Next Article in Journal
Flexible Augmented Reality-Based Health Solution for Medication Weight Establishment
Next Article in Special Issue
Recovery of N-Butanol from a Complex Five-Component Reactive Azeotropic Mixture
Previous Article in Journal
Room Air-Conditioning Operating as a Filling Box
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Influence of Variable CO2 Emission Tax Rate on Flexible Chemical Process Synthesis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 10
Issue 2
10.3390/pr10020218
Review Report
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Comparison of the New Refrigerant R1336mzz(E) with R1234ze(E) as an Alternative to R134a for Use in Heat Pumps

Processes 2022, 10(2), 218; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10020218
by Jan Drofenik *, Danijela Urbancl and Darko Goričanec
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Nguyen Van Vu
Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Processes 2022, 10(2), 218; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10020218
Submission received: 14 December 2021 / Revised: 18 January 2022 / Accepted: 21 January 2022 / Published: 24 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tools, Approaches and Modeling for Energy System Design Increasing Economic and Environmental Sustainability)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Checking spelling and grammar

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript analyzes the performance of R1336mzz(E) and R1234ze(E) replacing R134a in heat pump system. However, this work is not novelly, and there are too few working fluids considered. The authors need to rewrite the paper and add more information.

  1. The title "comparison of new refrigerant R1336mzz (E) and R1234ze (E) as alternatives to R134a".It should be added that the application occasion is heat pump in the title.
  2. R1234yf as an important alternative working fluidof R134a, should also be calculated as a reference. Why not consider R1233zd (E) and R1336mzz(Z), which are nonflammable and suitable for heat pumps. The authors should make a more comprehensive analysis and comparison of various HFOs working fluids replacing R134a under the design condition.
  3. This workdescribes the inlet and outlet temperature of the heat exchanger. Whether there are enough data on thermodynamic properties and transport properties of the considered working fluidsto discuss the heat exchanger in detail, such as the size and investment of the heat exchanger. If the data are not enough, the heat exchanger UA can be calculated and compared.
  4. This work mainly compares the COP of three working fluids in heat pump system. Compared with R134a, the volumetric heating capacity of HFO may be quite different. The authors should also compare the volumetric heating capacity of different working fluids under design conditions.
  5. If achieving the same heating capacity, the mass flow of three working fluids will be different. How will this difference affect the performance of various parts of the heat pump (heat exchanger and compressor). Whether it can directly fillthe HFOs to replace R134a incurrent heat pump system, or it must redesign the system?
  6. Have the authors considered optimization of evaporation temperature and condensation temperature of alternative working fluids?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

General comments:

Writing English should be improved.

The paper format is good but the authors should improve the content, especially the result and discussion section.

The introduction takes up too much space for the basic knowledge. Thus the manuscript is unnecessarily long.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

R1336mzz is evaluated as an alternative to R134a, most widely used refrigerant. R1336mzz is one of typical HFOs with low GWP. Hence, it is necessary to investigate the performance with comparison of R134a. It is recommended for publication following minor revision. (1) the performance was evaluated by ASPEN. It will be more consolidated with experimental verification. (2) The effect of outlet temperature of the heated water was investigated on the COP. How about the vapor pressure or compression pressure? (3) COP values of different heat pump systems for hot water heating were evaluated for R134 and R1234ze, rather than R1336. (4) As indicated by the authors, R1234yf is the first HFO tested. Why 1234yf was not included for comparision? (5) Was the investigation verified before simulations to assure the accuracy of the results? (6) Is it possible to evaluate the performance of a mixture containing R1336?

Author Response

Please check the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have made appropriate changes to the vast majority of the review comments. I still suggest that the title should make it clear that the application of this article is a heat pump.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have corrected the manuscript accordingly. The manuscript is quite long (I would say it due to the unnecessary parts in sections 2.1 and 2.2). I would recommend the authors to generally improve before it can be published.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop