HFO-1234yf

[spimps]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjoxedEmCeI&NR=1
On the video it appears to be comparing the danger surrounding leaks between r134a and HFO-1234yf on vehicle air con.Saw that concern has been expressed in this months rac magazine.
Any German speakers who can give a transcript of the video.
You wouldn't want to be involved in a crash if the vehicle is carrying that stuff with the condenser right at the front,must be mad to want to introduce it.

[desA]

There seems to be some interesting techno-spin going on, of late. We'll have to see how all this plays out in automotive RHVAC before getting too excited.

Frankly I'd hate my 120bar CO2 system to come loose upon impact. Wonder how well that's been thought through?

I'm beginning to wonder who's funding the techno-spin, I must say.

[taz24]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjoxedEmCeI&NR=1
On the video it appears to be comparing the danger surrounding leaks between r134a and HFO-1234yf on vehicle air con.Saw that concern has been expressed in this months rac magazine.
Any German speakers who can give a transcript of the video.
You wouldn't want to be involved in a crash if the vehicle is carrying that stuff with the condenser right at the front,must be mad to want to introduce it.

Why does a couple hundred grammes of the stuff scare you when it is in the front of your car.
Yet you will happily sit on 70 Kg's of the most flamible substance we have and not bother about it..

I have no fear what so ever about hyrocarbons, they are reasonable refrigerants and yes they do burn but
only in the correct concentrations mixed in air.

Why are you not affraid of the petrol in you cars tank??

Just my point of view.

taz

.

[Voyager]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjoxedEmCeI&NR=1

Any German speakers who can give a transcript of the video.

Try this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P19sG...eature=related

One thing that strikes me about those tests, is that they were both done on a vehicle sitting still while revving the nuts off it. Hardly a 'real world' test.

[spimps]

Why does a couple hundred grammes of the stuff scare you when it is in the front of your car.
Yet you will happily sit on 70 Kg's of the most flamible substance we have and not bother about it..

I have no fear what so ever about hyrocarbons, they are reasonable refrigerants and yes they do burn but
only in the correct concentrations mixed in air.

Why are you not affraid of the petrol in you cars tank??

Just my point of view.

taz

.

Very few cars will have the engine ticking over when in a collision,they'll certainly have some revs on,it's trying to show IMO the easiness with which it ignites and how it would spread as opposed to r134a.
It's an unnecessary extra risk being introduced.Spent 30 years as a retained firefighter and anything that endangers a person unduly in a collision which could be avoided should.Went to crashes that people were trapped in and the car caught fire,horrible,why add to the risk?Brake fluid has always been an accelerant for fires in vehicle collisions,it's housed in a plastic container which fractures on impact spilling onto hot manifolds and igniting,why add more to the risk.
Petrol vehicles, usually,apart from the old beatles which have the tank in the front usually survive the early impact through being of reasonable construction with the tank tucked away as far as possible from impact,condensers on car air cons are material of a very light alloy which is easily fractured.
Went to an overturned petrol tanker some years ago with 20 tons plus on board which was spilling onto the road,wasn't frighteneed,we dammed around it, at the same time as covering with foam.
Always carry two extinguishers in every vehicle,one in the passenger compartment one in rear .

[Quality]

Valid point that one - buts lets not get to carried away R123456789 will come weather we like it or not Europe is the place or the proving ground
What a joke

[Voyager]

I watched that video again, but listened more carfully this time.

Since when did 1234yf become a drop-in replacement for r134a?
The 'tests' used 1234yf in an r134a system, which will NOT be allowed. The port connectors are being changed to make it impossible to retro-fit.
The video also states that 600g is the 'correct charge for this vehicle' when they filled it with 1234yf. How do they know? Nobody has built a 1234yf system for that car, so they can't possibly know.

Closer inspection of the video shows the car to be a Toyota Corolla with the 4E-FE engine. That engine was only produced between 1989 and 1999. 1234yf shouldn't be anywhere near that A/C system.

