This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
REFRIGERATION SYSTEM
GENERATOR – HEAT EXCHANGER
ANTONIO J. BULA
DIANE L. HERRERA
LUIS F. NAVARRO
LESME A. CORREDOR
Uso Racional de la Energía y Preservación del Medio Ambiente
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Universidad del Norte
Barranquilla, Colombia
Km 5 Carretera Pto. Col.
abula@guayacan.uninorte.edu.co
ABSTRACT
A thermodynamic simulation of a solar absorption
refrigeration cycle has been carried out. The binary
mixture considered in the present investigation was H
2
O
– NH
3
(Water – Ammonia). This simulation was
performed in order to investigate the effect that the
generator temperature and the heat exchanger efficiency
have over the Coefficient of Performance (COP) and
mass flux on a single absorption refrigeration system that
uses solar energy as a primary source. It was found that
the heat exchanger efficiency determines the maximum
temperature that can be used at the generator in order to
obtain the maximum COP out of the system. For a
constant efficiency at the heat exchanger, there is an
optimum temperature to be used at the generator, while a
higher temperature will decrease the system COP.
KEYWORDS: Refrigeration, Absorption, Energy
Systems, Thermodynamic Simulation.
SYMBOLS
COP = Coefficient of Performance,
1
1
]
1
¸
,
_
¸
¸
+
• • •
b
g e
W Q Q
max
COP = Maximum Coefficient of Performance
E = Efficiency
ƒ = Mass flow ratio
h = Enthalpy (kJ/kg)
•
m = Mass flow (kg/s)
P = Pressure (kPa)
q = Heat per unit mass (kJ/kg)
Q = Heat (kJ)
•
Q = Heat rate (kW)
T = Temperature (
0
C)
υ = Specific volume (m
3
/kg)
•
W
= Power (kW)
x = Concentration (kg/kg)
Subscripts
a = Absorber
b = Pump
c = Condenser
e = Evaporator
l = Liquid
g = Generator
ref = Refrigerant
sf = Strong solution
sd = Weak solution
v = Vapor
INTRODUCTION
The use of solar energy as an alternative source has
been attracting a lot of interest in the last years due to the
environmental considerations that apply all around the
world. So many applications have been considered,
including transportation and refrigeration systems, among
others. Solar absorption refrigeration is one of the
applications under review because of the advantages that
present its use in sunny and warm regions, where solar
power can be used as the main source for its operation.
Unlike mechanical vapor compression refrigerators, these
systems cause no ozone depletion and reduce demand on
electricity supply. Besides, heat powered systems could
be superior to electricity powered systems because of the
use of inexpensive waste heat, solar, biomass or
geothermal energy sources for which the supplying cost
is negligible in many cases. Despite using an economic
energy source, the system is characterized by its low
COP, for that reason it is necessary to perform a study in
order to find the most efficient operation range. One of
the main factors that have helped to develop this kind of
systems is the thermodynamic simulation that can be
carried out in order to study the different variables
affecting the performance of the equipment. Whitlow [1]
gathered the memories of the Toronto 73
rd
ASHRAE
Conference, where the absorption refrigeration cycle was
studied from the thermodynamic point of view, the COP
and
max
COP were given as a function of the operation
temperature at the generator, evaporator and condenser.
The use of heat exchangers and some other binary
mixtures were recommended. Van Passen [2] presented
the work done by the International Health Organization in
order to impulse a vaccination program to control child
diseases through immunization where Delf University of
Technology was involved in the thermodynamic
simulation of a solar absorption refrigeration system. The
simulated model was developed because of the excellent
results obtained during the simulation process. In 1977
Shwarts and Shitzer [3] analyzed thermodynamically the
possibility to operate the solar absorption refrigeration
system for air conditioning. Their results showed that the
system was suitable for domestic use. Sun [4] analyzed
and performed an optimization of the water – ammonia
cycle. As a result, he obtained a mathematical model that
allowed the simulation of the process. Sun [5] presented a
thermodynamic design and performed an optimization of
the absorption refrigeration process in order to map the
most common cycles for water – ammonia, and lithium
bromide – water. The results can be used to select the
operation conditions in order to obtain a maximum
performance from the system. Sun [6] (1998) performed
a thermodynamic analysis of different binary mixtures
considered in the absorption refrigeration cycle.
