international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551

available at www.sciencedirect.com

w w w . i i fi i r . o r g

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrefrig

Review

Refrigeration with ammonia

Andy Pearson*
Star Refrigeration Ltd., Glasgow G46 8JW, UK

article info abstract

Article history: Ammonia is widely used as a refrigerant in industrial systems for food refrigeration, distri-
Received 11 August 2007 bution warehousing and process cooling. It has more recently been proposed for use in
Received in revised form applications such as water chilling for air-conditioning systems but has not yet received
22 November 2007 widespread acceptance in this field. This review paper assesses the reasons why ammonia
Accepted 23 November 2007 is so popular in industrial systems, the reasons why it is deemed less suitable for other ap-
Published online 16 January 2008 plications and the possible benefits at local, national and international levels that might be
gained by more general acceptance of ammonia as a refrigerant. The paper also considers
Keywords: other possible applications which might benefit from the use of ammonia as refrigerant.
Ammonia ª 2007 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
Refrigeration system
Survey
Refrigerant
Safety
Regulations
Development

Le froid à ammoniac
Mots clés : Ammoniac ; Système frigorifique ; Enquête ; Frigorigène ; Sécurité ; Réglementation ; Développement

1. Introduction applications where there is no technically and economically

The continued refinement of our understanding of climate
science combined with increased concerns on many levels
about energy consumption has created an unprecedented
requirement for the development of efficient refrigeration sys-
tems with minimal impact on the environment. If HFC refrig-
erants are to be substituted, as seems to be the case in several
European countries, or even if their use is to be constrained to
viable alternative, then it is essential that the chemicals
used in their stead satisfy some fundamental requirements.
They must be no less energy efficient than the HFCs that
they replace. They must be proven to be safe, both for the
immediate neighbourhood and for the global environment.
They must be simple and cost-effective to use, they must be
readily available and ideally they must not require any signif-
icantly new or unfamiliar technology.

* Tel.: þ44 141 638 7916; fax: þ44 141 638 8111.
E-mail address: apearson@star-ref.co.uk
0140-7007/$ – see front matter ª 2007 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2007.11.011
546 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551
Nomenclature
 3
a moles per unit volume at 25 C: 40.87 (mol m )
A dangerous toxic load (DTL) (–)
c speed of sound in gas (m s1)
C gas concentration in atmosphere (ppmv or
mg m3)
CoP coefficient of performance (kW/kW)
M molar mass (g mol1)
n toxicity exponent (–)
P pressure (bar gauge)
R universal gas constant: 8.314472 (J mol1 K1)
T temperature (K)
t exposure time (min)
Ammonia presents several challenges in this respect, if it is
truly to be considered to be an alternative to HFCs. The max-
imum charge permitted in an occupied space is defined by
the practical limit, also known as the practical charge limit,
for the refrigerant (EN-378:2007, 2007). If the charge exceeds
the practical limit, and in the majority of cases for ammonia
plant it does, then restrictions must be placed on the location
of the compressor equipment and gas detection must be
fitted, linked to appropriate emergency ventilation. Consider-
ation must also be given to the flammable limits for ammonia.
If it is possible for the concentration in air in the machinery
room to reach a level of 20% of the lower flammable limit
then additional precautions must be taken. In some interna-
tional safety codes, for example the European Standard
EN-378, automatic isolation of the electrical supply to the ma-
chinery room is required. In other safety codes, for example
ASHRAE-15 (2001), very high emergency ventilation rates, of-
ten exceeding one air change per minute, are mandated. The
safety codes are generally conservative in their approach,
but sensible. For example they recognise that, provided access
to the area containing ammonia plant is restricted to person-
nel with some basic knowledge of emergency safety proce-
dures and provided occupants are not restricted in their
movements there is no need to install gas detectors for human
safety, because the strong smell of ammonia provides suffi-
cient warning of its presence at concentrations well below
the danger zone. Ammonia is both flammable and toxic, but
despite the hazards implicit in its use as a refrigerant, over
100 years of experience and refinement in the industrial
refrigeration field has produced a clear understanding of
what needs to be done to avoid accidents. In general, if the
requirements of the existing safety codes are followed,
ammonia systems are very efficient, reliable and safe. This
makes them more attractive for large industrial refrigeration
systems than fluorocarbon alternatives for which the costs
of installation and operation are likely to be higher.
