COMPARATIVE THERMODYNAMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF VAPOR COMPRESSION REFRIGERATION SYSTEM USING C-PENTANE AS REFRIGERANT

Abstract

The selection of refrigerant is one of the most important parameters when designing a cooling system. Hydrocarbon refrigerants have low primary energy requirements for effective cooling capacity and favourable thermodynamic properties that reduce both direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. In this study, a comparative performance and environmental analysis of the vapor compression refrigeration cycle using C-Pentane as the refrigerant was performed. The cooling performance and environmental effect of C-Pentane has been compared with the cooling performance and environmental effect of R134A, R407C and R404A refrigerants in the cooling system. During the analysis, the cooling system was examined under different operating conditions. The highest coefficient of performance (COP) value in the analysis was 6.485 for the refrigeration cycle using C-Pentane, and this value was obtained at 0 oC evaporator temperature and 25 oC condenser temperature operating condition. According to the Life Cycle Climate Performance (LCCP) analysis for refrigerants, the lowest total emission value belongs to C-Pentane. Direct Emission (DE) value and indirect emission (IE) value of C-Pentane are 57.5 kgCO2 and 24928.04 kgCO2, respectively.

Keywords

• C-Pentane
• COP
• Environmental Analysis
• Thermodynamic Analysis
• Refrigeration System

References

1. Kulkarni, S., Chavali, S., & Dikshit, S. (2023). A review on analysis of vapour compression refrigeration system (VCRS) for its performance using different ecofriendly refrigerants and nanofluids. Materials Today: Proceedings, 72, 878-883.
2. Liu, B., Guo, X., & Xi, X. (2023). Thermodynamic analyses of ejector refrigeration cycle with zeotropic mixture. Energy, 263, 125989.
3. Zhao, D., Xu, W., & Zhao, R. (2023). Thermodynamic analysis of the combined organic flash and ejector refrigeration cycle using zeotropic mixtures. Applied Thermal Engineering, 219, 119605.
4. He, Y., Wu, H., & Xu, K. (2023). Theoretical performance comparison for a regenerator-enhanced three-stage auto-cascade refrigeration system using different zeotropic mixed refrigerants. Energy & Buildings, 283, 112815.
5. Sun, Z., Quan, J., & Wang, Y. (2022). Performance comparison of the single-refrigerant cascade refrigerating system. Energy Reports, 8, 8259-8270.
6. https://solkane-refrigerants.software.informer.com/8.0/
7. Çengel, A.Y., Boles, A.M. (1994). Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach, New York: McGraw-Hill.
8. Pilla, T. S., Sunkari, P. K. G., & Padmanabhuni, S. L. (2017). Experimental evaluation mechanical performance of the compressor with mixed refrigerants R-290 and R-600a. Energy Procedia, 109, 113-121.

9. Kılıç, B. (2012). Exergy analysis of vapor compression refrigeration cycle with two-stage and intercooler. Heat Mass Transfer, 48, 1207-1217.
10. Kılıç. B. (2022). Energy and exergy analysis of transcritical carbon dioxide refrigeration cycle for different working conditions. El-Cezerî Journal of Science and Engineering, 9(1), 290-299.
11. Rocca, V., & Panno, G. (2011). Experimental performance evaluation of a compression refrigeration plant when replacing R22 with alternative refrigerants. Applied Energy, 88, 2809-2815.
12. Allgood, C. C., & Lawson, C. C. (2010). Performance of R-438A in R22 refrigeration and air conditioning systems. Int. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Conference at Purdue, Indiana, 12-15.
13. Rocca, A., Rocca, L., & Messineo, L. (2014). Use of HFC Fluids as Suitable Replacements in Low-Temperature Refrigeration Plants. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 9(1), 74-79.
14. Tejaswi, S. P., Pranay, K. G. S., & Sai, L. P. (2017). Experimental evaluation mechanical performance of the compressor with mixed refrigerants R-290 and R-600A. Energy Procedia, 109, 113-121.
15. Yıldız, A., & Yıldırım, R. (2020). Energy and environmental analysis of vapor compression refrigeration systems using an alternative refrigerant (R513A) to R134A. Düzce University Journal of Science and Technology, 8, 1817-1828.
16. IIR, Guideline for Life Cycle Climate Performance, (2016) 1828.
17. Choi, S., Oh, J., & Hwang, Y. (2017). Life cycle climate performance evaluation (LCCP) on cooling and heating systems in South Korea. Applied Thermal Engineering, 120, 88-98.
18. Atılgan, B., & Azapagic, A. (2016). Assessing the environmental sustainability of electricity generation in Turkey on a life cycle basis. Energies, 9, 31.
19. Ahamed, J. U., Saidur, R., & Masjuki, H. H. (2011). Prospect of hydrocarbon uses based on exergy analysis in the vapor compression refrigeration system. IEEE First Conference on Clean Energy and Technology CET, 300-304.
20. Şencan, A., Selbaş, R., & Kızılkan, Ö. (2006). Thermodynamic analysis of subcooling and superheating effects of alternative refrigerants for vapour compression refrigeration cycles. International Journal of Energy Research, 30, 323-347.
21. Aprea, C., Greco, A., & Maiorino, A. (2018). HFOs and their binary mixtures with HFC134a working as drop-in refrigerant in a household refrigerator: Energy analysis and environmental impact assessment. Applied Thermal Engineering, 141, 226-233.