This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:43, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Why do we have a section on professional bodies (not sourced at that)? This seems entirely unnecessary, the whole article reads anyway as a promotion piece for air conditioning and this just makes it worse. The selecting of only certain countries is also not comprehensible so I have removed the whole section. ReyRichard ( talk) 17:42, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
see Arab architecture and passive cooling, induced airflow, convection, Bernoulli, Venturi, Coandă effect
See: Pergola
G. Robert Shiplett 12:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This article includes superb technical info but begs for the addition of information on the social and health impacts of AC during its early adoption in mid 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosware ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I've re-merged this page with content taken from air conditioner. This was split in 2006 following the logic behind splitting refrigerator and refrigeration: however, that's led to the pages containing largely-overlapping content which is less well maintained for being split over two pages. In the process I removed a lot of material which was unsourced or plainly copyvio from the merged content.
Lots of work will be required to bring this article up to scratch, but with the newly-imported material this should be easier to do in the long run. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 11:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
n — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.81.148.79 ( talk) 10:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Do we need two articles - HVAC and Air conditioning? Biscuittin ( talk) 19:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I also have a feeling this page is a bit promotional and messy. I created a 'critics' section that hopefully will welcome some information about nowadays issues on the topic.
I'm removing this: "Air conditioning may have a positive effect on sufferers of allergies and asthma." since the opposite is also true for the many houses/companies that have a poor maintenance of their systems. Maybe someone can find references for the two sides.
Adding sections inside critics about: -environnement, needs info about ozone depletants still used in some countries -global warming,
I also think a section about energy issues should be created.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarnelhdkw ( talk • contribs) 12:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm told "in the industry" AC refers to Alternating Current, and A/C refers to Air Conditioning. Does anyone have any knowledge on this? -- 68.55.169.90 ( talk) 23:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm currently going through the entire article, trying to put everthing into a consistent format. Mostly I didn't remove information, I just re-ordered it and re-organised the sections (e.g. there were 3 different sections on the topic of refrigerants, containing very similar information). My plan is to be done within the next few days. Hopefully that will resolve some of the issues the article is having at the moment. Noggo ( talk) 17:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
---I remved the section on St George's hall being the first air conditioned building. The plaque is technically correct, the air was conditioned...it was heated. It is not exactly what the scope of this article falls to. http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/culture/2002/08/st_georges/air_con.shtml The first modern air conditioned builings were those designed by Carrier, though, I'll have to find a reasonable source to use for those. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.65.196.20 ( talk) 14:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I added a gif to explain how an air conditioner works. It shows the process. Please let me know if it's ok. -- 131.175.28.132 ( talk) 14:54, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
In the section "Health Issues" para 3, we have the unsupportable statement "Spending most of the time in AC environment could lead to lower immunity because, lack of free supply of oxygen hinders with normal functioning of white blood cells that fight bacteria." I'm deleting the para because the "supporting" reference is a newspaper article which supplies no evidence--and even fewer citations--that refrigerated (or any other type of) airconditioning removes oxygen from the air. If anybody can find valid science to support the claims in the para, then youse can put it back. 203.161.102.82 ( talk) 06:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I haven't had the chance to read that article but if anyone is considering reinserting those claims, please make sure the source satisfies WP:MEDRS, if not, do not include it. YuMa NuMa Contrib 07:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
In addition to the reappearance of the issues noted above by YuMa, paragraph 5 of "Health Issues" has been deleted.
The paragraph stated "AC achieves cooling through the process of evaporation. Due to this, mucous membranes in the nose and mouth get dry...". User:AgniKalpa, the author of the offending edit, seems to believe that air conditioners cause evaporation of water vapor, thus drying the air in the room. This is incorrect.
