A Project Report submitted for the partial completion of Thermodynamics course on

Thermodynamic analysis of osmotic Power Plant

Submitted By

J Harshvardhan(2017H1010043P)
K Karthik (2017H1010047P)
G Kameshwar Sharma (2017H1010048P)

Of

M.E Chemical Engineering

Under The Guidance Of

Dr. Banasri Roy

Department of Chemical Engineering

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
Pilani, Rajasthan

1
 Acknowledgement

This is to certify that the work performed in this report is a work of:

J Harshvardhan(2017H1010043P)
K Karthik (2017H1010047P)
G Kameshwar Sharma (2017H1010048P)

Of M.E Chemical Engineering

Dr.Banasri Roy
Department of Chemical Engineering
BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus
Pilani, Rajasthan

2
 Table of Contents
Topic Page no.

Abstract

Introduction

Theory and calculations

Result and comparison

Analysis

Summary

Notations

References

3
ABSTRACT
Increasing global energy demands and the threat of climate change by environmental
pollution have revitalized the search for new renewable energy sources.Osmosis is the one of
such source of energy. In this project, analysis of the osmotic power plant has been
performed by varying the temperature of the sea water from 25oc to 65 oc, the pressure of the
draw solution from 10 to 15 bar at different flow rates 10LPM and 20LPM.The power
generated is calculated at the various temperatures and the power generated is found to be
increasing linearly with the temperature but decreases as pressure increases.

Various plots are plotted between the temperatures and power generated, pressure and power
generated.

4
 1. Introduction
1.1. Problem statement:

Increasing global energy demands and the threat of climate change by environmental
pollution have revitalized the search for new renewable energy sources.

1.2. Objectives:

To study:

• The effects of temperature of Draw water (from 250c to 600c), on rate of osmosis and
power generation.

• The effect of Pressure of Draw solution (from 10 to 14 bars) on rate of osmosis and
power generation.

• The effects of flow rate of draw solution (at 10LPM and 20LPM), on rate of osmosis
and power generation.

1.3. Background:

Osmosis is a natural process in which the solvents such as water pass through a semi
permeable membrane due to the phenomena of diffusion, in which the gradient is
concentration difference i.e. the solvent flows from higher concentration of solvent to lower
concentration of solvent. The semi permeable membrane is one which only allows the solvent
to pass but restricts the passage of dissolved solids.

The less saline river water which is available in abundance eventually gets mixed with the
high salinity seawater. This difference in concentration can be used for the process of
osmosis for energy generation by passing the river water through a semi permeable
membrane. When the river water flows through the membrane and gets mixed into the
seawater there is a certain increase in pressure which can be used for running a turbine.

Statkraft, the leading company in Europe for generating power from Renewable sources had
has put considerable resources in setting up first plant which uses osmosis as the renewable
source for the generation of power. The company estimated that if a 2000 m2 membrane was
used the net energy generation was 1600-2000 TWh. Although the process has potential the
company shut the plant stating the process was not economic because of low breakeven point.

In recent years efforts have been made to increase the rate of osmosis for increasing power
output. One of the recent studies shows that on increasing the temperature of the saline water
the rate of osmosis increases leading to increased power output.

The rate of osmosis can also be affected by the pressure applied on the draw solution
(seawater side). Higher the hydraulic pressure lower is the rate of osmosis. The hydraulic
pressure here refers to the force applied by the solution on the area of the membrane. Higher

5
flow rates results in higher power generation but the percentage power generation due to the
osmosis decreases.

6
 2. Theory and Calculations
2.1. System Description:

The schematic figure of osmotic power plant is as shown in the figure.

Fig-1 Schematic diagram of osmotic power plant

The chamber is divided into two compartments. The feed water is taken as fresh water with
concentration of salt (cs) equal to 0gm/lit. This inlet fresh water is entering into the
compartment at atmospheric pressure. The sea water is taken as the draw solution in high
pressure compartment by using pump. As in normal osmosis process, a semi-permeable
membrane (XLE) with permeability coefficient (Aw) of 7.48 L/m2.hr.bar and an area of 1m2
which allows only water to pass through it is chosen. The Pressurised draw solution is passed
to turbine from the outlet of the high pressure compartment. This pressure is used to run the
turbine and the power is produced from the generator. The operating time (τ) is chosen as
5hrs.

The increase in temperature of the draw solution will increase the performance of osmotic
system because the water fluxes (Jw) increases with rise in temperature. But the higher value
of Temperature will damage the membrane. Thus set of values of operating conditions must
be chosen according to the membrane selected for the operation. In this study, the inlet draw
solution temperature and the inlet Pressure of the draw solution is varied from 25oc to 60oc
and 10 to 15 bar respectively at different flow rates of draw solution(10 & 20 LPM) and the
power generated is calculated.

