Evaporative Pre Cooler

Emerging Technologies
Evaporative Condenser Air Pre-Coolers

ET13SCE1020
Prepared by:
Emerging Products
Customer Service
Southern California Edison
December 2015
Evaporative Condenser Air Pre-Coolers ET13SCE1020
Acknowledgments
Southern California Edisons Emerging Products (EP) group is responsible for this project. It
was developed as part of Southern California Edisons Emerging Technologies Program
under internal project number ET13SCE1020. Jay Madden conducted this technology
evaluation with overall guidance and management from Jerine Ahmed. Contact
[email protected] for more information on this project.
Disclaimer
This report was prepared by Southern California Edison (SCE) and funded by California
utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Reproduction or distribution of the whole or any part of the contents of this document
without the express written permission of SCE is prohibited. This work was performed with
reasonable care and in accordance with professional standards. However, neither SCE nor
any entity performing the work pursuant to SCEs authority make any warranty or
representation, expressed or implied, with regard to this report, the merchantability or
fitness for a particular purpose of the results of the work, or any analyses, or conclusions
contained in this report. The results reflected in the work are generally representative of
operating conditions; however, the results in any other situation may vary depending upon
particular operating conditions.
Southern California Edison

Emerging Products December 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In order to understand the energy benefits associated with evaporative pre-coolers, the
American Society for Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
formed a Standard Project Committee (SPC-212P) chaired by Mark Modera of the Western
Cooling Efficiency Center (WCEC) to develop a Method of Test for Determining Energy
Performance and Water-Use Efficiency of Add-On Evaporative Pre-Coolers for Unitary Air
Conditioning Equipment. This report describes laboratory testing of five evaporative
condenser air pre-cooler products on a packaged roof top unit and provided feedback to the
ASHRAE SPC-212P.
Evaporative pre-coolers evaporate water into the air stream that cools the condenser coil of
an air conditioning system. The evaporated water reduces the sensible temperature of the
air stream, increasing the overall air conditioning system efficiency.
There are a large numbers of manufacturers offering evaporative pre-coolers as retrofits to

existing RTUs and the methods of pre-cooling air vary. The design of the pre-cooler will
impact its performance and the resulting energy and demand savings of the air conditioning
system. While various field studies have been conducted, an objective laboratory test
protocol is needed to quantify both the energy savings and the associated water use of the
pre-cooler.
The objectives of this project as described in the scope of work were to:
1. Laboratory test five evaporative pre-cooler technologies (results to include energy
and water impacts). Evaluate the impact of wind speed and direction on one
technology.
2. Continue to move the Method of Test through the ASHRAE standards committee.
As part of objective 1, the decision was made by the ASHRAE committee to abort the wind
speed tests after the lab determined they were too difficult to conduct and accurately
reproduce between laboratories.
Before testing any evaporative condenser air pre-coolers, a set of baseline tests were
obtained for a 4-ton RTU. The 4-ton RTU was chosen in order to enable testing in a
laboratory scale environmental chamber, however, evaporative condenser air pre-coolers
tested in this study are designed for installation on cooling equipment between 3-50 tons.
The size of the air conditioning equipment is not expected to affect pre-cooler performance,
therefore a smaller RTU was used to simplify laboratory construction and testing.
Each pre-cooler was added to the RTU in the lab by, or in consultation with, the
manufacturer of the pre-cooler. If the pre-cooler added airflow resistance to the condenser-
air stream due to an evaporative media, a dry test was conducted to determine the
performance of the system with the pre-cooler installed with water off, an operating
condition that may occur during cooler weather. After dry test was completed, the pre-
cooler was tested with the evaporative pre-cooler installed and running. The lab tested the
RTU, retrofitted with pre-coolers, at a minimum of four outdoor conditions. Then, for each
pre-cooler test, the efficiency of the unit with the pre-cooler installed was compared to the
baseline unit performance curve to determine the temperature at which the baseline unit
had the equivalent efficiency. This temperature is equivalent to the average temperature
supplied by the evaporative pre-cooler and was used to calculate the evaporative
effectiveness and water-use effectiveness of the pre-cooler. The evaporative effectiveness,
also known as saturation efficiency, is a measurement of how close the temperature of the
Southern California Edison Page i

air leaving the pre-cooler is to the wet-bulb temperature of the entering air. The theoretical
maximum for evaporative effectiveness is 100% (where the exiting dry bulb temperature
equals the entering wet bulb temperature). The water-use effectiveness is the percent of
the water consumed by the pre-cooler that is used for pre-cooling (and not lost to leaks,
unevaporated droplets, overspray, etc.).
A laboratory test protocol that objectively compared evaporative pre-coolers from five
manufacturers of differing designs was successfully demonstrated. The main findings of the
testing were that:
1. The five products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness in the range of 20 80% and
water-use effectiveness in the 25 100%.
2. The three highest performing products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness in the
range of 50-80% and a water-use effectiveness greater than 50%. Of these pre-coolers,
two recirculated water and had the highest water-use effectiveness (>80%), however, in
field applications would require additional water use for maintenance or bleed water
because they are recirculation systems, which was not accounted for in the laboratory
test.
3. The two lowest performing products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness consistently
below 50%, with water use effectiveness generally below 50%.
Because pre-coolers designs are highly variable and the specific design and control
methodology will impact performance, it is critical to complete publication of the ASHRAE
test standard, so that end-users and utilities will have objective test data that can be used
to compare evaporative pre-cooler products and forecast energy savings.
An analysis tool previously developed shows energy savings and demand reduction vary as
a function of evaporative effectiveness and climate. As an example, an evaporative pre-
cooler with 70% evaporative effectiveness installed in climate zone 10, one of the most
populous in Southern California, is estimated to achieve a total energy savings of ~10% and
a peak demand savings of ~20%. In the same climate zone, an evaporative effectiveness of
50% is estimated to achieve a total energy savings of ~8% and a peak demand savings of
~15%.
WCEC recommends inclusion of evaporative pre-cooling products for inclusion in rebate

programs. WCEC also recommends that pre-coolers pass laboratory certification based on
the test protocol described in this report, with performance requirements set by the utility.
Rebate structures could be tiered to qualify more products, setting a higher rebate level for
higher performance products.
There are two obvious market barriers prevent widespread adoption of this technology. The
first is the lack of infrastructure (published protocol and test facilities) to test and certify
pre-cooler products if a rebate program was implemented that required certification. The
second, and most serious market barrier, is the staggering drought currently facing
California. While evaporative cooling uses a small amount of water in comparison to other
building requirements, any additional water burdens will be heavily scrutinized by end-users
and regulators. We can address this issue by 1) minimizing the water used in pre-coolers,
by optimizing bleed rates to use as little water as possible, 2) evaluating rainwater capture
and greywater and potential non-potable water sources, and 3) quantifying the trade-off
between electricity saved and water used, and the water and electricity impacts involved in
water transportation and electricity generation.
Southern California Edison Page ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AHRI Air-conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
ANSI American National Standards Institute
ASHRAE American Society for Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers
CDP Constant Dew Points
COP Coefficient of Performance
CWBD Constant Wet Bulb Depression
DB Dry Bulb
EA Exhaust Air
EE Evaporative Effectiveness
IA Indoor Air
HS Hot Side
OA Outside Air
RA Recirculated or Return Air
PID Proportional, Integral, and Differential
RTD Resistance Temperature Device
RTU Roof Top Unit
SA Supply Air
SCE Southern California Edison
WB Wet Bulb
WCEC Western Cooling Efficiency Center
WUE Water-use Effectiveness
Southern California Edison Page iii

CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ______________________________________________________ I
INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________ 1
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________ 3
TECHNICAL APPROACH/TEST METHODOLOGY __________________________________ 5

Environmental Chamber Design .................................................................... 5
Evaluation of Baseline Technology ............................................................... 12
Test Plan .................................................................................................. 12
Instrumentation Plan ................................................................................. 13
Pre-Cooler Water Supply Measurements .................................................. 16
Refrigerant Measurements ..................................................................... 16
Evaporator Measurements ..................................................................... 17
Condensing Air Measurements ............................................................... 17
Differential Pressure and Airflow Measurements ....................................... 17
Chamber Conditions Measurements ........................................................ 17
Power Measurements ............................................................................ 18
Data Acquisition System ....................................................................... 18
Tolerances................................................................................................ 18
BASELINE TEST RESULTS ___________________________________________________ 20

