Heat Exchangers in Carbon Dioxide Cascade Systems

Part II. Practical Aspects of Carbon Dioxide Installations

 % Initial evaporation, % Evaporation rate, % of R508A
1. A leakage above the liquid surface.
100
90
80
Initial liquid level
70
60
50
40
30
2a. If the CO2 tem- 2c. In a tank with a
20
10
perature drops to be- horizontal exit, both
0 low the triple point, vortex formation and the risk
dry ice can form and for dry ice entering the pipe are

R404A

R410A

R507A

R508A
CO2

NH3

R22

R23

R32

R41

R116

R125

R143a

R407C

R290

R1270

R218
sink to the bottom. decreased.

Figure 14. Leakage of refrigerants and 2b. Dry ice can then 3a. A leak below the liquid sur-
destroy pumps and face.
the formation of dry ice in CO2. block valves. 3b. If the leakage is here, the
The diagram is valid for a leakage above the liquid level. complete tank is drained, ex-
The absolute evaporation rate depends on insulation, re- cept for CO2, see text.
frigerant mass, shape of the vessel, etc. See also text.

3. Some design considerations for carbon dioxide installations.

3.1. Corrosion by carbon dioxide. somewhat devious though. Ice can get stuck, tighten
the leak and then release when the pressure increases.
Carbon dioxide itself is inert to practically all metals and
The positive aspect of it is that a large part of the filling
elastomers but some care should be taken:
might remain even for a leak at the bottom of a vessel.
♦ Metals. When CO2 is mixed with water, the carbonic acid, Carbamate formation. A special case is the formation
H2CO3, is formed. This is corrosive, especially if oxygen of ammonium carbamate when CO2 leaks into the am-
is present as well. Stainless steels are not affected but monia side in a cascade condenser/evaporator. As the
carbon steel, brass, copper and copper alloys are. The CO2 pressure is practically always higher than the am-
corrosive behaviour is impaired by the addition of corro- monia pressure, the leak is into the ammonia side. Am-
sive breakdown products of the oil. Stainless steel PHEs monium carbamate is corrosive and abrasive, i.e. it can
(PHEs) have not had any problem with corrosion due to destroy a compressor. It can be detected as white pow-
CO2, but there are cases of compressor breakdowns due der in the vapour after a direct expansion evaporator,
to too high water content. Thus, some precaution should e.g. by breaking a light circuit. The detection can be
be taken, §3.9. rapid and if action is taken quickly compressor break-
♦ Oil. The oil is not chemically affected by CO2 but CO2 down can be avoided. Carbamate dissolves readily in
dissolves in some oils and at a pressure decrease there water and it can be decomposed to ammonia and CO2
will be foaming. Oil can deteriorate by wear and tear by heating to above 60 °C. The temperature has to be
and high temperature and form corrosive products. Wa- kept until the gases have left the system otherwise they
ter and oxygen form corrosive organic acids with oil de- will recombine.
composition products.
Welded or semi welded PHEs are safer than HEs where
♦ Elastomers. CO2 will not corrode or affect these chemi- the CO2 channel is entirely surrounded by ammonia
cally but if high pressure CO2 diffuses into an elastomer channels. The reason is that leakage through a weld of
it can sometimes break this when the pressure is re- a PHE is to the exterior.
leased and the elastomer removed.
Flooded flow evaporator are probably safer as the car-
3.2. Leaks. bamate is dissolved in the liquid ammonia and rendered
relative harmless what regards the compressors. It will
A leak in a plant can be of either two types, figure 14:
accumulate in the separator-evaporator loop. The de-
♦ A leak at a vessel or its adjoining pipes above the tection will be more complicated though.
liquid level, figure 14.1. 3.3. Carbon dioxide close to the triple point.
There is an initial flashing down to the ambient pressure If a vessel with liquid CO2 is operating close to the triple
followed by an isobaric evaporation of the refrigerant. In point (-55.6 °C), a sudden pressure decrease could cause
a well insulated vessel the evaporation is slow. It is pro- the temperature to drop below this. Dry ice then forms and
portional to the temperature difference and inverse pro- as this it heavier than the liquid it sinks to the bottom of the
portional to latent heat. Ammonia has very little initial vessel. A lump of dry ice can then move along a pipe to
evaporation and the evaporation rate is slow, i.e. it e.g. a circulation pump or a valve and destroy or block this.
takes along time to empty a vessel. R508 leaves the
vessel quickly. This is due to large initial evaporation, If the exit from a vessel feeding a circulation pump is
large t to the outside and low latent heat. hydraulically correctly executed in order to prevent vor-
tices, this danger is substantially decreased, see figure
♦ A leak below the liquid level 14.2. A vortex free exit should be horizontal. In a vertical
In a leak (figure 14.3a) is between the lowest point and exit, at the bottom of a vessel, vortices can easily form es-
the liquid level, the vessel drains to the leak, followed pecially in CO2 with its low viscosity. There are vortex
by evaporation. If the leak is at the lowest point (figure breakers inserted at the exit but the author is not fond of
14.3b), the vessel drains completely. Carbon dioxide is inserts in vessels, which cannot be opened for inspection.
special. It solidifies, when it reaches the triple point and Note also, dry ice is heavier than liquid CO2 thus freeze
remains solid, i.e. it will not drain from a vessel. The ini- damages as in water circuits will not occur. See also figure
tial evaporation remains though. The behaviour is 11 for pressure increase in enclosed spaces.
1. The emergency valve opens, no
other actions. 5. At least two of critical com-
ponents.
2. Managed release of CO2.

