Energy Costs…

Are Changing
Refrigeration Design

Walter Gameiro, PhD Mec. Eng.

Abstract
Rising fuel costs are having an impact on the economy of the United States and on the rest of the
world. As prices per kilowatt-hour of electricity continue to go up, refrigeration end users must
compensate by charging higher prices or reducing profit margins. This paper demonstrates how
improvements to a poorly designed ammonia freezer saved 65% in utility costs in the refrigeration
system alone. All features of refrigerated warehouses that have an impact on energy use are analyzed.
The paper includes basic guidelines on how to design a state-of-the-art energy efficient refrigeration
plant in general and a refrigerated warehouse in particular

March 18, 2002 IIAR Ammonia Refrigeration Conference, Kansas City, Missouri

© IIAR 2002 1
Introduction
To remain viable in today’s marketplace, U.S. companies have to become more
competitive while keeping costs and prices down. Compared to the rest of the world,
businesses in the United States pay a relatively low price for various types of energy.
For example, in 1999, the U.S. industrial sector paid an annual average of 4.4 cents
per kWh for electricity (EEI 2002).

Of all of the factors that determine the price of goods and services in the U.S., utility
costs are unique. They present the greatest risk of unanticipated increases (just ask
California), yet are one of the most controllable of costs.

By contrast, the industrial sector in most European countries pays an annual average
of around 15 to 18 cents per kWh for electricity. As the U.S. continues to put
pressure on energy supplies, basic economics tells us that prices have but one way to
go—up. Looking at this trend and at the circumstances outside the U.S., we can
fairly predict where we will be in the near future.

Production and warehousing facilities in industrial refrigeration outside the U.S.

strongly reflect the pressure of high energy prices in their engineering and
operations. Because of the greater relative benefits to the bottom line of using less
energy in their operations, refrigeration plants in Europe, for example, tend to be
more energy conscious than most in the U.S. Plant owners in the U.S. generally
require less energy efficiency and are not yet prepared to invest in more, largely
because the penalties for being less efficient are not so severe.

In Europe, governments are sold on the idea of global warming and for some time
have been looking at the global warming potential associated with their citizens’ and
businesses’ activities. By signing the Kyoto Protocol, a worldwide agreement to

© IIAR 2002 2
reduce emissions of global warming gases, e.g., CO2 and HFCs, European nations
are clearly demonstrating their belief in the hazards of global warming.

These global warming gas emissions can be characterized as “direct” and “indirect.”
“Direct” emissions are defined as releases of chemicals directly into the atmosphere.
“Indirect” emissions come from burning fossil fuels to create electricity in power
plants. They are called indirect because they depend more on the demand for
electricity, an indirect cause, than they do on the emissions controls capabilities of
power plants. European commissions are studying and comparing the global
warming impact of various technological alternatives available to many industries. In
the refrigeration and air-conditioning industries, these studies have focused on
refrigerant leakage from equipment, which are sources of direct emissions, and
energy use in equipment, which are sources of indirect emissions.

An index has evolved to combine the impact of both direct and indirect emissions
potential of an activity or piece of equipment. This index is called the Total
Equivalent Warming Impact, TEWI. The European commissions are already
working on using TEWI levels as a way to regulate, enforce, and penalize inefficient
refrigeration plants or to offer incentives to make plants more energy efficient. The
clear objective is to reduce energy costs through more efficient refrigeration plants,
which can use up to 25% of total energy in some industrialized countries. European
equipment manufacturers are ready to print the TEWI index on the nameplates of
each piece of equipment.

How the TEWI formula treats a piece of refrigeration system depends on the country
it is in because of the indirect emissions component of the formula. The formula
calculates a lower index for equipment installed in countries that produce energy by
means that produce less CO2. The direct impact component remains the same
regardless of where the equipment is installed. At any rate, even if an end user is not

© IIAR 2002 3
concerned about global warming, more energy used means more money paid to
operate a plant, and this money comes right out of the bottom line.