Data Analysis............................................................................................ 21
Capacity.............................................................................................. 21
Coefficient of Performance ..................................................................... 22
Evaporative Effectiveness ...................................................................... 22
Water-use Effectiveness ........................................................................ 25
Measurement Uncertainty...................................................................... 26
Evaporative Effectiveness ........................................................................... 28
Water-Use Effectiveness............................................................................. 29
Pre-Cooler Power Consumption ................................................................... 30
Impact of Dry Media .................................................................................. 31
Expected Energy Savings and Demand Reduction .......................................... 32
Cost of Technology .................................................................................... 35
Life expectancy of Technology .................................................................... 35
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ____________________________________ 36
APPENDICES ___________________________________________________________ 37
REFERENCES ___________________________________________________________ 38
Southern California Edison Page iv

FIGURES
Figure 1: Example of direct evaporative cooling of condenser inlet
air .............................................................................. 3
Figure 2: Typical metrological year data - Davis CA .......................... 6
Figure 3: Schematic of test chambers and both indoor and outdoor
conditioning loops ........................................................ 9
Figure 4: Example air conditions for outdoor air conditioning loop .... 10
Figure 5: Example air conditions for indoor air conditioning loop ...... 11
Figure 6: Test unit installed in the environmental chamber .............. 14
Figure 7: Measurements for Pre-cooler testing apparatus ................ 14
Figure 8: Sensitivity Analysis of Condenser Coil Pressure Drop
Tolerances................................................................. 19
Figure 9: Coefficient of Performance for Baseline RTU Versus
Outdoor Air Temperature ............................................ 21
Figure 10: Using exhaust and ambient conditions to calculate post
pre-cool condition ...................................................... 23
Figure 11: Process for Calculating Tdb,equivalent ........................... 24
Figure 12: Example Uncertainty Analysis Propagation ..................... 27
Figure 13: Comparison of Evaporative Effectiveness of Five Pre-
coolers Tested. Outdoor Air Dewpoint is Constant For all
Tests (56F). ............................................................. 29
Figure 14: Comparison of Water-Use Effectiveness of Five Pre-
coolers Tested. Outdoor Air Dewpoint is Constant For all
Tests (56F). ............................................................. 30
Figure 15: Modeled average energy savings of an evaporative
condenser air pre-cooler ............................................. 33
Figure 16: Modeled average percent energy savings of an
evaporative condenser air pre-cooler ............................ 33
Figure 17: Modeled power savings of an evaporative condenser air
pre-cooler ................................................................. 34
Figure 18: Modeled percent power savings of an evaporative
condenser air pre-cooler ............................................. 34
Southern California Edison Page v

TABLES
Table 1: Properties of evaporative condenser air evaporative pre-
coolers ........................................................................ 4
Table 2: Design Conditions for Environmental Chambers ................... 5
Table 3: Test points for cooling equipment with no pre-cooler
installed (Baseline) ..................................................... 12
Table 4: Cooling equipment with dry evaporative pre-cooler
installed (dry cooler) .................................................. 13
Table 5: Cooling equipment with wet evaporative pre-cooler
installed (wet cooler) .................................................. 13
Table 6: Table of Instruments ...................................................... 15
Table 7 : Baseline Test Data for York 4-ton RTU ............................. 20
Table 8: Water Management Methods of Tested Pre-Coolers ............ 29
Table 9: Pre-cooler Power Consumption ........................................ 31
Table 10: Impact of Dry Media on RTU performance at 75F
Outdoor Air Temperature ............................................ 32
Table 11: Table of All Results for Five Pre-coolers Tested ................ 37
EQUATIONS
Equation 1: Capacity .................................................................. 21
Equation 2: Coefficient of Performance ......................................... 22
Equation 3: Evaporative Effectiveness ........................................... 22
Equation 4: General Second Order Polynomial ............................... 24
Equation 5: General Equation to Determine Tdb,equivalent ............. 24
Equation 6: Evaporative Effectiveness........................................... 25
Equation 7: Water Evaporation Rate ............................................. 25
Equation 8: Water-use Effectiveness ............................................. 25
Equation 9: Uncertainty using Sequential Perturbation .................... 26
Southern California Edison Page vi

INTRODUCTION
In order to understand the energy benefits associated with evaporative pre-coolers, the
American Society for Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
formed a Standard Project Committee (SPC-212P) to develop a Method of Test for
Determining Energy Performance and Water-Use Efficiency of Add-On Evaporative Pre-
Coolers for Unitary Air Conditioning Equipment. This report describes laboratory testing of
five evaporative condenser air pre-cooler products on a packaged roof top unit and provided
feedback to the ASHRAE SPC-212P.
Background
In air conditioning systems, condensing units reject heat from refrigerant directly
into the outside air stream. In these systems, higher outside air temperatures result
in higher energy use by the compressors. As a result, as the outdoor air temperature
rises, the efficiency of the air conditioning system drops and requires more energy to
provide the same amount of cooling to the conditioned space. To compound this
issue, more space cooling is necessary on days when the outdoor air temperature is
higher, due to the increased heat load on the building.
Evaporative cooling takes advantage of the potential of the outside air in dry
climates to absorb moisture, which results in a temperature reduction of the air
stream. When evaporative cooling is used for pre-cooling condenser inlet air, the
condenser operates at a lower temperature than a baseline air-cooled condenser,
and needs less power demand and electricity to meet the cooling demand.
Evaporative condenser air pre-coolers are of special interest in dry, arid climates
such as California. Arid climate zones allow for a larger amount of water to evaporate
into the airstream before entering the condenser, which correlates to a higher
amount of pre-cooling.
A large numbers of manufacturers offer evaporative pre-coolers as retrofits to

existing RTUs. The methods of pre-cooling air vary. The design of the pre-cooler will
impact its performance and the resulting energy savings of the air conditioning
system. While various field studies have been conducted, an objective laboratory test
protocol is needed to quantify both the energy savings and the associated water use
of the pre-cooler. While the laboratory test cannot evaluate every facet of the pre-
cooler technology, it is much faster and less expensive than field testing. A previous
project of the WCEC conducted a similar study for three residential evaporative pre-
cooler products and provided the framework for the commercial product testing
conducted here [1].
Southern California Edison Page 1

Assessment Objectives
The objectives of this project as described in the scope of work were to:
1. Laboratory test five evaporative pre-cooler technologies (results to include
energy and water impacts). Evaluate the impact of wind speed and direction on
one technology.
2. Continue to move the Method of Test through the ASHRAE standards committee.
As part of objective 1, the decision was made by the ASHRAE committee to abort the
wind speed tests after the lab determined they were too difficult to conduct and
accurately reproduce between laboratories.

TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
Five condenser air evaporative pre-coolers were laboratory tested on a 4-ton packaged roof
top unit (RTU), using the same test protocol. The pre-cooler evaporates water to lower the
dry bulb temperature of the air entering the condenser (Figure 1). Because the condenser
air does not interact with the building return and supply air, no humidity is added to the
building. The reduced temperature of the condenser inlet air increases the capacity of the
RTU and decreases power consumption, resulting in an overall efficiency increase for the
unit.
FIGURE 1: EXAMPLE OF DIRECT EVAPORATIVE COOLING OF CONDENSER INLET AIR
In general, an evaporative pre-cooler delivers water through a water distribution system

and uses various methods to evaporate the delivered water prior to the condenser coil. The
products vary in nozzle type and spray pressure, water flow rate, and the type of
evaporative media included (Table 1). In some products, the un-evaporated water is
collected and recirculated (2 of 5 tested), while in other products the excess water drains on
the ground (3 of 5 tested). In some products, the water is sprayed on an evaporative media
(3 of 5 tested), while in others there is no media and the water is sprayed directly on the
coil (1 of 5 tested) or is evaporated prior to the coil (1 of 5 tested).

TABLE 1: PROPERTIES OF EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR EVAPORATIVE PRE-COOLERS
PRE-COOLER WATER DELIVERY NOZZLE OPERATION MEDIA
Spray nozzles @60psig, once Pulse operation, integrated 1" thick foamed
1
through controller polyester
Spray nozzles @60psig, once Pulse operation, integrated Spray directly on coil. No
2
through controller media.
Distribution pipe fed by Continuous operation, on/off
3 8" deep cellulose media
recirculation pump control
Spray nozzles fed by Continuous operation, on/off 1" thick foamed
4
recirculation pump control polyester
Spray nozzles @220psig, once Continuous operation, on/off Evaporate without media
5
through control prior to coil

TECHNICAL APPROACH/TEST METHODOLOGY

ASHRAE formed a Standard Project Committee (SPC-212P) chaired by Mark Modera of the
Western Cooling Efficiency Center (WCEC) to develop an experimental Method of Test for
Determining Energy Performance and Water-Use Efficiency of Add-On Evaporative Pre-
Coolers for Unitary Air Conditioning Equipment.
The protocol was designed for retrofit products for packaged roof top cooling systems up to
20 tons cooling capacity, and the protocol was tested using a 4-ton packaged rooftop unit
(RTU). Five evaporative condenser pre-cooling products were tested. Because no existing
facility was available with adequate dehumidification for testing, WCEC designed and built a
facility optimized for testing evaporative cooling equipment as part of this research contract.
The capabilities and functionality of the facility will be described as a part of this report in
addition to the product test results for the five pre-coolers tested.
Environmental Chamber Design

WCEC built a permanent test facility including two environmental control chambers
specifically designed to test evaporative cooling technologies at the West Village on
the University of California, Davis campus in Davis, California. The primary focus of
the laboratory consists of controlling two conditioned chambers (Table 2). The larger
chamber is designed to produce outdoor air conditions and the smaller chamber is
designed to produce indoor air conditions.
The humidity and temperature of the air into the outdoor chamber can be fully
controlled to any temperature between 60 and 110F and any humidity ratio
between 0.005 and 0.013 lbw/lba, as long as outdoor ambient conditions are within
the blue region illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2 illustrates the numbers of hours per
year these weather conditions are expected in Davis, California, where the laboratory
is located. The chamber is operational outside of the listed weather conditions but
will have some limitations on capabilities (either on humidity, temperature, or
airflow).
TABLE 2: DESIGN CONDITIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHAMBERS
OUTDOOR CHAMBER INDOOR CHAMBER

Size 10.5 Wide x 15 Long x 8 Tall 7 wide x 10 Long x 8 Tall
Climate Dry Bulb 60-110F Dry Bulb 70-85F
Condition Humidity 0.005-0.013 lbw/lba Humidity 0.008-0.011 lbw/lba
Airflow 240-8,000 CFM 240-3,000 CFM

FIGURE 2: TYPICAL METROLOGICAL YEAR DATA - DAVIS CA
The outdoor air chamber has fully conditioned air capacities for flow rates between
240 and 5000cfm. This ensures the capacity to easily test 3 to 5 ton units under the
assumption that condensers tend to pull approximately 800cfm of air per ton of
cooling. The air cannot be conditioned completely at an airflow rate higher than
5000cfm, but for the purposes of studying wind effects the chamber can supply air at
rates up to 8000cfm with limited conditioning capacity.
Temperature and humidity control of the outdoor air chamber is accomplished by two
parallel conditioning paths, through which the distribution of airflow is controlled by
two computer controlled dampers. One path contains a heating coil supplied by hot
water and an evaporative media humidifier, the other path contains a chilled water
coil and a gas-fired desiccant dehumidifier. The hot and chilled water coils have
computer controlled valves to modulate water flow while the humidifier and
dehumidifier have on/off control. Modulating the dampers and valve positions allows
for precise control of the chamber humidity. The final temperature of the air is then
controlled by additional hot and chilled water coils prior to the chamber inlet.
The indoor air chamber capabilities are limited to heating and humidification. It is
designed to re-heat and re-humidify the supply air leaving an evaporator coil. The
design flow rate for the indoor air chamber is between 240 and 3000cfm.

The heated and chilled water for the laboratory is supplied by a boiler and chiller
located on the roof. They both supply a holding tank of water for use in the load
loops that run through the lab. A mixing valve is used to control the temperature
supplied by these loops to the coils located in the lab, mixing the return water from
the load loop with supply water from the boiler/chiller loop storage tanks.
The outdoor air conditioning loop is designed to run in either an open or recirculation
loop, where either Outside Air (OA) or Recirculated Air (RA) is used as a starting
condition for the process air. As shown in both the included diagram (Figure 3) and
psychometric chart (Figure 4), the OA or RA (OA1) is split into two paths which are
heated (OA2a) and humidified (OA3a) and cooled (OA2b) and dried (OA3b). It
should be noted that the dehumidifier heats as it dehumidifies, so that the net result
of the dehumidification path is hot, dry air. Two modulating dampers determine the
percentage of air that travels the heat/dehumidification path and
cooling/humidification path. After the two paths are recombined (OA4), they are
either chilled or heated to reach a desired set point condition (OA5). A nozzle box is
used to monitor the airflow through the loop just prior to the chamber entrance, and
blower is used to make up for the losses of this conditioning and measurement. The
conditioned and measured air enters the test chamber, where it passes through the
test unit. After exiting the test unit, it is either vented to the outside air as Exhaust
Air (EA) or recirculated to re-enter the loop as RA.
The control process for the outdoor air chamber is as follows:

1. The differential pressure across the condenser of test unit is measured in
free-air (no ducting attached). This pressure is used a proxy measurement for
airflow.
2. The exhaust air from the test unit is ducted to the chamber exit. The test unit
is turned on.
3. The damper in the humidification path is closed and all air is passed through
the drier.
4. The speed on the chamber blower is increased until the differential pressure
across the condenser of the test unit matches the measurement in Step 1.
The blower speed is fixed for the remainder of the test.
5. The differential pressure across the combined humidity control paths is
measured.
6. A control loop (Proportional, Integral, and Differential (PID)) closes the
damper for the drying path until the target dew point is reached.
7. A control loop (PID) opens the damper for the humidifying path to maintain
the differential pressure measured in Step 5. This maintains the conditioning
system at a fixed resistance.
8. A control loop (PID) adjusts the hot and/or chilled water flow until the target
dry bulb temperature is reached.
The indoor air conditioning loop can only run as a recirculation loop and lacks the
capacity to either chill or dehumidify the air. As shown in Figure 3 and
psychometric chart (Figure 5), the air enters this loop as supply from the test
unit (IA1) and is then heated (IA2), humidified (IA3), and reheated (IA4) on its
path back to the nozzle box and eventually cold side chamber (IA5). A blower is
used to make up for losses of this conditioning and measurement. The air from
this chamber eventually re-enters the test unit as return air to be cooled and
dehumidified, by the test unit, before returning to the conditioning load loop.

The control process for the indoor air chamber is as follows:

1. The supply and return to the test unit are ducted and the test unit is turned
on.
2. The bypass damper for the humidifier is closed and all air is passed through
the humidifier.
3. The speed on the chamber blower is set by following the procedure described
in section 6.1.3.3.1.1 of ANSI/AHRI Standard 210/240-2008.
4. The differential pressure across the humidification path is measured.
5. A control loop (PID) closes the damper for the humidifier until the target dew
point is reached.
6. A control loop (PID) opens the damper for the bypass to maintain the
differential pressure measured in Step 4. This maintains the conditioning
system at a fixed resistance.
7. A control loop (PID) adjusts the hot water flow until the target dry bulb
temperature is reached.
In both chambers, the inlet and outlet temperature and dew point of the
chambers are measured with resistance temperature devices (RTDs) and chilled
mirror hygrometers. Damper actuators and valves are manufactured by Belimo
and are fully controllable over a 2-10V range. Data acquisition inputs, PID
algorithms, and control outputs are accomplished with National Instruments
CompactDAQ hardware and custom LabVIEW software. Detailed tables of the
chamber equipment and instrumentation are available in Appendix 1.

