Liquid Overfeed Systems 4.

• Reduced potential of hot-gas bypass at the end of the defrost cycle The outlet temperature of the return line from each evaporator
using top-fed hot gas because of the presence of the distribution should be the same as the main return line’s saturation temperature,
orifices allowing for pressure drops. Starved units are indicated by tempera-
• Lower system refrigerant flow rates tures higher than those for adequately fed units. Excessive feed to a
circuit increases evaporator temperature because of excessive pres-
The top-feed system is limited by the relative location of com- sure drop.
ponents. Because this system sometimes requires more refrigerant The minimum flow bypass from the liquid line to the low-
circulation than bottom-feed systems, it has greater pumping re- pressure receiver should be adjusted and checked to ensure that it is
quirements, resulting in a larger refrigerant pump and possibly functioning. During operation, the pump manufacturer’s recommen-
larger feed and return lines, and increased line pressure drop penal- dations for lubrication and maintenance should be followed. Regular
ties. In bottom-feed evaporators, multiple headers with individual oil draining procedures should be established for ammonia systems;
inlets and outlets can be installed to reduce static pressure penalties. the quantities of oil added to and drained from each system should
For high lift of return overfeed lines from the evaporators, dual suc- be logged and compared, to determine whether oil is accumulating
tion risers can be used to reduce static pressure penalties (Miller out in the system. Oil should not be drained in halocarbon systems.
1974, 1979). Because of oil’s miscibility with halocarbons at high temperatures, it
Distribution must be considered when using a vertical refrigerant may be necessary to add oil to the system until an operating balance
feed, because of static pressure variations in the feed and return header is achieved (Soling 1971; Stoecker 1960).
circuits. For example, for equal circuit loadings in a horizontal-
airflow unit cooler, using gradually smaller orifices for bottom-feed Operating Costs and Efficiency
circuits than for upper circuits can compensate for pressure differ- Operating costs for overfeed systems are generally lower than for
ences. other systems (though not always, because of various inefficiencies
When the top-feed arrangement allows for free draining into wet that exist from system to system and from plant to plant). For exist-
suction return piping, particularly in air, water, or electric defrost ing dry expansion plants converted to liquid overfeed, the operating
units, any liquid remaining in the coils rapidly drains to the low- hours, power, and maintenance costs are reduced. Efficiency of
Licensed for single user. © 2018 ASHRAE, Inc.

