Glycol VS water
John Taylor
ftwhd wrote:
> Does anyone know off hand how much of an efficiency loss there will be
> using a glycol solution over plain water for hot water heat? I have a
> HW coil that I want to prevent from freezing and bursting in the
> winter and was thinking that a glycol water mix may be the simplest
> way to accomplish this. The fan coil is in a gymnasium and is supply
> by 100 % outside air There are 3 250K btu boilers supplying the two
> fan coil units. Barring the use of an anti freeze thing I will have
> to come up with somekind of control senerio to make them "freeze
> proof" Currently the HW valve is controlled by a Sebie hydraulic
> actuator and barber-coleman dc stats.
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
>
> Reply to, <ft...@accessflint.com>
Mike,
Here are the numbers I have. The following are based upon a 50% solution
of water/glycol.
Heat Transfer:
50% solution glycol/water
ethylene glycol = 13% less
propylene glycol = 10% less
Add 15% to the circulators flow rate, 40% to the pump head for the same
performance as water, also add 20% to the size of the expansion tank.
These figures are from one source I have on hydronic heating (written by
Dan Holohan).
Another reference I have is the tech sheet for Noburst propylene glycol
antifreeze. They state a much lower impact on system performance. I'm
not quite sure if I can send the data sheet as an attachment so if you'd
like to e-mail me with a fax number I can send it over.
A couple things to keep in mind when using glycol. It is not compatible
with aluminum or galvanized, does require periodic check-ups and it is
flammable under the right circumstances.
Hope this helps,
John Taylor
Mark Morissette
>using a glycol solution over plain water for hot water heat? I have a
I can't speak for the following in regards to your application, but I
can offer my knowledge of water/glycol in regards to automobile usage,
which for all intents and purposes is doing basically the same thing -
carrying heat..
A proper 50/50 Glycol/Water solution will carry MORE heat then a 100%
solution of either.. That's why when you add coolant to a car, it's
allways mixed 50% with water..
Now, as for it's usage in a hot water heating system, I can't offer
any knowledge at all! If it's designed for 100% water, I would
imagine there would be problems however - sensors, valves, etc may be
intollerant to the glycol..
---
Mark, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
Remove NOSPAM to respond via Email!
ICQ# 17308959
Bill Maghan
solution to prevent freezing. He asks if anyone knows off hand how much of
a loss to expect.
Water / glycol solutions have less heat capacity than water. You'll have to
run at a higher temperature or move more liquid to get the same performance.
How much of a hit you take depends on how strong a solution you make.
Mark Morisette wrote:
"A proper 50/50 Glycol/Water solution will carry MORE heat then a 100%
solution of either.. That's why when you add coolant to a car, it's
always mixed 50% with water.."
Mark is wrong. Sort of. The only reason the automotive mixture can carry
more heat than water is that the vapour pressure is less, so the liquid can
be used at a higher temperature. 50/50 isn't "proper" for ftwhd's
application. Mark may be totally wrong. Any opinions based on data?
Enough antifreeze to protect to the lowest expected temperature is
"proper." This may be as little as 10%, and the impact on heat capacity
might not matter much.
You'll get more leaks with glycol. The leaks will be much messier. There
are environmental concerns, so stock up on kitty litter. Sweating pipes in
the system will be less fun. And you'll need a sugar refractometer to check
the concentration of antifreeze. Use no more than you need to to avoid
freezing.
Bill Maghan
Vicki Nichols
>Does anyone know off hand how much of an efficiency loss there will be
>using a glycol solution over plain water for hot water heat? I have a
>winter and was thinking that a glycol water mix may be the simplest
>way to accomplish this. The fan coil is in a gymnasium and is supply
>by 100 % outside air There are 3 250K btu boilers supplying the two
>fan coil units. Barring the use of an anti freeze thing I will have
>to come up with somekind of control senerio to make them "freeze
>proof" Currently the HW valve is controlled by a Sebie hydraulic
>actuator and barber-coleman dc stats.
>
>Mike
>UA local 370
>
Freezing in a boiler in Phoenix isn't an issue, but I found out
something about glycol when I inherited a system that makes ice
at night (Trane "cold generator" with four Scroll compressors) and
acts as a chiller during the day before the rates go up.
Anyway, the (ethylene) glycol loop had no water treatment in
it -- the pH was around THREE when I took over. Acid can't be
good on the closed system! Compounding the problem was the fact
that the cretins used ethylene glycol and not propylene glycol;
we had to have it hauled off and disposed of as it's considered
a hazardous materials. Much flushing later, we replaced it with
the proper water treatment as well as several 55 gallon drums
of the propylene glycol.
I'm no expert, just sharing my experience. I suggest you
get advice from a water treatment company that you TRUST.
I remember seeing some stuff at a supply house made by
NuCalgon that's antifreeze heat transfer solution; it might
have water treatment in it and definitely will have a cut sheet
with more information on it. NuCalgon's got a web site where
we d/l MSDS sheets - probably have good info there.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Vicki Nichols
>Mark Morisette wrote:
>"A proper 50/50 Glycol/Water solution will carry MORE heat then a 100%
>solution of either.. That's why when you add coolant to a car, it's
>always mixed 50% with water.."
>
>Mark is wrong. Sort of. The only reason the automotive mixture can carry
>more heat than water is that the vapour pressure is less, so the liquid can
>be used at a higher temperature. 50/50 isn't "proper" for ftwhd's
>application. Mark may be totally wrong. Any opinions based on data?
The liquid is used at a higher temperature by controlling the
pressure with a radiator cap. A 14# cap, if I recall my HVAC schooling
oh so many years ago, gives you a 153 degree boiling temperature in
your radiator.
>You'll get more leaks with glycol. The leaks will be much messier. There
>are environmental concerns, so stock up on kitty litter. Sweating pipes in
>the system will be less fun. And you'll need a sugar refractometer to check
>the concentration of antifreeze. Use no more than you need to to avoid
>freezing.
>
Why do you say you'll get more leaks with the glycol? Just curious. It's
a larger molecule than water. Environmental concerns are about zero when
you use the PROPYLENE glycol, which is used in a LOT of FOOD products.
Vicki Nichols
>I can't speak for the following in regards to your application, but I
>can offer my knowledge of water/glycol in regards to automobile usage,
>which for all intents and purposes is doing basically the same thing -
>carrying heat..
>
>solution of either.. That's why when you add coolant to a car, it's
That's not why you use antifreeze; you use it to LOWER THE FREEZING
POINT. What's the specific heat of glycol?
Mike Hardy
Thanks John that's the info I was looking for. No need to fax the
other thing over as I was just running solutions over in my head and I
thought about glycol. Its probably not my best option.
Mike
UA local 370
Reply to, <ft...@accessflint.com>
Hello Mike,
I don't know what temperatures you go down to, but I wouldn't think of not
using glycol in most 100% outside air system here in Europe, especially if
the coil is near the intake!
I have lost one coil, and one was enough, I have never found a frost
protection system foolproof enough to let me sleep at nights:) Will the
outside air damper always close when the system de - energizes? what happens
if it gets stuck open? and/or the pump trips in frost protection mode!!!
It was many years ago - most embarassing and it cost me money, like these
things have a habit of doing of course! Not trying to be negative, but
perhaps other folk have other solutions (excuse the pun:) and would be
interested to know,
Regards, Mike
Ambthair Services, UK - http://www.ambthair.com/
Dan Duddy
mix. According to the ACCA/Ferris text, the sensible heat
equation for a glycol/water mix is:
BTUH = 480 * GPM * TD
This is compared to
BTUH = 500 * GPM * TD for pure water.
Although approximate, it thus appears that for the same flow rate
(GPM) and same temperature drop through the heat exchanger (TD),
the glycol mix will be only 480/500 (96%) as efficient.
If you increase the temperature of the fluid slightly, and slow
the flow rate down (to provide a slightly larger fluid TD through
the heat exchanger than you used with the water only), you should
get the same result you had with water only.
Mark Morissette
>>more heat than water is that the vapour pressure is less, so the liquid can
>>be used at a higher temperature. 50/50 isn't "proper" for ftwhd's
>>application. Mark may be totally wrong. Any opinions based on data?
>
> The liquid is used at a higher temperature by controlling the
>pressure with a radiator cap. A 14# cap, if I recall my HVAC schooling
>oh so many years ago, gives you a 153 degree boiling temperature in
>your radiator.
Ok, so I was only partly correct.. The theory behind my response was
at least correct to some extent - It just appears that (as I mentioned
might be possible) that the info may not be relevant in regards to a
heating system.. ;-)
Sonofdawra
>the flow rate down (to provide a slightly larger fluid TD through
>the heat exchanger than you used with the water only), you should
>get the same result you had with water only.
I assume by fluid TD you mean what the engineers would call Delta T-------
[ Entering fluid temp - leaving fluid temp]. I would suspect that you really
need to increase your flow rate of your fluid if you want to transfer more heat
to the air passing over the coil. The more gallons of heated fluid you put
past a given point, the more potential Btu's you have to transfer to the air.
Also, if the temperature of the leaving fluid is warmer due to the increased
flow of fluid, then the TD between the fluid and the coil's entering air temp
would remain greater throughout the coil. For example, if the leaving fluid
temp was 170 degrees and the entering air temp was 70 degrees on the coil, this
would create an approximate 100 degree TD in the latter part of the coil. Now
increase the flow rate and raise the leaving fluid temp to 185 degrees, then
the approximate coil TD in the latter part of the coil would be 115 degrees F
[185 -70]. Therefore the air would pick up more heat passing over that part of
the coil.
Hope I was able to explain my perspective well enough for you to understand
what I was getting at.
Have a nice day, Ron
Bill Maghan
which he was, but the guy has grace! He didn't get bent. I want you to
know, Mark, that I live where my truck will never freeze, but I use a
mixture of 60% distilled water and the rest antifreeze in my truck. You've
got to use antifreeze in any vehicle if you want it to last. No more than
fifty percent, no less than twenty.
Vickie asks:
"Why do you say you'll get more leaks with the glycol? Just curious. It's
a larger molecule than water."
I really don't know. It may have to do with surface tension. Glycol
doesn't evaporate like water does, so very small leaks that might not show
with water will show. My feeling is that glycol leaks in situations where
water does not. I should not state that it's a fact. Because the leaks are
more of a mess they may seem larger.
Dan Duddy wrote:
According to the ACCA/Ferris text, the sensible heat
equation for a glycol/water mix is:
BTUH = 480 * GPM * TD
This is compared to
BTUH = 500 * GPM * TD for pure water.
This reduces to a gylcol mix having 48/50 the heat capacity of water. When
the mixture is in the water-to-air heat exchanger fewer BTU leave the glycol
mix per degree of temperature loss than water. The antifreeze mix cools
more quickly in the coil. More gallons of it must flow to provide the same
heat at the same temperature. Or the antifreeze mix can be sent to the coil
at a higher temperature and the same GPM.