[spimps]

Sure I read in some blurb that "it might be considered a drop in"might be.Dupont have marketed thHFO one to compete for the German auto market against CO2 which apparently they are well on with and is the favourite.
My interest stemmed from an article in RAC,wether it's drop in or not it's flammability is being ignored,hopefully it wont be chosen.Dupont describe it as mildly falammable !
http://www2.dupont.com/Refrigerants/...FO-1234yf.html
,worse than politics this refrig game,why can't they settle on whats truly the best and safest instead of the pre loaded quest to secure markets and profit with no regard to trade and public both in safety and financial cost.

[NoNickName]

Surely the quantity of refrigerant suitable for a MAC is very limited. Despite, adding any quantity of a fire promoter agent into a car is a bad idea. Secondly, 1234yf is not yet tested for professional exposure, so engineers, mechanics and refrigeration engineers working on MAC should not come any close to that until there is a prove that it is either harmless or the harming potential is known. R134a is known to not be professionally dangerous up to 5000ppm.
Finally, the quantity of 1234yf Dupont is able to produce at this stage would not suffice the demand of the automotive industry, and it would not be enough until late 2011 at best, so in the meantime the automotive industry would need to have an interim solution anyway.

[taz24]

Very few cars will have the engine ticking over when in a collision,they'll certainly have some revs on,it's trying to show IMO the easiness with which it ignites and how it would spread as opposed to r134a.
It's an unnecessary extra risk being introduced.Spent 30 years as a retained firefighter and anything that endangers a person unduly in a collision which could be avoided should.Went to crashes that people were trapped in and the car caught fire,horrible,why add to the risk?Brake fluid has always been an accelerant for fires in vehicle collisions,it's housed in a plastic container which fractures on impact spilling onto hot manifolds and igniting,why add more to the risk.
Petrol vehicles, usually,apart from the old beatles which have the tank in the front usually survive the early impact through being of reasonable construction with the tank tucked away as far as possible from impact,condensers on car air cons are material of a very light alloy which is easily fractured.
Went to an overturned petrol tanker some years ago with 20 tons plus on board which was spilling onto the road,wasn't frighteneed,we dammed around it, at the same time as covering with foam.
Always carry two extinguishers in every vehicle,one in the passenger compartment one in rear .

You make a reasoned argument and in truth I have
no answer to your argument!! When I can't find an
argument I tend to shut up and listen to what others
have to say..

So this is me shutting up and listening.

taz

.

[ntron]

Hello All,

I would be pleased to answer any questions I can regarding the HFO-1234yf refrigerant. My name is Peter Coll and I am a member of the SAE committee making the rules for the use of the new refrigerant.

Please feel free to ask away.

[Brian_UK]

Very few cars will have the engine ticking over when in a collision,they'll certainly have some revs on,it's trying to show IMO the easiness with which it ignites and how it would spread as opposed to r134a.
It's an unnecessary extra risk being introduced.Spent 30 years as a retained firefighter and anything that endangers a person unduly in a collision which could be avoided should.Went to crashes that people were trapped in and the car caught fire,horrible,why add to the risk?Brake fluid has always been an accelerant for fires in vehicle collisions,it's housed in a plastic container which fractures on impact spilling onto hot manifolds and igniting,why add more to the risk.
Petrol vehicles, usually,apart from the old beatles which have the tank in the front usually survive the early impact through being of reasonable construction with the tank tucked away as far as possible from impact,condensers on car air cons are material of a very light alloy which is easily fractured.
Went to an overturned petrol tanker some years ago with 20 tons plus on board which was spilling onto the road,wasn't frighteneed,we dammed around it, at the same time as covering with foam.
Always carry two extinguishers in every vehicle,one in the passenger compartment one in rear .

Restarting this one again, sorry.

Reading this post and watching a car fill up at a local fuel stop with LPG makes the above comment quite pertinent.

A few cars that I know of that have been converted to use LPG tend to have the extra fuel tank in or under the rear boot area. Also the refuelling connector is mounted directly below the rear bumper/fender.

Any hard contact from the rear is liable to bend/break that connector. I am surprised that there isn't some regulation about these things (expect there is somewhere).

[NoNickName]

Hello All,

I would be pleased to answer any questions I can regarding the HFO-1234yf refrigerant. My name is Peter Coll and I am a member of the SAE committee making the rules for the use of the new refrigerant.

