0
Research Papers

Impact of Dynamics on the Accuracies of Different Experimental Data-Processing Methods for Steady-State Heat Transfer Rate Measurement

[+] Author and Article Information
Howard Cheung

Department of Building Services Engineering,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Room ZS 824, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong
e-mail: hcheun@polyu.edu.hk

Shengwei Wang

Professor
Chair Professor of Building Services Engineering
Department of Building Services Engineering,
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Room ZS 859, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong
e-mail: shengwei.wang@polyu.edu.hk

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received June 26, 2016; final manuscript received June 4, 2017; published online September 13, 2017. Assoc. Editor: John C. Chai.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 10(2), 021008 (Sep 13, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: TSEA-16-1180; doi: 10.1115/1.4037543 History: Received June 26, 2016; Revised June 04, 2017

It is becoming often to measure steady-state heat transfer rate from thermal systems with variable speed and volume equipment and hence with fluctuating properties and mass flow rates. However, it is unclear if the conventional heat transfer rate measurement based on averages of temperature and pressure measurement is representative enough to represent the effect of system dynamics and measure their heat transfer rates accurately. This paper studied the issue by comparing its accuracy and uncertainty to that of alternative data-processing methods with theoretically less systematic bias. The comparison was conducted with steady-state data from a variable-speed ductless heat pump (DHP) system with occasional fluctuation of refrigerant flow and properties. The results show that the accuracy improvement brought by one alternative method is statistically significant albeit small in magnitude, and the other method may reduce uncertainty of the heat transfer rate measurement in tests with large periodic changes of measured variables. Nonetheless, both alternative methods are about 100 times more computationally expensive than the conventional averaging method, and averages of temperature and pressure measurement are still appropriate when computational resources are limited.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

ASHRAE, 2009, “ Methods of Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,” American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA, Standard No. ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009. http://www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae-37-2009?product_id=1650947
ASME, 2016, “ Air-Cooled Heat Exchanger,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, Standard No. ASME PTC 30-1991 (RA 2016). https://www.asme.org/products/codes-standards/ptc-30-1991-air-cooled-heat-exchangers
BSI, 1999, “ Heat Exchangers—Water-to-Water Heat Exchangers for District Heating—Test Procedures for Establishing the Performance Data,” British Standards Institution, London, Standard No. BS EN 1148:1999. https://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030062475
BSI, 2014, “ Heat Exchangers—Forced Convection Unit Air Coolers for Refrigeration—Test Procedures for Establishing the Performance,” British Standards Institution, London, Standard No. BS EN 328:2014. https://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030269389
Payne, W. V. , Domanski, P. A. , and Muller, J. , 1999, “ A Study to Water-to-Water Heat Pump Using Hydrocarbon and Hydrofluorocarbon Zeotropic Mixtures,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, Report No. 6330. https://www.nist.gov/publications/study-water-water-heat-pump-using-hydrocarbon-and-hydrofluorocarbon-zeotropic-mixtures
Comstock, M. C. , 1999, “ Development of Analysis Tools for the Evaluation of Fault Detection and Diagnostics in Chillers,” Masters' dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. http://www.ibrarian.net/navon/paper/Development_of_Analysis_Tools_for_the_Evaluation_.pdf?paperid=11601308
Shen, B. , 2006, “ Improvement and Validation of Unitary Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Simulation Models at Off-Design Conditions,” Ph.D. thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3232237/
Stasiek, J. , Collins, M. W. , Ciofalo, M. , and Chew, P. E. , 1996, “ Investigation of Flow and Heat Transfer in Corrugated Passages: I—Experimental Results,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 39(1), pp. 149–164. [CrossRef]
He, X. , Lustbader, J. A. , Arik, M. , and Sharma, R. , 2015, “ Heat Transfer Characteristics of Impinging Steady and Synthetic Jets Over Vertical Flat Surface,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 80, pp. 825–834. [CrossRef]
ASME, 2013, “ Test Uncertainty Performance Test Codes,” The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, Standard No. ASME PTC 19.1-2013. http://files.asme.org/Catalog/Codes/PrintBook/35537.pdf
ASHRAE, 2013, 2013 ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA. [PubMed] [PubMed]
Buswell, R. A. , 2001, “ Uncertainty in the First Principle Model Based Condition Monitoring of HVAC Systems,” Ph.D. thesis, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134/7559
Cheung, H. , and Braun, J. E. , 2014, “ Performance Mapping for Variable-Speed Ductless Heat Pump Systems in Heating and Defrost Operation,” HVAC&R Res., 20(5), pp. 545–558. [CrossRef]
ASHRAE, 1987, “ Standard Method for Airflow Measurement,” American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA, Standard No. ANSI/ASHRAE 41.2-1987 (RA 1992). https://infostore.saiglobal.com/en-au/Standards/ASHRAE-41-2-1987-R1992--951050/
Chapra, S. , and Canale, R. , 2014, Numerical Methods for Engineers, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill Education, New York.
Kline, S. J. , and McClintock, F. A. , 1953, “ Describing Uncertainties in Single-Sample Experiments,” Mech. Eng., 75(1), pp. 3–8. https://wenku.baidu.com/view/155b9307eff9aef8941e0668.html
Lemmon, E. W. , and Jacobsen, R. T. , 2004, “ Equations of State for Mixtures of R-32, R-125, R-134a, R-143a, and R-152a,” J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 33(2), p. 593. [CrossRef]
Lemmon, E. W. , 2003, “ Pseudo-Pure Fluid Equations of State for the Refrigerant Blends R-410A, R-404A, R-507A, and R-407C,” Int. J. Thermophys., 24(4), pp. 991–1006. [CrossRef]
Roy, C. J. , and Oberkampf, W. L. , 2011, “ A Comprehensive Framework for Verification, Validation, and Uncertainty Quantification in Scientific Computing,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 200(25–28), pp. 2131–2144. [CrossRef]
Bell, I . H. , Wronski, J. , Quoilin, S. , and Lemort, V. , 2014, “ Pure and Pseudo-Pure Fluid Thermophysical Property Evaluation and the Open-Source Thermophysical Property Library CoolProp,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 53(6), pp. 2498–2508. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Thorade, M. , and Saadat, A. , 2013, “ Partial Derivatives of Thermodynamic State Properties for Dynamic Simulation,” Environ. Earth Sci., 70(8), pp. 3497–3503. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of experimental setup around the DHP condenser

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Example plot of changes of refrigerant mass flow rates during the experiments when the compressor is changing its speed constantly

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Relative uncertainties of case 1 (data-processing method 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Relative uncertainties of case 2 (data-processing method 2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Relative uncertainties of case 3 (data-processing method 3 with Δtf at 60 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Change of expanded uncertainty of heat transfer rate and random expanded uncertainty with integration time interval in experiment 1 in Table 7

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Change of expanded uncertainty of heat transfer rate and random expanded uncertainty with integration time interval in experiment 2 in Table 7

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Change of expanded uncertainty of heat transfer rate and random expanded uncertainty with integration time interval in experiment 3 in Table 7

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Change of expanded uncertainty of heat transfer rate and random expanded uncertainty with integration time interval in experiment 4 in Table 7

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Change of difference between heat transfer rates of cases 1 and 2 with relative random expanded uncertainty in case study 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Refrigerant flow in the ductless heat pump system in the psychrometric chamber for its experiments of its heating operation

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In