i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
w w w . i i fi i r . o r g

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

Thermodynamic design and simulation of a CO2

based transcritical vapour compression
refrigeration system with an ejector
Md. Ezaz Ahammed, Souvik Bhattacharyya*, M. Ramgopal
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721302, India

article info

abstract

Article history:

A two phase ejector suitable as an expansion device in a CO2 based transcritical vapour

Received 24 March 2014

compression refrigeration system is designed by extending the thermodynamic analysis

Received in revised form

and by interfacing with the system simulation model. A converging diverging nozzle is

9 June 2014

considered as primary nozzle of the ejector. For both design and parametric analyses, the

Accepted 12 June 2014

efficiencies of nozzles and diffuser have been assumed to be 85% each. Further, choked

Available online 21 June 2014

condition in the primary C-D nozzle and constant pressure mixing are assumed. Parameters such as COP, entrainment ratio, pressure lift and cooling capacity were obtained for

Keywords:

varying motive inlet and evaporator conditions. Motive inlet is found to be crucial for both

Carbon dioxide

performance and range of feasible application. Results show a COP improvement of 21%

Refrigeration cycle

compared to an equivalent conventional CO2 system. A comprehensive exergy analysis of

Thermodynamic analysis

the system establishes the justification of replacement of throttle valve by ejector in such

Ejector dimensions

systems.

Constant pressure mixing

2014 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

me
Conception et simulation thermodynamiques d'un syste

compression de vapeur au CO2 transcritique
frigorifique a
 jecteur
avec un e
jecteur ; Me
lange a

pression constante
Mots cles : Dioxyde de carbone ; Cycle frigorifique ; Analyse thermodynamique ; Dimensions de l'e

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: souvik.iit@gmail.com (S. Bhattacharyya).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2014.06.010
0140-7007/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

178

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

Nomenclature
A
a
COP
CRC
RCE
G
h
M
_
m
P
Pc
Pd
d
IHX
Pe
Ps
Q
s
u
W
x

1.

area, m2
sonic velocity, m s
1
coefficient of performance
conventional refrigeration cycle
refrigeration cycle with ejector
mass flux, kg m
2 s
1
enthalpy, J kg
1
Mach number
mass flow rate, kg s
1
pressure, Pa
inlet pressure to compressor, Pa
discharge pressure of compressor, Pa
diameter
internal heat exchanger
evaporator pressure, Pa
suction pressure of secondary stream, Pa
heat transfer, W
entropy, J kg
1 K
1
velocity, m s
1
work transfer, W
dryness fraction

Introduction

Carbon dioxide is an eco-friendly natural refrigerant with no

ODP and low GWP. Moreover, it is inexpensive, weakly toxic,
abundantly available and has the potential to be an ideal
refrigerant, provided the cycle and design are modified suitably for achieving competitive performance (Lorentzen, 1994).
Interestingly, the high system operating pressures which
rendered it to be unpopular earlier, turns out to be beneficial
as it leads to a compact system. However, relatively lower COP
of the CO2 based refrigeration cycle compared to basic vapour
compression refrigeration cycle has been cited to be a major
drawback or area where developments are required.
Enhancement in performance of CO2 transcritical cycle has
been attained through optimization of parameters, modification of basic cycle, replacement and addition of components
in system etc. Optimization of discharge pressure in CO2 cycle
has been done for air conditioning applications and various
methods have been proposed as well to control optimum high
pressure (Kauf, 1999; Liao et al., 2000; Casson et al., 2003).
Sarkar et al. (2004) presented energetic and exergetic optimisations of a heat pump for simultaneous cooling and heating.
It is shown that compared to other components, exergy losses
in the throttle valve are the highest. Various cycle modifications have been studied such as multi-staging and flash gas
bypass to improve the system performance (Kim et al., 2004;
Elbel and Hrnjak, 2004). Internal heat exchanger and work
producing expander were employed to avoid high throttling
loss (Kim et al., 2004; Robinson and Groll, 1998). Agrawal and
Bhattacharyya (2008) employed a capillary tube as an expansion device with optimum design and operating conditions
where the performance was reported to be marginally better

Greek symbols
h
efficiency
r
density
m
entrainment ratio
Subscripts
comp
compressor
com
compression
Diff
diffuser
E
equilibrium
evap
evaporator
exp
expansion
gc
gas cooler
i
ith state, number
is
isentropic
max
maximum
noz1
primary nozzle
noz2
secondary nozzle
p
primary
s
secondary, isentropic
sec
secondary
t
throat
tot
total

