| Author |
Chest refrigerator article
|
|
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-19, 11:25 pm |
| Here is an article I came across on a home made chest
fridge. Note that I said fridge and not freezer
see link
http://tinyurl.com/cay4t
To me this idea has merit
What's everyone else think?
Anyone actually using such a device on daily basis?
| |
| Ulysses 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| Huh.
<me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:ra7rd1ppkvqb6mlopb217brkvust7opk70@4ax.com...
> Here is an article I came across on a home made chest
> fridge. Note that I said fridge and not freezer
>
> see link
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cay4t
>
> To me this idea has merit
>
> What's everyone else think?
>
> Anyone actually using such a device on daily basis?
| |
| Tim Keating 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:40:30 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
>Here is an article I came across on a home made chest
>fridge. Note that I said fridge and not freezer
>
>see link
>
>http://tinyurl.com/cay4t
>
>To me this idea has merit
Yes, it has merit..
The .1 Kwh per day number is inline with products available from
sunfrost.
http://www.sunfrost.com/refrigerator_specs.html
I.E. R10 unit (9cu ft interior) consumes .17kWh a day @21 C.
>What's everyone else think?
It's a lot cheaper than the sunfrost units..
But, one must add in the PV charge controller and inverter losses
to make a fair comparison..
I suspect that the unit collects water. Most fridges have a
condensate pan to get rid of the water as it condenses out of the
humid air. Thus one might need to tilt and then open the drain plug
and/ or clean the unit on regular basis.
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| >>To me this idea has merit
>
>Yes, it has merit..
well I thought it was a good idea
It pointed out to me that the basic shape of an upright
fridge is flawed cause all the cold air falls out of
unit when door opened
A chest design is more like a "bucket". Keeps that
cold air contained even when top is open
| |
|
| me@privacy.net wrote:
>
>
> well I thought it was a good idea
>
> It pointed out to me that the basic shape of an upright
> fridge is flawed cause all the cold air falls out of
> unit when door opened
>
> A chest design is more like a "bucket". Keeps that
> cold air contained even when top is open
I agree . this is simply the best energy saving idear I have recently
herd of . our fridge frezer (80/20 split) uses in 24h 1.95kwh (15-27degc
amb) . my very next project . thanks Tom Chalko .
samc
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| >I agree . this is simply the best energy saving idear I have recently
>herd of . our fridge frezer (80/20 split) uses in 24h 1.95kwh (15-27degc
>amb) . my very next project . thanks Tom Chalko .
>samc
So what will you do?
Build a chest fridge or buy one?
| |
| Scott Willing 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:51:57 -0400, Tim Keating
<NotForJunkEmail@directinternet11.com1> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:40:30 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
>
Sorry to piggyback; the original post isn't available on my news
server.
FYI Backwoods Solar Electric has been advocating this concept and
selling an external thermostat to do it with for years.
http://backwoodssolar.com/Catalogpages2/refriger2.htm
Item R-4E047, just under the Crossley freezer.
-=s
| |
| Harry Chickpea 2005-07-24, 9:05 pm |
| me@privacy.net wrote:
>
>So what will you do?
>
>Build a chest fridge or buy one?
And more importantly, which Hooters will you be trying it at?
| |
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
| Scott Willing <NOTwilling2BSPAMMED@mts.net> wrote:
>FYI Backwoods Solar Electric has been advocating this concept and
>selling an external thermostat to do it with for years.
http://backwoodssolar.com/Catalogpages2/refriger2.htm
>Item R-4E047, just under the Crossley freezer.
I wonder who makes it.
Tom Chalko says the 2 AAA batteries onwould last "several months."
They might last longer (the shelf life date of Duracell AAA's for
sale today is 2011) if they were trickle-charged... 3 months is about
2000 hours, and the AAA low-current capacity is about 1 Ah, so they
might last till 2011 if trickle-charged at 1 mA via a simple charge pump
with a 0.047 uF cap in series with a 3.6 V zener diode to ground...
Like this:
0.047 uF
-------||---------------
| |
240 VAC - 3.6 V --- 3 V
50 Hz ^ -
| |
------------------------
1 mA = 50C2x240 makes C = 0.04 x 10^-6.
