This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Question on thermodynamics

Former Community Member
Former Community Member
Hello everyone, I have a question on the energy cost of compressing gas.

I didn't find a community about thermodynamics, so I post the question here..


When gas absorbs heat. its volume increases from v1 to v2. When we compress the volume of the same gas from v2 to v1, does the energy required equal to the heat it absorbs? Does the temperature affect the energy required?


  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Weizhi Yao:




    Lynton Mogridge:

    It sounds like you are running a sub-critical two phase refrigeration cycle. This is similar to your domestic refrigerator. If you look up refrigeration cycle on Wikepedia it will give you the details and the normal performance measure COP (coefficient of performance), more detail in Cengel and Boles Chapter 10.

    Lynton.




    Thanks, I found that the COP in air conditioner is about 3.x,


    If we use 1km copper line, radius is 900 mm2,

    At 20 deg c

    R = 0.0172*10^-6 * 1000 / (900*10^-6) = 0.0191(ohm)

    At 90 deg c, temperature coefficient of resistivity is 0.00393 at 20 deg c

    R = 0.0191*1.00393^70 = 0.02513(ohm)


    The current is 1000A

    P=1000*1000*0.0191=19100(W)

    P90 = 1000*1000*0.02513 = 25130(W)

    Psav = 25130-19100 = 6030(W)


    Per year, the energy saving is

    W = Psav* 24*365 = 52822.8(kw*h)   -- per kilometer


    To keep the line 20 deg c, the input power of compressor should be

    19100/3.5 = 5457.14(W)


    It seems it is worth implementing the solution.

    Am I right? Could anybody working in electricity domain point out the rough difference between the real value and the ideal value?


     




    The data model can be simplified to following.

     - The resistance at highest temp / lowest temp are Rh / Rl

     - The cooling COP is cop


    I^2 * (Rh-Rl) > I^2 * Rl / cop

      ==>

    Rh / Rl > (cop+1) / cop


    Substitute sample data of copper at 90 deg C and 20 deg C

    0.0226/0.0172 > (cop+1)/cop  ==>

    cop>3.7


    A little challenging, but if solar energy is used, the required level of cooling COP can be decreased.

    Am I right? Is anybody interested in it?

  • Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

  • Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

  • Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ian Evans:

    Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

     




    Thanks for pointing out the error.. I was misled by the Chinese article where the coeff is defined to "the change rate of resitivity per degree".

    I think the data in latter article is a little more exact.

    Actually, the benefit is not only the finacial saving. It also saves the non-renewable resources and the working efforts of workers in the mining or gas station..


    Well, the purpose I posted those equations is to make it more attractive instead of publishing a paper.. all the data are copied from the internet and their accuracy are not guaranteed.

    I'd like to find out if there's anybody who is interested in this topic and is willing to turn it into reality.. First of all, it should be feasible and valuable enough.

    Now it seems the biggest problem is to find out a suitable coolant. Any input is welcome~

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ian Evans:

    Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

     




    Thanks for pointing out the error.. I was misled by the Chinese article where the coeff is defined to "the change rate of resitivity per degree".

    I think the data in latter article is a little more exact.

    Actually, the benefit is not only the finacial saving. It also saves the non-renewable resources and the working efforts of workers in the mining or gas station..


    Well, the purpose I posted those equations is to make it more attractive instead of publishing a paper.. all the data are copied from the internet and their accuracy are not guaranteed.

    I'd like to find out if there's anybody who is interested in this topic and is willing to turn it into reality.. First of all, it should be feasible and valuable enough.

    Now it seems the biggest problem is to find out a suitable coolant. Any input is welcome~

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ian Evans:

    Firstly, your temperature adjustment for the resistance is incorrect: R(90°C) = R(20°C) × [1 + coeff × (90 - 20)]

    Secondly, are you considering an a.c. or d.c. system; if a.c. then you need to take account of the skin and proximity effects which will further increase the conductor resistance.

    Once you have the correct resistance you can calculate the losses from the conductor (joule losses).  All this energy needs to be removed from the conductor to maintain the temperature and you need to take account of all the heat transfer.  Your system would need to monitor the temperature because as soon as it gets above the required temperature the losses will increase and you will get thermal runaway.  As your system is 1 km long it is likely that the cooling gas will not be a constant temperature over the full length, it will be flowing around a system where the input will be colder than the output.  When considering cooling of a long conductor it is generally easier to think in terms of W/m (You are basically looking at a fluid dynamics problem to remove the W/m).

    Other things to consider are costs resulting from probable reduced reliability and additional maintenance - it isn't just about the savings in terms of energy losses.

     




    Thanks for pointing out the error.. I was misled by the Chinese article where the coeff is defined to "the change rate of resitivity per degree".

    I think the data in latter article is a little more exact.

    Actually, the benefit is not only the finacial saving. It also saves the non-renewable resources and the working efforts of workers in the mining or gas station..


    Well, the purpose I posted those equations is to make it more attractive instead of publishing a paper.. all the data are copied from the internet and their accuracy are not guaranteed.

    I'd like to find out if there's anybody who is interested in this topic and is willing to turn it into reality.. First of all, it should be feasible and valuable enough.

    Now it seems the biggest problem is to find out a suitable coolant. Any input is welcome~

  • Cooling systems on transmission cable circuits are not a new thing, however they have generally been used to allow greater currents when the cables have been operating at their maximum temperature rather than trying to keep the temperature to 20°C. Water is probably the most commonly used coolant and, for buried cable systems, is pumped along pipes adjacent to or enveloping the cables ; but many such systems are no longer used due to reliability issues. In tunnels cables have sometimes been installed in water filled troughs but this appraoch has generally been abandoned; more commonly is to rapidly push, or pull, air through the tunnel to remove the heat, sometimes with chiller units on the inlet or with additional cooling from water pipes along the tunnel.


    It should also be noted that for most of the time a transmission cable circuit does not operate at its full capacity and so is not at its maximum temperature as networks are usually designed to share the load over a number of circuits. Consequently any cooling system is unlikely to be operating most of the time and is hence more likely to not operate when required (just as central heating systems are more likely to breakdown when you turn them back on after a hot summer).


    Whilst cooling of transmission cables may seem a way of reducing the use of non-renewable resources etc., increasing the amount of conductor (by size, to some degree, or by increased numbers) carrying the current or reducing the end user demand are possibly better solutions. You also should remember that any repair work also uses non-renewable resources etc.


    If you want to know more about cable cooling then if you do a search you will find that there are a good number of papers on the subject. As I say, if talking about cooling transmission cables, sorry but it is not a new concept.
  • Cooling systems on transmission cable circuits are not a new thing, however they have generally been used to allow greater currents when the cables have been operating at their maximum temperature rather than trying to keep the temperature to 20°C. Water is probably the most commonly used coolant and, for buried cable systems, is pumped along pipes adjacent to or enveloping the cables ; but many such systems are no longer used due to reliability issues. In tunnels cables have sometimes been installed in water filled troughs but this appraoch has generally been abandoned; more commonly is to rapidly push, or pull, air through the tunnel to remove the heat, sometimes with chiller units on the inlet or with additional cooling from water pipes along the tunnel.


    It should also be noted that for most of the time a transmission cable circuit does not operate at its full capacity and so is not at its maximum temperature as networks are usually designed to share the load over a number of circuits. Consequently any cooling system is unlikely to be operating most of the time and is hence more likely to not operate when required (just as central heating systems are more likely to breakdown when you turn them back on after a hot summer).


    Whilst cooling of transmission cables may seem a way of reducing the use of non-renewable resources etc., increasing the amount of conductor (by size, to some degree, or by increased numbers) carrying the current or reducing the end user demand are possibly better solutions. You also should remember that any repair work also uses non-renewable resources etc.


    If you want to know more about cable cooling then if you do a search you will find that there are a good number of papers on the subject. As I say, if talking about cooling transmission cables, sorry but it is not a new concept.
  • Cooling systems on transmission cable circuits are not a new thing, however they have generally been used to allow greater currents when the cables have been operating at their maximum temperature rather than trying to keep the temperature to 20°C. Water is probably the most commonly used coolant and, for buried cable systems, is pumped along pipes adjacent to or enveloping the cables ; but many such systems are no longer used due to reliability issues. In tunnels cables have sometimes been installed in water filled troughs but this appraoch has generally been abandoned; more commonly is to rapidly push, or pull, air through the tunnel to remove the heat, sometimes with chiller units on the inlet or with additional cooling from water pipes along the tunnel.


    It should also be noted that for most of the time a transmission cable circuit does not operate at its full capacity and so is not at its maximum temperature as networks are usually designed to share the load over a number of circuits. Consequently any cooling system is unlikely to be operating most of the time and is hence more likely to not operate when required (just as central heating systems are more likely to breakdown when you turn them back on after a hot summer).


    Whilst cooling of transmission cables may seem a way of reducing the use of non-renewable resources etc., increasing the amount of conductor (by size, to some degree, or by increased numbers) carrying the current or reducing the end user demand are possibly better solutions. You also should remember that any repair work also uses non-renewable resources etc.


    If you want to know more about cable cooling then if you do a search you will find that there are a good number of papers on the subject. As I say, if talking about cooling transmission cables, sorry but it is not a new concept.