pressure receiver, allowing a quicker defrost. In this situation, early gas pump systems has been improved by using high-side pres-
defrost is faster than in a comparable bottom-feed evaporator. sure to circulate overfeed liquid. This type of system is indicated in
the controlled-pressure system shown in Figure 4.
8. REFRIGERANT CHARGE Gas-pumped systems, which use higher-pressure refrigerant gas
Overfeed systems need more refrigerant than dry expansion sys- to pump liquid directly to the evaporators or to return overfed liquid
tems. Top-feed arrangements have smaller charges than bottom- to the controlled-pressure receiver, require additional compressor
feed systems. The amount of charge depends on evaporator volume, volume flow rate, from which no useful refrigeration is obtained.
circulating rate, sizes of flow and return lines, operating tempera- These systems may consume 4 to 10% or more of the compressor
ture differences, and heat transfer coefficients. Generally, top-feed power to maintain refrigerant flow.
evaporators operate with the refrigerant charge occupying about 25 If condensing pressure is reduced as much as 70 kPa, the com-
to 40% of the evaporator volume. The refrigerant charge for the pressor power per unit of refrigeration drops by about 7%. Where
bottom-feed arrangement occupies about 40 to 60% of the evapora- outdoor dry- and wet-bulb conditions allow, a mechanical pump can
tor volume, with corresponding variations in the wet returns. Under be used to pump liquid with no effect on evaporator performance.
some no-load conditions in bottom-fed evaporators, the charge may Gas-operated systems must, however, maintain the condensing
approach 100% of the evaporator volume. In this case, the liquid pressure within a much smaller range to reliably pump the liquid
surge volume from full load to no load must be considered in sizing and maintain the required overfeed rate.
the low-pressure receiver (Miller 1971, 1974).
Evaporators with high heat transfer rates, such as flake ice mak- 10. LINE SIZING
ers and scraped-surface heat exchangers, have small charges The liquid feed line to the evaporator and wet return line to the
because of small evaporator volumes. The amount of refrigerant in low-pressure receiver cannot be sized by the method described in
the low side has a major effect on the size of the low-pressure Chapter 22 of the 2017 ASHRAE Handbook—Fundamentals. Figure
receiver, especially in horizontal vessels. The cross-sectional area 7 can be used to size liquid feed lines. The circulating rate from Table
for vapor flow in horizontal vessels is reduced with increasing liquid 1 is multiplied by the evaporating rate. For example, an evaporator
level. It is important to ascertain the evaporator refrigerant charge with a circulating rate of 4 that forms vapor at a rate of 50 g/s needs
with fluctuating loads for correct vessel design, particularly for a a feed line sized for 4 u 50 = 200 g/s.
low-pressure receiver that does not have a constant level control but Alternative ways to design wet returns include the following:
is fed through a high-pressure control.
• Use one pipe size larger than calculated for vapor flow alone.
• Use a velocity selected for dry expansion reduced by the factor
9. START-UP AND OPERATION
1/Circulating Rate . This method suggests that the wet-return
All control devices should be checked before start-up. If mechan- velocity for a circulating rate of 4 is 1 / 4 = 0.5, or half that of the
ical pumps are used, the direction of operation must be correct. Sys- acceptable dry-vapor velocity.
tem evacuation and charging procedures are similar to those for other • Use the design method described by Chaddock et al. (1972). The
systems. The system must be operating under normal conditions to report includes tables of flow capacities at 0.036 K drop per metre
determine the total required refrigerant charge. Liquid height is of horizontal lines for R-717 (ammonia), R-12, R-22, and R-502.
established by liquid level indicators in the low-pressure receivers.
When sizing refrigerant lines, the following design precautions
Calibrated, manually operated flow regulators should be set for
should be taken:
the design conditions and adjusted for better performance as neces-
sary. When hand expansion valves are used, the system should be • Carefully size overfeed return lines with vertical risers because
started by opening the valves about one-quarter to one-half turn. more liquid is held in risers than in horizontal pipe. This holdup
When balancing is necessary, the regulators should be cut back on increases with reduced vapor flow and increases pressure loss
units not starved of liquid, to force the liquid through underfed units. because of gravity and two-phase pressure drop.
 4.8 2018 ASHRAE Handbook—Refrigeration (SI)

Fig. 8 Basic Horizontal Gas-and-Liquid Separator

• Use double risers with halocarbons to maintain velocity at partial

loads and to reduce liquid static pressure loss (Miller 1979).
• Add the equivalent of a 100% liquid static height penalty to the
pressure drop allowance to compensate for liquid holdup in
ammonia systems that have unavoidable vertical risers.
• As alternatives in severe cases, provide traps and a means of
pumping liquids, or use dual-suction risers.
• Install low-pressure drop valves so the stems are horizontal or
nearly so (Chisholm 1971).

11. LOW-PRESSURE RECEIVER SIZING

Licensed for single user. © 2018 ASHRAE, Inc.

Low-pressure receivers are also called recirculators, liquid sepa-

rators, suction traps, accumulators, liquid/vapor separators, flash
coolers, gas and liquid coolers, surge drums, knockout drums, slop
tanks, or low-side pressure vessels, depending on their function and
user preference.
Low-pressure receiver sizing is determined by the required liquid
holdup (i.e., ballast or reserve) volume and allowable gas velocity.
The volume must accommodate fluctuations of liquid in the evapo-
rators and overfeed return lines as a result of load changes (i.e.,
surge) and defrost periods. It must also handle swelling and foaming
of the liquid charge in the receiver, which is caused by boiling
caused by heat gain or pressure reduction during load fluxations. At Fig. 9 Basic Vertical Gravity Gas and Liquid Separator
the same time, a liquid seal must be maintained on the supply line
for continuous-circulation devices. A separating space must be pro- Table 2 Maximum Effective Separation Velocities for R-717,
vided for gas velocity to slow enough to allow the liquid droplets to
R-22, R-12, and R-502, with Steady Flow Conditions
fall out by gravity and ensure a minimum entrainment of liquid
droplets into the piping to the compressor suction. Space limitations Vertical
and design requirements result in a wide variety of configurations Maximum Steady Flow Velocity, m/s
Temp., Separation
(Lorentzen 1966; Miller 1971; Niemeyer 1961; Scheiman 1963, °C Distance, mm R-717 R-22 R-12 R-502
1964; Sonders and Brown 1934; Stoecker 1960; Younger 1955).
+10 250 0.15 0.07 0.08 0.06
In selecting a gas-and-liquid separator, adequate volume for the 610 0.64 0.31 0.36 0.25
liquid supply and a vapor space above the minimum liquid height 910 0.71 0.39 0.43 0.32
for liquid surge must be provided. This requires analysis of oper-
–7 250 0.21 0.10 0.11 0.08
ating load variations. This, in turn, determines the maximum
610 0.87 0.44 0.49 0.35
operating liquid level. Figures 8 and 9 identify these levels and the
910 0.99 0.52 0.58 0.42
important parameters of vertical and horizontal gravity separators.
Vertical separators maintain the same separating area with level –23 250 0.31 0.14 0.16 0.11
610 1.29 0.61 0.69 0.49
variations, whereas separating areas in horizontal separators change
910 1.43 0.72 0.81 0.59
with level variations. Horizontal separators should have inlets and
outlets separated horizontally by at least the vertical separating –40 250 0.48 0.21 0.24 0.17
distance. A useful arrangement in horizontal separators distributes 610 1.99 0.88 1.01 0.71
the inlet flow into two or more connections to reduce turbulence and 910 2.17 1.04 1.17 0.84
horizontal velocity without reducing the residence time of the gas –57 250 0.80 0.33 0.37 0.25
flow within the shell (Miller 1971). 610 3.30 1.36 1.54 1.08
In horizontal separators, as the horizontal separating distance 910 3.54 1.57 1.78 1.25
increases beyond the vertical separating distance, the residence Source: Adapted from Miller (1971).
time of vapor passing through increases so that higher velocities
than allowed in vertical separators can be tolerated. As the sepa- should be reduced to a value achieved by a suitable multiplier such
rating distance reduces, the amount of liquid entrainment from as 0.75.
gravity separators increases. Table 2 shows the gravity separation The gas-and-liquid separator may be designed with internal
velocities. For surging loads or pulsating flow associated with baffles or eliminators to separate liquid from the suction gas return-
large step changes in capacity, the maximum steady-flow velocity ing from the top of the shell to the compressor. More often, these
 Liquid Overfeed Systems 4.9

additional internal devices are not needed because there is enough For nonuniform distribution of gas flow in the horizontal shell,
separation space above the liquid level in the vessel for gravity to be determine the minimum horizontal distance for gas flow from point
used as the sole separation method. Such a design is usually of the of entry to point of exit as follows:
vertical type, with a separation height above the liquid level of 600
1000QD
to 900 mm. The shell diameter is sized to keep suction gas velocity RTL = --------------------- (4)
low enough to allow liquid droplets to separate and not be entrained VA x
with the returning suction gas off the top of the shell.
Although separators are made with length-to-diameter (L/D) where
RTL = residence time length, mm
ratios of 1/1 increasing to 10/1, the least expensive separators usu-
Q = maximum flow for that portion of the shell, L/s
ally have L/D ratios between 3/1 and 5/1. Vertical separators are
normally used for systems with reciprocating compressors. Hori- All connections must be sized for the flow rates and pressure drops
zontal separators may be preferable where vertical height is critical permissible and must be positioned to minimize liquid splashing.
and/or where large volume space for liquid is required. The proce- Internal baffles or mist eliminators can reduce vessel diameter;
dures for designing vertical and horizontal separators are different. however, test correlations are necessary for a given configuration
A vertical gas-and-liquid separator is shown in Figure 9. The end and placement of these devices.
of the inlet pipe C1 is capped so that flow dispersion is directed An alternative formula for determining separation velocities that
down toward the liquid level. The suggested opening is four times can be applied to separators is
the transverse internal area of the pipe. Height H1 with a 120° dis-
Ul – Uv
persion of the flow reaches approximately 70% of the internal diam- v = k ---------------- (5)
eter of the shell. Uv
An alternative inlet pipe with a downturned elbow or mitered
bend can be used. However, the jet effect of entering fluid must be where
considered to avoid undue splashing. The pipe outlet must be a min- v = velocity of vapor, m/s
imum distance of IDS/5 above the maximum liquid level in the Ul = density of liquid, kg/m3
Licensed for single user. © 2018 ASHRAE, Inc.

Uv = density of vapor, kg/m3

shell. H2 is measured from the outlet to the inside top of the shell. It k = factor based on experience without regard to vertical separation
equals D + 0.5 times the depth of the curved portion of the head. distance and surface tension for gravity separators
For the alternative location of C2, determine IDS from the fol-
lowing equation: In gravity liquid/vapor separators that must separate heavy
entrainment from vapors, use a k of 0.03. This gives velocities
1270Q 2 equivalent to those used for 300 to 350 mm vertical separation dis-
IDS = ---------------- + C 2 (2)
V tance for R-717 and 350 to 400 mm vertical separation distance for
The maximum liquid height in the separator is a function of the halocarbons. In knockout drums that separate light entrainment, use
type of system in which the separator is being used. In some systems a k of 0.06. This gives velocities equivalent to those used for
this can be estimated, but in others, previous experience is the only 900 mm vertical separation distance for R-717 and for halocarbons.
guide for selecting the proper liquid height. Accumulated liquid
must be returned to the system by a suitable means at a rate compa- REFERENCES
rable to its collection rate. ASHRAE members can access ASHRAE Journal articles and
With a horizontal separator, the vertical separation distance used ASHRAE research project final reports at technologyportal.ashrae
is an average value. The top part of the horizontal shell restricts gas .org. Articles and reports are also available for purchase by nonmem-
flow so that the maximum vertical separation distance cannot be bers in the online ASHRAE Bookstore at www.ashrae.org/bookstore.
used. If Ht represents the maximum vertical distance from the liquid
level to the inside top of the shell, the average separation distance as Chaddock, J.B., D.P. Werner, and C.G. Papachristou. 1972. Pressure drop in
the suction lines of refrigerant circulation systems. ASHRAE Transactions
a fraction of IDS is as follows:
78(2):114-123.
Ht /IDS D/IDS Ht /IDS D/IDS Chisholm, D. 1971. Prediction of pressure drop at pipe fittings during two-
phase flow. Proceedings of the IIR Conference, Washington, D.C.
0.1 0.068 0.6 0.492
0.2 0.140 0.7 0.592 Lorentzen, G. 1963. Conditions of cavitation in liquid pumps for refrigerant
0.3 0.215 0.8 0.693 circulation. Progress Refrigeration Science Technology I:497.
0.4 0.298 0.9 0.793 Lorentzen, G. 1965. How to design piping for liquid recirculation. Heating,
0.5 0.392 1.0 0.893 Piping & Air Conditioning (June):139.
Lorentzen, G. 1966. On the dimensioning of liquid separators for refrigera-
The suction connection(s) for refrigerant gas leaving the hori- tion systems. Kältetechnik 18:89.
zontal shell must be at or above the location established by the aver- Lorentzen, G. 1968. Evaporator design and liquid feed regulation. Journal
age distance for separation. The maximum cross-flow velocity of of Refrigeration (November-December):160.
gas establishes residence time for the gas and any entrained liquid Lorentzen, G., and R. Gronnerud. 1967. On the design of recirculation type
droplets in the shell. The most effective removal of entrainment evaporators. Kulde 21(4):55.
occurs when residence time is the maximum practical. Regardless Miller, D.K. 1971. Recent methods for sizing liquid overfeed piping and
of the number of gas outlet connections for uniform distribution of suction accumulator-receivers. Proceedings of the IIR Conference, Wash-
gas flow, the cross-sectional area of the gas space is ington, D.C.
Miller, D.K. 1974. Refrigeration problems of a VCM carrying tanker. ASH-
2000DQ RAE Journal 11.
Ax = --------------------- (3) Miller, D.K. 1979. Sizing dual suction risers in liquid overfeed refrigeration
VL
systems. Chemical Engineering 9.
where Niederer, D.H. 1964. Liquid recirculation systems—What rate of feed is rec-
Ax = minimum transverse net cross-sectional area or gas space, mm2 ommended. The Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Business (December).
D = average vertical separation distance, mm Niemeyer, E.R. 1961. Check these points when designing knockout drums.
Q = total quantity of gas leaving vessel, L/s Hydrocarbon Processing and Petroleum Refiner (June).
L = inside length of shell, mm Scheiman, A.D. 1963. Size vapor-liquid separators quicker by nomograph.
V = separation velocity for separation distance used, m/s Hydrocarbon Processing and Petroleum Refiner (October).
 4.10 2018 ASHRAE Handbook—Refrigeration (SI)

Scheiman, A.D. 1964. Horizontal vapor-liquid separators. Hydrocarbon Pro- Geltz, R.W. 1967. Pump overfeed evaporator refrigeration systems. Air Con-
cessing and Petroleum Refiner (May). ditioning, Heating & Refrigeration News (January 30, February 6, March
Scotland, W.B. 1963. Discharge temperature considerations with multi- 6, March 13, March 20, March 27).
cylinder ammonia compressors. Modern Refrigeration (February). Jekel, T.B., J.M. Fisher, and D.T. Reindl. 2001. Gravity separator fundamen-
Scotland, W.B. 1970. Advantages, disadvantages and economics of liquid tals and design. Proceedings of IIAR Ammonia Refrigeration Conference
overfeed systems. ASHRAE Symposium Bulletin KC-70-3: Liquid over- and Exhibition.
feed systems. Lorentzen, G., and A.O. Baglo. 1969. An investigation of a gas pump recir-
Soling, S.P. 1971. Oil recovery from low temperature pump recirculating culation system. Proceedings of the Xth International Congress of
hydrocarbon systems. ASHRAE Symposium Bulletin PH-71-2: Effect of Refrigeration, p. 215. International Institute of Refrigeration, Paris.
oil on the refrigeration system. Richards, W.V. 1959. Liquid ammonia recirculation systems. Industrial
Sonders, M., and G.G. Brown. 1934. Design of fractionating columns, en- Refrigeration (June):139.
trainment and capacity. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry (January). Richards, W.V. 1970. Pumps and piping in liquid overfeed systems.
Stoecker, W.F. 1960. How to design and operate flooded evaporators for ASHRAE Symposium Bulletin KC-70-3: Liquid overfeed systems.
cooling air and liquids. Heating, Piping & Air Conditioning (December). Richards, W.B. 1985. A critical look at old habits in ammonia vessel speci-
Younger, A.H. 1955. How to size future process vessels. Chemical Engi- fications. Proceedings of IIAR Ammonia Refrigeration Conference.
neering (May). Slipcevic, B. 1964. The calculation of the refrigerant charge in refrigerating
systems with circulation pumps. Kältetechnik 4:111.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Thompson, R.B. 1970. Control of evaporators in liquid overfeed systems.
ASHRAE Symposium Bulletin KC-70-3: Liquid overfeed systems.
Chaddock, J.B. 1976. Two-phase pressure drop in refrigerant liquid overfeed Watkins, J.E. 1956. Improving refrigeration systems by applying established
systems—Design tables. ASHRAE Transactions 82(2):107-133. principles. Industrial Refrigeration (June).
Chaddock, J.B., H. Lau, and E. Skuchas. 1976. Two-phase pressure drop in Wiencke, B. 2002. Sizing and design of gravity liquid separators in indus-
refrigerant liquid overfeed systems—Experimental measurements. ASH- trial refrigeration. Proceedings of IIAR Ammonia Refrigeration Confer-
RAE Transactions 82(2):134-150. ence and Exhibition.
Licensed for single user. © 2018 ASHRAE, Inc.

Related Commercial Resources