with higher gas cooler exit temperature. More recently,

several studies have been reported on performance enhancing
expansion devices and the ejector has shown promising potential as an expansion device characterized by absence of
moving parts, low cost and low maintenance. The use of
ejector in vapour compression refrigeration system was first
introduced by Kornhauser (1990) through a numerical analysis
using R12 as a refrigerant reporting 21% improvement in COP.
Thereafter, a good body of research has been reported on
various ejector based refrigeration systems with different
working substances, which is well documented in two review
papers of Sumeru et al. (2012) and Sarkar (2012). Along with
empirical and semi empirical modelling of ejector, mathematical models on ejectors have progressed as thermodynamic models and dynamic models which are further
subdivided to single phase and two phase flow models. Dynamic models have higher prediction precision yielding
greater information (He et al., 2009). Li and Groll (2005)
implemented a thermodynamic analysis at different operating conditions for an assumed entrainment ratio and pressure drop in the suction section of the ejector for a
transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle and reported a 16% COP
improvement over the basic transcritical CO2 cycle. They
added a feedback fraction of vapour throttled to evaporator in
the cycle to satisfy mass balance constraint at the ejector exit.
Deng et al. (2007) also presented a theoretical analysis for a
transcritical CO2 ejector expansion refrigeration cycle reporting a 22% improvement in COP at working conditions and
11.5% at conditions for the maximum cooling COP. Liu and
Groll (2008) developed a simulation model of a two phase
flow ejector with converging nozzle as the motive nozzle and
employed it along with test data to obtain the adjusted nozzle

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

and mixing efficiencies while examining effect of operating

conditions and design parameters of the ejector. Lee et al.
(2011) designed a two phase ejector for their test facility
considering the non-equilibrium state to calculate sonic velocity and critical mass flux. They varied diameter of the
convergingediverging (CeD) nozzle and other geometrical
parameters to test their sensitivity with respect to performance leading to the optimal design of ejector for which the
Henry and Fauske (1971) model was employed. A 15%
improvement in COP over the conventional cycle was reported
and performance was higher for the constant pressure mixing
ejector. Nakagawa et al. (2011) reported experimental results
on a two phase ejector refrigeration system. They used an
ejector comprising a C-D motive nozzle, secondary nozzle and
diffuser of rectangular cross section and showed the effect of
mixing length on performance. With an optimum mixing
length size, 26% improvement in COP was obtained over
conventional system with IHX. It may be noted that most of
the theoretical analyses did not deal with geometrical features
and those which did employed only steam and refrigerants
other than CO2 as working fluids.
The detailed literature survey, presented above, shows that
even though several authors carried out thermodynamic
analysis of transcritical CO2 based refrigeration systems with
ejector as an expansion device, none of these studies included
the geometrical aspects of the ejector in the thermodynamic
system simulation. Also the second law analysis on these
systems did not estimate the individual contribution of primary and secondary nozzles, diffuser and mixing sections to
total system irreversibility.
This study supplements a thermodynamic approach to
design an ejector for a given operating condition employing
variable properties of the working fluid along with detailed
system simulation. Furthermore, effects of varying operating
conditions on the system simulation have been comprehensively evaluated for the given geometry of ejector.

2.

179

Fig. 1 e Schematic diagram of refrigeration system with

ejector.

motive fluid decreases in the primary nozzle of ejector from

h3 to h4 (Fig. 2) as it gets converted into to kinetic energy. For
the operation of the system to be feasible, the primary and
secondary fluids should enter the ejector in such a ratio that,

CO2 refrigeration system with an ejector

In the vapour compression refrigeration system with an

ejector, the ejector is used in place of the expansion valve
(Fig. 1). The ejector considered in the present analysis consists of a primary nozzle, a secondary nozzle, a convergent
mixing section followed by a constant area section and a
diffuser section. In the ejector, the primary fluid (motive
fluid) from the gas cooler after expansion through the primary nozzle entrains refrigerant vapour from the evaporator
(secondary fluid). The primary and secondary fluid streams
are mixed in the mixing chamber and flow through the
diffuser. The pressure of the two-phase fluid mixture increases as it flows through the diffuser. After diffuser vapour
and liquid are separated in separator. The saturated liquid
enters the evaporator through an expansion valve, while the
saturated refrigerant vapour is compressed in the
compressor. In the present study a converging-diverging (CD) nozzle is used as the primary nozzle, in which the primary
fluid or motive fluid expands from the super-critical, single
phase region to a sub-critical pressure, that is less than or
equal to the evaporator pressure. The static enthalpy of the

Fig. 2 e P-h diagram of the CO2 based refrigeration system

with ejector.

180

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

after mixing, the ejector is able to eject the mixed fluid in the
same ratio of vapour and liquid. The ratio of secondary to
primary mass flow rate is termed as entrainment ratio (m),
expressed as:


ms


mp

(1)

