Receiver Subcool
Marc O'Brien
How do we define "liquid seal" ?
What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the condenser
center ?
Is there any significance in about the total pressure of the "liquid seal",
speaking both velocity and static pressure ?
--
Marc O'Brien
Brochure :: http://fridgetech.com
Technicians :: http://www.fridgetech.co.uk
Development :: http://websmade.co.uk
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> What role, exactly, does the so called "liquid seal" play ?
at a minimum-
provides at least zero vapor to liquid receiver
(completion of condensing of vapor in coil.)
subcooled liquid
> How do we define "liquid seal" ?
absence of any vapor
specifically going into the LR from condenser.
> What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the
> condenser
> center ?
Temperature/pressure/heat content
> Is there any significance in about the total pressure of the "liquid
> seal",
> speaking both velocity and static pressure ?
hmm
no
> --
>
> Marc O'Brien
FTWHD
of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
reciever.
The reason for this is that when liquid refrigerant and vapor exist
together it is saturated. Therefore, no subcooling. Once a solid
column of liquid is formed, subcooling can take place by lowering its
temperature with the use of liquid-suction heat exchangers,
subcoolers, or from lower ambient temperature surrounding the liquid
line.
The line between the condenser and the reciever usually contains all
liquid but it would not be abnormal for this line to also have some
vapor mixed with the liquid. The reciever would have to contain 100%
liquid (not saturated) in order for subcooling to occure and this
would not be the case in a normal running system. You can take that
to the bank. :)
Mike
UA local 370
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:57:40 +0100, "Marc O'Brien"
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>What role, exactly, does the so called "liquid seal" play ?
>
>How do we define "liquid seal" ?
>
>What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the condenser
>center ?
>
bill
> Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
> of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
> there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
> reciever.
>
> The reason for this is that when liquid refrigerant and vapor exist
> together it is saturated. Therefore, no subcooling. Once a solid
> column of liquid is formed, subcooling can take place by lowering its
> temperature with the use of liquid-suction heat exchangers,
> subcoolers, or from lower ambient temperature surrounding the liquid
> line.
>
> The line between the condenser and the reciever usually contains all
> liquid but it would not be abnormal for this line to also have some
> vapor mixed with the liquid. The reciever would have to contain 100%
> liquid (not saturated) in order for subcooling to occure and this
> would not be the case in a normal running system. You can take that
> to the bank. :)
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
the above is true if a system was static which its not.
subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
have no temperature difference.
the liquid is subcooled in relation to condensing temperature even tho
there is vapor in the receiver.
measure the line into and out of a receiver and then tell me there is no
subcooling.
-bill
Sonofdawra
>of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
>there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
>reciever.
>
It starts to be somewhat of how you are comparing things. The refrigerant in
the receiver itself is saturated when looking solely at the refrigerant in the
receiver because both liquid and vapor are present and thus saturated by
definition. But when you compare the liquid in the receiver to the liquid
being condensed in the condenser, then the liquid in the receiver is subcooled
because hopefully it is some number of degrees cooler than the actual
condensing temperature.
Just my simple minded way of looking at it :o)
Have a nice day, Ron
FTWHD
wrote:
>In article <nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
>> of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
>> there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
>> reciever.
>>
>> The reason for this is that when liquid refrigerant and vapor exist
>> together it is saturated. Therefore, no subcooling. Once a solid
>> column of liquid is formed, subcooling can take place by lowering its
>> temperature with the use of liquid-suction heat exchangers,
>> subcoolers, or from lower ambient temperature surrounding the liquid
>> line.
>>
>> The line between the condenser and the reciever usually contains all
>> liquid but it would not be abnormal for this line to also have some
>> vapor mixed with the liquid. The reciever would have to contain 100%
>> liquid (not saturated) in order for subcooling to occure and this
>> would not be the case in a normal running system. You can take that
>> to the bank. :)
>>
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>the above is true if a system was static which its not.
>subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
>receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
>have no temperature difference.
>the liquid is subcooled in relation to condensing temperature even tho
>there is vapor in the receiver.
>measure the line into and out of a receiver and then tell me there is no
>subcooling.
>-bill
Measure the temperature in the reciever and compare to its pressure
then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
>>Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
>>of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
>>there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
>>reciever.
>>
>
>It starts to be somewhat of how you are comparing things. The refrigerant in
>the receiver itself is saturated when looking solely at the refrigerant in the
>receiver because both liquid and vapor are present and thus saturated by
>definition. But when you compare the liquid in the receiver to the liquid
>being condensed in the condenser, then the liquid in the receiver is subcooled
>because hopefully it is some number of degrees cooler than the actual
>condensing temperature.
>
>Just my simple minded way of looking at it :o)
>
>Have a nice day, Ron
Yup the temperature will be cooler in the reciever compared to the
condenser but the pressure is also lower than that of that in the
condenser, but that isnt what subcooling is.
My point is as long as there is a saturated condition there can not
be, no way no how any subcooling taking place. We must remember that
the pressure/temperature relationship as shown by a PT chart is only
valid when there is a mixture of vapor and liquid a condition know as
saturation. As long as the PT relationship holds true there is no
subcooling taking place.
By definition there has to be all liquid present in order for
subcooling to take place, and this isnt the case in the reciever. By
subcooling definition the temperature of the liquid is below that of
the temperature corresponding to the pressure. IE. subcooled.
Where ever there is all liquid, the PT relationship will not hold
true, as in the liquid line, however since there is not all liquid in
the reciever the PT relation holds true and here I go repeating
myselfs again, ...no subcooling.
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
><FTWHD> wrote in message news:c9njos0d7f8tjkipp...@4ax.com...
>> On 03 Aug 2000 15:51:25 GMT, sonof...@aol.com (Sonofdawra) wrote:
>>
>> >>Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
>> >>of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
>> >>there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
>> >>reciever.
>> >>
>> >
>> >It starts to be somewhat of how you are comparing things. The
>refrigerant in
>> >the receiver itself is saturated when looking solely at the refrigerant
>in the
>> >receiver because both liquid and vapor are present and thus saturated by
>> >definition. But when you compare the liquid in the receiver to the
>liquid
>> >being condensed in the condenser, then the liquid in the receiver is
>subcooled
>> >because hopefully it is some number of degrees cooler than the actual
>> >condensing temperature.
>> >
>> >Just my simple minded way of looking at it :o)
>> >
>> >Have a nice day, Ron
>>
>> My point is as long as there is a saturated condition there can not
>> be, no way no how any subcooling taking place. We must remember that
>> the pressure/temperature relationship as shown by a PT chart is only
>> valid when there is a mixture of vapor and liquid a condition know as
>> saturation.
>
>Okay, how would we explain the supercooling effect of water droplets up in
>stormy clouds which are sometimes able to remain as water even at -40F ?
>
>
A intense pressure difference between the two masses.
>>As long as the PT relationship holds true there is no
>> subcooling taking place.
>
>duh ! nudge nudge wink wink :-)
>
>
Tkae off the sheeps head! wink!
>> By definition there has to be all liquid present in order for
>> subcooling to take place, and this isnt the case in the reciever. By
>> subcooling definition the temperature of the liquid is below that of
>> the temperature corresponding to the pressure. IE. subcooled.
>
>
>Yes, well as you say "by definition" and that definition is meant to serve
>as a guiding tool, but like everything else, is not necessarily absolute in
>the greater scheme of things.
Im not challenging physical law as we know it. I'm applying it to
what I do. :)
>
>
>> Where ever there is all liquid, the PT relationship will not hold
>> true, as in the liquid line, however since there is not all liquid in
>> the reciever the PT relation holds true and here I go repeating
>> myselfs again, ...no subcooling.
>
>So when are you going to go take a subcool reading at the king valve next ?
>:-)
Is there not 100% liquid at the king valve? If it isnt, then the
subcool reading would be 0 degrees, indicating a saturated state and
flash gas in the liquid line. Not a good thing...
Now if you were to place a gauge in the reciever before the dip tube,
the state of the refrigerant will (should) be in a saturated state, in
which case, no subcooling of the refrigerant can occure.
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
"bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:lD5i5.2238$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <8mag10$o6p$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > What role, exactly, does the so called "liquid seal" play ?
> provides at least zero vapor to liquid receiver
> (completion of condensing of vapor in coil.)
> subcooled liquid
Okay, this is the 'no subcool as long as there is vapour' thing ?
> > How do we define "liquid seal" ?
>
> absence of any vapor
> specifically going into the LR from condenser.
Liquid located to the center of a liquid drop is sealed too ?
> > What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the
> > condenser
> > center ?
>
> Temperature/pressure/heat content
Folowing that refrigerants P/T curve or not ?
> > Is there any significance in about the total pressure of the "liquid
> > seal",
> > speaking both velocity and static pressure ?
So when travelling subcooled liquid slows to a stop there is no mechanical
subcooling effect ?
Marc O'Brien
<FTWHD> wrote in message news:nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com...
> Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
> of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
> there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
> reciever.
What makes you so sure Mike ?
> The reason for this is that when liquid refrigerant and vapor exist
> together it is saturated. Therefore, no subcooling. Once a solid
> column of liquid is formed, subcooling can take place by lowering its
> temperature with the use of liquid-suction heat exchangers,
> subcoolers, or from lower ambient temperature surrounding the liquid
> line.
Same question ?
> The line between the condenser and the reciever usually contains all
> liquid but it would not be abnormal for this line to also have some
> vapor mixed with the liquid. The reciever would have to contain 100%
> liquid (not saturated) in order for subcooling to occure and this
> would not be the case in a normal running system. You can take that
> to the bank. :)
I couldn't take that to my bank, they already know about your guarantees :-)
Marc O'Brien
>
> the above is true if a system was static which its not.
> subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
> receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
> have no temperature difference.
So what you are insisting is that no subcool can take place in the receiver
?
> the liquid is subcooled in relation to condensing temperature even tho
> there is vapor in the receiver.
Okay, so then, if we needed more subcool to compensate for liquid line
pressure drop what we could do is go for the same condenser surface area but
with smaller pipes so that there was a greater difference between coil
pressure and receiver pressure ?
--
Marc O'Brien
Brochure :: http://fridgetech.com
Technicians :: http://www.fridgetech.co.uk
Development :: http://websmade.co.uk
Marc O'Brien
<FTWHD> wrote in message news:45njosge0vqpt6j31...@4ax.com...
> >subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
> >receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
> >have no temperature difference.
> >there is vapor in the receiver.
> >subcooling.
> >-bill
>
>
> then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
> chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
When I take such readings, with R22 water chillers that is, designed for a
15K TD, I usually read around 5K subcool just after the king valve with
pressure gauge connected to the king valve.
Marc O'Brien
> On 03 Aug 2000 15:51:25 GMT, sonof...@aol.com (Sonofdawra) wrote:
>
> >>of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
> >>there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
> >>reciever.
> >>
> >
refrigerant in
> >the receiver itself is saturated when looking solely at the refrigerant
in the
> >receiver because both liquid and vapor are present and thus saturated by
> >definition. But when you compare the liquid in the receiver to the
liquid
> >being condensed in the condenser, then the liquid in the receiver is
subcooled
> >because hopefully it is some number of degrees cooler than the actual
> >condensing temperature.
> >
> >Just my simple minded way of looking at it :o)
> >
> >Have a nice day, Ron
>
> My point is as long as there is a saturated condition there can not
> be, no way no how any subcooling taking place. We must remember that
> the pressure/temperature relationship as shown by a PT chart is only
> valid when there is a mixture of vapor and liquid a condition know as
> saturation.
Okay, how would we explain the supercooling effect of water droplets up in
stormy clouds which are sometimes able to remain as water even at -40F ?
>As long as the PT relationship holds true there is no
> subcooling taking place.
duh ! nudge nudge wink wink :-)
> By definition there has to be all liquid present in order for
> subcooling to take place, and this isnt the case in the reciever. By
> subcooling definition the temperature of the liquid is below that of
> the temperature corresponding to the pressure. IE. subcooled.
Yes, well as you say "by definition" and that definition is meant to serve
as a guiding tool, but like everything else, is not necessarily absolute in
the greater scheme of things.
> Where ever there is all liquid, the PT relationship will not hold
> true, as in the liquid line, however since there is not all liquid in
> the reciever the PT relation holds true and here I go repeating
> myselfs again, ...no subcooling.
So when are you going to go take a subcool reading at the king valve next ?
:-)
Marc O'Brien
news:8mag10$o6p$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the condenser
> center ?
So, how about attacking this view point, one that I might adopt for the mean
time:
The liquid in the receiver has a temperature, and within the confines of the
receiver the refrigerant mass generates a saturated pressure, however
further up stream there exists superheated vapour which perhaps we could
consider the equivalent of a non condensable. After all, if we had air
sitting in the top of the condenser raising the total pressure then liquid
seal or no liquid seal, the liquid falling to the receiver would be
subcooled ?
How would a look at the laws of partial pressures respond to the above ?
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> "Marc O'Brien" <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:8mag10$o6p$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the
> > condenser
> > center ?
>
> So, how about attacking this view point, one that I might adopt for the
> mean
> time:
>
> The liquid in the receiver has a temperature, and within the confines of
> the
> receiver the refrigerant mass generates a saturated pressure, however
> further up stream there exists superheated vapour which perhaps we could
> consider the equivalent of a non condensable. After all, if we had air
> sitting in the top of the condenser raising the total pressure then
> liquid
> seal or no liquid seal, the liquid falling to the receiver would be
> subcooled ?
Yes it would distort it to look that way.
> How would a look at the laws of partial pressures respond to the above ?
>
Exactly as you discribed.
>
> Marc O'Brien
>
-bill
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> "bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:49ei5.2804$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> >
> > the above is true if a system was static which its not.
> > subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in
> > the
> > receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
> > have no temperature difference.
>
>
> So what you are insisting is that no subcool can take place in the
> receiver
> ?
no, I say you do have subcooled liquid in the liquid receiver.
>
> > the liquid is subcooled in relation to condensing temperature even tho
> > there is vapor in the receiver.
>
>
> Okay, so then, if we needed more subcool to compensate for liquid line
> pressure drop what we could do is go for the same condenser surface area
> but
> with smaller pipes so that there was a greater difference between coil
> pressure and receiver pressure ?
now that is a good monkey wrench. I'd say no. That is more in an
engineers area. I just want to know if he screwed it up. : -)
I'd see if additional charge would work first. Then go to other
alternatives like a heat exchanger, subcooler.
>
> Marc O'Brien
>
-bill
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > What role, exactly, does the so called "liquid seal" play ?
> > at a minimum-
> > provides at least zero vapor to liquid receiver
> > (completion of condensing of vapor in coil.)
> > subcooled liquid
>
>
> Okay, this is the 'no subcool as long as there is vapour' thing ?
Yes in the condenser, no in the receiver, unless you break the receiver
out separate. (Mikes arguement)
if you don't have solid liquid out of the condenser you are not done
condensing all the heat from the vapor.
> Liquid located to the center of a liquid drop is sealed too ?
huh?
> > > What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the
> > > condenser
> > > center ?
> >
> > Temperature/pressure/heat content
>
>
> Folowing that refrigerants P/T curve or not ?
yes
> > > Is there any significance in about the total pressure of the "liquid
> > > seal",
> > > speaking both velocity and static pressure ?
>
>
> So when travelling subcooled liquid slows to a stop there is no mechanical
> subcooling effect ?
not sure what you mean
like downward liquid pressure on a verticale line?
-bill
bill
> On 03 Aug 2000 15:51:25 GMT, sonof...@aol.com (Sonofdawra) wrote:
>
> >>Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
> >>of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
> >>there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
> >>reciever.
> >>
> >
> >It starts to be somewhat of how you are comparing things. The
> >refrigerant in
> >the receiver itself is saturated when looking solely at the refrigerant
> >in the
> >receiver because both liquid and vapor are present and thus saturated by
> >definition. But when you compare the liquid in the receiver to the
> >liquid
> >being condensed in the condenser, then the liquid in the receiver is
> >subcooled
> >because hopefully it is some number of degrees cooler than the actual
> >condensing temperature.
> >
> >Just my simple minded way of looking at it :o)
> >
> >Have a nice day, Ron
>
> Yup the temperature will be cooler in the reciever compared to the
> condenser but the pressure is also lower than that of that in the
> condenser, but that isnt what subcooling is.
>
> My point is as long as there is a saturated condition there can not
> be, no way no how any subcooling taking place. We must remember that
> the pressure/temperature relationship as shown by a PT chart is only
> valid when there is a mixture of vapor and liquid a condition know as
> saturation. As long as the PT relationship holds true there is no
> subcooling taking place.
>
> By definition there has to be all liquid present in order for
> subcooling to take place, and this isnt the case in the reciever. By
> subcooling definition the temperature of the liquid is below that of
> the temperature corresponding to the pressure. IE. subcooled.
>
> Where ever there is all liquid, the PT relationship will not hold
> true, as in the liquid line, however since there is not all liquid in
> the reciever the PT relation holds true and here I go repeating
> myselfs again, ...no subcooling.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
Get him Ron, I'm busy with Marc :-)
-bill
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
><FTWHD> wrote in message news:nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com...
>> Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
>> of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
>> there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
>> reciever.
>
>What makes you so sure Mike ?
I trust what the greatest know minds in histoy have discovered to be
thruths, at least as far as we know it to be.
>
>> The reason for this is that when liquid refrigerant and vapor exist
>> together it is saturated. Therefore, no subcooling. Once a solid
>> column of liquid is formed, subcooling can take place by lowering its
>> temperature with the use of liquid-suction heat exchangers,
>> subcoolers, or from lower ambient temperature surrounding the liquid
>> line.
>
>
>Same question ?
see above for answer...
>> The line between the condenser and the reciever usually contains all
>> liquid but it would not be abnormal for this line to also have some
>> vapor mixed with the liquid. The reciever would have to contain 100%
>> liquid (not saturated) in order for subcooling to occure and this
>> would not be the case in a normal running system. You can take that
>> to the bank. :)
>
>I couldn't take that to my bank, they already know about your guarantees :-)
I threw that in just for you because I know you like it so much. :)
Mike
UA local 370
bill
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:08:16 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
> Measure the temperature in the reciever and compare to its pressure
> then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
> chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
Subcooling is the amount of extra heat removed from a refrigerant below
its boiling point.
Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
The amount of cooling below its boiling point.
I see your argument Mike but I think the fallacy is ignoring the overall
system.
Good discussion.
-bill
Marc O'Brien
talking about here chaps.
There is a very simple little animation showing what more or less happens
when the condenser fan cycles on and off.
http://www.fridgetech.co.uk/projects/ph-subcool.html
Marc O'Brien
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:42:48 +0100, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> ><FTWHD> wrote in message
news:nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com...
> >> Since the reciever has a liquid level at some point it must be thought
> >> of as having a mixture of liquid and vapor (satruated refrigerant)
> >> there can be no subcooling at the surface of the liquid in the
> >> reciever.
> >
> >What makes you so sure Mike ?
>
> I trust what the greatest know minds in histoy have discovered to be
> thruths, at least as far as we know it to be.
Yes, but I'd be willing to bet you are working from only half the story, the
most important half, but still perhaps not enough to cover this topic.
Marc O'Brien
<FTWHD> wrote in message news:fdekos8ag9jfb2llj...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:56:13 +0100, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> My point is as long as there is a saturated condition there can not
> >> be, no way no how any subcooling taking place. We must remember that
> >> the pressure/temperature relationship as shown by a PT chart is only
> >> valid when there is a mixture of vapor and liquid a condition know as
> >> saturation.
> >
in
> >stormy clouds which are sometimes able to remain as water even at -40F ?
> >
> >
How much increase in pressure is required to lower waters freezing point
to -40F ?
> >> By definition there has to be all liquid present in order for
> >> subcooling to take place, and this isnt the case in the reciever. By
> >> subcooling definition the temperature of the liquid is below that of
> >> the temperature corresponding to the pressure. IE. subcooled.
> >
> >
> >Yes, well as you say "by definition" and that definition is meant to
serve
> >as a guiding tool, but like everything else, is not necessarily absolute
in
> >the greater scheme of things.
>
> Im not challenging physical law as we know it. I'm applying it to
> what I do. :)
Greater scheme of things I refer to here is simply the fridge circuit :-)
> >So when are you going to go take a subcool reading at the king valve next
?
> >:-)
> Is there not 100% liquid at the king valve? If it isnt, then the
> subcool reading would be 0 degrees, indicating a saturated state and
> flash gas in the liquid line. Not a good thing...
So the liquid suddenly loses significant specific heat as it starts its
journey up the dip tube ? It also loses pressure, both static and head, when
going up the dip tube meaning all the more tendancy to flash, hmmm, I don't
think your paragraph above holds any water :-)
> Now if you were to place a gauge in the reciever before the dip tube,
> the state of the refrigerant will (should) be in a saturated state, in
> which case, no subcooling of the refrigerant can occure.
In should be in a saturated state in which case no subcooling can occur ?
That is your explanation Mike ? Because it should be saturated ? That's
circular deduction old chap :-)
Marc O'Brien
> In article <8md6kq$vcr$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > "Marc O'Brien" <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:8mag10$o6p$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > >
> > > What is the difference between vapour in the receiver and at the
> > > condenser
> > > center ?
> >
> > mean
> > time:
> >
> > The liquid in the receiver has a temperature, and within the confines of
> > the
> > receiver the refrigerant mass generates a saturated pressure, however
> > further up stream there exists superheated vapour which perhaps we could
> > consider the equivalent of a non condensable. After all, if we had air
> > sitting in the top of the condenser raising the total pressure then
> > liquid
> > seal or no liquid seal, the liquid falling to the receiver would be
> > subcooled ?
>
> Yes it would distort it to look that way.
Okay, now, if that might be an approximation of what's happening then why do
we have to, have to, have to have a liquid seal?
So, anyway, we're still trying to work out how this limited amount of
subcool occurs, how the liquid in the receiver manages to becomed slightly
subcooled even though it should tend toward saturation because of the vapour
presense ?
The system lies unused for a day, liquid in the receiver and vapour in the
condenser are more or less at saturation. Then we turn the system on and
suddenly the pressure in the condenser and above the liquid in the receiver
starts to rise and in doing so the receiver liquid now becomes subcooled.
The process is mechanical since the liquid has actually aquired energy (I
think in the form of reduced entropy since there may not have been an
enthalpy change coinciding with the pressure rise)
So receiver liquid pressure rises but with maintained liquid temperature and
so we soon have subcooled liquid in the receiver. Now, if the liquid in the
receiver ever does happen to warm to saturation, when does this occur ?
Is it just a replacement thing, cool liquid drains and is replaced by warm
liquid? Does the development of a liquid seal before the drop into the
receiver act to maintain cool liquid in the receiver in relation to
saturation?
You see, while it's difficult to explain what one see's in their mind during
consideration, I'm still not convinced a liquid seal is absolutely necessary
for the small amount of receiver subcool that occurs, I do, however, think
it would improve things, but ....hmmm...
> > How would a look at the laws of partial pressures respond to the above ?
> >
> Exactly as you discribed.
Hmm, seems we all have our opinions but with no real substance to show for
them ? We're still just reasserting our fragile opinions ?
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> I've put up a tentative flash illustration of more or less what we're
> talking about here chaps.
>
> There is a very simple little animation showing what more or less happens
> when the condenser fan cycles on and off.
>
> http://www.fridgetech.co.uk/projects/ph-subcool.html
-
>
> Marc O'Brien
I like it! What program you using to make it?
-bill
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> "bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:FRqi5.4202$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> > In article <8md6kq$vcr$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> > <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Okay, now, if that might be an approximation of what's happening then why
> do
> we have to, have to, have to have a liquid seal?
if you don't have a liquid seal you still have vapor which means you
aren't done condensing yet.
you dont have to have measurable subcooling, just solid liquid.
> So, anyway, we're still trying to work out how this limited amount of
> subcool occurs, how the liquid in the receiver manages to becomed
> slightly
> subcooled even though it should tend toward saturation because of the
> vapour
> presense ?
How's this for a monkey wrench:
pressure drop in the receiver/flashing
> The system lies unused for a day, liquid in the receiver and vapour in
> the
> condenser are more or less at saturation. Then we turn the system on and
> suddenly the pressure in the condenser and above the liquid in the
> receiver
> starts to rise and in doing so the receiver liquid now becomes subcooled.
> The process is mechanical since the liquid has actually aquired energy (I
> think in the form of reduced entropy since there may not have been an
> enthalpy change coinciding with the pressure rise)
>
> So receiver liquid pressure rises but with maintained liquid temperature
> and
> so we soon have subcooled liquid in the receiver. Now, if the liquid in
> the
> receiver ever does happen to warm to saturation, when does this occur ?
>
> Is it just a replacement thing, cool liquid drains and is replaced by
> warm
> liquid? Does the development of a liquid seal before the drop into the
> receiver act to maintain cool liquid in the receiver in relation to
> saturation?
Yes
>
> You see, while it's difficult to explain what one see's in their mind
> during
> consideration, I'm still not convinced a liquid seal is absolutely
> necessary
> for the small amount of receiver subcool that occurs, I do, however,
> think
> it would improve things, but ....hmmm...
Let me take your side of the argument for a bit.
I believe you don't need a full liquid seal to isolate the condensing
temp/pressure from the reciever.
radiation from the receiver, pressure drop into the large volume of the
receiver (flash gas cooling the remaining liquid), flow, all combine to
produce measurable subcooling even in the presence of vapor.
The pressure drop is not plotted on a PE diagram
Its dynamic and minicule compared to the over all system.
> Hmm, seems we all have our opinions but with no real substance to show
> for
> them ? We're still just reasserting our fragile opinions ?
Naw
Its simple
if you have any vapor bubbles going into the receiver you are still on
the saturation line and have not removed all the heat to get to liquid.
you haven't finished condensing all the vapor. haven't reached the left
hand side of the PE chart.
subcooling is designed into the coil where the heat is rejected.
The receiver absorbing or rejecting heat is incidental.
I quess I'm saying all subcooling occurs in the coil, everything else is
flash gas or the like.
Marc O'Brien
> In article <8mdktv$rej$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I've put up a tentative flash illustration of more or less what we're
> > talking about here chaps.
> >
> > There is a very simple little animation showing what more or less
happens
> > when the condenser fan cycles on and off.
> >
> > http://www.fridgetech.co.uk/projects/ph-subcool.html
> -
> >
> > Marc O'Brien
> I like it! What program you using to make it?
Right mouse click on it and then click on the about... option, which if
I've disabled the menus will be all you see :-)
Marc O'Brien
> In article <8mdnsf$rth$4...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"> > news:FRqi5.4202$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> > > In article <8md6kq$vcr$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> > > <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Okay, now, if that might be an approximation of what's happening then
why
> > do
> > we have to, have to, have to have a liquid seal?
> aren't done condensing yet.
Well, yes, I know you'll have vapour if there is no seal, it's part and
parcel, but I'm thinking out loud, is it necessary in the same way it isn't
necessary in the receiver?
> you dont have to have measurable subcooling, just solid liquid.
Is that before subcooling takes place ? :-)
> > So, anyway, we're still trying to work out how this limited amount of
> > subcool occurs, how the liquid in the receiver manages to becomed
> > slightly
> > subcooled even though it should tend toward saturation because of the
> > vapour
> > presence ?
>
> How's this for a monkey wrench:
I don't know what that means ?
> pressure drop in the receiver/flashing
If the velocity drops, then condensation, if anything, should occur, not
flashing.
> > The system lies unused for a day, liquid in the receiver and vapour in
> > the
> > condenser are more or less at saturation. Then we turn the system on and
> > suddenly the pressure in the condenser and above the liquid in the
> > receiver
> > starts to rise and in doing so the receiver liquid now becomes
subcooled.
> > The process is mechanical since the liquid has actually acquired energy
(I
> > think in the form of reduced entropy since there may not have been an
> > enthalpy change coinciding with the pressure rise)
> >
> > So receiver liquid pressure rises but with maintained liquid temperature
> > and
> > so we soon have subcooled liquid in the receiver. Now, if the liquid in
> > the
> > receiver ever does happen to warm to saturation, when does this occur ?
> >
> > Is it just a replacement thing, cool liquid drains and is replaced by
> > warm
> > liquid? Does the development of a liquid seal before the drop into the
> > receiver act to maintain cool liquid in the receiver in relation to
> > saturation?
> Yes
Why? How? What's happening to affect this ?
> > You see, while it's difficult to explain what one see's in their mind
> > during
> > consideration, I'm still not convinced a liquid seal is absolutely
> > necessary
> > for the small amount of receiver subcool that occurs, I do, however,
> > think
> > it would improve things, but ....hmmm...
>
> Let me take your side of the argument for a bit.
>
> I believe you don't need a full liquid seal to isolate the condensing
> temp/pressure from the reciever.
okay, you saying we do not need a full liquid seal, what constitutes a full
and not a full liquid seal ?
> radiation from the receiver, pressure drop into the large volume of the
> receiver (flash gas cooling the remaining liquid),
Maybe you could expand on that Bill, especially the flash gas cooling the
remaining liquid. This stinks of saturation to me :-)
> The pressure drop is not plotted on a PE diagram
> Its dynamic and minicule compared to the over all system.
You saying there should be another axis to the graph to plot this other
pressure dimension? How many pressure dimensions do you think there are ?
> > Hmm, seems we all have our opinions but with no real substance to show
> > for
> > them ? We're still just reasserting our fragile opinions ?
>
> Naw
None of us have really changed our views, we just keep stating our views
without any substantiation.
> Its simple
> if you have any vapor bubbles going into the receiver you are still on
> the saturation line and have not removed all the heat to get to liquid.
But this goes against the dynamic scenario where you have already agreed
with me that the subcooled liquid exists while at the same time hot
superheated and pressurised gas is being added above maintaining liquid
pressure over temperature (subcool)
> you haven't finished condensing all the vapor. haven't reached the left
> hand side of the PE chart.
I prefer the first story you gave, which was different, you stated that the
vapour in the receiver is different from vapour in the condenser top.
Where would you plot the vapour in the receiver on the PH chart ?
> subcooling is designed into the coil where the heat is rejected.
For summer high load conditions or winter low load conditions ?
> The receiver absorbing or rejecting heat is incidental.
Yes, I would think so.
> I quess I'm saying all subcooling occurs in the coil,
Well, yes, since not much heat exchange takes place in the receiver.
> everything else is
> flash gas or the like.
Flash gas is the term used to represent a liquid to vapour transformation,
are you trying to use it to represent the opposite process ?
bill
> > How's this for a monkey wrench:
> I don't know what that means ?
gum up the works
throw a spanner in the gears? hehe whats a british term?
> You saying there should be another axis to the graph to plot this other
> pressure dimension? How many pressure dimensions do you think there are ?
maybe to have a complete picture of the cycle. pressures losses might be
a better discription?
no major ones I'm sure
> But this goes against the dynamic scenario where you have already agreed
> with me that the subcooled liquid exists while at the same time hot
> superheated and pressurised gas is being added above maintaining liquid
> pressure over temperature (subcool)
> I prefer the first story you gave, which was different, you stated that
> the vapour in the receiver is different from vapour in the condenser top.
> Where would you plot the vapour in the receiver on the PH chart ?
heat content is different.
seems conventional wisdom is to ignore it, treat it as subcooled liquid.
> Flash gas is the term used to represent a liquid to vapour
> transformation,
> are you trying to use it to represent the opposite process ?
no
term seemed closest what I mean't.
if I have 10 degrees of subcooling going in the receiver
having vapor on top doesn't erase the subcooling.
has to be a pressure drop.
maybe we have to discount the receiver when looking at a PE chart.
if we have to plot it subcooling would extend over then down, over again
then drop down to evaporation.
I have never seen a chart drawn like that.
> Marc O'Brien
-bill
Vicki
bill wrote:
> In article <8me305$3ca$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > How's this for a monkey wrench:
> > I don't know what that means ?
> fly in the ointment
> gum up the works
> throw a spanner in the gears? hehe whats a british term?
Hubby says "spanner in the works" is used there.
Vicki
FTWHD
wrote:
>In article <45njosge0vqpt6j31...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:08:16 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <nlhioscknp40u48qv...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> Measure the temperature in the reciever and compare to its pressure
>> then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
>> chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
>>
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>
>If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
>the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
change in volume. It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
the condenser changes back to a saturated state (vapor and liquid) and
in a saturated state there is no subcooling because the temperature of
the refrigerant will agree to its coressponding pressure. In a
saturated state the refrigerant temperature will not be below the
temperature of its corresponding pressure. No subcool.
