See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283835765

Exergy analysis of R1234yf and R1234ze as R134a replacements in a two

evaporator vapour compression refrigeration system

Article  in  International Journal of Refrigeration · December 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2015.08.010

CITATIONS READS

38 1,429

3 authors:

Alptug Yataganbaba Ali Kilicarslan

Hitit University Hitit University
6 PUBLICATIONS   80 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   251 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

İrfan Kurtbaş
Hitit University
24 PUBLICATIONS   498 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Drying of bricks View project

8th International Advanced Technologies Symposium (IATS’17) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by İrfan Kurtbaş on 07 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / i j r e f r i g

Exergy analysis of R1234yf and R1234ze as

R134a replacements in a two evaporator vapour
compression refrigeration system

Alptug Yataganbaba *, Ali Kilicarslan, İrfan Kurtbaş

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hitit University, Corum 19030, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Exergy analysis is a useful way for determining the real thermodynamic losses and optimising
Received 15 April 2015 environmental and economic performance in the systems such as vapour compression re-
Received in revised form 12 August frigeration systems. The present study deals with the exergy analysis on a two evaporator
2015 vapour compression refrigeration system using R1234yf, R1234ze and R134a as refriger-
Accepted 13 August 2015 ants. In the calculation of losses occurring in different system components, besides the exergy
Available online 20 August 2015 efficiency of the refrigeration cycle, a computer code was developed by using Engineering
Equation Solver (EES-V9.172-3D) software package program. The effects of the evaporator
Keywords: and condenser temperatures on the exergy destruction and exergy efficiency of the system
Two evaporators were investigated. R1234yf and R1234ze, which are good alternatives to R134a concerning
Exergy efficiency their environmentally friendly properties and this is the most significant finding emerging
Exergy destruction from this study.
EES © 2015 Elsevier Ltd and International Institute of Refrigeration. All rights reserved.

Analyse exergétique des substituts R1234yf et R1234ze au

R134a dans un système frigorifique à compression de vapeur
à double évaporateur
Mots clés : Deux évaporateurs ; Efficacité exergétique ; Destruction d’exergie ; EES

and costs, even a small optimisation in the system perfor-

1. Introduction
Refrigeration system’s energy consumption and costs are among
the most important items on the agenda of future strategy for
some industries and a number of commercial sectors, such as
food, drink and chemicals. By contrast with these high demands
mance can offer significant cost savings, resulting in increased
profits. Therefore, depending on the system requirements,
various configurations can be made in refrigeration systems
considering the conditions of the environment and energy
savings (Centre for Energy Advancement through Technological
Innovation (CEATI, 2010). For instance, some commercial

* Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hitit University, Corum 19030, Turkey. Tel.: +90 364 2274533; Fax: +90 364
2274535.
E-mail address: alptugyataganbaba@hitit.edu.tr (A. Yataganbaba).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2015.08.010
0140-7007/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd and International Institute of Refrigeration. All rights reserved.
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37 27

