3.6 A/C Upgrade

[kuehl]

at 25C (77F) latent heat of:
R134a 176
Water 2440

2440/176=13.86

Hence water has nearly 14 times more.....


lol

[brads911sc]

Good to know that wwest does not know how to read and comprehend. Lol

at 25C (77F) latent heat of:

R134a 176

Water 2440



2440/176=13.86



Hence water has nearly 14 times more.....





lol

[kuehl]

Originally Posted by wwest

Gonna take a LOT of heat....

An explanation, but no excuse...so my apologies...

More than 6 months ago I wanted to buy a new R/D and wanted be sure it was compatible with R-134a. Someone referred me to Griffiths and I subsequently attempted to buy a R/D. Every "lead" I followed at that time lead me to a Griffiths page "email for quote" or "call for quote".

Again, no excuse, just an explanation.

Here, we will show you the way
Porsche 911/930 Air Conditioning Components

We made pictures for you as hyperlinks
at McDonalds for new employees.

[SilberUrS6]

Originally Posted by Barrpete

Please explain how the ratio of latent heats of 2 different materials at 2 different pressures relates to the efficiency of a heat exchanger.

It doesn't. He's using the Freshman Cancellation Theorem:

If a number appears anywhere on a page twice, it cancels.

Now, seriously, the testing of the heat exchanger efficiency DOES NOT DEPEND on working fluid. If you use the same working fluid in each HE, then you will get very similar numbers, no matter what the working fluid.

Of course, if you use a fluid with very little heat capacity, then residence time might make a difference. But that's a variable you want to eliminate. Ideally, you test the component using the working fluid for which it is designed. But test rigs are often not representative of real-world use. Test rigs are often meant as standardized methods by which everyone tests a particular material or component. No, it's not the real world. But folks are comparing apples to apples.

What wwest is doing is multiplying one side of the equation by a number. But not the other side. On purpose.

It's just a plain lie. And an easy one to spot. He gets an "F" for this math assignment. He got an "F" on the pressure rise calculation as well. He doesn't have very many more assignments be fore he flunks right out of this course...

[SilberUrS6]

Originally Posted by kuehl

at 25C (77F) latent heat of:
R134a 176
Water 2440

2440/176=13.86

Hence water has nearly 14 times more.....


lol

Playing his game?

Please don't. It's bad enough that one person is lying with numbers. Don't give him even a little bit of credibility by doing the same in reverse. Dividing or multiplying the difference ratio between the two tests is bad logic and bad math. The latent heat for BOTH tests is the same with equal working fluid. And it doesn't matter WHICH working fluid one uses - the ratio will still be the same., and multiplying or dividing that ratio AGAIN by latent heat numbers is in essence multiplying or dividing one side of the equation by a number, but not the other.

Epic math fail, wwest.

[SilberUrS6]

Originally Posted by brads911sc

Good to know that wwest does not know how to read and comprehend. Lol

He does, but he's trying to obfuscate with numbers.

To those without a math background, what he says might seem reasonable.

But for those of us with both an analytical background, and strong math skills, his lies are blatantly obvious.

[wwest]

Okay, in layman terms...

The molecular density of (liquid) water vs refrigerant GAS makes the water astoundingly more efficient for heat transfer vs refrigerant GAS.

The more molecules, COLD molecules, flowing past, "touching" the inside of the condenser interior walls the better will be the heat transfer efficiency.

[wwest]

Originally Posted by SilberUrS6

It doesn't. He's using the Freshman Cancellation Theorem:

If a number appears anywhere on a page twice, it cancels.

Now, seriously, the testing of the heat exchanger efficiency DOES NOT DEPEND on working fluid. If you use the same working fluid in each HE, then you will get very similar numbers, no matter what the working fluid.

Of course, if you use a fluid with very little heat capacity, then residence time might make a difference. But that's a variable you want to eliminate. Ideally, you test the component using the working fluid for which it is designed. But test rigs are often not representative of real-world use. Test rigs are often meant as standardized methods by which everyone tests a particular material or component. No, it's not the real world. But folks are comparing apples to apples.

What wwest is doing is multiplying one side of the equation by a number. But not the other side. On purpose.

What "other" side..." If you adjust the "delta" equally, across the board, you end up with a radically smaller difference amongst the 3 test subjects.

It's just a plain lie. And an easy one to spot. He gets an "F" for this math assignment.

He got an "F" on the pressure rise calculation as well.

I did..? When did that occur..? All I have seen in rebuttant is "prove it", insofar as I am aware no one has offered any data that disputes my "speculation"

He doesn't have very many more assignments be fore he flunks right out of this course...

Water was at 39F, airflow to be cooled was at 100F...

OEM delta with water was, 100F - 62F = 38F, adjusted for R-134a, 38F/14 = 2.71F.

"Other" delta with water was, 100F - 59F = 41F, adjusted for R-134a, 41F/14 = 2.92F.

Kuehl delta with water was, 100F - 55F = 45F, adjusted for R-134a, 45F/14 = 3.21F.

OEM R-134a delta = 2.71F

Kuehl R-134a delta = 3.21F

3.21 - 2.71 = 0.50F

In layman terms the Kuehl evaporator offers less than 1% difference in heat transfer efficiency.


...

[kuehl]

No. Lol.

The Kuehl unit was 6 to 7 degrees colder than OEM.

And the Kuehl unit has fewer brazed/soldered joints compared to the OEM.

Simply put, the Kuehl unit is the best 911/930 evaporator on the earth.

[wwest]

Originally Posted by kuehl

No. Lol.

The Kuehl unit was 6 to 7 degrees colder than OEM.

Yes, but with water as the heat transfer medium, adjusted for R-134a's much lower molecular density the difference is less than 1%, 0.5F.

[wwest]

Originally Posted by kuehl

No. Lol.

The Kuehl unit was 6 to 7 degrees colder than OEM.

And the Kuehl unit has fewer brazed/soldered joints compared to the OEM.

And just what does that little tidbit of infomation "do" for the buyer...??

Simply put Willy, the Kuehl unit is the best 911/930 evaporator on the earth.

No denying that, but is a 1% improvement worthwhile given the labor and $$$ involved.

Now that you have, once again, wasted the communities time with childish jihad, go along and see what's on your honey do list Willyboy.

A DIY'er would be better served simply cleaning the OEM evaporator, blower wheel vanes, and renewing the motor brushes and commutator.

Oh, and removing the "bowtie"..

[brads911sc]

Sigh. Wwest. Please take your toys and go home.

[wwest]

Originally Posted by brads911sc

Sigh. Wwest. Please take your toys and go home.

What, no "factual" rebuttal..???

[kuehl]

Originally Posted by wwest

A DIY'er would be better served simply cleaning the OEM evaporator, blower wheel vanes, and renewing the motor brushes and commutator.

Oh, and removing the "bowtie"..

I know that a DIY would be better off ignoring your posts.

A DIY can't easily repair corroded evaporator joints on a 25 year old fashion tube and fin evaporator.

A DIY can't effectively repair an out of round commutator nor replace missing metal, nor worn bushings on a 25 year old motor

And, post your data of gains you got observed by cleaning all of your neighbors 911 blower wheel vanes.

And, post your graphical representation of the benefit achieved in cockpit air flow by simply removing the bow tie louver so the air hits the back of the console and the driver's leg.

[kuehl]

Originally Posted by wwest

Yes, but with water as the heat transfer medium, adjusted for R-134a's much lower molecular density the difference is less than 1%, 0.5F.

Prove it.

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by kuehl

Prove it. Not with your funky zany flip flop math. Actually prove it Willyboy.

You guys are doing ok without me. Keep up the good work.

When I started planning the trip to Oregon on tertiary roads, wearing diapers, I kinda figured it was time for a little "space" from the Will-meister.

I am far, far too unstable to be jacked with.

[brads911sc]

Wwest. You are the one making up the funny math, theories about the benefits of cleaning 30 year old components with no proof... You have a new solution in search of a problem daily. how about this. post a video showing the increase in air in cleaning the evap, the drop in pressures to rebuilding old fans, The air temp drop in cabin with and without Bowie.... And then we will actually have something to refute.

Post the videos wwest!!!

Quote de wwest

Sigh. Wwest. Please take your toys and go home.

What, no "factual" rebuttal..???

[wwest]

Originally Posted by kuehl

I know that a DIY would be better off ignoring your posts.

A DIY can't easily repair corroded evaporator joints on a 25 year old fashion tube and fin evaporator.

Apples vs Oranges..Repair vs UPGRADE...

$300.00:

RennAire Serpentine Evaporator - RennAire LLC

A DIY can't effectively repair an out of round commutator nor replace missing metal, nor worn bushings on a 25 year old motor

I have used a drill press to "turn" many commutators, re-oiled more bushings than replaced, but have replaced not just a few. Brushes/holders, POC.

And, post your data of gains you got observed by cleaning all of your neighbors 911 blower wheel vanes.

Restate the obvious...??

And, post your graphical representation of the benefit achieved in cockpit air flow by simply removing the bow tie louver so the air hits the back of the console and the driver's leg.

The OBJECT of a MAC A/C is to cool the cabin down as quickly as possible but not to excessive passenger discomfort...widely dispersed COLD and massive airflow volume. Once that is achieved low and slow is the name of the game.

w/bowtie:

....................

Without:

.................................

[brads911sc]

what do the dots represent? LOL
Post the video.

Originally Posted by wwest

The OBJECT of a MAC A/C is to cool the cabin down as quickly as possible but not to excessive passenger discomfort...widely dispersed COLD and massive airflow volume. Once that is achieved low and slow is the name of the game.

w/bowtie:

....................

Without:

.................................

[wwest]

Originally Posted by kuehl

Prove it. Not with your funky zany flip flop math. Actually prove it Willyboy.

Now that the math proves you have been selling (marketing..) Snake OIL it becomes "funky/zany"

Food for thought.