2. Implications of the properties of
ammonia for system efficiency
The properties which make ammonia so attractive as a refrig-
erant are well documented and clearly understood. It has an
Vi volume ratio (–)
Greek symbols
DP differential pressure (bar)
Pi pressure ratio (–)
g index of compression (–)
4 refrigerant concentration limit (mass) (mg m3)
c refrigerant concentration limit (volume) (ppmv)
Subscripts
c condenser
crit critical
e evaporator
i ratio
ideal for an ideal gas
extremely high latent heat, second only to water in commonly
recognised fluids, and therefore provides more refrigerating
effect per unit mass flow than any other refrigerant used in
traditional vapour compression systems. The relatively low
gas density of ammonia, which is a result of its low molecular
weight, predicates increased compressor swept volume in
comparison with the heavier fluorocarbon refrigerants, but
the combination of latent heat and density mean that the
volumic refrigerating effect of ammonia is almost identical
to that of HCFC-22 at typical operating conditions, namely
about 60% higher than that of HFC-134a and 60% lower than
that of R-410A. Ammonia also has a very high critical temper-
ature, comparable to HC-600a and only exceeded by CFC-11
and HCFC-123. This makes ammonia, unlike all of the HFC
refrigerants and refrigerant blends, particularly well suited
to use in air-cooled equipment in high ambient temperatures.
The speed of sound in an ideal gas is given by the equation
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
gRT
cideal ¼ : (1)
M
It follows that cideal will be a higher value for a low molar
mass. The acoustic velocity for ammonia is much higher
than for all other refrigerants. This means that higher gas
velocities can be used in the design of pipe, valves and fittings
without incurring excessive losses. At 10  C the acoustic
velocity for ammonia is 397.5 m s1 whereas for HFC-134a it
is 146.9 m s1 and for R-404A it is 143.4 m s1. This also has im-
plications for compressor design, where the efficiency losses
associated with inlet and discharge valves are much lower
for ammonia (Anon., 2007).
The combination of high acoustic velocity and high latent
heat results in remarkably small liquid pipe sizes for ammonia
compared to HFCs. Likewise the size of the expansion orifice
required to control the refrigerant flow is very small. This
can create a challenge in designing low capacity ammonia
systems because the very small diameter expansion orifice
is easily blocked. If a capillary tube expansion device is used
then it is better to make it longer than the equivalent for
HFCs, rather than to reduce the diameter and risk blockages.
The effect on theoretical system efficiency can be clearly
seen in Table 1 (Pearson, 2005a). The efficiency is based on
a theoretical cycle described in the ASHRAE Handbook of
2001 with compressor efficiencies and pipeline pressure
losses assumed to be equal in all systems. The key difference
 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551 547

compressor selection, or within limits through the use of an

Table 1 – Comparative refrigerant performance
automatically variable volume ratio (Vi) mechanism. It should
No. Name CoP be noted that for most compressors the limits of range of
R-717 Ammonia 4.84 automatic Vi adjustment are less than can be achieved in
R-290 Propane 4.74 customised machines. For example the range of variable Vi
R-600 Butane 4.68 might be from 2.8 to 4.8 for a given model of compressor,
R-22 Chlorodifluoromethane 4.65 but by specifying a very small, fixed discharge port a Vi of 5.8
R-134a Tetrafluoroethane 4.60
can be achieved. Likewise by modifying the profile of the slide
R-407C R-32/R-125/R-134a (23/25/52) 4.51
valve to increase the area of the discharge port the volume
R-410A R-32/R-125 (50/50) 4.41
R-404A R-125/R-143a/R-134a (44/52/4) 4.21 ratio can be reduced to as little as 2.1. It is therefore important
R-744 Carbon dioxide 2.96 for compressors operating over a large temperature lift to se-
lect as high a ratio as possible, particularly as the ideal volume
Based upon a standard operating cycle of 258 K evaporating
ratio for a compressor operating at these conditions is far
temperature, 303 K condensing temperature, 0 K subcooling and
0 K superheat. higher than the maximum that the compressor geometry
will allow. The pressure ratio for an ammonia compressor op-
erating at 30  C suction and 35  C discharge is 11.34, suggest-
between the refrigerants listed is in the size of the irreversibil- ing that the ideal volume ratio is 6.04. For the same conditions
ity losses in the expansion process, which in turn is a function with R-134a the pressure ratio is 10.46, indicating an ideal vol-
of the reduced pressure (the ratio of operating pressure to ume ratio of 7.57 when the maximum that the geometry will
critical pressure). Table 2 gives the reduced pressures for the allow is 5.8 as stated previously, or 4.8 if variable Vi is used.
