International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Refrigeration

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrefrig

A potential approach for reducing the R290 charge in air conditioners

and heat pumps
Wenjie Zhou, Zhihua Gan∗
Institute of Refrigeration and Cryogenics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
Key Laboratory of Refrigeration and Cryogenic Technology of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310027, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study presents a potential approach for reducing the propane (R290) charge required in air condi-
Received 11 May 2018 tioners (ACs) by introducing micro bare-tube heat exchangers as the condenser and evaporator. A the-
Revised 23 January 2019
oretical model is developed to predict the performance of a split AC unit, and the unit is tested in an
Accepted 24 February 2019
experiment. The split AC unit is tested under the ISO 5151:2017 standard capacity rating test condition
Available online 28 February 2019
in a psychrometric room (outdoor conditions: 35 °C dry bulb/24 °C wet bulb; indoor conditions: 27 °C
Keywords: dry bulb/19 °C wet bulb). The compressor input electricity power is 928 W with 62-W condenser fan
R290 propane power and 82-W evaporator fan power. The test cooling capacity is 3645 W with a system coefficient of
Micro bare tube heat exchanger performance of 3.40. The stainless steel micro-tube heat exchanger has a 0.58-mm outer diameter and
Air conditioner 0.38-mm inner diameter. Owing to the use of micro bare tubes, the optimal propane charge is 248±5 g,
Heat pump which follows the EN378-1:2016 regulation. The use of micro bare-tube heat exchangers in a split AC unit
could be a potential approach to reducing the R290 charge required in ACs and heat pumps.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

Une approche potentielle pour réduire la charge de R290 dans les climatiseurs et
les pompes à chaleur

Mots-clés: Propane R290; Échangeur de chaleur à micro-tube nu; Conditionneur d’air; Pompe à chaleur

1. Introduction industry to replace R22, and propane (R290) seems to be a good

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) have been used as refriger-
ants in residential air conditioners (ACs) and heat pumps for many
decades because of their good thermodynamic properties. How-
ever, owing to their high ozone depletion potential (ODP) and
global warming potential (GWP), the Montreal and Kyoto protocols
restrict the use of HCFCs in the refrigeration and air conditioning
sectors. R22 is an HCFC that has been extensively used in the com-
mercial and residential air conditioning field for many years and
is going to be phased out in developed countries by 2020 and in
developing countries by 2030 (Fernando et al., 2004). Therefore,
there is a requirement for a natural refrigerant in the refrigeration
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gan_zhihua@zju.edu.cn (Z. Gan).
alternative.
R290 has not only zero ODP but also a low GWP of 3 as per
the previously published literature (Lampugnani, 1996). There
are also some strong advantages of using propane such as its
low cost, common availability, and compatibility with mineral
and alkyl-benzene oils. Its most undesirable characteristic is its
flammability, which is a safety concern. Therefore, there have been
numerous studies on the reduction of the propane charge required
in commercial and residential ACs (Mohanraj et al., 2009). Park
and Jung (2009) published the performance of heat pumps with
an R170/R290 mixture as the refrigerant, which achieved a cooling
capacity of 3500 W. In the experiment, the percentage of R170
required varied from 2% to 10%, with a mixture charge uncertainty
of 10 g. The complicated charging process and the charging uncer-
tainty affected the system performance significantly. Padalkar et al.
(2014) reported the experimental results of a split AC unit with a
340-g propane charge, which is well below the lower flammable

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2019.02.030
0140-7007/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
48 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55

