Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551– 561 www.elsevier.

com/locate/cep

Evaluation of steam jet ejectors
Hisham El-Dessouky *, Hisham Ettouney, Imad Alatiqi, Ghada Al-Nuwaibit
Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait Uni6ersity, P.O. Box 5969, Safat 13060, Kuwait Received 4 April 2001; received in revised form 26 September 2001; accepted 27 September 2001

Abstract Steam jet ejectors are an essential part in refrigeration and air conditioning, desalination, petroleum refining, petrochemical and chemical industries. The ejectors form an integral part of distillation columns, condensers and other heat exchange processes. In this study, semi-empirical models are developed for design and rating of steam jet ejectors. The model gives the entrainment ratio as a function of the expansion ratio and the pressures of the entrained vapor, motive steam and compressed vapor. Also, correlations are developed for the motive steam pressure at the nozzle exit as a function of the evaporator and condenser pressures and the area ratios as a function of the entrainment ratio and the stream pressures. This allows for full design of the ejector, where defining the ejector load and the pressures of the motive steam, evaporator and condenser gives the entrainment ratio, the motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet and the cross section areas of the diffuser and the nozzle. The developed correlations are based on large database that includes manufacturer design data and experimental data. The model includes correlations for the choked flow with compression ratios above 1.8. In addition, a correlation is provided for the non-choked flow with compression ratios below 1.8. The values of the coefficient of determination (R 2) are 0.85 and 0.78 for the choked and non-choked flow correlations, respectively. As for the correlations for the motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet and the area ratios, all have R 2 values above 0.99. © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Steam jet ejectors; Choked flow; Heat pumps; Thermal vapor compression

1. Introduction Currently, most of the conventional cooling and refrigeration systems are based on mechanical vapor compression (MVC). These cycles are powered by a high quality form of energy, electrical energy. The inefficient use of the energy required to operate such a process can be generated by the combustion of fossil fuels and thus contributes to an increase in greenhouse gases and the generation of air pollutants, such as NOx, SOx, particulates and ozone. These pollutants have adverse effects on human health and the environment. In addition, MVC refrigeration and cooling cycles use unfriendly chloro-floro-carbon compounds (CFCs), which, upon release, contributes to the destruction of the protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 965-4811188x5613; fax: + 9654839498. E -mail address: eldessouky@kuc01.kuniv.edu.kw (H. El-Dessouky).

Environmental considerations and the need for efficient use of available energy call for the development of processes based on the use of low grade heat. These processes adopt entrainment and compression of low pressure vapor to higher pressures suitable for different systems. The compression process takes place in absorption, adsorption, chemical or jet ejector vapor compression cycles. Jet ejectors have the simplest configuration among various vapor compression cycles. In contrast to other processes, ejectors are formed of a single unit connected to tubing of motive, entrained and mixture streams. Also, ejectors do not include valves, rotors or other moving parts and are available commercially in various sizes and for different applications. Jet ejectors have lower capital and maintenance cost than the other configurations. On the other hand, the main drawbacks of jet ejectors include the following: “ Ejectors are designed to operate at a single optimum point. Deviation from this optimum results in dramatic deterioration of the ejector performance.

0255-2701/02/$ - see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 2 5 5 - 2 7 0 1 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 1 7 6 - 3

The entrainment ratio (w ) is the flow rate of the entrained vapor Fig. The diameters and lengths of various parts forming the nozzle. in refrigeration and air conditioning cycles. the diffuser and the suction chamber. This is necessary in order to follow the discussion and analysis that follow. expansion and compression ratios. The ejector capacity is defined in terms of the flow rates of the motive steam and the entrained vapor. As for the removal of non-condensable gases in heat transfer units. define the ejector capacity and performance. 1. Also. El -Dessouky et al. (2) the suction chamber. Also. . As for the ejector performance. Applications of jet ejectors include refrigeration. which allows evaporation at low temperature. it is defined in terms of entrainment. Although the construction and operation principles of jet ejectors are well known. the ejector entrainment process prevents their accumulation within condensers or evaporators. and (3) the diffuser (Fig. air conditioning. As a result. The function of the jet ejector differs considerably in these processes. However. The nozzle and the diffuser have the geometry of converging/diverging venturi. removal of non-condensable gases. The sum of the motive and entrained vapor mass flow rates gives the mass flow rate of the compressed vapor. The conventional steam jet ejector has three main parts: (1) the nozzle. the ejector compresses the entrained vapor to higher pressure. the cold evaporator fluid can be used for refrigeration and cooling functions. transport of solids and gas recovery. but their merits are manifested upon the use of low grade energy that has limited effect on the environment and lower cooling and heating unit cost. For example. The presence of non-condensable gases in heat exchange units reduces the heat transfer efficiency and increases the condensation temperature because of their low thermal conductivity. together with the stream flow rate and properties. Variation in stream pressure and velocity as a function of location along the ejector. the ejector cycle for cooling and refrigeration has lower efficiency than the MVC units.552 “ H. the ejector entrainment process sustains the low pressure on the evaporator side. which allows for condensation at a higher temperature. 1). the following sections provide a brief summary of the major features of ejectors. the presence of these gases enhances corrosion reactions. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 Ejectors have very low thermal efficiency.