Importance of Good Design

Historically, as far as their refrigeration plant is concerned, many end users tend to
adopt the “refrigeration as a necessary evil” mentality, in which investment in
equipment is to be tolerated but minimized if possible. This mindset leads to
inappropriate focus on inexpensive solutions. When energy was much less expensive
than it is now, this position made sense. Gradually, however, prices have been
creeping up, and unfortunately, some end users have not kept up with the times.
However, an increasing number of end users are seeking refrigeration plant redesign
and design of new facilities with the view that the refrigeration system is an
investment that has variable operating costs depending on which technical options
are included.

Energy Efficient Solutions

How do we save utility dollars? First, we determine what is using energy in a given
plant. Second, we study ways to reduce that energy consumption. When studying
these solutions, it is critical to analyze the financial aspects of the investment
required. Each plant is different. What makes sense in a new plant may not be cost
effective in a redesign. Downtime associated with any solution proposed to improve
efficiency is of supreme concern because of the costs associated with lost production.
As guidelines for the industry in general and end users in particular, I list several
typical energy saving measures to consider and analyze.

© IIAR 2002 4
Lighting improvements

Whether we are talking about a distribution center, refrigerated warehouse, or a

production facility, nearly all refrigerated plants have lighting. Often, the types of
light fixtures and lamps being used are not the most efficient in terms of the amount
of illumination produced per watt consumed. Engineering firms that understand
energy efficient lighting should be consulted to study whether changing the type of
lighting would be a good idea. Some types of lamps, such as high intensity
discharge, HID, are efficient but should not be used below a certain elevation
because of their intense brightness. Others, such as high pressure sodium, HPS, are
efficient but may not render colors as well as desired. Items may be perceived to be
washed out or have "off" colors when lit with these lamps. Further, some types of
efficient lamps, such as compact fluorescents, may not work at all at low
temperatures. Finally, some types of lamps require a long time to restrike when their
power is switched off or disconnected, which is not a good situation if no other
emergency lighting is provided. Whatever lamps are chosen, the main principles for
saving energy apply: turn down, turn off, or turn to a different technology.

Lighting controls should be evaluated concurrently with lamps and potential new
fixture layouts. Consider using task lighting and automatic control strategies, such as
providing lighting only to areas in which people are working. For example,
numerous control technologies are available that are capable of reducing the lighting
level for portions of each aisle to 50%, or even to turn the lights off completely.
Motion sensors can bring the lighting level back to 100% when they sense a forklift
approaching, for example.

Battery charging

In the past, when electricity was relatively inexpensive, typically plants had no plan
or schedule for charging batteries. The forklift operator simply charged the battery
when it had been discharged. With today’s prices, it becomes prudent to charge the

© IIAR 2002 5
units during periods when utility rates are lower, such as during the night. Not only
does this strategy lower a plant’s energy costs, it also benefits the utility company by
lowering power demand during peak hours.

Wall and roof insulation

Using thicker insulation reduces heat gains from the outside to the inside. Of course,
thicker insulation increases the investment in the building. How thick is “thick
enough?”

To determine the right thickness, consider several alternatives. First, calculate the
energy usage for each alternative. Second, calculate the investment required. Third,
determine the return on investment for each alternative. Fourth, let the end user
choose which of the projections best fits his or her business plan.

Besides thickness, the quality of the vapor barrier also determines the effectiveness
of the insulation. Moisture infiltration can ruin both the integrity and the
performance of insulation. The higher vapor pressure of the outside air will cause it
always to migrate indoors.

On an insulated wall, the outer face will usually achieve the same temperature as the
outdoor air, and the same applies to the inner face with the indoor air. Within the
thickness of the insulation, all of the intermediate temperatures between the outdoor
and indoor temperatures can be found, including the temperature that corresponds to
the dew point of the outdoor air. Any moisture from outside air that finds its way to
that point in the insulation will condense and begin to saturate the insulation. If the
indoor temperature is below freezing, water will migrate into the insulation even
farther, turning into ice when it reaches the freezing point. The soaked and/or frozen
insulation will lose nearly all of its insulating value.

Coolers with soaked insulation take a long time to, or even cannot, pull down to the
design temperature. In a freezer, ice builds inside the inner wall. The added volume

© IIAR 2002 6
of that freezing water causes the inner wall or roof to collapse. Thus, it is imperative
to keep vapor out of the insulation. Soaked insulation increases the refrigeration
load, energy usage, and the likelihood of structural damage to the cooler or freezer.