limit with the best coefficient of performance (COP) of 3.7. They

Nomenclature used the traditional fin-tube and parallel-flow micro-channel con-
denser to decrease the system charge. He et al. (2016) conducted
A area, m2 an experimental investigation on the R290 boiling-heat-transfer
C thermal capacitance, W/K performance with 5-mm, 7-mm, and 9.52-mm mini horizontal
D diameter of micro bare tube, mm tubes. The propane heat transfer performance was 14.3%–68.4%
Dis pitch distance between each micro tubes, mm higher than that of the R410A refrigerant. The heat transfer char-
h specific enthalpy of the propane J/kg acteristics of R290 flowing inside the micro tube of diameter 1
H height of single micro bare tube unit, m mm and 0.5 mm were not discussed in their model simulation
k thermal conductivity, W/m-K and experiment analyses. Choudhari and Sapali (2017) conducted
L length of micro bare tube, m a performance investigation of an R290 refrigeration system with
m˙ mass flow rate, kg/s a slightly low COP than that of R22. Only the theoretical R290
N number of tubes in each row properties obtained from REFPROP were investigated but no exper-
NTU number of transfer units imental comparison was made. Jin et al. (2017) studied an R290
Nu Nusselt number evaporator with a 5-mm fin tube, which exhibits a superior heat
P pressure, Pa transfer effect than that of R22. The model prediction results were
Pr Prandtl number compared with the EVAP-COND simulation prediction without an
q energy transfer rate, W experimental verification. Huang et al. (2014) studied the charac-
R thermal resistance, K/W teristics of a parallel-flow micro-channel heat exchanger, which
Re Reynolds number may be used as a potential approach to decreasing the refrigerant
T temperature, K charge required in a system. From the previous literatures, it
th stainless steel wall thickness, mm can be observed that research has been focused on developing
V˙ volumetric flow rate, m3 /h a low-charge R290 refrigeration system. This paper presents the
u˙ velocity, m/s performance of an AC unit with micro bare tube heat exchangers
V compressor cylinder volume, m3 as the condenser and evaporator, which appears to be a promising
w width of micro bare tube unit, m approach to both decreasing the required propane charge and
W power, W improving the system performance.
ω operating frequency, rpm This paper comprises four sections including the introduction
ε effectiveness of the heat exchanger section. The second section describes the safety requirements for
λ heat transfer coefficient, W/m2 -K R290 AC units and the model prediction of the system and micro
μ dynamic viscosity, kg/m-s bare-tube heat exchangers. The basic geometry of the condenser
ν specific volume, m3 /kg and evaporator with micro bare-tube heat exchangers is presented.
ρ working fluid density, kg/m3 The third section illustrates the experimental results obtained with
the R290 AC unit. Its COP and refrigerant charge are also com-
Subscripts
pared with the model prediction presented in the second section.
1 compressor intake state
The last section presents the conclusion and discussion of the low-
2 compressor outlet state
charge propane system and presents some future recommenda-
3 condenser outlet
tions for improving the system performance.
4 capillary tube outlet
air air fluid
cap capillary tube
2. Theoretical model prediction
cmp compressor
cnd condenser
Safety aspects take the highest priority in the case of commer-
D outside of micro bare tube
cial products. Such safety aspects should be taken into considera-
Dn downside of condenser air outlet
tion for the presented propane AC unit before it is introduced into
dis displacement
the market. R290 is highly flammable as per the EN 378-1:2016
evap evaporator
standard. The propane charge is under regulation, which means
i air inlet
the lower the charge, the safer the unit. However, a system with
in inner diameter of micro bare tube, or inside of the
a charge that is too low cannot provide sufficient cooling. There-
tube
fore, researchers are attempting to develop a low-charge system
l latent heat
with a relatively high cooling performance. The lower flammabil-
L left of condenser air outlet
ity limit of propane is 0.038 kg/m3 by mass and 2.1% by volume
max maximum
as per the EN 378-1:2016 standard. The flammability risk could be
net net cooling or heating capacity
avoided if the R290 charge in the system is less than 20% of the
o air outlet
lower flammability limit. In the case of a system that is located in
out outer diameter of micro bare tube, or outside of
a closed space, for a safe charge of R290, the charge should be less
tube
than 0.008 kg/m3 . For a typical 3520-W cooling system installed
R refrigerant propane
in a 15.8-m2 room, the allowable R290 charge is less than 0.3 kg
Rt right of the condenser air outlet
when the unit is wall mounted in the room (BS EN 378, 2016).
s sensible heat
In order to fulfill this requirement, an R290 AC unit is installed to
suc suction
provide sufficient cooling for the ISO-5151:2017 standard summer
tot total
condition (outdoor conditions: 35 °C dry bulb and 24 °C wet bulb).
tube micro bare tube
The schematic of this propane AC unit is shown in Fig. 1. A
U upside of condenser air outlet
commercial hermetic motor propane compressor is installed as the
pressure generator. The micro channel bare-tube heat exchangers
are installed as both condenser and evaporator in the AC unit. In
 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55 49

Table 2
Micro bare-tube geometry.

Symbols Parameters

L (mm) 480
w (mm) 200
H (mm) 15
Dis (mm) 1.64
Dout (mm) 0.58
Din (m) 0.38
N (-) 122

the condenser inlet and outlet, respectively. In the evaporator, the

heat transfer from the testing room to the refrigerant is the cool-
ing capacity of the AC unit. In the test, the electrical heating load is
added to the test chamber such that the room temperature can be
maintained at 27 °C dry bulb and 19 °C wet bulb, which is the ISO-
5151:2017 standard air-conditioning indoor air condition in sum-
mer. Therefore, the energy balance in the evaporator can be ex-
Fig. 1. Schematic of the AC unit system.
pressed as follows:
Table 1
AC unit system geometry and operating qevap + m˙ (h4 − h1 ) = 0 (4)
parameters.

