Performance measurements on a thermoacoustic refrigerator

driven at high amplitudes

Matthew E. Poese and Steven L. Garretta)
Graduate Program in Acoustics, The Pennsylvania State University, P.O. Box 30, State College,
Pennsylvania 16804

Received 11 June 1998; revised 8 December 1999; accepted 20 December 1999

Since the power density in a thermoacoustic device is proportional to the square of the acoustic
Mach number, there is strong motivation to design thermoacoustic refrigerators to operate at larger
pressure amplitudes. Measurements are reported of a modified version of the Space
Thermo-Acoustic Refrigerator STAR, driven at peak-to-mean pressure ratios up to 6%. This
pressure ratio corresponds to 30 W of cooling powerfive times as large as reported for STAR in
1993. The results of these measurements are compared to a DELTAE computer model of the
low-amplitude linear performance that matches experimental conditions on a point-by-point basis.
It is found that there is a small but measurable deviation in heat pumping power from the power
predicted with a linear acoustic computer model at moderate amplitudes. This deviation in heat
pumping power at 6% pressure ratio is about 23%. A large disagreement in the acoustic power
needed to attain a specific pressure ratio is found between measured data and DELTAE results. An
overview of the instrumentation, including a measurement of exhaust heat with an absolute accuracy
of 65 mW, is also presented. 2000 Acoustical Society of America. S0001-49660000504-X
PACS numbers: 43.35.Ud HEB

INTRODUCTION acoustic power while the SETAC driver is capable of pro-

The proliferation in the last 50 years of very reliable and
inexpensive refrigerators and air conditioners has led the
population of many developed countries to regard cooling
machines as a necessity rather than a luxury. Because a ther-
moacoustic refrigerator uses no environmentally harmful
working fluids, has very few moving parts, and can utilize a
proportional control scheme, the technology may become at-
tractive for widespread commercial use.
The fact that the power density of a thermoacoustic de-
vice in the linear regime increases with the square of increas-
ing pressure ratio provides strong motivation to design ther-
moacoustic refrigerators to operate at higher pressure ratios.
This experiment investigated deviations from linear predic-
tions of efficiency and heat pumping power at high pressure
amplitudes and determined at what pressure ratio these de-
viations become significant. The predictions of linear system
performance were made with a computer program called
DELTAE1,2 that models the performance of thermoacoustic
and other one-dimensional acoustic apparatus by numerically
integrating a one-dimensional wave equation in the usual
low-amplitude approximation.
This experiment was conducted on a small thermoacous-
tic refrigerator affectionately called Frankenfridge be-
cause the engine is made of parts3 from other refrigerators,
namely the Space ThermoAcoustic Refrigerator4 STAR
and the Shipboard Electronics Thermoacoustic Cooler5
SETAC, both designed and built at the Naval Postgraduate
School. Frankenfridge is the resonator section of STAR,
which includes the stack and heat exchangers, coupled to a
SETAC driver. The STAR driver produced about 10 W of
a
Electronic mail: garrett@sabine.acs.psu.edu
ducing up to 100 W of sound power. The SETAC driver
creates large enough pressure amplitudes in the STAR reso-
nator that nonlinear effects can be measured.
I. APPARATUS
A. The driver
The SETAC driver has an in vacuo mechanical reso-
nance frequency of 316 Hz. It is instrumented with a minia-
ture Endevco piezoresistive microphone Model 8514-10
positioned very near the pusher cone and a miniature Entran
piezoresistive accelerometer Model EGA-125-1000D
mounted directly on the rear surface of the pusher cone. The
signals from these two sensors, along with the effective
cross-sectional area of the bellows6,7 21 cm2, allow the
measurement of acoustic input power as well as the stroke of
the pusher cone and the acoustic impedance that the resona-
tor presents to the driver.
The pertinent driver parameters are listed in Table I. The
voice coil is attached to a reducing cone that ends in an
aluminum piston face. This cone is attached to the driver
housing with a two-convolution electroformed nickel bel-
lows that provides a flexure seal for the resonator and elimi-
nates the need for a sliding seal. The main function of the
bellows is to seal the oscillating pressure in the resonator
from the driver back volume. A capillary leak between the
volume of the resonator and the driver back volume allows
for equilibration of the 10 atm of static pressure.
The sinusoidal electrical signal supplied to the driver
originates from an HP 3314A signal generator and is ampli-
fied by a Techron 7520 power amplifier. The drive frequency
is adjusted to assure a 90-degree phase relationship between
acceleration and pressurea relationship that is monitored

