02862nas a2200277   4500008004100000022001400041245010000055210006900155260009900224300001200323490000700335520195800342653002002300653000802320653001502328653001502343653001602358653001202374653000902386653001502395653001102410100001502421700001702436700001302453856011802466       2005                        eng d  a0140-700700aPerformance assessment of HC-290 as a drop-in substitute to HCFC-22 in a window air conditioner0 aPerformance assessment of HC290 as a dropin substitute to HCFC22  aTHE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLANDbELSEVIER SCI LTDcJUN  a594-6040 v283 a<p>As per the Montreal Protocol, CFCs and HCFCs are being phased out. HCFC-22 is used in window air conditioners. This paper presents the experimental performance study of a window air conditioner with propane (HC-290), a natural refrigerant, as a drop-in substitute to HCFC-22. Experimental results showed that HC-290 had 6.6% lower cooling capacity for the lower operating conditions and 9.7% lower for the higher operating conditions with respect to HCFC-22. The coefficient of performance for HC290 was 7.9% higher for the lower operating conditions and 2.8% higher for the higher operating conditions. The energy consumption of the unit with HC-290 was lower in the range 12.4-13.5% than HCFC-22. The discharge pressures for HC-290 were lower in the range 13.7-18.2% than HCFC-22. For HC-290, the pressure drop was lower than HCFC-22 in both heat exchangers. This paper also presents simulation results for the heat exchangers of an HCFC-22 window air conditioner with HC-290 as a drop-in substitute. The simulation has been carried out using EVAP-COND, a heat exchanger model developed by NIST [National Institute of Standards and Technology. EVAP-COND: simulation models for finned-tube heat exchangers, Maryland, USA (2003). http://www2.bfrl.nist.gov/software/evap-cond/ [18]]. The simulated evaporator capacities are within +/- 4% of the experimentally measured cooling capacities for both refrigerants. Simulation results for HC-290 and HCFC-22 are compared. The exit temperatures of HC-290 are lower by 0.3-1.2 degrees C in the condenser and are higher by 2.1-2.4 degrees C in the evaporator than HCFC-22. Evaporating pressures of HC-290 are lower by 2.1-3.3% as compared to HCFC-22. The pressure drops of HC-290 are lower in both the evaporator and the condenser as compared to HCFC-22. The outlet temperatures of air for HCFC-22 and HC-290 in both heat exchangers are nearly the same. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.</p>10aair conditioner10aCOP10aEvaporator10aexperiment10aperformance10apropane10aR-2210asimulation10awindow1 aDevotta, S1 aPadalkar, AS1 aSane, NK  uhttps://library.ncl.res.in/content/performance-assessment-hc-290-drop-substitute-hcfc-22-window-air-conditioner-102354nas a2200241   4500008004100000022001400041245008500055210006900140260010600209300001400315490000700329520152300336653002101859653000801880653001601888653001601904653002201920653001101942100001501953700001701968700001301985856011401998       2005                        eng d  a1359-431100aPerformance assessment of HCFC-22 window air conditioner retrofitted with R-407C0 aPerformance assessment of HCFC22 window air conditioner retrofit  aTHE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLANDbPERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTDcDEC  a2937-29490 v253 a<p>This paper presents the experimental performance analysis of a 1.5 TR window air-conditioner, retrofitted with R-407C, as a substitute to HCFC-22. Experimental results showed that R-407C, for the operating conditions covered in this study, had lower cooling capacity in the range 2.1-7.9% with respect to HCFC-22. The coefficient of performance for R-407C was lower in the range 7.9-13.5%. The power consumption of the unit with R-407C was higher in the range 6-7% than HCFC-22. The discharge pressures for R-407C were higher in the range 11-13% than HCFC-22. This paper also presents simulation results of heat exchangers of an HCFC-22 window air conditioner retrofitted with R-407C. The simulation has been carried out using EVAP-COND, a heat exchanger model developed by National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S.A. The simulated evaporator capacities are within +/- 3% of the experimentally measured cooling capacities for both refrigerants. Simulation results for R-407C and HCFC-22 are compared. The exit temperatures of R-407C are lower by 1.9 degrees C to 5.2 degrees C in the condenser and are higher by 3.2 degrees C to 3.8 degrees C in the evaporator than HCFC-22. Evaporating pressures of R-407C are higher by 4.5-5.3% as compared to HCFC-22. The pressure drops of R-407C are lower in both the evaporator and the condenser as compared to HCFC-22. The outlet temperatures of air for HCFC-22 and R-407C in both heat exchangers are nearly the same. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</p>10acooling capacity10aCOP10ameasurement10aperformance10apower consumption10aR-407C1 aDevotta, S1 aPadalkar, AS1 aSane, NK  uhttps://library.ncl.res.in/content/performance-assessment-hcfc-22-window-air-conditioner-retrofitted-r-407c-0