500W at 240V = about 2 amps. That's not much of an air conditioner. Even at 120V, it's only about 4 amps, not even a decent window air conditioner.
Better check those nameplate ratings yourself; I think you're missing something. Maybe you're looking at the rating for the blower, instead of the compressor.
HWC05XCB Haier 5000 BTU Window AC
a.. Energy requirements: 115 Volts/ 60 Hz, 515 Watts, 4.5 Amps a.. EER: 9.7
..thank you Doug,, well put. Worth waiting for :- )
BTZ
All energy is conserved, therefore an air conditioner is like an outdoor heater with output being equal to that of power input. The heat output from refrigeration cycle is zero in thermodynamic perspective since it is simply being pumped outside.
Heat pump is also no more efficient than resistive heater at creating heat, because all it's doing is adding the thermal output of compressor
Heat pumps and air conditioners are more efficient than resistive heaters in practical purpose however.
For every one watt of power you put into air conditioner, it can remove about three watts of heat and pumps out four watts of heat. This means that to get 15,000 BTU heat removal capacity, you only need about 5,000 BTU energy input.
For a resistive heater, you need one watt for every watt of heating desired.
Heat transfers into room in summer just like heat transfer out of room in winter.
It's a given that air conditioner works against temperature gradient and this is why it's called a thermal pump. Even then, it has a C.O.P of about 3.
Oops my bad.
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in news:x3ZMc.2920$0m1.2671 @newssvr15.news.prodigy.com:
This is an embarassing thread. No one learns science any more.
The two processes are different because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It's not just a good idea...
CT/iMainCat.23/iSubCat.39/iProductID.4600/showTab.EnergyGuide/qx/shopping/pr
Question -- when it says 5k BTU does that mean it moves 5k BTU/HOUR from the house to the outside?
Wrong again, by a factor of 3.
Nick
conditioner.
CT/iMainCat.23/iSubCat.39/iProductID.4600/showTab.EnergyGuide/qx/shopping/pr
Yes.
The "H" on the end is commonly dropped, much the same as it is when discussing "KWH"
A BTU is the total amount of heat energy required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree F.
And so it follows, one btu is also the total amount of heat energy that must be rejected in order to cool a pound of water in temperature by one degree F.
In practical application, this heat is added or removed over a period of time--hence, a 5000 btu unit has the ability to reject an amount of heat sufficient to raise the temperature of 5000 pounds of water by one degree, if operated for one hours time.
..yeah,, roight :-/
U keep right on factoring away. I am sure your misconstrued theorems will resolve to have us all choking for oxygen whilst treading the streets in galoshes/wellingtons/ gumboots..!
BTZ
snipT
/me bows
Thank you again Doug :-)
I begin low level introduction with the line: "There is no such *thing* as cold. Show me some Cold"
Its a difficult concept to convey. Some get it,, some prefer denial and argument. That's the nature of it ('ooman nature),,problem is there is no scientific credos for Cold.
cYa
BTZ
Hi John, hope you are having a nice day
On 25-Jul-04 At About 21:40:00, John Cochran wrote to All Subject: Re: Does cooling require more BTU/hr than heating to maintain same t
JC> From: snipped-for-privacy@smof.fiawol.org (John Cochran)
JC> The Air Conditioner. This little device doesn't "generate cold". What JC> it does is move heat from one location to another.
Ok this is correct. but the rest of your explanation is not quite as correct. an a/c maintains a constant " delta T" even when it is hot outside. it would be quite a long explanation to go through how it works but just to let everyone know, your explanation is not correct.
-=> HvacTech2
It's been such a long time since I had a course in thermodynamics, and even then I didn't really understand it.
So what I say here might be totally wrong ...
Above, given an ideal world (no friction, everything done super-slowly, etc), are you saying that you could compress a gas, then let it escape (through a small hole?), and you'd be back to where you started?
Especially, that if you could get that escaping gas to do some "work", like drive a turbine or piston or something, that it'd all net out to zero?
Probably you're not saying that -- but if you are, or if someone thinks you are, then I have a dim recollection of something called a "carnot engine" or something like that, and there's some inherent max efficiency you can get, and never any more -- some work done to compress the gas is just plain lost, gone, unrecoverable for useful work.
Again, I never did really understand this stuff -- maybe someone who does can expand on it, or maybe even show that I'm just plain wrong.
David
snipped-for-privacy@panix.com (David Combs) wrote in news:cgh9d2$ecc$1 @reader1.panix.com:
The perfect heat engine utilizes the Carnot Cycle (you can't do any better than that for heat engine efficiency):
Here's a page that describes it in fairly simple terms:
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.