Journal of Thermal Science Vol.28, No.

4 (2019) 727735

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11630-019-1144-2 Article ID: 1003-2169(2019)04-0727-09

Experimental Investigation on Ejector Performance Using R134a as Refrigerant

DAI Zhengshu1,4*, YU Bo2*, LIU Pengpeng1,4, CHEN Guangming3, ZHANG Hua1,4

1. School of Energy and Power Engineering, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093,
China
2. State Key Laboratory of Air-conditioning Equipment and System Energy Conservation, Zhuhai 519070, China
3. Institute of Refrigeration and Cryogenics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
4. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Multiphase Flow and Heat Transfer in Power Engineering, Shanghai 200093, China

© Science Press, Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer
Nature 2019

Abstract: Ejector refrigeration has the advantage of low capital cost, simple design, reliable operation, long
lifespan and almost no maintenance. The only weakness is the low efficiency and its intolerance to deviations
from design operation condition. R134a used in ejector refrigeration system gives better performance in
comparison with many other environmental friendly refrigerants as the generation temperature is from 75°C to
80°C. The present work experimentally investigated the on-design and off-design performance of the ejector with
fixed geometry using R134a as refrigerant, and cycle performance of the ejector refrigeration system. The
experimental prototype was constructed and the effects of primary flow inlet pressure, secondary flow inlet
pressure and ejector back pressure on ejector performance and cycle performance were investigated respectively.
The operation conditions are: primary flow inlet pressure from 2.2 MPa to 3.25 MPa, secondary flow inlet
pressure from 0.36 MPa to 0.51 MPa, ejector back pressure from 0.45 MPa to 0.67 MPa. Conclusions were drawn
from the experimental results, and the experimental data can be used for validation of theoretical model for both
critical and subcritical mode.

Keywords: ejector performance, refrigeration, R134a, experiment

1. Introduction [2]. Ejector refrigeration systems have been unable to

Ejector refrigeration system could utilize low-grade
energy; it attracts attention again due to the energy
problems. Different from the traditional vapor
compression refrigeration system, ejector refrigeration
system has the advantage in simple construction,
installation and maintenance [1]. The temperature of the
low-grade thermal energy, which could be used to drive
the ejector refrigeration system, could be as low as 60°C
achieve commercial maturity due to their relative low
system efficiency and their intolerance to deviations from
the design operation condition [3,4]. Much effort has
been made to improve the performance of the system, in
other words, to overcome the only disadvantage of
ejector refrigeration systems. Ejector, as the heart of the
refrigeration system, whose performance is directly and
significantly germane to the performance of the system,
attracts researchers’ attention. Numerous researchers