are explained below: “ The motive steam enters the ejector at point (p ) with a subsonic velocity. the constant pressure ejector model is developed. Summary for a number of literature studies on ejector design and performance evaluation is shown in Table 1. its pressure is reduced and its velocity increases. which limits their use in investigating the performance of new ejector fluids. the motive steam pressure becomes lower than the entrained vapor pressure and its velocity ranges between 900 and 1200 m/s. Such models are limited to the range over which it was developed. the ejector entrainment ratio increases at lower pressure for the boiler and condenser. point (4). “ Ejector modeling is essential for better understanding of the compression process. Variations in the stream velocity and pressure as a function of location inside the ejector. where part of the kinetic energy of the mixture is converted into pressure. 2. The stream reaches sonic velocity at the nozzle throat. As a result. Other ejector models are based on fundamental balance equations [6]. Semi-empirical models give more flexibility in ejector design and performance evaluation [4. Also. “ The entrained vapor at point (e ) enters the ejector. Design models of stream mixing at constant pressure are more common in literature because the performance of the ejectors designed by this method is more superior to the constant area method and it compares favorably against experimental data. the model is simple to use and it eliminates the need for iterative procedures. where its velocity increases and its pressure decreases to that of point (3). This involved a number of modifications in the model. The review shows that there are two basic approaches for ejector analysis. The basis for modeling the constant pressure design procedure was initially developed by Keenan [6]. “ In either case. “ As the stream flows in the converging part of the ejector. “ As the subsonic mixture emerges from the constant cross section area of the diffuser. Power [2] and El-Dessouky and Ettouney [3]. the mixture goes through a shock inside the constant cross section area of the diffuser. it is defined as the ratio of the motive steam pressure to the entrained vapor pressure. designs or operating conditions. point (c ). the ejector can be maintained at critical conditions even if the operating conditions are varied. Models include empirical correlations.5]. where mixing occurs. The compression ratio (Cr) gives the pressure ratio of the compressed vapor to the entrained vapor. “ At the nozzle outlet plane. several investigators have used the model for design and performance evaluation of various types of jet ejectors. The condenser pressure controls the location of the shock wave. El -Dessouky et al. “ At the critical condition. especially losses within the ejector and mixing of the primary and secondary streams. 1. where an increase in the condenser pressure above the critical point results in a rapid decline of the ejector entrainment ratio. The shock is associated with an increase in the mixture pressure and reduction of the mixture velocity to subsonic conditions. “ Multi-ejector system increases the operating range and improves the overall system efficiency. point (2). such as those by Ludwig [1]. The shock occurs because of the back pressure resistance of the condenser. These include mixing of the motive steam and entrained vapor. Mathematical model The review by Sun and Eames [7] outlined the developments in mathematical modeling and design of jet ejectors. “ The motive steam and entrained vapor streams may mix within the suction chamber and the converging section of the diffuser or it may flow as two separate streams as it enters the constant cross section area of the diffuser. “ Use of a variable position nozzle can maintain the optimum conditions for ejector operation. The developed model is based on a number of literature studies [8 – 11]. since the shock wave moves towards the nozzle exit.H. The following outlines the main findings of these studies: “ Optimum ejector operation occurs at the critical condition. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 553 divided by the flow rate of the motive steam. As will be discussed later. “ The increase in the cross section area in the diverging part of the nozzle results in a decrease of the shock wave pressure and an increase in its velocity to supersonic conditions. system design and performance evaluation. higher temperature for the evaporator increases the entrainment ratio. The pressure of the emerging fluid is slightly higher than the condenser pressure. Operating at pressures below the critical points has negligible effect on the ejector entrainment ratio. As for the expansion ratio (Er). In this section. either at constant pressure or at constant area. which are shown in Fig. This study is motivated by the need for a simple empirical model that can be used to design and evaluate the performance of steam jet ejectors. further pressure increase occurs in the diverging section of the diffuser. Subsequently. The constant pressure model is based on the following assumptions: . The model is based on a large database extracted from several ejector manufacturers and a number of experimental literature studies. where its Mach number is equal to one.

