating
costs most dramatically. Increasing the tube diameter to 1/2” would noticeably decrease
the operating costs and the area. There is a point where the COP begins to decrease as the
tube circuiting or tube diameter increases. The effects of varying each of the geometry
factors with respect to operating cost and frontal area are shown in Figure 28.
Since the variations in COP for both changing tube diameter and circuiting based
on altering the refrigerant mass velocity, different circuiting configurations for each tube
diameter were run at 83° F with optimum airflow and subcool to see if the optimum tube
diameter was affected. When the base case was varied with fixed circuiting, the 1/2”
diameter tube provided the best performance. However, when the tube diameter was
varied in conjunction with circuiting, the smaller, 5/16” tube performed the best. As
shown in Table 15, the mass flux has a significant effect on the COP. COP’s that are
markedly lower than average have flow areas outside of the 700-1350 lbm/in2 -s range.
79
Tube Tubes Flow Area Mass Flux COP at
Diameter Per (in2 ) (lbm/in2 - 83 F
(in) Circuit s)
0.5 1 0.196 2091 3.517
0.5 2 0.393 1060 3.889
0.5 3 0.589 709 3.887
0.375 2 0.221 1853 3.862
0.375 3 0.331 1244 4.067
0.375 4 0.442 937 4.088
0.375 5 0.552 753 4.071
0.3125 2 0.154 2657 3.487
0.3125 3 0.230 1782 3.980
0.3125 4 0.307 1345 4.115
0.3125 5 0.383 1077 4.145
0.3125 6 0.460 899 4.144
0.3125 7 0.537 772 4.131
Table 15. COP and Flow Area for Different Circuiting Configurations
The trade-offs between operating costs and frontal area for different circuiting is
shown in Figure 29. The optimum diameter-circuiting combination is a 5/16” tube with 5
tubes per circuit, but a 3/8” tube with 4 tubes per circuit provides similar performance
with better space management. The effects of fin spacing for the optimum diameter-
circuiting combination and for the base case are shown in Figure 30. For the base case,
the optimum fin pitch was 12 fpi, but for the 5/16” tube with 5 tubes per circuit, the trend
is different. In this case, reducing the fin pitch increases the performance because the
refrigerant side pressure drop is considerably lower and the reduction in compressor
power does not compensate for the increase in fan power. Various condenser operating
80
81
0.29
5/16"
5/8"
0.28
Base Case:
Diameter 12 Fins/in
2 Tubes/Circuit
3 Rows
3/8" Diameter
0.27
4 FPI
1/COP
TPC
Diameter
Base
FPI 8 Rows
0.26 10
14
1/2"
2
Rows
TPC
0.25
3
5
4
0.24
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Area Factor
Figure 28. Operating Costs vs. Area Factor for Different Geometry Factors
82
0.29
2
3 Row Condenser
1
1
Fin Pitch = 12 fpi
Number next to data point
0.28 denotes tubes per circuit
1/2" Diameter
0.27
0.26
3 2
3/8" Diameter
1/COP
2
0.25
5/16" Diameter
5
3 4
4
7 5
0.24
6
0.23
0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15
Area Factor
Figure 29. Operating Costs For Different Tube Diameters and Circuiting at 83°° F with Fixed Cost
83
0.270
0.260
FPI=8
FPI=14 FPI=12 FPI=10
0.255
1/COP
0.250
0.240
FPI=12
FPI=10
FPI=8
0.235
0.230
0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Area Factor
Figure 30. Effect of Varying Fin Pitch for Base Case and Optimum Case at 83°° F with Fixed Cost
84
CHAPTER VI
In the previous chapter, the effects of varying the number of rows, tube diameter,
circuiting, and fin pitch while keeping the total cost of the evaporator and condenser
fixed were examined. With the exception of circuiting, altering these geometry factors
affected the frontal area. In many cases, packaging constraints limit the frontal area. In
this chapter, the heat exchanger cost will be a free variable, but the frontal area will be
held constant.
Number of Rows
As seen in Figure 31, the seasonal COP decreases slightly as the number of rows
is increased beyond 3, even though the condenser heat transfer area is getting larger.
85
3.87
3.86
3.85
Seasonal COP
3.84
3.83
Fixed Parameters
3.82
Fin Pitch =12 fpi
3.81
Tube Diameter = 3/8”
3.80
Tubes / Circuit = 2
3.79
3.78
1 2 3 4 5
Rows
Figure 31. Seasonal COP for Varying Rows with Fixed Area
There are several reasons for this. On the refrigerant side of the condenser, the
pressure drop increased as with the number of rows because of more bends and longer
tubes. At 83° F, the air-side pressure drop over the 2-row condenser is 15.1% lower than
the pressure drop over the 4-row condenser, so the fan power for the 2-row coil is only
20% greater even though the optimal velocity is 42% higher. Because the optimal air
velocity is greater, the air-side heat transfer coefficient is 26% higher for the 2 row
condenser compared to the 4 row condenser. These results are summarized in Table 16.
The tradeoffs between the fan and compressor power are shown in
Figure 32.
86
Numbe Evaporat Compress Fan Air-Side Heat Air Side Mass
r or or Power Transfer Pressure Flow
Of Capacity Power (Btu/hr Coefficient Drop Rate
Rows (Btu/hr) (Btu/hr) ) (Btu/hr-ft 2 -R) (psi) (lbm/hr)
2 30,982 6,487 332.8 12.55 3.972E-03 413.7
3 31,053 6,504 290.8 10.87 4.300E-03 409.6
4 31,073 6,674 276.8 9.94 4.676E-03 408.2
Table 16. Data for Varying Number of Rows at 83°° F
6750 350
Compressor Power (Btu/hr)
6700 300
Compressor
6600 200
Fan
6550 150
6500 100
6450 50
0 1 2 3 4 5
Number of Rows
Figure 32. Tradeoffs Between Compressor and Fan Power for Varying Number of Rows
with Fixed Area at 83 F
Usually, increasing the heat transfer area will increase the COP of a system, but
the area added by increasing the number of rows performs inefficiently. As the number
87
of rows increases, the allocation of the subcooled section increases and the allocation of
Figure 33). This increased subcool allocation is due to the large refrigerant
pressure drop resulting in a lower saturation temperature at the exit. The total UA’s for
the 2, 3, and 4 row coils are given in Table 17. The 4 row coil has a UA 60% greater
than the 2 row coil. However, it does not provide as high a seasonal COP as the 2 row
due to the high refrigerant pressure drop and fan power. This demonstrates the
0.9
0.8
0.7
Condenser Allocation
0.6
Superheated
0.5
Saturated
0.4
Subcooled
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Number of Rows
88
Rows Total UA UA/ Unit Length of Tube
(Btu/hr- (Btu/hr-R-ft)
R)
Superheate Saturated Subcool Average
d ed
2 2504.5 15.8 40.7 22.3 35.4
3 3362.1 15.1 37.1 21.1 32.6
4 4097 14.7 34.8 20.4 29.9
Table 17. Overall UA and UA/ Length for Varying Rows at 83°° F
The optimum air velocity over the condenser coils is heavily dependent on the
number of rows. Although there is a velocity range for each coil where the seasonal COP
varies minimally from the optimum value, that range is different for each row
configuration. Figure 34 shows how the range of velocities varies for different numbers
of rows for optimum subcool at air inlet temperature of 95° F. As the number of rows
decreases, the optimum air velocity increases. The seasonal COP was relatively
insensitive to subcool in the range of 10° to 15° for 2, 3 and 4 row condensers. The
89
3.90
3.85
3.80
3.75
3.70
3.65
3.60
3.55 Rows=2
Seasonal COP
3.50 Rows=3
3.45 Rows=4
3.40
4 6 8 10 12 14
Air Velocity (ft/s)
Figure 34. Air Velocity vs. Seasonal COP for Different Row Configurations with Fixed Area
Fin Pitch
Holding the frontal area constant, like holding the cost constant, does not
appreciably impact the seasonal COP or operating conditions of the system when the fin
pitch changes. The range of recommended operating conditions remains the same, but
the variance of the optimal point is greater when the frontal area is fixed than when the
cost is fixed. When the cost is fixed, the optimum COP occurs when the air velocity is
between 8.5 and 9.5 ft/sec, but the optimum air velocity varies from about 8 to 10 ft/sec
90
when the frontal area is fixed, as seen in Figure 35. Although higher fin pitches give
better performance, the maximum difference in seasonal COP over the recommended
range is only about 4.0%, but the coil that produces the lowest COP costs 80% of the coil
3.9
3.88
3.86
3.84
3.82
Seasonal COP
3.8
3.78
3.76
FPI=8
3.74 FPI=10
FPR=12
3.72
FPI=14
3.7
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Air Velocity (ft/sec)
Figure 35. Variance of Optimal Air Velocity with Fin Pitch for Fixed Frontal Area
When the cost is fixed, the fan power does not increase at the same rate as the
pressure drop because the area and the total air flow rate were decreasing. When the
frontal area is fixed, the increase in pressure drop due to increasing the fin pitch directly
affects the fan power. As always, at the optimum, the compressor work decreases by the
91
When the frontal area and number of rows are fixed, the tube length is also fixed.
When the tube length is fixed the allocation of condenser space is the opposite of when
the cost is fixed (Figure 36). As the fin pitch increases, the allocation of the subcooled
portion of the condenser increases and the allocation of the saturated portion decreases
while the percentage of tube length for the superheated section stays relatively constant.
This can be accounted for by the decrease in saturation temperature due to the higher UA
0.9
Superheated
0.8 (Fixed Area)
Condenser Allocation
0.7 Superheated
(Fixed Cost)
0.6
Saturated
0.5 (Fixed Area)
0.4 Saturated
(Fixed Cost)
0.3
Subcooled
0.2 (Fixed Area)
0.1 Subcooled
(Fixed Cost)
0
6 8 10 12 14 16
Fin Pitch (fins/in)
Tube Diameter
As the tube diameter changes, the optimum operating conditions change, but the
seasonal COP varies little with air velocity or subcool. For 5/16” tubes, the maximum
92
variation in seasonal COP is about 3% with subcools ranging from 10 to 30° F and air
velocities ranging from 7 to 11.5 ft/sec. For 5/8” tubes, the maximum change in seasonal
COP is less than 3.5% for subcools between 10 and 20° F and air velocities between 7
and 10 ft/sec. Figure 37 shows that the optimum velocity does change, but the curve is
very flat. The optimum operating conditions are given in Table 19.
4.2
4.0
Seasonal COP
3.8
5/16"
3/8"
3.6
1/2"
5/8"
3.4
3.2
3.0
4 6 8 10 12
Air Velocity (ft/sec)
Figure 37. Variance of Optimal Air Velocity with Tube Diameter at Optimum Subcool for Fixed
Frontal Area
93
Tube Seasona Cost Air Subcool
Diamete l Factor Velocity @ 95°
r COP (ft/s) F
5/16” 3.491 0.942 9.5 18
3/8” 3.862 1.000 8.8 10
1/2” 4.074 1.160 7.6 10
5/8” 3.952 1.461 7.9 13
Table 19. Optimum Operating Conditions For Varying Tube Diameter with Fixed Area
Although the air velocity and subcool near the optimum do not significantly affect
the seasonal COP, it is interesting to note that the trends are nearly opposite the ones
when the cost is fixed. With a fixed cost condenser, the optimum subcool and air
velocity are both minimums when the tube diameter is 3/8”. When the area of the
condenser is fixed, the optimum velocity continues to decrease as the tube diameter
increases because the area is not decreasing to help compensate for the airside pressure
drop. Figure 38 shows how the airside pressure drop varies for fixed area compared to
fixed cost. In both cases, the minimum pressure drop occurs with a tube diameter of
3/8”, even though the air velocity trends are different at larger tube diameters, but the
increase in pressure drop is more marked for the fixed cost case.
94
0.014
0.000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Tube Diameter (in)
Figure 38. Air Side Pressure Drop for Varying Tube Diameters at 83°° F
The trends for the refrigerant side pressure drop are the same for fixed area as
they are for fixed cost. As the tube diameter increases, the refrigerant pressure drop
decreases leading to decreased compressor work. This pressure drop effect is larger than
the effect of the lowered heat transfer coefficient. However, for large tubes, the fan
power continues to increase and the decrease in compressor work becomes less
significant. The tradeoffs between compressor power and fan power are illustrated in
Figure 39.
95
7600 800
7400 700
Compressor Power (Btu/hr)
7200 600
6000 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Tube Diameter (in)
Figure 39. Compressor and Fan Power Trends vs. Tube Diameter at 83°° F
As previously discussed, the tube circuiting and tube diameter should not be
considered separately, but with fixed area, the number of rows must also be considered.
For single parameter variations of the base case, the effects of geometry factors on the
operating costs and cost factor are plotted in Figure 40. For a 3/8” tube with two tubes
per circuit, it is better to use two condenser rows instead of three because of the
refrigerant side pressure drop. For condensers with different numbers of rows, the 5/16”
and 3/8” tubes provide virtually the same performance, but the smaller tubes cost less.
The operating costs and cost factors for two and three row condensers with different tube
diameter- tube circuiting configurations at 83° F run at optimum air velocity and
refrigerant charge are shown in Figure 41. In most cases, the operating costs are
relatively insensitive to the number of circuits. The operating costs and cost factors for
96
different tube diameters with optimum circuiting for 2, 3, and 4 row condensers at 83° F
run at optimum air velocity and refrigerant charge are shown in Figure 42. This figure
illustrates that the operating costs will be lower with there are more rows when the
97
0.290
5/16"
0.285
Diameter
0.280
0.265 Diameter
Base Rows
8 10 4 Rows
0.260
2
FPI
14
0.255
5/8"
TPC
0.250
3
0.245 5
4 1/2"
0.240
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Cost Factor
Figure 40. Operating Costs vs. Cost Factor for Different Geometry Factors
98
Figure 41. Operating Costs For Different Tube Diameters and Circuiting at 83°° F with Fixed Area
99
0.260
Rows=2
2 Rows 2 Rows=3
Rows=4
4*
OD=5/16"
0.255 OD=3/8"
3
OD=1/2"
3 Rows 3
0.245
4
5
4 Rows 3
0.240
5
7
0.235
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Cost Factor
Figure 42. Optimum Condenser Circuiting for Fixed Area at 83 F with Varying Rows
100
Comparing Fixed Area to Fixed Cost
Figure 43, Figure 44, and Figure 45 show how the maximum seasonal COP’s vary
with rows, fin spacing and tube diameter for fixed cost and for fixed area. In these
figures, the values of the cost factor correspond to the cases where the frontal area is
fixed and the values of the area factor correspond to the cases where the cost is fixed.
The circuiting is optimized for each case and all other parameters are the same as the base
case unless otherwise stated, i.e. 3 rows, 12 fins per inch, and 3/8” tubing.
4.5 1.6
4.0 1.4
3.5
Area Factor / Cost Factor
1.2
3.0
Seasonal COP
1.0
COP (Fixed
2.5 Area)
0.8
2.0 COP (Fixed
Cost)
0.6
1.5 Cost Factor
0.4
1.0
Area Factor
0.5 0.2
0.0 0.0
2 3 4
Number of Rows
Figure 43. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Number of Rows
101
4.50 1.4
4.00
1.2
0.00 0.0
8 10 12 14
Fin Pitch (fins/ inch)
Figure 44. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Fin Pitch
4.50 1.6
4.00 1.4
3.50
1.2
Cost Factor/ Area Factor
3.00
1.0
Seasonal COP
COP, Area
2.50 Fixed
0.8 COP, Cost
2.00 Fixed
CF
0.6
1.50
AF
0.4
1.00
0.50 0.2
0.00 0.0
5/16" 3/8" 1/2" 5/8"
Tube Diameter
Figure 45. Comparison of Area Factor to Cost Factor Based on Tube Diameter
102
CHAPTER VII
In this study, an accurate condenser model was developed and integrated into an
air-conditioning system. A base condenser model was chosen and design conditions
were established at 95° F. The operating parameters of condenser subcool and air face
velocity were examined over a wide range of ambient conditions to determine their
effects on the seasonal COP. It was determined that there is a range of subcools and face
velocities where the effects on the seasonal COP were negligible. The COP of the system
at an ambient temperature of 83° F was nearly identical to the seasonal COP and could be
The effects of changing the tube diameter, tube circuiting, number of rows, and
fin pitch have been investigated for both fixed cost and fixed frontal area. When the
parameters were varied from the base case individually, the changing the number of
circuits to 4 or changing the tube diameter to 1/2” gave the highest COP’s. It was
determined that tube diameter and tube circuiting could not be considered separately
because they both affect the refrigerant side pressure drop. When the cost or area was
fixed, the best tube diameter- circuiting configuration was 5 circuits of 5/16” tubing. In
both cases, 4 circuits of 3/8” tubing provided similar performance with better packaging
103
In general, the COP will be the highest when the frontal area is maximized and
rows should only be added if there is a frontal area constraint. This is because of the
relationship between the air velocity, depth, and air-side pressure drop. When the cost is
fixed, fewer rows provide better performance. If the frontal area is constrained, adding
rows will increase the performance as long as the refrigerant side pressure drop does not
Changing the fin pitch had a relatively negligible effect on the seasonal COP.
The fan power increases as the number of fins increases, but the compressor power
decreases by about the same amount. If cost is fixed, fewer fins provide better
performance. When the area is restricted, more fins provide better performance.
Improvements to the model might include the incorporation of moist air and
frosting. With these additions, modifications could be made to the evaporator with a high
degree of confidence that the results were accurate. An accumulator could also be added
to the condenser to ensure that the refrigerant always entered the valve as a liquid instead
of relying on the redistribution of refrigerant. Enhanced fins or tubes with interior fins
In the future, this computer model can be applied to many other studies. The
effects of modifying other condenser parameters such as longitudinal and transverse tube
spacing, frontal aspect ratio and materials, or running with different refrigerants could be
examined. In very hot areas like the Arizona desert, people often complain that their air-
conditioners do not supply sufficient cooling because the cooling capacity is rated for 95°
F and the air-conditioners are not designed to run at extremely high temperatures. The
104
model could be used to determine the design point and operating conditions for air-
105
APPENDIX I
This outlines the procedure for finding the refrigerant mass in the saturated
portion of the evaporator. The same process was used to find the mass of refrigerant in
the saturated portion of the condenser but with different boundary conditions. The mass
can be expressed:
Ac dl
m= ∫
L
v
Equation 1
v ( x ) = vl (1 − x ) + v g
Equation 2
For the saturated portion of the evaporator, the boundary conditions are
106
x (l = 0 ) = x1
Equation 3
x (l = L ) = 1
Equation 4
Using the boundary conditions and assuming the quality varies linearly with length:
1 − x1
x (l ) = l + x1
L
Equation 5
Substitute Equation 5 into Equation 2 to find the specific volume as a function of length.
1 − x1
v (l ) = vl + x1 (v g − v l ) + l (v g − vl )
L
Equation 6
For a uniform cross sectional area, substituting Equation 6 into Equation 1 yields:
dl
m = Ac ∫
L
1 − x1
vl + x1 (v g − v l ) + l (v g − vl )
0
L
Equation 7
107
Integrating gives:
L
1 − x1
ln vl + x1 (v g − v l ) + l (v g − vl )
Ac L
m=
(1 − x1 )(v g − v l ) L 0
Equation 8
Substituting for l gives the final mass in the saturated portion of the evaporator.