evaporating and condensing conditions of the refrigerants There is not such an obvious connection between refriger-
listed in Table 1 and also gives the pressure ratio, the ideal ra- ant choice and compressor isentropic efficiency although the
tio of suction to discharge volume and the pressure difference. following points should be noted. As previously stated the
It can be seen that carbon dioxide works closer to the critical high acoustic velocity of ammonia reduces the irreversible
point than any other refrigerant, with high pressure differ- losses in compressor valves so a smaller port size can be
ences and low pressure ratios. Ammonia shows lower reduced used for a given refrigerating duty. The relatively high volumic
pressures, implying good prospects for high efficiency, than refrigerating effect for ammonia, comparable with R-22 and
all the others except butane, which is exceptionally low. exceeded only by R-410A and R-744 in the common refriger-
Pressure ratio is a key consideration in the efficiency of ants, means that frictional losses and parasitic loads are rela-
reciprocating compressors because it determines, in conjunc- tively low for ammonia compressors. However comparison
tion with the clearance volume, the amount of re-expansion between refrigerants is difficult because lower pressure refrig-
that occurs as the piston draws gas into the cylinder, and erants such as R-123 tend to use different compressor types,
hence the volumetric efficiency of the compressor. In compar- and the most important conclusion is that a compressor
ison leakage past the piston rings is at least an order of optimised for one refrigerant type is unlikely to give as good
magnitude less significant. In screw compressors the pressure performance with another. For example a reciprocating
ratio indicates what the ideal volume ratio is, which in turn for compressor will require different valve designs for ammonia
a given compressor geometry will determine whether the gas and fluorocarbons in order to maximise the isentropic
is over- or under-compressed. However in screw compressors, efficiency in each case.
provided the geometry is suitable for the pressure ratio, the Ammonia tends to cope better with contaminants such as
pressure difference is a more significant factor in establishing water and oil than fluorocarbon refrigerants. Water will accu-
the volumetric efficiency as it affects the quantity of gas pass- mulate in the low pressure side of the system and will have an
ing from discharge to suction past the rotor tip seals and adverse effect on system efficiency (Cotter et al., 2007), but in
through the ‘‘blowhole’’ (the gap between the rotors). Suitable general it will not prevent the plant from operating, whereas
compressor geometry is achieved either through correct in an R-22 plant excess water will freeze at the expansion
valve and block it. Gigiel and Evans (2007) report that the
combined effect of oil contamination, water and compressor
wear on a large ammonia freezer plant which had been
extended several times over many years, had been to increase
Table 2 – Reduced pressures and pressure ratio for the energy consumption by 43%. However they noted that
Te [ 258 K and Tc [ 303 K even in this poor condition the plant was more efficient than
No. Pe/Pcrit Pc/Pcrit Pi Vi DP (bar) an equivalent R-22 system with electric defrost would be
when new.
