international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194

available at www.sciencedirect.com

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

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

A theoretical study on a novel combined power and ejector

refrigeration cycle

Jiangfeng Wang, Yiping Dai*, Zhixin Sun

Institute of Turbomachinery, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University,
No.28, Xianning West Road, Xi’an 710049, PR China

article info abstract

Article history: A new combined power and refrigeration cycle is proposed for the cogeneration, which
Received 17 October 2008 combines the Rankine cycle and the ejector refrigeration cycle by adding an extraction
Received in revised form turbine between heat recovery vapor generator (HRVG) and ejector. This combined cycle
13 January 2009 could produce both power output and refrigeration output simultaneously, and could be
Accepted 23 January 2009 driven by the flue gas from gas turbine or engine, solar energy, geothermal energy and
Published online 3 February 2009 industrial waste heats. Parametric analysis and exergy analysis are conducted to examine
the effects of thermodynamic parameters on the performance and exergy destruction in
Keywords: each component for the combined cycle. The results show that the condenser temperature,
Design the evaporator temperature, the turbine inlet pressure, the turbine extraction pressure and
Thermodynamic cycle extraction ratio have significant effects on the turbine power output, refrigeration output,
Ejector system exergy efficiency and exergy destruction in each component in the combined cycle. It is
Turbine also shown that the biggest exergy destruction occurs in the heat recovery vapor generator,
Cogeneration followed by the ejector and turbine.
R123 ª 2009 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
Modelling
Simulation
Performance
Exergy

Etude théorique sur un nouveau cycle frigorifique à éjecteur

pour cogénération
Mots clés : Conception ; Cycle thermodynamique ; Système à éjecteur ; Turbine à détente ; Cogénération ; R123 ; Modélisation ; Simulation ;
Performance ; Exergie

* Corresponding author. Tel./fax: þ86 029 82668704.

E-mail address: freego810211@gmail.com (Y. Dai).
0140-7007/$ – see front matter ª 2009 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2009.01.021
 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194 1187

Nomenclature extr extraction

g waste heat
E exergy, kW
d diffuser section of ejector
h specific enthalpy, kJ kg1
i ith state point
I exergy destruction, kW
in input
m mass flow rate, kg s1
J ejector
p pressure, MPa
m mixing section of ejector
Q heat load, kW
mf mixed fluid
R ratio
n nozzle
s specific entropy, kJ kg1 K1
NET Net
t temperature,  C
n1 inlet of nozzle
T temperature, K
n2 outlet of nozzle
u velocity, m s1
out output
W power, kW
P pump
Greek letters pf primary flow
m entrainment ratio pH preheater
h efficiency room cold-storage room
s isentropic process
Subscripts
sf secondary flow
B heat recovery vapor generator
T turbine
C condenser
thm thermal
E evaporator
V valve
exg exergy
0 environment state

separation and heat transfer processes. They investigated the

1. Introduction
Many works have been done to explore the combined power
and refrigeration cycle to utilize the low-grade heat sources,
such as industrial water heats, geothermal resources and
solar energy. Xu et al. (2000) proposed a combined power and
refrigeration cycle and some further researches on the cycle
were carried out (Hasan et al., 2002; Goswami et al., 2004;
Tamm et al., 2004; Yidal et al., 2006; Vijayaraghavan and
Goswami, 2006; Martin and Goswami, 2006; Sadrameli and
Goswami, 2007). The cycle with ammonia–water mixture as
working fluid could provide both power output and refriger-
ation capacity, and used an absorption condensation instead
of the conventional condensation process. But the refrigera-
tion output was relatively small, because this cycle employed
the ammonia-rich vapor in the turbine to generate power, and
the turbine exhaust passed through a heat exchanger trans-
ferring sensible heat to the chilled water. In order to obtain
more refrigeration output, Zheng et al. (2006) proposed
a combined power and cooling cycle based on the Kalina cycle.
The flash tank in Kalina cycle was replaced by a rectifier which
could obtain a higher concentration ammonia–water vapor for
refrigeration. A condenser and an evaporator were introduced
between the rectifier and the second absorber. Thus, the fluid
could go through a phase change in the cooler to produce
more refrigeration capacity. Liu and Zhang (2007) proposed
a novel ammonia–water cycle for the cogeneration of power
and refrigeration. They introduced a splitting/absorption unit
into the combined power and refrigeration system. Zhang and
Lior (2007a) proposed a new combined refrigeration and power
system. The system operates in a parallel combined cycle
mode with an ammonia–water Rankine cycle and an
ammonia refrigeration cycle, interconnected by absorption,
effects of the key thermodynamic parameters on both energy
and exergy efficiencies. They (Zhang and Lior, 2007b) also
proposed several novel combined refrigeration and power
systems using ammonia–water as working fluid, and
summarized some guidelines for integration of refrigeration
and power systems to produce higher energy and exergy
efficiencies. Wang et al. (2008) also proposed a combined
power and refrigeration system which combined Rankine
cycle and absorption refrigeration cycle. Although these
cycles above show higher energy and exergy efficiency, the
systems are relatively complicated, resulting in a higher
capital investment.
Although much research has been carried out on the
combined power and refrigeration cycle, most of them have
combined the Rankine cycle or Kalina cycle with the absorp-
tion refrigeration cycle, and little attention has been paid to
the combination of Rankine cycle and the ejector refrigeration
cycle. Alexis (2007) studied a combined power and refrigera-
tion cycle with ejector refrigeration cycle. This cycle used
extraction steam from steam turbine in conventional Rankine
cycle to heat the working fluid in an independent steam
ejector refrigeration cycle. The ejector refrigeration cycle
which many studies (Yapıcı, 2005, 2007; Li and Groll, 2005;
Yapıcı and Yetisen, 2007; Pianthong et al., 2007; Sankarlal and
Mani, 2007) have been devoted to, has many advantages such
as less movable parts and low operating, installation and
maintenance cost except for the relatively low performance.
In addition, the ejector refrigeration cycle has the possibility
of using a wide range of refrigerants with the system.
In the present study, a new combined power and ejector
refrigeration cycle is proposed. This cycle combines the
Rankine cycle and the ejector refrigeration cycle by adding an
extraction turbine between the HRVG and the ejector. The
1188 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194

vapor from the HRVG could be expanded through the turbine N M T D

to generate power, and the turbine extraction vapor could
drive the ejector. This combined cycle could produce both
power output and refrigeration output simultaneously, and 3
could be driven by the flue gas from gas turbine or engine, 4
solar energy, geothermal energy or any other industrial waste
heats. Parametric analysis and exergy analysis are conducted 3-Primary fluid
to examine the effects of thermodynamic parameters on the 9-Secondary fluid
performance and exergy destruction in each component for 9 4-Back pressure
the combined cycle. N-Nozzle section
M-Mixing section
3 T-Throat section

2. System description and assumptions
Fig. 1 illustrates the new combined power and ejector refrig-
eration cycle. The extraction turbine and ejector play impor-
tant roles in this combined cycle. The HRVG is a device in
which high pressure and temperature vapor is generated by
absorbing heat from heat sources such as solar energy,
geothermal energy and waste heats. The high pressure and
temperature vapor is expanded through the turbine to
generate power. The extracted vapor from the turbine enters
the supersonic nozzle of the ejector as the primary vapor, as
shown in Fig. 2. The very high velocity vapor at the exit of the
nozzle produces a high vacuum at the inlet of the mixing
chamber and entrains secondary vapor into the chamber from
the evaporator. The two streams are mixed in the mixing
chamber. Then the mixed stream becomes a supersonic
stream. On entering the constant cross-section zone, a normal
shock wave occurs, accompanied by a significant pressure
rise. After the shock, the velocity of the mixed stream
becomes subsonic and decelerates in the diffuser. The stream
out of the ejector mixed with turbine exhaust is cooled at the
preheater and enters the condenser where it condenses from
vapor to liquid by rejecting heat to the surroundings. Some of
the working fluid leaving the condenser enters the evaporator
after passing through the throttle valve, and the other part
flows to the pump. The high pressure working fluid is heated
at the preheater before entering heat recovery vapor generator
to be vaporized again. The working fluid with low pressure
and temperature from the valve is vaporized at the
Pressure
4
D-Diffuser section
Shock
9
Location in an ejector
Fig. 2 – The structure and working process of ejector.
evaporator, providing a cooling effect for cooling user such as
a cold-storage room. In addition, the heat source passes
through the HRVG, and finally exhausts into environment.
In the present study, the waste heat is used as heat source
to simulate the combined cycle. R123 is selected as the
working fluid because it is recognizable as a low pressure
refrigerant that is nontoxic, nonflammable and non-corrosive.
The main assumptions for the simulation of the combined
cycle are summarized in Table 1.
3. Mathematical model and performance
criteria
In the present study, the ejector performance simulation is
carried out based on the one-dimensional constant pressure
flow model used by most researchers in studying ejector
refrigeration systems. The basic principle of the model was

Table 1 – Main assumptions of the simulation for the

combined cycle
2 Turbine Environment temperature ( C) 20
Heat source Generator Environment pressure (MPa) 0.10135
18 3 Turbine inlet pressure (MPa) 0.70
Heat recovery 13
vapor generator Turbine inlet temperature ( C) 130
Turbine extraction pressure (MPa) 0.22
Ejector 9 Extraction ratio 0.40
16 Turbine isentropic efficiency (%) 82
Preheater
19 Evaporator temperature ( C) 5.0
1
4 Room Cold-storage room temperature ( C) 5.0
11 Heat source initial temperature ( C) 140
12 10
Evaporator Heat source mass rate (kg/s) 20.0
Pump 15
Condenser 17 Pump isentropic efficiency (%) 75
Cooling water Nozzle efficiency of ejector (%) 90
14
5 8
6 7 Mixing efficiency of ejector (%) 85
Valve Diffuser efficiency of ejector (%) 85
Pinch point temperature difference ( C) 10.0
Fig. 1 – Schematic diagram of combined power and ejector
Approach point temperature difference ( C) 5.0
refrigeration cycle.
 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194 1189

introduced by Keenan et al. (1950), and developed by Huang The actual velocity of mixed flow is written according to Eqs.
et al. (1999) and Ouzzane and Aidoun (2003). (4) and (5) as:
For the cycle simulation, the following assumptions are pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
umf;m ¼ upf;n2 hm =ð1 þ mÞ (6)
made:
The energy conservation equation for the mixing section is
(1) The system reaches a steady state, and pressure drop in ! !
pipes and heat losses to the environment in the condenser, u2pf;n2 u2sf;n2
mpf hpf;n2 þ þ msf hsf;n2 þ
heat recovery vapor generator, turbine and evaporator are 2 2
neglected. !
  u2mf;m
(2) The flow across the throttle valve is isenthalpic. ¼ mpf þ msf hmf;m þ (7)
2
(3) The condenser outlet state is saturated liquid, and its
temperature is assumed to be approximately 5  C higher
The enthalpy of mixed flow can be derived as:
than the environment temperature.
(4) The working fluid at the evaporator outlet is saturated  
hmf;m ¼ hpf;n1 þ mhsf =ð1 þ mÞ  u2mf;m =2 (8)
vapor.
In the diffuser section, the mixed flow converts the kinetic
To simulate the ejector, the following assumptions are energy into pressure energy. If neglecting the exit velocity of
made for the analysis: the mixed flow and taking diffuser efficiency into account, the
actual exit enthalpy of the mixed flow can be expressed as:
(1) The flow inside the ejector is in steady state and one-  
hmf;d ¼ hmf;m þ hmf;d;s  hmf;m =hd (9)
dimensional.
(2) Velocities of streams at the inlet and outlet of the ejector where hmf,d,s is the ideal exit enthalpy of the mixed flow under
could be negligible. the isentropic compression, hd is the diffuser efficiency.
(3) For simplicity, the effects of frictional and mixing losses in According to the above equations, the entrainment ratio m
the nozzle, diffuser and mixing section are taken into can be derived as:
account by using the nozzle efficiency, the mixing effi- qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
   ffi
ciency and the diffuser efficiency. m¼ hn hm hd hpf;n1  hpf;n2;s = hmf;d;s  hmf;m  1 (10)
(4) Whenever the mixed flow is supersonic, a normal shock
wave is assumed to occur upstream of diffuser inlet. Extraction ratio is defined as the extraction mass flow from
(5) Mixing process in the mixing section of ejector occurs at the turbine divided by the turbine inlet mass flow, given by
constant pressure and complies with the conservation of
mextr
energy and momentum. Rextr ¼ (11)
mT
(6) The ejector does not exchange heats with the
surroundings. The basic equations obtained from the conservation law for
energy in the components are written as follows:For
In the nozzle section, the inlet velocity of primary flow evaporator:
upf,n1 could be negligible, the exit enthalpy and velocity of
QE ¼ mE ðh9  h8 Þ (12)
primary flow can be derived as
For HRVG:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi
upf;n2 ¼ 2hn hpf;n1  hpf;n2;s (1)
QB ¼ mB ðh2  h1 Þ (13)
where hpf,n2,s is the ideal exit enthalpy of the primary flow For condenser:
under the isentropic expansion and hn is the nozzle efficiency.
The entrainment ratio of ejector is given as: QC ¼ mC ðh12  h5 Þ (14)

msf For turbine:

m¼ (2)
mpf
WT ¼ mT ðh2  h3 Þ þ ðmT  mextr Þðh3  h13 Þ (15)
In the mixing section, the momentum conservation equation is
For pump:
 
mpf upf;n2 þ msf usf;n2 ¼ mpf þ msf umf;m;s (3) WP ¼ mP ðh11  h6 Þ (16)
Neglecting the velocity of secondary flow usf,n2 compared with For preheater:
the primary flow velocity upf,n2, the ideal exit velocity of mixed
flow umf,m,s is expressed as mB ðh1  h11 Þ ¼ mC ðh10  h12 Þ (17)

upf;n2 The system performance can be evaluated by the thermal

umf;m;s ¼ (4)
1þm efficiency and exergy efficiency. The first law or thermal effi-
ciency is defined as the useful energy output divided by the
The mixing efficiency is given as:
total energy input, given by
u2mf;m WNET þ QE
hm ¼ (5) hthm ¼ (18)
u2mf;m;s Qin
1190 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194

where WNET is the power output from the turbine, reduced by

Table 2 – Results of simulation for the combined cycle
the power input to the pump, QE is the refrigeration output
and Qin is the total heat added to the cycle from the heat State t p Dryness h s m
( C) (MPa) (kJ kg1) (kJ kg1 K1) (kg s1)
source in the HRVG.
From the viewpoint of the first law of thermodynamics and 1 59.94 0.7000 0.000 261.69 1.202 4.549
energy conservation used to determine the overall thermal 2 130.00 0.7000 1.000 466.95 1.762 4.549
efficiency, work and heat are equivalent. On the other hand, 3 98.98 0.2200 1.000 448.59 1.773 1.765
4 89.88 0.0914 1.000 443.54 1.805 1.902
based on the second law of thermodynamics, exergy quan-
5 25.00 0.0914 0.000 225.14 1.088 4.549
tifies the difference between work and heat in terms of irre-
6 25.00 0.0914 0.000 225.14 1.088 4.549
versibility, or change in energy quality, and it is defined as 7 25.00 0.0914 0.000 225.14 1.088 0.137
maximum amount of work which can be produced by 8 5.00 0.0258 0.164 225.14 1.094 0.137
a system when it comes to equilibrium with a reference 9 5.00 0.0258 1.000 378.44 1.666 0.137
environment. Therefore, the exergy efficiency can evaluate 10 83.41 0.0914 1.000 438.67 1.792 4.549
the cycle performance from the energy quality and it is chosen 11 25.35 0.7000 0.000 225.69 1.088 4.549
12 35.35 0.0914 1.000 403.75 1.687 4.549
to be the criterion for the cycle performance evaluation.
13 78.73 0.0914 1.000 435.17 1.782 2.647
Exergy efficiency is defined as the exergy output divided by 14 20.00 0.10135 0.000 83.92 0.296 100.000
the exergy input to the cycle. The exergy input is taken as the 15 21.94 0.10135 0.000 92.05 0.324 100.000
available energy change of the heat source. The exergy output 16 5.00 0.10135 1.000 278.28 1.626 4.192
is the exergy of the network and the exergy of the 17 0.00 0.10135 1.000 273.27 1.608 4.192
refrigeration. 18 140.00 0.10135 1.000 431.66 7.052 20.000
19 98.24 0.10135 1.000 386.38 6.936 20.000
WNET þ EE
hexg ¼ (19)
Ein
The exergy destruction in the turbine can be given as
where Ein is the exergy of the heat source fluid, which is given
IT ¼ E2  WT  E3  E13 (25)
as
    The exergy destruction in the condenser can be given as
Ein ¼ mg $ hg  h0  T0 sg  s0 (20)
IC ¼ E12 þ E14  E5  E15 (26)
Since the heat source fluid is finally exhausted into the
environment, the calculation of the exergy input is based on The exergy destruction in the ejector can be given as
the difference between its initial state and the environment
IJ ¼ E3 þ E9  E4 (27)
state. EE is the exergy associated with the refrigeration output,
which is calculated as. The exergy destruction in the pump can be given as
EE ¼ QE $½1  ðT0 =Troom Þ (21) IP ¼ WP þ E6  E11 (28)

Consider P0 and T0 to be the reference environment pressure The exergy destruction in throttle valve is given as
and temperature as the specified dead state with the
assumption that the heat rejecting into environment for each IV ¼ E7  E8 (29)
component is negligible. The following assumptions are made
The exergy destruction in the preheater can be given as
to calculate the exergy of each state point:
IPH ¼ E11 þ E10  E12  E1 (30)
(a) It is assumed that only physical exergies are used for flue
gas and steam flows. The exergy destruction in the evaporator can be given as
(b) Chemical exergies of the substances are neglected.
IE ¼ T0 ðmE $ðs9  s8 Þ  ðQE =Troom ÞÞ (31)
(c) Kinetic and potential exergies of materials are ignored.

The exergy of each state point can be considered as

Ei ¼ m$½ðhi  h0 Þ  T0 ðsi  s0 Þ (22) Table 3 – The performance of the combined cycle

Turbine work (kW) 116.543
The exergy balance in each component for the combined cycle
Pump work (kW) 2.445
can be expressed as
Refrigeration output (kW) 21.015
X X Net power output (kW) 114.098
Ein  Eout ¼ I (23) Net power and refrigeration output (kW) 135.133
Heat source exhaust temperature ( C) 98.24
The exergy destruction of each component for the combined HRVG heat input (kW) 905.688
cycle can be found as follows: Exergy input (kW) 418.901
Refrigeration exergy (kW) 1.133
For HRVG, the exergy destruction can be estimated by
Thermal efficiency (%) 14.92
Exergy efficiency (%) 27.51
IB ¼ Ein;g þ E1  Eout;g  E2 (24)
 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194 1191

130 28.5 140 30

120
110 28.0 120
28

Exergy efficiency (%)

100

Exergy efficiency (%)

90 27.5 100
Output (kW)

Evaporator temperature 268.15K

Output (kW)
Condenser temperature 298.15K
80 Turbine inlet pressure 0.7MPa 26
27.0 Condenser temperature 298.15K
70 Extraction pressure 0.22MPa 80 Extraction pressure 0.22MPa
Extraction ratio 0.4
60 Extraction ratio 0.4
26.5
50 60 24
Turbine power
40 Turbine power
Refrigeration 26.0 Refrigeration
30 Exergy efficiency 40
Exergy efficiency 22
20 25.5
10 20
0 25.0 20
264 266 268 270 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Evaporator temperature (K) Turbine inlet pressure (MPa)

Fig. 3 – Effect of evaporator temperature on the turbine Fig. 5 – Effect of turbine inlet pressure on the turbine
power, refrigeration capacity and exergy efficiency. power, refrigeration capacity and exergy efficiency.

4. Results and discussion

Fig. 3 shows the effect of evaporator temperature on the
turbine power, refrigeration output and the exergy efficiency.
The simulation of the combined cycle is carried out using
It is found that the turbine power output does not vary with
a simulation program written in Fortran by present authors.
the increasing evaporator temperature because the turbine
The relative convergence tolerance of iteration was 0.01%. The
inlet state and outlet state are not changed. As the evaporator
thermodynamics properties of R123 were calculated by using
temperature increases, the refrigeration capacity increases
REFPROP 6.01 (NIST Standard Reference Database 23, 1998)
correspondingly. Since the pressure and mass flow rate of the
developed by the National Institute of Standards and Tech-
primary flow remain constant, and the secondary mass flow
nology of the United States.
rate increases with the increasing evaporator temperature,
Generally speaking, the nozzle efficiency of ejector is about
the refrigeration capacity of the system also increases. In
0.85–0.90, the mixing efficiency of ejector is about 0.77–0.85,
addition, the exergy efficiency increases with increasing
and the diffuser efficiency of ejector is about 0.80–0.85. For
evaporator temperature.
cycle simulation, the efficiencies of the ejector are assumed to
Fig. 4 shows the effect of condenser temperature on the
be hn ¼ 0.90, hm ¼ 0.85, hd ¼ 0.85 in the ranges of ejector effi-
turbine power, refrigeration capacity and the exergy effi-
ciencies which are mentioned above.
ciency. It is evident that the turbine power output decreases
Table 2 shows the thermodynamic state of each point for
with the increasing condenser temperature because the
the combined power and ejector refrigeration cycle and
turbine back pressure which influences turbine power output
Table 3 shows the results of thermodynamic simulation based
sharply increases with the increasing condenser temperature.
on the assumptions in Table 1.
It can also be seen that as the condenser temperature
In the parametric analysis, where a parameter is varied,
increases, the refrigeration capacity decreases. The reason for
the other parameters are kept constant as those in Table 1.
this is that as the condenser temperature increases, the back

140 130 30
30 120 29
120 110
28
Exergy efficiency (%)
Exergy efficiency (%)

100
100 28 90 27
Evaporator temperature 268.15K
Output (kW)
Output (kW)