The literature review on solar absorption
refrigeration cycles shows that a thermodynamic
simulation can be performed in order to study and
analyze the system. A lot of work has been done in this
area and the effect of the generator temperature has been
considered extensively, but the effect of the heat
exchange efficiency in a single absorption refrigeration
system has not been considered.
MATHEMATICAL MODEL
Figure 1 illustrates the main components of the
absorption refrigeration cycle. Highpressure liquid
refrigerant (2) from the condenser passes into the
evaporator (4) through an expansion valve (3) that
reduces the pressure of the refrigerant to the low pressure
existing in the evaporator. The liquid refrigerant (3)
vaporizes in the evaporator by absorbing heat from the
material being cooled and the resulting lowpressure
vapor (4) passes to the absorber, where it is absorbed by
the strong solution coming from the generator (8) through
an expansion valve (10), and forms the weak solution (5).
The weak solution (5) is pumped to the generator
pressure (7), and the refrigerant in it is boiled off in the
generator. The remaining solution (8) flows back to the
absorber and, thus, completes the cycle. By weak solution
(strong solution) is meant that the ability of the solution
to absorb the refrigerant vapor is weak (strong),
according to the ASHRAE definition. In order to improve
system performance, a solution heat exchanger is
included in the cycle. An analyzer and a rectifier need to
be added to remove water vapor from the refrigerant
mixture leaving the generator before reaching the
condenser. For the current study, it is assumed that the
refrigerant vapor is 100% ammonia.
Condenser
Evaporator
Generator
Absorber
Expansion
valve
Expansion
valve
Heat
Exchanger
Strong
Solution
Weak
Solution
Pump
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
8
9
10
Q
e
Q
c
Q
a
Q
g
Figure 1. Schematic of an absorption refrigeration cycle.
In order to analyze the system, mass and energy
balance must be performed at each component.
At the expansion valves,
ref
m m m
• • •
· ·
3 2
(Total mass balance) (1)
10 9
• •
· m m (Total mass balance) (2)
3 2
h h · (Energy balance) (3)
10 9
h h · (Energy balance) (4)
At the evaporator,
ref
m m m
• • •
· ·
4 3
(Total mass balance) (5)
) (
3 4
h h m Q
ref
e
− ·
• •
(Energy balance) (6)
At the generator,
• • •
+ ·
8 1 7
m m m (Total mass balance) (7)
8 8 1 1 7 7
x m x m x m
• • •
+ · (NH
3
mass balance) (8)
7 7 8 8 1
1
h m h m h m Q
g
• • • •
− + · (Energy balance) (9)
From equations (7) and (8), the strong and weak
solution mass flow rate can be obtained
1
7 8
1 7
8
• •
−
−
· m
x x
x x
m (10)
1
7 8
1 8
7
• •
−
−
· m
x x
x x
m (11)
From equation (11), the circulation ratio can de derived:
7 8
1 8
1
7
x x
x x
m
m
f
−
−
· ·
•
•
(12)
At the absorber,
5 10 4
• • •
· + m m m (Total mass balance) (13)
5 5 10 10 4 4
h m h m h m Q
a
• • • •
− + · (Energy balance) (14)
Dividing by 4
•
m
) ( ƒ ) (
5 10 10 4
h h h h q
a
− + − · (15)
where
a
q
•
represents the heat dissipated per unit mass,
and f the mass flow ratio. The first term of the right side
represents the phase change, and the second the cooling
of the mixture.
At the pump,
6 5
• •
· m m (Total mass balance) (16)
( )
5 6
5
h h m W
b
− ·
• •
(Energy balance) (17)
At the condenser,
• •
·
2 1
m m (Total mass balance) (18)
) (
2 1
h h m Q
ref
c
− ·
• •
(Energy balance) (19)
At the heat exchanger,
• • • •
+ · +
9 7
6
8
m m m m (Total mass balance) (20)
( )
9 8
6
8
6 7
h h
m
m
h h − + ·
•
•
(Energy balance) (21)
COMPUTATIONAL MODEL
In order to analyze how the system reacts to different
operating conditions, it is necessary to simulate the
variables that affect its performance, with the intention of
obtaining the maximum COP out of the system. The
operating conditions choose were:
g
T = 70 – 90
O
C
c
T = 30
O
C
a
T = 25
O
C
e
T = 5
O
C
Refrigerant mass flow
ref
m
•
= 1.0 kg/s
Heat exchanger efficiency: 50 – 100%
High pressure: 1.16 MPa
Low pressure: 0.51 MPa.