Does anyone else call this stuff "Brine?"
Bill Maghan
Vicki Nichols
>This reduces to a gylcol mix having 48/50 the heat capacity of water. When
>the mixture is in the water-to-air heat exchanger fewer BTU leave the glycol
>mix per degree of temperature loss than water. The antifreeze mix cools
>more quickly in the coil. More gallons of it must flow to provide the same
>heat at the same temperature. Or the antifreeze mix can be sent to the coil
>at a higher temperature and the same GPM.
>
>Does anyone else call this stuff "Brine?"
>
>Bill Maghan
When I was first starting out in the field, I asked an old
timer what was in a chilled water loop. He said, in his Missouri
drawl, "Brawn." I looked it up in a reference book, and at one
time, anything that wasn't "sweetwater" was called brine. (I
recall reading that sweetwater was plain water.)
I don't hear it called that any more that that was over
20 years ago. We just call it a glycol loop if it's used for making
ice...and I hope no one is running plain water with no water
treatment...
Vicki Nichols
>I assume by fluid TD you mean what the engineers would call Delta T-------
> [ Entering fluid temp - leaving fluid temp].
Now there's a question for ya. I'm wondering if there is any
kind of "official party line" on those two.
I've heard Delta T (delta being used by scientists to refer
to a change) used to mean the difference in temperature between
the coolant and the medium being cooled. For instance, the
higher the delta t, the higher the superheat. I think this is out
of a Sporlan booklet.
I've also heard it used interchangeably with TD -- stands
for Temperature Difference -- what we out here call the split...
the difference between supply and return, or between entering
and leaving.
Anyone know if the use of the phrase matters? For all
you engineer types out there?
Mike Hardy
>Hello Mike,
>
>I don't know what temperatures you go down to, but I wouldn't think of not
>using glycol in most 100% outside air system here in Europe, especially if
>the coil is near the intake!
That was my first choice but my boss is against it because of the loss
in efficiency and the cost. He's the boss what can I say. We can and
do experience temperatures down to -20F without a wind chill factor.
The intake currently is about 6 feet from the coil. I understand that
there are plans in the works to extend the intake duct but I am not
sure of how much the extension will be.
>I have lost one coil, and one was enough, I have never found a frost
>protection system foolproof enough to let me sleep at nights:) Will the
>outside air damper always close when the system de - energizes? what
happens
>if it gets stuck open? and/or the pump trips in frost protection mode!!!
Yes I have lost a few myself due to poor design by others. This
particular coil has froze and burst twice despite freeze protection.
It being in a gymnasium well you can imagine the cost of replacing the
hardwood floor. Big big bucks plus the inconvenience to the customer.
My mission (and I don't have a choice but to accept) is to devise a
way to freeze proof this coil. I know without a doubt that no matter
how elaborate or foolproof a freeze protection system is, shit
happens.
As you say dampers can and do bind, leak air, pumps fail, electricity
goes out and tons of things I cant even think of right now can happen
and the coil will burst, the customer will be pissed because my boss
is using the word freeze PROOF and we may end up in court over it
someday. Its really a no win situation using conventional controls.
That's why glycol was my first choice for a truly freeze proof system.
Im still going to push that idea the hardest but I have to come up
will a second option.
Using damper motors that fail closed on a loss of power, wiring the
relays to fail in the desired control sequence, using a valve that
fails open are some of the things I've been mulling around before I
actually commit pen to paper and draw something up.
Thank you for your input. I as you do believe that the glycol
solution is the best avenue for this application.
Regards, Mike
UA local 370
Hello Mike,
I can see where the boss is coming from, what with the loss of efficiency
etc., I went through this exercise recently pretty accurately with Daikin
and the output losses, from memory, were around 10% to 20%, Daikin had
pretty good information on this. The cost of the glycol and the monitoring
for dilution is also a pain.
As a back up, and apart from energizing the pumps for frost protection mode
and closing dampers on loss of power etc., I have toyed with the idea of
using tracer heating throughout or at critical points as a final fail safe.
I don't have to tell you, the vulnerable point is potential non-flowing
water in the coil, and I have often wondered if I could work with the coil
manufacturer so that tracer heating could be incorporated in to the coil.
It would be battery operated, I guess, and independent of the power supply,
I don't know if anyone has heard of anything like this. As quite a few
systems in Europe are going in as 100% outside air, these days, no doubt
more and more folk will be considering an alternative to glycol.
Some of the units going in have recuperators, so I guess if there is a
minimum temperature frost setting within the space then the warmer air
coming back over the recuperator will keep the temperature of the water in
the chilled water coil up, if the frost protection cycle is devised in such
a way,
Would be interested to know any innovations you come up with and the very
best of luck with it, you may be paving the way for some of us!
Sonofdawra
>>
>>Bill Maghan
>
> When I was first starting out in the field, I asked an old
>timer what was in a chilled water
>loop. He said, in his Missouri
>drawl, "Brawn." I looked it up in a reference book, and at one
>time, anything that wasn't "sweetwater" was called brine. (I
>recall reading that sweetwater was plain water.)
Vicki, I would assume that in the olden days that they were generally adding
some type of "salt" to the water for the freeze protection and thus the
reference to "brine".
Sonofdawra
>> [ Entering fluid temp - leaving fluid temp].
>
> Now there's a question for ya. I'm wondering if there is any
>kind of "official party line" on those
>two.
I was of the understanding that scientifically Delta T is used to mean the
change in the temperature of the same substance. Just as Delta P is the change
in the pressure of the same substance. TD is then used for the temperature
difference between two different things.
p...@see_my_sig_for_address.com
and wrote:
>
>Using damper motors that fail closed on a loss of power, wiring the
>relays to fail in the desired control sequence, using a valve that
>fails open are some of the things I've been mulling around before I
>actually commit pen to paper and draw something up.
Take a fire damper and a security door magnet. Lose the
fusible link ( this is not a fire damper any more ), and attach a
piece that will be clamped by the magnet you attach to the duct. Any
power failure, etc, causes the damper to close, at 'fire rated' levels
of assurance. 'manual reset' only, IE, someone climbs their ass up
there after any failure of any kind.
Or, instead of the climbing, you set up an external lever that
protrudes ( way up there ) , for 'resetting' after closures, and they
keep a really long stick, like a gas tank dipping stick, on site.
Cheap, positive, lo-tech.
Ultimately, this damper will reside in the closed position,
because no one will bother re-opening it. Problem solved :-)
Paul
>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~>~~
pjm@(remove this part )pobox.com
My ( newly revised ) WWW site is at http://www.pobox.com/~pjm, featuring free HVAC software.
The Sci.Engr.Heat-Vent-AC and Alt.HVAC FAQ is at http://www.elitesoft.com/sci.hvac/
Bill Maghan
"I was of the understanding that scientifically Delta T is used to mean the
change in the temperature of the same substance. Just as Delta P is the
change
in the pressure of the same substance. TD is then used for the temperature
difference between two different things."
I sure like Paul's idea of using a fire damper held shut by an electromagnet
instead of a fusible link. There is one thing to be careful of, though.
Some magnet coils will eventually overheat and burn if the magnet doesn't
hook up to the moving pole piece. So the lights go out, the shutter closes,
the lights come back on, and the electromagnet turns to smoke. Avoid smoke
by wiring an ice cube relay in the magnet coil circuit. Jump pin one to pin
seven. Wire one magnet lead to pin three. Wire the power to pins seven and
two. This leaves one magnet lead, it's the ground or neutral, whatever you
want to call it. Hopefully, the ice cube relay is the kind with the button
on it to close the contacts. Now you close the shutter, push the little
button on the relay, and the shutters stay closed. But maybe the magnet
coil would not overheat in the absence of it's moving pole piece. If you
think it would be OK when powered up and the shutter closed, a thermal fuse
in series with the magnet coil and attached to the magnet coil would provide
protection from coil overheating when the lights come back on and the
shutter is closed.
Elaborating even more on Paul's idea, you could add an uninterruptable power
supply and a timer and thermostat. This way the shutter doesn't close when
the lights blink, only when they go out and stay out AND it is cold enough
that you want the shutters to close. Still cheaper than a frozen coil.
Use Paul's idea, my elaboration upon Paul's idea, and 10% glycol. Tell
your boss that it's freeze proof.
Bill Maghan
Sonofdawra
>because no one will bother re-opening it. Problem solved :-)
No, ultimately the damper will end up bailing wired open because the in house
maintenance guys will get tired of screwing with it. :o(
Mike Hardy
Vicki Nichols wrote in message
<4.1.199908080...@pop.netaddress.com>...
>>
>>I assume by fluid TD you mean what the engineers would call Delta T-------
>> [ Entering fluid temp - leaving fluid temp].
>
> Now there's a question for ya. I'm wondering if there is any
>kind of "official party line" on those two.
>
>to a change) used to mean the difference in temperature between
>the coolant and the medium being cooled. For instance, the
>higher the delta t, the higher the superheat. I think this is out
>of a Sporlan booklet.
>
> I've also heard it used interchangeably with TD -- stands
>for Temperature Difference -- what we out here call the split...
>the difference between supply and return, or between entering
>and leaving.
>
> Anyone know if the use of the phrase matters? For all
>you engineer types out there?
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Hello Vicky,
I am with the old timer, I have always called any solution other than water
'brine', when I think back why, I have a vague recollection that is how it
is referred to in the Carrier Design Manual.
I always take delta to mean 'change of' so it could be temperature, moisture
content, heat flow - anything really. I suppose delta t is the most
common, but I guess that is used for any change of temperature ; so it could
be the difference from supply air to room air to calculate air volume, water
flow in and out to calculate water volume flow etc.,
Hope this makes some sort of sense!
p...@see_my_sig_for_address.com
time, and wrote:
>Ron I was waiting for someone else to say what a stupid idea that was
>in a more politer way than I ever could. Thanks.
Your mother smells of Elderberries.
p...@see_my_sig_for_address.com
>
>Actually my mother smells like shit, she is dead you asshole. Im
>getting about sick and fucking tired with your wimpy ass remarks about
>my fucking family.
It was a joke from Monty Python, asshole. Apparently it flew
about 2 yards over your seemingly drug-fogged head.
>Theres alot of shit I will and WILL NOT tolerate and you, my friend
>are treading on very unstable waters.
Or, at the very least, conversing with an apparently unstable
individual. WTF have you been smoking ?
>Sorry if your idea sucked.
Sorry if you're making a complete asshole out of yourself.
Excuse me now, I have to go tremble in the closet because of
your threat.
Vicki Nichols
>
>I am with the old timer, I have always called any solution other than water
>'brine', when I think back why, I have a vague recollection that is how it
>is referred to in the Carrier Design Manual.
Thank you! I don't feel as dumb now.
>I always take delta to mean 'change of' so it could be temperature, moisture
>content, heat flow - anything really. I suppose delta t is the most
>common, but I guess that is used for any change of temperature ; so it could
>be the difference from supply air to room air to calculate air volume, water
>flow in and out to calculate water volume flow etc.,
>
>Hope this makes some sort of sense!
>
>Regards, Mike
>
>Ambthair Services, UK - http://www.ambthair.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Deja.com: Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
> http://www.deja.com/
> * To modify or remove your subscription, go to
> http://www.deja.com/edit_sub.xp?group=alt.hvac
> * Read this thread at
> http://www.deja.com/thread/%3C7okrs1%242h3%241%40soap.pipex.net%3E
Vicki Nichols
>fuckoff...@accessflint.com (ftwhd) pondered an excessively long l
>>
>>Actually my mother smells like shit, she is dead you asshole. Im
>>getting about sick and fucking tired with your wimpy ass remarks about
>>my fucking family.
>
> It was a joke from Monty Python, asshole. Apparently it flew
>about 2 yards over your seemingly drug-fogged head.
>
>>Theres alot of shit I will and WILL NOT tolerate and you, my friend
>>are treading on very unstable waters.
>
> Or, at the very least, conversing with an apparently unstable
>individual. WTF have you been smoking ?
>
>>Sorry if your idea sucked.
>
> Sorry if you're making a complete asshole out of yourself.
>
> Excuse me now, I have to go tremble in the closet because of
>your threat.
>
Okay, gentlemen -- I am more than willing to share my
Midol and Budweiser...
Newton Ellison
professionalism to recommend heat-drive a.c? Our activism here could
save lives. Are we up to the challenge?
p...@see_my_sig_for_address.com
and wrote:
Screw your 'challenge'. I'd bet money that, somewhere or
another, somehow or another, you sell the damn things, or make your
money of them in some other way.
In case you haven't noticed, the response to your posts has
been 100 % negative. Take a hint, take a hike.
>Are we just gofers for the electricity industry, or do we have the
>professionalism to recommend heat-drive a.c? Our activism here could
>save lives. Are we up to the challenge?
Paul
roger perkins
<pjm@see_my_sig_for_address.com> wrote in message
news:37b0a81c...@news.ipass.net...
JSmart
What's your idea?
Newton Ellison wrote in message
<19181-37...@newsd-112.bryant.webtv.net>...
p...@see_my_sig_for_address.com
time, and wrote:
>hey Newt,
>
>What's your idea?
Oh, goody... 2 spammers / loonies meet.
Paul
Bob
I have this disturbing vision of the two of them, circling each other
like dogs who've just met, sniffing each others assholes. :-)
not-so-respectfully, Bob
Paul Prior MD
Ellison) wrote:
>Are we just gofers for the electricity industry, or do we have the
>professionalism to recommend heat-drive a.c? Our activism here could
>save lives. Are we up to the challenge?
What is "heat drive ac?"
--
Paul Prior MD ppr...@earthlink.net Don't Blame Me...
Ashland, KY USA I Voted For Bob Dole
"No question that an admission of making false statements
to government officials is an impeachable offense"
Bill Clinton, 1974
HVACMAN
JSmart
Perhaps your distrubing mental images are repressed from earlier childhood
trauma! Did you spend a lot of time with animals or breeding animals, as a
child? Did you partake in the sniffing of assholes? How long have you been
having this vivid mental images. There may be medication that you can take
to make your mental images less disturbing to you.
Wishing you a quick recovery,
Marc
Bob wrote in message <37B46ECB...@hotmail.com>...
>Let's hope they don't breed.
>I have this disturbing vision of the two of them, circling each other
>like dogs who've just met, sniffing each others assholes. :-)
>
>not-so-respectfully, Bob
>
>pjm@see_my_sig_for_address.com wrote:
>>
>> "JSmart" <Smar...@worldnet.att.net> pondered an excessively long
>> time, and wrote:
>>
>> >hey Newt,
>> >
>> >What's your idea?
>>
>> Oh, goody... 2 spammers / loonies meet.
>>
>> >
>> >Newton Ellison wrote in message
>> ><19181-37...@newsd-112.bryant.webtv.net>...
>> >Are we just gofers for the electricity industry, or do we have the
>> >professionalism to recommend heat-drive a.c? Our activism here could
>> >save lives. Are we up to the challenge?
>> >
>> >
>>
Newton Ellison
Heat, Dr.Prior, if you will remember your highschool physics, can do
work. Michael Faraday, in 1825, working with ammonia, found that heat,
applied creatively in a thermo-chemical process, makes ice. Vrtually
all of the ice artificially made in the 1900s used Faraday's process,
called "absorption."
Around 1900, a mechanical process called "vapour compression" was
devised for cooling-- a faster, but more energy-intensive concept. In
1900, even thru 1999, of course, few of us have cared anything about
using less energy, so we have converted, largely, to the mechanical
process.
Because it was easy, in the first half of the 20th century, to use
fuels however we wanted, we accellerated industrial development, and
when the concept of energy "too cheap to meter" from nuclear power was
introduced,
industrialsts, unquestioning, signed on.
So here we are, Doctor, in 1999, deeply witholden to the 11
thousand Dow, prison-building and military-industrial complex, and a
medical doctor doesn't know about heat drive a-c?
No offense, sir, but I am not surprised.
SOMEBODY GET ME A MACARTHUR GRANT! Newton *** San Antonio
Fred McGalliard
which generally requires two pistons. The simplest cooler is the common
expansion cycle which uses the non ideal gas characteristics in place of
the expansion cylinder. (The fluid works against it's own molecular
attraction to expand and thus cools off). The most energy intensive but
mechanically simplest is the ammonia, or similar, cycle absorption
cooler. No moving parts. They also go by useable range. The heat pump
works between any temperature differences, as long as the working fluid
does not freeze solid, hydrogen works fine if your system is tight. The
absorption cycle is very touchy about operating temperature and can be
easily too hot or too cold for a given material, and there are not that
many materials to chose from.
Newton Ellison wrote:
...
Newton Ellison
reciprocating piston, turbine, screw or scroll. Mechanical
refrigeration has usually lubricated metal parts working against each
other. They wear out, in time, and need replacing. Because cooling means
moving heat out of indoors, the process can be reversed, and the heat
that is in the outside air, as long as it is not lower that about 32F,
can be blown inside, as warmed air. If it is really cold, and the "heat
pump" can't make heat, the unit often has has a resistence heater that
must come on if the heating mode is to get you warm. And that's when the
old meter really spins!.
Absorption is a thermo-chemical process, invented in 1825 by
Michael Faraday, using ammonia. Most all the ice artificially produced
in the 1800s and much of the refrigeration, especially in large
installations, such as in breweries and meat-cutting plants, still uses
ammonia absorption. Remember the last time you read about an industrial
ammonia leak? Likely it was absorption refrigeration.
Since ammonia is real trouble when it leaks, some refrigeration
is done with a Lithium Bromide process, this less-efficient, more
labour-intensive and safer absorption cycle uses lower heat. Many have
used solar heat.
See <http://www.Broad.com/>
The nice thing about absorption refrigeration is that it has no
moving parts and therefore does not wear out.
Fred McGilliard is trying to muddy the water.
And he knows it, I'll bet. Shame on you, Fred!
Newton *** San Antonio
roger perkins
temperature. Just the quantity of that heat available diminishes as the
temperature drops. Regerdless of the outside air temperature, the heat pump
will ALLWAYS be more efficient than electric strip heat or other crap that
you're selling.
Newton Ellison <sola...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:27014-37B...@newsd-113.bryant.webtv.net...
Newton Ellison
Of course people can choose to believe the propoganda put out by our
energy masters or they can find out the truth themselves. I am not
selling anything. I do have some experience, however, with heat-drive
a-c as well as propoganda. I am concerned that the lack of public
awareness growing out of misnomers such as "heat pump" is part of the
general attitude that allows society to accept the deaths, in the summer
of 1999, as the Dow tops 11,000, of over 250 people, while folks who
could remedy parts of the problem disavow proven alternatives to
expensive mechanical compression a-c. Why does that seem such a threat?
Really, folks, tell me why my ideas make you so angry.
Newton
Buck153
(Newton Ellison) writes:
snip
>Really, folks, tell me why my ideas make you so angry.
>Newton
Newton,
Your ideas are extreme to say the least. I've quietly read them, and wonder if
your serious or pulling our legs. So really when your so far out of the
mainstream thinking you can expect to be ridiculed. Remember Scientist get
ridiculed by fellow Scientist. So we you come up with these ideas, you'd
better develop a thicker skin.
Buck
Arizona Vixen
sola...@webtv.net (Newton Ellison) wrote:
>
> The nice thing about absorption refrigeration is that it has
no
> moving parts and therefore does not wear out.
You know, Newt, your ignorance is REALLY showing here. Many of us
suspect that you've never even seen an absorption air conditioner, and
this proves it. Drop by my house and I'll show ya one that's less
than a block away -- overgrown with weeds and inoperative for at least
fifteen years.
NO MOVING PARTS? What about the solution pump? The condenser fan
motor? Cooling tower pump and fan for larger units? Chilled water
pumps, and air handler fans? The only units that'll have no moving
parts are small, small refrigerators -- hardly capable of cooling a
home.
That junked Arkla Servel on the next block -- and there were
hundreds installed in Phoenix in the sixties and seventies -- is not as
old as my next door neighbor's A/C -- with the ORIGINAL 1966 Tecumseh
compressor. It's doing a helluva good job considering it's older than
you are, and it'll be about 107 here today. But I guess it's one of
those moving parts that will wear out.
And, no, it's not a Janitrol -- it's a TRANE.
Vicki
Craig
I was through the Broad site a while back. They have several errors in
there site pertaining to the service and operation of absorption
chillers. I was going to send them an Email to this effect but if that's
the way they think it works then Oh Well.
Although as you state there are no moving parts YOUR WRONG. There are
level controls and sensors which fail. Pumps and purges which need to be
serviced. Solution/water side analysis and maintenance. Diaphragms
valves that need repair. You also have just about the same control
system as a centrifugal chiller to contend with which from time to time
has failures. Eddy currant analysis is much more critical on this type
of chiller. If the unit is gas/oil fired you have burner maintenance
that's involved.
Solution side maintenance on an absorption chiller is an ongoing
battle. The LiBr wants to deteriorate the machine while you want to
protect it by adding inhibitors to slow the process.
Next problem would be qualified service techs. Theres a shortage of
qualified vapor compression technicians at the present. There is even a
greater shortage of absorption technicians.
If you want to keep this maintenance free discussion going your arguing
with the wrong person. Ive been servicing absorption chillers alot
longer than you've been spamming the NGs with this theory of yours. Ive
also taught a service course on absorption chillers for the past few
years.
Craig
UA local 9
Author of Absorption Made Easy
Newton Ellison wrote:
>
> A "heat pump" is just another way to say mechanical compression, be it a
> reciprocating piston, turbine, screw or scroll. Mechanical
> refrigeration has usually lubricated metal parts working against each
> other. They wear out, in time, and need replacing. Because cooling means
> moving heat out of indoors, the process can be reversed, and the heat
> that is in the outside air, as long as it is not lower that about 32F,
> can be blown inside, as warmed air. If it is really cold, and the "heat
> pump" can't make heat, the unit often has has a resistence heater that
> must come on if the heating mode is to get you warm. And that's when the
> old meter really spins!.
> Absorption is a thermo-chemical process, invented in 1825 by
> Michael Faraday, using ammonia. Most all the ice artificially produced
> in the 1800s and much of the refrigeration, especially in large
> installations, such as in breweries and meat-cutting plants, still uses
> ammonia absorption. Remember the last time you read about an industrial
> ammonia leak? Likely it was absorption refrigeration.
> Since ammonia is real trouble when it leaks, some refrigeration
> is done with a Lithium Bromide process, this less-efficient, more
> labour-intensive and safer absorption cycle uses lower heat. Many have
> used solar heat.
> See <http://www.Broad.com/>
> The nice thing about absorption refrigeration is that it has no
> moving parts and therefore does not wear out.
Newton Ellison
operation. I have admitted that absorption is troublesome to install and
maintain, but worth the trouble.You guys are just stuck on what our
energy masters would like us to believe. That's OK, time will prove me
right. Trouble is, oldsters who won't use mechanical compressors because
they feel it is too costly, but might be convinced to use absorption,
will continue to suffer and, some of them, die.
My statements stand. Newton.
D.H. Kelly
facts and the performance of heat pumps at different temperature
differences.
An ideal heat pump will always have a COP greater than 1 but real heat pumps
do reach the point where the COP is 1 or less due to various factors
including heat losses and reduced transfer of heat between the reservoirs
and the working fluid. That is the point where electric heating will be as
efficient or more efficient than a heat pump. It does occur in practice.
Also, when the working fluid is warmer than the cold reservoir, it will not
pick up heat from it. If the hot reservoir is warmer than the working fluid
at that point, then no heat will be transferred to it. - In either case the
heat pump will not function.
Don Kelly
dke...@nanaimo.ark.combull
remove the bull to reply
roger perkins <cow...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aYRv3.52398$VL2.5...@news.direcpc.com...
> You're one ignorant asshole!!. The heat pump will remove heat at
ANYoutdoor
> temperature. Just the quantity of that heat available diminishes as the
> temperature drops. Regerdless of the outside air temperature, the heat
pump
> will ALLWAYS be more efficient than electric strip heat or other crap that
> you're selling.
> Newton Ellison <sola...@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:27014-37B...@newsd-113.bryant.webtv.net...
John Gilmer
roger perkins <cow...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aYRv3.52398$VL2.5...@news.direcpc.com...
> You're one ignorant asshole!!. The heat pump will remove heat at
ANYoutdoor
> temperature. Just the quantity of that heat available diminishes as the
> temperature drops. Regerdless of the outside air temperature, the heat
pump
> will ALLWAYS be more efficient than electric strip heat or other crap that
> you're selling.
NOPE!
At some point the true losses (friction in the outside plumbing, I^2R losses
in the outside wiring, superheat, defrost) will be equal to the amout of
heat "pumped" inside. Below this point, resistance heat is CHEAPER.
Long before you get there, however, the amount of heat you "pump" over what
you would get with resistance heat barely justifies the wear and tear on the
outside equipment .
I would generally agree, however, that once you have paid for a heat pump,
you might as well keep it running no matter how cold it gets.
JLG
Fred McGalliard
Newton Ellison wrote:
>
> A "heat pump" is just another way to say mechanical compression,
Sorry but I am a bit picky. A heat pump is just a thing that pumps
heat. A solid state pheltier cooler is classified as a heat pump and
obeys the same thermodynamics. That is, of course, the physics view. The
common usage implies a gas compression cycle used for house heating,
mostly, but in some cases also cooling.
Vicki Nichols
Noticeable in its absence, Newt, is the fact that absorption
cooling falls flat on its face when confronted with REAL summer
temperatures. For example, it was 100 degrees here this morning
already at 9:00 a.m.
It is a well-known fact in Phoenix that, if you have a house
that normally requires a five ton (vapor compression) air conditioner,
once the temperature passes 105 you'll need TEN TONS if you
have an air-cooled absorption unit. I realize that most of the
world doesn't live in Phoenix, but if solar-driven absorption
cooling was all that, it'd be selling like hotcakes here.
Just like a heat pump in the winter...when you need it
to work the hardest, it falls down on its face.
Maybe you can sell absorption in Anchorage...
Newton Ellison
Phoenix has the problems with absorption she says it has, the systems
are sized wrong, installed wrong or sabotaged, maybe all three. Or maybe
it's the low humidity? Solar-assisted installations are always
site-specific and locale-specific.
What is "popular" or "better" in times of technological change is
problematic. All I am saying is that absorption is a well-known,
no-surprises-but-needs-babysitting, proven, centuries-old,
labor-intensive way to cool. I am not selling them, nor am I getting any
kickbacks noting <http://www.broad.com/>
If HVAC people don't want to affront the conventional wisdom of
electricity producers, and can use the excuse that anything solar or
related to it is too much trouble, that's OK by me, keep recommending
energy-guzzling mechanical a-c and replacing them when they fail, over
and over again. Call them "heat pumps," even "Vegematics," if that's
what they tell you to call them. Put in cheap 110v window units that
spin the meter and scare old folks.