Feed side:

Flow rate = 10 LPM

P1 = 1bar

7
π1= 0 bar

Volume of feed water taken in 5 hrs = (10 lit/min*60 min/hr*5 hr) = 3000 lit.

Density of feed water, ρ = 1.0 kg/lit

Amount of feed water taken in 5 hrs = (volume)* ρ = 3000*(1.0) = 3000 kg.

Number of moles of feed water taken npw = 3000/18 = 166.67 kmol

Draw side:

Flow rate = 10 LPM

P2 = 10 bar

Volume of draw solution taken in 5 hrs = (10 lit/min*60 min/hr*5 hr) = 3000 lit.

Density of draw solution (sea water) ρs = 1.029 kg/lit

Amount of draw solution taken in 5 hrs (Zi) = (volume)* ρs = 3000* 1.029 = 3084 kg

Concentration of salts in the sea water is cs = 35 g/lit

Total amount of NaCl in 3000 lit of solution = 3000*35= 105000 g = 105kg

Number of moles of solute in draw solution (ns) = 1.8 kmol

Amount of solvent in solution = 3084–105 = 2979 kg

Number of moles of solvent (nw) = 165.5 kmol

Molality of the solution, m1 = ns/ kg of solvent = 0.604

Ionic strength Im = (1/2) * ∑(mi (zi)2 ) ----------------------------(1)

Where mi is the molality of component i and zi is the valence which is equal to unity for
NaCl.

Im = (1/2) *( (m(z1)2 + m (z2)2 ) = (1/2) *( (0.604(1)2 + 0.604 (1)2 ) = 0.604

The Water flux is defined as the rate at which the water passes through the unit area of
membrane [6].

t = 25oc and P2 = 10 bar

Jw = Aw*(∆π-∆P) -------------------------- (2)

Where Jw is the water flux in lit/m2hr

Aw is the membrane permeability coefficient, lit/m2hr bar

∆π is the osmotic pressure difference across the membrane = π2- π1, bar

8
 ∆P is the hydraulic pressure gradient across the membrane = P2- P1, bar

2.2. Osmotic pressure calculation

For sea water, the osmotic pressure varies with temperature and the equation for osmotic
pressure is given by [9]

∆π =i*1.12*(T)*mi, psi -------------------- (3)

Where T is the temperature in K

mi is the molality of the solution.

i is the van’t Hoff factor of NaCl = 2

∆π = 2*1.12*(T)*mi psi =2*1.12*(298)*0.604 psi = 2*201.59 psi = 27.42 bar

∆P = P2-P1 = 10-1 = 9 bar

Jw = Aw*(∆π-∆P) = 7.48*(27.42-9) = 140.6118 lit/m2.hr

Volume of water passed = Jw *(1m2)*5 hr = 723.4479 lit

Amount of water passed = 723.4479* ρ = 723.4479 kg

Molality of the final mixed draw solution m2 = ns/(zi+ Amount of water passed)
=1.8*1000/3769.636 = 0.486 mol/kg

Wmax theory and calculation

When two solutions of different compositions are mixed, energy is released. This energy is
known as the Gibbs free energy of mixing which is the maximum available energy that is
available for the useful work by a thermodynamic process without taking into account of the
inefficiencies of the process. The maximum work supplied by an energy converter is the
change in the Gibbs free energy (∆G) between the initial unmixed state (A) and the final
mixed state (B).[7]

Wmax = G(A) – G(B) --------------------- (4)

Where G(A) and G(B) are the Gibbs free energy at initial unmixed state and final mixed state
respectively.

The gibbs free energy of mixture can be expressed as [7]

G = ∑ni*μi -------------------------- (5)

Where ni is the number of moles of component i and μiis the chemical potential of the
component i in a solution.

The chemical potential of component i is given by the below equation[7]

9
μi = μi(T,Po) + RTlnai --------------------------(6)

Where μi(T,Po) is the chemical potential of the pure component i and aiis the activity of
component i at temperature T, R is the universal gas constant.

So the equation for maximum useful work is given by [7]

Wmax = nwRTln(aw (A)/aw (B)) + ns*RT ln(as(A)/as(B)) – npw*RT ln(apw(B)/ apw(A))—-(7)

Where nw is the number of moles of water in draw solution.

ns is the number of moles of solute (NaCl) in draw solution,

npw is the number of moles of water in feed side

aw (A) is the activity of water in draw solution in the initial unmixed state

aw (B) is the activity of water in draw solution in the final mixed state,

as (A) is the activity of solute in draw solution in the initial unmixed state

as (B) is the activity of solute in draw solution in the final mixed state,

apw (A) is the activity of water in feed solution in the initial unmixed state = 1

apw (B) is the activity of water in feed solution in the final mixed state.