From Sun [4], the pressure can be calculated
according to equation (22). The liquid and gas enthalpies
of the refrigerant (NH
3
) can be calculated from equation
(23) and (24), respectively.
( ) ( )
∑
·
− ·
6
0
3
15 . 27 10
i
i
i
T a T P (22)
( ) ( )
∑
·
− ·
6
0
15 . 27
i
i
i l
T b T h (23)
( ) ( )
∑
·
− ·
6
0
15 . 27
i
i
i
T c T h
υ
(24)
The coefficients for equations (22 – 24) are presented in
Table 1.
Table 1. Coefficients for equations (22 – 24) (Da Wen
Sun, 1997a)
i a
i
equation (22) b
i
equation (23) c
i
equation (24)
0 4.2871 x 10
1
1.9879 x 10
2
1.4633 x 10
3
1 1.6001 x 10
2
4.4644 x 10
0
1.2839 x 10
0
2 2.3652 x 10
4
6.2790 x 10
3
1.1501 x 10
2
3 1.6132 x 10
6
1.4591 x 10
4
2.1523 x 10
4
4 2.4303 x 10
9
1.5262 x 10
6
1.9055 x 10
6
5 1.2494 x 10
11
1.8069 x 10
8
2.5608 x 10
8
6 1.2741 x 10
13
1.9054 x 10
10
2.5964 x 10
10
Standard error 1.6 x 10
1
8.5626 x 10
0
1.059 x 10
1
Mean deviation 1.252 x 10
2
5.566 x 10
3
3.679 x 10
3
For the mixture, the enthalpy was calculated according to
equations (25 – 27).
( )
5 4 3
2
1084970 2309150 1911990
767227 148593 5 . 11101 , 60
x x x
x x x C h
o
− + −
+ − ·
(25)
( )
5 4 3
2
672653 1367500 1079610
413443 3 . 76879 1 . 5708 , 80
x x x
x x x C h
o
− + −
+ − ·
(26)
( )
5 4 3
2
4282390 8613990 6740720
2560630 . 470584 6 . 33499 , 100
x x x
x x x C h
o
− + −
+ − ·
(27)
Maximum standard error for equations (25 – 27) is 0.5%.
RESULTS
Table 2 presents a comparison between the results
obtained in this simulation and Da Wen Sun (1997a) for
COP and mass flow. It is noticed that the results in the
actual investigation have a good agreement with those
obtained by Da Wen Sun (1997a).
Table 2. COP and mass flow rate comparison for heat
exchanger efficiency of 80 %
COP COP Error f f Error
(Actual (Dae Wen % (Actual (Dae Wen %
Investigation) Sun 1997a) Investigation) Sun 1997a)
0,53 0,60 11,7 7,88 7,7 2,3
0,55 0,61 9,8 6,71 6,6 1,7
0,56 0,62 9,7 5,88 5,5 6,9
0,56 0,63 11,1 5,26 5 5,2
0,57 0,63 9,5 4,78 4,4 8,6
0,57 0,63 9,5 4,4 4,3 2,3
0,57 0,60 5,0 4,09 3,8 7,6
0,57 0,63 9,5 3,83 3,6 6,4
0,57 0,63 9,5 3,61 3,3 9,4
9,13 5,26
1,69 2,61
Media
Deviation
Media
Deviation
0,450
0,486
0,522
0,558
0,594
0,630
0,540 0,632 0,724 0,816 0,908 1,000
Heat Exchanger Efficiency
C
O
P
Tg = 70.0 C
Tg = 72.5 C
Tg = 75.0 C
Tg = 77.5 C
Tg = 80.0 C
Tg = 82.5 C
Tg = 85.0 C
Tg = 87.5 C
Tg = 90.0 C
Figure 2. COP variation as a function of the heat
exchanger efficiency for different
values of temperature at the generator
Figure 2 presents the variation of the COP as a
function of the heat exchanger efficiency for different
generator temperatures. This figure can be described as
follows:
 For a given generator temperature.
o As the heat exchanger efficiency increases,
the COP increases.
 For a given heat exchanger efficiency.
o If E < 0.7, the system COP increases as the
generator temperature rises.
o If E > 0.7,
§ If
g
T < 77.5
O
C, the system COP
increases as the efficiency
augments.