FIGURE 3: SCHEMATIC OF TEST CHAMBERS AND BOTH INDOOR AND OUTDOOR CONDITIONING LOOPS

0.025
Dryer Path
Humidifier Path 30%
0.020
Temperature
Control
Humidity Ratio - lb moisture / lb dry air

Chamber Exhaust Condition
OA3a 0.015
20%
OA2a
OA2b OA1 0.010
Chamber Inlet Control Condition
10%
OA4
OA5
0.005
OA3b
0.000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Dry Bulb Temperature - F
FIGURE 4: EXAMPLE AIR CONDITIONS FOR OUTDOOR AIR CONDITIONING LOOP

0.025
Indoor Load Path
30%
0.020
Indoor Load Loop
Humidity Ratio - lb moisture / lb dry air

Return Air Condition
0.015
20%
RTU Supply Air Condition

IA3 IA4
0.010
IA1
IA2
10%
0.005
P3b
0.000
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Dry Bulb Temperature - F
FIGURE 5: EXAMPLE AIR CONDITIONS FOR INDOOR AIR CONDITIONING LOOP

Evaluation of Baseline Technology

Before testing any evaporative condenser air pre-coolers, a set of baseline tests were
obtained for a 4-ton York RTU (model #D6NZ048N06525NX). The test team ran
baseline tests to record system efficiency and performance for a number of outdoor
air dry bulb test points and an indoor air condition of 80F/67F dry bulb/wet bulb
(DB/WB) (Table 3).
TABLE 3: TEST POINTS FOR COOLING EQUIPMENT WITH NO PRE-COOLER INSTALLED (BASELINE)
AMBIENT TEMPERATURES INDOOR LOAD TEMPERATURES

TEST
(F DB) (F DB/F WB)
B1 115 80/67
B2 105 80/67
B3 95 80/67
B4 90 80/67
B5 82 80/67
B6 75 80/67
B7 73 80/67
B8 64 80/67
Test Plan
Each pre-cooler was installed in the WCEC lab as a retrofit to the RTU by, or in
consultation with, the manufacturer of the pre-cooler. If the evaporative pre-cooler
added resistance to the condensing coil, the pre-cooler was testing in the dry
condition with no water running. This measured the penalty of running the RTU with
the pre-cooler on and no water running (which may occur in applications when the
outdoor air temperature is low). The test point for the dry condition is listed Table 4.
After dry test was completed, the pre-cooler was tested with the evaporative pre-
cooler installed and running. WCEC tested the RTU, retrofitted with pre-coolers, at 12
ambient conditions, shown in Table 5. The conditions can be grouped into three
categories: Constant Dew Points (CDP) conditions for tests W1, W2, W3, W4, and
W5; Constant Wet Bulb Depression (CWBD) conditions for tests W3, W6, W7, W8,
and W9; and other comparisons conditions for tests W10, W11 and W12. A few pre-
coolers were tested at all of these conditions, but after analysis and some discussion
it was decided to limit the scope to just the first four CDP test for the testing of
subsequent pre-coolers.

TABLE 4: COOLING EQUIPMENT WITH DRY EVAPORATIVE PRE-COOLER INSTALLED (DRY COOLER)

TEST (F DB) (F DB/F WB)
D1 75 80/67
TABLE 5: COOLING EQUIPMENT WITH WET EVAPORATIVE PRE-COOLER INSTALLED (WET COOLER)

TEST TEST GROUP
(F DB/F WB) (F DB/F WB)
W1 115/75.7 80/67 CDP
W2 105/73.0 80/67 CDP
W3 95/70.1 80/67 CDP/CWBD
W4 85/67.1 80/67 CDP
W5 75/63.8 80/67 CDP
W6 105/80.1 80/67 CWBD
W7 100/75.1 80/67 CWBD
W8 90/65.1 80/67 CWBD
W9 85/60.1 80/67 CWBD
W10 95/75 80/67 Other
W11 90/64 80/67 Other
W12 82/73 80/67 Other
Instrumentation Plan
The 4 ton RTU with refrigerant 410A (R-410A) was placed inside the conditioned
chamber and used for all pre-cooler tests (Figure 6). The measurements are color
coded; light blue sensors measure differential pressure, orange sensors measure
temperature, green sensors measure pressure, grey sensors measure air properties,
purple sensors measure power, and the red sensor measures condensate generation
(Figure 7).

FIGURE 6: TEST UNIT INSTALLED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHAMBER
FIGURE 7: MEASUREMENTS FOR PRE-COOLER TESTING APPARATUS

TABLE 6: TABLE OF INSTRUMENTS
MEASUREMENT TYPE MANUFACTURER ACCURACY SIGNAL DAQ CHANNEL CALIBRATION

AND MODEL # TYPE DATE
03/13/2012
Inlet Outdoor Air
GE Optisonde 0.3F RS-232 Serial Serial
Temp
#:0670312
03/13/2012
Inlet Outdoor Air
Dew Point Temp
#:0670312
1/13/2014
Exhaust Outdoor
Air Temp
#:0051213
Exhaust Outdoor 1/13/2014
Air Dew Point GE Optisonde 0.4F RS-232 Serial Serial
Temp #:0051213
01/30/2014
Return Indoor Air
Temp
#:0291113
01/30/2014
Return Indoor Air
Dew Point Temp
#:0291113
3/18/2013
Supply Indoor Air
Temp
#:0690113
3/18/2013
Supply Indoor Air
Dew Point Temp
#:0690113
Energy
Delta P Static 1% of
Conservatory RS-232 Serial
(Condenser) reading
DG-500
Energy
Delta P Static 1% of
(RTU Fan) reading
DG-500
Upstream Flow Energy
1% of
Nozzle Pressure Conservatory RS-232 Serial
reading
(Indoor Side) APT
Flow Nozzle
Energy 7/23/2013
Differential 1% of
Pressure (Indoor reading Serial
APT
Side) #CR6547
Upstream Flow Energy
1% of
Nozzle Pressure Conservatory RS-232 Serial
reading
(Outdoor Side) APT
Flow Nozzle
Energy
Differential 1% of
Pressure (Outdoor reading
APT
Side)
Energy
Indoor Chamber 1% of
Static Pressure reading
APT

MEASUREMENT TYPE MANUFACTURER ACCURACY SIGNAL DAQ CHANNEL CALIBRATION

AND MODEL # TYPE DATE
Energy
Outdoor Chamber 1% of
Static Pressure reading
APT
Atmospheric NI Compact
OMEGADYNE 0.08%
4-20mA DAQ Model 3/19/2010
Pressure PX409-26BI BSL
#9203
RTU Compressor, Dent 0.5% 7/24/2013
Blower, and Total PowerScout kW RS-485 Serial Serial#
Power 18 reading PS18909134
Adam 0.3 g
Condensate Equipment-
0.006 RS-232 Serial
Generation GBK 16A
Bench Scale lb
NI Compact
Pre-cooler Water
OMEGA RTD 0.3F RTD DAQ Model 7/24/2013
Temperature
#9217
NI Compact 7/24/2013
Pre-cooler Water Omega 0.25% of
4-20mA DAQ Model
Pressure PX209-100AI reading Serial #83070
#9203
1% of 7/24/2013
Pre-cooler Water Omega FTB- reading
Pulse NI PCI-6321 Serial
Flow Rate 4705 0.2-10
GPM #8117297
PRE-COOLER WATER SUPPLY MEASUREMENTS

The flow rate, pressure, and temperature of the water flow to the pre-cooler were
measured. The water source available at the laboratory was purified using a reverse
osmosis system to prevent scale accumulation on the condensing unit. The pre-
cooler water, which was stored in a five gallon buffer tank, was controlled to be
901 F as required by the test protocol. The temperature was measured by an RTD
in a circulated flow stream. The temperature was controlled using two relays that
turned a small chiller and electrical resistance heater on and off. After filtration and
temperature adjustment, the water from the storage tank was pressurized and
regulated to 6010 psi (gauge) which is consistent with typical municipal service
water pressure. For pre-cooler devices with intermittent spray patterns, a 5 gallon
pressurized buffer tank was added in-line between the pump and pre-cooler to
stabilize the operation of the pump. The flow rate of the water was measured, but
not controlled, as it was a function of the pre-cooler operation. The water flow
meters used were a paddle wheel, pulse output design, where the flow rate is
proportional to the frequency of the pulsed signal. Pulses were counted, converted
to flow rate using the manufacturer-reported conversion factor, and recorded.
REFRIGERANT MEASUREMENTS
Properties of the refrigerant were determined by measuring the temperature and
pressure of the refrigerant before and after the compressor, as well as measuring the
temperature after the condenser. The refrigerant properties were recorded for
information only; they were not used to calculate system capacity. The RTDs used to

measure the refrigerant temperatures were placed in contact with the refrigerant
pipes and insulated.
EVAPORATOR MEASUREMENTS
The evaporative load was supplied to the unit using a separate load conditioned air
chamber, where the indoor load air conditions were controlled similarly to the
outdoor conditions described above. Dry bulb temperature, wet bulb temperature,
and flow rate were controlled to provide return air at 80/67 (DBF/WBF) at the
manufacturer specified flow rate for the test unit. The external static pressure for the
test unit was maintained at a minimum of 0.20 in H2O, as specified in Table 11 of
AHRI/ASHRAE 210/240 [2]. Weight of condensate generated was measured and
recorded using a high accuracy bench scale.
CONDENSING AIR MEASUREMENTS

