Comparison of CFD and experimental performance results of a variable area ratio steam ejector

The advantages of numerical modelling compared with experimental studies (e.g. reduced cost, easy control of the variables, high yield etc.) are well known. Theoretical studies where experimental validation is also presented provide an important added value to numerical investigations. In the present paper, experimental and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) results for a 5-kW-rated capacity steam ejector, with a variable primary nozzle geometry, are presented and compared. The variable geometry was achieved by applying a movable spindle at the primary nozzle inlet. Relatively low operating temperatures and pressures were considered, so that the cooling system could be operated with thermal energy supplied by solar collectors (solar air-conditioning). The CFD model was based on the axi-symmetric representation of the experimental ejector, using water as a working fluid. The experimental entrainment ratio varied in the range of 0.1--0.5, depending on operating conditions and spindle tip position. It was found that the primary flow rate can be successfully adjusted by the spindle. CFD and experimental primary flow rates agreed well, with an average relative error of 8%. CFD predicted the secondary flow rate and entrainment ratio with good accuracy only in 70% of the cases. Copyright The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

[1]  Latra Boumaraf,et al.  Modeling of an ejector refrigerating system operating in dimensioning and off-dimensioning conditions with the working fluids R142b and R600a , 2009 .

[2]  Bin-Juine Huang,et al.  A 1-D analysis of ejector performance , 1999 .

[3]  Andrew Ooi,et al.  CFD analysis of ejector in a combined ejector cooling system , 2005 .

[4]  Saffa Riffat,et al.  Design, testing and mathematical modelling of a small-scale CHP and cooling system (small CHP-ejector trigeneration) , 2007 .

[5]  T. Sriveerakul,et al.  Performance prediction of steam ejector using computational fluid dynamics: Part 1. Validation of the CFD results , 2007 .

[6]  Da-Wen Sun,et al.  Comparative study of the performance of an ejector refrigeration cycle operating with various refrigerants , 1999 .

[7]  Wojciech Sobieski PERFORMANCE OF AN AIR-AIR EJECTOR: AN ATTEMPT AT NUMERICAL MODELLING , 2003 .

[8]  A. Mani,et al.  Experimental investigations on ejector refrigeration system with ammonia , 2007 .

[9]  Jean-Marie Seynhaeve,et al.  CFD analysis of a supersonic air ejector. Part II: Relation between global operation and local flow features , 2009 .

[10]  Ian W. Eames,et al.  Results of an experimental study of an advanced jet-pump refrigerator operating with R245fa , 2007 .

[11]  Satha Aphornratana,et al.  Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology , 2004 .

[12]  Bogdan Diaconu,et al.  Numerical assessment of steam ejector efficiencies using CFD , 2009 .

[13]  Bogdan Diaconu,et al.  Analysis of a solar-assisted ejector cooling system for air conditioning , 2009 .

[14]  R. Yapıcı,et al.  Experimental determination of the optimum performance of ejector refrigeration system depending on ejector area ratio , 2008 .

[15]  Bogdan Diaconu,et al.  Influence of geometrical factors on steam ejector performance – A numerical assessment , 2009 .

[16]  Ruzhu Wang,et al.  Progress of mathematical modeling on ejectors , 2009 .

[17]  K. Cizungu,et al.  Performance comparison of vapour jet refrigeration system with environment friendly working fluids , 2001 .

[18]  Masud Behnia,et al.  Investigation and improvement of ejector refrigeration system using computational fluid dynamics technique , 2007 .