developed by Zhu et al. (2013) is aimed at the optimal control

Nomenclature analysis of multi-evaporator variable refrigerant flow air con-
ditioning system both in cooling and heating modes. The results
Symbols
m mass flow rate [kg s−1] obtained from this study showed that the AGM-I is more ap-
 heat transfer rate [kW] plicable than a generic simulation model for multi-evaporator
Q
W  work rate [kW] VRF system. On the other hand, the AGM-II is more appli-
P pressure [kPa] cable for the one evaporator VRF system.
s specific entropy [kJ kg−1 K−1] Some writers have proposed a novel control method to
h specific enthalpy [kJ kg−1] optimise energy consumption and to determine maximum co-
To reference temperature [K] efficient of performance (COP) for multi evaporator systems
TL, TH source temperature [K] (Elliott and Rasmussen, 2008; Lin and Yeh, 2007, 2009; You et al.,
E 2010). In their case study, Minetto et al. (2014) suggested a new
exergy [kW]
method for feeding flooded multiple evaporators arranged par-
r refrigerant
allel in R744 plants. An ejector was used to promote evaporators
η efficiency
overfeeding. The proposed method provided energy saving and
smooth operating conditions when compared to dry-expansion
Subscripts and abbreviations
evaporator.
dest destruction
The studies depending on the energy and exergy analysis
in inlet
are essential for the efficient utilisation of energy recourses
out outlet
for a variety of systems. Therefore, a growing trend has been
comp compressor
observed towards these analyses in the last two decades. The
ev evaporator
traditional methods of process analysis (energy analysis) are
con condenser
based on the First Law of Thermodynamics. This method is the
exp expansion valve
failure to consider changes in energy quality during a process,
mc mixing chamber
since it does not consider the properties of the environment
sc subcooling
around the system and not characterise the irreversibility of
VCRS vapour compression refrigeration system
the processes within the system. Thus, it makes traditional ther-
EES Engineering Equation Solver
modynamic analysis methods quite unsatisfactory. To overcome
COP coefficient of performance
this inadequacy, the concept of exergy has quickly become a
EPR evaporator pressure regulator
key instrument in recent years. Exergy (value of energy) is a
GWP global warming potential
relatively alternative technique defined as the maximum useful
ODP ozone depleting potential
work obtainable from the system, when its state is brought to
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
the standard atmospheric conditions or a dead state (Rosen
HFO hydrofluoroolefin
and Dincer, 2001; Rosen et al., 2008). In the ideal energy con-
version process no exergy is lost, but in any real process exergy
refrigeration systems use one compressor and multi evapo- destruction (irreversibility) takes place and it constitutes the
rator because of their ability to meet various refrigerating loads main difference between energy and exergy. Hence, the exergy
at different temperatures in different zones within the same analysis is a more rational measure of environmental and eco-
system, such as large office buildings and hotels, food pres- nomic performance of process than the energy analysis.
ervation industries, supermarkets, etc. In that case, it requires Ansari et al. (2012) published a paper in which they de-
the use of separate evaporators at each location for maintain- scribed the performance of R1234yf and R1234ze in a simple
ing a specific temperature and producing the required vapour compression refrigeration system (VCRS) equipped with
refrigeration load. Another alternative is to use individual re- a liquid vapour heat exchanger. They carried out a theoretical
frigeration systems for each zone to compensate the different exergy analysis for R1234yf and R1234ze as a positive alterna-
performance requirements. However, this solution may not be tive to R134a. This study highlighted that R1234ze and R1234yf
economical due to the high initial cost. can be a good alternative to R134a. The highest efficiency defect
The first serious discussion and analysis of two evapora- value was obtained from the condenser while the lowest one
tor refrigeration system was performed by Stoecker (1985). In was obtained from liquid vapour heat exchanger among the
another major study, a mathematical programming approach system components. Yari et al. (2013) studied on a novel dual-
to optimise a refrigeration cycle comprising two evaporators evaporator system with dual-source (renewable and electrical
operating at two different temperatures for different types of energies). The proposed system was a combination of heat driven
refrigerant mixtures was developed by Churi and Achenie (1997). and VCRS. They performed an exergy analysis and optimised
As a result of this study, it was realised that the multi evapo- the system by using R1234yf as refrigerant and using the En-
rator cycle can give higher efficiencies compared to the single gineering Equation Solver (EES). A detailed examination of
evaporator cycle. As noted by Li and Su (2003, 2005) a two R1234yf by Ozgur et al. (2012) showed that R1234yf is a good al-
evaporator refrigeration system has a larger surface area for ternative to R134a according to energy and exergy analysis
heat recovery and this situation causes a reduction of com- results. Similarly, other researchers draw our attention to the
pressor work. Therefore, it can be said that two or more usage of R1234yf and R1234ze as R134a replacement in VCRS
evaporators in a refrigeration system show better perfor- (Babiloni et al., 2014; Esbrí et al., 2013; Jankovic et al., 2015; Jarall,
mance than one evaporator system. The simulation model 2012; Lai, 2014; Molés et al., 2014; Zhao et al., 2015).
28 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37