But don't make fools of all of us by trashing as well-proven a
technology as absorption.
Newton
Doni Lucero
on a 90 day or a 110 deg day. I do not get the argument of less capacity.
Doni
Craig
I have no problem either with the single or two stage machines I
service in high ambient. They are water cooled though like all high
tonnage absorbers. She is talking about air cooled 5 and 10 ton
residential units.
Craig
UA local 9
bill
Why don't you take your enviromental bs elsewhere? Everything is $ driven.
If people want it they'll buy it. Cramming it down our throats won't work.
absorbtion sucks for the resons discribed not the electric company paying
us off. YOU are the enviromental as*ho** I've been looking for. So I can
shove a stick ** your *** -bill
Vicki Nichols
>Vicky is wrong to trash absorbtion because of her parochial issues.
I think you need to find a better word than parochial; I have
brought up SEVERAL problems with the units.
Okay, Newt, you're the big expert -- let's compare practical
field experience here vs. the bovine defecation you're trying to pass
off here. How many of these units have you seen or worked on?
Do you own any tools? How about refrigeration/gas fitters licenses?
Had both for over twenty years now.
I had to repair one of these my first month out of refrigeration
school -- 1978...and I've yet to see one that didn't like a lot of
attention. Even if they were energy efficient, which they aren't,
you'd spend any money that you saved running them on maintenance
and repair. *IF* you can find someone qualified to work on the sealed
system.
>Phoenix has the problems with absorption she says it has, the systems
>are sized wrong, installed wrong or sabotaged, maybe all three.
Oh, sure, yeah, you betcha. How many of these systems have you
ever seen, and what sizes? Our central library has two enormous
absorption chillers, and it requires a man stationed there FULL TIME
to keep the POS's running. The only reason they were bought was
the enormous kickback the gas company paid the city to install them.
And me and Djelhnter are spending our weekends running around
sabotaging every absorption unit we can find here in Phoenix.
Or maybe
>it's the low humidity? Solar-assisted installations are always
>site-specific and locale-specific.
Oh, right, so low humidity makes it tougher for them to
cool????
> What is "popular" or "better" in times of technological change is
>problematic. All I am saying is that absorption is a well-known,
>no-surprises-but-needs-babysitting, proven, centuries-old,
>labor-intensive way to cool.
Labor and energy intensive. I've got a 26' motor home in
my east RV drive that has a dual fuel absorption refrigerator. It
really LIKES electricity or gas, whatever it's set to run on at the
time. And has a couple of moving parts (i.e., fans).
I am not selling them, nor am I getting any
>kickbacks noting <http://www.broad.com/>
> If HVAC people don't want to affront the conventional wisdom of
>electricity producers, and can use the excuse that anything solar or
>related to it is too much trouble, that's OK by me, keep recommending
>energy-guzzling mechanical a-c and replacing them when they fail, over
>and over again. Call them "heat pumps," even "Vegematics," if that's
>what they tell you to call them. Put in cheap 110v window units that
>spin the meter and scare old folks.
I know a lot of old folks who are too smart to buy in
to your lines. I have no idea why ANYONE would be scared
of a window shaker, though.
> But don't make fools of all of us by trashing as well-proven a
>technology as absorption.
> Newton
Well-proven to be labor-intensive and failure-prone. If
it were so terrific, I can guarantee you that it wouldn't have
been replaced by vapor compression units.
scrit
wrote:
>
>>Vicky is wrong to trash absorbtion because of her parochial issues.
>
> I think you need to find a better word than parochial; I have
>brought up SEVERAL problems with the units.
>
snip
The only real question that remains is, why. Why does anyone waste
their time on this thread?
He has been in my kill file since day one, if you ignore him he will
go away much faster.
FTW
Arizona Vixen
Jeez, I can't believe it took me so long to notice Newt's email
addy. ARGHH!
Arguing with a Newt is like mud wrestling with a pig. After
awhile, you realize that the pig enjoys it.
Vicki
Newton Ellison
"business-as-usual," energy-guzzling air-conditioning attacks my
internet access, asks for an inventory of my tools and for the numbers
of my licences?
"Vicky" seems to know a lot, in a narrow band of knowledge,
but she (maybe he) keeps flailing away in defense of a moribund
technology for large scale mechanical compression a-c, a technology
supported by the producers of electric power.
In incontrovertible fact, there are many areas where
heat-drive is better, longer-lasting, labour-intensive, cost saving, and
may, just in passing, create a conservationist ethic. Are we against
creating a conservatioist ethic, or maybe we don't understand what that
means?
My statements stand. I rest my case.
Bruce Birbeck
>
> My statements stand. I rest my case.
Good. The discussion is over, then. Thank you for your input.
--
BBB
Take out the NOSPAM to reply, unless it's already gone...
Bruce Birbeck
>
> On Wed, 25 Aug 1999 15:44:29 -0700, Bruce Birbeck
> <rocNoS...@tidewater.net> wrote:
>
> >Newton Ellison wrote:
> >>
> >> My statements stand. I rest my case.
> >
> >Good. The discussion is over, then. Thank you for your input.
>
>
> Mike
> UA local 370
>
Yeah, I know. What really amuses me about these threads is how the
other two NGs got trimed: alt.energy.renewable and alt.energy.homepower.
I guess that it wasn't relevent there either.