3. Emergency
cooler unit.

4. A liquid receiver design for the

vapour pressure at maximum am-
bient temperature.

Figure 15. Plant shut down.

3.4. Plant shut-down. 3.5. Condensate subcooler/vapour superheater.

In case of a compressor shut down, the pressure in the
CO2 circuit starts to increase. There are some different
responses to this, see figure 15 as well:
1. No response, the emergency valves release CO2 when
the set pressure is reached. The CO2 is then replaced.
2. A managed release of CO2, similar to 1 but all pres-
sures and temperatures are carefully monitored. This
can mean a saving of the lost CO2.
3. A special emergency cooling unit starts and condenses
the vaporized CO2
4. Pump the liquid CO2 to a vessel, which can stand the
highest possible pressure..
5. The HP system is built with a redundancy e.g. at least
two each of the critical components.
4 & 5 can obviously only be used in case of planned shut
down but not in case of a power outage.
2. The condensate and vapour pipes
are running together inside the insula-
tion.
1. Dedicated condensate sub-
cooler/vapour superheater
Condenser
Figure 16. Condensate subcooler/
Vapour superheater.
Sometimes subcooling of the condensate is done by su-
perheating the suction vapour; mainly for three reasons:
♦ Capacity increase. When the condensate is subcooled
less refrigerant evaporates after the expansion valve,
i.e. a higher liquid fraction remains. As it is the liquid,
which gives the capacity, the capacity increases.
On the other hand, the vapour density at the suction
inlet decreases. As the volume flow is constant, the
mass flow decreases, which decreases the capacity.
Less refrigerant circulates but with a higher liquid frac-
tion. The capacity thus depends on the balance be-
tween increase of the liquid content and decrease of
the total flow.
At the AC temperature program, 2/40 °C, some refrig-
erants – e.g. R404A and R507A – gain, others – espe-
cially NH3 and R22, loose and the capacity decreases.
In the temperature program studied here, -40/-10 °C, all
except the unimportant R116 and R508A, loose, but the
decrease is for most refrigerants unimportant.
♦ Drying of the oil. Some compressor manufacturers re-
quire that the suction inlet superheat is in the order of
18 to 25 K in order to evaporate as much refrigerant as
possible from the oil droplets. Especially R1270 and
R1290 but also carbon dioxide are very soluble in the
oil, which otherwise might enter the compressor diluted.
♦ The superheat is controlled after the condensate sub-
cooler/vapour superheater, i.e. the evaporator can run
with little superheat or even wet. This increases the
evaporator performance.
Two methods may be used, see figure 16:
1. A dedicated condensate subcooler/vapour superheater
is used for larger superheats. PHEs are suitable but in
case of some low pressure refrigerants, the low vapour
density causes to many channels as the number of
channels are controlled by the pressure drop. Carbon
dioxide with its large vapour density does not have this
problem.
2. If the site permits, the vapour and condensate lines
could run together inside the insulation. This is a cheap
way of getting a sufficient superheat for oil drying but it
should not be used to control the superheat at the suc-
tion inlet as the response time will be far too long.
 Cascade condenser with two separate condenser circuits.
12
4 1a 1b
11
17
5 .
6 PLR
“Through” liquid receiver (TLR).
Place all inlets at one end of the
LR and all exits at the other.
To DX evaporators.
9. Drain. 10. Drain.
Figure 17. Vents, drains, compressor connections and equalization lines.
3.6. Vents, drains, compressor connections and
equalization lines at condensers.
Figure 17 shows some dos and don’ts when arranging the
condenser piping.
A. Connection of the compressor discharge to the con-
denser inlet (1a) versus to the liquid receiver (2a, b).
If the hot gas from the compressor passes the liquid re-
ceiver (3) it heats up the liquid, but its temperature is
lowered, which reduces the stress on the condenser.
The drawback is that a refrigerant close to the bubble
point can cause cavitation in the pumps and in general
a loss of capacity. If the vapour connection is at (2b)
there is no larger heating of the condensate but a cer-
tain dampening of pressure variations occurs
B. Another method to dampen excessive pressure and/or
temperature variations is to connect a muffler, a vessel
or the like (4), which can impart inertia to the flow.
C. A drain from this vessel (4) to the liquid receiver should
be closed (5) during normal operation. See §3.6 K.
D. Vents (or drains) should never be placed directly on a
pipe (6-10) or a vessel, particularly not at low tempera-
ture operation. Moisture can enter from the outside,
freeze and block the valve.
E. The same is valid for safety valves.
F. In general, place safety valves, drains, vents, equalization
lines valves, etc. well away from vessels and main pipes.
G. The discharge vapour in (11) proceeds in a straight flow
from the discharge exit, possibly via a muffler (4), into con-
denser and finally into the “through” liquid receiver (TLR).
There might be pressure drops along the flow path but
these will not disturb the flow.
As the inlet to the TLR is flush with the shell, thus free
access to the vapour space, the condensate drips into
the TLR together with possible inerts. The inerts can be
vented from the TLR (12) but also at the condenser exit,
as shown for the SLR (13).
H. The other liquid receiver is of the “surge” type (though it
is not exactly a true “surge” SLR). The condensate pipe
ends at the very bottom of the SLR, well below the liquid
surface.
13
16 PCond
8
7 2b 18 2a 15
3
“Surge” liquid receiver (SLR).
14a. To DX evaporators.
14b. To flooded evaporators.
Inerts cannot pass this lock and are vented at the con-
densate exit (13). Vent (7) has a double error; inerts can-
not be vented from here and it is too close to the shell.
I. The refrigerant leaves through the pump (14b) to the
flooded flow evaporators and returns partly vaporized at
(15). The two-phase mixture separates and the liquid re-
turns to the pump (14b)
The discharge vapour from the compressor (2a or 2b)
of the DX system enters the liquid receiver as well.
The vapour flows, via the equalization line (16), back to
the condenser inlet (1b) for recondensation.
However, the pressure in the SLR is lower than at the
condenser inlet, there is the condenser pressure drop,
Pcond, and possibly others.
At start up, the pressure is equal in all points 1b, 3 &16
– 18. The liquid levels in the pipe (18) and the vessel
(3) are equal. Once the cold water enters at the lower
port, the vapour starts to condense and the pressure
decreases to reflect the liquid temperature in 17. The
lower pressure sucks vapour from the inlet port and the
pressure drop but it also cause the liquid to mount in
the pipe (18) until there is a balance between the result-
ing liquid column and the pressure drop.
The process is the same as drinking through a straw
from a glass of water. The pressure is lower at the con-
denser exit (the mouth) than in the liquid receiver (the
water surface in the glass) and refrigerant (water)
mounts in the condensate pipe (the straw).
J. Theoretically, the two-phase flow from the flooded
evaporators could enter directly to the condenser but it
is very difficult to design a condenser, where all the liq-
uid and vapour a distributed equally from channel to
channel. More important, the additional liquid gives an
extra resistance to the heat transfer
K. Note! A faulty placed or open equalization line is a
frequent cause of underperforming condensers.
L. The error can be insidious. The equalization line was
maybe not installed deliberately as such, it is simple a
connection, through various pipes and vessels from the
condenser inlet to the liquid receiver.
4. Detection of inert gases, a 6. Venting of CO2
vibrating needle.
2. t to inlet
5. Venting and re-
covery of HFCs.
3. t to cold
side.
1. Detection 7. Can CO2
and venting of be vented into
ammonia ammonia wa-
ter?
To waste water treatment
Figure 18. Detection of inerts and
venting.
3.7. Detection of inerts and venting, figure 18.
1. Ammonia is the easiest refrigerant what regards detec-
tion and venting. Connect a hose to the vent, dip the
other end as deep as possible into a bucket of cold wa-
ter. The result is clear
Bubbles emerge => Inerts are present
No bubbles emerge => Inerts are not present
Bubbles or no bubbles, practically no ammonia smell is
noticeable. Other refrigerant are harder to detect. There
are mainly three methods to indicate inerts:
2. A temperature difference, between condensate out and
cooling medium in, of less than a couple of degrees.
3. There is a large temperature drop from the saturation
temperature in to the condensate temperature out.
Note! It is practically impossible to distinguish between a
condensate flooding and inerts by using methods in 2 or
3. See also 6 below.
4. A vibrating needle in an undampened pressure gauge,
type Bourdon, indicates the presence of inert gases.
If inert gases are suspected, venting has to be done.
5. In case of H(C)FCs, venting should only be done into a
recovery unit.
6. Carbon dioxide can be vented directly to the atmos-
phere but to an outside location. Note, valve well away
from the vessel and no pipes after the valve.
Carbon dioxide does not actually need any detection, it
can be vented and the result checked. However, if there
is a lot of inerts, the venting can take quite some time.
The author once vented an ammonia system for four
hours. Thus some detection is useful.
A vent placed on the upper side of the condensate exit
can be used to detect if too low capacity is due to flood-
ing or inert gas presence. When the valve is opened:
♦ If liquid droplets leave, flooding is likely.
♦ If no liquid droplets leave, inerts are likely.
It can be difficult to detect liquid droplets, though
7. Question? Can CO2 be absorbed if vented into
a bucket with ammonia water and thus detected?
The inlet vapour temperature is substantially de-
50 °C creased, from 50 °C to 0 °C in a desuperheater.
Note, the superheat is decreased as well.
The pinch point is
approaching.
0 °C
5K -10 °C
-14 °C
-10 °C
5K
-14 °C
Fig. 19. The temperature program in a
cascade unit.
3.8. Temperature difference in a cascade unit.
Figure 19 shows the temperatures in a cascade conden-
ser evaporator. The vapour enters superheated at 50 °C,
condenses at -10 °C and leaves slightly subcooled at may-
be -11 °C. The cooling refrigerant evaporates at -14 °C
and superheats with 5 K to -9 °C.
If the vapour temperature is decreased, e.g. by a desuper-
heater or mixing with vapour from a flooded evaporator,
the temperature difference to the evaporating refrigerant
decreases and it might even be impossible to keep the
condensing or evaporating temperatures. The “pinch
point” is then approached and the evaporator size ap-
proaches infinity.
Compare also with an evaporator, § 2.8, figure 13.
3.9. Carbon dioxide quality.
There are various carbon dioxide qualities, differing mainly
in the water content. Check with the compressor maker of
the CO2 quality and oil type to be used.
♦ A compressor in the CO2 cycle. R744, Refrigerant
quality 4.0 (Ref. 3) with < 10 ppm O2 and < 10 ppm H2O
should be used. This is expensive, though.
♦ Note that some oils, e.g. ester oils are hygroscopic and
their use is thus somewhat questionable.
♦ Pump circulation (without compressor). Practically
any CO2 can be used. PHEs has been used for many
decades in treating all type of CO2 qualities, including
with a high water content without any problem. Other
components, e.g. valve & pumps, could be more sensi-
tive. As for compressors: check with makers for a suit-
able CO2 quality.
3.10. Fouling in carbon dioxide circuits.
Fouling usually ends up in the evaporators, especially
flooded evaporators, which then should be inspected regu-
larly and cleaned if necessary.
A source of fouling in the refrigerant circuit is oil and its
decomposition products. As no oil is completely insoluble
in carbon dioxide, it is flushed away be the liquid CO2 .
Fouling is usually a sign of excessive wear and tear or cor-
rosion somewhere else and excessive fouling should thus
entail an investigation to the causes.
Single section cascade condenser/evaporator Double section cascade condenser/evaporator

CO2 -10 °C
NH3 -15 °C
CO2
-40 °C
CO2 -40 °C

DX evaporators CO2 -10 °C

Liquid receiver Liquid receiver & LR & flooded

Flooded evaporators DX evaporators evaporators.
with pump circulation -10 °C

Fig. 20. Single or double carbon dioxide circuits.

A. Single circuit.
Advantages: Less costly, only one liquid receiver.
The same CO2 quality – but expensive - is
used in both the DX and the flooded,
pumped circuit.
Disadvan- Better quality – more expensive – CO2 is
tages: necessary.
Oil in the flooded circuit will foul the evapo-
rators and decrease the performance.
B. Double circuit.
Advantages: CO2 of a lesser quality but cheap can be
used in the flooded circuit.
The flooded section is oil free, important for
the performance of the evaporators.
Disadvan- It is easy to mix up the CO2 qualities for the
tages: DX and the flooded circuits.
Expensive, two liquid receivers and two con-
denser sections are necessary.

3.11. Carbon dioxide filling.
Follow the gas manufacturer’s instruction. In general, the
filling should start from the gas phase until a pressure well
over the triple point (5.2 bar) is reached otherwise dry ice
can form and block valves and pipes. When the pressure
is reached continue the filling from the liquid phase.
3.12. One or two liquid receivers.
Figure 20 gives an overview of one or two liquid receivers.
The advantages and disadvantages can be summed up as:
♦ The CO2 in the isothermal system is not very sensitive
to the water content and more important, it is oil free, an
important point for the operation of heat exchangers
♦ The compression cycle needs CO2 of a higher quality,
which is more expensive.
♦ As a compression cycle usually contains oil, an oil
management system is necessary. Insoluble oil is also
detrimental for the operation of heat exchangers as it
can cover the nucleation sites, which are responsible
for a major part of the boiling heat transfer coefficients.
♦ It is questionable to use two qualities of a refrigerant in
the same plant. Sooner or later, the qualities will be
mixed up, with compressor break down as a result.
♦ The benefit of two separate circuits is thus nullified, e.g.
two emergency cooling circuits are necessary,
♦ As the circuits are separate, they can operate at differ-
ent temperature levels, here one is condensing at
-10 °C and the other at -15 °C, albeit the temperatures
should not be too different.
♦ Another – better - option is two separate cascade units.
♦ Be aware of dry ice formation if evaporation just above
the triple point (-56.6 °C).
♦ There is no problem with distribution of liquid carbon
dioxide to parallel connected evaporators as is the case
with pump circulation, see § 3.15. The high pressure
drop in the parallel legs compared to the header pipes,
ensures an almost perfect distribution.
3.14. The flooded evaporator.
The condenser-liquid receiver has been treated in chapter
3.6 and 3.7. Here we will give some points on the design
and installation of flooded evaporators, either the cascade
evaporator – in flooded flow mainly ammonia – or a proc-
ess cooler with CO2 as refrigerant, see figure 21.
The main aspects are on PHEs, but most information are
valid for other evaporator types as well.
♦ In flooded flow the refrigerant leaves the evaporator wet,
sometimes as little as ten weight percent is vapour.
♦ The driving force is a liquid column L, which has to
overcome the pressure drops in the drop leg Pd,
evaporator Pe and return leg Pr. It can do this as the
Separator
Pr(eturn) leg

3.13. Dry expansion evaporators. L

The installation and selection of expansion valves and Liquid head
other components do no differ from other high pressure
Pe(vap) Evaporator
refrigerants, there are sufficient components available. Pd(rop
The main points to consider for carbon dioxide are: Leg) H
♦ Flash gas before the expansion valve. Liquid carbon Pump head
dioxide is sensitive to overheating of the condensate,
less so for a moderate pressure decrease in a sub-
cooled condensate. Fig. 21. The separator-evaporator.
 A B
D

E
F

Side placed (A) Top placed (B) or horizontal E. The pump is placed in a pit F. A downwards loop makes
with three bends. exit (C), both with two bends. to reduce cavitation danger. back flow more difficult.
Inclined (D) is questionable.
G
L
K
H

Avoid inlet from the top (G)- P with out An ejector inlet (J) is questionable as L. Short but wide separator. The design is
benefits - as well as letting the flash there will be maldistribution in the expensive and the separation efficiency is
vapour enter the liquid (H). evaporator. A simple tube (K) is useless. questionable, see also (O).

M N

M. Two symmetrical return legs. At N. Two symmetrical exits, joined before O. Avoid asymmetric return legs. A long and
least the return leg at the movable entrance to the separator. It is probably slender separator is cheaper than (L) and the
frame plate should have a flange. more expensive than (M). flow is more stream lined with better efficiency.

Figure 22. Separator placement.

density in the drop leg is much higher than the two-
phase density in the evaporator and the return leg.
♦ It is also possible to add a pump to give the natural cir-
culation a boost.
♦ Natural circulation is normally used if the evaporator
and separator are in the immediate vicinity. Pumped
flow is used for far away evaporators.
♦ The optimal circulation rate - inverse of the exit vapour
fraction – ranges from less than 1.1 to 10 for CO2 and
1.15 to 2 for ammonia. It varies with the thermal duty,
evaporator type and pipe length. As the evaporator is
usually the most critical component the manufacturer
should be consulted to get a proper circulation rate.
♦ The design of the return leg is especially critical in case
of natural flow, also called thermosiphon. A too small
pipe diameter, too many bends or too long pipes could
lead to a far too small circulation with an impaired heat
transfer. A too large pipe diameter could mean that the
vapour cannot lift the liquid in the vertical sections.
♦ If the pressure drop in the return leg is too large there is
a danger of oscillation; the vapour cannot leave the re-
turn leg as fast as it is produced and the liquid is
pushed out backwards into the drop leg.
When no more liquid in the evaporator, the vapour flow
decreases, the vapour leaves the return leg and the li-
quid enters the evaporator again, too much vapour is
produced and the process repeats.
A good design rule is to maximize the return leg pres-
sure drop to 25 % of the total.
♦ Pumped flow systems are less critical. The pump can
be rated for a fairly large circulation. If the pressure
drops in the system turn out to be larger than expected,
the circulation decreases but this is already taken into
consideration and most evaporators are fairly flexible.
Figures 22 and 23 shows some do’s and don’ts for sepa-
rators-evaporator systems.
♦ If design conditions permit, a horizontal exit as in (22C)
allows very large load variations. An inclined return leg
as in (22D) should be avoided, especially for low pres-
sure drop or expected very low load as instable flow
could result. Top inlet (22G) means an extra lift and
should be avoided. If the liquid level is used for control,
injection of the flash gas in the liquid body (22H) is un-
suitable as the level will be unstable.
♦ Ejector designs (22J) have in general proved to be un-
satisfactorily as the two-phase mixture tends to distrib-
ute unevenly over the plate pack. Especially unsuitable
is a simple pipe (22K) in the inlet; back flow is assured.
♦ A long and slender separator is cheaper and performs
better than a short and wide (22 L & O).
♦ Figure 23 shows some design elements for a thermosi-
phon separator-evaporator loop.
♦ Place all inlets at one end and all exits at the other.
♦ The separator can be divided into a separator (7) and a
receiver part (1, 1c). The liquid filling is minimized and if
the liquid level is used to control an expansion valve,
the operation will be more stable.
♦ Use a horizontal exit (1a, 1b & 1c) to the drop leg if
possible. Vortex formation is suppressed and in case of
CO2, dry ice is less likely to enter the pipes.
♦ A valve (2) in the drop leg can be used to suppress un-
stable evaporation.
♦ Never put a control valve in the return leg. If a stop valve
is necessary use a ball or gate valve, globe valves are
questionable as the pressure drop is too high.
♦ In case of insoluble oil, heavier than the refrigerant,
drain the oil at the lowest point (3). Oil separation is im-
proved if the pipe inclines slightly upwards.
♦ Especially for a low pressure vapour, the return leg (4)
should be as smooth as possible. The pipe exit should
be slightly pointing downwards, here by a 45 ° cut of a
pipe (5). Elbow bends (6) are very suitable.
♦ Figure 23 shows a two pass design on the liquid side. It
is used for cooling of water/brine to a temperature close
to the evaporation temperature. The liquid inlet and ex-
its are at the top. In this way the evaporating refrigerant
meets roughly the same liquid temperature when enter-
ing the channels at the bottom
A plate heat exchanger is one of the few evaporator
types, which can cool water close to the freezing point
without evaporator damage should freezing occur.
♦ Design of a two-phase circuit is difficult but an ex-
perienced evaporator manufacturer should be able
to assist in this.
3.15. Pumped flow evaporators.
The previous chapter dealt mainly with a separator in the
immediate vicinity of flooded flow evaporators – pumped
or natural circulation - typically plate or tube evaporators
for cooling of brine. It is also usually a compressor system.
The refrigerant, ammonia, carbon dioxide or other is
evaporated, compressed and condensed in a normal
compressor cycle.
This chapter deals with pumped flow evaporators where
evaporating carbon dioxide is used instead of brine. The
general properties of carbon dioxide in this application was
described in § 2.4. The evaporators – unit coolers, plate
freezers, tubes in an ice rink, freeze driers etc. are further
away and the carbon dioxide has to be pumped apprecia-
ble distances.
It is usually – but must not be - an isothermal circuit, see
figure 20. The carbon dioxide evaporates and condenses
at basically the same pressure except for the small pres-
sure differences necessary for the circulation.
Figure 24 shows some basic layouts of the separator-
pump-evaporator circuit. Distribution of a fluid between
parallel connected vessels of different types is a difficult
problem; for a single phase fluid and still more so for a
two-phase fluid. Only some points can be treated here.
♦ As figure 24 implies, each group of heat exchangers
should be fed by its own pump, at least if the groups
are far apart, at different heights or of different types.
♦ In figure 24A a number of unit coolers are placed at dif-
ferent heights. The exits from the UC join a common
header below the UC. If the pressure drop for all
1b
7
1a
1 1c
4
6
6 5
2
3
Fig. 23. Separator elements.
the UCs and the attached pipe work are equal, then the
distribution could be as required. The danger is that if
the capacity of lowest placed UC decreases suddenly,
the pressure drop decreases as well. It could the steal
CO2 from especially the highest placed UC.
♦ Better is to join the exits above the UC as in figure 24B.
If the pressure drops in the UC is lower than the corre-
sponding head H, the flow is better distributed over the
UC and capacity changes are easier accommodated.
If the capacity in one of the UC - # 3 - decreases to zero,
i.e. no evaporation at all, the pressure drop changes.
It increases if the friction pressure drop is small and the
static two-phase pressure drop is large as this part is
replaced by liquid with higher density.
It decreases if the friction part is large and the static
two-phase part is small. The friction part goes to zero
and replacement of the two-phase mixture with liquid
has no importance if this pressure drop is small.
There will be no flow in the non evaporating UC and in
the pipe a static liquid column – LC - forms, which cor-
responds to the pressure drops in the other UCs.
The other UCs get a little more refrigerant, which usu-
ally has no adverse effect.
If very large height difference between the UC, there
might be a temperature penalty in shape of a boiling
point increase. In such a case, the UC should be di-
vided into groups, each group fed by its own pump.
♦ One method to even out the refrigerant distribution is to
arrange the UC with symmetrical exits as in figure 24C.
♦ Figure 24D shows circuit, where the UC are arranged
with asymmetric exits, i.e. the refrigerant in the further-
most UC has a longer way to travel and has to pass
various bends & connections. This creates pressure
drops in both the feed and return leg. The driving head
in the furthermost UC is then less than in the first.
There is neither any appreciable vertical distance as in
figure 24B to even out pressure drop variations.
A high pressure drop at each UC inlet is a common
method of distributing a fluid between parallel channels.
This can be done by disks with tailored holes at the inlet
or better, as the figure shows, with valves.
 To cascade condenser.
From cascade
condenser.
A. Unit coolers with exits at different heights.
C. Symmetrical exits.
Figure 24. Arrangement of pumped flow systems.
Both methods are questionable, especially the disks,
which cannot easily changed as fine tuning of the pres-
sure drops might be necessary.
The major drawback is that for the disks/valves to be ef-
fective, the pressure drops have to be fairly large in or-
der to be effective.
A high pressure drop means a danger of flashing after
the disk/valve, especially if the liquid carbon dioxide has
been heated somewhat during the transport.
If the UC, or the freeze dryer, the plate freezer, the PHE
is not designed for a vapour fraction at the inlet a se-
vere maldistribution could occur in the unit.
Liquid systems use three way valves, which by-pass
part of the liquid but that is questionable in two-phase
system as a by-pass simply means extra circulation.
Note also that the pressure resistance of the valve has
to be comparable to that of the evaporator, otherwise
there will be no or only an erratic control function.
♦ A train of evaporators as in figure 24, could be com-
posed of various types of evaporators and with different
capacities. The manufacturers are consulted and then
submit the specifications. Most likely the pressure drops
will differ from the specifications.
Then, these are assembled to a circuit and the pump is
started. However, the pressure drops between parallel
legs in a well design circuit, e.g. figure 24C have to be
equal but most likely they are not. The system solves
this by redistributing the liquid carbon dioxide until the
pressure drops become equal. Thus one item can be
starved while others are overfed. This can be solved by:
o Instead of the exact, optimal circulation of liquid car-
bon dioxide, the circulation rate is increased. This is an
easy and fairly safe method of assuring that each item
should obtain at least its proper amount of refrigerant.
o Adjustment of the inlet valves as in figure 24D. It
probably needs a lot of time consuming tinkering with
the valves.
o Request from the manufacturer of each item, how
much refrigerant has to be fed to the item in order to
give the requested nominal pressure drop.
LC
H
#3
B. Unit coolers with exits at the same height.
D. Unsymmetrical exits.
♦ The return leg should be downwards inclining – 0.5 % -
but this might be difficult to keep in practice. Note how-
ever, that an ice rink has more than 100 m of two-phase
flow in perfectly horizontal pipes and with any problems.
♦ The optimal circulation rate can vary considerably, to
the point that the term “optimal” has no meaning.
The special design of PHEs – plates are removed or
added in parallel to increase the size – means that
when the circulation rate increases, the K-value in-
crease and the number of plates can be reduced but
the pressure drop increases.
Thus, natural circulation evaporators usually operate
with a very low circulation rate, in the order of 1.1 to 2.0.
Forced flow evaporators can operate for a little higher
circulation rate, 1.1 to around 3.
However, if the circulation is too high, the pressure drop
in all parts of the system becomes too large and the
evaporation temperature increases, see § 2.8. This is
especially serious for lower evaporation temperatures.
This implies that the circulation rate should be lower,
the lower the evaporation temperature is.
Unfortunately, there is a conflicting requirement, the liq-
uid volume fraction should not be too low. For a given
circulation rate, it decreases with decreasing temperature.
This is an area, which has not been investigated very
well but as a reference we can take an ammonia ther-
mosiphon evaporator operating around 0 °C, which is
usually laid out for an exit vapour fraction around 0.8,
circulation 1.25, but the actual circulation is probably
larger as the driving head usually is larger than the cal-
culated pressure drop. Thus use a circulation 2.5.
The liquid volume fraction out is then 0.75 % and this
value is used to calculate the circulation rates for CO2.
At -10 °C: Circulation: 1.12 (Ref. 1) 1.6
At -40 °C: “ 1.36 (Ref. 1) 2.4
(Ref. 1) recommends about the double circulation but
an overfeed is advantageous, see the previous section.
♦ In the end, the evaporator manufacturer should be con-
sulted. Only he knows under which conditions an evapo-
rator gives its best performance.
1100 Density, kg/m3
1000
900 CO2
800 PAO
Temperature, °C
700
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 E. Oil return
F. CO2 vs. oil densities.
DX compressor
Liquid receiver
Figure 25. Oil return in a flooded flow system.
A. An insoluble oil heavier than the refrigerant should be
drained at the lowest point of the loop.
B. An insoluble oil lighter than the refrigerant should be
drained from the surface. This implies a constant liquid
level. The separator is thus just a separator and not also
a liquid receiver. This function is taken by the receiver to
the left. The liquid level is kept low to minimize the filling.
A hanging liquid receiver can also be used, figure 22 E.
C. A soluble oil has to be separated by evaporating the
liquid refrigerant. Here it is done by an oil evaporator.
3.16. Oil return.
♦ Dry expansion. There is a straight flow from the com-
pressor to the condenser, expansion valve, evaporator
and back to the compressor and the oil follows this.
The minimum vapour velocity for oil transportation in a
vertical pipe depends mainly on the vapour & oil density,
viscosities, oil surface tension and pipe diameter. A
consistent design method is difficult to find. A pressure
drop of 5 kPa/meter vertical pipe is a reasonable simple
formula. The pressure drop per length is proportional to
the shear forces at the wall, an important parameter.
♦ Flooded flow in cascade system. If it is connected to
a cascade condenser/evaporator as in figure 20B, thus
no compressor in the system, there should be no oil in
the system at all.
♦ Flooded flow in parallel with a DX system, see figure
20A. The common liquid receiver feeds both pumped
flow evaporators and expands to feed DX evaporators.
The subsequent compressor will release oil into the
system, which will enter both the flooded and the DX
evaporators. The DX evaporators serve as oil evapora-
tors, i.e. oil will never accumulate in the liquid receiver.
♦ Flooded flow in a compressor system, see figure 25.
The liquid CO2 from the common liquid receivers ex-
pands in normal expansion valve to feed a number of
DX unit cooler and in a level controlled expansion valve
to feed the flooded circuit. The oil return from the DX
system is straightforward as described above.
♦ In the flooded circuit, the oil remains, as only vapour
leaves the circuit. It thus has to be removed as shown
in figure 25.
Flooded system
compressor
Expansion valve
F
B
Separator C. Oil eva-
porator
D
A
Heating medium for this usually the high pressure con-
densate but any suitable heat source can be used.
D. Another possibility could be to pump a small stream
back to the liquid receiver. If 1 % of the feed stream is
pumped back, the oil concentration in the flooded loop will
be 100 times the concentration in the liquid receiver.
E. If the UC are used for the oil return, the oil collects in
the oil vessel at the DX evaporators. Oil then has to be
pumped back to the flooded flow compressor or this will
be starved on oil.
Carbon dioxide has very little density difference to oil.
At low temperatures it is heavier than the oil but lighter
at higher temperatures, see figure 25 F. The oil density
varies with viscosity range and between manufacturers,
thus a check should be made for a specific oil.
The little density difference means that it might be diffi-
cult to separate it by gravity. More effective separators
can be used, e.g. a lamellae separator.
Another possibility is to use an oil evaporator for insolu-
ble oils as well.
Note that the oil draw-off point, whether soluble or in-
soluble oil, has to be in the refrigerant-oil loop. If it is
drawn off from a stagnant point, e.g. close to D, there is
a danger that there is little or no oil in the draw-off
stream and oil continues to build up in the circuit.
Figure 25 D shows how the DX system could be used
for the oil return. There are some considerations:
o If the flooded system is large and the DX small, the
strain on the DX evaporators could be too large.
o The flooded flow compressor could be starved on oil
if no oil return to the compressor is provided from the
DX system.
o There is another possibility for oil return not shown in
the figure. Liquid is drawn off from the separator at a
suitable point and fed directly to a DX evaporator. If
the evaporation pressure is lower than in the flooded
loop, no pump is necessary.
The strain on this DX evaporator will be large though.
 Tsat = -10 °C/Tsup = 49 °C
3b 4d 4c 4b 5a
54 °C
54 °C
3a
1 Discharge:
2
4a
Figure 26. Defrosting of unit coolers.
3.15. Defrosting.
The condenser in a LT typically operates well below 0 °C.
Defrosting the LT unit cooler by condensing the hot gas
from the compressor is thus not possible. For carbon diox-
ide particularly there are some possibilities, see figure 26:
1. Electric defrosting, suitable for lower capacity systems.
2. Glycol from the HT system. A special defrosting circuit is
necessary in the unit coolers
3. A special high pressure compressor, which increases
the pressure to condensation pressure of 10 °C. (Ref. 2)
has reported good experience with this arrangement.
The disadvantage is that all components in the circuit
must be designed for an operating pressure of 45 bar.
4. Instead of increasing the pressure by compressing a
gas, it can be done by increasing the pressure of the
liquid refrigerant (4a), followed by evaporation (4b),
separation of vapour and liquid (4c) and superheating
(4d). (Ref. 1) has reported good experience with this ar-
rangement. As before, all components have to be de-
signed for 45 bar.
In theory it might be possible defrost a unit cooler by using
the hot gas only, i.e. with no condensation. Unfortunately,
the defrosting time will be too long. The arrangement
shown here could overcome this problem.
5. In the figure are shown three operating and one stand-
by compressor, all equal. The standby compressor is
used for defrosting. The unit cooler to be defrosted (5a)
is connected to this compressor (5b) and both are dis-
connected from the system. In the loop, just before the
compressor, is a superheater (5c) installed as well.
The compressor has two functions:
♦ Act like a pump to circulate the vapour.
♦ Lift the temperature after the vapour superheater.
78 °C
70 °C 5b
5c
Ts = -10 °C/3 K subcooling
78 °C 5d. Data for the defrosting circuit.
Compressors: 3 working, 84.4 kW each
Unit coolers: 3 * 4, 21.1 kW/each
UC. Type: AlfaCubic BL403C
Electric defrost: 12.5 kW (If required)
Compressor when defrosting.
Power: 3.5 kW
Suction: -12.5 °C/24.7 bar
-10 °C/26.5 bar
Defrost cap.: 12.5 kW
Superheater: 9.0 kW
Ts = -40 °C/0 K subcooling
Brazed PHEs are suitable for
all the positions 4b, 4d & 5c
The data are shown in 5d. With a power input of 3.5 kW,
the defrosting capacity is 12.5 kW, which is delivered to
the unit cooler 78 °C in and 54 °C out. With the excel-
lent heat transfer properties of CO2, this could very well
be sufficient to defrost a unit cooler in sufficient short
time.
o The advantages of this system are:
o The maximum design pressure is equal to the con-
denser design pressure.
o No particular extra components, except the super-
heater are necessary (plus the standby compressor).
o A computer simulation where condensing R507A at
10 °C was compared with 26 bar CO2 cooled 78 to
54 °C gave a slightly lower heat transfer coefficient for
CO2 than for R507A, but the temperature difference
for CO2 was almost three times as large, giving a very
large advantage for CO2.
There are some restrictions:
• The heat source temperature has to be sufficient high
in order to heat the refrigerant vapour, to 70 °C in the
case studied. An ammonia compressor in the HT cir-
cuit can easily supply this temperature level, either
the oil or a special glycol circuit.
• The discharge temperature can be lifted higher by in-
creasing the compression ratio but this increases the
compressor power consumption as well.
• The compressing ratio is outside the range specified
by the manufacturers but this probably is due to that
such low ratios are usually not required rather than
any technical difficulties, but this has to be checked.
• The higher the compressor efficiency is, the lower the
discharge temperature will be and the more heat has
to be supplied by the superheater. This is an advan-
tage as this heat probably is cheaper than the elec-
tricity for the compressor motor.
Acknowledgements.
For the content of this paper, I have had the invaluable help
of colleagues within Alfa Laval, in both Italy and abroad, but
especially Göran Hammarson, to whom all I express my
thanks.
We also thank Friosol AG in Switzerland for the use of the
cover photography .

References.
1. Design Consideration when Using Carbon Dioxide
in Industrial Refrigeration Systems.
Angus Gillies, B. Eng., C. Eng. &
David Blackhurst BSc(Hons), C. Eng.
Star Refrigeration Ltd.
Glasgow UK.

2. Introducing a New Ammonia /CO2 Cascade Concept

for Large Fishing Vessels.
Per Skærbæk Nielsen and Thomas Lund.
York Refrigeration, Marine and Controls
Viby J, denmark
2003 Ammonia Refrigeration Conference & Exhibition.
IIAR, Albuquerque, New Mexico, March 16 – 19, 2003

3. Safety leaflet Carbon Dioxide, Linde/AGA.