−18. 5–13. 5–10. the plant scale results agree with this theory. El -Dessouky et al. 5–18. More efficient system requires multi-ejector and cold energy storage (cold storage in either phase changing materials. R142b 120–140. cold water or ice). Optimum performance is achieved by the use of variable geometry ejector when operation conditions change. −8. Steam jet refrigeration should be designed for the most often prevailing conditions rather than the most severe to achieve greater overall efficiency. entrainment ratio and compression ratio. 5–10. R114. 30–45 [4] Water [29] Water – Model of multistage steam ejector refrigeration system using annular ejector in which the primary fluid enters the second stage at annular nozzle on the sidewall.26] Water R-113 R-11 R-114 120–140. Increase in ejector performance using mechanical compression booster. HR-123 80. 42–50 82. 30–60 70–100.3 [30] R113. −12. Mathematical model use empirical parameters that depend solely on geometry. system performance increased with increasing boiler and evaporator temperatures and decreasing condenser temperature.2–182. Entrainment ratio is proportional to boiler temperature. Comparison of ejector and refrigerant performance. This will increase static pressure for low-pressure stream and mixture and reduce the velocity of the motive stream and reduce jet mixing losses shock wave formation losses. refrigeration and seawater desalination system. 43. 10. Entrainment ratio decreases for off design operation and increases for the two stage ejectors.3. 10. The optimum throat diameter depends on the freezer temperature Performance of HR-123 is similar to R-11 in ejector refrigeration.554 H. [20] R-113. Effect of throat area. 4. R-142b. 30 [27] R-134A −15. Modeling the effect of motive nozzle on system performance. 5. Effect of varying the nozzle position to meet operating condition.22] [8] R-114 Water 86. R113. in which the ejector is used to recover part of the work that would be lost in the expansion valve using high-pressure motive liquid. 25–45 [21. condenser and evaporator temperatures. 30 . R-113 (dry) has the best performance and R142b (wet) has the poorest performance. R114 93. The parameters are obtained experimentally for various types of ejectors. Performance depends on steam pressure. [24] R11. Wet fluid damage ejectors due phase change during isentropic expansion. Developed a new ejector theory in which the entrained fluid is choked. 43. Combined solar collector. 65–80 [5] [31] R134a 5. 30 120–140. [9] R11. Measure and calculate ejector entrainment ratio as a function of boiler. 10.2. R-114. cooling water temperature and suction pressure. 30–65 [13] [23] [24] [25. R-718 80–95. Entrainment ratio is highly affected by the condenser temperature especially at low evaporator temperature. 30 [28] Water 100–165. wet and isentropic fluids.4%. 40 Combined ejector and mechanical compressor for operation of domestic refrigerator-freezer increases entrainment ratio from 7 to 12. Maximum COP is obtained at the critical flow condition.3 90. 40–50 Conclusion [19] R-113 Basis for refrigerant selection for solar system. Increase in COP and cooling capacity by 100%. 6–25. Choking of the entrained fluid in the mixing chamber affects system performance. evaporator and condenser temperature (°C) 60–100. Dry. location of main nozzle and length of the constant area section on backpressure. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 Table 1 Summary of literature studies on ejector design and performance Reference Fluid Boiler. Combined solar generator and ejector air conditioner.

Therefore. Also. The model equations include the following: “ Overall material balance mp + me = mc (1) Me2 = “ ' 2 k−1   Pe P2 555 (k − 1/k) −1 n (6) The mixing process is modeled by one-dimensional continuity. In the above equation. 3. El -Dessouky et al. Friction losses are defined in terms of the isentropic efficiencies in the nozzle. The ejector flow is one-dimensional and at steady state conditions. (8) is used to calculate M* e2. the entrained vapor and the motive steam or primary stream. The relationship between M and M * at any point in the ejector is given by this equation M* = M* p2 + wM* e2 Te/Tp “ ' M 2(k + 1) M 2(k − 1) + 2 (8) “ “ where m is the mass flow rate and the subscripts c. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 1. Constant isentropic expansion exponent and the ideal gas behavior. 8. define the compressed vapor mixture. Velocity of the compressed mixture leaving the ejector is insignificant. These equations are combined to define the critical Mach number of the mixture at point 5 in terms of the critical Mach number for the primary and entrained fluids at point 2 M* 4= (7) (1 + w )(1 + wTe/Tp) where w is the entrainment ratio and M * is the ratio between the local fluid velocity to the velocity of sound at critical conditions. The motive steam expands isentropically in the nozzle. M4 Mach number of the mixed flow after the shock wave 2 M2 4+ (k − 1) M5 = (9) 2k 2 M −1 (k − 1) 4 Pressure increase across the shock wave at point 4 P5 1 + kM 2 4 = P4 1 + kM 2 5 (10) “ Compression ratio Cr = Pc/Pe (3) “ Expansion ratio Er = Pp/Pe (4) “ In Eq. 7. The motive steam and the entrained vapor are saturated and their velocities are negligible. The motive steam and the entrained vapor have the same molecular weight and specific heat ratio. Isentropic expansion of the entrained fluid in the suction chamber is expressed in terms of the Mach number of the entrained fluid at the nozzle exit plane The area ratio of the nozzle throat and diffuser constant area A1 Pc 1 = A3 Pp (1 + w )(1 + w (Te/Tp)) P2 1/k P (k − 1)/k 1/2 1− 2 Pc Pc 2 1/(k − 1) 2 1/2 1− k+1 k+1          1/2 (13) . 9. 6. M* p2. The area of the nozzle throat A1 = mp Pp ' 2pn k−1   Pp P2 (k − 1/k) −1 n '   RTp k + 1 kpn 2 (k + 1)/(k − 1) (12) (5) “ “ where M is the Mach number. the following equality constraint applies P2 = P3 = P4. Pressure lift in the diffuser Pc p (k − 1) 2 = d M5+1 P5 2  n (k/k − 1) (11) “ Isentropic expansion of the primary fluid in the nozzle is expressed in terms of the Mach number of the primary fluid at the nozzle outlet plane Mp2 = “ where pd is the diffuser efficiency. The mixing of motive steam and the entrained vapor takes place in the suction chamber. e and p. diffuser and mixing chamber. Entrainment ratio w = me/mp (2) “ Eq. (10) the constant pressure assumption implies that the pressure between points 2 and 4 remains constant. 5. momentum and energy equations. P is the pressure and k is the isentropic expansion coefficient. the mixture of the motive steam and the entrained vapor compresses isentropically in the diffuser. 2.H. The flow is adiabatic. pn is the nozzle efficiency and is defined as the ratio between the actual enthalpy change and the enthalpy change undergone during an isentropic process. 4.