For clarity, most air conditioners remove heat from a room by passing air over a coil in which the coolant, having passed from a higher pressure region to a lower pressure region, evaporates, dispersing the energy in the mass of the coolant over a larger volume, creating a volume of lower thermal energy relative to the air outside the coil. The second law of thermodynamics dictates that some of the heat in the air will be conducted through the metal of the coil into the coolant. The coolant is then forced into an area of higher pressure where the process is reversed, with the heat leaving the coolant outside the area to be cooled. The evaporation that results in cooling happens entirely within a sealed system, and can not remove moisture from the air as water vapor can not pass through the walls of the coil.
If User:AgniKalpa's belief were valid, the evaporation would add moisture to the air, not remove it.
The drying effect, as already explained earlier in the article, is caused by condensation of water vapor already in the air. The amount of condensation #and therefore, dehumidification# can be, and in many cases is, regulated by controlling the temperature of the coils. Specifically, keeping the coils above the dew point will prevent condensation, and may actually raise the relative humidity of the room by lowering the temperature while maintaining the absolute humidity.
Some air conditioners, as described in the section on "evaporative coolers", actually do use evaporation of water vapor. These systems do add water vapor to the air, raising the absolute humidity.
-- Bruce Bertrand # talk# 05:25, 21 June 2013 #UTC#
Ammonia still used in heat powered refrigeration systems. Somebody may be knowledgeable enough to add content. 184.77.255.15 ( talk) 16:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
The Environmental impact section, under energy consumption, is completely ridiculous industry rah-rah crap: "Innovation in air conditioning technologies continues, with much recent emphasis placed on energy efficiency."
AC is a horrible energy sink, and it has to be for thermodynamic reasons (yeah, except evaporative, I know), and any reasonable person would conclude it should be a last resort behind everything else you can think of-- better ventilation, white roofs, green roofs, etc.
But I'm afraid this is the future of wikipedia: no one in their right mind thinks it's "fun" to write for it, so over time it's going to be industry shills and political operatives moving in to do spin control. -- Doom ( talk) 19:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:DNFTT |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
According to a number of wikipedia approved authorised sources such as the Telegraph and Jezebel air conditioning is sexist. I feel it only right to help improve the diversity in inclusivity of wikipeida that a section be added to cover this important information. Udoks ( talk) 03:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Off-topicThis section seems off-topic from the overall article. It may be more suited to an article on occupational sexism, not airconditioning (i.e. Occupational sexism). 124.171.32.15 ( talk) 08:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
This is completely off topic and sensationalistic as written. The linked general interest articles are about office temperature setpoints; whether the air is conditioned or naturally ventilated is not particularly relevant. Somehow that is being extrapolated into "air conditioning is inherently sexist." Devoting an entire freaking section to this stupid clickbait is moronic; a sentence somewhere summarizing the ASHRAE and Nature standards for the disparate comfort ranges for men and women would be appropriate as that appears to have been missing. VQuakr ( talk) 01:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
|
According to wikipedia's own allowance and their use in other sources they are more than reputable and in now way Click-Baitey titles. [emph mine.] They are legitimate Wikipedia sources and such sites have been cited in a number of other articles including one recently cleared by Arbcom.
The constant focus on "wikipedia approved sources" the obvious sarcasm in the above statement, there is no way this person is not trolling. As such I've hatted everything.
Brustopher (
talk) 00:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
In response, to "You do realize you are being trolled, right?", this topic has been discussed by feminist academics on Sky TV news and in news websites including "The telegraph", "Globe and Mail", "Australia ABC News", and "Time" magazine. While, I personally disagree that air conditioning is sexist, the goal of Wikipedia is to keep a neutral point of view and it's factually accurate this has been debated on liveTV and published in many sourcesby feminists. This was and still is a trending topic in 3rd wave feminist circles. It is legitimate to discuss whether it should be added and is possibly not a "troll" as user Brustopher suggested. If it were a troll, the implication might just be that trolls write for Time Magazine, The Telegraph, Globe and Mail, ABC Australia News, SkyTV News and so forth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH0bmYT7os
http://motto.time.com/4464848/sexist-air-conditioning/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.180.129 ( talk • contribs)
Freon is not the future of AC. Probably Magnetics or something with Thermocooling.-- 2605:6000:1A0D:1C0:0:94F:F47E:FDD1 ( talk) 20:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Right there are multiple articles which talk about the process of air cooling. This looks to me like forks of the same content, and I propose to merge it to one place. Can anyone else comment on whether this is the same concept, and if so, suggest the one place where this information should be?