Symbols Parameters where qevap represents the cooling capacity of the propane in the
−6
evaporator. h4 and h1 are the specific enthalpy of propane at the
3
Vcmp (m ) 21.4 × 10
ω (rpm) 2860
evaporator inlet and outlet, respectively.
V˙ evap (m3 /h) 708 Fig. 2 shows the pressure–enthalpy diagram of the R290 vapor
Pdis (MPa) 1.87 compression cycle. The propane hermetic motor compressor in-
Psuc (MPa) 0.57 creases the pressure and temperature of the superheated propane
V˙ cnd (m3 /h) 2676
to 1.87 MPa and 67.7 °C, which corresponds to the process from
Rated Wc (W) 3170/3200 ± 3%
Rated Wcmp (W) 965/985 ± 3% state 1 to state 2 in Fig. 2. The high-temperature and high-pressure
Rated COP 3.34 vapor enters into the micro bare-tube condenser with a drastic
decrease in temperature and condenses into a high-pressure sub-
cooled liquid (state 3 in Fig. 2). The high-pressure liquid then
order to predict the system behavior, the thermodynamic model passes through a capillary tube with a large pressure drop to 0.57
is developed in Engineering Equation Solver (EES) software (Klein, MPa (state 4). This low-pressure vapor and liquid mixture flows
2018). Table 1 presents the basic system geometry and operation into another micro bare-tube evaporator and absorbs the heat from
parameters. the room while providing sufficient cooling. The superheated low-
The model is built in EES with the following equations. The temperature vapor (state 1) is sucked into the compressor inlet and
propane compression process is labeled in Fig. 1 from state 1 compressed into high-pressure vapor, which ends one vapor com-
to state 2. The mass flow rate of propane can be expressed as pression cycle. The evaporator is maintained at standard summer
follows: indoor air conditions with an electricity heater adding heat to the
room in order to facilitate the measurement of the room sensible
ω · ηv · Vcmp
m˙ = (1) load. The model of the basic vapor compression cycle is built to
60 · v simulate the behavior of the system. In Fig. 2, the calculated cool-
ω is the rotational speed of the compressor, and Vcmp is the com- ing capacity is 3719 W with a compression power of 922 W from
pressor compression volume, both of which are shown in Table 1. the model. From the point of view of heat transfer, the designed
v is the specific volume of the propane gas at the compressor in- heat exchangers are required to meet the condenser load and evap-
take, which is state 1 in Fig. 1. ηv is the volumetric efficiency of orator cooling capacity to improve the system efficiency. The heat
the compressor. The volumetric efficiency for the 1.3-HP AC com- exchanger design is the key to improving the system performance.
pressor is assumed to be 70% as a rough estimate. Using the above Owing to the stringent propane charge limit as per the EN 378-
equation, the mass flow rate of propane in the compressor can be 1:2016 standard, micro bare-tube heat exchangers with stainless
determined. By ignoring the heat transfer from the compressor to steel tubes of inner diameter of 0.38 mm are installed as the con-
the surroundings, the compression power provided by the com- denser and evaporator. The tiny micro tubes require much less
pressor can be calculated using the following equation: propane in the heat exchangers as compared to traditional fin-tube
heat exchangers. The configuration of one micro bare-tube heat ex-
Wcmp = m˙ (h2 − h1 ) (2)
changer unit is shown in Fig. 3. The micro bare tubes are welded
where Wcmp is the compression power. The heat transfer occurring inside D-shape connectors as indicated in the enlarged area in
in the condenser is the heating capacity. This heating energy may Fig. 3. There are N = 122 columns in the w width direction and
be dissipated to the surroundings or used as the heat pump. The 5–6 rows in the H height direction. Table 2 lists the detailed pa-
energy balance at the condenser may be represented by the fol- rameters of the condenser and evaporator installed in the AC unit.
lowing equation: The length of the one-piece heat exchanger is L = 480 mm, with a
width of 200 mm, and 15 mm height. The pitch distance between
qcnd + m˙ (h2 − h3 ) = 0 (3)
each tube is 1.64 mm. The effective number of transfer units (NTU)
where qcnd is the rate of energy transfer from the refrigerant in method is adopted to simulate the ideal performance of the micro
the condenser. h2 and h3 are the specific enthalpy of propane at bare-tube condenser and evaporator.
50 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55

7 R290 7
10 1x10

368.4 K

3 2

316.2 K
P [Pa]

6 6
10 1x10

4
1
271.4 K

0.4 0.6
0.2 0.8
233 K
5 5
10 1x10
0.0 2.0x105 4.0x105 6.0x105
h [J/kg]
Fig. 2. P–h diagram of vapor compression cycle with R290 as refrigerant.

Fig. 3. Schematic of the micro bare-tube heat exchanger.

The condensers and evaporators with micro bare tubes are de-
signed using the effective-NTU method. Several assumptions are
made to simplify the problem:
1. The evaporation and condensation process are not modeled in
detail.
2. Owing to the low wall thickness of the stainless steel tube, its
thermal resistance is neglected.
The air-side thermal resistance is modeled according to the air
flow across the bare tube. The Reynolds number is determined as
follows:
ReD = ρair · u˙ air · Dout /μair
where ReD is the Reynolds number outside the micro bare tube.
ρ air is the air density, u˙ air is the velocity of the air, and Dout is
the outer diameter of the bare tube. μair represents the dynamic
viscosity of the air. The Nusselt number NuD is determined from
Zukauskas correlation, which is shown below (Zukauskas, 1972):
0.36 Pr 1/4
N uD = 0.92 · 0.8 · ReD 0.4 Pr (6)
Prs
There are five or six rows of micro bare tubes in the flow direc-
tion and the calculated outside air Reynold number is 145, there-
fore, the Zukauskas correlation is adopted to determine the average
Nusselt number. Pr is the Prandtl number evaluated at the arith-
metic mean of the air inlet and outlet temperatures, Prs is the
Prandtl number evaluated at the tube wall surface temperature.
The thermal resistance Rout of the air side is given by the following
(5) equation:
Rout = 1/λout /Aout (7)
λout is the heat transfer coefficient outside the bare tube, and
Aout is the total outside area of the bare tube. On neglecting the

8000
Condenser heat rejection (W)
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
D out = 0.98 mm
2000
40 60 80
Number of tubes in each column (-)
Fig. 4. Heat rejection from condenser for various numbers of tube columns.
thermal resistance of the stainless steel tube, the thermal resis-
tance inside the micro bare tube can also be calculated as follows:
1
Rin =
Ltot · π · (Dout − 2 · th ) · λin
where Ltot is the total tube length, th is the stainless steel tube
wall thickness, and λin is the propane heat transfer coefficient.
The Reynolds number inside the micro bare tube is approximately
161, and therefore, the Nusselt number for a laminar, hydro-
dynamically, and thermally fully developed flow in a circular tube
can be determined using the following equation while assuming a
uniform wall temperature (Kays, 1993),
λin Din
N uin = = 3.66
kin
The number of heat transfer units can be calculated as follows:
1 phenomenon that occurs in the micro bare-tube heat exchanger is
NT U =
(Rout + Rin )cair m˙ air
The heat exchanger effectiveness is as follows:
ε = 1 − exp[−NT U ]
The maximum heat transfer rate can be determined as follows:
q˙ max = m˙ air · Cair (TR,in − Tair,in )
Furthermore, the heat transfer rate is
q˙ = q˙ max · ε
The condenser and evaporator design is shown in this paper
as an example. Figs. 4 and 5 show the micro bare-tube heat ex-
changer performance for various numbers of micro bare tubes and
tube outer diameters.
Fig. 4 indicates that the condenser heat rejection rate increases
significantly from 2750 W to 7250 W when the number of heat ex-
changer columns is increased from 50 to 150. For the same number
of micro bare-tube columns, the large-diameter micro bare-tube
heat exchanger dissipates more heat to the surroundings. For in-
stance, as shown in Fig. 4, with 122 columns of tubes, the 0.98-mm
outer diameter heat exchanger delivers a heating capacity of al-
most 6500 W while the 0.58-mm one only rejects 5800 W of heat.
The larger-diameter heat exchanger has a larger heat-transfer area
such that it transfers a greater amount of energy. However, the
tube column number is limited by the heat exchanger size. For a
heat exchanger of given dimensions, 122 0.58-mm-diameter tubes
can be fit in each row, while only 80 0.98-mm-diameter tubes
can be fit in each row. Thus, the total heat transfer area of the
W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55 51
4000
Evaporator cooling capacity (W)
3500
3000
D out = 0.98 mm
D out = 0.38 mm
2500
D out = 0.78 mm
D out = 0.58 mm
2000 D out = 0.58 mm
D out = 0.78 mm
1500 D out = 0.38 mm
1000
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
100 120 140 160
Number of tubes in each column (-)
Fig. 5. Evaporator cooling capacity for various numbers of tube columns.
larger-diameter heat exchanger is smaller than that of the smaller-
diameter heat exchanger. Moreover, a large outer diameter implies
a large void volume, and therefore, the required propane charge
(8) will also be greater. Fig. 5 illustrates the evaporator performance
for various numbers of tubes in each heat exchanger column. The
cooling capacity increases from 1500 W to 40 0 0 W when the num-
ber of tubes increases from 50 to 150. The calculated cooling ca-
pacity of 3200 W is close to the rated cooling capacity Rated Wc ,
which is specified as 3170 W in the compressor manual. However,
a cooling power of 3719 W is obtained on using the previously pre-
sented thermodynamic model. This discrepancy can be attributed
to the inaccuracy of the effectiveness-NTU method in predicting
the performance of heat exchangers involving a phase change, such
(9) as in the case of condensers or evaporators. This discrepancy could
also be caused by other uncertainties such as sub-cooling and de-
superheating. Moreover, the micro bare-tube condenser and evap-
orator are new types of heat exchangers. The detailed heat-transfer
(10)
required to be further explored.
Based on Fig. 4, a condenser with 122 columns of tubes per
row is fabricated and tested in the experiment. As shown in Fig. 5,
(11) an evaporator with 90 columns of micro bare tubes per row can
provide sufficient cooling. However, it is easy to fabricate the heat
exchanger with 122 columns per row in the case of both the con-
denser and evaporator. Moreover, there is always some discrepancy
(12)
between the theoretical calculation and the experimental results,
and therefore, the oversized evaporator with 122 columns of tubes
per row is adopted in the experiment. The condenser has (col-
(13)
umn × row × piece) 122 × 6 × 3 = 2196 micro bare tubes, while the
evaporator has 122 × 5 × 3= 1830 micro bare tubes.
The propane charge for the condenser and evaporator is esti-
mated based on the micro bare-tube heat-exchanger infrared im-
age, which is shown in Fig. 7. The color bar in the infrared image
indicates the temperature in Celsius. The inlet of the propane va-
por is on the top left and the outlet of the propane liquid is at the
bottom right in the image. The saturated propane vapor and liquid
temperature at 1.87 MPa is 56.6 °C, therefore, the vapor propane
condensed into saturated liquid immediately at the entrance of the
condenser as shown in Fig. 7. Thus, the amount of the propane
in the condenser is calculated by multiplying the saturated liq-
uid density with the void volume of the condenser; this should
provide a rough estimation of propane quickly in the condenser
during the operation. A similar method is used to calculate the
propane charge required in the evaporator as well. Fig. 6 shows the
condenser and evaporator liquid propane with micro bare tubes
of various outer diameters and various numbers of columns. In
Fig. 6(a), when the column number is maintained at 122, the 0.58-
52 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55