Ac L vg
m sat, evap =
(1 − x1 )(v g − v l ) x1 (v g − v l ) + v l
ln
Equation 9
108
APPENDIX II
109
Inputs to Main Program
110
{Refrigerant side
Pressure Drop
singledp
twophasedp
tpbenddrop
Heat transfer Coefficients
h_bar_single
h_bar_c
h_bar_e
Air Side
Heat Transfer coefficients
ha
Pressure Drop
GetEuler
Heat Exchangers
Surf_eff
Exch_size
Exch_size_un_un
sat_size
Tubing
Compressor
Compeff
}
Inputs
D- equivalent diameter of flow passage, ft
E- surface roughness, ft
G- mass flow per unit area lbm/hr-ft^2
mu_v- viscosity of vapor phase, lbm/hr-ft
mu_l- viscosity of liquid phase, lbm/hr-ft
rhov- density of liquid phase
rhol- density of vapor phase
ReV- Reynold's number of vapor phase
ReL- reynold's number of liquid phase
Dztp- length of two phase region
xf- final quality
xi- initial quality
VV- exit specific volume of vapor phase, ft^3/lbm
nr- number of flow passages
L- length of tube
Output-
DeltaP- pressure drop over two phase region
}
{Momentum component of 2 phase pressure drop}
{if xi<xf then
xt=xf
xf=xi
xi=xt
endif}
Tav=(T1+T2)/2
111
If Tav>converttemp(K,F,339) then Tav=converttemp(K,F,339)
G=(m_dot/(D^2*pi/4))/nr
mu_v=viscosity(R22, T=Tav, x=1)
mu_l=viscosity(R22, T=Tav, x=0)
rhov=density(R22, T=Tav, x=1)
rhol=density(R22, T=Tav, x=0)
DpM=((xf^2-xi^2)*(1+rhov/rhol-(rhov/rhol)^.333-(rhov/rhol)^(2/3))-(xf-xi)*(2*rhov/rhol-(rhov/rhol)^(1/3)-
(rhov/rhoL)^(2/3))*G^2/(rhov)*convert(lbm/hr^2-ft,psi))
C1=(xf-xi)/L "[1/ft]"
C2=.09*mu_v^.2*G^1.8/(C1*rhov*D^1.2*32.2*convert(ft/s^2,ft/hr^2))*convert(lbf/ft^2, psia)
C3=2.85*(mu_l/mu_v)^(.0523)*(rhov/rhoL)^.262
DP=(DpM+DPf)
end
112
If x<=0 then goto 10
mu_TP=mu_v*x+mu_l*(1-x)
Re_tp=G*D_i_1/mu_tp
lambda_tp=(-1.8*log10(6.9/Re_tp+((e/D_i_1)/3.7)^1.11))^(-2)
DELTAp_b_lo=lambda_l*G^2*equiv_L/(2*grav*rho_l)*convert(lbf/ft^2, psia)
k_b=lambda_tp*equiv_L/2 {k_b for 90 degree bend}
GAMMA_B=rho_l/rho_v*(mu_v/mu_l)^n
B=1+2.2/(k_b*(2+R_b/D_i_1)) {B for 90 degree bend}
B=.5*(1+B) {B for 180 degree bend}
phi_b_lo=1+(GAMMA_b-1)*(B*x^((2-n)/2)*(1-x)^((2-n)/2)+x^(2-n))
DELTAp_b=DELTAp_b_lo*phi_b_lo
DP=DP+DELTAp_b
L=L+width
until i>=num_circuit_2a2b-1
10:DP=Dp
{10:DP=0}
end
113
Function h_bar_e(Te, Pe,De, m_r, x_in)
{Purpose to evaluate the evaporation two phase heat
transfer coefficient for forced convection flow inside tubes
Description of parameters
Input
De- Equivalent diameter of flow passage (ft)
G- mass flow per unit area (lbm/hr-ft^2)
xi- initial quality
xe- exit quality
PrL-Prandtl number of the liquid phase
xkl-thermal conductivity of liq. phase (btu/hr-ft-F
xmuv- viscosity of vapor phase (lbm/ hr-ft)
xmul- viscosity of liquid phase (lbm/ hr-ft)
rhol- density of liq. phase (lbm/ft^3)
rhov- density of vapor phase (lbm/ ft^3)
Output
h_bar_ave_e- evp. heat trans. coeff. (btu/hr-ft^2-F)}
x_i:=x_in
Pr_L=prandtl(R22, T=Te-1, P=Pe) "Prandtl # of liquid phase in condenser"
kl=conductivity(R22, T=Te, x=0) "conductivity of liq. phase"
mu_v=viscosity(R22, T=Te, x=1) "viscosity of vap. phase"
mu_l=viscosity(R22, T=Te, x=0)
rho_l=density(R22, T=Te, x=0)
rho_v=density(R22, T=Te, x=1)
x_e:=1
g:=m_r/(pi*De^2/4)
h_bar_ave_e1 := 0.023 * 0.325 * 2.5 * kl * (g / mu_l) ^ 0.8 * De ^ (-0.2) * Pr_L ^ 1.4
h_bar_ave_e2 := (rho_L / rho_V) ^ 0.375 * (mu_v / mu_l) ^ 0.075 * (x_e - x_i) / (x_e ^.325 - (x_i ^ 0.325))
h_bar_e := h_bar_ave_e1 * h_bar_ave_e2
End
114
spacerat=a/b
Eu=0
k1=0
If (spacerat>.5) and (spacerat<1.2) and (re>=1000) and (Re<10000) then {this relationship is stated
for Re=1000, not the range 1000<Re<10000}
k1=spacerat^(-.048)
k2=1.28-.708/spacerat+.55/(spacerat^2)-0.113/(spacerat^3)
k1=(k2-k1)/(10000-1000)*(Re-1000)+k1
endIF
if (spacerat>1.25) and (spacerat<3.5) and (Re>1000) and (Re<10000) then
k1=.951*spacerat^.284
k2=1.28-.708/spacerat+.55/(spacerat^2)-0.113/(spacerat^3)
k1=(k2-k1)/(10000-1000)*(Re-1000)+k1
endIF
If (spacerat>.45) and (spacerat<3.5) and (Re>=10000) and (Re<100000) then {stated for Re=10000}
k1=1.28-.708/spacerat+.55/(spacerat^2)-0.113/(spacerat^3)
k2=2.016-1.675*spacerat+.948*spacerat^2-.234*spacerat^3+.021*spacerat^4
k1=(k2-k1)/(100000-10000)*(Re-10000)+k1
endif
If ((spacerat>.45) and (spacerat<3.5) and (Re>=100000)) or ((spacerat>.45) and (spacerat<1.6) and
(Re>=1000000)) then {stated for Re=100000}
k1=2.016-1.675*spacerat+.948*spacerat^2-.234*spacerat^3+.021*spacerat^4
endIF
if (spacerat>1.25) and (spacerat<3.5) and (Re>100) and (Re<1000) then
k1=.93*spacerat^.48
k2=spacerat^(-.048)
k1=(k2-k1)/(1000-100)*(Re-100)+k1
endIF
if (spacerat=1.155) then
k1=1
endif
If k1=0 then check1=0
115
Eu=(Eu2-Eu1)/(2-1.5)*(a-1.5)+Eu1
endif
116
IF Re>=1000 THEN
c_z1=1.149-(.411/(z-.412))
c_z2=.924+(.269/(z+.143))
c_z=(c_z2-c_z1)/(10000-1000)*(Re-1000)+c_z1
endif
IF Re>=10000 THEN
c_z1=.924+(.269/(z+.143))
c_z2=.62+(1.467/(z+.667))
c_z=(c_z2-c_z1)/(100000-10000)*(Re-10000)+c_z1
endif
IF Re>=100000 THEN
c_z=.62+(1.467/(z+.667))
endif
endif
z=z+1
C=C+c_z
until z>nrow
C=C/nrow
If C=0 then Check3=0
endif
Eu=Eu*C*k1
geteuler=Eu
end
117
Cr:=0
NTU:=-ln(1-E)
UA:=NTU*Cunmixed
end
Procedure tubing(Type:D_i,D_o)
{Returns the inner and outer diameter of copper tubes based on AAON product specifications
Type Standard size(in)
1 5/16
2 3/8
3 1/2
4 5/8
}
if type=1 then
D_i=.2885
D_o=.3125
endIF
if type=2 then
D_i=.3490
D_o=.375
endIF
if type=3 then
D_i=.4680
D_o=.5000
endIF
if type=4 then
D_i=.5810
D_o=.6250
endIF
D_i=D_i/12
D_o=D_o/12
end
Function seasonalcop(Tac)
seasonalcop=0
If Tac=67 then
seasonalcop=.214
endif
If Tac=72 then
seasonalcop=.231
endif
118
If Tac=77 then
seasonalcop=.216
endif
If Tac=82 then
seasonalcop=.161
endif
If Tac=87 then
seasonalcop=.104
endif
If Tac=92 then
seasonalcop=.052
endif
If Tac=97 then
seasonalcop=.018
endif
If Tac=102 then seasonalcop=.004
END
Function clffunc(BL)
clffunc=1
If BL<30000 then clffunc=BL/30000
end
Module At95(Tsc, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c, ncircuit_c:PD, m_sys, A_e,
A_c)
{System Constraints}
{Design Constraints}
A_c=7.5 "[ft2]"
{CF=1}
119
{Flow rate}
G_max_ac=m_ac/A_flow_c "[lbm/ft^2 hr]"
Pac2=P_atm "[psia]"
P_atm=14.7 "[psia]"
grav=32.2*convert(1/s^2,1/hr^2) "[lbm-ft/hr^2-lbf]"
Re_D_c=G_max_ac*D_o_c/(mu_ac*convert(1/s,1/hr))
DELTAP_fin=(f_f*G_max_ac^2*A_f_c/(2*A_flow_c*grav*rho_ac1))*convert(1/ft^2,1/in^2) "[psia]"
DELTAP_fin_inH2O=DELTAP_fin*convert(psia,inh2o)"[inh2O]"
f_f=1.7*Re_L_ac^(-.5)
Re_L_ac=G_max_ac*h_fft_c/mu_ac*convert(1/hr, 1/s)
{Compressor}
{Compressor Inputs}
Clearance=.05 "[%]" {Percent}
R=.025 {ratio of clearance volume to displacement}
{condenser Characteristics}
Call tubing(TubeType_c:D_i_c,D_o_c)
d_fft_c=d_f_c*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
Dep_c=d_fft_c*nrow_c "[ft]" {condenser depth, ft}
h_fft_c=h_f_c*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
H_c=h_fft_c*tpc_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
L_c=Width_c*nrow_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]"
V_c=Width_c*h_c*dep_c "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_c=Width_c*H_c "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
A_f_c=2*L_c*eta_c*tpc_c*(h_fft_c*d_fft_c-pi*(D_o_c/2)^2) "[ft^2]"
A_i_c=L_c*D_i_c*pi*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
120
A_t_c=D_o_c*pi*L_c*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_c=A_t_c+A_f_c "[ft^2]"
A_flow_c=Width_c*(1-eta_c*t_c)*(H_c-D_o_c*ncircuit_c*tpc_c)"[ft^2]"
A_i_c=A_i_22a+A_i_2a2b+A_i_2b3"[ft^2]"
{evaporator Characteristics}
{Variable Evaporator charcteristics}
TubeType_e=2
eta_e=12*12 "[1/ft]" {condenser fin pitch, fins/ft}
tpc_e=2 {number of rows per refrigerant parallel pass}
ncircuit_e=9
nrow_e=4 {number of columns of tubing}
t_e=.006/12 "[ft]" {thickness of fins, ft}
h_f_e=1 "[in]" {tube vertical spacing on centers, in}
d_f_e=.625 "[in]" {condenser fin depth per tube, in}
Call tubing(TubeType_e:D_i_e,D_o_e)
d_fft_e=d_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
h_fft_e=h_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
Dep_e=d_f_e*nrow_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {condenser depth, ft}
L_e=Width_e*nrow_e*ncircuit_e "[ft]"
H_e=h_f_e*tpc_e*ncircuit_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
V_e=width_e*h_e*dep_e "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_e=Width_e*H_e "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
A_i_e=L_e*D_i_e*pi*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_t_e=D_o_e*pi*L_e*(1-t_e*eta_e)*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_f_e=2*h_fft_e*tpc_e*d_fft_e*eta_e*L_e-2*pi*(D_o_e/2)^2*eta_e*L_e*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_o_e=A_t_e+A_f_e "[ft^2]"
A_flow_e=width_e*(1-eta_e*t_e)*(H_e-D_o_e*ncircuit_e*tpc_e) "[ft^2]"
CALL Surf_eff(D_o_e, h_bar_ae,h_f_e, d_f_e,t_e, A_f_e,A_o_e:phi_f_e,phi_e)
{***********************************************************
Begin Cycle Analysis
************************************************************}
{Compressor Equations}
h1=enthalpy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm]"
s1=entropy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm-R]"
s1=s2s "[Btu/lbm-R]"
h2s=enthalpy(R22, P=P2, s=s2s) "[btu/lbm]"
h2=h1+wc "[btu/lbm]"
T2=temperature(R22, P=P2, h=h2) "[F]"
wcs= h2s-h1 "[btu/lbm]"
wc=wcs/nc "[Btu/lbm]"
{Condenser Equations}
P3=P2b-DELTAP_2b3-DELTAP_b_2b3 "[psia]"
121
Q_22a=E_22a*min(C_22a,C_a22a)*(T2-Tac1) "[Btu/hr]"
C_a22a=m_ac*specheat(AIR, T=Tac1)*L_22a/L_c "[Btu/hr-R]"
C_22a=m_dot_r*specheat(R22, T=T2, P=P2) "[Btu/hr-R]"
Call exch_size_un_un(C_a22a, C_22a,UA_22a:E_22a)
UA_22a=U_o_22a*A_o_22a "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_22a=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_22a/(h_bar_22a*A_i_22a))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2, T2a, P2:Re_22a, h_bar_22a, rho_22a)
A_t_22a=D_o_c*pi*L_22a*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_22a=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_22a-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_22a*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_22a=A_t_22a+A_f_22a "[ft^2]"
A_i_22a=L_22a*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
Q_22a=(A_i_22a/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac22a-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2a2b=(A_i_2a2b/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2a2b-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2b3=(A_i_2b3/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2b3-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Tac22a=temperature(AIR, h=hac22a) "[F]"
Tac2a2b=temperature(AIR,h=hac2a2b) "[F]"
Tac2b3=temperature(AIR,h=hac2b3) "[F]"
hac1=enthalpy(AIR, T=Tac1) "[Btu/lbm]"
P2a=P2-DELTAP_22a-DELTAP_b_22a "[psia]"
Call SingleDP(m_dot_r, tpc_c,D_i_c,L_22a,f_22a,rho_22a:DELTAP_22a)
call singlebenddrop(tpc_c, D_i_c, m_dot_r,P1, T2, T2a, L_22a, Width_c, f_22a:DELTAP_b_22a)
1/f_22a^0.5=-2*log10((e/(D_i_c*3.7))+2.51/(Re_22a*f_22a^0.5))
122
C_2b3=m_dot_r*specheat(R22, T=T3, P=P3) "[Btu/hr-R]"{assume Cp for R22
constant over Tsc}
Call exch_size_un_un(C_a2b3, C_2b3,UA_2b3:E_2b3)
UA_2b3=U_o_2b3*A_o_2b3 "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_2b3=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_2b3/(h_bar_2b3*A_i_2b3))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2b, T3, P2b:Re_2b3,h_bar_2b3, rho_2b3)
A_t_2b3=D_o_c*pi*L_2b3*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_2b3=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_2b3-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_2b3*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_2b3=A_t_2b3+A_f_2b3 "[ft^2]"
A_i_2b3=L_2b3*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
{Valve Equation}
h4=h3 "[Btu/lbm]"
{Evaporator Equations}
{Neglect Pressure drop across evaporator}
P4=P4a "[psia]"
P4=P1 "[psia]"
Q_dot_e=Q_44a+Q_4a1 "[Btu/hr]"
A_i_e=A_i_44a+A_i_4a1 "[ft^2]"
T4=T4a "[F]"
P4=pressure(R22, T=T4, h=h4) "[psia]"
x4=quality(R22, T=T4, h=h4)
{COP}
123
W_dot_com=wc*m_dot_r "[Btu/hr]"
Q_c=Q_22a+Q_2a2b+Q_2b3 "[Btu/hr]"
COP=Q_dot_e/(W_dot_com+W_dot_fc+W_dot_fe)
{Mass balances}
Vol_22a=L_22a*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2a2b=L_2a2b*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2b3=L_2b3*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_44a=A_i_44a*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_4a1=A_i_4a1*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
m_22a=rho_22a*Vol_22a "[lbm]"
vfg2a2b=volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_2a2b=-(Vol_2a2b/vfg2a2b)*ln(volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0)/volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)) "[lbm]"
m_2b3=rho_2b3*Vol_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_c=m_22a+M_2a2b+m_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_4a1=rho_4a1*Vol_4a1 "[lbm]"
vfg44a=volume(R22, T=T4a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T4a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_44a=(Vol_44a/(x4*vfg44a))*ln(volume(R22, T=T4, x=1)/(volume(R22, T=T4, x=0)+x4*vfg44a)) "[lbm]
check this equation"
m_sys=m_4a1+m_44a+m_c "[lbm]"
m_e=m_4a1+m_44a
Module WithSubcool(Tac1,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP, Tsc, Q_dot_e, Qss, Ess)
{System Constraints}
124
V_ac=V_dot_ac*convert(1/min,1/sec)/A_c "[ft/s]"
mu_ac=viscosity(AIR, T=Tac1)*convert(1/hr,1/s) "[lbm/ft-s]"
rho_ac1=density(AIR, T=Tac1, P=Pac1) "[lbm/ft^3]"
m_dot_ac=m_ac*convert(1/hr,1/s) "[lbm/s]"
m_ac=V_dot_ac*convert(1/min,1/hr)*rho_ac1 "[lbm/hr]"
h_bar_ac=ha(h_c, eta_c,t_c, width_c,m_dot_ac, mu_ac, D_o_c, A_o_c,A_t_c, C_p_air, Pr_ac, nrow_c)
"[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
c_p_air=specheat(AIR, T=Tac1) "[Btu/lbm-R]"
Pr_ac=prandtl(AIR, T=Tac1)
{Compressor}
nc=compeff(P2a,P4,tc_ave,T4) {compressor efficiency}
{Volumetric efficiency from Threlkeld, p55- 56}
gamma_R22=1.16 {ratio of Cp/Cv}
Clearance=.05 "[%]" {Percent}
v1=volume(R22, P=P1,T=T1) "[ft^3/lbm]"
v2=volume(R22, P=P2,T=T2) "[ft^3/lbm]"
{nv=v1/v2*(1+clearance-clearance*(P2/P1)^(1/gamma_R22))}
nv=1-R*(v1/v2-1) {Klein}
R=.025 {ratio of clearance volume to displacement}
PD=m_dot_r*v1/nv "[ft^3/hr]" {piston displacement}
{condenser Characteristics}
{Variable Condenser charcteristics}
spac_rat=h_f_c/d_f_c
L_c=Width_c*nrow_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]"
H_c=h_fft_c*tpc_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
V_c=Width_c*h_c*dep_c "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_c=Width_c*H_c "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
CALL Surf_eff(D_o_c, h_bar_ac,h_f_c, d_f_c,t_c, A_f_c,A_o_c:phi_f,phi_c)
Call tubing(TubeType_c:D_i_c,D_o_c)
A_i_c=L_c*D_i_c*pi*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_t_c=D_o_c*pi*L_c*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_c=2*L_c*eta_c*tpc_c*(h_fft_c*d_fft_c-pi*(D_o_c/2)^2) "[ft^2]"
A_o_c=A_t_c+A_f_c "[ft^2]"
A_flow_c=Width_c*(1-eta_c*t_c)*(H_c-D_o_c*ncircuit_c*tpc_c)"[ft^2]"
A_i_c=A_i_22a+A_i_2a2b+A_i_2b3"[ft^2]"
{evaporator Characteristics}
{Variable Evaporator charcteristics}
125
h_f_e=1 "[in]" {tube vertical spacing on centers, in}
t_e=.006/12 "[ft]" {thickness of fins, ft}
eta_e=12*12 "[1/ft]" {condenser fin pitch, fins/ft}
d_f_e=.625 "[in]" {condenser fin depth per tube, in}
Dep_e=d_f_e*nrow_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {condenser depth, ft}
tpc_e=2 {number of rows per refrigerant parallel pass}
nrow_e=4 {number of columns of tubing}
ncircuit_e=9
L_e=Width_e*nrow_e*ncircuit_e "[ft]"
H_e=h_f_e*tpc_e*ncircuit_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
{V_c=3} "[ft^3]"
TubeType_e=2
V_e=width_e*h_e*dep_e "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_e=Width_e*H_e "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
CALL Surf_eff(D_o_e, h_bar_ae,h_f_e, d_f_e,t_e, A_f_e,A_o_e:phi_f_e,phi_e)
Call tubing(TubeType_e:D_i_e,D_o_e)
d_fft_e=d_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
h_fft_e=h_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
A_i_e=L_e*D_i_e*pi*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_t_e=D_o_e*pi*L_e*(1-t_e*eta_e)*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_f_e=2*h_fft_e*tpc_e*d_fft_e*eta_e*L_e-2*pi*(D_o_e/2)^2*eta_e*L_e*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_o_e=A_t_e+A_f_e "[ft^2]"
A_flow_e=width_e*(1-eta_e*t_e)*(H_e-D_o_e*ncircuit_e*tpc_e) "[ft^2]"
{***********************************************************
Begin Cycle Analysis
************************************************************}
{Compressor Equations}
h1=enthalpy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm]"
s1=entropy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm-R]"
s1=s2s "[Btu/lbm-R]"
h2s=enthalpy(R22, P=P2, s=s2s) "[btu/lbm]"
wcs= h2s-h1 "[btu/lbm]"
wc=wcs/nc "[Btu/lbm]"
h2=h1+wc "[btu/lbm]"
T2=temperature(R22, P=P2, h=h2) "[F]"
{Condenser Equations}
P2a=P2-DELTAP_22a-DELTAP_b_22a "[psia]"
P2b=P2a-DELTAP_2a2b-DELTAP_b_2a2b "[psia]"
P3=P2b-DELTAP_2b3-DELTAP_b_2b3 "[psia]"
UA_22a=U_o_22a*A_o_22a "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_22a=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_22a/(h_bar_22a*A_i_22a))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2, T2a, P2:Re_22a, h_bar_22a, rho_22a)
A_t_22a=D_o_c*pi*L_22a*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_22a=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_22a-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_22a*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
126
A_o_22a=A_t_22a+A_f_22a "[ft^2]"
A_i_22a=L_22a*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
Q_22a=(A_i_22a/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac22a-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2a2b=(A_i_2a2b/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2a2b-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2b3=(A_i_2b3/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2b3-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Tac22a=temperature(AIR, h=hac22a) "[F]"
Tac2a2b=temperature(AIR,h=hac2a2b) "[F]"
Tac2b3=temperature(AIR,h=hac2b3) "[F]"
hac1=enthalpy(AIR, T=Tac1) "[Btu/lbm]"
UA_2b3=U_o_2b3*A_o_2b3 "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_2b3=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_2b3/(h_bar_2b3*A_i_2b3))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2b, T3, P2b:Re_2b3,h_bar_2b3, rho_2b3)
A_t_2b3=D_o_c*pi*L_2b3*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_2b3=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_2b3-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_2b3*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_2b3=A_t_2b3+A_f_2b3 "[ft^2]"
A_i_2b3=L_2b3*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
{Valve Equation}
127
h4=h3 "[Btu/lbm]"
{Evaporator Equations}
{Neglect Pressure drop across evaporator}
P4=P4a "[psia]"
P4=P1 "[psia]"
Q_dot_e=Q_44a+Q_4a1 "[Btu/hr]"
A_i_e=A_i_44a+A_i_4a1 "[ft^2]"
{A_o_e=A_i_e*D_o_1/D_i_c}
T4=T4a "[F]"
P4=pressure(R22, T=T4, h=h4) "[psia]"
{m_ae=V_dot_ae*convert(1/min,1/hr)/volume(AIR, T=Tac1, P=14.7)}
x4=quality(R22, T=T4, h=h4)
Area_rat=A_o_e/A_i_e
{COP}
W_dot_com=wc*m_dot_r "[Btu/hr]"
Q_c=Q_22a+Q_2a2b+Q_2b3 "[Btu/hr]"
COP=Q_dot_e/(W_dot_com+W_dot_fc+W_dot_fe)
{Mass balances}
Vol_22a=L_22a*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2a2b=L_2a2b*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2b3=L_2b3*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_44a=A_i_44a*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
128
Vol_4a1=A_i_4a1*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
m_22a=rho_22a*Vol_22a "[lbm]"
vfg2a2b=volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_2a2b=-(Vol_2a2b/vfg2a2b)*ln(volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0)/volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)) "[lbm]"
m_2b3=rho_2b3*Vol_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_c=m_22a+M_2a2b+m_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_4a1=rho_4a1*Vol_4a1 "[lbm]"
vfg44a=volume(R22, T=T4a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T4a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_44a=(Vol_44a/(x4*vfg44a))*ln(volume(R22, T=T4, x=1)/(volume(R22, T=T4, x=0)+x4*vfg44a)) "[lbm]
check this equation"
m_sys=m_4a1+m_44a+m_c "[lbm]"
m_e=m_4a1+m_44a
{Flow rate}
G_max_ac=m_ac/A_flow_c "[lbm/ft^2 hr]"
Pac2=P_atm "[psia]"
P_atm=14.7 "[psia]"
grav=32.2*convert(1/s^2,1/hr^2) "[lbm-ft/hr^2-lbf]"
Re_D_c=G_max_ac*D_o_c/(mu_ac*convert(1/s,1/hr))
DELTAP_fin=(f_f*G_max_ac^2*A_f_c/(2*A_flow_c*grav*rho_ac1))*convert(1/ft^2,1/in^2) "[psia]"
DELTAP_fin_inH2O=DELTAP_fin*convert(psia,inh2o)"[inh2O]"
f_f=1.7*Re_L_ac^(-.5)
Re_L_ac=G_max_ac*h_fft_c/mu_ac*convert(1/hr, 1/s)
Module WithoutSubcool(Tac1,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c,
Tubetype_c, ncircuit_c:COP, Tsh, Q_dot_e, Qss, Ess)
{System Constraints}
129
x4a=1
x2a=1
Tc_ave=(T2a+T2b)/2 "[F]"
e=.000005 "[ft]" {roughness for drawn tubing (White), ft}
m_r_t=m_dot_r/tpc_c "[lbm/hr]" {mass flow rate per tube}
V_ac=V_dot_ac*convert(1/min,1/sec)/A_c "[ft/s]"
mu_ac=viscosity(AIR, T=Tac1)*convert(1/hr,1/s) "[lbm/ft-s]"
rho_ac1=density(AIR, T=Tac1, P=Pac1) "[lbm/ft^3]"
m_dot_ac=m_ac*convert(1/hr,1/s) "[lbm/s]"
m_ac=V_dot_ac*convert(1/min,1/hr)*rho_ac1 "[lbm/hr]"
h_bar_ac=ha(h_c, eta_c,t_c, width_c,m_dot_ac, mu_ac, D_o_c, A_o_c,A_t_c, C_p_air, Pr_ac, nrow_c)
"[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
c_p_air=specheat(AIR, T=Tac1) "[Btu/lbm-R]"
Pr_ac=prandtl(AIR, T=Tac1)
{Compressor}
nc=compeff(P2a,P4,tc_ave,T4) {compressor efficiency}
{Volumetric efficiency from Threlkeld, p55- 56}
gamma_R22=1.16 {ratio of Cp/Cv}
Clearance=.05 "[%]" {Percent}
v1=volume(R22, P=P1,T=T1) "[ft^3/lbm]"
v2=volume(R22, P=P2,T=T2) "[ft^3/lbm]"
{nv=v1/v2*(1+clearance-clearance*(P2/P1)^(1/gamma_R22))}
nv=1-R*(v1/v2-1) {Klein}
R=.025 {ratio of clearance volume to displacement}
PD=m_dot_r*v1/nv "[ft^3/hr]" {piston displacement}
{condenser Characteristics}
{Variable Condenser charcteristics}
spac_rat=h_f_c/d_f_c
L_c=Width_c*nrow_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]"
H_c=h_fft_c*tpc_c*ncircuit_c "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
V_c=Width_c*h_c*dep_c "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_c=Width_c*H_c "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
CALL Surf_eff(D_o_c, h_bar_ac,h_f_c, d_f_c,t_c, A_f_c,A_o_c:phi_f,phi_c)
Call tubing(TubeType_c:D_i_c,D_o_c)
A_i_c=L_c*D_i_c*pi*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_t_c=D_o_c*pi*L_c*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_c=2*L_c*eta_c*tpc_c*(h_fft_c*d_fft_c-pi*(D_o_c/2)^2) "[ft^2]"
130
A_o_c=A_t_c+A_f_c "[ft^2]"
A_flow_c=Width_c*(1-eta_c*t_c)*(H_c-D_o_c*ncircuit_c*tpc_c)"[ft^2]"
A_i_c=A_i_22a+A_i_2a2b+A_i_2b3"[ft^2]"
{evaporator Characteristics}
{Variable Evaporator charcteristics}
h_f_e=1 "[in]" {tube vertical spacing on centers, in}
t_e=.006/12 "[ft]" {thickness of fins, ft}
eta_e=12*12 "[1/ft]" {condenser fin pitch, fins/ft}
d_f_e=.625 "[in]" {condenser fin depth per tube, in}
Dep_e=d_f_e*nrow_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {condenser depth, ft}
tpc_e=2 {number of rows per refrigerant parallel pass}
nrow_e=4 {number of columns of tubing}
ncircuit_e=9
L_e=Width_e*nrow_e*ncircuit_e "[ft]"
H_e=h_f_e*tpc_e*ncircuit_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]" {height of condenser, ft}
{V_c=3} "[ft^3]"
TubeType_e=2
V_e=width_e*h_e*dep_e "[ft^3]" {Volume of Condenser}
A_e=Width_e*H_e "[ft^2]" {area of condenser, ft^2}
CALL Surf_eff(D_o_e, h_bar_ae,h_f_e, d_f_e,t_e, A_f_e,A_o_e:phi_f_e,phi_e)
Call tubing(TubeType_e:D_i_e,D_o_e)
d_fft_e=d_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
h_fft_e=h_f_e*convert(in,ft) "[ft]"
A_i_e=L_e*D_i_e*pi*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_t_e=D_o_e*pi*L_e*(1-t_e*eta_e)*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_f_e=2*h_fft_e*tpc_e*d_fft_e*eta_e*L_e-2*pi*(D_o_e/2)^2*eta_e*L_e*tpc_e "[ft^2]"
A_o_e=A_t_e+A_f_e "[ft^2]"
A_flow_e=width_e*(1-eta_e*t_e)*(H_e-D_o_e*ncircuit_e*tpc_e) "[ft^2]"
{***********************************************************
Begin Cycle Analysis
************************************************************}
{Compressor Equations}
h1=enthalpy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm]"
s1=entropy(R22, T=T1, P=P1) "[Btu/lbm-R]"
s1=s2s "[Btu/lbm-R]"
h2s=enthalpy(R22, P=P2, s=s2s) "[btu/lbm]"
wcs= h2s-h1 "[btu/lbm]"
wc=wcs/nc "[Btu/lbm]"
h2=h1+wc "[btu/lbm]"
T2=temperature(R22, P=P2, h=h2) "[F]"
{Condenser Equations}
P2a=P2-DELTAP_22a-DELTAP_b_22a "[psia]"
P2b=P2a-DELTAP_2a2b-DELTAP_b_2a2b "[psia]"
P3=P2b-DELTAP_2b3-DELTAP_b_2b3 "[psia]"
131
UA_22a=U_o_22a*A_o_22a "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_22a=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_22a/(h_bar_22a*A_i_22a))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2, T2a, P2:Re_22a, h_bar_22a, rho_22a)
A_t_22a=D_o_c*pi*L_22a*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_22a=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_22a-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_22a*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_22a=A_t_22a+A_f_22a "[ft^2]"
A_i_22a=L_22a*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
Q_22a=(A_i_22a/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac22a-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2a2b=(A_i_2a2b/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2a2b-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Q_2b3=(A_i_2b3/A_i_c)*m_ac*(hac2b3-hac1) "[Btu/hr]"
Tac22a=temperature(AIR, h=hac22a) "[F]"
Tac2a2b=temperature(AIR,h=hac2a2b) "[F]"
Tac2b3=temperature(AIR,h=hac2b3) "[F]"
hac1=enthalpy(AIR, T=Tac1) "[Btu/lbm]"
UA_2b3=U_o_2b3*A_o_2b3 "[Btu/hr-R]"
U_o_2b3=(1/(phi_c*h_bar_ac)+A_o_2b3/(h_bar_2b3*A_i_2b3))^(-1) "[Btu/hr-ft^2-R]"
Call h_bar_single(D_i_c, m_r_t, T2b, T3, P2b:Re_2b3,h_bar_2b3, rho_2b3)
A_t_2b3=D_o_c*pi*L_2b3*(1-t_c*eta_c)*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_f_2b3=2*h_f_c*tpc_c*convert(in, ft)*d_f_c*convert(in,ft)*eta_c*L_2b3-
2*pi*(D_o_c/2)^2*eta_c*L_2b3*tpc_c "[ft^2]"
A_o_2b3=A_t_2b3+A_f_2b3 "[ft^2]"
A_i_2b3=L_2b3*tpc_c*pi*D_i_c "[ft^2]"
132
vel_2b3=m_r_t/((pi*D_i_c^2/4)*rho_2b3) "[ft/hr]" {velocity of refrigerant through tube, ft/hr}
Call SingleDP(m_dot_r, tpc_c,D_i_c,L_2b3,f_2b3,rho_2b3:DELTAP_2b3)
call singlebenddrop(tpc_c, D_i_c, m_dot_r,P2b, T2b, T3, L_2b3, Width_c, f_2b3:DELTAP_b_2b3)
1/f_2b3^0.5=-2*log10((e/(D_i_c*3.7))+2.51/(Re_2b3*f_2b3^0.5))
{Valve Equation}
h4=h3 "[Btu/lbm]"
{Evaporator Equations}
{Neglect Pressure drop across evaporator}
P4=P4a "[psia]"
P4=P1 "[psia]"
Q_dot_e=Q_44a+Q_4a1 "[Btu/hr]"
A_i_e=A_i_44a+A_i_4a1 "[ft^2]"
{A_o_e=A_i_e*D_o_1/D_i_c}
T4=T4a "[F]"
P4=pressure(R22, T=T4, h=h4) "[psia]"
{m_ae=V_dot_ae*convert(1/min,1/hr)/volume(AIR, T=Tac1, P=14.7)}
x4=quality(R22, T=T4, h=h4)
Area_rat=A_o_e/A_i_e
{COP}
W_dot_com=wc*m_dot_r "[Btu/hr]"
Q_c=Q_22a+Q_2a2b+Q_2b3 "[Btu/hr]"
133
COP=Q_dot_e/(W_dot_com+W_dot_fc+W_dot_fe)
{Mass balances}
Vol_22a=L_22a*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2a2b=L_2a2b*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_2b3=L_2b3*D_i_c^2*pi*tpc_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_44a=A_i_44a*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
Vol_4a1=A_i_4a1*D_i_c/4 "[ft^3]"
m_22a=rho_22a*Vol_22a "[lbm]"
vfg2a2b=volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_2a2b=-(Vol_2a2b/vfg2a2b)*ln(volume(R22, T=T2a, x=0)/volume(R22, T=T2a, x=1)) "[lbm]"
m_2b3=rho_2b3*Vol_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_c=m_22a+M_2a2b+m_2b3 "[lbm]"
m_4a1=rho_4a1*Vol_4a1 "[lbm]"
vfg44a=volume(R22, T=T4a, x=1)-volume(R22, T=T4a, x=0) "[ft^3/lbm]"
m_44a=(Vol_44a/(x4*vfg44a))*ln(volume(R22, T=T4, x=1)/(volume(R22, T=T4, x=0)+x4*vfg44a)) "[lbm]
check this equation"
m_sys=m_4a1+m_44a+m_c "[lbm]"
m_e=m_4a1+m_44a
{Flow rate}
G_max_ac=m_ac/A_flow_c "[lbm/ft^2 hr]"
Pac2=P_atm "[psia]"
P_atm=14.7 "[psia]"
grav=32.2*convert(1/s^2,1/hr^2) "[lbm-ft/hr^2-lbf]"
Re_D_c=G_max_ac*D_o_c/(mu_ac*convert(1/s,1/hr))
DELTAP_fin=(f_f*G_max_ac^2*A_f_c/(2*A_flow_c*grav*rho_ac1))*convert(1/ft^2,1/in^2) "[psia]"
DELTAP_fin_inH2O=DELTAP_fin*convert(psia,inh2o)"[inh2O]"
f_f=1.7*Re_L_ac^(-.5)
Re_L_ac=G_max_ac*h_fft_c/mu_ac*convert(1/hr, 1/s)
end
Call At95(Tsc, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c, ncircuit_c:PD, m_sys, A_e, A_c)
134
{CALL WithoutSubcool(67,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP67,Tsh[1],Q_dot_e[1], Qss67,E67)}
{CALL WithoutSubcool(72,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP72, Tsh[2],Q_dot_e[2], Qss72, E72)
CALL WithoutSubcool(77,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP77, Tsh[3],Q_dot_e[3], Qss77, E77)}
{CALL WithoutSubcool(82,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP82, Tsh[4],Q_dot_e[4], Qss82, E82)}
{CALL WithoutSubcool(87,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP87, Tsh[5],Q_dot_e[5], Qss87, E87)}
{Call WithoutSubcool(92,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP92, Tsh[6],Q_dot_e[6], Qss92, E92)}