(1) and (2). The flow rates of the entrained vapor (me) and motive steam (mp) are calculated from Eqs. (a) Design procedure to calculate area ratios. El -Dessouky et al. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 The area ratio of the nozzle throat and the nozzle outlet A2 = A1 '  1 2 (k − 1) 2 1+ M p2 2 M p2 (k + 1 2   (k + 1)/(k − 1) “ (14) “ 3. Tp. Solution algorithms of the mathematical model. which include the entrainment ratio (w ). The first procedure is used for system design. A new value for P2 is estimated and the previous step is repeated until the desired value for the pressure of the compressed vapor is reached.462 and 1. Pp. (5) – (11) are solved sequentially to obtain the pressure of the compressed vapor (Pc).556 “ H. Solution procedure “ Two solution procedures for the above model are shown in Fig. where the system pressures and the entrainment ratio is defined.3. The iteration sequence for this procedure is shown in Fig. As for the universal gas constant and the specific heat ratio for steam. Pc). which include Tc. 2. (b) Performance evaluation to calculate w. Either procedure requires iterative calculations. their values are taken as 0. pd). 2. A value for the pressure at point 2 (P2) is estimated and Eqs. 2(a) and it includes the following steps: “ Define the design parameters. entrained vapor and motive steam. Iterations are made to determine the pressure of the motive steam at the nozzle outlet (P2) that gives the same back pressure (Pc). Fig. compressed vapor and motive steam (Pe. Calculate the saturation temperatures for the compressed vapor. using the saturation temperature correlation given in the appendix. Define the efficiencies of the nozzle and diffuser (pn. Te. . The calculated pressure of the compressed vapor is compared to the design value. the flow rate of the compressed “ “ “ “ vapor (mc) and the pressures of the entrained vapor.

