National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)

November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India

Design, CFD Analysis and Performance Evaluation of the Steam Jet Ejector
Arpit Singhal, Tarun k Chitkara, Mohammed Ameenuddin,
University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, India.
(singhal.arpit89@gmail.com)

ABSTRACT
In this paper, the steam jet ejector was designed and then the CFD analysis was carried out for the geometry
and the inlet condition data verified by the performance evaluation of the jet ejector to find the entrainment ratio, which
was then compared with the experimental data by (Eames et al (1995)) to conclude that the particular geometry and inlet
conditions taken for the CFD analysis are correct. And then the contour results are generated by the CFD Analysis for
the verified geometry.
Key Words: Entrainment ratio, Mathematical Modeling, Performance Evaluation, Steam Jet Ejector
NOMENCLATURE throat section. Holton (1951) studied the effect of
= Pressure of the primary fluid (steam) fluid molecular weight, whereas Holton and Schultz
= pressure of entrained vapor (air) (1951) studied the effect of fluid temperature.
= Mass flow rate of steam Many researchers have made an effort to understand
= Mass flow rate of air the effect of jet ejector geometry on jet ejector
= Mass flow rate of mixture performance. Like, Kroll (1947) investigated the
’ = nozzle efficiency effect of divergence, length, convergence and
= Mach number of steam at point 2 diameter of the throat section, nozzle position,
= Mach of entrained fluid at point 2 induced fluid entrance, and motive velocity. Croft
= Critical Mach and Lilley (1976) investigated the optimum length
= Specific heat ratio of steam and diameter of the throat section, nozzle position,
= Area of nozzle throat, nozzle exit and and angle of divergence.
diffuser Some researchers have studied the effect of nozzle
1. INTRODUCTION diameter on jet ejector performance. Steam is used as
a working fluid.
Jet ejectors are the simplest devices among all
compressors and vacuum pumps. They do not contain 2. DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF THE
any moving parts and lubricants; therefore, they are STEAM JET EJECTOR
considered as reliable devices with low capital and
maintenance costs. Mostly jet ejectors use steam or Ansys 14.0 workbench package was used for the pre-
compressed air as the motive fluid, which is easily processing, post processing and solving of this
found in chemical plants. Due to their simplicity and compressible flow problem. The geometry of the
high reliability, they are widely used in chemical ejector was designed in Design Modeler, the meshing
industrial processes; however, jet ejectors have a low was done in Ansys meshing and then it is solved in
efficiency because many factors affect steam jet Ansys Fluent.
ejector performance, including the feed temperature, The geometry was designed using the dimensions as:
mixing tube length, fluid molecular weight, nozzle
position, throat dimension, motive velocity, Reynolds
number, pressure ratio, and specific heat ratio
(DeFrate and Hoerl (1959); and Kim et al. (1999)).
Previous research by Riffat and Omer (2001) and Da-
Wen and Eames (1995) attempted to study the effect
of nozzle position on jet ejector performance. They
found that the nozzle position had a great effect on
the jet ejector performance, as it determines the
distance over which the motive and propelled stream
are completely mixed. ESDU (1986) suggested that
the nozzle should be placed between 0.5 and 1.0
length of throat diameter before the entrance of the
National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)
November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India

This case is the part which will be validated with the

experimental results by the Performance Evaluation.
Both pressure inlets were taken with primary pressure
inlet of (5043958.5 Pa) and secondary inlet of
(53296.95 Pa). The data verified are then used to do
the CFD Analysis.

Figure 1: Design sheet for the geometry

The geometry was designed in 3D, using the X value
to be 2mm, and hence corresponding values of Y &
Z. The geometry made is:

Figure 2: Geometry made on Design modeler

After the geometry was made it was meshed, the
meshed geometry is:

Figure 3: Meshed Geometry

Now as the proper mesh was generated using the
advancing front method, the mesh had one primary
inlet, one secondary inlet and the mixture outlet as
the named selections. Now the mesh was to be solved Figure 4: Contour plots of the CFD Analysis
and so was imported in Fluent.
National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)
November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India

There were other cases carried out with both mass

flow inlet and then varying the mass flow of the 7) Mach number of entrained fluid at the
entrained vapor, but we were focusing mainly on the nozzle outlet
pressure inlet case results so they can be used to
verify the result of CFD computation with the result √
of the performance evaluation.So this sums up the
CFD analysis and designing of the Ejector.
8) Critical Mach number at point 5 in terms of
3. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF mach of primary and enntrained fluid is:
THE STEAM JET EJECTOR
√( ) √ ( )