Proposal: Cut all sections of any article talking about the science of air cooling, paste that content to " Heat pump and refrigeration cycle", and point other articles there.
First we begin this article with saying "Air conditioning is the process of removing heat and moisture" (because that's somehow the non scholar way of using the word). Then we later say "In the most general sense, air conditioning can refer to any form of technology that modifies the condition of air" and this is actually the correct terminology, even though professionals use the former. Are we going to abide by non intellectuals to determine the definition of this terminology? — Preceding unsigned comment added by B0ef ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
The section on efficiency specifically relates to the USA, and uses units that make no sense to most people in the world. Can somebody rewrite it to be more neutral? Groogle ( talk) 02:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
The information about Carrier is treated like he is the original creator and patent holder of cooling technology. Latimer's patent expired the year prior to Carrier filing his patent. https://patents.google.com/patent/US334078. This article needs to include information about L.H. Latimer. Its a white washing of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.101.204.54 ( talk) 05:43, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
From the article:
I'd like to see that statement clarified. An electric resistance heating unit may be considered to be 100 percent efficient because it converts all of the applied electrical energy into heat and radiates all of it into the room in which the heating unit is installed. A heat pump converts most of the applied electrical energy into heat (some energy is expended in driving the unit's fan to pull air through the evaporator), but some of that heat is lost to the outdoors through radiation from the compressor and refrigerant piping that is not in the building's interior. Therefore, the heat pump cannot achieve the efficiency of the resistance heating unit.
The Heat pump section says cold weather heating efficiency goes down with temperature because the evaporator freezes up. While that may be true (I can't tell because there isn't a single source citation in this entire section), the main reason has to do with thermodynamics and the Carnot cycle. This section could use a re-write. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 03:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Rooftop packaged systems don't really belong in the "Split central (ducted) system" section, since they are not split systems. Should this be moved to the "Air-only central air conditioning" section? GA-RT-22 ( talk) 21:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello I have a question regarding the lead section in the 3rd paragraph. In sentence 2 of the 3rd paragraph I believe the statistics can be updated from 2018 to 2020 from the article "Air Conditioning Biggest Factor in Growing Electricity Demand" by Martin Armstrong in Statista.com in which he says there 1.9 billion air conditioner units in the world and expected 5.5 billion to be sold by 2050 according to International Energy Agency (IEA).
should this be updated in the artcile? link: https://www.statista.com/chart/14401/growing-demand-for-air-conditioning-and-energy/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20latest%20figures,the%20next%2030%20years%20though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alejandro Rodriguez 2690 ( talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
HLHJ: Please carry on your discussions here, on the talk page, not in the edit summaries or template fields.
This statement is a problem: "In the 17th century, the Dutch inventor Cornelis Drebbel demonstrated 'Turning Summer into Winter' as an early form of modern air conditioning for James I of England by adding salt to water." Adding salt to water does not lower the temperature. Now you're saying that you don't know what the source you cited means by this, because you don't have access to the source. Please don't add material to Wikipedia articles without citing a source, and actually checking that source yourself. The text says nothing about ice. Maybe it means ice, but you don't know that, do you? And if it did, that wouldn't make sense for air conditioning. Ice melts at 0° which is plenty cold enough to cool off a room. Lowering the temperature below that wouldn't make any sense. But it's pointless to speculate about that. We need a source. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 02:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
It's not a big issue and let's leave the citations in the lead, however my motivation for removing them was MOS:CITELEAD which suggests that citations are only recommended for challengeable material or direct quotes and that redundant citations are not encouraged. What I didn't do is confirm that all claims in the lead are indeed supported by citations within the body of the article so they may not actually be redundant. Possibly it's best to leave them there for the time being. Thanks. PeterEastern ( talk) 14:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
An anon I added the following text, quoted in its entirety:
There was no source nor real detail. So, true? Or not? -- Calton | Talk 13:29, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
The fifth paragraph in the History/Development section credits Stuart W. Cramer with coining the term 'air conditioning'. The photograph at the right of this section credits Willis Carrier with that action. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CTVKenney ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
The first operating hvac was made by a french medical doctor. He was (story omitted) in the tropics treating a person. The "usual methods" he'd have used to keep a fever lower were not available. He devised an excellent plan. This history is not incorrect: wikipedia has lied about the origins for political purposes.
The reason this is important is it was not theorty it was infact the first practical HVAC system in use and today's designs still use the same principle (but not the same refrigerant). THE CITATION: from historian documentary James Burke's "How the Universe Changed" series.
I editing that in the main article - IT WAS CANCEL CULTURED.
I EDITING IN THE ARTICLE "air conditioning is not just for comfort", and quickly listed major impact of society: such as keeping distributed food cool
THAT ALSO WAS DELETED
wikipedia is a worthless piece of trash— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:143:480:a4c0:4ecc:6aff:fe8e:47d ( talk • contribs)
The article presents two contradictory claims:
If B cannot be backed up with a reliable source, it has to be removed. Arminden ( talk) 18:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
@ PeterEastern: hi. I found out, and added to the text, that Gates died months before his house was finished, so that his A/C might never have been used. Maybe that's what was meant. Minding how absolutely huge the 1914 device was, I guess it was also meant for the whole house, so 'central', too. I'm curious now what you'll find out. If nothing comes out of your search, please consider putting the 1933 story back in, with the claim to be the first presented as just that, a claim. It's a good information apart for that unclear or contradictory point. Thanks, Arminden ( talk) 23:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
The structure of this article does seem a bit bonkers to me at present. My guess is that is is still showing its heritage as being a merge some time back of two articles (air conditioning and air conditioners).
By way of example, here is a quick review of the top level headings:
Personally I think we should consider reorganising the article into a series of top level sections heading for each technique, ie the first top-level heading for 'Air Conditioners', and then others for the other major methods discussed. All the relevant content for each method can then be organised until the relevant heading. In my view this process may expose that the article is primarily about air conditioners, but that is something we can come back to in due course possibly.
I will be interested in other people's thoughts.
-- PeterEastern ( talk) 15:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
The section on ″mini-splits″ says such systems ″... typically supply conditioned and heated air to a single or a few rooms...″. Does this not describe a ducted system? I would think a ductless system would supply a conditioned fluid to be passed through a HX in that single room. Air already in that room would be passed over the other side of that HX, warming or cooling it. No supplying of air (and no ducts) required.
What I came here to find was what sort of fluid is pumped to that in-room HX, whether a phase-change occurs there (so different return plumbing is required), if high-pressure plumbing is required, and finally whether it is a challenge to make that pluming flexible enough that attached devices (compressor/condenser, HX) can be moved a bit for servicing or accessing adjacent surfaces. Can enough heat be moved by, say, water, to supply the in-room HX? I doubt it, but have no experience with these devices and don't know. And I don't think the article answers the questions.
