Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Years ago, during 70s energy crisis (la plus sa change, la meme la chose!) I
did a simulation in lab with a variac and a homemade AC box that was
connected to a simple immersion heater placed in a an insulated beaker and
an uninsulated beaker. Part of the lab was to compare energy consumption
between complete AC turn off and reducing the set point temperature. A
complete cycle was run to simulate a constant AC setting, a temp reduction
setting and a complete AC off by starting all runs at a fixed temperature
and running through the 3 cycles for fixed times and then returning to the
initial temperature. Invariably, minimum energy consumption for the
complete cycle was lowest with the complete turn off cycle. Probably not
terribly applicable to today's units, but students found it very
surprising. Most students believed you used more energy to "catch up" if
you turned off the heater.
James Mackey