“ Define the efficiencies of the nozzle and diffuser (pn. [8] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 3 – 6.3. “ The flow rates of the compressed and entrained vapor are calculated from Eqs. The measure- . The data includes measurements by the following investigators: “ Eames et al. These are obtained by solving Eqs.9 pm 0.76. (1) and (2).75 0. which include mp.65–0. The semiempirical model includes a number of correlations to calculate the entrainment ratio (w ). (12) and (14). where the cross section areas and the entrainment and motive steam pressures are defined.98 0.85 0. “ This value is used to calculate other system parameters defined in Eqs.58.85–0.8–1 0. as shown in Table 2.268 – 0. which includes Croll Reynolds. The table also includes the ranges for the data reported by Power [12].85 0. “ An estimate is made for the entrainment ratio. The measurements are obtained for an area ratio of 200 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat. P5. “ As for the universal gas constant and the specific heat ratio for steam.11 – 0. A2.37 – 0.8 – 2.4 and entrainment ratio of 0. which includes M* e2. This is achieved by using three sets of design data acquired from major ejector manufacturers.8 0. El -Dessouky et al. several sets of experimental data are extracted from the literature and are used in the development of the empirical model. “ Calculate the saturation temperatures of the primary and entrained streams. The correlation for the entrainment ratio is developed as a function of the expansion ratio and the pressures of the motive steam. The measurements are obtained for an area ratio of 145 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat.9 0.4 – 3. (12) – (14). the entrained vapor and the compressed vapor. w. The iteration sequence for this procedure is shown in Fig.8–1 0.4.8 0. Semi-empirical model Development of the semi-empirical model is thought to provide a simple method for designing or rating of steam jet ejectors.57 – 0. As shown above. Table 3 shows a summary of the ranges of the experimental and the design data. which is used to develop the semi-empirical model is shown in Table 4. A3) and the area ratios (A1/A3 and A2/A1) are calculated from Eqs. “ Munday and Bagster [4] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 1. A summary of the experimental data.77 – 2. The correlations for the ejector area ratios are defined in terms of the system pressures and the entrainment ratio. Also. the pressure at the nozzle outlet (P2) and the area ratios in the ejector (A2/A1) and (A1/A3). “ Bagster and Bresnahan [14] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 2.42. “ Chen and Sun [16] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 1. The measurements are obtained for an area ratio of 81 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat. 2(b) and it includes the following steps: “ Define the performance parameters. (6).86. The measurements are obtained for an area ratio of 90 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat. The measurements are obtained for an area ratio of 81 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat. The semi-empirical model for the steam jet ejector is developed over a wide range of operating conditions. The correlation for the pressure at the nozzle outlet is developed as a function of the evaporator and condenser pressures. Iterations are made to determine the entrainment ratio that defines the ejector capacity. expansion ratio 160 – 415 and entrainment ratio of 0.95 4. “ Table 2 Examples of ejector efficiencies used in literature studies Reference [27] [32] [33] [31] [10] [24] [8] [34] pn 0. M5. Graham and Schutte – Koerting. (7) – (11). The second solution procedure is used for performance evaluation. Tp and Te.22.7 – 2. it is necessary to define values of pn and pd. expansion ratio of 116 – 220 and entrainment ratio of 0. expansion ratio of 309.85 0.905. Mp2. expansion ratio of 1. solution of the mathematical model requires an iterative procedure.6 – 5. P2. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 557 The ejector cross section areas (A1. expansion ratio of 356 – 522 and entrainment ratio of 0.85 0.462 and 1. M4.3.H. “ Sun [15] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 2. pd). “ Aphornratana and Eames [13] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 4. using the saturation temperature correlation given in the appendix.75 pd 0. The values of these efficiencies widely differ from one study to another. M* 4 . Also. Pc. expansion ratio of 165 – 426 and entrainment ratio of 0.06 – 3.7–1 0. the pressures of the entrained vapor (Pe) and the pressure of the primary stream (Pp). (13).59.85 0. “ A new estimate for w is obtained from Eq. (5). Me2.9 and entrainment ratio of 0. “ The error in w is determined and a new iteration is made if necessary.17 – 0. “ Calculate the flow rate of the motive steam and the properties at the nozzle outlet. A2. which include the cross section areas (A1.7–1 0. their values are taken as 0. M* p2.28 – 0.62. A3).

19 1.45 4.174–4. “ Everitt and Riffat [18] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 1. The semi-empirical ejector design procedure involves sequential solution of Eqs.14 R2 0.872–121.27 6. El -Dessouky et al. nozzle and mixing and a value of 1. except for a small number of points.11–1.2 34. The results shown in Fig.72 d 6.86 p w − 0.1818–2.1 27. respectively.1 790.2–248.79v10−2 e 22. As for the semi-empirical performance evaluation model.3 66.33 P 0. it involves non-iterative solution of Eqs.37 .82 f 4. It should be stressed that both solution procedures are indepen- Pc (kPa) 2. the fitting result is very satisfactory for entrainment ratios between 0.447–124. This procedure is not iterative in contrast with the procedure given for the mathematical model in the previous section.558 H. The correlations for the motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet and the area ratios are obtained semi-empirically. choked or non-choked).36–32.28×10−1 j 1.58–170.27 2.37×10−5 − − 0.11 P− w c p 0.25–4.09–2132. The results are obtained for efficiencies of 100% for the diffuser. Similarly.02 P − Pc e 1.5 0.0739 A2/A1 = 1.018 Cr 1. the following relations give the correlations for the un-choked flow: 0.34 P 1.99.72–510. As shown in Fig. expansion ratio of 22. This is because the major part of the data is found between entrainment ratios clustered over a range of 0.05×10−2 22.2–4 0. (15).3–429.47 – 3.27 790. Examining the experimental data fit shows that the major part of the data fit is well within the correlation predictions.65 b −1. Fig.6–1720 84.5. (20) (depending on the flow type.27 3.09 −6.86. The correlation for the entrainment ratio of choked flow or compression ratios above 1.16 A1/A3 = 0.6 – 56. The following relations give the correlations for the choked flow: P2 = 0.81 0. 4) a 0.74–2757.32 P 1.04 9.5.83 c P 0.1 1.22 P − Pp w c 2 (20) (21) (22) Fitting results against the design and experimental data are shown in Figs. (16). (1) – (14) together with Eq.57.3. 3 and 4.13 − 0.89×10−5 −5.32 j 1.81 − 0. The results are then correlated as a function of the system variables. In this regard. 3) flow (Eq. where the predictions have large deviations.82 −3.21 for the diffuser and the nozzle throat.34 h 9.73 1.8–2859.3 for k.27 344. especially in vacuum and Table 3 Range of design and experimental data used in model development Source Experimental Schutte–Koerting Croll–Rynolds Graham Power Er 1.3–224.85–2100.000762 0.2 – 0.37 – 2.27 – 0. respectively.47–301.8 is given by d W = aErbP c eP c (e + f ln(Pp)) (g + h ln(Pc)) (16) vapor compression applications.12 − 0.008–3.13 P 0.8.4–6.23 0.13 0.06–1480.36 A1/A3 = 0.644–53.6–526. (16) for choked or non-choked flow.32 5.8 is given by d W = aErbP c eP c (e + fP g p) (h + iP jc) (15) Similarly. Fig. and entrainment ratio of 0. (15) and (16) are given as follows (17) (18) (19) Entrainment ratio Entrainment ratio correlation choked correlation non-choked flow (Eq.8–1480.7 2–1000 Pe (kPa) The R values for the above three correlations are above 0.73 e c 1.04 1. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 ments are obtained for an area ratio of 79.24 1.85 −1.7 – 46. [17] obtained the data for a compression ratio of 2.9 and entrainment ratio of 0.04 P − 0. the correlation for the entrainment ratio of un-choked flow with compression ratios below 1.9 w 0.047–5.2 Pp (kPa) 38.2 and 1.09 P− w c p The constants in Eqs. the design and experimental data for the entrainment ratio and system pressures are used to solve the mathematical model and to calculate the area ratios and motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet.54 c 1. “ Arnold et al. (15) or Eq.18–3.22 446.1–4 0.132 0.12 The R 2 for each of the above correlations is above 0. 3.4 4. (1) – (14) together with Eq.8 3.99 P2 = 1. expansion ratio of 29. 3 cover the most commonly used range for steam jet ejectors. (17) or Eq.99.21×10−4 g 1.76–172.79 A2/A1 = 1.

