I would say Puron, or its official name refrigerant 410-A, has proven a viable replacement for R-22 in new equipment. It operates at considerably higher pressures than R-22 so compressors and other system components must be designed to handle the higher pressure. Because of the higher pressure there are lower compression ratios at low temperature operation which means the system is more efficient. For a heat pump I would definitely go with Puron without a second thought.

Hope I didnt bore you to death.

Hello,
Puron is the new forced standard. It is claimed to be the ONLY product to replace Freon22. With existing legislation, F22 will be difficult to find by year 2020. If a typical system installed today only lasts about 10 years, I would not be concerned with the need for PURON.

Puron is caustic and eats copper lines. Puron requires higher operating pressures. Until manufacturers redesign systems for the increased pressures, Puron will shorten the life of equipment.

From what I have read, PURON is a blend of 2 refrigerents.

This means that if you have a leaking system, the only way to insure the system works at peak efficiency, all of the existing Puron needs removal for a new charge. When charging a system with Puron, the process is wet and not gas. This further supports my claim that all of the Puron needs removal if a system leaks.

Technicians are not doing this. They are incorrectly adding Puron to leaky systems like they were taught to do with F22 and F12.

Puron may be marginally more friendly to the atmosphere, but from what I have read, it is insignificant. Manufacturing with F12 is probably 99.9% of the cause of ozone depletion as evidenced in the 1970's. With the claims of the ozone hole decreasing, I would believe F22 used in HVAC had little to do with the problem. I would imagine that this is a case of science going beyond extrems and nitpicking.

isn't puron just 410A or is it somehow different

Puron is a DuPont name brand, just like Pepsi is.

Hey Bob, what about the massive clouds of pure chlorine gas released on troops during World War 1? Shouldn't the ozone have been gone 50 years ago?

This is getting off topic but a friend of mine told me about the acceptance of pseudo-science by those in the field. My friend spent at least 15 years in full time schooling and has a PhD in biology and genetic engineering and is a full fledged scientist.

Here's the way it goes, according to him. If you want to get grants, you go with the flow. If public opinion says it true, you give them what they want. Follow the money.

There are quite a few scientists who publicaly don't support global warming, ozone depletion, evolution, you name it. There are many more who are afraid of losing funds and won't speak out. That leaves a few vocal proponents of any idea who know how to keep the money flowing in and who genuinely believe in their theories. Never mind the facts or lack of facts.

That's what's going on in science today according to an insider.

Kailor,410a is working fine with the hundreds of systems we have installed.I thought Puron was a name for 410a that Carrier was marketing.If you have a leak in a system with 410a you dont have to remove all the refrigerant.I have never had a problem with the blend leaking at different rates.410a makes better tech,s.You cant get by with charging by pressure anymore.You must check temps of refrigerant in the circuit to properly charge a 410a system.IMO it forces technicians to learn the refrigerant circuit which is better for the customer.I have always said that the ozone theory was a bunch of crap and a way for the government to take more of our hard earned money.

"I have always said that the ozone theory was a bunch of crap and a way for the government to take more of our hard earned money."
Amen bama dude! I'm with you 100% on that. Remember back in 94 when all the changes first started coming about. Whats the first thing the govt. does? Slap a big honkin excise tax of 12 and a couple others. So thats how to deal with a supposed crisis, SLAP A TAX ON IT

"From what I have read, PURON is a blend of 2 refrigerents.

This means that if you have a leaking system, the only way to insure the system works at peak efficiency, all of the existing Puron needs removal for a new charge. When charging a system with Puron, the process is wet and not gas. This further supports my claim that all of the Puron needs removal if a system leaks.

Technicians are not doing this. They are incorrectly adding Puron to leaky systems like they were taught to do with F22 and F12. "

Bob, as you have said here R-410A is indeed a blend of 2 refrigerants. It is 50% R-32, and 50% R-125. However, you are incorrect that they leak at different rates. Do some more research on R-410A. You will learn that alot of your statements about 410 are false.

Here is a clip taken out of my training manual for my EPA exam. You will find similar statements coming from other sources and manufacturers as well.

"Refrigerant 410A is a near azeotropic refrigerant, meaning that while it is a non-azeotrope refrigerant it exhibits a very low temperature glide during evaporation or condensation, making it behave very nearly like an azeotropic refrigerant. This means that while it is still best when charging to remove the R-410A as a liquid from the storage cylinder, there are no concerns about fractionalization of the R-410A refrigerant should a leak occur. That means that a R-410A system can be topped-off without any concern about altering the composition of the blend. Typically, these are all items of concern when dealing with non-azeotropic refrigerants, but again R-410A behaves nearly like an azeotropic refrigerant."

There is no need to stay away from R-410A. You will get equipment with much higher efficiences by choosing it. However, I do agree that there was no real need to develop it and do away with R-22.

Hello,
If it quacks like a duck, flies thru the air and swims on the surface of water, does this mean it is a Horse, Doctor or duck? Blends are not a compound. F12 and F22 are compounds. The basic requirement to charge using Puron wet says it is a blend. If it is a blend, It dissociates under pressure and leaks at different percentage rates.

For all the twits that think there is no link between CFCs and ozone depletion, the linked article below gives the mechanism of both the generation of ozone in the atmosphere and how chlorine from CFCs is involved as a catalyst in its destruction. As for the Cl2 that was released in the first world war, that is tiny in comparison to the millions of tons that were released as CFCs in the 1960s and 1970s. By the way, just to be clear, there is no connection between ozone depletion and global warming (even if CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs are greenhouse gases - their volume in the atmosphere is miniscule compared to CO2 and CH4).

As for Bob Brown's continued wilful ignorance on azeotropic mixtures, words fail me.

Here is a link that might be useful: Ozone Hole Tour: the chemistry

Does the article mention that 99+% (almost 100%) of all chlorine comes from volcanos and the ocean? If it doesn't then it's a paper of pseudo-science.

I see... an "insider friend" with a "...PhD in biology and genetic engineering and is a full fledged scientist..." said global warming is all hogwash and is promoted to get grants.

Well throw me down and call me dusty... does he work for the full-fledged Cowboy from Crawford too?!?

If the manufacturer of Puron requires the installer to charge Puron wet, what does this suggest? Logic says it is a mixture, that is different in wet and dry states. It is not a compound. Compounds are stable wet or dry. If a compound leaks, it is the same wet or dry. If Puron (a mixture) leaks dry, it leaks the individual components at different rates. If it leaks wet, it leaks like a compound.

I went thru the changeover from f12 to f134 in cars. It may have worked in a cooler climate, but in a hot climate, the engineering was several years behind the event, systems did not work correctly when 134 was substituted. I am an engineer, I talked to manufacturers to answer my questions, rather than the local mechanic. I found that most mechanics of the period in N. Texas did not understand the process beyond connecting the parts to the engine. Manufacturers were going nuts with all of the mechanic caused failures. The point of this paragraph; sales of a product does not mean it works. Products are sold that do not work as advertized. This is true from computers to commodes, Automobiles to Zippers.

At best, a mixture is a temporary substitute for the real deal. I am not against puron. In it's current usage, it is a 3rd class effort that needs considerable improvement.

Manufacturers will eventually correct the problems, and inprove design to allow usage of Puron. At this time it is not a good substitute for f22 in a hot climate.

Cooling has been used much more extensively in hot climates for a longer time. I see problems daily that techs in cooler climates seldom see. I find the justifications Puron pushers take insulting to my intelligence. Puron systems are inferior construction at this point. They will get better, but they are not ready for hot climate usage.

I am tired of arguing about Puron with people that are using emotion instead of commonsense. I don't care how much money, or how many systems you installed that use Puron. It just aint right.

Bob Brown repeated the myth:

"If Puron (a mixture) leaks dry, it leaks the individual components at different rates. "

Bob, no it doesn't. It's a constant boiling (or extremely close to) azeotrope. It does not fractionate. Why do you keep repeating this lie?

If this is so, why do you charge it wet? All other Freons are charged dry.

Personally I think in the next 20 years the ozone depletion theory will be re-evaluated and most florocarbon refrigerants will go back into manufacture. They still make R-12 in Mexico. Furthermore I think that elecronic and electromagnetic cooling will be developed further in the future. Why is it it gets 20 degrees colder when a ghost walks into a room? We need to study how they do this so we can get cheaper cooling. Okay I'll shut up now.

blacknumber1 wrote:

" ... and most florocarbon refrigerants will go back into manu ..."

Blacknumber, fluorocarbons are not the problem. Chloro-fluoro-carbons (CFCs - like R12) are the problem because of the chlorine in them.

Electronic cooling is already here - there are many products that incorporate Peltier-effect devices to move heat - they are just very inefficient compared to the standard refrigeration cycle. (From wikipedia: "Thermoelectric junctions are generally only around 5-10% as efficient as the ideal refrigerator (Carnot cycle), compared with 40-60% achieved by conventional compression cycle systems (reverse Rankine systems like a compressor)."

But how does paranormal activity make a room instantly 20 degrees cooler? We should be researching this instead!

You can all debate global warming and greenhouse gasses all day long but the link between CFC's/HCFC's and ozone depletion is pretty convincing.

1. The rise in chlorine measure in the stratosphere over the past couple decades matches the rise in Fluorine. (however fluorine has different natural sources)

2. The rise in Chlorine matches the rise in CFC emissions over the same time period.

3. Volcano emissions contribute a very small amount of chlorine compared to CFC's.

Isn't time here for a Coke break about now?

;-)

I keep seeing the arguement on the different leak rates of the two constituents that make the R410a. How about answer a simple question, do the two components have similar gas/liquid/pressure/temperature curves? If not they may leak out at different rate.

The two components of 410A (32 & 125) both have almost identical curves.

The temperature glide (the difference between the saturated vapor temperature and the saturated liquid temperature at constant pressure) for 410A is less than 0.5 degrees F.

This comes directly from Dupont - http://refrigerants.dupont.com/Suva/en_US/pdf/h45938.pdf

Here is a selection from another Dupont document.
"This refrigerant [Suva 410A] has even less tendency
to separate during leakage than Suva® 407C. Table 5 shows
the effect of repeated loss of 50% of the refrigerant
charge followed by addition of enough new Suva®
410A to restore the nominal amount of charge. After
repeated leakage and recharge, the effect on system
performance is negligible, with a slight increase in
HFC-125 composition that causes the resulting
blend to move further into the nonflammable region."

Here is the link to the whole document -
http://www.refrigerants.dupont.com/Suva/en_US/pdf/h47125.pdf

So as you can see, Dupont says that 410A DOES NOT fractionate, so maybe now Bob, you can stop saying things that the manufacturer says is not true.

Michael

Hello,
You have mixed stories. Not all f410's are the same. It appears that SUVA brand is very tolerant when adding to existing gas. This is not necessarly the same for all freons. I was taught from EPA documents when I certified for CFC's. Puron is charged wet. This suggests a non-homogenuous mixture by the wet installation requirement. SUVA 410a is charged wet. This also suggests a fractionalization differential issue. When you work in extreme conditions, the equipment and charge need to be exact. What may work in mild summer heat, will not work in hot climate regions.

In the Dupont literature, the leak is limited to 50% of the total capacity and will degrade capacity by 4%. The first time it will not be too much different. If the system lasts for 10 years and gas is added 5 times to a 3-ton system, by the 5th addition, the capacity is degraded by 1/2 ton. A 5-ton system similarly refilled, looses 1 ton of capacity.

This is a lot of lost capacity. In my climate, this is the difference of hundreds of dollars in utility bills each month, and a very hot unhappy customer.

I may be off slightly in calculations, but the ballpark is correct. The 4% was taken from table 4 of the SUVA f410a document. I dissagree with thier extended calculations, and derived my calculations based on 4% of the total remaining btu capacity. If you loose 1440 btu's the first year, the total btu capacity needs to be adjusted before recalculating performance losses. I used 1440, 1382, 1327, 1325, 1272. This loss over a 5 recharge period reduced 36000 btu's to 29254 btu's.

1440 btu's does not appear to be much, when you are talking about 36,000 btu's. When this is repetively done year after year, the cumulative effect is disaterous to the monthly utility bill. In hot climates, where the ambient is over 100, performance is very critical. If a system operates for more than 20% of the hour, the output drops even greater. So from this conclusion, the addition of F410 more than once, without removing the existing charge, would add $45 per month to my electric bill using the 4% times 5, but the lost capacity would increase run time and add even more money to the bill.

Do you still claim that f410 can be topped off without any reduction of cooling? When you look at a house that has multiple systems, it is more apparent that addition of F410 to existing charge without removal of charge before adding f410 should be considered criminal.

One tidbit that I found in the f410 spec sheet, was that f407 is a dropin replacement for f22. It will apparently work similar to freeze12 that is used as a replacement for f12 in cars. This means that consumers do not need to worry about availability of f22. F407 will be available, and will probably be around for many years in the future. If the past experience of auto freon is used, the cost will be approximatly the same to the consumer.

Your calculations are based on a system losing 50% of its Puron every 2 years and then being refilled? Is that common? I would think that if a system was that poorly put together a 2%/year loss of efficency would be the least of one's problems.

I expect that Dupont used 50% to show that there would be no problem under any reasonable scenario. And for reasonable leakage rates (5%?) the system can simple be topped off with 410a with very little loss of efficiency.

I would suggest that you do your calculations again, this time using a reasonable loss rate but there is another problem. As the system loses the more volatile component the composition of the vapor phase is very likely to change. Eventually, say when the liquid phase is composed of 45% of the more volatile component and 55% less volatile the vapor phase will be a 50-50 mix and what is lost will be replaced by a tech with no more change in the coolant composition. Of course the 45-55 numbers are just picked from the air, but it seems reasonable that at some point they will balance. And since the vapor pressures are similar one might suppose that the balance would come sooner rather than later. So one might more reasonably expect a 0.4% loss of efficiency the first year, 0.1% two years later and very nearly 0% after that.

You mentioned a while ago that you are an engineer, I'm betting you are not a Chemical Engineer or you would have a better handle on this problem. Definitely not an EE, perhaps Mechanical? To sort this out a ChemEng would need more information about the properties of the compounds involved and, if he was old, his text books. I have neither of those things so I will pass. You should as well, if you need more convincing look up 'fugacity'.

(I'm assuming a 50-50 mix of components in the original mix, I think that is right but it doesn't change the reasoning if it is different, just the numbers)

Hello,
You are using circular logic to disprove fact. It does not take a math major or an engineer to read a percentage and extrapolate the outcome. Political advisors do this on every major decision. Managers should be doing this daily. The college I attended required every student that graduated to have these tools. The college had 30,000 student when I graduated.

The only people that use circular logic, are those that try to prove an unproveable statement.

I see circular logic with vague conjectures daily in TV advertizing. Every brand of truck claims that they are the largest seller of trucks in Texas? Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, Toyota, Isuzu.

They could all be the biggest seller in a specific category, but TV advertizing omits the specifics. The specification could be so specific that it may be Females between 21 and 26, Black, with 3 children and a dog that are Catholic, that attend church on Saturday at 8:00pm.

I told you where to find the data, and you still try to disprove the published data. I am a generalist with work experience in several engineering fields. I have worked with chemicals, and developed a patentable product for composition roof leaks. I developed a mechanical manufacturing process that has 3 patentable areas. I developed a Automobile battery Tester that I presented to a major tool company. I designed and built a retrofit kit that changed telephone pulse dialing to tone dailing for a foreign government. I designed and built a LED microscope light source for a Canadian jewlery lab. I tried to obtain research money from the DOE to develop a solar energy generator. I developed a sales organization that sold Plumbing parts, that made the company a million dollars in 1975. I designed built and tested several energy saving devices for HVAC. I designed multiple products, built prototypes, sold them. I designed and built motor speed controls, I designed and built a 3 phase generator for a customer. I designed and built improvements to automobiles. I designed and built construction products. I designed and used a tool to automatically center the hole in bearing construction used in production of conveyor rollers. This was part of a collection box for Automobile batteries. It had multiple patentable points. I designed self lubercating conveyor wheels. I designed and built a high voltage power supply tester used to train electronics technicians. I have worked with LED lighting and currently designing replacement lighting. I ran out of money, so I am attempting to find a backer. I am also currently working on a high efficiency water heat and cooling system. I will attempt to sell the concept to a local manufacturing company in January. This will be the 3rd contact and presentation. I wrote specific use software, used in ship design, boiler sizing, and Manual J calculations/ sales contract that ran on a Radio Shack model 12 computer. 1978-1982 I worked on Mainframe DSP signal processing hardware used in Seismic Interperation of geologic formations. (Oil and Gas) When the programmers wrote communications software, I troubleshot it and determined why it would not work. This company is now a billion dollar company with offices all over the world. I am omitting several areas that I did not make a profit in, but this should satisfy your attempt to find my skill level.

