Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Research Paper

Mathematical modeling and performance analysis for multi-effect T

evaporation/multi-effect evaporation with thermal vapor compression
desalination system
⁎
Shihe Zhoua, Luyuan Gongb, Xinyu Liua, Shengqiang Shenb,
a
School of Ocean Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Panjin 12422, Liaoning, China
b
Key Laboratory for Desalination of Liaoning Province, School of Energy and Power Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, Liaoning, China

H I GH L IG H T S

• AComparison
steady-state model of multi-effect evaporation desalination system is developed.
• Influences ofofmotive
the present model with the other three models is accomplished.
• Energy and exergy analysis
steam and suction parameters are investigated.
• on the desalination system is achieved.

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Multi-effect evaporation/multi-effect evaporation with thermal vapor compression processes have shown more
Desalination remarkable advantages than the other thermal desalination technologies, especially applicable to large scale and
Multi-effect evaporation utilization of the industrial waste heat. A precise model is essential for development and improvement of the
Thermal vapor compression desalination system. In this paper, a detailed mathematical model of multi-effect evaporation/multi-effect
Mathematical modeling
evaporation with thermal vapor compression desalination system is developed based on the first law and second
Performance analysis
law of thermodynamics, of which the key parameters derive from the database established by targeted ex-
perimental studies. Verification of the model is conducted by comparison with various commercial plants.
Results indicate that the simulation results agree well with the available data of actual plants. In addition,
advantages and limitations of the present model are discussed by comparing with three models from the lit-
erature. Based on the mathematical model, the effects of pressures of motive steam and suction steam are deeply
investigated. Performance comparison between multi-effect evaporation and that with thermal vapor com-
pression was accomplished from the perspective of exergy destruction as well. Results show that higher gained
output ratio and lower specific cooling water can be acquired when the compression ratio of thermal vapor
compressor is 2.1–2.6.

1. Introduction
Desalination has been booming over the past few decades as one of
the most effective solutions to ease the shortage of fresh water source.
After decades of development, the global cumulative contracted capa-
city of desalination has reached 9.56 × 107 m3/d by 2016. In general,
the main desalination technologies can be divided into two categories:
membrane process (non-phase change) using electrical or mechanical
energy such as reverse osmosis (RO) and electrodialysis (ED), and
thermal process (phase change) consuming thermal energy such as
multi-stage flash (MSF) and multi-effect evaporation (MEE). From the
viewpoint of technological development, RO is the most widely applied
method accounting for 65%, followed by MSF, MEE and other methods
with 22%, 8% and 5%, respectively [1]. In the meanwhile, the desali-
nation industry in China is booming and the total installed capacity has
been 1.19 × 106 m3/d, where RO takes the largest proportion with
68.4% and MEE ranks second with 31.1% [2]. However, desalination is
still an energy-intensive process compared with the conventional water
production process. The specific energy consumption of RO for sea-
water is about 3–4 kWh/m3, and that of MEE and MSF can reach 5.5–9

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zzbshen@dlut.edu.cn (S. Shen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.113759
Received 26 November 2018; Received in revised form 30 April 2019; Accepted 10 May 2019
Available online 11 May 2019
1359-4311/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Nomenclature heat transfer tube, °C

ε entrainment ratio of TVC
A heat transfer area, m2 λ latent heat of vapor, kJ/kg
a* critical velocity, m/s ξ thermal resistance, m2⋅K/kW
BPE boiling point elevation, °C σ superficial isentropic velocity, m/s
cp specific heat at constant pressure, kJ/kg⋅K
CRTVC compression ratio of TVC Superscripts
d diameter of tube, m
E exergy, kW CH chemical
e specific exergy consumption, kJ/kg KN kinetic
ERTVC expansion ratio of TVC PH physical
GOR gained output ratio PT potential
h enthalpy, kJ/kg
K overall heat transfer coefficient, kW/m2⋅K Subscripts
LMTD logarithmic mean temperature difference, °C
M mass flow rate, kg/s b brine
NEA nonequilibrium allowance, °C bf vapor flashed off from the brine
q specific heat consumption, kJ/kg c condensation
Rfou fouling resistance, m2⋅K/kW con condenser
SHTA specific heat transfer area, m2/(kg/s) d vapor generated on the surface of heat transfer tube
T temperature, °C dc discharge steam
U velocity coefficient des destruction
X salinity, g/kg df vapor flashed off from the distillate
e the evaporation section of evaporator
Greek symbols f feed seawater
hs heating steam
α convective heat transfer coefficient, kW/m2⋅K in inner/ inlet
δTbun temperature depression across the tube bundle, °C m motive steam
δTdem temperature depression in the demister, °C out outer/outlet
δTfic temperature depression caused by the frictional resistance pre preheating section of evaporator
in the transmission line, °C s suction steam
δTloc temperature depression caused by the logical resistance in sw seawater
the transmission line, °C v vapor generated from the heat transfer tube
δTcon temperature depression in the condensation process inside w saturated water sprayed in the desuperheater

kWh/ m3 and 10–16 kWh/ m3, respectively [3].
MEE has some unique advantages over the other two methods. The
corrosion and scaling tendency of the equipment is effectively con-
trolled because the top brine temperature of MEE (not more than 70 °C)
is much lower than MSF (90–110 °C), and there is simpler pretreatment
of feed seawater with less chemical consumption and higher quality of
product water than RO [4]. In addition, the high flexibility and low
operation temperature of MEE desalination system makes it possible to
integrate with industrial processes to recovery the waste heat [5]. When
the pressure of heating steam is high enough, a thermal vapor com-
pressor (TVC) could be utilized for increasing the thermal efficiency of
the desalination plant. What’s more, alternative energy, such as nu-
clear, solar geothermal and wind energy [6], can be utilized to drive the
MEE desalination plant.
The research on MEE/MEE-TVC desalination systems can be mainly
divided into two aspects: One hand is technical improvements for the
desalination plant itself involving the optimization of operating para-
meters and flow configuration [7–9], and the promotion of heat transfer
efficiency in evaporator [10,11]. On the other hand, from the per-
spective of system level integrate MEE with the other desalination
technologies (RO, MSF, adsorption desalination (AD), etc.) [12,13]
and/or various thermal systems (steam/organic Rankine Cycle, heat
recovery steam generator, etc.) in order to reduce the specific energy
consumption through the optimizing allocation and rational utilization
of energy and material in the cogeneration system [14–17]. Obviously,
it is of great significance to develop an accurate mathematical model of
MEE/MEE-TVC desalination systems which can not only predict the
thermal performance of existing plants in a certain working condition,
but also contribute to an in-depth understanding of the multi-effect
evaporation process, and provide a theoretical guidance for design and
optimization of the system. El-Dessouky et al. [18] established a de-
tailed MEE model which takes into account the impacts of steam
leakage in the vacuum-pumping system and non-condensable gases,
and the thermodynamic losses during the flow process of steam be-
tween adjacent evaporators. El-Dessouky and Ettouney [19–21] con-
ducted parametric studies on the single-effect evaporation, MEE and
MEE-TVC desalination systems. The results indicate that the thermo-
dynamic performance of MEE-TVC is superior to the others for a large-
scale plant. Darwish et al. [22]developed a simple MEE model. It as-
sumes that the physical properties of seawater, brine, water and steam
including latent heat and specific heat are constant, not varying with
the temperature and the salinity. Mistry et al. [23] developed a math-
ematical model of MEE system in a modular method. The model of each
component forms a relative independent module and then is integrated
in accordance with specific conditions. Al-Mutaz and Wazeer [24]
presented a steady-state model for describing the MEE-TVC desalina-
tion system and the model validity was verified by comparison with
some commercial plants. Kamali et al. [25] developed a mathematical
model of MEE-TVC. The model considers the flow resistance during the
condensation process inside the tube and the selection of empirical
correlation of heat transfer coefficient corresponding to specific con-
ditions. Furthermore, parametric analysis of MEE/MEE-TVC desalina-
tion systems were carried out for better understanding and improve-
ment of system performance. For example, the effects of suction
position of TVC on energy consumption and specific heat transfer area
were investigated by Kamali et al. [26], Khalid et al. [8] and Ortega-
Delgado et al. [27], respectively. The results show that the highest
gained output ratio (GOR) can be obtained when TVC is set near the