The activity of water and solute is given by the following equations [7]:

aw = φw*xw-------------------(8)

as =(γs*(ms/mo))2 ----------------(9)

Where φw is the osmotic coefficient

xwis the mole fraction of water in the solution

γs is the activity coefficient of solute

ms is the molality of solute in the solution

mo is the molality of the standard conditions = 1mol/kg

The activity coefficient and osmotic coefficient for the ionic solutions is calculated by using
Debye Huckel equation [10]:

lnγ = (( α*|Z+ Z-|*(Im)0.5)/(1+B*(Im)0.5)) + b1(m/mo) -----(10)

φw = 1- (α|Z+ Z-|/B3*Im)*((1+B*(Im)0.5)–(2 ln(1+B*(Im)0.5) – (1/(1+B*(Im)))+1/2*b1(m/mo)

------------ (11)

Where α = Debye Huckel parameter,(mol/kg)-0.5 = 1.1744 at 25oc for NaCl

10
 Z+, Z - = Charge number of the cation and anion respectively.

m is the molality in mol/kg

BT = BTo + (dB/dT)To (T-To) + 1/2 *(d2B/dT2)To*(T2-To2) – ((d2B/dT2)To*To*(T-To))[5]

---------- (12)

b1 = b1(To) + ((db1/dT)To *(T-To)) +( 1/2*(d2b1/dT2)To*(T2-To2)) – ((d2b1/dT2)To*To*(T-

To))[5]

---------------- (13)

Where BT, (dB/dt)to, (d2B/dt2)to, b1,(b1)To, (db1/dt)to, (d2b1/dt2)to are huckel parameters.

The values of the huckel parameters are as follows [5]:

B = 1.321 (mo)-1/2

103*dB/dT = 1.34 K−1 (mo)-1/2

105*d2B/dT2 = −6.64 K−2 (mo)-1/2

b1 = 0.0883

103*db1/dT = 1.07 K−1

105*d2b1/dT2 = −3.07 K−2

For t = 250c, B= 1.321, and b = 0.0883

(lnγ)A = (( α*|Z+ Z-|*(Im)0.5)/(1+B*(Im)0.5)) + b1(m/mo)

= ((1.1744*1*(0.604)0.5)/(1+1.321*(0.604)0.5)) + (0.0833*(0.604/1))

= -0.39695

γ(A) = 0.672366

(lnγ)B = (( α*|Z+ Z-|*(Im)0.5)/(1+B*(Im)0.5)) + b1(m/mo)

= ((1.1744*1*(0.604)0.5)/(1+1.321*(0.604)0.5)) + (0.0833*(0.473/1))

= -0.40742

γ(B) = 0.665362

(φw)(A) =1-(α|Z+Z-|/B3*Im)*((1+B*(Im)0.5)–(2*ln(1+B*(Im)0.5)–(1/(1+B*(Im)))+ 1/2*b1(m/mo))

= 0.989636

Similarly, (φw)(B) = 0.9844

11
Xw = nw/(nw + ns) = 0.991311

(aw)A = (φw)A*xwA= 0.989636*0.989 = 0.97875

(aw)B = (φw)B*xwB= 0.9844*0.991311 = 0.975847

(as)A=((γs)A*(ms/mo))2 = 0.161934

(as)B=((γs)B*(ms/mo))2 = 0.104653

Therefore Wmax = 3539.355 kJ

2.3. Turbine work calculations

The pressure at which the draw solution exits from the osmotic system (P e) is given by the
following equation

Pe= (Posmosis) +P2 --------------- (14)

Where ∆P is the hydraulic pressure gradient across the membrane

P2 is the inlet pressure of the draw solution,

Posmosis is the pressure generated due to osmosis = 1.12*(t+273)*(m1-m2)*2

= 1.12*(25+273)*(0.604-0.473)*2

= 87.21 psi = 5.421 bar

Where m1 and m2 are the molality’s of the draw solution in initial unmixed state and

Final mixed state, and t is the temperature in oc.

Pe= (Posmosis) +P2 = 5.421 +10 = 15.421 bar

The power generated from the turbine is equal to change in enthalpy of the fluid.

Pturbine(watts) = Wturbine /(5*3600) -----------(15)

Where Wturbine is the work done by the turbine = ∆H = H2-H1

∆H is the change in enthalpy = (H2-H1)*m

Zf is the amount of the mixed draw solution fed to the turbine and τ is the
operating time = Zi + Amount of solvent passed

Zi is the initial amount of the draw solution fed.