As seen in the literature survey obtained via using differ-

Table 1 – Properties of selected refrigerants.
ent databases, such as Scopus, ISI Web of Science, these studies
provide important insights into the exergy analysis of VCRS R1234yf R1234ze R134a
(HFO) (HFO) (HFC)
employing different refrigerants. However, much of the re-
search considered up until now has tended to focus on single ASHRAE Safety Groupa A2L A2L A1
evaporator traditional VCRS. Additionally, although extensive GWPb 4 7 1430
ODPc 0 0 0
research has been carried out on multi evaporator VCRS, far
Critical pressure (MPa)d 34 36 41
too little attention has been paid to investigate the thermo- Critical temperature (°C)d 95 109 101
dynamic performance of multi evaporator systems and to Boiling point at 1 atm (°C)d −29 −19 −26
explore the effect of evaporator and condenser temperature ASHRAE flammability Yes (low) Yes (low) No
on the exergy efficiency of system components. In this study ASHRAE toxicity No No No
unlike previous studies, the exergy analysis for a two evapo- a
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 34–2010.
rator VCRS with using R1234yf and R1234ze as an alternative b
Global Warming Potential (100 years) (IPCC 4th Assessment report
to R134a was performed for different condenser and evapo- (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007))).
c
rator temperatures. Ozone Depletion Potential, United Nations Environment Program
(UNEP (2012).
This paper has been organised in the following way. In Section d
NIST REFPROP version 9.0, manufacturers’ published data (Lemmon
2, we present the refrigerants used in refrigeration system in
et al., 2010).
details. In Section 3, we explain the thermodynamic model of
a two evaporator VCRS including the details used in the exergy
analysis. In Section 4, we give the results of exergy analysis of
the refrigeration system components. Finally, we discuss con- by using R1234yf and R1234ze as an alternative to R134a was
cluding remarks in Section 5. 7. performed for the different condenser and evaporator tem-
peratures. A brief description of these refrigerants is given in
Table 1.
In order to effectively compare the range of application for
2. Qualitative evaluation of the refrigerants the refrigerants such as R1234yf, R1234ze, and R134a, the
temperature–entropy and pressure–enthalpy diagrams are
The selection of refrigerants for a given application, some cri- shown in Fig. 1 with the evaporator-1 (−5 °C), evaporator-2
teria should be taken into account, such as thermo-physical (−18 °C) and condenser temperature (40 °C).
characteristics, technological issues, economic aspects, safety
considerations and environmental factors (Kilicarslan and
Müller, 2005). Ozone depleting potential (ODP) is a very im- 3. Two evaporator refrigeration cycle
portant parameter for the selection of the refrigerants. In this
study, R1234yf and R1234ze were preferred as “fourth genera- 3.1. Description of cycle
tion refrigerants” because these refrigerants are categorised as
having zero ODP. As shown in Fig. 2, the refrigeration system consists of two
As a consequence of Kyoto protocol, the European Union evaporators operating at different temperatures, a single
(EU) has banned the new developed HFC refrigerants like R134a compressor with individual expansion valves for each evapo-
due to their high global warming potential (GWP) since the be- rator, one condenser and evaporator pressure regulator (EPR).
ginning of 2011. Therefore, alternative refrigerants should be In some commercial refrigeration systems, one condens-
replaced with more environmental friendly and safe refriger- ing unit associated with two or more evaporators are used. This
ants in a way that the energy efficiency can also be improved type of refrigeration system is usually used for commercial re-
in order to meet the global ecological goals. Hydrofluoroolefins frigeration, such as in supermarkets, hotels and restaurants.
(HFOs) are some of the energy efficient alternatives to tradi- Evaporators may have the same or different temperatures ac-
tional refrigerants with low GWP values that reduce the cording to the situation of the requirement of varied types of
environmental impact. HFO-1234yf and HFO-1234ze are clas- cooling loads. If two or more evaporating temperatures are
sified as A2L and have a GWP of 7. R134a is commercially desired, the device must be used to keep one of the evapora-
available from the family of HFC refrigerant. Its thermo- tors for a lower external pressure. Mechanical refrigeration is
physical properties are similar to R12; however R134a has less a continuous process with the refrigerant changing phase from
ODP. It is non-toxic, non-flammable, non-corrosive and gen- liquid to gas or liquid to liquid to absorb heat from a lower tem-
erally used for commercial and domestic refrigeration, medium perature place, raising the fluid’s pressure and temperature,
temperature applications, such as air conditioning and auto- so it can be rejected to a higher temperature place. The cold
motive air conditioning. According to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard refrigerant (saturated vapour) is absorbed by the compressor
34, it meets A1 classification. Although R134a is still the most at state 1 and compressed to a higher pressure by using me-
widely used refrigerants in refrigeration systems, Europe is chanical energy. The refrigerant vapour is heated up due to the
phasing out R134a due to its relationship to global warming. compression. The superheated refrigerant condenses in the con-
Therefore, major refrigerant manufacturers are trying to develop denser from state 2 to 3 and becomes liquid while releasing
new generation refrigerants having lower GWPs (HFOs) and heat to the environment. Additional reduction in tempera-
being a viable alternative for current generation of HFCs. In the ture results in sub-cooling. The liquid pressurised refrigerant
present study, the exergy analysis for a two evaporator VCRS (sub-cooled liquid) is then expanded to the low evaporation
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37 29

Fig. 1 – Temperature–entropy (T–s) and pressure–enthalpy (P–h) state diagram for R1234yf, R1234ze, and R134a.

pressure in the expansion valves from states 4 and 8 to 5 and
9, respectively. The next step in the evaporators, the refriger-
ant begins evaporating at a temperature not usually associated
with boiling. This low-temperature boiling is actually the ab-
sorption of heat by the refrigerant from states 5 and 9 to 6 and
10, respectively. EPRs are fitted after the evaporators as in a
multi-evaporator system. The purpose of using EPRs is to sustain
constant pressure, thereby providing the same pressure at the
inlet of the mixing chamber for each evaporator. In this study,
two evaporators were used to conform to the different cooling
needs. Each of the evaporators connected in parallel had their
own expansion valve. At state 6, the refrigerant enters into the
EPR and its pressure is reduced to the evaporator pressure of
evaporator 2. After the mixing of the refrigerants in the mixing
chamber, the refrigerant enters into the compressor at state
1 and thus completes the circuit.
A theoretical study based on the exergy analysis of two
evaporator VCRS is presented in order to observe the effects
of evaporating and condensing temperatures with sub-cooling
and superheating on the exergy of system components for
30 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37

Fig. 2 – The schematic diagram of VCRS with two evaporators.