Floors involve the same physics as walls or roofs but have additional considerations.
A high water table or even drainage water from the land itself may lie just below a
freezer floor. This water could freeze and heave up through the floor. Installing a
heat source below the freezer will prevent that water from freezing. The best and
least expensive method in the long run is to transfer heat from the refrigeration plant
itself.

Refrigeration doors

Many variables contribute to the selection of appropriate doors for a given situation.
The temperature and relative humidity of the dock protecting the entrance are
primary variables. The number of passes per day or per hour is another significant
variable when choosing a good application. Another consideration is whether the
door is locked at night but has a lot of passages during the day. In this case, the best
solution might be a manual door that only closes at night to be locked and a double
air curtain vestibule. For a long storage-type operation with little traffic during the
day, a hard door that is operated automatically, protected by a strip curtain vestibule
heated by an infrared heater, if it is a freezer, may best fulfill the requirements. For a
freezer with a number of daily passages around 1000 a double air curtain vestibule
can be often a good answer. For a situation with some traffic between two rooms that
are at similar temperature, a soft roll-up door may be sufficient. The basic principle
for any solution is to assess how much energy is required to handle the additional
refrigeration load and to prevent moisture condensation, because that determines
how much energy can be saved.

© IIAR 2002 7
Dock design

Equally important is designing the loading dock around cold storage rooms to
control air and humidity. Whatever the design, a certain amount of moisture and air
will always infiltrate the freezer or cooler from the dock.

Whether into a freezer or a cooler, any moisture that infiltrates through the doors will
be condensed by the evaporator, which costs money. For some engineers when the
design is wrong or the execution is poor, desiccant systems are an option. These
systems are very good. However, in the author’s opinion, it is a lot less expensive to
control infiltration, redesign the evaporators, or repair the insulation than to install a
desiccant system. For example, a desiccant system can fix the problems of a freezer
with an ineffective vapor barrier, but it is usually a lot cheaper to fix the vapor
barrier, and the plant will not incur the operating costs associated with a new
desiccant unit. When a dock has too high a humidity, the problem may be that its
evaporators have too much heat transfer surface. A better solution is to operate fewer
evaporators rather than to install a desiccant system. The dock’s refrigeration load
remains the same, but fewer evaporator with a larger TD will have less fans available
to run and consume energy.

Condenser design

Condenser selections are often not optimal from a financial return perspective.
Considering only energy consumption, the required compressor power is reduced
every time the condensing temperature is lowered. However, the heat transfer area of
the condenser must be extended, and additional fan motor and water pump energy
will be required for this to happen. The key is to balance all of these elements.

For example, a screw compressor from a known manufacturer uses around

1000 m3/hour (588 cfm) of swept volume (Table 1). Suction temperature is +20°F

© IIAR 2002 8
(-7°C) at all times. Superheat and desuperheat are both +5°F (2.8°C) in this example.
WB temperature is 80°F. There is no subcooling.

Because of significant differences in the coil and fan modulation employed among
condenser manufacturers, a rule of thumb for this type of selection cannot be
established. Each selection must be verified for each manufacturer. The client should
consider whether he or she wants to purchase the least expensive of the condensers
and pay for 191.5 kW of power consumption for the compressor and condenser. The
end user may be prepared to invest an extra 11% ($6,300) in the condenser’s first
cost and use only 183.5 kW at design conditions, which saves 4.3% in peak power
consumption. This investment may take a little more than 3 years to recover at an
annual average of 5 cents per kWh. Alternatively, another option would be to invest
an additional 21% ($29,286) to use 6.4% less peak power to obtain a 10 year
payback. It is up to the engineer to balance the initial investment with the return on
that investment, after consulting with the end user.

Evaporator design

Increasingly, end users are requesting designs that control relative humidity more
strictly. Achieving temperature inside a cooler or freezer is easy; achieving ideal
relative humidity to prevent product weight loss, is more complex. Table 2 shows the
results of a survey conducted in Europe that demonstrate this loss of product value
through decreased weight available for sale.

It is well known that the smaller the temperature difference, TD, between the
evaporator coil and the incoming air, the higher the humidity inside the room will be.
Except for special products that are sensitive to high humidity, e.g., unpacked pork
meat, smaller TDs are generally better than larger ones. Smaller TDs generally mean
a higher investment in evaporators but a lower investment in compressors and
condensers. The advantage is less energy and power use and less product weight
loss. However, available investment funds may constrain end users’ choices. Thus,

© IIAR 2002 9
all of the alternatives should be presented to the end user with an explanation of the
relationships among relative humidity, product shrinkage, and equipment investment.
When TD’s are smaller the suction temperature can be higher, saving energy to the
compressors.

One-stage, economized, or two-stage compression

Although not applicable to systems only handling high temperature applications,

e.g., coolers, two stage plants or economized compressors should be evaluated for
systems with low temperature loads, e.g., freezers, blast freezers, IQFs, or ice
makers, because of the significant differences in performance between these systems.

As always, investment must be considered. Table 3 shows an example of the

performance of different compressor solutions. Clearly, the investment in an
economized system can be only a few percentage points higher than the single-stage
system, and that is why is so popular. The two-stage system composed by at least
one high side and one booster requires an even greater investment. Even though
these alternatives use less energy, the end user should be aware of the initial
investment and what the return on investment will be.

Demand defrost

Poorly designed defrost systems can waste a great deal of energy. This waste is not
so much related to the energy used to defrost an evaporator coil, but to the energy
spent on removing the heat added to the evaporator and room by the defrost system.

Not long ago, common practice was to defrost coils four times a day for twenty
minutes each, no matter if they were in a cooler or a freezer, small or large. A few
years ago that idea began to be overshadowed as new techniques began being
employed.

© IIAR 2002 10
Modern defrost systems are intelligent. An infrared system can measure the amount
of frost on the coil and automatically trigger the defrost cycle to begin at the
appropriate thickness of frost; that takes care of the “four a day.” Smart systems also
take the temperature either of the water draining from the coil or of the refrigerant
condensate returning to the intermediate vessel, and use this information to stop the
defrost at the appropriate time; that takes care of the “twenty minutes.”

Other method to determine when it is time to defrost is to measure the air pressure
differential across the evaporator coil. These technologies have made great strides in
recent years and are becoming increasingly more reliable.

Two years ago, we had an experience with a similar system that, upon start-up, had a
sensor failure. While we were waiting for the replacement sensor, the method of run-
time was implemented. When the new sensor arrived we learned that instead of 4 x
20 min per day, this large freezer required defrosting only 1 x 10 min per week.

If the run-time method had continued to be used, the defrost system would have run
485 hours a year. With a sensor, the defrost cycle contributed to the heat load in the
freezer only 9 hours a year. In this case, we saved 476 compressor-working hours per
year.

This plant has a two stage system. So, if we take the efficiency at an average of 50%
capacity, 476 hours and 2.3 BHP/TR, the energy savings would be a little more than
163,000 kWh/year. With an annual average rate of 5 cents per kWh, this comes to
about $8,200 dollars/year. In this case, the computer controls were a necessary
expense anyway, so the sensor and box cost paid for themselves in less than a month.

Optimized pressure drop in suction lines

It is recommended to optimize the pressure drop in suction lines during initial plant
design. The price difference between one pipe size and the next is often very small
when compared to the potential impact on utility bills. End users often will purchase

© IIAR 2002 11
the least expensive of the proposals. One of the ways to achieve a lower price is to
install smaller diameter pipes, but unless a re-negotiation of an upgrade is possible,
the end user will pay for that decision for the life of the system.

For example, in a medium temperature plant with 34°F (1°C) temperatures in the
coolers and dock, a good design may offer a 1 psig pressure drop in the suction line.
If a less good design offers a 2 psig suction line pressure drop, energy use will be
2.07% greater. Energy penalties for larger pressure drops will be even higher.
Achieving a low suction line pressure drop is even more critical in low temperature
systems. For example, in a low temperature plant with a -10°F (-23°C) freezer, a
good design based on an economized screw compressor may offer a standard
pressure drop of 1 psig in the suction line. If a less good design offers a 2 psig
pressure drop in the suction line, energy use will be 4.30% greater. Table 4 illustrates
how energy penalties increase with higher pressure drops at two typical suction
temperatures. It is clear that it pays to have all contenders bid the same design or an
end user may end up with an inefficient solution. A rule of thumb of 1.7% per PSIG
can be established for coolers and 3.8% per PSIG for freezers.

