Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Research Paper

Experimental assessment of double-absorption heat transformer

operating with H2O/LiBr
W. Rivera a,⇑, A. Huicochea b, R.J. Romero b, A. Lozano a
a
Instituto de Energías Renovables, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Temixco, Morelos, Mexico
b
Centro de Ingeniería y Ciencias Aplicadas, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos, Av. Universidad 1001, C.P. 62209 Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico

h i g h l i g h t s

A double-absorption heat transformer was developed operating with H2O/LiBr.

Gross temperature lifts as high as 74 °C were achieved with the system.

The gross temperature lifts are the highest reported in the literature using H2O/LiBr.

Up to 37% of the energy supplied to the DAHT could be retrieved at higher temperature levels.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper reports on the experimental results of a double-absorption heat transformer operating with a
Received 28 July 2017 H2O/LiBr mixture. The generator and evaporator are pool boiling type heat exchangers, while the remain-
Revised 28 December 2017 ing components are coils inside shells. Plots of gross temperature lifts, economizer efficiency, and internal
Accepted 29 December 2017
and external performance coefficients are reported as functions of diverse operating parameters of the
Available online 30 December 2017
heat transformer. The results indicate that the system can achieve gross temperature lifts (GTLs) of
between 48 °C and 74 °C, with internal performance coefficients varying from 0.12 to 0.37. The GTLs
Keywords:
achieved are up to 30 °C higher than those reported in the literature, using a single-stage heat trans-
Heat transformers
Double absorption
former operating with the same working mixture. Furthermore, the system exhibits effective stability
Water/lithium bromide and repeatability.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
At present, numerous industries worldwide deliver waste heat
to the atmosphere at temperatures below 100 °C. Absorption heat
transformers (AHTs) constitute one of the most attractive thermal
systems for thermal energy savings in the industry, consuming
negligible amounts of primary energy. These systems can upgrade
the waste heat temperature to a higher level, in order to be reused
during the industrial process. Typically, with single-stage systems,
up to half of the heat supply could be increased in temperature,
while the remainder is discharged to the atmosphere at lower
temperatures.
In addition to single-stage heat transformers, advanced-
absorption heat transformers are available, which use more com-
ponents than single-stage systems in order to achieve greater gross
temperature lifts or higher performance coefficients.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wrgf@ier.unam.mx (W. Rivera).
Rivera et al. [1] carried out a bibliographic review related to the
development of absorption heat transformers. The review indi-
cated that there have been a considerable number of theoretical
studies on advanced-absorption heat transformers, such as
double-absorption and two-stage systems operating with diverse
working mixtures [2–13].
Regarding experimental studies, there have been certain inves-
tigations into developed systems operating with a H2O/LiBr mix-
ture [14–20], as well as with alternative mixtures [21–40].
Moreover, there have been studies related to heat transformers
for different applications, such as heat recovery in the industrial
process [41–45] or distillation process [46–53], but single-stage
absorption heat transformers were utilized in all cases. Further-
more, studies have been carried out on advanced absorption sys-
tems operating with a H2O/LiBr mixture, by Chen et al. [54] and
Xu and Wang [55], but these were related to the development of
advanced absorption cooling systems and not the development of
absorption heat transformers, which differ significantly not only
in their applications but also their configurations.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.12.117
1359-4311/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440
Regarding experimental studies related to advanced AHTs, Scott
et al. [56] developed a novel multi-compartment absorption heat
transformer for different steam temperatures. Both the absorber
and generator were partitioned in a number of compartments,
depending on the number of high-quality steam demands and
waste vapor sources, respectively. The results indicated that the
flow rate of the steam fed to the absorber is the most important
process variable affecting the U-value and consequently dominat-
ing the design process of the absorber heat transfer area. Sekhar
and Muthukumar [57] reported the results of a developed proto-
type of a two-stage heat transformer for upgrading the waste heat
available from 393 to 413 K to approximately 463 K. The coeffi-
cient of performance (COP) was 0.2 and the maximum gross tem-
perature lift achieved was approximately 80.5 K. Silva-Sotelo et al.
[58] reported the results of a two-stage heat transformer con-
trolled by a flow ratio operating with a water/Carrol mixture. The
waste heat energy was added to the system at 70 °C, resulting in
a temperature of 128 °C in the second absorber. Romero et al.
[59] reported the results of a two-stage heat transformer operating
with a H2O/Carrol mixture by means of object-oriented program-
ming, and the authors reported that the most effective heat recov-
ery was 47% at 100 °C. Isselhorst and Groll [60] developed a two-
stage metal hydride prototype heat transformer. The developed
system demonstrated the feasibility of upgrading heat of approxi-
mately 130–140 °C up to 200 °C with a COP of around 0.27. Willers
and Groll [61] reported the results of a prototype two-stage metal
hydride heat transformer. The results demonstrated that the sys-
tem provided 6 kW of useful heat at a temperature of approxi-
mately 190–200 °C, with a driving heat of 130–135 °C, achieving
a COP close to 0.1. A two-stage absorption heat transformer was
designed and constructed by Currie and Pritchard [62] in order to
investigate the potential for dehumidifying and reheating a simu-
lated dryer exhaust stream, to make it suitable for recycling to
the dryer inlet. The heat transformer performance data indicated
that an airstream could be reheated to 160 °C using a LiBr solution
of 68% w/w with a circulation ratio (LiBr to steam flow) of 14.8.
Temperature lifts of between 50 and 70 °C were possible in the
reheat column when using a low circulation ratio and high LiBr
concentration. The results indicated that a humid air stream could
be dehumidified to a level suitable for recycling by direct contact
with a concentrated LiBr stream.
It can be seen from the literature review that although there
have been numerous studies related to absorption heat transform-
ers in the past decades, none of these has included the experimen-
tal study of double-absorption heat transformers (DAHTs). This fact
is significant, as it will be seen in this study that DAHTs use only
one additional component to single-stage systems, but can achieve
considerably higher gross temperature lifts. In fact, the achieved
gross temperature lifts are as high as those obtained with two-
stage heat transformers, but these use a greater number of compo-
nents, with double the number of components compared to single-
stage systems.
2. Description of single and double-absorption heat
transformers
2.1. Single-stage heat transformer
A single-stage heat transformer operating with a H2O/LiBr mix-
ture basically consists of an evaporator, condenser, generator,
absorber, and economizer, as shown in Fig. 1. Waste heat is sup-
plied at an intermediate temperature to the generator in order to
vaporize the water from the weak solution (low salt concentra-
tion). The vaporized water enters the condenser, where it is con-
densed, delivering a certain amount of heat at a low ambient
433
temperature. The water leaving the condenser is pumped to the
evaporator, where it is evaporated by a quantity of waste heat sup-
plied at intermediate temperature. Following this, the water vapor
enters the absorber, where it is absorbed by the solution with a
high absorbent concentration from the generator, delivering useful
heat at the highest system temperature. Finally, the solution with a
low absorbent concentration returns to the generator, preheating
the solution into the economizer and thereby completing the cycle.
2.2. Double-absorption heat transformer
Double-absorption heat transformers (DAHTs) basically consist
of a generator, condenser, evaporator, absorber, absorber-
evaporator, and economizer, as illustrated in Fig. 2. A heat source
is supplied in order to separate the working fluid in the generator
at an intermediate temperature TG. The vaporized working fluid is
condensed in the condenser at a lower pressure PC and tempera-
ture TC. Thereafter, the condensed working fluid is split into two
streams: one is pumped to the evaporator, where it is vaporized
at an intermediate temperature TE and pressure PE, and the other
is pumped at a higher pressure PA and vaporized in the absorber-
evaporator by a certain amount of available heat QAE. The vapor-
ized working fluid is absorbed into the absorber by the solution
from the generator, producing useful heat at the highest system
temperature TA. The diluted solution at an intermediate concentra-
tion XA enters the absorber-evaporator, absorbing the vaporized
working fluid from the evaporator and delivering an amount of
heat QAE, which is used to vaporize the working fluid in the
absorber-evaporator. Then, the diluted solution at a low concentra-
tion XAE, leaving the absorber-evaporator, moves to the generator
preheating the solution from the generator to the absorber into
the economizer, starting the cycle again.
Thus, by using only one additional component compared to
single-stage heat transformers, it is possible to obtain two temper-
ature lifts: the first in the absorber-evaporator and the second in
the absorber, thereby achieving higher useful heat temperatures
than those obtained with single-stage systems. This effect is simi-
lar to that obtained with two-stage heat transformers (TSHTs), but
these systems require more components than DAHTs in order to
achieve the same effect.
2.3. Experimental facility
The experimental DAHT with approximately 1 kW of power is
operated with a H2O/LiBr mixture. The system consists mainly of
a generator, absorber, absorber-evaporator, condenser, evaporator,
economizer, pump, and expansion valve, as can be seen in Fig. 3.
The system was constructed entirely from stainless steel 316 in
order to avoid corrosion problems. The generator and evaporator
are of the stagnant pool type, whereby heat is supplied by means
of electrical heaters immersed in the solution and water, respec-
tively. The condenser is a tank with a coil inside that condenses
the water vapor arising from the generator. The absorber is of a
vertical falling film type, where oil circulates within the tubes to
remove the heat at the higher temperature produced by the water
vapor absorption into the strong solution. A round distributor was
placed above the coil in the absorber in order to distribute the solu-
tion. The economizer is a concentric tube heat exchanger and the
absorber-evaporator is similar to the absorber, but inside the coil,
the water from the condenser is evaporated by means of the heat
delivered by the absorption process. A gear pump with a velocity
controller Cole Parmer model 75,211-20 was used to pump the
working fluid in the system. The expansion valve is a Swagelok
model SS-4MG2-NEMH. All of the components were intercon-
nected with stainless steel tubing and connectors, and the entire
system was properly insulated. The heat input was controlled by
434 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440