However, for all operating conditions, the vapour fraction

at the exit of ejector may not be exactly equal to the required
_ p =m
_pm
_ s , which leads to a mass imbalance
value of x7 m
in the system simulation for these conditions. To relax the
constraint, the modified cycle with a feedback throttle valve
(Figs. 1 and 2) proposed by Li and Groll (2005) has been
considered in the simulation. The purpose of the feedback
throttle (Fig. 1) is to return back the extra vapour to evaporator
so that the condition (1 m) x7 > 1 is satisfied. It may be noted
that if the exit vapour fraction is less than that of the required
value stated above, then the cycle will not be realized as the
above modification in the cycle can take care of excess vapour
at ejector exit only. The feedback throttle is required for system simulation; however, in an actual system, the system will
adjust automatically to a new balanced condition, even
without the feedback throttle valve.
In Fig. 2, the lines 3e90 and 10e20 represent the expansion
and compression process in a conventional transcritical cycle
with a throttle valve and without any recovery during the
expansion process, and 10e20 e3e90 represents the corresponding cycle.
In this study, based on the thermodynamic model, an
ejector has been designed for a refrigeration capacity of 1 Ton
operating at a gas cooler outlet pressure of 110 bar, outlet
temperature of 35  C and an evaporator temperature of 2  C.
Mass flow rate for primary and secondary flow and Pc are
estimated from the thermodynamic analysis at the same
operating conditions with a zero feedback mass. Mixing section is an important part in the design of an ejector. Constant

pressure mixing is adopted in the present study since it leads

to superior performance compared to constant area mixing as
is evident from the literature (Keenan et al., 1950). Mixing
section length (Xm) is greater than zero for constant pressure
mixing whereas Xm 0 for constant area mixing (Fig. 3). The
performance of the ejector and the system can be specified in
terms of pressure lift and cooling COP, given by:
Pressure lift ; Plift Pc
Ps
COPcooling m

h10
h9
h2
h1

(2)

(3)

3.
Thermodynamic analysis of the ejector
based refrigeration cycle
The following simplifying assumptions have been made for
the thermodynamic analysis:
i. Steady one dimensional homogeneous equilibrium flow.
ii. Pressure drop in gas cooler and evaporator are negligibly small.
iii. No heat interaction with surrounding in all the components except evaporator and gas cooler.
iv. Refrigerant exits evaporator as saturated vapour.
v. Constant pressure mixing occurs in the mixing section.
vi. Primary nozzle, secondary nozzle and diffuser have an
isentropic efficiency of 85%.
vii. Velocities at inlet to primary and secondary nozzle are
negligibly small.
Additionally, the secondary nozzle pressure drop (PeePs)
was assumed to be 0.3 bar (Li and Groll, 2005) and the gas
cooler exit temperature is kept at 35  C with zero feedback
mass for 1 Ton cooling capacity. Isentropic efficiency for

Fig. 3 e Schematic diagram of the ejector with a convergingediverging nozzle.

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

compressor hcomp has been calculated from the following

correlation given by Robinson and Groll (1998):
2

Qgc

hcomp 0:815 0:022Pc =Pd
0:0041Pc =Pd 0:0001Pc =Pd

(4)
Motive stream of fluid expands with the given isentropic
efficiency and gets accelerated to very high velocity. For the
exit of the primary nozzle:
h4 f h3 ; h4s ; hnoz1
u4

q
2h3
h4

(5)

u5

q
2h10
h5

(7)
(8)

Both fluids are assumed to mix at constant pressure.

Therefore, the momentum and energy equations for the
mixing process are:
1 mu6 u4 mu5

  
 

 
1 m h6 u26 2 h4 u24 2 m h5 u25 2

(9)
(10)

In the diffuser section, the single fluid loses kinetic energy

and receives useful pressure lift before it is separated into
liquid and vapour fractions in the phase separator. For the
diffuser the applicable equations are:
s6 f Ps ; h6

(11)


h7 f Pc ; h7s ; hdiff

(12)

hdiff

h7s
h6
h7
h6

(13)

Applying overall energy balance to the ejector,

1 mh7 h3 mh10

Wcomp

1
_ tot
h2
h1 m
1m

(19)

(20)

The above set of equations is solved in MATLAB while

interfacing with REFPROP 9.0 for thermodynamic state and
property calculation. Entrainment ratio (m) and diffuser exit
pressure (Pc) are iterated in loop to satisfy both energy balance
(Eq. (14)) and mass balance (Eq. (16)).

(6)

The low pressure at the exit of primary nozzle causes

expansion of secondary stream through the secondary nozzle.
The enthalpy and velocity of secondary stream at the exit of
the secondary nozzle are:
h5 f h10 ; h5s ; hnoz2

1
_ tot
h3
h2 m
1m

181

4.

Ejector design

The design of ejector comprises design of primary nozzle,

secondary nozzle, mixing zone and diffuser. The important
geometrical factor is the throat diameter of primary nozzle
which is designed for choked condition. Secondary nozzle
experiences a very small expansion, and hence no choking is
expected to occur there. In the present study, homogeneous
equilibrium is considered for total expansion. Critical mass
flux and sonic velocity were obtained by interfacing REFPROP
9.0 with MATLAB and giving a particular path of expansion,
_ p , secondary
h 0.85 in the nozzles. Primary mass flow rate m
_ s and Pc are the outcome of the thermomass flow rate m
dynamic analysis at 110 bar discharge pressure and 35  C gas
cooler exit temperature keeping evaporator temperature 2  C
for a refrigeration capacity of 1 Ton. Pressure at exit of primary
nozzle has been taken as design pressure Ps to avoid shock in
the diverging section of nozzle as well as in the mixing
section.
The thermodynamic simulation for the above given condition is extended to design the ejector. Exit area of primary
nozzle (A4), exit area of secondary nozzle (A5) and exit area of
constant pressure mixing zone (A6) are obtained from the
following set of equations:
A4

_p
m
G4

(21)

A5

_s
m
G5

(22)

_s
_p m
m
G6

(23)

(14)

Vapour quality at the exit of diffuser of ejector is expressed

as:
x7 f Pc ; h7

(15)

A6

1 mx7 1

(16)

Fig. 4 shows the mass flux (G) variation with pressure for an
adiabatic expansion process in the nozzle at different nozzle
efficiencies.
At choking condition, the fluid achieves sonic velocity at
the throat where the mass flux attains the maximum value
termed as critical mass flux (Gmax). Mach number (M) and
sonic velocity (a) are given by,

Saturated liquid from separator is throttled to evaporator

through expansion valve in an isenthalpic process yielding:
h8 h9

(17)

The expression for refrigeration effect, gas cooler heat

rejection and compressor work are as follows:
Qevap

m
_ tot
h10
h9 m
1m

(18)

M u=a

(24)

182

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

dA dr du

0
A
r
u

(30)

Energy equation,
dh udu 0

(31)

Diameters of the given ejector are obtained by solving

Equations 21e31 for the primary and secondary mass flow
rates calculated from the thermodynamic simulation at given
condition.
Table 1 shows the diameters of the designed ejector with
mass flow rate of both streams for a motive stream pressure of
110 bar and the saturated suction stream at 2  C.

5.
System simulation at different operating
conditions with designed ejector

Fig. 4 e Pressure variation with mass flux for isentropic

and non-isentropic expansion.


vP
vr sc

(25)

The condition for choking is given by,

dG
0
dP

(26)

Suitable stage efficiency (hstage) for elemental pressure drop

is chosen by iteration such that it matches the end state point
and given isentropic efficiency (hnoz) while attaining the chosen
path of expansion. The simulation is run for the expansion
through small pressure drop steps keeping stage efficiency
constant for each step. Stage efficiencies are defined for
expansion and compression in Eq. (27) and Eq. (28), respectively.
hstage;exp

hstage;com

dh
dhiso

dhiso

dh

(27)

(28)

Properties such as enthalpy, entropy, velocity, Mach number and mass flux are calculated at each step. For a given inlet
condition, the critical mass flux is fixed and thus the throat
area can be determined as per the required mass flow rate.
At

The transcritical CO2 cycle with ejector is simulated to study

the effect of operating parameters on the system performance. In the simulation it is assumed that the evaporator
and gas cooler are capable of transferring the required heat
transfer rates, and the compressor is able to compress the
required amount of refrigerant. Keeping the dimensions of
ejector fixed, the complete system is simulated at different
values of gas cooler exit pressure (P3), temperature (T3) and
different evaporator temperatures (Te) while adhering to the
chosen expansion path through elemental pressure drops.
The following simplifying assumptions are considered:

_p
m
Gmax

(29)

Following mixing, fluid exits from the constant pressure

mixing zone with subsonic velocity and the state point of
diffuser inlet is the same as that of exit of the constant pressure mixing zone. With respective inlet condition, outlet area
of diffuser is calculated satisfying the continuity equation,
energy equation, diffuser efficiency and the corresponding
exit pressure.
Continuity equation,

i. Choked condition for primary nozzle

ii. Feedback mass is such that the difference in vapour fraction variation is below 2% of total mass flow rate.
Critical mass flux is determined from the motive input of
pressure (P3 Pd) and temperature, T3 for the given path of
expansion and primary mass flow rate is determined for the
designed throat area (At).
Gmax f Pd ; T3 ; hnoz1

(32)

_ p Gmax At
m

(33)

Secondary pressure drop (DPsec) is assumed in the iteration

loop.
P5 Pe
DPsec

(34)

Secondary mass flow rate for the small expansion DPsec is

expressed as:
G5 f Pe ; Ps ; hnoz2

(35)

_ s G5 A5
m

(36)

Table 1 e Dimension (mm) and mass flow rates (kg s1) of

the designed ejector.
_p
m
0.024

_s
m

dt

d4

d5

d6

d7

0.016

0.67

0.89

3.2

1.85

5.43

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

P5 is the back pressure for the diverging part of C-D

nozzle. Fluid in primary nozzle may exit with underexpansion or over-expansion to back pressure or it may
exit at back pressure with a shock at its diverging section.
Shock exit pressure (PSE) is checked considering shock just
at the exit of primary nozzle. Assuming shock thickness to
be negligible, equations for the jump across shock are
included in the simulation to obtain thermo-physical
properties across shock at the exit end given by the
following equations:
ru 0

(37)



p ru2 0

(38)

 

h u2 2 0

(39)

_pm
_sm
_ tot
m
Momentum conservation equation,
P P6
_ s u5 P4 A4 P5 A5
5
_ p u4 m
A4 A5
A6
m
2
_ tot u6 P6 A6
m

(40)

(41)

Energy conservation equation,





u2
u2
u2
_ s h5 5 m
_ tot h6 6
_ p h4 4 m
m
2
2
2

(42)

Mass flux at the exit of diffuser,

G7

_ tot
m
A7

(43)

Pressure and other thermodynamic properties at the exit of

diffuser are obtained for the given path and designed area A7.


Pc f G7 ; hdiff


h7 f G7 ; hdiff

Values of P6 and the pressure drop across the secondary

nozzle, DPsec were adjusted till convergence was obtained. It is
to be noted that the nozzle is designed assuming a secondary
pressure drop of 0.3 bar. However, during simulation it is
calculated for each off-design condition iteratively.
To assess the performance of the optimally designed
refrigeration system with ejector, it is compared with the
0
0
corresponding conventional transcritical cycle 10e2
3
9
10
(Fig. 2).
COPconv

6.

The square bracket notation in the above Eq. (37)e(39)

imply jump across the shock. For the present range of cases,
solving Eq. 37e39 for the given geometry of primary nozzle
confirms about the irreversible over-expansion of primary exit
to back pressure P5. A simplified mixing model has been
_ p and secondary
employed to solve the problem. Primary m
_ s are mixed in converging mixing zone and the
mass m
stream exits at pressure P6 which is assumed in the iteration
loop and the thermodynamic state after mixing is calculated
satisfying mass, momentum and energy conservation equations as expressed below.
Mass conservation equation,

(44)

(45)

x7 f Pc ; h7

(46)

1 mx7  1

(47)

h10
h3
h20
h10

(48)

(49)

Exergy analysis

Exergy calculations are carried out for both conventional and

ejector based cycles to have a clear view of losses occurring in
both the systems. The gas cooler exit pressure and temperature were assumed to be 110 bar and 35  C, respectively while
the evaporator temperature was taken as 2  C. It is assumed
that the system studied is suitable for the application of
comfort air conditioning, hence the refrigerated space temperature (Tw) for evaporator is assumed to be 25  C, while the
reference temperature (To) is 32  C.

6.1.

Exergy analysis of conventional cycle

_ 0 s20
s10
Exergy destruction in compressor; Ic mT
Exergy destruction in gas cooler;



h20
h3
_ 0$
Igc m$T

s20
s3
T0

(50)

_ 0 s90
s3
Exergy destruction in expansion valve; Iv mT

(52)

Exergy destruction in evaporator;




h10
h90
_ T0 s10
s90

Ievap m
Tw

(53)

6.2.

(51)

Exergy analysis of cycle with ejector

_ p T0 s2
s1
Exergy destruction in compressor; Ic m

(54)

Exergy destruction in gas cooler;




h2
h3
_ p $T0 $
Igc m

s2
s3
T0

(55)

_ p T0 s4
s3
Exergy destruction in primary nozzle; Inoz1 m
(56)
_ s T0 s5
s10
Exergy destruction in secondary nozzle; Inoz2 m

To allow feedback mass expressed in Eq. (47), the evaporator capacity equation changes to:




_ s h10
1
x7 m
_ p m
_ s h9
x7
1=1 m m
_ p m
_ s ah1
Qevap m

183

(57)
Exergy destruction in mixing section;



_ p s4 m
_ s s5
_ tot s6
m
Imix T0 m

(58)

184

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

_ tot T0 s7
s6
Exergy destruction in diffuser section; Idiff m
(59)
Exergy destruction in separator; Isep


_ tot h7
T0 s7
m
_ p h1
T0 s1 m
_ s h8
T0 s1
m

(60)

_ s T0 s9
s8
Exergy destruction in expansion valve; Iv m

(61)

Exergy destruction in evaporator;



h10
h9
_ s T0 s10
s9

Ievap m
Tw

(62)

Second law efficiency; h2nd

7.

I
1

Wcomp

(63)

Results and discussions

Behaviour of refrigeration system with ejector at different

operating parameters is investigated and performance parameters such as pressure lift, entrainment ratio, COP and
cooling capacity are presented below.
The analysis shows that the system with an ejector
designed for a specific operating condition is constrained to
operate within a particular range only at off-design conditions. For example, it can be seen from Fig. 5 that when the
evaporator temperature is maintained below 4  C, for high
pressure and low gas cooler exit temperature conditions, the
primary nozzle exit pressure is above the evaporator pressure.
Since this condition is not practically feasible, the system
cannot operate under these conditions. Similarly for some
range of operating conditions, the solution fails to converge,
as feedback mass has been kept below 0.5% of the total mass.
It can be inferred that had the ejector been designed for a
different set of operating conditions, then the applicability
range would have been different from the present range. Thus
depending upon the range of operating conditions, one has to
choose the design conditions of the ejector for the refrigeration system.

7.1.

Fig. 5 e Effect of gas cooler exit pressure and temperature

on primary nozzle exit pressure, and evaporator pressure
at corresponding temperature.

reasonably close match between the primary mass flow rate

from the simulation and experimental value is obtained. Then
fixing this efficiency, the other parameters are computed. It is
assumed that the secondary nozzle efficiency has no major role
as the expansion is kept low for all cases and hence is kept fixed
at 65% in the simulation. Isentropic efficiencies for diffuser are

Validation of numerical results

To validate the simulation model, the geometry of ejector

presented by Nakagawa et al. (2011) for their experimental
work has been chosen. As per their study the gas cooler outlet
temperature T3 and evaporator temperature Te are taken as
42  C and 2  C, respectively. Fig. 6 shows comparison of numerical results with experimental data of Nakagawa et al.
(2011), for the case without internal heat exchanger and an
ideal mixing length of 15 mm.
The plots clearly show that though qualitatively there is a
good match between the theoretical and experimental results,
quantitatively, the difference is significant. However, it is seen
that the difference between the predicted and experimental
values is gradually narrowing towards the high pressure. Since
Nakagawa et al. (2011) do not specify the efficiencies of the
ejector components, the primary nozzle efficiency is varied
from 65% to 70% for the purpose of validation so that a

Fig. 6 e Comparison between numerical and experimental

values.

185

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

Table 2 e Values for varying motive inlet pressure at T3 35  C, Te 2  C.

P3 (bar)
95
100
105
110

Pc (kPa)

P6 (kPa)

P4 (kPa)

Ps (kPa)

_ p (kg s
1)
m

_ s (kg s
1)
m

u6 (m s
1)

4119
4201
4275
4349

3766
3730
3689
3643

2933
3256
3486
3643

3658
3653
3648
3643

0.0185
0.0208
0.0229
0.0248

0.0120
0.0138
0.0154
0.0169

70.18
80.30
88.88
97.07

also kept between 65% and 70%. Feedback mass has been taken
to be zero. By doing so it is seen that the difference between the
predicted and experimental values for secondary mass flow
rate is high. Since the actual secondary mass flow rate is much
lower than the predicted mass flow rate, particularly at low gas
cooler pressure, the predicted COP and entrainment ratio are
much higher than that obtained from the experimental results.
A possible explanation for this could be that Nakagawa et al.
(2011) used an ejector of rectangular cross section fabricated
by piercing three plates stacked together. Hence, the secondary
nozzle path is restricted in their design leading probably to a
secondary flow that is much lower than that obtained from
simulations. At high pressure, secondary mass manages to
pass through the restricted passage and as a result there is a
better match between simulation predictions and reported test
values at higher pressures. In addition to this, in the simulation

the phase separator at the exit of the ejector is assumed to be

perfect. However, an examination of the experimental results
of Nakagawa shows that this is far from perfect in the actual
system. These and the usual frictional pressure drops and other
losses that exist in actual systems have resulted in the quantitative disagreement between the experimental and predicted
values.
It may be noted that for the given geometry and operating
condition, solutions are absent below 95 bar and above 105 bar
in simulation.

7.2.

Effect of gas cooler exit pressure

Pressure lift or pressure recovery represents the rise in pressure with the use of ejector. Difference between compressor
pressure and secondary suction pressure has been termed as

Fig. 7 e (a). Effect of P3 on Pressure lift and entrainment ratio. (b). Effect of P3 on COP and cooling capacity. (c). Effect of P3 on
COP for different motive inlet temperature.

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

pressure lift. Supersonic primary fluid and secondary fluid are

combined in the mixing section which causes pressure rise
partly before entering the diffuser.
As the mixture flows, pressure rise occurs in the diffuser
section. Table 2 shows the values of pressure at the exit of
primary nozzle (P4), secondary nozzle (P5), mixing section (P6),
diffuser (Pc) and other values when the system is operated at
various gas cooler pressures. Table 2 exhibits that even
though primary mass and secondary mass are increasing with
increase in P3 the ratio between them does not change
significantly. Furthermore, secondary fluid exit pressure Ps
does not vary much for various input conditions. The first part
of pressure lift in mixing zone is dominated by momentum
(mtot u6) of mixed fluid at the exit of mixing section. Even
though primary exit pressure is higher at higher P3, high
momentum leads to low exit pressure after mixing. In the
second part of pressure lift which occurs in diffuser, the same
high momentum gives rise to high pressure gain and thus a
reversal trend is found here due to larger gain in pressure than
that of the first phase lift. Thus, as shown in Fig. 7(a), pressure
lift increases with increase in gas cooler exit pressure. For the
given geometry, the primary exit pressure becomes lower for
low gas cooler exit pressure which causes a low value of
pressure lift.
Entrainment ratio is an important parameter in a refrigeration cycle with an ejector. Higher value of entrainment is
desirable as it reflects better performance of the ejector.
Fig. 7(a) shows that for a particular gas cooler exit and evaporator temperature there is negligible effect on entrainment
ratio when motive inlet pressure is varying. Cooling capacity,
work input and COP with variation of P3 are shown in Fig. 7(b).
It may be observed that cooling capacity and power input
decrease but COP increases marginally as P3 reduces.
In addition, at different values of T3, COP variation with P3
is presented in Fig. 7(c). At some operating points, solutions
are not available due to issues related to convergence and
other reasons discussed previously. At lower gas cooler exit
temperature, effect of P3 on COP is not significant. However,
for higher gas cooler exit temperature, the COP is seen to increase with P3; this implies that the system should be operated
at higher P3 when T3 is high.

