CO 2 Evaporator Room

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
Anybody Know what the the CO 2 Evaporator Room
was used for. What I know from Refridgeration
and Air Conditioning any type of evaporator
unit or coil would be where it any type
of cold is needed.
I would assume that the evaporator
units would be in the refrigerated cargo holds
and food storage on the Orlop deck along with G deck.
The condenser unit would be close to the compressor units ( Refrigeration engines )

Was CO 2 used a refrigerate or was it brine
water which is was stored in the compartment
to to the right of this room.

Being that Freon was not invented yet there
must have been a chemical used to create
the process of Refrigeration in a closed
loop system.

This location on the ship is right above the
Refrigeration engines. Is this wrong and should it
say condenser room.


John Senchak
http://www.antihotmail.com
 

Martin Pirrie

Member
Dec 30, 2000
141
3
148
I believe that ammonia was used as a refrigerant. Carbon dioxide, although theoretically possible as a refrigerant, is still not widely used.

The company supplying the refrigeration equipment was J & E Hall Ltd.. They still exist today and I build electrical control panels for them from time to time.

Martin Pirrie.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
If you check the Shipbuilder, you'll find; "The engines (Fig. 72) consist of two horizontal duplex CO2 machines, each of which combines two complete units capable of independant working so that actually four refrigerating units are provided"

The article also mentions brine pumps as a part of the machine. If you happen to have the Maxtone-Graham reprint...I do...you'll find the details on page 67.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
So what is the conclusion, Brine
(salt water or water with calcium cloride), Co2,or Ammonia

You still have not given me the answer to
the question. First the evaporators would
be in the food storage areas and not in a
room over the engines. It would make a
heck of alot of sense if there was condensor
units there. At this point if the system needed
charging then the brine tanks would be in the
next room.

What what does brine water have to do with carbon
dioxide? Was the brine tanks used to add
to the steam system that ran all the machinery
within the ship.

Co2 would be a gas that could be used a
a refrigerant in that period of time.

Ammonia is a very dangerous thing when it
comes to refrigerant and any type of leaks
would have indangered the passengers and crew.

Could it be that it was a mixture of brine
water and Co2. Sort of a salt water soda!.

John
http://www.antihotmail.com
webmaster@antihotmail.com
 

Martin Pirrie

Member
Dec 30, 2000
141
3
148
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread!"

I was writing without first checking.

Yes Michael, my spy at J & E Hall confirms the CO2 compressors.

Now we've got to condense the CO2 gas from the compressors to a liquid. A shell and tube condenser would be used. This consists of a large tube, could be 3 or 4 foot diameter and several feet long, through which the hot CO2 gas is passed in pipes. Sea water (brine) would be pumped into the condenser to cool the gas and the gas would change to a liquid. The warmed brine would be discharged back into the sea. Any sign of a condenser on your plans?

Now we allow the liquid to expand back to a gas in some kind of chiller and cool down.

This chiller is likely to be a shell and tube chiller (the reverse of the shell and tube condenser)a sort of heat exchanger. Once again, brine would be pumped through the chiller. The gas is allowed to expand and as it does so, it will boil and cool the pipes through which it is passing.The boiling point of CO2 is - 78 oC. The brine being pumped in pipes alongside the rapidly cooling CO2 pipes also cools. This cooled brine is taken to the refrigerated space. In there, pipes fixed to the wall in a serpentine formation would carry the chilled brine and cool the air by convection. Would there be fan motors in the refrigerated space moving the air about? I don't know for certain. I don't think so.This cooled brine would circulate in a closed cycle round and round from the refrigerated space back to the chiller.

Don't knock ammonia too much! There's a lot of it about in big refrigeration plants. Most ice rinks use ammonia and it is becoming more and more popular as freon gases are phased out because of their suspected ozone depletion effects.The use of ammonia cooled glycol systems (secondary systems)is becoming more common and is extensively used in Sweden. I have designed one or two plants for the UK where it is becoming more popular.

(This could become the most boring topic on the site!)

Martin Pirrie.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
Hi Martin, I don't have any detailed working drawings of the cooling units. Just the photo cited in the Shipbuilder article. Big bulky thing too...which is to be expected for one of the big industrial rigs needed by the Titanic. You seem to be the chap who's up on the subject.

John, I don't see how brine could be used to "add" to the steam system. Boilers for steam plants require extremely pure fresh water for feedwater. In addition to problems of rapid mineral/salt buildup throughout the system, salt water is very corrosive, especially when it's hot!

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
No way this is what makes this forum so dam interesting.

I did some research and Co2 is a Group A type
refrigerant (R-744) I found a lot of very boring information about Co2 properties and Martin
is right about the -78 oC -109 F

Brine water was used in air conditioning appications that kept water below
its freezing point.

It is my opinion that Martin could be right
on track with his heatexchanger/chiller idea.
Could the evaporator been in that area
along with a heat exchanger. Pipes that ran
from there could have sent brine water in a close
looped system to the cold storage area.
It sound like a very complicated system
for 1912. In todays age heat exchangers
sound like a very simple system.
But would a heat exchanger of that complexity
with multible compressors be available
in that time period.

I have no clue where the condensors where
but my guess would be that they where either
one of the following.

1) along side the compressor engines.
2) In the engine casing
3) Brine room ( Another one) on G deck
4) Fan ventilation between engine casing
and boiler casing ( boiler room 1 "g deck")

Anybody else have a clue?

Brine water, salt water, sweet water its all
the same thing. No matter if it was in the
boiler's or in a closed loop refrigeration
system it still will cause corosion over time.
I doubt very much when the engineers charged the system with brine they got all the air out.

John
http://www.antihotmail.com
webmaster@antihotmail.com
 

Martin Pirrie

Member
Dec 30, 2000
141
3
148
Would there have been air conditioning on Titanic? Anyone know?

There were coldrooms to store food but air conditioning in the cabins or public rooms? I am not sure.

Titanic was designed for the North Atlantic route and air conditioning was still in its infancy.

Martin Pirrie.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,967
211
193
Definitely not, Martin. Air conditioning had barely been invented at the time. I believe the first liner to have limited air conditioning in some public areas was Normandie.

Titanic was heated by warm air, presumably from some kind of heat exchanger. The temperature in individual cabins could be adjusted by using electric heaters. I expect they were confined to first class but others may know better. It was noted even in those days that Americans liked higher temperatures than the British, hence the ability to cater for different tastes.
 

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
Dave, Now I would think that because it's
a steam powered liner that it would use
steam heat in the cabins.
To run electric heat in all the cabins you
would need a heck of lot of current on
a 100 volt system ( I am under the assumption
that the generation system was A.C. )
But getting back on track, I agree that there
was no air conditioning on the ship.
The compressor units needed for A/C would be huge just to cool the entire ship.


John
http://www.antihotmail.com
webmaster@antihotmail.com
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,967
211
193
There were 520 separate electric heaters provided. They drew more than 5000 amps at 100 volts. That sounds like enough heaters for all of first class and maybe some for second class.

The electrical details are on line somewhere but I don't seem to have the URL handy. Another job for google.com!

I agree about the steam heating. It would be simpler.
 
M

Morgan Eric Ford

Guest
Maybe steerage and the crew quarters were steam heated?

The electrical system was D.C. Britannic supplemented the emergency generators with a battery bank.
 

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
I disagree with you regarding direct current
being used throughout the ship.
Do you have solid proof of this. Keep in mind
that DC was abandoned well before the ship
was built and most electric equipment of the
day was A.C. ran. I can't see how the electric generators where D.C..

There would have been no way
that any type of generator could produce
500,000 watts of power on a constant bases.
You are talking about a huge amount of heat
and a system that would have been very
inefficent. On the cold night that the ship went down you know everybody had the heat on.
Now how could all those heaters be on and also all the lights.

More current being used means voltage will go down proportionally
Ohms law States:

e
-----
i | r

p
-----
e | i

With all the heaters going, lights, gallery
equipment, elevators, heated pool, fans,
electric motors, ash ejectors, pumps, and
other electric devices 100 volts dc won't cut it
with a huge current demand,
A.C on the other hand is efficent and 100 volts
R.M.S. (140 peak voltage= 100 volts time 1.4)
can support current demand better on a parallel
circuit.

Branch load on a DC source will force
the internel resistance of the generators to
lower as the demand increases. This will cause
major heat inside and will eventually cook
the windings. Load a car battery enough and
the voltage will drop if you don't have the
car going to replace the energy.

A dc generator would have some type of coiled
shaft ( Called a Armature ) in a magnut surrounding.
It's like a D.C. motor in reverse.
The shaft would have to be kept at a constant
speed to keep 100 volts dc at a acceptable
level. As more current is being used the steam
would have to increase to compensate for
the lowering of voltage at the output.
You could imagine the heat being wasted as
the generator shafts having to be pushed harder
to produce more power to keep a constant 100
volts dc ( If you didn't light bulbs would dim,
and heater would not produce enough heat )

We know from what is written night of the sinking
all the lights where on almost to very end.
But only a small amount of the boilers where going
and who's to say what level they where operating
at. If it was cold that night how many electric
heaters where going. From all the pictures
I have seen the ship had a lot of lights going
very close to the end. I doubt very much that
a DC generator could produce enough power
to keep the lights going that long on just
a small amount of boilers.

That's my opinion.

We have gone way off track on this post
but it's keeping it interesting.


This forum is awesome !!


John
http://www.antihotmail.com
webmaster@antihotmail.com
 
M

Morgan Eric Ford

Guest
I think you'll find a lot of ships in the 1910's were using fairly low voltage DC. AC may have dominated land based systems, but ships were being built with DC systems well into the 1940's.

Testimony at the BOT inquiry indicates the ventilation fans and refer system were shut down to conserve steam. The cabin heaters were probably shut down at the same time.

The normal lighting load was roughly equal to one generator(400 KW) according to the "Engineering" article of Feb 27, 1914 about the Britannic. Her electrical plant was almost identical to Titanic's so this is probably a good figure.

Titanic had 4 generators of 400 KW each for a total of 1.6 MW. At 100 volts, this works out to 16,000 amps. The engines driving these generators were rated at 580 HP each.

Assuming steam consumption of 20 pounds per hour per HP, each generator engine requires 11600 pounds of steam an hour. Actual steam consumption was probably a lot less.

Each double ended boiler could supply about 26321 pounds of steam an hour. Each single ended boiler could generate about 13715 pounds of steam an hour.

It wouldn't take a lot of boilers to keep the lights on. One double ended boiler could carry two generators. One single ended boiler could carry one generator.

1.6 MW probably wouldn't be enough to run the casino on a modern cruise ship!

Morgan
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,967
211
193
According The Shipbuilder the dynamos gave "continuous current", which I take to mean DC. Apparently at the time a 2.5 megawatt plant was considered large for a shore station.
 

Martin Pirrie

Member
Dec 30, 2000
141
3
148
The electrical system was DC.

Some of the switchboards being by built Dorman & Smith. The company still exists, but they have dropped the ampersand in their title.

Martin Pirrie.
 

Cal Haines

Member
Dec 2, 2000
308
0
146
Tucson, AZ USA
John,

There is no question that Titanic's dynamos were DC (Direct Current). A two part article, published in The Electrician (London, England), beginning in the July 28, 1911 issue, discusses the electrical equipment of Olympic and Titanic in detail. On page 616 the commutators and brushes of the main generator sets are discussed, with reference to the high current loads that they carried. As I am sure you are aware, large AC (Alternating Current) generators do not have commutators. Titanic's dynamos had 10 poles, were compound wound and fitted with interpoles. As Dave points out, DC was the de facto standard; to the point that it was not even necessary to mention the fact that these were DC machines. In the continuation of the article, where the Marconi gear is discussed, there is specific reference to the DC nature of the power system: "Continuous current of 110 volts is supplied to a continuous-current motor which is mounted on a common bed with and direct-coupled to an alternating-current generator. The latter (the Marconi unit) has an output of 5 kw. at 300 volts.--page 662"

As to size, the "Victory" class of cargo ships, designed in the 1940's, were equipped with main generators which were 240 volt DC machines with a load capacity of 300 kw; two such machines, driven by steam turbines, were fitted. (Lecount, Practical Marine Electricity, MacMillian Co., NY, 1945) One of my text books makes reference to a 600 kW DC generator; Titanic's dynamos were only 400 kW.

You are incorrect in stating that DC is less efficient at transmitting power, compared to AC. At a given voltage, DC is no more or less efficient than is AC. It is the I²R loss of the wiring that determines the efficiency of transmission; given the same load and voltage, the average currents in the wiring are exactly the same in both systems. For an application such as resistive heating, AC has absolutely no advantage over DC.

By the way, the pumps, including those that operated the ash ejectors, were steam powered and took no electricity.

Cal
 

John Senchak

Member
Dec 26, 2004
31
0
76
I still Disagree that a 100 volt D.C. generator
can produce a constant voltage with relations
to current (load).

Futhermore, the terms continuous current can also
be used in A.C. with relations to transformers.

Is the 400kw rating for all 4 units or just
one. At 400kw that would mean 4000 amps.
At 4 units that would be 16,000 amps

That's a heck of a lot current to produce
on such a very primative network of wiring.

Still not Convinced

John

http://www.antihotmail.com
webmaster@antihotmail.com