Fig. 1. Pressure versus temperature diagram for a single-stage heat transformer.

Fig. 2. Pressure versus temperature diagram for DAHT.

 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440
Fig. 3. Double absorption heat transformer installed in the Instituto de Energías
Renovables of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
two variable transformers, each with a maximum power of 2 kW.
Copper piping was used in the auxiliary cooling system and vac-
uum systems, and neoprene hosepipes were used to connect the
main components. Three auxiliary systems were connected to
the heat transformer: (i) cooling system, (ii) vacuum system, and
(iii) heat-recovery system. The auxiliary cooling system was used
to condense the refrigerant vapor entering the condenser. The aux-
iliary vacuum system was used to produce a vacuum in the system
for evaporating the water in the generator and evaporator at tem-
peratures lower than 100 °C, while the heat recovery system was
used to recover useful heat at the higher temperature produced
in the absorber. The heat in this component was removed by
means of Mobil Therm oil.
2.4. Instrumentation
In order to determine the useful heat delivered in the absorber
as well as the performance coefficient of the heat transformer, pro-
cess parameters such as temperature, pressure, mass flow rate,
concentration, and electrical power were measured with the
instrumentation, as follows. The temperature was measured at
the inlet and outlet of each main component by means of 24 type
T thermocouples (copper/constantan) insulated with fiberglass. In
order to facilitate heat transfer, the thermowells were filled with
vacuum oil. Each thermocouple was calibrated separately using a
constant temperature source. The thermocouples were calibrated
in a range between 20 °C and 140 °C. Using the least-squares
method, polynomial equations were obtained for the thermocou-
ples and subsequently incorporated into a previously written com-
puter program. The correlation coefficient for the equations was
higher than 0.996. Temperatures were recorded with an accuracy
of 0.1 °C. Two Bourdon gauges were utilized in the equipment in
order to obtain qualitative pressure readings during the experi-
mental process. One of these was connected to the condenser,
and the other to the absorber. In addition to the gauges, three pres-
sure transducers were used to measure the pressure in the low,
intermediate, and high zones. The transducers were diaphragm
types with a maximum error of 0.05% and a working range
between 0.1 and 22.1 bar. The pressure transducers were previ-
ously calibrated, obtaining equations with correlation coefficients
435
higher than 0.99. Pressure transducers with a design exactitude
of ±0.25% within the total range were used to measure low and
high pressures. The power required for the pressure transducers
was supplied by a power source (Lambda, model LQ-302). The elec-
trical power supplied by electrical resistance placed in a spiral
winding along the test section and second preheater were mea-
sured by a voltmeter (Keithley, model 169-DMM) and an ammeter
(Amprobe, model ACD-10). The experimental data were gathered
by a data logging system, namely the Hewlett Packard model
2310A with a maximum capacity of 29 channels. The solution
and refrigerant flows were measured with analogical flowmeters
with a reading accuracy of ±2%. The H2O/LiBr concentrations in
the generator and absorber were measured using a refractometer
with an accuracy of ±0.0002. In order to supply heat to the evapo-
rator and generator, electrical heaters of 1 kW were placed inside
these components. The current intensity and voltage readings for
determining the power supplied by the heaters were measured
with accuracies of 0.01 A and 0.01 V, respectively. The instrumen-
tation was connected to a data logger, namely Agilent model
34970A, with two acquisition cards of 20 modules for voltage
and two for current, as well as one card with modules for digital
signal and voltage suppliers. The system was controlled through
a Hewlett-Packard Visual Engineering Environment (HPVEE)
program.
3. Important parameters
Several design parameters exist for a heat-driven absorption
heat transformer, and in this we took the following into consider-
ation: (i) gross temperature lift, (ii) economizer effectiveness, and
(iii) coefficient of performance.
3.1. Gross temperature lift
The gross temperature lift (GTL) is defined as the difference
between the temperature of the useful heat produced in the absor-
ber and that of the heat supplied to the generator and evaporator,
which are the same in this study. Thus, according to Fig. 2, the GTL
can be written as:
GTL ¼ T 11  T 7 : ð1Þ
3.2. Economizer effectiveness
The economizer is used to recover heat energy in AHTs. In par-
ticular, the economizer preheats the strong salt solution flowing
from the generator to the absorber by using the heat supplied from
the weak salt solution flowing from the absorber to the generator.
The economizer effectiveness (EFEC) can by defined as the actual
heat recovered to the maximum possible heat that can be recov-
ered. Therefore, from the energy balance and according to Fig. 2,
the economizer effectiveness can be written as:
m_ 8 ðh10  h9 Þ
EF EC ¼ : ð2Þ
_ 11 ðh13  h9 Þ
m
3.3. Coefficients of performance (COP)
The COP is an important parameter, as it represents the effi-
ciency of an AHT. It is defined as the useful heat delivered in the
absorber per unit of heat load supplied to the generator and evap-
orator plus the work done by the pumps.
Q_ AB
COP ¼ ð3Þ
Q GE þ Q_ EV þ W
_ _P
436 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440