2
S. Zhou, et al.
middle effect of evaporator. However, the influences on the specific
heat transfer area are controversial. Khalid et al. [8] pointed out that
the suction position of TVC has little influence on the specific heat
transfer area, while the specific heat transfer area decreases as the
suction position of TVC moves forwards in the conclusion drawn by
Kamali et al. [26] and Ortega-Delgado et al. [27]. In addition, there are
different opinions on the effect of motive steam pressure of TVC. The
GOR increases first and then decreases as the pressure of motive steam
increases from 0.1 to 3.5 MPa in Ref. [8], but the GOR is always in-
creasing with deceleration when the pressure of motive steam varies
from 0.36 to 4.54 MPa in Ref. [27] or from 0.3 to 2.3 MPa [28].
All the above models are based on the first law of thermodynamics,
and the thermal performance of MEE/MEE-TVC desalination system is
evaluated according to the “quantity” of energy. Meanwhile, utilization
of the available energy in MEE/MEE-TVC is studied based on the second
law of thermodynamics from the “quality” of energy, revealing the
exergy destruction due to the irreversibility in the thermal process and
pointing out the weak links and the direction of energy saving. Hamed
et al. [29] studied thermal performances of the MEE-TVC and made a
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of the MEE/ MEE-TVC desalination system (b) temperature profile in adjacent effects.
3
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
comparison between MEE, MEE-TVC and MEE with mechanical vapor
compression (MVC). As a result, it is found that MEE-TVC owns the
lowest exergy destruction and the irreversible losses mainly occur in the
TVC and the first effect of evaporator. In addition, Choi et al. [30]
carried out exergy analysis on the MEE-TVC desalination plants with
different production capacity to seek the improvement of thermal
performance. The results show that more than 70% of exergy destruc-
tions are caused by the TVC and evaporators, and higher entrainment
ratio will be helpful for cutting down the capital cost due to a smaller
required heat transfer area. Elsayed et al. [28] performed the exergy
and thermo-economic analysis for MEE-TVC with different feed con-
figurations. The results indicate that the exergy destruction of TVC is
the highest, and the exergy efficiency can be improved by reducing the
pressure of motive steam.
Review of the literature shows that the differences between simu-
lation results of various models are significant due to different as-
sumptions and correlation formulas, and performance analysis of MEE-
TVC, especially based on second law of thermodynamics, is still in-
sufficient. Therefore, a detailed mathematical model of MEE/MEE–TVC
S. Zhou, et al.
system is developed based on the energy and exergy analysis in this
paper. The calculation of both the flow resistances and the heat transfer
coefficients are according to the results of targeted experiments.
Validity of the model is verified by comparison with the actual plants.
Also, advantages and limitations of the present model are discussed by
comparing with three MEE models from the literature. In addition, the
thermal performance of MEE-TVC are deeply analyzed based on the
model, and the comparative analysis between MEE and MEE-TVC was
carried out from the perspective of exergy destruction as well.
2. Process description
A schematic diagram of MEE/MEE-TVC desalination system is
shown in Fig. 1(a). The system is mainly composed of an end condenser,
a series of evaporators, TVC, flashing boxes of distillate and brine and a
venting system. Besides, some ancillary equipment is installed for
feeding seawater and discharging the brine and the production.
The intake seawater is delivered to the condenser and then con-
denses the vapor generated from the last effect of evaporator with its
temperature rising from T0 to Tf,n. After that, a portion of the seawater
is discharged which is called cooling seawater and the rest is fed to the
evaporation process as feed seawater. According to the relationship
between the flow directions of feed seawater and vapor, the MEE
system can be divided into different feed configurations [31]. Among
them, the parallel feed configuration is widely used, in which the flow
direction of feed seawater is perpendicular to that of vapor and the feed
seawater is simultaneously supplied to the top of each evaporator as
shown in Fig. 1(a).
In general, the feed seawater could be further heated by the addi-
tional preheater in order to decrease the supercooling degree. In the ith
effect, the feed seawater flows on the surface of tube in a thin film form
from top to bottom due to gravity. Meanwhile, the feed seawater (Tf,i) is
heated to the saturation temperature by the vapor from the (i − 1)th
effect in the tube and then small amounts of vapor are generated. The
temperature of generated vapor Tv,i is less than the saturation tem-
perature of brine Tb,i by the boiling point elevation (BPE)i. The gener-
ated vapor flows across the tube bundle (δpbun), the demister (δpdem),
the steam channel (δploc + δpfri) and then condenses in tube side (δpcon)
of the (i + 1)th effect of evaporator (see Fig. 2). The condensing tem-
perature of vapor Tc,i is less than Tv,i by the temperature depression δTp,i
caused by all the flow resistances (see Fig. 1(b)). In order to recover the
energy, the remaining brine (Tb,i) in the bottom of evaporator goes into
the flashing box effect by effect and small quantity of vapor (Tbf,i) is
flashed off from the brine because the pressure is decreasing with the
ordinal number of effect. Eventually, the brine is collected and then
discharged in the last effect.
As for the MEE desalination system, heating steam supplied to the
Fig. 2. the path of steam in MEE desalination system.
4
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
first effect of evaporator is only saturated by the desuperheater. When
the pressure of heating steam is high enough and usually used as the
motive steam of TVC, which can not only solve the mismatch problem
of steam parameter, but also improve the recycling rate of generated
vapor and reduce the energy loss in end condenser. The discharge steam
of TVC gets saturated by the desuperheater and then is taken as heating
steam (Ths) releasing the latent heat of condensation in tube of the first
effect of evaporator. Correspondingly, the condensate either goes back
to the supply equipment or enters the flashing box of distillate de-
pending on its quality. Flash occurs in the flashing box of distillate
because of the change of pressure and the flashed off vapor (Tdf,i) flows
into the tube side of the next effect of evaporator. The process repeats
until the vapor generated in the last effect of evaporator is condensed in
the end condenser. The accumulated distillate is discharged as the
product.
Non-condensable gases from feed seawater or leakage of the plant
will greatly reduce the efficiency of heat transfer and even cause the
plant fail to run normally. Therefore, a venting system is necessary to
guarantee an effective and stable operation of MEE/MEE-TVC desali-
nation plant.
3. Mathematical modeling
Mathematical modeling of MEE/MEE-TVC desalination system is
accomplished which includes the feed configurations of forward,
backward, parallel and mixed, and in this section the parallel feed
configuration is taken for example. Assumptions and characteristics of
the developed models are given as below:
• Steady-state operation.
• Distillate is salt-free.
• Physical properties of water and vapor are determined by tem-
perature and pressure, and that of saline water vary with tempera-
ture and salinity.
• Thermodynamic losses are considered including BPE of brine, non-
equilibrium allowances in the evaporators and the flashing boxes,
and the flow resistance losses of steam from generation to sub-
sequent condensation.
• The heat transfer coefficients of falling-film around horizontal tube
for seawater and condensing inside a tube for steam are obtained
from the targeted experimental studies
3.1. Mass and energy balance model
3.1.1. Evaporator
A schematic diagram of the ith effect of evaporator is presented in
Fig. 3(a). The balances of mass, salt and energy for the ith effect are
S. Zhou, et al.
Fig. 3. Schematic of material flow (a) and heat transfer process (b) in the ith
effect of evaporator.
given by the following equations:
Mf,i = Md,i + Mb,i , i = 1, ...,n
Mf,i Xf,i = Mb,i Xb,i , i = 1, ...,n
Mhs λhs = Mf,i c pf,i (Tb, i − Tf,i ) + Md,i λ d,i , i = 1
Md,i − 1 λ d,i − 1 + Mdf,i − 1 λ df,i − 1 + Mbf,i − 1 λbf,i − 1 = Mf,i c pf,i (Tb, i − Tf,i ) + Md,i
λ d,i , i = 2, ...,n
