Confidential

ENGINEERING BULLETIN
No. Product: Evaporative Condensers Date March 2002 001A

Selecting Evaporative Condensers for Optimum System Efficiency

During the last several years, the cost and availability of energy has become a major issue for large power consumers in the United States. As a result of the pace of change in the power generation and distribution business and the threat of significantly higher costs, there is a greater emphasis on optimizing system efficiency in Air-Conditioning, Industrial Process and Industrial Refrigeration applications. This Engineering Bulletin will review the relationship between the compressor and evaporative condenser in an ammonia refrigeration system in terms of system operation and energy consumption. In addition, examples will be provided to demonstrate how system efficiency can be optimized by increasing the heat transfer surface area of the condenser and by developing the proper method of operating the condenser and compressor to reduce total energy consumption. The ultimate goal for any refrigeration system is to find the operating point that yields the lowest total system energy consumption. There are many ways to reduce the total system energy consumption. In terms of the evaporative condenser, exploring the most efficient system design as well as the most efficient condenser operation yields reduced system energy costs.

System Design
The design of a refrigeration system is instrumental in reducing the overall system energy consumption. A refrigeration system has four stages - compression, condensation, expansion and evaporation. These stages are displayed on the Pressure-Enthalpy diagram below. The distance between the compression line (A-B) and the condensation line (B-C) represents the compression ratio. Reducing the head pressure reduces the compression ratio and reduces the energy consumption of the compressor. As shown in the diagram, the lower the condensation line (B-C), the shorter the line will become. The length of the line indicates the amount of energy the evaporative condenser must reject. A shorter line means less energy is required in the compression stage and less heat must be rejected by the condenser. The condensation line more closely matches the evaporation line indicating an energy efficient refrigeration system.

A-B = COMPRESSION B-C = CONDENSATION C-D = EXPANSION D-A = EVAPORATION

Chart 1. Refrigeration System on Pressure-Enthalpy Diagram

PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE

ENTHALPY

Reducing the head pressure design point will have an effect on the compressor as well as the evaporative condenser as detailed below. This relationship between head pressure and energy consumption will be investigated. Compressor Compressor energy consumption (hp or kW) varies directly with condensing temperature. As the condensing temperature increases or decreases, the compressor horsepower also increases or decreases. Chart 2 below shows the energy requirement at various condensing temperatures for a sample screw compressor operating on a 330 TR (1,125 kW) single stage refrigeration system. As you can see from the values on the chart, compressors require a large amount of energy and, in fact, represent approximately 50% of the total system energy consumption. Therefore, compressors can be the source of significant energy savings - even for small reductions in condensing temperature.

Compressor Horsepower vs. Condensing Temperature

330 TR (1,125 kW) System
Compressor Horsepower
550

450

350

250 70 80 90 Condensing Temperature (deg F)

Chart 2. Compressor Energy Consumption vs. Condensing Temperature

100

110

In this example, operating at 95F (35C) condensing, the compressor requires approximately 440 hp (330 kW). Reducing the condensing temperature to 90F (32C) lowers the energy consumption to 410 hp (310 kW) a reduction of 7.3% as shown in the table below. Based on this relationship, for each 1F (0.55C) reduction in condensing temperature compressor horsepower is reduced approximately 1-1/2%. Compressor Hp (kW) 440 hp (330 kW) 410 hp (310 kW) Condensing Temperature, F (C) 95F (35C) 90F (32C) Percent Reduction -7.3%

However, there are limits on how low the condensing pressure can be set. If the head pressure is set too low, several system related difficulties might arise: Evaporator coils may fail to defrost Oil circulation and recovery may be hindered Refrigerant liquid may fail to feed to oil coolers

The operation of the refrigeration system to accommodate these difficulties must be evaluated by the design engineer to weigh the pros and cons of the head pressure set point for various ambient conditions. Evaporative Condenser The affect of head pressure on the evaporative condenser is directly opposite that of the compressor. The evaporative condenser energy consumption varies inversely with condensing temperature. Therefore, as condensing temperature rises, the condenser horsepower requirement drops. Looking at a typical 330 TR (1,125 kW) refrigeration system, Chart 3 below indicates the energy requirement for the typical axial fan evaporative condenser. The evaporative condenser energy consumption will increase dramatically as the condensing temperature approaches the ambient wet bulb temperature and will drop as the condensing temperature increases.

Condenser Horsepower vs. Condensing Temperature

330 TR (1,125 kW) System 200 Condenser Horsepower

150

100

50

0 70 80 90 100 110 Condensing Temperature (deg F)

Chart 3. Evaporative Condenser Energy Consumption vs. Condensing Temperature

As you can see from the above chart, the evaporative condenser requires much less energy than the compressor. The evaporative condenser usually represents 5-10% of the total system energy consumption for a refrigeration system. Since the energy consumption for the evaporative condenser is a small part of the total refrigeration system and is much smaller than the compressor energy consumption, the benefits of decreasing the condensing temperature outweigh the benefits of increasing the condensing temperature. Therefore, system design should be directed toward providing the lowest condensing temperature possible without adversely impacting the compressor operation.

System Operation
Efficient operation of the refrigeration system can provide operating costs savings not found through efficient system design. Refrigeration systems are most often operating at less than system design loads. Design wet bulb temperatures occur only a few hours every year and it is rare that all evaporators are

operating at the same time. During low ambient wet bulb temperatures or periods of reduced heat loads, the evaporative condenser will have more capacity than needed to provide the design condensing temperature. Taking advantage of excess condenser heat rejection capability during low ambient wet bulb conditions by reducing the condensing temperature is often the best means of improving system energy efficiency. In the following example, using the 330 TR (1,125 kW) system described above, the benefits of reducing condensing temperature during reduced ambient conditions will become apparent: Example: 330 TR (1,125 kW) Refrigeration System - Des Moines, IA Design Wet Bulb Temperature = 78F (25.5C) Design Condensing Temperature = 95F (35C) Design Compressor Hp = 440 hp (330 kW) Design Condenser Fan & Pump Hp = 35 hp (26.5 kW)

Condensing Temperature vs. Wet Bulb

330 TR (1,125 kW) Condenser 100 Condensing Temp (deg F)

90

80

70 40 50 60 70 80 90 Wet Bulb (deg F)

Chart 4. Condensing Temperature vs. Wet Bulb Temperature

Based on published weather data available from ASHRAE, the ambient wet bulb in Des Moines will be 60F (15.6C) or less 78% of the time, the refrigeration system could be operated at approximately 83F (28.3C) condensing temperature or below resulting in a compressor horsepower of 360 hp (270 kW) or less. This represents an energy savings on the compressor of over 20%. Condensing Temperature, F (C) 95F (35C) 83F (28.3C) Condenser Capacity Control Maintaining control over the heat rejection capability of the evaporative condenser is crucial for energy efficiency. For this reason, methods to control the condenser capacity to produce lower condensing temperatures until reaching the minimum setpoint must be developed. Traditional methods of system control have focused on condenser fan control to match the condenser capacity to the system load. The Compressor Hp (kW) 440 hp (330 kW) 360 hp (270 kW) Percent Reduction -22.2%

end result of these methods is to reduce the fan and pump motor energy consumption. However, these methods do not take into consideration the more significant effect of the system compressor energy requirement. Following are typical condenser fan motor control methods and their impact on the total refrigeration system efficiency: Off-cycling fan and pump motors Simply de-energizing the fan and pump motors to match the condenser capacity to the system load requirements will reduce the condenser energy consumption and therefore the total system horsepower. Condensers with multiple fan motors offer multiple steps of capacity control as individual motors are cycled on and off. Cycling pump motors while maintaining fan motor operation is not recommended as repeated wetting and drying of the coil can produce scale. Multi-speed fan motors Condensers furnished with multi-speed motors provide horsepower reduction and added steps of capacity control. Most frequently, multi-speed fan motors use a low speed equal to one half of the full speed. At half speed, the horsepower reduction and capacity increment is as follows: 1/2 Speed = Approx. 60% Capacity 1/2 Speed = Approx. 1/8 Motor Hp

Variable frequency drives Use of a variable frequency drive provides infinite steps of capacity control from ten percent of full speed to full design speed. The use of an inverter duty fan motor is required, however, the cost of motors suitable for vfd operation is relatively small. The reduction in capacity and horsepower versus fan speed is shown in Chart 5 below.

Fan Speed vs. Motor Hp & Capacity

100% Airflow, Motor hp & Capacity 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Fan Speed
Chart 5. Fan Speed vs. Motor Hp, Airflow & Capacity

Airflow Motor hp Capacity

Multi-speed motors or variable frequency drives are more effective than simply turning on and off motors, however, all of the above methods of control maintain a constant condensing temperature and therefore the head pressure and compressor energy requirement at a constant level. No energy savings on the compressor will be achieved, thusly these approaches do not offer the greatest possible energy

reduction, and so these methods are best for trimming out condensers to match system loads during periods of off peak production.