0.25 0.25
Propane liquid mass in condenser (kg)

Propane liquid mass in condenser (kg)

D out = 0.98 mm Dout = 0.98 mm

0.2 0.2

D out = 0.78 mm D out = 0.78 (mm)

0.15 0.15

0.1 0.1
D out = 0.58 mm D out = 0.58 (mm)

0.05 0.05

0 0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Number of tubes in each column (-) Number of tubes in each column (-)
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Propane liquid in condenser (a) and evaporator (b) with micro bare tubes of various outer diameters.

Fig. 7. The infrared image of the micro bare tube condenser.

mm diameter condenser requires only 44 g of propane, but the 3. Experimental verification

0.98-mm diameter heat exchanger contains 187 g of propane. The
0.58-mm diameter bare-tube propane charge mass is only 24% The R290 AC unit experimental setup is based on the design of
of that required for the 0.98-mm diameter condenser. The same the micro bare-tube condenser and evaporator. The 1.3-HP rotary
phenomenon was observed in the case of the evaporator propane R290 compressor is used as the pressure generator. The two micro
charge, which is shown in Fig. 6(b). The propane liquid and vapor bare-tube heat exchangers with different configuration serve as the
mixture inside the evaporator is only 6 g for the 0.58-mm outer di- condenser and evaporator. Three capillary tubes are installed to ex-
ameter tubes. The amount of propane in the evaporator is insignif- pand the propane liquid from a high pressure to a low pressure. A
icant as compared to the refrigerant in the condenser. As there is a photograph of this AC unit is shown in Fig. 8, the condenser and
significant decrease in the propane charge required in such a micro evaporator are shown in the left and right photographs, respec-
bare-tube condenser, the use of this type of heat exchanger could tively, and both have micro bare tubes as heat exchangers.
be a potential approach to decreasing the propane charge required In addition, the micro bare tube is fabricated using small stain-
for commercial R290 ACs and heat pumps. The lower the required less steel tubes, as shown in Fig. 9. Owing to the small inner di-
propane charge, the safer the propane AC or heat pump. Based on ameter, the liquid and vapor flows in the micro tubes are under a
Figs. 4–6, with a heat rejection of 4100 W and cooling capacity of laminar flow condition. The phase change in the micro bare tubes
3290 W, the 0.58-mm outer-diameter stainless steel tube could be also enhances the heat transfer coefficient because of the instant
used in the condenser and evaporator in the propane AC and heat boiling and condensing behavior in the micro tubes. The 67 °C
pump units. propane vapor condenses into liquid at less than 10 mm inside the
 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55 53