Noncondensable gas purgers

Purging noncondensable gases is a good way to reduce the condensing temperature

and save utility dollars. Every time oil is changed or added, air may potentially enter
the system. Because air is a noncondensable gas, the condensing pressure and
temperature will go up, causing the compressors to lose capacity and increase its
energy usage. A good rule of thumb is, for each degree F the condensing temperature
can be lowered, the system will use 1.7% less energy.

Optimized suction lines to reduce superheat

Also, it is recommended to optimize the design superheat on suction lines when one
initially designs a plant. The price difference between a good and bad design is often

© IIAR 2002 12
very small when compared with the impact on utility bills caused by this difference.
In one bad design we saw, recirculators had been installed far away from the
compressor room. The long dry suction line from the recirculator picked up
significant superheat on the way back to the compressor. Skimping on pipe
insulation thickness or vapor barriers especially in dry suction lines is a terrible idea
for the same reason. High superheat always leads to higher energy usage and loss of
capacity. Again, accepting the least expensive of the bid proposals frequently can
lead to a bad solution and higher utility bills for years to come.

Achieving a low superheat is especially important in low temperature systems

(Table 5). For example, in a low temperature plant with a -10°F (-23°C) freezer, a
good design based on an economized screw compressor may limit the suction line
superheat to 5°F (2.7°C). If a less good design results in 10°F (5.5°C) superheat,
energy use will be 1.09% greater. As another example, in a low temperature plant
with a -30°F (-34°C) IQF or blast freezer, a good design based on an economized
screw compressor may offer a standard suction line superheat of 5°F (2.7°C). If a
less good design results in 10°F (5.5°C) superheat, energy use will be 1.07% greater.

The rule of thumb is, for freezers, use 0.215% energy penalty per degree F of
superheat; for blast freezers and IQF systems, use 0.206% per degree F of superheat.
Clearly, it pays to have all contenders bid the same design or an end user may end up
with an inefficient solution.

The new valves

A new technology is emerging, called continuous adjustment variable suction,

CAVS, and it has great potential to save utility dollars. Manufacturers in the U.S.
and in Denmark currently offer this product, and it is relatively inexpensive. This
technology permits automatic variable evaporator pressure regulation with very little
pressure drop. Both valves are controllable by a 4-20 mA (milliamp) signal. Using a
system of pulse and pause, the control system can set the pressure regulator at the

© IIAR 2002 13
appropriate level continuously. This information is fed simultaneously to the
corresponding compressor(s), which raising their set points accordingly, will save a
significant amount of energy.

For example, consider a pull down on a -10°F (-23°C) freezer. The load reduces as
we approach the design temperature. Once that temperature is reached, it is possible
to set the electronic controls up so that every time the evaporator pressure regulator
valve goes up one degree, the computer control system will change the compressor
set point. When the design temperature is reached again, the evaporator and
compressor pressure can be readjusted. Assuming we can increase in average the
suction temperature by 4°F (2°C), the system will save 6% on energy. Considering
the number of hours at night, on weekends, and in the winter that the system is at
part load, this technology shows great promise.

Oil cooling design

When the end user bids a job wanting just the lowest price, quite often he or she ends
up with liquid injection oil cooling, LIOC, although sometimes glycol cooled or
water cooled oil cooling, WCOC, systems are submitted. End users should recognize
that thermosyphon oil cooling, TSOC, systems have good paybacks. Replacing
LIOC with TSOC saves 6% of the oil cooling energy; replacing LIOC with WCOC
saves 5.4%.

It is important to regulate the oil temperature in screw compressors. Most

applications specify 130°F (54°C) to be ideal; when we allow the oil to warm up
20°F (11°C), the increase in energy usage is about 2% for just about any
compression ratio.

© IIAR 2002 14
VFD Technology for Condensers, Evaporators, and Compressors

VFD or variable frequency drive technology has been around for a long time, with
limited success in fully penetrating motor markets. Two things have changed the
economics of this technology:

1. The price of energy

2. The price of this technology, because a number of industries are using it

extensively, which allows VFD manufacturers to obtain greater economies of
scale.