91 5.23 1.11 0.1 356 356 309.7 232.59 1.31 4.46 0.6 5.7 3.04 1.67 3.87 1.5 37.16 0.4 5.3 Pp/Pe 161.77 4.9 260.1 220.7 5.37 0.2 3.6 198.67 3.38 0.28 0.87 0.7 51.6 67.23 1.3 313.1 195.0 1.1 116.78 0.89 4.2 4.3 2.19 2.H.4 38.7 227.5 309.7 232.5 373.09 3.4 3.58 0.6 67.57 Reference [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [8] [4] [4] [4] [4] [4] [4] [13] [13] [13] [13] [13] [14] [14] [14] [14] [14] [14] [14] [15] [15] [15] [15] [15] [17] [17] [17] [17] [16] [16] [16] [16] [16] [16] [18] [18] [18] 90 90 200 81 145 81 .3 5.3 270.51 0.9 1.7 5.9 2.87 0.5 309.2 4.7 266.57 0.87 1.53 2.55 1.95 4.3 526.58 1.9 56.04 1.14 0.44 2.1 294.4 0.31 0.23 1.23 4.78 3.54 0.27 0.92 2.3 270.42 3.75 143 143 143 143 119.87 0.03 4.1 348.7 232.3 2.16 5.7 232.55 1.31 0.58 1.6 1.04 1.6 1.42 0.23 1.26 3.6 22.23 1.9 38.62 0.3 1.3 5.59 1.74 1.14 3.62 1.9 67.6 1.7 302.3 361.4 0.49 0.6 121.23 0.5 0.21 3 2.6 834 400 669 841 690 690 270 270 270 270 270 660 578 516 440 381 312 278 143.8 2.94 1.1 220.19 0.87 2.91 0.85 6.8 46.07 3.59 0.2 1.3 3.36 0.87 0.42 0.6 198. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 559 Table 4 Summary of literature experimental data for steam jet ejectors Ad/At 90 Pp (kPa) 198.47 2.86 1.24 5.51 3.8 189.1 255.5 426.35 0.5 1.9 1.34 0. El -Dessouky et al.7 4.94 0.57 1.3 5.1 186.3 361.3 0.38 3.3 1720 1720 1720 1720 79.1 5.2 392.15 2.23 1.1 5.3 99.3 361.01 67.22 0.7 4.8 2.42 3.42 0.3 270.23 1.21 116 153 270 198 198 198 57.1 2.3 313.59 1.6 165.04 5.7 250.23 57.39 3.42 3.59 0.71 1.56 3.5 326.9 192.2 198.1 29.5 0.49 3.47 3.7 33.8 161.5 309.9 2.3 313.8 137.86 0.4 191.4 w 0.64 0.61 2.47 0.51 4.4 45.6 239.27 0.7 2.43 0.8 359 414.19 1.39 0.04 5.29 0.6 Pe (kPa) 1.7 Pc (kPa) 3.81 4.02 1.1 4.04 1.44 4.9 47.18 0.8 4.3 270.15 4 4.23 1.1 195.7 224.3 6 3.87 0.68 1.2 309.8 189.36 3.29 0.6 4.4 3.3 1.06 2.8 5.51 0.5 4.2 3.4 521.23 1.9 151.04 0.89 3.35 0.13 0.2 2.87 0.5 309.6 223.5 37.1 4.83 4.9 280.87 0.59 1.4 4.6 Pc/Pe 3.87 0.17 2.25 0.34 0.56 0.4 169.