§ If
g
T > 77.5
O
C, the system COP
decreases as the efficiency
increases.
 For a given system COP.
o It can be attained with several combinations
of generator temperature and heat
exchanger efficiency.
The generator temperature effects over the system
COP for different heat exchanger efficiencies can be
observed in Figure 3. This figure can be described as
follows:
 For a given generator temperature
o The system COP increases as the efficiency
augment.
 For a given heat exchanger efficiency
o As the generator temperature is elevated,
the COP of the system presents a maximum,
after this point, as the temperature continues
raising, the COP decreases.
0,45
0,49
0,52
0,56
0,59
0,63
69,5 73,7 77,9 82,1 86,3 90,5
Generator Temperature,
O
C
C
O
P
E = 55 % E = 60 %
E = 65 % E = 70 %
E = 75 % E = 80 %
E = 85 % E = 90 %
E = 95 % E = 100 %
Figure 3. COP variation as a function of the generator
temperature for different values
of efficiency at the heat exchanger
Table 3. Heat, work and COP for different generator
temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 50 %
Tg (°C) Qc (KJ/s) Qe (KJ/s) Qa (KJ/s) Qg (KJ/s) Wb (KJ/s) COP
70.0 1240.49 1115.84 2372.02 2488.67 8.0019 0.4469
72.5 1247.13 1115.84 2240.40 2364.87 6.8156 0.4705
75.0 1253.78 1115.84 2151.51 2283.47 5.9737 0.4874
77.5 1260.42 1115.84 2088.45 2227.68 5.3452 0.4997
80.0 1267.07 1115.84 2041.73 2188.09 4.8581 0.5088
82.5 1273.43 1115.84 2005.61 2158.73 4.4695 0.5158
85.0 1279.80 1115.84 1976.43 2136.23 4.1523 0.5213
87.5 1286.16 1115.84 1951.79 2118.22 3.8885 0.5258
90.0 1292.53 1115.84 1930.13 2103.15 3.6656 0.5296
Table 4. Heat, work and COP for different generator
temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 75 %
Tg (°C) Qc (KJ/s) Qe (KJ/s) Qa (KJ/s) Qg (KJ/s) Wb (KJ/s) COP
70,0 1240,49 1128,63 2044,29 2149,73 6,4221 0,5234
72,5 1247,13 1128,63 1971,21 2084,24 5,4700 0,5401
75,0 1253,78 1128,63 1922,46 2042,81 4,7943 0,5512
77,5 1260,42 1128,63 1888,80 2016,30 4,2899 0,5586
80,0 1267,07 1128,63 1865,09 1999,62 3,8990 0,5633
82,5 1273,43 1128,63 1848,21 1989,42 3,5871 0,5663
85,0 1279,80 1128,63 1836,18 1984,02 3,3325 0,5679
87,5 1286,16 1128,63 1827,66 1982,07 3,1208 0,5685
90,0 1292,53 1128,63 1821,70 1982,66 2,9419 0,5684
Table 5. Heat, work and COP for different generator
temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 100 %
Tables 3, 4 and 5 present the values of the heat at
condenser, evaporator, absorber, and generator, as well as
the work done by the pump. The COP of the system for
these different conditions is presented too. The behavior
presented in the previous plots can be confirmed here.
CONCLUSIONES
Ammonia water absorption refrigeration cycle was
analyzed, with their thermodynamic properties expressed
in polynomial equations [4]. The coefficient of
performance (COP) of this cycle versus generator
temperature and heat exchanger efficiency was analyzed
and it was noticed that the heat exchanger efficiency is an
important factor at the moment to consider the optimum
temperature at which a solar absorption refrigeration
cycle operates. The heat exchanger efficiency determines
the maximum temperature that should be used at the
generator in order to achieve the maximum COP out of
the system. The simulation was carried out for specific
temperatures and pressures at the evaporator and
condenser and the study must continue in order to obtain
operational maps that include the heart exchanger
efficiency as a variable.
REFERENCES
[1] E.P. Whitlow, Tends of Efficiencies in Absorption
Machines, ASHRAE Journal, 19, (11), 1966, 44.
[2] J.P. Van Passen, Solar Powered Refrigeration by
means of an AmmoniaWater Intermittent Absorption
Cycle. Ed 1 (May 1987); p.12
[3] I. Shwartz, and A. Shitzer, Solar Absorption System
for Space Cooling & Heating, ASHRAE Journal, 19, (11),
1977, 5154.
