Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Analysis on performance characteristics of ejector with variable

area-ratio for multi-evaporator refrigeration system based on
experimental data
Cui Li a, b, Yanzhong Li a, *, Wenjian Cai b, Yu Hu b, Haoran Chen b, Jia Yan b
a
b

School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xian Jiaotong University, Xian 710049, China
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798, Singapore

h i g h l i g h t s

Experiment and analysis are performed on a variable area-ratio ejector used in MERS.

ER increases linearly with pS, but decreases monotonously with pP in a way of y axb.

PRR is a quadratic function of pS, but a piecewise-linear function of pP.

Critical AR is proposed to indicate the pressure recovery and energy saving status.

Critical AR can be predicted by a linear function of pP or a power function of pS.

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 17 December 2013
Accepted 13 April 2014
Available online 24 April 2014

This paper presents a study on experiment and analysis of variable area-ratio ejector used in a multievaporator refrigeration system (MERS). The experimental rig and method are described, and the
entrainment and pressure recovery performances of the variable ejector are measured at various operating and geometric conditions. The critical area ratio is proposed as an indicator of pressure recovery
status; area ratios smaller than the critical ones are required to make sure that the system operates at
energy saving mode. The investigation results indicate that the entrainment ratio, pressure recovery ratio
and critical area ratio are strongly affected by the primary pressure and secondary pressure. Greater
entrainment ratio can be obtained by increasing the secondary pressure or decreasing primary pressure.
The opposite trends are found for pressure recovery ratio. Moreover, the critical area ratio varies greatly
with the operation condition, and can be predicted by a linear tting function of primary pressure or a
power function in terms of secondary pressure.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Variable ejector
Multi-evaporator refrigeration system
Pressure recovery
Entrainment ratio
Critical area ratio
Experiment

1. Introduction
As a device without moving parts, ejector has the advantage of
being quiet, reliable, low-cost, easy to maintain and operate, etc.
[1]. It can be powered by low grade heat energy or renewable energy [2e4], and has found many applications in engineering, such
as refrigeration, aerospace, chemical and biochemical process industries [5,6]. Depending on its area of application, ejector could be
designed with the following intentions: (a) To get large entrainment of the secondary uid, (b) To produce intense mixing between
the primary and secondary uids, or (c) To pump uids from a
region of low pressure to a region of high pressure [7].
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 86 29 82668738; fax: 86 29 82668725.
E-mail addresses: yzli-epe@mail.xjtu.edu.cn, yzli-epe@163.com (Y. Li).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.04.031
1359-4311/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Downloaded from http://www.elearnica.ir

The application of ejector in refrigeration has a long-established

history. The rst ejector refrigeration system was introduced by
Maurice Leblanc in 1910 [8], and this system experienced a wave of
popularity during the early 1930s for air conditioning of large
buildings [9]. Although investigation on ejector refrigeration has
been almost at standstill after 1950s as most effort has been
concentrated on vapor-compression refrigeration systems, there
has been a strong resurgence recently in research and development
of ejector due to the growing concern towards environment, energy
utilization and sustainable development [10e20].
In ejector refrigeration systems, ejector plays an important role
as the incentive for its application is either replacing the mechanical compressor or optimizing the refrigeration cycle (for example,
the combined ejector-absorption refrigeration system). And the
ejector performance of primary interest is large entrainment of

126

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

secondary uid. Since the entrainment ratio of ejector using water

is very low, various refrigerants have been used as working uid for
ejector refrigeration. The earliest reported research on ejector
refrigeration using a refrigerant other than water was performed in
the 1950s [21,22]. After that, many pure uids as well as azeotropic
or non-azeotropic mixtures were used as candidate uids for
ejector refrigerators. For example, halocarbon compound refrigerants such as R11, R12, R13, R113, R114, R123, R133a, R134a,
R141b, R142b, R152a, R21, R22, R245ca, R245fa, and RC318 were all
used and tested. Among these refrigerants, CFC R12, HCFC R142b,
HFC R134a and R152a are reported to give high entrainment ratios
and comparative ejector performance [21]. Conguration optimization is another effective way to enhance the entrainment performance of ejector. In fact, a considerable portion of the published
literature on ejectors was directed toward the design and optimization of ejector [7,19,20,23e33]. And CFD technique is considered
as a reliable tool to perform such research if sufciently validated.
Up to present, the effects of such geometry parameters as area ratio,
mixing tube length and primary nozzle position on ejector
entrainment performance have been all studied. The results indicate that the optimal value of these geometry parameters that
provides maximum entrainment rate varies greatly with the
operation conditions, and it is difcult to nd a universal value that
meets all the conditions [33].
Apart from getting large entrainment of the low-pressure secondary uid, ejector used in refrigeration systems is expected to
contribute to reducing power consumption by its pressure recovery
effect. Typical applications include multi-evaporator refrigeration
system [34,35], household refrigerators [36,37], CO2 heat pump
[38e42], etc.
The multi-evaporator refrigeration system (MERS) consists of
more than one evaporator that operates at different pressure and
temperature levels, but one condenser and a single compressor
[34,43]. It is widely used in circumstances that involve two or three
evaporating temperatures. For example, in supermarket or other
food processing, transportation and storage applications, three
evaporating temperatures, namely 7  C, e5  C and e30  C, are
usually required for space cooling, storage of perishable or temperature sensitive food, and freezing, etc [44e46].
The application of ejector for two-evaporating temperature
refrigeration system dates back to early 1990s for domestic refrigerators [37,47e49]. And an energy-efcient three-evaporator
refrigeration system with two ejectors was also proposed recently
by Kairouani L. et al. [34]. In these systems, ejector is used to
maintain the required pressure differences between the hightemperature and low-temperature evaporators and more importantly, to lower the power consumption by its pressure recovery
effect. The exergy analysis results show that the system COP can be
improved by about 10% and 20% for two-temperature ejector-based
MERS and three-temperature ejector-based MERS, respectively, as
compared to the conventional MERSs. The main drawback of
ejector-based multi-evaporator refrigeration system is that it can
only work well at the on-design condition which is, however,
difcult to guarantee in actual operation due to ambient environmental variations. Therefore, a variable ejector is highly needed to
meet the variable cooling load conditions. To the best of the authors knowledge, information on variable ejector as a pressure
recovery device in a refrigeration cycle is still limited. Preliminary
results of an adjustable ejector applied in multi-evaporator refrigeration system can be found in the CFD study of Lin et al. They
reported that pressure recovery ratio is sensitive to the varying of
cooling loads [50].
However, little or no information is available with respect to the
optimal ejector geometry for energy saving running of multievaporator refrigeration system. In the present work, the

entrainment and pressure recovery performances of the variable

area-ratio ejector applied in MERS are rst studied in detail. The
concept of critical area ratio is then proposed as an indicator of
pressure recovery status, and the main concern of this study is to
obtain the relationship between the critical area ratio and the
operating pressures. These works are expected to contribute to the
energy savings potential of MERS in supermarket or other situations where MERSs are required, and can be easily extended to
other ejector refrigeration systems.

2. Variable ejector and the relevant experimental setup

The present experimental study is performed on the basis of an
ejector with variable area ratios. As presented in Fig. 1, this variable
ejector consists of ve parts: primary nozzle, suction chamber,
mixing chamber, diffuser, and a spindle. The primary nozzle, which
is illustrated in detail, has an inlet diameter (d1) of 15 mm, a throat
diameter (dt) of 4 mm and an exit diameter (d2) of 6 mm. It is placed
upstream of the constant-area section of mixing chamber, which
has a length (Lm) of 40 mm and a diameter (Dm) of 10 mm, and the
distance between the nozzle exit and the start of constant-area
mixing section (NXP) is 15 mm. Other geometric data are given in
Table 1. The spindle is driven by a motor. With its movement, the
effective ow area of primary nozzle changes accordingly. By this
means, the primary ow rate of ejector can be adjusted, which in
turn leads to the variation of secondary ow rate. It should be noted
that the ability of spindle to adjust the primary ow rate has
already been proved by the analysis of Varga S. et al. performed on a
variable area ratio steam ejector [51].
The application of variable ejector in a multi-evaporator
refrigeration system is expected to (a) achieve the required allocation of cooling capacity between the evaporators by adjusting the
entrainment of secondary uid, and (b) reduce power consumption
by its pressure recovery effect. The former is represented by the
entrainment ratio of ejector, which is dened as

ER

mS
mP

(1)

where mP is the primary mass ow rate, and mS is the secondary

mass ow rate. And the latter is evaluated by the pressure recovery
ratio (PRR), which is dened as:

PRR

pb  pS
pS

(2)

where pb is the outlet pressure of ejector and pS is the secondary

pressure. For the compressor, higher PRR implies a reduction in its
compression ratio and an increase in its efciency. Therefore, the
higher PRR the ejector provides, the less power the system
consumes.
The ejector based multi-evaporator refrigeration system is
schematically shown in Fig. 2. Besides the variable ejector, the main
elements of this test facility include an inverter compressor, an aircooled condenser, two evaporators (Evaporator 1 and Evaporator
2), and two electronic expansion valves (indicated by EEV1 and
EEV2, respectively). The working cycle of the present multievaporator refrigeration system consists of two parts: the refrigeration process and the subsequent pressure recovery process. The
former is accomplished by continuously compressing (State 1e2),
condensing (State 2e3), throttling (State 3e4, 3e6), and evaporating (State 4e5, 6e7) the refrigerant, while the latter is
happening within the variable ejector (State 5,7e9). Since CFCs and
HCFCs are no longer usable or will be phased out soon due to their
ozone depletion potential (ODP) or high global warming potential

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

Primary Flow

Suction Chamber

127

Constant-pressure Mixing
Chamber
Diffuser
Constant-area Mixing
Chamber

Motor

Mixed Flow

N1

Spindle

N2
S1

Primary Nozzle

S2
d

Secondary Flow

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the variable ejector and primary nozzle.

(GWP) [52], this experimental study is carried out with R134a as

the working refrigerant. Apart from its good entrainment performance and environmentally-friendly properties, R134a has a
reasonable cost and is safe for normal handling due to its non-toxic,
non-ammable and non-corrosive properties.
Evaporator 1 and Evaporator 2 operate at different pressure and
temperature levels, and use ethylene glycol solution with different
concentrations as heat transfer liquids. The ethylene glycol solution
in Evaporator 1 (the high-temperature evaporator) has a concentration of 20% and a freezing temperature of 8  C. It can meet the
temperature requirements for both air conditioning and fresh
storage. Evaporator 2 (the low-temperature evaporator) is aimed at
storage of dairy and frozen products, the temperature of which
generally starts at 0  C to as low as 30  C. Therefore the ethylene
glycol solution used in this evaporator has a concentration of 50%
and a freezing temperature of 37  C. It should be noted that the
allocation of cooling capacity between the two evaporators is
directly linked to the entrainment ratio of ejector. That is, the
higher the entrainment ratio, the bigger cooling capacity the lowtemperature evaporator provides.
The BITZER 4cc-9.2 semi-hermetic type of inverter compressor
has a rated output power of 6.6 kW, while the condenser has a
maximum condensing load of 10 kW. The electronic expansion
valves are driven by PID controlled step motor. The area ratio of
variable ejector is regulated by motor-driven spindle.
All the pressures are measured using pressure transducers with
the accuracies of 0.5% of full scales. The temperatures are measured
by PT1000 platinum resistance with an error of 0.3  C. The motive
and the entrained ow rates are measured by two metal tube rotameters mounted upstream of the expansion valves, each with an
accuracy of 1.6%. The output signals from the measurement devices
are transferred to a PC through a data acquisition board, and then
monitored and controlled by a system developed in Labview 2010
of the National Instruments.
Table 1
Congurations and dimensions of the variable area-ratio ejector.
Geometry parameters

Value

Inlet diameter of primary nozzle, d1

Throat diameter of primary nozzle, dt
Exit diameter of primary nozzle, d2
Converging angle of constant-pressure mixing chamber, qm
Diameter of constant-area mixing chamber, Dm
Length of constant-area mixing chamber, Lm
Length of diffuser, Ld
Diverging angle of diffuser, qd
Primary nozzle position, NXP
Area ratio, AR

15 mm
4 mm
6 mm
25
10 mm
40 mm
80 mm
3.5
15 mm
6.25e8.33

For a view of the real experimental rig, see Fig. 3.

3. Entrainment performance and pressure recovery of
variable area-ratio ejector
In consideration of its role in the MERS, this study is rst concerned with the performances of variable ejector, that is, the effects
of ejector area ratio on the entrainment ratio and the pressure recovery ratio. In this section, the low-temperature evaporator
(Evaporator 2) of the system is applied as a freezer and thus the
corresponding secondary pressure of ejector is 110 kPa. The case
that the high-temperature evaporator (Evaporator 1) used for air
conditioning is compared with that for refrigerator. And the primary pressure conditions covered by this comparison are 380 kPa
and 240 kPa, respectively. The results are summarized in Table 2.
The variation of entrainment ratio ER with area ratio AR is given
in Fig. 4(a). As mentioned above, the area ratio of ejector can be
adjusted by moving the spindle. When the spindle moves forward
in the primary nozzle under the driving of motor, the effective ow
area of primary nozzle decreases, which leads to the rapid increase
of area ratio. It is found that the entrainment ratio ER increases
linearly with the area ratio AR for xed conditions. Take the air
conditioning case (the corresponding primary pressure is 380 kPa)
for example. As AR increases from 6.25 to 8.33, the entrainment
ratio ER increases from 0.6 to 1.56. Moreover, the entrainment ratio
ER measured for pP 380 kPa is lower when compared with that of
pP 240 kPa for all the area ratios investigated.
The pressure recovery performance of variable ejector is also
dependent upon the area ratio AR. As shown in Fig. 4(b) and (c), the
pressure recovery ratio PRR decreases gradually with the area ratio
AR, so does the power consumed by the whole system. And the
optimum value of area ratio is 6.25 in the present study from the
viewpoint of high pressure recovery performance. The relationship
between PRR and AR can be described by quadratic function. Still,
larger primary pressure gives higher values of PRR for constant area
ratios. As AR increases from 6.25 to 8.33, the pressure recovery ratio
under pP 380 kPa condition decreases from 31% to 15% (the power
consumption decreases from 2.63 kW to 2.40 kW), while for the
condition of pP 240 kPa, it decreases from 11% to about 2%.
4. Effects of operating pressures on the variable ejector
performances
The primary pressure pP and secondary pressure pS of the variable ejector are determined by the evaporating pressures of MERS,
and their effects on the entrainment and pressure recovery performances have been studied in detail in this section. According to

128

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

Ejector
8

P8
T8

P5

P7

T5

T7
5

1
Accumulator

P1

7
Testing
Chamber 1

T1
Testing
Chamber 2

T9

T10
P2

Evaporator 1

Evaporator 2

T2

T6
P6

T4
P4

Compressor

Condensor
3

F Flowmeter 1

P3 T3

F Flowmeter 2

Receiver
Liquid indicator

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of experimental apparatus.

the characteristics of the experimental results, performance correlations are obtained and can be used to estimate ejector performance at other working conditions.
The variation of entrainment ratio ER with the secondary
pressure pS under different area ratios is shown in Fig. 5(a). The
secondary pressure varies in the range of 90e240 kPa while the
primary pressure pP keeps constant at 380 kPa. It is obvious that the
entrainment ratio is very sensitive to the variation of secondary
pressure. For all the area ratios studied, the entrainment ratio ER
increases linearly with the secondary pressure pS, and this rapid
growth of ER depends to a large extent on the area ratio. This
conclusion can be demonstrated by the linearly correlating results
of entrainment ratio data with secondary pressure. The slope of
linear tting equation is 0.73 for AR 6.25 and 1.0 for AR 7.03. In
other words, larger area ratio gives higher values of ER for xed
secondary pressures. To be specic, in the case of AR 6.25, the
entrainment ratio increases from 0.2 to 1.1 when the secondary
pressure pS rises from 120 kPa to 250 kPa, while for AR 7.03, the
same increase in ER requires an increase of secondary pressure pS
from 90 kPa to 180 kPa.

Table 2
Entrainment and pressure recovery performances of the variable area-ratio ejector.
pP 240 kPa, pS 110 kPa

Fig. 3. Photograph of the experimental rig.

pP 380 kPa, pS 110 kPa

AR

ER

PRR (%)

AR

ER

PRR (%)

6.250
6.294
6.429
6.667
7.031
7.563
8.333

0.608
0.659
0.725
0.814
0.982
1.244
1.559

11.15
10.93
9.35
7.04
6.06
4.39
2.47

6.250
6.294
6.429
6.667
7.031
7.563
8.333

0.301
0.312
0.353
0.410
0.485
0.687
0.911

31.09
29.39
26.58
22.45
19.74
18.89
14.97

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

2.0

Primary pressure: 240 kPa

Primary pressure: 380 kPa
Entrainment ratio

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

The variation of pressure recovery ratio with secondary pressure

is quite different from that of entrainment ratio. Fig. 5(b) shows the
plot of pressure recovery ratio PRR versus secondary pressure pS
under different area ratios. It can be seen that PRR is strongly
inuenced by pS. As the secondary pressure pS increases, the
pressure recovery ratio PRR goes down gradually until it hits zero
and keeps unchanged. This monotonic decreasing property of PRR
versus pS can be described by quadratic functions, the coefcients
of which are also presented in Fig. 5(b). For convenience, the area
ratio corresponding to the rst zero PRR is referred to in the present
study as the critical area ratio. The decreasing rate of PRR for
AR 6.25 is close to that for AR 7.03. The difference between
these two curves is that under same secondary pressures, the larger
area ratio gives the lower pressure recovery ratio. In other words,
larger area ratio is required to achieve the same pressure recovery
effect for smaller pS. This suggests that the critical area ratio is
different when the secondary pressure varies, for example, the
critical area ratio is 7.03 for pS 200 kPa and 6.25 for pS 250 kPa.
Since the energy saving effect of MERS is negligible when the PRR

Area ratio, AR
(a)

1.6

40

Primary pressure
Primary pressure

Area ratio: 6.25

Area ratio: 7.03

1.4

240 kPa
380 kPa

1.2

30

Entrainment ratio, ER

Pressure recovery ratio, PRR (%)

129

20

10

1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

y = a + b*x

Equation

0.0

Area ratio : 6.25

Area ratio : 7.03

a (Intercept)
--0.70768
-0.66644

b (Slope)
0.00729
0.01005

-0.2
80

0
5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

100

120

9.0

140

Arear ratio, AR
(b)

180

200

220

240

260

(a)

2.7

45

Primary pressure
Primary pressure

240 kPa
380 kPa

40

Pressure recovery ratio, PRR (%)

2.6
2.5

Power (kw)

160

Secondary pressure (kPa)

2.4
2.1

2.0

1.9

Equation

y = Intercept + B1*x^1 + B2*x^2

Value

Coefficient

35

Intercept

30

Area ratio: 6.25 B1

B2

25

Area ratio: 7.03 B1

B2

0.9647
-0.00738
1.43197E-5

Intercept

0.94001
-0.00902
2.16658E-5

20
15
10
5

Area ratio: 6.25

Area ratio: 7.03

0
-5

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

Arear ratio, AR
(c)
Fig. 4. Effect of area ratio on: (a) entrainment ratio (b) pressure recovery ratio and (c)
power consumption.

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Secondary pressure (kPa)

(b)
Fig. 5. Effect of secondary pressure on: (a) entrainment ratio and (b) pressure recovery
ratio.

130

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

drops to 0, this critical area ratio is of great importance in ejectorbased MERS and awaits further analysis to gain a better
understanding.
Fig. 6 shows the effect of primary pressure on the performances
of variable ejector, with (a) for entrainment ratio and (b) for pressure recovery ratio. The primary pressure varies between 150 kPa
and 400 kPa while the secondary pressure has a constant value of
150 kPa. From Fig. 6(a), it is evident that an increase in the primary
pressure pP leads to a decrease in the entrainment ratio ER of
ejector. The decreasing ER can be estimated by a power function of
pP in the form of y axb. As the area ratio AR increases from 6.25 to
7.03, an obvious rise in ER can be observed.
The variation of pressure recovery ratio with primary pressure
displays a quite different characteristic. As the primary pressure pP
increases from 150 kPa to 400 kPa, the pressure recovery ratio PRR
rst keeps constant at 0 and then increases linearly when pP

3.5
y = a*x^b

Equation

Value

Coefficient

Entrainment ratio, ER

3.0

Area ratio: 6.25

Area ratio: 7.03

2.5
2.0

29180.19804

-1.87085

15280.89477

-1.66363

5. Analysis and discussion

Area ratio: 6.25

Area ratio: 7.03

1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
150

200

250

300

350

400

Primary pressure (kPa)

(a)
20
y = a + b*x

Equation

Value

Pressure recovery ratio, PRR (%)

Coefficient
Area ratio: 6.25

15
Area ratio: 7.03

10

a
b

-0.2532
0.0011

-0.23438

8.06377E-4

200

From the results mentioned above, it can be concluded that the

pressure recovery effect generated by the variable ejector depends
not only on the operating pressures but on its area ratio. For a given
operation condition, there is a critical area ratio that corresponds to
the rst hit of zero pressure recovery ratio. This critical area ratio is
the maximal value of area ratio that can provide pressure recovery.
In other words, pressure recovery effect can only be achieved by
ejector with an area ratio smaller than this critical value. In view of
measurement and accuracy, the criterion used in the present study
to determine the critical value is PRR 1%, which assumes that the
pressure recovery effect vanishes when the ratio PRR falls to 1%. The
critical area ratio is found to differ widely when the primary and
secondary pressures vary. It is therefore necessary to investigate
the relationship between the critical area ratio and the operating
pressures.
The relationship between the critical area ratio and the primary
pressure is shown in Fig. 7(a). It is clear that the critical area ratio
increases linearly with the primary pressure, and the increase of pP
from 180 kPa to 530 kPa (as shown in Table 3) doubles the critical
AR (from 6.2 to 12.25). The red (in the web version) line in Fig. 7(a)
is obtained by correlating the critical values of AR as a linear
function of primary pressure, which is expressed as

y 0:01687x 3:139

Area ratio: 6.25

Area ratio: 7.03

-5
150

becomes higher than a certain value. In other words, the variation

of pressure recovery ratio with pP can be described by a piecewiselinear function. From the viewpoint of energy saving, ejector with
xed geometry parameters should avoid operating within the
constant zero-PRR region. Fig. 6(b) also shows that for the same
primary pressures, an increase in area ratio decreases the pressure
recovery ratio. This is considered mainly due to two facts. One is
that the linear variation region starts at different pP. In the case of
AR 6.25, the transition of PRR from constant to linear variation
occurs at a pP of 225 kPa, while in the case of AR 7.03, the pressure
recovery ratio PRR does not enter the linear variation region until
the primary pressure pP increases to 300 kPa. And the other is that
the growth rate of AR 6.25 is a bit faster when compared with
that of AR 7.03.
As explained earlier, the cooling capacity provided by the lowtemperature evaporator in MERS increases with an increase in
the entrainment rate. Therefore, the low-temperature evaporator
will make a greater contribution to the total cooling capacity with
an increase in secondary pressure pS or a decrease in primary
pressure pP. This is, however, unfavorable to the energy saving of
the whole system because in this process the pressure recovery
ratio drops to a lower value.

250

300

350

400

Primary pressure (kPa)

(b)
Fig. 6. Effect of primary pressure on: (a) entrainment ratio and (b) pressure recovery
ratio.

(3)

where y is the critical value of AR, and x is the primary pressure pP.
Area ratios those below this curve are capable of providing pressure
recovery effect and should be selected to decrease the power
consumption of this refrigeration system.
The variation of critical area ratio with the secondary pressure is
shown in Fig. 7(b). It appears that the critical area ratio decreases
with the increasing secondary pressure pS, and the increase of pS
from 125 kPa to 250 kPa causes a 40 percent decrease in critical AR
(from 10.4 to 6.2). It should be noted that the decreasing rate of
critical AR is not a constant; instead, the critical AR continues to
decrease but at a slower pace. The critical AR can be predicted by a
power function in terms of the secondary pressure, which is given
as

y 495x0:8

(4)

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

Table 3
Critical area ratio for different working conditions.

13
y = a + b*x

Equation

12

Intercept

Coefficient

3.13877

Slope

0.0168

Area ratio, AR

11

PRR=0

10
9

PRR>1%

critical area ratios

7
6
5
150

200

250

300

131

350

400

450

500

550

Primary Pressure (kPa)

Primary pressure (kPa)

Secondary pressure (kPa)

Critical area ratio

183.5
200.8
214.7
240.3
262.4
280.8
299.8
317.5
373.1
397.5
439.9
496.7
533.2
379.0
380.4
380.2
380.1
379.3
379.5

124.2
125.2
124.7
125.1
125.7
124.9
124.6
125.5
125.2
126.2
125.9
125.6
124.9
125.4
149.6
175.1
199.7
225.5
249.5

6.28
6.43
6.73
7.033
7.443
7.993
8.3333
8.733
9.473
9.77
10.44
11.25
12.25
10.44
9.21
7.99
7.03
6.43
6.25

(a)

results demonstrate the effects of operating pressures on the

entrainment and pressure recovery performances, and have
conrmed the advantages of ejector with variable geometry. The
concept of critical area ratio is then proposed for better understanding of pressure recovery effect, and the relationships between
the critical area ratios and the primary and secondary pressures are
discussed. The main results can be summarized as follows:

11
Equation
Coefficient

10

y = a*x^b
494.98398

-0.79842

Area ratio, AR

PRR=0

PRR>1%

critical area ratios

5
100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

260

Secondary Pressure (kPa)

(b)
Fig. 7. Relationship between the critical area ratio and: (a) the primary pressure and
(b) the secondary pressure.

where y is the critical value of AR, while x is the secondary pressure

pS. Still, the tting curve is a representative that the pressure recovery effect begins to disappear. For a given pS, an area ratio
smaller than the critical one is required to make sure that the
system operates at the energy saving mode.
Since the data used for prediction of critical area ratio indicate
wide variations in the primary and secondary pressures, these
correlations can serve as a guideline for design and operation of
variable ejector.

For given operation conditions, larger area ratio gives higher ER

and lower PRR. And the relationship between ER and AR can be
described by linear functions, while PRR is represented by
quadratic functions in term of AR.

For all the area ratios studied, the entrainment ratio ER increases
linearly with the secondary pressure pS, but decreases monotonously with the primary pressure pP in a way of y axb.

The pressure recovery ratio PRR decreases quadratically with
the secondary pressure pS. When it comes to the increasing
primary pressure pP, the pressure recovery ratio has a piecewiselinear character, that is, the PRR rst keeps constant at 0 and
then increases linearly when pP becomes higher than a certain
value.

The critical area ratio is considered as an indicator of pressure
recovery status. It increases with the primary pressure and decreases with the secondary pressure. For a given pP or pS, an area
ratio smaller than the critical one is required to make sure that
the system operates at the energy saving mode.

The critical AR can be predicted by a linear tting function of
primary pressure pP or a power function in terms of the secondary pressure pS.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the A*STAR-MND Green Building
Joint Grant of Singapore (1121760027), China Postdoctoral Science
Foundation funded project (2013M532041) and the Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities.

6. Conclusion
Nomenclatures
In this paper, the performance characteristics of a variable arearatio ejector have been investigated based on analysis of experimental data measured in a multi-evaporator refrigeration system
(MERS). The area ratio of variable ejector can be adjusted by moving
a spindle axially within the primary nozzle. The experimental

d1
d2
dN1S1
dt

inlet diameter of primary nozzle, mm

exit diameter of primary nozzle, mm
the relative spindle position, mm
throat diameter of primary nozzle, mm

132

Dm
Ld
Lm
mP
mS
pP
pS
pb

qd
qm

C. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 125e132

diameter of constant-area mixing chamber, mm

length of diffuser, mm
length of constant-area mixing chamber, mm
mass ow rate of primary ow, kg s1
mass ow rate of secondary ow, kg s1
primary ow pressure of ejector, kPa
secondary ow pressure of ejector, kPa
outlet pressure of ejector, kPa
diverging angle of diffuser, 
converging angle of constant-pressure mixing chamber, 

Abbreviation
AR
area ratio
ER
entrainment ratio, mS/mP
NXP
primary nozzle position, mm
PRR
pressure recovery ratio, (pb  pS)/pS
MERS
multi-evaporator refrigeration system
Index
N1
N2
S1
S2

inlet cross section of primary nozzle

outlet cross section of primary nozzle
cross section of spindle
spindle tip

References
[1] S. He, Y. Li, R.Z. Wang, Progress of mathematical modeling on ejectors, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 13 (2009) 1760e1780.
[2] M. Sokolov, D. Hershgal, Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by
low grade heat. Part 3. Experimental results, Int. J. Refrig. 14 (1991) 24e31.
[3] B.J. Huang, J.H. Wu, H.Y. Hsu, J.H. Wang, Development of hybrid solar-assisted
cooling/heating system, Energy Convers. Manag. 51 (2010) 1643e1650.
[4] B.M. Diaconu, S. Varga, A.C. Oliveira, Numerical simulation of a solar-assisted
ejector air conditioning system with cold storage, Energy 36 (2011) 1280e
1291.
[5] D.W. Sun, I.W. Eames, Recent developments in the design theories and applications of ejectors e a review, J. Inst. Energy 68 (1995) 65e79.
[6] C. Li, Y.Z. Li, Investigation of entrainment behavior and characteristics of gase
liquid ejectors based on CFD simulation, Chem. Eng. Sci. 66 (2011) 405e416.
[7] R.L. Yadav, A.W. Patwardhan, Design aspects of ejectors: effects of suction
chamber geometry, Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (2008) 3886e3897.
[8] W.B. Gosney, Principle of Refrigeration, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982.
[9] W.F. Stoecker, Steam-jet refrigeration, in: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1958, pp. 194e205.
[10] Z. Aidoun, M. Ouzzane, The effect of operating conditions on the performance
of a supersonic ejector for refrigeration, Int. J. Refrig. 27 (2004) 974e984.
[11] S. Aphornratana, I.W. Eames, A small capacity steam-ejector refrigerator:
experimental investigation of a system using ejector with movable primary
nozzle, Int. J. Refrig. Revue Int. Du Froid 20 (1997) 352e358.
[12] Y. Bartosiewicz, Z. Aidoun, Y. Mercadier, Numerical assessment of ejector
operation for refrigeration applications based on CFD, Appl. Therm. Eng. 26
(2006) 604e612.
[13] K. Chunnanond, Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 8 (2004) 129e155.
[14] I.W. Eames, S. Aphornratana, H. Haider, A theoretical and experimental-study
of a small-scale steam jet refrigerator, Int. J. Refrig. Revue Int. Du Froid 18
(1995) 378e386.
[15] B.J. Huang, C.B. Jiang, F.L. Hu, Ejector performance-characteristics and design
analysis of jet refrigeration system, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power Trans. ASME
107 (1985) 792e802.
[16] J.T. Munday, D.F. Bagster, New ejector theory applied to steam jet refrigeration, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 16 (1977) 442e449.
[17] S.B. Riffat, S.A. Omer, CFD modelling and experimental investigation of an
ejector refrigeration system using methanol as the working uid, Int. J. Energy
Res. 25 (2001) 115e128.
[18] E. Rusly, L. Aye, W. Charters, A. Ooi, CFD analysis of ejector in a combined
ejector cooling system, Int. J. Refrig. 28 (2005) 1092e1101.
[19] D.W. Sun, Variable geometry ejectors and their applications in ejector
refrigeration systems, Energy 21 (1996) 919e929.
[20] R. Yapici, H. Ersoy, A. Aktoprakoglu, H. Halkaci, O. Yigit, Experimental determination of the optimum performance of ejector refrigeration system
depending on ejector area ratio, Int. J. Refrig. 31 (2008) 1183e1189.
[21] D.W. Sun, Comparative study of the performance of an ejector refrigeration
cycle operating with various refrigerants, Energy Convers. Manag. 40 (1999)
873e884.

[22] J. Mizrahi, M. Solomiansky, T. Zisner, W. Resnick, Ejector refrigeration from

low temperature energy sources, Bull. Res. Counc. Israel 6C (1957) 1e8.
[23] A.E. Kroll, The design of jet pumps, Chem. Eng. Prog. 1 (1947).
[24] P. Havelka, V. Linek, J. Sinkule, J. Zahradnik, M. Fialova, Effect of the ejector
conguration on the gas suction rate and gas hold up in ejector loop reactors,
Chem. Eng. Sci. 52 (1997) 1701e1713.
[25] P.H.M.R. Cramers, A.A.C.M. Beenackers, Inuence of the ejector conguration,
scale and the gas density on the mass transfer characteristics of gaseliquid
ejectors, Chem. Eng. J. 82 (2001) 131e141.
[26] K. Cizungu, M. Groll, Z. Ling, Modelling and optimization of two-phase ejectors for cooling systems, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (2005) 1979e1994.
[27] S. Watanawanavet, Optimization of a High-efciency Jet Ejector by Computational Fluid Dynamics Software (Master of Science), Texas A&M University,
2005, p. 238.
[28] P. Chaiwongsa, S. Wongwises, Effect of throat diameters of the ejector on the
performance of the refrigeration cycle using a two-phase ejector as an
expansion device, Int. J. Refrig. 30 (2007) 601e608.
[29] S. Balamurugan, V. Gaikar, A. Patwardhan, Effect of ejector conguration on
hydrodynamic characteristics of gaseliquid ejectors, Chem. Eng. Sci. 63 (2008)
721e731.
[30] N.I.I. Hewedy, M.H. Hamed, F.S. Abou-Taleb, T.A. Ghonim, Optimal performance and geometry of supersonic ejector, J. Fluids Eng. 130 (2008) 041204.
[31] S. Varga, A.C. Oliveira, B. Diaconu, Inuence of geometrical factors on steam
ejector performance e a numerical assessment, Int. J. Refrig. 32 (2009) 1694e
1701.
[32] Y. Zhu, W. Cai, C. Wen, Y. Li, Numerical investigation of geometry parameters
for design of high performance ejectors, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 898e
905.
[33] C. Li, Y. Li, L. Wang, Conguration dependence and optimization of the
entrainment performance for gasegas and gaseliquid ejectors, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 48 (2012) 237e248.
[34] L. Kairouani, M. Elakhdar, E. Nehdi, N. Bouaziz, Use of ejectors in a multievaporator refrigeration system for performance enhancement, Int. J. Refrig.
32 (2009) 1173e1185.
[35] C. Lucas, J. Koehler, Experimental investigation of the COP improvement of a
refrigeration cycle by use of an ejector, Int. J. Refrig. 35 (2012) 1595e1603.
[36] S. Disawas, S. Wongwises, Experimental investigation on the performance of
the refrigeration cycle using a two-phase ejector as an expansion device, Int. J.
Refrig. 27 (2004) 587e594.
[37] Y. Liu, T. Xin, L. Cao, C. Wan, M. Zhang, Compressioneinjection hybrid
refrigeration cycles in household refrigerators, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010)
2442e2447.
[38] J.-Q. Deng, P.-X. Jiang, T. Lu, W. Lu, Particular characteristics of transcritical
CO2 refrigeration cycle with an ejector, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 381e388.
[39] J. Sarkar, Optimization of ejector-expansion transcritical CO2 heat pump cycle,
Energy 33 (2008) 1399e1406.
[40] M. Yari, Performance analysis and optimization of a new two-stage ejectorexpansion transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (2009)
1997e2005.
[41] M. Nakagawa, A.R. Marasigan, T. Matsukawa, A. Kurashina, 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. 34 (2011) 1604e1613.
[42] M. Yari, S.M.S. Mahmoudi, Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of novel
ejector-expansion TRCC (transcritical CO2) cascade refrigeration cycles (novel
transcritical CO2 cycle), Energy (2011).
[43] W. Chen, X. Zhou, S. Deng, Development of control method and dynamic
model for multi-evaporator air conditioners (MEAC), Energy Convers. Manag.
46 (2005) 451e465.
[44] D. Datta, S.A. Tassou, Articial neural network based electrical load prediction
for food retail stores, Appl. Therm. Eng. 18 (1998) 1121e1128.
[45] S.A. Tassou, J.S. Lewis, Y.T. Ge, H.I. Chaer, A review of emerging technologies
for food refrigeration applications, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 263e276.
[46] P.G. Jolly, C.P. Tso, Y.W. Wong, S.M. Ng, Simulation and measurement on the
full-load performance of a refrigeration system in a shipping container, Int. J.
Refrig. 23 (2000) 112e126.
[47] M. Sokolov, D. Hershgal, Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by
low grade heat. Part 1. Systems characterization, Int. J. Refrig. 13 (1990) 351e
356.
[48] M. Sokolov, D. Hershgal, Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by
low grade heat. Part 2. Design procedures, Int. J. Refrig. 13 (1990) 357e363.
[49] M. Sokolov, D. Hershgal, Enhanced ejector refrigeration cycles powered by
low grade heat. Part 3. Experimental results, Int. J. Refrig. 14 (1991) 24e31.
[50] C. Lin, W. Cai, Y. Li, J. Yan, Y. Hu, The characteristics of pressure recovery in an
adjustable ejector multi-evaporator refrigeration system, Energy 46 (2012)
148e155.
[51] S. Varga, A.C. Oliveira, X. Ma, S.A. Omer, W. Zhang, S.B. Riffat, Experimental
and numerical analysis of a variable area ratio steam ejector, Int. J. Refrig. 34
(2011) 1668e1675.
[52] J.M. Abdulateef, K. Sopian, M.A. Alghoul, M.Y. Sulaiman, Review on solardriven ejector refrigeration technologies, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13
(2009) 1338e1349.