Fig. 8. AC unit with micro bare tube heat exchanger (left condenser, right evaporator).

Table 3
Experimental testing results (20-V evaporator fan voltage).

T1 T2 T3 T4 Ti,cnd To,cnd,Rt To,cnd,L To,cnd,U To,cnd,Dn Ti,cap Ti,evap To,evap

Unit °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C

Min 12.4 67.9 38.1 8.9 34.6 40.6 43.0 43.0 39.9 37.3 26.9 14.0
Max 12.5 68 38.2 9.3 34.7 40.7 43.1 43.1 40.0 37.4 26.9 14.1
Ave. 12.4 67.9 38.2 9.0 34.7 40.6 43.0 43.1 39.9 37.4 26.9 14.0

Table 4
Experimental testing results (24-V evaporator fan voltage).

T1 T2 T3 T4 Ti,cnd To,cnd,Rt To,cnd,L To,cnd,U To,cnd,Dn Ti,cap Ti,evap To,evap qs ql qtot

Unit °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C °C W W W

Min 14.3 69.3 38.0 10.2 34.6 40.8 43.4 43.5 39.8 37.2 26.8 15.1 2787.8 809.6 3613.4
Max 14.4 69.5 38.1 10.3 34.8 40.9 43.5 43.6 40.0 37.3 27.0 15.2 2842.7 848.7 3668.6
Ave. 14.3 69.4 38.1 10.2 34.7 40.9 43.5 43.6 39.9 37.3 26.9 15.2 2814.0 831.6 3645.6

accuracy of ±0.1 °C are installed in the condenser and evaporator

Fig. 9. Photograph of the micro bare-tube heat exchanger (122 columns × 5 rows).
micro bare tube, and the high-temperature liquid then continues to
transfer heat to the low-temperature air outside the tube. A similar
high heat transfer performance is exhibited in the evaporator.
The AC unit system was sent to the Chinese national standard
equipment-testing center for performance evaluation. The testing
standard follows the ISO 5151:2017, non-ducted air conditioner and
heat pump testing and rating for performance. The testing con-
ditions for indoor air and outdoor air are also specified in the
dashed-line box in Fig. 10. The measurement results are shown in
Tables 3 and 4. The GE Druck/US 4-MPa PTX series pressure trans-
ducer with an accuracy of ±0.25% full scale were installed to de-
tect the low and high pressure across the compressor, as indicated
in Fig. 10. The platinum resistance thermometers PT10 0 0 with an
units, and their installation positions are shown in Fig. 10. There
are four Thermocouples (T1 , T2 , T3 , and T4 ) installed at the com-
pressor intake, compressor discharge, condenser outlet and evap-
orator inlet positions, respectively. There are also five Thermo-
couples (Ti,cnd , To,cnd,Rt , To,cnd,L , To,cnd,U , and To,cnd,Dn ) installed in
the condenser, and two Thermocouples (Ti,evap and To,evap ) in the
evaporator to measure the air temperature. Another Thermocou-
ple (Ti,cap ) is installed upstream of the capillary tube. The con-
denser is located in a chamber maintained at 35 °C dry bulb tem-
perature and 24 °C wet bulb temperature. The evaporator is in
the other room, which is maintained at 27 °C dry bulb temperature
and 19 °C wet bulb temperature. Table 3 shows the temperature
measurement with the evaporator fan power input of 51 W. The
measured temperatures T1 , T2 , T3 , and T4 are close to the thermo-
dynamic model prediction. The measured cooling capacity is 3516
W with the total compressor electricity power input of 1022 W.
Table 4 shows the temperature measurement at 24-V and 82-W
fan power condition. The cooling capacity under these conditions
is 3645 W with a total electricity input of 1072 W. The propane
charge is 248±5 g in both the testing cases. The “Kinfield Elec-
tronic Scale” with the full scale of 30 kg and accuracy of 5 g is
adopted in the experiment. In Table 4, qs represents the sensible
heat added to the chamber, and ql represents the latent heat added
to the testing room. The measured compressor power Wc is 928 W,
the condenser fan power is Wcnd 62 W, and the evaporator fan con-
sumption Wevap is 82 W. Therefore, the total COP can be expressed
as follows:
q˙ c
COP = (14)
Wcmp + Wcnd + W˙ evap
˙ ˙
54 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55
Fig. 10. Schematic of experimental setup and testing facility.
Table 5
Cooling performance comparison between model and experiment.
Model Experiment (20-V fan) Discrepancy with model
qtot (W) 3719 3516 5.4%
COP 4.0 3.44 14%
The total AC unit COP at this condition is 3.40 with a 24-V
evaporator fan input and 3.44 with a 20-V evaporator fan voltage.
The cooling capacity calculated using the thermodynamic model is
3719 W with a compression power of 922 W. The modeled COP
is 4.0, which is close to the measured COP of 3.93 without the
fan power. The discrepancy in the COP between the model predic-
tion and experimental result is 1.75%. The model does not take into
consideration the condensation of water on the evaporator surface;
this could cause the above-mentioned discrepancy.
Table 5 shows the comparison of the measured cooling capacity
with the thermodynamic model prediction. The measured cooling
power values are 3645 W and 3516 W for an 81-W and a 51-W fan
power input, respectively. The calculated cooling power from the
theoretical thermodynamic model is 3719 W. The cooling capacity
measured in the experiment is within 5% of the model, and the
COP comparison is within 15%. The evaporator cooling capacity
determined by the effectiveness-NTU method is 3200 W, which is
less than that of the measurement data. This is caused by the high
heat-transfer performance of the new micro bare-tube heat ex-
changers. The propane inside the micro channel provides a larger
heat transfer coefficient owing to the instant and high-efficiency
boiling process inside such micro bare tubes. There are 1830
micro bare tubes installed as evaporators such that the air-side
surface area is 435% greater than that of the copper tube heat
exchangers of 9.52-mm outer diameter and 10-m length (assume
no fins). Therefore, the air-side thermal resistance is enhanced by
the increased outside surface area. In addition, the wall thickness
of the stainless steel tube is 0.1 mm, which provides a rela-
tively low thermal resistance. This results in a high heat transfer
Experiment (24-V fan) Discrepancy with model
3645 2.0%
3.40 15%
performance. Moreover, the micro bare-tube heat exchanger has a
better Hinterland-relation between surface–area-to-volume ratios.
In the experiment, the propane charge in the system is 248±5 g.
The micro bare-tube system propane charge follows the EN378-
1:2016 regulation. Therefore, this R290 AC unit with a 248±5-g
propane charge and with micro bare tubes as a condenser and
evaporator could be a good approach to reducing the propane
charge in ACs and heat pumps.
Table 6 shows the comparison of the propane charge for vari-
ous ACs and heat pumps from previous studies and this work. The
proposed split AC unit has air to propane type heat exchangers as
condensers and evaporators which is similar to Park (2009), Zhou
(2010) and Padalkar (2014) air conditioner systems. Notice that the
system in this research are not exactly the same as the systems
reported by other researchers in Table 6, such as, different cool-