3.2. Mathematical constraints

Table 2 – Data for a two evaporator VCRS.
Refrigerant
Cooling capacity (evaporator-1)
Cooling capacity (evaporator-2)
Source temperatures for
evaporators (TL)
Sink temperatures for condenser
(TH)
Reference temperature (T0)
Reference pressure (P0)
Isentropic efficiency
Subcooling temperature (°C)
R1234yf-R1234ze-R134a Exergy is a measure of how far a certain system deviates from
10 kW the given state and the reference state. Overall balances of
15 kW exergy are illustrated in Fig. 3. Some of exergy is consumed
5 and −10 (°C) in real processes of a system. Therefore, the total exergy at the
output of a system ( E out ) is less than the total exergy at the
25 (°C)
inlet of a system ( E in ). This amount of exergy is generally named
25 (°C) as “the internal exergy losses or exergy destruction ( E dest )” that
100 kPa is caused by the irreversibilities in a system.
0.75 The following expressions can be written for general exergy
5 (°C) balance (Dincer and Kanoglu, 2010):

E in − E out = E dest (1)

different refrigerants namely, R1234yf, R1234ze and R134a. In
the course of the computer code operation, some parameters where E in and E out are the total exergy transferred by heat, work
are held constant and these parameters are given in Table 2. and mass, and E dest is the rate of exergy destruction.
The following assumptions were made in order to perform
exergy analysis of the VCRS using EES:

• The flow of refrigerants into the refrigerating system com-

ponents is analysed in a steady and homogeneous regime.
• The effect of variation of kinetic and potential energies is neg-
ligible during the flow of refrigerants throughout the system.
• Refrigerant passes through the evaporator and condenser
at constant pressure.
• The flow is assumed to be adiabatic through the pipes, the
expansion valve and compressor.
• Dead state of the refrigerants at pressure Po = 1.013 bar and Fig. 3 – Graphical presentation of general exergy balance
temperature To = 25 °C. (Shukuya and Hammache, 2002).
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37 31

The other form of Eq. (1) is given as (Yan et al., 2015): ⎛ E ⎞

ηex_con = 1 − ⎜  dest ,con (9)
⎝ E2 − E 3 ⎟⎠
∑ in m r e − ∑ out m r e + ∑ ⎡⎢⎣Q ⎛⎝ 1 − T0 ⎞⎠ ⎤⎥⎦in − ∑ ⎡⎢⎣Q ⎛⎝ 1 − T0 ⎞⎠ ⎤⎥⎦out
T T

 in − W
+ ∑W ∑  out = E dest (2) • Expansion valves

where m  and e are the mass flow rate of refrigerant and spe- E dest,exp_ 1 = E 4 − E 5 = m
 1T0 (s5 − s4 ) (10)
cific exergy, respectively. Q is the heat transfer rate through
 is the work rate. E dest,exp_ 2 = E 8 − E 9 = m
 2 T0 (s9 − s8 ) (11)
the boundary at temperature T, W
Kinetic and potential exergy is supposed to be insignifi-
cant by reason of the elevation and speed changes are minimal. E
ηex_ exp_ 1 =  5 (12)
Additionally, chemical exergy is affiliated with the departure E4
of the chemical composition of a system from its chemical equi-
librium and is viewed as significant in processes subsuming
E
combustion and other chemical changes (Ahmadi et al., 2013; ηex_ exp_ 2 =  9 (13)
E8
Srinivas and Deb, 1994). The values for the chemical exergy
analysis are regarded as negligible when this refrigeration
• Evaporator pressure regulator
process does not include mixtures of chemical substances or
chemical reactions (e.g. combustion), only the physical exergy
is taken into consideration in the system. E dest ,epr = E 6 − E 7 = m
 1 (h6 − T0s6 ) − m
 1 (h7 − T0s7 ) (14)
Specific exergy of a fluid circulating in the refrigeration
system can be defined as follows: E
ηex_epr =  7 (15)
E6
e = (h − T0s) − (h0 − T0s0 ) (3)
• Evaporators
where h0 and s0 are the enthalpy and entropy values of the dead
state of the refrigerant at pressure P0 and temperature T0.
⎛ T ⎞
Exergy efficiency is a very useful and meaningful indica- E dest ,ev_1 = (E 5 − E 6 ) + Q L ⎜ 1 − 0 ⎟
⎝ TL ⎠
tor to develop or optimise the efficiencies of thermal systems.
 1 (h6 − T0s6 ) + Q L ⎛⎜ 1 − 0 ⎞⎟
T
The exergy efficiency of the VCRS can be expressed as the ratio  1 (h5 − T0s5 ) − m
=m (16)
⎝ TL ⎠
of the actual COP of the cycle to the maximum COP of the cycle
under the same conditions. The exergy efficiency of a VCRS is
⎛ T ⎞
defined as (Dincer and Kanoglu, 2010): E dest , ev_2 = (E 9 − E 10 ) + Q L ⎜ 1 − 0 ⎟
⎝ TL ⎠
 2 (h10 − T0s10 ) + Q L ⎛⎜ 1 − 0 ⎞⎟
T
E E  2 (h9 − T0s9 ) − m
=m (17)
ηex = out = 1 − dest (4) ⎝ TL ⎠
Ein Ein

where ηex is the exergy efficiency of the cycle. The exergy pro- ⎛ E ⎞
ηex_ev_ 1 = 1 − ⎜ dest ,ev_ 1 ⎟ (18)
vided, in other words, the power required for the cycle, W can ⎝ E5 − E6 ⎠
be written as (Dincer and Kanoglu, 2010):
⎛ E ⎞
 =W
 comp = m ηex_ev_ 2 = 1 − ⎜  dest ,ev _ 2 ⎟ (19)
W  r (h2 − h1 ) (5) ⎝ E9 − E10 ⎠