>
>Subcooling is the amount of extra heat removed from a refrigerant below
>its boiling point.
>
>Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
>The amount of cooling below its boiling point.
>
>I see your argument Mike but I think the fallacy is ignoring the overall
>system.
>
>Good discussion.
>-bill
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
>
> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
> change in volume.
If what's leaving the receiver is more or less always equal to what's
entering the receiver, how would you expect the receiver to be at a pressure
considerably lower than say 1" up the condenser drain pipe? Surely it's not
a change in the available volume that induces flash gas, it has to be a
change in pressure?
> In a
> saturated state the refrigerant temperature will not be below the
> temperature of its corresponding pressure. No subcool.
Well, you must agree that climbing refrigerant will lose pressure, also, you
must agree that in order for the liquid to be driven up the receiver dip
tube there has to be a lower pressure in the dip tube.
If the so called saturated refrigerant in the receiver is going to
experience frictional pressure drop and weight related pressure drop going
up the dip tube, how is it that site glasses after the receiver, often even
further above the receiver, usually get to stay clear ?
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:49ei5.2804$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
>>
>> the above is true if a system was static which its not.
>> subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
>> receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
>> have no temperature difference.
>
>
>So what you are insisting is that no subcool can take place in the receiver
>?
>
>
Are you insiting that it does?
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
><FTWHD> wrote in message news:45njosge0vqpt6j31...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:08:16 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >the above is true if a system was static which its not.
>> >subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in the
>> >receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
>> >have no temperature difference.
>> >the liquid is subcooled in relation to condensing temperature even tho
>> >there is vapor in the receiver.
>> >measure the line into and out of a receiver and then tell me there is no
>> >subcooling.
>> >-bill
>>
>>
>> Measure the temperature in the reciever and compare to its pressure
>> then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
>> chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
>
>When I take such readings, with R22 water chillers that is, designed for a
>15K TD, I usually read around 5K subcool just after the king valve with
>pressure gauge connected to the king valve.
Yes but there again your not measuring the refrigerant temp in the
receiver, but instead you are measuring the temp in the liquid line.
Which of course subcooling should be found as long as everything is
working right.
All throughout this discussion you have jumped from one side of the
fence to the other. I think you like to argue. First you say that
subcooling does not occur in a receiver then you say that it does.
Talk about being circular...
So now are you trying to say the temperature of the saturated
refrigerant in the receiver is the same as the liquid line?
Are you saying that the temperature of the saturated refrigerant is
below that of its temperature corresponding to its pressure as listed
on the PT chart?
Subcooling can only be found at a place where 100% liquid exists. If
you don't understand this then how do you claim to have a better than
average understanding of the fridge cycle?
Since it is apparent that you don't understand or believe this or,
that you are just arguing just to argue, may I speculate that you are
below average in understanding or above average in arguing?
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
technical? Are we boring or what? :)
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
> In article <8me305$3ca$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > How's this for a monkey wrench:
> > I don't know what that means ?
> gum up the works
> throw a spanner in the gears? hehe whats a british term?
>
> > pressure dimension? How many pressure dimensions do you think there are
?
>
> a better discription?
> no major ones I'm sure
Naa, you can see how I've represented this pressure drop in the last PH
diagrams I posted, the condensing process is curved. For a given load and
ambient the coil has a natural pressure drop curve to follow, I guess.
> > But this goes against the dynamic scenario where you have already agreed
> > with me that the subcooled liquid exists while at the same time hot
> > superheated and pressurised gas is being added above maintaining liquid
> > pressure over temperature (subcool)
>
> > I prefer the first story you gave, which was different, you stated that
> > the vapour in the receiver is different from vapour in the condenser
top.
>
> > Where would you plot the vapour in the receiver on the PH chart ?
>
> heat content is different.
> seems conventional wisdom is to ignore it, treat it as subcooled liquid.
I would say the vapour is saturated, if some of it cooled any more then that
amount would condense. I doubt it could be superheated, that would just
drive more vapour up from the liquid surface.
So, we have saturated vapour above subcooled liquid. In the dynamics of it
all I would expect this is very possible.
> > Flash gas is the term used to represent a liquid to vapour
> > transformation,
> > are you trying to use it to represent the opposite process ?
> no
> term seemed closest what I mean't.
> if I have 10 degrees of subcooling going in the receiver
> having vapor on top doesn't erase the subcooling.
> has to be a pressure drop.
Absolutely, I agree.
> maybe we have to discount the receiver when looking at a PE chart.
I think if I were alked to calculate the receiver vapour density I would
treat it as saturated. I'd consider it the same way I would flash gas, which
is what you were trying to say.
> if we have to plot it subcooling would extend over then down, over again
> then drop down to evaporation.
Simply a pressure reading at the King Valve plus a minute amount for line
pressure drop to the valve and then reveiver wall temperature (bottom)
> I have never seen a chart drawn like that.
It wouldn't be a drawing as such, the vapour would be represented by a "dot"
or "point" along the condensing process pressure curve but right up against
the 100% quality line, I guess.
Marc O'Brien
<FTWHD> wrote in message news:m9emosg3v88eio7k8...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:46:47 +0100, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >"bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> the above is true if a system was static which its not.
> >> subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in
the
> >> receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
> >> have no temperature difference.
> >
> >
receiver
> >?
> >
> >
> Are you insiting that it does?
It may not necessary take place there, but I am finding that the only
explanation available to cover why we don't see sight glass flashing
downstream of a properly charged receiver is that there has to be subcool.
Usually, readings have taken, both pressure and temperature at the king
valve demonstrate about 5F subcool.
I never saw subcool on a centrif high side float system, only apparent
subcool when air is in the system, the difference between the centrifs and a
tube-fined condenser receiver is the liquid seal. I do think the liquid seal
is important, though I'd like to argue against that somehow just to
reinforce it, if you get my approach, which you should do by now :-)
Craig
Craig
UA local 420
Craig
> So what in fact is happening between the receiver bottom and the point on
> the liquid line I take my temperature reading is a "mechanical unsubcooling"
> of the liquid.
Mechanical unsubcooling LOL. Now that's a good one. Is that what you
brits call an expression? :)
Craig
UA local 420
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
MarC, I'm gpoing to send you something from sporland give it a look
and tell me what you think. It might help you to see where I'm coming
from.
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>"Craig" <cmoo...@home.com> wrote in message
>news:398B4B12...@home.com...
>> Yep. I am finding it interesting who can piss into the wind further. :)
>
>I think if it's subcooled the jet of ur--- will travel further with
>maintained density and aerodynamic boundary, but I'd have to experiment.
>
Marc whats your e mail addy? the one in your header bounced back.
Mike
UA local 370
FT...@USOL.com
Marc O'Brien
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:48:56 +0100, "Marc O'Brien"
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> ><FTWHD> wrote in message
> >> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:08:16 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >subcooling takes place in the last part of the coil and is stored in
the
> >> >receiver. you are comparing the subcooled liquid to itself which would
> >> >have no temperature difference.
> >> >there is vapor in the receiver.
> >> >measure the line into and out of a receiver and then tell me there is
no
> >> >subcooling.
> >> >-bill
> >>
> >>
> >> Measure the temperature in the reciever and compare to its pressure
> >> then tell me it is subcooled. The temperture will agree with the PT
> >> chart for its pressure therefore no subcooling.
> >
> >When I take such readings, with R22 water chillers that is, designed for
a
> >15K TD, I usually read around 5K subcool just after the king valve with
> >pressure gauge connected to the king valve.
>
>
> Yes but there again your not measuring the refrigerant temp in the
> receiver, but instead you are measuring the temp in the liquid line.
Well, whilst the dip tube could be considered part of the liquid line, it is
still burried in the receiver. Liquid static pressure drops going up the
receiver for three reasons, change from static to velocity pressure,
friction and head. And there is no way any significant amount of further
heat rejection can occur between entering the dip tube and going through the
king valve.
So what in fact is happening between the receiver bottom and the point on
the liquid line I take my temperature reading is a "mechanical unsubcooling"
of the liquid. Yet, it doesn't show bubbles in a sight glass ? Often even in
a sight glass situated higher than the condensing unit on a rising liquid
line ?
> Which of course subcooling should be found as long as everything is
> working right.
Everything is working right, maybe you could expand on this "everything is
working right" bit. You saying that as long as this "everything is working
right" is okay then there is further substantial heat rejection by the
liquid between entering the dip yube and leaving the king valve?
> All throughout this discussion you have jumped from one side of the
> fence to the other. I think you like to argue. First you say that
> subcooling does not occur in a receiver then you say that it does.
>
> Talk about being circular...
Any other approach could be deemed ignorance, or opinionated :-)
> So now are you trying to say the temperature of the saturated
> refrigerant in the receiver is the same as the liquid line?
Yes, but mechanically, the receiver liquid should be more subcooled than the
liquid line section connected to the king valve.
> Are you saying that the temperature of the saturated refrigerant is
> below that of its temperature corresponding to its pressure as listed
> on the PT chart?
What colour was Napolians white horse ?
> Subcooling can only be found at a place where 100% liquid exists. If
> you don't understand this then how do you claim to have a better than
> average understanding of the fridge cycle?
Seems perhaps you don't yet know enough to appreciate what I know ?
> Since it is apparent that you don't understand or believe this or,
> that you are just arguing just to argue, may I speculate that you are
> below average in understanding or above average in arguing?
No and yes :-)
Marc O'Brien
> On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
> participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
> technical? Are we boring or what? :)
Well, it hasn't exactly been a fruitful discussion has it, the guys out
there who know the answers are probably having a good laugh :-)
Marc O'Brien
Marc O'Brien
>
> MarC, I'm gpoing to send you something from sporland give it a look
> and tell me what you think. It might help you to see where I'm coming
> from.
Thanks Mike, I've just looked at it, all I see there is mention that the
liquid surface in the receiver has to be at saturation.
There is no explanation as to how liquid is able to climb up the dip tube.
Liquid here climbs up higher than the liquid column made up by the stored
liquid but without flashing. How can this be so if as Sporlan says, subcool
in the receiver is only due to height of liquid in the receiver. Personally,
I don't think the guy who prepared that for Sporlan was too interested in
that aspect of the subject we're tackling.
Now, I still maintain, as I did in the beginning, that for proper system
design where subcool is a necessity due to expected substantial liquid
pressure drops or transients, you have to assume no subcooling is achieved
in the receiver and design for some positive subcool facility extra to
"liquid seal".
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> <FTWHD> wrote in message
> news:sqfmos4rd86dm6v11...@4ax.com...
> > On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
> > participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
> > technical? Are we boring or what? :)
>
> Well, it hasn't exactly been a fruitful discussion has it, the guys out
> there who know the answers are probably having a good laugh :-)
>
> Marc O'Brien
Probably :-)
Rehashing refrig 101 isn't interesting for most people.