I also wonder what is ″mini″ about a ductless system. Are there maxi-splits? Captain Puget ( talk) 00:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
There are some floor standing air conditioners that exists and are similar to split types and found on some countries SugarMash ( talk) 07:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
user:Reywas92 adding unrelated edits to the article. The said section talks about air source heat pumps only, and these known to loose heating performance below 5*C, because ice forms on the outdoor unit heat exchangers and blocks airflow. זור987 ( talk) 14:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:43, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Air conditioning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Why do we have a section on professional bodies (not sourced at that)? This seems entirely unnecessary, the whole article reads anyway as a promotion piece for air conditioning and this just makes it worse. The selecting of only certain countries is also not comprehensible so I have removed the whole section. ReyRichard ( talk) 17:42, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
see Arab architecture and passive cooling, induced airflow, convection, Bernoulli, Venturi, Coandă effect
See: Pergola
G. Robert Shiplett 12:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
This article includes superb technical info but begs for the addition of information on the social and health impacts of AC during its early adoption in mid 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosware ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I've re-merged this page with content taken from air conditioner. This was split in 2006 following the logic behind splitting refrigerator and refrigeration: however, that's led to the pages containing largely-overlapping content which is less well maintained for being split over two pages. In the process I removed a lot of material which was unsourced or plainly copyvio from the merged content.
Lots of work will be required to bring this article up to scratch, but with the newly-imported material this should be easier to do in the long run. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 11:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
n — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.81.148.79 ( talk) 10:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Do we need two articles - HVAC and Air conditioning? Biscuittin ( talk) 19:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I also have a feeling this page is a bit promotional and messy. I created a 'critics' section that hopefully will welcome some information about nowadays issues on the topic.
I'm removing this: "Air conditioning may have a positive effect on sufferers of allergies and asthma." since the opposite is also true for the many houses/companies that have a poor maintenance of their systems. Maybe someone can find references for the two sides.
Adding sections inside critics about: -environnement, needs info about ozone depletants still used in some countries -global warming,
I also think a section about energy issues should be created.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarnelhdkw ( talk • contribs) 12:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm told "in the industry" AC refers to Alternating Current, and A/C refers to Air Conditioning. Does anyone have any knowledge on this? -- 68.55.169.90 ( talk) 23:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm currently going through the entire article, trying to put everthing into a consistent format. Mostly I didn't remove information, I just re-ordered it and re-organised the sections (e.g. there were 3 different sections on the topic of refrigerants, containing very similar information). My plan is to be done within the next few days. Hopefully that will resolve some of the issues the article is having at the moment. Noggo ( talk) 17:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
---I remved the section on St George's hall being the first air conditioned building. The plaque is technically correct, the air was conditioned...it was heated. It is not exactly what the scope of this article falls to. http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/culture/2002/08/st_georges/air_con.shtml The first modern air conditioned builings were those designed by Carrier, though, I'll have to find a reasonable source to use for those. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.65.196.20 ( talk) 14:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I added a gif to explain how an air conditioner works. It shows the process. Please let me know if it's ok. -- 131.175.28.132 ( talk) 14:54, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
In the section "Health Issues" para 3, we have the unsupportable statement "Spending most of the time in AC environment could lead to lower immunity because, lack of free supply of oxygen hinders with normal functioning of white blood cells that fight bacteria." I'm deleting the para because the "supporting" reference is a newspaper article which supplies no evidence--and even fewer citations--that refrigerated (or any other type of) airconditioning removes oxygen from the air. If anybody can find valid science to support the claims in the para, then youse can put it back. 203.161.102.82 ( talk) 06:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I haven't had the chance to read that article but if anyone is considering reinserting those claims, please make sure the source satisfies WP:MEDRS, if not, do not include it. YuMa NuMa Contrib 07:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
In addition to the reappearance of the issues noted above by YuMa, paragraph 5 of "Health Issues" has been deleted.
The paragraph stated "AC achieves cooling through the process of evaporation. Due to this, mucous membranes in the nose and mouth get dry...". User:AgniKalpa, the author of the offending edit, seems to believe that air conditioners cause evaporation of water vapor, thus drying the air in the room. This is incorrect.
For clarity, most air conditioners remove heat from a room by passing air over a coil in which the coolant, having passed from a higher pressure region to a lower pressure region, evaporates, dispersing the energy in the mass of the coolant over a larger volume, creating a volume of lower thermal energy relative to the air outside the coil. The second law of thermodynamics dictates that some of the heat in the air will be conducted through the metal of the coil into the coolant. The coolant is then forced into an area of higher pressure where the process is reversed, with the heat leaving the coolant outside the area to be cooled. The evaporation that results in cooling happens entirely within a sealed system, and can not remove moisture from the air as water vapor can not pass through the walls of the coil.
If User:AgniKalpa's belief were valid, the evaporation would add moisture to the air, not remove it.
The drying effect, as already explained earlier in the article, is caused by condensation of water vapor already in the air. The amount of condensation #and therefore, dehumidification# can be, and in many cases is, regulated by controlling the temperature of the coils. Specifically, keeping the coils above the dew point will prevent condensation, and may actually raise the relative humidity of the room by lowering the temperature while maintaining the absolute humidity.
Some air conditioners, as described in the section on "evaporative coolers", actually do use evaporation of water vapor. These systems do add water vapor to the air, raising the absolute humidity.
-- Bruce Bertrand # talk# 05:25, 21 June 2013 #UTC#
Ammonia still used in heat powered refrigeration systems. Somebody may be knowledgeable enough to add content. 184.77.255.15 ( talk) 16:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
The Environmental impact section, under energy consumption, is completely ridiculous industry rah-rah crap: "Innovation in air conditioning technologies continues, with much recent emphasis placed on energy efficiency."
AC is a horrible energy sink, and it has to be for thermodynamic reasons (yeah, except evaporative, I know), and any reasonable person would conclude it should be a last resort behind everything else you can think of-- better ventilation, white roofs, green roofs, etc.
But I'm afraid this is the future of wikipedia: no one in their right mind thinks it's "fun" to write for it, so over time it's going to be industry shills and political operatives moving in to do spin control. -- Doom ( talk) 19:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
WP:DNFTT |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
According to a number of wikipedia approved authorised sources such as the Telegraph and Jezebel air conditioning is sexist. I feel it only right to help improve the diversity in inclusivity of wikipeida that a section be added to cover this important information. Udoks ( talk) 03:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Off-topicThis section seems off-topic from the overall article. It may be more suited to an article on occupational sexism, not airconditioning (i.e. Occupational sexism). 124.171.32.15 ( talk) 08:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
This is completely off topic and sensationalistic as written. The linked general interest articles are about office temperature setpoints; whether the air is conditioned or naturally ventilated is not particularly relevant. Somehow that is being extrapolated into "air conditioning is inherently sexist." Devoting an entire freaking section to this stupid clickbait is moronic; a sentence somewhere summarizing the ASHRAE and Nature standards for the disparate comfort ranges for men and women would be appropriate as that appears to have been missing. VQuakr ( talk) 01:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
|
According to wikipedia's own allowance and their use in other sources they are more than reputable and in now way Click-Baitey titles. [emph mine.] They are legitimate Wikipedia sources and such sites have been cited in a number of other articles including one recently cleared by Arbcom.
The constant focus on "wikipedia approved sources" the obvious sarcasm in the above statement, there is no way this person is not trolling. As such I've hatted everything.
Brustopher (
talk) 00:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
In response, to "You do realize you are being trolled, right?", this topic has been discussed by feminist academics on Sky TV news and in news websites including "The telegraph", "Globe and Mail", "Australia ABC News", and "Time" magazine. While, I personally disagree that air conditioning is sexist, the goal of Wikipedia is to keep a neutral point of view and it's factually accurate this has been debated on liveTV and published in many sourcesby feminists. This was and still is a trending topic in 3rd wave feminist circles. It is legitimate to discuss whether it should be added and is possibly not a "troll" as user Brustopher suggested. If it were a troll, the implication might just be that trolls write for Time Magazine, The Telegraph, Globe and Mail, ABC Australia News, SkyTV News and so forth?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH0bmYT7os
http://motto.time.com/4464848/sexist-air-conditioning/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.180.129 ( talk • contribs)
Freon is not the future of AC. Probably Magnetics or something with Thermocooling.-- 2605:6000:1A0D:1C0:0:94F:F47E:FDD1 ( talk) 20:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Right there are multiple articles which talk about the process of air cooling. This looks to me like forks of the same content, and I propose to merge it to one place. Can anyone else comment on whether this is the same concept, and if so, suggest the one place where this information should be?
