energies

Article
Cooling Performance Enhancement of a 20 RT (70 kW)
Two-Evaporator Heat Pump with a Vapor–Liquid Separator
Won-Suk Yang 1 and Young Il Kim 2, *

1 Department of Architectural Engineering, Graduate School,

Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Seoul 01811, Korea; wsyang1004@nate.com
2 School of Architecture, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Seoul 01811, Korea
* Correspondence: yikim@seoultech.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-2-970-6557

Abstract: 20 RT (70 kW) two-evaporator heat pump system was developed, manufactured, and tested
to enhance the cooling performance using a vapor–liquid separator. In the proposed system, two
evaporators are connected in series, and the refrigerant passing through the primary evaporator is
separated into vapor and liquid using a vapor–liquid separator. The vapor refrigerant is passed to
the compressor, whereas the liquid phase flows into the second evaporator. The amount of vapor
refrigerant sent to the compressor can be adjusted through a needle valve opening (0%, 50%, and
100%). The influence of this parameter on the cooling performance was analyzed. The cooling
performance tests were repeated five times to check repeatability. Data associated with the air and
refrigerant sides were obtained, and the average coefficients of performance (COPs) were calculated.
The average COP associated with the air side was approximately 5% lower than that pertaining to the
refrigerant side owing to the heat loss. In terms of the air-side cooling performance, the average COP
was 3.14, 3.40, and 3.68 when the valve openings were 0%, 50%, and 100%, respectively. The cooling
performance when the valve opening was 100% was 17.2% higher than that for the valve opening of
0%. The findings demonstrated that the cooling performance of a heat pump can be enhanced using
Citation: Yang, W.-S.; Kim, Y.I. two evaporators and a vapor–liquid separator.
Cooling Performance Enhancement
of a 20 RT (70 kW) Two-Evaporator Keywords: COP; heat pump; cooling; two-evaporator; refrigerant; vapor–liquid separator
Heat Pump with a Vapor–Liquid
Separator. Energies 2022, 15, 3849.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en15113849

Academic Editors: Sławomir

1. Introduction
Rabczak, Daniel Słyś 1.1. Background
and Krzysztof Nowak Energy used for air conditioning in buildings is increasing to satisfy the improved
Received: 4 April 2022
quality of life and thermal comfort [1,2]. Moreover, the energy consumption of heating
Accepted: 15 May 2022
and cooling systems in buildings is rapidly increasing owing to the enhanced ventilation
Published: 24 May 2022
required to reduce COVID-19 infection through the air. The energy consumption of resi-
dential and commercial buildings in developed countries is 20–40% of the total, and the
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
International Energy Agency (IEA) pointed out that the energy consumption of buildings
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
accounts for 30–40% of the final energy consumption [3]. As shown in Figure 1, domestic
published maps and institutional affil-
building energy consumption corresponds to approximately 24% of the national energy
iations.
consumption. Notably, the energy consumed by heating and cooling systems accounts for
most (48.9%) of the total energy consumption in buildings [1].
Heat pump systems with high energy efficiency are widely used for the heating and
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
cooling of buildings [3]. Heat pumps, as highly efficient devices, can perform both heating
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. and cooling and supply more heat energy with less energy consumption [4,5]. Heat pump
This article is an open access article systems with high energy efficiency are widely used for the heating and cooling of buildings.
distributed under the terms and Despite the use of a heat pump system, the amount of energy used for heating and cooling
conditions of the Creative Commons in buildings continues to increase. In particular, as the number of cooling systems increases
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// due to climate change, energy consumption continues to increase [6]. Therefore, it was
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ judged that it was necessary to study the improvement of the heat pump system to increase
4.0/). the cooling performance and save energy.

Energies 2022, 15, 3849. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15113849 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 19
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 2 of 18

Figure 1. The type of energy consumption in buildings.

Figure 1. The type of energy consumption in buildings.
The cooling system of a heat pump cools the air as the liquid refrigerant flowing
Heat
through the pump systemsabsorbs
evaporator with high theenergy efficiency
surrounding are widely
thermal energyused andfor the heating
evaporates. In and
gen-
cooling
eral, allof buildings [3].
refrigerants do Heat pumps, asand
not evaporate highly
pass efficient
through devices, can perform
the evaporator in aboth
mixed heating
state
and coolingvapor
involving and supply moreforms.
and liquid heat energy
If the with less energy
refrigerant drawn consumption [4,5]. Heat
into the evaporator pump
does not
evaporate
systems sufficiently,
with high energy the capacity
efficiency that
arethe liquidused
widely accumulator can handle
for the heating may be exceeded.
and cooling of build-
In this
ings. case, the
Despite theexcess
use ofliquid
a heatrefrigerant
pump system, may flow into the of
the amount compressor
energy used resulting in damage
for heating and
to the compressor
cooling in buildings[7]. Therefore,
continues it was determined
to increase. In particular, that cooling
as the numberperformance
of cooling could
systems be
improved by configuring the two evaporators in series and evaporating
increases due to climate change, energy consumption continues to increase [6]. Therefore, the surplus liquid
itrefrigerant
was judged that
thatdidit not
wasevaporate
necessaryin tothe
studyprimary evaporator in
the improvement ofthe
thesecondary
heat pumpevaporator.
system to
In addition,
increase it was expected
the cooling performancethat itandwould
savebe possible to achieve stable cooling when pass-
energy.
ing through
The cooling the secondary
system of evaporator
a heat pump by significantly
cools the air cooling the airrefrigerant
as the liquid coming in from flowing the
primary the
through evaporator.
evaporator Wang et al. the
absorbs theoretically
surrounding compared
thermalthe thermodynamic
energy and evaporates. performance
In gen-
of a two-stage
eral, all refrigerantsevaporation
do not vapor
evaporatecompression
and passrefrigeration
through the cycle using refrigerants
evaporator in a mixed state R290
(propane) and R600 (butane) with low global warming potential
involving vapor and liquid forms. If the refrigerant drawn into the evaporator does not (GWP) and no ozone deple-
tion potential
evaporate (ODP) [8].the
sufficiently, They showed
capacity that
that thethe COP accumulator
liquid of R600 was better than that
can handle may of be
R134a,
ex-
but their work was not based on an experiment. Yataganbaba
ceeded. In this case, the excess liquid refrigerant may flow into the compressor resulting et al. carried out an exergy
analysis
in damage oftoR1234yf and R1234ze
the compressor as R134a replacements
[7]. Therefore, it was determined in a two-evaporator vapor com-
that cooling performance
pression refrigeration system [9]. Their work proved that
could be improved by configuring the two evaporators in series and evaporating exergy analysis was a useful way
the sur-
of determining thermodynamic losses and optimizing the environmental
plus liquid refrigerant that did not evaporate in the primary evaporator in the secondary and economic per-
formance of a two-evaporator vapor compression refrigeration
evaporator. In addition, it was expected that it would be possible to achieve stable coolingsystem, but the analysis was
done with
when passing theoretical
throughthermodynamic analysis andby
the secondary evaporator not actual measurements.
significantly cooling theInairthis work,
coming
however, the air-source two-evaporator vapor compression
in from the primary evaporator. Wang et al. theoretically compared the thermodynamic heat pump of cooling capacity
20RT (70 kW) was manufactured and tested in multi-environmental thermal chambers to
performance of a two-stage evaporation vapor compression refrigeration cycle using re-
obtain in situ measurement data. A theoretical study is good for qualitative analysis but
frigerants R290 (propane) and R600 (butane) with low global warming potential (GWP)
cannot surpass the quantitative measurement obtained by experiment, which was adopted
and no ozone depletion potential (ODP) [8]. They showed that the COP of R600 was better
in this study. Although this vapor separation technology in the primary evaporator was
than that of R134a, but their work was not based on an experiment. Yataganbaba et al.
applied and used in a water-source centrifugal turbo refrigeration system of large capacity,
carried out an exergy analysis of R1234yf and R1234ze as R134a replacements in a two-
few works appear in the literature that analyzed the performance of this technology. This
evaporator vapor compression refrigeration system [9]. Their work proved that exergy
study is worthwhile because there are few works where a two-evaporator system was
analysis was a useful way of determining thermodynamic losses and optimizing the en-
applied to a medium-sized capacity of air-source vapor compression refrigeration systems
vironmental and economic performance of a two-evaporator vapor compression refriger-
and performance measurement was carried out in actual operating conditions.
ation system, but the analysis was done with theoretical thermodynamic analysis and not
In this study, when two evaporators were connected in series and the vapor refrigerant
actual
from the measurements.
outlet of the In this work,
primary however,
evaporator was thesentair-source two-evaporator
to the compressor, vaporon
the effect com-
the
pression heat pump of cooling capacity 20RT (70
cooling performance of the heat pump was confirmed through an experiment. kW) was manufactured and tested in
multi-environmental thermal chambers to obtain in situ measurement data. A theoretical
study is good Review
1.2. Literature for qualitative analysis but cannot surpass the quantitative measurement
obtained by experiment,
Considerable research which was adopted
to enhance the heatin this study.
pump Although
performance has this
beenvapor separation
performed in var-
technology in the primary evaporator was applied and used in
ious domains, with the relevant studies focused on system design and improvement [10–13], a water-source centrifugal
turbo
controlrefrigeration
[14,15], buildingsystem of large
operation capacity, few
optimization works
[16,17], appear
energy in the analyses
efficiency literature[18–20]
that ana-
and
lyzed the performance of this technology.
comparison [21,22], and economic analyses [23,24]. This study is worthwhile because there are few
worksLee where a two-evaporator
[25] constructed a double system was applied
evaporator system to to aenhance
medium-sized
heat pump capacity of air-
performance.
The power required for the compressor operation was decreased by controlling the refriger-
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 3 of 18