Maybe throwing in minimum and maximum subcooling and superheats for
various systems might interest people.
-bill
bill
wrote:
> Yep. I am finding it interesting who can piss into the wind further. :)
> Craig
> UA local 420
>
Naaaa
nailing this stuff down takes the myths and half-truths out of it.
Complete understanding of the cycle is the goal.
Fleshing out the grey areas is a good thing.
I find it interesting.
I learn alot from a good argument.
-bill
bill
> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
>
> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
> change in volume.
Yes just like the outlet of a metering device.
lowering the temperature of the rest of the liquid. I'm with you so far.
> It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
> the condenser changes back to a saturated state
are you saying it re-absorbs the heat?
>(vapor and liquid) and
> in a saturated state there is no subcooling because the temperature of
> the refrigerant will agree to its coressponding pressure. In a
> saturated state the refrigerant temperature will not be below the
> temperature of its corresponding pressure. No subcool.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
There you go again measuring subcooling against itself.
So basically you say there can never be subcooling in a receiver unless
it is 100 percent full of liquid?
I disagree
I say again:
Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
The amount of cooling below its boiling point.
Here's what I think.
Compressor compresses the refrigerant
Top of coil desuperheats it (brings it down to its boiling point)
Bulk of the middle of the coil condenses the vapor by rejecting the heat
content changing it to liquid.
Bottom passes of the coil further cools the liquid (subcooling)
Subcooled liquid enters the receiver, hangs out till its sucked up the
dip tube on its way to visit the metering device.
The vapor in the liquid receiver, any attendant pressure drops, etc are
incidential.
Subcooling cannot occur in the receiver or liquid line. It occurs in the
coil. All heat rejection is in the coil.
The Receiver is storage for the subcooled liquid.
Say it with me:
Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
-bill :-)
Noon-Air
wrote:
I just assumed that you guys were defending your thesis :-)
Steve Nunes @ Noon-Air
Heating & Air Conditioning Service
Purvis, MS
jsn...@netdoor.com
A mind is like a parachute, its not worth a damn unless its open.
bill
(Noon-Air) wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, it hasn't exactly been a fruitful discussion has it, the guys out
> >> there who know the answers are probably having a good laugh :-)
> >>
> >> Marc O'Brien
> >
> >Probably :-)
> >Rehashing refrig 101 isn't interesting for most people.
> >Maybe throwing in minimum and maximum subcooling and superheats for
> >various systems might interest people.
> >-bill
>
> I just assumed that you guys were defending your thesis :-)
>
>
> Steve Nunes @ Noon-Air
> Heating & Air Conditioning Service
hehe we are.
but we welcome other view points.
Mike's observation that we're boring the hell out of people might be
true because usually 10 people jump in to point out where we're screwing
up! :-)
-bill
Vicki
FTWHD wrote:
> On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
> participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
> technical? Are we boring or what? :)
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
Well, I was figuring on jumping in, but you two were doing such
a good job of it that my submission would have been redundant,
Vicki
Marc O'Brien
> In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
> The vapor in the liquid receiver, any attendant pressure drops, etc are
> incidential.
Not sure what you mean here Bill?
> Subcooling cannot occur in the receiver or liquid line. It occurs in the
> coil.
It can occur and will occur, but usually by an insignificant amount.
>All heat rejection is in the coil.
Most.
> The Receiver is storage for the subcooled liquid.
Yes, the liquid therin simply has to be subcooled else sight glasses would
flash.
> Say it with me:
> Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
In reference to receiver pressure which due to proximity tends toward
condensin pressure. You will get the qrong subcool reading if you attached
your gauge to the compressor discharge service valve while reading receiver
temperature, you need to check at least as near as the king valve for
pressure.
I tend to agree with an email I got from Dan Murphy that the receiver is
just a bulge in the liquid/subcool line :-)
Marc O'Brien
FTWHD
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
><FTWHD> wrote in message news:s7mmoso8loao0g9tc...@4ax.com...
>>
>> MarC, I'm gpoing to send you something from sporland give it a look
>> and tell me what you think. It might help you to see where I'm coming
>> from.
>
>
>Thanks Mike, I've just looked at it, all I see there is mention that the
>liquid surface in the receiver has to be at saturation.
>
>There is no explanation as to how liquid is able to climb up the dip tube.
>Liquid here climbs up higher than the liquid column made up by the stored
>liquid but without flashing. How can this be so if as Sporlan says, subcool
>in the receiver is only due to height of liquid in the receiver. Personally,
>I don't think the guy who prepared that for Sporlan was too interested in
>that aspect of the subject we're tackling.
>
>Now, I still maintain, as I did in the beginning, that for proper system
>design where subcool is a necessity due to expected substantial liquid
>pressure drops or transients, you have to assume no subcooling is achieved
>in the receiver and design for some positive subcool facility extra to
>"liquid seal".
Well ok then I have no arguement with that MarC. Now as for how the
liquid *climbs* up the dip tube, The dip tube entrance is below the
liquid level providing there is enough liquid present. High pressure
is behind it which forces it up. It the direction of flow. Maybe I'm
not understanding what your questin is?
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
wrote:
You know Bill, you may be ok after all :)
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
wrote:
>In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
>> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
>>
>> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
>> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
>> change in volume.
>Yes just like the outlet of a metering device.
>lowering the temperature of the rest of the liquid. I'm with you so far.
>
>> It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
>> the condenser changes back to a saturated state
>are you saying it re-absorbs the heat?
No, just that when there is a mixture of liquid and vapor the
condition is saturated.
>>(vapor and liquid) and
>> in a saturated state there is no subcooling because the temperature of
>> the refrigerant will agree to its coressponding pressure. In a
>> saturated state the refrigerant temperature will not be below the
>> temperature of its corresponding pressure. No subcool.
>>
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>There you go again measuring subcooling against itself.
>So basically you say there can never be subcooling in a receiver unless
>it is 100 percent full of liquid?
Yes that's what i'm saying.
>I disagree
>I say again:
>Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
>The amount of cooling below its boiling point.
>
I think the point of reference is what i
>Here's what I think.
>Compressor compresses the refrigerant
>Top of coil desuperheats it (brings it down to its boiling point)
>Bulk of the middle of the coil condenses the vapor by rejecting the heat
>content changing it to liquid.
>Bottom passes of the coil further cools the liquid (subcooling)
>Subcooled liquid enters the receiver, hangs out till its sucked up the
>dip tube on its way to visit the metering device.
>
>The vapor in the liquid receiver, any attendant pressure drops, etc are
>incidential.
Not really incidental but rather than by design.
>Subcooling cannot occur in the receiver
That's what i'm saying to.
>or liquid line. It occurs in the
>coil. All heat rejection is in the coil.
>The Receiver is storage for the subcooled liquid.
>Say it with me:
>Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
>-bill :-)
Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
subcooling.
The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
condenser.
Mike
UA local 370
bill
> >There you go again measuring subcooling against itself.
> >So basically you say there can never be subcooling in a receiver unless
> >it is 100 percent full of liquid?
>
> Yes that's what i'm saying.
I still disagree. explain where you think the subcooling disappears to
when it goes in the receiver.
> I think the point of reference is what i
the rest didn't show up. included below?
>
> Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
> at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
> liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
> corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
> the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
> relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
>
> It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
> is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
> subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
> components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
> well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
> refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
> subcooling.
Then according to what you say there is never any subcooling from the
receiver on, except for line losses and gains.
> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
> condenser.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
How do you account for measurable subcooling from a receiver with a
proberly charged system. (not overcharged to 100 percent liquid in
receiver?
Seems we are missing a piece of the puzzle. Exception to the laws?
That explains the vapor and liquid in the receiver with subcooling.
Subcooling has to be in relation to condensing.
-bill
bill
> You know Bill, you may be ok after all :)
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
Union guys are so mushy!
-bill :-)
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> "bill" <tsu...@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:rNLi5.5859$IX6....@typhoon.columbus.rr.com...
> > In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
> >
> > The vapor in the liquid receiver, any attendant pressure drops, etc are
> > incidential.
>
> Not sure what you mean here Bill?
We have variations, but the overall subcooling is there, both in a PE
chart and measurable on a system.
> > Subcooling cannot occur in the receiver or liquid line. It occurs in
> > the
> > coil.
>
> It can occur and will occur, but usually by an insignificant amount.
agreed
> >All heat rejection is in the coil.
agreed
> > The Receiver is storage for the subcooled liquid.
>
> Yes, the liquid therin simply has to be subcooled else sight glasses
> would
> flash.
>
> > Say it with me:
> > Subcooling is explicitly in reference to condensing temperature.
>
> In reference to receiver pressure which due to proximity tends toward
> condensin pressure. You will get the qrong subcool reading if you
> attached
> your gauge to the compressor discharge service valve while reading
> receiver
> temperature, you need to check at least as near as the king valve for
> pressure.
agreed
> I tend to agree with an email I got from Dan Murphy that the receiver is
> just a bulge in the liquid/subcool line :-)
>
> Marc O'Brien
I like the way he thinks :-)
how does he square the vapor in the bulge with subcooling?
-bill
bill
> FTWHD wrote:
>
> > On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
> > participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
> > technical? Are we boring or what? :)
> >
> > Mike
> > UA local 370
>
> Well, I was figuring on jumping in, but you two were doing such
> a good job of it that my submission would have been redundant,
>
> Vicki
>
Whats your opinion?
Can you have subcooling out of a liquid receiver?
-bill
Unknown
wrote:
>In article <dctnos4v2im3hc9ti...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> You know Bill, you may be ok after all :)
>>
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>Union guys are so mushy!
>-bill :-)
Shhhhh dont let that get out!
Unknown
wrote:
>In article <398BBC78...@usa.net>, vic...@usa.net wrote:
>
>> FTWHD wrote:
>>
>> > On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
>> > participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
>> > technical? Are we boring or what? :)
>> >
>> > Mike
>> > UA local 370
>>
>> Well, I was figuring on jumping in, but you two were doing such
>> a good job of it that my submission would have been redundant,
>>
>> Vicki
>>
>Whats your opinion?
>Can you have subcooling out of a liquid receiver?
>-bill
Out of the reciever ok, but not inside the reciever. After all the
liquid line starts at the reciever outlet and thats where your
measuring subcooling right? Maybe this is the point that we are
misunderstanding each other?
bill
> >Can you have subcooling out of a liquid receiver?
> >-bill
>
> Out of the reciever ok, but not inside the reciever. After all the
> liquid line starts at the reciever outlet and thats where your
> measuring subcooling right? Maybe this is the point that we are
> misunderstanding each other?
Maybe
But where is the subcooling coming from if it isn't in the receiver?
lets say
we have 10 degrees of subcooling in the cond coil.
and 10 degrees of subcooling 6'' from the receiver.
Sound reasonable?
If so, walk me thru your thinking.
or suggest your own parameters to disuss.
-bill
Unknown
wrote:
>In article <hetnoss0fi1hjas3f...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>
>> >There you go again measuring subcooling against itself.
>> >So basically you say there can never be subcooling in a receiver unless
>> >it is 100 percent full of liquid?
>>
>> Yes that's what i'm saying.
>
>I still disagree. explain where you think the subcooling disappears to
>when it goes in the receiver.
Bill, can you subcool a saturated refrigerant? Is the refrigerant
saturated in the receiver? Will not a saturated refrigerants
temperature agree with it corresponding pressure? See below for a
further explaination.
>
>> I think the point of reference is what i
>the rest didn't show up. included below?
>
The train of thought vanished :)
>>
>> Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
>> at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
>> liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
>> corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
>> the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
>> relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
>>
>> It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
>> is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
>> subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
>> components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
>> well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
>> refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
>> subcooling.
>Then according to what you say there is never any subcooling from the
>receiver on, except for line losses and gains.
No, I'm saying the subcooling starts from the receiver on. In the
liquid line which is commonly cooled below saturation by the use of a
subcooler, or ambient.
>
>> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
>> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
>> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
>> condenser.
>>
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>How do you account for measurable subcooling from a receiver with a
>proberly charged system. (not overcharged to 100 percent liquid in
>receiver?
I think the key here is the word *from* the receiver. At that point
it is all liquid and subcooling would be expected.
>Seems we are missing a piece of the puzzle. Exception to the laws?
>That explains the vapor and liquid in the receiver with subcooling.
>Subcooling has to be in relation to condensing.
>-bill
I don't consider subcooling to be in relation to condensing at least
not in those words. Subcooling is lowering the temp of the liquid
line below its saturation temperature. The pressure in the condenser
is higher than that of the liquid line sure, but its temperature is
also higher.
In the condenser the refrigerant is at saturation, and will normally
agree to its corresponding pressure with no further reduction in
temperature. The liquid line is not saturated and its temp
(hopefully) will be lower than the corresponding PT relation for its
given pressure. Theoretically a saturated refrigerant cannot subcool
or for that matter superheat. In order to have subcooling you must
have all liquid and with superheat, all vapor. Satrurated is a
mixture of both liquid and vapor. Do you see what I'm getting at?
POPPYPLANK
>On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
>participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
>technical? Are we boring or what? :)
>
>Mike
>UA local 370
>
Mike
I for one just sit here and read and try to learn something from the
discussions from one side of the pond to the other...hell just the other day I
learned how to spell MarC.
Keep it going
Vic Plank
Lancaster PA
Al Gore is a risky scheme
Unknown
wrote:
>In article <39925496...@news.usol.com>, (ftwhd) wrote:
Ok. I suggest that the pressure is lower at the outlet of the
condenser than the inlet, Lower pressures equate to a lower
temperature at saturation. I also suggest that there is a small
amount of vapor leaveing the condenser along with the liquid which
impilies a saturated condition and the lower temp your seeing as
subcooling is a false subcooling. Subcooling does not begin until the
point of 100% liquid is reached as in the liquid line. Surley you're
not suggesting that we can subcool a refrigerant that is in a
saturated state are you?
Mike
UA local 370
Unknown
LOL I Know about that spelling thing! I was spelling it wrong for a
while to and now cap the C so I remember to get the ol boys name
right.
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
FTWHD wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 03:24:07 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
> >
> >> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
> >> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
> >>
> >> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
> >> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
> >> change in volume.
> >Yes just like the outlet of a metering device.
> >lowering the temperature of the rest of the liquid. I'm with you so far.
> >
> >> It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
> >> the condenser changes back to a saturated state
>
> >are you saying it re-absorbs the heat?
>
> No, just that when there is a mixture of liquid and vapor the
> condition is saturated
Think about what happens to that receiver liquid after it stood for half a day
before the compressor starts. When the compressor starts the receiver pressure
rises, but the liquid is not being given any heat and so it effectively becomes
subcooled even though it hasn't changed temperature.
> Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
> at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
> liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
> corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
> the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
> relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
Yes, it's easy enough to agree with that.
> It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
> is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
> subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
> components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
> well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
> refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
> subcooling.
With a static system yes, but after condensation and while the liquid is still
in the condenser pipe work and it is warmer than ambient it will continue to
lose heat, this makes for subcool.
>
> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
> condenser.
Yeah, that's around condenser mid point, not at the end of the condenser where
the solid liquid train exists.
Marc O'Brien
bill wrote:
>
> How do you account for measurable subcooling from a receiver with a
> proberly charged system. (not overcharged to 100 percent liquid in
> receiver?
> Seems we are missing a piece of the puzzle. Exception to the laws?
> That explains the vapor and liquid in the receiver with subcooling.
> Subcooling has to be in relation to condensing.
Heat obeys the laws of heat conductance, relative specific heats between
saturated vapour in the receiver and subcooled liquid in the receiver.
The vapour that sits at the top of the receiver is probably very stale vapour,
if you know what I mean. It probably very rarely gets changed. It is a
spectator, it sits at the top of the receiver saturated with the saturated
liquid during long off cycles, then it still sits there saturated but at a
higher pressure watching subcooled liquid flow through the receiver beneath it
during the running cycle.
I say the liquid enters the receiver subcooled and therefore does not flash at
all on entering the receiver. At the begining of the cycle when the receiver
liquid is cooler than the entering liquid there is still no flashing, the two
masses initially just acquire a mean temperature.
Marc
Marc O'Brien
ftwhd wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:58:33 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <hetnoss0fi1hjas3f...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
> >
> >> >There you go again measuring subcooling against itself.
> >> >So basically you say there can never be subcooling in a receiver unless
> >> >it is 100 percent full of liquid?
> >>
> >> Yes that's what i'm saying.
> >
> >I still disagree. explain where you think the subcooling disappears to
> >when it goes in the receiver.
>
> Bill, can you subcool a saturated refrigerant? Is the refrigerant
> saturated in the receiver? Will not a saturated refrigerants
> temperature agree with it corresponding pressure? See below for a
> further explaination.
The liquid in the receiver is only saturated at times when there is no liquid
column train leaving the condenser, which might happen with low loads and low
ambients, and then also deep into the off cycle.
> >> I think the point of reference is what i
> >the rest didn't show up. included below?
> >
> The train of thought vanished :)
> >>
> >> Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
> >> at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
> >> liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
> >> corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
> >> the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
> >> relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
> >>
> >> It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
> >> is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
> >> subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
> >> components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
> >> well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
> >> refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
> >> subcooling.
>
> >Then according to what you say there is never any subcooling from the
> >receiver on, except for line losses and gains.
>
> No, I'm saying the subcooling starts from the receiver on. In the
> liquid line which is commonly cooled below saturation by the use of a
> subcooler, or ambient.
There is neither sufficient heat loss or any pressure gain to facilitate this
Mike, not in or after the receiver. A liquid pump might help you prove your
theory though :-)
>
> >> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
> >> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
> >> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
> >> condenser.
> >>
> >> Mike
> >> UA local 370
> >
> >How do you account for measurable subcooling from a receiver with a
> >proberly charged system. (not overcharged to 100 percent liquid in
> >receiver?
>
> I think the key here is the word *from* the receiver. At that point
> it is all liquid and subcooling would be expected.
Bill is asking you how, he's not asking you to agree on a location.
> >Seems we are missing a piece of the puzzle. Exception to the laws?
> >That explains the vapor and liquid in the receiver with subcooling.
> >Subcooling has to be in relation to condensing.
> >-bill
>
> I don't consider subcooling to be in relation to condensing at least
> not in those words. Subcooling is lowering the temp of the liquid
> line below its saturation temperature. The pressure in the condenser
> is higher than that of the liquid line sure, but its temperature is
> also higher.
>
> In the condenser the refrigerant is at saturation, and will normally
> agree to its corresponding pressure with no further reduction in
> temperature. The liquid line is not saturated and its temp
> (hopefully) will be lower than the corresponding PT relation for its
> given pressure. Theoretically a saturated refrigerant cannot subcool
> or for that matter superheat. In order to have subcooling you must
> have all liquid and with superheat, all vapor. Satrurated is a
> mixture of both liquid and vapor. Do you see what I'm getting at?
So, Mike, answer me this old chap, lets take some liquid at saturation in a
very well thermally insulated cyclinder, so well insulted not a single BTU is
going to creep in over 100 years. Now we pump in some saturated vapour at some
arbitrary rate for some arbitrarily sustained period, what do you expect to see
?
Marc
Unknown
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>FTWHD wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 03:24:07 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>> >
>> >> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
>> >> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
>> >>
>> >> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
>> >> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
>> >> change in volume.
>> >Yes just like the outlet of a metering device.
>> >lowering the temperature of the rest of the liquid. I'm with you so far.
>> >
>> >> It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
>> >> the condenser changes back to a saturated state
>>
>> >are you saying it re-absorbs the heat?
>>
>> No, just that when there is a mixture of liquid and vapor the
>> condition is saturated
>
>Think about what happens to that receiver liquid after it stood for half a day
>before the compressor starts. When the compressor starts the receiver pressure
>rises, but the liquid is not being given any heat and so it effectively becomes
>subcooled even though it hasn't changed temperature.
>
Well in the context that I was talking about was a running system not
30 seconds after an extended off time. But are you saying that right
after start up there is no heat removed from the evap or rejected from
the condenser? It seems that there would be but given the time
limitations waiting for the temp probe to catch up it may be hard to
prove. How much of a time span are we talking? Nano seconds or
miniutes?
>> Is a saturated refrigerant subcooled? My understanding of it is that
>> at points in the system where only liquid is present such as in the
>> liquid line, the measured temperature will be below the temperature
>> corresponding to the pressure. In this case, the difference between
>> the measured temperature and the temperature corresponding to the P-T
>> relationship is a measure of liquid subcooling.
>
>Yes, it's easy enough to agree with that.
>
>
>> It is possible however, to find that the actual measured temperature
>> is equivalent to the P-T relationship, in which case the amount of
>> subcooling would be indicated as zero. If we look at the individual
>> components separately we can see that the condenser is saturated as
>> well as is the receiver and the evaporator. In a saturated state the
>> refrigerant should obey the PT relationship and thee should be no
>> subcooling.
>
>With a static system yes, but after condensation and while the liquid is still
>in the condenser pipe work and it is warmer than ambient it will continue to
>lose heat, this makes for subcool.
>
>
>>
>> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
>> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
>> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
>> condenser.
>
>Yeah, that's around condenser mid point, not at the end of the condenser where
>the solid liquid train exists.
You dont think there is a small amount of vapor still present at the
end of the condenser?
Mike
UA local 370
bill
> Bill, can you subcool a saturated refrigerant? Is the refrigerant
> saturated in the receiver? Will not a saturated refrigerants
> temperature agree with it corresponding pressure? See below for a
> further explaination.
> >Then according to what you say there is never any subcooling from the
> >receiver on, except for line losses and gains.
>
> No, I'm saying the subcooling starts from the receiver on. In the
> liquid line which is commonly cooled below saturation by the use of a
> subcooler, or ambient.
