Comparative Analysis of Air Conditioning Performance with 0.5 PK Capacity Using Environmentally Friendly Refrigerants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In accordance with the Montreal Protocol, R22 will be completely banned from its use from January 1, 2030. Research looking for alternative refrigerants replacing R22 has experienced a significant increase. One of the replacement refrigerants that have gradually expanded their use are hydrocarbon refrigerants, few of which are R32, R290, and R410a. However, there are no experiments using the same test equipment for use on R32, R410a and R290 refrigerants. In addition, a more detailed study comparing the respective those refrigerants has not been found. This study aims on knowing the performance of machines that use R32, R290, and R410a refrigerants. This research uses 0.5 PK air conditioner. This research has begun with the preparation of tools and materials. Preparatory steps include assembly and setting up test installations, vacuuming, refrigerant filling and leak tests. The testing and the data retrieval steps are carried out after the system operates for about 30 minutes, i.e. until the system is working normally. Data collection is carried out with the change parameter or replacing the refrigerant. After obtaining data, analysis on Coefficient of Performance (COP), electricity costs, and economical refrigerant needs is carried out. The results have shown that the COP of R32 had the highest value from the 1-hour test, which has been 49.1. The most economical electricity cost is assumed to live for 24 hours in 1 month, namely in R32 refrigerant with a total amount of $12.46. The most economical refrigerant capacity operational cost is R290 refrigerant with a total amount of $9.01.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".