2480 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107 (5), Pt. 1, May 2000 0001-4966/2000/107(5)/2480/7/$17.00 2000 Acoustical Society of America 2480

Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
TABLE I. SETAC driver parameters.
Parameter Value Units
Moving mass 36.4 g 0.8%
Stiffness 143 kN/m
Mechanical resistance 2.10 kg/s
Bl 19.1 N/A
dc electrical resistance 1.677
Effective bellows area 21 cm2
with a Lissajous pattern on an oscilloscope displaying the
accelerometer and microphone signals. There are many rea-
sons to stay on resonance, not the least of which is that heat
pumping power is a strong function of stack position in the
standing wave. This position is calculated and designed to be
a constant parameter for the system at resonance and, if the
frequency is not changed to accommodate the changing
sound speed of the gas mixture, this stack position in the
standing wave will vary with temperature. Another reason
for resonant operation the mechanical resonance frequency
of the driver and the resonator are made coincident by ad-
justing the relative concentration of helium and argon in the
resonator is that the driver has the potential to deliver its
maximum power when it operates close to its mechanical
resonance frequency.8
B. Resonator
The resonator is instrumented with thermocouples to
measure the external metal temperatures near the hot ex-
haust and cold heat load heat exchangers. There are no
sensors mounted directly inside of the resonator. As shown
in Fig. 1, the resonator is equipped with a small Minco elec-
trical resistance heater just below the cold side heat ex-
changer. This electrical heater provides an easily controlled
and measured amount of heat for the refrigerator to pump.
Table II lists parameters that describe the working fluid,
stack, and heat exchangers.
C. Exhaust heat sink flange
Even though the cold side of the refrigerator is insulated
from the room using standard Corning Pink fiberglass insu-
lation, heat leak to the cold side is expected when large tem-
perature differences exist between the cold side duct and
room air temperature. From the first law of thermodynamics
and the measured power delivered by the driver, knowledge
of the exhaust heat flux allows calculation of the heat leak
and provides an accurate determination of the amount of heat
that the refrigerator pumps. However, in the experiment pre-
sented here, the cold side was only a few degrees colder than
the room making the heat leak too small to measure. For
these measurements, the exhaust heat sink flange allowed the
continuous verification that the measured amount of heat
supplied by the resistance heater was moved up the stack
from the cold side to the hot side. For other experiments with
this refrigerator which included larger temperature differ-
2481 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000
Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
Relative
uncertainty
0.5%
0.6%
0.7%
negligible
3%
FIG. 1. Cross-sectional diagram of Frankenfridge. Approximate height is 56
cm and maximum width at the driver housing is 23 cm.
ences, the exhaust heat sink flange was relied upon to mea-
sure the significant heat leak from the room to the cold parts
of the resonator.
To make this measurement of exhaust heat flux, a cop-
per exhaust heat sink shown in Fig. 1 has been sandwiched
between the SETAC driver and the STAR resonator. This
1 1
2-in.-thick flange has two loops of 8-in. copper refrigeration
tubing wrapped and soldered around its perimeter to allow
water to be circulated around the flange. The water that is
pumped through this loop and around the flange absorbs the
exhaust heat and therefore experiences an increase in tem-
perature as it travels around the flange. The water circulation
loop is instrumented with a ten junction thermopile located
directly across the inlet and discharge ports of the flange
piping and a Hedland flow meter IR-OPFlow Model 502-
101 located in-line with the Tygon tubing that plumbs the
pump, filter, and dissipating heat exchanger in the loop. The
heat flux through the exhaust flange to the water flowing in
the loop can be calculated from the heat capacity of the wa-
ter, the temperature difference, and the fluid flow rate.
The driver housing is not insulated from the room. For
this reason, thermal insulation between the exhaust heat sink
and the aluminum driver housing is critical if a temperature
increase is to be directly measured in the exhaust heat sink
flange. The resonator, the new exhaust heat sink, and a 81-in.-
thick Delrin insulating ring are bolted to the driver hous-
ing. The exhaust thermal measurement system is shown in
M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2481
TABLE II. Physical parameters of the resonator and working fluid. and at the most 7 C at the highest operating power.
The water that absorbs heat from the exhaust heat sink
Parameter Symbol Value Units
flange must also be cooled somewhere in the loop if a tem-
Mean pressure pm 1.07 MPa perature difference is going be maintained across the flange
Mean stack temperature Tm 290 K
inlet and discharge. This is accomplished by submerging a
Gas mixture helium/argon 85.5% He
Gas mixture atomic mass M 9.214 kg/kmol coil of copper tubing in a large 50 gal bucket of water. The
Gas mixture density 4.105 kg/m3 dissipator is expected to dissipate this same amount of heat
Gas mixture sound speed a 660.4 m/s from the water loop that is introduced at the exhaust heat
Gas mixture specific heat cp 2256 J/kgK sink flange. The flow loop is diverted to loop twice around
Gas mixture polytropic coefficient 1.667
the driver housing after the discharge from the heat sink
Gas mixture Prandtl number 0.428
Gas mixture kinematic viscosity 2.10105 kg/sm flange in order to reduce Q d by keeping the driver housing
Gas mixture thermal conductivity Kg 0.111 W/mK and the flange at the same temperature. The flow diversion
Stack thermal conductivity Ks 0.161 W/mK also prevents the driver from overheating. No heat flux mea-
Stack specific heat cs 1101 J/kgK
surements are made across the driver cooling coil.
Stack material density s 1348 kg/m3
The accuracy of this measurement system is verified by
Stack plate thickness 2l 0.0762 mm running the closed water loop through two reservoirs of wa-
Stack plate separation 2y 0 0.191 mm ter without the inclusion of the refrigerator. One reservoir is
Stack length x 78.5 mm
Center position of stack ref. from driver xs 106.5 mm
the 50 gal bucket of water mentioned above. For calibration
Stack radius R 19.1 mm purposes, the closed flow loop is allowed thermal contact
Stack spiral perimeter 4846 mm with another very small 41 gal reservoir of water in place of
Stack heat capacity correction s 0.067 the refrigerator that is heated with an electrical resistance
Cold exchanger length x C 6.35 mm heater. The part of the loop that is immersed in this small
Hot exchanger length x H 2.54 mm reservoir is a coil of copper tubing. After the system reached
Exchanger fin thickness 2l EX 0.254 mm steady state approximately 15 min the standard deviation
Exchanger fin separation 2y EX
0 0.508 mm between the measured power to the electrical heater and the
Operating frequency f 328 Hz measured power dissipated by the flow loop is 0.052 W. This
Gas thermal penetration depth 0.108 mm small variability (0.052 W/5.27 W1.0%) is within an ac-
Stack thermal penetration depth s 0.010 mm ceptable limit for these measurements.
Gas viscous penetration depth 0.070 mm

