“Optimizing CRMC and CPM Steam Jet Ejectors using ANSYS CFD and

Response Surface Optimization: A Comparative Design Study”

A
DISSERTATION REPORT

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the Award of the degree
Of
MASTER OF ENGINEERING
In
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
With

SPECIALIZATION IN HEAT POWER ENGINEERING

Submitted by

BHUVNESHWAR TEKAM
0101ME21ME05

Under the Supervision of

Dr. Aseem C Tiwari
Professor and Head
Department of Mechanical Engineering
UIT- RGPV Bhopal (M.P.)

December -2023
Department of Mechanical Engineering

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA
BHOPAL (M.P.)
 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI
VISHWAVIDYALAYA
(State University of Technology, Madhya Pradesh)
Airport Bypass Road, Gandhi Nagar, Bhopal, 462033
Ph.No.0755-2678810

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project entitled “Optimizing CRMC and CPM Steam Jet
Ejectors using ANSYS CFD and Response Surface Optimization: A Comparative
Design Study” is presented by Bhuvneshwar Tekam Enrollment No. 0101ME21ME05,
student of Final Year M.E. (Heat Power Engineering) in the DEPARTMENT OF
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, UIT-RGPV Bhopal (M.P.) is a record of the original
bonafide presentation of their work done by him under my supervision and guidance. He has
submitted this dissertation report towards partial fulfillment for the award of degree of Master of
Engineering of the Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal (M.P.) during the academic
year 2021-2023.

Prof. (Dr) Aseem C Tiwari Director

Supervisor UIT- RGPV, Bhopal (M.P.)
Professor & HOD

Department of Mech. Engineering

UIT- RGPV, Bhopal (M.P.)

I
 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI
VISHWAVIDYALAYA
(State University of Technology, Madhya Pradesh)
Airport Bypass Road, Gandhinagar, Bhopal, 462033
Ph.No.0755-2678810

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work which is being presented in this dissertation report entitled
“Optimizing CRMC and CPM Steam Jet Ejectors using ANSYS CFD and Response Surface
Optimization: A Comparative Design Study” in partial fulfillment of requirements for the award
of the degree of Master of Engineering in Heat Power Engineering from University
Institute of Technology, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya, Bhopal, M.P.,
is an authentic record of my own work carried out under the guidance of Dr. Aseem C
Tiwari, Prof. & HOD Mechanical Engineering Department UIT-RGPV, Bhopal (M.P.).
I further declare that the matter embodied in this dissertation has not been
submitted as a whole or in part for a degree/diploma at this or any other Institution/
University.

Bhuvneshwar Tekam
M.E. (Heat Power Engg.)
Enrollment No. 0101ME21ME05
University Institute of Technology
RGPV, Bhopal (M.P.)

II
 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RAJIV
GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI
VISHWAVIDYALAYA
(State University of Technology, Madhya Pradesh)
Airport Bypass Road, Gandhinagar, Bhopal, 462033
Ph.No.0755-2678810

ACKNOWLEDGEMEN

It is my pleasure to have opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to all people

who have provided their support, collaboration and encouraged me to carry out this
project work. First of all, a very sincere and honest word of thanks is due for my
Supervisor, Dr. Aseem C Tiwari Professor & HOD, Mechanical Engineering.
Department UIT-RGPV Bhopal, for his prominent suggestions and guidance. His
silent but constant and sincere inspiration and his liberal co- operation in all respect
helped me throughout my way of making this project a success.

I express my sincere thanks to our respected Dr. Sudhir Singh Bhadauria

Director, UIT-RGPV Bhopal and Dr. A.C. Tiwari Prof. & Head of Department
Mechanical, who have provided me support & encouragement to carry out this
project work at University Institute of Technology, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal (M.P.) and also for Dr. Alka Bani Agrawal Prof. Mech.
Dept. UIT RGPV, Bhopal, Dr. Nitin Shrivastav Prof. of Department of ME, UIT-
RGPV, Bhopal, Mr. Prashant Sharma & Dr. Ravindra Randa Associate Prof.
UIT- RGPV, Bhopal for their continuous support and co-operation during the
course of my thesis work. I wish to place my deep sense of thanks to all who are
directly or indirectly associated with my project for their cooperation and critical
suggestions during our experimental work.

Bhuvneshwar Tekam
Enrollment No. 0101ME21ME05

III
 ABSTRACT
This research presents a systematic approach to optimize Convergent-Divergent CPM and
CRMC ejector geometries through advanced CFD simulations and Response Surface
Optimization (RSO). Notably, RSO 2 designs demonstrated significant enhancements in mass
flow rates and successfully transitioned the flow regime to subsonic, improving ejector
efficiency. Insights from sensitivity analysis highlighted key parameters like throat and mixing
chamber diameters crucial for ejector performance. By reducing computational complexity,
RSO and sensitivity analysis facilitated efficient exploration of the design space. Validation
against a base paper affirmed the accuracy of the techniques. The findings provide valuable
guidance for ejector design in applications requiring high mass flow rates and precise flow
control, extending to fields like jet propulsion and chemical processing. Future research
avenues include exploring additional parameters and real-world experimental validation,
promising more efficient and resource-friendly engineering solutions. This study represents a
significant advancement in ejector technology, offering a comprehensive, efficient, and
accurate methodology for optimizing ejector performance while conserving computational
resources.

Keyword-: Ejector Optimization, CFD Simulations, Response Surface Optimization, Flow

Regime Control, Sensitivity Analysis, Mass Flow Enhancement, Engineering Applications,
Resource Efficiency, Validation, Fluid Dynamics.

IV
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificate.................................................................................................................................I

Declaration...............................................................................................................................II

Acknowledgement..................................................................................................................III

Abstract...................................................................................................................................IV

CHAPTER 01 - INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................01

1.2 Historical Development......................................................................................................01

1.3 Working Principles and Thermodynamics.........................................................................02

1.4 Components of Ejector.......................................................................................................04

1.5 Types of Ejectors................................................................................................................05

1.6 Usage and Applications......................................................................................................08

CHAPTER 02 - LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Literature Review...............................................................................................................12

2.2 Literature Gap....................................................................................................................30

CHAPTER 03 - OBJECTIVE

3.0 Objective............................................................................................................................31

CHAPTER 04 - METHODOLOGY

4.1 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………..32

4.2 Response Surface Optimization (RSO) and Its significance……………….…………….40

4.3 Optimum Results…………………………………………………………………………50

4.4 Comparative Analysis…………………………………………………………………....55

CHAPTER 05 - CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclusion..........................................................................................................................56

5.2 Future Scope of Work………………………………………………………………….....57

REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................58

V
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Steam Jet Ejector.....................................................................................................01

Figure 1.2 Geometry of single stage ejector.............................................................................02

Figure 1.3 Types of Ejectors.....................................................................................................04

Figure 1.4 Three Stage Ejector Diagram..................................................................................05

Figure 1.5 Constant Pressure Mixing Diagram........................................................................06

Figure 1.6 Condensing Ejector Diagram..................................................................................06

Figure 1.7 Application of Ejector.............................................................................................07

Figure 4.1 Dimensions & Parameters of components..............................................................28

Figure 4.2 CAD model in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................28

Figure 4.3 CAD model in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change
(CRMC) ejector........................................................................................................................29

Figure 4.4 Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................29

Figure 4.5 Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change
(CRMC) ejector........................................................................................................................30

Figure 4.6 Mach number contour for Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................31

Figure 4.7 Mach number contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................32

Figure 4.8 Static pressure contour for of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................33

Figure 4.9 Static pressure contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................33

Figure 4.10 Optimization Process, parameter sets created using algorithms

seeking......................................................................................................................................36

VI
Figure 4.11 Goodness of fit for iterating observed points and generated by
RSM.........................................................................................................................................38

Figure 4.12 Parameter sensitivity showing effects of parameters on RSO

study..........................................................................................................................................39

Figure 4.13 3D response curve showing relationship between mixing chamber length and
diameter with respect to the mass flow at throat inlet..............................................................39

Figure 4.14 3D response curve showing relationship between mixing chamber length and
diameter with respect to the Mach number at throat exit.........................................................40

Figure 4.15 3D response curve showing relationship between throat length and diameter with
respect to the mass flow at throat inlet.....................................................................................40

Figure 4.16 3D response curve showing relationship between throat length and diameter with
respect to the Mach number at throat exit................................................................................41

Figure 4.17 3D response curve showing relationship between diffuser length and diameter
with respect to the mass flow at throat inlet.............................................................................41

Figure 4.18 3D response curve showing relationship between diffuser length and diameter
with respect to the Mach number at throat exit........................................................................41

Figure 4.19 RSO Result Technical Graph Data.......................................................................43

Figure 4.20 Local Sensitivity Data..........................................................................................44

Figure 4.21 Comparative Analysis between initial case and RSO cases.................................45

VII
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 RSO Parameters........................................................................................................38

Table 4.2 Representing the defining ranges of various parameters of DOE……………........41

Table 4.3 DOE Parameters.......................................................................................................43

Table 4.4 RSO Result Parameters............................................................................................50

Table 4.5 Technical Analysis of Tabular Data and Graphical Reference.................................52

Table 4.6 RSO Comparative Analysis......................................................................................54

VIII
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CPM - Constant Pressure Mixing

CRMC - Constant Rate of Momentum Change

CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics

RSO - Response Surface Optimization

DOE - Design of Experiments

RSM - Response Surface Methodology

IX
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction

Steam jet ejectors are versatile fluidic devices that utilize the motive action of high pressure
steam to entrain, compress and discharge a suction fluid. Also referred to as steam injectors or
thermos compressors, they operate on the principle of momentum exchange between steam and
suction flows within specially designed components. Steam jet ejectors find extensive
application in the evacuation of surface condensers in steam power plants, vapor recompression
refrigeration systems, evaporative crystallization processes, and other vacuum or compression
applications across oil, gas, chemical and process industries. The key functionality of steam jet
ejectors arises from the conversion of pressure energy of motive steam into kinetic energy and
using the high velocity jet to create vacuum and compress vapors. This is accomplished without
any moving components, giving steam jet ejectors inherent reliability advantages over
traditional vacuum pumps and compressors which have complex rotating parts. The lack of
sliding interfaces also allows steam jet ejectors to effectively handle corrosive, fouling and
explosive gas streams without lubrication requirements.

Figure 1.1 Steam Jet Ejector

1.2 Historical Development

The conceptual origins of using a steam jet for entrainment and compression can be traced back
to the 1850s, with the early work of Charles Grafton Page on steam jet pumps mainly aimed at
removing water from flooded mines. However, the modern precursors of steam jet ejectors

1
emerged in the early 20th century, motivated by the rapidly expanding steam power industry.
In 1901, Charles Parsons patented the first actual design of a steam jet ejector, comprising a
steam nozzle, suction chamber, mixing chamber and diffuser (Parsons, 1901). This milestone
established the prototypical components and working principle of modern steam jet ejectors.
At that time, Parsons was at the forefront of steam turbine development, which marked a pivotal
transition from reciprocating engines to steam turbines for efficient power generation.

As outlined by Keenan, Neumann and Lustwerk (1950), the most vital early application of
Parsons’ steam jet ejector invention was in evacuating the surface condensers of steam turbine
power plants in the early 1900s. This enabled vacuum levels below 50 mmHg, drastically
improving turbine efficiency and output. By the 1920s, the steam jet ejector had completely
supplanted the vacuum pump for condenser evacuation. The simplicity, low maintenance costs
and vapor handling ability of steam jet ejectors proved transformative for the efficiency of
thermal power plants. Another key advancement in steam jet ejector designs emerged in the
1930s through the work of French inventor Maurice Rateau. As described by Chunnanond and
Aphornratana (2004), Rateau developed an improved steam jet ejector configuration that used
multiple fixed steam nozzles discharging onto a rotating plate. This enhanced the mixing
between the steam jet and suction flow and significantly improved the entrainment ratio and
compression efficiency compared to previous ejector designs.

The foundational one-dimensional analytical model for steam jet ejectors was formulated by
Keenan, Neumann and Lustwerk in their seminal 1950 paper. This established the basic
governing equations for thermodynamic analysis of ideal steam jet ejectors without accounting
for losses. In the 1990s, the extensive research by Eames, Aphornratana and others led to more
detailed one-dimensional ejector models as well as explorations into multi-dimensional
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) techniques.

1.3 Working Principles and Thermodynamics

The operating principle of a steam jet ejector is based on converting the pressure energy of high
pressure superheated steam into kinetic energy using a converging-diverging motive nozzle.
As per one-dimensional flow analysis, the motive steam undergoes isentropic expansion in the
converging section followed by isobaric expansion in the diverging section. The rapidly
expanding steam reaches sonic velocity at the nozzle throat, and supersonic velocities at the
outlet, creating a high velocity jet. The conversion of pressure to velocity follows the
Bernoulli's equation, and the flow behaviour can be modelled using isentropic flow relations.

2
The high velocity jet exiting the nozzle creates a low pressure zone at the nozzle outlet. This
low pressure induces the suction fluid to be entrained into the ejector through the suction inlet.
The entrainment ratio is defined as the mass flow rate of the suction fluid divided by the mass
flow rate of motive steam. (Figure 1.2)

Figure 1.2 Geometry of single stage ejector

The mixing between the motive steam jet and the suction flow occurs in the mixing chamber.
Due to momentum exchange, the velocity of the high-speed jet decreases while the velocity of
the suction flow increases. This transfer of momentum from the steam jet results in a rise in
pressure of the suction fluid. The mixing process can be analyzed using a control volume
approach by applying conservation laws for mass, momentum and energy. For optimal
operation, the mixing must be as uniform as possible. The length and diameter of the mixing
chamber govern the residence time available for momentum exchange. The mixed stream then
passes through the diffuser section where the kinetic energy is converted back into pressure
energy. The diffuser has an increasing area in the flow direction, which decelerates the flow
and increases the static pressure. The compression ratio of the steam jet ejector is defined as
the ratio of the outlet pressure to the inlet suction pressure. The thermodynamic efficiency is
the ratio of the actual enthalpy rise to the isentropic enthalpy rise across the ejector. One-
dimensional models provide reasonably good estimation of ejector performance but do not
capture radial variations and flow losses. For analyzing steam jet ejectors, the conservation
equations are applied to each component as well as the overall ejector system. The conditions
across the motive nozzle are modelled using isentropic relations. The mixing chamber analysis
assumes uniform mixing between the primary and secondary streams. This provides the mixed
conditions entering the diffuser. The diffuser is modelled as a constant area or constant pressure
process. Steam jet ejectors are valued for their straightforward configuration devoid of moving
parts, resulting in reliable operation with minimal maintenance. However, their performance
and flexibility is limited compared to other conventional technologies. Analyzing steam

3
ejectors poses challenges arising from the complex internal flow physics involving supersonic
flows, shockwaves, turbulent mixing and thermal disequilibrium between fluids.

Overall energy balance equates the enthalpy rise of the suction flow to the kinetic energy loss
of the motive steam. Momentum balance equates the thrust produced by the steam jet to the
momentum increase of the suction flow. Valid solutions require the pressures to be within
certain limits to avoid shockwaves or choking. The ejector geometry and primary/secondary
pressures dictate the thermodynamic performance. Multi-dimensional computational fluid
dynamics techniques are increasingly used to simulate the complex flow behaviour.

1.4 Components of Ejector

A steam jet ejector comprises several critical components that handle the thermodynamic
processes of expansion, entrainment, momentum exchange, compression and discharge. The
major components are the motive nozzle, suction inlet, mixing chamber, diffuser and outlets.
Auxiliary systems like steam supply chest, supports, instrumentation and valves are also
required. The design of each component significantly influences the performance and
efficiency of the ejector system.

Motive Nozzle

The motive nozzle is the most vital component which accelerates the motive steam to
supersonic velocities of 300-600 m/s using a convergent-divergent geometry. The convergent
section decreases the steam cross-section reaching sonic velocity at the throat. The divergent
section further expands the steam. The nozzle efficiency depends on the area ratio, contour and
roughness. Higher discharge velocities increase entrainment but reduce efficiency.

Suction Inlet

The suction inlet is positioned after the nozzle outlet at a suitable location for the low pressure
suction fluid to be entrained into the ejector. The inlet cross-section and contour determine the
inlet losses. Smaller inlets enhance vacuum performance but reduce capacity. The inlet should
be streamlined to minimize shock losses.

Mixing Chamber

The mixing chamber provides the contact length for momentum transfer between the
supersonic steam jet and the entrained suction flow. An appropriate diameter and length is
required for efficient mixing. The chamber is often cylindrical but optimizing the contour can
improve performance. Mixing can be enhanced by using multiple nozzles.

4
Diffuser

The diffuser converts the kinetic energy of the mixed stream into pressure rise. A gradually
diverging passage is used to decelerate the flow velocity and increase pressure. Conical,
annular or rectangular diffuser geometries are employed. The area ratio and divergence angle
affect overall compression efficiency.

1.5 Types of Ejectors

Steam ejectors can be categorized into different types based on the number of stages, flow
arrangement, operating pressures, and construction. The selection of an appropriate ejector type
is critical for achieving optimal performance for a given application.

Figure 1.3 Types of Ejectors

• Single Stage Ejectors

The most common type is the single stage steam jet ejector consisting of a motive steam nozzle,
suction chamber, mixing chamber, diffuser and outlet in a single body. It represents the basic
ejector configuration where the compression occurs in one step. Single stage ejectors are
widely used for low compression ratio applications such as maintaining condenser vacuum in
power plants. They can handle inlet suction pressures down to about 80 mm Hg absolute. Single
stage units are relatively compact, simple to operate and most economical for modest
compression requirements. (Figure 1.3)

5
• Multi-Stage Ejectors

For obtaining very high compression ratios above 10:1, multi-stage ejectors are utilized. In
these, two or more single stage steam jet ejectors are combined in series with the discharge
from the first stage fed as the suction inlet for the second stage. Additional stages can be added
to achieve the desired outlet pressure. The motive steam requirement increases considerably
for multi-stage units. Intercoolers are often placed between stages to remove the heat of
compression. Multi-stage configurations are commonly used for evaporator applications in
chemical plants and as thermo-compressors for refrigeration. (Figure 1.4)

Figure 1.4 Three Stage Ejector Diagram

• Constant Pressure Mixing Ejectors

Also referred to as double throat ejectors, these contain a mixing chamber with two throats - a
primary throat near the motive nozzle outlet and a secondary throat downstream where the
mixed flow enters the diffuser. The region between the throats acts as a constant pressure
mixing zone. This design forces the primary jet to rapidly decelerate after the primary throat,
improving the mixing process and compression efficiency compared to a regular mixing
chamber. However, constant pressure ejectors have more complex geometries and may
experience stability issues.

6
 Figure 1.5 Constant Pressure Mixing Diagram

• Removable Cartridge Ejectors

These consist of a removable cartridge that houses the motive nozzle, mixing chamber and
diffuser components. The cartridge can be easily inserted into the ejector body which contains
the steam chest and inlet-outlet connections. This modular construction allows quick
maintenance, inspection and replacement of worn components. The simple removal of
cartridges avoids the need to disconnect the entire piping system. Removable cartridge ejectors
are advantageous where regular maintenance of internal parts is desired.

• Condensing Ejectors

This type of ejector has an additional condenser section at the outlet to condense and recover
the motive steam after it has been used for entrainment. The steam condensate can be reused
in the boiler. A significant portion of the motive steam's latent heat is recovered by the
condenser, improving the energy efficiency. Condensing ejectors are suitable when the latent
heat can be effectively used for district heating or feedwater heating.

Figure 1.6 Condensing Ejector Diagram

7
• Ejector Orientations

Based on the orientation of the motive and suction inlets, steam ejectors can have horizontal,
vertical upflow or vertical downflow configurations. Horizontal ejectors have parallel inlets
while vertical ejectors have perpendicular inlets. Vertical downflow ejectors require a drain
section below the mixing chamber for removal of accumulated liquid. Orientation affects the
flow behaviour and must be suited for the service conditions.

• Materials of Construction

Steam jet ejectors handle high temperature motive steam requiring selection of suitable
materials like steel, stainless steel, Inconel or Monel. The nozzle and mixing chamber may
employ high strength materials. Corrosion resistant coatings are used for wet suction
applications. The body can be of cast iron or fabricated steel. Gasket materials must withstand
the temperature and pressures involved. Hardness and surface finishes are designed to
minimize erosion and friction losses.

1.6 Usage and Applications

Steam jet ejectors find usage in a wide range of industries owing to their simple and reliable
design with no moving parts. The major application areas are summarized below:

Figure 1.7 Application of Ejector

8
• Power Plants

In steam turbine power plants, steam jet ejectors are widely used to maintain the required
vacuum levels in surface condensers of the order of 50-60 mmHg absolute pressure. The
ejectors continuously remove incondensable gases like air as well as non-condensing steam
from the condenser and discharge them to the atmosphere. This facilitates obtaining deeper
vacuum in the condenser, which leads to increased turbine efficiency and output. Ejectors offer
advantages of simple and rugged construction with no moving parts, handling of variable vapor
loads, and lower maintenance costs compared to vacuum pumps.

• Evaporators

In industrial evaporators used for concentration of process fluids and solutions, steam jet
ejectors serve as thermocompressors to recover the low pressure evaporated vapor and
compress it to a higher pressure. The compressed vapor is then reused as the heat source to
drive evaporation in the next effect instead of live motive steam. This vapor recompression
results in major energy savings in multi-effect evaporators. Ejectors can provide higher
reliability than mechanical vapor compressors in handling corrosive and fouling vapors. Multi-
stage ejectors may be required for compression ratios above 10:1 in multiple-effect
evaporators.

• Crystallizers

Similar to evaporators, steam jet ejectors compress the evaporated vapor in crystallization
plants producing salts, sugars, fertilizers and other compounds. The compressed vapor serves
as the heat source for the process fluid in the next crystallizer body instead of using live steam.
Ejectors allow efficient vapor recompression between multiple crystallization effects,
enhancing energy efficiency. The absence of moving parts provides reliability advantage for
handling corrosive saline solutions.

• Refrigeration Systems

In refrigeration systems, steam jet ejectors can replace mechanical compressors for the
compression of refrigerant vapor exiting the evaporator before it enters the condenser. This
utilizes available low grade thermal energy in the form of waste steam to provide the
compression work instead of electricity. Ejector refrigeration cycles are employed in ice plants,
cold storages, gas liquefaction and other large capacity systems owing to higher reliability and
lower maintenance than electric motor-driven compressors.

9
• Petrochemical Industry

In oil refineries and petrochemical plants, steam jet ejectors are often used as vapor recovery
units to collect fugitive hydrocarbon vapors from storage tanks, reactors, distillation columns
and other equipment. The vapors containing volatile organic compounds are then routed to a
condenser or disposal system. Ejectors offer simple, reliable and continuous operation in
handling large volumes of hydrocarbon and chemical vapors compared to vacuum pumps.

• Desalination

In membrane-based desalination systems, steam jet ejectors maintain the required vacuum
levels on the permeate side of RO or distillation membrane modules, typically around 50-60
mmHg absolute pressure. This enhances the vapor pressure gradient across the membrane,
increasing the freshwater production rate. Ejectors provide better reliability and lower
maintenance than vacuum pumps for continuous operation. Multiple ejectors may be installed
for large capacity desalination plants.

• Aerospace Industry

In aerospace systems, steam jet ejectors are used for thrust augmentation of propulsion engines.
The high velocity jet entrains and compresses the surrounding fluids, increasing thrust. Ejectors
also find application in noise reduction of jet engines by enhancing pumping and mixing
performance. They are also used for simulating high altitude test conditions in ground test
chambers.

• Automotive Industry

Steam jet ejectors have been proposed for using waste heat from internal combustion engine's
coolant to activate the air-conditioning system. Ejectors can provide air-conditioning without
significant load on the engine compared to mechanical compressors. However, controllable
operation remains a challenge.

10
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Literature Review

Decker, L.O [1]. Examine the cold facts of steam-jet vacuum cooling. Chemical Engineering
Progress, 1993. This article compares mechanical compression or absorption systems with
steam-jet vacuum cooling techniques, emphasizing the benefits of the former. Steam-jet
vacuum systems are particularly favoured in scenarios requiring continuous large flow rates of
cool water. Notably, utility and cogeneration plants often utilize steam-jet cooling to efficiently
manage excess summer steam, enhancing the balance between steam production and electricity
generation during warmer months. Initial costs of these systems are contingent upon their size
and capacity, with 100-200 ton units exhibiting competitive pricing compared to their
mechanical counterparts. Furthermore, the necessity of a cooling tower arises in situations
where natural water sources like rivers, ponds, or lakes are unavailable. The inherent simplicity
and reliability of steam-jet systems contribute to significant savings in maintenance
expenditures.

He, S.; Li, Y.; Wang, R.Z [2]. The development of mathematical ejector modelling.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009, 13, 1760–1780. The overall efficiency,
capacity, size, and cost-effectiveness of ejector refrigeration systems are all greatly influenced
by the performance of the ejector component. An integral component of carrying out a
comprehensive analysis of ejector performance is now creating and utilizing mathematical
models. In addition to aiding in system design and optimization, these models are used to
interpret experimental data and direct system operation. In order to build mathematical models
that emphasize the thermodynamic and hydrodynamic properties of ejectors, a thorough
assessment of the literature pertaining to these research endeavors is addressed in this study.
The paper commences by delivering an introductory overview of ejectors, elucidating their
fundamental principles, flow dynamics, and mixing mechanisms, as well as expounding upon
the methodologies employed in constructing these mathematical models. It then goes on to
provide a wide range of mathematical models, including idealized hypotheses, governing
formulas, auxiliary conditions, approaches to solving the problems, and significant
conclusions. These models fall into two primary categories: steady thermodynamic models,
further subdivided into single-phase and two-phase flow models, and dynamic models, further
subdivided based on the phases considered during the flow analysis. The review emphasizes

11
the way dynamic models outperform stationary thermodynamic models in terms of prediction
accuracy as well as comprehensive insights. Additionally, the paper briefly touches upon
simplified empirical and semi-empirical models that are grounded in measured data. Overall,
this comprehensive review is a useful tool for comprehending the development trajectory and
current status of mathematical models in ejectors. It also highlights important directions for
further model improvement, such as improved mixing mechanism representation and shock
wave capture, which further the continuous progress of ejector modelling techniques.

Abdulateef, J.M.; ., et. al. [3] Review on solar-driven ejector refrigeration technologies.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009. This paper's main goal is to offer an extensive literature
analysis on solar-driven ejector refrigeration systems, offering insightful information about
their history and basic principles of operation. This report provides ani-depth overview of the
development of solar-driven ejector refrigeration systems, including an analysis of their
historical evolution and more recent advances. It becomes evident that these solar-powered
systems have a great deal of potential for meeting the growing demand for energy conservation
and environmental protection as well as for cooling needs like air conditioning, ice production,
and the preservation of food and medical supplies in remote areas. Consequently, research
endeavours in this domain continue to rise as scientists and engineers seek solutions to the
challenges that presently impede these systems from competing with the established vapor
compression counterparts. Despite the significant strides made, substantial research efforts are
still required to enable large-scale industrial applications and the eventual replacement of
conventional refrigeration machinery.

Rahamathullah, M.R.; et. al. [4] Review On Historical And Present Developments In Ejector
Systems. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2013. Ejectors, although seemingly straightforward pieces of
equipment, often go underutilized, with their potential applications extending beyond their
conventional use for gas and vapor pumping to create a vacuum. This paper aims to present a
comprehensive review of the development in ejector technology, the diverse applications of
ejector systems, and strategies for enhancing their performance. The discussion covers a range
of topics that offer insightful information on the history and principles of operation of ejectors,
such as the use of geometric optimizations, numerical simulations of ejector systems, and
mathematical modeling. Although the majority of current studies have been directed toward
computer modeling, it is crucial to stress the necessity of larger-scale applications and more
comprehensive experimental work in order to fully comprehend and realize the potential of
ejectors in real-world industrial settings. Researchers and practitioners looking to investigate

12
the diverse capabilities of ejector systems and further their development for a range of
applications may find this paper to be a useful resource.

Chen, X.; et. al. [5]. Current advancements in technologies related to ejector refrigeration.
Renew. Sustain. Energy. (2013). This study provides a thorough assessment of the literature on
the many uses for ejector refrigeration systems, their performance enhancement techniques,
and new developments in ejector technology. The review sheds significant insight on the
fundamental ideas and practical applications of ejectors. A wide variety of research works
covering topics including refrigerant selection, mathematical modelling, numerical simulations
of ejector systems, geometric optimizations, optimization of operating conditions, and ejector
system integration with other refrigeration systems are all grouped. While a significant portion
of recent research has focused on computer modelling, it is imperative to underscore the
necessity for additional experimental and large-scale investigations to gain a deeper
understanding of ejector systems in practical industrial contexts. Researchers and industry
professionals interested in learning more about the possible uses and performance
enhancements of ejector technology are going to find this paper to be a useful resource as it
develops.

Chen, J., et. al. [6] A review on versatile ejector applications in refrigeration systems. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015. This paper offers valuable insights into the working principles of
ejectors and explores their extensive versatility and diverse applications within refrigeration
technologies. The study provides a comprehensive examination of several ejector refrigeration
system types, grouping them into four categories: ejector-enhanced vapor compression
systems, combination refrigeration systems, advanced ejector refrigeration systems, and
conventional ejector refrigeration systems. Furthermore, the present study explores important
variables that affect the best possible operation of ejector systems, emphasizing the findings of
research that consistently emphasizes their energy-efficient qualities and their substantial
potential to efficiently handle a broad spectrum of refrigeration temperature requirements.

Besagni, G., et. al. [7] Ejector refrigeration: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2016. In this paper, an extensive literature review on ejector refrigeration systems and the
associated working fluids is presented as an alternative to conventional compressor-based
refrigeration technologies, in response to the increasing demand for thermal comfort and
cooling systems in buildings. The goal of this review is to reduce energy consumption. The
review critically examines ejector technology and behaviour, analyzes the impact of refrigerant

13
properties on ejector performance, and categorizes various ejector refrigeration systems,
spanning historical developments, current applications, and future trends. Researchers,
practitioners, and other interested parties can use it as a useful resource to learn more about
how energy-efficient cooling technologies are developing.

Little, A.B.; Garimella, S. [8] A critical review linking ejector flow phenomena with
component- and system-level performance. Int. J. Refrig. 2016. By integrating a
comprehensive grasp of the fundamentals of ejector fluid flow with practical cycle applications,
this study offers an in-depth critical analysis of ejector technology in chiller applications.
Ejectors are passive momentum-transfer devices that do not require moving parts or external
mechanical input. Since the 1940s, ejectors have been the focus of several studies, ranging
from early analytical and numerical modeling to modern visualization research analyzing
ejector behavior. This evaluation also includes the newest computational models. The
implications of two-phase flow dynamics in ejectors and improved computer modeling of
shock phenomena are proposed as future research objectives. The paper also examines the use
of ejectors in chiller systems, emphasizing the development of passive systems that run without
a mechanical input and the fundamental ejector-based chiller cycle. Notably, it establishes
crucial linkages between component-level and system-level ejector investigations, promising
to enhance overall system performance through integrated research endeavours.

Keenan, J.H., et. al. [9]. An investigation of ejector design by analysis and experiment. J.
Appl. Mech. 1950. An analytical method for assessing the efficiency of jet pumps or ejectors
in one dimension is presented in this work. Constant pressure and constant area are two
different conditions under which the mixing of primary and secondary streams is taken into
consideration in the analysis. These results suggest that constant-pressure mixing can lead to
better performance. Strong agreement is found over a wide range of variables when comparing
experimental results with analytical predictions. The report also presents experimental data on
the minimum tube length needed to mix the two streams effectively. Moreover, it offers a useful
approach to jet pump design, providing insightful information for engineering uses.

Aphornratana, S., et. al. [10]. Examining an ejector refrigerator experimentally: The impact
of mixing chamber shape on system efficiency. Int. J. Energy Res. 2001. This paper describes
an experimental investigation that was carried out in an ejector refrigeration cycle using R11
as the working fluid. A variety of experimental setups were used in the study, including boiler
temperatures between 100 and 110°C, condenser temperatures between 35 and 41°C, and
evaporator temperatures as low as 12°C. Two distinct mixing chambers with an 8 mm throat

14
diameter were used; each showed consistent evidence of fluid choking in the first chamber but
not in the second. The system demonstrated greater operational flexibility in the absence of
choking within the mixing chamber. The cooling capacity of the studies varied from 500 to
1700 W, and their cooling temperatures were as low as -5°C. There was a range of the
coefficient of performance (COP) from 0.1 to 0.25. These findings provide important new
information about the characteristics of ejector refrigeration systems using R11 as the
refrigerant.

Yapici, R.; Ersoy, H.K. [11] This section outlines how the refrigeration system performs, using
the constant area ejector flow model as a basis. 2005's Energy Management Conversion.
Emphasizing optimal results for R-123, this paper presents a theoretical investigation of an
ejector refrigeration system utilizing a constant area ejector flow model. The results indicate
that variations in condenser and evaporator temperatures have a larger effect on the optimal
coefficient of performance (COP) than variations in generator temperature. Most notably, this
study discovers that the optimum coefficient of performance (COP) and area ratio obtained
from the constant area flow model are larger than those discovered in the literature for the
constant pressure flow model, for the same operating temperatures. But given the identical
area ratio, the system's COP featuring the constant pressure ejector is relatively higher,
contingent upon lowering the condenser temperature. Additionally, whether refrigeration
systems run at higher condenser temperatures or lower evaporator temperatures, their COP
values are almost constant. With light on the complex interactions between variables and a
focus on the possibility for increased energy efficiency, these findings provide insightful
information about the performance characteristics of ejector refrigeration systems.

Pianthong, K., et. al. [12]. Utilizing computational fluid dynamics, an examination and
enhancement of the ejector refrigeration system are conducted. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007,
Since they don't require a compressor to function, ejector refrigeration systems are renowned
for using inexpensive energy sources and requiring minimal maintenance. The ejector
component's efficiency is a critical factor in how well these systems operate. Therefore,
optimizing the overall efficiency of ejector refrigeration systems requires a thorough
examination of ejector characteristics as well as the creation of effective ejector designs. In
order to forecast flow phenomena and the operation of steam ejectors for counterflow parallel
mixing (CPM) and counterflow multi-throat area (CMA), this study uses computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) with the FLUENT code. The ejector refrigeration system operates with water
as the working fluid, with the boiler operating between 120 and 140 °C and the evaporator

15
between 5 and 15 °C. The use of CFD shows its ability to precisely forecast ejector performance
and clarify the effects of changing operating circumstances on the effective area, a crucial factor
that directly influences ejector performance. Additionally, the investigation reveals that the
flow patterns exhibit limited dependence on the suction zone, as evidenced by the congruence
between axisymmetric and 3D simulations. By providing crucial insights for the design of
ejectors that are suited to the best operating conditions, this research advances our
understanding of ejector characteristics.

Grazzini, G.; Mariani, [13] A simple software to design a multi-stage jet pump for cycles of
refrigeration. Energy Convers. Manag. 1998 A water refrigeration cycle's jet-pump device
design can be aided by a PC application developed in Quick BASIC. The program operates
with a defined cooling capacity under specific generator, evaporator, and condenser conditions.
The setup that provides the system with the highest possible pressure gain is the outcome of its
automation. The underlying physical model is formulated based on the classical one-
dimensional framework with constant-area mixing. The introduction of a second stage occurs
when boundary conditions prevent a single stage from meeting the necessary compression
ratio. The secondary stream's kinetic energy is optimally harnessed by a compact structure that
is promoted by the annular primary flow utilized at this stage. A third stage is ruled out as a
result of discussing the shortcomings of the perfect gas model. A robust association is seen for
the single-stage model when compared to experimental data found in literature using
comparative analysis. For this reason, the multistage annular jet-pump becomes one of the most
promising innovations in refrigeration technology.

Grazzini, G.; Rocchetti, A [14] .Numerical optimisation of a two-stage ejector refrigeration

plant. Int. J. Refrig. 2002. Jet-refrigeration cycles offer an intriguing solution in the context of
growing environmental concerns and the imperative for energy conservation. Their appeal lies
in their cost-effectiveness, reliability, and the ability to utilize water as an operating fluid. This
study examines the operation of a steam/steam ejector cycle refrigerator, which has an annular
primary at the second stage of the two-stage ejector configuration. The research study focuses
on an open system steady-state refrigerator that uses water streams at predetermined inlet
temperatures to facilitate heat exchange with three shell and tube heat exchangers: the
generator, condenser, and evaporator. The analysis considers external friction losses in the
water streams and the irreversibilities of heat transfer within the heat exchangers, while
ignoring the effects of interior vapor pressure drops. To optimize the system's performance, a
simulation program is employed to iteratively seek the maximum Coefficient of Performance

16
(COP) under specific external inlet fluid temperatures. The optimization procedure is
dependent on the heat exchangers' dimensions, temperature differentials, and mass fluxes.
Ultimately, the program yields design parameters for the ejector and heat exchangers, paving
the way for more efficient and environmentally friendly refrigeration solutions.

Kong, F.; Kim, H.D. [15] Analytical and computational studies on the performance of a two-
stage ejector-diffuser system. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, because of its inherent
advantages, which set it apart from conventional fluid machinery and include its simple design
and lack of moving components, the supersonic ejector-diffuser system has found significant
application in a variety of industrial applications. But the conventional one-stage ejector-
diffuser system has been criticized for being ineffective, mostly because of energy losses that
transpire throughout the mixing and discharge processes and result in momentum waste. A two-
stage ejector-diffuser system is an intriguing design to absorb the extra momentum from the
discharged flow and enhance overall system performance. Using both numerical simulations
based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations and theoretical evaluations using a
1D mathematical model, this work provides a comprehensive description of the intricate flow
processes in single-stage and two-stage ejector-diffuser systems. The accuracy of the
theoretical and numerical results is verified by validation against the available experimental
data. To assess the two-stage ejector's performance in comparison to its single-stage equivalent,
the study offers a thorough explanation and comparison. The analysis includes important
benefit coefficients such as the mass flow flux ratio, the coefficient of power (COPR), and the
entrainment ratio. The main conclusions highlight how well the two-stage ejector-diffuser
system can enhance entrainment effects and efficiently collect additional momentum, leading
to better system performance.

Eames, I.W [16]. A new prescription for the design of supersonic jet-pumps: The constant rate
of momentum change method. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2002, [16] This paper introduces and
assesses a novel theoretical approach for designing jet-pumps commonly employed in jet-pump
cycle refrigerators. The technique is based on the assumption that the diffuser passage of a
supersonic jet pump has a constant rate of momentum change. The theoretical results presented
in this study show significant improvements in two important parameters: the pressure lift ratio
(PDE/Ps) and the entrainment ratio (Rm), which are greater than what jet-pumps developed
using traditional techniques can achieve. The study is further bolstered by the presentation of
experimental data that aligns with and validates the theoretical findings.

17
Kitrattana, B., et. al. [17] Comparison of traditional and CRMC ejector performance used in
a steam ejector refrigeration. Energy Procedia 2017. In comparison to a conventional ejector,
the performance of a steam ejector constructed using the constant rate of momentum change
(CRMC) theory was assessed in this study. Three different types of ejectors were designed and
constructed for testing: a CRMC ejector with a throat diameter of 13.4 mm, a second traditional
ejector with a throat diameter of 13.4 mm, and a traditional ejector with a throat diameter of 19
mm. These ejectors were made to fit into an experimental ejector refrigerator with a 1kW
capacity with ease. The boiler saturation pressure was found to fluctuate between 130°C and
140°C, while the evaporator saturation temperature stayed constant at 7.5°C. The results of the
study demonstrated that, under the same operating conditions and with an identical ejector area
ratio (the ratio of nozzle throat area to ejector throat area), the CRMC ejector outperformed the
traditional ejectors by achieving a higher entrainment ratio while maintaining the critical
condenser pressure at the same level.

Kumar, V., et. al. [18] Realization of novel constant rate of kinetic energy change (CRKEC)
supersonic ejector. Energy 2018. This research offers a fresh perspective on ejector design,
considering ejectors as energy exchange devices first. The geometry of ejectors is determined
by the rate of energy change in the system, namely the constant rate of kinetic energy change
(CRKEC). This represents a departure from conventional geometry-based design towards a
flow physics-based approach. The CRKEC approach offers advantages in terms of reducing
thermodynamic shock, a major source of irreversibility in traditional ejector systems. This
research uses a 1-D gas dynamic model with frictional effects to propose a more realistic
supersonic ejector design based on CRKEC principles. The model predicts supersonic air
ejector shape for common input parameters: recovery ratio (ζ) of around 1.4, main stagnation
pressure (Pop) of approximately 5.7 bar, secondary stagnation pressure (Pos) of approximately
0.7 bar, and entrainment ratio (ω) of approximately 0.53. These outcomes are confirmed by
means of a comprehensive numerical examination utilizing the Navier-Stokes formulas, taking
into consideration turbulence in a two-dimensional axi-symmetric model. A created prototype's
experimental results are also covered in the report, showing consistent results with numerical
studies and the predictions of the 1-D gas dynamic model.

Chang, Y.J.; Chen, Y.M. [19] Enhancement of a steam-driven ejector using a novel
application of the petal nozzle. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. Trans. Chin. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 2000. This
study delves into the potential for enhancing the performance of steam-driven ejectors. First, a
one-dimensional ejector theory is used to assess the effects of three significant isentropic

18
efficiencies: diffuser efficiency (ηm), mixing efficiency (ηm), and nozzle efficiency (ηm).
According to the theoretical research, the other two efficiencies have relatively small effects
on ejector performance, while mixing efficiency is crucial. This highlights the significance of
efficient mixing in promoting ejector performance. Additionally, by utilizing a petal nozzle,
the research aims to improve mixing efficiency. A thorough analysis of the behavior and
features of this innovative nozzle design is conducted under a variety of operating conditions,
including primary pressure, secondary pressure, and back pressure. Through a comparison of
experimental results with theoretical predictions, the use of a petal nozzle is shown to improve
ejector performance in fact. The study uses the shadowgraph approach for visualization in order
to obtain deeper insights into the inner flow field of an ejector. This method produces insightful
observations of patterns of flow that provide opportunities to improve ejector performance.

Garris, C.A. [20] Pressure Exchanging Ejector and Refrigeration Apparatus and Method. U.S.
Patent 5647221A, 1997. This innovation proposes a novel ejector-refrigeration system and
method that are very suitable for energy harvesting, by utilizing waste heat from car engines
and solar collectors. This system may use safe refrigerants, such water, which makes it
environmentally friendly as well. By operating on the basis of "pressure exchange" instead of
"turbulent mixing," as is the case with conventional ejectors, the novel ejector presented here
achieves considerable improvements in performance. The oblique compression and expansion
waves produced within the jets originating from numerous supersonic nozzles are utilized by
this pressure-exchanging ejector, which is intended for use with compressible working fluids.
These waves transfer energy to a secondary gaseous fluid, with their movement relative to the
ejector housing facilitated by motion-inducing mechanisms applied to the nozzles, which are
integrated into a rotor. Within a vapor-compression refrigeration system, the pressure-
exchanging ejector of this invention serves as both an ejector and a compressor, with the
working fluid acting as the refrigerant. This innovative approach promises enhanced efficiency
and sustainability in refrigeration applications.

Garris, C.A.; ., et. al. [21]. The Pressure-Exchange Ejector Heat Pump. In Proceedings of the
ASME International Mechanical Engineering Conference and Exposition, Anaheim, CA, USA,
15–20 November 1998. By utilizing non-dissipative non-steady flow mechanisms, the
pressure-exchange ejector offers a viable path toward a significant advancement in ejector
performance. It's astonishing how much of the mechanical simplicity seen in conventional
steady-flow ejectors is retained. The prospect of such a remarkable enhancement in
performance carries profound implications, particularly in the context of ejector refrigeration

19
applications. If this advancement can be successfully demonstrated, it holds the potential to
yield significant environmental benefits by reducing the usage of ozone-depleting CFCs and
curbing greenhouse gas emissions. This paper delves into the intricacies of pressure-exchange
ejector refrigeration, offering a comprehensive exploration of the concept. It evaluates the
possible consequences that can occur if specific ejector performance levels are attained and
makes comparisons with current technologies. Since non-steady flow induction's fluid
dynamics is the primary factor limiting system performance, the paper also discusses relevant
research concerns and recent developments in this field. Ultimately, this research endeavours
to shed light on the transformative potential of pressure-exchange ejectors in the realm of
refrigeration and their environmental significance.

Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A [22]. Non-Steady Three-Dimensional Flow Field Analysis in
Supersonic Flow Induction. In Proceedings of the ASME 2002 Joint US-European Fluids
Engineering Division Conference, Montreal, QC. This paper conducts a thorough examination
of supersonic pressure-exchange ejectors using numerical analysis and computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) modelling. The research underscores the pivotal influence of geometry on
ejector performance, establishing its critical role in the system. Through 3D CFD simulations,
the study effectively anticipates and elucidates the various trends observed in the performance
curves of these ejectors. The results vividly demonstrate the substantial advantages that non-
steady flow mechanisms can offer over conventional steady-flow ejectors, shedding light on
the transformative potential of this technology.

Hong, W.J.; ., et. al. [23]. A novel thermally driven rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector
refrigeration system with environmental benefits and energy efficiency. Energy 2004. This
paper presents the latest research on the design and performance evaluation of a new supersonic
rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector meant for thermally operated ejector refrigeration
systems. The software is the result of group computational and experimental work. For the
supersonic rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector, precise control of entropy buildup is
essential, particularly with oblique shocks and boundary layers. Understanding this innovative
ejector's aerodynamics and optimizing its performance are still in the early stages of
development, considering how recently it was invented. Using a combination of computational
analysis and experimental data, this work offers insights into the regulation of supersonic
aerodynamics to provide desirable flow induction characteristics. Various rotor vane forms and
their corresponding ejector behavior are demonstrated through the use of flow visualization
tools in these studies. According to the study, some design features—like having a long

20
expansion ramp in the tail part, having a knife-edge-like leading edge, and having leading edges
at an appropriate height—are crucial for rotor vane shaping. It also mentions that higher spin
angle rotor vanes aid in better mixing and flow induction between the primary and secondary
flows, which eventually improves ejector performance.

Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. [24] Effect of Changing Throat Diameter Ratio on a Steam
Supersonic Pressure Exchange Ejector. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2005. This work will cover the
structure of the flow induction in a non-steady supersonic fluid with steam functioning as the
working fluid. Analyses pertaining to the induction processes are examined while varying the
throat diameter ratio. Applications involving compression employ this ejector. Investigating
the intricate fluid mechanisms occurring inside a non-steady, three-dimensional, steam
supersonic pressure exchange ejector using computational fluid dynamics is the work that will
be discussed here. The study will specifically concentrate on the pressure exchange
mechanisms and induction processes that occur between a main and secondary fluid, as well
as how these relate to the structure of the aerodynamic shroud. These results will point to the
proper throat diameter ratio in a three-dimensional supersonic non-steady viscous flow
environment that is required to create the correct flow induction effect. The calculated throat
diameter ratio is little less than 2.90.

Yang, X.; ., et. al. [25]. Numerical investigation on the mixing process in a steam ejector with
different nozzle structures. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2012. This study uses computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) to assess how various nozzle configurations affect the performance of the
steam ejector. Five distinct nozzle types are examined using the same set of parameters:
conical, elliptical, square, rectangular, and cross-shaped nozzles. A notable difference in
performance between the two nozzle shapes is that the cross-shaped nozzle has a 6.4% lower
critical back pressure (CBP) and a 9.1% greater entrainment ratio (ER). The research clarifies
that improved ER is facilitated by effective mixing, which is initiated by the interplay between
streamwise and spanwise vortices. As an alternative, early-stage vortex impacts with the
mixing chamber wall lower CBP and ER. This research highlights the significance of nozzle
design in optimizing ejector performance.

Opgenorth, M.J.; ., et. al. [26]. Maximizing pressure recovery using lobed nozzles in a
supersonic ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2012. Innovative supersonic ejector designs for
refrigeration applications prioritize reducing the required primary fluid flow rates, quantified
as the entrainment ratio, while simultaneously enhancing total pressure recovery. This study
focuses on augmenting performance through improved mixing facilitated by flow instability.

21
The circular nozzle design gains lobes, and the mixing channel's profile is improved. The
primary objective is to assess how these lobes' aspect ratio and total perimeter affect system
pressure recovery and entrainment ratio. By using the geometry and parameters established by
Eames as a baseline for the mixing channel and adding a lobed nozzle, the research offers a
notable improvement in pressure recovery, rising from 4.0 to 6.4 with a perimeter value of 30
mm. Nevertheless, additional perimeter expansion results in increased frictional losses along
the wall surfaces, which returns pressure recovery to levels similar to a circular nozzle.

Kong, F.S.; ., et. al. [27] Application of Chevron nozzle to a supersonic ejector-diffuser
system. Procedia Eng. 2013. The supersonic ejector-diffuser system has found wide
applications across various industries and has recently gained prominence as a crucial
component in solar seawater desalination facilities. There are many benefits to this method, not
the least of which is the lack of mechanical energy input directly and the absence of moving
components. It employs pure shear action to entrain secondary streams from high-speed
primary streams for applications such as compression and fluid transmission. Nevertheless,
optimizing the ejector-diffuser system and determining its optimal operating parameters has
proven difficult due to the complicated interactions of turbulent mixing, compressibility
effects, and flow unsteadiness inside the system. Considerable attention has been devoted to
improving its performance due to its comparatively poor efficiency, which has practical
implications in industrial applications. This study has employed a Chevron nozzle to start shear
activities between the primary and secondary streams. Longitudinal vortices are produced
using the Chevron pattern. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is used to simulate the flow
field inside the ejector-diffuser system. The experimental data that is currently available is used
to validate the CFD results. A comparison is presented between an ejector system with a
standard convergent nozzle and one with a Chevron nozzle for the primary stream. This study
assesses the performance of the ejector-diffuser system in terms of entrainment ratio, ejector
efficiency, total pressure loss, and pressure recovery.

Rao, S.; Jagadeesh, G.[28] Novel supersonic nozzles for mixing enhancement in supersonic
ejectors. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2014. With numerous applications in many different kinds of
industries, the supersonic ejector-diffuser system has recently gained prominence as a vital part
of solar seawater desalination facilities. There are many benefits to this method, not the least
of which is the lack of mechanical energy input directly and the absence of moving
components. Via pure shear action, it entrains secondary streams for applications like as
compression or fluid transmission using high-speed primary streams. That being said,

22
optimizing the ejector-diffuser system and determining its optimal operating parameters have
proven challenging due to the intricate relationship between turbulent mixing, compressibility
effects, and flow unsteadiness within the system. Considerable attention has been devoted to
improving its performance due to its comparatively poor efficiency, which has practical
implications in industrial applications. By creating longitudinal vortices through the Chevron
design, this research proposes a Chevron nozzle to initiate shear actions between the primary
and secondary streams. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is utilized to model the flow
field inside the ejector-diffuser system, and the output of the model is validated against existing
experimental data. An ejector system with a Chevron nozzle is compared to one with a
conventional convergent nozzle for the primary stream through an analysis. Overall pressure
loss, pressure recovery, ejector efficiency, and entrainment ratio are the performance metrics
used in the study to evaluate the ejector-diffuser system.

Zhu, Y.; Jiang, P.[29] Bypass ejector with an annular cavity in the nozzle wall to increase the
entrainment: Experimental and numerical validation. Energy 2014. A novel bypass ejector
design featuring an annular cavity within the nozzle wall was subjected to testing across various
operational conditions to assess its entrainment performance. Analysis was done in comparison
to a conventional ejector. The experimental data showed that the primary mass flow rate in the
bypass ejector was consistently roughly 20% lower than in the conventional ejector.
Remarkably, the results demonstrated that the bypass ejector outperformed the conventional
ejector at conditions with relatively high primary and secondary flow pressures, resulting in a
maximum improvement in entrainment performance of 31.5%. Better entrainment
performance was shown by the bypass ejector, particularly in critical mode operations. Given
that a significant portion of ejectors operate in this mode, the bypass ejector holds promise for
numerous applications requiring heightened entrainment capabilities.

Tang, Y.; ., et. al. [30]. Combined auxiliary entrainment and structure optimization for
performance improvement of steam ejector with consideration of back pressure variation.
Energy Convers. Manag. 2018. For steam ejectors operating in double-critical conditions,
optimizing their entrainment performance is crucial to increase the range of industrial
applications for these devices. This paper introduces a novel approach known as combined
auxiliary entrainment, accompanied by a systematic implementation of geometric structure
optimization. The principal objective is to effectively use the ejector's low-pressure potential,
which will result in a notable improvement in entrainment performance. Furthermore, an
extensive analysis is conducted to examine the impact of geometrical parameters on the

23
auxiliary entrainment performance. Several factors are included in this analysis, such as the
pressure field, the mass flow rate, and the unique internal flow properties. The outcomes
highlight the benefits of combined auxiliary entrainment for steam ejectors operating in double-
critical conditions. The optimal geometrical values for the throat auxiliary entraining entrance
are consistent with the desired state. On the other hand, for the diffuser auxiliary entraining
entry, it is advised to put the opening starting point (Xs) at the diffuser's entrance. The opening
angle can be anywhere in the common range (Rθ) between 75° and 105°. On the other hand,
when back pressure (pC) decreases, the optimal opening width (d) increase. In summary, each
back pressure level (pC) presents an optimal combination of geometrical parameters that
maximizes entrainment performance, with more substantial improvements observed at lower
pC values, reaching up to 34.8% for pC of 32 kPa.

Tang, Y.; ., et. al. [31] An innovative pressure-regulated steam ejector has been developed to
eliminate obstructions in entrained flow, hence enhancing the efficiency of the MED-TVC
desalination system. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018. Since steam ejectors are thought to be a
promising energy-saving technology, improving their operational efficiency is essential to
expanding the range of applications for which they can be used. A thorough simulation of a
steam ejector used in a MED-TVC desalination system is carried out in this work. The findings
indicate the presence of a sizable region of entrained flow that is blocked downstream of the
entraining entrance, as well as sizable low-pressure regions in the diffuser and throat that have
pressures significantly lower than those in the blocked region. Building on these discoveries, a
novel technology for pressure regulation is put forth that would take advantage of the current
pressure differentials to release the obstructed entrained flow and increase the amount of steam
that can be sucked into the ejector. The viability of different pressure regulation techniques is
rigorously verified in the study, and their effects on entrainment performance is thoroughly
analyzed and investigated while taking mass flow rate and pressure field parameters into
account. The findings demonstrate the existence of an ideal set of pressure regulation strategies
that successfully unblocks the entrained flow that was obstructed. This approach can yield a
substantial improvement in the entrainment ratio, with enhancements of up to 26.85% observed
in the simulations. Even under the design condition, an improvement of 3.31% can be achieved.
In particular, the downstream pressure adjustment at the throat-entraining entry is advised for
ejectors operating at the design condition. The combined-entraining entrance downstream
pressure regulation proves to be the best option in other scenarios.

24
Vermeulen, P.J., et. al. [32], N. Air Ejector Pumping Enhancement through Pulsing Primary
Flow. In Proceedings of the 2nd AIAA Flow Control Conference, Portland, Oregon, 28 June–
1 July 2004. The study analyzed a novel type of pulsed ejector using Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) and discovered that the ratio of secondary (entrainment) to primary mass
flow rate showed a significant improvement in pumping performance when compared to a non-
pulsed ejector. It was discovered that this augmentation performed best when pulsating at an
off-resonance frequency of 3250 Hz in relation to the ejector's fundamental frequency of 2000
Hz. These results were further supported by experimental testing of a model pulsed ejector,
which showed a substantial sensitivity at pulse frequencies below half of the ejector's
fundamental frequency, or roughly 746 Hz. The limitations of the acoustic driver's frequency
response restricted testing to frequencies below the experimental fundamental frequency.
Conversely, the positive results showed that the acoustic driver only required 150 W of power
and that the pumping effectiveness rose up to five times, particularly in suction performance.
The acoustic drive was also found to be responsible for a significant rise in the flow stagnation
pressure, with the best results happening at a frequency of roughly 250 Hz. These results
demonstrate the innovative pulsed ejector's tremendous research potential and its promising
applications across a range of fields.

Ouzzane, M.; Aidoun, Z [33]. Detailed ejector analysis and design can be achieved through
the development of models and numerical procedures. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2003. This study's
main goal was to create computer programs and a thorough mathematical model for analyzing
ejectors in refrigeration cycles. The software was developed in two versions: Version A, which
concentrated on the best ejector design, and Version B, which was more flexible and meant for
simulation. In this study, compressible refrigerant flow was analyzed in one dimension, and the
conservation equations were solved by forward marching. NIST Standard Reference Database
23 and NIST Thermodynamics and Transport Properties of Refrigerants and Refrigerant
Mixtures, 1998—more specifically, REFPROP, Version 6.01—were consulted in order to
determine the refrigerant properties using NIST subroutines. The approach taken in this study
allowed for a localized assessment of the flow, offering the flexibility to backtrack and make
necessary corrections upstream. When the model's output was compared to experimental data
for R141b from Huang et al. (Int. J. Refrig. 22, 1999, 354), it was shown to have excellent
agreement under all tested conditions. Furthermore, a study was conducted utilizing refrigerant
R142b under normal refrigeration conditions. The study assessed ejector performance by
utilizing critical performance metrics, including the entrainment ratio (ω), compression ratio

25
(P6/P2), and geometric dimensions such rings and axial lengths. The geographic distribution
of temperature, pressure, and Mach number under typical operating circumstances was also
revealed by the study. It was noteworthy that the ejector's performance and operation were
significantly influenced by the mixing chamber's design and features, especially when it came
to regulating the frequency and magnitude of shock waves.

Aidoun, Z.; Ouzzane, M [35]. The effect of operational conditions on a supersonic

refrigeration ejector's performance. Int. J. Refrig. 2004. The creation of computer programs
and a thorough mathematical model for the analysis of ejectors in refrigeration cycles was the
main goal of this project. Version A was developed with an emphasis on optimal ejector design,
whereas Version B was constructed with greater flexibility for simulation. Using a forward
marching technique to solve the conservation equations, this research comprised a one-
dimensional investigation of compressible refrigerant flow. Using NIST subroutines, the
refrigerant properties were determined by consulting NIST Standard Reference Database 23
and NIST Thermodynamics and Transport Properties of Refrigerants and Refrigerant Mixtures,
1998, in particular REFPROP, Version 6.01. The approach taken in this study allowed for a
localized assessment of the flow, offering the flexibility to backtrack and make necessary
corrections upstream. When the model's output was compared to experimental data for R141b
from Huang et al. (Int. J. Refrig. 22, 1999, 354), it was shown to have excellent agreement
under all tested conditions. Furthermore, a study was conducted utilizing refrigerant R142b
under standard refrigeration circumstances. The entrainment ratio (ω), compression ratio
(P6/P2), and geometric measurements such as rings and axial lengths were among the main
performance indicators used in the study to evaluate ejector performance. The geographic
distribution of temperature, pressure, and Mach number under typical operating circumstances
was also revealed by the study. It was noteworthy that the ejector's performance and operation
were significantly influenced by the mixing chamber's design and features, especially when it
came to regulating the frequency and strength of shock waves.

Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S [36]. Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology.

Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, [36] This comprehensive literature review offers an in-
depth exploration of ejectors and their wide-ranging applications within the realm of
refrigeration. It provides valuable insights into the foundational theory of ejectors, their
performance characteristics, the selection of optimal working fluids, ongoing efforts to enhance
jet refrigeration systems, and their diverse applications beyond traditional refrigeration
contexts. For researchers, engineers, and practitioners looking for an in-depth understanding of

26
ejector technology and its crucial role in many refrigeration applications, this review is an
invaluable resource.

Khalil, A.; Fatouh, M.; Elgendy, E [37]. Ejector design and theoretical study of R134a ejector
refrigeration cycle. Int. J. Refrig. 2011. The design of an R134a ejector and the prediction of
vapor jet refrigeration system performance characteristics are done in this study using a
mathematical model that encompasses a large number of parameters. The boiling temperature
(65–85 °C), condensing temperature (25–40 °C), evaporating temperature (0–10 °C), superheat
degrees (0–15 °C), nozzle efficiency (0.75–0.95), and diffuser efficiency (0.75–0.95) are
among the conditions in this set. The simulation results agree well with experimental data
reported in the literature, with an average error of 6%. Notably, throughout a range of
evaporating and condensing temperatures, the study shows that the ejector area ratio at a boiling
temperature of 85 °C is approximately twice that at a boiling temperature of 65 °C. These
findings underscore the suitability of waste heat sources within the 65-85 °C temperature range
for powering vapor jet refrigeration systems, particularly in air-conditioning applications.

García Del Valle, ., et. al. [38] An experimental investigation of a R-134a ejector refrigeration
system. Int. J. Refrig. 2014. This study looks at an ejector refrigeration system employing R-
134a refrigerant with an emphasis on improving pressure recovery. The critical condition for
three mixing chambers with the same internal diameter but different profiles is determined by
accounting for different primary and secondary fluid stagnation conditions. In this work, we
additionally examine the effects of the longitudinal position of the nozzle and the vapor
superheating of the main and secondary fluid stagnation phases on the mass ratio. In
comparison to the standard design "A," the trial results show that the novel mixing chamber
designs, designated as "B" and "C," do not significantly improve performance; mixing chamber
"C" shows the lowest level of effectiveness in all tests. A new performance metric, shown as
the ratio of theoretical to experimental mass ratios, based on the second law, is introduced in
this study to assess performance.

Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S [39]. An experimental investigation of a steam ejector

refrigerator: The analysis of the pressure profile along the ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2004. A
greater understanding of the flow and mixing inside the ejector is necessary to improve the
effectiveness of an ejector refrigerator. A steam ejector refrigerator with a 3 kW cooling
capacity was put together for this study. Static pressure under various operating circumstances
was measured and plotted along the ejector axis as part of the investigation. The analysis of
experimental findings led to the identification of three novel parameters. These parameters

27
provide valuable insights into the flow behavior within the steam ejector, offering a clearer
understanding and explanation of its operation.

Huang, B.J.; ., et. al. [40]. Ejector performance characteristics and design analysis of jet
refrigeration system. J. Eng. Gas. Turbine Power 1985, [40] Examining ejector performance
characteristics and undertaking a jet refrigeration system design analysis were the main
objectives of the project. A significant finding during ejector operation was the significant role
choking phenomena played in the secondary vapor. Error choking is a phenomena that occurs
when the ejector operates at a back pressure that is lower than a critical value. This is typically
associated with whatever is thought to be an effective region in the mixing zone for the
secondary vapor. The assumption of constant values was challenged when it was discovered
that the effective areas varied under various operating situations. The research produced a
performance map based on experimental data, illustrating ejector performance characteristics
and serving as a foundation for the design analysis of jet refrigeration systems. Additionally,
the study delved into the performance characteristics of jet refrigeration systems operating
under off-design conditions.

Eames, I.; ., et. al. [41] A theoretical and experimental study of a small-scale steam jet
refrigerator. Int. J. Refrig. 1995. This paper presents the findings of a combined theoretical and
experimental investigation on a steam jet refrigerator. Testing was done as part of the
investigation on a small-capacity steam jet refrigerator with boiler temperatures ranging from
120°C to 140°C. When the experimental data was compared to theoretical predictions, it was
found that the experimental results were over 85% accurate in matching theoretical values. The
experiments were significant because they illustrated the vital role that choking in the ejector's
secondary flow within the mixing chamber plays in system performance. The maximum
coefficient of performance (COP) might be attained by keeping the ejector at its critical flow
state. The report also sheds light on the system's off-design performance characteristics, giving
readers a thorough understanding of how it operates in different scenarios.

Yapici, R.; Yetişen, C.C [42]. Experimental study on ejector refrigeration system powered by
low grade heat. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, [42] This study involved the design and
construction of an ejector refrigeration system, specifically intended to operate with hot water
as its energy source. Energy from sources like solar, geothermal, and waste heat can be
harnessed with these refrigeration systems, which are designed to operate with low-pressure
refrigerants. With R-11 serving as the working fluid, the investigation's primary focus was on
the performance of the system through experimental testing. The main nozzle end of the ejector

28
stayed at the mixing chamber section's intake plane throughout the trial. The study addressed a
number of operational parameters, including vapor generator temperatures between about 90°C
and 102°C, evaporator temperatures between 0°C and 16°C, and condenser pressures between
114 kPa and 143 kPa. A Coefficient of Performance (COP) of up to 0.25 was demonstrated by
the system within these settings. Significantly, the outcomes showed that reaching a greater
cooling capacity and lower evaporator temperatures necessitates a substantial increase in vapor
generator temperature.

Shestopalov, K.O.; ., et. al. [43]. Investigation of an experimental ejector refrigeration

machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and off-design working conditions. Part
2. Theoretical and experimental results. Int. J. Refrig. 2015. Using refrigerant R245fa, this
study presents the main conclusions from a thorough analysis into the performance
characteristics of an ejector and an ejector refrigeration machine (ERM). A variety of operating
circumstances, including both design and off-design settings, are covered by the research. The
study analyzed the ejector and ERM using an enhanced 1D theoretical model, and the computed
results were verified by means of experimental testing carried out on an ejector test rig at
National Taiwan University. Performance maps and variations in the parameters of condensing,
producing, and evaporating temperatures are among the outcomes. Comparisons between
theoretical and experimental results indicate a good level of qualitative and quantitative
agreement.

Shestopalov, K.O., et. al. [44] Investigation of an experimental ejector refrigeration machine
operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and off-design working conditions. Part 1.
Theoretical analysis. Int. J. Refrig. 2015. The theoretical examination of ejector design and
ejector refrigeration cycle performance is covered in detail in this work. The study emphasizes
how important it is to consider the effects of operational parameters, ejector efficiency, and the
thermodynamic features of the refrigerant while analyzing the performance characteristics of
ejection refrigeration machines (ERMs). Apart from offering an optimal approach for ejectors
featuring cylindrical and conical-cylindrical mixing chambers, the study also suggests a one-
dimensional model capable of predicting the entrainment ratio (ω). To enhance ERM
performance, the study emphasizes the need for improving ejector performance as a primary
consideration.

Yan, J.; ., et. al. [45]. Experimental investigations on a R134a ejector applied in a refrigeration
system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017. Using R134a as the working fluid, the study performs
experimental research on an ejector's performance inside a refrigeration system. The results

29
demonstrate how important back pressure is in controlling an ejector's entrainment ratio. When
it comes to choosing the ejector's operating mode under particular primary and secondary fluid
pressures, back pressure is a crucial factor. While raising the primary fluid pressure can raise
the critical back pressure, it may also have an adverse effect on the ejector's best performance.
Additionally, the research identifies an optimal primary fluid pressure value associated with
maximizing the entrainment ratio within certain conditions. In order to forecast critical back
pressure and ascertain operational conditions in an R134a ejector refrigeration system, the
study also provides a logarithmic relationship. These results provide important new
information for researchers studying R134a ejectors in refrigeration systems and advance our
understanding of these components of systems.

2.2 Literature Gaps

While the literature reveals that previous research efforts have explored modifications to the
geometry of jet ejectors, there remains a distinct gap concerning the systematic optimization of
design parameters in these systems. Many existing studies have focused on altering the physical
geometry, but the comprehensive optimization of design parameters to enhance the
performance of jet ejectors has not been extensively addressed. Through the systematic
optimization of jet ejector design parameters using parametric modeling approaches, this study
aims to fill this gap.

Moreover, the identification of the main design parameters that exert a significant influence on
the desired output of jet ejectors is another aspect that has received limited attention in the
existing literature. Previous studies have often overlooked the critical task of pinpointing these
influential parameters, thereby hampering the ability to achieve desired performance levels
efficiently. This study addresses this knowledge gap by explicitly identifying and analyzing the
key design parameters that impact the outcome of jet ejectors.

30
 CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
• Examine the effectiveness and efficiency of jet ejectors that operate under constant rate of
momentum change (CRMC) and constant pressure mixing (CPM) scenarios.

• Conduct Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis of jet ejectors for establishing
baseline operating conditions and understand their fluid dynamics behavior.

• Use the Taguchi approach in the Design of Experiments (DOE) framework to develop a
number of test cases and systematically change pertinent parameters for a
thorough performance evaluation.

• Adopt the Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to maximize the jet ejector design
parameters and determine the critical elements affecting their operation in order to attain
the desired results.

31
 CHAPTER 4

METHODOLOGY
Design study of Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejectors and Constant
Pressure Mixing (CPM) Ejectors on ANSYS using FLUENT workbench.

4.1 Methodology

CAD modelling of Setting up boundary

Meshing ejector
CPM and CRMC conditions in
models
ejectors FLUENT solver

Results on Mass flux

Response Surface
in mixing chamber Computing CFD
Optimization (RSO)
and velocity at analysis
study
outlet

To successfully perform this CFD analysis here are the steps which we followed.

In the initial stage of our analysis, we began by creating a CAD model of the CPM ejector in
ANSYS Design Modeler. This model was designed to be axisymmetric, which offers two key
advantages. Firstly, it reduces computational time, making your study more resource efficient.
Secondly, axisymmetric simplifies geometry, making it easier to model and analyze. This
simplification is particularly valuable when dealing with complex geometries and flow
patterns. Next, we assigned parameter sets to define the dimensions of critical components such
as the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser area. This step is crucial as it allows you to control
the geometry and tailor it to your specific design requirements. By adjusting these parameters,
you can explore a range of design possibilities and their effects on the ejector's performance.

32
 Figure 4.1 Dimensions & Parameters of components

Figure 4.2 CAD model in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector

33
Figure 4.3 CAD model of the Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejector in Ansys
design modeler

Meshing is a critical step in CFD analysis, and we employed various meshing techniques in
ANSYS to ensure a high-quality mesh. Face meshing, face sizing, and multi-zone quad/tri
meshing techniques were used to generate a fine and uniform mesh. A well-structured mesh is
essential for accurate simulation results, as it discretizes the geometry into manageable
elements for numerical analysis. To define the fluid flow within our simulation, we named and
selected key edges and regions within the model. As part of this, the outlet, wall borders, and
axis were also defined, and the major inlet was assigned as inlet 1 and the secondary as inlet 2.
These boundary conditions are essential for defining how fluid interacts with the geometry and
how it behaves at various points within the domain.

Figure 4.4 Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector

34
 Figure 4.5 Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change
(CRMC) ejector

Moving on to the FLUENT solver setup, we employed a range of settings to capture the physics
of the ejector system accurately. This included selecting the solver type as density-based and
specifying that the analysis would be steady and 2D-space, as the problem is planar.

In the model setup, we enabled energy and employed the SST-k-omega turbulence model to
account for turbulence effects within the flow. We defined the fluid properties, using water
vapor from the Fluent fluid database, and modified density conditions to represent an ideal gas,
which is appropriate for modelling compressible flows.

For cell zone conditions, we defined the fluid domain and specified water vapor as the domain
fluid. We then set up boundary conditions, which included axis symmetry, velocity and pressure
inlets, a pressure outlet, and adiabatic walls. These boundary conditions are critical for
simulating real-world flow behaviour and interactions.

Boundary conditions that we have set for your CFD analysis using ANSYS Fluent Workbench.
Firstly, we established an axis boundary condition as symmetry. This choice reflects the
assumption that the geometry's behaviour is symmetric along a particular axis, simplifying the
computational domain by modelling only one part and reducing computational resources. Next,
defining inlet 1 as a velocity inlet with a specified velocity of 343 m/s. This boundary condition
mimics the real-world scenario where fluid enters the system with a certain velocity. In order
to take into consideration the consequences of turbulent flow, additional turbulence parameters

35
were provided, such as a turbulent viscosity ratio of 10 and a turbulence intensity of 5%. The
fluid that was entering at 130°C was represented by the thermal boundary condition, which
was set to 403 K. establishing a pressure inlet boundary condition with a 101325 Pa value for
inlet 2. This boundary condition assumes that the pressure at this inlet is known, which is
common when dealing with multi-inlet systems. Like inlet 1, we have also specified turbulence
parameters and a thermal condition of 300 K for inlet 2, which is likely based on the properties
of the fluid and the system's operating conditions with an operating pressure of 0 Pa. The outlet
boundary condition was designated as a pressure outlet with a value of 3350 Pa. Pressure
outlets are used to represent regions where the pressure is allowed to vary based on the
simulation results. Similar to the inlets, turbulence characteristics and a thermal condition of
300 K were specified at the outlet to account for turbulence effects and temperature conditions
in the outflow. Regarding the wall boundary condition, it was set as adiabatic with no heat flux.
This condition implies that the walls of the ejector do not exchange heat with the surrounding
environment. Adiabatic walls are commonly used when the heat transfer effects on the walls
are not of primary interest in the simulation.

Following the specification of the operational parameters, including the 0 Pa working pressure.
In order to properly define the pressure field inside the computational domain, this option sets
the reference pressure for our simulation. These carefully chosen boundary conditions play a
fundamental role in accurately representing the physical behaviour of our CPM ejector and
CRMC ejector system in the computational model. They ensure that the simulation taken into
account the correct flow dynamics, thermal effects, and pressure variations at the inlet, outlet,
and walls, thus yielding meaningful results for your design study. Lastly, we selected second-
order upwind discretization methods, implicit formulation, and gradient calculation based on
Green-Gauss cells in the solver parameters. These choices impact the numerical accuracy and
stability of our simulation. For initialization, we employed hybrid initialization techniques to
start the simulation from a reasonable initial state. Then, we initiated the calculation run. We
mentioned using double precision with 8-core processor utilization to ensure numerical
accuracy and efficiency during the computation. Our approach to CFD analysis using ANSYS
Fluent Workbench demonstrates a systematic and comprehensive methodology to simulate the
behaviour of CPM ejectors and CRMC ejectors. Each step, from geometry creation to boundary
condition setup, is crucial for obtaining accurate and meaningful results to inform your design
study.

36
 Figure 4.6 Mach number contour for Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector

The Mach number is a crucial parameter in the study of ejectors, specifically in the context of
our investigation into Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) and Constant Pressure
Mixing (CPM) ejectors using CFD analysis. Mach number, denoted as Ma, is a dimensionless
quantity that describes the speed of a fluid flow relative to the speed of sound in that fluid. It
is a fundamental measure in fluid dynamics, particularly in compressible flow regimes, where
changes in Mach number can have profound effects on the behaviour of the fluid. In our study,
Mach number contours play an important role in understanding the flow characteristics within
both CPM and CRMC ejectors.

Figure 4.7 Mach number contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector

The Mach number provides critical insights into the compressibility of the flow. When the
Mach number is less than 1 (Ma < 1), the flow is considered subsonic, and the flow velocities

37
are significantly below the speed of sound. In contrast, when the Mach number is greater than
1 (Ma > 1), the flow is supersonic, indicating that flow velocities are higher than the speed of
sound. The significance of Mach number lies in its ability to reveal key flow phenomena within
ejectors. In particular, it helps identify regions of compression and expansion within the nozzle,
throat, and mixing chamber. This is vital because, in ejectors, the goal is often to accelerate and
mix flows efficiently. The Mach number provides a clear indication of where these compressive
and expansive processes occur. Our validation process, where we compared the Mach number
contours obtained from CFD analysis with those from a base paper, underscores the importance
of Mach number. The fact that we were able to replicate similar findings to those in the base
paper reinforces the accuracy and reliability of this CFD simulations. It demonstrates that the
computational model effectively captures the real-world behaviour of CPM and CRMC
ejectors, where flow velocities increase to supersonic levels at the nozzle exit, subsequently
drop below Mach 1 within the throat region, and then evolve as they enter the mixing chamber.

Table 4.1 RSO Parameters

PARAMETERS

Mixing Mixing Mass flow

RSO Throat Diffuser Throat Diffuser Mach No.
chamber chamber at throat
Length Length radius radius at throat
Length radius inlet (J
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) exit
(mm) (mm) kg^-1)

Initial 130 114 180 12 9.5 20 14777 1.4843

The focus centers on the specific interior conditions identified for comparison in the CFD
analysis. These interior conditions serve as critical reference points, offering valuable insights
into the flow dynamics at key locations within both the CPM and CRMC ejectors.

38
 Figure 4.8 Static pressure contour for of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector

Figure 4.9 Static pressure contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector

A significant finding of the CFD research is that the Mach number is greater than Mach 4 at
the nozzle exit, where the flow enters the mixing chamber. This particular Mach number
signifies supersonic flow conditions, a crucial aspect of ejector behavior. Importantly, this
finding aligns closely with what was reported in the base paper, reinforcing the fidelity of the
computational model developed for this study. This consistency provides substantial assurance
of the accuracy of the CFD analysis, confirming its ability to replicate real-world flow
behaviors effectively. Furthermore, the CFD results reveal that as the flow progresses through
the throat region, the Mach number decreases below Mach 1. This transition from supersonic

39
to subsonic flow is a pivotal characteristic of ejector operation, impacting its overall
performance. It is noteworthy that this observation closely mirrors the findings presented in the
base paper, adding further weight to the validation of the simulations. The capability to
accurately capture this transition in flow regime underscores the reliability and accuracy of the
numerical approach employed in this study. The successful comparison of Mach number
contours at these significant interior conditions between the CFD analysis and the base paper's
results provides robust confirmation of the research's integrity. It reaffirms that the
computational model utilized faithfully reproduces the anticipated flow behaviors within CPM
and CRMC ejectors. This degree of validation boosts the credibility of the research findings
and makes a substantial contribution to the field's knowledge of ejector technology, which
makes it easier to build and optimize these devices for real-world uses.

Thus, validation not only affirms the credibility of this CFD setup but also provides confidence
in the applicability of our results. It means that your analysis has successfully replicated and
confirmed the key flow features observed in the base paper, strengthening the scientific basis
of this study. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the behavior of CPM and
CRMC ejectors, which is essential for optimizing their design and performance in practical
applications. Ultimately, validation process with Mach number contours underscores the rigor
and reliability of our research in this critical field of fluid dynamics and ejector technology.

4.2 Response Surface Optimization (RSO) and Its Significance

Response surface optimization is a mathematical and statistical technique used to depict the
relationships between input parameters, also known as factors or variables, and corresponding
output parameters, also known as responses, inside a system. In optimization studies, this
technique is utilized to locate the combination of input parameters that results in the optimal
values of the output parameters. It serves as an efficient surrogate model that bridges the gap
between complex, computationally-intensive simulations and the need for quick decision-
making.

40
 Design of Experiments (DOE)
 Input parameters  Output parameters

Response Surface Optimization (RSO)

 Goodness of fit  Response surface curves

Optimized geometry
 Parameter sensitivity  Optimized ejector geometry

In the context of this design of experiment (DOE) study aimed at optimizing the geometry of
ejectors, the utilization of a Response Surface Optimization technique holds immense
significance. This technique is an invaluable tool in engineering and scientific research that
aids in optimizing complex systems or processes while minimizing the computational
resources and time required. In this detailed study into the concept of Response Surface
Optimization, its importance in optimization studies, the methodology it involves, and how it
is planned to be executed in the context of our ejector geometry optimization.

The optimization procedure is initiated through developing a well-structured experimental

design and systematically varying the input parameters (mixing chamber length, throat length,
mixing chamber radius, diffuser length, throat radius, and diffuser radius) within predetermined
ranges. This is known as experimental design execution. This experimental design generates a
diverse set of data points, covering a wide parameter space.

Table 4.2 Representing the defining ranges of various parameters of DOE

A Input parameters Lower bound Upper bound

1 mixing chamber length 125 135

2 throat length 110 120

41
 3 diffuser length 175 185

4 mixing chamber radius 11 14

5 throat radius 8.5 10

6 diffuser radius 18 30

B Output parameters

1 Mass flow at throat To be maximized

2 Mach number at throat exit To be minimized

Response surface creation, with the experimental data in hand, a response surface is
constructed using mathematical and statistical techniques. The output parameters are the mass
flow at the throat inlet and the Mach number at the throat exit. The relationships between the
input and output parameters are approximately represented by this surface. Common response
surface models include polynomial regression, radial basis functions, and Gaussian processes.

Optimization Process, once the response surface is established, optimization algorithms are
employed to determine the combination of input parameters that yields the desired optimal
values of the output parameters. These algorithms seek to minimize or maximize the responses
while considering constraints or objectives defined by the study.

42
 4.10 Optimization Process, parameter sets created using algorithms seeking

Table 5.3 DOE Parameters

PARAMETERS

Mixing Mixing Mass flow

Throat Diffuser Throat Diffuser Mach No.
chamber chamber at throat
DOE length length radius radius at throat
length radius inlet (J
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) exit
(mm) (mm) kg^-1)

1 125 110 175 11.03 8.52 18.10 4901.76 4.69

2 125 115 178 11.83 8.80 19.19 4290.19 2.22

3 125 112 182 12.63 9.09 20.28 4139.31 4.45

4 125 118 176 13.43 9.37 21.37 5552.49 4.46

5 125 111 179 14.23 9.66 22.46 3584.57 4.27

6 126 116 183 11.19 9.95 23.55 6353.57 2.64

7 126 114 177 11.99 10.23 24.65 162872.00 4.60

43
8 126 119 181 12.79 8.56 25.74 3809.76 1.96

9 126 110 184 13.59 8.84 26.83 3972.26 2.07

10 126 116 175 14.39 9.13 27.92 6550.78 1.66

11 126 113 179 11.35 9.41 29.01 5075.16 1.71

12 127 119 182 12.15 9.70 18.20 31593.60 4.63

13 127 112 176 12.95 9.99 19.29 3461.91 4.51

14 127 117 180 13.75 10.27 20.38 2410.38 3.24

15 127 114 184 14.55 8.60 21.47 3537.47 2.14

16 127 120 177 11.51 8.88 22.56 29140.50 3.85

17 128 110 181 12.31 9.17 23.65 4138.27 4.52

18 128 115 185 13.11 9.46 24.74 3935.58 4.54

19 128 113 175 13.91 9.74 25.84 3460.25 2.78

20 128 111 183 11.67 10.31 28.02 2145.58 2.03

21 128 117 177 12.47 8.64 29.11 4225.43 1.53

22 129 111 178 14.87 9.50 20.48 4324.83 4.45

23 129 116 182 11.07 9.78 21.57 4043.92 1.71

24 129 113 185 11.87 10.07 22.66 2812.88 4.34

25 130 119 175 12.67 10.35 23.75 2530.55 4.37

26 130 112 178 13.47 8.68 24.84 5444.06 4.72

27 130 115 176 11.23 9.25 27.03 4219.24 2.96

28 130 120 180 12.03 9.54 28.12 4149.53 1.53

44
29 131 115 177 13.63 10.11 18.40 7904.75 4.56

30 131 113 181 14.43 10.39 19.49 2240.54 4.35

31 131 111 175 12.19 9.01 21.67 4182.91 4.65

32 131 117 179 12.99 9.29 22.76 4117.46 4.49

33 132 114 182 13.79 9.58 23.85 4253.48 4.50

34 132 119 176 14.59 9.86 24.94 39212.30 4.62

35 132 110 180 11.55 10.15 26.03 1194.03 1.78

36 132 116 184 12.35 10.44 27.12 1038.70 1.61

37 132 113 178 13.15 8.76 28.22 4795.84 1.53

38 132 119 181 13.95 9.05 29.31 4037.06 1.53

39 133 112 185 14.75 9.33 18.50 3478.03 2.16

40 133 117 176 11.71 9.62 19.59 6125.20 4.40

41 133 115 179 12.51 9.90 20.68 3269.75 4.47

42 133 120 183 13.31 10.19 21.77 67320.60 4.43

43 133 110 177 14.11 10.48 22.86 2280.74 4.34

44 134 116 180 14.91 8.52 23.95 8221.12 4.58

45 134 113 184 11.10 8.81 25.04 15765.50 1.67

46 134 118 178 11.90 9.09 26.13 4692.23 1.55

47 134 117 185 13.50 9.67 28.31 5522.65 1.54

48 134 114 175 14.30 9.95 29.41 2538.32 1.89

49 135 120 179 11.26 10.24 18.60 2374.04 4.63

45
50 135 111 182 12.06 8.56 19.69 5345.20 4.60

51 135 116 176 12.86 8.85 20.78 11421.50 4.50

52 135 114 180 13.66 9.13 21.87 5701.90 4.56

53 135 119 183 14.46 9.42 22.96 10147.60 4.39

Iterative refinement, the optimization process often involves iterations. The current set of input
parameters is used to update the response surface, allowing the optimization algorithm to make
more informed decisions for the subsequent iterations. This iterative refinement process
continues until a satisfactory solution is reached.

Figure 4.11 Goodness of fit for iterating observed points and generated by RSM

In this instance, finding the optimal geometry for the CPM and CRMC ejectors will be made
easier using the Response Surface Optimization method. We investigated a variety of potential
geometries by adjusting the input parameters that reflect the length and radius of various
components. The response surface thus essentially represents the effect of these fluctuations on
the output parameters, in particular the mass flow at the throat inlet and the Mach number at
the throat exit.

46
 Figure 4.12 Parameter sensitivity depicting effects of the parameters on RSO study

This approach allows us to quickly identify and understand the relationships between
geometry and performance. Instead of conducting resource-intensive simulations for every
geometry variation, the response surface guides the optimization process, significantly
reducing computational effort. This method not only accelerates the design process but also
ensures a comprehensive exploration of the design space.

Figure 4.13 Relationship between mixing chamber diameter and length in relation to mass
flow at the throat entrance is depicted in a 3D response curve.

47
 Figure 4.14 3D response curve illustrating the link between the diameter and length of the
mixing chamber at the throat outflow and the Mach number.

Figure 4.15 3D response curve illustrating the relationship between throat diameter and
length in relation to mass flow at the throat inlet.

Figure 4.16 3D response curve illustrating the connection between throat diameter and length
at the throat exit in relation to the Mach number.

48
 Figure 4.17 Diffuser length and diameter in proportion to mass flow at the throat inlet are
shown in a 3D response curve.

Figure 4.18 The diffuser length and diameter are correlated with the throat exit Mach number,
as indicated by the three-dimensional response curve.

In conclusion, Response Surface Optimization emerges as an indispensable methodology in

optimization studies, particularly in cases where computational resources and time are limited.
This technique will direct your parameter space exploration in your research of ejector
geometry optimization, allowing you to quickly and effectively discover optimal design
configurations for CPM and CRMC ejectors while ensuring that performance targets are
achieved. Response Surface Optimization

4.3 Optimum Results

49
 Table 4.4 RSO Result Parameters

PARAMETERS

Mass
Mixing Mixing Mach
RSO Throat Diffuser Throat Diffuser Flow at
chamber chamber No. at
length length radius radius throat
length radius throat
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) inlet (J
(mm) (mm) exit
kg^-1)

RSO 1 133.2 115.49 182.65 11.15 9.3103 29.394 4.91E+05 1.5349

RSO 2 133.2 116.07 182.51 11.179 9.3076 29.391 5.28E+05 1.5418

RSO 3 133.52 115.47 182.61 11.086 9.4525 29.39 5.24E+05 1.5363

These three optimized conditions are shown in the data that follows. These reflect the
dimensions of the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser in our ejector system, and the results of
Response Surface Optimization (RSO) for more than fifty sets of input parameters are shown.
The mass flow at the throat inlet (in J kg-1) and the Mach number at the throat exit are the two
output parameters that are taken into account. RSO examples: Three optimized separate RSO
examples are included in the data; they are referred to as RSO 1, RSO 2, and RSO 3. These
stand for various sets of input parameter combinations that were RSO-optimized.

The input parameters are as follows: three millimeters each for the length and diameter of the
mixing chamber, the throat length and diameter, and the diffuser length and diameter areas
comprise the three measured input parameters. These dimensions determine the geometry of
our ejector system. Each RSO case specifies a unique set of values for these dimensions.

Output parameters, The two key output parameters are:

Mass flow at the throat inlet: measured in Joules per kilogram J kg-1, this quantity indicates the
rate at which mass enters the throat per unit of time. It is an essential measure of the
effectiveness and performance of the system. The flow velocity at the throat exit in relation to
sound speed is indicated by the Mach number at the exit. It is dimensionless and provides
insight into the flow regime, particularly whether the flow is subsonic Mach < 1 or supersonic
Mach > 1.

50
Numerical values: The data shows the input and output parameter numerical values for every
RSO example. The system's performance under the given geometric configurations is
represented by these values, which are the outcome of the optimization process.

Now, to determine the best-case scenario:

To identify the best-case scenario, we should define our optimization objective. Are we aiming
to maximize mass flow at the throat inlet, minimize it, or achieve a specific target value?
Similarly, what are the objectives for the Mach number at the throat exit? This determination
should be based on the specific goals of our ejector system.

Once we have established our objectives, compare the values of the output parameters Mass
flow and Mach number for each RSO case against these objectives. Based on these defined
objectives and evaluation, one can conclude which RSO case represents the best-case scenario.
This is the set of input parameters that aligns most closely with our optimization goals and
satisfies the performance criteria of the ejector system.

The optimal situation would be the one that simultaneously lowers the Mach number at the
throat exit and obtains the maximum mass flow at the throat inlet.

Chart Title
5.40E+05 1.544

5.30E+05 1.542

5.20E+05 1.54

5.10E+05 1.538

5.00E+05 1.536

4.90E+05 1.534

4.80E+05 1.532

4.70E+05 1.53
RSO 1 RSO 2 RSO 3

Figure 4.19 RSO Result Technical Graph Data

From the data and the graph provided it can be deduced that RSO 2 appears to be the most
promising option. It has the highest Mass flow at the throat inlet 5.28E+05 J kg^-1, indicating
a substantial mass flow rate, which is typically desirable for ejector performance.

51
Furthermore, RSO 2 has a throat exit Mach number of 1.5418, which is comparatively lower
and suggests that the flow is closer to the intended subsonic zone at this point. When attempting
to avoid the difficulties posed by supersonic flows, a lower Mach number is frequently
recommended. Consequently, among the choices you've given, RSO 2 seems to be most
suitable in terms of optimizing mass flow and lowering the Mach number.

Technical Analysis of Tabular Data and Graphical Reference:

In the tabular data we see that the local sensitivity analysis reveals the impact of each input
parameter on the desired output parameters in percentage terms. Here’s a technical analysis:

Table 4.5 Technical Analysis of Tabular Data and Graphical Reference

Input parameters Mass flow at throat Inlet Mach number at throat exit

Mixing chamber length -8.892169804 -9.054224906

Throat length 3.258224253 -10.79757265

Diffuser length -4.23009321 -1.47210937

Mixing chamber diameter 2.615725275 37.41748408

Throat diameter 8.172407851 10.19921209

Diffuser diameter 2.526332677 -61.76071271

Mixing chamber length: About -8.89% and -9.05%, respectively, are the negative sensitivity
values for mass flow at the throat inlet and Mach number at the throat exit. This indicates that
increasing the mixing chamber length slightly decreases both output parameters.

Throat length: The sensitivity is negative at -10.80% for Mach number at throat exit but positive
at about 3.26% for mass flow at throat inlet. This suggests that a longer throat positively
influences mass flow but negatively affects Mach number at the throat exit.

Diffuser length: It exhibits negative sensitivities for both output parameters, implying that
increasing the diffuser length decreases both mass flow and Mach number at the throat exit.

Mixing chamber diameter: The mass flow at the throat inlet has a positive sensitivity of roughly
2.62% for this parameter, whereas the Mach number at the throat exit has a significantly

52
positive sensitivity of about 37.42%. Mach number is impacted more strongly by an increase
in mixing chamber diameter.

Throat diameter: It shows positive sensitivities for both output parameters, suggesting that the
mass flow and Mach number at the throat exit are both increased by a greater throat diameter.

Diffuser diameter: For mass flow at the throat inlet, it has a positive sensitivity of about 2.53%,
but for Mach number at the throat exit, it has a significant negative sensitivity of about -61.76%.
This indicates that while increasing diffuser diameter has a moderately advantageous impact
on mass flow, it significantly decreases the Mach number at the throat exit.

Local sensitivity (%)

60

40

20

0
Mixing Throat length Diffuser Mixing Throat Diffuser
-20 chamber length chamber diameter diameter
length diameter
-40

-60

-80

Mass flow at throat Inlet Mach number at throat exit

Figure 4.20 Local Sensitivity Data

In the graphical representation, the bar graph visually reinforces these relationships, with bars
pointing up or down indicating the direction and magnitude of sensitivity. It’s evident that
different input parameters have varying impacts on the desired output parameters, and
understanding these sensitivities is crucial for optimizing the ejector system’s performance
based on specific objectives and constraints.

We will evaluate and emphasize the superiority of RSO 2 over the other cases—including the
first case—in this technical comparison study using the data that has been provided. The factors
under consideration are the mass flow at the throat inlet, the Mach number at the throat exit,
and the dimensions of the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser of the ejector.

Table 4.6 RSO Comparative Analysis

53
 PARAMETERS

Mixing Mixing Mass flow

Throat Diffuser Throat Diffuser Mach at
RSO chamber chamber at throat
length length radius radius throat
length radius inlet (J
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) exit
(mm) (mm) kg^-1)

Initial 130 114 180 12 9.5 20 14777 1.4843

RSO 1 133.2 115.49 182.65 11.15 9.3103 29.394 4.91E+05 1.5349

RSO 2 133.2 116.07 182.51 11.179 9.3076 29.391 5.28E+05 1.5418

RSO 3 133.52 115.47 182.61 11.086 9.4525 29.39 5.24E+05 1.5363

Mixing chamber length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 keeps the dimensions nearly the same as
the initial case, with the mixing chamber length being slightly larger. This reveals a prudent
design choice that achieves significant performance gains without requiring significant
alterations to geometry.

Throat length and diameter (mm): The performance is improved partially because the RSO 2
throat dimensions are slightly bigger than in the initial casing. The critical dimensions of the
throat are maintained while supporting an increase in mass flow.

Diffuser length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 ensures the diffuser's efficacy without significant
modifications by maintaining dimensions that are comparable to the initial case.

Comparitive analysis between inital

case and RSO cases
600000 1.56
500000 1.54
400000 1.52
300000 1.5
200000 1.48
100000 1.46
0 1.44
Initial RSO 1 RSO 2 RSO 3

Figure 4.21 Comparative Analysis between initial case and RSO cases

The first case's mass flow at the throat inlet, which is 14777 J kg^-1, is comparatively lower
than the other cases'. RSO 2 is distinguished by an extraordinary mass flow at the throat

54
entrance of 5.28E+05 J kg^-1. This impressive rise denotes a significant improvement in
ejector performance, implying effective mixing and flow acceleration. Mach number at throat
exit: RSO 2 likewise significantly reduces the Mach number at the throat exit to 1.5418. The
basic case's Mach number is 1.4843. This reduction is noteworthy, even if it is not as
noteworthy as the first instance, and shows that RSO 2's flow is likewise approaching the ideal
subsonic domain, which minimizes the difficulties related to supersonic flow.

4.4 Comparative Analysis

In several crucial aspects, RSO 2 demonstrates a clear supremacy over both the initial case and
subsequent RSO cases.

1. Mass Flow: When compared to the initial case, RSO 2 achieves a remarkable rise in mass
flow at the throat inlet, showing a significantly better performance in terms of fluid acceleration
and mixing.

2. Mach Number: RSO 2 is superior in controlling the flow regime and improving the efficiency
of the ejector because it not only performs well in mass flow but also effectively reduces the
Mach number at the throat exit.

3. Geometry Changes: Remarkably, RSO 2 accomplishes these gains without requiring

significant modifications to geometry, which is frequently helpful for real-world uses since it
eliminates the need for complex manufacturing or design changes.

To sum up, RSO 2 is clearly the best case scenario; it performs better in terms of mass flow
and Mach number than the initial case and other RSO conditions. It sets the standard for
optimizing ejector design for increased efficacy and efficiency thanks to its subtle geometric
modifications and notable performance improvements.

55
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Conclusions

• Geometry Optimization Success:

Successful optimization of CPM and CRMC ejector geometry through comprehensive CFD
simulations and Response Surface Optimization (RSO).
In conclusion, RSO configurations demonstrated substantial improvements over the initial
case in key parameters:
• Mass Flow Enhancement:
Optimized designs, particularly RSO 2, resulted in a significant increase in mass flow at
the throat inlet, indicating improved mixing and acceleration in ejectors.
Mass Flow at Throat Inlet:
- Initial Case: 14777 J kg^-1
- RSO 1: 4.91E+05 J kg^-1, which is 32.40 times increase over the initial case
- RSO 2: 5.28E+05 J kg^-1, which is 34.77 times increase over the initial case
- RSO 3: 5.24E+05 J kg^-1, which is 34.42 times increase over the initial case
• Flow Regime Control
The optimized designs, notably RSO 2, effectively shifted the flow regime towards
subsonic, reducing challenges associated with supersonic flow and enhancing ejector
efficiency.
Mach Number at Throat Exit
- Initial Case: 1.4843
- RSO 1: 3.4% increase over the initial case
- RSO 2: 3.8% increase over the initial case
- RSO 3: 3.2% increase over the initial case
• Sensitivity Analysis Insights:
Local sensitivity analysis provided valuable insights into the impact of input parameter
variations, highlighting the role of parameters like throat diameter and mixing chamber
diameter in ejector performance.
• RSO 2 emerges as the superior configuration for the steam jet ejector, and this superiority
can be attributed to a synergy in its geometric design parameters. The careful collaboration
of design elements is evident in the following aspects:

56
 1. Throat Length and Radius
- RSO 2 maintains a throat length of 116.07 mm and a throat radius of 9.3076 mm,
contributing to a balanced acceleration and efficient mixing of the flow.
2. Mixing Chamber and Diffuser Design
- The geometric choices in the mixing chamber (133.2 mm length, 11.179 mm radius)
and diffuser (182.51 mm length, 29.391 mm radius) in RSO 2 foster an optimal flow
pattern, enhancing mass flow efficiency.
3. Mach Number Control:
- RSO 2 achieves a Mach number at the throat exit of 1.5418, showcasing a meticulous
design that ensures the flow remains close to the desired subsonic regime. This indicates a
harmonious balance between mixing efficiency and avoiding the challenges associated with
supersonic flow.
4. Overall Collaboration:
- The collaborative effect of these geometric design choices is reflected in RSO 2's
exceptional mass flow improvement of 34.77 times over the initial case. The balanced
design parameters contribute to efficient mixing and acceleration, making RSO 2 the
optimal choice for enhanced steam jet ejector performance.
In essence, the geometric design points of RSO 2 work in concert to create a well-
balanced and efficient steam jet ejector, making it the preferred configuration for achieving
superior performance.
5.2 Future Scope of Work
Future research may explore additional parameters and constraints for further ejector
refinement and consider real-world experimental validation of optimized geometries.
• Overall Impact:
The work contributes to ejector technology advancement, providing a systematic approach
for optimizing geometry, flow control, and performance while conserving computational
resources—a valuable contribution to engineering and fluid dynamics.
• Continued Exploration:
The study opens avenues for further investigation into ejector design and optimization
methodologies, potentially leading to more efficient and resource-friendly solutions across
various engineering domains.

57
 REFERENCES
[1] Decker, L.O. Consider the cold facts about steam-jet vacuum cooling. Chem. Eng. Prog.
1993 https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5134/4/1/15
[2] He, S.; Li, Y.; Wang, R.Z. Progress of mathematical modeling on ejectors. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 1760–1780
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032108001779?via%3Dihub
[3] Abdulateef, J.M.; Sopian, K.; Alghoul, M.A.; Sulaiman, M.Y. Review on solar-driven
ejector refrigeration technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S136403210800110X?via%3Dihub
[4] Rahamathullah, M.R.; Palani, K.; Venkatakrishnan, P. A Review On Historical And Present
Developments In Ejector Systems. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2013
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012IJERA...3b..10R/abstract
[5] Chen, X.; Omer, S.; Worall, M.; Riffat, S. Recent developments in ejector refrigeration
technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032112006405?via%3Dihub
[6] Chen, J.; Jarall, S.; Havtun, H.; Palm, B. A review on versatile ejector applications in
refrigeration systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032115003433?via%3Dihub
[7] Besagni, G.; Mereu, R.; Inzoli, F. Ejector refrigeration: A comprehensive review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032115009223?via%3Dihub
[8] Little, A.B.; Garimella, S. A critical review linking ejector flow phenomena with
component- and system-level performance. Int. J. Refrig. 2016,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700716301207?via%3Dihub
[9] Keenan, J.H.; Neumann, E.P.; Lustwerk, F. An investigation of ejector design by analysis
and experiment. J. Appl. Mech. 1950,
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article-
abstract/17/3/299/1106496/An-Investigation-of-Ejector-Design-by-Analysis-and
[10] Aphornratana, S.; Chungpaibulpatana, S.; Srikhirin, P. Experimental investigation of an
ejector refrigerator: Effect of mixing chamber geometry on system performance. Int. J.
Energy Res. 2001, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/er.689

58
[11] Yapici, R.; Ersoy, H.K. Performance characteristics of the ejector refrigeration system
based on the constant area ejector flow model. Energy Convers. Manag. 2005,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890405000312?via%3Dihub
[12] Pianthong, K.; Seehanam, W.; Behnia, M.; Sriveerakul, T.; Aphornratana, S. Investigation
and improvement of ejector refrigeration system using computational fluid dynamics
technique. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890407000933?via%3Dihub
[13] Grazzini, G.; Mariani, A. A simple program to design a multi-stagejet-pump for
refrigeration cycles. Energy Convers. Manag. 1998,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890498000703?via%3Dihub
[14] Grazzini, G.; Rocchetti, A. Numerical optimisation of a two-stage ejector refrigeration
plant. Int. J. Refrig. 2002,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700701000639?via%3Dihub
[15] Kong, F.; Kim, H.D. Analytical and computational studies on the performance of a two-
stage ejector-diffuser system. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0017931015001350?via%3Dihub
[16] Eames, I.W. A new prescription for the design of supersonic jet-pumps: The constant rate
of momentum change method. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2002,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431101000795?via%3Dihub
[17] Kitrattana, B.; Aphornratana, S.; Thongtip, T.; Ruangtrakoon, N. Comparison of traditional
and CRMC ejector performance used in a steam ejector refrigeration. Energy Procedia
2017,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187661021735172X?via%3Dihub
[18] Kumar, V.; Singhal, G.; Subbarao, P.M.V. Realization of novel constant rate of kinetic
energy change (CRKEC) supersonic ejector. Energy 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544218317201?via%3Dihub
[19] Chang, Y.J.; Chen, Y.M. Enhancement of a steam-driven ejector using a novel application
of the petal nozzle. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. Trans. Chin. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 2000,
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02533839.2000.9670589
[20] Garris, C.A. Pressure Exchanging Ejector and Refrigeration Apparatus and Method. U.S.
Patent 5647221A, 1997, https://patents.google.com/patent/US5647221A/en
[21] Garris, C.A.; Hong, W.J.; Mavriplis, C.M.; Shipman, J. The Pressure-Exchange Ejector
Heat Pump. In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering
Conference and Exposition, Anaheim, CA, USA, 15–20 November 1998,
59
 https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/IMECE/proceedings-
abstract/IMECE98/263/1134266
[22] Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. Non-Steady Three-Dimensional Flow Field Analysis in
Supersonic Flow Induction. In Proceedings of the ASME 2002 Joint US-European Fluids
Engineering Division Conference, Montreal,
[23] https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/FEDSM/proceedings-
abstract/FEDSM2002/1075/298100
[24] Hong, W.J.; Alhussan, K.; Zhang, H.; Garris, C.A. A novel thermally driven rotor-
vane/pressure-exchange ejector refrigeration system with environmental benefits and
energy efficiency. Energy 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S036054420400129X?via%3Dihub
[25] Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. Effect of Changing Throat Diameter Ratio on a Steam
Supersonic Pressure Exchange Ejector. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2005,
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0217984905010293
[26] Yang, X.; Long, X.; Yao, X. Numerical investigation on the mixing process in a steam
ejector with different nozzle structures. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2012,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1290072912000452?via%3Dihub
[27] Opgenorth, M.J.; Sederstrom, D.; McDermott, W.; Lengsfeld, C.S. Maximizing pressure
recovery using lobed nozzles in a supersonic ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2012,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431111006855?via%3Dihub
[28] Kong, F.S.; Kim, H.D.; Jin, Y.; Setoguchi, T. Application of Chevron nozzle to a supersonic
ejector-diffuser system. Procedia Eng. 2013,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187770581300461X?via%3Dihub
[29] Rao, S.; Jagadeesh, G. Novel supersonic nozzles for mixing enhancement in supersonic
ejectors. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431114005055?via%3Dihub
[30] Zhu, Y.; Jiang, P. Bypass ejector with an annular cavity in the nozzle wall to increase the
entrainment: Experimental and numerical validation. Energy 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544214001807?via%3Dihub
[31] Tang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, Y.; Shi, C. Combined auxiliary entrainment and structure optimization
for performance improvement of steam ejector with consideration of back pressure
variation. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890418303649?via%3Dihub

60
[32] Tang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Shi, C.; Li, Y. A novel steam ejector with pressure regulation to optimize
the entrained flow passage for performance improvement in MED-TVC desalination
system. Energy 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544218310879?via%3Dihub
[33] Vermeulen, P.J.; Ramesh, V.; Meng, G.C.; Miller, D.N.; Domel, N. Air Ejector Pumping
Enhancement through Pulsing Primary Flow. In Proceedings of the 2nd AIAA Flow
Control Conference, Portland, Oregon, 28 June–1 July 2004.
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-abstract/GT2002/57/295739
[34] Ouzzane, M.; Aidoun, Z. Model development and numerical procedure for detailed ejector
analysis and design. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2003,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431103002084?via%3Dihub
[35] Aidoun, Z.; Ouzzane, M. The effect of operating conditions on the performance of a
supersonic ejector for refrigeration. Int. J. Refrig. 2004,
[36] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700704001252?via%3Dihub
[37] Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S. Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032103001151?via%3Dihub
[38] Khalil, A.; Fatouh, M.; Elgendy, E. Ejector design and theoretical study of R134a ejector
refrigeration cycle. Int. J. Refrig. 2011,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700711000181?via%3Dihub
[39] García Del Valle, J.; Saíz Jabardo, J.M.; Castro Ruiz, F.; San José Alonso, J.F. An
experimental investigation of a R-134a ejector refrigeration system. Int. J. Refrig. 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700714001406?via%3Dihub
[40] Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S. An experimental investigation of a steam ejector
refrigerator: The analysis of the pressure profile along the ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431103002539?via%3Dihub
[41] Huang, B.J.; Jiang, C.B.; Hu, F.L. Ejector performance characteristics and design analysis
of jet refrigeration system. J. Eng. Gas. Turbine Power 1985,
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-
abstract/107/3/792/407403/Ejector-Performance-Characteristics-and-
Design?redirectedFrom=fulltext
[42] Eames, I.; Aphornratana, S.; Haider, H. A theoretical and experimental study of a small-
scale steam jet refrigerator. Int. J. Refrig. 1995,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/014070079598160M?via%3Dihub
61
[43] Yapici, R.; Yetişen, C.C. Experimental study on ejector refrigeration system powered by
low grade heat. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890406003645?via%3Dihub
[44] Shestopalov, K.O.; Huang, B.J.; Petrenko, V.O.; Volovyk, O.S. Investigation of an
experimental ejector refrigeration machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and
off-design working conditions. Part 2. Theoretical and experimental results. Int. J. Refrig.
2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715000365?via%3Dihub
[45] Shestopalov, K.O.; Huang, B.J.; Petrenko, V.O.; Volovyk, O.S. Investigation of an
experimental ejector refrigeration machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and
off-design working conditions. Part 1. Theoretical analysis. Int. J. Refrig. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715000298?via%3Dihub
[46] Yan, J.; Chen, G.; Liu, C.; Tang, L.; Chen, Q. Experimental investigations on a R134a
ejector applied in a refrigeration system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431116316428?via%3Dihub

62
 LIST OF PUBLICATION
[1] Bhuvneshwar Tekam, Dr Aseem C Tiwari, “Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Jet Ejectors: A
Computational Fluid Dynamics Investigation”, International Journal for Research in Applied
Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), Volume 11, Issue X, October 2023.

63
 11 X October 2023

https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2023.56282
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Jet Ejectors: A

Computational Fluid Dynamics Investigation
Bhuvneshwar Tekam1, Dr. Aseem C Tiwari2
1, 2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University Institute of Technology, RGPV, Bhopal, (M. P.), India

Abstract: This study investigates the analysis of the operating modes of two distinct jet ejector types, namely, Constant Rate of
Momentum Change (CRMC), Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM). Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) was employed to
thoroughly examine and evaluate their respective geometrical attributes. Through our comprehensive scrutiny, we ascertained
the notably superior performance of CRMC ejectors. This superiority is primarily linked to the continuous presence of
compression shock waves within the flow processes of CRMC, which consequently lead to comparable or even diminished
critical condenser pressures. The core objective of this research is to advance the application of jet-ejector refrigeration
technology, especially for the efficient harnessing of low-grade waste heat, thereby contributing to enhanced energy efficiency
and sustainable cooling solutions. We concentrated on two operational modes, CRMC and CPM, and employed CFD to analyze
the geometry of these ejectors. We found a particular configuration called RSO-2 that demonstrated exceptional performance
after carrying out extensive experiments encompassing 53 different parameter combinations using the Taguchi Design of
Experiments. With regard to the throat inlet, RSO-2 demonstrated an exceptional mass flow rate of 5.28E+05 J kg-1 and a Mach
number of 1.5418 at the throat exit. Furthermore, a strong correlation was found between the diameter of the throat and the
radius of the mixing chamber, as revealed by our thorough sensitivity analysis. This discovery offers important new information
for the development of jet ejector designs.
Keywords: Jet ejectors, Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC), Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM), Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD), Critical condenser pressures, Compression shock waves.

I. INTRODUCTION
Currently, the dominant approach in cooling and refrigeration technology centers on mechanical vapor compression (MVC) systems.
These systems primarily depend on electrical energy, a resource that is both valuable and finite. Regrettably, the heavy reliance on
energy generated from the combustion of fossil fuels has significantly exacerbated pressing environmental challenges. These
challenges encompass the release of greenhouse gases and the discharge of harmful air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides (NOx),
sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter, and ozone, into the atmosphere. The consequences of these environmental impacts are far-
reaching, presenting significant risks to both human health and the delicate equilibrium of our ecosystem.
The emission of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), has been a primary contributor to global warming and climate
change. The resultant rise in average global temperatures has led to phenomena such as more frequent and severe heatwaves,
melting polar ice caps, and rising sea levels. These changes have dire implications for human populations, including extreme
weather events, disruptions in food and water supplies, and the displacement of communities due to sea-level rise. Moreover, the
release of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx) into the atmosphere is linked to the formation of acid rain, which can have
devastating effects on ecosystems and aquatic life. It also contributes to air pollution, leading to respiratory diseases and other health
issues in humans.
Particulate matter and ozone, both byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, further deteriorate air quality and can harm respiratory
health. The accumulation of these pollutants in the atmosphere is a significant concern, especially in urban areas where energy
demand is high. In light of these challenges, there is an urgent need to explore and adopt alternative cooling and refrigeration
technologies that are energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable. Such innovations can help mitigate the adverse effects on
our environment, protect public health, and contribute to the global effort to combat climate change. Furthermore, in the domain of
refrigeration and cooling technologies, the traditional use of mechanical vapor compression (MVC) systems has been synonymous
with the employment of chlorofluorocarbon compounds (CFCs). Unfortunately, these compounds have proven to be extremely
detrimental to the environment. The release of these pollutants into the atmosphere plays a significant role in the depletion of the
protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere, a critical concern that resonates with global efforts to promote environmental
sustainability.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1646
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

In the face of these pressing environmental issues and the ever-growing imperative to enhance energy efficiency, there is an
escalating demand for techniques capable of efficiently harnessing low-grade heat. Such methods typically involve the entrainment
and compression of low-pressure vapor, raising it to higher pressures, thus rendering it suitable for a wide array of applications. This
compression process serves as a foundational element in numerous technological approaches, including absorption, adsorption,
chemical, and jet ejector vapor compression cycles.
Among these alternative methods, jet ejectors emerge as a superior choice, primarily due to their inherent simplicity and remarkable
effectiveness. Unlike other approaches, ejectors consist of a single unit that connects to motive, entrained, and mixture streams,
offering a streamlined and efficient solution for various cooling and refrigeration applications. Jet ejectors provide an elegant and
straightforward means of achieving the desired compression, making them an attractive option for industries seeking to improve
energy efficiency and reduce the environmental impact of their operations. Their versatility and efficiency make them a promising
solution in the quest for more sustainable and environmentally friendly cooling and refrigeration technologies. This streamlined
design makes them exceptionally efficient and uncomplicated for use in vapor compression cycles. Moreover, jet ejectors possess a
unique advantage in that they operate without the need for intricate components like valves, rotors, or any other moving parts. This
inherent simplicity not only enhances their versatility but also makes them exceptionally adaptable to a wide array of sizes, which,
in turn, renders them suitable for a diverse range of applications in the commercial sector. From small-scale to large-scale operations,
jet ejectors prove to be highly versatile and effective. In the realm of cost considerations, jet ejectors offer a distinctly clear and
compelling advantage. Their elegantly streamlined design, devoid of intricate or intricate components, results in not only lower
manufacturing costs but also reduced maintenance expenditures. This inherent affordability factor renders jet ejectors an
exceptionally attractive choice for businesses seeking to optimize their processes without the burden of excessive expenses.
The simplicity of jet ejectors, both in their construction and operation, significantly reduces the initial capital investment required to
implement these systems. Furthermore, their uncomplicated design simplifies the maintenance and servicing procedures, leading to
fewer breakdowns and shorter downtime periods. This inherent reliability minimizes the need for costly repairs and spare parts,
resulting in substantial long-term savings.
This fusion of simplicity and cost-effectiveness makes jet ejectors a highly valuable asset in various commercial applications.
Whether it's in the field of chemical manufacturing, power generation, or environmental control, businesses and industries can
harness the economic benefits of jet ejectors to enhance their operational efficiency while remaining financially prudent. In essence,
jet ejectors exemplify a cost-effective solution that does not compromise on performance, making them a compelling choice for
those seeking to balance economic considerations with operational excellence. They offer a compelling cost advantage both in terms
of initial capital investment and ongoing maintenance when compared to alternative configurations [1]. Conversely, the primary
disadvantages of jet ejectors encompass the following:
1) Ejectors are designed to work best under specific conditions, and moving away from those ideal conditions can cause a
significant drop in their performance. Ejectors are carefully engineered to operate most effectively within a particular set of
parameters. These ideal conditions ensure that ejectors can efficiently do their job, whether it's mixing or compressing fluids.
Achieving this as the outcome of a lot of meticulous planning, considering things like the ejector's design and how fluids
behave. When ejectors are used outside of these ideal conditions, it can lead to various issues. Key measures of ejector
performance, such as how much fluid it can handle, how much it can compress, and how efficiently it works, can drop
significantly. This means that ejectors may not perform as expected, which is a real problem in applications where precision
and reliability matter a lot. Ejectors are often used in situations where it's challenging to keep things perfect all the time. This is
because operating conditions can change, or there might be factors beyond your control. So, understanding how variations can
affect ejector performance and knowing how to keep ejectors working close to their ideal conditions is essential to get the best
results. Regular maintenance and adjustments can also help keep ejectors working well over time. In summary, the ideal
operating conditions for ejectors are really important. They're like the sweet spot where ejectors work best, and moving away
from this can seriously affect how well they do their job. So, understanding and managing these conditions is key for getting the
results you want when using ejectors.
2) Ejectors exhibit notably low thermal efficiency. Ejectors are known for their limited thermal efficiency. In simple terms, this
means that they are not very effective at converting heat into useful work. When ejectors are used to perform tasks like mixing
or compressing fluids, a significant portion of the input heat energy is not efficiently harnessed. Instead, it is lost or wasted in
the process. This low thermal efficiency can be a concern in applications where energy conservation is critical. In such
scenarios, it may be necessary to consider alternative technologies or methods that can provide higher efficiency in converting
heat into useful mechanical or fluidic work. In summary, the thermal efficiency of ejectors is an important factor to be aware of,

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1647
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

as it indicates their effectiveness in utilizing heat energy. Understanding this characteristic is essential when evaluating the
suitability of ejectors for specific applications, especially in situations where energy conservation is a priority. In traditional
vapor compression refrigeration systems, the compressor serves as the primary component responsible for reducing exergy. A
pivotal approach to elevate the overall efficiency of these systems entails the substitution of electrically-driven compressors
with components that function on either waste heat or renewable energy sources. Currently, thermal-driven refrigeration
systems fall into three main categories: absorption, adsorption, and ejector cooling systems. These innovative categories
represent diverse avenues of harnessing thermal energy to achieve cooling and refrigeration, each with its unique set of
advantages and applications. While operating for a long time, adsorption cooling systems may experience system interruptions
and have trouble reaching higher refrigeration capacities [2]. Comparatively speaking to their counterparts, the other two
cooling methods, absorption cooling systems, exhibit remarkable potential for achieving high system efficiency. They do,
however, have some drawbacks, chief among which are high initial investment costs, an expansion in the size of the system as a
whole, and the requirement for high cooling temperatures [3]. Here comes the ejector refrigeration system (ERS), a ground-
breaking and creative cooling method that emerges as a compelling substitute for traditional vapor compression systems. In
order to address the drawbacks of conventional systems, ERS offers a novel perspective on cooling and refrigeration. Exergy
losses experienced by conventional compression refrigeration systems are reduced by ERS, which does so by employing an
ejector to either recover expansion losses [4,5] or enhance fluid pressure [6,7]. This choice is favored due to the system's
uncomplicated structure, cost-effectiveness, and satisfactory performance. Hence, the adoption of an ejector refrigeration
system employing R1234yf stands as a promising solution to confront the challenges of energy scarcity and environmental
concerns in the refrigeration domain. It's crucial to keep in mind that this system has a limitation in the form of a relatively
lower Coefficient of Performance (COP) when compared to its competitors, particularly the absorption refrigeration system,
especially when using R1234yf as the refrigerant. The ejector component's subpar performance is primarily to blame for this
difference [3]. The importance of the relationship between the cooling capacity of the system and the ejector's entrainment ratio
has been recognized, and a substantial body of research has been devoted to increasing the ejector's efficiency. The ongoing
study aims to overcome this constraint, improve the system's overall performance, and make it more competitive with other
thermally-driven cooling systems. In essence, improving ejector performance is essential for closing the COP gap.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

In a comprehensive examination of cooling systems tailored for the construction industry, Lei, Y., et al. (2023) [8] introduces an
innovative bi-loop double-evaporator ejection-compression cycle that maximizes the utilization of low-grade heat while adapting to
varying temperature requirements. This system combines the strengths of a vapor compression system and an ejector refrigeration
system, adeptly managing diverse pressure levels and compression ratios while maintaining a common condenser pressure. In
contrast to traditional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) approaches, this research employs a wet steam model, accounting for
non-equilibrium water vapor condensation, which enhances precision in assessing condensation behavior and its consequences on
ejector performance. The incorporation of a wet steam model in this study marks a significant advancement over conventional dry
gas models. This innovation results in significantly reduced errors and a closer alignment with experimental data, ensuring greater
accuracy. The study extensively explores four crucial characteristics of wet steam, all aimed at elevating the performance and
efficiency of the ejector system. It involves the identification of optimal area and primary nozzle diameter ratios for the steam
ejector, thus contributing to the optimization of this process. This meticulous optimization process yields substantial benefits, not
only in terms of condensation intensity reduction but also in diminishing the liquid mass fraction within the diffuser. These findings
offer invaluable insights for enhancing and precisely calibrating ejector performance. Moreover, they underscore the critical
significance of incorporating spontaneous condensation behavior into ejector design and modeling practices. This innovative
approach not only deepens our understanding of ejector functionality but also provides practical guidance for achieving optimal
performance under varying operational conditions. In a similar vein, a study by Borirak Kitrattana and colleagues in 2021
introduced a one-dimensional ejector model. This model takes into account real fluid properties, with a specific focus on the steam-
water context. It is grounded in Stoecker's framework from 1958 and has demonstrated its high effectiveness in designing steam
ejector geometries and making accurate performance predictions. This research collectively contributes to advancing the field of
ejector technology and its application in real-world scenarios. Notably, it highlights the discrepancies between ideal gas-based
models and those incorporating condensation in supersonic flows, emphasizing the critical role of condensation in ejector analyses
and design considerations.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1648
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

In an earlier study conducted by A.J. Meyer et al. in 2009 [10], the development of a small-scale experimental steam jet ejector
system was reported, marking a significant step forward in the practical implementation and testing of steam ejector technologies.
This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge surrounding steam jet ejector systems and underscores the continuous
efforts to refine their performance for various applications. This ejector setup featured an open-loop configuration, with the boiler
operating within the temperature range of Tb = 85–140 °C. The evaporator's typical liquid temperatures ranged from Te = 5 °C to
10 °C, while the water-cooled condenser operated at pressures between Pc = 1.70 kPa and 5.63 kPa (Tc = 15–35 °C). To power the
boiler, two 4 kW electric elements were employed, and a 3 kW electric element simulated the cooling load in the evaporator. The
electric elements were controlled using variacs.
The study encompassed a meticulous examination of primary nozzles featuring throat diameters of 2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, and 3.5 mm,
with the secondary ejector throat diameter consistently maintained at 18 mm. These deliberate variations in the primary nozzle
throat diameter provided a range of options for the boiler's operation within the temperature spectrum, specifically between Tb = 85–
110 °C. What emerged from this investigation was the clear relationship between nozzle throat diameter and the minimum attainable
boiler temperature. It was evident that an increase in the nozzle throat diameter corresponded to a reduction in the minimum boiler
temperature.
As an illustration, a primary nozzle with a 3.5 mm throat diameter was subjected to testing at a boiler temperature of Tb = 95 °C, an
evaporator temperature of Te = 10 °C, and a critical condenser pressure of Pcrit = 2.67 kPa (22.6 °C). In this particular configuration,
the system demonstrated a coefficient of performance (COP) of 0.253. This meticulous case study is part of a broader investigation
into the experimental data of a solar-powered steam jet ejector air conditioner, which has been undertaken with meticulous attention
to detail.
The prominence of solar-powered steam ejector air conditioning systems is evident, as they prove to be both technically and
economically feasible in comparison to traditional vapour compression air conditioners. The utilization of either flat plate or
evacuated tube solar thermal collectors is contingent upon the specific type of solar energy available for the systemIn a noteworthy
study conducted in 2015 by B Tashtoush et al. [11], a comprehensive exploration was undertaken to investigate the impact of ejector
geometry, refrigerant category, and operational state on the efficiency of the ejector cooling cycle during its pivotal operational
phase. This research unveiled intriguing findings, shedding light on the intricate dynamics of these systems.
It was discovered that, under the same entrainment ratio and coefficient of performance (COP), constant-pressure mixing ejectors
tended to exhibit higher backpressure compared to their constant-area mixing counterparts. This divergence in performance can be
attributed to the heightened demand for condenser pressure and elevated generator temperatures in the case of constant-pressure
mixing ejectors. Consequently, a COP range of 0.59-0.67 was observed at a condenser backpressure of 24 bar, emphasizing the
significance of these operating parameters in optimizing ejector systems.
Furthermore, in a significant stride forward, a pioneering scientific prototype of a steam ejector refrigeration system was
successfully engineered by Jingming Dong et al. in 2017 [12]. This outstanding accomplishment represents a significant advance in
the field of ejector technology, further demonstrating the potential of steam ejector refrigeration systems and their ability to
completely alter the market for cooling and refrigeration solutions. This prototype represents an important development in the
understanding and practical application of steam ejector refrigeration systems, further validating their potential as effective and
environmentally friendly alternatives in the field of air conditioning technology.
The three ejectors were designed and developed using three different constant-area sections and the same fundamental nozzle. The
steam ejector refrigeration system comes into its own as a particularly alluring replacement for conventional absorption refrigeration
systems as the heat source temperature drops below the 80°C threshold. In this case, a thorough experimental investigation was
conducted to delve into the impact of a variable geometry ejector (VGE) design on the operational performance of a smaller-scale
solar heat-assisted ejector air conditioning system.
With a nominal capacity of 1.5 kW, this system positions itself as a promising and sustainable cooling solution. This insightful
study, conducted by Van Nguyen and their team in 2020 [13], clarifies the practical evaluation of the system's functionality under
actual operating conditions. It not only underscores the system's potential as an alternative cooling technology but also highlights
the role of innovative design features, such as the variable geometry ejector, in optimizing its performance. These findings
contribute significantly to the broader conversation surrounding energy-efficient cooling solutions, particularly in scenarios where
lower heat source temperatures are prevalent. This study underscores the practical implications of integrating a variable geometry
ejector design, highlighting its potential to bolster the performance and efficiency of solar heat-assisted ejector air conditioning
systems.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1649
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

III. METHODOLOGY
In a comprehensive examination of ejector performance, the study meticulously analyzed both Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) and
Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejectors employing ANSYS Fluent Workbench, as illustrated in Figures 2(a) and
1(b). The methodological approach consisted of several crucial stages. To enhance computational efficiency and simplify intricate
geometries, an axisymmetric CAD model of the ejectors was initially created in ANSYS Design Modeler. Subsequently, parameter
sets were assigned to pivotal components, enabling customization of the geometry to align with specific design criteria, as
showcased in Figure 1.

Fig. 1 Parameters of customization of the geometry for CPM and CRMC

The CFD analysis conducted in ANSYS Fluent Workbench employed precise boundary conditions for accuracy. An axis boundary
was assumed for symmetry, ensuring computational efficiency. Inlet 1 replicated real fluid entry with specified velocity (343 m/s)
and considered turbulence effects (5% turbulence intensity, turbulent viscosity ratio of 10) at a temperature of 403 K. Inlet 2 utilized
a known pressure (101325 Pa), similar turbulence parameters, and operated at 300 K. The outlet boundary allowed for pressure
variation (3350 Pa) and accounted for turbulence effects at 300 K in the outflow. Adiabatic wall boundaries were established,
assuming no heat transfer to the surroundings.

Fig. 2(a) CAD model of Constant Pressure Fig. 2(b) CAD model of Constant Rate Of
Mixing (CPM) ejector Momentum Change (CRMC) ejector

Operating conditions were established with a reference pressure of 0 Pa, employing solver settings such as implicit formulation,
Green-Gauss gradient calculation, and second-order upwind discretization schemes. Hybrid initialization techniques were utilized,
and simulations were executed in double precision with an 8-core processor for accuracy and efficiency. The analysis focused on the
Mach number, revealing subsonic (Ma < 1) and supersonic (Ma > 1) flow regions within the ejectors, indicating compression and
expansion areas. In the "Initial" state, the mixing chamber measured 130mm in length, with throat and diffuser diameters of 114mm
and 180mm, respectively. The throat, 12mm long and 9.5mm in diameter, led to a mass flow at the throat inlet of 14777 Joules per
kilogram and a Mach number of 1.4843 at the throat exit.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1650
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

IV. RESPONSE SURFACE OPTIMIZATION

Response Surface Optimization (RSO) is a mathematical and statistical approach employed to identify the ideal configuration for a
system or process in situations where the connection between input and output parameters is intricate and nonlinear. In this
particular scenario, RSO seeks to ascertain the optimal combination of input parameters (comprising mixing chamber length, throat
length, diffuser length, mixing chamber radius, throat radius, and diffuser radius) that maximizes mass flow at the throat while
minimizing the Mach number at the throat exit.

Fig.3 (a) 3D response curve showing relationship Fig. 3(b) 3D response curve showing relationship
between mixing chamber length and diameter with between mixing chamber length and diameter with
respect to the mass flow at throat inlet respect to the Mach number at throat exit

Fig.3 (c) 3D response curve showing relationship

Fig. 3(d) 3D response curve showing relationship
between throat length and diameter with respect to
between throat length and diameter with respect to
the mass flow at throat inlet
the Mach number at throat exit

Fig. 3 (e) 3D response curve showing relationship Fig. 3 (f) 3D response curve showing relationship
between diffuser length and diameter with respect to between diffuser length and diameter with respect to
the mass flow at throat inlet the Mach number at throat exit

The relationship between ejector geometry and performance is illustrated in Figure 3 (a-f). Response Surface Optimization (RSO) is
a valuable methodology, particularly when computational resources and time limitations are a factor. This study concentrates on
optimizing ejector geometry to maximize mass flow rate and Mach number. The technique employed serves as a practical guide for
efficiently exploring parameter variations to achieve optimal design configurations for CRMC ejectors, ensuring performance
objectives are met. Detailed results obtained from the RSO technique will be discussed in the following section.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1651
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

V. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

In this technical comparative analysis, we will assess and highlight the precedence of RSO 2 over the other cases, including the
initial case, based on the provided data. The parameters being considered are the dimensions of the ejector components (mixing
chamber, throat, and diffuser), Mass flow at the throat inlet, and the Mach number at the throat exit.

TABLE I: Parameters Comparison for Different RSO Variants in a Rocket Nozzle

PARAMETERS
Mass
RSO Mixing Mixing Mach
Throat Diffuser Throat Diffuser throat
chamber chamber throat
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) inlet (J
(mm) (mm) exit
kg^-1)
Initial 130 114 180 12 9.5 20 14777 1.4843
RSO 1 133.2 115.49 182.65 11.15 9.3103 29.394 4.91E+05 1.5349
RSO 2 133.2 116.07 182.51 11.179 9.3076 29.391 5.28E+05 1.5418
RSO 3 133.52 115.47 182.61 11.086 9.4525 29.39 5.24E+05 1.5363

Mixing chamber length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 maintains dimensions very close to the initial case, with a marginal increase in
mixing chamber length. This demonstrates a prudent design choice, avoiding drastic geometry changes while achieving substantial
performance improvements.
Throat length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 throat dimensions are marginally larger than the initial case, contributing to the
performance enhancement. This increase supports an increase in mass flow while maintaining the throat's critical dimensions.
Diffuser length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 also retains dimensions similar to the initial case, ensuring the diffuser's effectiveness
without significant alterations.

Fig. 4 Mass Flow and Mach Number Analysis in Rocket Nozzle Variants

Mass flow at throat inlet, the initial case exhibits a relatively lower mass flow at the throat inlet, standing at 14777 J kg-1. RSO 2
stands out significantly with an exceptional mass flow at the throat inlet, reaching 5.28E+05 J kg-1. This remarkable increase
signifies a substantial enhancement in ejector performance, indicating an efficient mixing and acceleration of the flow. Mach
number at throat exit, the initial case has a Mach number at the throat exit of 1.4843, RSO 2 also impressively lowers the Mach
number at the throat exit to 1.5418. This reduction is significant, though not less than the initial case, indicating that the flow in RSO
2 is also close to the desired subsonic regime, minimizing the challenges associated with supersonic flow.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1652
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

A. Comparative Analysis
RSO 2 clearly outperforms the initial case and other RSO cases in several critical aspects:
1) Mass Flow: RSO 2 achieves an astounding increase in mass flow at the throat inlet compared to the initial case, indicating a
much-improved performance in terms of fluid acceleration and mixing.
2) Mach Number: RSO 2 not only excels in mass flow but also manages to significantly reduce the Mach number at the throat exit,
demonstrating superior control over the flow regime and enhancing the ejector's efficiency.
3) Geometry Changes: Notably, RSO 2 achieves these improvements without radical changes in geometry, which is often
advantageous for practical applications as it avoids complex manufacturing or design alterations.

In conclusion, RSO 2 stands out as the best-case scenario, surpassing the initial case and other RSO cases in both mass flow and
Mach number performance. Its modest geometry adjustments coupled with remarkable enhancements in performance make it the
clear precedence in optimizing the ejector's design for improved efficiency and effectiveness.

VI. CONCLUSION
The effectiveness of jet ejectors operating in two distinct scenarios—constant pressure mixing (CPM) and constant rate of
momentum change (CRMC)—is evaluated in this study. To do this, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is used. The Taguchi
method and Response Surface Methodology (RSM), two statistical techniques, are used to optimize the design parameters of CRMC
jet ejectors.
Out of a pool of 53 Taguchi configurations that involved altering dimensions of the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser, three
optimum configurations (RSO1, RSO2, RSO3) have been identified. A comprehensive comparative analysis has brought to light the
exceptional promise of the RSO-2 configuration within the examined geometries.
This configuration is distinguished by its ability to generate a high mass flow at the throat inlet while maintaining a low Mach
number. The optimized geometry for this efficient CRMC ejector is characterized by specific dimensions, including a mixing
chamber length of 133.2mm, a throat length of 116.07mm, a diffuser length of 182.51mm, a throat diameter of 9.3076mm, a mixing
chamber diameter of 11.179mm, and a diffuser diameter of 29.391mm.These dimensions culminate in an impressive mass flow rate
of 5.28E+05 J kg-1 and a Mach number of 1.5418.
Sensitivity analysis has also emphasized the favorable impact of increasing the mixing chamber radius. These findings underscore
the immense potential for enhancing ejector designs across a spectrum of industrial applications. It is worth noting that further
practical validation and financial assessments are imperative to translate these promising results into real-world solutions.
Collectively, this research significantly contributes to the ongoing efforts aimed at bolstering energy efficiency and environmental
sustainability.

REFERENCES
[1] Hisham El-Dessouky, Hisham Ettouney, Imad Alatiqi, Ghada Al-Nuwaibit, “Evaluation of steam jet ejectors, Chemical Engineering and Processing:” Process
Intensification, Vol. 41, Issue 6, pp. 551-561, ISSN 0255-2701, 2002, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0255-2701(01)00176-3.
[2] Pridasawas, W. (2006). Solar-driven refrigeration systems with focus on the ejector cycle (Doctoral dissertation, KTH).
[3] J. Deng, R.Z. Wang, G.Y. Han, “A review of thermally activated cooling technologies for combined cooling, heating and power systems,” Progress in Energy
and Combustion Science, Vol. 37, Issue 2, pp. 172-203, ISSN 0360-1285, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2010.05.003.
[4] Neal Lawrence, Stefan Elbel, Experimental investigation of a two-phase ejector cycle suitable for use with low-pressure refrigerants R134a and R1234yf,
International Journal of Refrigeration, Vol. 38, pp. 310-322, ISSN 0140-7007, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2013.08.009.
[5] Zhen-ying Zhang, Yi-tai Ma, Hong-li Wang, Min-xia Li, Theoretical evaluation on effect of internal heat exchanger in ejector expansion transcritical CO2
refrigeration cycle, Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 50, Issue 1, pp. 932-938, ISSN 1359-4311, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.08.022.
[6] José Galindo, Vicente Dolz, Luis Miguel García-Cuevas, Alberto Ponce-Mora, “Numerical evaluation of a solar-assisted jet-ejector refrigeration system:
Screening of environmentally friendly refrigerants,” Energy Conversion and Management, Vol. 210, pp. 112681, ISSN 0196-8904, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112681.
[7] Bernardo Peris Pérez, Miguel Ávila Gutiérrez, José Antonio Expósito Carrillo, José Manuel Salmerón Lissén, Performance of Solar-driven Ejector
Refrigeration System (SERS) as pre-cooling system for air handling units in warm climates, Energy, Vol. 238, pp. 121647, ISSN 0360-5442, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121647.
[8] Lei, Y., Li, S., Lu, J., Xu, Y., Yong, Y., & Xing, D. “Numerical Analysis of Steam Ejector Performance with Non-Equilibrium Condensation for Refrigeration
Applications.” Buildings, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1672, 2023. MDPI AG. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/buildings13071672
[9] Borirak Kitrattana, Satha Aphornratana, Tongchana Thongtip, “One dimensional steam ejector model based on real fluid property,” Thermal Science and
Engineering Progress, Vol. 25, pp. 101016, ISSN 2451-9049, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2021.101016.
[10] A.J. Meyer, T.M. Harms, R.T. Dobson, “Steam jet ejector cooling powered by waste or solar heat,” Renewable Energy, Vol. 34, Issue 1, pp. 297-306, ISSN
0960-1481, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.03.020.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1653
 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Volume 11 Issue X Oct 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com

[11] Bourhan Tashtoush, Aiman Alshare, Saja Al-Rifai, “Performance study of ejector cooling cycle at critical mode under superheated primary flow,” Energy
Conversion and Management, vol. 94, pp. 300-310, ISSN 0196-8904, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.01.039.
[12] Jingming Dong, Mengqi Yu, Weining Wang, He Song, Celue Li, Xinxiang Pan, “Experimental investigation on low-temperature thermal energy driven steam
ejector refrigeration system for cooling application,” Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 123, pp. 167-176, ISSN 1359-4311, 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.05.061.
[13] Van Nguyen, V., Varga, S., Soares, J., Dvorak, V., & Oliveira, A. C. “Applying a variable geometry ejector in a solar ejector refrigeration system.”
International Journal of Refrigeration, vol. 113, pp. 187-195, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2020.01.018

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved | SJ Impact Factor 7.538 | ISRA Journal Impact Factor 7.894 | 1654
 It is here by certified that the paper ID : IJRASET56282, entitled
Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Jet Ejectors: A Computational Fluid Dynamics
Investigation
by
Bhuvneshwar Tekam

after review is found suitable and has been published in

Volume 11, Issue X, October 2023
in
International Journal for Research in Applied Science &
Engineering Technology
(International Peer Reviewed and Refereed Journal)
Good luck for your future endeavors
 It is here by certified that the paper ID : IJRASET56282, entitled
Enhancing Energy Efficiency in Jet Ejectors: A Computational Fluid Dynamics
Investigation
by
Dr. Aseem C Tiwari

after review is found suitable and has been published in

Volume 11, Issue X, October 2023
in
International Journal for Research in Applied Science &
Engineering Technology
(International Peer Reviewed and Refereed Journal)
Good luck for your future endeavors
 Plagiarism Checker X Originality Report
Similarity Found: 8%

Date: Wednesday, December 20, 2023

Statistics: 1506 words Plagiarized / 18035 Total words
Remarks: Low Plagiarism Detected - Your Document needs Optional Improvement.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ABSTRACT This research presents a systematic approach to optimize

Convergent-Divergent CPM and CRMC ejector geometries through advanced CFD
simulations and Response Surface Optimization (RSO). Notably, RSO 2 designs
demonstrated significant enhancements in mass flow rates and successfully transitioned
the flow regime to subsonic, improving ejector efficiency. Insights from sensitivity
analysis highlighted key parameters like throat and mixing chamber diameters crucial
for ejector performance.

By reducing computational complexity, RSO and sensitivity analysis facilitated efficient

exploration of the design space. Validation against a base paper affirmed the accuracy
of the techniques. The findings provide valuable guidance for ejector design in
applications requiring high mass flow rates and precise flow control, extending to fields
like jet propulsion and chemical processing. Future research avenues include exploring
additional parameters and real-world experimental validation, promising more efficient
and resource-friendly engineering solutions.

This study represents a significant advancement in ejector technology, offering a

comprehensive, efficient, and accurate methodology for optimizing ejector performance
while conserving computational resources. Keyword-: Ejector Optimization, CFD
Simulations, Response Surface Optimization, Flow Regime Control, Sensitivity Analysis,
Mass Flow Enhancement, Engineering Applications, Resource Efficiency, Validation, Fluid
Dynamics. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Certificate.................................................................................................................................I
Declaration...............................................................................................................................II
Acknowledgement..................................................................................................................III
Abstract...................................................................................................................................IV CHAPTER 01
- INTRODUCTION 1.1
Introduction........................................................................................................................01 1.2 Historical
Development......................................................................................................01 1.3 Working
Principles and Thermodynamics.........................................................................02 1.4

Components of Ejector.......................................................................................................04 1.5 Types

of Ejectors................................................................................................................05 1.6 Usage and
Applications......................................................................................................08 CHAPTER 02 -
LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Literature
Review...............................................................................................................12 2.2 Literature
Gap....................................................................................................................30 CHAPTER 03 -
OBJECTIVE 3.0 Objective............................................................................................................................31
CHAPTER 04 - METHODOLOGY 4.1
Methodology……………………………………………………………………………..32 4.2 Response Surface
Optimization (RSO) and Its significance……………….…………….40 4.3 Optimum
Results…………………………………………………………………………50 4.4 Comparative
Analysis…………………………………………………………………....55 CHAPTER 05 - CONCLUSION 5.1
Conclusion..........................................................................................................................56 5.2 Future
Scope of Work………………………………………………………………….....57
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................58 LIST OF
FIGURES Figure 1.1 Steam Jet
Ejector.....................................................................................................01 Figure 1.2 Geometry of
single stage ejector.............................................................................02 Figure 1.3 Types of
Ejectors.....................................................................................................04 Figure 1.4 Three Stage
Ejector Diagram..................................................................................05 Figure 1.5 Constant Pressure
Mixing Diagram........................................................................06 Figure 1.6 Condensing Ejector
Diagram..................................................................................06 Figure 1.7

Application of Ejector.............................................................................................07 Figure 4.1

Dimensions & Parameters of components..............................................................28 Figure 4.2
CAD model in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................28 Figure 4.3
CAD model in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector........................................................................................................................29 Figure 4.4

Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)

ejector.......................................................................................................................................29 Figure 4.5
Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector........................................................................................................................30 Figure 4.6 Mach
number contour for Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................31 Figure 4.7

Mach number contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)

ejector.......................................................................................................................................32 Figure 4.8
Static pressure contour for of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................33 Figure 4.9
Static pressure contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector.......................................................................................................................................33 Figure 4.10
Optimization Process, parameter sets created using algorithms
seeking......................................................................................................................................36 Figure 4.11
Goodness of fit for iterating observed points and generated by
RSM.........................................................................................................................................38 Figure 4.12
Parameter sensitivity showing effects of parameters on RSO
study..........................................................................................................................................39 Figure 4.13
3D response curve showing relationship between mixing chamber length and diameter
with respect to the mass flow at throat inlet..............................................................39 Figure 4.14
3D response curve showing relationship between mixing chamber length and diameter
with respect to the Mach number at throat exit.........................................................40 Figure
4.15 3D response curve showing relationship between throat length and diameter with
respect to the mass flow at throat inlet.....................................................................................40
Figure 4.16 3D response curve showing relationship between throat length and diameter
with respect to the Mach number at throat
exit................................................................................41 Figure 4.17 3D response curve showing
relationship between diffuser length and diameter with respect to the mass flow at
throat inlet.............................................................................41 Figure 4.18 3D response curve
showing relationship between diffuser length and diameter with respect to the Mach
number at throat exit........................................................................41 Figure 4.19 RSO Result
Technical Graph Data.......................................................................43 Figure 4.20 Local Sensitivity
Data..........................................................................................44 Figure 4.21 Comparative Analysis
between initial case and RSO cases.................................45
 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 RSO
Parameters........................................................................................................38 Table 4.2 Representing
the defining ranges of various parameters of DOE……………........41 Table 4.3 DOE
Parameters.......................................................................................................43 Table 4.4 RSO Result
Parameters............................................................................................50 Table 4.5 Technical Analysis
of Tabular Data and Graphical Reference.................................52 Table 4.6

RSO Comparative Analysis......................................................................................54

 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CPM - Constant Pressure Mixing CRMC - Constant Rate of
Momentum Change CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics RSO - Response Surface
Optimization DOE - Design of Experiments RSM - Response Surface Methodology
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction Steam jet ejectors are versatile fluidic devices
that utilize the motive action of high pressure steam to entrain, compress and discharge
a suction fluid.

Also referred to as steam injectors or thermos compressors, they operate on the

principle of momentum exchange between steam and suction flows within specially
designed components. Steam jet ejectors find extensive application in the evacuation of
surface condensers in steam power plants, vapor recompression refrigeration systems,
evaporative crystallization processes, and other vacuum or compression applications
across oil, gas, chemical and process industries. The key functionality of steam jet
ejectors arises from the conversion of pressure energy of motive steam into kinetic
energy and using the high velocity jet to create vacuum and compress vapors.

This is accomplished without any moving components, giving steam jet ejectors
inherent reliability advantages over traditional vacuum pumps and compressors which
have complex rotating parts. The lack of sliding interfaces also allows steam jet ejectors
to effectively handle corrosive, fouling and explosive gas streams without lubrication
requirements. / Figure 1.1 Steam Jet Ejector Historical Development The conceptual
origins of using a steam jet for entrainment and compression can be traced back to the
1850s, with the early work of Charles Grafton Page on steam jet pumps mainly aimed at
removing water from flooded mines. However, the modern precursors of steam jet
ejectors emerged in the early 20th century, motivated by the rapidly expanding steam
power industry.

In 1901, Charles Parsons patented the first actual design of a steam jet ejector,
comprising a steam nozzle, suction chamber, mixing chamber and diffuser (Parsons,
1901). This milestone established the prototypical components and working principle of
modern steam jet ejectors. At that time, Parsons was at the forefront of steam turbine
development, which marked a pivotal transition from reciprocating engines to steam
turbines for efficient power generation.

As outlined by Keenan, Neumann and Lustwerk (1950), the most vital early application
of Parsons’ steam jet ejector invention was in evacuating the surface condensers of
steam turbine power plants in the early 1900s. This enabled vacuum levels below 50
mmHg, drastically improving turbine efficiency and output. By the 1920s, the steam jet
ejector had completely supplanted the vacuum pump for condenser evacuation. The
simplicity, low maintenance costs and vapor handling ability of steam jet ejectors proved
transformative for the efficiency of thermal power plants.

Another key advancement in steam jet ejector designs emerged in the 1930s through
the work of French inventor Maurice Rateau. As described by Chunnanond and
Aphornratana (2004), Rateau developed an improved steam jet ejector configuration
that used multiple fixed steam nozzles discharging onto a rotating plate. This enhanced
the mixing between the steam jet and suction flow and significantly improved the
entrainment ratio and compression efficiency compared to previous ejector designs.

The foundational one-dimensional analytical model for steam jet ejectors was
formulated by Keenan, Neumann and Lustwerk in their seminal 1950 paper. This
established the basic governing equations for thermodynamic analysis of ideal steam jet
ejectors without accounting for losses. In the 1990s, the extensive research by Eames,
Aphornratana and others led to more detailed one-dimensional ejector models as well
as explorations into multi-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) techniques.
1.3

Working Principles and Thermodynamics The operating principle of a steam jet ejector
is based on converting the pressure energy of high pressure superheated steam into
kinetic energy using a converging-diverging motive nozzle. As per one-dimensional flow
analysis, the motive steam undergoes isentropic expansion in the converging section
followed by isobaric expansion in the diverging section. The rapidly expanding steam
reaches sonic velocity at the nozzle throat, and supersonic velocities at the outlet,
creating a high velocity jet.

The conversion of pressure to velocity follows the Bernoulli's equation, and the flow
behaviour can be modelled using isentropic flow relations. The high velocity jet exiting
the nozzle creates a low pressure zone at the nozzle outlet. This low pressure induces
the suction fluid to be entrained into the ejector through the suction inlet. The
entrainment ratio is defined as the mass flow rate of the suction fluid divided by the
mass flow rate of motive steam. (Figure 1.2) / Figure 1.2 Geometry of single stage
ejector The mixing between the motive steam jet and the suction flow occurs in the
mixing chamber. Due to momentum exchange, the velocity of the high-speed jet
decreases while the velocity of the suction flow increases.

This transfer of momentum from the steam jet results in a rise in pressure of the suction
fluid. The mixing process can be analyzed using a control volume approach by applying
conservation laws for mass, momentum and energy. For optimal operation, the mixing
must be as uniform as possible. The length and diameter of the mixing chamber govern
the residence time available for momentum exchange. The mixed stream then passes
through the diffuser section where the kinetic energy is converted back into pressure
energy. The diffuser has an increasing area in the flow direction, which decelerates the
flow and increases the static pressure.
The compression ratio of the steam jet ejector is defined as the ratio of the outlet
pressure to the inlet suction pressure. The thermodynamic efficiency is the ratio of the
actual enthalpy rise to the isentropic enthalpy rise across the ejector. One-dimensional
models provide reasonably good estimation of ejector performance but do not capture
radial variations and flow losses. For analyzing steam jet ejectors, the conservation
equations are applied to each component as well as the overall ejector system. The
conditions across the motive nozzle are modelled using isentropic relations.

The mixing chamber analysis assumes uniform mixing between the primary and
secondary streams. This provides the mixed conditions entering the diffuser. The diffuser
is modelled as a constant area or constant pressure process. Steam jet ejectors are
valued for their straightforward configuration devoid of moving parts, resulting in
reliable operation with minimal maintenance. However, their performance and flexibility
is limited compared to other conventional technologies. Analyzing steam ejectors poses
challenges arising from the complex internal flow physics involving supersonic flows,
shockwaves, turbulent mixing and thermal disequilibrium between fluids.

Overall energy balance equates the enthalpy rise of the suction flow to the kinetic
energy loss of the motive steam. Momentum balance equates the thrust produced by
the steam jet to the momentum increase of the suction flow. Valid solutions require the
pressures to be within certain limits to avoid shockwaves or choking. The ejector
geometry and primary/secondary pressures dictate the thermodynamic performance.
Multi-dimensional computational fluid dynamics techniques are increasingly used to
simulate the complex flow behaviour. 1.4

Components of Ejector A steam jet ejector comprises several critical components that
handle the thermodynamic processes of expansion, entrainment, momentum exchange,
compression and discharge. The major components are the motive nozzle, suction inlet,
mixing chamber, diffuser and outlets. Auxiliary systems like steam supply chest,
supports, instrumentation and valves are also required. The design of each component
significantly influences the performance and efficiency of the ejector system.

Motive Nozzle The motive nozzle is the most vital component which accelerates the
motive steam to supersonic velocities of 300-600 m/s using a convergent-divergent
geometry. The convergent section decreases the steam cross-section reaching sonic
velocity at the throat. The divergent section further expands the steam. The nozzle
efficiency depends on the area ratio, contour and roughness. Higher discharge velocities
increase entrainment but reduce efficiency. Suction Inlet The suction inlet is positioned
after the nozzle outlet at a suitable location for the low pressure suction fluid to be
entrained into the ejector.

The inlet cross-section and contour determine the inlet losses. Smaller inlets enhance
vacuum performance but reduce capacity. The inlet should be streamlined to minimize
shock losses. Mixing Chamber The mixing chamber provides the contact length for
momentum transfer between the supersonic steam jet and the entrained suction flow.
An appropriate diameter and length is required for efficient mixing. The chamber is
often cylindrical but optimizing the contour can improve performance. Mixing can be
enhanced by using multiple nozzles. Diffuser The diffuser converts the kinetic energy of
the mixed stream into pressure rise.

A gradually diverging passage is used to decelerate the flow velocity and increase
pressure. Conical, annular or rectangular diffuser geometries are employed. The area
ratio and divergence angle affect overall compression efficiency. 1.5 Types of Ejectors
Steam ejectors can be categorized into different types based on the number of stages,
flow arrangement, operating pressures, and construction. The selection of an
appropriate ejector type is critical for achieving optimal performance for a given
application. / Figure 1.3

Types of Ejectors Single Stage Ejectors The most common type is the single stage steam
jet ejector consisting of a motive steam nozzle, suction chamber, mixing chamber,
diffuser and outlet in a single body. It represents the basic ejector configuration where
the compression occurs in one step. Single stage ejectors are widely used for low
compression ratio applications such as maintaining condenser vacuum in power plants.
They can handle inlet suction pressures down to about 80 mm Hg absolute. Single stage
units are relatively compact, simple to operate and most economical for modest
compression requirements. (Figure 1.3) Multi-Stage Ejectors For obtaining very high
compression ratios above 10:1, multi-stage ejectors are utilized.

In these, two or more single stage steam jet ejectors are combined in series with the
discharge from the first stage fed as the suction inlet for the second stage. Additional
stages can be added to achieve the desired outlet pressure. The motive steam
requirement increases considerably for multi-stage units. Intercoolers are often placed
between stages to remove the heat of compression. Multi-stage configurations are
commonly used for evaporator applications in chemical plants and as
thermo-compressors for refrigeration. (Figure 1.4) / Figure 1.4

Three Stage Ejector Diagram Constant Pressure Mixing Ejectors Also referred to as
double throat ejectors, these contain a mixing chamber with two throats - a primary
throat near the motive nozzle outlet and a secondary throat downstream where the
mixed flow enters the diffuser. The region between the throats acts as a constant
pressure mixing zone. This design forces the primary jet to rapidly decelerate after the
primary throat, improving the mixing process and compression efficiency compared to a
regular mixing chamber.

However, constant pressure ejectors have more complex geometries and may
experience stability issues. / Figure 1.5 Constant Pressure Mixing Diagram Removable
Cartridge Ejectors These consist of a removable cartridge that houses the motive nozzle,
mixing chamber and diffuser components. The cartridge can be easily inserted into the
ejector body which contains the steam chest and inlet-outlet connections. This modular
construction allows quick maintenance, inspection and replacement of worn
components.

The simple removal of cartridges avoids the need to disconnect the entire piping
system. Removable cartridge ejectors are advantageous where regular maintenance of
internal parts is desired. Condensing Ejectors This type of ejector has an additional
condenser section at the outlet to condense and recover the motive steam after it has
been used for entrainment. The steam condensate can be reused in the boiler. A
significant portion of the motive steam's latent heat is recovered by the condenser,
improving the energy efficiency. Condensing ejectors are suitable when the latent heat
can be effectively used for district heating or feedwater heating. / Figure 1.6

Condensing Ejector Diagram Ejector Orientations Based on the orientation of the motive
and suction inlets, steam ejectors can have horizontal, vertical upflow or vertical
downflow configurations. Horizontal ejectors have parallel inlets while vertical ejectors
have perpendicular inlets. Vertical downflow ejectors require a drain section below the
mixing chamber for removal of accumulated liquid. Orientation affects the flow
behaviour and must be suited for the service conditions. Materials of Construction
Steam jet ejectors handle high temperature motive steam requiring selection of suitable
materials like steel, stainless steel, Inconel or Monel.

The nozzle and mixing chamber may employ high strength materials. Corrosion resistant
coatings are used for wet suction applications. The body can be of cast iron or
fabricated steel. Gasket materials must withstand the temperature and pressures
involved. Hardness and surface finishes are designed to minimize erosion and friction
losses. Usage and Applications Steam jet ejectors find usage in a wide range of
industries owing to their simple and reliable design with no moving parts. The major
application areas are summarized below: / Figure 1.7

Application of Ejector Power Plants In steam turbine power plants, steam jet ejectors are
widely used to maintain the required vacuum levels in surface condensers of the order
of 50-60 mmHg absolute pressure. The ejectors continuously remove incondensable
gases like air as well as non-condensing steam from the condenser and discharge them
to the atmosphere. This facilitates obtaining deeper vacuum in the condenser, which
leads to increased turbine efficiency and output.

Ejectors offer advantages of simple and rugged construction with no moving parts,
handling of variable vapor loads, and lower maintenance costs compared to vacuum
pumps. Evaporators In industrial evaporators used for concentration of process fluids
and solutions, steam jet ejectors serve as thermocompressors to recover the low
pressure evaporated vapor and compress it to a higher pressure. The compressed vapor
is then reused as the heat source to drive evaporation in the next effect instead of live
motive steam. This vapor recompression results in major energy savings in multi-effect
evaporators.

Ejectors can provide higher reliability than mechanical vapor compressors in handling
corrosive and fouling vapors. Multi-stage ejectors may be required for compression
ratios above 10:1 in multiple-effect evaporators. Crystallizers Similar to evaporators,
steam jet ejectors compress the evaporated vapor in crystallization plants producing
salts, sugars, fertilizers and other compounds. The compressed vapor serves as the heat
source for the process fluid in the next crystallizer body instead of using live steam.
Ejectors allow efficient vapor recompression between multiple crystallization effects,
enhancing energy efficiency.

The absence of moving parts provides reliability advantage for handling corrosive saline
solutions. Refrigeration Systems In refrigeration systems, steam jet ejectors can replace
mechanical compressors for the compression of refrigerant vapor exiting the evaporator
before it enters the condenser. This utilizes available low grade thermal energy in the
form of waste steam to provide the compression work instead of electricity.

Ejector refrigeration cycles are employed in ice plants, cold storages, gas liquefaction
and other large capacity systems owing to higher reliability and lower maintenance than
electric motor-driven compressors. Petrochemical Industry In oil refineries and
petrochemical plants, steam jet ejectors are often used as vapor recovery units to collect
fugitive hydrocarbon vapors from storage tanks, reactors, distillation columns and other
equipment. The vapors containing volatile organic compounds are then routed to a
condenser or disposal system. Ejectors offer simple, reliable and continuous operation in
handling large volumes of hydrocarbon and chemical vapors compared to vacuum
pumps.
Desalination In membrane-based desalination systems, steam jet ejectors maintain the
required vacuum levels on the permeate side of RO or distillation membrane modules,
typically around 50-60 mmHg absolute pressure. This enhances the vapor pressure
gradient across the membrane, increasing the freshwater production rate. Ejectors
provide better reliability and lower maintenance than vacuum pumps for continuous
operation. Multiple ejectors may be installed for large capacity desalination plants.
Aerospace Industry In aerospace systems, steam jet ejectors are used for thrust
augmentation of propulsion engines.

The high velocity jet entrains and compresses the surrounding fluids, increasing thrust.
Ejectors also find application in noise reduction of jet engines by enhancing pumping
and mixing performance. They are also used for simulating high altitude test conditions
in ground test chambers. Automotive Industry Steam jet ejectors have been proposed
for using waste heat from internal combustion engine's coolant to activate the
air-conditioning system. Ejectors can provide air-conditioning without significant load
on the engine compared to mechanical compressors. However, controllable operation
remains a challenge.
 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Literature Review Decker, L.O [1].

Examine the cold facts of steam-jet vacuum cooling. Chemical Engineering Progress,
1993. This article compares mechanical compression or absorption systems with
steam-jet vacuum cooling techniques, emphasizing the benefits of the former. Steam-jet
vacuum systems are particularly favoured in scenarios requiring continuous large flow
rates of cool water. Notably, utility and cogeneration plants often utilize steam-jet
cooling to efficiently manage excess summer steam, enhancing the balance between
steam production and electricity generation during warmer months.

Initial costs of these systems are contingent upon their size and capacity, with 100-200
ton units exhibiting competitive pricing compared to their mechanical counterparts.
Furthermore, the necessity of a cooling tower arises in situations where natural water
sources like rivers, ponds, or lakes are unavailable. The inherent simplicity and reliability
of steam-jet systems contribute to significant savings in maintenance expenditures. He,
S.; Li, Y.; Wang, R.Z [2]. The development of mathematical ejector modelling.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009, 13, 1760–1780. The overall efficiency,
capacity, size, and cost-effectiveness of ejector refrigeration systems are all greatly
influenced by the performance of the ejector component. An integral component of
carrying out a comprehensive analysis of ejector performance is now creating and
utilizing mathematical models. In addition to aiding in system design and optimization,
these models are used to interpret experimental data and direct system operation.

In order to build mathematical models that emphasize the thermodynamic and

hydrodynamic properties of ejectors, a thorough assessment of the literature pertaining
to these research endeavors is addressed in this study. The paper commences by
delivering an introductory overview of ejectors, elucidating their fundamental principles,
flow dynamics, and mixing mechanisms, as well as expounding upon the methodologies
employed in constructing these mathematical models. It then goes on to provide a wide
range of mathematical models, including idealized hypotheses, governing formulas,
auxiliary conditions, approaches to solving the problems, and significant conclusions.

These models fall into two primary categories: steady thermodynamic models, further
subdivided into single-phase and two-phase flow models, and dynamic models, further
subdivided based on the phases considered during the flow analysis. The review
emphasizes the way dynamic models outperform stationary thermodynamic models in
terms of prediction accuracy as well as comprehensive insights. Additionally, the paper
briefly touches upon simplified empirical and semi-empirical models that are grounded
in measured data.
Overall, this comprehensive review is a useful tool for comprehending the development
trajectory and current status of mathematical models in ejectors. It also highlights
important directions for further model improvement, such as improved mixing
mechanism representation and shock wave capture, which further the continuous
progress of ejector modelling techniques. Abdulateef, J.M.; ., et. al. [3] Review on
solar-driven ejector refrigeration technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009.

This paper's main goal is to offer an extensive literature analysis on solar-driven ejector
refrigeration systems, offering insightful information about their history and basic
principles of operation. This report provides ani-depth overview of the development of
solar-driven ejector refrigeration systems, including an analysis of their historical
evolution and more recent advances. It becomes evident that these solar-powered
systems have a great deal of potential for meeting the growing demand for energy
conservation and environmental protection as well as for cooling needs like air
conditioning, ice production, and the preservation of food and medical supplies in
remote areas.

Consequently, research endeavours in this domain continue to rise as scientists and

engineers seek solutions to the challenges that presently impede these systems from
competing with the established vapor compression counterparts. Despite the significant
strides made, substantial research efforts are still required to enable large-scale
industrial applications and the eventual replacement of conventional refrigeration
machinery. Rahamathullah, M.R.; et. al. [4] Review On Historical And Present
Developments In Ejector Systems. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2013.

Ejectors, although seemingly straightforward pieces of equipment, often go

underutilized, with their potential applications extending beyond their conventional use
for gas and vapor pumping to create a vacuum. This paper aims to present a
comprehensive review of the development in ejector technology, the diverse
applications of ejector systems, and strategies for enhancing their performance. The
discussion covers a range of topics that offer insightful information on the history and
principles of operation of ejectors, such as the use of geometric optimizations,
numerical simulations of ejector systems, and mathematical modeling.

Although the majority of current studies have been directed toward computer modeling,
it is crucial to stress the necessity of larger-scale applications and more comprehensive
experimental work in order to fully comprehend and realize the potential of ejectors in
real-world industrial settings. Researchers and practitioners looking to investigate the
diverse capabilities of ejector systems and further their development for a range of
applications may find this paper to be a useful resource. Chen, X.; et. al. [5]. Current
advancements in technologies related to ejector refrigeration. Renew. Sustain. Energy.
(2013).

This study provides a thorough assessment of the literature on the many uses for ejector
refrigeration systems, their performance enhancement techniques, and new
developments in ejector technology. The review sheds significant insight on the
fundamental ideas and practical applications of ejectors. A wide variety of research
works covering topics including refrigerant selection, mathematical modelling, numerical
simulations of ejector systems, geometric optimizations, optimization of operating
conditions, and ejector system integration with other refrigeration systems are all
grouped.

While a significant portion of recent research has focused on computer modelling, it is

imperative to underscore the necessity for additional experimental and large-scale
investigations to gain a deeper understanding of ejector systems in practical industrial
contexts. Researchers and industry professionals interested in learning more about the
possible uses and performance enhancements of ejector technology are going to find
this paper to be a useful resource as it develops. Chen, J., et. al. [6] A review on versatile
ejector applications in refrigeration systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015.

This paper offers valuable insights into the working principles of ejectors and explores
their extensive versatility and diverse applications within refrigeration technologies. The
study provides a comprehensive examination of several ejector refrigeration system
types, grouping them into four categories: ejector-enhanced vapor compression
systems, combination refrigeration systems, advanced ejector refrigeration systems, and
conventional ejector refrigeration systems.

Furthermore, the present study explores important variables that affect the best possible
operation of ejector systems, emphasizing the findings of research that consistently
emphasizes their energy-efficient qualities and their substantial potential to efficiently
handle a broad spectrum of refrigeration temperature requirements. Besagni, G., et. al.
[7] Ejector refrigeration: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016. In
this paper, an extensive literature review on ejector refrigeration systems and the
associated working fluids is presented as an alternative to conventional
compressor-based refrigeration technologies, in response to the increasing demand for
thermal comfort and cooling systems in buildings. The goal of this review is to reduce
energy consumption.

The review critically examines ejector technology and behaviour, analyzes the impact of
refrigerant properties on ejector performance, and categorizes various ejector
refrigeration systems, spanning historical developments, current applications, and future
trends. Researchers, practitioners, and other interested parties can use it as a useful
resource to learn more about how energy-efficient cooling technologies are developing.
Little, A.B.; Garimella, S. [8] A critical review linking ejector flow phenomena with
component- and system-level performance. Int. J. Refrig. 2016.

By integrating a comprehensive grasp of the fundamentals of ejector fluid flow with

practical cycle applications, this study offers an in-depth critical analysis of ejector
technology in chiller applications. Ejectors are passive momentum-transfer devices that
do not require moving parts or external mechanical input. Since the 1940s, ejectors have
been the focus of several studies, ranging from early analytical and numerical modeling
to modern visualization research analyzing ejector behavior. This evaluation also
includes the newest computational models.

The implications of two-phase flow dynamics in ejectors and improved computer

modeling of shock phenomena are proposed as future research objectives. The paper
also examines the use of ejectors in chiller systems, emphasizing the development of
passive systems that run without a mechanical input and the fundamental ejector-based
chiller cycle. Notably, it establishes crucial linkages between component-level and
system-level ejector investigations, promising to enhance overall system performance
through integrated research endeavours. Keenan, J.H., et. al. [9].

An investigation of ejector design by analysis and experiment. J. Appl. Mech. 1950. An

analytical method for assessing the efficiency of jet pumps or ejectors in one dimension
is presented in this work. Constant pressure and constant area are two different
conditions under which the mixing of primary and secondary streams is taken into
consideration in the analysis. These results suggest that constant-pressure mixing can
lead to better performance. Strong agreement is found over a wide range of variables
when comparing experimental results with analytical predictions. The report also
presents experimental data on the minimum tube length needed to mix the two streams
effectively.

Moreover, it offers a useful approach to jet pump design, providing insightful

information for engineering uses. Aphornratana, S., et. al. [10]. Examining an ejector
refrigerator experimentally: The impact of mixing chamber shape on system efficiency.
Int. J. Energy Res. 2001. This paper describes an experimental investigation that was
carried out in an ejector refrigeration cycle using R11 as the working fluid. A variety of
experimental setups were used in the study, including boiler temperatures between 100
and 110°C, condenser temperatures between 35 and 41°C, and evaporator temperatures
as low as 12°C.

Two distinct mixing chambers with an 8 mm throat diameter were used; each showed
consistent evidence of fluid choking in the first chamber but not in the second. The
system demonstrated greater operational flexibility in the absence of choking within the
mixing chamber. The cooling capacity of the studies varied from 500 to 1700 W, and
their cooling temperatures were as low as -5°C. There was a range of the coefficient of
performance (COP) from 0.1 to 0.25. These findings provide important new information
about the characteristics of ejector refrigeration systems using R11 as the refrigerant.
Yapici, R.; Ersoy, H.K.

[11] This section outlines how the refrigeration system performs, using the constant area
ejector flow model as a basis. 2005's Energy Management Conversion. Emphasizing
optimal results for R-123, this paper presents a theoretical investigation of an ejector
refrigeration system utilizing a constant area ejector flow model. The results indicate
that variations in condenser and evaporator temperatures have a larger effect on the
optimal coefficient of performance (COP) than variations in generator temperature.

Most notably, this study discovers that the optimum coefficient of performance (COP)
and area ratio obtained from the constant area flow model are larger than those
discovered in the literature for the constant pressure flow model, for the same operating
temperatures. But given the identical area ratio, the system's COP featuring the constant
pressure ejector is relatively higher, contingent upon lowering the condenser
temperature. Additionally, whether refrigeration systems run at higher condenser
temperatures or lower evaporator temperatures, their COP values are almost constant.

With light on the complex interactions between variables and a focus on the possibility
for increased energy efficiency, these findings provide insightful information about the
performance characteristics of ejector refrigeration systems. Pianthong, K., et. al. [12].
Utilizing computational fluid dynamics, an examination and enhancement of the ejector
refrigeration system are conducted. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, Since they don't
require a compressor to function, ejector refrigeration systems are renowned for using
inexpensive energy sources and requiring minimal maintenance.

The ejector component's efficiency is a critical factor in how well these systems operate.
Therefore, optimizing the overall efficiency of ejector refrigeration systems requires a
thorough examination of ejector characteristics as well as the creation of effective
ejector designs. In order to forecast flow phenomena and the operation of steam
ejectors for counterflow parallel mixing (CPM) and counterflow multi-throat area (CMA),
this study uses computational fluid dynamics (CFD) with the FLUENT code.
The ejector refrigeration system operates with water as the working fluid, with the boiler
operating between 120 and 140 °C and the evaporator between 5 and 15 °C. The use of
CFD shows its ability to precisely forecast ejector performance and clarify the effects of
changing operating circumstances on the effective area, a crucial factor that directly
influences ejector performance. Additionally, the investigation reveals that the flow
patterns exhibit limited dependence on the suction zone, as evidenced by the
congruence between axisymmetric and 3D simulations.

By providing crucial insights for the design of ejectors that are suited to the best
operating conditions, this research advances our understanding of ejector
characteristics. Grazzini, G.; Mariani, [13] A simple software to design a multi-stage jet
pump for cycles of refrigeration. Energy Convers. Manag. 1998 A water refrigeration
cycle's jet-pump device design can be aided by a PC application developed in Quick
BASIC. The program operates with a defined cooling capacity under specific generator,
evaporator, and condenser conditions. The setup that provides the system with the
highest possible pressure gain is the outcome of its automation.

The underlying physical model is formulated based on the classical one-dimensional

framework with constant-area mixing. The introduction of a second stage occurs when
boundary conditions prevent a single stage from meeting the necessary compression
ratio. The secondary stream's kinetic energy is optimally harnessed by a compact
structure that is promoted by the annular primary flow utilized at this stage. A third
stage is ruled out as a result of discussing the shortcomings of the perfect gas model. A
robust association is seen for the single-stage model when compared to experimental
data found in literature using comparative analysis.

For this reason, the multistage annular jet-pump becomes one of the most promising
innovations in refrigeration technology. Grazzini, G.; Rocchetti, A [14] .Numerical
optimisation of a two-stage ejector refrigeration plant. Int. J. Refrig. 2002.
Jet-refrigeration cycles offer an intriguing solution in the context of growing
environmental concerns and the imperative for energy conservation. Their appeal lies in
their cost-effectiveness, reliability, and the ability to utilize water as an operating fluid.

This study examines the operation of a steam/steam ejector cycle refrigerator, which has
an annular primary at the second stage of the two-stage ejector configuration. The
research study focuses on an open system steady-state refrigerator that uses water
streams at predetermined inlet temperatures to facilitate heat exchange with three shell
and tube heat exchangers: the generator, condenser, and evaporator. The analysis
considers external friction losses in the water streams and the irreversibilities of heat
transfer within the heat exchangers, while ignoring the effects of interior vapor pressure
drops.

To optimize the system's performance, a simulation program is employed to iteratively

seek the maximum Coefficient of Performance (COP) under specific external inlet fluid
temperatures. The optimization procedure is dependent on the heat exchangers'
dimensions, temperature differentials, and mass fluxes. Ultimately, the program yields
design parameters for the ejector and heat exchangers, paving the way for more
efficient and environmentally friendly refrigeration solutions. Kong, F.; Kim, H.D.

[15] Analytical and computational studies on the performance of a two-stage

ejector-diffuser system. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015, because of its inherent
advantages, which set it apart from conventional fluid machinery and include its simple
design and lack of moving components, the supersonic ejector-diffuser system has
found significant application in a variety of industrial applications. But the conventional
one-stage ejector-diffuser system has been criticized for being ineffective, mostly
because of energy losses that transpire throughout the mixing and discharge processes
and result in momentum waste.

A two-stage ejector-diffuser system is an intriguing design to absorb the extra

momentum from the discharged flow and enhance overall system performance. Using
both numerical simulations based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations
and theoretical evaluations using a 1D mathematical model, this work provides a
comprehensive description of the intricate flow processes in single-stage and two-stage
ejector-diffuser systems. The accuracy of the theoretical and numerical results is verified
by validation against the available experimental data.

To assess the two-stage ejector's performance in comparison to its single-stage

equivalent, the study offers a thorough explanation and comparison. The analysis
includes important benefit coefficients such as the mass flow flux ratio, the coefficient of
power (COPR), and the entrainment ratio. The main conclusions highlight how well the
two-stage ejector-diffuser system can enhance entrainment effects and efficiently collect
additional momentum, leading to better system performance. Eames, I.W [16].

A new prescription for the design of supersonic jet-pumps: The constant rate of
momentum change method. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2002, [16] This paper introduces and
assesses a novel theoretical approach for designing jet-pumps commonly employed in
jet-pump cycle refrigerators. The technique is based on the assumption that the diffuser
passage of a supersonic jet pump has a constant rate of momentum change.
The theoretical results presented in this study show significant improvements in two
important parameters: the pressure lift ratio (PDE/Ps) and the entrainment ratio (Rm),
which are greater than what jet-pumps developed using traditional techniques can
achieve. The study is further bolstered by the presentation of experimental data that
aligns with and validates the theoretical findings. Kitrattana, B., et. al. [17] Comparison of
traditional and CRMC ejector performance used in a steam ejector refrigeration. Energy
Procedia 2017. In comparison to a conventional ejector, the performance of a steam
ejector constructed using the constant rate of momentum change (CRMC) theory was
assessed in this study.

Three different types of ejectors were designed and constructed for testing: a CRMC
ejector with a throat diameter of 13.4 mm, a second traditional ejector with a throat
diameter of 13.4 mm, and a traditional ejector with a throat diameter of 19 mm. These
ejectors were made to fit into an experimental ejector refrigerator with a 1kW capacity
with ease. The boiler saturation pressure was found to fluctuate between 130°C and
140°C, while the evaporator saturation temperature stayed constant at 7.5°C. The results
of the study demonstrated that, under the same operating conditions and with an
identical ejector area ratio (the ratio of nozzle throat area to ejector throat area), the
CRMC ejector outperformed the traditional ejectors by achieving a higher entrainment
ratio while maintaining the critical condenser pressure at the same level. Kumar, V., et. al.
[18] Realization of novel constant rate of kinetic energy change (CRKEC) supersonic
ejector. Energy 2018.

This research offers a fresh perspective on ejector design, considering ejectors as energy
exchange devices first. The geometry of ejectors is determined by the rate of energy
change in the system, namely the constant rate of kinetic energy change (CRKEC). This
represents a departure from conventional geometry-based design towards a flow
physics-based approach. The CRKEC approach offers advantages in terms of reducing
thermodynamic shock, a major source of irreversibility in traditional ejector systems. This
research uses a 1-D gas dynamic model with frictional effects to propose a more realistic
supersonic ejector design based on CRKEC principles.

The model predicts supersonic air ejector shape for common input parameters: recovery
ratio (?) of around 1.4, main stagnation pressure (Pop) of approximately 5.7 bar,
secondary stagnation pressure (Pos) of approximately 0.7 bar, and entrainment ratio (?)
of approximately 0.53. These outcomes are confirmed by means of a comprehensive
numerical examination utilizing the Navier-Stokes formulas, taking into consideration
turbulence in a two-dimensional axi-symmetric model. A created prototype's
experimental results are also covered in the report, showing consistent results with
numerical studies and the predictions of the 1-D gas dynamic model. Chang, Y.J.; Chen,
Y.M.

[19] Enhancement of a steam-driven ejector using a novel application of the petal

nozzle. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. Trans. Chin. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 2000. This study delves into the
potential for enhancing the performance of steam-driven ejectors. First, a
one-dimensional ejector theory is used to assess the effects of three significant
isentropic efficiencies: diffuser efficiency (?m), mixing efficiency (?m), and nozzle
efficiency (?m). According to the theoretical research, the other two efficiencies have
relatively small effects on ejector performance, while mixing efficiency is crucial. This
highlights the significance of efficient mixing in promoting ejector performance.

Additionally, by utilizing a petal nozzle, the research aims to improve mixing efficiency.
A thorough analysis of the behavior and features of this innovative nozzle design is
conducted under a variety of operating conditions, including primary pressure,
secondary pressure, and back pressure. Through a comparison of experimental results
with theoretical predictions, the use of a petal nozzle is shown to improve ejector
performance in fact.

The study uses the shadowgraph approach for visualization in order to obtain deeper
insights into the inner flow field of an ejector. This method produces insightful
observations of patterns of flow that provide opportunities to improve ejector
performance. Garris, C.A. [20] Pressure Exchanging Ejector and Refrigeration Apparatus
and Method. U.S. Patent 5647221A, 1997. This innovation proposes a novel
ejector-refrigeration system and method that are very suitable for energy harvesting, by
utilizing waste heat from car engines and solar collectors.

This system may use safe refrigerants, such water, which makes it environmentally
friendly as well. By operating on the basis of "pressure exchange" instead of "turbulent
mixing," as is the case with conventional ejectors, the novel ejector presented here
achieves considerable improvements in performance. The oblique compression and
expansion waves produced within the jets originating from numerous supersonic
nozzles are utilized by this pressure-exchanging ejector, which is intended for use with
compressible working fluids.

These waves transfer energy to a secondary gaseous fluid, with their movement relative
to the ejector housing facilitated by motion-inducing mechanisms applied to the
nozzles, which are integrated into a rotor. Within a vapor-compression refrigeration
system, the pressure-exchanging ejector of this invention serves as both an ejector and
a compressor, with the working fluid acting as the refrigerant. This innovative approach
promises enhanced efficiency and sustainability in refrigeration applications. Garris, C.A.;
., et. al. [21]. The Pressure-Exchange Ejector Heat Pump.

In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Conference and

Exposition, Anaheim, CA, USA, 15–20 November 1998. By utilizing non-dissipative
non-steady flow mechanisms, the pressure-exchange ejector offers a viable path toward
a significant advancement in ejector performance. It's astonishing how much of the
mechanical simplicity seen in conventional steady-flow ejectors is retained.

The prospect of such a remarkable enhancement in performance carries profound

implications, particularly in the context of ejector refrigeration applications. If this
advancement can be successfully demonstrated, it holds the potential to yield significant
environmental benefits by reducing the usage of ozone-depleting CFCs and curbing
greenhouse gas emissions. This paper delves into the intricacies of pressure-exchange
ejector refrigeration, offering a comprehensive exploration of the concept.

It evaluates the possible consequences that can occur if specific ejector performance
levels are attained and makes comparisons with current technologies. Since non-steady
flow induction's fluid dynamics is the primary factor limiting system performance, the
paper also discusses relevant research concerns and recent developments in this field.
Ultimately, this research endeavours to shed light on the transformative potential of
pressure-exchange ejectors in the realm of refrigeration and their environmental
significance. Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A [22].

Non-Steady Three-Dimensional Flow Field Analysis in Supersonic Flow Induction. In

Proceedings of the ASME 2002 Joint US-European Fluids Engineering Division
Conference, Montreal, QC. This paper conducts a thorough examination of supersonic
pressure-exchange ejectors using numerical analysis and computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) modelling. The research underscores the pivotal influence of geometry on ejector
performance, establishing its critical role in the system.

Through 3D CFD simulations, the study effectively anticipates and elucidates the various
trends observed in the performance curves of these ejectors. The results vividly
demonstrate the substantial advantages that non-steady flow mechanisms can offer
over conventional steady-flow ejectors, shedding light on the transformative potential of
this technology. Hong, W.J.; ., et. al. [23]. A novel thermally driven
rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector refrigeration system with environmental benefits
and energy efficiency. Energy 2004.

This paper presents the latest research on the design and performance evaluation of a
new supersonic rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector meant for thermally operated
ejector refrigeration systems. The software is the result of group computational and
experimental work. For the supersonic rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector, precise
control of entropy buildup is essential, particularly with oblique shocks and boundary
layers. Understanding this innovative ejector's aerodynamics and optimizing its
performance are still in the early stages of development, considering how recently it was
invented.

Using a combination of computational analysis and experimental data, this work offers
insights into the regulation of supersonic aerodynamics to provide desirable flow
induction characteristics. Various rotor vane forms and their corresponding ejector
behavior are demonstrated through the use of flow visualization tools in these studies.
According to the study, some design features—like having a long expansion ramp in the
tail part, having a knife-edge-like leading edge, and having leading edges at an
appropriate height—are crucial for rotor vane shaping.

It also mentions that higher spin angle rotor vanes aid in better mixing and flow
induction between the primary and secondary flows, which eventually improves ejector
performance. Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. [24] Effect of Changing Throat Diameter Ratio on
a Steam Supersonic Pressure Exchange Ejector. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2005. This work will
cover the structure of the flow induction in a non-steady supersonic fluid with steam
functioning as the working fluid. Analyses pertaining to the induction processes are
examined while varying the throat diameter ratio. Applications involving compression
employ this ejector.

Investigating the intricate fluid mechanisms occurring inside a non-steady,

three-dimensional, steam supersonic pressure exchange ejector using computational
fluid dynamics is the work that will be discussed here. The study will specifically
concentrate on the pressure exchange mechanisms and induction processes that occur
between a main and secondary fluid, as well as how these relate to the structure of the
aerodynamic shroud. These results will point to the proper throat diameter ratio in a
three-dimensional supersonic non-steady viscous flow environment that is required to
create the correct flow induction effect. The calculated throat diameter ratio is little less
than 2.90.

Yang, X.; ., et. al. [25]. Numerical investigation on the mixing process in a steam ejector
with different nozzle structures. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2012. This study uses computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) to assess how various nozzle configurations affect the performance
of the steam ejector. Five distinct nozzle types are examined using the same set of
parameters: conical, elliptical, square, rectangular, and cross-shaped nozzles. A notable
difference in performance between the two nozzle shapes is that the cross-shaped
nozzle has a 6.4% lower critical back pressure (CBP) and a 9.1% greater entrainment
ratio (ER). The research clarifies that improved ER is facilitated by effective mixing, which
is initiated by the interplay between streamwise and spanwise vortices.

As an alternative, early-stage vortex impacts with the mixing chamber wall lower CBP
and ER. This research highlights the significance of nozzle design in optimizing ejector
performance. Opgenorth, M.J.; ., et. al. [26]. Maximizing pressure recovery using lobed
nozzles in a supersonic ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2012. Innovative supersonic ejector
designs for refrigeration applications prioritize reducing the required primary fluid flow
rates, quantified as the entrainment ratio, while simultaneously enhancing total pressure
recovery.

This study focuses on augmenting performance through improved mixing facilitated by

flow instability. The circular nozzle design gains lobes, and the mixing channel's profile is
improved. The primary objective is to assess how these lobes' aspect ratio and total
perimeter affect system pressure recovery and entrainment ratio. By using the geometry
and parameters established by Eames as a baseline for the mixing channel and adding a
lobed nozzle, the research offers a notable improvement in pressure recovery, rising
from 4.0 to 6.4 with a perimeter value of 30 mm.

Nevertheless, additional perimeter expansion results in increased frictional losses along

the wall surfaces, which returns pressure recovery to levels similar to a circular nozzle.
Kong, F.S.; ., et. al. [27] Application of Chevron nozzle to a supersonic ejector-diffuser
system. Procedia Eng. 2013. The supersonic ejector-diffuser system has found wide
applications across various industries and has recently gained prominence as a crucial
component in solar seawater desalination facilities.

There are many benefits to this method, not the least of which is the lack of mechanical
energy input directly and the absence of moving components. It employs pure shear
action to entrain secondary streams from high-speed primary streams for applications
such as compression and fluid transmission. Nevertheless, optimizing the
ejector-diffuser system and determining its optimal operating parameters has proven
difficult due to the complicated interactions of turbulent mixing, compressibility effects,
and flow unsteadiness inside the system.

Considerable attention has been devoted to improving its performance due to its
comparatively poor efficiency, which has practical implications in industrial applications.
This study has employed a Chevron nozzle to start shear activities between the primary
and secondary streams. Longitudinal vortices are produced using the Chevron pattern.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is used to simulate the flow field inside the
ejector-diffuser system. The experimental data that is currently available is used to
validate the CFD results.

A comparison is presented between an ejector system with a standard convergent

nozzle and one with a Chevron nozzle for the primary stream. This study assesses the
performance of the ejector-diffuser system in terms of entrainment ratio, ejector
efficiency, total pressure loss, and pressure recovery. Rao, S.; Jagadeesh, G.[28] Novel
supersonic nozzles for mixing enhancement in supersonic ejectors. Appl. Therm. Eng.
2014.

With numerous applications in many different kinds of industries, the supersonic

ejector-diffuser system has recently gained prominence as a vital part of solar seawater
desalination facilities. There are many benefits to this method, not the least of which is
the lack of mechanical energy input directly and the absence of moving components.
Via pure shear action, it entrains secondary streams for applications like as compression
or fluid transmission using high-speed primary streams.

That being said, optimizing the ejector-diffuser system and determining its optimal
operating parameters have proven challenging due to the intricate relationship between
turbulent mixing, compressibility effects, and flow unsteadiness within the system.
Considerable attention has been devoted to improving its performance due to its
comparatively poor efficiency, which has practical implications in industrial applications.
By creating longitudinal vortices through the Chevron design, this research proposes a
Chevron nozzle to initiate shear actions between the primary and secondary streams.

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is utilized to model the flow field inside the
ejector-diffuser system, and the output of the model is validated against existing
experimental data. An ejector system with a Chevron nozzle is compared to one with a
conventional convergent nozzle for the primary stream through an analysis. Overall
pressure loss, pressure recovery, ejector efficiency, and entrainment ratio are the
performance metrics used in the study to evaluate the ejector-diffuser system. Zhu, Y.;
Jiang, P.[29] Bypass ejector with an annular cavity in the nozzle wall to increase the
entrainment: Experimental and numerical validation. Energy 2014.

A novel bypass ejector design featuring an annular cavity within the nozzle wall was
subjected to testing across various operational conditions to assess its entrainment
performance. Analysis was done in comparison to a conventional ejector. The
experimental data showed that the primary mass flow rate in the bypass ejector was
consistently roughly 20% lower than in the conventional ejector. Remarkably, the results
demonstrated that the bypass ejector outperformed the conventional ejector at
conditions with relatively high primary and secondary flow pressures, resulting in a
maximum improvement in entrainment performance of 31.5%.

Better entrainment performance was shown by the bypass ejector, particularly in critical
mode operations. Given that a significant portion of ejectors operate in this mode, the
bypass ejector holds promise for numerous applications requiring heightened
entrainment capabilities. Tang, Y.; ., et. al. [30]. Combined auxiliary entrainment and
structure optimization for performance improvement of steam ejector with
consideration of back pressure variation. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018.

For steam ejectors operating in double-critical conditions, optimizing their entrainment

performance is crucial to increase the range of industrial applications for these devices.
This paper introduces a novel approach known as combined auxiliary entrainment,
accompanied by a systematic implementation of geometric structure optimization. The
principal objective is to effectively use the ejector's low-pressure potential, which will
result in a notable improvement in entrainment performance.

Furthermore, an extensive analysis is conducted to examine the impact of geometrical

parameters on the auxiliary entrainment performance. Several factors are included in
this analysis, such as the pressure field, the mass flow rate, and the unique internal flow
properties. The outcomes highlight the benefits of combined auxiliary entrainment for
steam ejectors operating in double-critical conditions. The optimal geometrical values
for the throat auxiliary entraining entrance are consistent with the desired state.

On the other hand, for the diffuser auxiliary entraining entry, it is advised to put the
opening starting point (Xs) at the diffuser's entrance. The opening angle can be
anywhere in the common range (R?) between 75° and 105°. On the other hand, when
back pressure (pC) decreases, the optimal opening width (d) increase. In summary, each
back pressure level (pC) presents an optimal combination of geometrical parameters
that maximizes entrainment performance, with more substantial improvements
observed at lower pC values, reaching up to 34.8% for pC of 32 kPa. Tang, Y.;

., et. al. [31] An innovative pressure-regulated steam ejector has been developed to
eliminate obstructions in entrained flow, hence enhancing the efficiency of the
MED-TVC desalination system. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018. Since steam ejectors are
thought to be a promising energy-saving technology, improving their operational
efficiency is essential to expanding the range of applications for which they can be used.
A thorough simulation of a steam ejector used in a MED-TVC desalination system is
carried out in this work.
The findings indicate the presence of a sizable region of entrained flow that is blocked
downstream of the entraining entrance, as well as sizable low-pressure regions in the
diffuser and throat that have pressures significantly lower than those in the blocked
region. Building on these discoveries, a novel technology for pressure regulation is put
forth that would take advantage of the current pressure differentials to release the
obstructed entrained flow and increase the amount of steam that can be sucked into the
ejector.

The viability of different pressure regulation techniques is rigorously verified in the

study, and their effects on entrainment performance is thoroughly analyzed and
investigated while taking mass flow rate and pressure field parameters into account. The
findings demonstrate the existence of an ideal set of pressure regulation strategies that
successfully unblocks the entrained flow that was obstructed. This approach can yield a
substantial improvement in the entrainment ratio, with enhancements of up to 26.85%
observed in the simulations. Even under the design condition, an improvement of 3.31%
can be achieved.

In particular, the downstream pressure adjustment at the throat-entraining entry is

advised for ejectors operating at the design condition. The combined-entraining
entrance downstream pressure regulation proves to be the best option in other
scenarios. Vermeulen, P.J., et. al. [32], N. Air Ejector Pumping Enhancement through
Pulsing Primary Flow. In Proceedings of the 2nd AIAA Flow Control Conference,
Portland, Oregon, 28 June–1 July 2004. The study analyzed a novel type of pulsed
ejector using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and discovered that the ratio of
secondary (entrainment) to primary mass flow rate showed a significant improvement in
pumping performance when compared to a non-pulsed ejector. It was discovered that
this augmentation performed best when pulsating at an off-resonance frequency of
3250 Hz in relation to the ejector's fundamental frequency of 2000 Hz.

These results were further supported by experimental testing of a model pulsed ejector,
which showed a substantial sensitivity at pulse frequencies below half of the ejector's
fundamental frequency, or roughly 746 Hz. The limitations of the acoustic driver's
frequency response restricted testing to frequencies below the experimental
fundamental frequency. Conversely, the positive results showed that the acoustic driver
only required 150 W of power and that the pumping effectiveness rose up to five times,
particularly in suction performance.

The acoustic drive was also found to be responsible for a significant rise in the flow
stagnation pressure, with the best results happening at a frequency of roughly 250 Hz.
These results demonstrate the innovative pulsed ejector's tremendous research
potential and its promising applications across a range of fields. Ouzzane, M.; Aidoun, Z
[33]. Detailed ejector analysis and design can be achieved through the development of
models and numerical procedures. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2003.

This study's main goal was to create computer programs and a thorough mathematical
model for analyzing ejectors in refrigeration cycles. The software was developed in two
versions: Version A, which concentrated on the best ejector design, and Version B, which
was more flexible and meant for simulation. In this study, compressible refrigerant flow
was analyzed in one dimension, and the conservation equations were solved by forward
marching.

NIST Standard Reference Database 23 and NIST Thermodynamics and Transport

Properties of Refrigerants and Refrigerant Mixtures, 1998—more specifically, REFPROP,
Version 6.01—were consulted in order to determine the refrigerant properties using
NIST subroutines. The approach taken in this study allowed for a localized assessment of
the flow, offering the flexibility to backtrack and make necessary corrections upstream.
When the model's output was compared to experimental data for R141b from Huang et
al. (Int. J. Refrig. 22, 1999, 354), it was shown to have excellent agreement under all
tested conditions. Furthermore, a study was conducted utilizing refrigerant R142b under
normal refrigeration conditions.

The study assessed ejector performance by utilizing critical performance metrics,

including the entrainment ratio (?), compression ratio (P6/P2), and geometric
dimensions such rings and axial lengths. The geographic distribution of temperature,
pressure, and Mach number under typical operating circumstances was also revealed by
the study. It was noteworthy that the ejector's performance and operation were
significantly influenced by the mixing chamber's design and features, especially when it
came to regulating the frequency and magnitude of shock waves. Aidoun, Z.; Ouzzane,
M [35].

The effect of operational conditions on a supersonic refrigeration ejector's performance.

Int. J. Refrig. 2004. The creation of computer programs and a thorough mathematical
model for the analysis of ejectors in refrigeration cycles was the main goal of this
project. Version A was developed with an emphasis on optimal ejector design, whereas
Version B was constructed with greater flexibility for simulation.

Using a forward marching technique to solve the conservation equations, this research
comprised a one-dimensional investigation of compressible refrigerant flow. Using NIST
subroutines, the refrigerant properties were determined by consulting NIST Standard
Reference Database 23 and NIST Thermodynamics and Transport Properties of
Refrigerants and Refrigerant Mixtures, 1998, in particular REFPROP, Version 6.01. The
approach taken in this study allowed for a localized assessment of the flow, offering the
flexibility to backtrack and make necessary corrections upstream. When the model's
output was compared to experimental data for R141b from Huang et al. (Int.

J. Refrig. 22, 1999, 354), it was shown to have excellent agreement under all tested
conditions. Furthermore, a study was conducted utilizing refrigerant R142b under
standard refrigeration circumstances. The entrainment ratio (?), compression ratio
(P6/P2), and geometric measurements such as rings and axial lengths were among the
main performance indicators used in the study to evaluate ejector performance. The
geographic distribution of temperature, pressure, and Mach number under typical
operating circumstances was also revealed by the study.

It was noteworthy that the ejector's performance and operation were significantly
influenced by the mixing chamber's design and features, especially when it came to
regulating the frequency and strength of shock waves. Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S
[36]. Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004,
[36] This comprehensive literature review offers an in-depth exploration of ejectors and
their wide-ranging applications within the realm of refrigeration. It provides valuable
insights into the foundational theory of ejectors, their performance characteristics, the
selection of optimal working fluids, ongoing efforts to enhance jet refrigeration systems,
and their diverse applications beyond traditional refrigeration contexts. For researchers,
engineers, and practitioners looking for an in-depth understanding of ejector
technology and its crucial role in many refrigeration applications, this review is an
invaluable resource. Khalil, A.; Fatouh, M.;

Elgendy, E [37]. Ejector design and theoretical study of R134a ejector refrigeration cycle.
Int. J. Refrig. 2011. The design of an R134a ejector and the prediction of vapor jet
refrigeration system performance characteristics are done in this study using a
mathematical model that encompasses a large number of parameters. The boiling
temperature (65–85 °C), condensing temperature (25–40 °C), evaporating temperature
(0–10 °C), superheat degrees (0–15 °C), nozzle efficiency (0.75–0.95), and diffuser
efficiency (0.75–0.95) are among the conditions in this set.

The simulation results agree well with experimental data reported in the literature, with
an average error of 6%. Notably, throughout a range of evaporating and condensing
temperatures, the study shows that the ejector area ratio at a boiling temperature of 85
°C is approximately twice that at a boiling temperature of 65 °C. These findings
underscore the suitability of waste heat sources within the 65-85 °C temperature range
for powering vapor jet refrigeration systems, particularly in air-conditioning applications.
García Del Valle, ., et. al.

[38] An experimental investigation of a R-134a ejector refrigeration system. Int. J. Refrig.

2014. This study looks at an ejector refrigeration system employing R-134a refrigerant
with an emphasis on improving pressure recovery. The critical condition for three mixing
chambers with the same internal diameter but different profiles is determined by
accounting for different primary and secondary fluid stagnation conditions. In this work,
we additionally examine the effects of the longitudinal position of the nozzle and the
vapor superheating of the main and secondary fluid stagnation phases on the mass
ratio.

In comparison to the standard design "A," the trial results show that the novel mixing
chamber designs, designated as "B" and "C," do not significantly improve performance;
mixing chamber "C" shows the lowest level of effectiveness in all tests. A new
performance metric, shown as the ratio of theoretical to experimental mass ratios, based
on the second law, is introduced in this study to assess performance. Chunnanond, K.;
Aphornratana, S [39]. An experimental investigation of a steam ejector refrigerator: The
analysis of the pressure profile along the ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2004.

A greater understanding of the flow and mixing inside the ejector is necessary to
improve the effectiveness of an ejector refrigerator. A steam ejector refrigerator with a 3
kW cooling capacity was put together for this study. Static pressure under various
operating circumstances was measured and plotted along the ejector axis as part of the
investigation. The analysis of experimental findings led to the identification of three
novel parameters. These parameters provide valuable insights into the flow behavior
within the steam ejector, offering a clearer understanding and explanation of its
operation. Huang, B.J.; ., et. al. [40].

Ejector performance characteristics and design analysis of jet refrigeration system. J.

Eng. Gas. Turbine Power 1985, [40] Examining ejector performance characteristics and
undertaking a jet refrigeration system design analysis were the main objectives of the
project. A significant finding during ejector operation was the significant role choking
phenomena played in the secondary vapor. Error choking is a phenomena that occurs
when the ejector operates at a back pressure that is lower than a critical value.

This is typically associated with whatever is thought to be an effective region in the

mixing zone for the secondary vapor. The assumption of constant values was challenged
when it was discovered that the effective areas varied under various operating
situations. The research produced a performance map based on experimental data,
illustrating ejector performance characteristics and serving as a foundation for the
design analysis of jet refrigeration systems.

Additionally, the study delved into the performance characteristics of jet refrigeration
systems operating under off-design conditions. Eames, I.; ., et. al. [41] A theoretical and
experimental study of a small-scale steam jet refrigerator. Int. J. Refrig. 1995. This paper
presents the findings of a combined theoretical and experimental investigation on a
steam jet refrigerator. Testing was done as part of the investigation on a small-capacity
steam jet refrigerator with boiler temperatures ranging from 120°C to 140°C.

When the experimental data was compared to theoretical predictions, it was found that
the experimental results were over 85% accurate in matching theoretical values. The
experiments were significant because they illustrated the vital role that choking in the
ejector's secondary flow within the mixing chamber plays in system performance. The
maximum coefficient of performance (COP) might be attained by keeping the ejector at
its critical flow state.

The report also sheds light on the system's off-design performance characteristics,
giving readers a thorough understanding of how it operates in different scenarios.
Yapici, R.; Yetisen, C.C [42]. Experimental study on ejector refrigeration system powered
by low grade heat. Energy Convers. Manag. 2007, [42] This study involved the design
and construction of an ejector refrigeration system, specifically intended to operate with
hot water as its energy source.

Energy from sources like solar, geothermal, and waste heat can be harnessed with these
refrigeration systems, which are designed to operate with low-pressure refrigerants.
With R-11 serving as the working fluid, the investigation's primary focus was on the
performance of the system through experimental testing. The main nozzle end of the
ejector stayed at the mixing chamber section's intake plane throughout the trial. The
study addressed a number of operational parameters, including vapor generator
temperatures between about 90°C and 102°C, evaporator temperatures between 0°C
and 16°C, and condenser pressures between 114 kPa and 143 kPa.

A Coefficient of Performance (COP) of up to 0.25 was demonstrated by the system

within these settings. Significantly, the outcomes showed that reaching a greater cooling
capacity and lower evaporator temperatures necessitates a substantial increase in vapor
generator temperature. Shestopalov, K.O.; ., et. al. [43]. Investigation of an experimental
ejector refrigeration machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and off-design
working conditions. Part 2. Theoretical and experimental results. Int. J. Refrig. 2015.

Using refrigerant R245fa, this study presents the main conclusions from a thorough
analysis into the performance characteristics of an ejector and an ejector refrigeration
machine (ERM). A variety of operating circumstances, including both design and
off-design settings, are covered by the research. The study analyzed the ejector and
ERM using an enhanced 1D theoretical model, and the computed results were verified
by means of experimental testing carried out on an ejector test rig at National Taiwan
University.

Performance maps and variations in the parameters of condensing, producing, and

evaporating temperatures are among the outcomes. Comparisons between theoretical
and experimental results indicate a good level of qualitative and quantitative agreement.
Shestopalov, K.O., et. al. [44] Investigation of an experimental ejector refrigeration
machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design and off-design working conditions.
Part 1. Theoretical analysis. Int. J. Refrig. 2015. The theoretical examination of ejector
design and ejector refrigeration cycle performance is covered in detail in this work.

The study emphasizes how important it is to consider the effects of operational

parameters, ejector efficiency, and the thermodynamic features of the refrigerant while
analyzing the performance characteristics of ejection refrigeration machines (ERMs).
Apart from offering an optimal approach for ejectors featuring cylindrical and
conical-cylindrical mixing chambers, the study also suggests a one-dimensional model
capable of predicting the entrainment ratio (?). To enhance ERM performance, the study
emphasizes the need for improving ejector performance as a primary consideration.
Yan, J.; ., et. al. [45]. Experimental investigations on a R134a ejector applied in a
refrigeration system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017.

Using R134a as the working fluid, the study performs experimental research on an
ejector's performance inside a refrigeration system. The results demonstrate how
important back pressure is in controlling an ejector's entrainment ratio. When it comes
to choosing the ejector's operating mode under particular primary and secondary fluid
pressures, back pressure is a crucial factor. While raising the primary fluid pressure can
raise the critical back pressure, it may also have an adverse effect on the ejector's best
performance.

Additionally, the research identifies an optimal primary fluid pressure value associated
with maximizing the entrainment ratio within certain conditions. In order to forecast
critical back pressure and ascertain operational conditions in an R134a ejector
refrigeration system, the study also provides a logarithmic relationship. These results
provide important new information for researchers studying R134a ejectors in
refrigeration systems and advance our understanding of these components of systems.
2.2
Literature Gaps While the literature reveals that previous research efforts have explored
modifications to the geometry of jet ejectors, there remains a distinct gap concerning
the systematic optimization of design parameters in these systems. Many existing
studies have focused on altering the physical geometry, but the comprehensive
optimization of design parameters to enhance the performance of jet ejectors has not
been extensively addressed. Through the systematic optimization of jet ejector design
parameters using parametric modeling approaches, this study aims to fill this gap.

Moreover, the identification of the main design parameters that exert a significant
influence on the desired output of jet ejectors is another aspect that has received
limited attention in the existing literature. Previous studies have often overlooked the
critical task of pinpointing these influential parameters, thereby hampering the ability to
achieve desired performance levels efficiently. This study addresses this knowledge gap
by explicitly identifying and analyzing the key design parameters that impact the
outcome of jet ejectors.
 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Examine the effectiveness and efficiency of jet
ejectors that operate under constant rate of momentum change (CRMC) and constant
pressure mixing (CPM) scenarios. Conduct Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis
of jet ejectors for establishing baseline operating conditions and understand their fluid
dynamics behavior. Use the Taguchi approach in the Design of Experiments (DOE)
framework to develop a number of test cases and systematically change pertinent
parameters for a thorough performance evaluation.

Adopt the Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to maximize the jet ejector design
parameters and determine the critical elements affecting their operation in order to
attain the desired results. CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY Design study of Constant Rate of
Momentum Change (CRMC) ejectors and Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) Ejectors on
ANSYS using FLUENT workbench. 4.1 Methodology / To successfully perform this CFD
analysis here are the steps which we followed. In the initial stage of our analysis, we
began by creating a CAD model of the CPM ejector in ANSYS Design Modeler.

This model was designed to be axisymmetric, which offers two key advantages. Firstly, it
reduces computational time, making your study more resource efficient. Secondly,
axisymmetric simplifies geometry, making it easier to model and analyze. This
simplification is particularly valuable when dealing with complex geometries and flow
patterns. Next, we assigned parameter sets to define the dimensions of critical
components such as the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser area. This step is crucial as
it allows you to control the geometry and tailor it to your specific design requirements.
By adjusting these parameters, you can explore a range of design possibilities and their
effects on the ejector's performance. / Figure 4.1

Dimensions & Parameters of components / Figure 4.2 CAD model in Ansys design
modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector / Figure 4.3 CAD model of the
Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejector in Ansys design modeler Meshing
is a critical step in CFD analysis, and we employed various meshing techniques in ANSYS
to ensure a high-quality mesh. Face meshing, face sizing, and multi-zone quad/tri
meshing techniques were used to generate a fine and uniform mesh.

A well-structured mesh is essential for accurate simulation results, as it discretizes the

geometry into manageable elements for numerical analysis. To define the fluid flow
within our simulation, we named and selected key edges and regions within the model.
As part of this, the outlet, wall borders, and axis were also defined, and the major inlet
was assigned as inlet 1 and the secondary as inlet 2.

These boundary conditions are essential for defining how fluid interacts with the
geometry and how it behaves at various points within the domain. / Figure 4.4 Meshing
in Ansys design modeler of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector / Figure 4.5
Meshing in Ansys design modeler of Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC)
ejector Moving on to the FLUENT solver setup, we employed a range of settings to
capture the physics of the ejector system accurately. This included selecting the solver
type as density-based and specifying that the analysis would be steady and 2D-space, as
the problem is planar.

In the model setup, we enabled energy and employed the SST-k-omega turbulence
model to account for turbulence effects within the flow. We defined the fluid properties,
using water vapor from the Fluent fluid database, and modified density conditions to
represent an ideal gas, which is appropriate for modelling compressible flows. For cell
zone conditions, we defined the fluid domain and specified water vapor as the domain
fluid. We then set up boundary conditions, which included axis symmetry, velocity and
pressure inlets, a pressure outlet, and adiabatic walls.

These boundary conditions are critical for simulating real-world flow behaviour and
interactions. Boundary conditions that we have set for your CFD analysis using ANSYS
Fluent Workbench. Firstly, we established an axis boundary condition as symmetry. This
choice reflects the assumption that the geometry's behaviour is symmetric along a
particular axis, simplifying the computational domain by modelling only one part and
reducing computational resources. Next, defining inlet 1 as a velocity inlet with a
specified velocity of 343 m/s. This boundary condition mimics the real-world scenario
where fluid enters the system with a certain velocity.

In order to take into consideration the consequences of turbulent flow, additional

turbulence parameters were provided, such as a turbulent viscosity ratio of 10 and a
turbulence intensity of 5%. The fluid that was entering at 130°C was represented by the
thermal boundary condition, which was set to 403 K. establishing a pressure inlet
boundary condition with a 101325 Pa value for inlet 2. This boundary condition assumes
that the pressure at this inlet is known, which is common when dealing with multi-inlet
systems.

Like inlet 1, we have also specified turbulence parameters and a thermal condition of
300 K for inlet 2, which is likely based on the properties of the fluid and the system's
operating conditions with an operating pressure of 0 Pa. The outlet boundary condition
was designated as a pressure outlet with a value of 3350 Pa. Pressure outlets are used to
represent regions where the pressure is allowed to vary based on the simulation results.
Similar to the inlets, turbulence characteristics and a thermal condition of 300 K were
specified at the outlet to account for turbulence effects and temperature conditions in
the outflow.

Regarding the wall boundary condition, it was set as adiabatic with no heat flux. This
condition implies that the walls of the ejector do not exchange heat with the
surrounding environment. Adiabatic walls are commonly used when the heat transfer
effects on the walls are not of primary interest in the simulation. Following the
specification of the operational parameters, including the 0 Pa working pressure. In
order to properly define the pressure field inside the computational domain, this option
sets the reference pressure for our simulation.

These carefully chosen boundary conditions play a fundamental role in accurately

representing the physical behaviour of our CPM ejector and CRMC ejector system in the
computational model. They ensure that the simulation taken into account the correct
flow dynamics, thermal effects, and pressure variations at the inlet, outlet, and walls,
thus yielding meaningful results for your design study. Lastly, we selected second-order
upwind discretization methods, implicit formulation, and gradient calculation based on
Green-Gauss cells in the solver parameters. These choices impact the numerical accuracy
and stability of our simulation.

For initialization, we employed hybrid initialization techniques to start the simulation

from a reasonable initial state. Then, we initiated the calculation run. We mentioned
using double precision with 8-core processor utilization to ensure numerical accuracy
and efficiency during the computation. Our approach to CFD analysis using ANSYS
Fluent Workbench demonstrates a systematic and comprehensive methodology to
simulate the behaviour of CPM ejectors and CRMC ejectors.

Each step, from geometry creation to boundary condition setup, is crucial for obtaining
accurate and meaningful results to inform your design study. / Figure 4.6 Mach number
contour for Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector The Mach number is a crucial
parameter in the study of ejectors, specifically in the context of our investigation into
Constant Rate of Momentum Change (CRMC) and Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM)
ejectors using CFD analysis. Mach number, denoted as Ma, is a dimensionless quantity
that describes the speed of a fluid flow relative to the speed of sound in that fluid.

It is a fundamental measure in fluid dynamics, particularly in compressible flow regimes,

where changes in Mach number can have profound effects on the behaviour of the fluid.
In our study, Mach number contours play an important role in understanding the flow
characteristics within both CPM and CRMC ejectors. / Figure 4.7 Mach number contour
for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejector The Mach number provides
critical insights into the compressibility of the flow.
When the Mach number is less than 1 (Ma < 1), the flow is considered subsonic, and the
flow velocities are significantly below the speed of sound. In contrast, when the Mach
number is greater than 1 (Ma > 1), the flow is supersonic, indicating that flow velocities
are higher than the speed of sound. The significance of Mach number lies in its ability to
reveal key flow phenomena within ejectors. In particular, it helps identify regions of
compression and expansion within the nozzle, throat, and mixing chamber. This is vital
because, in ejectors, the goal is often to accelerate and mix flows efficiently.

The Mach number provides a clear indication of where these compressive and expansive
processes occur. Our validation process, where we compared the Mach number
contours obtained from CFD analysis with those from a base paper, underscores the
importance of Mach number. The fact that we were able to replicate similar findings to
those in the base paper reinforces the accuracy and reliability of this CFD simulations.

It demonstrates that the computational model effectively captures the real-world

behaviour of CPM and CRMC ejectors, where flow velocities increase to supersonic
levels at the nozzle exit, subsequently drop below Mach 1 within the throat region, and
then evolve as they enter the mixing chamber. Table 4.1 RSO Parameters RSO
_PARAMETERS _ _ _Mixing chamber Length (mm) _Throat Length (mm) _Diffuser Length
(mm) _Mixing chamber radius (mm) _Throat radius (mm) _Diffuser radius (mm) _Mass
flow at throat inlet (J kg^-1) _Mach No.

at throat exit _ _Initial _130 _114 _180 _12 _9.5 _20 _14777 _1.4843 _ _The focus centers
on the specific interior conditions identified for comparison in the CFD analysis. These
interior conditions serve as critical reference points, offering valuable insights into the
flow dynamics at key locations within both the CPM and CRMC ejectors. / Figure 4.8
Static pressure contour for of Constant Pressure Mixing (CPM) ejector / Figure 4.9

Static pressure contour for of Constant Rate Of Momentum Change (CRMC) ejector A
significant finding of the CFD research is that the Mach number is greater than Mach 4
at the nozzle exit, where the flow enters the mixing chamber. This particular Mach
number signifies supersonic flow conditions, a crucial aspect of ejector behavior.
Importantly, this finding aligns closely with what was reported in the base paper,
reinforcing the fidelity of the computational model developed for this study.

This consistency provides substantial assurance of the accuracy of the CFD analysis,
confirming its ability to replicate real-world flow behaviors effectively. Furthermore, the
CFD results reveal that as the flow progresses through the throat region, the Mach
number decreases below Mach 1. This transition from supersonic to subsonic flow is a
pivotal characteristic of ejector operation, impacting its overall performance.

It is noteworthy that this observation closely mirrors the findings presented in the base
paper, adding further weight to the validation of the simulations. The capability to
accurately capture this transition in flow regime underscores the reliability and accuracy
of the numerical approach employed in this study. The successful comparison of Mach
number contours at these significant interior conditions between the CFD analysis and
the base paper's results provides robust confirmation of the research's integrity.

It reaffirms that the computational model utilized faithfully reproduces the anticipated
flow behaviors within CPM and CRMC ejectors. This degree of validation boosts the
credibility of the research findings and makes a substantial contribution to the field's
knowledge of ejector technology, which makes it easier to build and optimize these
devices for real-world uses. Thus, validation not only affirms the credibility of this CFD
setup but also provides confidence in the applicability of our results.

It means that your analysis has successfully replicated and confirmed the key flow
features observed in the base paper, strengthening the scientific basis of this study.
These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the behavior of CPM and CRMC
ejectors, which is essential for optimizing their design and performance in practical
applications. Ultimately, validation process with Mach number contours underscores the
rigor and reliability of our research in this critical field of fluid dynamics and ejector
technology. 4.2

Response Surface Optimization (RSO) and Its Significance Response surface

optimization is a mathematical and statistical technique used to depict the relationships
between input parameters, also known as factors or variables, and corresponding output
parameters, also known as responses, inside a system. In optimization studies, this
technique is utilized to locate the combination of input parameters that results in the
optimal values of the output parameters. It serves as an efficient surrogate model that
bridges the gap between complex, computationally-intensive simulations and the need
for quick decision-making.

/ In the context of this design of experiment (DOE) study aimed at optimizing the
geometry of ejectors, the utilization of a Response Surface Optimization technique holds
immense significance. This technique is an invaluable tool in engineering and scientific
research that aids in optimizing complex systems or processes while minimizing the
computational resources and time required. In this detailed study into the concept of
Response Surface Optimization, its importance in optimization studies, the methodology
it involves, and how it is planned to be executed in the context of our ejector geometry
optimization.

The optimization procedure is initiated through developing a well-structured

experimental design and systematically varying the input parameters (mixing chamber
length, throat length, mixing chamber radius, diffuser length, throat radius, and diffuser
radius) within predetermined ranges. This is known as experimental design execution.
This experimental design generates a diverse set of data points, covering a wide
parameter space. Table 4.2 Representing the defining ranges of various parameters of
DOE A _Input parameters _Lower bound _Upper bound _ _1 _mixing chamber length
_125 _135 _ _2 _throat length _110 _120 _ _3 _diffuser length _175 _185 _ _4 _mixing
chamber radius _11 _14 _ _5 _throat radius _8.5

_10 _ _6 _diffuser radius _18 _30 _ _B _Output parameters _ _1 _Mass flow at throat _To
be maximized _ _2 _Mach number at throat exit _To be minimized _ _ Response surface
creation, with the experimental data in hand, a response surface is constructed using
mathematical and statistical techniques. The output parameters are the mass flow at the
throat inlet and the Mach number at the throat exit. The relationships between the input
and output parameters are approximately represented by this surface. Common
response surface models include polynomial regression, radial basis functions, and
Gaussian processes.

Optimization Process, once the response surface is established, optimization algorithms

are employed to determine the combination of input parameters that yields the desired
optimal values of the output parameters. These algorithms seek to minimize or
maximize the responses while considering constraints or objectives defined by the
study. / 4.10 Optimization Process, parameter sets created using algorithms seeking
Table 5.3 DOE Parameters DOE _PARAMETERS _ _ _Mixing chamber length (mm) _Throat
length (mm) _Diffuser length (mm) _Mixing chamber radius (mm) _Throat radius (mm)
_Diffuser radius (mm) _Mass flow at throat inlet (J kg^-1) _Mach No.

at throat exit _ _1 _125 _110 _175 _11.03 _8.52 _18.10 _4901.76 _4.69 _ _2 _125 _115 _178
_11.83 _8.80 _19.19 _4290.19 _2.22 _ _3 _125 _112 _182 _12.63 _9.09 _20.28 _4139.31
_4.45 _ _4 _125 _118 _176 _13.43 _9.37 _21.37 _5552.49 _4.46 _ _5 _125 _111 _179 _14.23
_9.66 _22.46 _3584.57 _4.27 _ _6 _126 _116 _183 _11.19 _9.95 _23.55 _6353.57 _2.64 _ _7
_126 _114 _177 _11.99 _10.23 _24.65 _162872.00 _4.60 _ _8 _126 _119 _181 _12.79 _8.56
_25.74 _3809.76 _1.96 _ _9 _126 _110 _184 _13.59 _8.84 _26.83 _3972.26 _2.07 _ _10 _126
_116 _175 _14.39 _9.13 _27.92 _6550.78 _1.66 _ _11 _126 _113 _179 _11.35 _9.41 _29.01
_5075.16 _1.71 _ _12 _127 _119 _182 _12.15 _9.70 _18.20 _31593.60 _4.63 _ _13 _127 _112
_176 _12.95 _9.99 _19.29 _3461.91 _4.51 _ _14 _127 _117 _180 _13.75 _10.27 _20.38
_2410.38 _3.24 _ _15 _127 _114 _184 _14.55 _8.60 _21.47 _3537.47 _2.14 _ _16 _127 _120
_177 _11.51 _8.88 _22.56 _29140.50 _3.85 _ _17 _128 _110 _181 _12.31 _9.17 _23.65
_4138.27 _4.52 _ _18 _128 _115 _185 _13.11 _9.46 _24.74 _3935.58 _4.54 _ _19 _128 _113
_175 _13.91 _9.74 _25.84 _3460.25 _2.78 _ _20 _128 _111 _183 _11.67 _10.31 _28.02
_2145.58 _2.03 _ _21 _128 _117 _177 _12.47 _8.64 _29.11 _4225.43 _1.53 _ _22 _129 _111
_178 _14.87 _9.50 _20.48 _4324.83 _4.45 _ _23 _129 _116 _182 _11.07 _9.78 _21.57
_4043.92 _1.71 _ _24 _129 _113 _185 _11.87 _10.07 _22.66 _2812.88 _4.34 _ _25 _130 _119
_175 _12.67 _10.35 _23.75 _2530.55 _4.37 _ _26 _130 _112 _178 _13.47 _8.68 _24.84
_5444.06 _4.72 _ _27 _130 _115 _176 _11.23 _9.25 _27.03 _4219.24 _2.96 _ _28 _130 _120
_180 _12.03 _9.54 _28.12 _4149.53 _1.53 _ _29 _131 _115 _177 _13.63 _10.11 _18.40
_7904.75 _4.56 _ _30 _131 _113 _181 _14.43 _10.39 _19.49 _2240.54 _4.35 _ _31 _131 _111
_175 _12.19 _9.01 _21.67 _4182.91 _4.65 _ _32 _131 _117 _179 _12.99 _9.29 _22.76
_4117.46 _4.49 _ _33 _132 _114 _182 _13.79 _9.58 _23.85 _4253.48 _4.50 _ _34 _132 _119
_176 _14.59 _9.86 _24.94 _39212.30 _4.62 _ _35 _132 _110 _180 _11.55 _10.15 _26.03
_1194.03 _1.78 _ _36 _132 _116 _184 _12.35 _10.44 _27.12 _1038.70 _1.61 _ _37 _132 _113
_178 _13.15 _8.76 _28.22 _4795.84 _1.53 _ _38 _132 _119 _181 _13.95 _9.05 _29.31
_4037.06 _1.53 _ _39 _133 _112 _185 _14.75 _9.33 _18.50 _3478.03 _2.16 _ _40 _133 _117
_176 _11.71 _9.62 _19.59 _6125.20 _4.40 _ _41 _133 _115 _179 _12.51 _9.90 _20.68
_3269.75 _4.47 _ _42 _133 _120 _183 _13.31 _10.19 _21.77 _67320.60 _4.43 _ _43 _133
_110 _177 _14.11 _10.48 _22.86 _2280.74 _4.34 _ _44 _134 _116 _180 _14.91 _8.52 _23.95
_8221.12 _4.58 _ _45 _134 _113 _184 _11.10 _8.81 _25.04 _15765.50 _1.67 _ _46 _134 _118
_178 _11.90 _9.09 _26.13 _4692.23 _1.55 _ _47 _134 _117 _185 _13.50 _9.67 _28.31
_5522.65 _1.54 _ _48 _134 _114 _175 _14.30 _9.95 _29.41 _2538.32 _1.89 _ _49 _135 _120
_179 _11.26 _10.24 _18.60 _2374.04 _4.63 _ _50 _135 _111 _182 _12.06 _8.56 _19.69
_5345.20 _4.60 _ _51 _135 _116 _176 _12.86 _8.85 _20.78 _11421.50 _4.50 _ _52 _135 _114
_180 _13.66 _9.13 _21.87 _5701.90 _4.56 _ _53 _135 _119 _183 _14.46 _9.42 _22.96
_10147.60 _4.39 _ _Iterative refinement, the optimization process often involves
iterations. The current set of input parameters is used to update the response surface,
allowing the optimization algorithm to make more informed decisions for the
subsequent iterations.

This iterative refinement process continues until a satisfactory solution is reached. /

Figure 4.11 Goodness of fit for iterating observed points and generated by RSM In this
instance, finding the optimal geometry for the CPM and CRMC ejectors will be made
easier using the Response Surface Optimization method. We investigated a variety of
potential geometries by adjusting the input parameters that reflect the length and
radius of various components.

The response surface thus essentially represents the effect of these fluctuations on the
output parameters, in particular the mass flow at the throat inlet and the Mach number
at the throat exit. / Figure 4.12 Parameter sensitivity depicting effects of the parameters
on RSO study This approach allows us to quickly identify and understand the
relationships between geometry and performance. Instead of conducting
resource-intensive simulations for every geometry variation, the response surface guides
the optimization process, significantly reducing computational effort.

This method not only accelerates the design process but also ensures a comprehensive
exploration of the design space. / Figure 4.13 Relationship between mixing chamber
diameter and length in relation to mass flow at the throat entrance is depicted in a 3D
response curve. / Figure 4.14 3D response curve illustrating the link between the
diameter and length of the mixing chamber at the throat outflow and the Mach number.
/ Figure 4.15 3D response curve illustrating the relationship between throat diameter
and length in relation to mass flow at the throat inlet. / Figure 4.16 3D response curve
illustrating the connection between throat diameter and length at the throat exit in
relation to the Mach number. / Figure 4.17 Diffuser length and diameter in proportion to
mass flow at the throat inlet are shown in a 3D response curve./

Figure 4.18 The diffuser length and diameter are correlated with the throat exit Mach
number, as indicated by the three-dimensional response curve. In conclusion, Response
Surface Optimization emerges as an indispensable methodology in optimization studies,
particularly in cases where computational resources and time are limited. This technique
will direct your parameter space exploration in your research of ejector geometry
optimization, allowing you to quickly and effectively discover optimal design
configurations for CPM and CRMC ejectors while ensuring that performance targets are
achieved. Response Surface Optimization 4.3 Optimum Results Table 4.4

RSO Result Parameters RSO _PARAMETERS _ _ _Mixing chamber length (mm) _Throat
length (mm) _Diffuser length (mm) _Mixing chamber radius (mm) _Throat radius (mm)
_Diffuser radius (mm) _Mass Flow at throat inlet (J kg^-1) _Mach No. at throat exit _
_RSO 1 _133.2 _115.49 _182.65 _11.15 _9.3103 _29.394 _4.91E+05 _1.5349 _ _RSO 2
_133.2 _116.07 _182.51 _11.179 _9.3076 _29.391 _5.28E+05 _1.5418 _ _RSO 3 _133.52
_115.47 _182.61 _11.086 _9.4525 _29.39 _5.24E+05 _1.5363 _ _These three optimized
conditions are shown in the data that follows.

These reflect the dimensions of the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser in our ejector
system, and the results of Response Surface Optimization (RSO) for more than fifty sets
of input parameters are shown. The mass flow at the throat inlet (in J kg-1) and the
Mach number at the throat exit are the two output parameters that are taken into
account. RSO examples: Three optimized separate RSO examples are included in the
data; they are referred to as RSO 1, RSO 2, and RSO 3. These stand for various sets of
input parameter combinations that were RSO-optimized.
The input parameters are as follows: three millimeters each for the length and diameter
of the mixing chamber, the throat length and diameter, and the diffuser length and
diameter areas comprise the three measured input parameters. These dimensions
determine the geometry of our ejector system. Each RSO case specifies a unique set of
values for these dimensions. Output parameters, The two key output parameters are:
Mass flow at the throat inlet: measured in Joules per kilogram J kg-1, this quantity
indicates the rate at which mass enters the throat per unit of time.

It is an essential measure of the effectiveness and performance of the system. The flow
velocity at the throat exit in relation to sound speed is indicated by the Mach number at
the exit. It is dimensionless and provides insight into the flow regime, particularly
whether the flow is subsonic Mach < 1 or supersonic Mach > 1. Numerical values: The
data shows the input and output parameter numerical values for every RSO example.
The system's performance under the given geometric configurations is represented by
these values, which are the outcome of the optimization process.

Now, to determine the best-case scenario: To identify the best-case scenario, we should
define our optimization objective. Are we aiming to maximize mass flow at the throat
inlet, minimize it, or achieve a specific target value? Similarly, what are the objectives for
the Mach number at the throat exit? This determination should be based on the specific
goals of our ejector system. Once we have established our objectives, compare the
values of the output parameters Mass flow and Mach number for each RSO case against
these objectives.

Based on these defined objectives and evaluation, one can conclude which RSO case
represents the best-case scenario. This is the set of input parameters that aligns most
closely with our optimization goals and satisfies the performance criteria of the ejector
system. The optimal situation would be the one that simultaneously lowers the Mach
number at the throat exit and obtains the maximum mass flow at the throat inlet. /
Figure 4.19 RSO Result Technical Graph Data From the data and the graph provided it
can be deduced that RSO 2 appears to be the most promising option. It has the highest
Mass flow at the throat inlet 5.28E+05 J kg^-1, indicating a substantial mass flow rate,
which is typically desirable for ejector performance. Furthermore, RSO 2 has a throat exit
Mach number of 1.5418, which is comparatively lower and suggests that the flow is
closer to the intended subsonic zone at this point. When attempting to avoid the
difficulties posed by supersonic flows, a lower Mach number is frequently
recommended.

Consequently, among the choices you've given, RSO 2 seems to be most suitable in
terms of optimizing mass flow and lowering the Mach number. Technical Analysis of
Tabular Data and Graphical Reference: In the tabular data we see that the local
sensitivity analysis reveals the impact of each input parameter on the desired output
parameters in percentage terms. Here’s a technical analysis: Table 4.5 Technical Analysis
of Tabular Data and Graphical Reference Input parameters _Mass flow at throat Inlet
_Mach number at throat exit _ _Mixing chamber length _-8.892169804 _-9.054224906 _
_Throat length _3.258224253 _-10.79757265 _ _Diffuser length _-4.23009321
_-1.47210937 _ _Mixing chamber diameter _2.615725275 _37.41748408 _ _Throat
diameter _8.172407851 _10.19921209 _ _Diffuser diameter _2.526332677 _-61.76071271
_ _Mixing chamber length: About -8.89% and -9.05%, respectively, are the negative
sensitivity values for mass flow at the throat inlet and Mach number at the throat exit.
This indicates that increasing the mixing chamber length slightly decreases both output
parameters.

Throat length: The sensitivity is negative at -10.80% for Mach number at throat exit but
positive at about 3.26% for mass flow at throat inlet. This suggests that a longer throat
positively influences mass flow but negatively affects Mach number at the throat exit.
Diffuser length: It exhibits negative sensitivities for both output parameters, implying
that increasing the diffuser length decreases both mass flow and Mach number at the
throat exit.

Mixing chamber diameter: The mass flow at the throat inlet has a positive sensitivity of
roughly 2.62% for this parameter, whereas the Mach number at the throat exit has a
significantly positive sensitivity of about 37.42%. Mach number is impacted more
strongly by an increase in mixing chamber diameter. Throat diameter: It shows positive
sensitivities for both output parameters, suggesting that the mass flow and Mach
number at the throat exit are both increased by a greater throat diameter.

Diffuser diameter: For mass flow at the throat inlet, it has a positive sensitivity of about
2.53%, but for Mach number at the throat exit, it has a significant negative sensitivity of
about -61.76%. This indicates that while increasing diffuser diameter has a moderately
advantageous impact on mass flow, it significantly decreases the Mach number at the
throat exit. / Figure 4.20 Local Sensitivity Data In the graphical representation, the bar
graph visually reinforces these relationships, with bars pointing up or down indicating
the direction and magnitude of sensitivity.

It’s evident that different input parameters have varying impacts on the desired output
parameters, and understanding these sensitivities is crucial for optimizing the ejector
system’s performance based on specific objectives and constraints. We will evaluate and
emphasize the superiority of RSO 2 over the other cases—including the first case—in
this technical comparison study using the data that has been provided. The factors
under consideration are the mass flow at the throat inlet, the Mach number at the throat
exit, and the dimensions of the mixing chamber, throat, and diffuser of the ejector. Table
4.6

RSO Comparative Analysis RSO _PARAMETERS _ _ _Mixing chamber length (mm) _Throat
length (mm) _Diffuser length (mm) _Mixing chamber radius (mm) _Throat radius (mm)
_Diffuser radius (mm) _Mass flow at throat inlet (J kg^-1) _Mach at throat exit _ _Initial
_130 _114 _180 _12 _9.5 _20 _14777 _1.4843 _ _RSO 1 _133.2 _115.49 _182.65 _11.15
_9.3103 _29.394 _4.91E+05 _1.5349 _ _RSO 2 _133.2 _116.07 _182.51 _11.179 _9.3076
_29.391 _5.28E+05 _1.5418 _ _RSO 3 _133.52 _115.47 _182.61 _11.086 _9.4525 _29.39
_5.24E+05 _1.5363 _ _Mixing chamber length and diameter (mm): RSO 2 keeps the
dimensions nearly the same as the initial case, with the mixing chamber length being
slightly larger.

This reveals a prudent design choice that achieves significant performance gains without
requiring significant alterations to geometry. Throat length and diameter (mm): The
performance is improved partially because the RSO 2 throat dimensions are slightly
bigger than in the initial casing. The critical dimensions of the throat are maintained
while supporting an increase in mass flow. Diffuser length and diameter (mm): RSO 2
ensures the diffuser's efficacy without significant modifications by maintaining
dimensions that are comparable to the initial case. / Figure 4.21 Comparative Analysis
between initial case and RSO cases The first case's mass flow at the throat inlet, which is
14777 J kg^-1, is comparatively lower than the other cases'.

RSO 2 is distinguished by an extraordinary mass flow at the throat entrance of 5.28E+05

J kg^-1. This impressive rise denotes a significant improvement in ejector performance,
implying effective mixing and flow acceleration. Mach number at throat exit: RSO 2
likewise significantly reduces the Mach number at the throat exit to 1.5418. The basic
case's Mach number is 1.4843. This reduction is noteworthy, even if it is not as
noteworthy as the first instance, and shows that RSO 2's flow is likewise approaching the
ideal subsonic domain, which minimizes the difficulties related to supersonic flow. 4.4

Comparative Analysis In several crucial aspects, RSO 2 demonstrates a clear supremacy

over both the initial case and subsequent RSO cases. 1. Mass Flow: When compared to
the initial case, RSO 2 achieves a remarkable rise in mass flow at the throat inlet,
showing a significantly better performance in terms of fluid acceleration and mixing. 2.
Mach Number: RSO 2 is superior in controlling the flow regime and improving the
efficiency of the ejector because it not only performs well in mass flow but also
effectively reduces the Mach number at the throat exit. 3.
Geometry Changes: Remarkably, RSO 2 accomplishes these gains without requiring
significant modifications to geometry, which is frequently helpful for real-world uses
since it eliminates the need for complex manufacturing or design changes. To sum up,
RSO 2 is clearly the best case scenario; it performs better in terms of mass flow and
Mach number than the initial case and other RSO conditions. It sets the standard for
optimizing ejector design for increased efficacy and efficiency thanks to its subtle
geometric modifications and notable performance improvements.
 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1

Conclusions Geometry Optimization Success: Successful optimization of CPM and CRMC

ejector geometry through comprehensive CFD simulations and Response Surface
Optimization (RSO). In conclusion, RSO configurations demonstrated substantial
improvements over the initial case in key parameters: Mass Flow Enhancement:
Optimized designs, particularly RSO 2, resulted in a significant increase in mass flow at
the throat inlet, indicating improved mixing and acceleration in ejectors. Mass Flow at
Throat Inlet: - Initial Case: 14777 J kg^-1 - RSO 1: 4.91E+05 J kg^-1, which is 32.40 times
increase over the initial case - RSO 2: 5.28E+05 J kg^-1, which is 34.77 times increase
over the initial case - RSO 3: 5.24E+05 J kg^-1, which is 34.42 times increase over the
initial case Flow Regime Control The optimized designs, notably RSO 2, effectively
shifted the flow regime towards subsonic, reducing challenges associated with
supersonic flow and enhancing ejector efficiency.

Mach Number at Throat Exit - Initial Case: 1.4843 - RSO 1: 3.4% increase over the initial
case - RSO 2: 3.8% increase over the initial case - RSO 3: 3.2% increase over the initial
case Sensitivity Analysis Insights: Local sensitivity analysis provided valuable insights into
the impact of input parameter variations, highlighting the role of parameters like throat
diameter and mixing chamber diameter in ejector performance. RSO 2 emerges as the
superior configuration for the steam jet ejector, and this superiority can be attributed to
a synergy in its geometric design parameters.

The careful collaboration of design elements is evident in the following aspects: 1.

Throat Length and Radius - RSO 2 maintains a throat length of 116.07 mm and a throat
radius of 9.3076 mm, contributing to a balanced acceleration and efficient mixing of the
flow. 2. Mixing Chamber and Diffuser Design - The geometric choices in the mixing
chamber (133.2 mm length, 11.179 mm radius) and diffuser (182.51 mm length, 29.391
mm radius) in RSO 2 foster an optimal flow pattern, enhancing mass flow efficiency. 3.
Mach Number Control: - RSO 2 achieves a Mach number at the throat exit of 1.5418,
showcasing a meticulous design that ensures the flow remains close to the desired
subsonic regime. This indicates a harmonious balance between mixing efficiency and
avoiding the challenges associated with supersonic flow. 4.

Overall Collaboration: - The collaborative effect of these geometric design choices is

reflected in RSO 2's exceptional mass flow improvement of 34.77 times over the initial
case. The balanced design parameters contribute to efficient mixing and acceleration,
making RSO 2 the optimal choice for enhanced steam jet ejector performance. In
essence, the geometric design points of RSO 2 work in concert to create a well-balanced
and efficient steam jet ejector, making it the preferred configuration for achieving
superior performance. 5.2

Future Scope of Work Future research may explore additional parameters and
constraints for further ejector refinement and consider real-world experimental
validation of optimized geometries. Overall Impact: The work contributes to ejector
technology advancement, providing a systematic approach for optimizing geometry,
flow control, and performance while conserving computational resources—a valuable
contribution to engineering and fluid dynamics. Continued Exploration: The study opens
avenues for further investigation into ejector design and optimization methodologies,
potentially leading to more efficient and resource-friendly solutions across various
engineering domains.
REFERENCES Decker, L.O. Consider the cold facts about steam-jet vacuum cooling.
Chem. Eng. Prog. 1993 https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5134/4/1/15 He, S.; Li, Y.; Wang,
R.Z. Progress of mathematical modeling on ejectors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009,
13, 1760–1780
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032108001779?via%3Dihub
Abdulateef, J.M.; Sopian, K.; Alghoul, M.A.; Sulaiman, M.Y. Review on solar-driven ejector
refrigeration technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S136403210800110X?via%3Dihub
Rahamathullah, M.R.; Palani, K.; Venkatakrishnan, P. A Review On Historical And Present
Developments In Ejector Systems. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 2013
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012IJERA...3b..10R/abstract Chen, X.; Omer, S.;
Worall, M.; Riffat, S. Recent developments in ejector refrigeration technologies. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032112006405?via%3Dihub
Chen, J.; Jarall, S.; Havtun, H.;

Palm, B. A review on versatile ejector applications in refrigeration systems. Renew.

Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032115003433?via%3Dihub
Besagni, G.; Mereu, R.; Inzoli, F. Ejector refrigeration: A comprehensive review. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032115009223?via%3Dihub
Little, A.B.; Garimella, S. A critical review linking ejector flow phenomena with
component- and system-level performance. Int. J. Refrig. 2016,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700716301207?via%3Dihub
Keenan, J.H.; Neumann, E.P.; Lustwerk, F.

An investigation of ejector design by analysis and experiment. J. Appl. Mech. 1950,

https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article-abstract/17/3/299/110
6496/An-Investigation-of-Ejector-Design-by-Analysis-and Aphornratana, S.;
Chungpaibulpatana, S.; Srikhirin, P. Experimental investigation of an ejector refrigerator:
Effect of mixing chamber geometry on system performance. Int. J. Energy Res. 2001,
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/er.689 Yapici, R.; Ersoy, H.K. Performance
characteristics of the ejector refrigeration system based on the constant area ejector
flow model. Energy Convers. Manag. 2005,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890405000312?via%3Dihub
Pianthong, K.; Seehanam, W.;
Behnia, M.; Sriveerakul, T.; Aphornratana, S. Investigation and improvement of ejector
refrigeration system using computational fluid dynamics technique. Energy Convers.
Manag. 2007,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890407000933?via%3Dihub
Grazzini, G.; Mariani, A. A simple program to design a multi-stagejet-pump for
refrigeration cycles. Energy Convers. Manag. 1998,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890498000703?via%3Dihub
Grazzini, G.; Rocchetti, A. Numerical optimisation of a two-stage ejector refrigeration
plant. Int. J. Refrig. 2002,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700701000639?via%3Dihub
Kong, F.; Kim, H.D.

Analytical and computational studies on the performance of a two-stage ejector-diffuser

system. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0017931015001350?via%3Dihub
Eames, I.W. A new prescription for the design of supersonic jet-pumps: The constant
rate of momentum change method. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2002,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431101000795?via%3Dihub
Kitrattana, B.; Aphornratana, S.; Thongtip, T.; Ruangtrakoon, N. Comparison of traditional
and CRMC ejector performance used in a steam ejector refrigeration. Energy Procedia
2017,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187661021735172X?via%3Dihub
Kumar, V.; Singhal, G.;

Subbarao, P.M.V. Realization of novel constant rate of kinetic energy change (CRKEC)
supersonic ejector. Energy 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544218317201?via%3Dihub
Chang, Y.J.; Chen, Y.M. Enhancement of a steam-driven ejector using a novel application
of the petal nozzle. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. Trans. Chin. Inst. Eng. Ser. A 2000,
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02533839.2000.9670589 Garris, C.A.
Pressure Exchanging Ejector and Refrigeration Apparatus and Method. U.S. Patent
5647221A, 1997, https://patents.google.com/patent/US5647221A/en Garris, C.A.; Hong,
W.J.; Mavriplis, C.M.; Shipman, J. The Pressure-Exchange Ejector Heat Pump.

In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Conference and

Exposition, Anaheim, CA, USA, 15–20 November 1998,
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/IMECE/proceedings-abstract/IMECE98/263/1134
266 Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. Non-Steady Three-Dimensional Flow Field Analysis in
Supersonic Flow Induction. In Proceedings of the ASME 2002 Joint US-European Fluids
Engineering Division Conference, Montreal,
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/FEDSM/proceedings-abstract/FEDSM2002/1075/
298100 Hong, W.J.; Alhussan, K.; Zhang, H.; Garris, C.A. A novel thermally driven
rotor-vane/pressure-exchange ejector refrigeration system with environmental benefits
and energy efficiency. Energy 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S036054420400129X?via%3Dihub
Alhussan, K.; Garris, C.A. Effect of Changing Throat Diameter Ratio on a Steam
Supersonic Pressure Exchange Ejector. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2005,
https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0217984905010293 Yang, X.; Long,
X.; Yao, X.

Numerical investigation on the mixing process in a steam ejector with different nozzle
structures. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2012,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1290072912000452?via%3Dihub
Opgenorth, M.J.; Sederstrom, D.; McDermott, W.; Lengsfeld, C.S. Maximizing pressure
recovery using lobed nozzles in a supersonic ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2012,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431111006855?via%3Dihub
Kong, F.S.; Kim, H.D.; Jin, Y.; Setoguchi, T. Application of Chevron nozzle to a supersonic
ejector-diffuser system. Procedia Eng. 2013,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187770581300461X?via%3Dihub
Rao, S.; Jagadeesh, G.

Novel supersonic nozzles for mixing enhancement in supersonic ejectors. Appl. Therm.
Eng. 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431114005055?via%3Dihub
Zhu, Y.; Jiang, P. Bypass ejector with an annular cavity in the nozzle wall to increase the
entrainment: Experimental and numerical validation. Energy 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544214001807?via%3Dihub
Tang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, Y.; Shi, C. Combined auxiliary entrainment and structure optimization
for performance improvement of steam ejector with consideration of back pressure
variation. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890418303649?via%3Dihub
Tang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Shi, C.; Li, Y. A novel steam ejector with pressure regulation to optimize
the entrained flow passage for performance improvement in MED-TVC desalination
system. Energy 2018,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544218310879?via%3Dihub
Vermeulen, P.J.; Ramesh, V.; Meng, G.C.; Miller, D.N.; Domel, N. Air Ejector Pumping
Enhancement through Pulsing Primary Flow. In Proceedings of the 2nd AIAA Flow
Control Conference, Portland, Oregon, 28 June–1 July 2004.
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings-abstract/GT2002/57/295739
Ouzzane, M.; Aidoun, Z. Model development and numerical procedure for detailed
ejector analysis and design. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2003,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431103002084?via%3Dihub
Aidoun, Z.; Ouzzane, M.

The effect of operating conditions on the performance of a supersonic ejector for

refrigeration. Int. J. Refrig. 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700704001252?via%3Dihub
Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S. Ejectors: applications in refrigeration technology.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032103001151?via%3Dihub
Khalil, A.; Fatouh, M.; Elgendy, E. Ejector design and theoretical study of R134a ejector
refrigeration cycle. Int. J. Refrig. 2011,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700711000181?via%3Dihub
García Del Valle, J.; Saíz Jabardo, J.M.; Castro Ruiz, F.;

San José Alonso, J.F. An experimental investigation of a R-134a ejector refrigeration

system. Int. J. Refrig. 2014,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700714001406?via%3Dihub
Chunnanond, K.; Aphornratana, S. An experimental investigation of a steam ejector
refrigerator: The analysis of the pressure profile along the ejector. Appl. Therm. Eng.
2004,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431103002539?via%3Dihub
Huang, B.J.; Jiang, C.B.; Hu, F.L. Ejector performance characteristics and design analysis of
jet refrigeration system. J. Eng. Gas. Turbine Power 1985,
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article-abstract/107/3/792/40
7403/Ejector-Performance-Characteristics-and-Design?redirectedFrom=fulltext Eames,
I.; Aphornratana, S.; Haider, H. A theoretical and experimental study of a small-scale
steam jet refrigerator. Int. J. Refrig. 1995,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/014070079598160M?via%3Dihub
Yapici, R.; Yetisen, C.C.

Experimental study on ejector refrigeration system powered by low grade heat. Energy
Convers. Manag. 2007,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890406003645?via%3Dihub
Shestopalov, K.O.; Huang, B.J.; Petrenko, V.O.; Volovyk, O.S. Investigation of an
experimental ejector refrigeration machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design
and off-design working conditions. Part 2. Theoretical and experimental results. Int. J.
Refrig. 2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715000365?via%3Dihub
Shestopalov, K.O.; Huang, B.J.; Petrenko, V.O.; Volovyk, O.S. Investigation of an
experimental ejector refrigeration machine operating with refrigerant R245fa at design
and off-design working conditions. Part 1. Theoretical analysis. Int. J. Refrig.

2015,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715000298?via%3Dihub
Yan, J.; Chen, G.; Liu, C.; Tang, L.; Chen, Q. Experimental investigations on a R134a ejector
applied in a refrigeration system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431116316428?via%3Dihub
LIST OF PUBLICATION Bhuvneshwar Tekam, Dr Aseem C Tiwari, “Enhancing Energy
Efficiency in Jet Ejectors: A Computational Fluid Dynamics Investigation”, International
Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology (IJRASET), Volume
11, Issue X, October 2023. Bhuvneshwar Tekam, Dr Aseem C Tiwari, “Optimizing Jet
Ejectors for Efficient Energy Utilization: A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study”, ASEAN
Engineering Journal, 2023 communicated.

INTERNET SOURCES:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187123001402
<1% - https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/ra/d0ra09759d#!
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-319-43742-2_17.pdf
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1702/10/7/559
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/19/7058
<1% -
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2021-0026/full/html
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700715003266
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/11/10/1917
<1% -
https://vjit.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/1.Design-And-Development-Of-Suitable-
Electric-Vehicle-Motor.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ewumini-Senevirathna-2/publication/318920807_F
actors_Affecting_Employee_Retention/links/59853037aca27266ad9a2e71/Factors-Affecti
ng-Employee-Retention.pdf
<1% -
https://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/69756/frontmatter/9781107069756_frontmatter.
pdf
<1% - https://www.smc.eu/en-eu/products/vacuum-ejectors~29029~nav
<1% -
https://dspace.uii.ac.id/bitstream/handle/123456789/12613/05.%202%20Chapter%202.p
df?sequence=7
<1% - https://library.une.edu/research-help/guides-tutorials/gaps-in-the-literature/
<1% -
https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Response+Surface+Methodology%3A+Process+and+Pro
duct+Optimization+Using+Designed+Experiments%2C+4th+Edition-p-9781118916018
<1% -
https://idr-lib.iitbhu.ac.in/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/1440/CHAPTER%205.pdf?s
equence=12
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V9/i1/IRJET-V9I1143.pdf
<1% - https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/16162
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Pressure-variations-along-an-ejector_fig1_2369618
83
<1% - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09544089211033129
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214785320363653
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/19739955/Performance_Optimization_of_Steam_Jet_Ejector_
using_CFD
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5134/4/1/15
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40430-023-04618-8
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Constant-Rate-of-Momentum-Change-Ejector%
3A-and-flow-Alsafi/206a8612c1d5ef44104e41339e54b4e6ab72ed22/figure/36
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214785322060746
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352484722017668
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221282711830146X
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362183430_Goodness_of_fit_tests_for_random
_multigraph_models
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/5/693
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340508312_Numerical_investigation_on_the_i
nfluence_of_mixing_chamber_length_on_steam_ejector_performance
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892687518304746
<1% - https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/mflchk.html
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/78507104/Effect_of_diffuser_configuration_on_the_flow_field
_pattern_inside_wind_concentrator
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1270963822002644
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128204917000049
<1% -
http://digilib.unimed.ac.id/45410/7/7.%20NIM%20%202163121028%20TABLE%20OF%2
0TABLES.pdf
<1% - http://varianceexplained.org/RData/lessons/lesson4/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_13
<1% - https://croll.com/library/vacuum-systems-ejectors-operations/
<1% -
https://www.theengineeringconcepts.com/thermocompressor-steam-jet-thermocompre
ssor/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0255270101001763
<1% - https://graham-mfg.com/solutions/products/ejectors/
<1% -
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ebooks/book/271/Steam-Jet-Ejectors-for-the-Pr
ocess-Industries
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0255270101001763
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032103001151
<1% - https://www.s-k.com/steam-jet-vacuum/single-stage-steam-jet-ejectors/
<1% - https://appel.nasa.gov/2010/02/26/ao_1-13_f_parsons-html/
<1% -
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/appliedmechanics/article/18/1/117/1106569/Disc
ussion-An-Investigation-of-Ejector-Design-by
<1% -
https://biomechanical.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/POWER/proceedings/POWER2016
/50213/V001T04A002/365727
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0040601523040080
<1% - https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/5/2/51/775569
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2311-5521/6/11/409
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431121013600
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-58239-4_1.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306927851_An_experimental_analysis_of_the_i
mpact_of_primary_nozzle_geometries_on_the_ejector_performance_used_in_R141b_eject
or_refrigerator
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431120333482
<1% - https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/211496867.pdf
<1% - https://savvycalculator.com/pressure-to-velocity-calculator/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Suction-mass-flow-rate-versus-suction-pressure-at
-different-motive-stagnation-pressures_fig4_325512159
<1% -
https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2018/57/matecconf_meae2
018_03001.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431120338369
<1% - https://www.jpharmsci.org/article/S0022-3549(21)00085-X/fulltext
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214785320383590
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369650706_New_Adapted_One-Dimensional_
Mathematical_and_Regression_Model_to_Predict_Ejector_Performance
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544215016692
<1% -
https://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/655/chapter/349757/Process-Analysis-The-I
mportance-of-Mass-and-Energy
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360006596_The_Effect_of_Different_Pressure_
Conditions_on_Shock_Waves_in_a_Supersonic_Steam_Ejector/fulltext/6262453e1b747d1
9c29d968b/The-Effect-of-Different-Pressure-Conditions-on-Shock-Waves-in-a-Superso
nic-Steam-Ejector.pdf
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s43588-022-00264-7
<1% -
https://croll.com/sb/understand-working-principle-steam-ejector-injector-system/
<1% - https://croll.com/steam-ejector-fundamentals/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306261919301588
<1% -
https://graham-mfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Understanding-Ejector-Systems
-Necessary-to-Troubleshoot-Vacuum-Distillation.pdf
<1% - https://www.irjet.net/archives/V8/i8/IRJET-V8I8490.pdf
<1% - https://pdhonline.com/courses/c619/c619content.pdf
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11630-022-1606-9.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331441794_Constructal_branched_micromixer
s_with_enhanced_mixing_efficiency_Slender_design_sphere_mixing_chamber_and_obstac
les
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/supersonic-diffuser
<1% -
https://www.nashpumps.com/en-in/technologies-by-nash/technology-of-steam-ejector
s
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331210138_A_comprehensive_review_of_eject
or_design_performance_and_applications
<1% - https://www.s-k.com/bulletin-5eh-single-multi-stage-steam-jet-vacuum-pumps/
<1% - https://whatispiping.com/basics-of-centrifugal-compressors/
<1% - https://www.ezejector.com/ejector-ranges
<1% - https://www.advancedvacuum.se/pages/steam-ejectors
<1% - https://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c07/e6-144-44-00.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-constant-pressure-mixing-eject
or_fig3_336805457
<1% - https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1789&context=iracc
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40430-021-03207-x
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214785322060746
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-diagram-of-a-constant-pressure-mixing
-ejector_fig3_275533797
<1% -
https://downloads.opito.com/downloads/Standards/standards-archive/pem-nos-41-rem
ove-components-from-instrument-and-control-process-plant-and-equipment.pdf
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/25916873/Condensation_in_supersonic_steam_ejectors_com
parison_of_theoretical_and_numerical_models
<1% -
https://www.tlv.com/steam-info/steam-theory/condensate-recovery/introduction-to-co
ndensate-recovery
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700711002635
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-19-6470-1_14
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13658816.2017.1358365
<1% - https://encyclopedia.che.engin.umich.edu/nozzles/
<1% -
https://material-properties.org/what-is-surface-hardness-and-wear-resistance-definition
/
<1% -
https://www.eit.edu.au/resources/practical-troubleshooting-of-electronic-circuits-for-en
gineers-and-technicians/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S0040601523040018
<1% -
https://www.edwardsvacuum.com/content/dam/brands/edwards-vacuum/edwards-web
site-assets/our-markets/industrial-solutions/documents/edwards-steam-ejector-brochur
e.pdf
<1% -
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/increase-turbine-efficiency-by-increasing-vacu
um-in-condenser.693948/
<1% - https://venturipumps.com/ejector.html
<1% -
https://www.globalspec.com/learnmore/manufacturing_process_equipment/fluid_proces
sing_equipment/evaporators
<1% -
https://swensontechnology.com/mechanical-vapor-recompression-mvr-evaporators/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-4613-3976-2_16.pdf
<1% -
https://www.gea.com/assets/mechanical-vapor-recompression-distillation-mvr-gea-304
829.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273207026_Analysis_and_prevention_of_serio
us_and_fatal_accidents_related_to_moving_parts_of_machinery
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19942060.2020.1756913
<1% -
https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128236901/low-grade-thermal-energy-harves
ting
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ejector-refrigeration-cycle
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-45256-2_1
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-13-7488-3_4
<1% - https://worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789811226984_0001
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8778876/
<1% - https://croll.com/sb/how-steam-ejectors-work-ultimate-guide/
<1% -
https://insights.globalspec.com/article/18359/vacuum-ejector-understanding-its-workin
g-principle-and-some-design-parameters
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-CFD-Simulation-of-High-Altitude-Testing-of-
the-Shariq/3d13e1310c9fdf197d58c1048c0fc94d3fe9852b
<1% - https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6803767
<1% - https://croll.com/designing-steam-jet-vacuum-systems/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/cogeneration-plant
<1% -
https://theconstructor.org/construction/costs-associated-with-constructed-facilities/836
/
<1% -
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-05/ws-commercial-watersense-at-w
ork_Section_6.3_Cooling_Towers.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320994104_Ejectors_of_power_plants_turbine_
units_efficiency_and_reliability_increasing
<1% - https://www.site.uottawa.ca/~rhabash/ELG4126DGD1Paper.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431121011261
<1% - https://www.crio.do/blog/a-comprehensive-guide-to-system-design/
<1% - https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/59006
<1% -
https://scholarworks.alaska.edu/bitstream/handle/11122/12246/MathModelingWithMatl
ab.pdf?sequence=3
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032108001779
<1% - https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b00317
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/developmental-trajectory
<1% -
https://qi.elft.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/the-model-for-improvement.pdf
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Review-on-solar-driven-ejector-refrigeration-Ab
dulateef-Sopian/2a0948d452daf6e41a256683bc03b72e2def56ae
<1% - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ese3.239
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ejector-refrigeration
<1% - https://www.arka360.com/ros/solar-powered-cooling-benefits-challenges/
<1% -
https://www.thebetterindia.com/257923/covid-remote-areas-village-coronavirus-resour
ces-donation-support-rural-areas-healthcare/
<1% -
https://indiabioscience.org/columns/opinion/the-role-of-science-and-scientists-in-mitig
ating-the-covid-19-pandemic
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17641-3
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715003266
<1% - https://whatispiping.com/ejector-types-parts-working-principle/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258652974_A_Review_On_Historical_And_Pres
ent_Developments_In_Ejector_Systems
<1% - https://peepstrategy.com/group-discussion-steps-to-make-it-better/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345704417_Impact_of_computer_modeling_o
n_learning_and_teaching_systems_thinking
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352906714_Effect_of_ejector_design_paramet
ers_on_flow_structure_inside_the_mixing_chamber
<1% -
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/inventions/inventions-04-00015/article_deploy/inve
ntions-04-00015-with-cover.pdf?version=1679393027
<1% - https://etd.iisc.ac.in/handle/2005/3402
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032112006405
<1% - http://ignou.ac.in/upload/Unit%205-32.pdf
<1% - https://www.nature.com/subjects/computer-modelling
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131515300683
<1% - https://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A848857
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/22/7705
<1% - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29262162/
<1% - https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/55258029.pdf
<1% -
https://typeset.io/papers/ejector-refrigeration-a-comprehensive-review-43hjl8jdeh
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227421558_A_review_of_sustainable_cooling_t
echnologies_in_buildings
<1% - https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v53y2016icp373-407.html
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11038128.2018.1541224
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-critical-review-linking-ejector-flow-phenome
na-Little-Garimella/b4e121a121a9d25a993833458c869db19c49ed9d
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ejector-technology
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/22/4325
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272962988_Studying_the_Relationship_betwe
en_System-Level_and_Component-Level_Resilience
<1% - https://www.scilit.net/publications/b68c8db589d82d8bad7e89d1bdf4eb5e
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/7-Ejector-are-classified-as-constant-area-mixing-ej
ector-and-the-constant-pressure_fig1_335551844
<1% -
https://www.roadsafellc.com/NCHRP22-24/Literature/Papers/Metrics/Measures%20of%
20agreement%20between%20computation%20and%20experiment%20-%20Validation%
20metrics.pdf
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/11/10/2841
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-small-capacity-steam-ejector-refrigerator%3A
-of-a-Aphornratana-Eames/72090d0be59e74248f77c619712e8ba032af56ee
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-schematic-of-the-experimental-setup_fig1_319
641512
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Pre-chamber-assembly-and-key-dimensions-of-the
-prechamber-body-unit-mm_fig8_343084544
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431121013570
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coefficient-of-performance
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-schematic-diagram-of-an-ejector-refrigeration-c
ycle-and-P-h-diagram_fig1_222430999
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890405000312
<1% -
https://www.toppr.com/ask/question/find-coefficient-of-performance-if-in-a-mechanica
l-refrigerator-the-lower-temperature-coils-of-evaporator/
<1% -
https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-15d2252c-693c-3d2e-a466-b
43e404e1d68
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890406003645
<1% -
https://byjus.com/question-answer/what-is-the-relationship-between-observed-colour-
of-the-complex-and-the-wavelength-of-light/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-15-5947-1_2
<1% -
http://web.mit.edu/lienhard/www/papers/conf/2012_McGovern_Ejector_Efficiency.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135943112100137X
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890407000933
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-19-6223-3_106
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1385894723015036
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222540342_Investigation_and_improvement_o
f_ejector_refrigeration_system_using_computational_fluid_dynamics_technique
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431121007353
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-51211-2_3
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890498000703
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/57568480/Numerical_optimisation_of_a_two_stage_ejector_r
efrigeration_plant
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222136209_Development_of_a_circulating_sys
tem_for_a_jet_refrigeration_cycle
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0026271483913677
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/1-Refrigerator-Freezer-State-Point-Diagram_fig4_3
2963232
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1290072900012060
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304479757_Building_Performance_and_Simula
tion
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-10477-1_3
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Analytical-and-computational-studies-on-the-o
f-a-Kong-Kim/9305bea92465dc49613342b4e599e642117bef41
<1% - https://academic.oup.com/fqs/article/2/2/59/4965159
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272360458_Analytical_and_computational_stu
dies_on_the_performance_of_a_two-stage_ejector-diffuser_system
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0017931015001350
<1% - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781119191575.ch8
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-new-prescription-for-the-design-of-superson
ic-the-Eames/0b7514a4b78e0b0f910231e031edb469779c0003
<1% - https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1521280/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263081286_A_new_prescription_for_the_desig
n_of_supersonic_jet-pumps_The_constant_rate_of_momentum_change_method
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336211152_Numerical_Investigation_of_the_Fl
ow_Dynamics_Inside_Supersonic_Fluid_Ejector
<1% -
https://www.rsc.org/journals-books-databases/author-and-reviewer-hub/authors-infor
mation/prepare-and-format/experimental-reporting-requirements/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187661021735172X
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371618849_Investigation_on_Improvement_P
otential_of_Steam_Ejector_Performance_in_Refrigeration_Cycle_via_Constant_Rate_of_Mo
mentum_Change_Design_Method
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431123009821
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/36854969/Ejectors_for_Efficient_Refrigeration_Design_Applic
ations_and_Computational_Fluid_Dynamics
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431107003390
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/5206605/CFD_Experiments_Integration_in_the_Evaluation_of_
Six_Turbulence_Models_for_Supersonic_Ejectors_Modeling
<1% - https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v164y2018icp694-706.html
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Entrainment-ratios-as-a-function-of-gas-load-facto
r-for-glycerol-water-a-vapor-based_fig6_350694885
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-349-01942-7_2.pdf
<1% - https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/3.23788
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271750520_Enhancement_of_a_steam-driven_
ejector_using_a_novel_application_of_the_petal_nozzle
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316065567_Theoretical_analysis_on_impact_of
_irreversibility_on_ejector_performance
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228407944_Enhancement_of_a_steam-jet_refri
gerator_using_a_novel_application_of_the_petal_nozzle
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X23001121
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165212502000185
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272368705_Visualization_and_Validation_of_Ej
ector_Flow_Field_With_Computational_and_First-Principles_Analysis
<1% - https://www2.seas.gwu.edu/~garris/Pages/Pubs&Patents.html
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365304847_Optimization_Design_and_Perfor
mance_Evaluation_of_R1234yf_Ejectors_for_Ejector-Based_Refrigeration_Systems/fulltext
/636e440154eb5f547cc3ce60/Optimization-Design-and-Performance-Evaluation-of-R12
34yf-Ejectors-for-Ejector-Based-Refrigeration-Systems.pdf
<1% -
https://www.intarcon.com/en/efficient-and-environmentally-friendly-refrigeration/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267492445_Analysis_of_Application_of_Pressu
re_Exchange_Device_in_Thermal_Vapor_Compression_Desalination_System
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Contour-plots-of-Mach-number-showing-oblique-
shock-wavesandjet-interactions-of-complete_fig5_269098550
<1% -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zw982hv/articles/zh28jsg?course=zn7qwnb
<1% - https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abe3692
<1% -
https://blog.isginc.com/2021/09/02/sustainable-industrial-refrigeration-systems-for-ma
ximized-efficiencies/
<1% -
https://www.asme.org/publications-submissions/proceedings/find-proceedings/internat
ional-mechanical-engineering-congress-exposition-(1)
<1% - https://www2.seas.gwu.edu/~garris/Files-PDF/IECECpap.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269098729_The_SupersonicRotor-VanePressu
re-Exchange_Ejector
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1385894722037305
<1% - https://www.oecd.org/env/tools-evaluation/anewstrategyfortheenvironment.htm
<1% -
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/IMECE/proceedings/IMECE98/15991/263/113426
6
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267587400_Computational_Analysis_of_Flow_I
nside_a_Diffuser_of_Three-Dimensional_Supersonic_Non-Steady_Ejectors
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-022-02444-x
<1% -
https://journals.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/IMECE/proceedings/IMECE2005/42193/6
57/312285
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Non-Steady-Three-Dimensional-Flow-Field-Ana
lysis-in-Alhussan-Garris/4aa0328c3029c89a29e66b5422c8a9aa657fb4b9
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275090958_Influence_of_Geometry_on_Startin
g_Vortex_and_Ejector_Performance
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032591022000754
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1270963820309895
<1% - https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v29y2004i12p2331-2345.html
<1% - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Charles-Garris
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289243353_Recent_progress_in_an_experimen
tal_and_computational_investigation_on_the_supersonic_pressure-exchange_ejector
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/topics/AI_Complex
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377025701000957
<1% - https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.J059386
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269098641_Study_the_Effect_of_Changing_Ar
ea_Inlet_Ratio_of_a_Supersonic_Pressure-Exchange_Ejector
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/2/647
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Khaled-Alhussan/publication/241571607_Effect_of
_Changing_Throat_Diameter_Ratio_on_a_Steam_Supersonic_Pressure_Exchange_Ejector/l
inks/548008220cf2ccc7f8bb09e6/Effect-of-Changing-Throat-Diameter-Ratio-on-a-Stea
m-Supersonic-Pressure-Exchange-Ejector.pdf
<1% - https://www2.seas.gwu.edu/~garris/Pages/PE%20Ejector.html
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/6900
<1% - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2020.593111/full
<1% -
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/energies/energies-14-06900/article_deploy/energie
s-14-06900-v2.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364273356_A_streamlining_method_for_eject
or_nozzle_profile_optimization_based_on_polynomial_function
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0255270122004147
<1% - https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.11.057
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431111006855
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0255270122003701
<1% - https://kdusling.github.io/teaching/Applied-Fluids/Notes/FrictionLosses
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187770581300461X
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257726666_Application_of_Chevron_Nozzle_t
o_a_Supersonic_Ejector-diffuser_System/fulltext/026790690cf2946d9a21ed63/Applicatio
n-of-Chevron-Nozzle-to-a-Supersonic-Ejector-diffuser-System.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376614537_Advancements_challenges_and_a
pplications_of_rechargeable_zinc-ion_batteries_A_comprehensive_review
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224406001981
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11630-013-0648-4.pdf
<1% -
https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/44806/Kong_Numerical_2014.pdf
<1% - https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.06.025
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257726666_Application_of_Chevron_Nozzle_t
o_a_Supersonic_Ejector-diffuser_System
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11630-011-0502-5.pdf
<1% - https://www.scientificbulletin.upb.ro/rev_docs_arhiva/full5ff_208250.pdf
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_fluid_dynamics
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273296478_An_investigation_of_the_effective_
pressure_ratio_effects_on_the_ejector-diffuser_system
<1% - https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7700-4689
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544214001807
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544214001807
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431119362404
<1% - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yongzhi-Tang
<1% - https://daneshyari.com/en/article/7158372
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321158384_Performance_improvement_of_ste
am_ejectors_under_designed_parameters_with_auxiliary_entrainment_and_structure_opti
mization_for_high_energy_efficiency
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0196890423006647
<1% - https://academic.oup.com/ijlct/article/doi/10.1093/ijlct/ctad056/7216573
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890418303649
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571066106000247
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306261911007434
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019689041830743X
<1% - https://doaj.org/article/ffb76b96b6a940949ac1e427a7d38bc0
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431119314954
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0011916406013889
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544218310879
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/22/10603/htm
<1% -
https://byjus.com/question-answer/the-observation-that-the-pressure-of-an-ideal-gas-i
s-inversely-proportional-to-the-volume/
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Air-Ejector-Pumping-Enhancement-Through-Pu
lsing-Vermeulen-Ramesh/a98ff67fabd17c26eae3d63af39554d233356624
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267498345_Ejector_Pumping_Enhancement_T
hrough_Pulsing_Primary_Flow
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235100508_Air_Ejector_Pumping_Enhanceme
nt_Through_Pulsing_Primary_Flow
<1% -
https://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/GT/proceedings/GT2002
/36061/57/295739
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228498015_Performance_Limitations_of_Acou
stic_Echo_Cancellers_for_Handsfree_Telephony
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1540748922001389
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0029801822010873
<1% -
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/energies/energies-13-05835/article_deploy/energie
s-13-05835.pdf?version=1604896955
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563204000500
<1% -
https://medium.com/4th-coffee/on-devops-17-everything-you-need-to-know-about-ve
rsioning-2ea821d65f37
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431121005007
<1% -
https://www.nist.gov/publications/nist-standard-reference-database-23-nist-thermodyn
amic-and-transport-properties
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13762-012-0062-6
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431103002084
<1% -
https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/102358/2012%20McGovern%20Analysi
s%20of%20Reversible%20Ejectors%20and%20Definition%20of%20Ejector%20Efficiency.
pdf;sequence=1
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Velocity-temperature-pressure-and-the-Mach-num
ber-contours-in-the-outlet-nozzle-and_fig5_253640120
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ejector-performance
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700704001252
<1% - https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-0-387-09766-4_218
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222677068_Model_development_and_numeri
cal_procedure_for_detailed_ejector_analysis_and_design
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13369-021-06437-2.pdf
<1% - https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/rensus/v8y2004i2p129-155.html
<1% - https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-22512-3
<1% -
https://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=24590760
<1% -
https://iifiir.org/en/fridoc/ejector-design-and-theoretical-study-of-r134a-ejector-refriger
ation-133708
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700711000181
<1% - https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/1.1899263
<1% -
https://iifiir.org/en/fridoc/an-experimental-investigation-of-a-r-134a-ejector-refrigeratio
n-system-137849
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1290072912002098
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371095089_Experimental_study_of_a_R290_va
riable_geometry_ejector
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2213138823003156
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0030402615014060
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-experimental-investigation-of-a-steam-eject
or-of-Chunnanond-Aphornratana/0d57c948ac6c266084a93a45af42d7547430b009
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359881984_Study_of_a_novel_inlet_geometry_
for_ejectors
<1% -
https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-e0c05016-ed76-305e-8704-7
a35329840f8
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/9/7/1486/html
<1% -
https://www.academia.edu/20889814/Ejector_Performance_Characteristics_and_Design_
Analysis_of_Jet_Refrigeration_System
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/14/8/1201
<1% -
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/309995/how-does-the-assumption-of-const
ant-variance-affect-the-inferential-tools
<1% -
https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/gasturbinespower/article/107/3/792/407403/Ejec
tor-Performance-Characteristics-and-Design
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014070079598160M
<1% -
https://typeset.io/papers/a-theoretical-and-experimental-study-of-a-small-scale-steam-
58izhbcsyd
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ian-Eames/publication/222235416_A_theoretical_a
nd_experimental_study_of_a_small-scale_steam_jet_refrigerator/links/575ff9b908aec913
74b62fe5/A-theoretical-and-experimental-study-of-a-small-scale-steam-jet-refrigerator.
pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/a-The-A-0-values-are-compared-with-theoretical-p
redictions-using-the-FSCC-method-and_fig4_346887805
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338710004_A_double-choking_theory_as_an_
explanation_of_the_evolution_laws_of_ejector_performance_with_various_operational_an
d_geometrical_parameters
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544220311518
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Experimental-study-on-ejector-refrigeration-sys
tem-Yapici-Yeti%C5%9Fen/d16dfb1b42a0ac77a8b38b45f29b536c6697800b
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245160017_Experimental_study_on_ejector_re
frigeration_system_powered_by_low_grade_heat
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032119305374
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/13/6111
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/15/3761/htm
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/a-Coefficient-of-performance-COP-of-the-heap-pu
mp-and-b-energy-efficiency-ratio_fig3_343395285
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40997-023-00631-3
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Ejector-refrigeration%3A-A-comprehensive-revi
ew-Besagni-Mereu/28d9957444f2d9cc6614f67df61fc1fc81db7e67
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140700715000365
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4615-6604-5_22
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700715000365
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374246544_Zeotropic_mixture_ejector_modeli
ng_approach_validation_and_assessment_based_on_composition_ratio
<1% -
https://faculty.kaust.edu.sa/en/publications/investigation-of-an-experimental-ejector-ref
rigeration-machine-op-2
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Ejector-design-and-theoretical-study-of-R134a-
cycle-Khalil-Fatouh/58cd3c5b4fca90d075b6da841597cc1406866055
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7152893/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/e-Structure-of-ejectors-with-a-cylindrical-and-b-co
nical-cylindrical-mixing-chambers_fig3_272524257
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02203-3
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308051039_Experimental_Investigations_on_a
_R134a_Ejector_Applied_in_a_Refrigeration_System
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700717301998
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/9/20/4435
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431116316428
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0894177718304850
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/12/20/10441
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261902000235
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/13/9/5486
<1% - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.955661/full
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344461506_Understanding_the_concept_of_k
nowledge_gap_and_knowledge_expansion_A_theoretical_perspective
<1% -
https://www.ijraset.com/research-paper/enhancing-energy-efficiency-in-jet-ejectors-a-c
omputational-fluid-dynamics-investigation
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-10-1633-2_38
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224065.2002.11980178
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590123023003407
<1% - https://blog.spatial.com/cfd-analysis
<1% - https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/19434
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/10/16/5425
<1% - https://www.khanacademy.org/math/geometry-home
<1% - https://www.vedantu.com/maths/dimensions
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431113004705
<1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5khP-o_sXEw
<1% -
https://www.ansys.com/blog/fundamentals-of-fea-meshing-for-structural-analysis
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/fluid-flow-model
<1% -
https://open.oregonstate.education/aandp/chapter/8-3-the-pelvic-girdle-and-pelvis/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/boundary-condition
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214785320349312
<1% - https://forum.ansys.com/forums/topic/density-based-solver/
<1% -
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/cfd/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/
2016/ENU/SimCFD-Learning/files/GUID-0F5C4828-9F91-46B6-A16A-2578D72DCFCC-ht
m.html
<1% - https://www.afs.enea.it/project/neptunius/docs/fluent/html/tg/node315.htm
<1% - https://www.afs.enea.it/project/neptunius/docs/fluent/html/ug/node233.htm
<1% -
https://www.learncax.com/knowledge-base/blog/by-category/cfd/recirculation-boundar
y-conditions-in-ansys-fluent
<1% -
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/geometry/xff63fac4:hs-geo-transformation-proper
ties-and-proofs/hs-geo-symmetry/v/axis-of-symmetry
<1% -
https://www.simscale.com/docs/simulation-setup/boundary-conditions/velocity-inlet-an
d-velocity-outlet-2/
<1% - https://www.mit.edu/course/1/1.061/www/dream/SEVEN/SEVENTHEORY.PDF
<1% -
https://www.comsol.com/blogs/using-the-inflow-boundary-condition-in-nonisothermal-
flow-simulations/
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_conditions_in_fluid_dynamics
<1% - https://www.afs.enea.it/project/neptunius/docs/fluent/html/tg/node250.htm
<1% -
https://www.simscale.com/docs/simulation-setup/boundary-conditions/pressure-inlet-a
nd-pressure-outlet/
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-76128-9
<1% - https://www.simscale.com/docs/simulation-setup/boundary-conditions/wall/
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_wall
<1% -
https://doc.comsol.com/5.5/doc/com.comsol.help.comsol/comsol_ref_fluidflow.20.27.ht
ml
<1% - https://www.electricity-magnetism.org/boundary-conditions-for-electric-fields/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/order-upwind-scheme
<1% - https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3592143
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363843955_Computing_Double_Precision_Euc
lidean_Distances_using_GPU_Tensor_Cores
<1% - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d9TQXwTtgw
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-13992-6_19
<1% - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/16878140221075304
<1% - http://ijates.com/images/short_pdf/1490856820_S3172.pdf
<1% -
https://resources.system-analysis.cadence.com/blog/msa2022-equations-of-compressibl
e-and-incompressible-flow-in-fluid-dynamics
<1% - https://www.hindawi.com/journals/mpe/2021/3526454/
<1% - https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mach-number-d_581.html
<1% -
https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/role-of-the-mach-number/
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-15-9601-8_3
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0399-z
<1% - https://carleton.ca/cognitivescience/wp-content/uploads/2005-04.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362070823_Optimization_Analysis_of_the_Mix
ing_Chamber_and_Diffuser_of_Ejector_Based_on_Fano_Flow_Model
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/25/1/7
<1% - https://www.enthealth.org/conditions/post-nasal-drip/
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9582830/
<1% -
https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/engineering/engineering-fluid-mechanics/
supersonic-flow/
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19312458.2021.1953455
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/9/1/75
<1% -
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/47eb/08e4a4e9e0bd5c0131499ae674f07648e065.pdf
<1% - https://bookdown.org/abezarescalderon/guide-research/presentation.html
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261563385_Analytical_Solution_of_Plane_Cou
ette_Flow_in_the_Transition_Regime_and_Comparison_with_Direct_Simulation_Monte_Ca
rlo_Data
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-Mach-number-contours-in-single-a
nd-two-phase-flow-computations-a_fig13_325662442
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK547532/
<1% - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7750925/
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312279559_Simulation_Credibility_Subtitle_Ad
vances_in_Verification_Validation_and_Uncertainty_Quantification
<1% - https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010957
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431123009821
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_surface_methodology
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350042503_Optimization_of_process_paramet
ers_using_response_surface_methodology_A_review
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266047462_Surrogate-Based_Modeling_and_
Optimization_Applications_in_Engineering
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039914014000459
<1% - https://www.bobstanke.com/blog/operations-research-overview
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363647857_Applications_of_Response_Surface
_Methodology_RSM_in_Product_Design_Development_and_Process_Optimization
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169743998000653
<1% - https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/guide-to-experimental-design/
<1% - http://www.dspace.dtu.ac.in:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/575/1/thesis.pdf
<1% - https://courses.ansys.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/S1LT3C4L4-Handout.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328222483_Comparing_Kriging_and_Radial_B
asis_Function_Surrogates
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-20782-8
<1% - https://scipbook.readthedocs.io/en/latest/intro.html
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431121011340
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-2300-9_4
<1% -
https://medium.com/@andrew_johnson_4/leveraging-iterative-refinement-in-prompting
-large-language-models-bcb7d29baf0b
<1% -
https://stats.libretexts.org/Courses/Rio_Hondo_College/Math_130%3A_Statistics/09%3A
_More_Hypothesis_Tests/9.01%3A_Goodness-of-Fit_Test
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42452-022-05256-w
<1% - https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pri/section4/pri473.htm
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652623014026
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-54902-8
<1% -
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/5-stages-in-the-design-thinking-pr
ocess
<1% - https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1134/S1061934809050165.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431121008140
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264624787_Effect_of_throat_length_on_the_pe
rformance_of_an_air_ejector
<1% - https://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=db-theses
<1% - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311916.2022.2115283
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-64583-4_16
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S135943111935183X
<1% - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41438-021-00616-w
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359431122008468
<1% - https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/rktthsum.html
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1290072922001703
<1% - https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/flow-rate
<1% -
https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Civil_Engineering/Book%3A_Fluid_Mechanics_(Ba
r-Meir)/11%3A_Compressible_Flow_One_Dimensional/11.4_Isentropic_Flow/11.4.3%3A_T
he_Properties_in_the_Adiabatic_Nozzle/11.4.3.1%3A_The_pressure_Mach_number_relatio
nship
<1% - https://whatispiping.com/reynolds-number/
<1% -
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/108865/kwangjae_1.pdf;seque
nce=1
<1% -
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/power-best-case-worst-case-scenario-planning-alok-de
vrani
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can_someone_say_how_is_the_mass_flow_rate_maxi
mum_in_throat_of_a_CD_nozzle
<1% -
https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/discussing-ultimate-management-model-9903
<1% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_41
<1% - https://medium.com/generative-design/design-optimization-2ec2ba3b40f7
<1% - https://journalofbigdata.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40537-021-00443-9
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140700716301207
<1% - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressible_flow
<1% -
https://byjus.com/question-answer/in-the-following-reversible-reaction-2so-2-o-2-right
arrow-2so-3-delta-h-q/
<1% -
https://table-representation-learning.github.io/assets/papers/tabular_data_generation_c
an_we.pdf
<1% - https://www.elearnmarkets.com/uploads/content_pdf/MxudjQevBU.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Balasem-Jabbar-Al-Quraishi/publication/33829442
5_CFD_Investigation_of_Empty_Flanged_Diffuser_Augmented_Wind_Turbine/links/5e773
9cb92851cf2719daede/CFD-Investigation-of-Empty-Flanged-Diffuser-Augmented-Wind
-Turbine.pdf?origin=publication_detail
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323145931_Throat_diameter_influence_on_the
_flow_characteristics_of_a_critical_Venturi_sonic_nozzle
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2504-186X/4/3/31/htm
<1% -
https://medium.com/@pelinokutan/understanding-descriptive-statistics-measures-of-ce
ntral-tendency-dispersion-data-visualization-8fd1e940ae99
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Influence-of-each-input-parameter-on-the-model-
output_fig5_303774861
<1% - https://bmcgeriatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12877-023-03804-6
<1% - http://dscet.ac.in/questionbank/aero/fifth-sem/AE6503-Aerodynamics-II.pdf
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011916414004688
<1% - https://www.scribd.com/document/680444430/doc
<1% - https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/935565/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301932221001841
<1% -
https://www.xylem.com/siteassets/brand/sanitaire/resources/brochure/sanitaire-coarse-
bubble-diffuser-datasheet-us-low-en.pdf
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Total-pressure-ratio-vs-mass-flow-rate_fig17_3237
87075
<1% - https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/noteworthy
<1% - https://www.questionpro.com/blog/comparative-analysis/
<1% - https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/beginners-guide-to-aeronautics/mass-flow-rate/
<1% -
https://courses.ansys.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/An-Airfoil-in-Different-Flow-Re
gimes-results-and-discussion-v2.pdf
<1% - https://learnsql.com/blog/case-when-with-sum/
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0098135423000091
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40744-020-00214-7
<1% -
https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/35/10/103601/2914162/Flow-regime-identification-
and-flow-instability
<1% - https://gsa-module.readthedocs.io/en/develop/implementation/gsa.html
<1% - https://dribbble.com/resources/design-collaboration-guide
<1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10404-023-02658-z
<1% - https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijae/2020/8855314/
<1% - http://mae-nas.eng.usu.edu/MAE_5420_Web/section5/section.5.5.pdf
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/24/12147
<1% - https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/11/3/733
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/rSO-2-measurement-of-the-intestine-a-Experiment
al-design-of-rSO-2-measurement-of-1-h_fig3_345810102
<1% - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/01492063211000435
<1% - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21582440221114320
<1% -
https://zenodo.org/records/3749448/files/Effect%20of%20Nozzle%20Expansion%20Posi
tion%20on%20Ejector%20performance%20-HBRP%20Publication%20(1).pdf
<1% -
https://iifiir.org/en/fridoc/consider-the-cold-facts-about-steam-jet-vacuum-cooling-980
20
<1% -
https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/gsabulletin/article/134/7-8/1760/609416/Linking-
sediment-supply-variations-and-tectonic
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2095495621004940
<1% - https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.028
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359431116328290
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332053021_Effects_of_Variation_of_Operating
_Parameterson_the_Performance_of_Ejector_A_Review
<1% -
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-constant-pressure-flow-model-for-ejectors_fig
8_222430999
<1% - https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.03.021
<1% - https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/S0196-8904(98)00070-3
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Numerical-optimisation-of-a-two-stage-ejector
-plant-Grazzini-Rocchetti/e703503154fa79b45ee0c758da1c84288a01cac2
<1% - https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1007/s00158-011-0726-8
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Comparison-of-traditional-and-CRMC-ejector-u
sed-in-Kitrattana-Aphornratana/b92774717b69845ac6133291a2d995c77e654695
<1% - https://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:energy:v:164:y:2018:i:c:p:694-706
<1% - https://patents.google.com/patent/US5636521A/en
<1% - https://www.asme.org/publications-submissions/proceedings/find-proceedings
<1% - https://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:energy:v:29:y:2004:i:12:p:2331-2345
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Numerical-investigation-on-the-mixing-process
-in-a-Yang-Long/82bae793ff5bf661baeecf071dfa0ab765bd22bd
<1% -
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Application-of-Chevron-Nozzle-to-a-Supersoni
c-Kong-Kim/7b33deb6908d1a44108fdfc7ec64fabf77453134/figure/0
<1% -
https://www.wizdom.ai/publication/10.1016/J.ENERGY.2014.02.046/title/bypass_ejector_
with_an_annular_cavity_in_the_nozzle_wall_to_increase_the_entrainment_experimental_a
nd_numerical_validation
<1% - https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q109042838
<1% - https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v242y2022ics0360544221032163.html
<1% - https://sci-hub.se/10.1115/gt2002-30007
<1% -
https://vdocuments.mx/model-development-and-numerical-procedure-for-detailed-eje
ctor-analysis-and.html
<1% - https://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:rensus:v:8:y:2004:i:2:p:129-155
<1% - https://sci-hub.se/10.1115/1.3239802
<1% - https://repository.kaust.edu.sa/handle/10754/679225?show=full
<1% - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867420304918