Oil for LPG Air Con.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neil 90

im no a/c expert ( but some here are) but why would you even consider putting something as flammable as lpg where it was never intended to go. its this kind of back yard conversion that allways ends in tears or 3rd degree burns. if it was a good idea it would be well known to be a good cheap fix but it isnt. nothing personal but i hope i never come near a vehicle with lpg being pumped around the dash.

---

There is a much bigger fire risk from a ruptured power steering line than there is from a ruptured AC line with LPG in it.
Pumping 2 litres of oil onto a red hot turbo (worst case) is a far bigger concern than venting 300g of LPG in the same direction. For a start the LPG is at a much lower pressure and won't cover the distance before being dispersed by the engine fans.

LPG contains Ethyl Mercaptan as a stenching agent. That's the smelliest substance known to man. Your nose can pick up the faintest of leaks.
http://cms.shellgaslpg.com/files/NZ/...Data_Sheet.pdf

But what is most interesting are the number of people screaming about 300g being a safety hazard in an aircon system. Yet saying nothing about the people fitting whole gas fumigation systems to diesels.

:D;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p38arover

Aha! I didn't know the business you were in but now I understand the visit to the west of the Blue Mountains when you were up here for the Expo. :)

---

Yes no names - no packdrill :D:D;);)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ladas

Have a read of this.

---

The bugger uses km/litre not litres/100 km! :D:D

Having said that, he punctuates in the wrong places. He should have had the document proofread. :D :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p38arover

The bugger uses km/litre not litres/100 km! :D:D

Having said that, he punctuates in the wrong places. He should have had the document proofread. :D :D

---

yes but most academics are like that ;)

Next time I'll get him to send it to you first :)

The document talks of fires from collisions, etc, which are pretty infrequent - yet the P38A Range Rover had a number of instances of underbonnet fires from the cooling hose failures. That prompted a couple of recalls to replace the hoses.

Only a Land Rover could catch fire from the cooling hose faults. :D

Has anyone quantified the performance difference between say an R134a system and a hydrocarbon system?
Comparing the COP of similar systems or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ladas

No Neil you re no expert.

Hydrocarbon Gases have been around as refrigerants longer than chemical ones.

Most if not all petro chemical companies use them.

Even companies like Coco Cola and Unlilever use them.

90% of the domestic refrigerators produced in Europe and SE Asia use them.

Shortly one of Australia major refrigerator manufacturers will be using them.

And again it is NOT LPG. These are highly refined blended hydrocarbons.

And do you know why they give certain hydrocarbons R numbers - it is because they are classed as refrigerants and are designed to be used as such - so they are meant to go in there.

And the risk of getting any burns from a hc charged system has been proven to be almost none existant, however the chances of being poisonned or asphixiated by chemical gases is very real.

Later when you get new cars and my guess they will be charged with R152 supplied by the chemical companies like ICI and Du Pont - and you will all say 'oh thats okay' its made by the same people who produced R134a - it must be okay - well if you are a sheep you will.

Read up on it and get the facts without making blind statements from zero knowledge base.

I doubt if you would remember when they first suggested using LPG for cars - same blinkered views, major panic - and now the governments actually help you to do it.

Look outside the square

---

I think you have misunderstood my point, im saying that the correct refrigerent should be used and not lpg, you say this yourself. you are the expert and i totally respect that, i wasnt insinuating anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dougal

Has anyone quantified the performance difference between say an R134a system and a hydrocarbon system?
Comparing the COP of similar systems or something like that.

---

Yes of course.

See attached

Is it not illegal to remove, or service your own AC with no Arctick licence???

If not, then why did i go out and apply and pay for my licence.

I'm no Web nazi nor is my Vehicle Stock, but when you are breaking the law and the potential to cop a large fine by doing so then i feel i have the right to speak up.

a couple of extra points to consider.

R134a. It's GWP (Global Warming Potential) is as Ladas notes above. Ozone depleting potential, IIRC is zero, or close to it.

From a users and system design standpoint, I really dislike the stuff. It has inherent inefficiencies and I haven't used it on new commercial or industrial refrigeration applications for ten years. There are much better refrigerants around.
I haven't used the HC blends Ladas imports, too much long standing fear/bias against a flammable product, although with more of his posts this is being eroded. I'm often wielding an oxy torch around systems, although these days they are always purged with dry nitrogen, so there shouldn't be any issues :D

It's interesting to note the bulk of the 'drop in' refrigerants (blends) that are mineral oil compatible are majority R134a, (usually in the region of 85-90%) with a blend of HC and alcohol (usually isopropyl alcohol) to ensure miscibility with the mineral oil.
It's also interesting that some of these blends are similar in performance to Ladas pure HC refrigerants, usually in the region of 5-8% better than R134a.

Did I mention I don't like R134a ? ;)