Accepted Manuscript

An analysis on the comparison of low-GWP refrigerants to alternatively use in

mobile air-conditioning systems

Atilla G. Devecioğlu, Vedat Oruç

PII: S2451-9049(16)30023-3
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2017.02.002
Reference: TSEP 2

To appear in: Thermal Science and Engineering Progress

Received Date: 19 December 2016

Revised Date: 26 January 2017
Accepted Date: 15 February 2017

Please cite this article as: A.G. Devecioğlu, V. Oruç, An analysis on the comparison of low-GWP refrigerants to
alternatively use in mobile air-conditioning systems, Thermal Science and Engineering Progress (2017), doi: http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2017.02.002

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
An analysis on the comparison of low-GWP refrigerants to alternatively use in mobile air-

conditioning systems

Atilla G. Devecioğlu, Vedat Oruç*

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey

*Corresponding author, E-mail: voruc@dicle.edu.tr

Abstract

The results of an analysis are discussed in this paper considering R1234yf, R444A and R445A

refrigerants having low Global Warming Potential (GWP) which can be used in the mobile air

conditioning systems. The evaporation temperatures of −5°C and +5°C while condenser

temperatures of 30°C and 60°C were taken for the evaluations of thermodynamic properties

of the refrigerants. In the study, electrical power consumption of the system and COP values

were calculated considering thermodynamic properties determined for the points in the cycle

depending on the assumed system parameters. The system was considered to operate in a

steady-state cycle. The pressure loss through evaporator and condenser, and heat transfer

amounts through connecting tubes, expansion valve and compressor were neglected for the

computations. The computations have pointed out that while cooling capacity of R444A and

R445A were higher; their COP values were smaller compared to R1234yf because of their

increased consumption of electricity. Although COP of R444A is smaller compared to

R1234yf, it may be suggested that R444A can be utilized in air-conditioning systems of heavy

vehicles such as busses, trucks, and trains due to its decreased flammability risk by mixture

content.

Keywords: MAC systems, alternative refrigerant, flammability, COP, isentropic efficiency

1
Nomenclature

COP coefficient of performance

GWP global warming potential

h enthalpy, kJ·kg-1

h’ enthalpy for isentropic case, kJ·kg-1

 mass flow rate, kg·s-1

P pressure, kPa

Q cooling capacity, kW

T temperature, °C

Wel electrical power input to the system, kW

Ws energy consumed for constant entropy, kW


 volumetric flow rate at suction, m3·s-1

ηis isentropic efficiency

Subscripts

C compressor

con condenser

ev evaporator

in inlet

out outlet

1. Introduction

According to the instructions of EU F-Gas and mobile air conditioning (MAC), the

refrigerants with global warming potential (GWP) value less than 150 should be used

2
mandatorily in the automotive air-conditioning systems [1,2]. The number of refrigerants with

low GWP developed for using in automotive air conditioners has been increased in the several

decades. Along with this increase, it would be important to select the refrigerants with better

energy performances. The major problem of HFC based low GWP refrigerants produced as a

substitute for R134a is that they are flammable. Although low-GWP refrigerants are in the

high flammability class, they have proper values in terms of satisfying the gas regulations.

The common properties of some natural refrigerants of very low-GWP (such as CO2 and

ammonia) and hydrocarbon derivative refrigerants (e.g., propane and isobutane) are that they

have high flammability and toxic effect [3]. Hence, their application fields are limited to small

refrigeration systems only. Although recently developed HFO refrigerants have lower GWP

values, their flammability risk restricts using of these new refrigerants. The HFO/HFC

derived refrigerants are classified as flammable and non-flammable with respect to cases of

GWP<700 and GWP>700, respectively. ASHRAE has introduced mildly flammable gases

class and 2L code for these refrigerating fluids. Despite R1234yf has been passed through

previous safety tests, some of the vehicle manufactures do not prefer that refrigerant because

of its flammability risk. The investigations on R1234yf which is a HFO derived refrigerant

remarkably increase in recent years [4-6]. Most of the studies include experimental

comparison of R134a and R1234yf for different operating conditions. The common results of

the published papers suggest that both cooling capacity and COP decrease when R1234yf is

used in the system [4-10]. The similar conclusions were also obtained by experimental

investigations on R134a and R1234yf for MAC systems [11-15]. Prior to the experimental

study R134a and its alternatives were theoretically compared in order to estimate the proper

conditions and physical behavior [16,17]. Mota-Babiloni et al. [17] compared R134a and its

alternatives, they expressed according to the results that R444A had higher cooling capacity

than R134a. It is seen that most of the previous investigations were carried on alternative

3
refrigerants those may be used instead of R134a. Comparing and obtaining the related

information about low GWP refrigerants, which are inevitably used, should be very useful for

air conditioning applications. In this paper, some thermodynamic properties and energy

performances under different conditions were compared for the refrigerants of HFO based

R1234yf, and R444A, R445A which are the blend of HFO/HFC.