Received: Aug 10, 2018 Corresponding authors: DAI Zhengshu E-mails: zsdai-hvacr@163.com
Associate editor: WANG Lin YU Bo yubo198722@163.com
www.springerlink.com
728
Nomenclature
COP coefficient of performance
G mass flow rate/kg s-1
P pressure/MPa
Q heat input or cooling capacity/W
T temperature/°C
TS temperature set/°C
w velocity/m s-1
conducted research on improving ejector performance,
which will lead to the improvement of the system
performance.
In the open literatures, researchers [5-7] pointed out
that refrigerant property plays a very important role in
ejector refrigeration cycle performance. Some individuals
[8-10] pointed out that R134a is a suitable option as the
generation temperature is from 75°C to 80°C. Selvaraju
and Mani [11, 12] also got the conclusion that R134a
used in ejector refrigeration system gives better
performance compared with many other environmental
friendly refrigerants. Since the thermodynamic
characteristic of R134a is suitable for ejector refrigeration
system, and it is and will be widely used in fields like
automobile application in Asia for the next decade,
R134a was chosen as refrigerant in the present work.
Among numerous researchers who conducted
researches on ejector refrigeration systems, some of them
focused on ejector performance using R134a as
refrigerant.
Yan et al. [13] developed a CFD model to evaluate the
effect of six key geometry parameters on ejector
performance in an air-cooled R134a ejector refrigeration
system. Yan and Cai [14] conducted experiments to study
the optimum area ratios for the ejector used in an
air-cooled R134a ejector refrigeration system under
air-conditioning working conditions. They also got the
conclusion that with fixed area ratio of the ejector, the
performance depends mainly on operation conditions.
Selvaraju and Mani [15] experimentally investigated on
the performance of an R134a ejector refrigeration system.
Six ejectors with different geometries were studied by
varying operation conditions. Khalil et al. [16] developed
a mathematical model to design the R134a ejector and to
predict the system performance. The model was used to
investigate the influence of operation conditions on the
performance of the ejector and the system. But in the
model, the detailed component efficiency was not
decided accurately, which means the simulated results
can only show the variation trend. Garcia del Valle et al.
[17] studied on an ejector refrigeration system working
with R134a, aiming at the enhancement of the pressure
recovery. Effects of nozzle exit position and the
stagnation degree of superheating for both primary and
J. Therm. Sci., Vol.28, No.4, 2019
Greek symbols
μ entrainment ratio
Subscripts
C compressed flow
e evaporator
g generator
H secondary flow
P primary flow
secondary flows on entrainment ratio were tested for
three mixing chambers with different geometries.
Moreover, the critical conditions of ejectors with three
different mixing chambers were investigated.
Zegenhagen and Ziegler [18] experimentally investigated
the characteristics of a jet-ejector refrigeration system
using R134a as refrigerant. They proposed a simple
representation method of the operation characteristics of
the system for changing boundary conditions, and the
ejector performance was only investigated in double
choking operation. Zegenhagen and Ziegler [19]
proposed a one-dimensional, experimentally validated
model of an ejector in critical double choking mode with
R134a as refrigerant, which includes real gas effect and a
single physically interpretable loss coefficient in the
model. Yan et al. [20] established an R134a ejector
cooling system, and the influence of key parameters on
ejector performance was investigated experimentally.
Wang et al. [21] experimentally and theoretically studied
a hybrid air-conditioning system using R134a as
refrigerant. The system consists of two parts, an ejector
cycle driven by exhausted waste heat and a compressor
A/C cycle. Effects of condensation pressure, evaporation
pressure, and primary pressure on system performance
were studied. Chen et al. [22] proposed a two-
dimensional theoretical model based on an adjustable-
nozzle theory, which could accurately predict the driving-
flow development in the mixing section and the suction-
flow velocity distribution on the effective area.
Experimental setup was also constructed using R134a as
refrigerant to validate the theoretical model. Wang et al.
[23] proposed an optimum primary pressure model and
an optimum entrainment ratio model. The experimental
apparatus was setup to validate the models, and R134a
was chosen as refrigerant in the experiment. Yan et al.
[24] conducted research on ejector performance applied
in an R134a refrigeration system. Tan et al. [25] proposed
a mixed refrigerant ejector refrigeration cycle which
could operate at -40°C. The thermodynamic investigation
on performance of the system using zeotropic mixture
refrigerant R23/R134a was conducted, and comparisons
of cycle performance were made between the systems
with one-stage and two-stage vapor-liquid separators.
From the literatures above, it could be seen that some
DAI Zhengshu et al. Experimental Investigation on Ejector Performance Using R134a as Refrigerant 729

individuals have focused on experimental studies on

R134a ejector refrigeration system, and there are limited
numbers of comprehensive experimental investigation on
on-design and off-design performance of a geometry-
fixed ejector using R134a as refrigerant. Since
intolerance to deviations from the design operation
condition is one of the most important reasons for unable
to achieve commercial maturity for ejector refrigeration
system, a comprehensive experimental study of ejector
performance is needed. In the present work, an
experimental prototype was constructed and the
experiments were focused on on-design and off-design Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of a conventional ejector
ejector performance and cycle performance of an ejector refrigeration system
refrigeration system using R134a as refrigerant, with
varying primary flow inlet pressure, ejector back pressure
and secondary flow inlet pressure, respectively. The
experimental data can be used for validation of a
mathematical model for predicting ejector performance
with both critical mode and subcritical mode.

2. Working Principle of the Ejector and Ejector

Refrigeration System

A conventional ejector refrigeration system is shown

in Fig. 1. Unlike the vapor compression refrigeration
system, the ejector refrigeration system does not have a
compressor employed in the system. The system is
composed of an ejector, a condenser, an evaporator, a
generator, an expansion valve and a circulating pump.
The high pressure vapor generated by the generator flows
into the ejector and entrains the low pressure vapor from
the evaporator; these two streams mix with each other
and flow into the condenser to be cooled. The liquid
refrigerant separates into two parts. One stream goes into
the evaporator to provide cooling capacity; the other
stream is pumped back to the generator and absorbs heat
to offer the high pressure refrigerant vapor.
The ejector, which is the key component of the ejector
refrigeration system, was invented by Charles Parsons
around 1901. It was first used by Maurice Leblanc in the
steam jet refrigeration system in 1910 [26]. The
performance of the ejector refrigeration system relies
strongly on the performance of the ejector. As shown in
Fig. 2, an ejector consists of a converging-diverging
nozzle, a mixing chamber, a suction chamber, and a
diffuser. The high pressure refrigerant vapor goes through
the converging-diverging nozzle; expansion occurs
during this process, and at the exit of the nozzle the flow
is of high velocity and low pressure; this supersonic flow
thus entrains low pressure refrigerant vapor from the
evaporator; these two flows mix with each other in the
mixing chamber, get a uniform velocity and pressure, and
the mixed flow experiences shock which leads to abrupt
pressure rise and velocity drop. After the shock, the
supersonic flow becomes subsonic again. The pressure of
Fig. 2 Variation of static pressure and velocity along ejector
axis
the flow gets recovered in the diffuser, and then the flow
goes into the condenser. The variations of the pressure
and velocity along ejector axis are clearly presented in
Fig. 2.
3. Experimental Setup
3.1 Description of experimental apparatus
In order to conduct experiments on ejector
performance, experimental apparatus was constructed,
shown in Fig. 3. The experimental apparatus can be
divided into ejector refrigeration cycle, cooling water
loop, chilled water loop, and the constant-temperature
hot water loop.
Ejector refrigeration cycle is composed of an ejector, a
condenser, a generator, an expansion valve, an evaporator,
a refrigerant pump and a liquid storage tank. Ejector was
designed based on momentum conservation, energy
conservation and mass conservation [27,28] at the design
condition from Table 1. The detailed geometry and
dimensions of the ejector were shown in Fig. 4. Because
730 J. Therm. Sci., Vol.28, No.4, 2019

it is difficult to be machined as a whole, the ejector was temperature and the set temperature. The automatic
separated into several parts and it was assembled as temperature controller works as follows. T is the
shown in Fig. 5. Finally the ejector used in the temperature at the exit of water bath, and TS is the
experiment was assembled as shown in Fig. 6. A temperature set. There are three U-shaped heaters
tube-in-tube condenser and a shell-and-coil evaporator immersed in the water bath.
were designed for the experimental apparatus.
The constant-temperature hot water loop is used to Table 1 Design condition of the experimental setup
simulate the solar heated hot water loop. The water bath Primary Secondary
Ejector back Secondary flow
was heated by electrical heaters. The water bath flow inlet flow inlet
pressure/ mass flow rate/
pressure/ pressure/
temperature was controlled by an automatic controller, MPa g·s-1
MPa MPa
and its accuracy is ±1°C. The hot water temperature was
2.633 0.488 0.887 5.69
controlled by difference between the water bath exit

1. ejector; 2. condenser; 3. evaporator; 4. liquid storage tank; 5. generator; 6. refrigerant pump; 7. expansion valve; 8. voltage regulator;
9. chilled water tank; 10. cooling water tank; 11. constant-temperature controlled hot water tank; 12. cooling water pump; 13. hot water
pump; 14,16,17,18. mass flow rate control valve; 15. chilled water pump; 19. U-shaped heater

Fig. 3 Schematic representation of the test rig

Fig. 4 Geometric representation of the ejector

Fig. 6 Picture of the ejector in connection with other
components of the system

Step 1: As T≤(TS-2°C), three heaters work

1. mixing section and diffuser; 2. coupling; 3. tee cylinder; 4.
nozzle thread fixed component; 5. converging-diverging nozzle;
6. seal ring; 7. seal gasket
Fig. 5 Assembling representation of the ejector
simultaneously;
Step 2: As (TS-2°C)<T≤(TS-1°C), only one heater
works;
Step 3: As (TS-1°C)<T<TS, only one heater works
intermittently with period to be 400 seconds. The heater
continues to work for 400 seconds. After one period,
comparison is made between the measured temperature
and the temperature of last period. If the two
DAI Zhengshu et al. Experimental Investigation on Ejector Performance Using R134a as Refrigerant 731