Table 1
Temperatures, concentrations, heat loads and coefficients of performance of the double-absorption heat transformer.

TE TC TG TG, IN TE,OUT TA (°C) TA,IN TAB, OUT TAE TAE, IN TAE, OUT TOIL, IN TOil, OUt TWA, IN TWA, OUT
(°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C) (°C)
1 66.19 35.82 71.06 71.92 70.27 105.81 83.07 97.15 74.98 83.5 70.4 71.1 92.8 27.2 36.2
2 62.29 35.64 71.32 72.61 70.81 108.09 83.26 98.93 74.55 84.4 71.7 71.5 94.0 27.5 36.4
3 55.41 35.72 77.02 78.82 76.12 102.42 86.08 93.38 74.69 81.7 69.0 71.9 90.0 28.2 36.4
4 57.27 46.39 98.35 96.63 97.61 108.54 97.36 100.52 84.30 77.9 74.4 69.4 95.5 29.0 35.1
5 42.49 35.49 75.17 74.54 74.13 105.59 94.14 95.64 73.88 82.6 69.5 65.5 90.0 28.1 36.0
6 45.78 35.60 72.70 71.18 71.11 103.26 91.83 91.13 74.31 80.2 69.1 65.7 95.5 28.1 35.4
7 48.60 36.44 75.01 74.26 73.98 99.72 91.47 91.56 78.78 81.2 73.6 69.9 91.1 28.2 36.5
8 46.11 35.10 72.93 72.82 71.91 103.78 91.64 93.85 75.54 81.9 72.0 67.4 92.8 26.6 35.0
9 50.54 37.48 72.82 72.21 71.86 104.15 91.01 94.00 78.36 81.3 71.5 69.3 94.5 26.8 35.5
10 52.89 39.21 74.41 73.71 73.50 107.92 93.86 97.13 78.89 83.8 72.9 67.2 97.0 27.0 35.3
11 47.30 34.81 71.76 71.81 70.82 103.48 90.94 93.95 77.11 81.2 70.4 66.0 94.8 26.8 35.7
12 50.48 34.96 68.91 68.97 67.92 99.11 87.25 90.55 79.28 78.1 67.6 61.9 91.7 25.8 34.9
13 44.49 33.11 73.75 73.13 72.70 102.16 91.41 92.43 77.58 81.2 72.5 68.0 90.7 26.5 33.7
14 50.69 34.98 72.22 71.97 71.22 105.69 91.87 95.76 79.87 81.7 70.4 67.4 96.2 26.8 35.0
15 52.74 36.13 67.20 68.27 66.80 102.77 88.99 93.25 75.84 79.5 68.2 69.8 87.1 26.6 32.0
16 34.90 29.47 66.91 67.24 66.10 95.50 86.70 88.77 64.71 76.4 61.7 69.6 85.3 26.0 29.8
17 39.08 32.15 72.13 72.86 66.10 99.23 89.28 89.71 69.58 80.2 67.1 67.1 85.5 26.7 32.3
18 37.32 31.73 69.79 70.56 69.52 96.87 86.90 87.55 67.65 78.1 65.4 67.2 82.4 26.7 31.6
19 36.69 33.56 69.43 69.92 69.40 93.93 84.65 85.12 66.58 76.1 64.5 66.0 81.4 27.0 33.9
20 37.71 31.95 71.51 72.19 71.19 100.63 89.48 91.23 69.03 79.7 66.3 73.0 88.0 27.0 30.8
21 36.92 31.31 70.95 72.02 70.45 100.97 89.41 91.05 68.62 79.9 66.3 77.8 86.8 26.9 31.1
22 35.81 30.58 71.92 72.97 71.39 104.65 91.84 94.23 69.21 80.7 65.2 78.2 91.7 26.8 30.8
23 35.31 29.50 73.27 74.58 72.57 106.77 94.35 96.83 68.43 82.0 65.4 82.0 94.7 25.7 29.7
24 42.34 38.72 86.77 87.00 86.00 114.94 106.97 106.37 75.91 88.3 72.8 90.0 103.5 30.0 33.2
25 42.65 35.42 81.91 81.58 81.04 108.06 99.78 99.40 72.61 88.4 69.2 76.6 95.2 29.0 32.0
26 44.02 37.00 84.40 84.26 83.55 110.87 102.48 102.06 74.74 88.2 71.9 79.1 98.9 29.2 32.0
27 41.82 34.65 80.99 81.60 80.21 109.73 99.76 100.10 71.35 86.5 68.4 82.2 96.9 28.4 31.4
28 44.11 33.94 76.40 76.63 75.62 105.32 94.92 96.30 68.46 84.1 66.1 81.0 93.0 28.9 32.1
29 47.21 32.83 76.77 77.81 75.93 109.49 98.27 101.00 70.75 87.6 67.3 88.4 97.8 29.0 32.6
30 44.79 32.74 77.26 78.27 76.46 109.01 98.01 100.24 69.72 86.4 67.1 85.2 96.7 28.9 32.3
31 45.17 32.21 77.61 78.67 77.01 111.05 99.40 102.09 71.20 87.8 68.6 91.7 99.5 28.6 32.2
32 49.01 32.80 77.48 78.47 77.18 110.21 99.42 101.44 70.74 87.1 67.6 92.4 99.0 28.4 32.0
33 45.68 32.55 77.76 79.14 77.36 111.29 99.78 103.02 71.66 87.9 67.9 93.5 99.1 28.7 32.3
34 44.23 31.27 78.00 79.28 77.94 110.85 99.26 101.01 70.48 87.1 66.9 92.3 98.0 28.1 31.5
35 42.30 30.89 77.89 78.68 77.48 111.58 100.29 103.36 71.43 88.0 67.1 91.5 96.2 27.4 30.9
36 44.79 31.90 78.65 80.87 78.32 112.12 100.94 102.56 72.28 88.6 67.6 92.3 99.9 27.4 32.2