D. Heat exchanger performance model

Fig. 2 the insulating ring has been left out of the drawing for
simplicity. The heat flow rate, Q H , is the exhaust heat flux
of the thermoacoustic engine and Q d is the heat leak from
the copper flange to the driver housing. The heat flux mea-
sured with the thermopile/flow-meter combination is the ex-
haust heat flux less the amount that escapes to the driver
housing. The thermal resistance of the Delrin insulating
ring was measured to be 1.0 K/W. Two Type-E thermo-
couples, one mounted on the exhaust heat sink flange and the
other on the driver housing, allow measurement of Q d and
correction for the measured value of exhaust heat flux. The
temperature difference measured by these thermocouples
was at the least experimentally zero at lower input power
FIG. 2. Schematic of the exhaust heat sink flange and heat flux measure-
ment instrumentation. The small arrows show the water flow direction and
the large arrows indicate heat flux.
In order to compare experimental data to the DELTAE
model, knowledge of the stack end temperatures hot and
cold side is necessary. Space qualification of the resonator
in the STAR project required that no penetrations were made
in the pressurized resonator for signal leads. Since the ther-
mocouples are mounted outside the resonator and not di-
rectly on the fins, a method to infer the temperature of the
fins and hence the stack temperature is needed. A simple
mathematical calculation for the parallel thermal resistance
of the 50 fins of the heat exchanger allows the temperature of
the central fin region of the heat exchanger to be estimated.
The hot side thermocouple is located on the copper flange
where the hot heat exchanger is seated and the cold side
thermocouple is located just below the cold side heat
exchanger.9
The addition of a fin to a surface is usually motivated by
a need for greater convective heat transfer from or to the
surface. However, the addition of surface area and therefore
material also carries with it some thermal resistance that
depends partly on the fin geometry. Since the potential for
heat transfer to or from a surface depends on the temperature
of the surface and the temperature of the surrounding me-
dium, the best performance from a fin would be realized if
that fin were at the same temperature across the whole length
of the fin. However, because a fin has nonzero thermal resis-
tance, the fin sustains a temperature gradient and performs
below this optimum. The fin efficiency is a multiplicative
constant10 that expresses the degradation of heat transfer due

2482 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000 M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2482

Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
to the addition of the thermal resistance of the fin material
and is defined as
qf qf
f ,
q max hA f T b T
where q f is the actual heat transferred by the fin, q max is the
amount which would be transferred if the fin resistance were
zero, h is the convective heat transfer coefficient, A f is the
surface area of the fin, T b is the temperature at the base of
the fin, and T is the temperature of the medium surrounding
the fin. By symmetry we assure that the end of the fin is
insulated from the medium, therefore q f is
q f h P c K f A c T b T tanh mL ,
where P c and A c are the cross-sectional perimeter and area
of the fin, K f is the thermal conductivity of the fin material,
and the critical length 1/m is defined by m 2 h P c /K f A c .
With a little manipulation, the fin efficiency Eq. 1 can be
expressed as
tanh mL
f .
mL
All of the parameters that make up the critical length, 1/m,
are geometric or tabulated except for the convective heat
transfer coefficient, h. A common dimensionless parameter
that includes the convective heat transfer coefficient is the
Nusselt number which can be thought of as the ratio of total
heat transfer to conductive heat transfer. This is expressed in
Eq. 4 spatially averaged over a plate of length L,
h L
Nu , 4
K efficiency, is calculated with a computer. Since the resonator
where K is the thermal conductivity of the fluid. Scaling
arguments11 similitude suggest that the Nusselt number
over the length of a plate is correlated to the Reynolds num-
ber over the length and the Prandtl number a nondimen-
sional ratio of a fluids viscous to thermal diffusivity. The
standard correlation10 for steady, laminar flow that allows
calculation of the heat transfer coefficient over the length of
the plate, h , in terms of these dimensionless parameters is
Nu0.664 ReL1/2Pr1/3.
The above expression leads to a value of the convective heat
transfer coefficient over the width of a fin in the heat ex-
changer. The value for h H at the hot side heat exchanger is
700 W/m2K for a flow velocity that corresponds to a pressure
ratio of 3%.
However, in oscillatory flow the validity of this correla-
tion is not clear. In this case, a time-averaged convective heat
transfer coefficient, h , may have more relevance and the
standard laminar correlation is modified as follows. Since the
Nusselt number depends on the square root of the free-
stream flow velocity the Reynolds number is proportional to
velocity and this velocity is oscillating sinusoidally, a time
average value over half a period because the heat transfer is
independent of the sign of the velocity is used. This time
average is12
2483 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000
Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
TABLE III. Heat exchanger model summary.
Parameter Hot exchanger Cold exchanger
Ac 6
1.6210 m 2
6.45107 m2
1 1.32102 m 5.59103 m
Pc
h 530 W/m2K 1000 W/m2K
m 104 m1 147 m1
R 0.17 K/W 0.30 K/W
u 1/2
u 1/2
1
0
sin x 1/2 dx0.763. 6
2
A more rigorous approach, which produces a similar numeri-
cal value, has been obtained by Mozurkewich.13
The fin efficiency, a value less than 1, increases the
value for the effective thermal resistance of the fin,
1
R fin , 7
3 h f A f
where h is the convective heat transfer coefficient aver-
aged over the length of the fin and over time. The time av-
erage heat transfer coefficient corresponding to the hot side
and cold side flow at a 3% pressure ratio is shown in Table
III. With these values of h , the characteristic length, 1/m,
can be calculated using values for the fin cross-sectional area
and cross-sectional perimeter, A c and P c , respectively. The
results are shown in Table III. Since each fin has a different
length, the total parallel thermal resistance, including the fin
body is thin copper, it is assumed that there is very little
thermal resistance from the inside of the resonator body to
the external thermocouple.
E. Measurement procedure
The performance of Frankenfridge was measured in
5 eight controlled experiments. The device was operated in the
same manner for each of these experiments. First, the refrig-
erator was turned on with no heat load and the cold side was
stabilized at 17.2 C by adjusting the acoustic pressure am-
plitude created by the driver. This modest temperature dif-
ference was chosen to minimize the heat leak from the room
to the cold resonator parts. The frequency of the driver piston
oscillation was adjusted so that an in-phase relationship be-
tween pressure and velocity at the face of the driver piston
was maintained. Once the machine reached a steady state at
the preestablished cold side temperature, the electric heat
load was activated to dissipate 21 W at the cold side. The
acoustic pressure was readjusted to keep the cold side at
17.2 C. Once this new state stabilized taking about 6 to 8
mins, the heat load was again incremented by 21 W and the
