### Air

- Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Low

- GWP Alternative Refrigerants Evaluation Program (Low

- GWP AREP)



## TEST REPORT #7

System Drop

- In Tests of R134a Alternative Refrigerants (ARM

- 42a, N

13a, N

- 13b, R

- 1234ze(E), and Opteon TM


## XP10 ) in a 230

- RT Water

- Cooled Water Chiller

Ken Schultz Steve Kujak

Trane / Ingersoll Rand 3600 Pammel Creek Rd La Crosse, WI 54601

January 25

, 2013

This report has been made available to the public as part of the author company’s participation in the AHRI’s Low

- GWP AREP.

## List of Tested Refrigerants’ Compositions (Mass%)

ARM

- 42a R

- 134a/R

- 152a/R

- 1234yf (7/11/82) N

- 13a R

- 134a/R

- 1234yf/R

- 1234ze(E) (42/18/40) N

- 13b R

- 134a/R

- 1234ze(E) (42/58) R

- 1234ze(E) R

- 1234ze(E) (100) Opteon TM 

## XP10 R

- 134a/R

- 1234yf (44/56)Low	GWP	AREP	R134a	W/C	Screw	Chi ller	Test	Summary	 –	 Final	Repor t created:		19	November	2012 last	edited:		19	November	2012 page	2	of	16

TraneMP_Report#1_external_121119.docx Ken Schultz •	Thermal	Systems	Group I NTRODUCTION

This	report	documents	tests	run on	a	nominal	230‐ton	water‐cool ed	screw	compressor‐based	water	chiller	in Trane’s	La	Crosse,	Wisconsin,	la boratory.		The	refrigerants	tes ted	are	listed	below:

name supplier order begin testing end testing number of runs

R134a (#1) (self) 1 16

‐ May

‐ 2012 23

‐ May

‐ 2012 38

XP10 DuPont 2 29

‐ May

‐ 2012 11

‐ Jun

‐ 2012 24

N

‐ 13a Honeywell 3 13

‐ Jun

‐ 2012 20

‐ Jun

‐ 2012 34

N

‐ 13b Honeywell 4 25

‐ Jun

‐ 2012 29

‐ Jun

‐ 2012 33 R1234ze(E) Honeywell 5 06

‐ Jul

‐ 2012 13

‐ Jul

‐ 2012 40

ARM

‐ 42a Arkema 6 20

‐ Aug

‐ 2012 11

‐ Oct

‐ 2012 67

R134a (#2) (self) 7 15

‐ Oct

‐ 2012 16

‐ Oct

‐ 2012 13
R1234yf Honeywell 8 Dec

‐ 2012 ?

D4Y Daikin Daikin	could	not	supply	enough	refrigerant	for	the	chiller.

Tests	with	R134a	were	repeated	at the	end	as	a	check;	performan ce	very	closely	duplicated	the	original	baseline data	set.		Tests	with	R1234yf	wi ll	be	conducted	if/when	Honeywe ll	can	supply	the	volume	o f	refrigerant	needed. Daikin	was	unable	to	provide	su fficient	volume	of	D4Y	for	the	t est	chiller	used	here.

T EST S ETUP

The	chiller	tested	here	is	a	nom inal	230‐ton	“RTW D”	dual‐circui t	water‐cooled	screw	compressor‐based	water chiller.		The	specific	unit	teste d	is	a	pre‐production	prototyp e	built	for	design	verification	testing	in	the laboratory.		The	chiller	underwen t	several	modifications	during previous	testing,	includi ng	a	change	to	high	lift compressors,	cupronickel	condense r	tubes,	and	alternative	coppe r	evaporator	tubes.

Photos	of	the	chiller	are	shown	in	Figure	1.		The	chiller	consi sts	of	two	independent	refrigerant	circuits.		To minimize	the	amount	of refrigerant	needed,	tests	here	were	run with	only	one	circuit.		The	circuit	adjacent	to	the chilled	and	cooling	water	connect ions	was	used.		The	second	cir cuit	was	charged	with	nitrogen	at	5	psig	to minimize	heat	transfer	between	the	water	passes.

The	evaporator	uses	falling	film technology	in	conjunction	with a	flooded	pool.		The	condenser	incorporates	a liquid	refrigerant	subcooler.		T he	compressor	runs	at	fixed	spe ed	(no	AFD).

Primary	instrumentation	included:

 Chilled	water	loop

o volume	flow	rate	(ma gnetic	flow	meter)

o inlet	and	outlet	temperatures	(dual	RTD’s	at	each	location)

o absolute	pressures	collocated with	temperature	measurements

o water‐side	pressure	drop

 Cooling	water	loop

o volume	flow	rate	(ma gnetic	flow	meter)

o inlet	and	outlet	temperature	( dual	RTD’s	at	each	location)

o absolute	pressures	collocated with	temperature	measurements

o water‐side	pressure	drop

 Compressor	power	input

The	collocated	temperature	and	pr essure	measurements	are	used	t o	compute	the	inlet	and	outlet	enthalpies	of the	water.		Heat	transfer	rate	i s	calculated	as	the	product	of the	water	mass	flow	rate	a nd	the	difference	between the	inlet	and	outlet	enthalpies. The	compressor‐based	EER	is	c alculated	as	the	ratio	of	the	chilled	water	heat transfer	rate	to	the	compressor	power	input.Low	GWP	AREP	R134a	W/C	Screw	Chi ller	Test	Summary	 –	 Final	Repor t created:		19	November	2012 last	edited:		19	November	2012 page	3	of	16

TraneMP_Report#1_external_121119.docx Ken Schultz •	Thermal	Systems	Group Secondary	instrumentation	include s	various	temperature	and	pres sure	measurements	along	the	refrigerant	flow path.		Key	measurements	include the	temperature	and	pressure	at the	compressor	suction	and	discharge	along with	the	condenser	liquid	leavin g	temperature	and	pressure.		A list	of	instrumentation	is included	as	Appendix	A.

M ETHOD OF T EST

The	method	of	test	is	consistent	with	Appendix	C	of	AHRI	Standa rd	550/590‐2011	with	operating	conditions generally	held	within	tighter	tol erances.		Performance	is	repor ted	here	as	measured;	no	adjustments	are	made for	fouling	allowance. The	cooling	capacities	reported	are	cal culated	from	the	measured	chilled	water	flow	rate and	the	difference	between	the	ent ering	and	leaving	chilled	wat er	enthalpies.		The	enthalpies	are	computed	from the	measured	water	temperatures and	pressures	(collocated).		Th erefore,	the	capacities	reported	here correspond	to	the	“gross	refriger ating	capacity”	defined	in	AHR I	Standard	550/590‐2011.		Thermodynamic properties	of	water	are	computed using	Trane’s	internal	code,	w hich	is	consistent	with	the	550/590	equations	to well	within	experimental	accuracies.

The	test	matrix	consisted	of	the	following	steps: 1. Refrigerant	charge	sweep	at	baseline	operating	(boundary)	condi tions	of: –		leaving	chilled	water	temperature	=	44°F  0.1°Fd	(  2s) –		chilled	water	flow	rate	=	550	gpm  2	gpm –		entering	cooling	water	temperature	=	85°F  0.1°Fd –		cooling	water	flow	rate	=	700	gpm  2	gpm The	charge	for	further	testing	w as	selected	at	m aximum	EER	(5	l bm	resolution)	with	consideration given	to	the	refrigerant	level in	the	condenser/subcooler. 2. Load	line	at	100%,	90%,	80%,	70%, 60%,	min	with	“baseline”	flow rates: –		leaving	chilled	water	temperature	=	44°F  0.1°Fd	(  2s) –		chilled	water	flow	rate	=	550	gpm  2	gpm –		entering	cooling	water	temperature	=	85°F  0.1°Fd –		cooling	water	flow	rate	=	700	gpm  2	gpm 3. Load	line	at	100%,	90%,	80%,	70%, 60%,	min	with	“standard”	flow rates: –		leaving	chilled	water	temperature	=	44°F  0.1°Fd	(  2s)
–		chilled	water	flow	rate	=2. 4	gpm/ton	×	to ns@100%	×	2 –		entering	cooling	water	temperature	=	85°F  0.1°Fd –		cooling	water	flow	rate	= 3.0	gpm/ton	×	tons@100%	×	2
4. Variation	in	cooling	water	en tering	temperature	with –		leaving	chilled	water	temperature	=	44°F  0.1°Fd	(  2s) –		chilled	water	flow	rate	=	510	gpm  2	gpm –		entering	cooling	water	temperature	=	85°F  0.1°Fd –		cooling	water	flow	rate	=	635	gpm  2	gpm

Note	that	the	water	flow	rates	w ere	based	on	full	chiller	capac ity	(ie,	as	if	both	circuits were	active).		Running	the water	flow	rates	based	on	the	si ngle	circuit	capacity	would	res ult	in	very	low	water	velocities	in	the	tubes	and poor	water‐side	heat	transfer	coe fficients.		In	hindsight,	it	m ight	have	been	more	appropriate	to	elevate	the entering	cooling	water	temperatur e	by	5°Fd	or	so	to	be	more	con sistent	with	AHRI	550‐590	standard	rating conditions.		In	the	end,	consisten t	conditions	wer e	used	that	p rovide	a	fair	comparison	among	the	different alternative	refrigerants	tested.

Figure	2	shows	the	energy	balanc e	closure	errors	for	all	of	the test	points	run.		Energ y	balance	errors	were generally	less	than  1%.		This	demonstrates	the	stability	and	accuracy	of	the	primar y	test	measurements.Low	GWP	AREP	R134a	W/C	Screw	Chi ller	Test	Summary	 –	 Final	Repor t created:		19	November	2012 last	edited:		19	November	2012 page	5	of	16

TraneMP_Report#1_external_121119.docx Ken Schultz •	Thermal	Systems	Group alternative	refrigerants	are	a ll	lower	than	for	R134a,	except	f or	the	third	ARM‐42a	data	set. 2 The	XP10	HTC’s	are just	slightly	lower	than	for	R 134a.		The	shell‐side	HTC’s	for	R 1234ze(E)	were	roughly	30%	l ower	than	for	R134a. This	appears	contrary	to	recently published	single‐tube	pool	bo iling	data. 3 The	UoE	for	R1234ze(E)	is	also negatively	impacted	by	the	reduc ed	tube	in‐side HTC	due	to	the reduction	in	chilled	wa ter	flow	rate	when operating	with	reduced	capacity	at	the	standard	flow	rates.		N‐ 13a	and	N‐13b	had	ver y	poor	evaporator performance.		This	could	possibl y	be	attributable	to	the	~1°Fd glide	associated	with these	two	blends.

Visual	observations	indicated	th at	the	bundle	we tting	appeared to	be	similar	for	all	refr igerants;	there	were	no obvious	indications	of	unusual	d ry‐out	or	carryover	for	any	of the	refrigerants.		There	were	some	variations	in	oil foaming	behavior	in	the	pool	sec tion	(eg,	the	bubble	sizes	were larger	for	R1234ze(E),	in dicative	of	the	higher vapor	specific	volume),	but	they were	minor	and	did	not	appear to	impact	evaporator	performance.

The	bundle	average	heat	transfer coefficients	for	the	condenser relative	to	R134a	are	shown	in	Figure	10. Relatively	mild	to	moderate	redu ctions	in	condenser	shell‐side heat	coefficients	were	observed	for	R1234ze(E), XP10,	N‐13a,	and	N13b.		Curiously ,	the	N‐13	blends	(with	~1°Fd glide)	appeared	to	have	suffered	a	greater degradation	in	evaporator	performance	than	condenser	performanc e.

After	seeing	very	poor	condenser heat	transfer	performance	duri ng	the	initial	test	set with	ARM‐42a	(#1),	a refrigerant	sample	was	collected from	the	chiller	condenser	vap or	space,	appearing	to	indicate	a	non‐ condensables	concentration	of	1.5%vol. 4 The	refrigerant	charge	was	recl aimed	back	into	the	original	t wo cylinders	and	the	cylinder	vapor space	vented	until	the	non‐con densables	concentration s	were	0.96%	vol	and 0.78%vol. 5 The	chiller	was	then	recharged	w ith	ARM‐42a	and	the	test	set repeated	(#2).		Condenser performance	improved	marginally, but	was	still	quite	poor.		The condenser	vapor	space	was	again	sampled,	this time	with	a	non‐condensables concentration	of	0.9%vol.

The	refrigerant	was	again	reclaimed	into	the	cylinders.		Sample s	taken	from	cylinders	showed	a	non‐ condensables	concentration	of	~1.5 %vol.		The	cylinders	were	aga in	vented	until	the	non‐condensables concentrations	were	0.5 %vol	and	0.7%vol.		T he	chiller	was	then recharged	with	ARM‐42a	and	the	test	set repeated	a	third	time	(#3).		Con denser	performance	again	did	no t	change.		A	refrigerant	sample	extracted	from the	condenser	vapor	sp ace	showed	a	non‐con densables	concentrati on	of	only	0.3%vol.		W hen	reclaimed	back into	the	cylinders,	the	non‐cond ensables	concentration	was	meas ured	to	be	only	0.6%vol.

As	noted	above,	curiously	during the	third	ARM‐42a	test	set,	th e	evaporator	heat	transfer performance	increased significantly.		The	reason	for	th is	is	unknown.		A	repeat	of	th e	baseline	with	R134a	(Oct) following	the	ARM‐42a tests	produced	results	very	consi stent	with	the	initial	baselin e	test	set	(May).		The	com parisons	shown	here	are based	on	the	overall	better	perfor mance	of	the	third	ARM‐42a	da ta	set.

The	source	of	the	non‐condensabl es	found	in	the	ARM‐42a	tests	i s	unknown.		We	are	confident	in	our	laboratory procedures	with	respect	to	chiller	evacuation	and	charging.		Ad ditional	precautions	were	taken	during preparation	and	charging	for	the third	test	of	ARM‐42a	to	ensur e	no	introduction	of	a ir	during	the	process.

The	isentropic	efficiency	of	the compressor	can	be	determined	f rom	the	measured	temperatures	and	pressures at	the	compressor	suction	and	di scharge	along	with	the	refriger ant	thermodynamic	properties	description provided	by	the	refrigerant	suppl iers.		The	results	obtained	he re	for	the	full‐load	capacity	points	run	with standard	water	flow	rates	are	sh own	in	Figure	11.		The	compress or	performed	similarly	for all	refriger ants,	most running	slightly	below	R134a	(∆η~0..

 0.02).		The	N‐13b	point	in	Figure 11	is	somewhat	of	an	outlier; the	part‐ load	points	all	fell	at	or	belo w	the	respective	R134a	points.

2 More	below.		The	first	two	ARM‐ 42a	data	sets	produced	evaporat or	HTC’s	that	fell	betw een	XP10	and	R1234ze.

3 E	van	Rooyen	and	JR	Thome,	“POOL	BOILING	ON	ENHANCED	BOILING	T UBES	WITH	R‐134a,	R‐236fa	AND R‐1234ze”,	ECI	8th	International Conference	on	Bo iling	and	Cond ensation	Heat	Transfer,	Ecole	Polytechnique Fédérale	de	Lausanne,	3‐7	Jun e	2012,	Lausanne,	Switzerland.

4 The	non‐condensable	gases	elute d	from	the	GC	column	at	the	tim e	indicative	of	being	air.

5 The	concentrations	are	below	th e	1.5%vol	upper	limit	typical	o f	most	refrigerants	list ed	in	AHRI	Standard	700.Low	GWP	AREP	R134a	W/C	Screw	Chi ller	Test	Summary	 –	 Final	Repor t created:		19	November	2012 last	edited:		19	November	2012 page	7	of	16

TraneMP_Report#1_external_121119.docx Ken Schultz •	Thermal	Systems	Group consideration	will	need	to	be	giv en	to	design	of	the	condenser coil	for	air‐cooled	chiller	products	using R1234ze(E).

All	of	the	alternate	f luids	suffered	to	some	extent	with	regard to	heat	transfer	performance	relative	to	R134a. The	poor	performance	of	ARM‐42a	i n	the	condenser	remains	puzzli ng	at	this	point.	Further	study	of	both evaporation/boiling	and	condensin g	behavior	of	these	refrigeran ts	on	enhanced	tubes	is	warranted.

The	consistency	between	calculate d	saturation	and	measured	temp eratures,	along	with	general	agreement among	the	compressor	adiabatic	e fficiencies	and	suction	volume flow	rates,	indicates that	the	refrigerant properties	descriptions	provid ed	are	reasonably	accurate.

N OMENCLATURE

BL	 “baseline”	operating	conditions	as described	in	Method	of	Test	section
CAP	 Capacity
Chrg	 refrigerant	charge

COP	 Coefficient	of	Performance;	see	EER
EB	 Energy	balance	closure	error
EER	 Energy	Efficiency	Ratio	=	cooling capacity	divided	by	electrical	power input	to	the	compressor	[Btu/W·hr]
°Fd	 temperature	difference	in	Fahrenheit
FC,	FC’s	 “fouling	checks”;	essentially	repeat points	taken	at	a	specific	operating condition

HTC	 heat	transfer	coefficient

hoC’,	݄ ௢,஼ ᇱ shell‐side	heat	transfer	coefficient	in the	condenser	bundle

hoE,	݄ ௢,ா shell‐side	heat	transfer	coefficient	in the	evaporator	bundle
Pmsrd	 measured	pressure
q"C	 average	heat	flux	in	the	condenser
q"E	 average	heat	flux in	the	evaporator
QChW,	ܳ ሶ ஼௛ௐ heat	transfer	rate	computed	from measurements	of	the	chilled	water
QClW,	ܳ ሶ ஼௟ௐ heat	transfer	rate	computed	from measurements	of	the	cooling	water Std	 “standard”	operating	conditions	as described	in	Method	of	Test	section (in	particular,	standard	evaporator chilled	water	flow	is	2.4	gpm/max	ton and	standard	condenser	cooling	water flow	is	3.0	gpm/max	ton)
∆TappC,	dTappC			approach	temperature	in	the condenser	(condenser	saturation

 leaving	cooling	water	temperature)
∆TappE,	dTappE			approach	temperature	in	the evaporator	(leaving	chilled	water

 evaporator	saturation	temperature)
∆Tsc	 refrigerant	subcooling	leaving	the condenser/subcooler	(refrigerant saturation	temperature

 actual temperature)
Tmsrd	 measured	temperature
Tsat	 saturation	temperature

UoC,	ܷ ௢,஼ overall	heat	transfer coefficient	in	the condenser	bundle

UoE,	ܷ ௢,ா overall	heat	transfer coefficient	in	the evaporator	bundle

Wcmpr,	ܹ ሶ ௖௠௣௥ compressor	power	consumption
x	 refrigerant	quality	in	the	two‐phase region
ηCmpr	 adiabatic	efficiency	of	the	compressorT	&	P	measurement stations	for	cooling	and chilled	water	loops.not	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testednot	testedAppendix A

– Instrumentation List

ID # ** Description Units Type Measurement Accuracy

1 EVAP WATER FLOW GPM SI: m3/h Rosemount Magnetic ± 0.5% of Rdg

2 EVAP Unit water delta Press psid SI: kPa

∙ diff Rosemount 1151 ± 0.054 PSID 3 Evap unit water press ‐ ent psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA 4 Evap unit water press ‐ lvg psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA

5 COND WATER FLOW GPM SI: m3/h Rosemount Magnetic ± 0.5% of Rdg

6 Cond Unit Water Delta Press psid SI: kPa

∙ diff Rosemount 1151 ± 0.054 PSID
7 Cond Unit Water Press ‐ ent psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA
8 Cond Unit Water Press ‐ lvg psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA 100 Evap Shell Press (1) ‐ Ckt #1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA 105 Evap Shell Press (2) ‐ Ckt #1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA 110 Comp Suct Refrig Press ‐ Ckt #1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.125 PSIA 115 Comp Disch Refrig Press ‐ Ckt #1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 500 psia ± 0.25 PSIA
125 Cond Top Shell Press Loc 1 ‐ Ckt # 1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 500 psia ± 0.25 PSIA
126 Cond Top Shell Press Loc 2 ‐ Ckt # 1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 500 psia ± 0.25 PSIA 130 Lvg Subcooler Refrig Press ‐ Ckt 1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 500 psia ± 0.25 PSIA

137 Ent Evap Refrig Press Ckt #1 psia SI: kPa

∙ abs Sensotec DS

– 250 psia ± 0.25 PSIA 215 Comp Disch Temp ‐ Ckt #1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F

240 Ent Evap Refrig Temp Ckt #1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F 250 Comp Suct Refrig Temp Ckt #1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F

251 Line Lvg Oil Separator T Ckt #1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F 330 Evap RI probe Temp ‐ Loc 1 ‐ Ckt 1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F 331 Evap RI probe Temp ‐ Loc 2 ‐ Ckt 1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F 332 Evap RI probe Temp ‐ Loc 3 ‐ Ckt 1 °F SI: °C Type T TC ± 1.0 F

400 ENT EVAP WATER TEMP LOC 1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

401 ENT EVAP WATER TEMP LOC 2 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

402 LVG EVAP WATER TEMP LOC 1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

403 LVG EVAP WATER TEMP LOC 2 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

405 ENT COND WATER TEMP LOC 1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

406 ENT COND WATER TEMP LOC 2 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

407 LVG COND WATER TEMP LOC 1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F

408 LVG COND WATER TEMP LOC 2 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F 410 Evap Sat RTD ‐ Ckt #1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F 417 Lvg subcooler refrigerant RTD ‐ Ckt #1 °F SI: °C 100 Ω RTD ± 0.1 F 420 Compressor VOLTAGE AB ‐ Ckt # 1 V SI: V 421 Compressor VOLTAGE AC ‐ Ckt # 1 V SI: V 422 Compressor VOLTAGE CB ‐ Ckt # 1 V SI: V 423 Compressor CURRENT A ‐ Ckt # 1 A SI: A ~0.5% of Rdg w/ CTs 424 Compressor CURRENT B ‐ Ckt # 1 A SI: A ~0.5% of Rdg w/ CTs 425 Compressor CURRENT C ‐ Ckt # 1 A SI: A ~0.5% of Rdg w/ CTs 426 Compressor Power ‐ Ckt # 1 W SI: W ~0.5% of Rdg w/ CTs 427 Compressor Power ‐ Frequency ‐ Ckt # 1 Hz SI: Hz 428 Compressor Power ‐ Power Factor ‐ Ckt # 1 None SI: NONE 480 Evap RI probe ‐ loc 1 ‐ ckt 1 % SI: % 481 Evap RI probe ‐ loc 2 ‐ ckt 1 % SI: % 482 Evap RI probe ‐ loc 3 ‐ ckt 1 % SI: % 496 Leaving Oil Separator RI Probe ‐ ckt 1 % SI: %

500 BAROMETRIC PRESS FROM METROLOGY psia SI: kPa

∙ abs ± 0.0157 PSIA
600 Chiller : Liquid Level Setpoint in SI: mm N/A

601 Circuit 1 : Refrigerant Liquid Level in SI: mm N/A

602 Circuit 2 : Refrigerant Liquid Level in SI: mm N/ALow	GWP	AREP	R134a	W/C	Screw	Chi ller	Test	Summary	 –	 Final	Repor t created:		19	November	2012 last	edited:		19	November	2012 page	16	of	16

TraneMP_Report#1_external_121119.docx Ken Schultz •	Thermal	Systems	Group 

### Appendix B

Data Points Collected at Full

‐ Load Capacity When Running at the Standard Operating Conditions

(Insert	the	pages	from TraneMP_Report#1_DataForms.pdf

following	this	page	in	the	PDF.)

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 1

Manufacturer: 

## Trane

Basic Information

Alternative Refrigerant 

## XP10 DuPont

Alternative Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Baseline Refrigerant R134a
Baseline Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Make and Model of System RTWD water

‐ cooled chiller (running first of two refrigerant circuits
Nominal Capacity and Type of System 230 nominal tons (preproduction prototype for lab verification)

Comparison Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio
Mode (heating/cooling) cooling Compressor Type screw compressor (high lift version) Compressor Displacement m3/hr cfm

Nominal Motor Size kW hp

Motor Speed (60 Hz) Hz Expansion Device Type electronic expansion valve
Lubricant Charge L gal Refrigerant Charge 81.6 81.6 kg 180 180 lbm 1.000 Composition (at Cmpr Suct)

6.7 6.7 °C 43.98 44.00 °F 0.02 1928 1927 L/min 509.3 509.2 gpm 1.000
Flow rate (tons × 2) 5.2 5.2 L/min

∙ kW 2.41 2.41 gpm/ton 1.002
29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.1 °F 0.0 2409 2409 L/min 636 636 gpm 1.000
Flow rate (tons × 2) 6.5 6.5 L/min

∙ kW 3.01 3.01 gpm/ton 1.002 Capacity 371.9 371.2 kW 105.7 105.5 tons 0.998

Power to Compressor 86.0 89.6 kW 86.0 89.6 kW 1.043

COP or EER (compressor only) 4.33 4.14 [] 14.76 14.13 Btu/W

∙ hr 0.957 Refrigerant Mass Flow Rate 8,596 9,961 kg/hr 18,950 21,960 lbm/hr 1.159 Refrig Flow @ Cmpr Suction 518.2 514.3 m3/hr 305.0 302.7 cfm 0.992

Other System Changes

The unit tested has non

‐ standard evaporator tubes (alternate high performance design).
The unit tested has non

‐ standard condenser tubes (90/10 cupronickel). Only one of two refrigerant circuits was run due to limited availability of some refrigerants.

System Data Base Alt. Ratio Degradation Coefficient
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ration

– SEER Heating Seasonal Performance Factor

– HSPF 12 3.1

Chilled

Water Leaving Temp
Flow rate

Cooling

Water Entering Temp
Flow rate 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 2

Type of System: RTWD wc Water Chiller Alternate Refrigerant: 

## XP10

Water Side Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio | Diff
Evaporator (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 1928.0 1927.4 L/hr 509 509 gpm 1.000

T entering 9.4 9.4 °C 48.9 48.9 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 6.7 6.7 °C 44.0 44.0 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 121 114 kPa 17.5 16.5 psid 0.945

Condenser (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 2408.9 2408.5 L/hr 636 636 gpm 1.000

T entering 29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.1 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 32.2 32.3 °C 90.0 90.1 °F 0.1°F

pressure drop 140 136 kPa 20.3 19.7 psid 0.969

Refrigerant Side

T (°C) P (kPa) T (°C) P (kPa) T (°F) P (psia) T (°F) P (psia)

Compressor (screw)

suction 3.9 338 3.7 367 39.0 49.0 38.7 53.2 discharge 51.2 943 47.5 1007 124.2 136.8 117.4 146.0 dchrg SH | Pratio 14.0 9.5 25.2 2.79 17.15 2.75

Condenser (shell & tube w/integral subcooler) inlet/shell 51.2 943 47.5 1,007 124.2 136.8 117.4 146.0
shell dewpoint 36.4 37.0 97.6 98.6
shell bubblept 36.4 37.0 97.6 98.6
subcooler outlet 32.5 911 32.5 964 90.5 132.1 90.5 139.8 subcooling (local ) 3.5 3.8 6.2 6.8
Expansion Device (EXV)
inlet 32.5 911 32.5 964 90.5 132.1 90.5 139.8
Evaporator (shell & tube) inlet/shell 4.3 341 4.2 370 39.7 49.5 39.5 53.7 outlet/shell 4.3 341 4.2 370 39.7 49.5 39.5 53.7

Refrigerant Side Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio

suction line pressure drop 3.2 3.7 kPa 0.46 0.53 psid 1.16 discharge line pressure drop 20 25 kPa 2.90 3.59 psid 1.24 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

water

water

Base Alt. Base Alt.

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 1

Manufacturer: 

## Trane

Basic Information

Alternative Refrigerant 

## N

‐ 13a Honeywell

Alternative Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Baseline Refrigerant R134a
Baseline Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Make and Model of System RTWD water

‐ cooled chiller (running first of two refrigerant circuits
Nominal Capacity and Type of System 230 nominal tons (preproduction prototype for lab verification)

Comparison Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio
Mode (heating/cooling) cooling Compressor Type screw compressor (high lift version) Compressor Displacement m3/hr cfm

Nominal Motor Size kW hp

Motor Speed (60 Hz) Hz Expansion Device Type electronic expansion valve
Lubricant Charge L gal Refrigerant Charge 81.6 79.4 kg 180 175 lbm 0.972 Composition (at Cmpr Suct)

6.7 6.6 °C 43.98 43.93 °F

‐ 0.06 1928 1708 L/min 509.3 451.3 gpm 0.886
Flow rate (tons × 2) 5.2 5.2 L/min

∙ kW 2.41 2.41 gpm/ton 1.001
29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0 2409 2138 L/min 636 565 gpm 0.887
Flow rate (tons × 2) 6.5 6.5 L/min

∙ kW 3.01 3.02 gpm/ton 1.003 Capacity 371.9 329.1 kW 105.7 93.6 tons 0.885

Power to Compressor 86.0 79.0 kW 86.0 79.0 kW 0.919

COP or EER (compressor only) 4.33 4.17 [] 14.76 14.21 Btu/W

∙ hr 0.963 Refrigerant Mass Flow Rate 8,596 8,405 kg/hr 18,950 18,530 lbm/hr 0.978 Refrig Flow @ Cmpr Suction 518.2 518.2 m3/hr 305.0 305.0 cfm 1.000

Other System Changes

The unit tested has non

‐ standard evaporator tubes (alternate high performance design).
The unit tested has non

‐ standard condenser tubes (90/10 cupronickel). Only one of two refrigerant circuits was run due to limited availability of some refrigerants.

System Data Base Alt. Ratio Degradation Coefficient
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ration

– SEER Heating Seasonal Performance Factor

– HSPF 12 3.1

Chilled

Water Leaving Temp
Flow rate

Cooling

Water Entering Temp
Flow rate 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 2

Type of System: RTWD wc Water Chiller Alternate Refrigerant: 

## N

‐ 13a

Water Side Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio | Diff
Evaporator (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 1928.0 1708.3 L/hr 509 451 gpm 0.886

T entering 9.4 9.4 °C 48.9 48.8 °F

‐ 0.1°F

T leaving 6.7 6.6 °C 44.0 43.9 °F

‐ 0.1°F

pressure drop 121 96 kPa 17.5 14.0 psid 0.799

Condenser (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 2408.9 2137.7 L/hr 636 565 gpm 0.887

T entering 29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 32.2 32.2 °C 90.0 90.0 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 140 112 kPa 20.3 16.3 psid 0.802

Refrigerant Side

T (°C) P (kPa) T (°C) P (kPa) T (°F) P (psia) T (°F) P (psia)

Compressor (screw)

suction 3.9 338 3.3 311 39.0 49.0 38.0 45.1 discharge 51.2 943 48.2 893 124.2 136.8 118.7 129.5 dchrg SH | Pratio 14.0 10.7 25.2 2.79 19.18 2.87

Condenser (shell & tube w/integral subcooler) inlet/shell 51.2 943 48.2 893 124.2 136.8 118.7 129.5
shell dewpoint 36.4 36.7 97.6 98.1
shell bubblept 36.4 36.1 97.6 97.0
subcooler outlet 32.5 911 32.6 861 90.5 132.1 90.8 124.9 subcooling (local ) 3.5 2.9 6.2 5.3
Expansion Device (EXV)
inlet 32.5 911 32.6 861 90.5 132.1 90.8 124.9
Evaporator (shell & tube) inlet/shell 4.3 341 2.9 314 39.7 49.5 37.2 45.5 outlet/shell 4.3 341 3.5 314 39.7 49.5 38.2 45.5

Refrigerant Side Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio

suction line pressure drop 3.2 3.0 kPa 0.46 0.44 psid 0.96 discharge line pressure drop 20 19 kPa 2.90 2.82 psid 0.97 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

water

water

Base Alt. Base Alt.

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 1

Manufacturer: 

## Trane

Basic Information

Alternative Refrigerant 

## N

‐ 13b Honeywell

Alternative Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Baseline Refrigerant R134a
Baseline Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Make and Model of System RTWD water

‐ cooled chiller (running first of two refrigerant circuits
Nominal Capacity and Type of System 230 nominal tons (preproduction prototype for lab verification)

Comparison Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio
Mode (heating/cooling) cooling Compressor Type screw compressor (high lift version) Compressor Displacement m3/hr cfm

Nominal Motor Size kW hp

Motor Speed (60 Hz) Hz Expansion Device Type electronic expansion valve
Lubricant Charge L gal Refrigerant Charge 81.6 79.4 kg 180 175 lbm 0.972 Composition (at Cmpr Suct)

6.7 6.7 °C 43.98 43.98 °F 0.00 1928 1636 L/min 509.3 432.3 gpm 0.849
Flow rate (tons × 2) 5.2 5.2 L/min

∙ kW 2.41 2.40 gpm/ton 0.995
29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.1 °F 0.1 2409 2047 L/min 636 541 gpm 0.850
Flow rate (tons × 2) 6.5 6.5 L/min

∙ kW 3.01 3.00 gpm/ton 0.996 Capacity 371.9 317.2 kW 105.7 90.2 tons 0.853

Power to Compressor 86.0 74.4 kW 86.0 74.4 kW 0.865

COP or EER (compressor only) 4.33 4.26 [] 14.76 14.55 Btu/W

∙ hr 0.986 Refrigerant Mass Flow Rate 8,596 7,784 kg/hr 18,950 17,160 lbm/hr 0.906 Refrig Flow @ Cmpr Suction 518.2 519.0 m3/hr 305.0 305.5 cfm 1.002

Other System Changes

The unit tested has non

‐ standard evaporator tubes (alternate high performance design).
The unit tested has non

‐ standard condenser tubes (90/10 cupronickel). Only one of two refrigerant circuits was run due to limited availability of some refrigerants.

System Data Base Alt. Ratio Degradation Coefficient
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ration

– SEER Heating Seasonal Performance Factor

– HSPF 12 3.1

Chilled

Water Leaving Temp
Flow rate

Cooling

Water Entering Temp
Flow rate 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 2

Type of System: RTWD wc Water Chiller Alternate Refrigerant: 

## N

‐ 13b

Water Side Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio | Diff
Evaporator (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 1928.0 1636.2 L/hr 509 432 gpm 0.849

T entering 9.4 9.4 °C 48.9 48.9 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 6.7 6.7 °C 44.0 44.0 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 121 92 kPa 17.5 13.4 psid 0.766

Condenser (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 2408.9 2046.9 L/hr 636 541 gpm 0.850

T entering 29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.1 °F 0.1°F

T leaving 32.2 32.3 °C 90.0 90.1 °F 0.1°F

pressure drop 140 108 kPa 20.3 15.7 psid 0.774

Refrigerant Side

T (°C) P (kPa) T (°C) P (kPa) T (°F) P (psia) T (°F) P (psia)

Compressor (screw)

suction 3.9 338 3.6 290 39.0 49.0 38.5 42.0 discharge 51.2 943 48.0 836 124.2 136.8 118.4 121.2 dchrg SH | Pratio 14.0 10.4 25.2 2.79 18.75 2.89

Condenser (shell & tube w/integral subcooler) inlet/shell 51.2 943 48.0 836 124.2 136.8 118.4 121.2
shell dewpoint 36.4 36.7 97.6 98.1
shell bubblept 36.4 36.1 97.6 96.9
subcooler outlet 32.5 911 32.1 806 90.5 132.1 89.7 116.9 subcooling (local ) 3.5 3.5 6.2 6.3
Expansion Device (EXV)
inlet 32.5 911 32.1 806 90.5 132.1 89.7 116.9
Evaporator (shell & tube) inlet/shell 4.3 341 3.3 292 39.7 49.5 37.9 42.4 outlet/shell 4.3 341 3.8 292 39.7 49.5 38.8 42.4

Refrigerant Side Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio

suction line pressure drop 3.2 2.9 kPa 0.46 0.42 psid 0.92 discharge line pressure drop 20 20 kPa 2.90 2.84 psid 0.98 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

water

water

Base Alt. Base Alt.

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 1

Manufacturer: 

## Trane

Basic Information

Alternative Refrigerant 

## R1234ze Honeywell

Alternative Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Baseline Refrigerant R134a
Baseline Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Make and Model of System RTWD water

‐ cooled chiller (running first of two refrigerant circuits
Nominal Capacity and Type of System 230 nominal tons (preproduction prototype for lab verification)

Comparison Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio
Mode (heating/cooling) cooling Compressor Type screw compressor (high lift version) Compressor Displacement m3/hr cfm

Nominal Motor Size kW hp

Motor Speed (60 Hz) Hz Expansion Device Type electronic expansion valve
Lubricant Charge L gal Refrigerant Charge 81.6 79.4 kg 180 175 lbm 0.972 Composition (at Cmpr Suct)

6.7 6.6 °C 43.98 43.96 °F

‐ 0.02 1928 1417 L/min 509.3 374.2 gpm 0.735
Flow rate (tons × 2) 5.2 5.1 L/min

∙ kW 2.41 2.37 gpm/ton 0.985
29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0 2409 1774 L/min 636 469 gpm 0.736
Flow rate (tons × 2) 6.5 6.4 L/min

∙ kW 3.01 2.97 gpm/ton 0.987 Capacity 371.9 277.4 kW 105.7 78.9 tons 0.746

Power to Compressor 86.0 63.0 kW 86.0 63.0 kW 0.733

COP or EER (compressor only) 4.33 4.40 [] 14.76 15.02 Btu/W

∙ hr 1.017 Refrigerant Mass Flow Rate 8,596 6,981 kg/hr 18,950 15,390 lbm/hr 0.812 Refrig Flow @ Cmpr Suction 518.2 517.7 m3/hr 305.0 304.7 cfm 0.999

Other System Changes

The unit tested has non

‐ standard evaporator tubes (alternate high performance design).
The unit tested has non

‐ standard condenser tubes (90/10 cupronickel). Only one of two refrigerant circuits was run due to limited availability of some refrigerants.

System Data Base Alt. Ratio Degradation Coefficient
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ration

– SEER Heating Seasonal Performance Factor

– HSPF 12 3.1

Chilled

Water Leaving Temp
Flow rate

Cooling

Water Entering Temp
Flow rate 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 2

Type of System: RTWD wc Water Chiller Alternate Refrigerant: 

## R1234ze

Water Side Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio | Diff
Evaporator (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 1928.0 1416.6 L/hr 509 374 gpm 0.735

T entering 9.4 9.4 °C 48.9 49.0 °F 0.1°F

T leaving 6.7 6.6 °C 44.0 44.0 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 121 71 kPa 17.5 10.2 psid 0.585

Condenser (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 2408.9 1773.7 L/hr 636 469 gpm 0.736

T entering 29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 32.2 32.3 °C 90.0 90.1 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 140 81 kPa 20.3 11.7 psid 0.578

Refrigerant Side

T (°C) P (kPa) T (°C) P (kPa) T (°F) P (psia) T (°F) P (psia)

Compressor (screw)

suction 3.9 338 4.4 251 39.0 49.0 39.9 36.4 discharge 51.2 943 44.8 694 124.2 136.8 112.7 100.6 dchrg SH | Pratio 14.0 8.5 25.2 2.79 15.24 2.77