The zener vs plain diode would avoid harming the load
if the battery is removed with the power on.
Nick
| |
|
| On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:40:30 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
>Here is an article I came across on a home made chest
>fridge. Note that I said fridge and not freezer
>
>see link
>
>http://tinyurl.com/cay4t
>
>To me this idea has merit
>
>What's everyone else think?
Wow, nice project, and well done web site.
I'm not keen on the chest-fridge idea though. Access to the full
capacity is going to be awkward, and extra time spent rummaging is
going to waste some of the benefits of the chest configuration.
If I understand his reasoning, he's saying that the top door is the
primary advantage. He also says it only took 2 minutes of run time to
cool it from room temp to 6C. Disregarding any possible extra leakage
of a vertical gasket over a horizontal one, it would seem that the
maximum the horizontal door configuration can save is say, 10 openings
per day at 2 minutes run-time each. In reality, the savings are likely
much less. But lets call it 20 openings at an extra runtime of 1
minute each, perhaps 155 Whrs per day total for a more practical
vertical configuration, versus 100 for the horizontal layout. About
$80 in PV to avoid the stooping, rummaging, and enable the practical
use of shelves. Or perhaps quite a bit more for either arrangement in
a more typical application.
I notice at the Backwoods site that they're still marketing fridges by
using non-standard energy ratings, and claiming that by top-mounting
the compressor, "no heat goes back into the box". Yet a top-mounted
compressor doesn't seem to be needed at Mt. Best... I wish vendors
would stick to publishing the Energy Star ratings instead, in order to
make comparisons fairer.
Wayne
| |
| dial1800eatshit 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
| samc wrote:
> me@privacy.net wrote:
> I agree . this is simply the best energy saving idear I have recently
> herd of . our fridge frezer (80/20 split) uses in 24h 1.95kwh (15-27degc
> amb) . my very next project . thanks Tom Chalko .
> samc
Dont forget that design has no freezer compartment.
I wonder if your upright could get 20% energy savings if you just elimited
the freezer.
| |
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
| wmbjk <wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net> wrote:
>If I understand his reasoning, he's saying that the top door is the
>primary advantage...
Freezers also have more insulation than fridges. Dr. Chalko says he got
started on this when he noticed that some chest freezers used less energy
than some fridges, despite the larger temperature difference.
>Disregarding any possible extra leakage of a vertical gasket over
>a horizontal one...
That may be a large disregarding.
>...it would seem that the maximum the horizontal door configuration can
>save is say, 10 openings per day at 2 minutes run-time each.
Compared to a vertical door...
>In reality, the savings are likely much less.
Why?
>But lets call it 20 openings at an extra runtime of 1 minute each, perhaps
>155 Whrs per day total for a more practical vertical configuration,
>versus 100 for the horizontal layout.
Why did you get 155 Wh/day?
Nick
| |
| twillmon@cybermesa.net 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
|
On 2005-07-22 nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu said:
>Newsgroups: alt.energy.homepower
>Scott Willing <NOTwilling2BSPAMMED@mts.net> wrote:
>http://backwoodssolar.com/Catalogpages2/refriger2.htm
>I wonder who makes it.
Mine is a White-Rodgers type 1609-102 style P1, remote bulb, set-
point and differential both adjustable.
Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA
Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered
| |
| Philip Lewis 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
| twillmon@cybermesa.net writes:
>Scott Willing <NOTwilling2BSPAMMED@mts.net> wrote:
>Mine is a White-Rodgers type 1609-102 style P1, remote bulb, set-
>point and differential both adjustable.
http://www.google.com/search?q=free...sion+thermostat
turned up a few...
--
be safe.
flip
Ich habe keine Ahnung was das bedeutet, oder vielleicht doch?
Remove origin of the word spam from address to reply (leave "+")
| |
|
| On 23 Jul 2005 00:24:47 -0400, nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
>wmbjk <wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>Freezers also have more insulation than fridges. Dr. Chalko says he got
>started on this when he noticed that some chest freezers used less energy
>than some fridges, despite the larger temperature difference.
Yes, but some fridges have much more insulation than others. I doubt
that one needs to live with the disadvantages of converting a chest
freezer to a fridge to get the advantages of better insulation. The
Vestfrost 255 is normally rated at 610Whrs per day
www.solarshop.com.au/fridges%20page.htm, which is about the same per
cubic foot as a fairly standard $800, 22 cu.ft., front opening,
self-defrosting fridge-freezer.
>
>That may be a large disregarding.
Why do you say that? Most gaskets seem to make a pretty good seal, and
are about the same size on both arrangements. The temp difference
across either gasket should be similar as well. And we're only talking
about the sides and bottom of the gasket after all, the top is the
same for both configurations. ;-)
>
>Compared to a vertical door...
>
>Why?
Because the two minutes run-time he noted was to take the empty box
from room temperature to 6C. In normal ops, a fridge is only partly
empty, and opening a front door doesn't drop the empty portion to room
temperature.
>
>Why did you get 155 Wh/day?
He wrote 90 seconds run-time per hour - 36 minutes and 100Whrs per
day. I imagined the same box tilted on its end, and added a generous
20 minutes runtime to cover one minute extra for each of 20 openings
of the now vertical door. If 36 minutes run-time uses 100Whrs per day,
then 56 minutes needs 155Whrs per day. But if we knew that at Mt. Best
the fridge is only opened 10 times per day for example, then the
difference might be even less.
I'm thinking that at Mt. Best, the low energy consumption of the chest
fridge might have more to do with the small size, coolish room
temperatures, and minimal door openings per day, than with the unit's
configuration. According to this http://tinyurl.com/bp4mu door
openings (and hence door configuration I would think) only account for
10% of energy consumption, while an extra 10 degrees F can account for
40%.
Anyway, this is getting into a lot of supposing. It would be
interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of the two
configurations, with consumption figures quoted for the same
conditions the Energy Star system uses. A worthwhile project for Home
Power Magazine or ESSN.
Wayne
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-24, 9:06 pm |
| >Anyway, this is getting into a lot of supposing. It would be
>interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of the two
>configurations, with consumption figures quoted for the same
>conditions the Energy Star system uses. A worthwhile project for Home
>Power Magazine or ESSN.
Agreed
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-25, 6:21 pm |
| >I'm not keen on the chest-fridge idea though. Access to the full
>capacity is going to be awkward,
Couldn't good design help with access in a chest fridge
tho?
| |
| wmbjk 2005-07-25, 10:21 pm |
| On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:04:01 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
[color=darkred]
>Couldn't good design help with access in a chest fridge
>tho?
Air-ride elevating shelves perhaps?
Articulated parallelogram racks on the underside of the lid?
Drawers that slide open to the front? ;-)
Wayne
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-25, 11:21 pm |
| >Air-ride elevating shelves perhaps?
>Articulated parallelogram racks on the underside of the lid?
>Drawers that slide open to the front? ;-)
Well... something like the above. <G>
Just seems to me that with some clever engineering it
could be just as easy to get stuff in and out of a
chest design as an upright fridge.
It seems so obvious to me that the chest design has got
be so much more efficient at keeping that could "in"
the unit than an upright that access has to be designed
around it. Rather than efficiency being designed around
access
| |
| Anthony Matonak 2005-07-26, 2:21 am |
| me@privacy.net wrote:
....
> It seems so obvious to me that the chest design has got
> be so much more efficient at keeping that could "in"
> the unit than an upright that access has to be designed
> around it. Rather than efficiency being designed around
> access
I don't know about efficiency but drawer fridges/freezers
seem to be getting popular these days. Why go with a chest
or upright when you can get one built in under the counter?
Anthony
| |
|
|
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2005-07-26, 7:21 am |
| me@privacy.net wrote:
>Couldn't good design help with access in a chest fridge tho?
Shelves on rollers that slide left and right as you look at the fridge
with the lid up might halve the capacity...
Maybe we need a winch on the ceiling that hauls all the shelves
up to eye level :-)
Nick
| |
| Pete C 2005-07-26, 8:21 am |
| On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:40:37 GMT, "Dave" <dave456xx@nospam.com> wrote:
>US studies by Kao & Saidur have suggested about 11 Wh is lost from an
>upright fridge per door opening. So if it is opened 20 times a day, this
>could about to the output of about one 80W solar panel.
