摘要
在制冷量为55 kW的风冷热泵冷热水机组上,比较了热气旁通除霜和逆循环除霜的性能.结果表明:逆循环除霜的能量来自压缩机的输入功率以及从房间和循环水中吸收的热量,除霜时间为94 s,但房间温度存在剧烈波动,舒适性较差;热气旁通除霜的能量只来自压缩机的输入功率,而且制冷剂流过分液器和分液毛细管的能量损失较大,除霜时间比逆循环除霜方式多178 s,但不会从循环水和房间吸热,舒适性较好;在热气旁通除霜方式的融霜阶段,压缩机的吸气过热度一直在0℃左右,导致排气温度和过热度不断降低,可能会危及压缩机的安全.
The dynamic characteristics for both the hovgas bypass defrosting method and the reverse-cycle defrosting method were compared experimentally on a 55 kW unitary airto-water heat pump. The duration time for the reverse-cycle defrosting method was 94 seconds because the two energy sources for the melting frost were the input power of the compressor and the heat absorbed from the circulating water and indoor space. But the indoor room temperature decreased greatly and quickly, which destroyed the indoor amenity. The duration time for the hot-gas by pass defrosting method was 178 seconds more than that for the reverse-cycle defrosting method because the only energy source was the input power of the compressor. Moreover, the larger heat loss caused by the distributor and distributor capillary was the other main cause of the longer defrosting time for the hot-gas bypass defrosting method. Since the heat was not absorbed from the indoor space, the amenity was greatly improved. However, the discharge temperature and superheat decreased gradually because the compressor suction superheat was always 0℃ during all the melting stage for the hot-gas bypass defrosting method. Correspondingly, we must prevent the discharge temperature and superheat from decreasing to a level where the compressor does not function safely.
出处
《西安交通大学学报》
EI
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2006年第5期539-543,共5页
Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University
作者简介
黄东（1975-），男，博士，讲师．