ant state with one expansion valve, thereby decreasing the fuel consumption by 1.4–3.0%
and cooling efficiency by approximately 6–10%. Zhang et al. [26] demonstrated that the use
of two evaporators could decrease the energy waste and high-temperature steam heat could
be used to configure a system with a heat of evaporation of 1985 kg/h and COP of 4.92,
which could be used in the industry. Through simulation-based analyses, Baik et al. [27]
demonstrated that at a supply temperature of 60 ◦ C, the heating performance associated
with two heat pumps connected in series was approximately 5% higher than that of two
pumps connected in parallel.
Elliott and Rasmussen [28] proposed a predictive control-based controller model
that could effectively control multiple evaporators. Moreover, the authors attempted to
increase the efficiency by controlling the amount of refrigerant supplied to the compressor
by adjusting the expansion valves at the evaporator outlet according to the degree of
superheat. Mei and Xia [29] proposed the autonomous hierarchical distributed control
strategy to achieve the efficient operation of a two-evaporator air-conditioning system,
which decreased the energy consumption by 38% and costs by 48.5%.
To decrease the energy consumption of a heat pump, Chen et al. [30] used a cooling
device (ESD: Energy-Saving Device) that sent condensed water to a compressor. According
to experiments in various indoor and outdoor conditions, the energy efficiency could be
increased by approximately 25.4%. Chaiyat [31] attempted to decrease the temperature of
the air entering the evaporation coil by using a phase-change material (PCM) to enhance
the cooling efficiency of the air conditioner. In an experiment involving a PCM of approxi-
mately 40 cm, the average daily power consumption of the air conditioner decreased by
approximately 3.09 kWh, corresponding to annual cost savings of 170.03 USD.

1.3. Objectives and Limits of Research

In the literature review, it was possible to confirm the study of improving the energy
performance through the improvement of the performance of the heat exchanger and the
control of the heat pump. The vapor generated in the evaporator no longer contributes to
cooling and acts as a resistance to the refrigerant flow. In this study, a heat pump consisting
of two evaporators was conducted to reduce the power consumption of the compressor
while improving the cooling performance of the evaporator by reducing the refrigerant
flow resistance by sending the vapor generated from the evaporator to the compressor.
If two evaporators are used, the heat exchanger area can be reduced compared to using
one evaporator of the same capacity, resulting in a smaller product size. Furthermore,
like a general heat pump system, a heating operation is possible by reversing the cooling
cycle with a four-way valve. It is expected that this study will be used as basic data for
a heat pump system that improves energy performance by reducing the flow resistance
of refrigerants with multiple evaporators and, at the same time, reducing the power
consumption of the compressor.
For the cooling performance test, standard climate evaluation conditions were applied
in the national standard test conditions for air-cooled heat pumps (KS B ISO 13253). Under
standard climate evaluation conditions, the outdoor dry-bulb temperature and the air
conditioner inlet dry-bulb temperature are 35 ◦ C and 27 ◦ C, respectively [31]. Depending
on the characteristics of the heat pump during cooling, if the outdoor temperature is higher
than the experimental conditions, the condenser efficiency is lowered, hence the cooling
performance is lowered; however, in the opposite case, the performance is higher. On the
other hand, if the temperature entering the air conditioner is low, the evaporator efficiency
is lowered, but in the opposite case, it is increased. Therefore, it was judged that the results
of this study were significantly affected when the outdoor temperature was low or the air
conditioner inlet temperature was high compared to the experimental conditions.

2. Materials and Methodology

In this study, a 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner to which a two-evaporator heat pump
system configured with two evaporators in series was applied was tested. RT (Refrigeration
 low or the air conditioner inlet temperature was high compared to the experimental con
ditions.

2. Materials and Methodology

Energies 2022, 15, 3849 In this study, a 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner to which a two-evaporator 4 ofheat
18 pump
system configured with two evaporators in series was applied was tested. RT (Refrigera
tion Ton) is a unit for representing capacities of heat pumps or refrigeration devices and
is equivalent
Ton) to 3.517
is a unit for kW. Thus,
representing 20 RT is
capacities of equivalent
heat pumpstoorabout 70 kW. In
refrigeration the two-evaporato
devices and is
system, the
equivalent to refrigerant
3.517 kW. Thus,passing
20 RTthrough the primary
is equivalent to about 70 evaporator
kW. In theistwo-evaporator
separated into vapo
system,
and liquidthe refrigerant
refrigerants passing
throughthrough the primaryseparator.
a vapor–liquid evaporatorThe is separated into vaporis sent to
vapor refrigerant
and liquid refrigerants through a vapor–liquid separator. The vapor
the compressor and the liquid refrigerant is sent to the secondary evaporator. refrigerant is sent to
The effec
the compressor and the liquid refrigerant is sent to the secondary evaporator. The effect
of the amount of vapor refrigerant input to the compressor on the cooling performance o
of the amount of vapor refrigerant input to the compressor on the cooling performance of
the heat pump was examined. The amount of vapor refrigerant was adjusted through the
the heat pump was examined. The amount of vapor refrigerant was adjusted through the
openingofofa aneedle
opening needle valve
valve [32][32]
(0%,(0%,
50%,50%, and 100%
and 100% in thisinstudy).
this study).
Figure 2 shows the research flow
Figure 2 shows the research flow chart. chart.

Figure2.2.Research
Figure Research flow
flow chart.
chart.

2.1. Heat Pump Cycle Analysis

2.1. Heat Pump Cycle Analysis
Prior to the experiment, a cycle analysis was performed to evaluate the cooling per-
Prior to the experiment, a cycle analysis was performed to evaluate the cooling per
formance based on predetermined conditions as listed in Table 1. The difference in the
formance
condensation based on predetermined
and evaporation conditions
temperatures as listed
and superheat insubcooling
and Table 1. The difference
degrees were in the
determined with reference to existing experimental results. The compressor adiabatic effi-
ciency was set with reference to the performance table of the Copeland compressor model
ZP234KCE-TFD. The indoor and outdoor dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures were deter-
mined with reference to the standard cooling test KS B ISO 13253: Ducted air-conditioners
and air-to-air heat pumps—Testing and rating for performance [33]. The bypass coeffi-
cient of air passing through the evaporator, defined in Equation (1), was calculated using
experimental data. The number of thermodynamic states required for cycle analysis was
calculated using the Engineering Equation Solver (EES) program.

te − tevap.c
Bevap = (1)
ti − tevap.c
 condensation and evaporation temperatures and superheat and subcooling degrees were
determined with reference to existing experimental results. The compressor adiabatic ef-
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 ficiency was set with reference to the performance table of the Copeland compressor 5 of 18
model ZP234KCE-TFD. The indoor and outdoor dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures
were determined with reference to the standard cooling test KS B ISO 13253: Ducted air-
conditioners and air-to-air heat pumps—Testing and rating for performance [33]. The by-
Table 1. Input conditions for cycle analysis.
pass coefficient of air passing through the evaporator, defined in Equation (1), was calcu-
Item lated using experimental
Valuedata. The number of thermodynamic
Item states required Value
for cycle
analysis was calculated using the Engineering Equation Solver (EES) program.
Dry-bulb temperature 27 ◦ C Evaporation temperature difference 20 ◦ C
Indoor ◦C
Wet-bulbTable
temperature 19
1. Input conditions for Condensation
cycle analysis. temperature difference 14 ◦ C
Dry-bulb temperature 35 ◦ C Superheat degree 5 ◦C
Outdoor
Wet-bulb temperature
Item 24 ◦ C
Value Subcooling
Item degree 3 ◦C
Value
Compressor adiabatic efficiency
Dry-bulb temperature 69.7%
27 °C Bypass coefficientdifference
Evaporation temperature 12%
20 °C
Indoor
Wet-bulb temperature 19 °C Condensation temperature difference 14 °C
Dry-bulb temperature 35 °C Superheat
2.1.1. General Heat Pump System Configuration degree 5 °C
Outdoor
Wet-bulb temperature
A typical heat pump system consists of one compressor, one condenser, one3 expansion
24 °C Subcooling degree °C
Compressor adiabatic valve,
efficiency 69.7%
and one evaporator, Bypasscirculation
and the refrigerant coefficient involves compression,
12% con-
densation, expansion, and evaporation, in order. Figure 3 shows the configuration and
pressure–enthalpy (P–h) diagram of a general 𝑡𝑒 − 𝑡𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝.𝑐
heat pump system. Equations (2)–(4) can be
𝐵𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝 = (1)
used to calculate the cooling coefficient of performance
𝑡𝑖 − 𝑡𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝.𝑐 (COP) of the system.
. .
Qevap = m(h1 − h4 ) (2)
2.1.1. General Heat Pump System Configuration
.
A typical heat pump system consists of one
. compressor, one condenser, one expan-
W comp = m(h2 − h1 ) (3)
sion valve, and one evaporator, and the refrigerant circulation involves compression, con-
.
densation, expansion, and evaporation, in order. Figure 3 shows the configuration and
Qevap
pressure–enthalpy (P–h) diagram of a COP c =heat
general . pump system. Equations (2)–(4) can be (4)
W evap (COP) of the system.
used to calculate the cooling coefficient of performance

Figure3.3.Configuration
Figure Configuration and
and P–h
P–h diagram
diagramofofaageneral
generalheat
heatpump
pumpsystem.
system.

2.1.2. Two-Evaporator Heat Pump System

𝑄̇
Configuration
= 𝑚̇(ℎ − ℎ ) (2)
𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝 1 4
The two-evaporator heat pump system consists of one compressor, one condenser, two
𝑊̇𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 = 𝑚̇(ℎ2 − ℎ1 ) (3)
expansion valves, and two evaporators. Like a general heat pump system, the refrigerant
repeats the steps of compression, condensation,𝑄̇𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝
expansion, and evaporation in a cycle. The
𝐶𝑂𝑃𝑐 = (4)
difference is that the refrigerant that has passed𝑊̇𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝
through the primary evaporator passes
through a separate vapor–liquid separator and is separated into a vapor refrigerant and
a liquid refrigerant. The separated vapor refrigerant is sent to the compressor and the
2.1.2. Two-Evaporator Heat Pump System Configuration
liquid refrigerant is sent to the secondary evaporator. Figure 4 is a two-evaporator system
configuration and P-h diagram [34]. In Figure 4, state a is the exit of 1st stage compression
and state b is a mixture of state 6 and state a. Equations (5)–(11) were used to calculate the
cooling COP of the two-evaporator heat pump system.
. .
Qevap1 = m(1 − f )(h1 − h8 ) (5)
. .
Qevap2 = m(h5 − h4 ) (6)
 Energies
Energies 2022,
2022, 15,15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
3849 6 of6 19
of 18

. . .
The two-evaporator heat pump system
Qt.evap consists
= Qevap1 of one compressor, one condenser,(7)
+ Qevap2
two expansion valves, and two .evaporators. Like a general heat pump system, the refrig-
.
erant repeats the steps of compression,
W comp1 = condensation,
m(1 − f )(h a −expansion,
h1 ) and evaporation in a(8)
cycle. The difference is that the refrigerant
. that
.
has passed through the primary evapora-
W
tor passes through a separate vapor–liquid = m (
comp2 separator h 2 − h b is separated into a vapor refrig-(9)
and)
erant and a liquid refrigerant. The separated vapor refrigerant is sent to the compressor
. . .
and the liquid refrigerant is sentWtot.comp = W comp1evaporator.
the secondary + W comp2 Figure 4 is a two-evaporator(10)
.
system configuration and P-h diagram [34]. In Figure 4, state a is the exit of 1st stage com-
Qt.evap
pression and state b is a mixture of COP statec 6=and . state a. Equations (5)–(11) were used to (11)
calculate the cooling COP of the two-evaporator W t.comp
heat pump system.

Figure 4. Two-evaporator heat pump system and P-h diagram.

Figure 4. Two-evaporator heat pump system and P-h diagram.

2.1.3. Cycle Analysis Result

𝑄̇𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝1 = 𝑚̇(1 − 𝑓)(ℎ1 − ℎ8 ) (5)
Table 2 summarizes the results of analyzing the cycles of general and two-evaporator
𝑄̇𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝2 = 𝑚̇(ℎ
heat pump systems using the EES program. 5 − general
The ℎ4 ) heat pump system exhibits (6) a
compression work, evaporation capacity,
𝑄̇𝑡.𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝 = 𝑄anḋ 𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝1cooling
+ 𝑄̇𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝2 COP of 44.5 kW, 151.7 kW,(7) and
3.41, respectively. The compression work, evaporative heat, and cooling COP of the two-
evaporator heat pump systems are 𝑊̇𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝1
43.4 = 𝑚̇(1
kW, − 𝑓)(ℎ
159.3 𝑎 − and
kW, (8)
ℎ1 ) 3.68, respectively. The cooling
COP of the two-evaporator heat pump system
𝑊̇𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝2 = 𝑚̇(ℎ is2 approximately
− ℎ𝑏 ) 0.27 (7.92%) higher (9)
than
that of the general heat pump system, and thus, the heat pump performance was expected
̇ ̇ ̇ (10)
to be enhanced in the experiment.𝑊𝑡.𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝 = 𝑊𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝1 + 𝑊𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝2
𝑄̇𝑡.𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑝
𝐶𝑂𝑃𝑐and
Table 2. Results of the cycle analysis of general = two-evaporator heat pump systems. (11)
𝑊̇ 𝑡.𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝

Value
ItemAnalysis Result
2.1.3. Cycle Symbol
General Two-Evaporator
Table 2 summarizes the results
. of analyzing the cycles of general and two-evaporator
Compression work W comp 44.5 kW 43.4 kW
heat pump systems using the EES . program. The general heat pump system exhibits a
Evaporation capacity 151.7 kW 159.3 kW
compression work, evaporationQcapacity,
evap and cooling COP of 44.5 kW, 151.7 kW, and 3.41,
Cooling COP COPc 3.41 3.68
respectively. The compression work, evaporative heat, and cooling COP of the two-evap-
orator heat pump systems are 43.4 kW, 159.3 kW, and 3.68, respectively. The cooling COP
2.2. Air two-evaporator
of the Conditioner Experiment
heat pump system is approximately 0.27 (7.92%) higher than that
2.2.1.
of the20general
RT (70heat
kW)pump
Air Conditioner
system, andSpecification
thus, the heat pump performance was expected to
be enhanced in the experiment.
Table 3 lists the specifications of the air conditioner for the 20 RT (70 kW) two-
evaporator heat pump system, and Figure 5 shows images of the air-conditioning system.
The cooling capacity, refrigerant, compressor capacity, blower air volume flow rate, and
blower static pressure of the air conditioner are 65.1 kW, R410A, 15 kW, 150 m3 /min, and
20 mmAq, respectively. The cooling capacity of the primary evaporator is about 37 kW
(32,000 kcal/h), and the cooling capacity of the secondary evaporator is about 34 kW
(29,000 kcal/h). According to GSEED (Green Standard for Energy and Environmental De-
sign of Buildings, www.gseed.or.kr (accessed on 1 May 2020) of Korea, R410A is classified
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 7 of 18

as an eco-friendly refrigerant [35]. In GSEED certification, for refrigerant, if ODP is less

than 0.003 and GWP is less than 3000, then it is considered an eco-friendly refrigerant. For
R410A, ODP is 0 and GWP is 1730, thus qualifies the criteria of eco-friendly refrigerant in
GSEED. Though GWP of R410A is low but not zero, this refrigerant cannot be a permanent
solution and must be replaced with alternative, of which both ODP and GWP are zero or
infinitesimally small. R410A is a mixture of R32 and R125 and is a zoetrope, meaning tem-
perature changes during constant pressure condensation and evaporation. Condenser and
evaporator designs are affected by this temperature glide during phase change. Currently,
research on refrigerants with a lower GWP than R410A is carried out actively worldwide.
As a result of comparing performance of various refrigerants with experiment, Guilherme
and Pico [36] confirmed that COP could be increased by 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively, when
DR55 (R452b) and DR5A (R456b) were applied to equipment designed with R410A. In
particular, DR5A (R456b) can be expected to increase COP by about 5.5–7.1% due to low
compressor energy consumption, so it is said that it is appropriate to use it as an alternative
refrigerant. Therefore, when an alternative refrigerant that can replace R410A is applied to
two-evaporator system, it is expected that it will not significantly deviate from the results
of this study.

Table 3. Specifications of the 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner.

