A/C service: Time to get ready

Jan. 1, 2020
One of the focal points of the annual Mobile Air Conditioning Society Worldwide’s (MACS) convention and trade show is the State of the Industry presentation delivered by Ward Atkinson.

One of the focal points of the annual Mobile Air Conditioning Society Worldwide’s (MACS) convention and trade show is the State of the Industry presentation delivered by Ward Atkinson, past Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Interior Climate Control committee chairman. Atkinson always has insights to offer as to what the future might hold for the motor vehicle air conditioning (MVAC) industry, and his crystal ball typically proves highly accurate in forecasting the challenges we’ll face in the coming years.

This year, Atkinson painted a picture of an industry in flux. Those who have relied in the past on A/C and cooling system repair alone to support their businesses are seeing that market shrink and forcing them to expand their service offerings or close their doors. The refrigerant we were so sure would be the accepted alternative for R134a is under fire, and as of early March, still is causing headlines in industry newsletters and magazines. Alternatives are being raised - not only in the type of refrigerant - but the type of system design future automobiles will use to cool their occupants, and the familiar blue container of R134a sitting in the storage room of your shop might contain anything but, with some contaminants wielding the ability to kill or maim an unsuspecting service tech.

Let’s start there.

Safety First

A few years ago, several workers were killed in separate instances involving contaminated R134a in the commercial refrigeration industry, specifically in the commercial shipping containers used to transport perishable cargo around the world. These containers violently and unexpectedly exploded during routine service of the refrigeration systems. Investigators determined that the explosions were caused by the introduction of a counterfeit R134a refrigerant containing significant amounts of methyl chloride (also known as chloromethane or R-40) and R-22.

R-40 chemically reacts with the aluminum components found in the air conditioning system and generates highly reactive and/or toxic compounds. One suspect compound is Trimethylaluminum (TMA), a pyrophoric (a flammable liquid or vapor that ignites on contact with air).

Early in the investigation, it was apparent that all of the contaminated containers had received a refrigerant charge in Vietnam but continuing investigations have now found refrigerant contamination in containers serviced in other major sea ports, as well as in stock refrigerant containers. Additionally, the contaminated gas has been found in consumer automobiles in Europe and installed in U.S. military vehicles that saw duty overseas. Now, many of these military vehicles are arriving stateside, where they have been quarantined pending the development of a process by which they can be safely serviced.

Is this a situation you should be concerned with? Here’s what DuPont had to say in a recent blog on its company website, as reported by ACR News:

“Illegal blended mixtures being marketed online and elsewhere as R134a for automotive air conditioning and refrigeration uses can actually contain R-40, R-12, R-22 and/or R-30 (methylene chloride) and a variety of other hydrocarbons. These counterfeit refrigerants have the potential to cause not only harm to a company or end user, but there are also serious physical dangers associated with these fraudulent products.”

While I know of no reported instances of R-40 counterfeits surfacing in the U.S. market to date, that doesn’t mean there won’t be, and I don’t want any of our readers to be the first to discover this dangerous counterfeit uninformed. The first step you can take to protect yourself is to make sure you buy your stock from a known good source, where the product can be easily traced all the way back to the manufacturer.

The Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), in a recent white paper, offers these additional suggestions:

  • Verify the quality of the refrigerant in the virgin cylinder before use
  • Verify the quality of the refrigerant in the vehicle system before repair or servicing
  • Properly label and isolate systems suspected of contamination

Motor Age and other industry trade publications have long promoted the use of refrigerant identifiers, primarily to prevent the contamination of the virgin supply in your recovery equipment but only a few higher end identifiers made beginning in 2012 are capable of identifying the presence of R-40. One clue to a possible R-40 counterfeit blend is the presence of identifiable R-22.

For now, anything less than a 100 percent pure reading should be treated with caution. Certainly, do not rely on any type of pressure/temperature relationship check. That might help identify the presence of air in the virgin tank but will not conclusively eliminate any counterfeit product.