2. Characteristics of R444A, R445A and R1234yf

The mixing ratios by mass for the refrigerants used in the study are given in Table 1. R444A

blend consists of R1234ze(E), R152a and R32 refrigerants which are accepted as flammable

according to ASHRAE standards. Among the alternative refrigerants, R445A differs

favorably such that there are HFC derived non-flammable R134a and carbon dioxide (R744)

which is an inorganic fluid in its mixture content.

Table 1. Mixture composition of refrigerants

R1234yf R1234ze(E) R152a R32 R134a R744

R1234yf 100%

R444A 83% 5% 12%

R445A 85% 9% 6%

Some basic characteristics for the considered refrigerants are indicated in Table 2. As it can

be noted GWP values are less than 150 and all three refrigerants are in flammable class. It is

clear that R445A has higher critical temperature than R1234yf 10.5% and its critical pressure

is greater than the other ones as well. Some of the thermodynamic and transport

4
characteristics of the refrigerants shown in the tables and figures of this study were obtained

through Refprop software [18].

Table 2. Some characteristics of the investigated refrigerants

R1234yf R444A R445A

Boiling point at 1 atm (°C) -29.45 -23.3 -21.5

Critical temperature (°C) 94.7 101.2 104.7

Critical pressure (kPa) 3382 4235.80 4496.90

Critical density (kg⋅m-3) 475.55 481.93 468.93

GWP100 years 4 92 130

ASHRAE class A2L A2L A2L

The variations of saturation pressure with saturation temperature of the considered

refrigerants are shown in Fig. 1 for a temperature range of -40°C to 60°C. Although the

observed pressure behavior is similar for the refrigerants, the pressure of R445A at -15°C and

35°C is higher than that of R1234yf about 90% and 47%, respectively. Since it is expected the

higher saturation pressure in evaporator should be related to better results for some energy

parameters, R445A may be said to be more advantageous among the investigated refrigerants.

5
 2500
R1234yf
2000 R444A
R445A
Pressure (kPa)

1500

1000

500

0
-40 -15 10 35 60
Temperature (°C)

Fig. 1. The behavior of saturation pressure versus temperature for the studied refrigerants

The mass flow rate of the refrigerant which circulates in the evaporator is one of the important

parameters affecting the cooling capacity. The amount of refrigerant that would be charged

into the system decreases significantly with lower liquid density of refrigerating fluid [19].

The dependence of the refrigerants’ liquid density on temperature is demonstrated in Fig. 2.

As expected liquid density decreases with higher temperatures since volume is larger at a

greater temperature for a given mass causing lower density. It is obvious that R1234yf and

R444A gases exhibit nearly the same density versus pressure distribution, but R445A has

greater the density values by 4.3 to 6.4% compared to R1234yf. Hence, using R444A or

R445A refrigerant should lead to less gas charging to the system because of their smaller

liquid density values.

6
 1400
R1234yf
1300 R444A
Liquid density (kg/m3)
R445A
1200

1100

1000

900
-40 -15 10 35 60
Temperature (°C)

Fig 2. Variation of liquid density with temperature of study refrigerants

The higher liquid thermal conductivity, which is one of the transport properties of the gases,

causes more amount of heat transfer, thereby using smaller or more compact heat exchanger

directly corresponding to lower initial investment cost. The relationship between liquid

thermal conductivity and temperature for the studied refrigerants is presented in Fig. 3. First

of all, liquid thermal conductivity values of R444A and R445A refrigerants are close to each

other and evidently greater than those of R1234yf. This consequence expresses that utilizing

R444A and R445A may enable using smaller size of heat exchangers in the new designed air

conditioning systems. Note also that increasing temperature reduces thermal conductivity

values regardless of refrigerant type.

7
 120

Liquid thermal conductivity x 103

R1234yf
100 R444A
R445A
(W/mK)

80

60

40
-40 -15 10 35 60

Temperature (°C)

Fig 3. Variation of liquid thermal conductivity with temperature for studied refrigerants

The cooling capacity of gases changes depending on saturation pressure of the refrigerant.

The saturation curves for the refrigerants are plotted on pressure-enthalpy, P-h diagram in

Fig.4 which schematically includes operation principle for a simple cycle as well. It is seen

for the same saturation pressure from P-h chart that evaporation heat (i.e., the cooling

capacity) of R1234yf is less about 26% and 28% compared to R444A and R445A,

respectively.

Fig. 4. Pressure-enthalpy diagram for the gases and basic components of the system

8
3. The parameters and methods for the analysis

The analysis was conducted for a single stage vapor compression refrigeration cycle. The

evaporation temperatures (Tev) were selected as -5, 0 and +5 °C while condenser temperatures

(Tcon) were assessed as 35, 45 and 55°C which are typical values for a mobile air conditioner.

Furthermore, some considered assumptions for the system analysis were as follows:

• the system operates under steady-state conditions,

• the pressure loss through evaporator and condenser, and heat transfer through

connecting tubes, expansion valve and compressor were neglected,

• the energy consumed by the fans evaporator and condenser is not taken into account,

• the process in the expansion valve occurs at constant enthalpy,

• kinetic and potential energy terms are neglected,

• isentropic efficiency of the compressor is 75%,

• Sub-cooling is 3°C,

• superheat value is 7°C

The energy performance of an air-conditioning and/or refrigeration system is defined by

coefficient of performance, COP which can be determined by the ratio of cooling capacity to

the supplied electrical power [20] as

 ( ,  ,)
COP = 
(1)

where
 is the mass flow rate in kg/s, hout,ev and hin,ev are the enthalpy values of fluid leaving

and entering to the evaporator, respectively in kJ/kg, and Wel is the electrical power input to

the system in kW. Note that the numerator in Eq.(1) indicates cooling capacity (extracted

9
heat) of the refrigerant through evaporator in kW. The actual consumed energy Wel in

compressor may be evaluated by means of isentropic efficiency, ηis [20] defined as:

 
  ( ,  , ) ( ,  , )
 =   =  ( ,  ,)
=( (2)
 !"#,$  ,)

where Ws is the energy consumed for constant entropy in kW; h ’out,C is the enthalpy of

refrigerant at compressor discharge for constant entropy (i.e., isentropic) case; hout,C and hin,C

are the enthalpy values of refrigerant at outlet and inlet of compressor, respectively. The

points in the cycle shown in Fig. 4 were subsequently found as follows:

Point 1: Refers to low pressure and suction temperature regarding superheat value as

well.

Point 2: Enthalpy at the compressor discharge was computed from isentropic

efficiency (Eq. 2), then point 2 represents the high pressure and determined enthalpy values.

Point 3: Temperature of liquid is obtained by subtracting sub-cooling value from the

assumed condenser temperature. The intersection of liquid temperature and high-pressure is

fixed, hence thermodynamic properties at this state correspond to point 3.

Point 4: It indicates thermodynamic properties corresponding to intersection of

constant enthalpy (i.e., h 3 = h4) and low pressure values.

4. Results and discussions

 was investigated initially owing to the fact that it may

The volumetric flow rate at suction 

 was determined
represent the refrigerant’s adaptation for the compressor in the system. 

by dividing mass flow rate to the density of fluid at suction state. Then obtained distribution

for the considered refrigerants is demonstrated in Fig. 5 with two evaporation temperature

cases of +5°C and −5°C. It is clear that volumetric flow rate values at suction are nearly same

10
  (roughly 35% for
regardless of Tev for R444A and R445A having greater magnitudes of 

 ,
both temperatures) compared to R1234yf which may be preferred due to its smaller 

 remarkably
hence leading to lower electricity consumption potential. Furthermore, 

increases with decreasing Tev whatever the refrigerating fluid type.

16
Tev=-5 °C
Tev=5 °C
12
Vsuc x 104 (m3/s)

.
4

0
R1234yf R444A R445A

Fig. 5. The volumetric flow rate at suction for the refrigerants

The energy performances for the investigated refrigerants are discussed in Fig. 6 with

assumed evaporation and condenser temperatures. Fig. 6(a) demonstrates the cooling capacity

of the refrigerants obtained in the evaporator, Qev. It is evident that R444A and R445A

provide nearly same magnitude of Qev which is higher approximately 27% by comparison that

obtained using R1234yf refrigerant, namely R444A and R445A have a greater heat extraction

potential in the evaporator. Moreover, evaporation and condenser temperatures (i.e., Tev and

Tcon, respectively) have significant effect on Qev results such that the largest cooling capacity

could be obtained for Tev=5°C and Tcon=30°C regardless of refrigerant type. Similarly, the

lowest Qev is seen for Tev=−5°C and Tcon=60°C for all refrigerants. Nevertheless, it is not easy

11
to make a generalization on refrigerant type and/or the temperature effect without referring

the COP analysis which requires electrical power supplied to the system as well as Qev.

