Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Area ratio effects to the performance of air-cooled ejector refrigeration cycle

with R134a refrigerant
Yan Jia, Cai Wenjian ⇑
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798, Singapore

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, the key ejector geometry parameters for an air-cooled ejector cycle using R134a with cool-
Received 3 May 2011 ing capacity of 2 kW are designed by 1D analysis. Through enlarging the designed area ratios by connect-
Received in revised form 1 September 2011 ing the replaceable nozzles with a main body, optimum area ratios under air-conditioning working
Accepted 3 September 2011
conditions are studied experimentally. Three parameters, namely, the entrainment ratio, COP and cooling
Available online 1 October 2011
capacity are evaluated, and the results show that the optimum area ratios are from 3.69 to 4.76 that are
lower than those mentioned in other studies. With a fixed area ratio, experiments also show that the
Keywords:
influence of the ejector area ratio on the ejector performance largely depends on the operating condi-
Ejector refrigeration cycle
Air-cooled condenser
tions. Consequently, the effects of operating conditions such as primary flow pressures on the ejector sys-
Area ratio tem performance are evaluated.
Entrainment ratio Crown Copyright Ó 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Coefficient of performance
Cooling capacity

1. Introduction
Low temperature heat energy is the energy generated by heat
with temperature between 80 and 150 °C, which is easily available
from sources such as automobiles, industrial processes, geothermal
and solar energies [1–3]. An effective way of utilizing the low tem-
perature heat energy is to convert them into cooling by means of
either mechanical compressor-based cooling or non-mechanical
cooling systems. Although it is generally possible to run mechani-
cal compressor-based cooling systems by heat generated electric-
ity, this method requires additional energy input and suffers
from low overall efficiency and high initial cost. Non-mechanical
cooling systems, on the other hand, rely on heat as their prime en-
ergy without fossil fuel consumption, are therefore good candi-
dates for produce cooling economically [4,5].
Among several technologies currently available, ejector cooling
system (ECS) utilizing low temperature heat energy to generate
cooling possesses several advantages over vapor compression
refrigeration systems such as no moving parts, little maintenance,
long lifespan, and high reliability [6–12]. Although the coefficient
of performance (COP) is relatively low, ECS has attracted intensive
research interests, owing to the high cost of energy and the de-
crease of energy resources. One of the hot topics in the field of re-
search is the influence of geometry parameters on the ejector
system performance such as: area ratio between throat section
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +65 6790 6862; fax: +65 6793 3318.
E-mail address: ewjcai@ntu.edu.sg (C. Wenjian).
and the primary nozzle throat [13–15,17–20] nozzle exit position
to constant area section inlet (NXP) [13,15,21] length of constant
area mixing section [13,22] and converging angle of constant pres-
sure mixing chamber [21]. These studies showed that area ratio is
the most sensitive parameter on the ejector system performance.
By using water (R718) as working fluid and a water-cooled con-
denser, Varga et al. [13] analyzed area ratio on the ejector perfor-
mance with CFD simulation. The authors indicated that ejectors
with area ratios varying from 13.5 to 26.4 can achieve entrainment
ratios from 0.18 to 0.38. They have also pointed out that the ejector
has different optimal area ratio for different operating conditions,
for example, the optimal area ratio is 22 with entrainment ratio
of 0.31 if a condenser temperature is at 29 °C, but the optimal area
ratio becomes 14 with entrainment ratio of 0.18 at the 33 °C con-
denser temperature while ejector area ratio of 22 will fail to oper-
ate at such operating condition. Ma et al. [14] also investigated an
ejector system using water as refrigerant and with a water-cooled
condenser by experimental studies where the primary nozzle of
the ejector is controlled by a spindle such that area ratio can be
varied. The experimental results showed that there exists an opti-
mum entrainment ratio but the variable area ratios are from 3.38
to around 15 which are less than those of Varga’s ejector system
at almost same designed working conditions. Furthermore, the
ranges of entrainment ratios which are also less than those of for-
mer one vary from 0.31 to 0.34 when the spindle positions vary
from 0 mm to 30 mm.
Even though water is the most environmental friendly working
fluid for ECS, it requires higher temperature heat sources for the

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2011.09.002
 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246
system to work properly. To find solutions for low grade heat en-
ergy sources, low boiling temperature working fluids such as
R141b and R123 have drawn some research attentions. With
refrigerant R141b, designed for air-conditioning working condi-
tions (evaporating temperatures from 8 °C to 12 °C) as well as
water-cooled condenser, Huang et al. [23,24] studied the perfor-
mance of 11 ejectors which with area ratios from 6.4 to 10.6 with
a one-dimensional ejector model, it was revealed that the ejectors
with area ratios higher than 8.3 have least loss coefficient. Yacipi
[15] studied the performance of R123, still with air-conditioning
working conditions, by using six configurations of ejector over a
range of the ejector area ratio from 6.5 to 11.5. It concluded that
the optimum area ratio nearly linearly increases with the generator
temperature in the ranges from 83 °C to 103 °C.
The ejector refrigeration systems using refrigerants R718,
R141b and R123, however, usually employ water-cooled condens-
ers due to their lower condensation pressures. The use of air-
cooled condenser unable the vapor refrigerant fully condense to li-
quid refrigerant due to the higher on-way resistance of air-cooled
condenser compared to water-cooled condenser. Consequently,
the ejector performance will drop dramatically because the
increased pressure drop between the back pressure and the
secondary flow pressure due to the higher on-way resistance.
Among comparable refrigerants for ejector systems, such as
R134a, R245fa and R365mfc [2,8,16], R134a has several advanta-
ges: (1) its Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) is 0; and (2) its
condensation pressure is much higher (770 kPa) than those of
R245fa (177.8 kPa) and R365mfc (69.2 kPa). However, it is very dif-
ficult to build the testing system, as a suitable liquid circulating
pump with low flow rate and high boost pressures is hard to find
on the market due to its higher generating pressure requirement.
Among the very few reports available in the literature, Selvaraju
and Mani [17] developed an ejector refrigeration system with
water-cooled condenser to study the system performance using
six ejectors with different geometrical dimensions but mainly
T7
Ejector
P7
V7
V6
Generator
Hot
water
bath
T6
P6
Room
Water pump R.H. 1 T8
P4 T4
F2 R.H.2 T9
F
Electric
Liquid pump
V3 Evaporator
Temperature sensor
Pressure transmitter
F
Flowmeter
Fig. 1. Schematic view of experimental setup.
241
focus on the ejector area ratios (from 4 to 10). The testing results
showed that the ejectors with area ratios between 7 and 8 have
good performances. However, the water-cooled condenser pro-
vides a low back pressure working condition, and the results ob-
tained in such working condition may not be applicable to higher
back pressures when air-cooled condenser is used.
In this paper, the works on design and testing of an ejector
refrigeration system using environmentally friendly refrigerant
R134a and air-cooled condenser is described. First, the ejector
key geometry parameters for cooling capacity of 2 kW and higher
back pressures are designed using one-dimensional analysis meth-
od. Second, replaceable nozzles with varying ejector area ratios
from 2.74 to 5.37 are used to find for the optimum area ratios.
Third, an experimental ejector system is assembled to determine
the optimum ejector area ratio and the system performance under
various operating conditions. Through large amount of experi-
ments, the best system performance can be achieved for the area
ratios from 3.69 to 4.76.
2. Ejector geometries
A schematic view of an experimental setup for ejector based
refrigeration system is shown as in Fig. 1. The working process of
the system is described as below:
High pressure superheated R134a vapor generated in the Gen-
erator passes through a (converging/diverging) nozzle, drawing
low pressure R134a vapor into the ejector from the Evaporator.
The two streams mix in the Ejector and leave it after a recovery
of pressure in the diffuser part of the Ejector. Then, heat is rejected
from the fluid to the surroundings, resulting in condensate at the
exit of the Condenser. The condensed R134a is divided into two
streams: one enters the Evaporator after a pressure reduction in
the Electronic expansion valve and the other enters the Generator
after a pressure rise in the Liquid pump to start another cycle.
V8 P1
T1 Condenser
P2 T2
Liquid indicator
V1
Liquid
receiver
Liquid indicator
Evaporator Dryer-filter
T5
V5
P5 V2
EEV
F1
V4 F
P3
T3
Electronic expansion vale
Control valve
Humidity transmitter
242 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246

Primary nozzle Suction chamber Mixing chamber Diffuser

2.2

3.8

4.8
Primary fluid Outflow

30 7

8 20 70

Secondary fluid

Fig. 2. Key geometry parameters of the initial ejector.

Fig. 3. Ejector assembly: (a) whole ejector; (b) replaceable nozzle; (c) main body.

The key geometry parameters of the experimental ejector are
initially calculated by 1-D constant pressure flow model with the
following assumptions:
 The primary and secondary fluids supplied to the ejector are at
zero velocity.
 The two fluids begin to mix with a uniform pressure at the mix-
ing section.
 Both the primary and the secondary flows are ideal gas inside
adiabatic ejector walls.
 Pressure and temperature of both the primary and the second-
ary flows are uniformly distributed inside the ejector.
 The isentropic relations hold in calculating friction losses.
Based on these assumptions, the conservation equations for
mass, momentum and energy are successively applied to a control
volume in the primary nozzle; the suction chamber; the mixing
chamber as well as the diffuser. The calculation of R134a thermo-
dynamics properties is supplemented by the use of NIST database
and subroutines (NIST) [25]. For a rated cooling capacity of 2 kW
and specific designed air-conditioning working conditions: evapo-
rating pressure of 4.14 bar (evaporating temperature 10 °C), critical
back pressure of 8.4 bar (air-cooled condenser temperature 33 °C)
and generating pressure of 23.5 bar (generating temperature
75 °C), the ejector geometry parameters are obtained as:
 nozzle diameter Dt = 2.2 mm;
 nozzle exit diameter D1 = 3.8 mm;
 constant area section diameter Dm = 4.8 mm;
 nozzle exit position to constant area section inlet NXP = 8 mm;
 constant area section length Lm = 20 mm;
 diffuser length Ld = 70 mm;
 nozzle convergent section length Lc,n = 20 mm;
 nozzle divergent section length Ld,n = 7 mm.
Other geometry parameters such as the converging angle of
constant pressure mixing section are obtained by the approaches
given in ASHRAE [26] and Zhu et al. [27]. The 1-dimentional
 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246 243

Table 1 The generator includes a vapor collection tank, a temperature-

Six area ratios varying from 2.74 to 5.37.
controlled hot water bath and a tubular heat exchanger which is
Dm Dt, D1 immersed in the vapor collection tank. The hot water bath is
(mm) heated by a variable electric heater with maximum power output
Dt = 2.2 (mm), Dt = 2.5 (mm), Dt = 2.9 (mm),
D1 = 3.8 (mm) D1 = 4.1 (mm) D1 = 4.5 (mm) of 8 kW. The temperature of the hot water is controlled within
5.1 EJ1 (cA = 5.37) EJ3 (cA = 4.16) EJ5 (cA = 3.09) ±0.5 °C by a PID type temperature controller in the monitoring
4.8 EJ2 (cA = 4.76) EJ5 (cA = 3.69) EJ6 (cA = 2.74) and control system. The air-cooled condenser has a maximum con-
densing load of 10 kW, and its air flow inlet comes from a temper-
ature-controlled wind tunnel. To prevent cavitations, the liquid
pump is installed at the lowest position with a large liquid receiver
tank. An air-cooled evaporator is placed in the cycle to demon-
strate the cooling effect. In addition, an electric evaporator with
maximum power output of 3 kW and adjustable cooling load is
also installed to accurately measure the system COP. The EEV is
driven by a step motor which is also controlled by a PID type con-
troller. The algorithms in the monitoring and control are developed
on Labview 8.6 of the National Instruments.
The function of the monitoring and control system is to mea-
sure the primary flow rate, the secondary flow rate, temperatures,
relative humidity and pressures. Several types of sensors are
installed:

 Pressure transmitters with error of 0.5% of full scales.

 Temperature sensors of PT1000 platinum resistance with error
of ±0.3 °C.
 Humidity sensors of with error of ±2% R.H.
 Mass flow rate meters are calibrated with error of ±1.6%.

4. Determination of optimum ejector area ratio

Based on measurements of ejector primary fluid and secondary

fluid mass flow rates, the ejector entrainment ratio which is used
to determine optimum ejector area ratio can be calculated by

_ s =m
k¼m _p ð1Þ

Fig. 4. Photograph of ejector refrigeration system. where k is the entrainment ratio of the ejector, m_ s is the mass flow
rate of the secondary fluid, m _ p is the mass flow rate of the primary
fluid.
ejector geometry is shown as in Fig. 2, which gives the area ratio
As the ejector refrigeration system is for air-conditioning appli-
of 4.76.
cations, the evaporating temperature should not be too high for
Since the area ratio is a very important parameter for the ejector
cooling purpose even though higher evaporating temperature
performance, the ejector is designed with replaceable nozzles for
resulting higher cooling capacity. On the other hand, the entrain-
convenience in investigation. By connecting a nozzle to the main
ment ratio will be very low or even fail to work if the evaporating
bodies with different dimensions, different area ratios can be ob-
temperature is too low. During the tests, therefore, we vary the
tained as shown in Fig. 3. To prevent against leakage of refrigerant,
evaporating temperatures among 8 °C, 10 °C and 12 °C which cor-
an O-ring is placed between the contact surfaces when the two
responding to the secondary flow pressures at 3.88 bar, 4.14 bar
parts are matched with screws.
and 4.43 bar, respectively. In addition, we adopt the typical operat-
Combining three Dt of 2.2 mm, 2.5 mm and 2.8 mm and two Dm
ing conditions for the primary flow pressures which varying from
of 4.8 mm and 5.1 mm, six ejectors with different area ratios can be
resulted for our studies which are listed as in Table 1.

3. Experimental setup

A photograph of experimental setup is shown as in Fig. 4, the

whole system consists of following components:

 a generator;
 an ejector;
 an air-cooled condenser;
 a liquid receiver;
 a liquid circulating pump;
 an electronic expansion valve (EEV);
 an air-cooled evaporator;
 an electric evaporator;
 a monitoring and control system. Fig. 5. Variation of entrainment ratio with area ratio (Pg = 22 bar, Pc = 7.9 bar).
244 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246

22 bar to 25 bar, corresponding to the generating temperatures

varying from 72 °C to 78 °C [14,17,27], while fixing the condenser
temperature at 31 °C which corresponding to a back pressure of
7.9 bar.
Fig. 5 shows the testing results for the six ejector area ratios
(from 2.74 to 5.37) under the different secondary flow pressures
(4.43 bar, 4.14 bar and 3.88 bar) while fixing the primary flow
pressure at 22 bar.
It is observed that when the secondary flow pressure is at
4.43 bar, the entrainment ratio increases initially and peaks at
the ejector area ratio of 3.69 with the maximum entrainment ratio
of 0.26. Continue to increase the area ratio, the entrainment ratio
starts to decrease until to become negative when the area ratio is
at 5.37. This is because the ejector with higher area ratio is working
at sub-critical mode for the given primary flow and secondary flow Fig. 7. Variation of entrainment ratio with area ratio (Pg = 23.5, 25 bar, Pc = 7.9 bar).
pressures. Consequently, the performance of ejector with higher
area ratio drops dramatically as illustrated in Fig. 6. Ejectors
encounter higher losses when the area ratio is lower than that of
critical mode and hence the entrainment ratio is comparatively
lower at the same operating conditions.
Reducing the secondary flow pressure to 4.14 bar, the maxi-
mum entrainment ratio also occurs at the area ratio of 3.69 but
the value reduced to 0.213. At this secondary flow pressure, how-
ever, the entrainment ratio becomes zero or negative when the
area ratio is either reduced to 2.74 or increased to 4.76. Further re-
duce the secondary flow pressure to 3.88 bar, the maximum
entrainment ratio still happens at the same area ratio but it is re-
duced to 0.15. All the entrainment ratios become zero or negative
when the area ratios are not of 3.69 and 4.16.
Another phenomenon can be observed from Fig. 5 is that the
ranges of effective area ratios which can create entrainment de-
crease along with the decreased secondary flow pressure. For
Fig. 8. Variation of entrainment ratio with primary flow pressure (cA = 3.69,
example, the area ratios from 3.09 to 4.16 can entrain secondary
Pc = 7.9 bar).
flow when the secondary flow pressure is at 4.14 bar, while the
area ratios between 3.69 and 4.16 can create entrainment when
the secondary flow pressure is at 3.88 bar. pressure at 7.9 bar and the primary flow pressures varying from
Increase the primary flow pressure to 23.5 bar and 25 bar, while 22 bar to 25 bar:
keep the back pressure same as before at 7.9 bar, the testing results cA;optimum ¼ 0:3567pg  4:735 ð2Þ
for the six area ratios under the three secondary flow pressures are
shown as in Fig. 7. where cA;optimum is optimum area ratio.
It can be seen that entrainment ratios follow the same pattern
as in the case of Pg = 22 bar but there is a noticeable difference: 5. Determination of optimum operating conditions
The optimum area ratio is found at 3.69 for the primary flow pres-
sure of 22 bar while the optimum ejector area ratios are at 4.16 and Based on the optimum ejector area ratios (3.69, 4.16 and 4.76)
4.76 for the primary flow pressures of 23.5 bar and 25 bar, under resulted from entrainment ratio, the optimum operating condi-
the three secondary flow pressures (4.43 bar, 4.14 bar and tions, namely, optimum primary flow pressures and critical back
3.88 bar), respectively. pressures will be investigated in this section. For this purpose,
Using empirical approach, a relation between the optimum area the primary flow and the back pressures are varied from 17.5 bar
ratios and the primary flow pressures for the secondary flow pres- to 26.5 bar and from 7.5 bar to 8.7 bar, respectively.
sures ranging from 3.88 bar to 4.43 bar can be obtained with back The first testing is conducted on seven primary flow pressures
(from 17.5 bar to 26.5 bar) under the different secondary flow
pressures (4.43 bar, 4.14 bar and 3.88 bar), while fixing the back
Back-flow pressure at 7.9 bar. Fig. 8 shows the testing results for the ejector
Sub-critical
Critical mode mode area ratio of 3.69.
mode
It is observed that, for area ratio of 3.69, the entrainment ratios
increase initially and peak at the primary flow pressure of 20.5 bar
for all three secondary flow pressures, after that they decrease as
0.26 the primary flow pressure continues to increase from 20.5 bar to
0.22 26.5 bar. The reasons for the variation of entrainment ratio with
A =4.16 primary flow pressures can be analyzed as below:
A =3.69
 When the primary flow pressure is low, the pressure differential
Pc (bar)
7.9 between primary flow pressure and back pressure is relatively
small; the ejector is working at the sub-critical region, such that
the secondary flow is entrained proportionally and very sensi-
Fig. 6. Area ratio and back pressure effect to the ejector working modes. tive to the primary flow pressure.
 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246 245

6. Determination of system performances

Based on measurements of power inputs to electric evaporator

and gas generator, the cooling capacity of the ejector system with-
out respect to the heat loss and the system COP can be calculated
by

Qe ¼ We ð3Þ

and

COP ¼ W e =W g ð4Þ

respectively, where Qe is the cooling capacity of the electric evapo-

rator, We is the input power to electric evaporator, and Wg is the in-
put power to gas generator.
Fig. 9. Variation of entrainment ratio with primary flow pressure (cA = 4.16, 4.76, The COP tests are conducted under the typical primary flow
Pc = 7.9 bar). pressures at 22 bar, 23.5 bar and 25 bar for the six area ratios with
the back pressure is fixed at 7.9 bar and the secondary flow pres-
sure is fixed at 4.43 bar. The COP testing results are shown in
Fig. 11.
 An optimum entrainment ratio occurs when working conditions
It is observed that, for the primary flow pressure at 22 bar, COP
reach the critical mode. In such mode, the secondary flow rate
increases initially and peaks at the ejector area ratio of 3.69 with
keeps constant even the primary flow rate increases, causing
the maximum COP of 0.223. Continue to increase area ratio, COP
the entrainment ratio decreases.
starts to decrease until to almost zero when the area ratio is at
4.76. Increase the primary flow pressures to 23.5 bar and 25 bar,
For area ratios of 4.16 and 4.76, the entrainment ratios follow
the COP has the same pattern as in the case of primary flow pres-
the same pattern as in the case of area ratio at 3.69 as shown in
sure at 22 bar, but the area ratios with maximum COP increase up
Fig. 9 for given secondary flow pressures. Nevertheless, the opti-
to 4.16 and 4.76, respectively. Therefore, the tests of COP are in line
mum primary flow pressures with maximum entrainment ratios
with the testing results of entrainment ratio.
are found to increase along with area ratios in the ranges from
The cooling capacity tests are conducted under the same oper-
3.69 to 4.76.
ating conditions of the COP tests. The cooling capacity testing re-
The second testing is to find the effect of critical back pressure
sults are illustrated in Fig. 12.
to the entrainment ratio with regard to the ejectors with optimum
The testing reveals that, the optimum area ratios with highest
area ratios (3.69, 4.16 and 4.76) and corresponding optimum pri-
system performances (maximum cooling capacities and COPs)
mary flow pressures (20.5 bar, 23.5 bar and 25 bar). The back pres-
are in line with the testing results of entrainment ratio. However,
sures are varied from 7.5 bar to 8.9 bar under the three secondary
it can be seen that the cooling capacities are related to both area
flow pressures (4.43 bar, 4.14 bar and 3.88 bar). The results are
ratios and nozzle diameters. Since the generating capacities of lar-
shown as in Fig. 10, which indicates:
ger nozzle diameters are higher than that of smaller ones, the cool-
ing capacities with larger nozzle diameters may be much higher
 The critical back pressures occur between 8.3 bar and 8.5 bar for
than that of smaller nozzle diameters even though COPs (area ra-
cA ¼ 3:69, and drop to around 8.1 bar for cA ¼ 4:16, even drop to
tios) are same.
between 7.7 bar and 7.9 bar for cA ¼ 4:76.
Furthermore, to expose a clear relationship between cooling
 The entrainment ratios keep constant when the back pressures
capacities and the primary flow pressures, we fix the back pressure
are lower than critical back pressure, but they drop dramati-
at 7.9 bar and the secondary flow pressure at 4.43 bar while vary
cally with an increased back pressure when it is beyond the
the primary flow pressures. The cooling capacities and COPs vary-
critical back pressure. Therefore, for higher critical back pres-
ing with the primary flow pressures under area ratios of 3.69, 4.16
sure, a lower area ratio is desired to achieve optimal ejector
and 4.76 are shown as in Fig. 13.
performance.
It is found that cooling capacities increase firstly and then keep
constant (maximum cooling capacity) after certain primary flow

Fig. 10. Variation of entrainment ratio with back pressure. Fig. 11. Variation of COP with area ratio (Pe = 4.43 bar, Pc = 7.9 bar).
246 Y. Jia, C. Wenjian / Energy Conversion and Management 53 (2012) 240–246
Fig. 12. Variation of cooling capacity with area ratio (Pe = 4.43 bar, Pc = 7.9 bar).
Fig. 13. Variation of cooling capacity and COP with primary flow pressure
(Pe = 4.43 bar, Pc = 7.9 bar).
pressures for given all area ratios, while the COPs increase initially
and then decrease with an increase of primary flow pressures. This
can also be explained by Fig. 6, with an increase of the primary
flow pressure to the critical mode, the secondary flow rate in-
creases and then keeps constant, so do the cooling capacity and
COP.
7. Conclusions
According to the ejector initial area ratio designed by 1D analy-
sis method for high critical back pressures (air-cooled condenser),
six ejector area ratios are designed by replaceable nozzles for con-
venience in investigation to study the optimum area ratios and
operating conditions with experimental setup. The primary find-
ings are:
 For given typical operating conditions, the optimum area ratios
are found at 3.69, 4.16 and 4.76 for the primary flow pressures
of 20.5 bar, 23.5 bar and 25 bar, respectively. It appears that the
optimum area ratios increase almost linearly with an increase
of the primary flow pressures, which are equal to and smaller
than the initial calculation of 4.76.
 The ranges of effective area ratios which can create entrainment
ratio decrease along with a decreased secondary flow pressure.
 Optimum primary flow pressures increase along with area
ratios, critical back pressures decrease along with area ratios.
 For given operating conditions, the optimum area ratios can
also provide maximum cooling capacities and COPs.
 For given operating conditions, the cooling capacities are
related to area ratios as well as nozzle diameters while COPs
depend only on area ratios.
Acknowledgments
The work was funded by National Research Foundation of
Singapore: NRF2008EWT-CERP002-010. The other project partners
are also acknowledged.
References
[1] Zhu YH, Cai WJ, Wen CY, Li YZ. Shock circle model for ejector performance
evaluation. Energy Convers Manage 2007;48:2533–41.
[2] Huang BJ, Wu JH, Hsu HY, Wang JH. Development of hybrid solar-assisted
cooling/heating system. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:1643–50.
[3] Sun DW. Comparative study of the performance of an ejector refrigeration
cycle operating with various refrigerants. Energy Convers Manage
1999;40:873–84.
[4] Sun DW. Solar powered combined ejector-vapour compression cycle for air
conditioning and refrigeration. Energy Convers Manage 1997;38:479–91.
[5] Alexis GK. Estimation of ejector’s main cross sections in steam-ejector
refrigeration system. Appl Therm Eng 2004;24:2657–63.
[6] Yu JL, Li YZ. A theoretical study of a novel regenerative ejector refrigeration
cycle. Int J Refrig 2007;30:464–70.
[7] Nguyen VM, Riffat SB, Doherty PS. Development of a solar-powered passive
ejector cooling system. Appl Therm Eng 2001;21:157–68.
[8] Wang JH, Wu JH, Hu SS, Huang BJ. Performance of ejector cooling system with
thermal pumping effect using R141b and R365mfc. Appl Therm Eng
2009;29:1904–12.
[9] Bartosiewicz Y, Aidoun Z, Mercadier Y. Numerical assessment of ejector
operation for refrigeration applications based on CFD. Appl Therm Eng
2006;26:604–12.
[10] Munday JT, Bagster DF. A new ejector theory applied to steam jet refrigeration.
Ind Eng Chem Process Des Dev 1977;16:442–9.
[11] Keenan JH, Newman EP. A simple air ejector. J Appl Mech Trans ASME
1942;64:A75–81.
[12] Keenan JH, Neumann EP, Lustwerk F. An investigation of ejector design by
analysis and experiment. J Appl Mech Trans ASME 1950;72:299–309.
[13] Varga S, Oliveira AC, Diaconu B. Influence of geometrical factors on steam
ejector performance – A numerical assessment. Int J Refrig 2009;32:1694–701.
[14] Ma XL, Zhang W, Omer SA, Riffat SB. Experimental investigation of a novel
steam ejector refrigerator suitable for solar energy applications. Appl Therm
Eng 2010;30:1320–5.
[15] Yapici R. Experimental determination of the optimum performance of ejector
refrigeration system depending on ejector area ratio. Int J Refrig
2008;31:1183–9.
[16] Eames IW, Ablwaifa AE, Petrenko V. Results of an experimental study of an
advanced jet-pump refrigerator operating with R245fa. Appl Therm Eng
2007;27:2833–40.
[17] Selvaraju A, Mani A. Experimental investigation on R134a vapour ejector
refrigeration system. Int J Refrig 2006;29:1160–6.
[18] Dennis M, Garzoli K. Use of variable geometry ejector with cold store to
achieve high solar fraction for solar cooling. Int J Refrig 2010;XXX:1–7.
[19] Sun DW. Variable geometry ejectors and their applications. Energy
1996;21:919–29.
[20] Chunnanond K, Aphornratana S. An experimental investigation of a steam
ejector refrigerator: the analysis of the pressure profile along the ejector. Appl
Therm Eng 2004;27:311–22.
[21] Zhu YH, Cai WJ, Wen CY, Li YZ. Numerical investigation of geometry
parameters for design of high performance ejectors. Appl Therm Eng
2009;29:898–905.
[22] Nakagawa M, Marasigan AR, Matsukawa T, Kurashina A. Experimental
investigation on the effect of mixing length on the performance of two-
phase ejector for CO2 refrigeration cycle with and without heat exchanger. Int J
Refrig 2010;XXX:1–10.
[23] Huang BJ, Chang JM, Wang CP, Petrenko VA. A 1D analysis of ejector
performance. Int J Refrig 1999;22:354–64.
[24] Huang BJ, Chang JM. Empirical correlation for ejector design. Int J Refrig
1999;22:379–88.
[25] NIST Chemistry WebBook. NIST standard reference database number 69; June
2005 hhttp://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/i.
[26] ASHRAE. Steam–jet refrigeration equipment. vol. 13. Equipment Handbook;
1979. p. 13.1–6.
[27] Zhu YH, Cai WJ, Wen CY, Li YZ. Fuel ejector design and simulation model for
anodic recirculation SOFC system. J Power Sources 2007;173:437–49.