where Mf, Mb, Md, Mbf, Mdf and Mhs stand for the mass flow rates of feed
seawater, brine, vapor formed on the surface of heat transfer tube and
flashed off from the brine and the distillate, and heating steam, re-
spectively. Xf, cpf, Xb, λ and T are the salinity and the specific heat of
feed seawater, the salinity of brine, latent heat and temperature, re-
spectively.
The heat transfer process in the ith effect of evaporator is shown in
Fig. 3(b) and the heat transfer equations are as follows,
Mhs λhs = Kpre,1 Apre,1 (LMTD)1 + K e,1 Ae,1 (Ths − Tb,1)
Fig. 4. Schematic of the ith effect of flashing box of brine.
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
Md,i − 1 λ d,i − 1 + Mdf,i − 1 λ df,i − 1 + Mbf,i − 1 λbf,i − 1 = Kpre,i Apre,i (LMTD)i + K e,i
Ae,i (Tc,i − 1 − Tb, i ) i = 2, ...,n (6)
where Apre and Ae are the heat transfer areas for pre-heating and eva-
porating, respectively. LMTD is the logarithmic mean temperature
difference of pre-heating section of evaporator, which can be calculated
by
(LMTD)i = (Tb, i − Tf, i)/ln[(Tc, i − 1 − Tf, i )/(Tc, i − 1 − Tb, i )], i = 1, ...,n (7)
Tc,i is the condensing temperature of vapor, which subtracts BPE
and the temperature depressions δTp,i caused by flow resistances from
the boiling temperature Tb,i of brine as shown in Fig. 1(b).
Tc,i = Tb, i − BPEi − δ Tp,i, i = 1, ...,n (8)
where δTp,i denotes the sum of temperature depressions corresponding
to pressure drops (δpbun,i, δpdem,i, (δpfic,i + δploc,i) and δpcon,i) of vapor
flowing across the tube bundle, the demister and the passage and then
condensing in the tube of next effect as shown in Fig. 2, which can be
obtained from the targeted experiments in our previous work [32].
Kpre is the heat transfer coefficient of pre-heating section [18]. Ke is
the heat transfer coefficient of evaporating section and its general for-
mula is as follow:
1
Ke = 1 dout 1
α out
+ din αin
+ d
+ Rfou
2πξ ln ⎛ out ⎞
(9)
⎜ ⎟
⎝ din ⎠
where ξ, Rfou, dout and din represent thermal resistance, fouling re-
sistance, outer and inner diameters of the heat transfer tube, respec-
tively. αout and αin denote the heat transfer coefficients of falling-film
around horizontal tube for seawater and condensing inside a tube for
steam, which were obtained from the databases established by targeted
experimental studies in our previous work [33,34].
3.2. Flashing box of brine
(1) The pressure is decreasing effect by effect and the ith effect of
flashing box of brine is connected with shell side of the ith effect of
(2) evaporator, so its pressure is lower than the saturated vapor pressure
corresponding to the temperature of accumulated brine from shell side
(3) of the (i − 1)th effect of evaporator. Therefore, flash occurs in the ith
effect of flashing box of brine. As shown in Fig. 4, the energy balance of
flashing box of brine is as follow
(4) Mbf,i λbf,i = Mb',i − 1 c pb,i −1 (Tb,i − 1 − Tbf, i ), i = 2, ...,n (10)
where Mb′,i-1 is the mass flow rate of accumulated brine until the
(i − 1)th effect. Tbf,i is the flashing temperature of brine. It is higher
than the boiling point Tb,i of brine by the nonequilibrium allowance
(NEA)bf,i [35].
3.2.1. Flashing box of distillate
Similarly, the ith effect of flashing box of distillate is connected with
tube side of the ith effect of evaporator, so its pressure is lower than the
saturated vapor pressure corresponding to the temperature of accu-
(5) mulated distillate from tube side of the (i − 1)th effect of evaporator
5
S. Zhou, et al.
and then flash occurs. As shown in Fig. 5, the energy balance of flashing
box of distillate is given
Mdf,i λ df,i = Md',i −1 c p,i −1 (Tc,i − 1 − Tdf,i ), i = 2, ...,n (11)
where Md′,i-1 is the mass flow rate of accumulated distillate until the
(i − 1)th effect. Tdf,i is the flashing temperature of distillate. It exceeds
the saturation temperature Tv,i of vapor by the nonequilibrium allow-
ance (NEA)df,i [35].
3.2.2. Condenser
The energy balance and the heat transfer equation of condenser are
given as follows,
Md,n λ d, n + Mbf,n λbf,n + Mdf,n λ df,n = Msw c p,sw (Tcon,out − Tcon,in ) (12)
Md,n λ d, n + Mbf,n λbf,n + Mdf,n λ df,n = K con Acon (LMTD)con (13)
where Msw, Tcon,in and Tcon,out are mass flow rate, inlet temperature and
outlet temperature of the seawater flowing through condenser. Acon and
Kcon are heat transfer area and heat transfer coefficient of the con-
denser, respectively. Kcon is calculated according to the correlation in
the Ref. [18]. (LMTD)con is given by
(LMTD)con = (Tcon,out − Tcon,in )/ln[(Tc, n − Tcon,in )/(Tc, n − Tcon,out )] (14)
3.2.3. Preheater
Suppose the number of preheaters is m (0 ⩽ m < n ), the energy
balance equation and the heat transfer equation of the jth preheater are
as follows:
Mf c pf (Tf,j − Tf,j + 1) = Mpreh,j (h preh,in,j − h preh,out,j ), j = 1, ...,m , (15)
Mf c pf (Tf,j − Tf,j + 1) = Kpreh,j Apreh,j (LMTD) preh, j , j = 1, ...,m (16)
where Mpreh, hpreh,in and hpreh,out are mass flow rate, enthalpies of inlet
and outlet of the hot fluid where the hot fluid could be external steam,
generated vapor, brine or distillate. Apreh and Kpreh are heat transfer
area and heat transfer coefficient of the preheater, respectively.
(LMTD)preh is given by
(LMTD) preh,j
= [(Tpreh,in,j − Tf,j + 1) − (Tpreh,out,j − Tf,j )]
/ln[(Tpreh,in,j − Tf,j + 1)/(Tpreh,out,j − Tf,j )] (17)
3.2.4. TVC and desuperheater
From Fig. 6(a) it can be seen that TVC mainly consists of nozzle and
three chambers of suction, mixing and diffusion. In addition, the dis-
charge steam of TVC is usually cooled to the saturation state by the
desuperheater and then supplied to the desalination plant. The ther-
modynamic states of all the involved streams have been illustrated in
Fig. 6(b).
The ratio of the pressures of discharge steam and suction steam is
called the compression ratio CRTVC, and that of the pressures of motive
steam and suction steam is termed as the expansion ratio ERTVC. As a
key parameter, the entrainment ratio ε is usually used for measuring the
performance of TVC and its definition is the ratio of the mass flow rates
Fig. 5. Schematic of the ith effect of flashing box of distillate.
6
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
of suction steam Ms and motive steam Mm:
ε = Ms/ Mm (18)
The calculation formula of entrainment ratio ε is [36]:
a*
U1 a m
∗ σ − U3 σdc2
dc
ε=
a∗
U4 σdc2 − U2 a ∗s σs1
dc (19)
where Ui (i = 1–4), a and σ are the velocity coefficient, the critical
velocity and the superficial isentropic velocity, respectively. The sub-
scripts of dc and s stand for the discharge steam and the suction steam,
respectively. The superscript of * is the critical value. The subscripts of
1 and 2 are positions of the two sections in Fig. 6(a).
The balance equations of energy and mass are given by
Mhs hhs = Mdc hdc + Mw h w (20)
Mhs = Mdc + Mw (21)
where Mw and hw are mass flow rate and specific enthalpy of the sa-
turated water sprayed in the desuperheater, respectively.
3.3. Exergy model
The specific exergy e of stable flowing fluid consists of kinetic ex-
ergy eKN, potential exergy ePT, physical exergy ePH and chemical exergy
eCH. For the MEE desalination system, the kinetic exergy and the po-
tential exergy are negligible. The ideal work provided by the system
from the current state to the state of incomplete equilibrium (in the
equilibriums of mechanics and thermodynamics with the restricted
dead state) is called the physical exergy of the system. The physical
exergy ePH of stream is calculated by:
EPH = Me PH = M ((h − h 0) − T0 (s − s0)) (22)
where, h and s are specific enthalpy and specific entropy of the current
state, respectively. The subscript of 0 stands for the restricted dead
state.
The ideal work provided by the system from the state of incomplete
equilibrium to the state of complete equilibrium (in the equilibriums of
mechanics, thermodynamics and chemistry with the restricted dead
state) is the chemical exergy of the system. The calculation of chemical
exergy eCH in the MEE desalination system is as follows [37]:
EdCH = NXd wth,0 (23)
EbCH = NXd (wth,r − wth,0) (24)
where, NXd stands for molar flow rate of the distillate. wth,0 and wth,r are
the theoretical minimum work required to separate 1 mol pure water
from saline water when the concentration ratio (Xb/Xf) is infinitely
close to 1 and greater than 1, respectively [38].
In this paper the MEE/MEE-TVC system is simply regarded as a
“black box” and focuses on the input and the output of exergy at the
boundary of the box in order to obtain the total exergy destruction.
Therefore, the total exergy destruction Edes,tot can be expressed by
Edes,tot = Wpump + Ein − Eout (25)
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Fig. 6. (a) Schematic and (b) T-s diagram of the TVC and the desuperheater.

where, Wpump denotes the pump work required by transferring the fluid 3.4. Performance parameters
materials in the desalination plant. The total input exergy Ein consists of
the motive steam exergy Em and the seawater exergy Esw entering the The gained output ratio (GOR) reflects the operating cost of thermal
condenser: desalination plant. The GOR of MEE and MEE-TVC desalination systems
are defined as follows:
Ein = Em + Esw (26)
Md
The total output exergy Eout includes the exergy of distillate Ed, GORMEE =
Mhs (33a)
brine Eb and cooling seawater Erej:
Eout = Ed + Eb + Erej (27) Md
GORMEE - TVC =
Mm (33b)
The exergy destruction model of each subprocess is established as
follows: The specific heat consumption qd and the specific exergy con-
Similarly, taking the ith effect of evaporator and flashing boxes of sumption ed denote the amount of heat and exergy consumed by pro-
brine and distillate as a “black box”, the exergy destruction Edes,i of ducing per unit distillate, respectively.
which is given by qd = Mm λ m / Md (34)
Edes, i = Ef,i + Ehs − (Ed,i + Edf,i + Ebf,i ) − Eb,i − Ec,i i=1 (28)
ed = (Em + Wpump)/ Md (35)
Edes, i The specific cooling seawater (SCS) determines the power of sea-
= Ef,i + (Ed,i − 1 + Edf,i − 1 + Ebf,i − 1) + Eb',i − 1 + Ed′i − 1 − water pump and the heat loss caused by rejecting the brine.
(Ed,i + Edf,i + Ebf,i ) − Eb',i − Ed',i i ∈ {2, ...,n} (29) SCS = Mrej/ Md (36)
The exergy destruction Edes,con of condenser can be expressed by The definition of specific heat transfer area (SHTA) is expressed by
Edes,con = Esw,in + (Ed,n + Edf,n + Ebf,n ) − (Edc,n + Edfc,n + Ebfc,n ) − Esw,out n m
∑i = 1 Ai + ∑ j = 1 Apre, j + Acon
A
(30) SHTA = =
Md Md (37)
The exergy destruction Edes,pre of preheater is calculated by
Edes,pre = Ef,j + 1 + Eprei,j − Ef,j − Epreo,j j ∈ {1, ...,m − 1} (31) 3.5. Computational algorithm
Consider the TVC and desuperheater as a “black box” and its exergy
destruction is as follows, According to the above-mentioned physical and mathematical
models, a simulation program of MEE/MEE-TVC desalination system is
Edes,TVC + DES = Em + Es + EW − Ehs (32) prepared, the structure of which is illustrated in Fig. 7.