The dry bulb temperature of the air entering the condenser was measured using four
RTDs spaced equally over the surface of the condenser. Measurements were taken
during baseline tests to ensure uniform temperature distribution of the inlet
condenser air. The sensors values were averaged, and maximum and minimum
readings were assured to be within 1F of the average. The average value was
compared to the inlet air temperature measured by the GE Optisonde. For the tests
of evaporative cooling equipment, only the inlet air temperature measured by the GE
Optisonde was used because the additional RTDs become wet during testing yielding
incorrect readings of the dry bulb temperature.
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE AND AIRFLOW MEASUREMENTS

The differential and static pressures for the environmental chambers were recorded
using an Energy Conservatory APT-8 pressure transducer with 8 differential pressure
channels. For each chamber, the following values were measured and recorded: the
static pressure upstream of the flow nozzle with respect to the laboratory, the
differential pressure across the flow nozzle, and the static pressure of the chamber
with respect to the laboratory.
Differential pressures for the RTU were measured with an Energy Conservatory DG-
500 pressure transducer with two differential pressure channels. These two channels
were used to measure differential pressure across just condenser coil and evaporator
fan with evaporator (total external static pressure). A baseline measurement across
the condenser coil with no ducting attached was performed for the baseline test unit
and with each of the pre-coolers tested. This measurement was matching during
testing after the ductwork had been reattached to set the condenser air flow rate.
CHAMBER CONDITIONS MEASUREMENTS

During all tests the inlet and exit conditions of both chambers were monitored with
four GE Optisonde chilled mirror hygrometers. These sensors use an RTD to
measure dry bulb temperature and air from a sampling grid to measure the dew
point. Wet bulb temperature is then calculated from the dry bulb temperature and
dew point. Data is digitally output via serial interface every second.

POWER MEASUREMENTS
Measurements for the total power, compressor power, and fan power were recorded
using a PowerScout 18 with a serial interface and Modbus protocol. It digitally
outputs data every three seconds.
DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM

All signals were acquired using National Instruments hardware at 0.3 Hz or greater,
averaged every 30 seconds using LabVIEW software, and logged to a text file.
Tolerances
The goal for all tests was to adhere to the relevant tolerances specified in ANSI/AHRI
Standard 210/240-2008 [2], ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-2007 [3], and ASHRAE
37-2009 [4]. Tolerances for both indoor and outdoor dry bulb and wet bulb
tolerances specified in these standards were adhered to.
The tolerances are listed in Table 8. There are two types of tolerances; the range
tolerance and the mean tolerance. The range tolerance specifies the maximum
and minimum limits that the controlled variable was allowed, and the mean tolerance
specifies the range that the average value of all recorded test points must fall within.
The range and mean tolerance had to be met for a 30 minute period to allow the test
equipment to reach steady state and for the immediately following 30 minute test
period.
TABLE 8: TEST TOLERANCES
TEST CONDITION RANGE TOLERANCE MEAN TOLERANCE
Dry Bulb Temp. (indoor and 2F 0.5F

outdoor)
Wet Bulb Temp. (indoor and 1F 0.3F
outdoor)
Pre-Cooler Water Temp. 2F 1F
Pre-Cooler Water Pressure 6010 psi
Condenser Coil Pressure Drop 7% of setpoint
In order to operate the condensing unit inside the conditioned chamber, external
ducting and fans are needed to replicate the free air condition that the system
normally operates in.
The pressure drop across the condenser coil was measured during operation in free
air and was replicated with the external ducting attached. Since no information was
found for tolerances for this measurement, a sensitivity analysis from a previous
experiment was used to approximate the sensitivity of the condensing unit
performance with respect to changes in the pressure drop across the condenser coil.
In these tests a condensing unit was tested at a range of pressure drops from -15
pascals to -28 pascals where the airflow through the condensing unit was changed

by using external resistance and fans while all other variables were held constant.
For each test, the unit was allowed to run for 10 minutes to obtain steady state for
each pressure drop, and then data was obtained for another 10 minutes after steady
state. System coefficient of performance (COP) was calculated for each pressure
drop and the results from this previous test are plotted and shown in Figure 8. A
tolerance on pressure drop was set to 7% of the free-air condenser pressure drop.
The sensitivity results show this has a less than 1% impact on COP.
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
y = 0.0159x + 3.6838
R = 0.5518
3.0
COP
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-30 -27 -24 -21 -18 -15
Pressure Drop (Pascals)
FIGURE 8: SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF CONDENSER COIL PRESSURE DROP TOLERANCES

BASELINE TEST RESULTS

The performance of the baseline performance for the RTU is documented in Table 7. The
coefficient of performance (COP) versus outdoor air dry bulb temperature is plotted in
Figure 9. For comparison, the COP at 95F as measured by an Air-Conditioning, Heating,
and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) certified lab is shown in the table and plot, and the
agreement is within 2% of power, 5% of capacity, and 3% of COP.
TABLE 7 : BASELINE TEST DATA FOR YORK 4-TON RTU
TARGET OA ACTUAL OA ACTUAL RA ACTUAL POWER CAPACIT COP

TEMP F TEMP F DB TEMP F RA WB (KW) Y (BTUH)
LAB TEMP F
WCEC 64 64.3 80.0 67.0 3.22 53813 4.89
WCEC 73 73.2 80.0 66.8 3.44 51388 4.38
WCEC 75 75.1 80.0 66.8 3.49 50782 4.27
WCEC 82 82.1 80.0 66.6 3.69 47801 3.79
WCEC 90 90.0 80.0 66.8 3.94 45746 3.40
WCEC 95 95.0 80.0 66.7 4.12 43656 3.11
WCEC 105 105.0 80.4 67.0 4.52 39255 2.55
WCEC 115 115.0 80.1 66.8 4.98 35186 2.07
AHRI 95 95 80 67 4.2 46000 3.21

FIGURE 9: COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE FOR BASELINE RTU VERSUS OUTDOOR AIR TEMPERATURE
Data Analysis
For each pre-cooler test, the following calculations were made to determine
evaporative effectiveness at each test point. First the capacity of the test unit with
pre-cooler installed, power of the test unit with pre-cooler installed, and coefficient of
performance with the pre-cooler installed were measured and calculated as described
in the following sections. The resulting coefficient of performance was compared to
the least squares polynomial curve for baseline coefficient of performance trend in
order to calculate the equivalent evaporative effectiveness, the equivalent
evaporated water, and the water-use efficiency.
CAPACITY
The capacity of the test unit with the pre-cooler installed was determined for each
test from Equation 2 [4]:
EQUATION 1: CAPACITY
(1 2 )
=
, (1 + , )

where is the measured flow rate of the evaporator air in ft3/min as described by
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 [5], 1 and 2 are the enthalpy of the return and
supply air, respectively, in btu/lb, , is the specific volume of dry air at the
evaporator side nozzle, measured in ft3/lb, and , is the humidity ratio of the air at
the evaporator side nozzle in lbw/lba.
COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE
The coefficient of performance (COP) of the test unit with the pre-cooler installed
was determined for each test from Equation 2:
EQUATION 2: COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE
where is the capacity of the test unit as calculated in equation 2 and is the power
of the unit, including the compressor, condenser fan, and blower.
EVAPORATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
The evaporative effectiveness (EE) of an evaporative pre-cooler apparatus is defined
as how closely the dry bulb temperature leaving the pre-cooler approaches
saturation along the wet bulb temperature line (Equation 3).
EQUATION 3: EVAPORATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
, ,
=
, ,
where , and , are the dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures entering the pre-
cooler and , is the dry bulb temperature leaving the pre-cooler.
Measuring the temperature at the pre-cooler outlet of evaporative pre-coolers is

difficult for several reasons. It is difficult to measure directly because water droplets
on the temperature sensors give inaccurate measurements. In addition, the air
leaving the pre-cooler apparatus may be poorly mixed, which causes difficulty in
determining where or how to take the measurement. A possible workaround involves
measuring the temperature and humidity of the condenser exhaust, using
psychometric calculations to back out the air temperature at the condenser inlet.
This involves assuming that the absolute humidity ratio is constant between the
condenser inlet and the exhaust, and that the wet bulb temperature is constant as
the air passes through the pre-cooler Figure 10. This is potentially unreliable for
several reasons: 1) poorly mixed exhaust air contributes to measurement
inaccuracy, 2) pre-coolers that have pulsing sprays have fluctuating exhaust data
that is difficult to measure, and 3) the method ignores heat transfer benefits from
water directly contacting the condensing coil.

FIGURE 10: USING EXHAUST AND AMBIENT CONDITIONS TO CALCULATE POST PRE-COOL CONDITION
To compensate for the deficiencies of using the exhaust measurements to calculate

evaporative effectiveness, another method for calculating the equivalent EE was
developed. This method assumes that the performance of the unit (COP) is only a
function of the outside air dry bulb temperature when evaporator conditions are held
constant; with the installation of an evaporative pre-cooler on a condensing unit, the
equivalent air temperature seen by the condenser is changed. For example, the
condensing unit will operate the same for both of the following scenarios:
1. The outside air temperature is 90F and there is no evaporative pre-cooler
installed; or
2. The outside air temperature is 105F and an evaporative pre-cooler is
installed that cools the air to an average of 90F and supplies this air to the
condenser coil.
Since the condensing unit will perform comparably for the same condenser inlet
temperatures, the equivalent dry bulb temperature seen by the condenser with the
pre-cooler installed can be calculated by using the baseline condenser data with no
pre-cooler installed. For the remainder of the results this method is used to
determine the evaporative effectiveness of the pre-cooler at each test point.
Using this theory, the equivalent dry bulb temperature was calculated by solving for
the point on the baseline curve where the condensing unit performs comparably to
the test point, as shown in Figure 11, which is an example calculation using COP data

as the performance metric. The equivalent dry bulb temperature leaving the pre-
cooler apparatus is calculated by determining the temperature on the baseline curve
where the COP is equal to the COP obtained during the test period.
FIGURE 11: PROCESS FOR CALCULATING TDB,EQUIVALENT
The baseline curve for COP obtained in this experiment is a second order polynomial.
The general equation for a second order polynomial is shown in Equation 4.
EQUATION 4: GENERAL SECOND ORDER POLYNOMIAL
= 2 + +
Constants a, b, and c are solved from a least squares fit of the baseline test data
from the condensing unit (Figure 9), is the condenser inlet dry bulb temperature,
and COP is the coefficient of performance of the unit. To determine the equivalent
dry bulb temperature entering the condenser during a pre-cooler test, the quadratic
equation was solved as shown in Equation 5.
EQUATION 5: GENERAL EQUATION TO DETERMINE TDB,EQUIVALENT
+ 2 4( )
, =
2
Constants a, b, and c are equal to the constants of the second order baseline
equation in Equation 4, is the COP of the test unit measured during the pre-

cooler test, and , is the equivalent dry bulb temperature of the test. Using the
equivalent dry bulb temperature, the evaporative effectiveness of each pre-cooler
was solved using Equation 6:
EQUATION 6: EVAPORATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
, ,eq
=
, ,
where , and , are the dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures entering the pre-
cooler and , is the equivalent dry bulb temperature from Equation 5. The
evaporative effectiveness for all five products calculated and the results are shown in
Figure 13.
WATER-USE EFFECTIVENESS
Water-use effectiveness (WUE) is defined as the percentage of water that is used for
pre-cooling divided by the total water supplied to the pre-cooler. In order to calculate
the water-use effectiveness, it is necessary to calculate the rate at which water is
evaporated into the air before passing through the condensing unit. This can be
calculated using Equation 7.
EQUATION 7: WATER EVAPORATION RATE
( ) ,
, =
,
where mwater,evap is the rate at which water evaporates into the air in lb/min and Wout
and Win are the humidity ratio exiting and entering the pre-cooler apparatus in
lbw/lbda, respectively. The volumetric flow rate of the air, across the condenser, in
ft3/min, Q c,n was measured as described by ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.2-1987 [5].
The specific volume of the dry air at the condenser side nozzle, vc,n , was measured in
ft3/lb. The exiting humidity ratio, Wout , was calculated using the equivalent dry bulb
temperature (Equation 5) and a psychometric calculator to determine the humidity
ratio at that dry bulb temperature, which assumes the pre-cooling process has a
constant wet bulb temperature. With this, the water-use effectiveness was calculated
as shown in Equation 8.
EQUATION 8: WATER-USE EFFECTIVENESS
,
=
,
where the volumetric flow rate of supplied water was converted to units of lb/min,
assuming a density of 8.33 lb/gal, and recorded as mwater,supplied . The results are
plotted in Figure 14.

MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY
The uncertainty of the evaporative effectiveness and the water-use effectiveness
calculations were conducted using the sequential perturbation method, which is a
numerical approach that utilizes a finite difference method to approximate the
derivatives representing the sensitivity of the calculated value to the variables used
within the calculation [6]. This method is well accepted and used when the partial
differentiation method of the propagation of error is complex, or the amount of
variables used is very large. The process used for sequential perturbation involves
calculating a result, Ro, based on measured values. After Ro has been calculated, an
independent variable within the equation for Ro is increased by its respective
uncertainty, and a new value, Ri+ is calculated. Next, the same independent variable
within Ro is decreased by its respective uncertainty, and a new value, R i- is
calculated. The differences between Ri+ and Ro, and Ri- and Ro are calculated and the
absolute values are averaged. The result is defined as R i. This process is repeated
for every independent variable within Ro, and the final uncertainty is calculated as
shown in Equation 9.
EQUATION 9: UNCERTAINTY USING SEQUENTIAL PERTURBATION
1
L 2
UR = [(R i 2 )]
i=1
An example of the error propagation for the test of pre-cooler 3 and outdoor air
conditions of 115F DB and 75F WB is shown in Figure 12. The process starts with
measured values, and their uncertainties shown in the blue boxes of the figure. As
intermediate values and their uncertainties are calculated by the method described
above, using the appropriate equations. Uncertainties are propagated until those
related to the final desired values are reached. The uncertainty of the evaporative
effectiveness and water-use effectiveness were calculated using this method for all
five pre-cooler products for all tests conducted and the results are shown as error
bars in Figure 13 and Figure 14. Of note in these calculations, as the wet bulb
depression of the outdoor air increases, the accuracy of the signal relative to the
noise significantly improves.

FIGURE 12: EXAMPLE UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS PROPAGATION

Evaporative Effectiveness
Evaporative effectiveness varied for each pre-cooler technology, with results ranging
between 20-80% for the four constant dew point tests at outdoor air temperatures of
85-115F (Figure 13). Evaporative effectiveness of pre-coolers 3, 4, and 5 were
similar and, in most cases, the results clustered together within the uncertainty
limits and between 60-75% evaporative effectiveness. The exceptions were that the
performance of pre-cooler 4 was reduced at 115 and the performance of pre-cooler
5 was reduced at 85F. Generally speaking, the results show that pre-coolers with
significant design differences are able to achieve similar results for evaporative
effectiveness. The limit for designs tested to date in all tests was 75% evaporative
effectiveness (Appendix: Table 11).
Evaporative effectiveness of pre-coolers 1 and 2 was lacking in comparison to pre-

coolers 3, 4, and 5, with all evaporative effectiveness measurements between 20-
50%. Pre-cooler 1 showed increased performance with increasing outdoor air
temperature.
In general, the magnitude of the uncertainty relative to the magnitude of the result
is concerning for the 85F test results. For the purposes of setting test protocols and
performance requirements for utility rebate programs, the results at 95F and higher
may be more useful from the stand-point of product comparisons.

FIGURE 13: COMPARISON OF EVAPORATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF FIVE PRE-COOLERS TESTED. OUTDOOR AIR
DEWPOINT IS CONSTANT FOR ALL TESTS (56F).
Water-Use Effectiveness
Water-use effectiveness was highest for pre-coolers 3 and 4, measuring between 80-
100% in the four constant dew point tests at outdoor air temperatures of 85-115F
(Figure 14). However, pre-coolers 4 and 5 are re-circulation technologies and require
a constant bleed of sump water to prevent scaling of the pre-cooler (Table 8). This
maintenance water is not included here and may increase water use 10-50% based
on manufacturer recommendations and the hardness of the water supply (which may
be reduced by softening, which has its own water burden). It should also be noted
that both of these systems are configured so that the condensate generated by the
air conditioner can be routed to the pre-cooler sump, which would reduce the water
burden slightly (this was not considered in the laboratory test).
Water-use effectiveness for pre-cooler 5 was in the range of 55-75%, increasing with
outdoor air temperature. Pre-cooler 5 does not re-circulate water and requires no
maintenance water. This pre-cooler creates a mist upstream of the coil. The system
is designed to evaporative the water prior to the condenser coil surface. However,
the manufacturer recommends water treatment such as softening or possibly reverse
osmosis to protect the condenser coil from stray droplets. In addition, the water
treatment is needed to prevent small orifice nozzles from clogging. Water treatment
methods such as softening and reverse osmosis consume additional resources
including water, electricity, and salt, which were not considered in this analysis.
Water-use effectiveness measured for pre-coolers 1 and 2 was generally less than
50% and was lacking in comparison to the performance of pre-coolers 3-5. Pre-
coolers 1 and 2 do not re-circulate water so do not require maintenance water. Pre-
cooler 2 sprays directly on the coil and therefore requires water treatment such as
softening or osmosis for continuous use. The manufacturer also markets the device
for occasional peak demand load shedding, in which case occasional wetting of the
condenser coil may be considered acceptable by the customer.
TABLE 8: WATER MANAGEMENT METHODS OF TESTED PRE-COOLERS
Re-circulation? Coil-Wetted?
PC1 NO NO
PC2 NO YES
PC3 YES NO
PC4 YES NO
Not intentionally, some
PC5 NO
droplets may reach coil

FIGURE 14: COMPARISON OF WATER-USE EFFECTIVENESS OF FIVE PRE-COOLERS TESTED. OUTDOOR AIR
DEWPOINT IS CONSTANT FOR ALL TESTS (56F).
Pre-Cooler Power Consumption

The pre-cooler power consumption is not included in the evaporative effectiveness
calculation and must be accounted for separately. Pre-coolers 1 and 2 consumed
minimal power to accomplish the delivered pre-cooling, averaging 51 Watts and 20
Watts, respectively. Pre-cooler 3 consumed an average of 117 Watts. Pre-coolers 4
and 5 used high pressure pumping systems and consumed significantly more power
than other pre-coolers at 287 and 506 Watts, respectively. However, manufacturers
of these pre-coolers only market pre-coolers to cooling systems sized 20 tons or
greater, and did not have a pump sized appropriately for the laboratory experiment
on the 4 ton cooling system. The pump for pre-cooler 4 is sized for a cooling system
of approximately 20 tons and the pump for pre-cooler 5 is sized for a cooling system
of approximately 25 tons. For the purposes of laboratory testing over-sized pumps
the extra water was pumped in a re-circulation loop.

TABLE 9: PRE-COOLER POWER CONSUMPTION
PRE-COOLER POWER CONSUMPTION

(AVERAGE WATTS DURING TEST)
105F 115F
PRE-COOLER NOTES 85F TEST 95F TEST TEST TEST AVERAGE
PC1 Controller 50 50 51 53 51
PC2 Controller 28 10 8 32 20
PC3 Re-circulation pump 118 117 117 116 117
Re-circulation pump
PC4 (sized for 20-ton 302 271 290 284 287
cooling system)
Re-circulation pump
PC5 (sized for 25-ton 474 510 516 525 506
cooling system)
Impact of Dry Media

Pre-coolers 1, 3, and 4 have media in front of the condenser coil that causes some
resistance to airflow. This may reduce performance of the air conditioning system
during times when the air conditioner is on but the pre-cooler is not running. In
some cases, the manufacturer may configure the controller to always run the pre-
cooler when the air conditioner is on. In other cases, the manufacturer may set a
minimum outdoor air temperature threshold that has to be met for the pre-cooler to
turn on, in which case the air conditioner may run without the pre-cooler. Specific
control schemes were not evaluated during this laboratory test. However, a single
test was run at an outdoor air temperature of 75F to determine the impact of a
dry pre-cooler on the air conditioner performance.
Pre-coolers 3 and 4 had minimal performance impacts in the presence of a dry pre-
cooler (Table 10). The power consumption increased less than 1% and the efficiency
decreased approximately 1%. Pre-cooler 1 had a significant impact. The power
increased 1.7% and the efficiency decreased more than 10%. Pre-coolers 2 and 5
were not tested because the pre-cooler did not contain a media.

TABLE 10: IMPACT OF DRY MEDIA ON RTU PERFORMANCE AT 75F OUTDOOR AIR TEMPERATURE
% Power Impact % Capacity Impact % COP Impact

PC1 1.70% -9.21% -10.50%
PC2 N/A N/A N/A
PC3 0.55% -0.77% -1.06%
PC4 0.73% -0.45% -0.93%
PC5 N/A N/A N/A
Expected Energy Savings and Demand

Reduction
A model for energy savings and demand reduction in climate zones in SCE territory
was developed as part of a previous project on pre-cooling technology [1]. The
results from that analysis are summarized here, and the complete methodology is
available in the referenced report. The absolute and percent savings for both energy
and peak demand were determined by calculating the difference between a baseline
RTU and the same RTU with pre-cooler installed. The results show that increasing
evaporative effectiveness of the pre-cooler increases energy savings and that inland
climate zones are expected to have higher savings than coastal climate zones (Figure
15 - Figure 18).
The energy savings described here are for an average RTU based on aggregate load
data. An RTU with increased run time would have a greater total energy savings. If
the baseline energy use of a particular RTU or building is known, pre-coolers can be
strategically installed on units with high run times to increase annual energy savings.
Peak demand savings are not a function of the load data and are strictly a function of
modeled RTU efficiency and pre-cooler effectiveness. Since all RTUs are assumed to
run during a peak event, the savings are expected for any RTU regardless of the load
profile of the building.

CZ06 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16

350
Average Energy Savings (kWh/ton/year)

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
FIGURE 15: MODELED AVERAGE ENERGY SAVINGS OF AN EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR PRE-COOLER
CZ06 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16

30%
25%
Energy Savings, %kWh
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
FIGURE 16: MODELED AVERAGE PERCENT ENERGY SAVINGS OF AN EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR PRE-COOLER

CZ06/CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16

0.40
Peak Demand Savings (kW/nominal ton) 0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
FIGURE 17: MODELED POWER SAVINGS OF AN EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR PRE-COOLER
CZ06/CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16

35%
30%
Peak Demand Savings, %kW
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
FIGURE 18: MODELED PERCENT POWER SAVINGS OF AN EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR PRE-COOLER

Cost of Technology
The cost of evaporative pre-coolers varies by manufacturer and the size of the
installation, but an estimated cost range is $250-$500 per ton of cooling equipment
retrofitted.
Life expectancy of Technology

Generally speaking, pre-cooler components may consist of pumps, sprayers,
evaporative media, and electronic controllers. The evaporative media is expected to
need periodic replacement, similar to air filter replacement in air handlers. The
period of replacement is a function of the type of media and the water quality at the
location. Generally speaking, the media should last at least one cooling season and
possibly several cooling seasons. Several evaporative pre-cooling manufacturers
include a maintenance agreement in the sale of the pre-cooler, and this is
recommended to ensure persistence in performance. Several pre-cooling
manufacturers also include a 10 year warranty in the sale of their pre-cooler,
providing reasonable assurance that the life expectancy of the technology is at least
10 years.
Furthermore, pre-coolers allow compressors to operate at reduced head pressures. It

is reasonable that this would extend the life of compressors and reduce failures. Pre-
coolers with evaporative media, while requiring periodic replacement, protect the
condenser coils and fins from dirt and debris, potentially extending the lifetime of the
condenser coil.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A laboratory test protocol that objectively compared evaporative pre-coolers from five
manufacturers of differing designs was successfully demonstrated. The main findings of the
testing were that:
1. The five products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness in the range of 20
80% and water-use effectiveness in the 25 100%.
2. The three highest performing products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness in
the range of 50-80% and a water-use effectiveness greater than 50%. Of these
pre-coolers, two recirculated water and had the highest water-use effectiveness
(>80%), however, in field applications would require additional water use for
maintenance or bleed water because they are recirculation systems, which
was not accounted for in the laboratory test.
3. The two lowest performing products demonstrated evaporative effectiveness
consistently below 50%, with water use effectiveness generally below 50%.
Because pre-coolers designs are highly variable and the specific design and control
methodology will impact performance, it is critical to complete publication of the ASHRAE
test standard, so that end-users and utilities will have objective test data that can be used
to compare evaporative pre-cooler products and forecast energy savings.
An analysis tool previously developed shows energy savings and demand reduction vary as
a function of evaporative effectiveness and climate. As an example, an evaporative pre-
cooler with 70% evaporative effectiveness installed in climate zone 10, one of the most
populous in Southern California, is estimated to achieve a total energy savings of ~10% and
a peak demand savings of ~20%. In the same climate zone, an evaporative effectiveness of
50% is estimated to achieve a total energy savings of ~8% and a peak demand savings of
~15%.
WCEC recommends inclusion of evaporative pre-cooling products for inclusion in rebate