R-717 0.021 0.103 4.95 3.22 9.3
R-290 0.068 0.253 3.71 2.97 7.9
R-600 0.015 0.074 5.03 3.16 2.3
R-22 0.059 0.238 4.03 3.02 8.9 3. Safety considerations
R-134a 0.040 0.189 4.71 3.79 6.0
R-407C 0.055 0.247 4.52 3.56 8.4 The toxic effect of ammonia is dependent upon the level of
R-410A 0.102 0.399 3.92 2.95 13.4
concentration in the atmosphere and on the length of time
R-404A 0.097 0.381 3.93 3.15 10.6
the exposure lasts. A chart is shown in Fig. 1 which enables
R-744 0.309 0.974 3.15 1.97 49.1
the time and concentration to be assessed in the event of an
548 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551
1000 5% probability of damage
5% lethal probability
50% lethal probability
Service Technician threshold
Exposue time (minutes)
Miljokontrollen request
100
10
1 room, which has a gross volume of 24 m3, the maximum
10 100 1000 10000 100000
Atmospheric concentration (mg m-3)
Fig. 1 – Ammonia concentration exposure limits, adapted
from Lindborg (2006).
industrial accident (Lindborg, 2006). The chart was created by
the Swedish National Defence Research Establishment for use
in toxic release scenario modelling and is based on the litera-
ture review, tests and experience. The line on the left of the
diagram corresponds to the maximum concentration that
can be sustained by a susceptible population (the elderly, in-
firm and very young) without sustaining injury and the two
lines on the right correspond to various risks of fatality in
the same susceptible population. The shorter line in the
centre of the graph is used to determine the risk for techni-
cians engaged in service activity. If the concentration exceeds
that indicated by the line then it is probable that some form of
medical treatment will be required. It should be noted that the
concentration figures used in Fig. 1 are in mg/m3.
The following equation (adapted from EN-378:2007, 2007)
can be used to convert the atmospheric concentration from
mass per unit volume, g/m3, to a volumetric ratio, ppm by
volume, assuming a temperature of 25  C:
4  103
c¼ : (2)
aM
For ammonia, with a molar mass of 17 g/mol, this simplifies
to
4 ¼ 0:7c:
In a study for the Carlsberg Brewery in Copenhagen
(Lindborg, 2006) the Swedish Environment Agency (Miljo-
kontrollen) required confirmation that a concentration of
1200–1500 ppm would not be exceeded for more than 5 min.
This range is shown by the black horizontal line in Fig. 1, which
is slightly lower than the level used for risk assessment for
technical staff.
Ammonia is not considered suitable for use in domestic
refrigerators or air-conditioners because it is not compatible
with the materials commonly used in these systems, particu-
larly copper, but also because the practical limit results in
extremely low quantities for the maximum charge. The
practical limit is derived from the IDLH value published by
the United States National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH, 1994), which for ammonia was reduced
from 500 ppm to 300 ppm in 1996. It should be noted however
that the practical limit for ammonia commonly quoted in
safety standards of 0.00035 kg/m3 is based upon the old IDLH
of 500 ppm under ‘‘grandfather clauses’’ in the standards.
These are clauses where a previously agreed value is retained
because it is in common usage, even after the basis for the
original calculation of the value has changed. IDLH is defined
as the maximum concentration at which escape will not be
impaired by 30 min exposure, which is deemed to be repre-
sentative of conditions found in the workplace for industrial
installations. However in the domestic context for typical
small kitchen dimensions of 2 m wide  4 m  long  3 m
high this definition for IDLH seems excessive. In this typical
charge of ammonia permitted would be 8.4 g. It seems
unlikely that it would require 30 min to escape from this
room in the event of a bad smell of ammonia: 1 min seems
a more reasonable estimate, and 5 min would be a very
conservative allowance.
The effect of large doses of toxic chemicals on humans is
difficult to study directly. Values for lethal doses for humans
based on laboratory tests need to be extrapolations from tests
on other species or from lower doses on humans. Field expe-
rience from incidents is never sufficiently well documented
and the estimates of exposure levels suffered are subject to
wide margins of error. In particular it has been noted that
humans have a higher respiratory rate than animals in acci-
dent or emergency situations. It is therefore right to take a con-
servative approach to these values. In the method proposed by
Fairhurst and Turner (1993) a ‘‘Specified Level of Toxicity’’
(SLOT) is determined from available data extrapolated to
humans. The SLOT dangerous toxic load (DTL or SLOT DTL)
is denoted as A. This is usually calculated from the concentra-
tion that would result in the onset of fatality in the most
vulnerable members of the exposed population and can be
correlated to exposure at a given concentration for a specified
time by the simple equation
A ¼ Cn t; (4)
where C is the atmospheric concentration, n is a substance-
specific exponent and t is the exposure time. In the case of
ammonia the SLOT DTL is 3.78  108 and the exponent is 2
(Anon., 2006). It follows that the maximum concentration
related to a 5 min exposure for this toxic load is 8695 ppm. A
(3)
higher toxic load, termed as the Significant Likelihood of
Death (SLOD) can also be calculated. For SLOD the DTL is
equivalent to the concentration likely to result in fatality for
50% of the exposed population. A value of 1.03  109 is given
for ammonia, which results in a calculated maximum concen-
tration for 30 min exposure of 5859 ppm. Using the concept of
the dangerous toxic load for the original IDLH values gives
a value for A of 7.5  106. When these values are considered
in the domestic context two things are clear. Firstly, it seems
unlikely, given the high latent heat of ammonia, that the total
system charge would be able to transfer from within the
system as liquid to vapour distributed throughout the room
in 1 min, or even 5 min. The more likely scenario is that
a sudden leak behind the refrigerator would diffuse through
the room at a slower rate. Secondly applying Eq. (4) to the
30 min ‘‘grandfathered’’ practical limit value for 1 min and
5 min exposures gives values of 2740 ppm and 1225 ppm,
 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551
respectively. If these values were adopted for domestic
circumstances, characterised by small charge systems in rela-
tively small rooms, then the maximum charge allowed would
be 45 g and 20 g, respectively. These ammonia charge values
seem low compared to the typical charge of refrigerant in a do-
mestic refrigerator with R-134a as the refrigerant, but when
the liquid densities are compared the actual difference in re-
frigerant quantity is considerably less than it appears at first
sight. The density of liquid R-134a at 20  C is 1219 kg/m3,
whereas for ammonia it is almost exactly half, at 609.7 kg/
m3. If the maximum charge of a large domestic refrigerator
is taken to be 100 g of R-134a (Clodic et al., 1999) then the
equivalent design would require 50 g of ammonia. It is not un-
reasonable to conclude that minor alterations to the con-
denser, liquid line and evaporator could achieve a charge of
45 g and to speculate that further optimisation might achieve
a charge of 20 g. Furthermore the choice of material would not
present a problem provided a hermetic design of unit was
used and the ammonia was completely free of moisture
when the unit was charged, so that there would be no reaction
between the ammonia and the copper in the system (Anon.,
2005; Hansen, 2006).
The comparison of the Specified Level of Toxicity, Signifi-
cant Likelihood of Death and Immediately Dangerous to Life
and Health concentrations over a 120 min time period is
shown in Fig. 2. It is clear that it would be necessary to remain
in the concentration level calculated for a 1 min IDLH for
50 min in order to reach the SLOT value. It is highly improba-
ble that this concentration level could be sustained for 50 min.
For comparison of Figs. 1 and 2 the conversion factor given in
Eq. (3) must be used. This shows that the levels used by the
Swedish National Defence Research Establishment are gener-
ally conservative, and equate to an exposure concentration for
a 30 min period of 240 ppm, 20% lower than the NIOSH revised
IDLH and less than half of the older figure.
It is unlikely that there will be any move towards the
adoption of ammonia in domestic refrigerators in the near
future although it would appear to be technically feasible
and of low risk, because the use of isobutane and propane/
isobutane mixtures has been comprehensively demonstrated
to be safe, with millions of units now in use. However with in-
creasing interest in heat pumps there might be a role for the
unique properties of ammonia in domestic heat pumps
1000
onset of
fatality in
Exposue time (minutes)
susceptible
members
of the
population 50% fatality rate
100
10
Likely to cause injury
new IDLH old IDLH
1 presence on sites in Canada with more than 25 kW connected
10 100 1000
Atmospheric concentration (ppm)
Fig. 2 – SLOT and SLOD concentrations with IDLH values,
calculated values.
549
alongside the propane and carbon dioxide systems already
on the market. This high efficiency system would be more
likely to be successfully adopted if the practical limit for in-
stallations were based on the pragmatic approach outlined
above, giving a significant energy advantage in the domestic
heat pump market compared to fluorocarbon systems.
4. Regulatory considerations
Safety regulations concerning refrigeration can be traced back
to the early years of the 20th century. Since then the codes and
standards have diversified. There is now such a wide range of
national regulatory constraints on the use of ammonia, even
within the European Union, that it must be concluded that
they all cannot be correct. In France the use of ammonia in
refrigeration systems is governed by the government agency
DRIRE (Direction Régionale de l’Industrie de la Recherche et
de l’Environnement). This stipulates that systems must be
notified to the regional authorities if they are expected to
contain more than 150 kg of ammonia and the design must
be subject to third party examination and approval if the
charge is greater than 1500 kg. One of the most unattractive
aspects of the French regulations is the requirement that
any modification to the plant must also be approved by the
regional authority. This gives sufficient doubt as to the ease
with which the plant may be amended to suit future require-
ments to persuade many users to avoid ammonia completely.
As a result the plants selected, typically using secondary
refrigerants or fluorocarbons, are less efficient in operation,
and so the users are placed in an uncompetitive position
compared to other manufacturers in Europe. As energy prices
rise this discrepancy becomes more significant.
In the United States the use of ammonia in industrial
facilities is governed by the Occupational Safety and Health Ad-
ministration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) through various sub-sections of OSHA 29 CFR part 1910
and EPA 40 CFR part 68. In addition the Department of Home-
land Security (DHS) is currently formulating additional regula-
tions to cope with the threat of terrorist attack on industrial
facilities. It is not yet known how many industrial refrigeration
facilities will be affected by these new rules, although it is likely
that only the very largest facilities will be covered. It is surpris-
ing, given the highly toxic nature of the products of combustion
C SLOD
of fluorocarbons (Pearson, 2007), that large plants using HCFC
C SLOT and HFC refrigerants are also not covered.
C IDLH 500ppm
C IDLH 300ppm
In the United Kingdom the use of ammonia in industrial
refrigeration facilities is not covered by specific rules, but
rather is included in various sections of general Health and
Safety at Work regulations. There is a much greater scope
for end-users to develop their own methodology for providing
a safe system of working to their employees and there is much
less bureaucracy than in either the French or the American
systems. In other countries there are various additional
requirements, for example, the need for permanent operator
10000 100000
shaft power on the compressors.
A review of national accident statistics shows that there is
no appreciable difference in the fatality rate in these
countries, despite the large variation in approaches to safety
550 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551
legislation. There are so few fatal accidents, and such wide
variations in system size and type that it is difficult to draw
any conclusion, however the fatality rate due to ammonia
refrigeration in the United States of America and the United
Kingdom is in the range 0.5–2.5 deaths per billion people per
year (Pearson, 2007). It appears that this level is much the
same in other European countries, and is similar to the level
of fatalities due to accidents with fluorocarbon refrigerants,
with liquid nitrogen and with carbon dioxide in the food
industry, although this includes non-refrigeration uses such
as CO2 recovery from brewing and CO2 injection in soft drinks.
By comparison the rate of deaths by lightning strikes in the
United States is in the range 32–48 deaths per billion per year.
According to EN-378:2007 (2007) ammonia is not permitted
for use in direct air-conditioning systems for human comfort
(where the refrigerant-containing parts are in contact with the
air being cooled), but it can be used as the refrigerant in chillers
where the chilled water is pumped to air handling units. The
standard requires that any such system with an ammonia
charge greater than 500 kg must have ammonia detectors fitted
to the water circuit. There is also a requirement for automatic air
purgers on all secondary circuits, but this fails to discriminate
between the soluble refrigerants like ammonia or carbon diox-
ide and the insoluble, such as fluorocarbons and hydrocarbons.
When the wide range of legal positions from country to
country is contrasted with the homogeneity of the fatality rates
across all industries it seems that there is no strong correlation
between strict regulation and fatality rate. It is more likely that
there is a certain rate at which the population as a whole will do
something unforeseen and inadvertently dangerous. This leads
to the conclusion that regulations which discourage the use of
ammonia, as is the case in France, the Netherlands and Italy,
provide no safety benefit, but penalise the manufacturers in
these countries by leading them to adopt more expensive, less
efficient systems for their refrigeration plant, for no benefit.
5. Implications for the design of ammonia
systems for new markets
The benefits of using ammonia for water chilling applications
have been described by several authors in recent years
(Pearson, 2004). Apart from the efficiency improvement, said
to be in the range 9–17% (Tychsen, 2003), there is also a signifi-
cant improvement in heat transfer, both in the evaporator and
the condenser (Hrnjak and Park, 2007). This offers the opportu-
nity to make efficient chillers in smaller footprints, particularly
when air-cooled condensers are used. The major constraint
identified by Palm (2007) was that components for small am-
monia systems are difficult to source. Continued development
of these components, including electronic expansion valves,
low charge evaporators and hermetic compressors would
make it much easier to use ammonia in small systems. In larger
systems there is significant benefit in air-cooled systems if
a method of evaporative cooling is used to lower the dry bulb
temperature in very warm weather. Such systems use a sparge
on the condenser air inlet to pre-cool the air. It would be possi-
ble, with an air-cooled ammonia condenser fitted with such
a system, to arrange for the fans to run in reverse and the
sparge to be activated in the event of a leak on the condenser.
This would prevent the loss of ammonia to the neighbourhood,
although the resultant ammonia solution would need to be
trapped rather than allowing it to run to drainage.
As ammonia-based water chillers are adopted for use in
commercial buildings, there is likely to be an increased use
of ammonia in commercial scale heat pumps. The high latent
heat and high critical temperature of ammonia relative to all
other refrigeration fluids make it particularly suited to the
heating of low pressure hot water (LPHW) systems for building
heating applications, where there has been no natural
successor to R-12 as a heat pump fluid.
The concept of a semi-hermetic ammonia compressor has
been proved in several ways, but at present there is very little
demand principally because most ammonia systems are
installed on site using welded steel pipework, and do not
achieve sufficient levels of cleanliness to permit the use of
semi-hermetics. If the stator is kept out of the refrigerant
flow, for example using a canned motor, then the overall
motor efficiency is low. As ammonia is introduced to new
markets which lend themselves more readily to packaged
systems, for example smaller water chillers, packaged air
handling units for process cooling and heat pumps, there
will be an increased use of factory built, sealed systems. In
this style of equipment there would be no disadvantage in
using a good semi-hermetic design.
6. Implications for the use of ammonia
in traditional markets
There is very little motivation to do research on the use of
ammonia in existing applications because it is believed that
it is already well understood, so there is very little to learn.
This is a rather simplistic view, and in fact there are many
aspects of traditional systems that would benefit greatly
from further enhancement. The adaptation of the recently
commercialised technology of electromagnetic bearings, cur-
rently only applied to centrifugal compressors with R-134a
(Pearson, 2005b), would enable oil-free ammonia systems to
be constructed. This could improve the overall heat transfer
performance of air coolers by up to 50% (Shen and Groll,
2003) and would reduce the risk of performance degradation
over time. There would also be significant advantages to be
gained in evaporator design to minimise refrigerant charge.
There are currently no commercial applications of microchan-
nel heat exchangers to ammonia evaporator duties, partly be-
cause the available size of heat exchanger elements is rather
small for the current ammonia market, and partly because
the combination of ammonia, water and lubricant could cause
blockage of the microchannels. It is also likely that ammonia
will lose ground in some of these traditional applications to
carbon dioxide; particularly when the evaporating tempera-
ture is lower than 40  C. Under these conditions a cascade
carbon dioxide/ammonia installation is likely to be more effi-
cient than a two stage ammonia plant, and in plate freezers
particularly the high heat transfer and low pressure drop
combination offered by carbon dioxide is unbeatable (Pearson,
2005a). There is still a place for ammonia, as the high temper-
ature side of the cascade, where the charge can be greatly
reduced.
 international journal of refrigeration 31 (2008) 545–551
7. Conclusion
It seems counterintuitive to suggest that established safety
limits in the industrial sector should be relaxed for the domes-
tic market, but in the case of practical limits for ammonia the
use of a common standard for all sizes of equipment results in
an excessively cautious approach to allowable system charge.
There are grounds for adopting a more suitable approach for
the domestic market, without compromising on safety, in
order to facilitate the beneficial application of ammonia to
certain types of equipment such as air-to-air heat pumps. It
also seems that the application in national legislation of
particularly onerous constraints on the design and use of
ammonia systems does not deliver increased safety. In the
drive for increased efficiency it may also be appropriate to
consider a unified approach to safety legislation, at least at
a European level, to ensure that the best combination of
efficiency, safety, reliability and ease of use is achieved. It
seems that this combination is most likely to be delivered by
increased adoption of ammonia as a refrigerant.
references
ASHRAE Standard 15, 2001. Safety Standard for Refrigeration
Systems. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta.
Anon., 2007. Ammonia as a Refrigerant, third ed. International
Institute of Refrigeration, Paris.
Anon., 2006. Methods of Approximation and Determination of
Human Vulnerability for Offshore Major Accident Hazard
Assessment. SPC/Tech/OSD/30. Health and Safety Executive,
London.
Anon., 2005. Innovation in Small Capacity Ammonia
Refrigeration Plants, EU Contract No ENK6-CT-2002-30020,
Final Report. Institut für Luft-und Kältetechnik GmbH,
Dresden.
Cotter, D., Missenden, J., Maidment, G., 2007. Contaminants in
ammonia refrigeration systems. In: IIR Conference: Ammonia
Refrigeration Technology for Today and Tomorrow, Ohrid.
Clodic, D., Chang, Y.S., Pougin, A.M., 1999. Evaluation des fluides
frigorigènes à faible GWP pour le froid domestique et
551
commercial, les transports réfrigérés et la climatisation
automobile. Ecole de Mines, Paris.
EN-378:2007, 2007. Refrigerating Systems and Heat Pumps –
Safety and Environmental Requirements. Comité Européen de
Normalisation, Geneva.
Fairhurst, S., Turner, R.M., 1993. Toxicological assessments in
relation to major hazards. Journal of Hazardous Materials 33,
215–227 (Elsevier).
Gigiel, A., Evans, J., 2007. Experience of operating an older
ammonia plant and the energy consumption. In: IIR
Conference: Ammonia Refrigeration Technology for Today
and Tomorrow, Ohrid.
Hrnjak, P., Park, C.Y., 2007. In-tube heat transfer and pressure
drop characteristics of pure NH3 and CO2 in refrigeration
systems. In: IIR Conference: Ammonia Refrigeration
Technology for Today and Tomorrow, Ohrid.
Hansen, S., 2006. Experience with R723 in small refrigeration
systems. In: IIR Gustav Lorentzen Conference on Natural
Refrigerants, Trondheim.
Lindborg, A., 2006. Risk assessment on a large industrial
ammonia refrigeration system in Central Copenhagen,
Denmark. In: IIAR Annual Meeting, Reno.
Documentation for Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health
Considerations (IDLH). NTIS Publication No. PB-94-195047,
1994. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
Washington DC.
Pearson, A., 2005a. The Optimisation of Carbon Dioxide
Refrigeration Systems. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Pearson, A., 2005b. Chillers for Building Retrofit – Low Charge,
Leakproof, R-134a. Institute of Refrigeration Conference,
London.
Pearson, A., 2007. Designing and operating safe ammonia
refrigeration systems. In: XIIth European Convention on
Refrigeration, Milan.
Pearson, A., 2004. Assessment of life cycle climate performance
for chillers. In: IIR Gustav Lorentzen Conference on Natural
Refrigerants, Glasgow.
Palm, B., 2007. Ammonia in small capacity refrigeration and heat
pump systems. In: IIR Conference: Ammonia Refrigeration
Technology for Today and Tomorrow, Ohrid.
Shen, B., Groll, E., 2003. Critical Literature Review of Lubricant
Influence on Refrigerant Heat Transfer and Pressure Drop.
Report 21CR 611-20080. Air-conditioning and Refrigeration
Technology Institute, Arlington.
Tychsen, H., 2003. Comparing R-134a Chillers v Packaged
Ammonia Chillers for Air Conditioning Applications.
International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration,
Albuquerque.