Understanding Applications for Alternate Refrigerants...R-410A Like Capacity R-404A and R-407/22...

49
Understanding Applications for Alternate Refrigerants Ron Bonear Emerson Climate Technologies

Transcript of Understanding Applications for Alternate Refrigerants...R-410A Like Capacity R-404A and R-407/22...

  • Understanding Applications for Alternate Refrigerants

    Ron BonearEmerson Climate Technologies

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Evaluation Methodology

    Alternate Refrigerant Evaluation — Performance

    – Focus on Developing Fast/Flexible Refrigerant Release

    Sidney Refrigeration Engineering Team Developed Test

    Strategy for Simultaneous Approval of R-448A and R-449A

    – Equivalent Chemical Composition Between the Two

    Refrigerants

    Thermophysical Comparison, Miscibility and Compatibility

    Analysis Performed on R-448A/R-449A

  • UL Qualification Strategy

    Objective: Reduce UL Qualification Time

    – Due to Chemical Equivalency of Refrigerants, UL Agreed to Full Model Line

    Approvals of Both R-448A/R-449A by Testing Only R-448A

    – Testing Required to Show That R-448A MCC Amp Values Were ≤ +10%

    Above R-404A

    – In All Instances, R-448A Met This Criteria

    The Majority of MCC Values Fall Below That of R-404A

    – As a Result, R-448A Has Been Released Using Existing R-404A MCC Values

    By Utilizing This Approach, It Was Possible to Significantly Reduce the Total

    Number of Compressors Tested:

    8 Scroll Compressors

    6 Semi-Hermetic Compressors (4 Discus / 2 KEL)

  • Alternate Refrigerant Evaluation — Reliability

    – Evaluation of the Interaction of Refrigerants With Oil

    Miscibility/Solubility/Viscosity

    – Bearing Analysis Performed Using Mobility Analysis

    – Full Operating Envelope and Reliability (CFM) Testing

    Performed Using R-448A/R-449A

    R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Evaluation Methodology

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • Evaluation of Alternate Refrigerant Performance

    Evaluation of R-448A/R-449A Relative to Existing Medium-

    Pressure Refrigerants

    – Evaluate Equivalency of R-448A Relative to R-449A

    Evaluate Refrigerant Chemical Compositions

    – Evaluate R-448A Relative to R-404A and R-407A

    Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Pressure Differential

    – Density

    – Enthalpy

    Refrigerant Performance Testing Comparison

  • Evaluation of Refrigerant Chemical Composition

    R-448A/R-449A Relative Comparison

    – Both R-448A and R-449A are medium-pressure, A1 refrigerants

    Verify chemical composition ± 5%

    Honeywell R-448A Composition DuPont R-449A Composition

    R-32 (26%)

    R-125 (26%)

    R-134a (21%)

    1234yf (20%)

    1234ze (7%)

    Determination Made That the Two Refrigerants Are

    Effectively Chemically Equivalent

    R-32 (24%)

    R-125 (25%)

    R-134a (26%)

    1234yf (25%)

  • Evaluation of Refrigerant Pressure Differential

    Evaluate R-448A ∆P to R-404A/R-407A

    R-448A exhibits a lower pressure differential than R-404A. R-448A

    compressor loads will be lower.

    R-448a and R-407A have essentially identical pressure differentials.

  • Evaluation of Refrigerant Density

    Evaluate R-448A Density Relative to R-404A/R-407A

  • Evaluation of Refrigerant Enthalpy

    Evaluate R-448A Theoretical Enthalpy Relative to R-404A/R-407A

  • Scroll MT — Mid/Dew Point CapacityR-404A Versus R-407A/R-448A (20/70)

  • Scroll MT — Mid/Dew Point CapacityR-404A Versus R-407A/R-448A (20/120)

  • Scroll LT — Mid/Dew Point CapacityR-404A Versus R-407A/R-448A (-25/70)

  • Scroll LT — Mid/Dew Point CapacityR-404A Versus R-407A/R-448A (-25/105)

