Professional Documents
Culture Documents
307
Modeling of Hermetic Scroll Compressors:
Model Validation and Application
Yu Chen Eckhard A. Groll, Ph.D. James E. Braun, Ph.D., P.E.
Member ASHRAE Member ASHRAE
A detailed model for hermetic scroll compressors was presented in a companion paper. The cur-
rent paper presents validation results for this model based upon detailed experimental measure-
ments and application of the model to study the impact of design changes. The experimental
study included a range of operating conditions that were controlled using a hot gas bypass com-
pressor load stand. The model was validated in terms of overall performance predictions
(refrigerant mass flow rate, discharge temperature, and compressor power consumption) and
predictions of internal measurements (refrigerant pressures within the scrolls as a function of
orbiting angle, temperatures along the scroll wraps, and temperatures at various points within
the shell). The model performed very well in terms of predicting overall performance and was
adequate in predicting the internal measurements. The parametric modeling study identifies
some areas for potential improvement. Most significantly, a relative improvement of about 5%
in overall compressor efficiency can be achieved through small changes in the scroll geometry.
INTRODUCTION
The first comprehensive compressor model of a hermetic scroll compressor was presented by
Chen et al. (2002a, 2002b). This model was validated using overall performance measurements
for an R-22 compressor. A companion paper describes significant improvements to the original
model. As a result of these improvements and application to a new R-410A compressor, it was
necessary to provide additional validation of the model. Furthermore, there was a need to pro-
vide more detailed validation of the model, including its ability to predict the proper refrigerant
pressures within the scrolls as a function of orbiting angle, the temperature distribution within
the scroll wraps, and temperatures within the shell. The current paper addresses these validation
issues. In addition, the validated model was used to perform a parametric study on the effect of
important design parameters on system performance, including the effect of radial and flank
leakage areas, heat transfer between the refrigerant, and scroll geometry. More details on the
experimental methods, model validation, and parametric study can be found in Chen (2000).
OVERALL COMPRESSOR MEASUREMENTS
A hot gas bypass load stand was used to control operating conditions for testing the compres-
sor described in Chen et al. (2004). In the hot gas bypass load stand, the discharged refrigerant
flow is split, and one part of this flow bypasses the condenser and is directly expanded back to
the suction side of the compressor, whereas the other portion of the flow undergoes a phase
change in the condenser and is expanded and then mixed with the bypassed flow before it is
returned to the compressor. The advantage of this type of load stand is that no evaporator and a
smaller condenser are needed. It provides a relatively easy way to control the external compres-
sor operating conditions while maintaining extremely stable steady-state characteristics.
A schematic of the hot gas bypass load stand is shown in Figure 1. The different states that the
refrigerant assumes during one cycle can best be shown by means of the schematic and P-h dia-
gram given in Figure 2. At point 1, the superheated refrigerant is drawn into the compressor and
Yu Chen is with United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, Conn. Eckhard A. Groll is an associate professor
and James E. Braun is a professor at Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind. Part I of this article appeared in the
April 2004 issue of HVAC&R Research, Volume 10, Issue 2.
308 HVAC&R RESEARCH
compressed to discharge pressure and temperature at point 2. After being discharged, the refrig-
erant goes through an expansion valve (EEV) to point 2', and then the flow is divided into two
streams. One part of the flow is directly expanded to point 5, where it is still in the superheated
region at suction pressure, whereas the other flow is condensed and subcooled in a condenser to
point 3. From point 3, the subcooled refrigerant expands through an expansion valve into the
two-phase region at suction pressure at point 4. If the appropriate ratio of mass flow rates
between the bypassed refrigerant flow and the condensed flow is found, the two flows at points
4 and 5 can be mixed together and returned to the superheated state at point 1. However, at
start-up, if the mixing state, defined as point 6, of the bypassed flow and the two-phase flow
from the condenser are below the saturation temperature of the actual pressure, a heater is
Figure 1. Hot gas bypass load stand.
Figure 2. Pressure and enthalpy for the load stand.