{CALL WithSubcool(67,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP67, Tsc[1], Q_dot_e[1], Qss67, E67)}
{CALL WithSubcool(72,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP72,Tsc[2],Q_dot_e[2], Qss72, E72)
CALL WithSubcool(77,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP77, Tsc[3],Q_dot_e[3], Qss77, E77)
CALL WithSubcool(82,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP82, Tsc[4],Q_dot_e[4], Qss82, E82)
CALL WithSubcool(87,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP87, Tsc[5],Q_dot_e[5], Qss87, E87)
CALL WithSubcool(92,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP92, Tsc[6],Q_dot_e[6], Qss92, E92)
CALL WithSubcool(97,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP97, Tsc[7],Q_dot_e[7], Qss97, E97)
CALL WithSubcool(102,PD,A_e, A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c: COP102, Tsc[8],Q_dot_e[8], Qss102, E102)}
Call WithSubcool(83, PD,A_e,A_c, m_sys, V_ac, h_f_c, t_c, eta_c, d_f_c, tpc_c, nrow_c, Tubetype_c,
ncircuit_c:COP85, Tsc[9], Q_dot_e[9], Qss85, E85)
{COP_tot=(Qss67+Qss72+Qss77+Qss82+Qss87+Qss92+Qss97+Qss102)/(E67+E72+E77+E82+E87+E92+
E97+E102)}
{Operating inputs}
Tsc=13
V_ac=8.9
135
APPENDIX III
136
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Cost Condenser Geometries at 83 F, English Units
Tube Tubes # Fin Rows Air Subco Saturation Compress Condens Evaporat Isentropic Volumetri Area COP
Diamet / Circuit Pitch Face ol @ Temperatu or Work er Fan or Compress c Factor
er Circui s (fpi) Velocit 95 re (Btu/hr) Work Capacity or Compress
(in) t y (F) (F) (Btu/hr) (Btu/hr) Efficiency or
(ft/s) Efficiency
3/8” 2 12 12 3 8.8 10 94.9 6504 290.8 31053 0.590 0.976 1.000 3.862
5/16" 6 4 8 3 8.9 10 96.24 5841 265.9 30998 0.633 0.976 1.408 4.216
5/16" 6 4 10 3 8.8 13 97.63 5899 266.0 31009 0.638 0.976 1.227 4.185
5/16" 5 5 12 3 8.9 13 97.53 5952 282.8 31002 0.635 0.976 1.088 4.145
5/16" 5 5 14 3 9.1 13 98.05 5993 309.6 30981 0.637 0.975 0.977 4.105
3/8" 4 6 8 3 9.0 13 97.95 5960 281.9 31023 0.637 0.975 1.259 4.143
3/8" 4 6 10 3 8.8 10 97.75 6011 278.3 30991 0.637 0.975 1.115 4.113
3/8" 4 6 12 3 9.2 13 98.54 6010 327.4 30997 0.640 0.975 1.000 4.088
3/8" 4 6 14 3 9.3 13 99.05 6060 351.4 30983 0.641 0.975 0.907 4.047
1/2" 2 12 8 3 10.0 10 99.48 6293 398.5 31014 0.636 0.974 0.969 3.908
1/2" 2 12 10 3 9.8 13 100.1 6265 406.3 31006 0.638 0.974 0.885 3.917
1/2" 2 12 12 3 9.7 13 100.3 6282 422.9 30999 0.639 0.974 0.815 3.899
1/2" 2 12 14 3 9.6 15 101.3 6322 437.6 31001 0.642 0.973 0.755 3.873
137
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Cost Condenser Geometries at 83 F, English Units (cont’d)
Tube Tubes # Fin Row Compress Refrigerant Air Side Air-Side h Superheated Saturated Subcooled
2
Diamet / Circuit Pitc s or Exit Side Pressure (Btu/hr-ft - Refrigerant Refrigerant Refrigerant
er (in) Circui s h Pressure Pressure Drop R) Side h Side h (Btu/hr- Side h (Btu/hr-
t (fpi) (psi) Drop (psi) (Btu/hr-ft 2 -R) ft2 -R) ft2 -R)
(psi)
3/8” 2 12 12 3 209 23.6 0.00430 10.9 127.2 1505 229.0
5/16" 6 4 8 3 202 3.0 0.00276 11.9 87.8 904 159.1
5/16" 6 4 10 3 205 2.4 0.00320 11.5 87.9 895 158.6
5/16" 5 5 12 3 206 4.1 0.00380 11.4 98.4 1035 177.4
5/16" 5 5 14 3 207 3.7 0.00453 11.3 98.7 1035 177.7
3/8" 4 6 8 3 207 3.4 0.00324 11.6 83.0 877 149.6
3/8" 4 6 10 3 206 3.4 0.00369 11.1 83.6 886 150.5
3/8" 4 6 12 3 208 2.9 0.00463 11.2 83.4 878 149.9
3/8" 4 6 14 3 209 2.7 0.00542 11.1 83.7 878 150.1
1/2" 2 12 8 3 213 6.4 0.00535 11.8 80.6 904 143.9
1/2" 2 12 10 3 214 5.6 0.00610 11.3 80.3 896 143.2
1/2" 2 12 12 3 215 5.4 0.00696 11.0 80.4 897 143.3
1/2" 2 12 14 3 217 5.0 0.00786 10.8 80.5 891 143.0
138
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Cost Condenser Geometries at 28.3 C, SI Units
Tube Tubes # Fin Row Air Subco Saturation Compress Condens Evaporat Isentropic Volumetri Area COP
Diamet / Circuit Pitch s Face ol @ Temperatu or Work er Fan or Compress c Factor
er Circui s (1/cm Velocit 35 re (C) (kW) Work Capacity or Compress
(mm) t ) y (m/s) (C) (kW) (kW) Efficiency or
Efficiency
3.86
9.53 2 12 4.72 3 2.7 5.6 36.0 1.91 0.0850 9.012 0.590 0.976 1.000 2
4.21
7.94 6 4 3.15 3 2.7 5.6 35.7 1.71 0.0779 9.086 0.633 0.976 1.408 6
4.18
7.94 6 4 3.94 3 2.7 7.2 36.5 1.73 0.0780 9.089 0.638 0.976 1.227 5
4.14
7.94 5 5 4.72 3 2.7 7.2 36.4 1.74 0.0829 9.087 0.635 0.976 1.088 5
4.10
7.94 5 5 5.51 3 2.8 7.2 36.7 1.76 0.0907 9.081 0.637 0.975 0.977 5
4.14
9.53 4 6 3.15 3 2.7 7.2 36.6 1.75 0.0826 9.093 0.637 0.975 1.259 3
4.11
9.53 4 6 3.94 3 2.7 5.6 36.5 1.76 0.0816 9.083 0.637 0.975 1.115 3
4.08
9.53 4 6 4.72 3 2.8 7.2 37.0 1.76 0.0960 9.085 0.640 0.975 1.000 8
4.04
9.53 4 6 5.51 3 2.8 7.2 37.3 1.78 0.1030 9.081 0.641 0.975 0.907 7
3.90
12.70 2 12 3.15 3 3.0 5.6 37.5 1.84 0.1168 9.090 0.636 0.974 0.969 8
3.91
12.70 2 12 3.94 3 3.0 7.2 37.8 1.84 0.1191 9.088 0.638 0.974 0.885 7
139
3.89
12.70 2 12 4.72 3 3.0 7.2 37.9 1.84 0.1240 9.086 0.639 0.974 0.815 9
3.87
12.70 2 12 5.51 3 2.9 8.3 38.5 1.85 0.1283 9.086 0.642 0.973 0.755 3
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Cost Condenser Geometries at 28.3 C, SI Units (cont’d)
Tube Tubes # Fin Rows Compress Refrigerant Air Side Air- Superheated Saturated Subcooled
Diamet / Circuit Pitch or Exit Side Pressure Side h Refrigerant Refrigerant Refrigerant
2
er (mm) Circui s (1/cm Pressure Pressure Drop (W/m - Side h Side h Side h
t ) (kPa) Drop (kPa) K) (W/m2 -K) (W/m2 -K) (W/m2 -K)
(kPa)
9.53 2 12 4.72 3 1443 162.7 0.02965 61.7 722 8613 1300
7.94 6 4 3.15 3 1390 20.7 0.01903 67.7 499 5132 903
7.94 6 4 3.94 3 1415 16.5 0.02209 65.4 499 5082 901
7.94 5 5 4.72 3 1419 28.3 0.02620 64.4 559 5877 1007
7.94 5 5 5.51 3 1428 25.5 0.03124 64.2 560 5877 1009
9.53 4 6 3.15 3 1425 23.4 0.02233 65.8 472 4977 849
9.53 4 6 3.94 3 1421 23.4 0.02544 63.1 475 5030 855
9.53 4 6 4.72 3 1435 20.0 0.03191 63.6 473 4983 851
9.53 4 6 5.51 3 1444 18.6 0.03735 62.9 475 4984 852
12.70 2 12 3.15 3 1467 44.1 0.03691 66.9 457 5134 817
12.70 2 12 3.94 3 1476 38.6 0.04203 64.3 456 5089 813
12.70 2 12 4.72 3 1480 37.2 0.04800 62.6 457 5091 814
12.70 2 12 5.51 3 1497 34.5 0.05417 61.0 457 5060 812
140
141
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Area Condenser Geometries at 83 F, English Units
Tube Tube # Fin Row Air Subco Saturation Compress Condens Evaporat Isentropic Volumetric Area COP
Diamet s / Circui Pitc s Face ol @ Temperatu or Work er Fan or Compress Compresso Factor
er Circu ts h Velocit 95 re (Btu/hr) Work Capacity or r
(in) it (fpi) y (F) (F) (Btu/hr) (Btu/hr) Efficiency Efficiency
(ft/s)
5/16" 4 6 12 2 11.7 15 101.1 6320 346.1 30939 0.642 0.973 0.720 3.911
5/16" 5 5 12 3 9.5 13 98.22 6013 309 30982 0.637 0.975 0.942 4.094
5/16" 6 4 12 4 8.3 13 97.36 5887 293.5 31020 0.637 0.976 1.163 4.177
3/8" 3 8 12 2 11.2 15 101.2 6313 358 30961 0.643 0.973 0.760 3.911
3/8" 4 6 12 3 9.2 13 98.55 6011 327.3 30997 0.640 0.975 1.000 4.087
3/8" 5 5 12 4 8.0 13 97.83 5897 306.1 31025 0.640 0.976 1.239 4.165
1/2" 2 12 12 2 10.4 15 101.9 6352 409.4 30986 0.645 0.973 0.872 3.870
1/2" 3 8 12 3 8.6 13 99.56 6067 375.8 31015 0.644 0.974 1.160 4.034
1/2" 3 8 12 4 7.5 13 98.17 5938 352.1 31035 0.640 0.975 1.449 4.119
142
Tube Tubes # Fin Row Compresso Refrigerant Air Side Air-Side h Superheated Saturated Subcooled
