Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ejector Modeling and Examining of Possibility of Replacing Liquid Vacuum Pump in Vacuum Production Systems
Ejector Modeling and Examining of Possibility of Replacing Liquid Vacuum Pump in Vacuum Production Systems
2, April 2011
II. THEORITICAL
I. INTRODUCTION
Ejectors are important equipment to produce vacuum and
although have a relatively low efficiency, many industries
and power plants use them to produce vacuum. Due to simple
design and lack of moving parts in system, installation costs
and a little maintenance is required and therefore is easily
used is the industry. On the other hand, the major defects of
ejectors, is large size versus their relatively little efficiency
and production of noise pollution and high consumption of
high pressure steam.
Several review articles to assess the full works have done
in order to optimize the yield and consider the function of
ejectors which have been published for example cunnanond
and Emas [1] and Sun Aphornatana completely analyzed
functionality of ejectors and those which have looked like
sun and Emas [2], who have studied mathematical models for
designing ejectors.
In this study, with attention to work done by previous
researchers to evaluate and recognize ejectors, Different parts
of ejector has been modeled and simulated with the computer
analysis of production system of Tehran refinery vacuum in
which ejector was used.
P1 1 2 1
= 1 +
.M
(1)
P2
2n
T1
1 2
.M (2)
= 1+
T2
2 n
91
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
Mixing chamber
Nozzle
Ejector's Throat
Diffuse
r
Ejector's Output
M 4+
Calculating
Pc by equation (31)
|<
W1-W2|
92
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
(3)
P2 =
1 2 1
.M 2 + 1
2 n
Ts
(5)
1
1+
. M 22
2 n
M 4 =
T
(1 + w)1 + w. v
Ts
C2 = .RT2 (6)
By finding the speed of sound in level 2, the actual flow
rate at this stage is achieved as follows:
V2 = C2 M 2 (7)
M5 =
1+
M 42 +
(18)
. M 24
(19)
2
. M 42 1
1
+ M 52
(20)
(11)
T2
1
M3 =
2
M 52 1
1
M i =
(17)
T4 =
M v2
( + 1) M 4 ( 1)
(16)
2. M 4
M4 =
Tv
Ts
M 2 + wM v
2 Pv
=
.
1 P2
(15)
M v22 ( 1) + 2
M v22 ( + 1)
M v2 =
( 4)
(13)
M 22 ( 1) + 2
+1
2
1 2 1
(
.M 2 )
).(1 +
2
1+
A2
=
A1
M 22
M 22 ( + 1)
M 2 =
P3 =
(12)
P2
1 2 1
M3
1 +
2
(22)
Also the speed of sound and the actual flow rate in section
3 and 4 are obtained as:
C 3 = .RT3
93
(23)
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
C 4 = .RT4
(24)
V3 = C 3 M 3
(25)
V4 = C 4 M 4
( 26)
1 + M 42
. P4
1 + M 52
(28)
V5 = [V 42 + (h4 h5 )] 2
( 29 )
1
2 P2 P2 12
. 1
PC PC
A1 PC
1
= .
1
.
A3 Ps
2 12
Tv 2 1
1 + w.
. 1
w
1
(
)
+
Ts + 1
+ 1
(30)
mc = m s + mv
(31)
1 2 1
PC = P5 . d .
. M 5 + 1
2
(32)
30
28
26
24
22
20
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
85
38
83
36
81
34
79
32
77
30
75
28
73
26
71
24
69
22
67
20
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
8500
65
9000
40
85
38
83
36
81
34
79
32
77
30
75
28
73
26
71
24
69
22
20
3500
67
3700
3900
4100
4300
4500
4700
4900
5100
5300
65
5500
40
85
38
83
36
81
34
79
32
77
30
75
28
73
26
71
24
69
22
67
20
3500
3600
3700
3800
3900
4000
4100
65
4200
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
economically affordable.
Table 4 shows the result of using ejectors in third step in
different position.
value
Profile
value
Profile
Number of condensers
Number of condensers
15696 Ib / hr
15696 Ib / hr
Ib / hr 6050
Ib / hr 10697
Ib / hr 5126
Ib / hr 8273
1.9 Psia
2.4 Psia
4.8 Psia
4.8 Psia
15 Psia
15.5 Psia
545 0 F
545 0 F
304.7 Psia
304.7 Psia
2EJ-152 A/B
Percent relative
error
0.05%
steam () Ib / hr
consumption rate
simulation
design
3612
3651
2EJ-151 A/B
Percent relative
error
0.08%
steam () Ib / hr
(consumption rate
simulation
design
5671
5600
Percent
relative error
1.26%
3985
EJ-152 A/B
0.01%
2985
2950
EJ-151 A/B
1.18%
4835
4835
Capacity (m3/hr)
Pump
third step
in second step
first step
(mbar)
35
33
5950
120
10350
200
10150
name
96
%0
International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2011
TABLE IV: RESULT OF USING EJECTORS IN THIRD STEP IN DIFFEREN POSITION
percent of changing of pump
Percent reduction of steam
Percent of changing of vacuum production of
capacity
consumption in the second stage
pump
ejector.
54
+39
+20
54
+39
+25
30
+8
+30
Enthalpy ( kj )
IV. CONCLUSION
kg
Length (m)
M
M
Much number
*
Pressure (kpa)
Temperature (K)
Velocity (m/s)
Specific volume ( m )
Suction rate
Yield
kg
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
Section area (m )
Cp
[5]
Cr
Contraction rate
[7]
Diameter (m)
Er
Expansion rate
[6]
97