VOLUME 10, NUMBER 3, JULY 2004 309
needed to add extra heat to the flow to prevent liquid going into the compressor. An additional
electronic expansion valve was installed on the discharge of the compressor to accurately con-
trol the discharge pressure. Pressure transducers and temperature thermocouples were installed
on the suction and discharge of the compressor to measure the suction pressure, suction temper-
ature, discharge pressure, and discharge temperature. A mass flow meter was installed behind
the oil separator to measure the mass flow rate of the refrigerant. Details about the pressure,
temperature, and mass flow instrumentation are described by Chen (2000).
The operating conditions chosen for the design of the load stand are listed in Table 1.
DETAILED COMPRESSOR MEASUREMENTS
Definition of Various Compressor Chambers
As shown in Figure 3, different compressor chambers are referred to by numbers (see Chen et
al. [2002a]). The suction chamber with its suction port located directly next to the suction line
inlet is labeled chamber 1; the suction chamber connected via the channel line is called chamber
2. Chamber 3 is the compression chamber that developed from chamber 1 and chamber 4 is the
one that developed from chamber 2. As the compression chambers open up to the discharge
region, chamber 3 becomes chamber 5 and chamber 4 becomes chamber 6. The innermost por-
tion is labeled chamber 7. If the pressures in chamber 5 and chamber 7 have equalized, both
chambers are treated as one control volume, chamber 8, and if the pressures in chamber 6 and
chamber 7 have equalized, the control volume will be labeled chamber 9. In the case where the
pressures in all three chambers of 5, 6, and 7 have equalized, the entire control volume will be
treated as chamber 10.
Table 1. Operating Conditions of the Compressor Load Stand
Parameters Operating Conditions
Evaporating temperature 25C ~ 15C
Condensing temperature 25C ~ 65C
Subcooling 10C
Superheat 10C
Figure 3. Definition of various compressor chambers.
310 HVAC&R RESEARCH
Pressure Measurements
Dynamic pressure transducers were used to measure the instantaneous pressures of the refrig-
erant in each compressor chamber. Since the orbiting scroll rotates at a working speed of
roughly 3600 rpm and the size of the scrolls for the currently investigated compressor is rela-
tively small (scroll outside radius is 36.8 mm), pressure transducers that have fast response and
small size had to be used. Specifications of the pressure transducers chosen for this study are
given in Table 2.
Since the output voltage of the sensor is proportional to the pressure that the sensor measures,
pressure can be determined by measuring voltage. Certificate calibration of the sensor was sup-
plied by the manufacturer.
Six pressure transducers were used and their locations were identified so that each pressure
sensor is associated with a certain compressor chamber and capable of keeping track of the pres-
sure of the refrigerant in that specific compressor chamber for most of one revolution of the
scroll. Table 3 lists the positions of the pressure transducers and the index number of the com-
pressor chambers associated with each of the pressure transducers. The values of X and Y are the
coordinates of the pressure transducers relative to the center of the scroll.
Figure 4 shows the position of the pressure transducers. Sensors 1 to 6 are labeled as P1, P2
to P6. The dotted line shows the location and the shape of the discharge valve. Since this dis-
charge valve is very delicate, pressure transducers 5 and 6 had to be located at the edge of the
valve. Pressure transducers 5 and 6 were originally expected to measure the pressure of cham-
bers 5 and 6, respectively, for one entire revolution. The relocation meant that sensor 5 could
only measure the pressure of chamber 5 for orbiting angles between about 0 and 270, and sen-
sor 6 could measure the pressure of chamber 6 between 0 and 280. However, since chambers 5
and 6 do not exist after an orbiting angle of 180, the relocation of sensors 5 and 6 did not result
in any lost information. It was found that chamber 7 is directly connected to the discharge port;
therefore, no sensors could be installed in the chamber to measure the pressure of chamber 7.
Table 2. Specifications of the Dynamic Pressure Transducers
Natural resonant frequency 500 kHz
Maximum pressure 6895 kPa
Operating temperature 73C ~ 135C
Input current 2 mA ~ 20 mA
Table 3. Position of the Pressure Transducers
Pressure
Transducer
No.
Involute Angle
Relative to the
Fixed
Scroll (degree)
Close to
Inner /
Outer
Scroll Wrap
X
(mm)
Y
(mm)
Chambers that
the Pressure
Transducers Measure
1 766.35 Outer 19.8022 16.2502 Chamber 1
2 966.35 Inner 27.5247 9.9682 Chamber 2
3 426.35 Outer 13.7843 3.9513 Chamber 3
4 621.35 Inner 17.7975 0.7753 Chamber 4
5 156.35 Outer 0.3411 5.5401 Chamber 5/8 (0270)
Chamber 3 (270360)
6 326.35 Inner 2.7756 7.6166 Chamber 6/9 (0270)
Chamber 4 (270360)
VOLUME 10, NUMBER 3, JULY 2004 311
The pressure transducers could not always measure refrigerant pressure throughout one revo-
lution of the orbiting scroll. There is a certain period of time during each revolution where the
pressure transducer is not in equilibrium with the refrigerant. This is due to the following two
reasons. First, whenever the orbiting scroll passes the pressure transducer, the sensor is covered
by the orbiting scroll and does not contact the refrigerant. Second, after the orbiting scroll passes
the pressure transducer, the sensor suddenly contacts the refrigerant that has much lower pres-
sure than the refrigerant that the sensor contacted before the orbiting scroll passed it. The refrig-
erant trapped in the volume between the sensor and the orbiting scroll needs some time to
expand before equilibrium is achieved.
Orbiting Angle Measurements
The orbiting angle of the rotating scroll needs to be measured simultaneously with the instan-
taneous pressure so that the pressure of the refrigerant in each chamber can be plotted as a func-
tion of the orbiting angle. It was found that the distance d
fixed_orbiting
between the fixed scroll
and the orbiting scroll at the beginning of the suction chamber has the following relation with
the orbiting angle:
(1)
Therefore, the orbiting angle can be determined from a distance measurement.
A photoelectric sensor was mounted to measure distance (see Figure 4) to the orbiting scroll.
The optical sensor emits light to the orbiting scroll. Since the intensity of the light reflected by
the orbiting scroll is a function of the distance, the distance was determined by measuring the
intensity of the light using a light detector. It was found that the oil in the refrigerant influences
the intensity of the reflected light. Since the concentration of oil in the refrigerant could not be
determined, the exact relation between the intensity of the light and the distance could not be
obtained. However, it was found that whenever the orbiting scroll is closest to the fixed scroll,
the intensity of the reflected light is the highest. Therefore, when the voltage output of the light
detector reaches a maximum, the distance between the orbiting scroll and the fixed scroll
becomes the smallest, which corresponds to an orbiting angle of zero. Since Ishii et al. (1988)
reported that angular speed fluctuation of the orbiting scroll is very small (below 0.5%), the
Figure 4. Positions of the pressure transducers (p1 to p6), optical sensor, and thermocou-
ples (t1 to t6).
d
fixed_orbiting
r
o
1 cos ( ) =
312 HVAC&R RESEARCH
angular velocity was assumed to be constant during one revolution of the orbiting scroll. The
measured voltage of the light detector changes with a period of 2. Thus, orbiting angles 0 and
2 correspond to the two peaks of the voltage output, and the angles in between 0 and 2 were
distributed evenly due to the assumption of the constant angular speed.
Temperature Measurements
In order to calculate the heat transfer between the refrigerant and the compressor scrolls, tem-
peratures of the scrolls need to be known. Six thermocouples were used to measure the tempera-
ture distribution along the fixed scroll wrap. The locations of thermocouples were chosen so that
the length of the scroll between each two thermocouples was equal (see Figure 4). The thermo-
couples were submerged into the fixed scroll so that the tip of the thermocouple was at one half
of the height of the scroll wrap. Positions of the thermocouples are given in Table 4. The values
of X and Y are the coordinates of the thermocouples relative to the center of the scroll.
In addition, to validate the temperature prediction of the overall compressor model, thermo-
couples were used to measure the temperatures of the suction pipe, the motor windings, the
lubricating oil, and the compressor shell. Type-T thermocouples were used due to their high
accuracy (0.1C).
New Compressor Shell
Figure 5 is a photo of the head of the compressor showing the installation of the pressure
transducers, the photoelectric sensor, and the thermocouples. Part of the original compressor
shell needed to be removed in order to mount the pressure transducers and thermocouples. A
new larger pressure-tight shell was built to accommodate the mounted sensors (see Figure 6).
Wires of the pressure transducers and thermocouples come out of the compressor through the
pressure-sealed pass-throughs mounted on the flange of the compressor. The new shell of the
compressor was significantly larger than the original shell. In order to minimize the influence of
the new shell, an iron rod was installed behind the original compressor to reduce the volume
between the original compressor and the new shell, as shown in Figure 6.
VALIDATION OF OVERALL PERFORMANCE PREDICTIONS
Measurements of mass flow rate, power input, and discharge temperature were first per-
formed for the scroll compressor in its original shell. The measurements were taken for fifteen
different operating conditions, as given in Table 5, labeled OP1 to OP15. All measurements
were taken for a driving frequency of 60 Hz and a superheat of 10C. The operating pressures
and temperatures fluctuated around their setpoints, with fluctuations of 5 kPa for the pressures
and 1C for the suction temperatures. These fluctuations led to fluctuations in mass flow rate of
1 kg/h, discharge temperature of 1C, and power input of 20 W.
Table 4. Positions of the Thermocouples
Thermocouple
No.
Involute
Angle Relative
to Fixed Scroll
Position Relative
To Inner / Outer
Scroll Wrap
X
(mm)
Y
(mm)
Length from
Thermocouple to
the Center
(mm)
1 639.7652 Middle 3.5747 8.8865 35.3698
2 479.3371 Middle 10.6150 10.3949 99.8620
3 336.0976 Middle 19.4998 1.9962 181.6094
4 239.2380 Middle 4.7107 22.3256 249.8076
5 154.5168 Middle 25.4869 2.7271 318.0058
6 78.2666 Middle 3.9336 27.8916 386.2039
VOLUME 10, NUMBER 3, JULY 2004 313
Table 5. The Fifteen Operating Points
Parameters of
the Operating
Points
T
cond
= 25C
P
cond
=
1646 kPa
T
cond
= 30C
P
cond
=
1876 kPa
T
cond
= 35C
P
cond
=
2131 kPa
T
cond
= 40
P
cond
=
2410 kPa
T
cond
= 45C
P
cond
=
2718 kPa
T
evap
= 10C
P
evap
= 572 kPa
OP1 OP2 OP3 OP4 OP5
T
evap
= 0C
P
evap
= 796 kPa
OP6 OP7 OP8 OP9 OP10
T
evap
= 10C
P
evap
= 1081 kPa
OP11 OP12 OP13 OP14 OP15
Figure 5. Photo of the pressure transducers, optical sensor, and thermocouples installation.
Figure 6. New shell of the scroll compressor.
314 HVAC&R RESEARCH
Mass flow rate, discharge temperature, and power input of the compressor were calculated for
the fifteen operating points using the model described by Chen et al. (2002a, 2002b, 2003).
Some empirical factors were tuned using the measurements, including a mass flow factor for
calculating the suction, discharge, and leakage flows and frictional coefficients for calculating
frictional forces and torques. The flow factor was tuned using the measured mass flow rate. The
frictional coefficients were assumed to be the same, and a single value was tuned using the mea-
sured power. The tuned value of the flow factor was 0.625, and the tuned value of the frictional
coefficient was 0.0324. The mass flow factor of 0.625 is used as a universal value for all of the
operating conditions and all of the calculations for suction, discharge, and leakage flows. Since
the refrigerant flow was simulated as an isentropic flow corrected by a flow factor, this empiri-
cal factor needs to be found based on test data. Thermal resistances for heat transfer within the
shell were determined from internal temperature measurements, as described by Chen et al.
(2003).
Comparisons of the measured and calculated data are presented in Table 6 and Figures 7, 8,
and 9. As shown in Figures 7 and 8, the compressor model predicts mass flow rate and discharge
Table 6. Comparison of the Measured and the Calculated Data
Evaporating
Temperature
Properties Condensing Temperature T
cond
25 (C) 30 (C) 35 (C) 40 (C) 45 (C)
T
evap
= 10C
(kg/h) Measured 36.98 36.99 36.07 35.55 34.18
Modeling 34.99 34.79 34.16 33.51 32.83
Error (%) 5.4 6.0 5.3 5.7 4.0
T
gas
(C) Measured 61.3 66.86 72.54 80.06 88.11
Modeling 60.65 66.23 72.76 79.33 86.14
Difference 0.65 0.63 0.22 0.73 1.97
P (W) Measured 670.74 735.79 798.12 879.21 970.14
Modeling 670.44 738.56 811.56 886.27 963.59
Error (%) 0.0 0.4 1.7 0.8 0.7
T
evap
= 0C
(kg/h) Measured 50.35 50.37 49.82 48.55 46.94
Modeling 48.58 48.42 48.54 48.90 48.10
Error (%) 3.5 3.9 2.6 0.7 2.5
T
gas
(C) Measured 55.55 60.24 65.63 73.13 80.35
Modeling 55.13 61.23 66.99 72.94 79.85
Difference 0.42 0.99 1.36 0.19 0.50
P (W) Measured 654.09 719.05 778.12 896.83 1015.11
Modeling 649.00 727.38 814.46 901.03 996.00
Error (%) 0.8 1.2 4.7 0.5 1.9
T
evap
= 10C
(kg/h) Measured 67.52 66.95 65.75 64.43 63.34
Modeling 68.20 67.26 66.51 66.19 66.13
Error (%) 1.0 0.5 1.2 2.7 4.4
T
gas
(C) Measured 48.15 54.08 61.14 67.54 73.73
Modeling 48.27 54.84 61.56 68.21 74.41
Difference 0.12 0.76 0.42 0.67 0.68
P (W) Measured 546.72 645.66 756.90 838.84 944.21
Modeling 553.82 662.19 773.56 875.11 983.08
Error (%) 1.3 2.6 2.2 4.3 4.1
m
overall
= overall compressor efficiency
= isentropic compression power, which can be calculated by
(3)
where
= specific heat ratio of the refrigerant
suc
= suction density of the refrigerant
P
suc
= suction pressure of the refrigerant
P
dis
= discharge pressure of the refrigerant
= mass flow rate of the refrigerant
The simulations were performed for an operating point that is defined by an evaporating tem-
perature of 0C (corresponding to suction pressure of 796.4 kPa), condensing temperature of
35C (corresponding to discharge pressure of 2131 kPa), and 10C suction superheat. This is the
same working condition as operating point 8 given in Table 5.
Figure 16. Temperature distribution along the compressor fixed scroll.
overall
W
isentropic
P
--------------------------- =
W
isentropic
W
isentropic
1
------------
P
suc
suc
----------
P
suc
P
dis
----------
1
------------
1 m
=
m
r
= radial leakage gap
f
= flank leakage gap
= specific heat ratio of the refriger-
ant
suc
= suction density of the refrigerant
overall
= overall compressor efficiency
REFERENCES
Chen, Y. 2000. Mathematical modeling of scroll compressors. Ph.D. thesis, Ray W. Herrick Laboratories,
Purdue University.
Chen, Y., E.A. Groll, and J.E. Braun. 2004. Modeling of hermetic scroll compressors: Model development.
International Journal of Heating, Ventilating, Air-Conditioning and Refrigerating Research 10(2):
129-152.
Chen, Y., N.P. Halm, E.A. Groll, and J.E. Braun. 2002a. Mathematical modeling of scroll compressors,
Part I: Compression process modeling. Intl J. Refrig. 25(7): 731-750.
Chen, Y., N.P. Halm, J.E. Braun, and E.A. Groll. 2002b. Mathematical modeling of scroll compressors,
Part II: Overall scroll compressor modeling. Intl J. Refrig. 25(7): 751-764.
Ishii, N., et al. 1988. Dynamic behavior of a scroll compressor. Proceedings of International Compressor
Engineering Conference at Purdue.
m
isentropic