37 40.29 30.60 75.47 75.68 75.23 109.74 97.24 99.60 70.45 85.6 66.6 93.8 98.4 26.8 30.0
38 46.47 31.81 76.47 76.66 75.82 118.64 101.90 105.04 75.55 89.4 71.8 99.4 105.3 27.4 31.6
39 39.69 31.85 76.91 76.73 23.89 120.27 101.59 108.39 77.50 88.4 73.5 103.5 107.8 27.4 31.5
40 41.27 30.92 74.53 74.22 74.13 108.50 97.39 99.49 70.20 85.8 66.7 93.2 97.5 27.4 31.0
41 44.89 31.65 75.56 76.74 74.94 111.58 99.64 104.19 71.88 87.5 68.6 97.8 101.0 27.8 31.9
42 36.61 31.89 76.78 76.80 24.97 115.40 102.18 104.97 75.23 87.8 71.7 101.8 106.0 28.2 32.1
43 36.61 31.88 77.33 77.99 25.03 116.43 102.45 107.09 76.19 88.3 72.6 106.7 108.0 28.0 32.2
44 41.58 32.44 79.23 78.81 78.95 110.80 101.85 102.63 70.93 89.6 66.8 94.2 101.0 28.3 31.2
45 46.58 33.67 81.25 81.97 80.60 118.57 107.78 107.42 74.67 94.2 71.7 108.1 109.6 28.8 32.3
46 38.83 31.84 77.68 78.04 77.19 116.61 103.63 108.08 74.15 89.0 70.8 104.2 106.1 28.0 31.8
47 43.92 32.43 78.65 79.96 77.89 120.02 107.11 107.43 77.48 91.5 73.9 108.3 108.9 28.0 32.4
48 47.30 35.19 85.08 84.88 84.36 121.82 109.65 113.67 77.33 94.8 74.1 109.4 112.2 28.6 31.7
49 46.02 31.49 75.95 77.82 75.13 118.07 104.92 108.22 78.13 91.8 74.6 108.2 109.2 27.0 32.2
50 50.33 33.12 79.53 81.25 78.70 122.42 109.22 112.32 80.97 96.2 77.9 113.9 113.9 28.5 33.8
51 52.92 33.64 80.75 82.77 79.86 128.08 113.42 115.53 83.72 99.4 79.0 117.2 118.2 29.0 34.4
XG XAE XA QC,IN QE,IN QG,IN QAE,IN QA,IN QE,EX QG,EX QAE,EX QA,EX EFE GTL DT COPIN COPEX
(%) (%) (%) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (-) (°C) (°C) (-) (-)
1 53.6 52.1 52.6 332.1 136.1 289.7 439.2 101.5 207.0 727.3 236.5 178.6 0.39 39.6 21.71 0.18 0.19
2 55.2 52.9 53.7 331.4 131.9 312.5 457.5 96.5 148.8 727.3 281.2 189.1 0.40 45.8 22.58 0.16 0.22
3 57.3 51.9 53.8 331.7 131.5 298.7 211.4 67.8 147.0 726.0 280.0 141.8 0.39 47.0 18.12 0.12 0.16
4 53.7 51.5 52.2 386.6 169.9 687.2 224.1 283.0 210.6 726.0 226.2 223.3 0.31 51.3 26.09 0.28 0.24
5 55.9 53.3 54.9 330.8 265.0 433.3 567.8 113.8 142.8 733.9 285.1 262.4 0.37 63.1 30.44 0.14 0.30
6 54.6 51.4 52.8 398.5 266.1 487.6 550.3 290.7 192.9 733.9 226.3 243.8 0.35 57.5 28.86 0.32 0.26
7 55.0 52.1 53.4 536.2 337.4 618.7 570.8 386.1 260.7 733.9 169.5 169.6 0.34 51.1 21.15 0.35 0.17
8 54.8 52.0 52.8 531.1 332.1 579.7 611.8 325.8 293.9 726.0 203.3 209.3 0.38 57.7 25.44 0.31 0.21
9 52.9 50.5 51.9 405.6 205.8 402.3 431.3 206.9 292.6 728.6 154.9 212.8 0.35 53.6 25.22 0.28 0.21
10 52.4 49.1 52.1 344.9 144.8 376.0 368.7 221.4 293.9 730.6 102.5 260.3 0.37 55.0 29.77 0.33 0.25
11 55.1 51.8 54.0 395.5 195.5 426.9 481.2 255.8 294.3 730.4 203.0 244.2 0.38 56.2 28.81 0.33 0.24
12 53.1 50.1 52.6 409.5 196.5 382.5 420.4 221.9 351.4 728.6 155.2 251.8 0.38 48.6 29.84 0.31 0.23
13 57.4 54.3 56.0 321.9 120.9 363.8 250.9 184.9 289.1 731.9 203.3 181.1 0.35 57.7 22.72 0.30 0.18
14 54.6 51.4 54.4 328.9 128.6 341.0 416.9 189.0 347.0 728.6 154.7 248.6 0.37 55.0 28.76 0.31 0.23
15 54.4 52.3 53.0 467.9 269.2 442.9 554.3 244.9 305.3 699.6 204.6 130.6 0.43 50.0 17.29 0.29 0.13
16 56.5 56.3 55.7 321.5 106.2 429.9 369.5 158.6 308.7 743.8 203.9 115.3 0.43 60.6 15.69 0.23 0.11
17 56.8 56.4 56.5 318.2 116.7 418.0 328.2 237.9 303.7 1045.2 206.6 135.6 0.36 60.2 18.40 0.35 0.10
18 55.8 55.6 55.2 316.6 115.0 370.0 354.4 206.9 293.3 891.6 211.7 107.0 0.37 59.5 15.25 0.33 0.09
19 55.8 55.7 54.5 323.6 121.9 437.3 354.1 228.7 288.5 754.4 215.7 106.3 0.30 57.2 15.40 0.33 0.10
 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440 437

