4.7 Article

Experimental study on hot liquid subcooling defrosting of an air source heat pump with multi-connected outdoor units

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 291, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113104

关键词

Air source heat pump; Defrosting; Heating performance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper designed and built an experimental ASHP system with multiple outdoor units connected in parallel to study the efficient defrosting technology for continuous heating. The experimental results showed that the hot liquid subcooling defrosting (HLSD) enabled the heat pump to complete rotational defrosting with good defrosting effect, and the heating capacity and energy efficiency ratio could be increased by 10% to 20% compared with the hot gas bypass defrosting (HGBD).
Air source heat pumps (ASHPs) are widely used in clean heating because of the high efficiency, energy saving and economic advantages. Efficient defrosting technology for continuous heating is a key issue that must be addressed when operating the large ASHP at low temperatures. To solve the technical problem, this paper designed and built an experimental ASHP system with multi outdoor units connected in parallel, and used the hot liquid from the outlet of the condenser to defrost outdoor units in turn to study the change of heat pump per-formance with defrosting start time at different outdoor temperatures and outdoor humidity, and compared the system performance of the hot liquid subcooling defrosting (HLSD) with that of the hot gas bypass defrosting (HGBD). The experimental results showed that the HLSD enabled the heat pump to complete rotational defrosting with good defrosting effect in the case of continuous heating. The lower the outdoor ambient tem-perature and higher the air relative humidity, the worse the heating performance, and the longer the defrosting time. When using the HLSD, the heating capacity and energy efficiency ratio of heat pumps could be increased by 10% to 20% compared with the HGBD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据