Thus, electrical power consumption using three types of refrigerants is investigated in Fig.

6(b). Obviously, R1234yf needs the lowest electrical energy among the refrigerants. R444A

and R445A have nearly same characteristic in terms of Wel. Note also that the effect of

temperature has different influence in contrast to Fig. 6(a). In summary, R1234yf for

Tev=+5°C and Tcon=30°C condition seems to offer most advantageous result among the

studied cases. However, an overall assessment could be discussed by plotting COP

distribution as in Fig. 6(c).

COP values are calculated for the covered cases and the results are demonstrated in Fig. 6(c).

Among the refrigerants R1234yf may be preferred in general due to its higher COP at the

considered temperatures. Especially, it has also noticeable greater COP value for Tev=+5°C

and Tcon=30°C case at which COP of R1234yf is larger about 40% than that of R444A.

Interestingly, COP is almost same for Tev=−5°C and Tcon=60°C whatever the refrigerant type.

Although COP values of R444A and R445A are in the same order, R444A seems better

compared to R445A. It is useful to address the effect of temperature in Fig. 6(c) such that the

best result in terms of COP could be achieved for Tev=+5°C and Tcon=30°C. The next

preferable case may be suggested as Tev=−5°C and Tcon=30°C with R1234yf while the worst

case among the discussed refrigerants appears for Tev=−5°C and Tcon=60°C. Finally it may be

useful to simultaneously discuss plots in Fig. 6 such that although cooling capacity of

R1234yf is lower, its COP is markedly higher due to smaller electrical power consumption.

Hence it may be stated that Wel is dominant parameter on COP rather than Qev.

12
 2500
(a)
2000 Tev=-5 °C
Tcon=30 °C
Tev=5 °C
Qev (W)

1500 Tcon=30 °C
Tev=-5 °C
Tcon=60 °C
1000
Tev=5 °C
Tcon=60 °C
500

0
R1234yf R444A R445A

1000
(b)
800
Tev=-5 °C
Tcon=30 °C
600 Tev=5 °C
Wel (W)

Tcon=30 °C
400 Tev=-5 °C
Tcon=60 °C
Tev=5 °C
200 Tcon=60 °C

0
R1234yf R444A R445A

8
(c)
Tev=-5 °C
6
Tcon=30 °C
Tev=5 °C
Tcon=30 °C
COP

4
Tev=-5 °C
Tcon=60 °C
Tev=5 °C
2 Tcon=60 °C

0
R1234yf R444A R445A

13
Fig. 6. Energy performances of the refrigerants for different evaporation and condenser

temperatures (a) cooling capacity, (b) power consumption in the compressor, (c) coefficient

of performance distribution

The relationship between COP and Tev/Tcon ratio (where temperatures are evaluated in Kelvin)

is plotted in Fig. 7 for the studied refrigerants. Obviously, greater Tev/Tcon (especially for

Tev/Tcon > 0.85) causes COP to increase for all refrigerants significantly. For example,

increasing Tev/Tcon from 0.83 to 0.88 for R444A causes an improvement in COP about 63%.

In other words, higher Tev and/or lower Tcon creates a desirable condition as far as COP is

considered. This evidence, which could also be detected from Fig.6 (c), in fact clearly verifies

the well-known behavior in refrigeration applications. Moreover, COP of R1234yf is seen to

be larger among the refrigerants. Note additionally that R444A is better compared to R445A

regarding their difference in COP.

8
R1234yf
7
R444A
6
R445A
5
COP

1
0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95

Tev/Tcon

Fig. 7. The variation of coefficient of performance with the evaporation to condenser

temperature ratio for the investigated refrigerants (T values are in Kelvin)

14
5. Conclusions

The analysis on the energy performances of R1234yf, R444A and R445A with low-GWP

values those may be used in MAC systems have demonstrated that COP values of R444A and

R445A are less compared to R1234yf. However, R444A or R445A could be utilized in the

systems referring to their lower potential of flammability risk because of their content in the

mixture. Therefore, these may be considered as alternatives to R1234yf for the air

conditioning systems of large vehicles for which flammability is a major problem. Actually,

investigation presented that the cooling capacity of R444A or R445A were greater than that of

R1234yf, but their electricity consumption magnitudes were also higher which caused COP to

 for R444A and R445A were similarly noted

decrease for the covered Tev and Tcon cases (

to be higher with respect to R1234yf, hence electricity consumption was lower for the latter

refrigerant). Furthermore, R444A or R445A can be used safely in the all refrigeration systems

operating with R134a as long as possible highest COP is not the essential object. As a further

recommendation referring to the results of this investigation, different expansion valve

designs may be considered and/or increased condenser surface area could be tested to obtain

better COP values with R444A or R445A.

References

[1] Official Journal of the European Union, Directive 2006/40/EC of the European Parliament

and of the Council, 2006.

15
[2] Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 April

2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006. Off. J.

Eur. Union, 2014.

[3] Mohanraj, M., Jayaraj, S., Muraleedharan, C., 2009. Environment friendly alternatives to

halogenated refrigerants-A review. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 3, 108-119.

[4]Navarro, E., Martinez-Galvan, I.O., Nohales, J., Gonzalvez-Macia, J., 2013. Comparative

experimental study of an open piston compressor working with R-1234yf, R-134a and R-290.

International Journal of Refrigeration, 36, 768-775.

[5] Mota-Babiloni, A., Navarro-Esbri, J., Barragan, A., Moles, F., Peris, B., 2014. Drop-in

energy performance evaluation of R1234yf and R1234ze(E) in a vapor compression system as

R134a replacements. Applied Thermal Engineering 71, 259-265.

[6] Navarro-Esbri, J., Mendoza-Miranda, J.M., Mota-Babiloni, A., Barragan-Cervera, A.,

Belman-Flores, J.M., 2013. Experimental analysis of R1234yf as a drop-inreplacement for

R134a in a vapor compression system. International Journal of Refrigeration, 36, 870-880.

[7] Navarro-Esbri, J., Moles, F., Barragan-Cervera, A., 2013. Experimental analysis of the

internal heat exchanger influence on a vapour compression system performance working with

R1234yf as a drop-in replacement for R134a. Applied Thermal Engineering 59, 153-161.

16
[8] Zvonimir, J., Atienza, J.S., Suarez, J.A.M., 2015. Thermodynamic and heat transfer

analyses for R1234yf and R1234ze(E) as drop-in replacements for R134a in a small power

refrigerating system. Applied Thermal Engineering 80, 42-54.

[9] Fukuda, S., Kondou, C., Takata, N., Koyama, S. 2014. Low GWP refrigerants R1234ze(E)

and R1234ze(Z) for high temperature heat pumps. International journal of Refrigeration, 40,

161-173.

[10] Minor, B., Spatz, M., 2008. HFO-1234yf low GWP Refrigerant Update. In: International

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Conference at Purdue, West Lafayette, IN, USA, Paper

No. 2349.

[11] Qi, Z., 2013. Experimental study on evaporator performance in mobile air conditioning

system using HFO-1234yf as working fluid. Applied Thermal Engineering 53, 124-130.

[12] Cho, H., Lee, H., Park, C., 2013. Performance characteristics of an automobile air

conditioning system with internal heat exchanger using refrigerant R1234yf. Applied Thermal

Engineering 61, 563-569.

[13] Qi, Z., 2015. Performance Improvement Potentials of R1234yf Mobile Air Conditioning

System. International Journal of Refrigeration 58, 35-40.

[14] Qi, Z., 2015. Quick and Empirical Correlations for Refrigerant Pressure Drop in Mobile

Air Conditioning System Evaporators. International Journal of Refrigeration 55, 30-36.

17
[15] Zilio, C., Brownb, J.S., Schiochet, G., Cavallini, A., 2011. The refrigerant R1234yf in air

conditioning systems. Energy 36, 6110-6120.

[16] Moles, F., Navarro-Esbri, J., Peris, B., Mota-Babiloni, A., Barragan-Cervera, A., 2014.

Theoretical energy performance evaluation of different single stage vapour compression

refrigeration configurations using R1234yf and R1234ze(E) as working fluids. International

Journal of Refrigeration, 44, 141-150.

[17] Mota-Babiloni, A., Navarro-Esbri, J., Barragan-Cervera, A., Moles, F., Peris, B., 2015.

Analysis based on EU Regulation No 517/2014 of new HFC/HFO mixtures as alternatives of

high GWP refrigerants in refrigeration and HVAC systems. International Journal of

Refrigeration, 52, 21-31.

[18] Lemmon, E.W., Huber, M.L., McLinden, M.O., 2013. NIST Standard Reference

Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties-REFPROP, Version

9.1, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Standard Reference Data Program,

Gaithersburg.

[19] Mohanraj M., 2013. Energy performance assessment of R430A as a possible alternative

refrigerant to R134a in domestic refrigerators. Energy for Sustainable Development 17, 471–

476.

[20] Dinçer İ., Kanoğlu M., Refrigeration Systems and Applications, John Wiley and Sons

Ltd., 2010.

18