Abstract
In this paper the design evolution from rolling piston compressor (RP) to revolving vane compressor (RV) and finally to cross-vane expander-compressor unit (CVEC) is presented and discussed. The details in the design philosophy which initiated this evolution will be presented and discussed.It is estimated that more than 90% of the room air-conditioners uses RP in its compressor. This is because of its advantages: it has the few parts, it is simple geometrically and it is reliable. However, it is with no weaknesses. RP's weaknesses lie in three parts:too many rubbing surfaces with high relative rubbing velocity with each other which give rise to high frictional losses;components (eccentric and roller) are not rotating at their centres and resulted in unnecessary inherent vibration;vane tip is constantly rubbing against the roller making it a weakest part in design.To overcome RP's weaknesses, RV is introduced. As compared to RP, RV has fewer rubbing surfaces, and the relative velocities among these surfaces are reduced Components in RV rotate at their own centres and there is no inherent vibration; the rubbing at the vane tip has been eliminated completely.However, like RP, RV also has a large rotor which occupied "useful" space and making the working chamber relatively small. To overcome this latter problem, CVEC is introduced. In this newly invented CVCE, not only parts are all concentric and rotate at their own centres, the unit also recovers expansion energy and hence significantly reduces energy required by the refrigeration systems. And, more importantly, all these are carried out not at the expense of the additional cost.In this paper, details on these three compressors are explained, compared and their respective uniqueness are shown and discussed.
Highlights
Literature shows that significant research has been carried out to arrive at what we have today for a relatively energy efficient running refrigeration compressors
Rolling piston compressor (RP) is generally used for cooling capacity below 15 kW, though recently more and more RPs are used for cooling capacity of 15kW and above
RP has some design weaknesses such as significant frictional losses due to a number of rubbing surfaces which have high relative rubbing velocity to each other; components are not rotating at their centres and resulted in unnecessary inherent vibration; vane tip is constantly rubbing against the roller making it a weakest part in design
Summary
Literature shows that significant research has been carried out to arrive at what we have today for a relatively energy efficient running refrigeration compressors. RP has some design weaknesses such as significant frictional losses due to a number of rubbing surfaces which have high relative rubbing velocity to each other; components (eccentric and roller) are not rotating at their centres and resulted in unnecessary inherent vibration; vane tip is constantly rubbing against the roller making it a weakest part in design. To overcome RP’s weaknesses, revolving vane compressor (RV) is introduced. Components in RV rotate at their own centres and no inherent vibration, and there is no vane tip contact. In CVCE, parts are all concentric and rotate at their own centres, the unit recovers expansion energy and significantly reduces energy required by the refrigeration systems. Details on these three compressors are explained, compared and their respective uniqueness are shown and discussed
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.