The exergy efficiency is equal to 1 when the process is re- • Mixing chamber
versible, and is less than 1 in another case. If the above exergy
equations are performed on each system component of the two
E dest ,mc = [ms
 1 − (m
 1s7 + m
 2s10 )] T0 (20)
evaporator VCRS given in Fig. 2, the exergy destructions and
efficiencies can be determined by Eqs. (6)–(21).
⎛ E ⎞
ηex_mc = 1 − ⎜  dest ,mc ⎟ (21)
• Compressor ⎝ E7 + E10 ⎠

E dest ,comp = E 1 − E 2 + W
 in = m
 r ( T0 (s2 − s1 )) (6) EES software was used to solve the equations above and to
perform exergy analysis of all system components. EES is pow-
erful software for finding some thermo physical properties of
⎛ E dest ,comp ⎞
ηex_comp = 1 − ⎜  (7) the refrigerants and solving thermodynamic and heat trans-
⎝ Win ⎟⎠ fer problems. The second advantage of using EES is that it can
solve a system of simultaneous equations.
• Condenser The analysis procedure follows the flowchart shown in Fig. 4.
EES database was used in the calculation step of thermody-
E dest ,con = E 2 − E 3 = m
 r (h2 − T0s2 ) − m
 r (h3 − T0s3 ) (8) namic properties of refrigerants.
32 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37

Fig. 4 – Flowchart for two evaporator VCRS.

with the variation of evaporating and condensing tempera-

4. Results and discussions
This study set out with the aim of assessing the importance
of exergy analysis in VCRS with two evaporators. A math-
ematical computational model was developed for performing
the exergy analysis of the system using EES software The as-
sumptions and the operating conditions are kept constant as
given in Section 3.1, whereas the evaporator-1 temperature
varies between −5 and 0, evaporator-2 temperature varies
between −18 and −10, and condenser temperature varies
between 35 and 45 °C.
The exergy destructions in the VCRS with two evaporators
for refrigerants R1234yf, R1234ze and R134a are shown in Fig. 5
tures. Condenser temperature is kept constant at 40 °C in
Fig. 4(a), (b), evaporator-1 and evaporator-2 temperatures are
kept constant at −5 °C and −18 °C in Fig. 5(c), respectively. The
main factor affecting the exergy destruction in evaporaotor-1
and evaporator-2 is the entropy flow because of keeping
constant the capacities of evaporator-1 and evaporator-2 as
10 kW and 15 kW, respectively. As the evaporator tempera-
ture increases, this causes the entropy flow across the
evaporators to decrease as shown from the T–s diagrams in
Fig. 1 for the refrigerants under the study. Therefore, the exergy
destruction in the evaporators decreases as the evaporator tem-
perature increases. From the curves in Fig. 5, it is apparent that
the effect of evaporator-1 temperature on the total exergy
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37 33

7,7 8
(b) R1234yf
7,6
(a) 7,5 R1234ze
7,5 R1234yf R134a
ED, tot (kW)

R1234ze 7

ED, tot (kW)

7,4
R134a
7,3 6,5

7,2
6
7,1

7 5,5

6,9
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
5
-18 -16 -14 -12 -10
Tev-1 (°C) Tev-2 (°C)

9,5
(c)
9
R1234yf
8,5 R1234ze
R134a
ED, tot (kW)

7,5

6,5

5,5
36 38 40 42 44
Tcon (°C)

Fig. 5 – The total exergy destructions vs. evaporating and condensing temperatures.

destruction can be ignored when it is compared to that of
evaporator-2 temperature at the temperature range studied.
In addition, as the condenser temperature increases the total
exergy destruction of the refrigeration system increases. It is
obvious because the higher the temperature difference between
the ambient and the condenser causes the higher exergy losses.
The most obvious finding to emerge from the exergy analysis
is that the lowest total exergy destruction is obtained by using
R134a as a refrigerant while obtaining the highest ones with
R1234yf in the refrigeration system as the evaporator and con-
denser temperature increase as it is seen from Fig. 5. Fig. 5 also
depicts that R1234ze can be an alternative refrigerant to R134a.
Exergy efficiencies of the VCRS with two evaporator as a func-
tion of the evaporator-1, evaporator-2 and condenser
temperatures are depicted in Fig. 6. The exergy efficiency is not
influenced remarkably by the evaporator-1 temperature, however
it increases with the increase of evaporator-2 temperature. It is
encouraging to compare these figures with those found by Ansari
et al. (2012). It should be gathered from their study that the in-
crement of exergy efficiency is up to an optimal value of
evaporator temperature after that it goes down with the in-
crease in evaporator temperature. Conversely, exergy efficiency
decreases with the increasing value of condenser temperature.
Among the considered working fluids, R134a shows the best
exergetic performance. The trends of exergy efficiency of the
VCRS for R1234ze and R134a match nearly the same values.
R1234yf shows lower performance among refrigerants. Indeed,
if the environmental and safety criteria are taken into account,
the best working fluid is R1234ze for this configuration. Al-
though thermodynamic performance is not good as well as
R134a, R1234yf can be proposed as an alternative choice of
working fluid to R134a due to the desired environmental char-
acteristics. The maximum difference observed between the
exergy efficiency values of R1234yf and R134a is 2%–3%.
Fig. 7 depicts the variation of exergy efficiency as a func-
tion of degree of sub-cooling, reference temperature and
isentropic efficiency. During the operation of the computer code,
condenser, evaporator-1 and evaporator-2 temperatures are kept
constants, as 40 °C, −5 °C and −18 °C, respectively. It is evident
that exergy efficiency for all refrigerants increases with the in-
creasing value of sub-cooling temperature, as illustrated in
Fig. 7(a) because the sub-cooling process increases the spe-
cific refrigeration effect, thereby decreasing the refrigerant mass
flow rate for a constant refrigeration capacity. This causes the
entropy generation to decrease, so the exergy efficiency of the
refrigeration system increases. It can be noticed from Fig. 7 that
34 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37

0,29 0,36
R1234yf
0,34 R1234ze
0,28 R134a
R1234yf
R1234ze
0,32
R134a
ηII

ηII
0,27
0,3

0,26 0,28

0,26
0,25
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10
Tev-1 (°C) Tev-2 (°C)

0,33
R1234yf
R1234ze
0,31 R134a

0,29
ηII

0,27

0,25

0,23
36 38 40 42 44
Tcon (°C)

Fig. 6 – The exergy efficiency vs. evaporating and condensing temperatures.

exergy efficiency of R134a is higher than that of R1234ze and
R1234yf. R1234yf gives lower values of exergy efficiency. The
total increase rate in exergy efficiency for 5 °C of sub-cooling
is approximately the same for all refrigerants, namely 8.62%
for R1234yf, 7.94% for R1234ze and 7.23% for R134a. Fig. 7(b)
shows the effect of reference temperature on exergy effi-
ciency. The exergy efficiency accrues with an increase in the
reference temperature, because of the increment in the term
⎛ 1 − T0 ⎞ . This can also be attributed to the reason that with
⎝ T⎠
an increase in the reference temperature, the exergy destruc-
tion decreases due to finite temperature difference and hence
exergy efficiency inreases. R1234ze and R134a show similar
trends and their curves for exergy efficiency are almost over-
lapping. R1234yf shows lower values for exergy efficiency as
compared to R1234ze and R134a for the reference tempera-
ture range considered. The effect of isentropic efficiency on the
second law efficiency of the refrigeration system is shown in
Fig. 7(c). As the isentropic efficiency of the compressor in-
creases, this causes the entropy generation across the
compressor and through the condenser to decrease. There-
fore the exergy destruction in these elements decreases, but
in other main system elements, such as evaporator and
expansion valves it is not affected by this process. Therefore,
the exergy efficiency of the refrigeration system increases as
it is depicted in Fig. 7(c). Higher amount of exergy efficiency
is obtained by employing R134a as a refrigerant in the refrig-
eration system while the lower is obtained by using R1234yf
in the system for parameters, namely Tsc , T0 , ηs .
Table 3 and Fig. 8 show the exergy analyses of the compo-
nents of the refrigeration system for refrigerants R1234yf,
R1234ze and R134a for a specific operating condition. The
maximum amount of exergy destruction occurs in the com-
pressor while the minimum occurs in the mixing chamber for
all the refrigerants under consideration. Fig. 8 depicts that the
exergy destruction values in the compressor range from 2.19
to 2.41 kW as shown in Table 3. The percentage of the exergy
destruction in the compressor is 31.59% for R1234yf, 32.42% for
R1234ze and 31.38% for R134a. The second highest exergy de-
struction occurs in the condenser for all of refrigerants in the
study. As the exergy efficiencies are taken into consideration,
the mixing chamber has the maximum efficiency, namely 99%
for the refrigerants considered. The exergy efficiency of
evaporator-2 is 80% for R1234yf and R1234ze, 79% for R134a.
The heat rejection process in the condenser takes place at a
boundary temperature of T0, so the exergy efficiency of the
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37 35

0,29
0,39 (b) R1234yf
(a) R1234yf
R1234ze R1234ze
0,28 R134a R134a
0,36

0,27
0,33

ηII
ηII

0,26
0,3

0,25
0,27

0,24
0,24
1 2 3 4 5 6 298 300 302 304 306 308 310
Tsc (°C) T0 (K)

0,28 (c) R1234yf

R1234ze
0,26 R134a

0,24
ηII

0,22

0,2

0,18

0,16
0,5 0,55 0,6 0,65 0,7 0,75
ηs

Fig. 7 – The total exergy efficiency vs. Tsc , T0 , ηs .

condenser is 0% for all of the refrigerants. As the exergy effi-

ciencies of expansion valves are compared, expansion valve-1
has higher exergy efficiency than expansion valve-2 because
of larger amount of expansion process in expansion valve-2
as shown in Table 3. As it is shown in Fig. 8 that the percent-
age of exergy destruction (around 10%) occurring in the EPR
is approximately same for the refrigeration under consideration.
5. Conclusion
This paper covered the analysis of the low GWP refrigerants
R1234yf and R1234ze as replacements for R134a in a two evapo-
rator VCRS. A theoretical model based on exergy analysis for
a two evaporator VCRS has been discussed. The results have

