International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrefrig

Detailed thermodynamic characterization of

hermetic reciprocating compressors
C.D. Pérez-Segarra*, J. Rigola, M. Sòria, A. Oliva
Centre Tecnològic de Transferència de Calor (CTTC), Lab. de Termotècnia i Energètica.
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), ETSEIT, Colom 11, 08222 Terrassa, Spain
Received 17 February 2004; received in revised form 21 September 2004; accepted 22 September 2004
Available online 8 January 2005

Abstract
The aim of this paper is the detailed analysis of different well-known thermodynamic efficiencies usually used to characterize
hermetic compressors. Attention is focussed on the volumetric efficiency, the isentropic efficiency, and the combined
mechanical–electrical efficiency. A procedure is presented to detach these efficiencies into their main components (physical
sub-processes) to get deeper insight on the overall behavior.
The volumetric efficiency is split into partial efficiencies related to pressure drop and heat transfer effects, supercharging
effects, superdischarging effects, leakages, etc. The isentropic efficiency is detached using two different points of view: the work
associated to the individual sub-processes (compression, discharge, expansion, suction), and the work associated to the
underpressures, overpressures, and between the inlet and outlet mean compressor pressures. Finally, the combined mechanical–
electrical efficiency is related to the heat transfer losses/gains, and to the exergy transfers and exergy destroyed.
Even though some of the concepts introduced in the paper can be applied to different kinds of compressors, the discussion is
specially focussed on hermetic reciprocating compressors. An advanced simulation model developed by the authors has been
used to generate data to illustrate the possibilities of the detailed thermodynamic characterization proposed. The criteria
developed are useful tools for comparison purposes, to characterize compressors, and to assist designers during the optimization
process.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Survey; Reciprocating compressor; Hermetic compressor; Efficiency; Volumetric efficiency; Modelling

Caractérisation thermodynamique des compresseurs à piston

hermétiques
Mots clés : Enquête ; Compresseur à piston ; Compresseur hermétique ; Efficacité ; Rendement volumétrique ; Modélisation

1. Introduction

A vapor compression refrigeration system is basically

* Corresponding author. Tel.: C34 93 7398192; fax: C34 93
7398101. composed by an evaporator, a compressor, a condenser, and
E-mail address: labtie@labtie.mmt.upc.es (C.D. Pérez- an expansion device. The system is designed to extract some
Segarra). amount of energy in the evaporator, and deliver this energy

0140-7007/$35.00 q 2004 Elsevier Ltd and IIR. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2004.09.014
580 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593

Nomenclature
A area alone) to the global input, Eq. (9), or normalized
BDC bottom dead centre relative deviation of the k-subprocess respect to
c clerance ratio, cZVmin/Vcl its corresponding ideal value, Eq. (11)
COP coefficient of performance hm mechanical efficiency, Eq. (5)
cp specific heat capacity at constant pressure hme overall mechanical–electrical efficiency, Eq. (5)
e total specific energy, eZ hC ec C ep h~ QðkÞ efficiencies related to the heat transfer pro-
es,ed suction and discharge valve thickness cesses (kZsh, sl, dl, cc), Eqs. (29) and (11)
f actual compressor frequency h~ Qðcc;kÞ efficiencies related to the heat transfer process
fn nominal compressor frequency in the compression chamber (kZs,c,d,e), Eqs.
Gs isentropic volumetric flow (per cycle) (30) and (11)
G_ s isentropic volumetric flow rate hs isentropic efficiency, Eq. (4)
I_k rate of exergy destruction (kZtot,f,nf) h~ sðkÞ isentropic efficiency related to the compression
m refrigerant flow (per cycle) processes (kZs,c,d,e), Eqs. (23) and (11)
m_ refrigerant mass flow rate h~ sðjIÞ isentropic efficiency excluding underpressure
mij mass entering the cyclinder from position i to and overpressure effects, Eqs. (25) and (11)
position j (per cycle) h~ sðII;IIIÞ isentropic efficiency related to underpressure
ml piston–cylinder leakages (per cycle) (II) or overpressure (III) effects, Eqs. (25) and
Mt mass contained in the compressor chamber at (11)
instant t hsme product of efficiencies, hsmeZhshmhe
p absolute pressure hv volumetric efficiency, Eq. (3)
p1,p2 mean inlet/outlet compressor pressures hv,c theoretical volumetric efficiency, Eq. (16)
Q_ k rate of heat transfer lost to the environment hv,f ratio of the actual frequency to the nominal
(kZsh), or gained by the fluid (kZsl, cc, dl) one, Eq. (16)
Q_ ccðkÞ rate of heat transfer gained by the fluid in the hv,v second volumetric efficiency, Eq. (16)
compression chamber (kZs,c,d,e) h~ v;vðkÞ volumetric efficiency related to irreversibilities
R gas constant (kZirr), supercharging (sch), superdischarging
s specific entropy (sdh), or piston-cyclinder leakages (l) effects,
S_gen;k rate of entropy generation (kZtot,f,nf) Eq. (17)
T temperature hvsme overall efficiency or efficiency of performance,
T1,T2 mean inlet/outlet compressor temperatures hvsmeZhvhshmhe
TDC top dead centre h~ xðkÞ efficiency associated to the exergy transfer by
Vcl swept volume the heat flow (kZsh, sl, dl, cc), Eqs. (36) and (11)
Vmin clearance volume h~ xðcc;kÞ efficiency associated to the exergy transfers by
w specific input work the heat flow in the compression chamber (kZ
W work per cycle s,c,d,e), Eqs. (37) and (11)
W_ cp rate of work delivered to the refrigerant P compression ratio, PZp2/p1
W_ e electrical power supplied to the compressor r fluid density
W_ m motor shaft power x specific exergy, xZ ðeK eo ÞK To ðsK so Þ
W^ s isentropic work (per cycle) to compress the
Subindex
actual mass flow
1,2,3,4 refrigeration cycle main points (Fig 1)
3k fraction of the k-input lost in the k-subsystem,
amb ambient conditions
Eq. (7)
o dead state
3~k fraction of the global input lost in the k-
s isentropic conditions
subsystem, Eq. (8), or normalized deviation of
s,c,d,e suction, compression, discharge, and expan-
the k-subprocess respect to its corresponding
sion, respectively
ideal value, Eq. (10)
sh,sl, cc, dl shell, suction line, compression chamber,
f generic variable
and discharge line, respectively
g isentropic index, gZcp/cv
tot,f,nf related to the whole system, fluid flow, whole
he electrical efficiency, Eq. (5)
system excluding fluid flow, respectively
hE exergetic efficiency, Eq. (38)
hI(k) efficiency associated to the exergy destruction, Superindex
Eq. (38), kZf, nf, tot cZ0 isentropic compression without clearance
hk ratio of k-output to the k-input in the k- volume
subsystem, Eq. (7) s,c,d,e suction, compression, discharge, and expan-
h~ k ratio of k-output (considering the k-subsystem sion, respectively
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
in the condenser. The role of the compressor is to drive the
refrigerant gas from the low pressure level to the high
pressure level. To carry this out, some amount of external
electrical energy is needed in hermetic compressors. Due to
mechanical losses and motor efficiency, this energy is higher
than the energy directly delivered to the refrigerant gas.
A quick look at the thermodynamic behavior of
compressors can be made using different non-dimensional
parameters (or efficiencies) proposed in the technical
literature. Most of these efficiencies are defined by
comparison of the actual compressor behavior vs. an
‘ideal’ one. Comparisons must be performed working both
compressors (real and ideal) with the same fluid and under
well defined refrigerating cycle conditions (Fig. 1):
evaporation and condensation pressures, and superheating
and subcooling temperatures. The refrigeration system can
be conceived with no pressure losses in both the evaporator
and condenser, under isoenthalpic expansion, and without
heat transfer and pressure losses in the connecting tubes.
It is assumed the ideal compressor has the same
geometry (swept and clearance volume) and working
conditions (inlet state, outlet pressure, and nominal
frequency) as the actual one, but operating reversibly
according to: adiabatic compression and expansion, and
isobaric suction and discharge processes. The refrigerant gas
is considered to behave as a perfect gas. Furthermore, it is
assumed that not only the pressure but also the temperature
do not change along the suction line or discharge line (no
pressure losses and heat transfer). Thus, suction and
discharge pressures and temperatures are identified with
the mean inlet and outlet compressor pressures and mean
temperatures, respectively. No mechanical or electrical
losses are allowed.
To define this ideal or reference compressor only a few
parameters are needed. Specifically: (i) inlet state and outlet
pressure: T1, p1, p2; (ii) type of fluid: R, cp; (iii) basic
compressor characteristics: Vcl, c, fn. The volumetric flow
rate pumped by the ideal (isentropic) compressor and the
Fig. 1. Refrigerating cycle operating conditions using the actual
compressor (1-2-3-4) and the isentropic one (1-2s-3-4).
581
specific input work required can be easily obtained [1]:
G_ s Z Vcl ½1 K cðP1=g K 1Þ
fn (1)
g
ws Z RT1 ½PðgK1Þ=g K 1
(2)
g K1
where PZp2/p1 is the compression ratio, and gZ cp =ðcp K
RÞ is the adiabatic exponent. The specific heat is assumed as
constant and evaluated from the real fluid thermophysical
properties at the arithmetic mean suction/discharge ideal
compressor temperatures and pressures.
A source of inefficiency of the ideal compressor is due to
the compressed gas re-expansion from the clearance
volume. Thus, an even more efficient ideal compressor
without clearance volume (cZ0) can then be imagined. This
compressor will give a higher volumetric flow rate,
cZ0
G_ s Z Vcl fn R G_ s , for the same cycle operating conditions.
The refrigerating effect and the compressor power con-
sumption are also higher. However, both compressors have
the same specific refrigerating effect and the same specific
work.
It is now possible to define different efficiencies by
comparison of the actual compressor with the ideal one
(isentropic compression with or without clearance volume).
One of the most important is the volumetric efficiency,
defined as the ratio of the actual volumetric flow rate at inlet
conditions and the maximum one (ideal compressor without
clearance volume):
cZ0
_ 1 Þ=G_ s :
hv Z ðm=r (3)
Another important parameter is the isentropic (or com-
pression) efficiency, which is usually defined as the ratio of
the specific work delivered to the gas by the ideal
compressor (with or without clearance volume) and the
specific work delivered by the actual one, i.e.:
hs Z ws =wcp : (4)
The energy supply to the compressor is greater than the
energy delivered to the refrigerant gas due to mechanical
friction losses and, for hermetic compressors, electrical
motor inefficiencies. These effects are described by the
mechanical efficiency, hm Z W_ cp =W_ m , and the electrical
efficiency, he Z W_ m =W_ e , where W_ e is the electrical power
supplied to the motor, and W_ m is the motor shaft power. An
overall mechanical–electrical efficiency is defined as:
W_ cp W_ cp W_ m
hme Z Z Z hm he : (5)
W_ e W_ m W_ e
It is interesting to compare the two compressors (real and
ideal) working under the above mentioned cycle conditions
(Fig. 1). Firstly, the specific refrigerating effects are
obviously the same: qs,evap/qevapZ1. Furthermore, the
following product of efficiencies, hshmhe, indicates how
many times the specific work required by the ideal
compressor in comparison with the electrical one is lower.
582 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
This product of efficiencies can also be seen from another
point of view. Firstly, consider a well-known parameter
used to characterize compressors (and also the cycle), the
coefficient of performance or COP. This parameter is
usually defined as the ratio of the useful refrigerating effect
to the net energy supplied by the electrical motor. Based on
this definition, it is easy to show that the ratio of the COP
produced by the real compressor and the ideal one is the
above mentioned product of efficiencies. Therefore, hshmhe
also indicates how many times the COP associated to the
actual compressor in comparison with the COP using the
ideal one is lower.
All the above mentioned efficiencies are well known in
the refrigeration field. However, different attempts have
been proposed in the technical literature to go ahead in the
analysis. For example, Roger and Mayhen [1] introduce an
isothermal efficiency to take into account cooling effects.
Pandeya and Soedel [2] identify a parameter to be
maximized: the refrigerant mass rate per unit of specific
work delivered to the compressor. As a consequence, an
efficiency called overall efficiency of the compressor, hvsme,
is defined by the comparison of the above mentioned
parameter corresponding to the actual compressor and the
ideal one (without clearance volume). McGovern [3]
analyses the different factors affecting volumetric efficiency
in reciprocating compressors and some parameters are
proposed and quantified. McGovern and Harte [4] present an
exergy method for compressor performance analysis with
the purpose of identifying and quantifying compressor shaft
power. Stouffs et al. [5] present a detail analysis of
compressor performance based on a global thermodynamic
model; different dimensionless compressor parameters are
identified and quantified. Perez-Segarra et al. [6] show a
different way of detaching two important compressor
efficiencies: the volumetric efficiency and the isentropic
efficiency. This analysis is herewith re-examined and
extended to the combined electrical–mechanical efficiency.
This paper is structured in different sections. Section 2
presents two general formulations to detach efficiencies. In
Section 3, the volumetric efficiency is split into different
efficiencies related to pressure losses and heat transfer,
suction and discharge valves closing delay, and piston–
cylinder leakages. In Section 4, the isentropic efficiency is
split into different efficiencies considering two criteria: areas
associated to the individual processes, and areas associated
to the work performed taken as reference to the mean inlet
and outlet pressures. In Section 5, the combined mechan-
ical–electrical efficiency is broken down according to two
different criteria. The first one is related to the heat transfer
exchanged, while the second one involves irreversibilities
associated to these heat transfer exchanged and exergy
destruction.
There is no attempt to quantify these efficiencies using
global thermodynamic models. In fact, all these efficiencies
are calculated by means of an advanced computational
model developed by the authors [7,8]. Therefore, the
method allows an easier parametrization of the huge amount
of data generated by the simulation. Illustrative examples of
hermetically sealed reciprocating compressors used in the
refrigeration field are presented to show the possibilities of
the proposed detailed thermodynamic characterization.
2. Notes on efficiency detachment
Efficiencies are sometimes defined as the ratio of the
output to the input of a system: hZfout/fin (e.g. the
mechanical or the electrical efficiency of a compressor). The
system can sometimes be split into N ordered sub-systems in
such a way that the output of any subsystem is the input of
the next one (Fig. 2). Therefore, it is possible to write:
fout f f f f
hZ Z out;N Z out;1 $ out;2 . out;N
fin fin;1 fin;1 fin;2 fin;N
Z h1 h2 .hN (6)
where hk represents the efficiency of the k-subsystem, i.e. its
output (fout,k) is a hk fraction of its input (fin,k). As can be
seen in Eq. (6), the product of individual efficiencies gives
the system output (fout) as a fraction of the system input
(fin). These efficiencies can also be expressed as:
fout;k f K Dfk
hk Z Z in;k Z 1 K 3k (7)
fin;k fin;k
where 3k Z Dfk =fin;k Z ðfin;k K fout;k Þ=fin;k represents the
fraction of the k-input (fin,k) lost in the k-subsystem. It is
worthwhile to mention that, in general, the summation of all
3k will not give the total fraction of the global input (fin) lost
by the whole system.
Alternatively, Eq. (6) can also be expressed as:
fout f K Df1 K Df2 K . K DfN
hZ Z in
fin fin
Z 1 K 3~1 K 3~2 K . K 3~N (8)
where 3~k Z Dfk =fin Z ðfin;k K fout;k Þ=fin represents the frac-
tion of the global input (fin) lost in the k-subsystem. As can
be seen in Eq. (8), the summation of all 3~k gives the fraction
of the global input (fin) lost by the whole system.
As in Eq. (7), an efficiency associated to each k-
subsystem can also be defined as:
fin K Dfk
h~ k Z Z 1 K 3~k (9)
fin
where h~ k represents the efficiency of the k-subsystem alone,
i.e. its output (finKDfk) is a h~ k fraction of the global input
(fin). In general, h s h~ 1 h~ 2 .h~ N . However, h z h~ 1 h~ 2 .h~ N , if
the 3~k values are not too far from zero.
Efficiencies can be defined in a different way using ideal
or reference values (e.g. the volumetric efficiency of a
compressor). In that case, the efficiency is the ratio of the
actual considered variable f of the system to the same
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
Fig. 2. Transmission losses in a system split into N-subsystems.
variable f* corresponding to the idealized or reference
model, i.e. hZf/f*. The global process described by the
considered variable can sometimes
P be split into different
P N
related sub-processes, i.e.: fZ NkZ1 fk and f Z NkZ1 fk .
Thus, the efficiency can be written as:
PN PN
f f ðf K fk Þ
h Z  Z PNkZ1 k Z 1 K kZ1 PN k 
f kZ1 fk kZ1 fk
PN
Df
Z 1 K kZ1 k Z 1 K 3~1 K 3~2 K . K 3~N (10)
f
where Dfk Z fk K fk represents the deviation of the k sub-
process respect to the corresponding ideal or reference
value. In Eq. (10) deviations are normalized in terms of the
global ideal value, i.e. 3~k Z Dfk =f .
Sometimes the ideal value is lower than the actual one
(e.g. the isentropic efficiency). In order to keep global
efficiencies lower than unity (i.e. h%1), they can also be
defined as the ideal minimum value f* divided by the actual
one f: hZf*/f. In this case, a similar equation as Eq. (10) is
obtained where 3~k Z Dfk =fZ ðfk K fk Þ=f. Low (or even
negative) values of these ratios are desirable.
As in Eq. (9), an efficiency associated to each individual
k-subprocess can be defined as:
h~ k Z 1 K 3~k :
In general 3~k R 0, and then h~ k % 1. However, it is possible to
obtain situations where the actual behavior is more efficient
than the ideal one, i.e. 3~k ! 0, and then h~ k O 1.
Apart from the definition of the efficiency associated to
each subprocess given by Eq. (11), other definitions have
been used [6]. Specifically, h~ k Z expðKa~3k Þ or
h~ k Z 1C thðKa3k Þ, with aZ1, or using a as a correction
factor to get h h h~ 1 h~ 2 h~ 3 .h~ N . When 3~k values are not too far
from zero, the differences between Eq. (11) and the above
mentioned alternatives are small.
3. Volumetric efficiency
The real behavior of a hermetic reciprocating compres-
sor (see Fig. 3) differs from the ideal one described in
Section 1. The ideal compressor is based on the assumptions
of isentropic compression and expansion processes, and
both isobaric and reversible suction and discharge pro-
cesses; suction and discharge pressures are assumed to be
equal to the mean inlet (p1) and outlet (p2) compressor
pressures, without considering pressure drops in the suction
583
and discharge lines and valves throttling. Furthermore, in
the real compressor the gas entering the shell expands and
contacts the electrical motor and the hot oil for lubrication,
reducing the gas density through its way to the compression
chamber. Single-phase asynchronous induction motors are
usually used. The angular velocity of these motors is not
constant but depends on the charge (lower during the
compression step, and higher during the expansion step). As
a consequence, the actual mean frequency of the compressor
(f) is lower than the nominal one (fn). Other sources of
discrepancies between the ideal compressor and the actual
one are the leakages between the cylinder and the piston,
delays in valves closing, mechanical friction, heat transfer
losses to the environment, etc.
Fig. 4 shows the pressure–volume diagram correspond-
ing to the real compressor behavior. Points t and b indicate
the position of the TDC (top dead centre; minimum
compression chamber volume) and BDC (bottom dead
centre; maximum volume), respectively. The suction valve
opens at point A and closes at point B. The discharge valve
opens at point C and closes at point D. These points depend
on working conditions because these compressors use self-
acting valves.
Consider an arbitrary piston position, for example point
(11) A in Fig. 4. The refrigerant mass inside the cylinder at that
instant is denoted by MAt . The suction valve begins opening
and a refrigerant mass mAb enters the compression chamber
(suction process) up to the BDC (point b). Due to valve
dynamics, a delay in closing suction valve occurs, and an
Fig. 3. Schematic representation of a hermetic reciprocating
compressor. Detail of the mass flow rates distribution.
584 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
Fig. 4. Actual pressure–volume diagram with indication of the main
processes/steps: suction (AB); compression (BC); discharge (CD)
and expansion (DA). Bottom (b) and top (t) piston positions.
extra charge of refrigerant mbB enters the cylinder until the
valve closes (point B). Compression process takes place
from this point until the discharge valve begins opening
(point C). From there and up to the TDC (point t), a mass of
gas mCt leaves the compression chamber. However, a delay
in closing the discharge valves occurs, and an extra
discharge mass mtD can be produced. Once the discharge
valve closes (point D), the residual gas inside the cylinder
expands up to point A finishing a complete cycle, being
MAtCDt the instantaneous mass in the cylinder at that point.
During the cycle, a mass ml leaves the compression chamber
to the shell (more important during the compression step)
due to piston–cylinder leakages. For the described process
(see also Fig. 3), the mass conservation equation for one
cycle reads as:
ðMAtCDt K MAt Þ C ðKmAb K mbB C mCt C mtD C ml Þ Z 0:
(12)
Under transitory cyclic conditions (the p–V diagram is
identically repeated every cycle), the unsteady term
vanishes, and the mass conservation equation per cycle is:
KmAb K mbB C mCt C mtD C ml Z 0: (13)
The refrigerant mass flow rate discharged by the compressor
can be obtained from:
m_ Z ðmCt C mtD Þf : (14)
Alternatively, and using the mass conservation Eq. (13):
m_ Z ðmAb C mbB K ml Þf
Z ðmtb C mbB C mtD K ml Þf (15)
where mtbZmAbKmtD represents the mass entering the
compression chamber from the TDC (point t) to the BDC
(point b).
The volumetric efficiency defined in Eq. (3) can be split
into three efficiencies:
_ 1
m=r f m f Gs m
hv Z cZ0
Z cZ0
Z cZ0 r G
_
Gs f r G
n 1 s f n G s 1 s
Z hv;f hv;c hv;v : (16)
The efficiency hv,fZf/fn takes into account the effect of the
charge on the compressor mean angular velocity. The
efficiency hv;c Z Gs =GcZ0
s , also called theoretical volumetric
efficiency, can be viewed as a simple estimation of the gas
re-expansion due to the clearance volume. From Eq. (1):
hv;c Z 1K cðP1=g K 1Þ. As can be seen, the clearance
volume is an important parameter, specially for high aspect
ratios. For example, for R-134a with gz1.18, the
theoretical volumetric efficiency for the following aspect
ratios of 5, 10 and 15 is, respectively: 0.97, 0.94 and 0.91
when cZ0.01, and 0.94, 0.88 and 0.82 when cZ0.02.
The last efficiency, hv,vZm/r1Gs, here referred as second
volumetric efficiency, is the ratio of the actual volumetric
flow (at inlet conditions) to the ideal one (considering the
clearance volume). This efficiency can be further split into
new efficiencies by means of Eq. (15):
m m C mbB C mtD K ml
hv;v Z Z tb
r1 Gs r1 Gs
r1 Gs K mtb KmbB KmtD m
Z1K K K K l
r1 Gs r1 Gs r1 Gs r1 Gs
Z 1 K~3v;vðirrÞ K 3~v;vðschÞ K 3~v;vðsdhÞ K 3~v;vðlÞ : (17)
According to Section 2, these non-dimensional ratios can be
expressed in terms of the individual efficiencies using Eq.
(11): h~ v;vðkÞ Z 1K 3~v;vðkÞ , where kZirr, sch, sdh, l.
The first ratio, 3~v;vðirrÞ Z ðr1 Gs K mtb Þ=r1 Gs , is a direct
comparison of the refrigerant mass entering the cylinder
(from the TDC to the BDC) of the actual compressor and the
ideal one (considering the real inlet density). This ratio is
specially affected by the pressure losses and heat transfer
gains. Its value is always positive, 3~v;vðirrÞ R 0, and then
h~ v;vðirrÞ % 1. The second ratio, 3~v;vðschÞ ZKmbB =r1 Gs , rep-
resents the supercharging effects due to valve dynamics and
the wave action in the suction line (~3v;vðschÞ % 0, and then
h~ v;vðschÞ R 1). The third ratio, 3~v;vðsdhÞ ZKmtD =r1 Gs , takes into
account superdischarging effects. However, the opposite
(reverse flow) is usually observed, being 3~v;vðsdhÞ R 0, and
then h~ v;vðsdhÞ % 1. The last term, 3~v;vðlÞ Z ml =r1 Gs , represents
piston–cylinder leakage; as 3~v;vðlÞ R 0, h~ v;vðlÞ % 1. This value
essentially depends on geometric considerations (piston–
cylinder gap), pressure ratio, and lubrication effects.
4. Isentropic efficiency
As mentioned in the introduction, the isentropic
efficiency is defined as the ratio between the specific work
delivered to the ideal compressor (with or without clearance
volume) and the actual specific work delivered to the gas:
hs Z ws =wcp Z mws =Wcp Z W^ s =Wcp , where W^ s represents the
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593 585

equivalent work per cycle needed by the ideal compressor to processes are more convenient expressed as a combined
compress the actual mass flow m. efficiency, i.e. h~ sðceÞ Z 1K 3~sðcÞ K 3~sðeÞ .
The actual work performed on the fluid per cycle can be The isentropic efficiency can also be split into three
split into the four main natural sub-processes (Fig. 4): different efficiencies related to the areas enclosed in the pV-
suction, compression, discharge, and expansion, i.e.: diagram. Three areas have been indicated in Fig. 4: (i) area I,
enclosed between the compressor inlet and outlet mean
Wcp Z K pdV# pressures (p1 and p2); (ii) area II, below p1 due to the
underpressure needed during the suction process; (iii) area
ð VB ð VC ð VD ð VA III, above p2 due to the overpressure needed during the
ZK pdV K pdV K pdV K pdV discharge process. Therefore:
VA VB VC VD
I
Wcp Z Wcp II
C Wcp III
C Wcp : (24)
s
Z Wcp c
C Wcp d
C Wcp e
C Wcp : (18)
Similarly, the isentropic work (to drive the same amount of
The actual indicator diagram is needed to evaluate the gas as the actual compressor) can also be split into the same
different terms in Eq. (18). However, for the ideal three regions:
I II III
W^ s Z W^ s C W^ s C W^ s , however,
compressor is relatively easy the evaluation of its detached ^ II
^ III
W s Z W s Z 0.
equivalent work: Thus, the isentropic efficiency can be written as:
s
W^ s Z KmRT1 ½1 C c K cP1=g
hK1
v;c (19) ws I
Wcp K W^ s Wcp
II III
Wcp
hs Z Z1K K K
c wcp Wcp Wcp Wcp
W^ s Z KmRT1 ð1 C cÞ½PðgK1Þ=g K 1
ð1 K gÞK1 hK1
v;c (20)
Z 1 K 3~sðIÞ K 3~sðIIÞ K 3~sðIIIÞ : (25)
d
W^ s Z KmRT1 ½cP K ð1 C cÞPðgK1Þ=g
hK1
v;c (21) The efficiencies associated to these works can be obtained
from Eq. (11). The first ratio, 3~sðIÞ Z ðWcp I
K W^ s Þ=Wcp ,
e
v;c :
W^ s Z KmRT1 c½P1=g K P
ð1 K gÞK1 hK1 (22) represents the efficiency of the compression process
excluding underpressures and overpressures effects. As
Based on the efficiency detachment procedure described in
3~sðIÞ R 0, h~ sðIÞ % 1. The second ratio, 3~sðIIÞ Z Wcp II
=Wcp ,
Section 2:
represents the inefficiency related to the underpressures
ws W^ during the suction process. As 3~sðIIÞ R 0, h~ sðIIÞ % 1. The last
hs Z Z s ratio, 3~sðIIIÞ Z WcpIII
=Wcp , represents the inefficiency related to
wcp Wcp
the overpressures during the discharge process. Also
s c d 3~sðIIIÞ R 0, and then h~ sðIIIÞ % 1.
s
Wcp K W^ s Wcp
c
K W^ s Wcp
d
K W^ s
Z1K K K
Wcp Wcp Wcp
e
e
Wcp K W^ s 5. Mechanical–electrical efficiency. Heat transfer
K
Wcp analysis

Z 1 K 3~sðsÞ K 3~sðcÞ K 3~sðdÞ K 3~sðeÞ :
The efficiencies associated to these main sub-processes can
be obtained from Eq. (11): h~ sðkÞ Z 1K 3~sðkÞ where kZs, c, d,
e. The compression process is the most inefficient and
deviation from the reversible and adiabatic ideal process is
the highest. The discharge process is usually more
inefficient than the suction process. The expansion process
deserves a special attention. This process is related to the re-
expansion of the residual gases in the compression chamber
after the discharge process. Due to heating effects and
valves closing/opening delays, this efficiency is usually
greater than the unity, which means that higher work than
the ideal one is performed by the gases during the re-
expansion process. Even though this effect gives a lower
global work performed on the fluid, the re-expansion
process has obvious negative effects in the volumetric
efficiency (e.g. suction valve opening is delayed). The
efficiencies associated to the compression and expansion
(23) Fig. 5 shows a schematic representation of the energy
interaction between the compressor and its environment,
where Q_ sh represents the heat transfer losses (by convection
and radiation) to the environment. Assuming transitory
cyclic conditions, the energy equation reads as:
_ 2 K e1 Þ Z KQ_ sh C W_ e
mðe (26)
where e represents the total specific energy, eZhCecCep.
In hermetic compressors, the space where the refrigerant
gas is flowing can be divided into three main regions (Fig.
6): the suction line, the compression chamber, and the
discharge line. The energy conservation principle for the
refrigerant gas in its way along the compressor domain can
be written as:
_ 2 K e1 Þ Z Q_ sl C Q_ cc C Q_ dl C W_ cp
mðe (27)
where Q_ sl is the heat transfer rate delivered to the refrigerant
gas in the space between the shell and the motor-compressor
586 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
Fig. 5. Schematic representation of the energy interactions between
the compressor and its environment.
unit and along the suction ducts, Q_ cc is the heat transfer
delivered to the gas in the compression chamber, and Q_ dl is
the heat transfer delivered to the gas along the discharge
line. The three above mentioned heat transfer rates refer to
convection effects because the net rate of radiation
exchanged in each zone (sl, cc, dl) is zero (the gas behaves
as a non-participating medium).
The two energy equations indicated above, Eqs. (26) and
(27), can be combined to give:
W_ cp Z W_ e K Q_ sh K Q_ sl K Q_ cc K Q_ dl : (28)
Based on this equation, the combined mechanical–electrical
efficiency can be expressed as:
W_ cp Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_
hme Z _ Z 1 K _sh K _ sl K _cc K _dl
We We We We We
Z 1 K 3~QðshÞ K 3~QðslÞ K 3~QðccÞ K 3~QðdlÞ (29)
or in terms of the efficiencies (Eq. (11)): h~ QðkÞ Z 1K 3~QðkÞ
where kZsh, sl, cc, dl.
These efficiencies express deviation respect to the
reference case (no heat transfer). Values lower than unity
are obtained in case of heat transfer losses to the ambient
(usually 3~QðshÞ O 0 and then h~ QðshÞ ! 1), or heat transfer gains
to the refrigerant gas (usually 3~QðslÞ O 0 and then 3~QðslÞ ! 1).
Due to the high gas temperatures in the compression
chamber and the discharge line, the fluid is usually cooled,
i.e. 3~QðccÞ O 0 and 3~QðdlÞ O 0 (thus, h~ QðccÞ O 1 and h~ QðdlÞ O 1,
respectively).
It is interesting to investigate the heat transfer processes
Fig. 6. Schematic representation of the energy interactions between the refrigerant gas and its surroundings in hermetic compressors.
in the compression chamber in more detail. To carry this
out, the heat transfer rate is split into its four natural
components following the four compression steps (suction,
compression, discharge and expansion):
s c d e
Q_ cc Z Q_ cc C Q_ cc C Q_ cc C Q_ cc . Thus, new four efficiencies
can be obtained:
X k
3~QðccÞ Z Q_ QðccÞ =W_ e
kZs;c;d;e
Z 3~Qðcc;sÞ C 3~Qðcc;cÞ C 3~Qðcc;dÞ C 3~Qðcc;eÞ : (30)
The refrigerant gas is usually heated during the expansion
and suction steps, i.e. 3~Qðcc;eÞ O 0 and 3~Qðcc;sÞ O 0 (thus,
h~ Qðcc;eÞ ! 1 and h~ Qðcc;sÞ ! 1), and cooled during the com-
pression and discharge steps, i.e. 3~Qðcc;cÞ ! 0 and 3~Qðcc;dÞ ! 0
(and then h~ Qðcc;cÞ O 1 and h~ Qðcc;dÞ O 1).
6. Mechanical electrical efficiency. Exergy analysis
Directionality of physical processes is restricted by the
second law of thermodynamics. In terms of the entropy, the
second law can be written for the whole hermetic
compressor (assuming cyclic conditions):
ð
dQ_ sh
_ 2 K s1 Þ zK
mðs C S_ gen;tot : (31)
T
Ash
The first term of Eq. (35) represents the transport of entropy
by the fluid flow. The second term (without the minus sign)
is the transport of entropy from the shell to the environment
by the heat flow (convectionCradiation). The integral is
performed on the boundaries of the defined control volume
(just on the external part of the shell). The temperature on
the denominator refers to the absolute temperature of the
boundary where the heat flux is considered. The last term is
the total entropy generated due to irreversibilities (viscous
dissipation, heat transfer through finite difference tempera-
ture, flow mixing, electrical motor inefficiencies—Joule
effect—, etc). The second law of thermodynamics states that
S_ gen;tot R 0. For details see [10].
The second law for the refrigerant gas through the
compressor can be written as:
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593 587

ð ð ð
dQ_ sl dQ_ cc dQ_ dl W_ cp XQ_ XQ_ XQ_ XQ_
_ 2 K s1 Þ z
mðs C C C S_ gen;f : (32) hme Z Z 1 K sh K sl K cc K dl
T T T _
We _
We _
We _
We W_ e
Asl Acc Adl
I_tot K I_f
K
In this equation, the transport of entropy due to the heat flow W_ e
from the walls to the fluid has been split into three terms
Z 1 K 3~xðshÞ K 3~xðslÞ K 3~xðccÞ K 3~xðdlÞ K 3~IðnfÞ (36)
(Fig. 6): suction line (sl), compression chamber (cc), and
discharge line (dl). The last term in Eq. (32) represents the where 3~xðkÞ with kZsh, sl, cc, dl, represents the transfer of
entropy generated by the heat flow. According to the second exergy associated to the heat flux, and 3~IðnfÞ is associated to
law S_gen;f R 0. the destruction of exergy in the whole compressor excluding
The second law of thermodynamics can also be written the gas flow ðI_nf Z I_tot K I_f Þ. The corresponding efficiencies
in terms of exergy (or availability). Exergy has units of can be written according to Eq. (11), i.e. h~ xðkÞ Z 1K 3~xðkÞ
energy, and represents the maximum theoretical shaft work where kZsh, sl, cc, dl, and h~ IðnfÞ Z 1K 3~IðnfÞ . As in Section
performed by a system, or the minimum work delivered to a 5, these efficiencies express deviations respect to the ideal
system, when it goes from a given state to a reference state case (no exergy transfer by the heat flow and no exergy
or dead state [10]. At the dead state, the system is at rest destruction).
relative to the environment, and internally in equilibrium at The exergy transfers in the compression chamber ð~3xðccÞ Þ
its temperature (To) and pressure (po). can also be split into the exergy transfers associated to the
The specific exergy associated with the gas flow is four main compression processes (suction, compression,
usually defined as: xZ ðeK eo ÞK To ðsK so Þ. A transport discharge, expansion): XQ_ cc Z XQ_ scc C XQ_ ccc C XQ_ dcc C XQ_ ecc .
equation for x can be easily obtained from Eq. (26) after Therefore,
subtracting out To times Eq. (31). As a consequence, the X
following exergy equation is obtained for the whole 3~xðccÞ Z X _ k =W_ e
Qcc
kZs;c;d;e
compressor domain:
Z 3~xðcc;sÞ C 3~xðcc;cÞ C 3~xðcc;dÞ C 3~xðcc;eÞ (37)
_ 2 K x1 Þ Z KXQ_ sh C W_ e K I_tot
mðx (33)
or, in terms of the associated efficiencies,
h~ xðcc;kÞ Z 1K 3~xðcc;kÞ , where kZs, c, d, e.
where the first term represents the transport of exergy The exergetic efficiency, usually defined as
associated to the refrigerant gas flow, the second term hE Z ðx2 K x1 Þ=ðW_ e =mÞ, _ also involves the different global
(without the minus sign) is the exergy transfer from the shell exergy transfers and destruction of exergy. From Eq. (33):
to the
Ð
environment
 due to heat flow:
XQ_ sh Z Ash 1K TTo dQ_ sh , the third term is the input exergy XQ_ sh I_
hE Z 1 K K tot Z 1 K 3~xðshÞ K 3~IðtotÞ
transfer due to the electrical power supplied to the motor, _
We W_ e
and the fourth term, I_tot Z To S_gen;tot , represents the total
Z 1 K 3~xðshÞ K 3~Iðf Þ K 3~IðnfÞ (38)
destruction of exergy. From the second law I_tot R 0.
A transport equation for x can also be obtained where 3~xðshÞ refers to the global exergy transfer to the
subtracting out To times Eq. (32) to Eq. (27): ambient by the heat flow (see Eq. (29)), and 3~IðtotÞ represents
the total exergy destruction, which is a consequence of the
_ 2 K x1 Þ Z XQ_ sl C XQ_ cc C XQ_ dl C W_ cp K I_f
mðx (34) destruction of exergy associated to the gas flow,
3~Iðf Þ Z I_f =W_ e , and the destruction of exergy excluding the
Ð
 gas flow, 3~IðnfÞ Z ðI_tot K I_f Þ=W_ e . All these values can also be
where: XQ_ k Z Ak 1K TTo dQ_ k (kZsl, cc, dl), and
described by their associated efficiencies using Eq. (11):
I_f Z To S_gen;f R 0.
h~ xðshÞ , h~ IðtotÞ ,h~ Iðf Þ and h~ IðnfÞ . Eq. (38) expresses how the flow
The two exergy balance equations indicated above, Eqs.
availability decreases from compressor inlet to exit due to
(33) and (34), can be combined as:
the exergy losses to the ambient by the heat flow and the
total exergy destroyed.
W_ cp Z W_ e K XQ_ sh K XQ_ sl K XQ_ cc K XQ_ dl

KðI_tot K I_f Þ: ð35Þ

7. Illustrative results

All the results presented in this section have been

From this equation, the mechanical–electrical efficiency can obtained by means of a detailed numerical simulation of the
be viewed from a different point of view based on the thermal and fluid dynamic behavior of hermetic reciprocat-
transfer of exergy by the heat flow and the destruction of ing compressors (see Fig. 3). The model is based on the
exergy: integration of the transient fluid conservation equations
588 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
(continuity, momentum, energy) in the whole compressor
domain (compressor chamber, valves, manifolds, mufflers,
shell, connecting tubes, parallel paths, etc) using instan-
taneous local mean values for the different variables.
Effective flow areas are evaluated considering a multi-
dimensional model based on a nodal analysis of fluid
interactions in the valve. In order to evaluate the
instantaneous compression chamber volume, force balances
in the crankshaft connecting rod mechanical system are
simultaneously solved at each time-step. The thermal
analysis of the solid elements is based on global energy
balances at each macro-volume considered (shell, mufflers,
tubes, cylinder head, crankcase, motor, etc.). The selected
motor is empirically characterized, at different motor
temperatures, by its performance curves (motor electrical
efficiency and motor torque vs. instantaneous angular
velocity). The resulting governing equations (fluid flow,
valve dynamics, conductive heat transfer in solids, mech-
anical system, electrical motor, etc.) are discretized by
means of a fully implicit control volume formulation. The
complete set of algebraic equations is coupled using the
well-known segregated pressure-based algorithm Semi-
Implicit Method for Pressure-Linked Equations (SIMPLEC)
extended to compressible flows. Details of the mathematical
model and its numerical solution procedure are given in [7].
References [7–9] address some important aspects about
the model and its numerical solutions. Specifically: (i) code
verification [7]: strategies to assure no programming errors/
mistakes; (ii) mathematical model validation (modeling
errors) [8,9]: the accuracy of the detailed mathematical
model developed is demonstrated by comparison of
numerical results vs. experimental data under a wide range
of refrigerant fluids and working conditions; (iii) verifica-
tion of the numerical solutions (convergence errors and
discretization errors) [7]: the quality of different numerical
solutions is assessed by means of a critical analysis of the
numerical sources of errors.
Based on the above mentioned simulation tool, some
illustrative results of the efficiencies defined in the previous
sections are presented. All cases herewith reported corre-
spond to different variants of a reference case. The reference
case corresponds to a hermetic reciprocating compressor of
a nominal frequency of 50 Hz, with a 7.5 cm3 cylinder
capacity, and using R-134a as a refrigerant fluid. The
compressor works in a single-stage vapor compression low-
pressure cycle at an inlet compressor temperature of 32 8C,
condensation temperature of 55 8C, evaporation temperature
of K23.3 8C, and outlet condenser temperature of 32 8C.
Ambient temperature is considered at 32 8C. Details of the
compressor (cylinder diameter, clearance ratio, suction and
discharge ports, motor crank radius, motor characteristics,
etc.) are given in [7].
All the efficiencies referred to in this paper have been
presented in Tables 1–6 for the reference case at different
evaporation temperatures (or compression ratios). Table 1
shows the global thermodynamic efficiencies. Most of these
efficiencies, together with the overall compressor efficiency,
are also shown in Fig. 7 for a wide range of compression
ratios.
As can be seen, volumetric efficiency decreases when
compression ratio increases. A closer examination of Table
2 shows that efficiency related to compressor speed is quite
high. In fact, the actual frequency increases from 47.7 to
49.7 Hz when compression ratio increases. The theoretical
volumetric efficiency (hv,c) is low and decreases when
compression ratio increases. The second volumetric effi-
ciency (hv,v) is the lowest of these efficiencies, and also
decreases when compression ratio increases. This effect is
mostly due to the irreversibilities associated to pressure drop
and heat transfer effects. Piston–cylinder leakages also play
a negative effect, but not very important in this case. For all
the compression ratios tested, supercharging effects (extra
suction process after BDC, h~ v;vðschÞ R 100%) and negative
superdischarging effects (reverse flow after TDC,
h~ v;vðsdhÞ % 100%) are observed. In general, these effects are
more significant when compression ratio increases. How-
ever, there is an exception for PZ21.94, which is mainly a
consequence of valve dynamics. Fig. 8 shows the suction
and discharge valve positions at three different compression
ratios (10.08, 12.86 and 21.94). It must be said that no valve
stops have been used in this compressor. As can be seen,
after BDC supercharging effects are significant for PZ
10.08 and 12.86. However, for PZ21.94 the suction valve
is almost closed after BDC and opens later when pressure in
the cylinder is higher, reducing the extra inlet gas. The
discharge valve shows a different behavior for PZ21.94:
the valve opens, gets a maximum valve displacement, and
closes near the TDC. For the two other compression ratios,
the discharge valve opens and two maximum values are
described before the valves closes after TDC (the delay
increases when the compression ratio increases).
The isentropic efficiency increases up to a maximum and
decreases rapidly for high compression ratios. Table 3
shows the details of the isentropic efficiency detachment.
The efficiency h~ sðceÞ is lower than h~ sðIÞ , indicating a higher
work associated to the compression–expansion process than
Fig. 7. Global efficiencies at different compression ratios.
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593 589

Table 1
Global efficiencies (in percentage) at different compression ratios (or evaporation temperatures)

P Te [8C] hv [%] hs [%] hm [%] he [%] hme [%] hE [%] COP

2.60 10.0 73.7 66.2 95.4 79.5 75.8 53.0 2.696
7.46 K10.0 68.2 71.9 94.4 83.5 78.9 56.6 1.922
10.08 K16.5 65.3 72.5 93.9 83.0 77.9 54.5 1.650
12.86 K23.3 60.3 72.4 93.1 81.2 75.5 51.1 1.435
21.94 K35.0 45.3 69.8 90.3 73.1 66.0 39.3 0.982
26.27 K38.0 39.2 67.7 88.9 68.8 61.2 34.7 0.828

the work performed between the inlet and outlet mean
compressor pressures. Both efficiencies decrease when
compression ratio increases. The efficiency associated to
the compression process ðh~ sðcÞ Þ strongly decreases when
compression ratio increases (the area enclosed by this curve
is significantly reduced), while the efficiency associated to
the expansion process ðh~ sðeÞ Þ is always greater than 100%,
and increases when compression ratio increases (suction
valve opens later). Higher underpressures and lower over-
pressures are produced when the compression ratio
increases (lower mass fluxes are delivered by the compres-
sor). These effects can be seen in the efficiencies h~ sðIIÞ and
h~ sðIIIÞ . However, the influence of valve dynamics (Fig. 8) is
only reflected by the isentropic efficiencies associated to
the suction and discharge processes (h~ sðsÞ and h~ sðdÞ ). Some of
the above mentioned comments can also be observed in the
pressure–volume diagrams of Fig. 9 for three compression
ratios (10.08, 12.86 and 21.94).
The combined mechanical–electrical efficiency reduces
when the evaporation pressure and, consequently, evapor-
ation temperature reduces. Table 4 shows its detachment
based on the heat transfer analysis. Even though the inlet
compressor temperature is kept constant at 32 8C, the heat
transfer losses to the ambient are more intense (h~ QðshÞ
strongly reduces) when the compression ratio increases.
This is a consequence of the lower effect of convection in
the internal part of the shell (mass fluxes are lower when
compression ratio increases), while radiation effects
between the motor and the shell are more and more
dominant. Gas heat transfer gains in the suction line are
reduced (h~ QðslÞ increases) because of the lower convection
effects (lower gas velocities). Global heat transfer losses are
observed in the compression chamber ðh~ QðccÞ O 100%Þ, due
to the high gas temperature during both the compression and
discharge steps. In contrast, during the expansion and
suction steps the gas is heated more intensively when the
pressure ratio increases. The gas temperature in the
discharge line is relatively high, and the fluid is cooled in
contact with the walls ðh~ QðdlÞ O 100%Þ. However, for high
compression ratios, heat transfer losses in the discharge line
are reduced when the compression ratio increases, because
of the lower gas velocities and lower heat transfer
coefficients.
The exergy transfers due to the heat flow ðh~ xðkÞ Þ and the
destruction of exergy excluding the gas flow ðh~ IðnfÞ Þ are
presented in Table 5 and 6, respectively. The most important
terms are the exergy lost to the ambient ðh~ xðshÞ Þ and the
destruction of exergy. For high compression ratios both
efficiencies decrease when compression ratio increases,
more markedly the total destruction of exergy excluding the
gas flow (electrical motor, mechanical transmission, .).
Table 6 also gives the exergetic efficiency and its
detachment in terms of the exergy lost to the ambient by
the heat flow and the total destruction of exergy. The total
destruction of exergy is split into the destruction of exergy
associated to the gas flow (which shows low but quite
uniform values), and the destruction of exergy excluding the
gas flow (which strongly reduces for high compression
ratio).
Table 7 shows the main compressor efficiencies
considering different variations in the reference case
(Table 7 caption). For brevity, the values of the detached
efficiencies are not presented. Comments are restricted to
the efficiencies that show higher changes. The percentages
given below refer to the values corresponding to the
reference case (e.g. if an efficiency increases 3% or
decreases 3% means that it is 1.03 or 0.97 times the
reference value).

Table 2
Volumetric efficiency detachment at different compression ratios (in percentage)

P hv [%] hv,f [%] hv,c [%] hv,v [%] h~ v;vðirrÞ [%] h~ v;vðschÞ [%] h~ v;vðsdhÞ [%] h~ v;vðlÞ [%]
2.60 73.7 95.4 96.5 80.1 77.3 103.5 100.0 99.2
7.46 68.2 97.6 91.7 76.2 77.0 100.3 99.9 98.9
10.08 65.3 98.1 88.6 75.1 73.2 103.4 99.7 98.8
12.86 60.3 98.5 85.3 71.8 67.7 106.5 99.0 98.6
21.94 45.3 99.2 75.1 60.9 60.7 102.4 99.8 97.9
26.27 39.2 99.4 70.3 56.1 56.7 102.3 99.5 97.5
590 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593
Table 3
Isentropic efficiency detachments at different compression ratios (in percentage)
P hs [%] h~ sðceÞ [%] h~ sðsÞ [%]
2.60 66.2 87.5 93.7
7.46 71.9 87.2 95.9
10.08 72.5 82.3 99.0
12.86 72.4 80.4 98.5
21.94 69.8 75.8 96.6
26.27 67.7 75.3 96.3
The first variant uses two different cylinder–piston gaps:
half and double of the reference value (the first is very low
for this kind of compressors; it is just used for comparison
purposes). For the lower gap value, all the basic efficiencies
(except hme) increase slightly (about 1%). Leakages are
obviously reduced (h~ v;vðlÞ increases 1.2%), but internal
irreversibilities increase (h~ v;vðirrÞ reduces 0.8%). Isentropic
efficiency increases mainly due to the expansion–com-
pression process (h~ sðceÞ increases 1.3%). Higher heat transfer
gains in the suction line are also observed (h~ QðslÞ reduces
0.9%). For the higher gap, all the basic efficiencies (except
hme) decrease significantly (more than 12%). Volumetric
efficiency decreases mainly due to the leakages (h~ v;vðlÞ
decreases 9.6%), but the efficiencies associated to the
irreversibilities in the compression chamber decreases
(h~ v;vðirrÞ increases 2.6%). The isentropic efficiency decreases
due to the compression–expansion and the discharged
processes (h~ sðceÞ and h~ sðdÞ reduce 11.9 and 3.2%, respect-
ively); the efficiency associated to the suction process
increases (h~ sðsÞ increases 3.6%). However, the efficiencies
associated to the underpressures and overpressures are
almost unaffected. The combined mechanical–electrical
efficiency is kept almost unchanged. This effect is mainly
due to the reduction on the fluid heat transfer gains in the
suction line (h~ QðslÞ increases 8.5%), together with an
increase of the heat transfer losses to the ambient (h~ QðshÞ
reduces 9.0%). Furthermore, exergy transfer to the ambient
Fig. 8. Suction and discharge valves position depending on the
instantaneous angular position (BDC: 08 or 3608; TDC: 1808) at
three compression ratios: 10.081 (dashed line); 12.862 (solid line);
21.941 (dotted line).
h~ sðdÞ [%] h~ sðIÞ [%] h~ sðIIÞ [%] h~ sðIIIÞ [%]
85.0 93.9 90.9 81.4
88.9 87.6 92.4 91.9
91.2 85.7 92.8 94.0
93.5 83.9 93.1 95.3
97.3 79.2 93.5 97.0
96.1 76.6 93.8 97.4
due to the heat flux and destruction of exergy (specially the
part associated to the fluid flow) becomes more intense
(h~ xðshÞ , h~ IðtotÞ and h~ Iðf Þ reduce 1.2, 8.0 and 6.4%,
respectively).
The second variant is related to the clearance ratio. Two
situations are tested considering 50% lower and 30% higher
than the reference value. For the lower clearance ratio, the
volumetric efficiency significantly increases (11%), because
hv,c and h~ v;vðirrÞ increase (8.6 and 9.9%, respectively).
However, supercharging effects decrease (5%, from
h~ v;vðschÞ Z 106:5%, standar case, to 101.2%). The isentropic
efficiency increases slightly because h~ sðceÞ increases (3.8%),
but h~ sðsÞ decreases (2.9%). The combined mechanical–
electrical efficiency increases (2.2%) essentially due to
lower external heat transfer losses (h~ QðshÞ increases 6.6%). In
the compression chamber the global heat transfer exchanged
is similar to the reference case, but not its individual
contributions (h~ Qðcc;eÞ and h~ Qðcc;sÞ increase 3.4 and 3.6%,
while h~ Qðcc;cÞ and h~ Qðcc;dÞ decrease 1.1 and 3.1%, respect-
ively). The exergetic efficiency increases (4.3%) because the
total destruction of exergy decreases (h~ xðtotÞ increases 2.9%),
mainly due to the destruction of exergy excluding the gas
flow (hxðnfÞ increases 1.7%, while h~ xðnfÞ increases 0.5%). For
the higher clearance ratio, the tendencies are generally the
opposite. For example, volumetric efficiency decreases
(8.2%) because hv,c and hv,v decrease (5.2 and 3.4%,
respectively). The isentropic efficiency decreases slightly
(1.1%). The combined mechanical–electrical efficiency
decreases (1.8%) because heat transfer losses to the ambient
increases (h~ QðshÞ decreases 5.9%), and the heat transfer gains
in the suction line decreases (h~ QðslÞ increases 1.4%). Even
though in this case h~ QðccÞ remains almost unchanged, this is
not the case of the individual efficiencies associated to the
heat transfer in the compression chamber (h~ Qðcc;eÞ and h~ Qðcc;sÞ
decrease 1.7 and 3.6%, while h~ Qðcc;cÞ and h~ Qðcc;dÞ increase 1.6
and 1.8%, respectively). The exergetic efficiency decreases
(3.4%) due to the exergy destroyed (h~ xðtotÞ decreases 2.3%).
The suction valve thickness is also analysed. Two
situations corresponding to a lower and a higher value the
reference case are also tested. For brevity, the variations
corresponding to the higher thickness are given in brackets.
The volumetric efficiency is specially affected by the
irreversibilities and the supercharging processes: h~ v;vðirrÞ
increases 5.6% (decreases 9.3%) and hv,v(sch) decreases 2%
Table 4
Combined mechanical–electrical efficiency and its detachment (based on the heat transfer analysis) at different compression ratios (in percentage)

P hme [%] h~ QðshÞ [%] h~ QðslÞ [%] h~ QðdlÞ [%] h~ QðccÞ [%] h~ Qðcc;sÞ [%] h~ Qðcc;cÞ [%] h~ Qðcc;dÞ [%] h~ Qðcc;eÞ [%]

C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593

2.60 75.8 84.9 64.5 117.8 108.5 77.1 107.1 126.9 97.4
7.46 78.9 66.4 65.7 123.2 123.6 80.7 117.0 130.9 94.9
10.08 77.9 55.8 67.9 124.6 129.6 82.9 122.0 131.2 93.6
12.86 75.5 44.6 71.1 123.6 135.3 82.6 128.8 132.3 91.6
21.94 66.0 21.2 81.1 121.6 142.0 79.6 146.7 131.3 84.3
26.27 61.2 14.4 84.9 118.4 143.4 78.1 152.0 135.1 81.9

Table 5
Combined mechanical–electrical efficiency and its detachment (based on the exergetic analysis) at different compression ratios (destruction of exergy excluding gas flow in Table 6) (in
percentage)

P hme [%] h~ xðshÞ [%] h~ xðslÞ [%] h~ xðdlÞ [%] h~ xðccÞ [%] h~ xðcc;sÞ [%] h~ xðcc;cÞ [%] h~ xðcc;dÞ [%] h~ xðcc;eÞ [%]
2.60 75.8 98.0 92.5 103.6 101.6 95.8 101.3 104.9 99.5
7.46 78.9 94.7 91.1 105.2 104.8 96.0 103.5 106.3 99.0
10.08 77.9 92.7 91.0 105.6 106.3 96.4 104.8 106.6 98.6
12.86 75.5 90.9 91.4 105.3 107.5 96.3 106.1 106.9 98.2
21.94 66.0 87.5 93.3 104.4 108.4 95.9 109.3 106.2 96.9
26.27 61.2 87.0 94.2 103.5 108.2 95.8 109.9 106.0 96.6

591
592 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593

Table 6
Exergy efficiency and its detachment at different compression ratios (in percentage)

P hE [%] h~ xðshÞ [%] h~ IðtotÞ [%] h~ Iðf Þ [%] h~ IðnfÞ [%]

2.60 53.0 98.0 54.9 74.8 80.1
7.46 56.6 94.7 61.8 78.9 83.0
10.08 54.5 92.7 61.7 79.4 82.3
12.86 51.1 90.9 60.2 79.5 80.2
21.94 39.3 87.5 51.9 79.4 72.5
26.27 34.7 87.0 47.7 79.5 68.2

(increases 2.5%) for the lower (higher) thickness. The
influence of the suction valve thickness is also observed in
the isentropic efficiency: h~ sðIIÞ increases 1.3% (decreases
2.1%), h~ sðsÞ increases 0.8% (decreases 2.9%) and h~ sðceÞ
decreases 0.8% (decreases 0.2%) for the lower (higher)
thickness. The total destruction of exergy increases 1.3%
(decreases 3.1%) for the lower (higher) thickness, mainly
due to the destruction of exergy associated to the fluid flow.
No significant effects (less than 1%) have been observed
when the discharge valve thickness is modified.
Table 7 also shows the basic efficiencies considering two
inlet compressor temperatures and two ambient tempera-
tures. The inlet gas temperature has an impact on the
volumetric efficiency essentially due to the irreversibility
term (h~ v;vðirrÞ reduces 2.5% for the lower inlet temperature).
The isentropic efficiency is affected due to h~ sðIÞ , with minor
variations in h~ sðIIÞ or h~ sðIIIÞ . In contrast, the efficiencies
associated to the different compression steps show more
variations (specially nsðceÞ ). Even though the combined
mechanical–electrical efficiency is almost unaffected,
important variations have been observed in the heat transfer
to the ambient and the suction line: h~ QðshÞ increases 5.4% for
the lower temperature and decreases 5.9% for the higher
one, while h~ QðslÞ decreases 3.1% for the lower temperature
and increases 2.3% for the higher one. The influence of the
ambient temperature is specially observed on the heat
transfer losses to the ambient (h~ QðshÞ decreases 4.6% for the
lower temperature and increases 4.0% for the higher one),
and the gas heat transfer gains in the suction line (h~ QðslÞ
increases 1.8% for the lower temperature and decreases
2.6% for the higher one).
8. Conclusions
A detailed analysis of some well-known thermodynamic
efficiencies usually used to characterize compressors has
been presented with special emphasis on hermetic recipro-
cating compressors used in the refrigeration field. Attention
has been focussed on the volumetric efficiency, the
isentropic efficiency, and the combined mechanical–elec-
trical efficiency. A procedure is presented to detach these
efficiencies into their main components (physical sub-
processes).
The volumetric efficiency is split into different efficien-
cies related to pressure drop and heat transfer effects,
supercharging effects, superdischarging (or reverse flow)
effects, leakages, etc. The isentropic efficiency is detached
using two different points of view: the work associated to the
individual sub-processes (compression, discharge, expan-
sion, suction), and the work associated to the under-
pressures, overpressures, and between inlet and outlet

Fig. 9. Left: pressure–volume diagram corresponding to three compression ratios. Right: detail of the suction process.
 C.D. Pérez-Segarra et al. / International Journal of Refrigeration 28 (2005) 579–593 593

Table 7
Global compressor efficiencies of the reference case and considering different variations (cylinder–piston gap; clearance ratio; suction and
discharge valve thickness; inlet gas compressor temperature; ambient temperature)

Cases hv [%] hs [%] hm [%] he [%] hme [%] hE [%] COP

Reference case 60.4 72.4 93.1 81.2 75.5 51.1 1.435
gapZ0.0025 mm 60.7 73.4 93.0 81.1 75.3 51.6 1.451
gapZ0.01 mm 52.8 63.4 93.2 81.3 75.6 45.2 1.258
cZ0.775% 67.0 73.4 93.7 82.4 77.2 53.3 1.487
cZ2.015% 55.4 71.6 92.6 80.2 74.2 49.4 1.394
esZ0.101 mm 61.2 73.4 93.0 81.2 75.5 51.8 1.454
esZ0.406 mm 57.6 70.5 93.1 80.8 75.3 49.5 1.392
edZ0.15 mm 61.0 72.8 93.2 81.2 75.7 51.5 1.445
edZ0.25 mm 60.3 72.2 93.1 81.2 75.5 51.0 1.432
T1Z26 8C 58.9 71.1 93.0 81.1 75.4 50.9 1.401
T1Z38 8C 60.3 72.8 93.0 81.1 75.4 51.0 1.457
TambZ26 8C 60.2 72.7 93.0 81.1 75.4 50.7 1.443
TambZ38 8C 58.9 71.3 93.0 81.0 75.3 50.9 1.415

Reference case: PZ12.862 (TeZK23.3 8C); 0.005 mm cylinder–piston gap; cZ1.55%; esZedZ0.203 mm; T1ZTambZ32 8C.

mean compressor pressures. The combined mechanical–
electrical efficiency is related to the heat transfer losses/
gains, and also to the exergy transfers and exergy destroyed.
Some illustrative examples are presented to show the [2]
possibilities of the thermodynamic performance character-
ization proposed. The results have been generated by a
verificated and validated advanced simulation model of the [3]
thermal and fluid dynamic behavior of hermetically sealed
reciprocating compressors. The results show the influence of
different design and operating parameters, such as the
compression ratio, mean compressor inlet temperature, [4]
ambient temperature, cylinder–piston gap, clearance
volume, valves thickness. The criteria developed are useful [5]
tools for comparison purposes, to characterize compressors,
and to assist designers during the optimization process.
[6]
Acknowledgements
[7]
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
provided by CUBIGEL, S.A.- Unidad Hermética (ref. no.
3907) and by the Comisión Interministerial de Ciencia y
[8]
Tenologı́a (ref. no. TIC2003- 07970). We would also like to
acknowledge the technical support of the R and D group of
Unidad Hermética, Spain.
[9]
References
[10]
[1] G. Rogers, Y. Mayhen, Reciprocating expanders and
compressors, 4th ed. Engineering thermodynamics, work and
heat transfer, Longman Singapour Publishers, Singapore,
1995. Chapter 16.
P. Pandeya, W. Soedel, A generalized approach toward
compressor performance analysis. Proceedings of the Inter-
national Compressor Technology Conference at Purdue, West
Lafayette, USA; 1978, p. 135–43.
J.A. McGovern, Utilization of volumetric displacement in
reciprocating compressors. Proceedings of the International
Compressor Technology Conference at Purdue, West Lafay-
ette, USA; 1990, p. 254–63.
J.A. McGovern, S. Harte, An exergy method for compressor
performance analysis, Int J Refrigeration 18 (1995) 421–433.
P. Stouffs, M. Tazerout, P. Wauters, Thermodynamic analysis
of reciprocating compressors, Int J Thermal Sci 40 (2001) 52–
66.
C.D. Perez-Segarra, J. Rigola, A. Oliva, Thermal and fluid
dynamic characterization of hermetic reciprocating compres-
sors. Proceedings of the International Compressor Technology
Conference at Purdue, West Lafayette, USA; 2002, p. C4–C1.
C.D. Perez-Segarra, J. Rigola, A. Oliva, Modeling and
numerical simulation of the thermal and fluid dynamic
behaviour of hermetic reciprocating compressors, part 1:
theoretical basis, HVAC Res 9 (2003) 215–235.
J. Rigola, C.D. Perez-Segarra, A. Oliva, Modeling and
numerical simulation of the thermal and fluid dynamic
behaviour of hermetic reciprocating compressors, part 2:
experimental investigation, HVAC Res 9 (2003) 237–249.
J. Rigola, G. Raush, C.D. Perez-Segarra, A. Oliva, Detailed
experimental validation of the thermal and fluid dynamic
behaviour of hermetic reciprocating compressors, HVAC Res
10 (2003) 291–306.
A. Bejan, G. Tsatsaronis, M. Moran, Thermal design and
optimization, Wiley, New York, 1996.