2
Diamet / Circuit Pitc s r Exit Side Pressure (Btu/hr-ft - Refrigerant Refrigerant Refrigerant
er (in) Circui s h Pressure Pressure Drop R) Side h Side h (Btu/hr- Side h (Btu/hr-
t (fpi) (psi) Drop (psi) (Btu/hr-ft 2 -R) ft2 -R) ft2 -R)
(psi)
5/16” 4 6 12 2 217 4.8 0.00385 13.6 115.0 1228 204.5
5/16” 5 5 12 3 208 3.8 0.00423 11.9 98.8 1035 177.7
5/16” 6 4 12 4 205 2.8 0.00460 10.8 87.7 895 158.5
3/8” 3 8 12 2 217 4.5 0.00416 12.8 100.9 1096 179.3
3/8” 4 6 12 3 208 2.9 0.00463 11.2 83.4 878 149.9
3/8” 5 5 12 4 206 1.9 0.00498 10.2 72.3 734 130.4
1/2” 2 12 12 2 218 3.8 0.00542 11.6 80.8 892 143.3
1/2” 3 8 12 3 210 1.5 0.00568 10.2 62.2 651 111.5
1/2” 3 8 12 4 207 2.2 0.00611 9.3 61.7 651 111.2
143
Operating Conditions for Different Fixed Area Condenser Geometries at 28.3 C, SI Units
Tube Tubes # Fin Row Air Subco Saturation Compress Condens Evaporat Isentropic Volumetri Cost COP
Diamet / Circuit Pitch s Face ol @ Temperatu or Work er Fan or Compress c Factor
er Circui s (1/cm Velocit 35 re (C) (kW) Work Capacity or Compress
(mm) t ) y (m/s) (C) (kW) (kW) Efficiency or
Efficiency
3.91
7.94 4 6 4.72 2 4.6 8.3 38.4 1.85 0.1014 9.068 0.642 0.973 0.720 1
4.09
7.94 5 5 4.72 3 4.0 7.2 36.8 1.76 0.0906 9.081 0.637 0.975 0.942 4
4.17
7.94 6 4 4.72 4 4.0 7.2 36.3 1.73 0.0860 9.092 0.637 0.976 1.163 7
3.91
9.53 3 8 4.72 2 4.6 8.3 38.4 1.85 0.1049 9.075 0.643 0.973 0.760 1
4.08
9.53 4 6 4.72 3 4.0 7.2 37.0 1.76 0.0959 9.085 0.640 0.975 1.000 7
4.16
9.53 5 5 4.72 4 4.0 7.2 36.6 1.73 0.0897 9.093 0.640 0.976 1.239 5
3.87
12.70 2 12 4.72 2 4.6 8.3 38.8 1.86 0.1200 9.082 0.645 0.973 0.872 0
4.03
12.70 3 8 4.72 3 4.0 7.2 37.5 1.78 0.1101 9.090 0.644 0.974 1.160 4
4.11
12.70 3 8 4.72 4 4.0 7.2 36.8 1.74 0.1032 9.096 0.640 0.975 1.449 9
144
Tube Tubes # Fin Rows Compress Refrigerant Air Side Air- Superheated Saturated Subcooled
Diamet / Circuit Pitch or Exit Side Pressure Side h Refrigerant Refrigerant Refrigerant
er (mm) Circui s (1/cm Pressure Pressure Drop (W/m2- Side h Side h Side h
t ) (kPa) Drop (kPa) K) (W/m -K) (W/m2 -K)
2
(W/m2 -K)
(kPa)
7.94 4 6 4.72 2 1493 33.1 0.02654 77.4 653 6973 1161
7.94 5 5 4.72 3 1432 26.2 0.02917 67.3 561 5877 1009
7.94 6 4 4.72 4 1411 19.3 0.03172 61.5 498 5079 900
9.53 3 8 4.72 2 1494 31.0 0.02867 72.6 573 6223 1018
9.53 4 6 4.72 3 1435 20.0 0.03191 63.6 473 4983 851
9.53 5 5 4.72 4 1417 13.1 0.03432 57.9 410 4170 740
12.70 2 12 4.72 2 1505 26.2 0.03532 65.6 459 5066 814
12.70 3 8 4.72 3 1449 10.3 0.03919 57.7 353 3695 633
12.70 3 8 4.72 4 1425 15.2 0.04211 52.6 350 3694 631
145
REFERENCES
i
Air-Conditioning Facts from the 1997 Residential Energy Consumption Survey.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/consumptionbriefs/recs/aircond_use.htm
ii
Hayter, Richard B., Ph.D., P.E. The Future of HVAC: The Perspective of One American. Presented at the
40th anniversary of the Netherlands Technical Association for Building Services (TVVL), June
11, 1999, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. http://www.engg.ksu.edu/people/rhayter/tvvlpapr.htm
iii
Home Energy Saver Web page. http://homenergysaver.lbl.gov
iv
Propst, James L. “Air Conditioner Condenser Optimization”. Georgia Institute of Technology Thesis.
August, 1975.
v
Beans, E. William. “Computer program for refrigeration cycle analysis”. Thermodynamics and the
Design, Analysis, and Improvement of Energy Systems. ASME Adv Energy Syst Div Publ, AES v
27, 1992, ASME, New York, NY, p 153-159.
vi
Haselden, Geoffrey. Chen, J. “Computer simulation program for mixed-refrigerant air conditioning.” Int
J Refrig, v 17, n 5, Jun 1994, p 343-350.
vii
Klein, S. A. Reindl, D. T. “The relationship of optimum heat exchanger allocation and minimum entropy
-generation for refrigeration cycles.” Advanced Energy Systems Division, ASME Adv Energy Syst
Div Pupl AES v 37 1997 ASME, Fairfield, NJ, p 87-94.
viii
Chen, Lingen. Wu, Chih. Sun, Fengui. “Optimisation of steady flow refrigeration cycles.”
International Journal of Ambient Energy, v 17, n 4, Oct. 1996, Ambient Press Ltd, Lutterworth,
England, p 199-206.
ix
Chen, Lingen. Wu, Chih. Sun, Fengui. “Cooling load versus COP characteristics for an irreversible air
refrigeration cycle.” Energy Conversion and Management, v 39, n 1-2, Jan 1998, Elsevier Sci
Ltd, Exeter, England, p 117-125.
x
McQuiston, Faye. Parker, Jerald. Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning Analysis and Design, 4th
Ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1994 p636
xi
Klein, S.A. and Reindl, D.T. “The Relationship of Optimum Heat Exchanger Allocation and Minimum
Entropy Generation for Refrigeration Cycles.” AES-Vol. 37, Proceedings of the ASME Advanced
Energy Systems Division, p 87-94
xii
Klein, S.A.
xiii
Threlkeld, James R. Thermal Environmental Engineering, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall International, NY, 1970,
p55.
xiv
ARI Standard 210/240-89, p 3, sect. 5.1
146
xv
ARI Standard 210/240-89, p 3, sect. 5.1
xvi
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 116-1983 “Methods of Testing for Seasonal Efficiency of Unitary Air-
Conditioners and Heat Pumps.: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc. Atlanta, GA, 1983 p22.
xvii
McQuiston, Faye. Parker, Jerald. p579
xviii
Sieder, E.N., and Tate, G. E. Ind. Eng. Chem., 28 1429, 1936 as referenced in Incropera, F., DeWitt, D.
Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, 4th Ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1996, p445.
xix
Traviss, D. P., Rohsenow, W. M., Baron, A.B. Forced-Convection Condensation Inside Tubes: A Heat
Transfer Equation for Condenser Design. ASHRAE Transactions 1972.
xx
Pate, M.B. “Design considerations for air-conditioning evaporator and condenser coils.” Two-Phase
Flow Heat Exchangers: Thermal-Hydraulic Fundamentals and Design. Kakac et. al. Ed. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Boston, 1987, p 849- 884.
xxi
Tong, L.S., Boiling, Heat Transfer and Two-Phase Flow. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1965, CPT 5.
Taken from Hiller, p372.
xxii
Hiller, Carl. Improving Heat Pump Performance Via Compressor Capacity Control: Analysis and Test.
PhD Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1976, p 381-387
xxiii
Chisolm, D. Two-Phase Flow in Pipelines and Heat Exchangers. George Godwin, New York, 1983.
Pp. 154-163.
xxiv
Haaland, S.E. “Simple and explicit formulas for the friction factor in turbulent pipe flow,” Fluids Eng.,
March 1983, p89-90. as referenced in White, Frank. Fluid Mechanics, 3rd ed. McGraw Hill, Inc.
New York, 1994, p317
xxv
Rich, D. G. “The effect of fin spacing on the heat transfer and friction performance of multi-row,
smooth plate fin-and-tube heat exchangers”. ASHRAE Transactions Vol. 79, Part 2, 1973
xxvi
Zukauskas, A., Ulinskas, R. “Banks of plain and finned tubes”. Heat Exchanger Design Handbook .
G.F. Hewitt, ed. Begell House, In. NY 1998, p 2.2.4-1- 2.2.4-17.
xxvii
Conversation with Chuck Kenwright, February 2000.
xxviii
London Metals Exchange October, 1999
xxix
1996 ASHRAE Handbook- HVAC Systems and Equipment. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. Atlanta, 1996, p 40.1.
xxx
AAON Heating and Air-Conditioning Products web site. http:// www.aaon.com.
147