  • Scroll MT — Mid/Dew Point Weighted EERR-404A Versus R-407A/R-448A

  • Scroll LT – Mid / Dew Point Weighted EERR-404A Versus R-407A / R-448A

  • R-448A/R-449A Operating Envelopes —Summary and Conclusions

    Following Operating Envelope Testing and CFM, R-448A/R-449A Will

    Use Same Envelope as R-407A

    R-448A/R-449A Demonstrated Thermophysical Equivalence

    Discharge Line Temperatures Are Similar to But Slightly Higher Than

    R-407A at HCR/MDP Conditions

    – Reliability Testing Confirms Higher Temperatures at Envelope Corners

    Are Acceptable

    » Only Map Affected Is ZBK5 Envelope

    All R-448A/R-449A Are the Same Envelopes as R-407A

    Only Exception Is ZBK5 Envelope, With Slightly Reduced HCR

    Corner Point

  • Final R-448A/R-449A MT K5 Operating Envelope

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • Refrigerant Reliability Evaluation

    Refrigerant Reliability Assessment

    – Reliability

    Bearing Analysis

    – Miscibility

    – Solubility/Viscosity

    – Mobility Analysis

    DFMEA

    – High RPN Failure Modes Drive CFM Test Strategy

    CFM Testing Summary

  • Refrigerant Reliability Evaluation

    Reliability Development Envelope

  • Miscibility Evaluation

  • Viscosity Evaluation

  • Mobility Analysis of R-448A Relative to R-404A

  • R-448A/R-449A CFM Summary

    Evaluated Full Range of Compressors Using Standard Reliability

    Engineering Procedure

    Performed CFM Testing at Envelope Corner Points

    – HCR

    – MDP

    – High Load

    Flooded Start and Defrost Cycles Tested to Verify Miscibility

    – Ensure Full Hydrodynamic Bearing Film Thickness Following

    Refrigerant Washout

    Mobility Used to Validate Minimum Oil Film Thickness to

    Surface Finish Ratio (ʎ)

    – R-448A/R-449A Meets or Exceeds ʎ for R-404A

    All Scroll/Semi-Hermetic Compressors Passed Full Battery of CFM Testing

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • R-448A/R-449A Summary and Conclusions

    From R-448A/R-449A Qualification, the Sidney Refrigeration Engineering

    Team Has Utilized a Standardized Test Strategy for New Refrigerants

    - Comparative Evaluation of Refrigerant Properties

    - Full UL, Performance, Operating Maps and Reliability Testing

    Thermophysical Similarity of R-448A and R-449A Has Been Verified

    The Thermophysical Properties of R-448A Are Much Closer to

    R-407A Than R-404A

    - R-404A Is Much Denser Than R-448A; Higher Mass Flows

    - R-448A Exhibits Lower ∆P; Lower Bearing Loading Than R-404A

    - R-404A Capacity Significantly Greater Than R-448A at LT Conditions,

    Roughly Equivalent on MT Applications

  • R-448A/R-449A Summary and Conclusions

    R-448A/R-449A Operating Envelopes Are Equivalent to Current R-407A

    - Ref ZB*K5 HCR Condensing Will Be Slightly Reduced to

    Accommodate R-448A/R-449A and R407A on One Map

    Bearing Analysis Performed by Evaluating Miscibility/Viscosity, Loads,

    M Mobility Analysis and CFM

    Comprehensive R-448A/R-449A Performance and Reliability

    Evaluation Complete

    Captured Lessons Learned in Standardized Document

    - Utilized for All New Refrigerant Releases

    Accuracy and Completeness of Data for Both Performance and

    Reliability Are Assured

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • Update on R-513A/R-450A and R-452A

    Performance and Initial Reliability Evaluations Underway for Low-

    Pressure R-513A/R-450A (Europe and U.S.) and for Medium-Pressure

    R-452A (U.S., Transport Scroll Only)

