<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Devotta, S</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Padalkar, AS</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sane, NK</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Performance assessment of HC-290 as a drop-in substitute to HCFC-22 in a window air conditioner</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Refrigeration - Revue Internationale Du Froid</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">air conditioner</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">COP</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Evaporator</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">experiment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">performance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">propane</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">R-22</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">simulation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">window</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">JUN</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ELSEVIER SCI LTD</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">28</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">594-604</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Article</style></work-type><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Foreign&lt;/p&gt;</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2.291</style></custom4></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Devotta, S</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Padalkar, AS</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sane, NK</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Performance assessment of HCFC-22 window air conditioner retrofitted with R-407C</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Applied Thermal Engineering</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">cooling capacity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">COP</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">measurement</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">performance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">power consumption</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">R-407C</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DEC</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17-18</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLAND</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">25</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2937-2949</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">17-18</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Article</style></work-type><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Foreign&lt;/p&gt;</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3.043</style></custom4></record></records></xml>