Optimum System Operating Conditions

Most systems operate today with condensing temperatures of around 95F (35C) at a design wet bulb temperature of 78F (25.5C). These operating conditions have become the standard in the industrial refrigeration industry when, in fact, different conditions would save owners literally thousands of dollars in energy costs per year. System design engineers often use standard conditions and other rules of thumb to establish system design criteria without realizing their impact on the end users annual energy costs. The best approach to identifying the optimum system operating conditions combines the two ideas presented above. While lowering head pressure is more effective at reducing total energy consumption than maintaining or even raising head pressure, the limits described above and with the potential increase in condensing fan and pump energy requirement tells us that the ideal condition rests somewhere in the middle and will vary from system to system. The first step to find the ideal operating condition is to identify the total energy requirement by adding the condenser and compressor horsepower together. Chart 6 illustrates the effect of adding the compressor and condenser energy requirements for the same operating conditions.

Optimum Control Point

OPTIMUM CONTROL POINT

E N E R G Y

COMBINED / SYSTEM SYSTEM ENERGY COMPRESSOR ENERGY CONDENSER ENERGY

CONDENSING TEMPERATURE
Chart 6. Combination of Compressor and Condenser Energy to Yield Optimum Control Point

The addition of the compressor and condenser energy requirement creates a third line representing the total system horsepower. This line will contain a minimum horsepower identified as the optimum control point. The optimum control point provides the condensing temperature where the lowest energy consumption for the combination of the compressor and evaporative condenser. At this condensing temperature, the system will achieve the minimum total energy consumption. For each set of operating conditions, there will be an optimum control point. However, a relationship exists between condenser and compressor horsepower that will not change from system to system or from unit to unit. This relationship can be plotted to illustrate the optimum control point for every condensing temperature. Chart 7 shows the result of this analysis. The line represents the operating

conditions (condensing temperature and wet bulb temperature) that yields the minimum energy consumption.

Conditions for Minimum System Horsepower

Condensing Temp. (deg F) 90 80 70 60 50 40 50 60 70 80 90 Wet Bulb Temperature (deg F)
Chart 7. Operating Conditions for Minimum Energy Consumption

This chart represents the lowest combined energy consumption for screw compressors and evaporative condensers. If the system is operating above the line, then the condensing temperature should be reduced through the addition of evaporative condenser capacity. If the system is operating below the line, then the head pressure should be raised by eliminating evaporative condenser capacity. As you can see, the operating point at the typical 78F (25.5C) design wet bulb temperature is well below the industry standard of 95F (35C). From the 330 TR (1,125 kW) example, the reduction in total energy consumption is nearly 3%. This agrees closely with our previous calculations above. This chart can be used as a benchmark for lowest system horsepower during operation of the refrigeration system.

Improving System Efficiency

Evaporative condensers offer the refrigeration industry many ways to save energy. Lowering condensing temperatures is the most cost-effective way to achieve lower energy costs. Finding the optimum control point will provide the lowest combined energy requirement and ultimately the lowest energy cost for end users. Methods of promoting lower energy costs include over-sizing condensers to increase heat transfer surface area as well as specifying efficiency standards for evaporative condensers as detailed below: Use the Biggest Model in the Plan Area One way to promote lower condensing temperatures is to offer the condenser that is the largest model available in any given plan area. This consideration has been gaining popularity with many end users who realize that the benefit of the larger capacity condenser outweighs the additional first cost of the condenser including incremental rigging and installation costs. For example, for a nominal 500 TR system, the unit required for the design capacity is an ATC-713B, however, if the owner were to use an ATC-892B, he could lower the condenser temperature 4F (2.2C) and reduce the compressor energy consumption over 5%. In this example, the owner has wisely positioned himself to reap lower operating costs and maintained the ability to economically expand his system capacity without changing condensers.

For years, vessels and recirculators have been over-sized to accommodate future capacity requirements. Even though this same approach is seldom applied to condensers, it offers significant energy savings and greater flexibility in system operation. The benefits of up-sizing evaporative condensers within the same plan area are: Same field labor cost Same piping requirements Little or no increase in rigging costs Little or no increase in structural steel costs Little or no increase in freight cost

Selection Criteria When sizing evaporative condensers, the basic information required is the heat rejection requirement along with the operating conditions and the design wet bulb temperature. In addition, the size of the condenser and its motor horsepower can affect the choice of condenser. Using the above information, additional criteria may be considered: Optimum condensing temperature Based on the above chart, the optimum condensing temperature will yield the lowest energy consumption for the compressor and evaporative condenser. Condenser efficiency rating A minimum ratio of base heat rejection per horsepower (MBH/hp or kW/TR) for an evaporative condenser will provide a starting point for evaluating the total system efficiency. In this way, the evaporative condenser is treated like most HVAC equipment in terms of energy efficiency. Using an efficiency rating for evaporative condensers will provide added energy savings beyond any improvements in system design or system operation. Breaking away from the industrys standard conditions will set new standards for energy efficiency in refrigeration systems. Implementing the guidelines described in this bulletin will lead end users to lower energy costs.