1 / 40

Chilled Engineering Systems “Helping You Be Cool”

Chilled Engineering Systems “Helping You Be Cool”. Ice Pond Refrigeration System. Derek Britten Roger Connolly Ben Francis Adam Trudeau Steve Vines. Final Presentation to the Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Students, Clients and Guests April 7, 2005. CO 2 Emissions Reductions.

murray
Download Presentation

Chilled Engineering Systems “Helping You Be Cool”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Chilled Engineering Systems“Helping You Be Cool” Ice Pond Refrigeration System Derek Britten Roger Connolly Ben Francis Adam Trudeau Steve Vines Final Presentation to the Mechanical Engineering Faculty, Students, Clients and Guests April 7, 2005

  2. CO2 Emissions Reductions • 2002 world FF emissions • 24.5 billion metric tonnes • 0.703 kg of CO2 emitted per KWh of energy produced • Environmental stewardship • “One Tonne Challenge” www.ge-at.iastate.edu

  3. System Overview • Evaluate the effectiveness of an ice pond system • Under development in Norway, Japan • Potential to save energy and lower emissions • Kyoto Protocol • System was created to compare results to vapor compression system

  4. Ice Reservoir Heat Exchanger & Support Reservoir Cover Fan Coil Unit (FCU) System Components

  5. Selected Pond • 12 foot diameter • 3 feet high • 8 tonnes of ice • Double liner • Water tight vinyl • Protective tarp

  6. Selected HX Support • 1” x 4” wood planks • 2” x 4” wood spacers • ¼” steel flat bars • Ice block support

  7. Selected Heat Exchanger • 1” M copper piping • 6” pipe spacing • Length = 51.7m • 20% PG mix

  8. FCU SelectionSystem Balancing • Load Selection • Cooling Load: 12000Btu/hr per 500ft2(USDOE 2004) • ½ HVAC Lab ≈ 300ft2 2110W • Qin = 2000W • Trane FCU vs. CES HX

  9. FCU SelectionModel Chosen 4 pass, 2 row horizontal FCU

  10. Ice Pond Cover • Design: • Self weight • 1.8kPa snow load • Result: • No significant snow accumulation • Withstood all environmental conditions

  11. Insulation • Heat transfer major concern • Ice preservation during summer • All reservoir components will be insulated • Sub-floor • Reservoir wall • Protective cover • Pipes and hoses

  12. Ice Making • Began Feb. 17 • Delayed due to warm temps - highs of 7°C • Slow initial production rates

  13. Ice farms employed Feb. 21 – Production rate increased 2 - 3x Ice making completed in two weeks Ice Making

  14. Finished Product • Core sample showing layers

  15. Remaining SystemCompression Fittings

  16. Remaining SystemInterior

  17. Remaining SystemAir Separator

  18. Remaining SystemPump & Flow Meter

  19. Measurements • ΔT across pool inlet and outlet • ΔT across FCU inlet and outlet • Control volume temperature • Power consumed by system Q = mcpΔT

  20. Measurements • 10 thermocouples located throughout system

  21. Control Volume

  22. Closed Loop Testing • 3 short 2 hour tests • One 24 hour test • Test with maximum flow rate = 2.3gpm & 2100W heat input

  23. Closed Loop Temperatures

  24. Closed Loop Power

  25. Closed Loop Testing • 24 hours • Average FCU cooling rate = 1660W • Average pool cooling rate = 1989W • Average COP = 7.22 • Average system efficiency = 83.68% • Estimated 400 kg of ice melted • Average control volume temp = 20.94°C

  26. Open Loop • Converted system to open loop – bypassed heat exchanger due to mild temperatures • Compare systems • Flow rate increased • 2.9gpm • Less head loss • Less viscous

  27. Open Loop Testing • Same 2 hour tests as closed loop • One 2 hour test at maximum flow rate • One 24 hour test • Test with maximum flow rate = 2.9gpm & 2500W heat input

  28. Open Loop Temperatures

  29. Open Loop Power

  30. Open Loop Testing • 24 hours • Average FCU cooling rate = 2264W • Average pool cooling rate = 2892W • Average COP = 9.84 • Average system efficiency = 78.45% • Estimated 815 kg of ice melted • Average control volume temp = 19.35°C

  31. Project Assessment

  32. Conclusions • All tests had a COP > 5 • Little to no transient operating zone – reached steady state quickly • More melt water = less performance • Open loop is better than closed loop • ΔT between working fluid and air • Mass flow rate • Cp of working fluid Q = mcpΔT

  33. Conclusions • Need a powerful system for low temperatures • No energy consumed for ice making • System efficiency high because of cool ambient temperatures during testing

  34. Budget Estimated Budget: $5000.00 Actual Costs

  35. CO2 Emissions Reductions • Environmental stewardship • “One Tonne Challenge” • OUR SYSTEM • Reduced by 3x! www.ge-at.iastate.edu

  36. Recommendations • Full scale model • Melt water • No heat exchanger • Increase space between pool inlet & outlet • Colder outlet temperatures • Higher flow rates • Turbulent instead of laminar flow • Increases rate of heat transfer • More durable reservoir • Not dependent on vinyl liner • Automated ice making system

  37. Demonstration

  38. Special Thanks To: • Mr. Richard Rachals • Dr. Murat Koksal • Albert Murphy • Greg Jollimore • Dr. Peter Allen • Import Tool Corporation • Jeff MacNeil of Trane • Mike Trudeau of HCDJ

  39. Questions?

More Related