Table 3 – The results of exergy analysis of the refrigeration system for refrigerants (Tev-1 = −5 °C, Tev-2 = −18 °C,
Tcon = 40 °C).
Comp Con Exp. valve 1 Exp. valve 2 Ev_1 Ev_2 EPR MC
R1234yf E in [kW] 2.99 10.86 3.48 39.30 3.03 4.41 1.94 3.00
E out [kW] 10.86 9.09 3.03 30.65 1.94 1.92 1.07 2.99
E dest [kW] 2.41 1.78 0.45 1.24 0.37 0.49 0.87 0.01
hII 0.77 0 0.87 0.78 0.66 0.80 0.55 0.99
R1234ze E in [kW] 0.76 8.29 2.52 33.28 2.16 3.04 1.06 0.77
E out [kW] 8.29 6.63 2.16 24.98 1.06 0.54 0.23 0.76
E dest [kW] 2.28 1.66 0.35 1.01 0.39 0.51 0.82 0.01
hII 0.77 0 0.86 0.75 0.65 0.80 0.22 0.99
R134a E in [kW] 1.96 9.51 2.97 4.71 2.64 3.78 1.52 1.97
E out [kW] 9.51 7.74 2.64 3.78 1.52 1.25 0.71 1.96
E dest [kW] 2.19 1.77 0.33 0.93 0.40 0.53 0.81 0.006
hII 0.77 0 0.89 0.80 0.64 0.79 0.47 0.99
36 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37
Fig. 8 – Percentage (%) of exergy destruction in different
components of VCRS. (Tev-1 = −5 °C, Tev-2 = −18 °C,
Tcon = 40 °C).
been presented for three different refrigerants R1234yf, R1234ze
and R134a.
Based on the irreversibility analysis, the following remark-
able conclusions are presented:
• The exergy efficiency was greatly affected by changes in the
evaporator (especially evaporator-1) and condenser
temperature.
• R1234ze is the best among considered refrigerants since it
has 238 times lower GWP values than R134a and R1234ze
is eco-friendly and has both the lowest ODP and GWP.
• It can be concluded that even though the values of perfor-
mance parameters for HFO-1234yf are smaller than that of
HFC-134a, but the difference is small, so it can be a good
alternative to HFC-134a because of its environmentally
friendly properties. HFO-1234ze can replace the conven-
tional HFC-134a after having a slight modification in the
design as the performance parameters are almost similar.
• The greater portion of exergy destruction takes place in the
compressor.
• Mixing chamber has lower exergy destruction compared to
other components.
• The highest exergy efficiencies are obtained with R1234ze
and R134a.
REFERENCES
Ahmadi, P., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., 2013. Thermodynamic
modelling and multi-objective evolutionary-based
optimization of a new multi generation energy system.
Energy Convers. Manage. 76, 282–300. <http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2013.07.049>.
Ansari, N., Yadav, B., Kumar, J., 2012. Theoretical exergy analysis
of HFO-1234yf and HFO-1234ze as an alternative replacement
of HFC-134a in simple vapour compression refrigeration
system. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 4 (8), 137–144.
ASHRAE Standard 34, 2010. Designation and safety classification
of refrigerants. American society of heating ventilating and
air-conditioning engineers. Atlanta, GA.
Babiloni, M.A., Esbrí, J.N., Barragán, Á., Molés, F., Peris, B., 2014.
Drop-in energy performance evaluation of R1234yf and
R1234ze (E) in a vapor compression system as R134a
replacements. Appl. Therm. Eng. 71 (1), 259–265.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.06.056>.
Centre for Energy Advancement through Technological
Innovation (CEATI), 2010. Refrigeration systems energy
efficiency reference guide. <http://www.ceati.com/
freepublications/7044_guide_web.pdf> (accessed 02.03.15).
Churi, N., Achenie, L., 1997. The optimal design of refrigerant
mixtures for a two-evaporator refrigeration system. Comp.
Chem. Eng. 21 (97), 349–354. <http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87526-6>.
Dincer, I., Kanoglu, M., 2010. Refrigeration systems and
applications, 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., UK.
Elliott, M., Rasmussen, B., 2008. Model-based predictive control of
a multi-evaporator vapor compression cooling cycle.
American Control Conference 3, 1463–1468.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2008.4586698>.
Esbrí, N.J., Miranda, M.J.M., Babiloni, M.A., Cervera, B.A., Flores,
B.J.M., 2013. Experimental analysis of R1234yf as a drop-in
replacement for R134a in a vapor compression system. Int. J.
Refrigeration 36 (3), 870–880. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijrefrig.2012.12.014>.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2007. The
fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on
climate change. Geneva, Switzerland.
Jankovic, Z., Atienza, J.S., Suarez, J.A.M., 2015. Thermodynamic
and heat transfer analyses for R1234yf and R1234ze (E) as
drop-in replacements for R134a in a small power refrigerating
system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 80, 42–54. <http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.01.041>.
Jarall, S., 2012. Study of refrigeration system with HFO-1234yf as
a working fluid. Int. J. Refrigeration 35, 1668–1677.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2012.03.007>.
Kilicarslan, A., Müller, N., 2005. A comparative study of water as a
refrigerant with some current refrigerants. Int. J. Energy Res.
29, 947–959. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/er.1084>.