temperatures are the same, then the period of heating
keeps the same. If the measured temperature is higher
than that of last period, then the heating period will
decrease, 5 seconds less than that of last period. If the
measured temperature is lower than that of last period,
the heating period will increase, 5 seconds more than that
of last period.
Step 4: As T≥TS, all heaters stop working, and the
water cools down until T<TS, then it goes to step3.
3.2 Measurement and uncertainty analysis
Temperature was measured by thermocouples and
pt100, which were calibrated before use, with the
measurement accuracy of ±0.1°C. The outlet and inlet
temperatures of ejector, condenser and evaporator were
measured by copper constantan thermocouples (T-type).
Water bath temperature was measured by a 4-wire pt100.
The secondary flow inlet pressure, primary flow inlet
pressure and ejector back pressure were measured by
pressure sensors, with the measurement accuracy of
±0.2%FS. The mass flow rate of the primary flow and
secondary flow were measured by mass flow meters, and
the measurement accuracy is ±0.35%. Data logger
Agilent 34970A was used to acquire the temperature and
pressure signals. The data acquisition software explored
by Micro Motion was used to obtain the mass flow rate
data. The detailed information of the measurement
parameters and instrumentation were shown in Table 2.
According to Moffat’s theory [29], the relative
uncertainty of entrainment ratio in the present work is
0.495%, and the maximum relative uncertainty of COP is
0.526%, which means the data in the present work are
reliable.
3.3 Experimental procedure
The temperature of constant-temperature water bath
was set according to the primary flow inlet pressure
expected in the experiment. The hot water loop was
started to heat the refrigerant in the generator. The
refrigerant was vaporized and flew into the ejector,
entrained the secondary flow from the evaporator and
mixed with the secondary flow through the mixing
section and diffuser. Then the mixed flow was condensed
in the condenser. It took about an hour for the primary
flow inlet pressure to reach the expected value and kept
constant. The ejector back pressure could be controlled
by adjusting the condensation temperature. The
secondary flow inlet pressure could be controlled by
adjusting the opening of the expansion valve and the
temperature of the chilled water. The experiments in the
present work were carried out for different primary flow
inlet pressure, ejector back pressure and secondary flow
inlet pressure, two parameters of which were kept fixed
and the rest one was adjusted for each experiment.
4. Results and Discussion

Table 2 Detailed information of the measurement parameters
and instrumentation
Parameter
Inlet and outlet temperature of each
component/°C
Hot water temperature to
generator/°C
Primary flow inlet pressure/MPa
Secondary flow inlet pressure/MPa
Ejector back pressure/MPa
-1
Primary flow mass flow rate/kg·s
Secondary flow mass flow rate
/kg·s-1
Hot water flow rate to generator
/m3·h-1
Cooling water flow rate/L·h-1
Chilled water flow rate/L·h-1
The entrainment ratio µ is defined as:
G In this section, experiments of ejector performance
 H
GP
The cycle performance is defined as:
Q
COP  e
Qg
Huang et al. [30] pointed out that according to the
theory proposed by Munday and Bagster [31], the ejector
has three working modes: 1) Critical mode. In this
Range Uncertainty
working mode, the primary flow and secondary flow
0~100 ±0.1 both get choked. The entrainment ratio keeps constant
until the ejector back pressure reaches critical point. 2)
0~100 ±0.1
Subcritical mode. In this working mode, only the primary
0~4 ±0.2%FS flow gets choked in the nozzle. And the entrainment ratio
0~1 ±0.2%FS decreases sharply. 3) Back flow mode. In this working
0~2.5 ±0.2%FS
mode, the ejector cannot work, both the primary flow and
the secondary flow are not choked, and the entrainment
0~0.04 ±0.35%
ratio is negative or equals to zero. So for a geometry-
0~0.01 ±0.35% fixed ejector, in order to make the ejector work with good
performance, detailed on-design and off- design working
0.25~2.5 ±1.5%
conditions for each working mode should be known, thus
400~4 000 ±1.5% subcritical mode and back flow mode can be avoided
100~1 000 ±1.5% during operation. Since the design methods for ejectors
are not so accurate, experiments are needed for getting
the detailed data, which could be used in developing
theoretical model for verification.
(1)
and cycle performance with a geometry-fixed ejector
were conducted; experimental data for different working
modes were presented and analyzed. The ranges of the
(2) operation conditions in the present work were as follows:
the primary flow inlet pressure varied from 2.2 MPa to
732 J. Therm. Sci., Vol.28, No.4, 2019