Table 1 (continued)

XG XAE XA QC,IN QE,IN QG,IN QAE,IN QA,IN QE,EX QG,EX QAE,EX QA,EX EFE GTL DT COPIN COPEX
(%) (%) (%) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (W) (-) (°C) (°C) (-) (-)
20 56.8 56.5 56.4 317.5 115.9 421.5 334.3 193.6 289.8 740.3 213.7 114.5 0.36 62.9 14.96 0.29 0.11
21 57.2 57.1 56.6 315.0 113.4 409.4 326.5 195.5 287.7 743.6 216.7 67.8 0.38 64.1 9.02 0.29 0.07
22 59.1 58.5 58.0 312.3 110.5 470.0 361.0 221.4 271.6 739.9 211.0 109.1 0.39 68.8 13.48 0.31 0.11
23 60.1 59.9 59.0 308.2 106.3 450.8 353.3 214.7 270.9 743.8 216.7 106.9 0.39 71.5 12.63 0.31 0.11
24 60.7 60.3 59.5 342.9 141.9 616.0 414.9 328.9 266.7 749.5 211.1 133.9 0.35 72.6 13.50 0.36 0.13
25 59.0 58.8 57.9 330.6 129.5 604.5 443.2 289.5 292.6 744.5 211.7 158.8 0.34 65.4 18.63 0.33 0.15
26 59.3 58.9 58.1 336.5 135.6 609.0 409.0 302.1 281.0 742.5 212.7 177.5 0.33 66.8 19.77 0.34 0.17
27 59.5 59.1 58.3 327.7 126.5 586.8 418.2 264.6 268.0 750.4 215.4 127.8 0.36 67.9 14.63 0.31 0.13
28 58.3 58.1 57.7 325.0 124.1 524.6 412.6 239.5 265.4 738.5 216.4 98.5 0.35 61.2 11.94 0.30 0.10
29 58.7 58.5 58.0 320.8 120.1 488.0 446.8 181.9 265.4 735.9 217.7 83.9 0.39 62.3 9.48 0.24 0.08
30 59.1 58.7 57.9 320.5 119.5 512.5 429.6 253.9 260.0 745.8 216.4 100.3 0.38 64.2 11.52 0.33 0.10
31 58.9 58.5 57.9 318.5 117.5 515.4 434.6 195.0 261.2 747.1 216.7 70.1 0.38 65.9 7.74 0.25 0.07
32 58.2 57.8 57.4 320.7 120.1 532.7 447.6 215.0 255.4 751.0 216.4 59.5 0.38 61.2 6.61 0.27 0.06
33 58.7 58.1 57.8 319.8 118.9 528.8 454.4 183.8 249.9 739.6 215.4 50.2 0.39 65.6 5.58 0.23 0.05
34 59.6 58.9 58.6 314.9 113.9 558.0 438.3 213.6 256.6 759.8 213.7 50.9 0.37 66.6 5.75 0.26 0.05
35 60.6 60.3 59.5 380.8 112.2 618.5 418.2 251.1 265.6 751.5 214.0 40.0 0.38 69.3 4.63 0.29 0.04
36 60.4 60.0 59.3 330.8 116.3 533.5 428.2 203.0 318.2 875.7 257.8 69.1 0.38 67.3 7.60 0.26 0.06
37 58.7 58.2 57.7 325.8 110.9 550.7 425.3 204.8 272.9 740.8 217.1 40.7 0.38 69.4 4.56 0.25 0.04
38 59.0 58.4 57.9 343.9 116.1 502.8 416.7 210.1 272.7 754.5 210.3 60.1 0.43 72.2 5.82 0.28 0.06
39 59.3 58.5 57.8 344.1 115.7 514.3 375.2 111.7 268.8 749.0 210.7 47.1 0.38 80.6 4.30 0.14 0.05
40 58.5 58.0 57.1 327.1 112.2 552.3 429.2 188.5 222.3 750.3 217.1 37.6 0.42 67.2 4.27 0.23 0.04
41 58.9 58.3 57.8 343.2 115.5 500.1 414.8 195.7 222.3 750.7 213.9 29.9 0.41 66.7 3.20 0.26 0.03
42 59.4 59.1 58.4 344.2 115.8 517.4 378.0 141.3 216.3 744.9 216.0 44.6 0.44 78.8 4.25 0.18 0.05
43 59.5 59.1 58.5 344.2 115.8 513.7 374.9 131.7 216.3 747.6 216.4 15.0 0.43 79.8 1.37 0.17 0.02
44 58.9 57.9 57.7 319.4 118.1 639.6 508.8 243.7 225.5 737.0 215.7 60.0 0.37 69.2 6.81 0.27 0.06
45 60.2 59.3 58.6 350.9 123.2 610.6 494.9 328.8 207.9 739.9 215.0 14.5 0.46 72.0 1.55 0.38 0.02
46 58.9 58.0 57.6 330.5 115.6 543.7 431.7 100.7 211.7 742.6 216.3 20.0 0.41 77.8 1.90 0.13 0.02
47 59.3 58.8 58.3 346.3 118.3 534.7 416.9 300.9 204.8 750.5 217.7 7.2 0.51 76.1 0.64 0.38 0.01
48 60.3 59.8 58.9 343.2 129.1 600.2 457.6 195.3 181.9 740.6 217.1 33.6 0.37 74.5 2.89 0.22 0.04
49 60.2 59.0 57.9 329.2 114.8 470.1 407.3 196.2 267.5 742.6 210.7 10.9 0.48 72.1 0.97 0.27 0.01
50 60.0 59.0 58.7 348.9 121.4 420.8 577.6 229.2 255.8 745.8 211.0 1.4 0.49 72.1 1.03 0.34 0.01
51 60.5 59.8 59.6 364.3 123.7 429.5 438.8 279.9 245.3 748.1 209.0 12.2 0.52 75.2 1.01 0.40 0.01

The COP can be internal, when is calculated based on the inter-
nal streams, or external, when is estimated based on external
streams or heat loads.
From the mass and energy balances and based on Fig. 2, the
internal COP be written as:
_ 5 h5 þ m
m _ 10 h10  m11 h11
COP INT ¼
m _ 8 h8  m
_ 1 h1 þ m _ 15 h15 þ m _P
_ 6 ðh7  h6 Þ þ W
and the external COP can be calculated as:
_ 16 C Poil ðT 17  T 16 Þ
m expected, as a higher concentration of LiNiO3 (in the solution leav-
COP EXT ¼ ; ð5Þ
_P
V GE  IGE þ V EV  IEV þ W
where CPoil is the specific heat of the oil circulating in the heat
recovery system, VGE and IGE are the voltage and electric current
supplied to the electrical heater in the generator, and VGE and IGE
are the voltage and electric current supplied to the electrical heater
in the evaporator.
The physical and thermodynamic properties for the H2O/LiBr
mixture were taken from McNeely [63].
4. Results
In order to evaluate the DAHT, more than 70 test runs were car-
ried out at different temperatures and solution concentrations;
however, only 51 were considered in this study, as they were the
only ones to reach the steady state conditions. The steady state
was considered when the system temperatures varied by less than
1 °C over a period of one hour. Table 1 shows the temperatures,
concentrations, heat loads and coefficients of performance for the
51 experimental test runs.
An uncertainty evaluation was carried out based on the
National Institute of Standards of Technology (NIST) uncertainty
propagation, with the actual instrumentation accuracy from Sec-
tion 2.3. The GTL uncertainty value was approximately 0.1414 °C
for all operating conditions. For the economizer effectiveness, the
uncertainty was approximately 0.06325, with a significant depen-
dency on the mass flow values. The COPINT uncertainty values were
approximately 0.066 for TAB from 90 to 130 °C, while the COPEXT
uncertainty values were approximately 0.0100, depending mainly
ð4Þ on the mass flow values.
Fig. 4 illustrates the GTL versus generation solution concentra-
tion. It can be seen that the GTL increases linearly with the incre-
ment in generator solution concentration. This behavior was
ing the generator) means that a greater amount of water was gen-
erated in the generator, which will be absorbed into the absorber
posteriorly. On the other hand, it can be seen that the GTLs vary
between 48 °C and 74 °C. According to Eq. (1), this means that
the heat transformer can increase the absorber temperature
between 48 °C and 74 °C over the temperature of the heat supplied
to the evaporator. Based on this figure, it appears to be desirable to
increase the LiNiO3 concentration in the solution even further;
however, it is important to remember that crystallization problems
may occur at higher concentration values. On the other hand, it is
important to note that, from the bibliographic review, it is clear
that with single-stage heat transformers, it is possible to achieve
GTLs of up to 44 °C, while it is possible to achieve up to 74 °C using
the developed system.
Fig. 5 illustrates the GTL versus absorber solution concentration,
and a similar trend can be observed to that in Fig. 4. Once again, this
behavior was expected, because at a higher LiNiO3 concentration in
the solution inside the absorber, its capacity is increased to absorb
greater amounts of water, thus increasing its temperature due to
the exothermic reaction during the absorption process. The GTL val-
ues were similar to those reported in the previous figure.
Fig. 6 illustrates the internal COP versus internal useful heat
produced in the absorber. It can be seen that the internal COP
438 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440
increases with an increment in the absorber heat load. This occurs
because, according to Eqs. (3) and (4), the internal COP is directly
Fig. 4. GTL versus generator solution concentration.
Fig. 5. GTL versus absorber solution concentration.
proportional to the absorption heat load. Furthermore, it can be
observed that the inlet COPs vary between 0.12 and 0.37, meaning
that up to 37% of the energy supplied to the generator and evapo-
rator could be reused as useful heat at higher temperature levels.
According to the literature review, it is possible to achieve internal
COPs close to 0.5 with single-stage heat transformers, while in this
work we achieve COPs no higher than 0.37. This is the price paid by
double-absorption systems in order to produce useful heat at
higher temperature levels.
Fig. 7 illustrates the external COPs against the external absorber
heat load. It can once again be observed that the external COP
increases with an increment in the external absorption heat load,
for the same reasons as those explained in Fig. 6. However, it can
be seen in Fig. 7 that the external COPs are lower than the internal
coefficient reported in Fig. 6. This occurs because the internal val-
ues do not consider the system heat losses to the atmosphere,
while the external values do. Comparing Figs. 6 and 7, it can be
observed that higher data dispersion of the COP values exists in
Fig. 6 than in Fig. 7. This occurs because the internal COP depends
on a greater number of variables (see Eq. (4)), while the external
values depend only on several variables, which are also easy to
control (see Eq. (5)).
Fig. 8 illustrates the external COP against the absorber temper-
ature. It can be observed that the external COP decreases drasti-
cally with an increase in absorber temperature. This occurs
because when the absorber temperature increases, the concentra-
tion differences between the strong and weak solutions decrease
considerably, tending to zero at high absorber temperatures, which
means that the refrigerant production decreases considerably;
thus, the COP decreases abruptly.
Fig. 9 illustrates the economizer efficiency versus absorber tem-
perature. It can be seen that EFEC increases with an increment in
the absorber temperature. This occurs because, as the absorber
temperature increases, the heat gained by the solution moving
from the generator to the absorber increases, thereby increasing
economizer efficiency.
Fig. 6. Internal COP as function of internal absorber heat load.
 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440 439

Fig. 7. Internal coefficient of performance as function of internal absorber heat Fig. 9. Economizer efficiency as function of absorber temperature.
load.

5. Conclusions

This paper has reported on the experimental results of a DAHT

operating with a H2O/LiBr mixture. The results indicated that the
system can achieve GTLs of between 48 °C and 74 °C, with internal
COPs varying from 0.12 to 0.37, and external COPs of up to 0.3.
From the bibliographic review, it was clear that it is possible to
achieve GTLs of up to 44 °C with single-stage heat transformers
operating with the same working mixture; however, with the
actual system, it was possible to achieve GTLs of up to 74 °C, which
is 30 °C more than with single-stage systems.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the projects SENER-CONACyT 117914 and

CONACYT 154301 for the economic support provided for the devel-
opment of this study.

