Talk:List of refrigerants
|WikiProject Chemistry||(Rated List-class, Mid-importance)|
- 1 Dimethyl ether
- 2 Add EPA Designations and Downloadable File to Make Super Useful
- 3 Practically worthless
- 4 Unwarranted precision?
- 5 Value dissarangement!
- 6 Molecular masses at the column of normal boiling point temperature
- 7 Reverted to 5 July 2012 EmausBot edit
- 8 Removed molecular mass uncertainty
- 9 R-723
- 10 Hydrocarbon Refrigerants
I am by no means an expert on refrigerants, but I happened to notice that dimethyl ether has an ASHRAE number (E170):
Add EPA Designations and Downloadable File to Make Super Useful
This is the best reference on ASHRAE numbers and GWPs I have seen! Could we improve it by adding the EPA and global numbering scheme for Ozone Depleting Substances as a cross reference? This would be even more useful. Having a downloadable spreadsheet would also be nice. I am a wiki newbie so would not venture to do this myself although the cross refernce sources are in 40 CFR 98 Table A-1 and http://www.epa.gov/ozone/geninfo/numbers.html
This article's table is practically worthless. I would delete all of the global warming mumbo jumbo and replace it with hard facts, such as the refrigerant's boiling point or vapor pressure at STP or something that has some practical use in refrigeration. Adding in the global warming potential is like listing the types of fuels derived from petroleum and not listing their heating values when burnt in air but instead focusing on how toxic each one is if ingested. The big picture is more important than the bunny trails. I like to saw logs! (talk) 23:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I haven't looked at the primary sources for this data, but some values seem way too precise. Example: Atmospheric lifetime for R-401A is given as 8.514 years. Whew! It's a good thing it doesn't last for 8.517 years. That's facetious, but you get the idea. They should be rounded to one decimal point. ChrisWinter (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
There is obviously a big confusion of several listed values from R-511 to R-611 - somebody who is able to should fix them! Thanx!
Molecular masses at the column of normal boiling point temperature
It seems to me that for quite many compounds the molecular mass is in the column of normal boiling point temperature. Needs a lot of fixing! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Just for the order sake: the values of molecular weight (those with (1) as ref.) should be moved to the left, and the values of boilng point (ref.2) to the correct column.
Reverted to 5 July 2012 EmausBot edit
I reverted all edits to the EmausBot edit of 5 July 2012. The subsequent four edits scrambled the columns in a way that would be very tedious to manually fix. Most noticablly is the molecular mass column. The molecular mass column is OK for the first 20 lines or so. Jim1138 (talk) 04:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Removed molecular mass uncertainty
Per suggestion of Material scientist, I have removed the molecular mass uncertainty and reduced the mass precision. The mass uncertainty would not be useful except to someone doing extreme precision experiments. The experimenter would be referencing literature and not Wikipedia for this information. As the uncertainty and extra precision bloats the article and makes it difficult to read and maintain, I have removed it. Jim1138 (talk) 08:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
You might want to add R-723 (Ammonia-dimethil-ether)
There is no mention of hydrocarbon refrigerants - R170 (ethane), R290 (propane), R600/600a (butane/iso-butane).
Alongside the relevance of these refrigerants for general subject coverage, HC Rrefrigerants are, in many cases, superior refrigerants to others mentioned in the article, particularly with regard to performance, cost, availability and environmental impact, which appears to be a key focus of the current article:
Hydrocarbon refrigerants have GWP's only a tiny fraction of the HCFC/HFC refrigerants. Do not damage the ozone layer as do CFC's. More thermodynamically efficient than HCFC. Much lower toxicity than CFC/HCFC. Compatible with most existing systems; (R12, R22, R134a, R404A, R407C, R502, R600a). Lower head pressure is gentler to equipment. Compatible with all refrigeration lubricants, including synthetic and mineral oils. More readily available than alternatives. Cheaper than alternatives.