Remember, the real problem with R-40 is what happens after it has already been installed in a customer’s car. The reactant chemicals, at the least, are highly damaging to the system components and, at the very worst, will cause an explosive hazard triggered when you open the system for repair or during the recovery of the gas into your machine. Organizations worldwide are still working on the best procedure for dealing with a system found to contain R-40.

While I’ve focused on R-40, the counterfeit problem is not limited to just this one chemical. According to Peter Coll, vice president at Neutronics Inc.:

“We have had the opportunity to examine over 1,000 sets of test data on R134a during the past 18 months. While some contained R-40, the amount of R-22, R-142b and (other) hydrocarbons was extensive. It looks like the unscrupulous refrigerant manufacturers and packagers are putting any combination of refrigerants in the bottle if they can make a few extra dollars. We are still a bit mystified by this due to the relatively low cost of R134a. They must be producing these rogue cocktails on a massive scale to see any real financial benefit.”

The AHRI white paper backs up Coll’s comments, stating in part, “Compounds such as R-40, R-22, R-142b, R-152a, and R-12 have been found mixed with R134a in newly filled refrigerant cylinders marked as containing R-134a. There have also been instances of counterfeited brand name R-134a cylinders sold containing refrigerants other than R-134a.”

Even if that can of refrigerant looks like the real thing, it might not be, and it may not explode in your face, but the use of any counterfeit blend can create holes in the coil (evaporator/condenser), leakages, system performance issues and flammability concerns, according to DuPont. More reason than ever to test, don’t guess.

On To HFO1234yf

If you’ve attended any trade shows in the last few years, you might have noticed that all the heavy hitters in the A/C business have been unveiling new tools and Recovery/Recycling/Recharging (RRR) equipment designed to meet the SAE standards for servicing the newest automotive refrigerant, HFO1234yf. Many models globally are using the new gas and domestically, at least one manufacturer has chosen to include it in a platform offered for sale right here in the U.S.

The decision to identify a replacement for R134a was made in response to regulations passed by the European Commission, banning the sale of “new model platforms” using R134a starting in 2011 and banning the use of the gas all together by the 2014 model year. The concern was the global warming potential of R134a, an environmental condition where certain chemical compounds act as a blanket of insulation in the upper atmosphere. One of the first alternatives to be considered was CO2, also referred to as R744.

At first glance, this appeared an ideal solution. Refrigerants (and other chemicals) were being analyzed and rated in terms of their global warming potential and assigned a numeric grade called a “GWP” number. R134a has a GWP of 1,300 (according to the online resource, engineeringToolbox.com), and the maximum allowed by the new rules was a GWP of 150. CO2 is actually the baseline for establishing a GWP rating, making its rating one (can’t get much better than that, but there were other concerns that surfaced as the idea of using R744 in an automobile was being considered):

  1. In order for it to work, the system would have high side operating pressures in the 2,000-plus psi range. This could pose safety issues to both the technician and the passengers if used in a conventional design.
  2. CO2 systems weren’t that good at cooling cabins in climates that were on the high end of the normal temperature range. It might do the job in Trenton but wouldn’t cut the mustard in Phoenix.
  3. In terms of total emissions, CO2 systems polluted more than their R134a counterparts.
  4. The cost of a system using secondary loop design features to keep the high pressure circuit out of the cabin (and also control the threat of high CO2 cabin levels in the event of a system leak) were costly and complex.

Other alternatives were assessed and considered, including the substitute eventually agreed on — HFO1234yf. Unlike others, though, HFO1234yf had pressure and temperature characteristics very similar to R134a. It was nearly a drop-in replacement that would require very little on the manufacturing side to adopt. One flaw to HFO1234yf is its classification as “mildly flammable", but tests conducted proved to everyone involved that the risk was manageable (As a side note, it was found that several other fluids residing under the hood were more susceptible to combustion in an accident scenario than the new gas was). The conclusions appeared to be so favorable that Atkinson even told Motor Age in an interview a few years back the topic of R744 was a "dead horse”, and “1234yf would be the replacement of choice.” Aftermarket tool and equipment companies spent resources and capital to bring the needed service equipment to market and as noted, some manufacturers started producing production vehicles fitted with HFO1234yf systems.