The reason that Dupont used a 50% replacement was because this is a maximum condition. 4% is not a reasonable reduction in capacity. Maybe in America when selling to HO's and uninformed people. Japan strives to maintain a 1% or less reject or loss ratio. As stated previously, 4% on a hot day equates to an uncomfortable environment, that soon fails to cool. It really doesnt matter. After multiple additions of f410a, the result is degraded capacity. Many techs never find the leak, and continue to add freon. This normally falls below the minimum standards specified by the EPA. Many techs add freon to systems regardless of the need, because the bill is larger. I am suggesting that every service call is a chance to add freon to the system. This increases the loss of cooling capacity. In Hot climate, the ambient causes a major loss when using todays method of sizing systems with Man J. Trying to meet Texas size standards for new construction is almost impossible using normal design technique. 4% will kill a new system quickly in over 100f degree days, and require yearly addition of Freon to the system. I have found many systems that leak during the winter, from bad schrader valves. Most techs don't care, they gas and go.

I have supervised construction in the USA and Canada. I have supervised production manufacturing and several other production lines. I owned and operated a service company for 10 years. I have installed many machines all over the USA. For this site I have posted 14 topics of interest as a FAQ editor?

Kinda mind boggling isnt it?

Micheal,(ameiich) as a member of the American Chemical Society, the word 'almost' doesn't cut it. Bob is right you are wrong.
Puron is a flavor of R410. It also is a blend of Refrigerants. Your words of nearly identical, almost etc..
are useless when doing Physical Chemistry which is an EXACTING SCIENCE.
Dupont has trademarked the name of Puron. and Puron is a form of R410. However it is my understanding that not every R410 can be installed in a system designed and being run with Puron. Why? Because it is a combination of 2 products.
Not every combination of R410 is the same is it?
They have different properties.
Different associate rates.
Different absorbtion rates.
Different evaporative rates.

Micheal( Ameeich) go back to taking your EPA exam professor
and give him a link to this website so he can re-educate you.

[BTW I am replacing my furnace with a new Rheem Prestige series 13 SEER with R-22 in it.] Have seen many Puron installs in builder houses.. have seen plenty of those fake gas fireplaces too..Micheal do you want to srgue with me about how much heat they put out ???

A recent article in the Journal of Physical Chemistry has sent everyone back to the drawing board about the ozone hole. The photolysis rate of a key step (photolysis of chlorine peroxide) is a factor of 6 slower than everyone had previously believed to be the case.
'we can basically no longer say we understand how ozone holes come into being.'
'at least 60% of ozone destruction at the poles seems to be due to an unknown mechanism.'
See
http://www.co2science.org//articles/V10/N42/EDIT.php

Pope, F.D., Hansen, J.C., Bayes, K.D., Friedl, R.R. and Sander, S.P. 2007. Ultraviolet absorption spectrum of chlorine peroxide, ClOOCl. Journal of Physical Chemistry A 111: 4322-4332.

As for the two components of puron leaking at different rates, Graham's law of diffusion says that the rate of diffusion is inversely proportional to the square root of the molecular mass of the gas. Puron consists of a mixture of CH2F2 and C2HF5 which have different molecular masses.
http://members.aol.com/profchm/graham.html