Item Value Item Value

Compressor Scroll type Cooling capacity 65.1 kW
Compressor capacity 15 kW Heating capacity 76.7 kW
Energies
Blower 2022, 15, x FOR
volumetric PEER REVIEW
flow 150 CMM Evaporator coil 3/800 , 4R × 48S8 ×
of 800EL
19

Blower static pressure 20 mmAq Accumulator 20 HP

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 5. (a) Air conditioner frame, supply fan; (b) Outdoor condensing coil; (c) Air conditioner coil;
Figure 5. (a) Air conditioner frame, supply fan; (b) Outdoor condensing coil; (c) Air conditioner coil;
(d) Compressor, control panel; (e) Air conditioner unit piping connection; (f) Cooler for the outdoor
(d) Compressor,
unit. control panel; (e) Air conditioner unit piping connection; (f) Cooler for the outdoor unit.

2.2.2. System Diagram and Data Measurement Location

Figure 6 schematically illustrates the configuration of the 20 RT (70 kW) two-evapo-
rator heat pump system and data measurement locations. To increase the accuracy of the
experimental results, both the air-side and refrigerant-side data were acquired. Table 4
 (d) (e) (f)
Figure 5. (a) Air conditioner frame, supply fan; (b) Outdoor condensing coil; (c) Air conditioner coil;
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 8 of 18
(d) Compressor, control panel; (e) Air conditioner unit piping connection; (f) Cooler for the outdoor
unit.

2.2.2. System
2.2.2. System Diagram
Diagram and
and Data
DataMeasurement
MeasurementLocation
Location
Figure66schematically
Figure schematicallyillustrates
illustratesthethe configuration
configuration of the
of the 20 (70
20 RT RT kW)
(70 kW) two-evapo-
two-evaporator
heat pump system and data measurement locations. To increase the accuracy ofofthe
rator heat pump system and data measurement locations. To increase the accuracy the
experimental results,
experimental results, both
both the
the air-side
air-side and
and refrigerant-side
refrigerant-side data
data were
were acquired.
acquired. Table
Table 44
showsthe
shows thetypes
typesof
ofdata
dataobtained
obtainedat atthe
themeasurement
measurementlocations.
locations.

Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 19

Figure 6. System diagram and data measurement locations for the 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEWFigure 6. System diagram and data measurement locations for the 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner
9 of 19 system.
system.
Table4.4.Measurement
Table Measurementlocation
locationand
anditem.
item.
Table 4. Measurement location and item.
Location
Location Item
Item Location
Location Item
Item Location
Location Item
Item
.
A1
Location
A1 Item 𝐻,V𝑉̇
T,𝑇,H, R1
Location
R1 Item T,𝑇,P𝑃 Location R6
R6 Item 𝑇, 𝑃P
T,
A1
A2
A2 ̇
𝐻,𝑇,𝑉H
𝑇, T, 𝐻 R1 R2
R2 𝑇, 𝑃 T,𝑇,P𝑃 R6 R7 𝑇, 𝑃 𝑇, 𝑃P
T,
.
A2
A3
A3 𝑇,T,𝑇,
𝐻H 𝐻 R2 R3
R3 𝑇, 𝑃T,
𝑇, P.
𝑃.m𝑚̇ R7 R8
R8 𝑇, 𝑃 T,
𝑇, 𝑃P .
A4
A3
A4 𝑇,T,𝑇,
𝐻H 𝐻 R3 R4
R4 𝑇, 𝑃. 𝑚̇T,𝑇,P𝑃 R8 R9
R9 𝑇, 𝑃 T, P.𝑚
𝑇, 𝑃. ṁ
A5
A4
A5 𝑇,T,𝑇,
𝐻H 𝐻 R4 R5
R5fan 𝑇, 𝑃 T,𝑇,P𝑃 R9 R10
R10 𝑇, 𝑃. 𝑚̇ T, P
𝑇,E𝑃
Compressor
A5 𝑇, 𝐻E Supply
R5 𝑇, 𝑃 E Condenser fan
R10 𝑇, 𝑃
Compressor 𝐸 Supply fan 𝐸 Condenser fan 𝐸
Compressor 𝐸 Supply fan 𝐸 Condenser fan 𝐸
2.2.3. Measuring Equipment and Specifications
2.2.3. Measuring Equipment and Specifications
2.2.3. Measuring Equipment and Specifications
Tables 5–10 summarize the equipment used to measure the experimental data and
Tables 5–10 summarize the equipment used to measure the experimental data and
theTables 5–10 summarize
corresponding the equipment
specifications. used to
All equipmentmeasure thethe
used in experimental
experimentdata
wasand
used after
thethe corresponding
corresponding specifications.
specifications. All equipment used in the experiment was
All equipment used in the experiment was used after used after
calibration within the error range.
calibration
calibration within
within the error
the error range.
range.
Table 5. Airflow sensor specification.
Table
Table 5. Airflow
5. Airflow sensor
sensor specification.
specification.

Model
Model
Model Kanomax TAB master
Kanomax
Kanomax 6710
TABmaster
TAB master67106710
RangeRange Range 40 to 4250
40 m
to /h
3
4250 /h m3 /h
m34250
40 to
Airflow
AirflowAirflow
Accuracy ±3% of reading
Accuracy Accuracy ±3% of reading±8 m 3/h
±3% of reading 3
±8 m3/h±8 m /h
Measurement Range 0 to 50 °C
Measurement
Measurement Temperature Range Range 0 to 50 °C0 to 50 ◦ C
Specifications Temperature
Temperature Accuracy ±0.5 °C ◦
Specifications Accuracy Accuracy ±0.5 °C ±0.5 C
Specifications Range 0 to 100% RH
Humidity Humidity Range Range 0 to 100% 0 to
RH100% RH
Humidity Accuracy Accuracy ±3% RH ±3% RH
Accuracy ±3% RH
Table 6. Data logger specification.
Table6.6.Data
Table Datalogger
loggerspecification.
specification.
Model Graphtec MIDI logger GL840
ModelModel Range Graphtec MIDI
Graphtec logger
MIDI 20 mVGL840
loggertoGL840
100 V
Voltage
Measurement Range
Accuracy Range 20
±0.05% mV to 100 20 mVV to 100 V
Specifications
Voltage Voltage
Measurement
Measurement Thermocouple
Accuracy R, S, B,
Accuracy K, E, T, J, N,
±0.05%W ± 0.05%
Temperature
Specifications
Specifications Accuracy
Thermocouple Thermocouple ±1.1 °C
R, S, B, K, E,R, T, J, K,
S, B, N,E,WT, J, N, W
Temperature Temperature
Accuracy Accuracy ±1.1 °C ±1.1 ◦ C
Table 7. Mass flow meter specification.

Model Table 7. Mass flow meter specification.Rheonik RHM 08

Typical application range 0.3 up to 50 kg/min
Model
Measurement Max. pressure
Rheonik RHM 08
1254 bar/18057 psi
Specifications Typical application
Temperature range −196 up0.3toup
400to°C50 kg/min
Measurement Max. pressure
Accuracy 1254 bar/18057 psi
0.1%
 Table 6. Data logger specification.
Table
Table 6. Data 6. Dataspecification.
logger logger specification.
Model
Model
Model Graphtec
Graphtec MIDI
Graphtec
MIDI logger
MIDI
logger GL840
logger
GL840 GL840
Range
Range Range 20 mV
20 mV to 20 tomV
100 100toV100 V
V
Voltage
Voltage
Voltage
Measurement
Measurement
Measurement Accuracy
Accuracy
Accuracy ±0.05%
±0.05% ±0.05%
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 9 of 18
Specifications
Specifications
Specifications Thermocouple
Thermocouple
Thermocouple R, R,
S, S,
B, B,
K,
R,E,K, E,J, K,
T,B,
S, T,
N, J,
WN,
E, T, W
J, N, W
Temperature
Temperature
TemperatureAccuracy
Accuracy
Accuracy ±1.1±1.1
°C °C ±1.1 °C
Table 7. Mass flow meter specification.
Table7.
Table 7.Mass
Mass
Table flow
7.flow meter
meter
Mass specification.
flowspecification.
meter specification.
Model
Model Model Rheonik
RheonikRHM 08 08
Rheonik
RHM RHM 08
Model Rheonik RHM 08
Typical application
Typical range
application range
Typical application 0.3 up
0.3to
up50toup
kg/min
50toto
kg/min
Typical application range range 0.3
0.3 up 5050
kg/min
kg/min
Measurement
Measurement Measurement Max. pressure
Max. Max.
pressure Max. pressure 1254 bar/18057
1254 psi
bar/18,057
1254 bar/18057 psi psi
Measurement pressure 1254 bar/18057 psi
Specifications Temperature
Specifications Temperature up −
−196−196 to196
400up°C to 400 ◦ C
Specifications
Specifications Temperature
Temperature up to 400 °C
−196 up to 400 °C
Accuracy Accuracy 0.1%0.1%0.1%
Accuracy Accuracy 0.1%
Table
Table 8. Power
8. Power meter
meter specification.
specification.
Table 8. Power
Table meter
8. Power specification.
meter specification.
Model Yokogawa CW240
Model Model
Model Yokogawa
Yokogawa
YokogawaCW240
CW240
CW240
Voltage range 0/150, 0/300, 0/600, 0/1000 V
Voltage range 0/150, 0/300, 0/600,0/600,
0/10000/1000
V
Measurement CurrentVoltage
mode range
Voltage range 0/150,
0/150,0/300,
0/300,
2/50/200/500/1000 A0/600,0/1000 VV
Measurement
Measurement
Measurement Current mode
Current Current mode
mode 2/50/200/500/1000 A
2/50/200/500/1000AA
2/50/200/500/1000
Specifications Wiring mode 1P2W/1P3W/1P3W/3P3W/3P4W
Specifications Wiring mode Wiring mode
Specifications 1P2W/1P3W/1P3W/3P3W/3P4W
1P2W/1P3W/1P3W/3P3W/3P4W
Specifications Time Wiring mode
interval 1P2W/1P3W/1P3W/3P3W/3P4W
0.1/0.2/0.5 Each waveform
Time interval 0.1/0.2/0.5 Each waveform
TimeTime
interval
interval 0.1/0.2/0.5 Each Each
0.1/0.2/0.5 waveform
waveform
Table 9. Temperature and humidity sensor specification.
Table
Table 9. Temperature
9. Temperature
Table and humidity
and humidity
9. Temperature sensor
andsensor specification.
specification.
humidity sensor specification.
Model SRN-300
Model
Temperature rangeModel
Model 0 to 70 °CSRN-300
(±0.3SRN-300
SRN-300°C)
Temperature
Humidity rangerange
range
Temperature 0 to 0100%
to 70 °C
(±3%
0 to (±0.3
◦ C70RH) °C)
Temperature range 0 to 70 (±°C
0.3 (±0.3
◦ C) °C)
Energies 2022, 15, x 2022,
Energies FOR 15,
PEER REVIEW
x FOR PEER REVIEW Humidity rangerange
Humidity
Humidity range 0 0toto100% (±3%
0 to 100%
100% RH)
(±3%(±3% 10
RH) RH)10 of
of 19
19