References

[1] W. Rivera, R. Best, M.J. Cardoso, R.J. Rosenberg, A review of absorption heat
transformers, Appl. Therm. Eng. 99 (2016) 654–670.
[2] W. Rivera, R. Best, J. Hernández, C.L. Heard, F.A. Holland, Thermodynamic study
of advanced absorption heat transformers-I. Single and two stage
configurations with heat exchangers, Heat Recovery Syst. CHP 14 (2) (1994)
173–183.
[3] W. Rivera, R. Best, J. Hernández, C.L. Heard, F.A. Holland, Thermodynamic study
of advanced absorption heat transformers-II. Double absorption
configurations, Heat Recovery Syst. CHP 14 (2) (1994) 185–193.
[4] J. Ji, M. Ishida, Behavior of a two-stage absorption heat transformer combining
latent and sensible heat exchange modes, Appl. Energy 62 (1999) 267–281.
[5] L. Shi, J. Yin, X. Wang, M.S. Zhu, Study on a new ejection-absorption heat
transformer, Appl. Energy 68 (2001) 161–171.
[6] P. Donnellan, K. Cronin, Y. Acevedo, E. Byrne, Economic evaluation of an
Fig. 8. External COP as function of absorber temperature. industrial high temperature lift heat transformer, Energy 73 (2014) 581–591.
440 W. Rivera et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 132 (2018) 432–440
[7] S. Wang, X. Xie, Y. Jiang, Optimization design of the large temperature lift/drop
multi-stage vertical absorption temperature transformer based on entransy
dissipation method, Energy 68 (2014) 712–721.
[8] S.A. Fartaj, Comparison of energy, exergy, and entropy balance methods for
analyzing double-stage absorption heat transformer cycles, Int. J. Energy Res.
28 (2004) 1219–1230.
[9] H. Martínez, W. Rivera, Energy and exergy analysis of a double absorption heat
transformer operating with water/lithium bromide, Int. J. Energy Res. 33
(2009) 662–674.
[10] Z. Zhao, F. Zhou, X. Zhang, S. Li, The thermodynamic performance of a new
solution cycle indouble absorption heat transformer using water/lithium
bromide as the working fluids, Int. J. Refrig. 26 (2003) 315–320.
[11] Z. Zhao, Y. Ma, J. Chen, Thermodynamic performance of a new type of double
absorption heat transformer, Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (2003) 2407–2414.
[12] Z.L. Hao, X.H. Ma, Z. Lan, T. Bai, Exergy analysis of a high temperature water-
lithium bromide double effect absorption heat transformer, J. Dalian Univ.
Technol. 53 (2013) 327–332.
[13] P. Donnellan, E. Byrne, K. Cronin, Internal energy and exergy recovery in high
temperature application absorption heat Transformers, Appl. Therm. Eng. 56
(2013) 1–10.
[14] W. Rivera, J. Cerezo, H. Martínez, Energy and exergy analysis of an
experimental single-stage heat transformer operating with the water/
lithium bromide mixture, Int. J. Energy Res. 34 (2010) 1121–1131.
[15] W. Rivera, A. Huicochea, H. Martínez, J. Siqueiros, D. Juárez, E. Cadenas, Exergy
analysis of an experimental heat transformer for water purification, Energy 36
(2011) 320–327.
[16] M.R. Contreras-Valenzuela, A. Rodriguez-Martínez, R.J. Romero-Domínguez,
Experimental analysis of heat transformer using the six sigma methodology,
Chem. Eng. Trans. 29 (2012) 1369–1374.
[17] J. Olarte-Cortés, J. Torres-Merino, J. Siqueiros, Experimental study of a graphite
disks absorber couple to a heat transformer, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 46 (2013)
29–36.
[18] Y. Lazcano-Véliz, J. Siqueiros, D. Juárez-Romero, L.I. Morales, J. Torres-Merino,
Analysis of effective wetting area of a horizontal generator for an absorption
heat transformer, Appl. Therm. Eng. 62 (2014) 845–849.
[19] J. Ibarra-Bahena, R.J. Romero, L. Velazquez-Avelar, C.V. Valdez-Morales, Y.R.
Galindo-Luna, Experimental thermodynamic evaluation for a single stage heat
transformer prototype build with commercial PHEs, Appl. Therm. Eng. 75
(2015) 1262–1270.
[20] X. Ma, Z. Lan, Z. Hao, Q. Wang, S. Bo, T. Bai, Heat transfer and thermodynamic
performance of LiBr/H2O absorption heat transformer with vapor absorption
inside vertical spiral tubes, Heat Transf. Eng. 35 (2014) 1130–1136.
[21] K. Eriksson, Å. Jernqvist, Heat transformer with self-circulation: design and
preliminary operational data, Int. J. Refrig. 12 (1) (1989) 15–20.
[22] S.G. Pataskar, S.D. Adyanthaya, S. Devotta, F.A. Holland, Performance of an
experimental absorption heat transformer using aqueous LiBr, LiCl, and LiBr/
LiCl solutions, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 29 (8) (1990) 1658–1662.
[23] J.M. Goerge, S. Srinivasa Murthy, Experiments on a vapor absorption heat
transformer, Int. J. Refrig. 16 (2) (1993) 107–119.
[24] R.M. Barragan, C.L. Heard, V.M. Arellano, R. Best, F.A. Holland, Experimental
performance of the water-lithium chloride system in a heat transformer, Int. J.
Energy Res. 19 (7) (1995) 593–602.
[25] R.M. Barragan, C.L. Heard, V. Arellano, Experimental performance of the
water/calcium chloride system in a heat transformer, Int. J. Energy Res. 20
(1996) 651–661.
[26] R.M. Barragán, V.M. Arellano, C.L. Heard, R. Best, F.A. Holland, Experimental
performance of the system water/magnesium chloride in a heat transformer,
Int. J. Energy Res. 21 (1997) 139–151.
[27] K. Stephan, M. Schmitt, D. Hebecker, T. Bergmann, Dynamics of a heat
transformer working with the mixture NaOH-H20, lnt. J. Refrig. 20 (7) (1997)
483–495.
[28] R.M. Barragán, V.M. Arellano, C.L. Heard, R. Best, F.A. Holland, Experimental
performance of ternary solutions in an absorption heat transformer, Int. J.
Energy Res. 22 (1998) 73–83.
[29] W. Rivera, R.J. Romero, R. Best, C.L. Heard, Experimental evaluation of a single-
stage heat transformer operating with the water/Carrol mixture, Energy 24
(1999) 317–326.
[30] W. Rivera, R.J. Romero, M.J. Cardoso, J. Aguillón, R. Best, Theoretical and
experimental comparison of the performance of a single-stage heat
transformer operating with water/lithium bromide and water/Carrol, Int. J.
Energy Res. 26 (2002) 747–762.
[31] D. Alonso, T. Cachot, J.M. Hornut, Experimental study of an innovative
absorption heat transformer using partially miscible working mixtures, Int. J.
Therm. Sci. 42 (2003) 631–638.
[32] W. Rivera, J. Cerezo, Experimental study of the use of additives in the
performance of a single-stage heat transformer operating with water-lithium
bromide, Int. J. Energy Res. 29 (2005) 121–130.
[33] W. Rivera, H. Martínez, J. Cerezo, R.J. Romero, M.J. Cardoso, Exergy analysis of
an experimental single-stage heat transformer operating with single water/
lithium bromide and using additives (1-octanol and 2-ethyl-1-hexanol), Appl.
Therm. Eng. 31 (2011) 3526–3532.
[34] I.S. Glaznev, D.S. Ovoshchnikov, Y.I. Aristov, Kinetics of water adsorption/
desorption under isobaric stages of adsorption heat transformers: the effect of
isobar shape, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 52 (2009) 1774–1777.
[35] W.G. Haije, J.B.J. Veldhuis, S.F. Smeding, R.J.H. Grisel, Solid/vapor sorption heat
transformer: design and performance, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 1371–
1376.
[36] S. Silva-Sotelo, R.J. Romero, Improvement of recovery energy in the absorption
heat transformer process using water-Carrol for steam generation, Chem. Eng.
Trans. 17 (2009) 317–322.
[37] H.H. Xiao, J.X. Ying, J.G. Zan, W. Qin, M.C. Guang, Vapor-liquid equilibrium
study of an absorption heat transformer working fluid of (HFC-32 + DMF), J.
Chem. Eng. Data 56 (2011) 1268–1272.
[38] R. Zehioua, C. Coquelet, A.H. Meniai, D. Richon, p-T-x measurements for some
working fluids for an absorption heat transformer: 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane
(R134a) + dimethylether diethylene glycol (DMEDEG) and dimethylether
triethylene glycol (DMETrEG), J. Chem. Eng. Data 55 (2010) 2769–2775.
[39] S.B. Sekhar, S.P. Pailwan, P. Muthukumar, Studies on metal hydride based
single-stage heat transformer, Int. J. Hydr. Energy 38 (2013) 7178–7187.
[40] J. Ibarra-Bahena, R.J. Romero, L. Velazquez-Avelar, C.V. Valdez-Morales, Y.R.
Galindo-Luna, Evaluation of the thermodynamic effectiveness of a plate heat
exchanger integrated into an experimental single stage heat transformer
operating with water/Carrol mixture, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 51 (2013) 257–
263.
[41] G. Alefeld, H.C. Bauer, P. Maier-Laxhuber, M.A. Rothmeyer, A zeolite heat
pump, heat transformer and heat accumulator, in: Proc. Int. Conf. on Energy
Storage (Brighthon U.K. Apr. 29-May 1, 1981), Paper D1, pp. 61–72.
[42] T. Nomura, N. Nobuya, Thermal performance and evaluation of superheated
steam drying system using solar-assisted absorption heat transformer, Source
Document Drying Technol. 10 (3) (1992) 659–677.
[43] K. Abrahamsson, A. Gidner, A. Jernqvist, Design and experimental performance
evaluation of an absorption heat transformer with self-circulation, Heat
Recovery Syst. CHP 15 (3) (1995) 257–272.
[44] C. Mostofizadeh, C. Kulick, Use of a new type of heat transformer in process
industry, Appl. Therm. Eng. 18 (1998) 857–874.
[45] E. Gómez–Arias, J. Ibarra–Bahena, L. Velázquez–Avelar, R.J. Romero, A.
Rodríguez–Martínez, M. Montiel–González, Temperature and concentration
fields in a generator integrated to single stage heat transformer using water/
Carrol mixture, J. Therm. Sci. 23 (2014) 564–571.
[46] X. Ma, J. Chen, S. Li, Q. Sha, A. Liang, W. Li, J. Zhang, G. Zheng, Z. Feng,
Application of absorption heat transformer to recover waste heat from a
synthetic rubber plant, Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (2003) 797–806.
[47] A. Huicochea, J. Siqueiros, R.J. Romero, Portable water purification system
integrated to a heat transformer, Desalination 165 (2004) 385–391.
[48] A. Huicochea, J. Siqueiros, Increase of COP for an experimental heat
transformer using a water purification system, Desalin. Water Treat. 12
(2009) 305–312.
[49] A. Huicochea, J. Siqueiros, Improved efficiency of energy use of a heat
transformer using a water purification system, Desalination 257 (2010) 8–15.
[50] S. Sekar, R. Saravanan, Experimental studies on absorption heat transformer
coupled distillation system, Desalination 274 (2011) 292–301.
[51] A. Huicochea, R.J. Romero, W. Rivera, G. Gutierrez-Urueta, J. Siqueiros, I.
Pilatowsky, A novel cogeneration system: a proton exchange membrane fuel
cell coupled to a heat transformer, Appl. Therm. Eng. 50 (2013) 1530–1535.
[52] A. Huicochea, W. Rivera, H. Martínez, J. Siqueiros, E. Cadenas, Analysis of the
behavior of an experimental absorption heat transformer for water
purification for different mass flux rates in the generator, Appl. Therm. Eng.
52 (2013) 38–45.
[53] M. Meza, A. Márquez-Nolasco, A. Huicochea, D. Juárez-Romero, J. Siqueiros,
Experimental study of an absorption heat transformer with heat recycling to
the generator, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 53 (2014) 171–178.
[54] L. Chen, Y.M. Chen, M.H. Sun, Y.L. Zhang, X.R. Zhang, Concept design and
formation of a lithium bromide–water cooling system powered by
supercritical CO2 solar collector, Energy Convers. Manage. 85 (2014) 313–322.
[55] Z.Y. Xu, R.Z. Wang, Simulation of solar cooling system based on variable effect
LiBr-water absorption chiller, Renew. Energy 113 (2017) 907–914.
[56] M. Scott, A. Jernqvist, J. Olsson, G. Aly, Experimental and theoretical study of an
open multi-compartment absorption heat transformer for different steam
temperatures. Part II: process modeling and simulation, Appl. Therm. Eng. 19
(1999) 409–430.
[57] S.B. Sekhar, P. Muthukumar, Performance tests on a double-stage metal
hydride based heat transformer, Int. J. Hydr. Energy 38 (2013) 15428–15437.
[58] S. Silva-Sotelo, R. Romero, A. Rodríguez-Martínez, Double stage heat
transformer controlled by flow ratio, Innovat. Comput. Sci. Softw. Eng. 19
(2010) 577–581.
[59] R.J. Romero, S. Silva-Sotelo, R. Martínez, J.C. Román, Energy saving in advanced
absorption heat pump with object oriented programming, in: Emerging Trends
in Computing, Informatics, Systems Sciences, and Engineering 151 (2013)
1101–1111.
[60] A. Isselhorst, M. Groll, Two-stage metal hydride heat transformer laboratory
model, J. Alloy. Compd. 231 (1995) 888–894.
[61] E. Willers, M. Groll, The two stage metal hydride heat transformer, Int. J. Hydr.
Energy 13 (1999) 269–276.
[62] J.S. Currie, C.L. Pritchard, Energy recovery and plume reduction from an
industrial spray drying unit using an absorption heat transformer, Heat
Recovery Syst. CHP 14 (3) (1994) 239–248.
[63] A. McNeely, Thermodynamic properties of aqueous solutions of lithium
bromide, ASHRAE Trans. 85 (1) (1979) 413–434.