|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 25, 2017 15:29:02 GMT
It'll be fun to compare the numbers of the guinea pigs. I did that to our 1940 CF-2 and 1935 CK-2 using only one kill-a-watt between the two of them, and it sucked.
I did learn that the flat top was about 20-30% more efficient. By freezing a few lbs of ice slowly over a 24 hour period, I was able to estimate the R-value of the cabinets. They were about the same (R 8.3), which ruled out cabinet insulation differences.
The same analysis showed the '35 CK monitor top to have a real-world cooling COP of between 1.1 and 1.4 in a 67F room at various cabinet temps.
If my CK were in the same 70-80F garage as the guinea pigs, I would make a semi-educated guess that it'd draw just over 33W on average to maintain a 34F cabinet temp. That would be with 113 BTU/hr entering the cabinet through the insulation, and an effective cooling COP of 1.
If I recall correctly, that guinea pig has a 23W heater, and is probably on a similar cabinet. If I added the load of a heater to my CK, addition of the heater would bump it up to 33W + 23W = 55W average, or about 1.3-1.4 kWh/day. So that's a sort of milestone I'll be using at this early stage to help mentally model the performance of this DR on R124. Playing with apples and oranges, just for fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 27, 2017 20:14:47 GMT
Tanks to birkies generosity and desier to help I have 3 Kill a Watts now. Thank you birkie for the offer to buy two more. The following units are hooked to the three Kill A Watts. Ginny pig #1 (DR-2-G16) with R124, Ginny pig #2 (DR2) with so2, and my CK is joining the tests as Ginny pig #3 (CK-2-B16) with so2. I will post some kill A Watt data latter but for now here is a video for your listing pleasre. www.youtube.com/watch?v=y81Weo47VFg&feature=youtu.be First I start #1, next #2 and last #3. At the very end you here my 38 flattop start. |
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 28, 2017 0:56:27 GMT
Very cool! Ginny #2 (the DR2 on SO2) sounds the loudest to me, #1 and #3 about the same. Interestingly, #1 (DR-2-G16 on R124) sounds a bit deeper in tone than #2. That 38 flattop has a very distinctive sound in and of itself.. my '40 flat top sounds nothing like it.
The selection of machines is neat as well. We have the same kind of evaporator on different mechanisms (the DR-2-G16 vs the CK), and the same mechanism on different evaporators (the DR-2-G16 vs the DR2, which presumably has a pig evap?)
I'm looking forward to tracking the relative differences between them (average duty cycle, daily power draw, average watts during a cycle, etc), and seeing if bringing the DR2 and CK to R124 maintains the same trend. I believe the DR is a less volumetrically efficient than the CK. That means the DR and the CK could potentially react quite differently to the different compression ratios found in SO2 vs R124. This experiment should be able to reveal all that!
|
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 28, 2017 2:01:28 GMT
Well I messed up and did not reset the Kill A Watt I had on Ginny pig #2 so I have no correct information on it yet. I forgot when I plugged it in to check watts and I never reset it. I do have the other twos info after 48 hours. I presently pay 12.9 cents a KWHR total.
I have added foam to seals and all boxes are sealing pretty good, garage ambeiant is is mid 70s to low 80s. I am also not opening doors unless nesassary to put a temp probe inside. Ginny pigs #1&3 are running about 34-35F Ginny pig #2 is running about 36-37f
Ginny pig #1 after 48 hrs and 12 mins has used 3.32 KWHR, total cost .42, per day .21. Power factor shown was .48
Ginny pig #3 after 47 hrs and 50 mins has used 1.6 KWHR, total cost .20, per day .10. Power factor shown was.60
|
|
|
|
Post by Travis on Aug 28, 2017 2:25:39 GMT
#2 should get a break for being the pioneer.
|
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 28, 2017 4:12:17 GMT
So if we disregard the heater on the the DR and just consider the refrigeration parts, Ginny #1 (the DR-2-G16) draws 45W average, whereas #3 the CK is just over 33W. That's about 36% more.
Assuming a 166W average power draw when the compressor is on, #1 has an average duty cycle of about 31%; something like 7 minutes on, 15.6 minutes off.
Don't know cycle characteristics of #3 the CK. If it's anything like mine, I'd predict watts probably are around 168, duty cycle 20%; something like 3 mins on, 12 off.
At the higher cabinet temp of ginny 2, I would predict a 12% decrease in power consumption, neglecting the heater. If Ginny 1's cabinet temperature were raised to match, that'd result in 40 refrigeration watts, 63W total, or about 3.0 kWh for a 48 hr period.
|
|
|
|
Post by elec573 on Aug 29, 2017 4:29:03 GMT
Thanks for sharing it's your very interesting to us old fridge geeks .
|
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 30, 2017 1:57:09 GMT
I should have mentioned that that Ginny pig 1 has one of Rays 20 watt heaters in it, it draws about 21 watt. Ginny pig 2 did have one of the 20 watt but it is shorted to its shell and tried to fry me, luckly all I got was a tingle and I thought wth only thing plugged in is the new heater. Anyway Ginny pig 2 has a factory heater in it and it draws about 15.6 watt. Of course Ginny pig 3 has no heater.
Also Ginny pig 2 does have a pig evaporator.
Here is the Kill a Watt info on Ginny pig 2 so far. After 55 hours and 26 mins- kwhr 3.28,total cost .42, per day .19. Power factor shown was .48
Ginny pig 1 Last night I watched 4 cycles and had on times from just about 2.5 min to as much as 3 & 6 sec. Off times varied from about 7 min to and long as about 9.5 min
Ginny pig 3 Last night I watched 4 cycles and had on times from just over 2 min to as much as 3.5 min. Off times varied from about 7 min to and long as 13.5 min (hapened after the 3.5 min run time)
|
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 30, 2017 2:30:48 GMT
Huh.. it looks to me like Ginny #2 is a lot closer to the CK as far as efficiency is concerned, even compensating for the higher cabinet temps. That's like 31 refrigeration watts average (ignoring the heater). Either that, or the past 70 hours were much cooler than the 48hrs Ginny #1 was measured at.
I have a suspicion Ginny #1 is underperforming. It's too early to conclude that definitively, though. If it is, it's too early to tell if it's the R-124, or something with the machine itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 30, 2017 2:47:56 GMT
Huh.. it looks to me like Ginny #2 is a lot closer to the CK as far as efficiency is concerned, even compensating for the higher cabinet temps. That's like 31 refrigeration watts average (ignoring the heater). Either that, or the past 70 hours were much cooler than the 48hrs Ginny #2 was measured at. I have a suspicion Ginny #1 is underperforming. It's too early to conclude that definitively, though. If it is, it's too early to tell if it's the R-124, or something with the machine itself. Not much change in garage ambeint. More Kill a Watt info Ginny pig 1 so far. After 97 hours and 36 mins- kwhr 6.53, total cost .84, per day .20 Ginny pig 3 so far. After 97 hours and 18 mins- kwhr 3.02, total cost .38, per day .09 |
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 30, 2017 3:11:51 GMT
Fantastic. So far, average refrigeration watts (neglecting the heater) is:
Ginny #1 44W
Ginny #2 31W (35W adjusting for temp)
Ginny #3 31W
In order to compare capacity, we'll need to know the run watts of #2 and #3 at some point. We already know #1 is about 175-160 for an 'on' cycle.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 30, 2017 3:19:41 GMT
Ginny #2 starts at about 176 watts and ends the on cycle at about 155.
Ginny #3 starts at about 170 watts and ends the on cycle at about 156.
|
|
|
|
Post by birkie on Aug 30, 2017 3:52:32 GMT
Ginny #2 starts at about 176 watts and ends the on cycle at about 155. Ginny #3 starts at about 170 watts and ends the on cycle at about 156. All three are strikingly close! Looking through your previous post, it's apparent that #1 seems to have shorter 'off' cycles, and comparable 'on' cycles to #3. That would account for its higher average refrigeration watts due to the increased duty cycle. A less-than-ideal cabinet could be one possible cause of that. By the way, it is a very good thing you didn't get shocked worse by that heater. Did you say it was a new one.... Yikes! |
|
|
|
Post by coldspaces on Aug 30, 2017 4:05:46 GMT
Yes it was a new heater, had 90 volts on its case when checked latter. Guess the old factory ceramics might be safer.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackhorse on Aug 30, 2017 12:29:34 GMT
Oh that's wonderful! New heater and it tries to kill you....
|
|