Table 10. Pressure sensor specification.

Table
Table 10. 10. Pressure
Pressure sensorsensor specification.
specification.

ModelModel Model SETRA

SETRA SETRA
206 206
206
Pressure
Pressure rangerange
Pressure range 0 to
0 to 500500
0 to psi
psi500 (±0.13%)
psi (±0.13%)
(±0.13%)
Operation temperature
Operation
Operation temperature temperature to −
−40−40 to 85
8540 to°C85 ◦ C
°C

2.2.4. Air Conditioning Room Simulator

2.2.4.
2.2.4. Air
Air Conditioning Simulator
Conditioning Room Simulator
Figure 7 schematically illustrates the simulator for the 20 RT (70 kW) air conditioner
Figure
Figure
cooling
77 schematically
schematically
performance test.
illustrates
illustrates thesimulator
The air the
input
simulator for
to the airfor
the2020RT
the
conditioner
RT (70kW)
is(70
kW)air
a mixture
air conditioner
ofconditioner
indoor and
cooling performance
coolingoutdoor air, supplied to the room after passing through evaporators 1 and 2. Inindoor
performance test.
test. The
The air
air input
input to
to the
the air
air conditioner
conditioner isis
a a mixture
mixture of of
indoor and
and
the space
outdoor
outdoor air,
air, supplied
supplied to the room after
after passing
passing through
through evaporators
evaporators 1 and
1
in which the condenser is installed, the temperature may continuously increase owing to and2.
2.InInthe space
the space
inwhich
in which the
thethe
heat condenser
condenser
emitted byistheinstalled,
installed, the
condenser.the temperature
temperature
Therefore, may
maycontinuously
a separate continuously increase
increase
cooler is installed owing
owing
to maintain toato
theheat
the heat emitted
emitted
constant condenser.
Figure 8Therefore,
by the condenser.
temperature. Therefore, aaseparate
separatecooler
shows the components in the is
cooler isinstalled
installedtotomaintain
air-conditioning maintain
room and aa
constant
constant temperature.
temperature.
simulator used inFigure
Figure 88 shows
shows the
the experiment. thecomponents
componentsininthe theair-conditioning
air-conditioningroom room and
and
simulator used
simulator used in in the
the experiment.

Figure 7. Air conditioning simulator layout.

Figure7.7. Air
Figure Air conditioning
conditioning simulator
simulator layout.
layout.
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 10 of 18

Figure 7. Air conditioning simulator layout.

Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 8. (a) Air conditioner; (b) Ceiling duct of the outdoor unit; (c) Refrigerant pipe of the vapor–
8. (a)separator;
Figureliquid Air conditioner; (b) Ceiling duct of the outdoor unit; (c) Refrigerant pipe of the vapor–
(d) Indoor return chamber inlet; (e) Indoor air supply and exhaust duct; (f) Indoor
liquidair
separator; (d) Indoor return chamber inlet; (e) Indoor air supply and exhaust duct; (f) Indoor
supply duct.
air supply duct.
2.2.5. Test Condition and Method
2.2.5. TestThe
Condition and Method
test was conducted with reference to the standard cooling test described in KS B
ISO 13253
The [33]. conducted
test was According to with
the standard cooling
reference test conditions,
to the standard the indoortest
cooling and described
outdoor in KS B
inflow dry-bulb temperatures (wet-bulb temperatures) were set as 27 °C (19 °C), and 35
ISO 13253 [33]. According to the standard cooling test conditions, the indoor and outdoor
°C (24 °C), respectively. Table 11 specifies the cooling capacity evaluation◦ conditions
inflowbased
dry-bulb
on the temperatures
standard climate(wet-bulb temperatures)
of the standard were set as 27 C (19 ◦ C), and 35 ◦ C
cooling test conditions.
◦
(24 C), respectively. Table 11 specifies the cooling capacity evaluation conditions based on
Table 11. Cooling
the standard climate testof
conditions in standard
the standard climate.test conditions.
cooling
Item Dry-Bulb Temperature Wet-Bulb Temperature
Table 11. Cooling test conditions
Indoor inflow air temperature in standard climate.
27 °C 19 °C
Outdoor inflow air temperature 35 °C 24 °C
Item Dry-Bulb Temperature Wet-Bulb Temperature
Indoor In the experiment,
inflow air temperature 27 ◦through
the refrigerant that passed C the primary evaporator ◦C
19 was
separated
Outdoor intoair
inflow vapor and liquid forms by a vapor–liquid
temperature 35 ◦ C separator and input to the 24com-
◦C
pressor and secondary evaporator, respectively. The amount of vapor refrigerant was ad-
justed using a needle valve to examine the influence of this parameter on the cooling per-
In the experiment,
formance. The needlethe refrigerant
valve thatadjusted
opening was passedtothrough
0%, 50%,the
andprimary evaporator
100%. Table 12 de- was sep-
aratedscribes the configuration
into vapor of forms
and liquid the two-evaporator cooling performance
by a vapor–liquid test. input
separator and Data measure-
to the compressor
ment was initiated as soon as the air conditioner started operating. To obtain steady-state
and secondary evaporator, respectively. The amount of vapor refrigerant was adjusted
data, the air conditioner was operated for more than 30 min.
using a needle valve to examine the influence of this parameter on the cooling performance.
The needle
Table 12.valve opening
Two-evaporator testwas adjusted to 0%, 50%, and 100%. Table 12 describes the
method.
configuration of the two-evaporator
Experiment Methodcooling performance test. Data measurement was
No 1. initiated as soon as the air conditioner
Needle valve opening 0% (No vapor refrigerant is sent tostarted operating. To obtain steady-state data, the
the compressor)
No 2. air conditioner
Needle valve opening 50% was operated for more than 30 min.
No.3 Needle valve opening 100%
Table 12. Two-evaporator test method.
3. Results and Discussions
Experiment
The following sections describe the experimentalMethod
results obtained for different needle
valve opening
No 1. (0%, 50%, 100%). To ensure repeatability,
Needle valve opening 0% (No vapor the experiment
refrigerant for eachto
is sent configu-
the compressor)
ration
No 2.was repeated five times. The measured
Needle valve opening 50% data were divided into air side and refrig-
erant side, and the data
No.3 associated
Needle valve with a stable
opening state were primarily used. The data meas-
100%
urement locations specified in the tables of experimental results correspond to those
shown in Figure 6. Moreover, A represents air, H is the humidity, MF is the mass flow rate,
P is the pressure, R represents the refrigerant, T is the temperature, VF is the volumetric
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 11 of 18

3. Results and Discussions

The following sections describe the experimental results obtained for different needle
valve opening (0%, 50%, 100%). To ensure repeatability, the experiment for each con-
figuration was repeated five times. The measured data were divided into air side and
refrigerant side, and the data associated with a stable state were primarily used. The data
measurement locations specified in the tables of experimental results correspond to those
shown in Figure 6. Moreover, A represents air, H is the humidity, MF is the mass flow rate,
P is the pressure, R represents the refrigerant, T is the temperature, VF is the volumetric
flow rate, and WP is the compressor power. The cooling COP was calculated according to
the experimental results as the heat of evaporation associated with the compressor power.