80 Condenser temperature 298.15K 26

80 26 70 Turbine inlet pressure 0.70MPa
Evaporator temperature 268.15K Extraction ratio 0.4 25
Turbine inlet pressure 0.70MPa 60 Turbine power
60 Extraction pressure 0.22MPa 24
24 50 Refrigeration
Extraction ratio 0.4
40 40 Exergy efficiency 23
Turbine power 30
Refrigeration 22 22
20 20
Exergy efficiency 21
10
0 20 0 20
297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26
Condenser temperature (K) Turbine extraction pressure (MPa)

Fig. 4 – Effect of condenser temperature on the turbine Fig. 6 – Effect of turbine extraction pressure on the turbine
power, refrigeration capacity and exergy efficiency. power, refrigeration capacity and exergy efficiency.
1192 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194

140
45
30 Ejector
120 40 Boiler
28

Exergy destruction (kW)

Turbine

Exergy efficiency (%)

100 35 Condenser
Turbine power 26 Preheater
Output (kW)

Refrigeration
30 Pump
Exergy efficiency
80 24
Valve
25
Evaporator temperature 268.15K Evaporator
60 Condenser temperature 298.15K 22
Turbine inlet pressure 0.70MPa
20
Extraction pressure 0.22MPa 20
40 15
18
20 10
16 5
0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0
Extraction ratio 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304
Condenser temperature (K)
Fig. 7 – Effect of extraction ratio on the turbine power,
refrigeration capacity and exergy efficiency. Fig. 8 – The exergy destruction in each component vs.
condenser temperature.

pressure on the ejector increases. Thus, the compression ratio

(ratio of condenser pressure to evaporator pressure) is temperature with constant extraction pressure, namely
increased. With the constant primary vapor velocity, the primary flow temperature of the ejector. The decreasing
entrainment of secondary vapor decreases, resulting in primary flow temperature reduces the primary stream
a decrease for the refrigeration capacity. In addition, the velocity leaving the nozzle in the ejector, resulting in the
exergy efficiency decreases with increasing condenser decreasing the entrainment of secondary vapor. Thus, the
temperature. refrigeration capacity decreases correspondingly. Due to
Fig. 5 shows the effect of turbine inlet pressure on the the combined effects of turbine power and refrigeration
turbine power, refrigeration output and the exergy efficiency. capacity on the performance of the combined cycle, the
It can be seen that the turbine power output increases first to exergy efficiency increases first to a maximum and then
maximum and then decreases as the turbine inlet pressure decreases.
increases. It is known that the enthalpy drop across the Fig. 6 shows the effect of turbine extraction pressure on the
turbine increases as the pressure ratio increases. This is why turbine power, refrigeration output and the exergy efficiency.
the turbine power output increases at first. But the enthalpy It is obvious that as the turbine extraction pressure increases,
gains from an increased pressure ratio do not make up for the the turbine power output decreases. It is also found that the
decrease in mass flow rate through the turbine, thus the refrigeration capacity increases with the increasing turbine
turbine power output decreases afterwards. It is also found extraction pressure. The reason for this is that the increasing
that as the turbine inlet pressure increases, the refrigeration turbine extraction pressure increases the pressure and
capacity decreases. The reason for this is that the increasing temperature of the primary flow entering the ejector. Thus,
turbine inlet pressure results in decrease of turbine extraction primary flow velocity leaving the nozzle in the ejector
increases, which contributes to the increasing the entrain-
ment of secondary vapor. Due to the combined effects of

Table 4 – The exergy inputs, outputs, exergy destructions 45

and exergy losses for the combined cycle Ejector
40 Boiler
Exergy destruction (kW)

Amount Percentage Turbine

(kW) (%) 35 Condenser
Preheater
30 Pump
Exergy input HRVG 418.90 100.00 Valve
Exergy output Net power 114.10 27.24 25 Evaporator
Refrigeration 1.13 0.27
Exergy HRVG 46.10 11.00 20
destruction Turbine 21.24 5.07 15
Condenser 11.50 2.75
Pump 0.60 0.14 10
Ejector 22.47 5.36 5
Valve 0.25 0.06
Evaporator 0.83 0.20 0
263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271
Preheater 7.37 1.76
Exergy loss HRVG 190.63 45.51 Evaporator temperature (K)
exhaust
Fig. 9 – The exergy destruction in each component vs.
Cooling water 2.68 0.64
evaporator temperature.
 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194 1193

Ejector 50
90
Boiler
Turbine 45
80
Exergy destruction (kW)

Condenser

Exergy destruction (kW)

40
70 Preheater Ejector
Pump 35 Boiler
60 Valve Turbine
30 Condenser
Evaporator
50 Preheater
25 Pump
40 Valve
20 Evaporator
30
15
20
10
10
5
0
0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Turbine inlet temperature (MPa) Extraction ratio
Fig. 10 – The exergy destruction in each component vs. Fig. 12 – The exergy destruction in each component vs.
turbine inlet pressure. extraction ratio.

turbine power and refrigeration output on the performance of
the combined cycle, the exergy efficiency decreases with the
increasing turbine extraction pressure.
Fig. 7 shows the effect of extraction ratio on the turbine
power, refrigeration output and the exergy efficiency. It is
obvious that the turbine power decreases and the refrigera-
tion output increases with increasing extraction ratio. In
addition, the exergy efficiency decreases with increasing
extraction ratio.
Exergy analysis has been performed to evaluate the exergy
destructions in the system. The exergy destruction of each
component calculated based on the assumptions in Table 1, is
shown in Table 4. It is found that 72.49% of the total input
exergy is lost: 26.34% due to the irreversibilities in the
components, 46.15% to the environment from the HRVG
exhaust and cooling water leaving condenser. The biggest
exergy destruction occurs in the heat recovery vapor gener-
ator followed by the ejector (5.36%), the turbine (5.07%). The
rest of the exergy destruction occurs in the condenser, the
preheater, the evaporator, the pump and the valve.
Ejector
40 Boiler
Turbine
Exergy destruction (kW)
The largest irreversibility occurs in the HRVG. The major
exergy destruction here is due to heat transfer over a finite
temperature difference. Because the exergy destruction the
HRVG is the largest in this combined cycle, it can influence the
exergy efficiency remarkably. Decreasing the exergy destruc-
tion in the HRVG can increase the exergy efficiency. Both the
condenser and preheater are exchanging heat over a finite
temperature difference. The exergy destruction in the ejector
is due to the friction losses of the flow inside the ejector
through the convergence-diverging nozzle, mixing section,
throat section and diffuser section, the non-ideal adiabatic
expansion in the nozzle and the corresponding
irreversibilities.
The parameters including evaporator temperature,
condenser temperature, turbine inlet pressure, turbine
extraction pressure and extraction ratio could influence
exergy destruction in each component, as shown in Figs. 8–12.
The variation of condenser temperature influences exergy
destruction in the condenser drastically because the heat
transfer temperature difference in the condenser increases
with increasing condenser temperature. And the increasing
turbine inlet pressure results in sharp reduction of exergy
destruction in the HRVG due to the reduction in the heat
transfer temperature difference. The increasing turbine
extraction pressure makes the exergy destruction increasing

Condenser and decreasing in the ejector and turbine, respectively. In

Preheater addition, the extraction ratio impacts on exergy destruction in
30 Pump
Valve
the ejector and turbine, and the evaporator temperature has
Evaporator little effect on the exergy destruction for each component.
20
The proposed combined cycle can be used as a bottoming
cycle using waste heat from a conventional power cycle or
an independent cycle using low temperature sources such as
10 geothermal and solar energy or waste heat. The refrigeration
capacity could be regulated by controlling the extraction
ratio to meet the refrigeration requirement of the user, and
0
the surplus electricity can be sold to power grid. Owing to
0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26
lack experimental data for this combined cycle, the experi-
Turbine extraction pressure (MPa)
mental study will be carried out to validate the feasibility of
Fig. 11 – The exergy destruction in each component vs. the combined power and ejector refrigeration cycle in the
turbine extraction pressure. future.
1194 international journal of refrigeration 32 (2009) 1186–1194
5. Conclusion
A novel combined power and ejector refrigeration cycle is
proposed, which combines the Rankine cycle and ejector
refrigeration cycle. Parametric analysis and exergy analysis
are conducted to investigate the effects of key thermodynamic
parameters on the performance and exergy destruction in
each component.
From the discussions above, it can be concluded that the
amounts of exergy destruction in the HRVG, ejector and
turbine account for large percentage. Therefore, it is signifi-
cant to employ methods for reducing exergy destructions of
these components, such as increasing the area of heat trans-
fer and the coefficient of heat transfer in the HRVG, optimi-
zation design and manufacture in the ejector and turbine.
Thus, the performance for this combined cycle could be
improved greatly. In addition, the parametric study shows
that condenser temperature, evaporator temperature, turbine
inlet pressure, turbine extraction pressure and extraction
ratio have significant effects on the turbine power output,
refrigeration capacity, exergy efficiency and exergy destruc-
tion in each component. It is recognized that additional
studies, especially experimental studies, are needed to
establish the practical usefulness of this cycle.
references
Alexis, G.K., 2007. Performance parameters for the design of
a combined refrigeration and electrical power cogeneration
system. Int. J. Refrigeration 30, 1097–1103.
Goswami, D.Y., Vijayaraghavan, S., Lu, S., Tamn, G., 2004. New and
emerging developments in solar energy. Sol. Energ. 76, 33–43.
Hasan, A.A., Goswami, G.Y., Vijayaraghavan, S., 2002. First and
second law analysis of a new power and refrigeration
thermodynamic cycle using a solar heat source. Sol. Energ. 73,
385–393.
Huang, B.J., Chang, J.M., Wang, C.P., Petrenko, V.A., 1999. A 1-D
analysis of ejector performance. Int. J. Refrigeration 22, 354–364.
Keenan, H., Neumann, E.P., Lustwerk, F., 1950. An investigation of
ejector design by analysis and experiment. J. Appl. Mech.
Trans. ASME 72, 299–309.
Li, D., Groll, E.A., 2005. Transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle with
ejector-expansion device. Int. J. Refrigeration 28, 766–773.
Liu, M., Zhang, N., 2007. Proposal and analysis of a novel
ammonia–water cycle for power and refrigeration
cogeneration. Energy 32, 961–970.
Martin, C., Goswami, D.Y., 2006. Effectiveness of cooling
production with a combined power and cooling
thermodynamic cycle. Appl. Therm. Eng. 26, 576–582.
NIST Standard Reference Database 23, 1998. NIST
Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Refrigerants and
Refrigerant Mixtures REFPROP, Version 6.01.
Ouzzane, M., Aidoun, Z., 2003. Model development and numerical
procedure for detailed ejector analysis and design. Appl.
Therm. Eng. 23, 2337–2351.
Pianthong, K., Seehanam, W., Behnia, M., Sriveerakul, T.,
Aphornratana, S., 2007. Investigation and improvement of
ejector refrigeration system using computational fluid
dynamics technique. Energ. Convers. Manag. 48, 2556–2564.
Sadrameli, S.M., Goswami, D.Y., 2007. Optimum operating
conditions for a combined power and cooling thermodynamic
cycle. Appl. Energ. 84, 254–265.
Sankarlal, T., Mani, A., 2007. Experimental investigation on
ejector refrigeration system with ammonia. Renew. Energ. 32,
1403–1413.
Tamm, G., Goswami, D.Y., Lu, S., Hasan, A.A., 2004. Theoretical
and experimental investigation of an ammonia–water power
and refrigeration thermodynamic cycle. Sol. Energ. 76,
217–228.
Vijayaraghavan, S., Goswami, D.Y., 2006. A combined power and
cooling cycle modified to improve resource utilization
efficiency using a distillation stage. Energy 31, 1177–1196.
Wang, J.F., Dai, Y.P., Lin, G., 2008. Parametric analysis and
optimization for a combined power and refrigeration cycle.
Appl. Energ. 85, 1071–1085.
Xu, F., Goswami, D.Y., Bhagwat, S.S., 2000. A combined power/
cooling cycle. Energy 25, 233–246.
Yapıcı, R., 2005. Performance characteristics of the ejector
refrigeration system based on the constant area ejector flow
model. Energ. Convers. Manag. 46, 3117–3135.
Yapıcı, R., 2007. Experimental investigation of performance of
vapor ejector refrigeration system using refrigerant R123.
Energ. Convers. Manag. 49, 953–961.
Yapıcı, R., Yetisen, 2007. Experimental study on ejector
refrigeration system powered by low grade heat. Energ.
Convers. Manag. 48, 1560–1568.
Yidal, A., Best, R., Rivero, R., Cervantes, J., 2006. Analysis of
a combined power and refrigeration cycle by the exergy
method. Energy 31, 3401–3414.
Zhang, N., Lior, N., 2007a. Development of a novel combined
absorption cycle for power generation and refrigeration. ASME
J. Energ. Res. 129, 254–265.
Zhang, N., Lior, N., 2007b. Methodology for thermal design of
novel combined refrigeration/power binary fluid systems. Int.
J. Refrigeration 30, 1072–1085.
Zheng, D., Chen, B., Qi, Y., Jin, H., 2006. Thermodynamic analysis
of a novel absorption power/cooling combined-cycle. Appl.
Energ. 83, 311–323.