7
S. Zhou, et al.
Fig. 7. The algorithm block diagram of present work.
3.6. Model verification
Validity of the present model is proved by comparison with the
available data of some commercial MEE-TVC desalination plants. As
indicated in Table 1, the simulation results of model well agree with the
actual plants. The relative error of GORMEE-TVC is between −2.4% and
2%, and that of specific heat transfer area is between −2.9% and
∼3.8%.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Comparative analysis between various mathematical models
Advantages and limitations of the present model are discussed by
comparing with three MEE models from the literature [18,22,23], and
the data of selected MEE models is based on the results of Mistry et al.
[23]. The main features or assumptions of these three models are briefly
described below.
The detailed MEE model established by El-Dessouky et al. [18]
mainly has the following characteristics:
8
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
• Constant heat transfer area of evaporator and preheater in each
effect.
• The vapor leakage through the venting system is considered.
• The physical properties of brine vary with salinity and temperature.
• The impact of non-condensable gases on heat transfer coefficients of
the evaporator and the feed preheater are taken into account.
• The thermodynamic losses considered include BPE, non-equilibrium
allowance, temperature depression corresponding to the pressure
drop in the demister, vapor transmission lines, and during the
condensation process.
The simple MEE model developed by Darwish et al. [22] is based on
the following postulates:
• The amount of steam generated in each evaporator is equal other
than the first effect.
• The temperature difference between adjacent effects is equal.
• The feed seawater is preheated by an equal temperature rise in feed
heaters.
• Equal specific heat of brine, distillate and feed, and equal latent heat
of the steam and BPE of the brine.
The assumptions are made in the model developed by Mistry et al.
[23]:
• The properties of seawater are a function of temperature and sali-
nity.
• Non-equilibrium allowance is negligible.
• The generated vapor is slightly superheated.
• The overall heat transfer coefficient is averaged in the length di-
rection of exchanger.
• The overall heat transfer coefficient is only a function of tempera-
ture.
Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 illustrate the changes of GORMEE obtained from
different models with the number of effects n and the temperature of
heating steam Ths. It can be seen that the GORMEE gets raised with n for
all the models investigated, and the increasing rate of Darwish model is
significantly higher than the other three models; as Ths increases, the
GORMEE shows a slightly decrease; under the same condition, the
GORMEE presents a descending order of Darwish model, Mistry model,
present model, and El-Dessouky model, and the relative deviation be-
tween Darwish model and present model is up to 29.5% when n is 14.
The increase of n means a higher efficiency of energy utilization,
which reduces the load of condenser and the energy waste due to the
discharge of cooling seawater. Owing to the existence of thermo-
dynamic losses and the physical properties of saturated vapor that the
latent heat of vaporization increases with the decrease of temperature,
the relationship between GORMEE and n is not linear. Mistry model, El-
Dessouky model, and present model can all reflect the above relation-
ship owing to the properties of saturated vapor regarded as the function
of temperature. In MEE desalination system, evaporation temperature
generally decreases by effect from 70 °C to 40 °C, and the corresponding
latent heat of vaporization increases from 2333 kJ/kg to 2406 kJ/kg.
The Darwish model assumes the latent heat of vaporization as a con-
stant of 2333 kJ/kg, and results in an excessive GORMED.
The required amount of heating steam gets raised for the same
distillate production because the latent heat of vaporization decreases
with the increase of Ths. Therefore, the variations of GORMEE with Ths in
Mistry model, El-Dessouky model, and present model all show a de-
crease. However, the Darwish model also obtains the same trend with
the assumption of constant latent heat of vaporization. The reason is
that the temperature difference between brine and feed seawater of the
first effect increases as Ths increases according to the approximate
formula of GORMEE derived by the Darwish model.
Within the range of calculation parameters in this paper, the
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Table 1
Mathematical model predictions against some commercial plants.
Desalination plant (1) Ref. [39] (2) Ref. [11] (3) Ref. [40]

Actual Model Actual Model Actual Model

Operating and design conditions

Number of effects n 4 4 4 4 4 4
Distillate production Md, m3/d 5000 5000 1536 1536 10,000 10,000
Motive steam pressure Pm, MPa 2.3 2.3 1.68 1.68 0.55 0.55
Salinity of feed seawater Xf, g/kg 39 39 N/A 32 36 36
Maximum salinity of brine Xb, g/kg 53 53 N/A 45.4 51.6 51.6
Heat steam temperature Ths, °C 65 65 65 65 65 65
Minimum brine temperature Tn, °C 45.4 45.4 45.7 45.7 51.8 51.8
Feed seawater temperature Tf, °C 41.5 41.5 45 45 48 48
Cooling seawater temperature Tsw, °C 31.5 31.5 29 29 25 25

TVC design
Entrainment ratio ε 0.625 0.67 0.875 0.845 1.08 1.07
Compression ratio CRTVC 2.66 2.6 2.58 2.53 1.85 1.87
Expansion ratio ERTVC 240.9 238.6 173.3 169.8 40.7 41
System performance
Gained output ratio GORMEE-TVC 6.51 6.6 6.67 6.8 8.33 8.42
Specific heat transfer area, m2/(kg/s) N/A 251.1 216 220.6 352.1 341.7

Desalination plant (4) Ref. [41] (5) Ref. [42] (6) Ref. [43]

Actual Model Actual Model Actual Model

Operating and design conditions

Number of effects n 4 4 12 12 6 6
Distillate production Md, m3/d 10,921 10,921 9000 9000 5000 5000
Motive steam pressure Pm, MPa 2.1 2.1 4.5 4.5 0.34 0.34
Salinity of feed seawater Xf, g/kg 36 36 38 38 41.2 41.2
Maximum salinity of brine Xb, g/kg 53.3 53.3 57 57 N/A 65.9
Heat steam temperature Ths, °C 67 67 65 65 73.6 73.6
Minimum brine temperature Tn, °C 47 47 37 37 48.5 48.5
Feed seawater temperature Tf, °C 43 43 35 35 N/A 46.5
Cooling seawater temperature Tsw, °C N/A 30 22 22 32 32

TVC design
Entrainment ratio ε 1.98 1.97 N/A 0.44 N/A 0.56
Compression ratio CRTVC 1.58 1.61 4 4 N/A 3.2
Expansion ratio ERTVC 121.1 124 730 720.2 N/A 29.8

System performance
Gained output ratio GORMEE-TVC 7.6 7.5 16.7 16.5 8.2 8.0
Specific heat transfer area, m2/(kg/s) 221 229.4 N/A 555 N/A 263.9

Fig. 8. Effect of number of effects on GORMEE calculated by various mathe- Fig. 9. Effect of temperature of heating steam on GORMEE calculated by various
matical models. mathematical models.

9
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Fig. 12. Variations of GORMEE-TVC with Pm and Ps of the TVC.

Fig. 10. Effect of number of effects on SHTA calculated by various mathema-
tical models.

Fig. 13. Variations of ε and CRTVC with Pm and Ps of the TVC.

Fig. 11. Effect of heating steam temperature on SHTA calculated by various
mathematical models.
GORMEE obtained from the El-Dessouky model is the lowest of all the
four models, and about 5% lower than that of the present model, while
the relative error between the present model and the available data is
−2.4% to 2%. Therefore, it is assumed that the El-Dessouky model may
have an overestimation of the amount of steam leakage. In addition, the
GORMEE obtained from the Mistry model is about 6% higher than that of
the present model. The reason may be mainly that the Mistry model
ignores the nonequilibrium allowance in the flashing processes, so that
the amount of flash-off steam increases, which leads to the decrease of
heating steam consumption with constant distillate production.
The different considerations for thermodynamic losses make the
predicted specific heat transfer area have significant differences as
presented in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11. With the increase of n or the decrease
of Ths, the specific heat transfer area increases for all the models in-
vestigated because the driving force of heat transfer in each evaporator
is reduced. The SHTA calculated by the present model is always the
highest except for n = 14. As n increases or Ths decreases, the relative

Table 2
The specifications of MEE-TVC desalination plant investigated.
Parameter Value Parameter Value

Distillate production Md, m3/d 15,000 Heating steam temperature Ths, °C 70

Feed configuration Parallel Minimum evaporation temperature Tv,n, °C 45
Number of effects n 6 Motive steam pressure Pm, MPa 0.35–0.75
Concentration ratio 1.45 Suction steam pressure Ps, kPa 9.6–25.5

10
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Fig. 14. Variations of Tdc with Pm and Ps of the TVC.

Fig. 17. Variations of SCS with Pm and Ps of the TVC.