H2 and H1 are the specific enthalpies of the fluid at outlet and inlet of the turbine, the
pressure of the fluid at the inlet of turbine is the pressure at which the fluid exits from the
osmotic system (Pe). The pressure of the fluid at the outlet of the turbine is the considered to

12
be 1 atm. The values of specific enthalpies of brine solution are calculated by using the MPEI
calculator [11].

H2 = 99.8058

H1 = 101.0883

m = 3769.636 kg

Wturbine = H2-H1 = -1.2825 kJ/kg

Power generated by turbine = (Wturbine)* 3769.636/ (5*3600)= 271.28067 W

2.4. Pump calculations

The energy required for the pump to deliver the draw solution at specified pressure is the
change in the enthalpy of the fluid.

Wp= ∆Hp* ṁ =(H4-H3)* ṁ ----------(15)

Where Wp is the work required for the pump,

∆Hp is the change in enthalpy of the fluid in the pump,

H4 and H3 are the specific enthalpies of the fluid at the inlet and outlet of the pump.

The inlet pressure of the pump is taken as 1 bar and the outlet pressure of the pump is equal
to the pressure at which the draw solution is entering into the osmotic system (P2).The
values of the enthalpies are calculated using the MPEI calculator [11].

H3 = 99.8058 KJ/kg

H4 = 100.6059

m = 3084

Wp=(100.6059-99.8058)*3084 = 2467.5084 KJ.

Thus the net work done is Wnet=Wturbine +Wp = -2415543.66 J

13
 3. Results and comparisons
The values of the water flux at different temperatures and pressures are calculated using the
equation (2). The data is as shown in the below figure.

At 10 LPM

P =10 bar P =11 bar P =12 bar P= 13 bar P =14 bar P= 15 bar

Temperature(oC) Flux, Jw Flux, Jw Flux, Jw Flux, Jw Flux, Jw Flux, Jw

25 140.6118 133.1318 125.6518 118.171 110.691 103.211

30 144.1006 136.6206 129.140 121.66 114.18 106.7

35 147.5894 140.1094 132.62 125.149 117.669 110.18

40 151.0782 143.5892 136.118 128.638 121.15 113.67

45 154.567 147.087 139.6 132.127 124.64 117.16

50 158.0558 150.5758 143.09 135.615 128.135 120.655

55 161.5446 154.0646 146.58 139.104 131.624 124.144

60 165.0334 157.5534 150.07 142.5933 135.11 127.633

Table no.1- Variation of fluxJw vs Temperature T at different hudraulic pressure difference

The plot between Jw and T is as shown below:

Flux vs T at 10 LPM
180

170

160
del P=9 bar
150 del P=10 bar

140 del P=11 bar

del P=12 bar
130
del P=13 bar
120
del P=14 bar
110

100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Fig-2. Variation of fluxJw vs Temperature T at different hudraulic pressure

difference
14
The variation of flux with change in hydraulic pressure is as shown in the below figure

∆P vs Flux
170
160 t=25
150 t=30
F
l 140 t=35
u 130 t=40
x t=45
120
110 t=50
t=55
100
7 9 11 13 15 t=60
∆P

Fig.3-variation of flux with hydraulic pressure at different temperatures

It can be noted from the figure that at a specified temperature, as the hydraulic pressure
gradient increases, the flux decreases.

Similarly the maximum obtainable work calculated from the equation (4) at various
temperatures and pressures are as follows:

∆P=10bar ∆P=11bar ∆P=12 bar ∆P=13bar ∆P=14 ∆P=15 bar

bar
Temperature(oC) Wmax Wmax Wmax Wmax Wmax Wmax
25 3539.355 3364.499 3181.2020 2996.839 2811.386 2624.819
94
30 3844.922 3659.063 3464.919 3269.701 3073.384 2875.945
35 4140.432 3952.825 3748.874 3543.840 3337.700 3130.429
40 4423.336 4243.733 4031.068 3817.313 3602.444 3386.43
45 4690.977 4530.372 4310.141 4088.18 3866.385 3642.77
50 4940.518 4809.738 4583.147 4355.454 4126.63 3896.65
55 5169.025 5080.206 4848.52 4615.725 4381.79 4146.709
60 5373.361 5338.503 5103.048 4866.477 4628.76 4389.89

Table 2- Fig4.- variation of Wmax vs temperature at 10 LPM

15
 Wmax vs Temperature in 10 LPM
6000
5500
Wmax in Kilojoules

5000 ∆P=9bar
4500
∆P=10bar
4000
∆P=11bar
3500
3000 ∆P=12bar
2500 ∆P=13bar
2000 ∆P=14bar
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Temperatture in Celsius

Fig4.- variation of Wmax vs temperature at 10 LPM

Wmax vs Temperature (20 LPM)

7000

6000

5000
Wmax in Kilojoiles

∆P=9bar
4000 ∆P=10bar

3000 ∆P=11bar
∆P=12bar
2000
∆P=13bar
1000 ∆P=14bar

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Temperature in Celsius

Fig5.- variation of Wmax vs temperature at 20 LPM

The Wmax shows the maximum amount of work that can be extracted from the system which
consists of the turbine, pumps or any devices if used. The net work done by the system will
be less than Wmax.

The variation of Power from the turbine with the temperature has been analyzed and it has
been found that as temperature increases, the power from the turbine also increases. The
values of power from the turbine are tabulated at 10 LPM and 20 LPM.

16
 10 LPM
T ∆P=9bar ∆P=10bar ∆P=11bar ∆P=12bar ∆P=13bar ∆P=14bar
25 271.2807 282.7979 293.9202954 304.6715 315.0138 324.9907
30 272.9634 284.3341 295.3137314 305.9261 316.1534 326.0191
35 274.778 286.02 296.8742837 307.3649 317.4736 327.204
40 276.8121 287.9215 298.6675754 309.0321 319.0388 328.6496
45 279.0903 290.1056 300.7179423 310.9729 320.8733 330.4009
50 281.6807 292.5547 303.0926448 313.2544 323.064 332.5035
55 284.6312 294.9924 305.8814634 315.9656 325.6997 335.0658
60 288.0775 298.8249 309.1971968 319.2186 328.8917 338.1777
Table3- Variation of Power output from turbine at different hydraulic pressure difference at 10 LPM

20LPM
T ∆P=9bar ∆P=10bar ∆P=11bar ∆P=12bar ∆P=13bar ∆P=14bar
25 409.7467 436.3444 461.5949 488.718 512.2070484 523.6236265
30 409.8142 436.6076 461.8979 487.7449 512.2932102 528.4104751
35 409.992 436.6364 461.9294 487.0628 512.2973401 533.4463305
40 410.5513 436.7746 462.2222 486.788 512.4453424 538.8586472
45 411.534 436.9461 462.2804 486.962 512.5704714 544.7045705
50 412.9045 438.0777 463.0621 487.6647 512.6462752 551.1597493
55 414.8993 439.8673 464.6113 489.0151 513.0793547 558.3690861
60 418.0694 442.3588 466.9727 491.2485 515.148688 567.7564386

Table 4- Variation of Power output from turbine at different hydraulic pressure difference at 20 LPM

T vs Power
430
410
390
370
del P=9 bar and 10
350
Lpm
330
Del P=9 bar and 20
310 Lpm
290
270
250
0 20 40 60 80

Fig 6.- Variation of power generated by turbine with temperature at ∆P=9 bar at 10 LPM and 20 LPM

The variation of power with temperature is as shown in the above figure.

17
Work done by the pump is calculated at different pressures and temperatures of the draw
solution.

10 LPM
T ∆P=9bar ∆P=10bar ∆P=11bar ∆P=12bar ∆P=13bar ∆P=14bar
25 2467.508 2741.984 3016.46 3290.936 3565.412 3839.888
30 2437.285 2708.369 2979.452 3250.536 3521.62 3792.703
35 2408.296 2676.295 2944.295 3212.294 3479.986 3747.985
40 2381.773 2646.689 2911.604 3176.828 3441.744 3706.66
45 2357.718 2619.858 2882.306 3144.446 3406.895 3669.035
50 2336.13 2596.111 2856.092 3115.765 3375.746 3635.419
55 2317.934 2575.757 2833.579 3091.402 3349.224 3607.046
60 2303.748 2560.028 2816.309 3072.281 3328.561 3584.842

Table 5- Variation ofwork done by pump at different hydraulic pressure difference at 10 LPM

20 LPM
T ∆P=9bar ∆P=10bar ∆P=11bar ∆P=12bar ∆P=13bar ∆P=14bar
25 4939.8174 5489.303 6038.789 6588.275 7137.761 7687.247
30 4879.3122 5422.007 5964.701 6507.396 7050.091 7592.785
35 4821.2766 5357.797 5894.318 6430.838 6966.742 7503.262
40 4768.1802 5298.527 5828.873 6359.837 6890.184 7420.531
45 4720.023 5244.813 5770.22 6295.01 6820.418 7345.208
50 4676.805 5197.273 5717.741 6237.592 6758.06 7277.911
55 4640.3784 5156.525 5672.671 6188.818 6704.964 7221.11
60 4611.978 5125.037 5638.097 6150.539 6663.598 7176.658

Table 6- Variation ofwork done by pump at different hydraulic pressure difference at 20 LPM

Pump Work vs Temperature (10 LPM)

4000
3800
3600
3400 ∆P=9bar
3200
∆P=10bar
Joules

3000
∆P=11bar
2800
∆P=12bar
2600
2400 ∆P=13bar
2200 ∆P=14bar
2000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Temperature in Celsius