    – Preliminary Performance Evaluation for Refrigerants Complete

    – Initial Reliability Assessments of Both R-452A and R-513A Indicate

    Higher Solubility Index May Pose Challenge for Compressor Boundary

    Lubrication

    Higher Solubility Reduces Oil Viscosity and May Affect Boundary

    Lubrication During Liquid Applications

    – Currently Evaluating Alternate, Higher Viscosity Oil as

    Countermeasure

  • R-450A/R-513A Refrigerant Performance —Capacity

  • R-450A/R-513A Refrigerant Performance —EER

  • R-452A Refrigerant Performance — Capacity

  • R-452A Refrigerant Performance — EER

  • Agenda

    Overview of R-448A/R-449A Refrigerant Development Methodology

    – Evaluation Strategy — R-448A /R-449A Refrigerants

    Performance Development

    – Thermophysical Comparison of Refrigerants

    – Refrigerant Performance

    Reliability Evaluation

    – Effect of New Refrigerants on Compressor Components

    – Reliability Assessment

    R-448A/R-449A Development Summary and Conclusions

    Brief Update on Alternate Refrigerants — R-450A/R-513A and R-452A

    Update on ECT’s Alternate Refrigerant Facilities Development Plan

  • Recap of Alternatives for Refrigeration Applications

    R-410A

    Like

    Capacity

    R-404A and

    R-407/22

    Like

    R-134a

    Like

    GWP Level

    400–675

    < 1,500

    ~600

    ~300

    HFO 1234yf

    HFO 1234ze

    ARM-42

    R-410A

    R-22

    R-407A

    R-407C

    R-407F, R-452A = XP44

    AR M-35

    0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

    Pressure

    or

    R-32/HFC/HFO

    Blends

    R-32/HFO

    Blends

    HFC/HFO

    BlendsR134a

    CO2

    R-404A

    R-507A

    DR2, N12, ARC 1

    R290

    NH3

    A1 – Non-Flammable

    A2L – Mildly Flammable

    A3 – Flammable

    R-123 Like

    (V. Low Pr.)

    (3922)

    R32

    R-32/HFO

    Blends

    R-448A = N40

    R-449A = DR33

    R-449B = ARM-32

    N20

    R-450A = N13

    R-513A = XP10

    R-444B = L20

    L40, DR7

    ARM-20b

    HDR110

    DR3

    ARM-20a

    R-446A, R-447A, ARM-71a

  • Emerson’s A3 / A2L Facilities Development Plan

  • Emerson’s A3 / A2L Facilities Development Plan

  • Emerson’s A3 / A2L Facilities Development Plan

  • Selecting a TXV for

    Use With R-448A /

    R-449A / R-513A

    Brad HopsonEmerson Climate Technologies

  • Selecting a TXV for

    Use With R-448A /

    R-449A / R-513A

    Brad HopsonEmerson Climate Technologies

  • TXV Selection Review

    1. Refrigeration Type

    2. Evaporator Temperature/Pressure

    3. Evaporator Capacity

    4. Condensing Temperature/Pressure

    5. Liquid Temperature

    6. Distributor Type (if used)

    Note: The valve is sized to the evaporator and not the compressor.

  • Glide and the p-h Diagram

    Zeotropic Blends Exhibit Glide

    Calculating Delta P at

    Expansion Device:

    – Bubble Point (Saturated

    Liquid) for Condensing

    Pressure

    – Dew Point (Saturated

    Vapor) for Evaporating

    Pressure

  • TXV Pressure Differential

    This Is Also the Delta P at the Expansion Device

    Lower Delta P Generally Lowers Valve Capacity

    In the Given Applications, the Change in Pressure Differential Is Very Small

  • Superheat Curves (and Other Secrets)

    Evaporator Temp.

    Supe

    rheat

    R-404A Bulb Charges Are NOT Optimized for R-448/449

    Superheat Settings MUST Be Adjusted

    At Low Temps, the Superheat Tends to Rise

  • Low-Temp. Valve Capacity Adjustment

    Low-Temp. Applications Require Larger Valves

    In Practice, Choose a Valve With 50% More Capacity

  • Summary

    Pressure Differential:

    – Use Bubble Point for Condensing Pressure

    – Use Dew Point for Evaporating Pressure

    R-513A — Use R-134A Tables

    R-448A/R-449A

    – Medium-Temp – Very Similar to R-404A

    – Low-Temp – Select Approximately 50% More Capacity

  • Thank You!

    DISCLAIMER

    Although all statements and information contained herein are believed to be accurate and reliable, they are presented without guarantee or

    warranty of any kind, expressed or implied. Information provided herein does not relieve the user from the responsibility of carrying out its

    own tests and experiments, and the user assumes all risks and liability for use of the information and results obtained. Statements or

    suggestions concerning the use of materials and processes are made without representation or warranty that any such use is free of patent

    infringement and are not recommendations to infringe on any patents. The user should not assume that all toxicity data and safety measures

    are indicated herein or that other measures may not be required.

    Questions?