The correlations cover a cross section area (m2) coefficient of performance. Nomenclature A COP Cr Er m M M* Fig. since it can be used to determine the entrainment ratio. upon specification of the system load. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge funding support of the Kuwait University Research Administration. especially those used in industrial applications. The correlations for the entrainment ratio are obtained by fitting against a large set of design data and experimental measurements. The developed correlations are simple and very useful for design and rating calculations. the correlations for the motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet and the area ratios are obtained semi-empirically by solving the mathematical model using the design and experimental data for the entrainment ratio and system pressures. El -Dessouky et al. Fig. dimensionless compression ratio defined as pressure of compressed vapor to pressure of entrained vapor expansion ratio defined as pressure of compressed vapor to pressure of entrained vapor mass flow rate (kg/s) Mach number. can be used to determine the motive steam flow rate and the cross section areas of the ejector. 4. which varies over a wide range. 5. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 wide range of compression. P DP R Rs T w dent of the nozzle and diffuser efficiencies. ratio of fluid velocity to speed of sound critical Mach number. Fitting of the entrainment ratio for compression ratios higher than 1. Conclusions A semi-empirical model is developed for design and performance evaluation of steam jet ejector.8. mass flow rate of motive steam to mass flow rate of entrained vapor temperature (K) entrainment ratio. 3. which. Fitting of the entrainment ratio for compression ratios lower than 1. The model includes correlations for the entrainment ratio in choked and non-choked flow.8. ratio of fluid velocity to speed of sound pressure (kPa) pressure drop (kPa) universal gas constant (kJ/kg °C) load ratio. the motive steam pressure at the nozzle outlet and the area ratios of the ejector. In addition. as shown in Table 2. expansion and entrainment ratios. Appendix A.560 H. mass flow rate of entrained vapor to mass flow rate of motive steam Greek symbols k compressibility ratio p ejector efficiency Subscripts 1–7 locations inside the ejector b boiler c condenser d diffuser e evaporator or entrained vapor m mixing n nozzle p primary stream or motive steam t throat of the nozzle . Project No. EC084 entitled ‘Multiple Effect Evaporation and Absorption/Adsorption Heat Pumps’.