acoustic pressure adjusted accordingly to maintain a constant
cold resonator temperature.
M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2483
FIG. 3. Comparison of heat pumping power. The outside cold metal tem-
perature is 17.2 C.
II. RESULTS
A. Performance at low amplitudes P A p m 3%
The performance of the refrigerator is illustrated in Figs.
3 and 4. Figure 3 shows the measured and modeled cooling
power as a function of the ratio of peak-to-mean pressure in
the resonator. Figure 4 is a plot of the input acoustic power
required to attain a certain pressure ratio. In the presence of
a stack and heat exchangers, this acoustic power is respon-
sible for pumping heat from the side of the stack that gets
cold to the side that gets hot.
The DELTAE model was generated by entering each ex-
perimental datum into the model, one at a time, and letting
the model generate a solution for each point. For the com-
parisons in Figs. 3 and 4, the hot and cold side heat ex-
changer temperatures were targets for DELTAE and the pro-
gram was allowed to solve for the input acoustic power and
heat pumping power that correspond to the target tempera-
tures. The acoustic pressure at the specific datum point was
given to DELTAE as an invariant input parameter, allowing
DELTAE to very accurately model an experimental condition.
The acoustic power required to attain a certain pressure
ratio as seen in Fig. 4 under the experimental condition is
approximately 25% greater than DELTAE predicts it to be in
the low-amplitude region. In Fig. 3 at low amplitudes, the
graph of heat pumping power or cooling power shows
agreement with DELTAE to within the accuracy of this ex-
periment.
2484 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000
Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
FIG. 4. Comparison of acoustic input power. The outside cold metal tem-
perature is 17.2 C.
B. Performance at high amplitudes P A p m 6%
The high-amplitude data from 3% to 6% pressure ratio
is presented in Figs. 3 and 4 as well. The data in Fig. 3 show
the nonlinear degradation in cooling power between the mea-
sured data and the linear DELTAE results above a 3% drive
ratio. This nonlinear performance degradation is modest
enough that the gain in power density associated with opera-
tion at higher pressure amplitudes may be worth the sacrifice
in efficiency for some applications.
The discrepancy in the acoustic power required to attain
a specific pressure ratio evident in Fig. 4 is greater in this
high-amplitude region than is seen in the data below 3%
pressure ratio. The cause of the discrepancy is undetermined
at this time. In the following section we explore some pos-
sible loss mechanisms that may explain the disagreement
between model predictions and measured data.
C. Resonator losses
In an attempt to explore the disagreement between
model predictions and measured data, DELTAE models were
created that include the effects of turbulent flow, a larger
surface area for enhanced thermoviscous loss, and a different
stack geometry that may more closely represent the rolled
Mylar and fishing line stack used in this refrigerator.
Instead of using a STKS1ab segment in DELTAE which
models a parallel plate stack and does not account for spacers
that support and separate the plates, a STKREct which
models the stack as rectangular pores was substituted. It is
M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2484
possible that this stack model more closely represents the
Mylar film/fishing-string stack used in Frankenfridge. This
modification decreases the acoustic power discrepancy by
only a few percent and is not shown on a graph.
Because the discrepancy of DELTAE predictions and
measured data at low amplitudes suggests an inaccurately
modeled thermoviscous loss, comparison of the quality fac-
tor of the resonator to the quality factor predicted by the
DELTAE model should reflect the discrepancy in input acous-
tic power. By driving the resonator with a negligibly small
pressure oscillation, Q was measured to be 11.0. The Fran-
kenfridge model in DELTAE can be programmed to produce
a frequency sweep at very low pressure amplitudes to
allow a determination of the model resonators Q. This
sweep was executed at a constant volume velocity and at
such very low pressure amplitudes so as not to cause DEL-
TAE to form a temperature gradient across its stack. A half-
power point fit for Q from this pressure response curve yields
a value of 11.75.
Since the stack provides the dominant thermoviscous
loss in the resonator and it seems to be modeled well in
DELTAE, the effects of smaller thermoviscous losses in the
resonator could be magnified if the stack is removed. With
the stack removed from the resonator of the refrigerator and
the heat exchangers left in place the input power required to
attain several values of pressure ratio was measured. The
results of this experiment are compared to a DELTAE model
that includes HX**** finned heat exchanger segments but
no stack segment. The model uses the same values for acous-
tic pressure that were imparted into the physical resonator.
The quality factor of the physical stackless resonator was
measured to be 56. The model predicts Q to be 66 for the
model that has no stack. The fact that the measured quality
factor for the stackless refrigerator is smaller than the model
predicts leads us to believe that there is some part of the
resonator that is not understood, or not modeled in DELTAE
correctly.
Along these same lines, the surface area of the cold re-
ducer, cold duct, and trumpet was increased by 30% in DEL-
TAE. This model, with a lower value for Q, causes the dis-
crepancy to shrink by only 2% across the entire amplitude
range.
The parameter that DELTAE uses to quantify the turbu-
lence of the flow is the relative roughness. In a duct, this is
defined11 as the ratio of the surface roughness, e, to the di-
ameter of the duct: e/D. A typical value11 of surface rough-
ness e for drawn tubing is 5106 in. The result from the
DELTAE model with turbulence that best matches the mea-
sured cooling power degradation corresponds to a relative
roughness value of 0.1 as shown in Fig. 3. This value was
assigned to the cold reducer, the cold duct, and the trumpet.
A relative roughness of 10% is outrageously large for hard-
ware of the size and type in this refrigerator but it is a way to
get DELTAE to model a nonlinear loss that is on the order of
that measured in Frankenfridge. In this only academically
interesting limit, the discrepancy in acoustic power becomes
as low 10% at the highest measured amplitude as compared
to almost 40% in the linear model.
In summary, none of the above changes to the DELTAE
2485 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000
Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
model correct the acoustic power discrepancy to within ex-
perimental error, nor do they destroy the agreement of cool-
ing power for a given pressure ratio below pressure ratios of
3%.
III. CONCLUSIONS
There is a measurable deviation in heat pumping power
of Frankenfridge from the power predicted with a linear
acoustic computer model for the same pressure amplitude.
This deviation in heat pumping power at 3% pressure ratio is
about 8% and at 6% pressure ratio is about 24%. For some
applications, the correspondingly poorer coefficient-of-
performance may be an acceptable sacrifice in the face of a
dramatically increased power density. This rolloff in heat
pumping power could be due in part to the fact that the
acoustic particle displacement is four to five times higher
than the heat exchanger lengtha high-amplitude design
would likely have longer heat exchanger fins which might
lessen the cooling power degradation.
The exhaust heat flux measurement system has allowed
the device to trade the complicated vacuum insulation used
in the STAR experiments for a simple fiberglass insulation
shield and to increase the rate of data acquisition. The new
driver can create stack power densities which are almost six
times greater than could be obtained with the STAR driver.
While these experiments have shown excellent agree-
ment with computer models of the stack, the resonator per-
formance shows significant deviations from the DELTAE
model. The computer model predicts the acoustic power re-
quirements to be almost 32 of the measured acoustic input
power needed to reach a certain pressure ratio. This deviation
is consistent in experiments with and without the stack. The
discrepancy is greater in the stackless resonator model be-
cause the stack is the dominant loss mechanism and reduces
the effect of the resonator model inaccuracy.
A preliminary analysis shows that the power discrep-
ancy may be caused by minor losses in the stack, heat ex-
changers, and horn outlet of the machine. The term minor
loss refers to nonlinear loss that occurs in the flow around
obstacles, through orifices, and at abrupt changes in cross-
sectional area or flow direction: this loss mechanism is not
accounted for in the surface-roughness/turbulence module in
DELTAE.
Not reported in this paper are measurements of the co-
efficient of performance for Frankenfridge. These measure-
ments exhibit a disagreement with DELTAE predictions simi-
lar to that shown in this paper. Interestingly, a comparison of
1993 STAR coefficient of performance data with a DELTAE
model of STAR shows the same disagreement.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully thank the Office of Naval Re-
search, NASA through the Pennsylvania Space Grant Con-
sortium, and the Applied Research Lab through the Explor-
atory and Foundation Program for generous financial
support. We thank Robert Smith for his effective technical
assistance and Greg Swift and Bill Ward of Los Alamos
National Laboratories for providing several upgrades to
M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2485