Please feel free to ask away.

I think you should ask us, not we ask you.
We should be making the rules.

[ntron]

I think you should ask us, not we ask you.
We should be making the rules.

Ok, What would you like in the rules??

[NoNickName]

Because we are those who will abide to them, and thus they have to be written with our consent and our participation.

[ntron]

Could you guide me to a location where I could view your rules?

[Brian_UK]

Now, now gents, let's not get silly, please.

Ntron, you mentioned the rules for using this refrigerant.

Would you please elaborate on these rules so that if we come across this new mixture we will be able to work safely and maybe legally?

[ntron]

My Pleasure Brian.

Here is what we know and i apologize if some of this has been previously discussed.

The EU passed a rule that New Passenger Vehicle platforms introduced after 1/1/2011 can not contain a refrigerant with a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of greater than 150. R134a has a GWP of 1403.

Several candidates emerged including CO2, R152A, AC1, HFO-1234yf and HFO-1243zf. In the end, HOF-1234yf was determined to be the best candidate by the Auto Makers. The Auto makers decided to have a single global refrigerant even though only the EU was required to change. There are still many proponents and opponents but for the purpose of this post, I will leave that debate for a later time.

HFO-1234yf is classified as flammable. There are only two choices in Europe, flammable and non-flammable. For HFO-1234yf to ignite, several things must occur at the same time. To simplify things, a heat source of greater than 405C must be present and the concentration of HFO- 1234yf must be approximately 6.2%. Even then, the flame propagation is extremely small when compared to R152a, R290 or R600. It can not be ignited with a cigar lighter.

The cost of HFO-1234yf will be very high. Currently, we pay $500 USD per kg. for the samples we have in our office. No one has confirmed the final price when it is in full production but the estimates are about $50 USD per lb. There is approximately 1 lb in new vehicle AC systems.

The only rules that I am involved in are the SAE regulations that are typically accepted by all vehicle makers around the world.

SAE J2843 is the new standard for HFO-1234yf Recovery/Recharge/Recycling machines.
SAE J2913 is the new standard for HFO-1234yf electronic leak detectors.
SAE J2912 and SAE J2927 are the new standards for HFO-1234yf Refrigerant Analyzers.

In everyday use, HFO-1234yf will act just like R134a. The P/T curves are very close and AC systems will look and work very much like R134a systems. One major difference in the USA is that HFO-1234yf will only be sold to certified technicians. (This could change if certain large companies put enough political pressure on the USA EPA.

I am unclear on any current EU regulations for commercial use of R134a and if there are not any new rules, HFO-1234yf will be very slow to show up in commercial systems due to the very high cost.

I have seen many of the proposed refrigerants in vehicles and each has their positives and negatives. In my opinion, HFO-1234yf poses no safety risk to occupants in either normal operation or a crash scenario. I do not know the long term effects of exposure to the refrigerant and have no expertise in that area.

Thank you for your interest.

Peter Coll

[Brian_UK]

Thanks Peter.

I just wish that they would think of an easier name for it; HFO-1234yf doesn't slip off the tongue does it?

[ntron]

Once ARI gets done it will be known as R-1234 or R- Twelve Thirty Four.

[Voyager]

My Pleasure Brian.

HFO-1234yf is classified as flammable. There are only two choices in Europe, flammable and non-flammable. For HFO-1234yf to ignite, several things must occur at the same time. To simplify things, a heat source of greater than 405C must be present and the concentration of HFO- 1234yf must be approximately 6.2%. Even then, the flame propagation is extremely small when compared to R152a, R290 or R600. It can not be ignited with a cigar lighter.

Which is where that video falls flat on it's face.
The temp gauge showed 600c - to get that kind of temperature from a vehicle AC condensor would require far more pressure than the system would allow.

One major difference in the USA is that HFO-1234yf will only be sold to certified technicians. (This could change if certain large companies put enough political pressure on the USA EPA.

It's the same here in the UK. To buy HFO-1234yf you will have to have a 'safe handling' certificate.
But..... if DuPont apply enough pressure/money to the right politicians ............