9) M* in terms of M

This is used to find values Me2*, Mp2* &

M4
10) Mach number of flow after the shock wave:

Figure 5: Variation of Pressure&Velocity along the Ejector

Mathematical modeling
The step wise procedure is followed using the
mathematical correlations to find out the entrainment
ratio. Then the entrainment ratio achieved is validated
with the help of the experimental results (Eames et
al) generated as well as with the CFD simulation.
1) For Stagnation Temperature
11) Pressure increase after shock wave at point
4:
As the pressure from point 2 to point 4
will be equal so p2=p3=p4
12) Pressure lift in the diffuser

( )
( )
13) Area of the nozzle throat
2) Now overall material balance is given by:
√

14) Area ratio of nozzle throat and diffuser

3) Entrainment ratio: constant area

4) Compression Ratio:
( )
( ( ))
5) Expansion Ratio: ( )

6) Mach number of primary fluid at the nozzle ( ( ) )

outlet
( ( ) )
√ ( )
National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)
November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India

15) Area ratio of nozzle throat and nozzle outlet

Algorithm followed for the Code:

Performance evaluation of the ejector is in which we
define the cross section areas, entrainment ratio and
the motive steam pressures.
Iterations are then made to calculate the value of
entrainment ratio, which defines the ejector capacity. Table 1: Efficiencies of nozzle and diffuser
1) We first define the performance parameters 5) An estimate is made for the entrainment
A1, A2, A3 (which are the area we take ratio (we can assume any initial value).
from the geometry used in CFD analysis),
then we define the pressure of the primary 6) This value is used to calculate other system
vapor (P_p) also called the motive fluid and parameters using eq 7-11, these include
the pressure of the secondary fluid also M_e2*,M_p2*,M4,M5,P5,P_c.
called entrained vapors (P_e) (These 7) A new estimate in the value of entrainment
pressure values are used as we have taken it ratio is made.
in case of the CFD analysis of the ejector).
8) The difference in the values of the
entrainment ration marks the point till the
value converges.
Results generated:
The code was written in FORTRAN, to find the
entrainment ratio; making use of the mathematical
formulations and following the algorithm written
above. The values generated by the code are:

PERFORMANCE VALUES
PARAMETERS
t_p (Celsius) 264.2566
t_e (Celsius) 82.989480
P2 (Pascals) 18011.2
Ma_e2 1.377160
M_p 8.048345E-02
M_e 4.643720E-02
M_c 1.26920E-01
Figure 6: Performnce Evaluation Algorithm Ma_p2* 2.326833
2) Then the efficiency is defined. Based on the Ma_e2* 1.303073
data provided in the following table1: Ma4* 1.99042
Ma4 2.670171
3) The saturation temperature value (T_p &
Ma5 4.763893E-01
T_e) is calculated using the equation given
P4 18011.2
4) Then we calculate the flow rate of motive P5 142817.2
steam and the properties at the nozzle exit W(entrainment 5.769782E-01
(m_p,P2,M_e2,M_p2). These are calculated
using equations 5,6,12 and 14.
ratio)
National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)
November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India
4. CONCLUSION
Jet ejectors are widely used in the chemical industrial
process because they are highly reliable with low
capital and maintenance costs. However, jet ejectors
have a low efficiency compared with mechanical
compressors. A high-efficiency jet ejector, which was
designed and presented in the High Efficiency Jet
Ejector invention disclosure of Holtzapple (2001) is
an engaging solution to resolve the low efficiency
problem. This research was conducted to investigate
the optimal geometry and operating conditions for a
high-efficiency jet ejector.
The steam jet ejector was tested with the performance
evaluation and the result generated should be in the
range as calculated experimentally by (Eames et
al(1995)), according to which for area ratio of 90 for
diffuser and nozzle throat, the entrainment ratio
should be in 0.17-0.58, the compression ratio should
be in (3-6) and the expansion ratio should be in 160-
415. As the area ratio we took in the CFD analysis
was of order 90.25 so our result should in the range
mentioned.
The result generated by the code showed that the
entrainment ratio for our geometry was 0.57 and
giving the compression ratio of about 3. This proved
that the CFD analysis data took was correct and
agreed with the experimental data and hence the
CFD Analysis was carried for the geometry of same
order.
REFERENCES
1. Berkeley, F. D., “Ejectors Give Any Suction
Pressure,” Chem Eng. J., 64, 4(1957).
2. Croft, D. R., and D. G. Lilley, “Jet Pump
Design and Performance Analysis,” AIAA
14thAerospace Science Meeting, AIAA
Paper 76183, New York (1976).
3. Croll, W. S., “Keeping Steam Ejectors,”
Chem. Eng. J., 105, 4(1998).
4. Da-Wen, S., and I. W. Eames, “Recent
Developments in the Design Theories and
Applications of Ejectors,” J.Inst. Energy, 68
(1995).
5. DeFrate, L. A., and A. E. Hoerl, “Optimum
Design of Ejectors Using Digital
Computers,” Chem. Eng. Prog. Symp.
Series, 21 (1959).
6. Djebedjian, B., S. Abdalla, and M. A.
Rayan, “Parametric Investigation of Boost
Jet Pump Performance,” Proceedings of
FEDSM, ASME Fluids Engineering
Summer Conference, Boston (2000).
7. El-Dessouky, H., H. Ettouney, I. Alatiqi, and
G. Al-Nuwaibit, “Evaluation of Steam Jet
Ejectors,” Chem. Eng. Process., 41, 6
(2002).
8. Engineering Sciences Data Unit (ESDU),
Ejector and Jet Pump; Design for Steam
Driven Flow, Item number 86030, ESDU
International Ltd., London (1986).
9. Fletcher, C. A. J., Computational
Techniques for Fluid Dynamics, Volumes I
& II, 2nded., Springer-Verlag, Orlando, FL
(1991).
10. Fluent Inc., Fluent User Guides,
www.fluent.com, (2012).
11. Habashi, W. G., Solution Techniques for
Large-Scale CFD Problems, John Wiley
&Sons, New York (1995).
12. Happle J., and H. Brenner, Low Reynolds
Number Hydrodynamics(Mechanics of
Fluids and Transport Processes), McGraw
Hill, New York (1965).
13. Hedges, K. R., and P. G. Hill,
“Compressible Flow Ejectors; Flow Field
Measurements and Analysis,” ASME Trans.
Fluid Eng., 96, 3 (1974).
14. Holton, W. C., “Effect of Molecular Weight
and Entrained Fluid on the Performance of
Steam-Jet Ejectors,” Trans. Am. Soc. Mech.
Eng., 73 (1951).
15. Holtzapple, M. T., “High-Efficiency Jet
Ejector,” (Invention Disclosure) Department
of Chemical Engineering, Texas A&M
University, College Station, Texas (2001).
16. I.W. Eames,S. Aphornaratana, H Haider, A
Theorotical and experimental study of a
small Scale steam-jet refrigerator, Int. J.
Refrig. 18 (1995) 378-385
17. Keenan, J. H., and E. P. Neumann, “A
Simple Air Ejector,” ASME J. Appl. Mech.,
9 (1942).
18. Kim, H. D., T. Setoguchi, S. Yu, and S.
Raghunathan, “Navier-Stokes Computations
of the Supersonic Ejector-Diffuser System
with a Second Throat,” J. Therm. Sci., 8, 2
(1999).
19. Knight, G. B., “Five Ways to Automatically
Control Pressure for Ejector Vacuum
Systems,” Chem. Eng. J., 66, 6 (1959).
20. Lines, J. R. and Smith, R. T., “Ejector
System Trouble Shooting,” Int. J. of Hydro.
Eng.,(1997).
21. Mains, W. D., and R. E. Richenberg, “Steam
Jet Ejectors in Pilot and Production
Plants,”Chem. Eng. Process., 63, 3 (1967).
Publishers, New York, NY (1983).
National Convention of Aerospace Engineers (27th NCAE)
November 08-09, 2013, Dehradun, India

22. Schmitt, H., Diversity of Jet Pump and

Ejector Techniques, The Second Symposium
on Jet Pumps & Ejectors and Gas Lift
Techniques, BHRA Fluid Engineering,
Bedford, UK (1975).
23. Smith, J. M., and H. C. Van Ness,
Introduction to Chemical Engineering
Thermodynamics, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York (1975).
24. Steam Jet Syphons; Design, Construction,
and Operation, AMETEK Inc., Cornwells
Heights, PA (1979).
25. Vishwannathappa, D. M., “High-Efficiency
Jet Ejector,” Department of Chemical
Engineering, Texas A&M University,
College Station, Texas (2001).

1.Arpit Singhal: Mr. Arpit Singhal is postgraduate

student in Computational Fluid Dynamics from University of
Petroleum & Energy Studies.