|
Posted by Zephyr on May 11, 2007, 9:55 pm
I believe the difference is what each Mfg.'s thought is on suction losses,
oil return, and capacity losses "vs." line length. Didn't they list also
"limits" for line length at the recommend line sizes?
--
Zyp
>
> >
> > at one of my vendors I picked up an interesting comparison chart
> > listing suction tubing sizes req'd to achieve rated seer ratings for
> > 1.5-5 ton splits
> >
> >
> >
> > Carrier
> > Goodman
> > Lennox
> > Trane
> > Rheem
> >
> > goodman shows 3/4 up thru 024, 7/8 for 030 & 1-1/8 up thru 060
> >
> > lennox shows 3/4 up thru 030, 7/8 up thru 048, & 1-1/8 for 060
> >
> > rheem shows 3/4 up thru 030, 7/8 up thru 042, &1-1/8 up thru 060
> >
> > trane is identical to rheem except 5/8 for 018
> >
> > carrier shows 5/8 up thru 024, 3/4 up thru 036, 7/8 up thru 048, &
> > 1-1/8 for 060
> >
> > so whats different, coil fin spacing? nominal cfm? fudge factor?
>
>
> They figure it makes up for the lack of a proper vacuum? <g>
>
>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap