Automotive Air Conditioning Information Forum (Archives)

Provided by www.ACkits.com

We've updated our forums!
Click here to visit the new forum

Archive Home

Search Auto AC Forum Archives

Es-12a industrial? Pages: 12

Turbo on Tue May 04, 2010 5:01 PM User is offline

I have a few questions about the enviro-safe industrial? I know many here object to using this type of gas. I came here for some information about the hydro-carbon refrigerant not to hear how bad and dangerous it is. I know there are other brands on the market which sell 12a as well. Does anyone here know what makes the industrial / advance formula different? I have been to all the websites and they all say to charge at 0 psig Except for the enviro-safe industrial. Does anyone know why the industrial is charged in a vacuum? Also, why are hydro-carbon refrigerants charged at 0 psig except for the es-12a. Also how well do these product actually cool. Looking at the pressure temperature chart they should work really well but I would like to know if anyone has had any really world experience. I apologize if this is not the board to ask such questions but I am looking for some answers and I was hopping someone here could help or point me in the direction of where I could get answers. Thanks.

Chick on Tue May 04, 2010 8:38 PM User is offlineView users profile

Perhaps checking their sites would help?? At this moment, there are "two" approved refrigerants auto AC tech use, R12 and R134a, in the future we may be forced to dabble in blends, but since compressor manufacturers won't warranty their compressors if anything else is used, I would not give advice that would come back to "But you said it would work" type of questions.. they should have their own tech forums for those blends, do a search to find them, and if you can't, well that might say a lot for them...
so I'll pass on this one...

-------------------------
Chick
Email: Chick

---------------------------------------------

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

bigkev on Thu May 06, 2010 2:40 AM User is offline

This crapola doesnt move oil through the system like it should. Save some time and money dont use it.

Karl Hofmann on Thu May 06, 2010 3:40 AM User is offlineView users profile

It works fine in fridges and chillers but they ain't car aircon are they?

Enviroblast.... The MVAC refrigerant choice of Allah..

-------------------------
Never knock on deaths door... Ring the doorbell and run away, death really hates that!

Peter_Coll on Thu May 06, 2010 9:41 AM User is offlineView users profile

Quote
Originally posted by: Turbo
I have a few questions about the enviro-safe industrial? I know many here object to using this type of gas. I came here for some information about the hydro-carbon refrigerant not to hear how bad and dangerous it is. I know there are other brands on the market which sell 12a as well. Does anyone here know what makes the industrial / advance formula different? I have been to all the websites and they all say to charge at 0 psig Except for the enviro-safe industrial. Does anyone know why the industrial is charged in a vacuum? Also, why are hydro-carbon refrigerants charged at 0 psig except for the es-12a. Also how well do these product actually cool. Looking at the pressure temperature chart they should work really well but I would like to know if anyone has had any really world experience. I apologize if this is not the board to ask such questions but I am looking for some answers and I was hopping someone here could help or point me in the direction of where I could get answers. Thanks.

I suggest you contact the seller for the answers to the following questions. [email protected]

Does anyone here know what makes the industrial / advance formula different?

Does anyone know why the industrial is charged in a vacuum?

Why are hydro-carbon refrigerants charged at 0 psig except for the es-12a.

Also how well do these product actually cool. They cool Very Well when properly installed in an appropriate system.

You will not find much support from me or many others here as we do not care for these products.

NickD on Thu May 06, 2010 10:26 AM User is offline

Most industrial refrigeration, HVAC, and even home refrigeration use compressors with an oil sump, really don't depend upon miscibility for oil carrying capability. These refrigeration type systems are also stationary with sealed compressors, so leakage of the lighter HC's doesn't pose a problem. Practically all MVAC system leak where the lighter gas leaves first leading to way over high pressure problems.

On the old AC board that no longer exists giving Tim a reason to start this one. was a lot of discussion about using HC's with even the factory reps on board. Most were running into severe low pressure problems, the solution was adding air to the system that sounded a bit crazy to me, mixing air with a very flammable gas. Only ran into a couple that said it was good stuff. Also way overpriced considering the cheap price of propane and butane, been so long, I forgot the ratios, but you can play with it to get the correct pressures. A guy by the name of Oz started all this stuff, and he also was on that board. You really cannot get a patent by mixing two gases.

In the USA, illegal to use HC's for MVAC, and if your insurance company finds you are using it, even though it doesn't have a darn thing to do with an accident, can avoid your claim, if you have one for that type of modification. Plus as already mentioned, you will lose your warranty.

So there you have it, illegal, low pressure problems, warranty coverage, and insurance claims working against you. So give one good logical reason for using it. Would be different if AC's were designed for this stuff, but you could also design your own system and manufacture it yourself.

Peter_Coll on Thu May 06, 2010 11:06 AM User is offlineView users profile

Nick,

HC's are only illegal for MVAC's in all R12 vehicles. Only 19 states have bans on the use of HC's for R134a vehicles.

TRB on Thu May 06, 2010 2:46 PM User is offlineView users profile

I tried to buy it once for testing. Had to meet the guy at KFC in the middle of the night. That was enough to make me think twice about using it even for testing! Sealed system like a refrigerator I see this as a usable product. Auto A/C, no thank you.

-------------------------

When considering your next auto A/C purchase, please consider the site that supports you: ACkits.com
Contact: ACKits.com

NickD on Thu May 06, 2010 4:34 PM User is offline

Was basing that statement on this link:

http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/lists/unaccept.html

If it is legal to use in some states, what happens if you are caught in a state where it is illegal. To me, sounds like unnecessary risk for a refrigerant that doesn't work very well. Know for a fact that air sure doesn't cool.

pippo on Thu May 06, 2010 7:43 PM User is offline

I hear the state of AZ is trying to go forward with this HC product. They making any headway as far as yous know? yes, I agree, legality for Insurance is a factor, and for that matter , warranties. But that is applicable only to new cars, which would not be likely candidates for an HC fill, OR new comps in older cars, and thats only for the one yr period, after which, no more warranty.

Given the 10-15 yr life of a good comp, warranty becomes a minor point. Insurance with their ambulance chaser trial lawyers could be the biggest hindrance.....providing the technical aspects are in line. remember, and I , an ameteur ac guy doesnt have to tell yous, there are plenty of drawbacks to using our beloved DuPont R134a.......

-------------------------
beware of the arrival

Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 7:47 PM by pippo

TRB on Thu May 06, 2010 7:49 PM User is offlineView users profile

Never read anything that HC was going legal in AZ.

-------------------------

When considering your next auto A/C purchase, please consider the site that supports you: ACkits.com
Contact: ACKits.com

mk378 on Thu May 06, 2010 8:48 PM User is offline

There are two formulas of this stuff around. The Original Recipe was submitted to EPA but approved as a R-12 replacement only for industrial process refrigeration applications. Not for cars or any consumer equipment. Thus the label "industrial" as a CYA measure should some fool use it for something else. The problem was that this formula had too high a vapor pressure to be legal under DOT rules to ship in thinwall small cans. Note that R-12 and R-134a have no pressure issues with those cans, so the ES-12a was different in pressure characteristics. A reformulated ES-12a was thus developed that is legal to ship in small cans, as yet another miracle in a can to be foisted on the American consumer. This formula kept the same name for additional confusion. It was never submitted to the EPA. Being not approved as a R-12 replacement for any purpose, they labeled it as an "R-134a replacement". This exploits a loophole as R-134a systems are not regulated the same as R-12.

The problem with the new formula (I mean besides the obvious one of extreme flammability) is with it's lower vapor pressure in the can, at evaporator conditions the pressure is way too low. Existing unmodified TXVs, CCOT switches, and variable compressors will not bring the pressure down low enough for effective cooling. The severely suboptimal workaround was to add air to the system. This lowers the partial pressure of HC vapor in the evaporator while keeping the total pressure the same (similar to the famous Electrolux heat operated refrigerator, which uses a noncondensable buffer gas (hydrogen) to allow the evaporator and condenser to operate at the same absolute total pressure). Air in the high side though is of course murder on system performance.

Now I see they are selling the "Industrial" in small cans. Either those cans are afoul of DOT rules, or it's some other formula entirely, or it's just the reformula with a different name. I think the stuff was always a mixture of only isobutane and propane, in varying proportions. At least when you buy a can of R-134a there is no mystery what it is.

Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 8:54 PM by mk378

pippo on Thu May 06, 2010 8:52 PM User is offline

Hmm, TRB, thats why I was asking yous.....this is all over at least one Mercedes forum. It doesnt seem like theyd make it up. eh? I didnt mean to infer it was close to being legal, just it appeared like they were giving it all they had and they had momentum. Who knows what will happen in the future, you know what I mean? Its who ever kicks and moans the most.....thats what drives lots of business as we know today, and has for centuries, actually....LOL

Kinda like whats in the Gulf right now. Yeah, nobody likes dirty beaches/dead birds, but then, how is it we can drive our cars anytime/anywhere we want?? It comes at a cost. We drill or China/Mexico drills at their benefit. HC may come at a cost.

-------------------------
beware of the arrival

pippo on Thu May 06, 2010 9:01 PM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: mk378
There are two formulas of this stuff around. The Original Recipe was submitted to EPA but approved as a R-12 replacement only for industrial process refrigeration applications. Not for cars or any consumer equipment. Thus the label "industrial" as a CYA measure should some fool use it for something else. The problem was that this formula had too high a vapor pressure to be legal under DOT rules to ship in thinwall small cans. Note that R-12 and R-134a have no pressure issues with those cans, so the ES-12a was different in pressure characteristics. A reformulated ES-12a was thus developed that is legal to ship in small cans, as yet another miracle in a can to be foisted on the American consumer. This formula kept the same name for additional confusion. It was never submitted to the EPA. Being not approved as a R-12 replacement for any purpose, they labeled it as an "R-134a replacement". This exploits a loophole as R-134a systems are not regulated the same as R-12.



The problem with the new formula (I mean besides the obvious one of extreme flammability) is with it's lower vapor pressure in the can, at evaporator conditions the pressure is way too low. Existing unmodified TXVs, CCOT switches, and variable compressors will not bring the pressure down low enough for effective cooling. The severely suboptimal workaround was to add air to the system. This lowers the partial pressure of HC vapor in the evaporator while keeping the total pressure the same (similar to the famous Electrolux heat operated refrigerator, which uses a noncondensable buffer gas (hydrogen) to allow the evaporator and condenser to operate at the same absolute total pressure). Air in the high side though is of course murder on system performance.



Now I see they are selling the "Industrial" in small cans. Either those cans are afoul of DOT rules, or it's some other formula entirely, or it's just the reformula with a different name. I think the stuff was always a mixture of only isobutane and propane, in varying proportions. At least when you buy a can of R-134a there is no mystery what it is.

Thanks, MK. Your right...there is MUCH confusion on that. I wish I.....WE (the general public, even many ac guys) could make better sense of it. DOT CAN be funny....yeah, funny too. Years ago, they shipped Nitric acid as a dual class (corosive and oxidizer). Then, they changed their mind to JUST corrosive. Now, chemistry does not change, so how is it nitric all of a sudden becomes NOT an oxidizer?? And now, they changed it back (rumor, I have yet to confirm), to bOTH corrosive and Ox.

The can thing for shipping HC vs R134a is to me, subject to similar political, lobbying, AND vapor pressures....LOL

-------------------------
beware of the arrival

Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 9:03 PM by pippo

TRB on Thu May 06, 2010 9:19 PM User is offlineView users profile

Don;t believe everything you read on the Internet. There is someone that peddles this stuff from AZ the last time I checked. But again they do not have an office and you have to meet them at KFC to buy it. If that sounds like it's going to be legal in AZ I guess crack is going to be legal soon also.

Heck it's AZ we have no laws do as you like.

-------------------------

When considering your next auto A/C purchase, please consider the site that supports you: ACkits.com
Contact: ACKits.com


Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 9:52 PM by TRB

mk378 on Thu May 06, 2010 9:42 PM User is offline

They also have a "502a" version recommended for semi-trailer cargo refrigeration. If you thought those little British household refrigerator explosions were cute, imagine one 100 times that size while already moving at 75 mph...

Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 9:50 PM by mk378

Turbo on Thu May 06, 2010 10:05 PM User is offline

Thank you everyone for making this an informative post. So, the industrial has a higher pressure in the can which was unsafe for shipping. I believe I read this somewhere on the net. Many years a go they were only shipping the industrial in cylinders because of this. So, they now have better cans for the industrial. As for the standard it has a lower can pressure so if charged in a hard vacuum the systems was suffering from a low pressure on the suction side? So, the fix was to add air in to the system. I might be wrong by asking this but why couldn't you just add more gas to bring the low side up instead of adding air? Doesn't the air raise the high side as well so why not just add more gas?

Edited: Thu May 06, 2010 at 10:08 PM by Turbo

mk378 on Thu May 06, 2010 10:14 PM User is offline

The pressure temperature relationship doesn't depend on the quantity of refrigerant, just it's composition. It's like a pot of boiling water will always be 212 degrees from when it starts to boil, until the water is all gone. It's an inherent thing about water.

NickD on Fri May 07, 2010 5:46 AM User is offline

Flammability is not an issue with me with several hundred pounds of gasoline, engine oil, PS, and transmission fluid. but sure is with the idiots at the EPA. What the key issue is, the compatibility for the refrigerant for the design of the AC system, the very first thing you do is to select a refrigerant than design a system against its parameters.

With just a tad of worse case design principles is protecting the system in the event of a minor leak. Practically all current MVAC systems are like a two cycle engine where you have to mix the oil with the gas, forget the oil or use to lean of a mixture, and your two stroker is history. Dealing with a blend here that is a mixture, HC's are not a homogeneous refrigerant but rather a heterogeneous type. While you can emulate the P-T curve at a specific temperature, its impossible to maintain an appropriate curve for the specified temperature range. Could do it, if you had a variable ratio between the propane and butane.

We went through all of this stuff about 15 years ago, with a limited amount of ram in my brain, had to delete most of it to recall items of more importance like where did I leave my keys. Thing is, if the butane leaks out first and it will, system pressures will remain high to fool the protection system with limited oil carrying capability, and your system will seize before it shuts down.

In short, you would be an idiot to use HC's in a system that was designed to use exclusively a homogeneous refrigerant, not only with HC's but with most of this aftermarket crap that relies on a mixture that does not chemically combine to form a new compound, and plenty of this crap hit the market when R-12 was banned from new vehicles that are now over 16 years old.

First thing you have to realize is that the EPA doesn't give a damn if your system seizes or not, only care what happens if that refrigerant leaks into the air. So while many alternatives are accepted, this in no way implies its a safe refrigerant for you to use in your vehicle. Another annoyance that I don't even know if it was corrected or not, the EPA insists that with each different refrigerant, a different service port must be used. As I recall, these alternate refrigerant sources supplied the port for the vehicle, but not an adapter so you could connect standard gauges. So the guys fooling around with this crap with over sized mouths and undersized brains, couldn't even provide the details of performance over the entire temperature range. Unless they were cheating, but sure didn't want to admit that.

Even hair pulling was done even to convert from R-12 to R-134a, while only a 10% difference in the P-T curve existed at low operating temperatures, R-134a pressures would skyrocket compared to R-12 at the higher temperatures, so rather expensive means had to be taken to control those higher temperatures, namely trying to find a parallel flow condenser that would fit your vehicle and adding more fans.

Where the EPA really teed me off, they instantly banned a refrigerant that supposingly was killing us. We didn't chose R-12, the OE's did, but due to their corrupted politics, the basterds, and I mean that sincerely, the burden of correcting this problem was put on the user. Before that time, my company darn near went bankrupt when asbestos was banned, even though our use was contained. We had to recall all those products, but using asbestos was the accepted and proven way to for safety. One example, the WTC would be still standing if asbestos was used.

Just seems to me, rather than screwing around with any alternatives, we should have been screaming at congress for the injustice they imposed on the American people. But in this light, we also are the idiots for not screaming.

Turbo on Fri May 07, 2010 3:48 PM User is offline

MK378 I am still confused. Could you please explain your statement a little better.

You stated " at evaporator conditions the pressure is way too low" then you say " TXVs, CCOT switches, and variable compressors will not bring the pressure down low enough for effective cooling". Air lowers the partial pressure of HC vapor in the evaporator while keeping the total pressure the same. Am I understanding your stement correctly? The low side was way too high to have proper cooling. So the air blened with the refergerant to "Dilute" the gas. So, the systems could pull down the low side while maintaining the same high side? Why not use less gas?

mk378 on Fri May 07, 2010 4:42 PM User is offline

If you tried to use less charge, there wouldn't be enough liquid in the evaporator to have cooling. BTU's are removed by putting liquid into the evaporator and having it change to gas. The problem is that the HC (especially new formula) refuses to evaporate like R-12 would at the same pressure.

Bottom line is that the stuff just isn't the fluid that a R-12 system was designed for. The whole exercise is pointless since it's still possible to buy and use R-12. If you want to try a substitute, R-134a is cheap, safe, and legal. Years of widespread use as a retrofit make it generally considered the "next best thing" to R-12.

Edited: Fri May 07, 2010 at 4:47 PM by mk378

pippo on Sat May 08, 2010 8:14 AM User is offline

I have a great deal of reverence for you guys here that really know ac. Thing is, future of synthetic compounds is feeling the pressure (pun?) from environmentals, etc. And, although I dont do ac for a living, I trust my perspective might still be relevant. Internet is fuul of info, and yes, sometimes even full of it. You have to choose wisely. I am no stranger to libraries, knowing the county librarians by first name.

Nick's point on flammability of HC is well taken, as there are far more hazards in driving a car than worrying about the limited effect of an HC fire (the Porsche incident has many questions still). If you doubt that, read the book "Traffic" by Tom Vanderbilt, of even 'Traffic Safety" by Leonard Evans (former DOT Guru). This is a total of over 1300 pages, with about 200 pgs of credible references. You will afterward be stunned (even if you just get to Chapter 3!), and how petty and insignificant the potential of HC risk seems to compares with driving dangers which are WAY under reported by the media. Yeah, I read them. Yet, having read these, and remembering the great poet Alexander Pope's warning how "A little learning can be a dangerous thing", that still doesnt make me an expert. Driving a car is a dangerous , serious activity period. I necessary, I can elaborate on these books (and others).........

I keep an open mind for now, people, and as a chemist I find the strictly chemical nature of different compounds in ac interesting, especially compounds found in nature and not manufactured by monopolies with lobbyists pandering politicians in DC. Yeah, data is lacking from the marketers of HC's. This is typical of an industry which for now is in the fringes. When pockets become deep, data tables/tech details suddenly are available at a click of a mouse. You see this in the Chemical field/other sciences, as funding pours in........... boom. I think the question becomes "What are the alternatives?" when they phase this stuff out. Its funny how we end up embracing in time what initially was forced on us by market and industry whether it is refrigerant or the new "efficient" and economical light bulbs (ladened with toxic mercury) being peddled by those who have interests to protect, with the pretext of saving the planet.

I've had HC 12a on a shelf, havnt used it yet. I have old cars with R12, and R134a. Both have their drawbacks and hazards. I just liketo prod and poke....carefully. Lots of Mercedes (seems to be a thing with old Mercedes) and Alfa Romeo's out there running HC ...yeah, with no problems, guys. If its the oil miscibility thing, those compressors arent feeling it. So, how long COULD a compressor go without this proper lubing of its innards?? I really want to know, cuz I am at a loss here. I imagine compressors quit eventually, no matter what humans do to extend their lives........ Still, keeping cool in humid FL is a challenge. The battle against nature continues........



-------------------------
beware of the arrival

Edited: Sat May 08, 2010 at 8:19 AM by pippo

NickD on Sat May 08, 2010 4:20 PM User is offline

Don't really consider myself in the blind obedience class, but do read my owners and shop manuals for recommended fluids, especially when under warranty. If it calls for R-134a, that is what I use, but even have to be careful in buying that as all kinds of crap is added nowadays to what you may think is a pure can of R-134a. Even read in my 04 Cavalier shop manual, can use E-10 fuel, but on a very limited basis, that is confusing. Getting extremely difficult to find a gas station that sells pure gas anymore.

I know these guys create paranoia by the big companies, but R-134a in an R-134a vehicle works very well, do have one R-134a vehicle that is 14 years old now that will freeze you out. So why change? And that is what that vehicle calls for.

TRB on Sat May 08, 2010 4:30 PM User is offlineView users profile

One would think that after 15 years of discussing this topic. It would have been put to rest by now!

-------------------------

When considering your next auto A/C purchase, please consider the site that supports you: ACkits.com
Contact: ACKits.com

pippo on Sun May 09, 2010 11:33 AM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: TRB
One would think that after 15 years of discussing this topic. It would have been put to rest by now!

Aww, c'mon, TRB (slapping left hand hard onto left thigh), Then what would we do for fun?? Do you think I like it when all my cars are working perfectly and theres nothing to do (LOL)?? Fiddling around (albeit carefully) trying new ideas is it for me. My most boring cars are my NEW ones........

Cheers.....have a good Mother's day (going to Home Depot, buying a potted plant)..........

-------------------------
beware of the arrival

Back to Automotive Air Conditioning Forum

We've updated our forums!
Click here to visit the new forum

Archive Home

Copyright © 2016 Arizona Mobile Air Inc.