## 3 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Component** & \(\dot{E}_{F,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{P,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{UN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{EX}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{IN,EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{IN,EX}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV,EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV,EX}\) \\  & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** \\ \hline CM & 46.360 & 38.090 & 8.271 & 1.097 & 7.174 & 4.850 & 3.421 & 1.031 & 0.066 & 3.819 & 3.355 \\ CD & 9.893 & 2.441 & 7.452 & 2.135 & 5.317 & 5.798 & 1.654 & 2.008 & 0.127 & 3.790 & 1.527 \\ TV & 30.650 & 20.580 & 10.070 & 4.213 & 5.887 & 4.002 & 6.068 & 4.002 & 0.211 & 0.000 & 5.857 \\ EV & 18.130 & 11.410 & 6.714 & 2.358 & 4.356 & 6.714 & 0.000 & 2.358 & 0.000 & 4.356 & 0.000 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Results obtained from the conventional advanced exergy analysis [2]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Component** & \(\dot{E}_{F,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{P,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{UN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{EX}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{IN,EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{IN,EX}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV,EN}\) & \(\dot{E}_{D,k}^{AV,EX}\) \\  & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** & **kW** \\ \hline CM & 46.368 & 38.096 & 8.272 & 1.109 & 7.163 & 4.897 & 3.375 & 1.041 & 0.068 & 3.856 & 3.307 \\ CD & 9.885 & 2.441 & 7.444 & 2.290 & 5.153 & 5.790 & 1.653 & 2.154 & 0.136 & 3.637 & 1.517 \\ TV & 30.661  
endogenous exergy destruction (\(\dot{E}^{AV,EN}_{D,CM}\)) obtained on the basis of the existing methodology. Moreover, the compressor's avoidable externally caused exergy destruction (\(\dot{E}^{AV,EXT}_{D,CM}\)) was equal to 3.058 kW, being 8.9% lower compared to the avoidable exogenous exergy destruction (\(\dot{E}^{AV,EX}_{D,CM}\)). According to the proposed approach, the condenser featured 4.575 kW of avoidable exergy destruction due to irreversibilities taking place within this component. The existing methodology suggested that 3.790 kW of the exergy destruction within the condenser can be avoided by improvement of this component. Thus, the relative difference of 20.7% was observed for the condenser. The proposed approach estimated 1.180 kW of avoidable exergy destruction within the condenser, which could be removed by improving the efficiencies of the remaining components. The existing methodology of advanced exergy analysis evaluates this part of exergy destruction equal to 1.527 kW. The avoidable internally caused exergy destruction \(\dot{E}^{AV,INT}_{D,CM}\) or the part that can be reduced by improving the efficiency of the compressor equal to 6.507 kW (see Table 9) can be obtained in a real cycle of the investigated refrigeration machine after increasing the isentropic efficiency of the compressor to 0.95 and performing a recalculation with the help of the service presented in [24]. As a result, exergy destruction within the compressor is decreased from 8.272 kW to 1.765 kW or by 6.507 kW. The application of the existing methodology would have suggested a lower decrease of 3.819 kW in exergy destruction for this case (see Table 9). Moreover, after improving the isentropic efficiency of the compressor from 0.80 to 0.95 and reducing the pinch point temperature difference in the evaporator from 10 K to 0.5 K on the web-page presented in [24], a decrement from 7.444 kW to 6.264 kW in the exergy destruction within the condenser could be observed. In this case, the decrease in exergy destruction was equal to 1.180 kW, which completely corresponds to the findings acquired on the basis of the proposed approach (see Table 9). According to the existing methodology of advanced exergy analysis, this improvement would enable a 1.527 kW decrease in exergy destruction within the condenser.