Proposal: Cut all sections of any article talking about the science of air cooling, paste that content to " Heat pump and refrigeration cycle", and point other articles there.
First we begin this article with saying "Air conditioning is the process of removing heat and moisture" (because that's somehow the non scholar way of using the word). Then we later say "In the most general sense, air conditioning can refer to any form of technology that modifies the condition of air" and this is actually the correct terminology, even though professionals use the former. Are we going to abide by non intellectuals to determine the definition of this terminology? — Preceding unsigned comment added by B0ef ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
The section on efficiency specifically relates to the USA, and uses units that make no sense to most people in the world. Can somebody rewrite it to be more neutral? Groogle ( talk) 02:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
The information about Carrier is treated like he is the original creator and patent holder of cooling technology. Latimer's patent expired the year prior to Carrier filing his patent. https://patents.google.com/patent/US334078. This article needs to include information about L.H. Latimer. Its a white washing of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.101.204.54 ( talk) 05:43, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
From the article:
I'd like to see that statement clarified. An electric resistance heating unit may be considered to be 100 percent efficient because it converts all of the applied electrical energy into heat and radiates all of it into the room in which the heating unit is installed. A heat pump converts most of the applied electrical energy into heat (some energy is expended in driving the unit's fan to pull air through the evaporator), but some of that heat is lost to the outdoors through radiation from the compressor and refrigerant piping that is not in the building's interior. Therefore, the heat pump cannot achieve the efficiency of the resistance heating unit.
The Heat pump section says cold weather heating efficiency goes down with temperature because the evaporator freezes up. While that may be true (I can't tell because there isn't a single source citation in this entire section), the main reason has to do with thermodynamics and the Carnot cycle. This section could use a re-write. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 03:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Rooftop packaged systems don't really belong in the "Split central (ducted) system" section, since they are not split systems. Should this be moved to the "Air-only central air conditioning" section? GA-RT-22 ( talk) 21:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello I have a question regarding the lead section in the 3rd paragraph. In sentence 2 of the 3rd paragraph I believe the statistics can be updated from 2018 to 2020 from the article "Air Conditioning Biggest Factor in Growing Electricity Demand" by Martin Armstrong in Statista.com in which he says there 1.9 billion air conditioner units in the world and expected 5.5 billion to be sold by 2050 according to International Energy Agency (IEA).
should this be updated in the artcile? link: https://www.statista.com/chart/14401/growing-demand-for-air-conditioning-and-energy/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20latest%20figures,the%20next%2030%20years%20though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alejandro Rodriguez 2690 ( talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
HLHJ: Please carry on your discussions here, on the talk page, not in the edit summaries or template fields.
This statement is a problem: "In the 17th century, the Dutch inventor Cornelis Drebbel demonstrated 'Turning Summer into Winter' as an early form of modern air conditioning for James I of England by adding salt to water." Adding salt to water does not lower the temperature. Now you're saying that you don't know what the source you cited means by this, because you don't have access to the source. Please don't add material to Wikipedia articles without citing a source, and actually checking that source yourself. The text says nothing about ice. Maybe it means ice, but you don't know that, do you? And if it did, that wouldn't make sense for air conditioning. Ice melts at 0° which is plenty cold enough to cool off a room. Lowering the temperature below that wouldn't make any sense. But it's pointless to speculate about that. We need a source. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 02:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
It's not a big issue and let's leave the citations in the lead, however my motivation for removing them was MOS:CITELEAD which suggests that citations are only recommended for challengeable material or direct quotes and that redundant citations are not encouraged. What I didn't do is confirm that all claims in the lead are indeed supported by citations within the body of the article so they may not actually be redundant. Possibly it's best to leave them there for the time being. Thanks. PeterEastern ( talk) 14:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
An anon I added the following text, quoted in its entirety:
There was no source nor real detail. So, true? Or not? -- Calton | Talk 13:29, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
The fifth paragraph in the History/Development section credits Stuart W. Cramer with coining the term 'air conditioning'. The photograph at the right of this section credits Willis Carrier with that action. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CTVKenney ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
The first operating hvac was made by a french medical doctor. He was (story omitted) in the tropics treating a person. The "usual methods" he'd have used to keep a fever lower were not available. He devised an excellent plan. This history is not incorrect: wikipedia has lied about the origins for political purposes.
The reason this is important is it was not theorty it was infact the first practical HVAC system in use and today's designs still use the same principle (but not the same refrigerant). THE CITATION: from historian documentary James Burke's "How the Universe Changed" series.
I editing that in the main article - IT WAS CANCEL CULTURED.
I EDITING IN THE ARTICLE "air conditioning is not just for comfort", and quickly listed major impact of society: such as keeping distributed food cool
THAT ALSO WAS DELETED
wikipedia is a worthless piece of trash— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:143:480:a4c0:4ecc:6aff:fe8e:47d ( talk • contribs)
The article presents two contradictory claims:
If B cannot be backed up with a reliable source, it has to be removed. Arminden ( talk) 18:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
@ PeterEastern: hi. I found out, and added to the text, that Gates died months before his house was finished, so that his A/C might never have been used. Maybe that's what was meant. Minding how absolutely huge the 1914 device was, I guess it was also meant for the whole house, so 'central', too. I'm curious now what you'll find out. If nothing comes out of your search, please consider putting the 1933 story back in, with the claim to be the first presented as just that, a claim. It's a good information apart for that unclear or contradictory point. Thanks, Arminden ( talk) 23:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
The structure of this article does seem a bit bonkers to me at present. My guess is that is is still showing its heritage as being a merge some time back of two articles (air conditioning and air conditioners).
By way of example, here is a quick review of the top level headings:
Personally I think we should consider reorganising the article into a series of top level sections heading for each technique, ie the first top-level heading for 'Air Conditioners', and then others for the other major methods discussed. All the relevant content for each method can then be organised until the relevant heading. In my view this process may expose that the article is primarily about air conditioners, but that is something we can come back to in due course possibly.
I will be interested in other people's thoughts.
-- PeterEastern ( talk) 15:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
The section on ″mini-splits″ says such systems ″... typically supply conditioned and heated air to a single or a few rooms...″. Does this not describe a ducted system? I would think a ductless system would supply a conditioned fluid to be passed through a HX in that single room. Air already in that room would be passed over the other side of that HX, warming or cooling it. No supplying of air (and no ducts) required.
What I came here to find was what sort of fluid is pumped to that in-room HX, whether a phase-change occurs there (so different return plumbing is required), if high-pressure plumbing is required, and finally whether it is a challenge to make that pluming flexible enough that attached devices (compressor/condenser, HX) can be moved a bit for servicing or accessing adjacent surfaces. Can enough heat be moved by, say, water, to supply the in-room HX? I doubt it, but have no experience with these devices and don't know. And I don't think the article answers the questions.
I also wonder what is ″mini″ about a ductless system. Are there maxi-splits? Captain Puget ( talk) 00:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
There are some floor standing air conditioners that exists and are similar to split types and found on some countries SugarMash ( talk) 07:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
user:Reywas92 adding unrelated edits to the article. The said section talks about air source heat pumps only, and these known to loose heating performance below 5*C, because ice forms on the outdoor unit heat exchangers and blocks airflow. זור987 ( talk) 14:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)