3.1. Valve Opening 0%

Table 13 presents the results of five experiments on the air side. When the primary
evaporator inlet (A3) and outlet (A2) temperatures are 26.8–27.3 ◦ C and 15.0–15.5 ◦ C, the
humidity values are 51.9–52.5% and 99.2–99.3%, respectively. When the secondary evapo-
rator outlet (A1) temperature is 13.5–13.9 ◦ C, the humidity is 98.7–98.8%. The volumetric
flow rates range from 9510 to 9545 m3 /h, with an average of approximately 9531 m3 /h.

Table 13. Air side measurement result (five times).

A1 A2 A3
No VF (m3 /h)
T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%)
1 13.7 98.8 15.2 99.2 27.0 52.3 9542
2 13.8 98.7 15.5 99.3 27.3 51.9 9545
3 13.5 98.7 15.5 99.2 26.9 52.5 9510
4 13.9 98.8 15.0 99.2 27.1 52.1 9511
5 13.8 98.7 15.3 99.3 26.8 52.3 9545

Table 14 shows the results of five experiments on the refrigerant side. When the
primary evaporator inlet (R4) and outlet (R5) refrigerant temperatures are 15.6–15.9 ◦ C
and 21.2–23.5 ◦ C, the pressure values are 1279–1290 kPa and 1269–1296 kPa, respec-
tively. When the secondary evaporator inlet (R6) and outlet (R7) refrigerant temper-
atures are 14.1–14.7 ◦ C and 21.2–24.3 ◦ C, the pressure values are 1202–1216 kPa and
969–981 kPa, respectively.

Table 14. Refrigerant side measurement result (five times).

R4 R5 R6 R7
No MF (kg/s) WP (kW)
T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa)
1 15.7 1283 22.4 1289 14.7 1210 23.4 971 0.3668 18.5
2 15.9 1289 23.4 1294 14.5 1203 24.3 976 0.3713 18.6
3 15.7 1281 23.5 1296 14.5 1202 23.4 981 0.3675 18.7
4 15.6 1279 21.5 1278 14.2 1209 22.9 973 0.3668 18.7
5 15.9 1290 21.2 1269 14.1 1216 21.2 969 0.3752 18.6

Table 15 specifies the heat of evaporation on the air side and refrigerant side and the
cooling COP calculated from the experimental results. The heat of evaporation on the air
and refrigerant sides is 60.4–62.3 kW and 63.4–64.2 kW, with average values of 61.3 kW,
and 63.8 kW, respectively. The cooling COP on the air and refrigerant sides is 3.03–3.23 and
3.26–3.34, with average values of 3.14 and 3.31, respectively. The average cooling COP on
the refrigerant side is 0.17 lower than that on the air side, indicating that the average heat
loss on the air side is approximately 5.1%.
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 12 of 18

Table 15. Air side and refrigerant side cooling performance result (five times).

Cooling Capacity (kW) Cooling Coefficient of Performance

No
Air Refrigerant Air Refrigerant
1 61.0 63.8 3.19 3.30
2 61.6 64.0 3.21 3.32
3 62.3 64.2 3.23 3.34
4 60.4 63.5 3.06 3.32
5 61.1 63.4 3.03 3.26
Average 61.3 63.8 3.14 3.31

3.2. Valve Opening 50%

Table 16 presents the results of five experiments on the air side. When the primary
evaporator inlet (A3) and outlet (A2) temperatures are 27.0–27.3 ◦ C and 15.1–15.7 ◦ C, the
humidity values are 51.0–52.8% and 99.1–99.3%, respectively. When the secondary evapo-
rator outlet (A1) temperature is 13.3–13.8 ◦ C, the humidity is 98.8–99.2%. The volumetric
flow rates range from 9755 to 9771 m3 /h, with an average of approximately 9761 m3 /h.

Table 16. Air side measurement result (five times).

A1 A2 A3
No VF (m3 /h)
T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%)
1 13.3 98.9 15.1 99.3 27.2 51.0 9755
2 13.5 99.2 15.7 99.1 27.0 52.2 9758
3 13.5 98.8 15.2 99.3 27.1 51.7 9765
4 13.8 98.8 15.5 99.2 27.3 52.8 9771
5 13.4 98.8 15.7 99.1 27.2 51.0 9755

Table 17 shows the results of five experiments on the refrigerant side. When the
primary evaporator inlet (R4) and outlet (R5) refrigerant temperatures are 15.3–15.8 ◦ C
and 21.2–22.6 ◦ C, the pressure values are 1269–1281 kPa and 1273–1286 kPa, respec-
tively. When the secondary evaporator inlet (R6) and outlet (R7) refrigerant temper-
atures are 12.2–13.2 ◦ C and 23.3–25.5 ◦ C, the pressure values are 1158–1190 kPa and
965–987 kPa, respectively.

Table 17. Refrigerant side measurement result (five times).

R4 R5 R6 R7
No MF (kg/s) WP (kW)
T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa)
1 15.6 1278 21.2 1273 13.2 1190 23.3 987 0.3824 18.9
2 15.8 1281 22.4 1282 12.8 1178 25.4 981 0.3861 18.9
3 15.3 1269 21.6 1275 12.2 1158 24.4 976 0.3849 18.7
4 15.5 1274 22.6 1286 12.8 1177 23.5 983 0.3766 18.9
5 15.4 1271 21.4 1274 12.8 1179 25.5 965 0.3812 18.9

Table 18 specifies the heat of evaporation of the air side and refrigerant side and the
cooling COP calculated from the experimental results. The heat of evaporation on the air
and refrigerant sides is 63.5–64.9 kW and 64.9–66.3 kW, with average values of 64.2 kW and
65.8 kW, respectively. The cooling COP on the air and refrigerant sides is 3.36–3.43 and
3.42–3.54, with average values of 3.40 and 3.49, respectively. The average cooling COP on
the refrigerant side is 0.09 lower than that on the air side, indicating that the average heat
loss on the air side is approximately 2.6%.
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 13 of 18

Table 18. Air side and refrigerant side cooling performance result (five times).

Cooling Capacity (kW) Cooling Coefficient of Performance

No
Air Refrigerant Air Refrigerant
1 64.8 66.3 3.43 3.51
2 63.9 66.3 3.38 3.51
3 63.8 66.2 3.41 3.54
4 64.9 64.9 3.43 3.42
5 63.5 65.5 3.36 3.47
Average 64.2 65.8 3.40 3.49

Uncertainty propagation analysis has been carried out for air-side cooling capacity
to determine the uncertainty of the results in Table 18. Air-side cooling capacity can be
calculated with Equation (12).
. .
Qevap,a = ρ C pa V ∆T (12)
.
where, Qevap,a is air-side cooling capacity, ρ is air density, C pa is constant pressure specific
.
heat of air, V is volumetric air flow rate, and ∆T is temperature difference between inlet
and outlet air passing through the evaporator.
Uncertainty of air-side cooling capacity is expressed in Equation (13) [37].
 . 2  . 2
2
∂ Qevap,a ∂ Qevap,a

wQ. = wV. .  + w∆T  (13)
evap,air ∂V ∂∆T

where w is uncertainty. Uncertainty of volumetric air flow rate wV. is 8 m3 /h as given in

Table 5, and uncertainty of temperature wT is 0.2 ◦ C. From Table 16, the nominal value
. .
of Qevap,a is 64 kW, the air flow rate V is 9531 m3 /h, and the temperature difference
∆T is 12.5 ◦ C. For air, density ρ is assumed as 1.2 kg/m3 , and constant specific heat
1.004 kJ/kg ◦ C. Using Equation (12) for deriving partial derivatives in Equation (13), the
.
uncertainty of air-side cooling capacity Qevap,a becomes 0.64 kW or 1.0%.

3.3. Valve Opening 100%

Table 19 presents the results of five experiments on the air side. When the primary
evaporator inlet (A3) and outlet (A2) temperatures are 27.0–27.2 ◦ C and 14.7–15.2 ◦ C, the
humidity values are 50.2–51.5% and 99.3–99.5%, respectively. When the secondary evapo-
rator outlet (A1) temperature is 12.8–13.0 ◦ C, the humidity is 99.1–99.3%. The volumetric
flow rates range from 9764 to 9787 m3 /h, with an average of approximately 9773 m3 /h.

Table 19. Air side measurement result (five times).