Lai, N.A., 2014. Equations of state for HFO-1234ze (E) and their
application in the study on Refrigeration cycle. Int. J.
Refrigeration 43, 194–202. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijrefrig.2013.11.011>.
Lemmon, E.W., Huber, M.L., McLinden, M.O., 2010. NIST Standard
Reference Database 23: Reference Fluid Thermodynamic and
Transport Properties, REFPROP, Version 9.0. Standard
Reference Data Program. National Institute of Standards and
Technology, Gaithersburg. <http://www.nist.gov/srd/upload/
REFPROP9.pdf> (accessed 04.03.15).
Li, C.J., Su, C.C., 2003. Experimental study of a series-connected
two-evaporator refrigerating system with propane (R-290) as
the refrigerant. Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (12), 1503–1514.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-4311(03)00082-6>.
Li, C.J., Su, C.C., 2005. Characteristics of a series-connected two-
evaporator refrigerating system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (4), 519–
532. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2004.07.007>.
Lin, J.L., Yeh, T.J., 2007. Identification and control of multi-
evaporator air-conditioning systems. Int. J. Refrigeration 30,
1374–1385. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2007.04.003>.
Lin, J.L., Yeh, T.J., 2009. Control of multi-evaporator air-
conditioning systems for flow distribution. Energy Convers.
Manage. 50 (6), 1529–1541.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.02.018>.
Minetto, S., Brignoli, R., Zilio, C., Marinetti, S., 2014. Experimental
analysis of a new method for overfeeding multiple
evaporators in refrigeration systems. Int. J. Refrigeration 38,
1–9.
Molés, F., Esbrí, N.J., Peris, B., Babiloni, M.A., Cervera, B.Á., 2014.
Theoretical energy performance evaluation of different single
stage vapour compression refrigeration configurations using
R1234yf and R1234ze (E) as working fluids. Int. J. Refrigeration
44, 141–150. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2014.04.025>.
Ozgur, A.E., Kabul, A., Kizilkan, O., 2012. Exergy analysis of
refrigeration systems using an alternative refrigerant
 international journal of refrigeration 60 (2015) 26–37
(hfo-1234yf) to R-134a. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol 9 (1), 56–62.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/cts054>.
Rosen, M.A., Dincer, I., 2001. Exergy as the confluence of energy,
environment and sustainable development. Int. J. Exergy 1 (1),
3–13. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1164-0235(01)00004-8>.
Rosen, M.A., Dincer, I., Kanoglu, M., 2008. Role of exergy in
increasing efficiency and sustainability and reducing
environmental impact. Energy Policy 36, 128–137.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.09.006>.
Shukuya, M., Hammache, A., 2002. Introduction to the concept of
exergy – for a better understanding of low-temperature-
heating and high-temperature-cooling systems. VTT
Tiedotteita – Valtion Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus 3–41.
<http://virtual.vtt.fi/virtual/proj6/annex37/presentation
_of_annex_37/introduction_to_exergy.pdf> (accessed
16.03.15).
Srinivas, N., Deb, K., 1994. Multi objective optimization using
nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms. J. Evolut. Comp.
2, 221–248.
Stoecker, W.F., 1985. Internal performance of a refrigerant
mixture in a two-evaporator refrigerator. ASHRAE
Transactions 9 (1B), 241–249.
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), 2012. Handbook
for the Montreal protocol on substances that deplete the
ozone layer, 9th ed. United Nations, New York.
View publication stats
37
<http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/MP_Handbook/
MP-Handbook-2012.pdf> (accessed 16.03.15).
Yan, G., Cui, C., Yu, J., 2015. Energy and exergy analysis of
zeotropic mixture R290/R600a vapor-compression
refrigeration cycle with separation condensation. Int. J.
Refrigeration 53, 155–162.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2015.01.007>.
Yari, M., Mehr, A.S., Mahmoudi, S.M.S., 2013. Thermodynamic
analysis and optimization of a novel dual-evaporator
system powered by electrical and solar energy sources.
Energy 61, 646–656.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.09.025>.
You, Y., Wu, A., Yang, S., 2010. An optimal control strategy for
multi-evaporator vapor compression systems. Int. Conf.
Electrical Control Eng 410–413.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/iCECE.2010.106>.
Zhao, Y., Liang, Y., Sun, Y., Chen, J., 2015. Development of a mini-
channel evaporator model using R1234yf as working fluid. Int.
J. Refrigeration 35, 2166–2178.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2012.08.026>.
Zhu, Y., Jin, X., Du, Z., Fan, B., Fu, S., 2013. Generic simulation
model of multi-evaporator variable refrigerant flow air
conditioning system for control analysis. Int. J. Refrigeration
36, 1602–1615. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijrefrig.2013.04.019>.