Fig. 15. Variation of Md,i with the location of TVC for Pm = 0.35 MPa.

Fig. 18. Variations of SHTA with Pm and Ps of the TVC.

deviation between the El-Dessouky model/ the Mistry model and the
present model increases, while that between the Darwish model and the
present model decreases. For instance, when n increases from 6 to 14,
the relative deviation of SHTA between the El-Dessouky model and the
present model increases from 7.6% to 22.8%, and that between the
Darwish model and the present model decreases from 40.6% to 1.3%.
The Darwish model only considers the BPE of brine as a constant of
1 °C ignoring thermodynamic losses caused by the flow resistances. In
addition, it is noted that the heat transfer area of condenser is not
counted in SHTA of the Darwish model, which causes a large impact
when the heat transfer area of evaporator is relatively small corre-
sponding to fewer n or higher Ths. Consequently, it leads to a lower
prediction of SHTA. As n increases or Ths decreases, the heat transfer
temperature difference of each evaporator decreases, and therefore the
influence of BPE is gradually strengthened [44]. At the same time, the
effect of ignoring the heat transfer area of condenser on SHTA weakens
Fig. 16. Variations of qd and ed with Pm and Ps of the TVC.
because the total heat transfer area of evaporators rapidly increases.

11
S. Zhou, et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759

Table 3 steam pressure Pm, and meanwhile the effect is more remarkable at
Comparison of the thermodynamic performance between MEE and MEE-TVC lower suction steam pressure Ps. With the increase of Ps, GORMEE-TVC
desalination systems. increases first and then decreases, and the increasing rate is lower than
Parameters MEE MEE-TVC the decreasing rate.
Since the discharged steam pressure of TVC remains constant in this
System performance study, the compression ratio CRTVC gets raised as the suction steam
Gained output ratio GORMEE, GORMEE-TVC 4.93 8.08
pressure Ps decreases [26]. With the increase of motive steam pressure
Specific heat consumption qd, kJ/kg 498.4 304.5
Specific exergy consumption ed, kJ/kg 152.7 93.5 Pm, the entrainment ratio ε increases and the effect is more significant
Specific cooling seawater SCS 3.93 0.38 when the CRTVC gets lower as presented in Fig. 13. Moreover, the dis-
Specific heat transfer area SHTA, m2/(kg/s) 269.3 249.8 charged steam temperature Tdc of TVC is overheated and usually
Exergy balance reaches the saturation state by spraying saturated water in the desu-
Pump work Wpumpa, kW 735.2 483.3 perheater before entering the first effect. As demonstrated in Fig. 14,
Exergy of motive steam Em, kW 25770.8 15740.9 the superheat degree of discharged steam increases with the increasing
Exergy of condensate Edm, kW 452.9 593.5
Exergy of distillate Ed, kW 932.4 876.1
Pm, and the increase is more significant when the CRTVC gets higher.
Exergy of brine Eb, kW 1402.8 1402.8 Obviously, the increasing amount of sprayed water helps to reduce the
Exergy of cooling seawater Erej, kW 930.1 87.0 consumption of motive steam. As a result, the combined influences of
Exergy destruction of evaporators and flashing boxes, kW 5223.9 5401.8 both ε and Tdc bring about the variation of GORMEE-TVC with Pm. It is
Exergy destruction of condenser Edes,con, kW 2856.5 1425.5
also confirmed by the results obtained by Kamali et al. [26] and Ortega-
Exergy destruction of ETDPR(MEE)/ETVC+DES(MEE-TVC), 13972.2 5954.2
kW Delgado et al. [27].
The total exergy destruction Edes,tot, kW 22052.6 12781.5 From Fig. 13 and Fig. 14, it can be also seen that the entrainment
ratio ε gets raised and the discharged temperature Tdc gets diminished
a
Wpump is estimated based on the flow rate of fluid transported. as the suction pressure Ps increases. In the meantime, distillate pro-
duction of the first effect of evaporator presents a notable increase with
Both the two factors result in a dramatic increase of the predicted the increasing Ps as exhibited in Fig. 15, and it can lead to a larger
SHTA. consumption of heating steam. Therefore, the comprehensive effects of
The El-Dessouky model does not consider the flow resistance of ε, Tdc and distillate production of the first effect cause the GORMEE-TVC
steam across the tube bundle, and the Mistry model ignores the pressure to increase first and then decrease with the increase of Ps. The change
drop of steam condensing in the tube. Meanwhile, the present model rate of GOR with Ps before and after the maximum GOR is not exactly
considers both of the flow resistances above and the corresponding data the same with the earlier work [26] in the literature. It may be caused
were obtained from the targeted experiments for LT-MEE. Therefore, as by the entrainment ratio ε corresponding to the different temperature
n increases or Ths decreases, a smaller heat transfer temperature dif- difference of each effect between the present and earlier studies.
ference of each effect becomes more sensitive to the pressure drop With an increasing motive pressure Pm, the specific exergy con-
caused by flow resistances [32]. It is probably the main reason which sumption ed increases, and the specific heat consumption decreases.
causes the relative deviation of SHTA between the El-Dessouky model/ Meanwhile, with the increase of suction pressure Ps, both ed and qd
the Mistry model and the present model. However, the steam leakage of decrease first and then increase (seen in Fig. 16). According to the
vacuum system and the effect of non-condensable gas have been ig- definition of ed and qd, both of them are related to the quality of motive
nored in the present model, and it needs to be completed in the future steam. When the distillate production remains constant, GORMEE-TVC
work. rises with the increasing Pm, which means a decreasing consumption of
motive steam. Furthermore, the latent heat of evaporation decreases
4.2. Performance analysis of MEE/MEE-TVC with the increase of temperature. Therefore, it is the reason that the qd
decreases with the increase of Pm at a decreasing rate. In spite of a lower
4.2.1. Effects of Pm and Ps on MEE-TVC consumption of motive steam, the specific exergy of motive steam in-
In the present section, the influences of motive steam pressure Pm creases with the increase of Pm, and it eventually leads to an increase of
and suction steam pressure Ps on the thermodynamic performance of ed. The effect of Ps is discussed under the same Pm, and therefore the
MEE-TVC have been analyzed. The specifications of MEE-TVC desali- variations of ed and qd with Ps just show the opposite trend of GORMEE-
nation plant investigated are shown in Table 2. It should be noted that TVC.

the increasing suction steam pressures are corresponding to the ex- It can be seen in Fig. 17 that the specific cooling seawater decreases
traction positions of TVC moving from the nth effect to the first effect in as Pm increases, and decreases first and then increases with the increase
the plant, and TVC adopts the converging mixing tube. of Ps. When Pm increases, the entrainment ratio ε gets raised and thus
As shown in Fig. 12, GORMEE-TVC rises with the increase of motive the amount of suction steam increases, which causes the distillate

(a) MEE (b) MEE-TVC

Fig. 19. Distributions of exergy destruction in the MEE-TVC and MEE for Pm = 0.55 MPa.