The price of VFDs is now at a point where it is a good investment in the industrial
refrigeration industry.

We design refrigeration systems to handle peak loads as if all extreme conditions

occurred at the same time, such as:
• The warmest outdoor temperature of the year
• The worst case scenario for door infiltration
• The largest expected amount of product entering the cold rooms at the highest
expected temperature
• The heaviest forklift traffic
• The maximum amount of lighting
• All evaporator fans blowing at maximum power.

Rarely do all of these extreme loads occur at the same time. Thus, normally the plant
design is perfect for 10-15 days a year and the rest of the time, is oversized. What
VFD technology offers is an opportunity to throttle a complete plant down when the
required load is reduced.

© IIAR 2002 15
Condenser VFDs

The condenser is at maximum capacity when fans and water pump are running full
out. When the total compressor output is reduced, the condenser becomes oversized.
Typically, we shut down fans and eventually water pumps to regulate the condensing
pressure.

In a hypothetical example, assume we have two 50 kW fans installed on a condenser.

Sometimes we will only need half of the capacity of the condenser. If we shut down
one of the fans, we can meet the requirement, because will have half of the flow and
use 25KW. Compared to the full load situation, we are using half of the energy. Now
assume we install a VFD on the fan motors to manage part load conditions better.
We can slow down both fans in parallel to 50% of full speed. Because the power
drawn is proportional to the cube of the speed, we use only about 1/3 of the power,
i.e., 16.6 kW instead of 25 kW when we stop the fan.

When we slow down the speed below 50% the results are spectacular, providing
these slow speeds don’t present technical difficulties for the systems the motors are
powering. The challenge for the condenser manufacturers, of course, is to provide
electric motors capable of being cooled down efficiently at low speeds and provide
propeller fans capable of being slowed down to speeds below 50% and still be able
to push air effectively through the condenser.

Evaporator VFDs

What savings result from applying VFDs to condenser fan motors applies also to
other types of fan motors, including evaporators. Savings energy in evaporator fans
is even more important than in condenser fans, because evaporator fans represent
very often 22 to 25% of the total electric load of the refrigeration system. Imagine
having the capability to slow down fans at the appropriate time during the day when
personnel are doing picking inside the freezers. This would reduce the air velocity

© IIAR 2002 16
and make life inside the freezers much more bearable. Perhaps the turnover of that
type of worker in distribution centers and public refrigerated warehouses could even
be reduced!

Imagine a situation where after we cool down the product and the load is reduced,
we reduce the airflow to use only 1/3 of the normal energy consumption. Imagine
using this technology in combination with variable evaporator pressure regulators.

The challenge for the evaporator manufacturer is to provide propeller fans capable of
being slowed down to 1/3 of the speed and still be able to push air effectively
through the evaporator coil. The manufacturers have the additional challenge of
providing enough throw at reduced speeds to prevent warm areas from developing in
the cold rooms. I would present one more challenge to the manufacturers: to develop
an alternative product with the VFD starter wired into the evaporator, ready to go. It
would standardize wiring at the evaporator and provide the benefits of one point
responsibility.

Compressor VFDs

Compressors are always the heavy part of the electric power used in a refrigeration
system. Very often they represent 70% and more of the total electric load. This is
why it is so important to focus on developing this technology specifically for
compressors.

Theoretically, VFD technology should offer the possibility to modulate the

compressor capacity at part load without bypassing gas back to the suction side,
which is the slide valve principle. Using slide valves to bypass gas still requires a
substantial amount of energy to keep the screws moving. With the VFD there is the
potential to slow down the screws without having to bypass any gas.

Another great opportunity I see for this technology is if we can engineer the plants to
run the compressors above 60 hertz during peak load times. By doing so, the size of

© IIAR 2002 17
the machines can be reduced. Large diameter screws may not be able to rotate at
very high speeds. There is a chance though for the small machines to become more
efficient. The smaller diameter screws, “mini-screws,” already rotating at over 7000
RPM through the use of gears suddenly can become regular screws rotating at speeds
close to what they do now, for peak conditions. Instead of reducing capacity with
slide valves, these compressors can be designed to slow down to around 1000 rpm. If
we think in these terms we are talking about capacity control between 14 and 100%,
which is better than we have right now with the mini-screw slide valves.