Fig 7.- variation of Pump work vs Temperate at 10 LPM

18
 Pump Work vs Temperature (20 LPM flow Rate)
8000

7500

7000
∆P=9bar
6500
∆P=10bar
Joules

6000
∆P=11bar
5500 ∆P=12bar
5000 ∆P=13bar

4500 ∆P=14bar

4000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Temperature in Celsius

Fig 8.- variation of Pump work vs Temperate at 20 LPM

Flow rate Flow Rate

T 10 LPM 20 LPM
25 4939.8174 5489.303
30 4879.3122 5422.007
35 4821.2766 5357.797
40 4768.1802 5298.527
45 4720.023 5244.813
50 4676.805 5197.273
55 4640.3784 5156.525
60 4611.978 5125.037

Table 5- Variation ofwork done by pump at hydraulic pressure difference = 9 bars and at 10 and 20 LPMLPM

Pump work vs Temperature at

different flow rates.
6000
Pump work in joules

5000
4000
3000 Work done by pump at
10 lpm and ΔP = 9 bar
2000
Work done by pump at
1000 20 lpm and ΔP = 9 bar
0
0 20 40 60 80
Tempertaure in Celsius

Fig 9.-Pump work vs Temperature at different flow rates.

19
Comparison with Experimental Data:
From the literature, data for variation of the flux with the temperature at hydraulic pressure
inlet of the draw solution (P2) of 15bar is given.

Fig 10- variation of water flux with temperature at concentration C=1M, 0 .66M, 0.5M [6][7]

Experimental data for variation of inlet hydraulic pressure of draw solution with Water flux is
shown below.

Fig 11.- variation of water flux Jw inlet hydraulic pressure[3]

20
Exp. 1 – feed water as fresh water and sea water as draw solution

Exp. 2 – feed water as brackish water and high salinity water as sea water

Exp. 3 – feed water as brackish water and sea water as draw solution.

Experimental Data of Variation of osmotic pressure with the Gross power produced

Fig 12.- variation of Power with area at different osmotic pressure ΔΠ [3]

Net Power generated by the system vs ΔΠ

170

160

150
Net Poer (Watts)

∆P=9bar
140 ∆P=10bar

130 ∆P=11bar
∆P=12bar
120
∆P=13bar
110
∆P=14bar
100
27 28 29 30 31 32
Osmotic Pressure (ΔΠ),bar

Fig 13.- Net power generated by the osmotic system vs ΔΠ

21
 4. Analysis
4.1. Flux (Jw) vs Temperature at different ΔP:

In the experimental data showed in Figure 10. Observed in the temperature range of 20 oC to
60oC at different concentrations of 0.5M, 0.66M and 1M water flux increases with
temperature due to the high value of osmotic pressure difference which depends on the
concentration of draw solution. In our data analysis the temperature of the draw side is
increased from 25oC to 60oC. The highest temperature in the range mentioned above was
taken because above that temperature there is a chance of damage to the membrane, which
also acts as a limitation. As the temperature of the seawater is increased, the space between
the water molecules increases which results in decrease in density of the salt solution and
hence increasing the salinity of the salt solution. This results in increase in concentration
gradient across the membrane and hence increases the rate of osmosis or the Flux increases,
which results in increase in the rate of flow of fresh water from the feed side to the draw side.
From Figure 2. It can be inferred that the Flux increases w.r.t temperature linearly at constant
ΔP according to equation 2 and 3, which are as follows:

Jw= Aw (ΔΠ- ΔP) ……………….Equation 2

∆π =i*1.12*(T)*mi……...............Equation3

From above equations it can deduced that Flux (Jw) varies linearly with Temperature (T).

4.2. Flux (Jw) vs ΔP at different temperatures:

As it can be seen from figure 3.that, with increase in ΔP the Flux (J w) decreases at any
constant temperature line. The constant temperature lines follow the linear relationship as
given in equation 2. Increase in ΔP results in increased back flux on the membrane from draw
side to feed side which results in decrease in water flux coming from feed side to the draw
side. The seawater contains salt which starts to accumulate on the membrane because of the
back flux applied by the hydraulic pressure applied on the draw side. This stops the solvent
passage and forms a concentration gradient of salt on the membrane itself. This is known as
concentration polarization. So this has to be avoided therefore a bit of low pressures are
preferred. The results obtained from the study were compared with experimental data shown
by figure 9. Though the experimental data were plotted for Flux (J w) vs ΔP at different
concentrations, but the trend followed by both the graphs are similar.

In the experimental results of experiment 1 conducted by (Reference) they have used OMU
membrane of permeability coefficient as 0.1L/m2hr bar and P2 was varied from 1 to 10 bar.
They have observed that as P2 increases ΔP also increases which results in decrease in the
water flux due to the reduction of the driving force for osmosis (ΔΠ- ΔP).

22
4.3. Wmax vs Temperature at different ΔP:

As it can be seen from figure 4 and 5 that Wmax is increasing linearly with respect to
temperature. Wmax is the net possible energy that can be generated by our system. As the
temperature is raised from 25 to 60 Celsius, the osmotic pressure increases which results in
higher fluxes which generates more energy. The Wmax can be calculated by equation (7)

Wmax = nwRTln(aw (A)/aw (B)) + ns*RT ln(as(A)/as(B)) – npw*RT ln(apw(B)/ apw(A))

As the flux increases the activity of salt decreases significantly compared to activity of water
because the amount of freshwater passing through the membrane increases which results in
higher values of Wmax. The actual work done comprised of both the turbine and pump
should be less than Wmax.

4.4. Power generated by turbine vs temperature at different flow rates:

With increment in temperature on the draw side the power generated by the turbine increases
because of increase in the specific enthalpy of the system. The specific enthalpy of the system
increases because of the increase in temperature and also because of the increase in net
pressure coming out of the system. This increment in pressure is due to the addition of extra
solvent on the draw side. It can be inferred from figure 6. That as the temperature increases
the power generated by turbine also increases. The flow rates of the solution entering on the
draw side also affect the power generated by the turbine. In this report the flow rate of the
system was increased from 10LPM to 20LPM which resulted in significant increase in power
generation, because as the flow rate was increased the amount of solution treated was
increased significantly so the net pressure out of the draw side (which was fed to the turbine)
increased which resulted in higher specific enthalpies.

But as the flow rate in the draw side is increased the net work done a by the pump or the
specific enthalpies for pumping at 20LPM is also increased which can be inference from
figure 9. This results in decrease in net power generated by the osmotic system.

4.5. Pump work vs Temperature at different ΔP:

If the temperature of a fluid is increased the density, viscosity decreases due to which the
work requires by the pump also decreases, since the resistance to flow is decreased. Figure
(7) and (8) show the variation in pump work w.r.t. different temperatures at different
pressures. The figure also infers that as ΔP increases the net work done by the pump also
increases. It can also be verified using Bernoulli’s equation which can be written as follows:

𝛥𝑣 2 𝛥𝑃
+ Δgz + = work done by the pump
2 𝜌

In the above equation as ρdecreases keeping velocity and Z constant, the net work required
for pump also decreases.

23
4.6. Net power generated by the system vs ΔΠ:

In the experimental results the permeability of membrane was taken as 0.1L/m 2hr bar. They
have concluded that if the osmotic pressure difference is more than 50 bars for a specified
power output then less membrane area is required. The osmotic pressure in the experiment
was varied by taking three different concentrations of draw solution. In our study the osmotic
pressure was increased by increasing the temperature of the draw solution. In the
experimental data plotted in figure 12 at an area A1 the power generated at three values of ΔΠ
were observed. The experimental results showed that as ΔΠ increases there is an increase in
power generated. Similar are the results obtained in our study. As ΔΠ was increased the net
power generated also increased.

24
 Summary

The fluxes were calculated at different pressures and temperatures, and data obtained was
plotted and compared with the experimental data available. The flux was found to be
increasing linearly with temperature, while was found to be decreasing with Hydraulic
pressure difference. The turbine work was also found to be increasing with higher hydraulic
pressure difference, but the pump work required to pump the seawater at high pressure was
found to be increasing with increasing hydraulic pressure difference. This resulted in
decrease in net power generated by the system from 160.09 W, ΔP= 9bar to 139.01 W,
ΔP=14 bar.

The increase in temperature from 25oC to 60oC resulted in increase in osmotic pressure which
in turn increased the passage of the water through the membrane from feed side to the draw
side. This increase in osmotic pressure resulted in increase in the turbine work.

The increase in flow rates from 10 LPM to 20 LPM resulted in increased turbine work but
was found to require high pumping energy, which resulted in decrease in net power generated
by the entire osmotic system.

25
 Notations
∆P = Hydraulic Pressure gradient, (bar)

∆π = Osmotic Pressure gradient, (bar)

Aw = Membrane Permeability Coefficient (liter/ m2 *hr *bar)

Jw = Water Flux, (litre/ m2*hr)

mi = Molality of salt solution(moles of solute/kg of solvent)

μ = Chemical Potential(Joule/mol)

T = Temperature of feed side solution(Kelvin)

t= Temperature of feed side solution(oc)

Im=ionic strength(mol/kg)

To = Room temperature, 298 K

γ = activity coefficient

φw= Osmotic Coefficient

Xw = Mole fraction of water

∆G = Gibbs Free Energy, Joule

as = activity of solute

aw = activity of solvent

aw(A) = activity of solvent in initial unmixed state

aw (B) = activity of solvent in final mixed state

as (A) = activity of solute in initial unmixed state

(aw (B))f = activity of pure water in the final mixed state in feed water.

mo = molality of hypothetical solution at infinite dilution, 1 mol/kg

ms = molality of salt solution, mol/kg

nw = No. of moles of water in salt solution, mol

ns = No. of moles of solute in salt solution, mol

npw = No. of moles of feed water, mol

R = Universal gas constant, 8.314 J/mol*K

26
Wmax = Maximum work extractable from the FO system,KW

α = Debye Huckel parameter,(mol/kg)-0.5[5]

HuckelParameters :

BT, (dB/dt)to, (d2B/dt2)to, (b1)To, (db1/dt)to, (d2b1/dt2)to

Z+ , Z- = Charge number of the cation and anion respectively.

ρavg=Average density of final mixed draw solution

Wsolvent=weight fraction of solvent in final mixed draw solution

Wsolution= weight fraction of brine solution in final mixed draw solution

ρsolvent= density of solvent

ρsolution= density of brine solution

m1=molality of draw solution in the initial unmixed state

m2= molality of draw solution in the final mixed state

Posmosis= Pressure generated by osmosis

(Pin )DS =inlet pressure of draw solution

Pe= exit pressure of the draw solution

Patm= pressure at the outlet of turbine

Zi= Amount of draw solution initially present

Zf= Amount of draw solution finally present

Vf= volume of the final draw solution

Ws= Isentropic work done by the turbine(MJ)

H2=specific enthalpy of the draw solution at patm

H1= specific enthalpy of the draw solution at pe

delH=Total change in enthalpy in MJ

Pturbine=Power generated by turbine in watts

H3= enthalpy of the inlet draw solution at 25oc, 1atm

H4= enthalpy of the draw solution at (Pin )DS

delHp=total change in enthalpy at pump

Wpump=Work supplied to turbine

27
Tf= exit temperature of the draw solution

T1= temperature of the solvent entering through membrane

T2= temperature of the unmixed draw solution

C1= specific heat of pure water

C2= specific heat of brine solution

m1=mass flow rate of solvent passing through membrane

m2= mass flow rate of inlet draw solution.

28
 References
1. Wei He, Yang Wang, Mohammad Hasan Shaheed, Energy and thermodynamic analysis
of power generation using a natural salinity gradient based pressure retarded osmosis
process, 2014, 86-94.
2. Anthony P. Straub, AkshayDeshmukh and MenachemElimelech, Pressure-retarded
osmosis for power generation from salinity gradients: is it viable, 2016, 9, 31.
3. Adel O. Sharif , Ali A. Merdaw , Maryam Aryafar and Peter Nicoll, Theoretical and
Experimental Investigations of the Potential of Osmotic Energy for Power
Production,World Renewable Energy Congress, 2011, 8–13.
4. Emil Drazevic, KresimirKosutic, ViatcheslavFreger, Permeability and selectivity of
reverse osmosis membranes: Correlation to swelling revisited, 2014, 445.
5. Jaakko I. Partanen, Mean Activity Coefficients and Osmotic Coefficients in Dilute
Aqueous Sodium or Potassium Chloride Solutions at Temperatures from (0 to 70) °C,
2016, 61, 286−306
6. KhaledTouati, Christopher Hänel, Fernando Tadeo, Thomas Schiestel, Effect of the
operating temperature on hydrodynamic and membrane parameters in pressure retarded
osmosis process, 2015, 2.
7. Ari Seppälä, Thermodynamic studies of osmotic flows and their application to energy
conversion systems, 2007, 15, 20-21.
8. R. N. Traxler, The Effect of Temperature on Rate of Osmosis, 1927, 127-141.
9. Ibrahim S. Al-Mutaz1 , Mohammad A. Al-Ghunaimi2,Performance of Reverse Osmosis
Units at High Temperatures, 2001, 2.
10. Jaakko I. Partanen, Lauri J. Partanen, and Kari P. Vahteristo,Traceable Thermodynamic
Quantities for Dilute Aqueous Sodium Chloride Solutions at Temperatures from (0 to
80) °C. Part 1. Activity Coefficient, Osmotic Coefficient, and the Quantities Associated
with the Partial Molar Enthalpy, 2017, 62, 2617−2632.
11. Thermodynamics properties of sea water for industrial use by konstantin,orlovvalery,
ockhov calculators.

http.twd.mpei.ac.ru/mcs/worksheets/iapws/seawater-industrial.xmcd, accessed on 2017

(15/11/2017).

29
30