P. Alexis. D. Chem. Sun. A.M. [6] J. [31] M. Refrig. [27] P. Riffat. A theoretical and experimental study of a small-scale steam jet refrigerator.M. Mech. Bagster.A. Al-Khalidy. Recent developments in the design theories and applications of ejectors — a review. Yen. Performance of ejector heat pumps. D. Sun. vol. S. Energy Res. Chem. Assassa. 20 (2000) 213 – 226. Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by low grade heat. Chen. Manag.48654)   where P is in kPa and T is in °C. Energy Convers. Sun. H. Chem. 1 (1995) 1431 – 1438. Wang. Arnold. Int. Chen. Energy 20 (1999) 14 – 20. 2 (1994) 915 – 920. Comparative study of the performance of an ejector refrigeration cycle operating with various refrigerants. Systems characterization. Performance characteristics of HCFC-123 ejector refrigeration cycle. Analysis of a domestic refrigerator cycle with an ejector. Astronaut. Desalination 123 (1999) 1 – 8. Appl. Gupta. Int.T. J.419242 f5 0. J.E. Aphornratana. [8] I. Int. [20] S. Huang. Tomasek. 4 – 7 September.1155286 f7 0. I. Sokolov. Chen. Mech. Int. M. 20 (1997) 352 – 358.1%. Chang. Energy 51 (1993b) 183 – 194.J. Huang.T. 13 (1990a) 351 – 356. Sun. Inst.H. R. H. Inst.6776 − 3892. [24] F. Perez-Blanco. Everitt. [23] N. second ed. Eames.00439993 f3 −0. J. 104 (1998) 153 – 160. A. Houston. A 1-D analysis of ejector performance.001094098 f2 0. [10] N. [16] Y.000521868 where P and T are in kPa and °C. [4] J. Energy 50 (1993a) 507 – 516. 1977. Eng. [5] H. Design procedures. Inst. [13] S. Sol. J. Sol. Sokolov. Eng. J. G. Brisbane. Ger. Abdel-Aal. C. 11 (1987) 289 – 300. Eng. Energy Convers. Correlations of saturation pressure and temperature The saturation temperature correlation is given by T = 42. A simple program to design a multi-stage jet-pump for refrigeration cycles. W.L. Design and parametric investigation of an ejector in an air-conditioning system. Ettouney. An experimental investigation of ejector performance based upon different refrigerants. 101 (1995) 383 – 391.W. Design and experimental investigation of an ejector in an air-conditioning and refrigeration system. Power.W. steam jet ejector.G. 13 (1990b) 357 – 363. [19] N. S. J. 103 (1997) 56 – 64. References [1] E. Am. J. Eng. Petrenko. Huang. El-Swify. S. 20 (1996) 871 – 885. Part 1.K. 18 (1995) 378 – 385. Proc. Eng. Kornhauser. . Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by low grade heat. 20 (1999) 52 – 68. A simple air ejector. Henzler. [26] M. [33] D. Hershgal. Hershgal. V.1. Fluid Sci.15 (ln(P /1000) − 9.E.W. [25] M. Dixit.F. [34] S. Appl. [30] M. Chen. I. Applied Process Design for Chemical and Petrochemical Plants. [18] P. [17] H.W. Refrig. [12] R.008685635 f8 −0. A. Haider. I.W. H. [29] G.K. Manag. Single effect thermal vapor compression desalination process: thermal analysis. Menegay.S.H.S. 18 (1979) 81 – 85. Ejector expansion refrigeration cycle with underexpanded motive nozzle.29721 f6 −0. ASHRAE Trans. Mariani. Radermacher. J. Exper. Eames. J. 1983. J. 45 (1990) 99 – 110. Performance of solar refrigerant ejector refrigerating machine. Zayonia. The above correlation is valid for the calculated saturation temperature over a pressure range of 10 – 1750 kPa. Karmeldin. E.P. Therm. Al-Zakri. Aphornaratana. Optimal coupling and feasibility of solar powered year-round ejector air conditioner. Eames. Huntley. J.L. A.B. Ludwig. An examination of the two-stream theory of steam-jet ejectors. Eames.E. The percentage errors for the calculated versus the steam table values are B 0. Hershgal. J. D. TX.R.15 8 i=1   × % fi (0.7 − 273.B.L. El-Dessouky.Y.M. 22 (1999) 354 – 364. 1. 15 (1997) 384 – 394. A small capacity steam-ejector refrigerator: experimental investigation of a system using ejector with moveable primary nozzle. Int.286 K and Pc = 22089 kPa and the values of fi are given in the following table f1 −7. [7] D.M. [32] E.W.K.D. R. ASHRAE Trans. Variable geometry ejectors and their applications in ejector refrigeration systems.C. Al-Khalidy. M. Bresnahan. Am. Bagster. ASHRAE Trans. 39 (1998) 1827 – 1834. D. IEC 16 (1977) 442 – 449. Experimental study of the performance characteristics of a steam-ejector refrigeration system. Keenan. D.H. M.M. Modelling and simulation of steam jet ejectors. [28] H. Hydrocarb. G.T. A. Predicting unstable-mode performance of a steam jet ejector. [21] M. 64 (1942) 85 – 91. J. Energy Res. Steam jet ejector system for vehicle air conditioning. Energy 68 (1995) 65 – 79. C. 27 (1996) 91 – 100. [14] D. Int. Singh. Refrig. Chin. ASHRAE Trans. Aly. 6 (1983) 292 – 300. Steam ejector as an industrial heat pump. Aeronaut. The correlation for the water vapor saturation pressure is given by ln(P /Pc) = Tc −1 T + 273. [15] D. Hsu. A comparative parametric study of two theoretical models of a single-stage single-fluid. Shamloul. Int. Sun.Y. Heat Trans. Therm. FSPI 1 (1994) 11 – 15. Eng. [9] D. Soc.J. Chem.05% for the corresponding values in the steam tables. Gulf. C. Solar-powered compression-enhanced ejector air conditioner. ASHRAE Trans.D. 40 (1999) 873 – 884. Other options of mass and energy input for steam jet refrigeration systems. Grazzini. A new ejector theory to steam jet refrigeration. R. Eng.01(T + 273. / Chemical Engineering and Processing 41 (2002) 551 – 561 561 Appendix B B. Energy 21 (1996) 919 – 929. Design of ejectors for single-phase material systems. Amb.15 − 338. Refrig. Refrig. [3] H. Neumann. [22] M. Part 2. J.C.C. An experimental investigation of ejector performance characteristics in a jet refrigeration system.F. Power. 43 (1964) 138. Hershgal. [2] R. Sokolov. Sokolov. Rogdakis. [11] B. Proceedings of the Eleventh Australian Conference on Chemical Engineering. J. M.002520658 f4 0. The above correlation is valid over a temperature range of 5 – 200 °C with a percentage error of B 0.A.P. El-Sarha. El -Dessouky et al. Munday.B.W. 88 (1982) 845 – 857.15))(i − 1) where Tc = 647.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful