**11. Conclusion**

The energy indicators of the GWBC zone are much lower (**Table 3**). The specific

, and the power of the cooling system is determined by the sum of the inflows of

Due to the low compactness of the accommodation of patients in the treatment area, the GWBC thermal efficiency coefficient was 0.49. Under conditions of a single-seat installation, the thermal efficiency coefficient was 0.71, which indicates a more rational expenditure of energy. This is clearly illustrated by the histogram of the structure of the heat load on the cooling system of the IWBC and GWBC zones

In single-seat installations, the heat storage capacity of the thermal fencing makes a significant contribution to the heat load, due to which the share of heat removed from thermal insulation reaches 24%. At the beginning of each procedure, a single-seat cab is filled with atmospheric air, which heats the inner surface of the thermal insulation. When implementing the GWBC technology, the heat load from the insulation is insignificant means of 9%, but the convective heat supply is 24%. The negative impact of convective heat transfer is determined by a large share of

The data in **Table 3** do not allow giving an unambiguous preference for a particular technology. This is due to the fact that all indicators are related to the volume unit of the WBC zone, while the technological task of the process is to cool the surface of the patient's body shell. If we calculate the specific heat load values and the expenditure of energy for cooling a unit of the shell surface (**Table 4**), the advantages of the IWBC technology become indisputable. According to all energy indicators, the IWBC technology is 1.5 times more efficient than the GWBC process.

, the mean heat load on the cooling system is 15.6 kW/

heat input is *Q*<sup>Σ</sup> = 566 kJ/m3

*Low-temperature Technologies*

heat into the main cab and lock chamber.

the free space in the low-temperature zone.

*The structure of the heat load on the cooling system zones IWBC and GWBC.*

**Indicators IWBC GWBC**

*Q*Σ*=f* <sup>1</sup>, kJ/m2 629 913 *Q*5*=f* <sup>1</sup>,*Q*5*=f* <sup>1</sup>*,* kW/hour/m2 0.67 0.92 *GLN=f* <sup>1</sup>, kg/m2 2.34 3.24 *GLN=f* <sup>1</sup>*F1*, kg/m2 3.77 5.18

m3

(**Figure 13**).

**Figure 13.**

**Table 4.**

**154**

*Energy features of devices for IWBC and GWBC.*

The performed analysis of the healthcare and energy efficiency of the two options for the implementation of the WBC technology allows us to reasonably give preference to individual procedures that not only combine high healthcare efficiency with relatively low expenditure of energy but also to a greater extent correspond to the traditional principle of individuality of therapeutic techniques.

The effectiveness of WBC technology depends on the choice of the duration of contact with cryogenic gas. The minimum duration of WBC procedure at the optimum gas temperature (130°С) is 120 s. Meanwhile, one should remove 440 kJ/m<sup>2</sup> with an average intensity of at least 2.4 kW/m<sup>2</sup> and spend not less than 1.7 kg/m2 of liquid nitrogen on heat removal. The electric drive of the cooling system of WBC zone should have an average power of at least 9.3 kW/m<sup>2</sup> , and in the case of using nitrogen cooling system, the cryoagent consumption should be not less than 2.4 kg/m<sup>2</sup> .