7.3.

Effect of gas cooler exit temperature

Gas cooler exit temperature (T3) is a vital parameter as it depends upon the available heat sink for a given gas cooler size.
Fig. 8(a) and (b) exhibit the adverse effect of increased value of
T3 on system performance. As T3 increases, primary mass
decreases which also causes lower secondary mass. This leads
to low momentum at the exit of mixing section or in other
words at the inlet of diffuser section. Therefore, lower pressure lift occurs in diffuser.
Entrainment ratio significantly decreases at higher gas
cooler exit temperature in this condition. Lower cooling capacity at higher gas cooler exit temperature lowers COP
drastically. Due to this it is advisable that since under adverse
ambient conditions, as the cooling load is much lower than
the design value (3.517 kW), either design value for T3 should
be taken higher or design value of cooling load should be set

(a)

186

(b)

Fig. 8 e (a). Effect of T3 on Pressure lift and entrainment

ratio. (b). Effect of T3 on COP and cooling capacity.
larger to fulfil the cooling capacity requirement even under
such adverse conditions.

7.4.

Effect of evaporator temperature

Fig. 9(a) and (b) shows the effect of evaporator temperature on

system performance. Evaporator temperature variation
seems to have no significant effect on pressure lift, entrainment ratio and cooling capacity.
Primary mass flow rate does not change for fixed motive
inlet condition. Secondary mass flow rate change is very
small. However, in actual conditions, since evaporator temperature affects the cooling capacity of the compressor, the
balanced condition between the ejector and compressor need
to be obtained by including compressor characteristics in the
analysis. As shown in Fig. 9(a), pressure lift and entrainment
ratio show slight variation. Increasing evaporator temperature also has marginal effect on cooling capacity but

187

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

4
T 3 =35C
T e=2C

COP

3.5

2.5

Ejector based cycle

Conventional cycle

2
90

95

100

105

110

Gas Cooler Exit Pressure (P3 ,bar)

Fig. 10 e COP of ejector based and conventional
transcritical CO2 system at varying P3.

7.6.

Exergy destruction rate at different components

Exergy analysis is typically carried out to identify component

level performance deficiencies so that remedial measures can
be undertaken for those identified components leading to
system performance enhancement. Exergy destruction rates
are estimated (Fig. 11) at a gas cooler pressure and exit temperature of 110 bar and 35  C for evaporator temperature of
2  C and 1 Ton cooling capacity for both refrigeration cycle
with ejector (RCE) and conventional refrigeration cycle (CRC).
Exergy destruction rate in the evaporator of both the cycles are
Fig. 9 e (a) Effect of Te on Pressure lift and entrainment
ratio. (b). Effect of varying Te on COP and cooling capacity.
350

200
150
100
50

or
ra
t

er
us

pa
Se

in

g
D
iff

M
ix

N
oz

1
oz
N

va

lv

le
r
p.
Ex

co
o

so

as
G

pr
es

om

or

at

or

Vapour compression cycle with an ejector is expected to yield

superior performance but that needs to be substantiated
through a systematic evaluation compared to conventional
systems. A comparison between cycle with ejector and conventional CO2 transcritical cycle is presented in Fig. 10. While
generally the system with ejector exhibits greater benefit at
higher gas cooler exit pressures, as a specific example at
110 bar it yields a very significant 21% improvement in
performance.

Irreversibility (Watt)

Comparison with conventional cycle

250

ap

7.5.

RCE
CRC

300

Ev

decreased compressor work gives higher COP for the system.

COP, cooling capacity and compressor work variation with
varying evaporator temperature are presented in Fig. 9(b).

Fig. 11 e Exergy destruction in different components of

conventional and ejector based cycle.

188

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f r e f r i g e r a t i o n 4 5 ( 2 0 1 4 ) 1 7 7 e1 8 8

almost the same for the given operating conditions and

cooling capacity. The secondary nozzle of ejector and separator contributes negligibly to system exergy destruction. It
may be noted that total exergy destruction in the entire ejector
(nozzle, mixing and diffuser) is around half of that in an
expansion valve of conventional cycle. Small pressure drop
during throttling in cycle with an ejector leads to a much
lower exergy destruction. At higher operating pressures such
as 110 bar, irreversibility in the gas cooler is high for both
conventional and cycles with ejector. The resulting second
law efficiencies obtained are 6.6% and 7.52% for conventional
and systems with ejector, respectively, under the given
conditions.

8.

Conclusion

An ejector has been designed for choked condition based on a

thermodynamic model, solved numerically employing MATLAB interfaced with REFPROP to derive refrigerant properties.
A converging-diverging nozzle is used as the primary nozzle
and a constant pressure mixing section is assumed. Effects of
varying operating conditions on the performance of the
designed refrigeration system with ejector were investigated.
Effort has been made with a viewpoint of exploring
geometrical features with simplified numerical analysis. Results confirm that design condition should be chosen as per
the range of application requirement. From the validation
results, it is evident that design of secondary nozzle has as
much significance as primary nozzle. Parametric variation
exhibits that at lower heat sink temperatures performance is
slightly better towards low gas cooler pressure but cooling
capacity significantly decreases, whereas at higher ambient
temperature high gas cooler pressure leads to notable
improvement in performance. It is inferred that motive inlet
is the deciding factor of performance and applicability. A
comparison is presented with conventional cycle which
yields as much as 21% improvement on COP for design condition in case of the system with ejector. Additionally, a
comprehensive exergy analysis was implemented to identify
component level deficiencies and it establishes the justification of replacement of throttle valve by an ejector as an
expansion device in a CO2 based transcritical vapour
compression refrigeration system.

Acknowledgement
The work is supported by Science and Engineering Research
Board (SERB), Technology Bhawan, New Mehrauli Road, New
Delhi, for the project Design and development of a demonstration unit of carbon dioxide based transcritical refrigeration system.

references

Agrawal, N., Bhattacharyya, S., 2008. Optimized transcritical CO2

heat pumps: performance comparison of capillary tubes
against expansion valves. Int. J. Refrigeration 31, 388e395.
Casson, V., Cecchinato, L., Corradi, M., Fornasieri, E., Girotto, S.,
Minetto, S., Zamboni, L., Zilio, C., 2003. Optimisation of the
throttling system in a CO2refrigerating machine. Int. J.
Refrigeration 26 (8), 926e935.
Deng, J., Jiang, P., Lu, Tao, Lu, W., 2007. Particular characteristics
of transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle with an ejector. App.
Therm. Engg 27, 381e388.
Elbel, S., Hrnjak, P., 2004. Flash gas bypass for improving the
performance of transcritical R744 systems that use
microchannel evaporators. Int. J. Refrigeration 27 (7), 724e735.
He, S., Li, Y., Wang, R.Z., 2009. Progress of mathematical modeling
on ejectors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 1760e1780.
Henry, E.R., Fauske, H.K., 1971. The two phase critical flow of onecomponent mixtures in nozzles, orifices and short tubes. J.
Heat. Transf., 179e187.
Kauf, F., 1999. Determination of the optimum high pressure for
transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycles. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 38 (4),
325e330.
Keenan, J.H., Neumann, E.P., Lustwerk, F., 1950. An investigation
of ejector design by analysis and experiment. J. Appl. Mech.
Tran. ASME 72, 299e309.
Kim, M., Pettersen, J., Bullard, C.W., 2004. Fundamental process
and system design issues in CO2 vapor compression systems.
Prog. Energy Comb. SC. 30 (2), 119e174.
Kornhauser, A.A., 1990. The use of an Ejector as a Refrigerant
Expander. Proceedings of USNC/IIR-Purdue refrigeration
conference. USA, 10e19.
Lee, J.S., Kim, M.S., Kim, M.S., 2011. Experimental study on the
improvement of CO2 air conditioning system performance
using an ejector. Int. J. Refrigeration 34, 1614e1625.
Li, D., Groll, E.A., 2005. Transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle with
ejector expansion device. Int. J. Refrigeration 28, 766e773.
Liao, S.M., Zhao, T.S., Jakobsen, A., 2000. A correlation of optimal
heat rejection pressures in transcritical carbon dioxide cycles.
Appl. Therm. Engg. 20 (9), 831e841.
Liu, F., Groll, E.A., 2008. Analysis of a two phase flow Ejector for
the Transcritical CO2 Cycle. International Refrigeration and
Air Conditioning Conference, Purdue.
Lorentzen, G., 1994. Revival of carbon dioxide as a refrigerant. Int.
J. Refrigeration 17 (5), 292e301.
Nakagawa, M., Marasigan, A.R., Matsukawa, T., Kurashina, A.,
2011. 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.
Refrigeration 34, 1604e1613.
Robinson, D.M., Groll, E.A., 1998. Efficiencies of transcritical CO2
cycles with and without an expansion turbine. Int. J.
Refrigeration 21 (7), 577e589.
Sarkar, J., 2012. Ejector enhanced vapor compression refrigeration
and heat pump systems e a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 16, 6647e6659.
Sarkar, J., Bhattacharyya, S., Ramgopal, M., 2004. Optimization of
a transcritical CO2 heat pump cycle for simultaneous cooling
and heating application. Int. J. Refrigeration 27, 830e838.
Sumeru, K., Nasution, H., Ani, F.N., 2012. A review on two-phase
ejector as an expansion device in vapor compression
refrigeration cycle. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16, 4927e4937.