Condenser (shell & tube w/integral subcooler) inlet/shell 51.2 943 44.8 694 124.2 136.8 112.7 100.6
shell dewpoint 36.4 35.6 97.6 96.1
shell bubblept 36.4 35.6 97.6 96.1
subcooler outlet 32.5 911 32.4 671 90.5 132.1 90.3 97.3 subcooling (local ) 3.5 2.8 6.2 5.0
Expansion Device (EXV)
inlet 32.5 911 32.4 671 90.5 132.1 90.3 97.3
Evaporator (shell & tube) inlet/shell 4.3 341 4.4 254 39.7 49.5 39.9 36.8 outlet/shell 4.3 341 4.4 254 39.7 49.5 39.9 36.8

Refrigerant Side Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio

suction line pressure drop 3.2 2.6 kPa 0.46 0.38 psid 0.83 discharge line pressure drop 20 15 kPa 2.90 2.14 psid 0.74 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

water

water

Base Alt. Base Alt.

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 1

Manufacturer: 

## Trane

Basic Information

Alternative Refrigerant 

## ARM

‐ 42a Arkema

Alternative Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Baseline Refrigerant R134a
Baseline Lubricant Type and ISO Viscosity POE

– 68
Make and Model of System RTWD water

‐ cooled chiller (running first of two refrigerant circuits
Nominal Capacity and Type of System 230 nominal tons (preproduction prototype for lab verification)

Comparison Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio
Mode (heating/cooling) cooling Compressor Type screw compressor (high lift version) Compressor Displacement m3/hr cfm

Nominal Motor Size kW hp

Motor Speed (60 Hz) Hz Expansion Device Type electronic expansion valve
Lubricant Charge L gal Refrigerant Charge 81.6 79.4 kg 180 175 lbm 0.972 Composition (at Cmpr Suct)

6.7 6.7 °C 43.98 43.99 °F 0.01 1928 1856 L/min 509.3 490.4 gpm 0.963
Flow rate (tons × 2) 5.2 5.0 L/min

∙ kW 2.41 2.34 gpm/ton 0.973
29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0 2409 2319 L/min 636 613 gpm 0.963
Flow rate (tons × 2) 6.5 6.3 L/min

∙ kW 3.01 2.93 gpm/ton 0.973 Capacity 371.9 367.9 kW 105.7 104.6 tons 0.989

Power to Compressor 86.0 88.1 kW 86.0 88.1 kW 1.024

COP or EER (compressor only) 4.33 4.18 [] 14.76 14.25 Btu/W

∙ hr 0.966 Refrigerant Mass Flow Rate 8,596 9,825 kg/hr 18,950 21,660 lbm/hr 1.143 Refrig Flow @ Cmpr Suction 518.2 526.1 m3/hr 305.0 309.7 cfm 1.015

Other System Changes

The unit tested has non

‐ standard evaporator tubes (alternate high performance design).
The unit tested has non

‐ standard condenser tubes (90/10 cupronickel). Only one of two refrigerant circuits was run due to limited availability of some refrigerants.

System Data Base Alt. Ratio Degradation Coefficient
Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ration

– SEER Heating Seasonal Performance Factor

– HSPF 12 3.1

Chilled

Water Leaving Temp
Flow rate

Cooling

Water Entering Temp
Flow rate 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

### Appendix B
Data Points Collected at Standard Operating Conditions



## Low GWP AREP SYSTEM DROP

‐ IN TEST DATA FORM page 2

Type of System: RTWD wc Water Chiller Alternate Refrigerant: 

## ARM

‐ 42a

Water Side Data Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio | Diff
Evaporator (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 1928.0 1856.3 L/hr 509 490 gpm 0.963

T entering 9.4 9.5 °C 48.9 49.0 °F 0.1°F

T leaving 6.7 6.7 °C 44.0 44.0 °F 0.0°F

pressure drop 121 111 kPa 17.5 16.1 psid 0.919

Condenser (shell & tube)
fluid
flow rate 2408.9 2318.9 L/hr 636 613 gpm 0.963

T entering 29.5 29.5 °C 85.0 85.0 °F 0.0°F

T leaving 32.2 32.3 °C 90.0 90.2 °F 0.2°F

pressure drop 140 130 kPa 20.3 18.9 psid 0.932

Refrigerant Side

T (°C) P (kPa) T (°C) P (kPa) T (°F) P (psia) T (°F) P (psia)

Compressor (screw)

suction 3.9 338 4.1 368 39.0 49.0 39.4 53.4 discharge 51.2 943 46.5 989 124.2 136.8 115.7 143.4 dchrg SH | Pratio 14.0 7.7 25.2 2.79 13.92 2.69

Condenser (shell & tube w/integral subcooler) inlet/shell 51.2 943 46.5 989 124.2 136.8 115.7 143.4
shell dewpoint 36.4 37.9 97.6 100.2
shell bubblept 36.4 37.8 97.6 100.1
subcooler outlet 32.5 911 32.5 948 90.5 132.1 90.4 137.5 subcooling (local ) 3.5 4.6 6.2 8.3
Expansion Device (EXV)
inlet 32.5 911 32.5 948 90.5 132.1 90.4 137.5
Evaporator (shell & tube) inlet/shell 4.3 341 4.5 372 39.7 49.5 40.1 53.9 outlet/shell 4.3 341 4.5 372 39.7 49.5 40.2 53.9

Refrigerant Side Base Alt. SI Units Base Alt. IP Units Ratio

suction line pressure drop 3.2 3.6 kPa 0.46 0.53 psid 1.16 discharge line pressure drop 20 22 kPa 2.90 3.24 psid 1.12 08

‐ Nov

‐ 2012

water

water

Base Alt. Base Alt.