A1 A2 A3
No VF (m3 /h)
T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%) T (◦ C) H (%)
1 12.9 99.3 14.9 99.3 27.1 51.1 9772
2 13.0 99.2 15.1 99.5 27.2 50.9 9764
3 12.8 99.3 14.8 99.5 27.0 51.2 9787
4 12.8 99.3 14.7 99.4 27.2 50.2 9764
5 13.0 99.3 15.2 99.3 27.0 51.5 9780

Table 20 shows the results of five experiments on the refrigerant side. When the
primary evaporator inlet (R4) and outlet (R5) refrigerant temperatures are 14.8–15.1 ◦ C
and 22.9–23.6 ◦ C, respectively, the pressure values are 1248–1261 kPa and 1287–1299 kPa,
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 14 of 18

respectively. When the secondary evaporator inlet (R6) and outlet (R7) refrigerant tem-
peratures are 12.2–12.8 ◦ C and 24.2–25.5 ◦ C, the pressure values are 1158–1179 kPa and
946–981 kPa, respectively.

Table 20. Refrigerant side measurement result (five times).

R4 R5 R6 R7
No MF (kg/s) WP (kW)
T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa) T (◦ C) P (kPa)
1 15.1 1259 23.6 1299 12.3 1162 25.5 978 0.3838 18.1
2 14.9 1254 22.9 1287 12.8 1177 24.2 969 0.3889 18.3
3 15.1 1261 23.1 1295 12.2 1158 24.3 946 0.3892 18.5
4 14.8 1248 23.1 1296 12.8 1178 24.2 981 0.3889 18.3
5 15.0 1256 23.0 1288 12.8 1179 24.9 948 0.3845 18.1

Table 21 specifies the heat of evaporation of the air side and refrigerant side and the
cooling COP calculated from the experimental results. The heat of evaporation on the air
and refrigerant sides is 66.6–67.9 kW and 68.1–68.9 kW, respectively, with average values
of 67.1 kW and 68.5 kW, respectively. The cooling COP on the air and refrigerant sides is
3.61–3.73 and 3.72–3.78 on the air side, with average values of 3.68 and 3.76, respectively.
The average cooling COP on the refrigerant side is 0.08 lower than that on the air side,
indicating that the average heat loss on the air side is approximately 2.1%.

Table 21. Air side and refrigerant side cooling performance result (five times).

Cooling Capacity (kW) Cooling Coefficient of Performance

No
Air Refrigerant Air Refrigerant
1 67.4 68.3 3.73 3.78
2 67.9 68.7 3.71 3.75
3 66.8 68.9 3.61 3.72
4 66.8 68.6 3.66 3.76
5 66.6 68.1 3.69 3.77
Average 67.1 68.5 3.68 3.76

3.4. Main Findig and Remarks

Figure 9 shows the average cooling COP calculated from the experimental results of
the air and refrigerant sides for different valve openings. The average cooling COP for the
air and refrigerant sides differs by approximately 5.1%, 2.6%, and 2.1% when the valve
opening is 0%, 50%, and 100%, respectively. In all the experiments, the cooling COP for the
refrigerant side is higher than that of the air side, attributable to the heat loss that occurs
when cooling heat from the refrigerant side is transferred to the air side. Because the error
is within 5%, the results are not significantly different. Therefore, the experimental results
were comparatively analyzed based on the air-side data.
Table 22 lists the average (of five air side experiments) temperature, total evaporative
heat, and cooling COP for different measurement locations and valve openings. A rep-
resents air, COP is the cooling COP, and TH is the total heat evaporation. The numbers
represent the measurement positions in Figure 6.
In the experiments, the average temperature of the inlet (A3) of the primary evaporator
is 27.02–27.16 ◦ C, which satisfies the standard cooling test condition of 27 ◦ C. For all valve
openings, the average air temperature difference between the inlet (A3) and outlet (A2) of
the primary evaporator is almost constant (11.72–12.16 ◦ C). The average air temperatures
at the inlet (A2) and outlet (A1) of the secondary evaporator differ by 1.56 ◦ C, 1.94 ◦ C, and
2.04 ◦ C at valve openings of 0%, 50%, and 100%, respectively. The average total evaporative
heat and cooling COP are 61.30 kW and 3.14, respectively, when the valve opening is 0%,
64.20 kW and 3.40 when the valve opening is 50%, and 67.10 kW and 3.68 when the valve
 Average 67.1 68.5 3.68 3.76

3.4. Main Findig and Remarks

Figure 9 shows the average cooling COP calculated from the experimental results of
the air and refrigerant sides for different valve openings. The average cooling COP for the
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 air and refrigerant sides differs by approximately 5.1%, 2.6%, and 2.1% when the valve 15 of 18
opening is 0%, 50%, and 100%, respectively. In all the experiments, the cooling COP for
the refrigerant side is higher than that of the air side, attributable to the heat loss that
occurs when cooling heat from the refrigerant side is transferred to the air side. Because
opening
the error isis 100%.
withinA5%,
higher valve opening
the results corresponds
are not significantly to a higher
different. evaporator
Therefore, cooling effect,
the experi-
and thus,
mental a higher
results cooling COP. analyzed based on the air-side data.
were comparatively

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Average
AverageCOP
COPresults forfor
results thethe
air and refrigerant
air and sides sides
refrigerant for different valve openings.
for different valve openings.

TableTable 22 lists the

22. Average dataaverage (of five air side
of five experiments experiments)
based on the air temperature,
side. total evaporative
heat, and cooling COP for different measurement locations and valve openings. A repre-
Division sentsA1 (◦ C)
air, A2 (◦COP,
COP is the cooling C) and TH is the ◦ C) heat evaporation.
A3 (total TH (kW)The numbers rep-
COP
resent the measurement positions in Figure 6.
Valve opening (0%) 13.74 15.30 27.02 61.30 3.14
Valve opening (50%) 13.50 15.44 27.16 64.20 3.40
Valve opening (100%) 12.90 14.94 27.10 67.10 3.68

4. Conclusions and Future Work

To enhance the cooling performance of a heat pump, a 20 RT (70 kW) two-evaporator
heat pump air conditioner was manufactured and tested. The refrigerant passing through the
primary evaporator was separated into a vapor and liquid using a vapor–liquid separator,
and the vapor refrigerant was input into a compressor. The influence of the amount of vapor
refrigerant on the cooling performance of the heat pump was analyzed. The amount of
vapor refrigerant was controlled by setting the needle valve opening as 0%, 50%, and 100%.
Experiments for each case were repeated five times, and data on the air and refrigerant sides
were measured and compared. The results could be summarized as follows.
(1) According to the heat pump cycle analysis, the COP values of the general system and
two-evaporator system were 3.41 and 3.68, respectively, indicating that the cooling
performance of the two-evaporator system was approximately 7.92% higher.
(2) According to the cooling performance test, heat loss occurred regardless of the change in
valve opening, so the air-side COP was about 2–5% lower than the refrigerant-side COP.
(3) When the valve opening was 0%, the average cooling capacity based on the air side
was 61.30 kW and the average COP was 3.14.
(4) When the valve opening was 50%, the average cooling capacity based on the air side
was 64.20 kW and the average COP was 3.40.
(5) When the valve opening was 100%, the average cooling capacity based on the air side
was 67.10 kW and the average COP was 3.68.
(6) When the valve opening was 100%, the average cooling capacity and COP were
5.8 kW (9.46%) and 0.54 (17.20%) higher than those when the valve opening was 0%.
(7) The COP of the double evaporator heat pump system was 3.68 in the cycle analysis
and 3.76 in the refrigerant side experiment with 100% valve opening degree, which
was almost similar. Therefore, it was judged that the double evaporator heat pump
system had better cooling performance than the general heat pump system in the
experiment as in the result of item (1).
The findings demonstrated that the cooling effect in the secondary evaporator was
enhanced when a larger amount of vapor refrigerant, derived from the refrigerant passing
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 16 of 18

through the primary evaporator, was input to the compressor, and the cooling performance
of the heat pump was effectively enhanced. The proposed technology is thus an effective
platform to enhance the heat pump cooling performance.
Future research can be aimed at performing economic analyses and comparisons for
general and two-evaporator heat pump systems. In particular, we want to study the energy-
saving effect according to the cooling load when applied to home, corporate, and industrial
air conditioners and find improvements. Since industrial air conditioners require a large
amount of energy, it is expected that the ripple effect will be large as the energy-saving effect
for each facility is large and the economic feasibility is good compared to the investment.
Furthermore, since these industrial air conditioners are used in various environments, we
want to conduct experiments in high- and low-temperature climates. Through this study, it
is hoped that the double evaporator heat pump system will be applied in various fields to
help save energy.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, W.-S.Y.; methodology, W.-S.Y.; experiment, W.-S.Y.; soft-

ware, W.-S.Y.; validation, Y.I.K.; formal analysis, W.-S.Y.; investigation, W.-S.Y.; resources, W.-S.Y.; data
curation W.-S.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, W.-S.Y.; writing—review and editing, Y.I.K.;
visualization, W.-S.Y.; supervision, Y.I.K.; project administration, Y.I.K.; funding acquisition, Y.I.K. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This study was supported by the Research Program funded by the SeoulTech (Seoul
National University of Science and Technology).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
A air
B bypass factor
C specific heat (kJ/kg ◦ C)
COP coefficient of performance
E electric power
f bypass coefficient of refrigerant
H humidity
h enthalpy (kJ/kg)
.
m mass flow rate (kg/s)
P pressure
.
Q heat capacity (kW)
R refrigerant
T (t) temperature (◦ C)
.
V volumetric air flow rate (m3 /h)
.
W work (kW)
w uncertainty
ρ air density (kg/m3 )
∆ difference
Subscript
a air
c cooling
evap.c evaporator coil
comp compressor
e exit
evap evaporator
i inlet
p constant pressure
t total
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 17 of 18

