The present disclosure relates to refrigeration. More particularly, it relates to ejector refrigeration systems.
Earlier proposals for ejector refrigeration systems are found in U.S. Pat. No. 1,836,318 and U.S. Pat. No. 3,277,660.
In the normal mode of operation, gaseous refrigerant is drawn by the compressor 22 through the suction line 56 and inlet 24 and compressed and discharged from the discharge port 26 into the discharge line 28. In the heat rejection heat exchanger, the refrigerant loses/rejects heat to a heat transfer fluid (e.g., fan-forced air or water or other fluid). Cooled refrigerant exits the heat rejection heat exchanger via the outlet 34 and enters the ejector primary inlet 40 via the line 36.
The exemplary ejector 38 (
Use of an ejector serves to recover pressure/work. Work recovered from the expansion process is used to compress the gaseous refrigerant prior to entering the compressor. Accordingly, the pressure ratio of the compressor (and thus the power consumption) may be reduced for a given desired evaporator pressure. The quality of refrigerant entering the evaporator may also be reduced. Thus, the refrigeration effect per unit mass flow may be increased (relative to the non-ejector system). The distribution of fluid entering the evaporator is improved (thereby improving evaporator performance). Because the evaporator does not directly feed the compressor, the evaporator is not required to produce superheated refrigerant outflow. The use of an ejector cycle may thus allow reduction or elimination of the superheated zone of the evaporator. This may allow the evaporator to operate in a two-phase state which provides a higher heat transfer performance (e.g., facilitating reduction in the evaporator size for a given capability).
The exemplary ejector may be a fixed geometry ejector or may be a controllable ejector.
One aspect of the disclosure involves an ejector having a primary inlet, a secondary inlet, and an outlet. A primary flowpath extends from the primary inlet to the outlet. A secondary flowpath extends from the secondary inlet to the outlet. A mixer convergent section is downstream of the secondary inlet. A motive nozzle surrounds the primary flowpath upstream of a junction with the secondary flowpath. The motive nozzle has an exit. The mixer has a downstream divergent section downstream of the convergent section and having a divergence half angle of 0.1-2.0° over a first span of at least 3.0 times a minimum diameter of the mixer.
In various implementations, there may be essentially no normal mixture straight portion (e.g., no straight portion of length more than 5.0 times the minimum diameter of the mixer, more narrowly, no more than 2.0 times). There may be a diffuser downstream of the mixer (e.g., having a divergence half angle of greater than 2.5° over a span of at least 3.0 times the minimum diameter of the mixer. A needle may be mounted for reciprocal movement along the primary flowpath between a first position and a second position. A needle actuator may be coupled to the needle to drive the movement of the needle relative to the motive nozzle.
Other aspects of the disclosure involve a refrigeration system having a compressor, a heat rejection heat exchanger coupled to the compressor to receive refrigerant compressed by the compressor, a heat absorption heat exchanger, a separator, and such an ejector. An inlet of the separator may be coupled to the outlet of the ejector to receive refrigerant from the ejector.
The details of one or more embodiments are set forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features, objects, and advantages will be apparent from the description and drawings, and from the claims.
Like reference numbers and designations in the various drawings indicate like elements.
This exemplary configuration may be distinguished from a hypothetical configuration that has a conventional straight mixer and a shallow diffuser in several ways. First, there is the presence of the steeper diffuser. Second, there may be the absence of any straight mixer. For example, the exemplary mixer would lack any straight or nearly straight portion (e.g., less than 0.1° half angle) over a longitudinal span of more than 5.0 times a minimum diameter of the mixer (more narrowly, 3.0 times or 2.0 times).
The pressure recovery performance of a typical ejector depends greatly on the mixer diameter. For a given operating condition (i.e. motive and suction mass flows) there exists an optimum mixer entrance diameter. A mixer diameter smaller than the optimum value results in the acceleration of the flow within the mixer which is followed by a lossy shock through the diffuser resulting in a poor pressure-rise performance. On the other hand, if the mixer is too big for the flow-rate, the entrainment of the suction flow at the entrance would be suppressed, leading to a drop in the performance.
In
If, however, flow rate drops below the design point, the diverging mixer will have slightly worse (more lossy) performance than the straight mixer. However, it will be worse by much less than its high flow performance is better. Thus, integrated over time, the performance of the diverging mixer will be more efficient.
Thus, in the divergent mixer, the small entrance diameter reduces the deterioration of suction entrainment at low flow rates while the divergence suppresses the flow acceleration inside the mixer for high flow rate operating conditions.
In one basic implementation, the ejector may be implemented from a conventional baseline ejector (or configuration thereof) replacing the straight mixing portion with the slightly divergent portion. For example, DMIN may initially be chosen as the diameter of the baseline straight mixing portion. DT will be slightly greater based upon the chosen angle θ2. The diffuser divergence angle may be preserved from the baseline. Further experimental variations may refine such ejector or configuration. For example, it has been determined that DMIN may be modified to be slightly less than the diameter of the baseline straight mixing portion. For example, it may be 95-100% of the baseline diameter (more narrowly, 98-99%). In distinction, DT may be slightly greater than the baseline diameter (e.g., 101-110%, more narrowly, 102-104%).
Alternatively, or additionally, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) program may be used to model ejector performance while the various parameters are varied. For example, as discussed above,
As an alternative variation,
The ejectors and associated vapor compression systems may be fabricated from conventional materials and components using conventional techniques appropriate for the particular intended uses. Control may also be via conventional methods. Although the exemplary ejectors are shown omitting a control needle, such a needle and actuator may, however, be added.
Although an embodiment is described above in detail, such description is not intended for limiting the scope of the present disclosure. It will be understood that various modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the disclosure. For example, when implemented in the remanufacturing of an existing system or the reengineering of an existing system configuration, details of the existing configuration may influence or dictate details of any particular implementation. Accordingly, other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims.
Benefit is claimed of U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 61/501,448, filed Jun. 27, 2011, and entitled “Ejector Mixer”, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety as if set forth at length.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2012/043453 | 6/21/2012 | WO | 00 | 9/16/2013 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2013/003179 | 1/3/2013 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3838002 | Gluntz et al. | Sep 1974 | A |
4301662 | Whitnah | Nov 1981 | A |
5230656 | Paterson et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5343711 | Kornhauser et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
6334758 | Popov | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6742356 | Saito et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6782713 | Takeuchi et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6941768 | Ikegami et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7497666 | Garris, Jr. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
20050044881 | Ogata et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20100313582 | Oh et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20120034106 | Lecoffre et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1332344 | Jan 2002 | CN |
1590926 | Mar 2005 | CN |
101532760 | Sep 2009 | CN |
1160522 | Dec 2001 | EP |
1160155 | Jul 1958 | FR |
2010116076 | Oct 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280031987.2, dated Aug. 25, 2015. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280031987.2, dated Jan. 30, 2015. |
Praitoon Chaiwongsa et al., Effect of Throat Diameters of the Ejector on the Performance of the Refrigeration Cycle Using a Two-Phase Ejector as an Expansion Device, International Journal of Refrigeration, May 1, 2007, pp. 601-608, vol. 30, No. 4. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2012/043453, dated Aug. 9, 2012. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 201280031987.2, dated Dec. 21, 2015. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140109604 A1 | Apr 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61501448 | Jun 2011 | US |