>100% efficiency in aircons & thermodynamics

HavocXphere

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
33,153
Reaction score
1,297
Location
Europe
One of Fuzzbox's comments made me wonder about >100% inefficiencies in aircons.

Specifically:
heating capacity of about 4000w and draws about 1300 w.

Which led me to this wiki entry:

It is typical for air conditioners to operate at "efficiencies" of significantly greater than 100%.[16] However, it may be noted that the input electrical energy is of higher thermodynamic quality (lower entropy) than the output thermal energy (heat energy).
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_conditioning#Energy)

I still don't understand it though. Their use of entropy in this context specifically & how this leads to 100%+.

Can someone please explain it - preferably without heavy duty thermodynamics theory?
 
The aircon has a 12000 BTU rating therefore
12000 BTU x .239 w per BTU
The aircon will pump out about 2868 w
 
Very poorly explained on there.

It's a quirk in the maths. We define differential entropy dS = dQ_rev/T where T=f(T). In order for the process to be thermodynamically possible, the integral of the dQ/T term must be greater than zero: i.e \Delta S > 0. That is what causes the heat to flow from high potential to low potential (Fourier's law). What we do with that function is put it into something called a carnot cycle, which works for combustion engines and air conditioners. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle). In the end, we can determine net efficiency of heat flow to be \eta = W/Q_h = 1-Tc/Th.

If we have the system set up such that entropy is in fact increased with energy flowing from the cold side to the hot side (expansion of gasses generates more entropy than the movement of heat energy on the cold side if the aircon), that \eta value is above unity, or the carnot efficiency is greater than 1.

That's simply because the carnot efficiency definition does not take into account physical phenomena. Normally we consider carnot efficiency to be "thermodynamic efficiency", but it is more useful to look at things in terms of entropy than efficiencies.
 
The trick with an aircon is that it doesn't generate heat. It absorbs heat from the outside air and transfers it to the inside air, which is how you get 3kw of heat for 1kw of electricity.
 
Very poorly explained on there.

It's a quirk in the maths. We define differential entropy dS = dQ_rev/T where T=f(T). In order for the process to be thermodynamically possible, the integral of the dQ/T term must be greater than zero: i.e \Delta S > 0. That is what causes the heat to flow from high potential to low potential (Fourier's law). What we do with that function is put it into something called a carnot cycle, which works for combustion engines and air conditioners. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle). In the end, we can determine net efficiency of heat flow to be \eta = W/Q_h = 1-Tc/Th.

If we have the system set up such that entropy is in fact increased with energy flowing from the cold side to the hot side (expansion of gasses generates more entropy than the movement of heat energy on the cold side if the aircon), that \eta value is above unity, or the carnot efficiency is greater than 1.

That's simply because the carnot efficiency definition does not take into account physical phenomena. Normally we consider carnot efficiency to be "thermodynamic efficiency", but it is more useful to look at things in terms of entropy than efficiencies.
So its a quirk in the measuring rather than output exceeding input so to speak? Would the real "perceived" output also be greater than say if you use a electrical heater with equal input?
 
So its a quirk in the measuring rather than output exceeding input so to speak? Would the real "perceived" output also be greater than say if you use a electrical heater with equal input?

More a quirk in definition. Entropy as a differential is macroscopic, and concerns its self with reversible heat flow from first principals. Carnot efficiency is a detailed look at heat flow from one state to another, not necessarily entropic formations within each state.

Electrical heater will have the same problem of carnot efficiency. It obeys the same rules, since heat must flow from the element to the air. But in a heater, you are adding heat to a state (heat energy naturally flows from hot to cold, hot element to cold air). In an aircon, you are removing heat. In order to get heat to flow in the "wrong" direction in an aircon (from cold to hot), you need to generate more entropy in gas expansion than the entropy lost in heat travelling the wrong way.


IMPORTANT DEFINITION OF EFFICIENCY: \eta = W/Q_h
, or in words, the fraction of work(in this case, electrical work) as heat flow. This is NOT what fraction of electrical power is in the form of heat/cooling, which is where I think the confusion is being caused.

In a heater, you efficiency is more or less 100%, since the heat flowing from hot element to the air is unhindered. In an aircon, you use electrical energy to generate an entropy differential in the form of compressing the fluid to a gas on the hot side, cooling on a radiator to more or less room temp, then taking that compressed gas/liquid to the cold side, allowing it to expand pulling heat from the room. See here, we need electricity to make the entropy differential to cause the heat to flow the "wrong" way.

It is important to understand here that it is quite easy to generate entropy with a gas expansion/contraction compared with straightforward heating of an element.

If we were to operate the aircon in reverse, (commonly called a heat pump), then yes we could produce heat more easily (electrically efficiently) than using a heating element. Sometimes even over unity. Why? Because rather than generating the heat in an element, we are moving heat between hot and cold places.

It is easier to move the heat than it is to generate the heat.

Just as a thumb suck, say we have an aircon with a cooling duty of 1 ton (1 short ton of ice melting over a 24 hour period =~ 3.5kW or 12 000BTU), we are saying it is moving an equivalent of 3.5kJ of heat energy per second, but to move that much heat energy, the compressor may only need say 1kW of electrical power.

Another analogy: Say I have a tanker truck filled with a million liters of diesel. The truck needs say 100 liters of diesel to move the rest of the diesel out of the depot and to the fuel station. We have moved a million litres of diesel only using 100 litres of diesel.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X