ing/heating capacities, different oil types and different oil charge
etc. In order to simplify the propane charge comparison, the charge
per kilo-watts capacity is listed in the table. As shown in the table,
the micro bare-tube split AC can reduce 56.1%, 61.2% and 2.7% less
propane charge per kilo-watts cooling capacity comparing to the
previous studies. The first two rows in Table 6 indicate the propane
charge/capacity increases, which is caused by adopting different
type of condensers or evaporators. Fernando (2004) used the
liquid-to-propane micro channel heat exchanger as a condenser
and evaporator and obtained 5 kW of heating capacity with a
charge/capacity of 40 g/kW propane in the experiment. Corberan
(2008) used the plate and frame heat exchanger cooling system
and achieved a cooling capacity of 14 kW with a 550-g propane
charge. The micro channel plate heat exchangers could use water
 W. Zhou and Z. Gan / International Journal of Refrigeration 101 (2019) 47–55
Table 6
Comparison of the propane charge between previous literatures and this research.
Researcher Heat exchanger type Cooling/heating capacity
Fernando (2004) Water to propane 5 kW (heating)
Corberan (2008 Water to propane 14 kW (cooling)
Park (2009) Air to propane 3.5 kW (cooling)
Zhou (2010) Air to propane 2.7 kW (cooling)
Padalkar (2014) Air to propane 4.8 kW (cooling)
This work Air to propane 3.6 kW (cooling)
or other liquids to transfer heat with the propane refrigerant. Air
is not suitable for this type of heat exchanger because of the large
pressure drop across the small channels. The micro bare-tube heat
exchanger could also be used in a liquid-to-liquid heat transfer
scenario and provides good performance. The micro bare-tube
condenser and evaporator split AC unit could be a potential ap-
proach to reducing the required propane charge while avoiding a
degradation in the performance of residential ACs and heat pumps.
4. Conclusion and discussion
The micro bare-tube heat exchanger could be used in an R290
AC and heat pump system because of its high heat transfer perfor-
mance, small size, and low required charge. The reported R290 AC
unit could achieve a COP of 3.40 with a cooling power of 3645 W.
The system propane charge is 248±5 g, which follows the EN378-
1:2016 regulation. Therefore, the use of the micro bare-tube AC
unit could potentially be an approach to reducing the required
propane charge in ACs and heat pumps, which could also poten-
tially be used in the AC and heat pump field in the future.
The use of the new micro bare-tube heat exchangers as a con-
denser and evaporator also poses some problems, such as the un-
even distribution of the liquid and gas in the evaporator and con-
denser, and the required improvement in the fan performance and
efficiency for both the condenser and evaporator. Therefore, fur-
ther study is required to understand the characteristics of the mi-
cro bare tube R290 AC and heat pump units in depth.
Acknowledgments
This research is sponsored by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant No. 51806191) and the 63rd post-
doctor foundation of China (Grant No. 2018M632458). The authors
55
Charge (g) Charge/Capacity (g/kW) Charge/capacity savings by this work
200 40.0 -72.25%
550 39.3 -75.3%
550 157 56.1%
480 177.8 61.2%
340 70.8 2.7%
248 68.9 -
also thank the staff of Jinstong Tech, Inc., Shouren Yu, Xianliang
Han, and Wenlong Zhao, for their useful work done. Their useful
input and good experimental skills provided a great help in this
research.
References
BSEN378, 2016. The British Standard Institution BS EN 378.
Choudhari, C.S., Sapali, S.N., 2017. Performance investigation of natural refriger-
ant R290 as a substitute to R22 in refrigeration systems. Energy Procedia 109,
346–352.
Corberan, J.M., Martinez, I.O., Gonzalvez, J., 2008. Charge optimisation study of re-
versiable water to water propane heat pump. Int. J. Refrig. 31, 716–726.
Fernando, P., Palm, B., Lundqvist, P., Granryd, E., 2004. Propane Heat Pump with Low
Refrigerant Charge: Design and Laboratory Tests.
He, G., Liu, F., Cai, D., Jiang, J., 2016. Experimental investigation on flow boiling heat
transfer performance of a new near azeotropic refrigerant mixture R290/R32 in
horizontal tubes. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 102, 561–573.
Huang, L., Aute, V., Radermacher, R., 2014. A model for air-to-refrigerant microchan-
nel condensers with variable tube and fin geometries. Int. J. Refrig. 40, 269–281.
Jin, S., Wang, X., Ma, X., Wang, Q., 2017. Study on the performance of small tube
diameter R290 fin-tube evaporator. Procedia Eng. 205, 1578–1583.
Kays, W.M., Crawford, M.E., 1993. Convective Heat and Mass Transfer. McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Klein, S., 2018. EES: Engineering Equation Solver. F-Chart Software, Madison, WI.
Lampugnani, G., Z., M., 1996. R290 as a substitute of R502 and R22 in commercial
refrigeration and air conditioning. In: Proceedings of the International Compres-
sor Engineering Conference, pp. 1087–1094.
Mohanraj, M., Jayaraj, S., Muraleedharan, C., Chandrasekar, P., 2009. Experimental
investigation of R290/R600a mixture as an alternative to R134a in a domestic
refrigerator. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48, 1036–1042.
Padalkar, A.S., Mali, K.V., Devotta, S., 2014. Simulated and experimental performance
of split packaged air conditioner using refrigerant HC-290 as a substitute for
HCFC-22. Appl. Therm. Eng. 62, 277–284.
Park, K.-J., Jung, D., 2009. Performance of heat pumps charged with R170/R290 mix-
ture. Appl. Energy 86, 2598–2603.
Zukauskas, A., 1972. Heat transfer from tubes in cross-flow. Adv. Heat Transf. 8,
93–160.
Zhou, G, Zhang, Y., 2010. Performance of a split-type air conditioner matched with
coiled adiabatic capillary tubes using HCFC22 and HC290. Appl. Energy 87,
1522–1528.