3.25 MPa, and it was in saturation state; the secondary
flow inlet pressure varied from 0.36 MPa to 0.51 MPa,
and it kept superheated about 10°C above its saturation
temperature corresponding to each pressure; ejector back
pressure varied from 0.45 MPa to 0.67 MPa, and it was
found to be superheated. Ejector entrainment ratio is an
important judgement parameter to ejector performance; it
is the ratio of secondary flow mass flow rate to the
primary flow mass flow rate. The following part focused
on the effect of operation conditions on ejector
entrainment ratio and cycle performance of the system.
both of the primary flow mass flow rate and the
secondary flow mass flow rate are increasing, but as the
primary flow inlet pressure increases to some extent, the
increase rates of both flows are different.
Fig. 10 shows the variation of cycle performance with
primary flow inlet pressure. As can be seen from the
figure, the variation trend of the effect of primary flow
inlet pressure on COP is similar to that of entrainment
ratio. For an ejector refrigeration system, finding the
optimum primary flow inlet pressure is important so that
the cycle performance could be optimized.

4.1 Effect of primary flow inlet pressure

Fig. 7 depicts the effect of primary flow inlet pressure
PP on entrainment ratio µ. With given secondary flow
inlet pressure and ejector back pressure, the entrainment
ratio initially increases with the increase of primary flow
inlet pressure and then decreases, and there exists an
optimum primary flow inlet pressure corresponding to
the maximum entrainment ratio. With the same
secondary flow inlet pressure, the optimum primary flow
inlet pressure is higher when the ejector back pressure is
higher, this is because the compression ratio of the
ejector is larger with higher ejector back pressure, thus a Fig. 8 Variation of primary flow mass flow rate with primary
higher primary flow inlet pressure is required. flow inlet pressure
Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show the variation of primary flow
mass flow rate GP and secondary flow mass flow rate GH
with primary flow inlet pressure PP, respectively. The
primary flow mass flow rate increases linearly with the
increase of primary flow inlet pressure. For a given
working fluid, the primary flow mass flow rate is related
to the throat area of the converging-diverging nozzle and
thermodynamic state of the primary flow. With a fixed
nozzle throat area, the primary flow mass flow rate
increases with the primary flow inlet pressure. The
secondary flow mass flow rate also increases with the
primary flow inlet pressure; it increases very rapidly
initially and slows down thereafter. That is why there
Fig. 9 Variation of secondary flow mass flow rate with
exists an optimum entrainment ratio shown in Fig. 7,
primary flow inlet pressure

Fig. 7 Variation of entrainment ratio with primary flow inlet Fig. 10 Variation of cycle performance with primary flow
pressure inlet pressure
DAI Zhengshu et al. Experimental Investigation on Ejector Performance Using R134a as Refrigerant 733

4.2 Effect of secondary flow inlet pressure

Fig. 11 shows the variation of entrainment ratio µ with
secondary flow inlet pressure PH. With given primary
flow inlet pressure and ejector back pressure, entrainment
ratio increases linearly with the increase of the secondary
flow inlet pressure.
Fig. 12 depicts the variation of secondary flow mass
flow rate GH with secondary flow inlet pressure PH. The
mass flow rate increases linearly with the secondary flow
inlet pressure. For a fixed primary flow inlet pressure, the
secondary flow is much easier to be entrained into the
ejector with higher secondary flow inlet pressure, which
leads to higher entrainment ratio and higher cycle
performance shown in Fig. 13. But in reality, the Fig. 13 Variation of cycle performance with secondary flow
entrainment ratio cannot be improved in this way, inlet pressure
because in an ejector refrigeration system, the secondary
flow inlet pressure can be approximately considered as
evaporation pressure, which is decided by users.

4.3 Effect of ejector back pressure

Fig. 14 clearly shows the detailed working range for
each operation condition. With the same secondary flow
inlet pressure, the critical ejector back pressure is higher

Fig. 14 Variation of entrainment ratio with ejector back

pressure

with higher primary flow inlet pressure; also the working

range of the ejector is much wider. It could be seen that
with the secondary flow inlet pressure to be 0.31 MPa,
and the primary flow inlet pressure within the range of
2.39 MPa to 2.85 MPa, as the ejector works in critical
Fig. 11 Variation of entrainment ratio with secondary flow
mode, the entrainment ratio is higher with lower primary
inlet pressure
flow inlet pressure.
Fig. 15 depicts the variation of secondary flow mass
flow rate GH with ejector back pressure PC. As the ejector
works at critical mode, the secondary flow mass flow rate
keeps constant; as the ejector works at subcritical mode,
the secondary flow mass flow rate decreases with the
increase of the ejector back pressure. For a certain
refrigerant, with fixed primary flow thermodynamic state
and the throat area of converging-diverging nozzle, the
mass flow rate of primary flow keeps constant when the
primary flow gets choked. According to the definition of
entrainment ratio, it should be constant as the ejector
works at critical mode. Similarly, the conclusion could be
Fig. 12 Variation of secondary flow mass flow rate with drawn that the entrainment ratio in the subcritical mode
secondary flow inlet pressure decreases sharply.
734
Fig. 15 Variation of secondary flow mass flow rate with
ejector back pressure
Fig. 16 Variation of cycle performance with ejector back
pressure
Fig. 16 shows the variation of cycle performance with
ejector back pressure. Similar to the effect of ejector back
pressure on entrainment ratio, the COP keeps constant as
ejector works at critical mode, and it decreases sharply at
subcritical mode. The cycle performance is greatly
depending on the ejector performance, so finding the
critical back pressure of the ejector is important, so that
the subcritical mode and back flow mode could be
avoided.
5. Conclusions
The present work comprehensively studied the ejector
performance and cycle performance of the ejector
refrigeration system with R134a as refrigerant.
Experiments were conducted by varying primary flow
inlet pressure, secondary flow inlet pressure and ejector
back pressure. For each experiment, two parameters were
kept constant, and the rest one was tuned. The
experimental results drew the conclusions as follows.
(1) The entrainment ratio increases first and then
decreases with the increase of primary flow inlet pressure,
and an optimum value exists. For the same secondary
J. Therm. Sci., Vol.28, No.4, 2019
flow inlet pressure, the optimum primary flow inlet
pressure is higher when the ejector back pressure is
higher.
(2) The entrainment ratio increases nearly linearly
with the increase of the secondary flow inlet pressure.
(3) The entrainment ratio keeps constant with the
increase of ejector back pressure until it reaches critical
back pressure, and then it decreases rapidly to zero. With
the same secondary flow inlet pressure, the critical
ejector back pressure is higher with higher primary flow
inlet pressure.
(4) The ejector refrigeration cycle performance is
greatly depending on ejector performance; the effects of
primary flow inlet pressure, secondary flow inlet pressure
and ejector back pressure on cycle performance are
similar to that of the entrainment ratio.
Acknowledgement
This study is financially supported by State Key
Laboratory of Air-conditioning Equipment and System
Energy Conservation (ACSKL2018KT11) and National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
51276171).
References
[1] Chen X., Omer S., Worall M., et al., Recent
developments in ejector refrigeration technologies.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, 19:
629‒651.
[2] Sun D., Eames I., Recent developments in the design
theories and applications of ejectors—a review. Journal
of the Institute of Energy, 1995, 68(475): 65‒79.
[3] Chunnanond K., Aphornratana S., Ejectors: applications
in refrigeration technology. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 2004, 8(2): 129‒155.
[4] Riffat S., Jiang L., Gan G., Recent development in ejector
technology: a review. International Journal of Ambient
Energy, 2005, 26(1): 13–26.
[5] Chen J., Havtun H., Palm B., Screening of working fluids
for the ejector refrigeration system. International Journal
of Refrigeration, 2014, 47: 1‒14.