Nope, leave the subcooler out of it. Thats an additional toy. ambient
doesn't cut it.
The bulk of subcooling occurs in the coil. The receiver is storage the
liquid line is the conduit.
> >> The temperature of the condenser should correspond to the PT
> >> relationship because it is in a saturated state, if the temperature is
> >> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
> >> condenser.
yes. Bingo-
> >> if the temperature is
> >> much cooler, then air or other non-condensables are indicated in the
> >> condenser.
Liquid Line in relation to condensing. ok
But by your definition distortion cannot appear in the receiver.
comparing Liquid Line to receiver wouldn't show excessive subcooling.
> >> Mike
> >> UA local 370
> >
> >How do you account for measurable subcooling from a receiver with a
> >proberly charged system. (not overcharged to 100 percent liquid in
> >receiver?
> I think the key here is the word *from* the receiver. At that point
> it is all liquid and subcooling would be expected.
10 degrees 6'' from the receiver? I don't think so. Isn't any fans
blowing on the liquid line to shed the heat.
> >Subcooling has to be in relation to condensing.
> >-bill
>
> I don't consider subcooling to be in relation to condensing at least
> not in those words. Subcooling is lowering the temp of the liquid
> line below its saturation temperature.
Substitute boiling for saturation in your sentence above.
That give you any ideas?
All meaningful heat rejection takes place in the coil. Almost all
subcooling takes place in the coil.
> The pressure in the condenser
> is higher than that of the liquid line sure, but its temperature is
> also higher.
:-)
> In the condenser the refrigerant is at saturation, and will normally
> agree to its corresponding pressure with no further reduction in
> temperature. The liquid line is not saturated and its temp
> (hopefully) will be lower than the corresponding PT relation for its
> given pressure. Theoretically a saturated refrigerant cannot subcool
> or for that matter superheat. In order to have subcooling you must
> have all liquid and with superheat, all vapor. Satrurated is a
> mixture of both liquid and vapor. Do you see what I'm getting at?
Yes
You are saying that subcooling from the coil disappears in the receiver
and reappears AFTER the flare nut on the king valve.
You still haven't accounted for the subcooled liquid from the coil.
-bill
bill
> >But where is the subcooling coming from if it isn't in the receiver?
> >lets say
> >we have 10 degrees of subcooling in the cond coil.
> >and 10 degrees of subcooling 6'' from the receiver.
> >Sound reasonable?
> >If so, walk me thru your thinking.
> >or suggest your own parameters to disuss.
> >-bill
>
> Ok. I suggest that the pressure is lower at the outlet of the
> condenser than the inlet, Lower pressures equate to a lower
> temperature at saturation. I also suggest that there is a small
> amount of vapor leaveing the condenser along with the liquid which
> impilies a saturated condition and the lower temp your seeing as
> subcooling is a false subcooling. Subcooling does not begin until the
> point of 100% liquid is reached as in the liquid line. Surley you're
> not suggesting that we can subcool a refrigerant that is in a
> saturated state are you?
no
> Mike
> UA local 370
you are saying that no subcooling occurs in the coil.
is that ever? Or an illustration?
-bill
Marc O'Brien
ftwhd wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:30:57 +0100, Marc O'Brien
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Think about what happens to that receiver liquid after it stood for half a day
> >before the compressor starts. When the compressor starts the receiver pressure
> >rises, but the liquid is not being given any heat and so it effectively becomes
> >subcooled even though it hasn't changed temperature.
> >
> Well in the context that I was talking about was a running system not
> 30 seconds after an extended off time.
Nah, you know what I'm talking about :-)
> >
> >Yeah, that's around condenser mid point, not at the end of the condenser where
> >the solid liquid train exists.
>
> You dont think there is a small amount of vapor still present at the
> end of the condenser?
I have tried to consider this as a possibility but I haven't been able to convince
myself, I have to say that during the condensation process there can not be
significant subcool in the presence of vapour in a turbulent flow. There would
therefore have to be a liquid seal inorder that the required subcoool may take place
before falling into the receiver.
And I do not see any flashing of this liquid on entering the receiver.
Marc
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Heat obeys the laws of heat conductance, relative specific heats between
> saturated vapour in the receiver and subcooled liquid in the receiver.
>
> The vapour that sits at the top of the receiver is probably very stale
> vapour,
> if you know what I mean. It probably very rarely gets changed. It is a
> spectator, it sits at the top of the receiver saturated with the
> saturated
> liquid during long off cycles, then it still sits there saturated but at
> a
> higher pressure watching subcooled liquid flow through the receiver
> beneath it
> during the running cycle.
>
> I say the liquid enters the receiver subcooled and therefore does not
> flash at
> all on entering the receiver. At the begining of the cycle when the
> receiver
> liquid is cooler than the entering liquid there is still no flashing, the
> two
> masses initially just acquire a mean temperature.
>
> Marc
>
> http://fridgetech.com
Thats the best damn answer I ever heard.
I like it.
-bill
Marc O'Brien
bill wrote:
>
> Liquid Line in relation to condensing. ok
> But by your definition distortion cannot appear in the receiver.
> comparing Liquid Line to receiver wouldn't show excessive subcooling.
Bill, liquid line temperature in relation to condenser pressure is not subcool,
there is often at least 6 psi pd through the condenser on small systems.
Temperatures and pressures taken at the king valve very often read 5F subcool,
by my experience, and immagine even more could be acheived easily.
>
> You still haven't accounted for the subcooled liquid from the coil.
Yes I now, Mike doesn't try explaing the physics of this process, he just keeps
saying "because I say so" :-)
Marc
bill
> You dont think there is a small amount of vapor still present at the
> end of the condenser?
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
no
subcooling is designed in to the coil surface.
Thats why they increased the cond coil in relation to the compressor in
high eff. air conditioners. More subcooling.
-bill
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> bill wrote:
>
> >
> > Liquid Line in relation to condensing. ok
> > But by your definition distortion cannot appear in the receiver.
> > comparing Liquid Line to receiver wouldn't show excessive subcooling.
>
> Bill, liquid line temperature in relation to condenser pressure is not
> subcool,
> there is often at least 6 psi pd through the condenser on small systems.
>
> Temperatures and pressures taken at the king valve very often read 5F
> subcool,
> by my experience, and immagine even more could be acheived easily.
True
I was trying to point out his thinking.
> >
> > You still haven't accounted for the subcooled liquid from the coil.
>
> Yes I now, Mike doesn't try explaing the physics of this process, he just
> keeps
> saying "because I say so" :-)
>
> Marc
>
> http://fridgetech.com
>
-bill
bill
any contrary opinions?
I vote this as the definative answer.
do we have any ayes?
In article <398C48BE...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk>, Marc O'Brien
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
Heat obeys the laws of heat conductance, relative specific heats between
saturated vapour in the receiver and subcooled liquid in the receiver.
The vapour that sits at the top of the receiver is probably very stale
vapour,
if you know what I mean. It probably very rarely gets changed. It is a
spectator, it sits at the top of the receiver saturated with the
saturated
liquid during long off cycles, then it still sits there saturated but at
a
higher pressure watching subcooled liquid flow through the receiver
beneath it
during the running cycle.
I say the liquid enters the receiver subcooled and therefore does not
flash at
all on entering the receiver. At the begining of the cycle when the
receiver
liquid is cooler than the entering liquid there is still no flashing,
the two
masses initially just acquire a mean temperature.
Marc
-bill
Unknown
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>FTWHD wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 03:24:07 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <vu8mossnc9p11cjop...@4ax.com>, FTWHD wrote:
>> >
>> >> >If I have 10 degrees of subcooling coming from the condenser, going into
>> >> >the receiver, where did my subcooling go?
>> >>
>> >> When that little ol line from the condenser empties into that big ol
>> >> reciever the liquid flashes off back into a saturated state due to a
>> >> change in volume.
>> >Yes just like the outlet of a metering device.
>> >lowering the temperature of the rest of the liquid. I'm with you so far.
>> >
>> >> It is at this point where the subcooled liquid from
>> >> the condenser changes back to a saturated state
>>
>> >are you saying it re-absorbs the heat?
>>
>> No, just that when there is a mixture of liquid and vapor the
>> condition is saturated
>
>Think about what happens to that receiver liquid after it stood for half a day
>before the compressor starts. When the compressor starts the receiver pressure
>rises, but the liquid is not being given any heat and so it effectively becomes
>subcooled even though it hasn't changed temperature.
>
>
I think in that case we would need to install a stale refrigerant
re-circulator on the reciever up stream of the mechanical
un-subcooler. :) Im cracking myself up now!
Mike
UA local 370
Craig
ŽMechanical-Unsubcooler* would create enough turbulence in the receiver
to reintegrate the stale refrigerant back into the system and thus keep
system performance at it's peak.
* The Mechanical-Unsubcooler is a registered trademarK of MTB
Enterprises
Craig
UA local 420
Unknown
wrote:
>In article <3996666c...@news.usol.com>, (ftwhd) wrote:
>> Ok. I suggest that the pressure is lower at the outlet of the
>> condenser than the inlet, Lower pressures equate to a lower
>> temperature at saturation. I also suggest that there is a small
>> amount of vapor leaveing the condenser along with the liquid which
>> impilies a saturated condition and the lower temp your seeing as
>> subcooling is a false subcooling. Subcooling does not begin until the
>> point of 100% liquid is reached as in the liquid line. Surley you're
>> not suggesting that we can subcool a refrigerant that is in a
>> saturated state are you?
>no
>> Mike
>> UA local 370
>
>you are saying that no subcooling occurs in the coil.
>is that ever? Or an illustration?
>
>
>-bill
No not really, but I think I'm going to have to take a break from
this. With mechanical un-subcooling, stale refrigerant vapor and
super insulation that wont gain or loose a single degree in a hundred
years, this discussion belongs in a Star Trek movie.
Just try and remember that in order for subcooling to occur there has
to be 100% liquid present. For superheat there must be 100% vapor.
At saturation, the refrigerant will obey the PT relationship for the
given pressure. When there is 100% liquid or vapor the PT
relationship should not exist. If it does exist then you have zero
subcooling or zero superheat which is not a good thing.
Now I'm going to put on my life preserver and abandon this sinking
ship.
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
bill wrote:
> This is so good I'm posting it again.
> any contrary opinions?
> I vote this as the definative answer.
> do we have any ayes?
>
> In article <398C48BE...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk>, Marc O'Brien
> <mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Heat obeys the laws of heat conductance, relative specific heats between
> saturated vapour in the receiver and subcooled liquid in the receiver.
>
> The vapour that sits at the top of the receiver is probably very stale
> vapour,
> if you know what I mean. It probably very rarely gets changed. It is a
> spectator, it sits at the top of the receiver saturated with the
> saturated
> liquid during long off cycles, then it still sits there saturated but at
> a
> higher pressure watching subcooled liquid flow through the receiver
> beneath it
> during the running cycle.
>
> I say the liquid enters the receiver subcooled and therefore does not
> flash at
> all on entering the receiver. At the begining of the cycle when the
> receiver
> liquid is cooler than the entering liquid there is still no flashing,
> the two
> masses initially just acquire a mean temperature.
>
Yes, I keep running the thought experiment or mind picture process in my
super efficient mental simulation machine and it all makes perfect sense.
This process would suggest that the amount of subcool available in the
receiver is only limited by design condenser TD. Specifically by the
difference between liquid seal saturated temperature and ambient.
Most condensers are sized to provide some subcool with the use of the liquid
seal, but there are times when the condenser is sized just to condense. This
might be when all the pipe run is downhill from the receiver. These
condesers will use larger condenser drain lines and will only maybe develop
a subcooling liquid seal if the drain line is undersized. In this instance
the subcooling is not wanted because it would be acquired at the expense of
raised head pressure and lower compressor power efficiencies.
Marc
Unknown
>You dick you beat me to it. Although I think the
>ŽMechanical-Unsubcooler* would create enough turbulence in the receiver
>to reintegrate the stale refrigerant back into the system and thus keep
>system performance at it's peak.
> * The Mechanical-Unsubcooler is a registered trademarK of MTB
>Enterprises
> Craig
>UA local 420
>
>
LOL Well you know you have to be quick here. :)
Mike
UA local 370
Marc O'Brien
FTWHD wrote:
>
> Well ok then I have no arguement with that MarC.
Lol, you have no argument period Mike :-)
套arC
http://www.fridgetech.com
http://www.fridgetech.co.uk
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
bill
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:57:54 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <3996666c...@news.usol.com>, (ftwhd) wrote:
>
> >> Ok. I suggest that the pressure is lower at the outlet of the
> >> condenser than the inlet, Lower pressures equate to a lower
> >> temperature at saturation. I also suggest that there is a small
> >> amount of vapor leaveing the condenser along with the liquid which
> >> impilies a saturated condition and the lower temp your seeing as
> >> subcooling is a false subcooling. Subcooling does not begin until the
> >> point of 100% liquid is reached as in the liquid line. Surley you're
> >> not suggesting that we can subcool a refrigerant that is in a
> >> saturated state are you?
> >no
> >> Mike
> >> UA local 370
> >
> >you are saying that no subcooling occurs in the coil.
> >is that ever? Or an illustration?
> >
> >
> >-bill
>
> No not really, but I think I'm going to have to take a break from
> this. With mechanical un-subcooling, stale refrigerant vapor and
> super insulation that wont gain or loose a single degree in a hundred
> years, this discussion belongs in a Star Trek movie.
That's uncalled for and nasty.
If you had a better understanding, analogy's wouldn't have to be used to
explain it to you.
> Just try and remember that in order for subcooling to occur there has
> to be 100% liquid present. For superheat there must be 100% vapor.
> At saturation, the refrigerant will obey the PT relationship for the
> given pressure. When there is 100% liquid or vapor the PT
> relationship should not exist. If it does exist then you have zero
> subcooling or zero superheat which is not a good thing.
You still haven't addressed the question.
> Now I'm going to put on my life preserver and abandon this sinking
> ship.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
Yes do some homework and we'll talk when you get back.
-bill
bill
<mlob...@fridgetech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
There are exceptions.
but your explanation of the receiver rings true.
You play a good devils adocate.
now what are we gonna debate?
-bill
Marc O'Brien
Craig wrote:
> You dick you beat me to it. Although I think the
> ®Mechanical-Unsubcooler* would create enough turbulence in the receiver
> to reintegrate the stale refrigerant back into the system and thus keep
> system performance at it's peak.
> * The Mechanical-Unsubcooler is a registered trademarK of MTB
> Enterprises
> Craig
> UA local 420
>
®Mechanical-Unsubcooler identified by me (®MarC)
It is an expression, used to describe what happens in the liquid line and is a
deriviative of the 3 causes of liquid pressure loss therein.
At each start up a quantity of this semi stale vapour condenses and so accumaltively
over the cycles is replaced. In the other words the receiver is ALIVE.
®MarC
bill
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 18:01:59 GMT, Craig <cmoo...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >You dick you beat me to it. Although I think the
> >套echanical-Unsubcooler* would create enough turbulence in the receiver
> >to reintegrate the stale refrigerant back into the system and thus keep
> >system performance at it's peak.
> > * The Mechanical-Unsubcooler is a registered trademarK of MTB
> >Enterprises
> > Craig
> >UA local 420
> >
> >
> LOL Well you know you have to be quick here. :)
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
>
Maybe you guys should get a refrig book without pictures eh?
Should we put you two down as against?
Marc O'Brien
ftwhd wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:57:54 GMT, bill <tsu...@columbus.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <3996666c...@news.usol.com>, (ftwhd) wrote:
>
> >> Ok. I suggest that the pressure is lower at the outlet of the
> >> condenser than the inlet, Lower pressures equate to a lower
> >> temperature at saturation. I also suggest that there is a small
> >> amount of vapor leaveing the condenser along with the liquid which
> >> impilies a saturated condition and the lower temp your seeing as
> >> subcooling is a false subcooling. Subcooling does not begin until the
> >> point of 100% liquid is reached as in the liquid line. Surley you're
> >> not suggesting that we can subcool a refrigerant that is in a
> >> saturated state are you?
> >no
> >> Mike
> >> UA local 370
> >
> >you are saying that no subcooling occurs in the coil.
> >is that ever? Or an illustration?
> >
> >
> >-bill
>
> No not really, but I think I'm going to have to take a break from
> this. With mechanical un-subcooling, stale refrigerant vapor and
> super insulation that wont gain or loose a single degree in a hundred
> years, this discussion belongs in a Star Trek movie.
>
> Just try and remember that in order for subcooling to occur there has
> to be 100% liquid present.
This happens in the liquid seal leaving the condenser.
Think of the vapour sitting above the receiver as a place holder, try to
imagine it is just air at a pressure used to cushion the fluctuating liquid
level in the receiver. Just like air in a water systems expansion tank, after
all, water in that imagined system would be subcooled too :-)
I hope you soon see the light Mike and find peace with yourself over the
issue as I have :-)
套arC
> For superheat there must be 100% vapor.
> At saturation, the refrigerant will obey the PT relationship for the
> given pressure. When there is 100% liquid or vapor the PT
> relationship should not exist. If it does exist then you have zero
> subcooling or zero superheat which is not a good thing.
>
Vicki
bill wrote:
> In article <398BBC78...@usa.net>, vic...@usa.net wrote:
>
> > FTWHD wrote:
> >
> > > On a side note to this disscussion, have you noticed the lack of
> > > participation of other group members when the disscussion gets
> > > technical? Are we boring or what? :)
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > UA local 370
> >
> > Well, I was figuring on jumping in, but you two were doing such
> > a good job of it that my submission would have been redundant,
> >
> > Vicki
> >
> Whats your opinion?
> Can you have subcooling out of a liquid receiver?
> -bill
My opinion was more on a point of physics, where it was stated
something to the effect that you couldn't have a sub-cooled liquid with
vapor there, such as in a receiver. But you can have it that way in REAL
life; for example, you have water vapor at all sorts of
temperatures...steam, clouds, humidity, etc. And isn't 32º what is
called the triple point of water, because it can exist in all three
states at that temperature?
Sliding back into lurking mode...
Vicki
Earle
simultaneously. It doesn't have to be just 32º. It could be anywhere as
long as all three exist at the same time.
--
Earle
Vicki <vic...@usa.net> wrote in message news:398C7432...@usa.net...
Steve's Account
Stale refrigerant replacement... or maybe a stale vapor recovery system..
What a good midwinter HVAC scam... :-)
Steve
Craig
I have seen the refrigerant changed because it was "worn out". LOL
Craig
UA local 420
bill
(Steve's Account) wrote:
> I can see the next big home owner scam....
>
> Stale refrigerant replacement... or maybe a stale vapor recovery system..
>
> What a good midwinter HVAC scam... :-)
>
> Steve
>
I suppose you agree with Mike that there is no subcooling in a condenser
coil or a receiver.
-bill
bill
wrote:
> Steve
> I have seen the refrigerant changed because it was "worn out". LOL
> Craig
> UA local 420
>
> Steve's Account wrote:
> >
> > I can see the next big home owner scam....
> >
> > Stale refrigerant replacement... or maybe a stale vapor recovery
> > system..
> >
> > What a good midwinter HVAC scam... :-)
> >
> > Steve
proud to be union eh?
-bill
Craig
Yes Bill Im very proud to be union. I definitely couldn't find better
benefits, pay or education in the non union sector than I receive now.
The "worn out" freon deal was done by some scab hack to a friend of my
mothers.
Craig
UA local 420
Craig
When did Mike ever post that there was no sub cooling in the condenser
coil? I must have missed this post your referring to. And I guess your
sucking up to ®MarC the Brit since you thought the mechanical
unsubcooling and stale freon theories were great. The lad has quite an
imagination with those 2 ideas. :)
Craig
UA local 420
bill wrote:
>
> In article <slrn8ootsp...@hub.fern.com>, ste...@hub.fern.com
> (Steve's Account) wrote:
>
> > I can see the next big home owner scam....
> >
> > Stale refrigerant replacement... or maybe a stale vapor recovery system..
> >
> > What a good midwinter HVAC scam... :-)
> >
> > Steve
> >
>
FTWHD
wrote:
>In article <slrn8ootsp...@hub.fern.com>, ste...@hub.fern.com
>(Steve's Account) wrote:
>
>> I can see the next big home owner scam....
>>
>> Stale refrigerant replacement... or maybe a stale vapor recovery system..
>>
>> What a good midwinter HVAC scam... :-)
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
>
>I suppose you agree with Mike that there is no subcooling in a condenser
>coil or a receiver.
>-bill
Bill, recap one more time for me how the action of subcooling a
saturated refrigerant takes place within the reciever.
Mike
UA local 370
FTWHD
> Bill
> When did Mike ever post that there was no sub cooling in the condenser
>coil? I must have missed this post your referring to. And I guess your
>sucking up to ®MarC the Brit since you thought the mechanical
>unsubcooling and stale freon theories were great. The lad has quite an
>imagination with those 2 ideas. :)
> Craig
>UA local 420
>
In my mind in order to have *stale* refrigerant in the reciever you
would need a bladder. As you point out, I never said there isnt any
subcooling available at the end of the condenser. What I was trying
to say was that subcoolong does not occure in the reciever.
I said it over and again, but I guess the point is lost that a
refrigerant in a saturated state musy obey the PT relationship and
cannot be subcooled without a change of state to a liquid. I could
tell MarC was getting weary when he pulled out all the stops and
invented the Mechanical Un-Subcooler and stale vapor theroys that Bill
swallowed hook line and sinker. Oh well.
Mike
UA local 370
Buck153
at 135°F and the condenser subcooled the refrigerant 10°F and it enters the
receiver at 125° and then a dog pisses on the receiver tank.
Is the refrigerant further subcooled in the receiver tank?
Buck