Some auto manufacturers, however, were holding back. Late last year, Daimler dropped a bombshell announcement, stating that tests they had conducted independently assessing the flammability risk of the new gas indicated issues that were outside of what they considered an acceptable level. They announced publicly that, because of these test results, they would not consider the use of HFO1234yf in any of their products and even recalled a few models that had been delivered state-side fitted with HFO1234yf systems. What makes the announcement even more staggering is that Daimler, along with other German manufacturers that have since added their support to Daimler’s position, where part of the original process that selected HFO1234yf in the first place.

In response, another Cooperative Research Project (CRP) was begun, so all of the original participants could review Daimler’s new data. An interim report from the group released just before Christmas suggested data collected at that stage had so far failed to uncover any new concerns about the safety of the refrigerant. Furthering the frustration felt by the industry as a whole was the announcement Daimler was withdrawing from the CRP, followed soon thereafter by VW/Audi and BMW.

Honeywell, co-developer of HFO1234yf, said in press release shortly after the announcements, “The decision by Daimler to pull out of the cooperative research program, which had included 13 automakers from Europe, the U.S. and Asia, shows its unwillingness to accept the SAE’s proven, scientific, peer-based approach that repeatedly demonstrated the product is safe as well as the fact that other automakers have been able to effectively and safely use 1234yf. Unlike the SAE approach, Daimler’s testing was conducted without the participation of any reputable third party and without consultation with others in the industry.”

Daimler stands fast in its refusal to use the new refrigerant even though they may be facing serious fines for failure to comply with the EC rules. They had asked for an extension (and have been denied) so that they may pursue an alternative they feel is more attractive. The alternative they want to pursue? R744.

What does all this mean for us? While R744 is on the EPA Significant New Alternatives Program (SNAP) list and approved for use in automotive air conditioning systems, the systems are only in the design phase and have a ways to go before they can be put into production. In the mean while, other automakers are staying with R134a for models they offer in the U.S. because they can.

Even though some are calling for a phase down (rather than a phase out) of R134a in the States, right now the EC rules only apply to models offered for sale in Europe. And while we have a few out in the domestic marketplace using HFO1234yf (primarily for the CAFE credits they can earn by making the switch), dealers will likely be tasked with taking care of the recovery and recharging tasks for the time being. The only real exception that comes to mind would be our collision repair brethren. Certainly, someone somewhere is going to wreck one.

What it does mean is a potential for unnecessary complications down the road.

According to an observation offered by Coll, “Unfortunately, small shops, large chains and ultimately the consumer will suffer greatly if the industry finds itself with different (refrigerant) cooling fluids from different OEMs. The ‘We service all makes and models’ may become a thing of the past unless service facilities are willing to spend excessive amounts of money on equipment and training.”

And you thought having to own more than one scan tool was a pain in the backside.

Content brought to you by Motor Age. To subscribe, click here.

Sponsored Recommendations

Best Body Shop and the 360-Degree-Concept

Spanesi ‘360-Degree-Concept’ Enables Kansas Body Shop to Complete High-Quality Repairs

How Fender Bender Operator of the Year, Morrow Collision Center, Achieves Their Spot-On Measurements

Learn how Fender Bender Operator of the Year, Morrison Collision Center, equipped their new collision facility with “sleek and modern” equipment and tools from Spanesi Americas...

ADAS Applications: What They Are & What They Do

Learn how ADAS utilizes sensors such as radar, sonar, lidar and cameras to perceive the world around the vehicle, and either provide critical information to the driver or take...

Coach Works implements the Spanesi Touch system

Coach Works Uses Spanesi Equipment to Ensure a Safe and Proper Repair for Customers