TurboCor retrofit on Carrier 30 HCX 261?

[Katsuchiyo]

Anyone got expierence with the TurboCor retrofit's?
We got 2 carrier 30 HXC 261 chillers (260 ton).
The chillers are 10 years old, we are looking for opportunitys to save energy costs. Is it worth to replace the compressors on 10 years old chillers?

Thanks in advance,

Simon

[Dallas Duster]

Not sure why you would want to do that I don't think it could be worth it.

[Tech Rob]

I agree. It's not as simple as putting new compressors on top of the shells.

[chilbrig]

I think it would be more cost effective to buy a new chiller than retrofit the 30HXC.

[Katsuchiyo]

The problem with the chillers is.. they build a little building over the chillers.. So they will have to cut the roof open.. I think replacing the chillers will cost alot because of the building..

It's not a good idea to put turbocor's on the current chillers? (even that we will have to cut the roof open)

[jd 07]

http://multistack.com/products/centrifugal.aspx
I have worked on several dozen of these and find them a very nice fix for tight equipment rooms.

[mal_c]

A nice fix until the condenser plate heat exchangers foul and then see what's involved in trying to clean them: that can be expensive, if it works.

[mal_c]

Any of these options won't be cheap; it sounds like the 30HXC is still doing what is asked of it in the cold water dept so you need to also think about this. What will it cost to retrofit- and I agree with thegoodlistener and BergerMech Rob, it's not necessarily a good idea- or replace, what is the expected financial benefit in energy savings, and what will be the payback period? Probably years (and years).

[Katsuchiyo]

Since the energy price is three times as high than in the VS the payback period will be a lot faster.. at the moment the energy price is $0,27/kW.. That's why it's here necessery to continue research for new options.. because the payback period is smaller... So everyone do not recommend to retrofit a carrier?

[chilbrig]

I still don't think it would be worth the the extra expence. I'm not sure but I believe the turbocores cost a lot more than the 06N Carrier Compressors. You will probably have to spend more to update your controls also. I see you are in Aruba, how reliable is your power supply? Turbocores do not like voltage surges. I will probably start something here, but the 06N is a very reliable compressor with a proven track record. I haven't been around Turbo's long enough to get a good feel on their long term reliablity.

[Katsuchiyo]

Ive got iplv matrix of both chillers, so i guess it will be pretty egual with just the chillers. We run most times 2 chillers on 60 and 40.percent.. The efficiency is twice as good of a turbocor on that percents.. With yearly energy costs of 400.000 dollars the payback will be pretty fast i think..

I will ask my colleages about how constant the powersupply is..

[Dallas Duster]

Ive got iplv matrix of both chillers, so i guess it will be pretty egual with just the chillers. We run most times 2 chillers on 60 and 40.percent.. The efficiency is twice as good of a turbocor on that percents.. With yearly energy costs of 400.000 dollars the payback will be pretty fast i think..

I will ask my colleages about how constant the powersupply is..

You might want to check the part load and full load effientcies and I'm just curious as to why you done have one chiller running 100% and the other one turned off. I can imagine that cycling compressors can't be a power saving feature. Just a thought.

[Gibbo]

Please tell me this hotel is not depending on you to save them money.
The fact its a hotel will mean the PPM is piss poor or non existent on both
chillers. Which may be why you think your chillers are not running efficently.
Suggest you get someone who knows what he is looking at and what he is
doing to resolve your problems..

[mal_c]

Assuming your building air conditioning is run by a BMS and you haven't already got them involved, as thegoodlistener has intimated, it may be worthwhile getting the BMS contractor involved to check and perhaps modify staging strategies and check all their sensors (temp, PD, etc) are in calibration and working. It is my experience, at least here in my part of the world, that BMS techs while often quite adept with the software end of things don't always understand chillers and chiller control. This can also have a large inpact on energy consumption.

[Katsuchiyo]

We have not usual running 1 chiller on 100% thats a mistake.. but at if you look at the specs of the chiller aint it more efficient to run 1 chiller on 100% than one and 40 and one and 60%?

The directors doesn't want to let everything measured.. Also my time that I got left is to short.. I'm gonna put the chillers efficiency next to eachother and let them show many many energy costs they can save with it..

I will bring an advice out wich include measuring the whole system.. and they we need a control system.. because no we got no numbers of efficiency..

I would like to thank everyone for their support, If anyone of you have any more suggestion to add to my report I will be glad to hear.

Thanks,

Simon

[mal_c]

In theory you would think it more effiecient to run one chiller at 100% than two at 40 and 60, providing the single chiller will actually deliver the same water temperatures by itself. In practice though you could run out of chilled water at the extremities of the hydronics sytem with only one primary pump running- unless you have a primary/ secondary system. It will depend then, on how the hydronics system is set up as well as the controls system.