DISCUSSIONS:
The power input, heat output, and coefficient of performance were to be calculated during
the first experiment. The power input for the experiment is 159 W, the heat output is 112.799 W,
and the coefficient of performance is 0.8792, as indicated in Table 1. A heat pump is the device used
in this experiment to transport heat from a low-temperature media to a high-temperature medium.
The goal of the second experiment was to figure out how to make heat pump performance
curves over a wide range of source and delivery temperatures. To get reliable results, the
experiment was conducted with four trials at varying cooling water flow rates, starting at 57.8
percent, 43.2 percent, 30.4 percent, and 28.2 percent. For each water flow rate, the power input
ranges between 159 W, 162 W, 163 W, and 165 W. The data reveals that the flow rate is inversely
related to the compressor's power input. The heat pump's rate of heat transfer and coefficient of
performance (COPR) were determined using the same method as the previous experiment. The
value of COPR for cooling water flow rate is 0.8837, 1.1113, 1.4897, and 2.1638 for each trial.
The goal of the third experiment was to use a p-h diagram and an energy balance research
to determine the production of a vapour compression cycle. All of the data is captured in order to
plot the p-h diagram. The enthalpy for each recorded temperature is then compared to the
saturated and superheated refrigerant property table. The graph is an ideal vapor-compression
refrigeration cycle, as shown by the p-h diagram.
Next, p-h diagram that was plotted in the result is similar to the theoretical p-h diagram. Line
1-2 represent cooling process where superheated gas in the condenser turned into saturated
vapour. Then, latent heat is removed from the process in line 2-3. The procedure is continued by
using an expansion device, which reduces the pressure without changing the enthalpy. Finally, line 4-
1 depicted the process of liquid/vapour totally evaporating into gas. The data that we have recorded
may be inaccurate for a variety of reasons. First, the water flowrate is not stable when the reading is
being taken. This is due to the fact that there was a lot of machinery running in the pilot plant, which
influenced the reading of the water flowrate. Second, the reading of other measurements was
likewise influenced by the water flowrate. Simply assuming a value range may have an impact on the
outcome of this experiment.
In the fourth experiment, the aim was to estimate the effect of the compressor pressure
ratio on volumetric efficiency. As the data shown in Table 4, the refrigerant flowrate is 61.8% at
27.4˚C. The calculated value for compressor pressure ratio is 3.47 whereas the actual flow rate of
refrigerant is 5.149 × 10-5 m3/s. Then, the calculated value for volumetric efficiency is 0.125 or
12.5%.
CONCLUSION:
The power input, heat output, and coefficient of performance of a vapour compression in
the first experiment were 159 W, 112.799 W, and 0.8792, respectively. The second experiment was
carried out with the goal of calculating the performance of a heat pump over a range of sources and
flow rates. The vapour compression cycle was then shown on the p-h diagram and compared to the
ideal cycle in experiment 3. Energy balances for the condenser and compressor are also performed,
with W=0.0414 kJ/s. As a result, an increase in the water flow rate will result in a decreased
coefficient of performance. For experiment 4 the estimated compressor pressure ratio is 3.47,
however the actual refrigerant flow rate is 5.149 10-5 m3/s. At 27.4°C, volumetric efficiency is 0.125,
or 12.5 percent.