>
>http://www.rpc.com.au/products/appl...idge_Apr05.html
>
How about adding a thin perspex flap across each shelf to keep cold
air in? They could be bottom hinged with a light magnetic catch or a
sprung hinge.
Shouldn't be too tricky to do a mock up with cardboard and measure the
difference in power consumption.
cheers,
Pete.
| |
| wmbjk 2005-07-26, 12:21 pm |
| On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 20:53:45 -0500, me@privacy.net wrote:
>
>Well... something like the above. <G>
>
>Just seems to me that with some clever engineering it
>could be just as easy to get stuff in and out of a
>chest design as an upright fridge.
I can't think of any practical way to do it, at least not any way that
would be as good as a front door and shelves. The article mentioned
removing basket loads of groceries altogether, which would provide
easier access to the bottom tier(s). But having the door completely
open, and exposing some of the contents fully to room temperature seem
like things that might eat away at any efficiency advantage of the
chest configuration.
>It seems so obvious to me that the chest design has got
>be so much more efficient at keeping that could "in"
It shouldn't be too hard to test for any efficiency advantage.
Perhaps a simple test box, built with variable refrigeration component
mounting, so that the same box could be run in a top-door and a
front-door configuration. Test both configurations with door closed,
and with a number of door openings per day. Perhaps test with top and
bottom compressor mounting as well.
I'd prefer that someone else did the work, and that I get to comment
on their methods. <G> But if somebody loaned the refrigeration unit
(this one should do http://www.novakool.com/remoprnt.pdf), then I'd
supply the materials for the box and build it. Until the end of
August, I might even be able to provide an Energy Star compliant 90F
room. ;-) Testing methodology by the group (within reason).
Wayne
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-26, 6:21 pm |
| >Why go with a chest
>or upright when you can get one built in under the counter?
Didn't know such a thing existed.
Do you have a link to one?
These are fridges that are mounted under cabinet,
right?
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-26, 6:21 pm |
| >How about adding a thin perspex flap across each shelf
what is Perspex?
| |
| me@privacy.net 2005-07-26, 6:21 pm |
| >Shelves on rollers that slide left and right as you look at the fridge
>with the lid up might halve the capacity...
That might work
| |
|
|
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2005-07-26, 7:21 pm |
| <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>That might work
I think the main heat gain with the door open is condensation on cold
fridge contents from room air. Baskets that lift out with poly film
liners would also work, and avoid collecting much condensation on
their contents when they are lifted out.
Nick
| |
|
|
|
|
| no_child_left_unleashed@yahoo.com.sg 2005-07-27, 10:21 am |
| > I think the main heat gain with the door open is condensation on cold
> fridge contents from room air
Our 35 F chest-refrigerator with 50% RH has14 grains of water-vapor in
each pound of room air
But Nick's rooftop solar still bakes his LiCl desiccant liquid to
50% concentration. This puts his room air, which is in vapor-pressure
equilibrium with it, at a vapor pressure of 0.109 "Hg, with a RH of
7.5% and its dewpoint is 18.2F
Nick will need to take measures to prevent the room air from DRYING OUT
the food contents, not from wetting them.
Beer spills might work well. If you could mention, Nick, the ACH
you're experiencing through the gasket of the fridge?
| |
| nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu 2005-07-27, 10:21 am |
| <no_child_left_unleashed@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
>
>Our 35 F chest-refrigerator with 50% RH has14 grains of water-vapor in
>each pound of room air
I'm not sure what you mean by that. It seems to me that the moisture in
the room air is more important than the moisture inside the fridge when
the fridge door is closed.
>But Nick's rooftop solar still bakes his LiCl desiccant liquid to
>50% concentration. This puts his room air, which is in vapor-pressure
>equilibrium with it, at a vapor pressure of 0.109 "Hg, with a RH of
>7.5% and its dewpoint is 18.2F
That's a completely different application (cooling and dehumidifying
a house), and the vapor pressure of the room air would be higher than
the vapor pressure in the still.
Nick
| |
| no_child_left_unleashed@yahoo.com.sg 2005-07-27, 11:21 am |
| > vapor pressure of the room air would be higher than
> the vapor pressure in the still.
That's because you're spilling too much beer. Re-calibration may be
indicated.
|
|
|
|