References
1. Mun, E.J. Thermal Comfort Analysis on a Space and Seasonal Performance Evaluation of a Building with Multi-type Air Source
Heat Pump System. Master’s Thesis, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea, 2015.
2. Yang, L.; Yan, H.; Lam, J.C. Thermal comfort and building energy consumption implications—A review. Appl. Energy 2014, 115,
164–173. [CrossRef]
3. Song, M.; Mao, N.; Xu, Y.; Deng, S. Challenges in, and the development of, building energy saving techniques, illustrated with
the example of an air source heat pump. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2019, 10, 337–356. [CrossRef]
4. Von Cube, H.L.; Steimle, F. Heat Pump Technology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013.
5. Chua, K.J.; Chou, S.K.; Yang, W.M. Advances in heat pump systems: A review. Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 3611–3624. [CrossRef]
6. Lee, M.J.; Lee, D.K.; Park, C.; Park, J.H.; Jung, T.Y.; Kim, S.K.; Hong, S.C. Prediction of Heating and Cooling Energy Consumption
in Residential Sector Considering Climate Change and Socio-Economic. Environ. Impact Assess. 2015, 24, 487–498. [CrossRef]
7. Seo, J.H.; Bang, Y.M.; Lee, M.Y. Investigation on the Performance of Special Purpose Automotive Air-Conditioning System Using
Dual Refrigeration Cycle. Trans. Korean Soc. Mech. Eng.-B 2016, 40, 213–220. [CrossRef]
8. Wang, Q.; Li, T.; Jia, Y.; Zhang, W. Thermodynamic performance comparison of series and parallel two-stage evaporation vapor
compression refrigeration cycle. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 1616–1626. [CrossRef]
9. Yataganbaba, A.; Kilicarslan, A.; Kurtbas, I. Exergy analysis of R1234yf and R1234ze as R134a replacements in a two evaporator
vapour compression refrigeration system. Int. J. Refrig. 2015, 60, 26–37. [CrossRef]
10. Hu, H.; Ji, J.; Xie, L.; Li, Y.; Zhang, X. Performance investigation of a multi-connected heating tower heat pump system. Int. J.
Refrig. 2022, 135, 154–163. [CrossRef]
11. Bae, S.M.; Nam, Y.J. Economic and environmental analysis of ground source heat pump system according to operation methods.
Geothermics 2022, 101, 102373. [CrossRef]
12. Hu, B.; Xu, S.; Wang, R.Z.; Liu, H.; Han, L.; Zhang, Z.; Li, H. Investigation on advanced heat pump systems with improved
energy efficiency. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 192, 161–170. [CrossRef]
13. Wu, W.; You, T.; Wang, J.; Wang, B.; Shi, W.; Li, X. A novel internally hybrid absorption-compression heat pump for performance
improvement. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 168, 237–251. [CrossRef]
14. Vering, C.; Wüllhorst, F.; Mehrfeld, P.; Müller, D. Towards an integrated design of heat pump systems: Application of process
intensification using two-stage optimization. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 250, 114888. [CrossRef]
15. Joo, Y.J.; Kang, H.; Ahn, J.H.; Lee, M.Y.; Kim, Y.C. Performance characteristics of a simultaneous cooling and heating multi-heat
pump at partial load conditions. Int. J. Refrig. 2011, 34, 893–901. [CrossRef]
16. Vering, C.; Tanrikulu, A.; Mehrfeld, P.; Müller, D. Simulation-based design optimization of heat pump systems considering
building variations. Energy Build. 2021, 251, 111310. [CrossRef]
17. Krützfeldt, H.; Vering, C.; Mehrfeld, P.; Müller, D. MILP design optimization of heat pump systems in German residential
buildings. Energy Build. 2021, 249, 111204. [CrossRef]
18. Safa, A.A.; Fung, A.S.; Kumar, R. Heating and cooling performance characterization of ground source heat pump system by
testing and TRNSYS simulation. Renew. Energy 2015, 83, 565–575. [CrossRef]
19. Luo, J.; Rohn, J.; Bayer, M.; Priess, A.; Wilkmann, L.; Xiang, W. Heating and cooling performance analysis of a ground source heat
pump system in Southern Germany. Geothermics 2015, 53, 57–66. [CrossRef]
20. Çakır, U.; Çomaklı, K.; Çomaklı, Ö.; Karslı, S. An experimental exergetic comparison of four different heat pump systems working
at same conditions: As air to air, air to water, water to water and water to air. Energy 2013, 58, 210–219. [CrossRef]
21. Zeng, R.; Zhang, X.; Deng, Y.; Li, H.; Zhang, G. Optimization and performance comparison of combined cooling, heating and
power/ground source heat pump/photovoltaic/solar thermal system under different load ratio for two operation strategies.
Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 208, 112579. [CrossRef]
22. Hakkaki-Fard, A.; Eslami-Nejad, P.; Aidoun, Z.; Ouzzane, M. A techno-economic comparison of a direct expansion ground-source
and an air-source heat pump system in Canadian cold climates. Energy 2015, 87, 49–59. [CrossRef]
23. Kong, R.; Deethayat, T.; Asanakham, A.; Kiatsiriroat, T. Performance and economic evaluation of a photovoltaic/thermal
(PV/T)-cascade heat pump for combined cooling, heat and power in tropical climate area. J. Energy Storage 2020, 30, 101507.
[CrossRef]
24. Zhou, K.; Mao, J.; Li, Y.; Zhang, H. Performance assessment and techno-economic optimization of ground source heat pump for
residential heating and cooling: A case study of Nanjing, China. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2020, 40, 100782. [CrossRef]
25. Lee, H.J.; Ahn, Y.N.; Jung, C.S.; Wang, Y.H.; Kim, J.Y. Study on Two-zone separated evaporation system’s theory & Improvement
of Cooling Performance, Fuel Efficiency. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 2013, 20, 689–697.
26. Zhang, C.; Wu, J.; Gao, J.; Huang, X. Experimental study of a novel double-effect evaporation concentration system for high
temperature heat pump. Desalination 2020, 491, 114495. [CrossRef]
27. Baik, Y.J.; Kim, M.S.; Chang, K.C.; Lee, Y.S.; Kim, H.J. Potential Performance Enhancement of Dual Heat Pump Systems through
Series Operation. Korean Soc. Mech. Eng. Trans. B 2012, 38, 797–802. [CrossRef]
28. Elliott, M.S.; Rasmussen, B.P. A model-based predictive supervisory controller for multi-evaporator HVAC systems. In Proceed-
ings of the 2009 American Control Conference, St. Louis, MO, USA, 10–12 June 2009; pp. 3669–3674.
29. Mei, J.; Xia, X. Distributed control for a multi-evaporator air conditioning system. Control. Eng. Pract. 2019, 90, 85–100. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022, 15, 3849 18 of 18

30. Chen, W.H.; Mo, H.E.; Teng, T.P. Performance improvement of a split air conditioner by using an energy saving device. Energy
Build. 2019, 174, 380–387. [CrossRef]
31. Chaiyat, N. Energy and economic analysis of a building air-conditioner with a phase change material (PCM). Energy Convers.
Manag. 2015, 94, 150–158. [CrossRef]
32. Xu, H.; Tang, R.; Sun, J.; Xi, H. Experimental Study of Flow in the Gap of Needle Valve. In Proceedings of the JFPS International
Symposium on Fluid Power, Dresden, Germany, 1–2 April 1999; Volume 4, pp. 437–442.
33. KS B ISO13253; Standard Cooling Test Conditions (Ducted Air-Conditioners and Air-to-Air Heat Pumps-Testing and Rating for
Performance). Korean Agency for Technology and Standards: Eumseong-gun, Korea, 2018; pp. 10–12.
34. Wang, X.; Yu, J.; Xing, M. Performance analysis of a new ejector enhanced vapor injection heat pump cycle. Energy Convers.
Manag. 2015, 100, 242–248. [CrossRef]
35. Green Standard for Energy and Environmental Design; G-SEED Detailed Criteria for Certification Examination; The Association for
Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA): Nanjing, China, 2021; p. 44.
36. Guilherme, Í.F.; Pico, D.F.M.; dos Santos, D.D.O.; Bandarra Filho, E.P. A review on the performance and environmental assessment
of R-410A alternative refrigerants. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 47, 103847. [CrossRef]
37. Wheeler, A.J.; Ganji, A.R. Introduction to Engineering Experimentation, 2nd ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2004.