Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

# Efficiency Analysis and Recommendations

For the heat exchanger designed, the effectiveness is slightly less than 5%, as
calculated by the equation

NTU
1+ NTU

when CR=1. Obviously this is a not very effective amount so it follows that the heat
exchanger wont reduce the power usage of the dryer by a significant effect. As
calculated, the total wattage saved was 58. Assuming a dryer cycle time of 45
minutes with constant energy usage and an electric rate of \$0.127 [1] per kWh,
each load of clothing dried in this dryer costs a whopping half cent less than a load
in a normal dryer. Considering each load of laundry can cost 32 to 41 cents in a
normal electric dryer [2], this equates to a cost savings of 1.2% to 1.5%.
TABLE ###
Effectiveness
NTU
QQ (W)
QQ reduction
Area Required (m^2)
Length Required (m)
Cost

0.0491
0.0517
58.21
1.7%
0.044
\$0.00554
0.17
0.75
\$304.45

Various other solutions, both possible and impossible were tested to research what
results would be found and what energy/cost savings would be achieved with using
other sizes of heat exchangers. Two effectiveness goals were set, 50% and 90%.
50% was chosen because it is about what other heat exchangers offer. 90% was
chosen because literature stated that was close to the maximum effectiveness
practically achievable.
Table ####
Effectiveness
Area Required (m^2)
Length Required (m)
Cost
year)

0.0491
\$0.00554
0.17
0.75
\$304.45
54912
137

0.5
\$ 0.05635
3.33
14.51
\$2,221.32
39423
99

0.9
\$0.10142
29.97
130.62
\$18,391.90
181339
453

With a dryer with a theoretical heat exchanger operating at 50% effectiveness, the
system would save 5 cents per load. Unfortunately, using 5 inch diameter outer
piping and 3 inch diameter inner piping, the heat exchanger alone would be nearly
15 meters long and would occupy over 3 cubic meters, far too big to fit in a
standard size dryer. In addition, it would cost more than even the most expensive
dryers available on the market today. [5] For a dryer with 90% effectiveness, the
heat exchanger would save 10 cents per load but it would need to be 130 m long,
take up 30 cubic meters, and cost nearly \$20,000. Both of these options are clearly
not possible to put in a consumer dryer. Unfortunately, the ineffective option is also
not suitable for commercial production. To improve the effectiveness, possibly to
the point where a dryer and heat exchanger design could be viable, the design must
be significantly reworked. A major design change could be to use a different style of
heat exchanger, one that has much more surface area to enable the transfer of
more heat as air passes through it. Two possible designs are the shell and tube
design and the plate and tube. The shell and tube is more effective and has air of
one temperature passing through a large tank with baffles to mix it up as it passes
over many smaller conductive pipes carrying the other air. The plate and tube
method has air passing through small plates in order to heat them up, at which
point the other air is allowed to flow between the plates and warm from convection.
This method is much more effective than the double pipe exchanger chosen but
more difficult and costly to implement.

In order for this dryer to be a good financial choice for a potential owner, the cost
savings the heat exchanger provides must be greater than the additional cost
required to design and manufacture it. The estimated cost of the heat exchanger as
seen in the table above, is \$304.45. This amount includes both materials and labor.
For an average American family who washes 400 loads [4] of laundry a year, this
equates to a cost savings of \$2.22 every year which would mean that the family
would need to use the dryer for about 137 years and 3 months to break even. For a
customer looking for dryers with cheaper operating costs and higher purchase
costs, a potential option is a gas dryer. While they can cost \$50 to \$150 more than
their electric counterparts [3] they only cost 15 to 33 cents per load [1] resulting in
a much greater cost savings with a lower extra cost to purchase. In addition, an
added cost to the dryer with the heat exchanger both upfront and per hour would
be the 2nd fan that would be required to push air through the heat exchanger
initially. The fan would increase the upfront cost as it is an additional part which
needs to be purchased and its operation would increase the price per hour that the
dryer costs to run. Even if the customer has to pay for gas lines to be run to the
laundry room, the economics of a gas dryer far outweigh those of an electric dryer
with a heat exchanger. For these reasons, it is not recommended that the company
produce this kind of dryer.
While the dryer does not make sense to a consumer that is looking for the cheapest
possible cost over the lifetime of the product, it may appeal to an environmentally
conscious buyer willing to pay more for a product which uses less energy. According
to Nielsen, a large group of consumers are purchasing items with particular thought

to how green the product, packaging, and company are [6, 7]. From a survey of
people residing in and around a large North American city, 13.1% of subjects were
willing to pay significantly more for green products with a larger group of undecided
consumers who could possibly be convinced to purchase products from that
category [8]. If the marketing team researches potential buyers of this sort and
determines that there are enough of them that selling the dryer and heat exchanger
combo will be profitable for Dryer Inc., then the company should pursue the
manufacturing of the efficient clothes dryer.

Sources
[3]"Clothes Dryer Buying Guide", Consumer Reports, 2016. [Online]. Available:
17- Oct- 2016].
[4]"Clothes Washer | Home Water Works", Home-water-works.org, 2016. [Online].
Available: http://www.home-water-works.org/indoor-use/clothes-washer. [Accessed:
17- Oct- 2016].
[2]"Consumer Energy Center - Clothes Dryers", Consumerenergycenter.org, 2016.
[Online]. Available:
http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/residential/appliances/dryers.html.
[Accessed: 17- Oct- 2016].
[1]"EIA - Electricity Data", Eia.gov, 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a.
[Accessed: 17- Oct- 2016].
[7]"Green Generation: Millennials Say Sustainability Is a Shopping Priority",
Nielsen.com, 2016. [Online]. Available:
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/green-generation-millennials-saysustainability-is-a-shopping-priority.html. [Accessed: 17- Oct- 2016].
[6]"Global Consumers are Willing to Put Their Money Where Their Heart is When it
Comes to Goods and Services from Companies Committed to Social Responsibility",
Nielsen.com, 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/pressroom/2014/global-consumers-are-willing-to-put-their-money-where-their-heartis.html. [Accessed: 17- Oct- 2016].
[8]"Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly
products: Journal of Consumer Marketing: Vol 18, No 6", Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 2016.
[5]"Washer & Dryer Prices", Kitchens.com, 2016. [Online]. Available:
http://www.kitchens.com/product-guide/washers-dryers/washer-dryer-prices/washerdryer-prices. [Accessed: 17- Oct- 2016].