programs. WCEC also recommends that pre-coolers pass laboratory certification based on
the test protocol described in this report, with performance requirements set by the utility.
Rebate structures could be tiered to qualify more products, setting a higher rebate level for
higher performance products.
There are two obvious market barriers prevent widespread adoption of this technology. The
first is the lack of infrastructure (published protocol and test facilities) to test and certify
pre-cooler products if a rebate program was implemented that required certification. The
second, and most serious market barrier, is the staggering drought currently facing
California. While evaporative cooling uses a small amount of water in comparison to other
building requirements, any additional water burdens will be heavily scrutinized by end-users
and regulators. We can address this issue by 1) minimizing the water used in pre-coolers,
by optimizing bleed rates to use as little water as possible, 2) evaluating rainwater capture
and greywater and potential non-potable water sources, and 3) quantifying the trade-off
between electricity saved and water used, and the water and electricity impacts involved in
water transportation and electricity generation.

APPENDICES
TABLE 11: TABLE OF ALL RESULTS FOR FIVE PRE-COOLERS TESTED
OUTDOOR EVAPORATIVE WATER-USE

AIR DRY OUTDOOR AIR EFFECTIVENESS EFFECTIVENESS
PRE- BULB TEMP DEW POINT EVAPORATIVE ABSOLUTE WATER-USE ABSOLUTE
COOLER F TEMP F EFFECTIVENESS UNCERTAINTY EFFECTIVENESS UNCERTAINTY
1 85.0 57.0 21% 8% 29% 12%
1 95.0 56.9 36% 5% 34% 8%
1 104.9 57.0 41% 4% 45% 9%
1 115.0 56.8 49% 3% 44% 8%
2 86.0 55.9 29% 7% 26% 7%
2 90.1 46.7 29% 9% 59% 19%
2 94.9 57.4 32% 5% 58% 12%
2 95.1 66.8 27% 7% 79% 25%
2 105.1 56.1 24% 4% 43% 8%
2 115.0 56.1 28% 3% 49% 7%
3 75.0 57.1 54% 21% 70% 29%
3 82.0 68.9 44% 25% 66% 42%
3 85.0 56.4 62% 8% 79% 12%
3 85.1 40.4 63% 10% 91% 15%
3 90.0 48.9 67% 6% 94% 10%
3 90.0 46.3 65% 5% 88% 9%
3 95.0 66.1 71% 7% 97% 13%
3 95.1 56.6 69% 5% 95% 10%
3 100.1 64.2 72% 5% 71% 8%
3 104.9 57.2 73% 4% 97% 8%
3 105.0 71.1 68% 5% 95% 11%
3 115.1 56.0 75% 3% 101% 7%
4 75.1 57.1 47% 20% 66% 30%
4 82.0 69.0 45% 25% 71% 44%
4 85.0 57.4 68% 8% 94% 14%
4 85.1 40.2 71% 9% 98% 14%
4 89.9 48.2 71% 5% 97% 10%
4 89.9 45.7 72% 5% 101% 10%
4 95.0 57.1 69% 5% 96% 10%
4 95.0 66.2 65% 7% 92% 13%
4 100.0 64.4 67% 5% 99% 11%
4 104.9 57.0 70% 4% 83% 7%
4 104.9 70.8 63% 5% 92% 12%
4 114.9 56.3 67% 3% 98% 8%
5 85.0 56.6 54% 8% 54% 9%
5 95.0 56.8 67% 5% 66% 7%
5 105.0 56.5 71% 4% 70% 6%
5 115.0 56.3 75% 3% 75% 6%

REFERENCES
[1] SCE, "Condenser-Air Evaporative Pre-cooler Test Protocol," SCE, Irwindal, 2012.
[2] ANSI/AHRI, "Standard 210/240 "2008 Standard Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning and Air-Source
Heat Pump Equipment"," 2013.
[3] AHRI, "AHRI 340/360. Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning
and Heat Pump Equipment," AHRI, Arlington, 2007.
[4] ASHRAE, "ASHRAE 37-2009. Methods of Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment," ASHRAE, 2009.
[5] ASHRAE, "Standard 41.2-1987 - Standard Methods for Laboratory Air Flow Measurement," ASHRAE,
Atlanta, 1987.
[6] R. S. Figliola and D. E. Beasley, Theory and Design for Mechanical Measurements, 3rd ed., John
Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2000.
[7] B. Girod, P. Erberich and Z. Davidoff, "Device to Simulate Wind Conditions for Testing of Evaporative
Pre-Coolers," Western Cooling Efficiency Center, Davis, 2014.


Evaporative Pre Cooler

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaporative Pre Cooler

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaporative Pre Cooler

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Emerging Technologies

Evaporative Condenser Air Pre-Coolers

Southern California Edison

There are a large numbers of manufacturers offering evaporative pre-coolers as retrofits to

Southern California Edison Page i

WCEC recommends inclusion of evaporative pre-cooling products for inclusion in rebate

Southern California Edison Page ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Southern California Edison Page iii

TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION ________________________________________________ 3

TECHNICAL APPROACH/TEST METHODOLOGY __________________________________ 5

BASELINE TEST RESULTS ___________________________________________________ 20

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ____________________________________ 36

Southern California Edison Page iv

Southern California Edison Page v

Southern California Edison Page vi

A large numbers of manufacturers offer evaporative pre-coolers as retrofits to

Southern California Edison Page 1

Southern California Edison Page 2

FIGURE 1: EXAMPLE OF DIRECT EVAPORATIVE COOLING OF CONDENSER INLET AIR

In general, an evaporative pre-cooler delivers water through a water distribution system

Southern California Edison Page 3

TABLE 1: PROPERTIES OF EVAPORATIVE CONDENSER AIR EVAPORATIVE PRE-COOLERS

PRE-COOLER WATER DELIVERY NOZZLE OPERATION MEDIA

Southern California Edison Page 4

TECHNICAL APPROACH/TEST METHODOLOGY

Environmental Chamber Design

TABLE 2: DESIGN CONDITIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHAMBERS

OUTDOOR CHAMBER INDOOR CHAMBER

Southern California Edison Page 5

FIGURE 2: TYPICAL METROLOGICAL YEAR DATA - DAVIS CA

Southern California Edison Page 6

The control process for the outdoor air chamber is as follows:

Southern California Edison Page 7

The control process for the indoor air chamber is as follows:

Southern California Edison Page 8

Southern California Edison Page 9

Humidifier Path 30%

Humidity Ratio - lb moisture / lb dry air

FIGURE 4: EXAMPLE AIR CONDITIONS FOR OUTDOOR AIR CONDITIONING LOOP

Southern California Edison Page 10

Indoor Load Path

Indoor Load Loop

Humidity Ratio - lb moisture / lb dry air

RTU Supply Air Condition

FIGURE 5: EXAMPLE AIR CONDITIONS FOR INDOOR AIR CONDITIONING LOOP

Southern California Edison Page 11

Evaluation of Baseline Technology

AMBIENT TEMPERATURES INDOOR LOAD TEMPERATURES

Southern California Edison Page 12

AMBIENT TEMPERATURES INDOOR LOAD TEMPERATURES

AMBIENT TEMPERATURES INDOOR LOAD TEMPERATURES

Southern California Edison Page 13

FIGURE 6: TEST UNIT INSTALLED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHAMBER

FIGURE 7: MEASUREMENTS FOR PRE-COOLER TESTING APPARATUS

Southern California Edison Page 14

TABLE 6: TABLE OF INSTRUMENTS

MEASUREMENT TYPE MANUFACTURER ACCURACY SIGNAL DAQ CHANNEL CALIBRATION

Southern California Edison Page 15

MEASUREMENT TYPE MANUFACTURER ACCURACY SIGNAL DAQ CHANNEL CALIBRATION