DELTAE. The BLKDAta and RPNTArget features were par-
ticularly useful in the analysis of this experimental data.
Also, Anthony Atchley and Ray Wakeland provided insight-
ful conversations and guidance during this project.
1
W. C. Ward and G. W. Swift, Design environment for low-amplitude
thermoacoustic engines, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95, 36713672 1994.
2
W. C. Ward and G. W. Swift, Design Environment for Low Amplitude
ThermoAcoustic Engines, Version 3.04b software available from Energy
Science and Technology Center, U.S. DOE, Oak Ridge, TN, http://
www.lanl.gov.
3
M. W. Shelley, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus London,
Lackington, 1818.
4
S. L. Garrett, J. A. Adeff, and T. J. Hofler, Thermoacoustic refrigerator
for space applications, J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 7, 595599 1993.
5
S. C. Ballister and D. J. McKelvey, Shipboard Electronics Thermoacous-
tic Cooler, Master of Science Thesis, Physics Department, Naval Post-
graduate School, 1995; DTIC Report No. ADA 300514; S. L. Garrett,
U.S. Patent No. 5,647,216 1997.
2486 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pt. 1, May 2000
Downloaded 14 Aug 2013 to 152.3.102.242. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
6
Servometer Corporation, 501 Little Falls Road, Cedar Grove, NJ 07009.
7
T. J. Hofler, Accurate acoustic measurements with a high-intensity
driver, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 777786 1988.
8
R. S. Wakeland, Use of electrodynamic drivers in thermoacoustic refrig-
erators, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 827832 2000.
9
J. A. Adeff, Measurement of the Space Thermoacoustic Refrigerator
Performance, Master of Science Thesis, Physics Department, Naval
Postgraduate School, 1990; DTIC Report No. AD A241-320.
10
F. P. Incropera and D. P. DeWitt, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Trans-
fer, 3rd ed. Wiley, New York, 1990, pp. 491497.
11
R. W. Fox and A. T. McDonald, Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, 4th ed.
Wiley, New York, 1992, Chap. 7.
12
S. L. Garrett, Thermoacoustics life sciences refrigerator: heat exchanger
design and performance prediction, June 1992; S. L. Garrett, D. K.
Perkins, and A. Gopinath, Thermoacoustic refrigerator heat exchangers:
design, analysis and fabrication, Heat Transfer 1994 Proceedings 10th
International Heat Transfer Conference 1994, Vol. 4, pp. 375380.
13
G. Mozurkewich, Time-average temperature distribution in a thermoa-
coustic stack, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 380388 1998.
M. E. Poese and S. L. Garrett: Thermoacoustic refrigerator 2486