12
S. Zhou, et al.
production of each effect behind TVC to decrease. As a result, the SCS
decreases because the cooling load of condenser is reduced. With the
increase of Ps, the amount of generated steam of last effect decreases
first and then increases (seen in Fig. 15). Therefore, the change trend of
SCS with Ps is consistent with the amount of generated steam of last
effect.
Through the above analysis, it can be found that the CRTVC of
2.1–2.6 contributes to cut down the operation cost from the perspective
of energy consumption owing to a higher GORMEE-TVC and a lower SCS.
This finding is almost in accordance with the earlier work with the
CRTVC of 2–2.5 [26] and 2.3–2.8 [8].
Meanwhile, the variations of specific heat transfer area with motive
steam pressure Pm and suction steam pressure Ps are displayed in
Fig. 18. From the figure it can be seen that Pm has little effect on the
SHTA. When Pm increases from 0.35 MPa to 0.75 MPa, the SHTA only
decreases by less than 1.5%. In addition, the SHTA decreases as Ps in-
creases. When Ps increases from 9.6 kPa to 25.5 kPa, the SHTA has a
decrement of about 10.8%. As Ps increases, that is the TVC moves
forward, the proportion of heat transfer area of evaporator behind TVC
in the SHTA is increasing gradually. The distillate production load of
each effect before TVC increases while that behind TVC decreases as
shown in Fig. 15. At the same time, the amount of feed water of each
effect behind TVC goes down because of a constant concentration ratio.
Both the two factors make the flow resistances reduced and a larger
drive force of heat transfer obtained, which leads to the decrease of heat
transfer area of evaporator behind TVC. Therefore, the SHTA decreases
with the increase of Ps. The finding of the present work agrees with the
previous work [26,27] in the literature, but there is a greater difference
with that obtained by Khalid et al. [8] in which the suction position of
TVC has little influence on the specific heat transfer area. The reason
may be the model [8] based on the assumption of constant values of
BPE and the thermal losses caused by flow resistances cannot exactly
reflect the variations of temperature difference of heat transfer with Ps.
4.2.2. Performance comparison between MEE and MEE-TVC
Performance comparison between MEE and MEE-TVC is carried out
in this section. Motive steam pressure is 0.55 MPa and suction steam
pressure is 14.6 kPa (TVC behind the 4th effect) for MEE-TVC. The
remaining parameters of desalination plant are shown in Table 2. The
reference state assumed for seawater is 25 °C and 32000 ppm, and that
assumed for water is 0.101325 MPa and 25 °C, at which the exergy is 0.
The comparative results are shown in Table 3. It can be seen that
compared with MEE, GORMEE-TVC is improved by 63.9%, and specific
heat consumption qd, specific exergy consumption ed and specific heat
transfer area are diminished by 38.9%, 38.8% and 7.2%, respectively.
Moreover, Table 3 also shows exergy balances of the two systems, and
in conjunction with Fig. 19 it can be found as follows:
In the MEE desalination system, the exergy destruction ETDPR of
temperature-decreased pressure reducer (TDPR) is the highest ac-
counting for 63% of the total exergy destruction, and it serves to show a
great throttling loss. The exergy destruction Econ of condenser comes in
the second place with 13% of the total exergy destruction. Furthermore,
the exergy destruction Edes,i of each effect of evaporator and flashing
box reduces initially and then increases with the increase of sequence
number of effects. The temperature difference between the feed sea-
water outside the tube and the steam in the tube is reduced, that is, the
difference of energy grade between the receiving side and the releasing
side is reduced. In the meanwhile, the generated steam of each effect
decreases first and then increases as the sequence number of effects gets
raised for the parallel feed configuration. Both the two aspects result in
the variation of Edes,i with the sequence number of effects.
In the MEE-TVC desalination system, 47% of the total exergy de-
struction is attributed to the TVC and desuperheater. Followed by the
condenser and the first effect, each accounts for 11%. The exergy de-
struction of subsequent effect decreases with the increasing sequence
number of effects, especially that behind TVC. It is primarily caused by
13
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
the declining amount of generated steam due to the extraction of TVC.
Compared to the earlier work [28,30,45] in the literature, it can be
found that the attribution of exergy destruction of each component
reaches a consensus, and meanwhile the proportion of exergy destruc-
tion occurring in TVC varies with the suction location because of the
various difference between the grades of motive steam and suction
steam. For example, the exergy destruction of TVC in Ref. [28] is up to
58.3% with the TVC behind the last effect, while that in Ref. [45] is
44% close to that in the present work with the TVC behind the middle
effect.
By comparing the thermodynamic performances and the distribu-
tions of exergy destruction of the two systems, it can be drawn that the
TVC reduces the cooling load of condenser and the consumption of
motive steam due to the reuse of low-pressure generated steam.
Therefore, it will greatly lower the exergy destruction of condenser and
the exergy loss caused by rejecting the cooling seawater. In addition,
the throttling loss caused by temperature-decreased pressure reducer is
much higher than that caused by the TVC.
5. Conclusions
A steady-state mathematical model of MEE/MEE-TVC based on the
first law and second law of thermodynamics is developed in this paper,
and validity of the present model is proved by comparison with the
actual plant. In addition, compared with the other three models of MEE,
it can be seen that the present model may be able to provide a more
accurate simulation result. However, the steam leakage of vacuum
system and the effect of non-condensable gas should be considered to
make the simulation more rigorous, and it will be expected to complete
in the future work.
The performance analysis of MEE/MEE-TVC was carried out, and
results indicate that the increase of motive steam pressure of TVC is
helpful to raise the GOR while it makes little influence on the specific
heat transfer area. The variation of suction steam pressure has a sig-
nificant effect on the performance of MEE-TVC, and in the calculation
range of this paper the compression ratio of TVC of 2.1–2.6 contributes
to cut down the operation cost from the perspective of energy con-
sumption owing to a higher GOR and a lower SCS. What’s more, the
comparison of performance and exergy destruction distributions be-
tween MEE and MEE-TVC show that MEE-TVC can obtain higher GOR
and lower specific heat transfer area, and the exergy destruction of
temperature-decreased pressure reducer adopted in MEE is much
higher than that caused by the TVC.
Acknowledgement
This research is supported by the project of National Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. 51336001) and the project of the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (DUT17RC (3)
014). The authors are grateful for the support.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.113759.
References
[1] IDA, IDA desalination yearbook 2016-2017, Oxford: Media Analytics Ltd, 2016.
[2] State Oceanic Administration of China, National seawater utilization report 2016,
www.soa.gov.cn/zwgk/hygb/hykjnb_2186/201707/t20170719_57029.html.
[3] N. Ghaffour, J. Bundschuh, H. Mahmoudi, M.F.A. Goosen, Renewable energy-driven
desalination technologies: A comprehensive review on challenges and potential
applications of integrated systems, Desalination 356 (2015) 94–114.
[4] I.S. Al-Mutaz, Features of multi-effect evaporation desalination plants, Desalin.
Water Treat. 54 (2014) 3227–3235.
[5] M. Salimi, M. Amidpour, Modeling, simulation, parametric study and economic
assessment of reciprocating internal combustion engine integrated with multi-effect
S. Zhou, et al.
desalination unit, Energy Convers. Manage. 138 (2017) 299–311.
[6] M.A. Abdelkareem, M. El Haj Assad, E.T. Sayed, B. Soudan, Recent progress in the
use of renewable energy sources to power water desalination plants, Desalination
435 (2018) 97–113.
[7] R. Kouhikamali, Thermodynamic analysis of feed water pre-heaters in multiple
effect distillation systems, Appl. Therm. Eng. 50 (2013) 1157–1163.
[8] K.A. Khalid, M.A. Antar, A. Khalifa, O.A. Hamed, Allocation of thermal vapor
compressor in multi effect desalination systems with different feed configurations,
Desalination 426 (2018) 164–173.
[9] S. Zhou, S. Shen, Y. Guo, X. Mu, Comparative performance evaluation of LT-MEE
desalination systems with three feed configurations, Desalin. Water Treat. 69
(2017) 217–228.
[10] F. Wunder, S. Enders, R. Semiat, Numerical simulation of heat transfer in a hor-
izontal falling film evaporator of multiple-effect distillation, Desalination 401
(2017) 206–229.
[11] S. Bigham, R. Kouhikamali, M.P. Zadeh, A general guide to design of falling film
evaporators utilized in multi effect desalination units operating at high vapor
qualities under a sub-atmospheric condition, Energy 84 (2015) 279–288.
[12] S. Sadri, R.H. Khoshkhoo, M. Ameri, Optimum exergoeconomic modeling of novel
hybrid desalination system (MEDAD+RO), Energy 149 (2018) 74–83.
[13] T.H. Dahdah, A. Mitsos, Structural optimization of seawater desalination: II novel
MED–MSF–TVC configurations, Desalination 344 (2014) 219–227.
[14] Y. Xue, X. Du, Z. Ge, L. Yang, Study on multi-effect distillation of seawater with low-
grade heat utilization of thermal power generating unit, Appl. Therm. Eng. 141
(2018) 589–599.
[15] R. Ahmadi, S.M. Pourfatemi, S. Ghaffari, Exergoeconomic optimization of hybrid
system of GT, SOFC and MED implementing genetic algorithm, Desalination 411
(2017) 76–88.
[16] M.A. Sharaf, A.S. Nafey, L. García-Rodríguez, Exergy and thermo-economic ana-
lyses of a combined solar organic cycle with multi effect distillation (MED) desa-
lination process, Desalination 272 (2011) 135–147.
[17] A. Baccioli, M. Antonelli, U. Desideri, A. Grossi, Thermodynamic and economic
analysis of the integration of Organic Rankine Cycle and Multi-Effect Distillation in
waste-heat recovery applications, Energy 161 (2018) 456–469.
[18] H.T. El-Dessouky, I. Alatiqi, S. Bingulac, H.M. Ettouney, Steady-State Analysis of the
Multiple Effect Evaporation Desalination Process, Chem. Eng. Process. 21 (1998)
437–451.
[19] F. Al-Juwayhel, H. El-Dessouky, H. Ettouney, Analysis of single-effect evaporator
desalination systems combined with vapor compression heat pumps, Desalination
114 (1997) 253–275.
[20] H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. Ettouney, F. Mandani, Performance of parallel feed multiple
effect evaporation system for seawater desalination, Appl. Therm. Eng. 20 (2000)
1679–1706.
[21] H.T. El-Dessouky, H.M. Ettouney, F. Al-Juwayhel, Multiple Effect Evaporation-
Vapour Compression Desalination Processes, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 78 (2000)
662–676.
[22] M.A. Darwish, F. Al-Juwayhel, H.K. Abdulraheim, Multi-effect boiling systems from
an energy viewpoint, Desalination 194 (2006) 22–39.
[23] K.H. Mistry, M.A. Antar, V.J.H. Lienhard, An improved model for multiple effect
distillation, Desalin. Water Treat. 51 (2013) 807–821.
[24] I.S. Al-Mutaz, I. Wazeer, Comparative performance evaluation of conventional
14
Applied Thermal Engineering 159 (2019) 113759
multi-effect evaporation desalination processes, Appl. Therm. Eng. 73 (2014)
1194–1203.
[25] R.K. Kamali, A. Abbassi, S.A. Sadough Vanini, A simulation model and parametric
study of MED-TVC process, Desalination 235 (2009) 340–351.
[26] R. Kouhikamali, M.S.M. Mehdizadeh, Process investigation of different locations of
thermo-compressor suction in MED-TVC plants, Desalination 280 (2011) 134–138.
[27] B. Ortega-Delgado, P. Palenzuela, D.-C. Alarcón-Padilla, Parametric study of a
multi-effect distillation plant with thermal vapor compression for its integration
into a Rankine cycle power block, Desalination 394 (2016) 18–29.
[28] M.L. Elsayed, O. Mesalhy, R.H. Mohammed, L.C. Chow, Exergy and thermo-eco-
nomic analysis for MED-TVC desalination systems, Desalination 447 (2018) 29–42.
[29] O.A. Hamed, A.M. Zamamiri, S. Aly, N. Lior, Thermal performance and exergy
analysis of a thermal vapor compression desalination system, Energy Convers.
Manage. 37 (1996) 379–387.
[30] H.-S. Choi, T.-J. Lee, Y.-G. Kim, S.-L. Song, Performance improvement of multiple-
effect distiller with thermal vapor compression system by exergy analysis,
Desalination 182 (2005) 239–249.
[31] M.A. Darwish, H.K. Abdulrahim, Feed water arrangements in a multi-effect de-
salting system, Desalination 228 (2008) 30–54.
[32] S. Zhou, Y. Guo, X. Mu, S. Shen, Effect of design parameters on thermodynamic
losses of the heat transfer process in LT-MEE desalination plant, Desalination 375
(2015) 40–47.
[33] X. Mu, S. Shen, Experimental study of falling film evaporation heat transfer coef-
ficient on horizontal tube, Desalin. Water Treat. 50 (2012) 310–316.
[34] S. Shen, R. Liu, Y. Yang, X. Liu, J. Chen, Condensation character of a stratified flow
inside a horizontal tube, Desalin. Water Treat. 33 (2011) 218–223.
[35] O. Miyatake, K. Murakami, Y. Kawata, T. Fujii, Fundamental experiments with flash
evaporation, Heat Transfer- Japanese Research 2 (1973) 89–100.
[36] Y. Song, Study on calculation method of performance of thermal vapor compressor,
Dalian University of Technology, China, 2010.
[37] K.S. Spiegler, Y.M. El-Sayed, The energetics of desalination processes, Desalination
134 (2001) 109–128.
[38] K. Ansari, H. Sayyaadi, M. Amidpour, Thermoeconomic optimization of a hybrid
pressurized water reactor (PWR) power plant coupled to a multi effect distillation
desalination system with thermo-vapor compressor (MED-TVC), Energy 35 (2010)
1981–1996.
[39] M.M. Ashour, Steady state analysis of the Tripoli West LT-HT-MED plant,
Desalination 152 (2002) 191–194.
[40] R. Deng, L. Xie, H. Lin, J. Liu, W. Han, Integration of thermal energy and seawater
desalination, Energy 35 (2010) 4368–4374.
[41] M.A. Darwish, A. Alsairafi, Technical comparison between TVC/MEB and MSF,
Desalination 170 (2004) 223–239.
[42] C. Temstet, G. Canton, J. Laborie, A. Durante, A large high-performance MED plant
in Sicily, Desalination 105 (1996) 109–114.
[43] I.S. Al-Mutaz, I. Wazeer, Development of a steady-state mathematical model for
MEE-TVC desalination plants, Desalination 351 (2014) 9–18.
[44] S. Shen, S. Zhou, X. Mu, Y. Guo, Analysis of thermodynamic losses of heat transfer
process in large-scale LT-MED desalination plant, CIESC Journal (2014)
3366–3374.
[45] F.N. Alasfour, M.A. Darwish, A.O. Bin Amer, Thermal analysis of ME-TVC+MEE
desalination systems, Desalination 174 (2005) 39–61.