[4] D.W. Sun, Computer Simulation and Optimization of
AmmoniaWater Absorption Refrigeration Systems,
Energy Sources, 17, (3), 1997, 211221.
[5] D.W. Sun, Thermodynamic Design Data an Optimum
Design Maps for Absorption Refrigeration Systems,
Applied Thermal Engineering, 17, (3), 1996, 211221.
[6] D.W. Sun, Comparison of the Performances of NH
3

H
2
O, NH
3
LiNO
3
and NH
3
NaSCN Absorption
Refrigeration Systems: Energy Conversion Management,
39, (5/6), 1998, 357368.
ASHRAE, AHSRAE Handbook, Refrigeration Systems
and Applications, Chapter 40, p 40,1. ASHRAE, 1791
Tullie Circle, N. E., Atlanta, GA 30329, 1994.
Tg (°C) Qc (KJ) Qe (KJ) Qa (KJ) Qg (KJ) Wb (KJ/s) COP
70,0 1240,49 1128,63 1703,78 1809,21 6,4221 0,6216
72,5 1247,13 1128,63 1689,23 1802,26 5,4700 0,6243
75,0 1253,78 1128,63 1680,63 1800,98 4,7943 0,6250
77,5 1260,42 1128,63 1676,37 1803,87 4,2899 0,6242
80,0 1267,07 1128,63 1675,66 1810,19 3,8990 0,6221
82,5 1273,43 1128,63 1678,03 1819,24 3,5871 0,6192
85,0 1279,80 1128,63 1683,15 1830,98 3,3325 0,6153
87,5 1286,16 1128,63 1690,74 1845,15 3,1208 0,6106
90,0 1292,53 1128,63 1700,49 1861,45 2,9419 0,6054
according to the ASHRAE definition. where it is absorbed by the strong solution coming from the generator (8) through an expansion valve (10). m 3 = m 4 = m ref • • • (Total mass balance) (Energy balance) (5) (6) • • Q e = m ref (h4 − h3 ) At the generator. The use of heat exchangers and some other binary mixtures were recommended. he obtained a mathematical model that allowed the simulation of the process. The remaining solution (8) flows back to the absorber and. The weak solution (5) is pumped to the generator pressure (7). In order to analyze the system. In 1977 Shwarts and Shitzer [3] analyzed thermodynamically the possibility to operate the solar absorption refrigeration system for air conditioning. An analyzer and a rectifier need to be added to remove water vapor from the refrigerant mixture leaving the generator before reaching the condenser. and lithium bromide – water. m7 = m1 + m8 • • • (Total mass balance) (7) . The literature review on solar absorption refrigeration cycles shows that a thermodynamic simulation can be performed in order to study and analyze the system. Van Passen [2] presented the work done by the International Health Organization in order to impulse a vaccination program to control child diseases through immunization where Delf University of Technology was involved in the thermodynamic simulation of a solar absorption refrigeration system. Qc 1 Qg Condenser Generator 7 8 2 Strong Solution Heat Exchanger Expansion valve Expansion valve 9 3 Weak Solution 10 6 Evaporator 4 Absorber 5 Pump Qe Qa Figure 1. a solution heat exchanger is included in the cycle. Their results showed that the system was suitable for domestic use. The simulated model was developed because of the excellent results obtained during the simulation process. By weak solution (strong solution) is meant that the ability of the solution to absorb the refrigerant vapor is weak (strong). thus. Sun [5] presented a thermodynamic design and performed an optimization of the absorption refrigeration process in order to map the most common cycles for water – ammonia. mass and energy balance must be performed at each component. In order to improve system performance. and the refrigerant in it is boiled off in the generator. The results can be used to select the operation conditions in order to obtain a maximum performance from the system. evaporator and condenser. Sun [4] analyzed and performed an optimization of the water – ammonia cycle. One of the main factors that have helped to develop this kind of systems is the thermodynamic simulation that can be carried out in order to study the different variables affecting the performance of the equipment. Schematic of an absorption refrigeration cycle. and forms the weak solution (5). m 2 = m 3 = m ref • • m 9 = m10 • • • (Total mass balance) (1) (2) (3) (4) (Total mass balance) (Energy balance) (Energy balance) h2 = h3 h9 = h10 MATHEMATICAL MODEL Figure 1 illustrates the main components of the absorption refrigeration cycle. The liquid refrigerant (3) vaporizes in the evaporator by absorbing heat from the material being cooled and the resulting lowpressure vapor (4) passes to the absorber.energy source. the COP and COPmax were given as a function of the operation temperature at the generator. for that reason it is necessary to perform a study in order to find the most efficient operation range. where the absorption refrigeration cycle was studied from the thermodynamic point of view. Sun [6] (1998) performed a thermodynamic analysis of different binary mixtures considered in the absorption refrigeration cycle. As a result. the system is characterized by its low COP. completes the cycle. Whitlow [1] gathered the memories of the Toronto 73rd ASHRAE Conference. Highpressure liquid refrigerant (2) from the condenser passes into the evaporator (4) through an expansion valve (3) that reduces the pressure of the refrigerant to the low pressure existing in the evaporator. At the expansion valves. At the evaporator. it is assumed that the refrigerant vapor is 100% ammonia. For the current study. but the effect of the heat exchange efficiency in a single absorption refrigeration system has not been considered. A lot of work has been done in this area and the effect of the generator temperature has been considered extensively.
6132 x 106 4 2. the circulation ratio can de derived: • f = m7 • m1 x − x1 = 8 x8 − x7 (12) Refrigerant mass flow m ref = 1.0 kg/s Heat exchanger efficiency: 50 – 100% High pressure: 1.m7 x7 = m1 x1 + m8 x8 • • • (NH3 mass balance) (Energy balance) (8) (9) COMPUTATIONAL MODEL In order to analyze how the system reacts to different operating conditions. m1 = m 2 • • • • (Total mass balance) (Energy balance) (18) (19) Q c = m ref (h1 − h2 ) i ai equation (22) 0 4. 1997a) (Total mass balance) (Energy balance) (16) (17) • • W b = m 5 (h6 − h5 ) At the condenser. and the second the cooling of the mixture.059 x 101 3. the enthalpy was calculated according to equations (25 – 27). the pressure can be calculated according to equation (22).4644 x 100 6.5 − 148593x + 767227 x2 − 1911990 x3 + 2309150 x4 − 1084970 x5 • m8 (h − h9 ) h7 = h6 + • 8 m6 ( ) (25) . From Sun [4].1523 x 104 1.5262 x 106 1.566 x 103 ci equation (24) 1. with the intention of obtaining the maximum COP out of the system.5608 x 108 2. x = 11101.2494 x 1011 6 1.6001 x 102 2 2. The operating conditions choose were: T g = 70 – 90 OC Tc = 30 OC Ta = 25 OC Te = 5 OC • • • • • Q g = m1 h1 + m8 h8 − m7 h7 From equations (7) and (8). (Total mass balance) (Energy balance) (20) (21) h 60o C .679 x 103 At the heat exchanger. m8 + m 6 = m7 + m9 • • • • For the mixture.15)i 6 (22) Dividing by m 4 qa = (h4 − h10 ) + ƒ(h10 − h5 ) (15) • where q a represents the heat dissipated per unit mass.6 x 101 Mean deviation 1.252 x 102 bi equation (23) 1. Coefficients for equations (22 – 24) (Da Wen Sun. The first term of the right side represents the phase change.2839 x 100 1.9055 x 106 2.5964 x 1010 1.3652 x 104 3 1.4591 x 104 1.15)i i =0 (23) ∑ ci (T − 27.1501 x 102 2. hυ (T )= i=0 6 ∑ bi (T − 27. respectively. At the pump. At the absorber.2871 x 101 1 1.4303 x 109 5 1. the strong and weak solution mass flow rate can be obtained • x − m8 = 7 x8 − • x − m7 = 8 x8 − x1 • m1 x7 x1 • m1 x7 (10) (11) From equation (11). Table 1.9054 x 1010 8. The liquid and gas enthalpies of the refrigerant (NH3) can be calculated from equation (23) and (24).15)i (24) and f the mass flow ratio. m5 = m6 • • The coefficients for equations (22 – 24) are presented in Table 1.8069 x 108 1.5626 x 100 5.9879 x 102 4.4633 x 103 1.16 MPa Low pressure: 0. it is necessary to simulate the variables that affect its performance.2741 x 10 13 Standard error 1. m 4 + m10 = m 5 • • • (Total mass balance) (13) P (T )= 103 • • • • Q a = m 4 h4 + m10 h10 − m 5 h5 (Energy balance) • (14) hl (T )= 6 i=0 ∑ ai (T − 27.51 MPa.2790 x 103 1.
26 5 4.7 77. the COP increases. COP variation as a function of the heat exchanger efficiency for different values of temperature at the generator Figure 2 presents the variation of the COP as a function of the heat exchanger efficiency for different generator temperatures.0 C 0.2 8. 0.57 0.486 Tg = 87.7 9.h 80o C .4 4. This figure can be described as follows: For a given generator temperature. x = 5708. o As the heat exchanger efficiency increases. the COP decreases.1 9.56 0.57 0.0 C Tg = 82. o It can be attained with several combinations of generator temperature and heat exchanger efficiency.0 C 0.63 0.3x + 413443x2 − 1079610 x3 + 1367500x 4 − 672653x5 h 100o C .61 3.63 Media Deviation Error % 11.53 0. COP variation as a function of the generator temperature for different values of efficiency at the heat exchanger Table 3.69 f f (Actual (Dae Wen Investigation) Sun 1997a) 7.5 C 0.8 9.5 5.0 C E = 55 % 0. § If T g > 77.56 COP 0.5%.3 7. the system COP increases as the generator temperature rises.5 C Tg = 90.7 6. OC Figure 2.632 0.88 7.26 2.63 0.540 0. For a given heat exchanger efficiency o As the generator temperature is elevated.816 0.4 4.3 1. For a given system COP.55 0.5 9.63 0.6 2.5 OC.5 73. work and COP for different generator temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 50 % .724 0.x + 2560630 x2 − 6740720x3 + 8613990x 4 − 4282390x5 ( ( ) (26) ) (27) For a given heat exchanger efficiency.5 C Tg = 85.63 0.62 0.60 0.5 C Tg = 80. the system COP increases as the efficiency augments. o If E < 0. COP and mass flow rate comparison for heat exchanger efficiency of 80 % COP COP (Actual (Dae Wen Investigation) Sun 1997a) 0.57 0.63  0.88 5.61  The generator temperature effects over the system COP for different heat exchanger efficiencies can be observed in Figure 3.5 9.6 6. Heat. the system COP decreases as the efficiency increases.3 90.4 5.7.4 9. § If T g < 77.7 6.7 11.1 − 76879. Maximum standard error for equations (25 – 27) is 0. as the temperature continues raising. the COP of the system presents a maximum.13 1.57 0. after this point.0 C COP Tg = 72.9 82. This figure can be described as follows: For a given generator temperature o The system COP increases as the efficiency augment.6 − 470584.5 9.59 0.6 3.09 3.8 3.1 86.522 Tg = 77.60 0.57 0.3 Media Deviation Error % 2.5 Heat Exchanger Efficiency Generator Temperature. RESULTS Table 2 presents a comparison between the results obtained in this simulation and Da Wen Sun (1997a) for COP and mass flow.000 0.5 OC.7.71 6.45 69. Figure 3.83 3.630 0. x = 33499.450 0.5 5. It is noticed that the results in the actual investigation have a good agreement with those obtained by Da Wen Sun (1997a). Table 2.61 0.78 4.908 1.0 9. o If E > 0.558 Tg = 70.9 5.3 4.594 0.49 E = 65 % E = 75 % E = 85 % E = 95 % E = 60 % E = 70 % E = 80 % E = 90 % E = 100 % 0.56 0.52 Tg = 75.6 5.
0 77.18 1827.51 2088.2899 1999.0 72. ASHRAE Journal.78 1689. 357368. E. The simulation was carried out for specific temperatures and pressures at the evaporator and condenser and the study must continue in order to obtain operational maps that include the heart exchanger efficiency as a variable. Computer Simulation and Optimization of AmmoniaWater Absorption Refrigeration Systems.45 2041. Solar Powered Refrigeration by means of an AmmoniaWater Intermittent Absorption Cycle. Chapter 40.80 1286.0 Qc (KJ) 1240.63 1676.66 1821.W.40 2151.07 1273.63 1128. Ed 1 (May 1987).5 90.84 1115.42 1267.6054 Tables 3.63 1128. [2] J.53 Qe (KJ/s) 1128.63 1128. 1791 Tullie Circle.66 1678.02 3.37 1675.5871 3.5 90.29 1971.63 1128.5296 Table 4.63 1128. [6] D. p 40.84 1115. work and COP for different generator temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 100 % Tg (°C) 70.5401 0.63 1128.8990 1989.0019 6. Thermodynamic Design Data an Optimum Design Maps for Absorption Refrigeration Systems.4700 2042.84 1115. evaporator.6250 0. Shwartz.23 1680. Table 5.4221 2084.4874 0. Sun. GA 30329.45 Wb (KJ/s) 6. (3). p.63 1128.3452 4.5685 0. The COP of the system for these different conditions is presented too. (3). (11).98 1803. Heat.0 Qc (KJ/s) 1240.5 80.5663 0. Applied Thermal Engineering.63 1128.78 1260.7943 2016.23 2118.5 80. ASHRAE.43 1279. N.80 1286. (11).42 3. Solar Absorption System for Space Cooling & Heating.49 1247.49 1247.24 5.9419 COP 0.3325 1982.8990 3.74 1700. The behavior presented in the previous plots can be confirmed here.30 4. REFERENCES [1] E.07 3.9419 COP 0.07 1273.43 1279.78 1260. 4 and 5 present the values of the heat at condenser.5871 1984. (5/6).5 75. Sun.5 90.5684 in polynomial equations [4]. 1994.73 2136.78 1260.6216 0.21 1836. 17. ASHRAE.98 1845.5258 0.09 2158.68 2188. NH3LiNO3 and NH3NaSCN Absorption Refrigeration Systems: Energy Conversion Management. The coefficient of performance (COP) of this cycle versus generator temperature and heat exchanger efficiency was analyzed and it was noticed that the heat exchanger efficiency is an important factor at the moment to consider the optimum temperature at which a solar absorption refrigeration cycle operates.13 1253.80 1865.2899 3. Refrigeration Systems and Applications.12 [3] I.0 77. Shitzer. Comparison of the Performances of NH3H2O.13 1253.15 1861.5 75.4469 0.07 1273.22 2103.0 Qc (KJ/s) 1240.5234 0.16 1292. 17.0 87.70 Qg (KJ/s) Wb (KJ/s) 2149.W. ASHRAE Journal.84 1115.84 1115. Atlanta. 44.87 1810.63 1128.1208 2. Whitlow. absorber.19 1819.63 1128. Van Passen. AHSRAE Handbook. Heat. [5] D.5633 0.63 1128.0 82.5 85.. 39.W. 211221. 1997.63 1128.46 1888. [4] D.6656 COP 0.8156 5.02 2240. 5154. Sun.0 72.42 1267.42 1267.4700 4. 1998.24 1830.8581 4.9737 5.0 87.6106 0.4705 0.Tg (°C) 70.1523 3.09 1848. The heat exchanger efficiency determines the maximum temperature that should be used at the generator in order to achieve the maximum COP out of the system.80 1286.26 1800.1.0 77.49 Qg (KJ) 1809.P.63 1128.49 1247.6153 0.16 1292.21 1802.73 6.5679 0.73 2005.03 1683.5586 0. Tends of Efficiencies in Absorption Machines.1208 1982. and A.79 1930.5213 0. 19.81 4. and generator.5 85.5158 0.6192 0.43 1279. as well as the work done by the pump.6221 0.0 82.87 2283.16 1292.13 Qg (KJ/s) 2488. work and COP for different generator temperatures and heat exchanger efficiency of 75 % Tg (°C) 70.6242 0.8885 3. 1977.0 87.5 85.6243 0.P.0 82.5 80.63 1128. 1966.84 1115.7943 4.0 72.4221 5. 1996.15 1690.61 1976.47 2227.4997 0.84 Qa (KJ/s) 2372.21 1922.53 Qe (KJ) 1128. 211221.53 Qe (KJ/s) 1115.62 3.5088 0. Energy Sources.84 1115.66 2.5512 0. CONCLUSIONES Ammonia water absorption refrigeration cycle was analyzed.63 Qa (KJ/s) 2044.84 1115.13 1253.15 Wb (KJ/s) 8.67 2364. 19.63 1128. with their thermodynamic properties expressed .63 Qa (KJ) 1703.63 1128.3325 3.5 75.43 1951.4695 4.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.