Yet another exciting opportunity is linked to the tremendous number of economized

compressors installed in the U.S. market. It is well known that these machines have a
fixed economizer port that is designed with a certain geometry related to the inlet
and outlet pressure of the screw. When the slide valve is brought forward to reduce
capacity, the compression starts further to the front but the economizer port cannot
change location. Therefore, the compressor’s efficiency is good at 100% load, but
quite poor below 85% capacity. With VFD technology, this machine can be slowed
down for capacity control without changing the initial geometry therefore the
economizer port will always work well, thus improving the overall efficiency of the
machine at part load conditions.

All of these ideas will be great challenges for the screw compressor manufacturers.
The challenge for the motor manufacturers producing typical air cooled motors is the
fact that the more you slow them down, the less cooling air you have available. This
air-cooling technology has been partly responsible for the large size of the electric
motors. A solution to their problem may be further development of fluid cooling
systems for motors, including the use of ammonia, water and glycol. Effective fluid-
cooled motors will be a lot smaller in size and quite efficient at low speeds since they
will not be dependent on small fans attached to the shaft that would be slowed down
at low frequencies.

© IIAR 2002 18
State-of-the-art computer control systems

It is clear that to handle all these new “toys” one requires a computer control system
of good quality. Computer control technology is being pushed further and further to
meet these new standards. Most of the “standard” packages being offered in the
marketplace cannot cope with the new technologies. Their programming routines and
algorithms are outdated and require re-engineering.

Systems that cannot analyze and adjust the capacity controls of several screws in
operation to save energy will become obsolete. Systems that cannot adjust
evaporator fan speeds and evaporating pressure as a function of the design TD and
also be capable of sending signals to change the set points of screw compressor will
also become obsolete.

Conclusions
• Choose your room temperatures wisely
• Select the right temperature and humidity for the right set of products
• Design two-level lighting of the right type
• Design the number battery chargers wisely
• Select insulation thickness wisely
• Choose your doors looking at all parameters
• Optimize your condenser selection
• Optimize evaporator selection for TD and right humidity
• Adjust the type of compression considering return on investment
• Use demand defrost technologies
• Optimize pressure drops in all lines
• Install non-condensable purgers
• Optimize pipe design and pipe insulation for low superheat
• Consider the “new valves”

© IIAR 2002 19
• Take care in designing your oil cooling system
• Use VFD for motors on condensers, evaporators, and compressors
• Choose state-of-the-art computer control systems

Table 1. Condenser energy performance and investment premium

Condensing Price premium

temperature Compressor Condenser Condenser High-side over baseline
(°F) (kW) fans (kW) pump (kW) total (kW) condenser (%)
95 177.70 12.0 1.8 191.5 STD
94 175.40 12.0 1.8 189.2 +10.8
93 173.01 7.5 3.0 183.5 +11.0
92 170.70 12.0 3.0 185.7 +10.6
91 168.30 14.0 3.0 185.3 +20.9
90 165.90 9.0 5.0 179.9 +21.0

© IIAR 2002 20
Table 3. Performance of different compressor solutions (BHP/TR)
Capacity
Compression type 100% 75% 50%
Single stage (-30/+90°F) 2.575 2.940 3.723
Economized (-30/+90°F) 2.285 2.575 3.179
Two stage (-30/20/+90°F) 2.177 2.346 2.906
These values are indicative of compressor solutions only. No allowance was
made for evaporator or condenser fans and pumps.

© IIAR 2002 21
Table 4: Energy Penalties from Excessive Suction Line Pressure Drop

Suction line pressure drop Energy Penalty (%): Energy Penalty (%):
(psi)
34°F (+1°C) system -10°F (-23°C) system

1 Standard Standard

2 2.07 4.30

3 4.16 8.89

4 6.29 13.83

5 8.44 19.20

Table 5: Energy penalties from excessive suction line superheat

Suction line superheat (°F) Energy Penalty (%): Energy Penalty (%):

10°F (-12°C) system -30°F (-34°C) system

5 Standard Standard

10 1.09 1.07

15 2.15 2.11

20 3.20 3.14

25 4.28 4.15

30 5.38 5.15

© IIAR 2002 22