[6] Dorantes R., Lallemand A., Prediction of performance of
a jet cooling system operating with pure refrigerants or
non-azeotropic mixtures. International Journal of
Refrigeration, 1995, 18(1): 21‒30.
[7] Tashtoush B., Alshare A., Al-Rifai S., Performance study
of ejector cooling cycle at critical mode under
superheated primary flow. Energy Conversion and
Management, 2015, 94: 300‒310.
[8] Cizungu K., Mani A., Groll M., Performance comparison
of vapour jet refrigeration system with environment
DAI Zhengshu et al. Experimental Investigation on Ejector Performance Using R134a as Refrigerant
friendly working fluids. Applied Thermal Engineering,
2001, 21(5): 585‒598.
[9] Zhang Y., Zhao W., Tian Q., et al., Investigation on
performance of ejector and optimal refrigerants for solar
ejector refrigeration system. Acta Energiae Solaris Sinica,
2007, 28(2): 130‒136. (in Chinese)
[10] Zheng A., Potential energy driving jet refrigerant. Journal
of Chemical Industry and Engineering. 2008, 59(S2):
246‒250. (in Chinese)
[11] Selvaraju A., Mani A., Analysis of a vapour ejector
refrigeration system with environment friendly
refrigerants. International Journal of Thermal Sciences,
2004, 43(9): 915‒921.
[12] Selvaraju A., Mani A., Analysis of an ejector with
environment friendly refrigerants. Applied Thermal
Engineering, 2004, 24(5): 827‒838.
[13] Yan J., Cai W., Li Y., Geometry parameters effect for
air-cooled ejector cooling systems with R134a refrigerant.
Renewable Energy, 2012, 46: 155‒163.
[14] Yan J., Cai W., Area ratio effects to the performance of
air-cooled ejector refrigeration cycle with R134a
refrigerant. Energy Conversion and Management, 2012,
53(1): 240‒246.
[15] Selvaraju A., Mani A., Experimental investigation on
R134a vapour ejector refrigeration system. International
Journal of Refrigeration, 2006, 29(7): 1160‒1166.
[16] Khalil A., Fatouh M., Elgendy E., Ejector design and
theoretical study of R134a ejector refrigeration cycle.
International Journal of Refrigeration, 2011, 34(7):
1684‒1698.
[17] García del Valle J., Saíz Jabardo J., Castro Ruiz F., et al.,
An experimental investigation of a R-134a ejector
refrigeration system. International Journal of
Refrigeration, 2014, 46: 105‒113.
[18] Zegenhagen M., Ziegler F., Experimental investigation of
the characteristics of a jet-ejector and a jet-ejector cooling
system operating with R134a as a refrigerant.
International Journal of Refrigeration, 2015, 56: 173‒185.
[19] Zegenhagen M., Ziegler F., A one-dimensional model of a
jet-ejector in critical double choking operation with
R134a as a refrigerant including real gas effects.
735
International Journal of Refrigeration, 2015, 55: 72‒84.
[20] Yan J., Lin C., Cai W., et al., Experimental study on key
geometric parameters of an R134A ejector cooling
system. International Journal of Refrigeration, 2016, 67:
102–108.
[21] Wang L., Cai W., Zhao H., et al., Experimentation and
cycle performance prediction of hybrid A/C system using
automobile exhaust waste heat. Applied Thermal
Engineering. 2016, 94: 314–323.
[22] Chen Z., Jin X., Dang C., et al., Ejector performance
analysis under overall operating conditions considering
adjustable nozzle structure. International Journal of
Refrigeration, 2017, 84: 274–286.
[23] Wang L., Wang C., Hou W., et al., Experimental
investigation on ejector performance near critical back
pressure. International Journal of Refrigeration, 2017, 80:
158–168.
[24] Yan J., Chen G., Liu C., et al., Experimental
investigations on a R134a ejector applied in a
refrigeration system. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2017,
110: 1061–1065.
[25] Tan Y., Chen Y., Wang L., Thermodynamic analysis of a
mixed refrigerant ejector refrigeration cycle operating
with two vapor-liquid separators. Journal of Thermal
Science, 2018, 27(3): 230‒240.
[26] Gosney W., Principle of refrigeration, fourth ed.,
Cambridge University Press, London, 1982.
[27] Sokolov E., Zinger H., Ejector, first ed., Science Press,
Beijing, 1977. (in Chinese)
[28] ASHRAE, Steam-jet refrigeration equipment, Equipment
Handbook, ASHRAE, Atlanta, 1979.
[29] Moffat R., Describing the uncertainties in experimental
results. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 1988,
1(1): 3‒17.
[30] Huang B., Chang J., Wang C., et al., A 1-D analysis of
ejector performance. International Journal of
Refrigeration. 1999, 22(5): 354‒364.
[31] Munday J., Bagster D., A new ejector theory applied to
steam jet refrigeration. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Process Design and Development. 1977, 16(4):
442‒449.