Professional Documents
Culture Documents
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Siloxanes are usually used in the high temperature organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for engine waste heat
Received 9 November 2016 recovery, but their flammability limits the practical application. Besides, blending siloxanes with retar-
Received in revised form 22 December 2016 dants often brings a great temperature glide, causing the large condensation heat and the reduction in
Accepted 23 December 2016
net output power. In view of this, the zeotropic mixtures based on siloxanes used in a dual-loop organic
Available online 11 January 2017
Rankine cycle (DORC) system are proposed in this paper. Three kinds of binary zeotropic mixtures con-
sisting of R123 and various siloxanes (octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane ‘D4’, octamethyltrisiloxane ‘MDM’,
Keywords:
decamethyltetrasiloxane ‘MD2M’), represented by D4/R123, MDM/R123 and MD2M/R123, are selected
Zeotropic mixtures
Dual-loop organic Rankine cycle (DORC)
as the working fluid of the high temperature (HT) cycle. Meanwhile, R123 is always used in the low tem-
Waste heat recovery perature (LT) cycle. The net output power and utilization of heat source are considered as the evaluation
Thermodynamic analysis indexes to select the optimal mixture ratios for further analysis. Based on the thermodynamic and eco-
Economic performance nomic model, net output power, thermal efficiency, exergy efficiency, exergy destruction and electricity
production cost (EPC) of the DORC system using the selected mixtures have been investigated under dif-
ferent operating parameters. According to the results, the DORC based on D4/R123 (0.3/0.7) shows the
best thermodynamic performance with the largest net power of 21.66 kW and the highest thermal effi-
ciency of 22.84%. It also has the largest exergy efficiency of 48.6% and the smallest total exergy destruc-
tion of 19.64 kW. The DORC using MD2M/R123 (0.35/0.65) represents the most economic system with
the smallest EPC of 0.603 $/kW h. Besides, the irreversibility in the internal heat exchanger, turbine
and evaporator of HT cycle contributes most to the total exergy destruction which can serve as the
parameter to be optimized in the further study.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction as one of the most promising technologies for the engine waste
heat recovery.
The shortage of oil resources created an unprecedented energy As the exhaust gas of the engine has a high temperature with
crisis around the world. Internal combustion engines (ICEs), are the over 500 °C, there are two methods to fit this issue: the suitable
main oil-consuming equipment. The research shows in ICEs about working fluid with good thermostability and high system effi-
one third of the combustion heat is wasted through the exhaust gas ciency; the dual-loop organic Rankine cycle (DORC) system. For
[1]. If such waste heat is reused, the engine fuel economy and envi- the suitable working fluid, siloxanes [4–8], with excellent environ-
ronment pollution can be effectively relieved, bringing tremendous ment and cycle characteristics, are commonly used as the working
economic and environmental benefit. fluid, but their flammability limits the application. Besides, some
As a mature and effective heat recovery method, organic Rank- refrigerants are also widely used in ORC, such as R245fa [8–11],
ine cycle (ORC) has received more and more attention [2]. It fea- and R123 [11–14]. However, due to higher global warming poten-
tures simple structure, good applicability, and user friendliness tial (GWP) and toxicity, refrigerants usually have poorer environ-
for small-scale power generation systems. Besides, it consumes mental performance in comparison with siloxanes. To solve this
no additional fuel for extra power [3]. Therefore, it is considered problem, a combination of siloxanes and non-inflammable refrig-
erants is proposed. The mixture has the merit to overcome the
drawbacks of each fluid and realize the complementary advan-
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +86 22 27409558. tages. The refrigerants can be seen as the retardants to suppress
E-mail address: shugqtju@163.com (G. Shu).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.12.066
0196-8904/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
12 H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26
Nomenclature
the flammability of siloxanes and the usage quantity of the refrig- heat source. Liu et al. [22] studied some zeotropic mixtures includ-
erants can be reduced in this way. The thought is supported by the ing MDM/MD2M in ORC, and found there existed optimal mole
work of Oellrich [15] who researched the flammability suppression fractions to maximize the cycle efficiency and the net power. Zhou
of propane with perfluoropropane for application in refrigeration. et al. [23] discussed various zeotropic mixtures used in a dual-loop
Moreover, Yang et al. [16] studied the flame-resistant effect of non- system for waste heat recovery from the internal combustion
flammable refrigerants on flammable refrigerants by the experi- engine. The simulation results revealed that with RC318/R1234yf
ment, and found with the number of nonflammable components as the working fluid in the low temperature loop, the engine out-
increased, the area of the nonflammable zone expanded. Li et al. put can be improved by nearly 14.4%. Chys et al. [24] explored
[17] researched the flame-resistant effect of the refrigerant R134 the potential of zeotropic mixtures used in ORC. Results showed
on R290 and R152a, and found adding R134 could change the that the ORC using mixtures always had an improvement in the
lower flammable limit of the flammable refrigerant. Kondo et al. cycle efficiency for both heat source types compared with using
[18] measured the dilution effect of CO2 on the flammability limit, pure fluids.
and the obtained values were analyzed using the extended Le However, when siloxanes are blended with nonflammable
Chatelier’s formula. Results showed that the addition of CO2 was refrigerants, the condensation temperature glides of the mixtures
a typical way of ensuring safety in the use of flammable gases. are usually very large (>80 K). If the mixtures are cooled by the
The research in our group [19,20] also indicated that the retardant water directly, the cycle effects are not ideal. Besides, the exhaust
CO2 could reduce the flammable zones of the hydrocarbon. through a single heat exchanger still has a rather high temperature
In addition, the composed mixtures have another advantage in and the direct rejection would result in a great waste. Hence, it’s
ORC application. For zeotropic mixtures, the temperature is vari- feasible to consider using these two parts of heat simultaneously
able during the phase change process, and the dew point temper- to form a dual loop cycle.
ature is higher than the bubble point temperature at a fixed phase Currently, in order to recover the engine waste heat effectively,
transition pressure. The temperature difference of the two is researches on the DORC are carried out. Song and Gu [25] pre-
known as the temperature glide, which ensures a better match sented a DORC system for engine waste heat recovery to generate
with the heat source or heat sink, improving the cycle perfor- additional power. The simulation results revealed that the maxi-
mance. Dong et al. [21] investigated zeotropic mixtures MM/ mum net power output of the DORC system could reach
MDM as the working fluid for the high temperature ORC, and found 111.2 kW, increasing the engine power by 11.2%. Shu et al.
the mixtures led to a cycle efficiency increase compared to pure [26,27] proposed a DORC to recover the waste heat of the exhaust,
fluids, and MM/MDM (0.4/0.6) showed the best match with the engine coolant and residual heat of the HT loop. Results showed
H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26 13
that the system performed better at the high operating load, and
R1234yf was found to be the best working fluid. Using water as
the working fluid of the HT loop, the system obtained maximum
net output power (39.67 kW) and exergy efficiency (42.98%). Using
siloxanes, the dual loop cycle with double regenerators performed
better. Sciubba et al. [28] raised a DORC based on a single steam
Rankine cycle loop to recover waste energy from marine engines
of different power range. The paper showed adding a second recov-
ery loop improved the system performance both in terms of recov-
ered electric power (up to 8.11% and 2.67% respectively in small
and large application size) and heat source utilization rate.
It is observed that the researches on the DORC mainly focus on
using the pure working fluids as the cycle medium. Therefore, it’s
meaningful and thoughtful to conduct an in-depth analysis and
research on applying the mixtures to the DORC. So this paper pro-
posed an application of mixtures based on siloxanes blending with
refrigerant retardants used in the engine waste heat recovery,
which can extend the application range on the basis of improving
cycle efficiency and reducing exergy loss. A set of DORC system is
designed to recover the exhaust energy and the condensation heat
generated by the temperature glide. Thermodynamic and eco-
nomic theoretical models of the system are built by MATLAB soft-
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the DORC system.
ware. Net output power, thermal efficiency, and electricity
production cost (EPC) of the DORC system using the selected mix-
tures have been investigated under different operating parameters. perature (LT) cycle (the blue lines). The HT cycle consists of an
Moreover, the exergy analysis on exergy efficiency and exergy evaporator (Eva1), a turbine (Tur1), an internal heat exchanger
destruction is another emphasis to be evaluated. (IHE), a condenser (Con1), and a pump (Pum1). The LT cycle
includes an evaporator (Eva2), a turbine (Tur2), a condenser
2. System description and working fluid selection (Con2), and a pump (Pum2). Among them, the condenser in the
HT cycle acts as the pre-evaporator in the LT cycle. Thus, the two
2.1. Topping ICE system separate cycles are coupled.
The thermodynamic processes of the DORC system are shown in
In this paper, an in-line 6-cylinder 4-stroke turbocharged diesel Fig. 2. The working fluids in Fig. 2(a) and (b) are the mixture D4/
engine is used as the topping system. The main testing parameters R123 and pure R123, respectively. In the HT cycle, the mixture
of the engine are listed in Table 1. Based on the fuel composition as which is pressurized into high pressure state by Pum1 (1–2), is pre-
shown in Table 1, the average chemical formula for common diesel heated in IHE (2–3). Then it flows into Eva1 (3–4), to be heated by
fuel is considered as C12H23. Supposing that the fuel is in complete the high temperature exhaust. Later, it enters Tur1 to generate
combustion, the composition of the exhaust on mass basis can be electricity (4–5). The superheated vapor goes through IHE to trans-
figured out which is also listed in Table 1. The composition is used fer heat to the working fluid out of Pum1 (5–6). Finally, the work-
for evaluating the gas properties. The outlet temperature of the ing fluid flows into Con1 to be cooled (6–1). Thus, the HT cycle is
exhaust should be at least 393.15 K [29] to avoid acid dew point finished. In the LT cycle, the working fluid pressurized in Pum2
for fuels containing sulphur. (7–8), flows into the Con1 to be heated by the released heat of
the condensation process in HT cycle (8–9). Afterwards, it is sent
2.2. Bottoming DORC system to Eva2 and heated up into a superheated vapor state by the low
temperature exhaust (9–11). The superheated vapor enters Tur2,
Fig. 1 provides the configuration of the DORC system, including to deliver work and generate electricity (11–12). Finally, the work-
a high temperature (HT) cycle (the magenta lines) and a low tem- ing fluid enters Con2 and is condensed into a saturated liquid state
by the supplied cooling water (12–7). The whole process then
Table 1 completes.
Main engine testing parameters, exhaust composition and fuel
composition.
of R123 is also relatively high (around 600 K) which suits the oper-
ating condition well. Hence, coordinating their performance char-
acteristics, the mixtures based on siloxanes and refrigerants
(R123) are selected as the working fluid in the HT cycle to recover
the waste heat from the high temperature exhaust. In the LT cycle,
R123 is used alone to recover the waste heat from the low temper-
ature exhaust and the condensation heat generated by the temper-
ature glide of the mixtures in the HT cycle. Table 2 lists the
properties of some pure siloxanes and R123. The thermodynamic
properties are calculated by the commercial software REFPROP
9.0 [35].
For the mixture proportion, Zabetakis [36] investigated flamma-
bility envelopes of some hydrocarbons mixed with inert compo-
nents, and found generally 0.3 vol fraction was enough to take
most hydrocarbons outside the flammability zone. Garg [37]
deduced that the heavier the molecular weight of the inert additive
was, the smaller the mole fraction of the inert additive was ade-
quate to suppress the flammability, and only 0.18 mol fraction
R245fa can achieve the same suppression effect as 0.3 mol fraction
CO2. Due to the lack of experimental data, 0.3 mass fraction of R123
is preliminarily set as the minimum limit in this study. Fig. 3 shows
the temperature glides of the mixtures with the mass fraction of
R123 changing from 0.3 to 0.7 at the condensation pressure of
0.1 MPa. Combining Fig. 3 with Table 2, it can be observed that
the temperature glide of zeotropic mixtures is related to the nor-
mal boiling point (Tb) of each composition. The mixture with larger
Tb difference between the two components has the higher temper-
ature glide under the same mass fraction of R123 [38]. The temper-
ature glides of D5/R123 are above 120 K under most mixing ratios,
which may result in a high concentration shift and fractionation of
the mixture components [39]. Therefore, D5/R123 will not be con-
sidered in the following analysis. On the other hand, if the compo-
sition of R123 is too high, meaning lower temperature glide, the
heat transfer of the LT cycle would get worse, and the net power
Fig. 2. T–s diagram of the DORC system, (a) for HT cycle and (b) for LT cycle.
x being the total number of silicon atoms [32]. For the high tem-
perature ORC, R123 proves to have good performance in terms of
theories and experiments [11–14]. Although R123 is classified as
Class II Ozone-depleting Substances, the GWP (77) and ODP
(0.012) of R123 are actually relatively low compared to the other
substances in the same class [33]. Especially, the GWP of R123
has met the requirement of the most restrictive environmental
regulations worldwide (GWP < 150). Also R123 has a short atmo-
spheric lifetime which highly decreases its damage to the environ-
ment. Besides, R123 system presents a minor negative pressure at
halt state, which also helps avoid leakage. Therefore it can main-
tain a low annual leakage rate (<0.5%) and reduce the possibility
of poisoning accident. Moreover, it is nonflammable [34] which
can serve as the flame retardant. The decomposition temperature Fig. 3. Condensation temperature glide of different mixtures.
Table 2
Properties of the pure working fluids.
Fluids M (g/mol) Tb (K) Tcri (K) Pcri (MPa) Combustibility ODP GWP
MDM 236.53 425.66 564.09 1.415 Flammable 0 Small
D4 296.62 448.5 586.5 1.332 Flammable 0 Small
MD2M 310.69 467.51 599.4 1.227 Flammable 0 Small
D5 370.77 484.05 619.15 1.16 Flammable 0 Small
R123 152.93 300.97 456.83 3.6618 Non-flammable 0.012 77
H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26 15
of the LT cycle is very small, so the dual loop cycle proposed in the
paper would not come into effect. Besides, the requirements for the
pinch temperature difference in IHE may not be met. In conclusion,
the mass fraction of R123 is set as 0.3–0.7 for both D4/R123 and
MDM/R123. And for MD2M/R123, the mass fraction of R123 is
0.41–0.65 to guarantee the convergence of calculation.
3. Thermodynamic model
E_ i ¼ m
_ ½ðhi h0 Þ T 0 ðsi s0 Þ ð1Þ
where the subscript ‘‘0” means the reference state, referring to the
ambient condition in this paper.
Then, specific analysis for each component of the system is as
follows. Fig. 4. Q–T diagram of the DORC system, (a) for HT cycle and (b) for LT cycle.
For pump Pum2: Shell-and-tube heat exchanger is chosen for the heat exchang-
ers in this work. The tube banks consist of stainless steel tubes
_ p2 ¼ m
W _ f 2 ðh8s h7 Þ=gp
_ f 2 ðh8 h7 Þ ¼ m ð13Þ with a hexagonal arrangement and the shell side sets up baffle
plates. While several heat exchanger parameters are given in
I_p2 ¼ m
_ f 2 T 0 ðs8 s7 Þ ð14Þ Table 3, several other parameters are determined by the number
of tubes which is considered as the only manipulating variable to
For evaporator Eva2: be modified later to satisfy the pressure constraints. The working
fluid always flows in the tube side for Eva1, Eva2 and Con2 while
Q_ e2 ¼ m
_ f 2 ðh11 h9 Þ ¼ m
_ exh ðhexh;out hexh;final Þ ð15Þ
the two-phase fluid flows in the tube side for Con1 and IHE.
The heat transfer surface area of shell-and-tube heat exchanger
I_e2 ¼ m
_ exh ðhexh;out hexh;final Þ T 0 ðsexh;out sexh;final Þ is calculated as:
_ f 2 ½ðh11 h9 Þ T 0 ðs11 s9 Þ
m ð16Þ
Q_
A¼ ð28Þ
For turbine Tur2: K DT lm
_ t2 ¼ m
W _ f 2 ðh11 h12s Þgt
_ f 2 ðh11 h12 Þ ¼ m ð17Þ where Q_ is the heat transfer rate; K is the overall heat transfer coef-
ficient; DT lm is the logarithmic mean temperature difference
I_t2 ¼ m
_ f 2 T 0 ðs12 s11 Þ ð18Þ (LMTD).
The overall heat transfer coefficient is obtained by:
For condenser Con2: 1
do rs;i do do lnðdo =di Þ 1
K¼ þ þ þ r s;o þ ð29Þ
Q_ c2 ¼ m
_ f 2 ðh12 h7 Þ ¼ m
_ w ðhw2 hw1 Þ ð19Þ ai di di 2k ao
where ai and ao are heat transfer coefficient inside and outside
I_c2 ¼ m
_ f 2 ½ðh12 h7 Þ T 0 ðs12 s7 Þ
tubes, respectively; k is the thermal conductivity of the tube mate-
_ w ½ðhw2 hw1 Þ T 0 ðsw2 sw1 Þ
m ð20Þ rial and set as 16.3 W/m K; do and di are outer and inner diameters
of tubes; r s;i and rs;o are fouling resistance inside and outside tubes,
respectively.
3.3. Thermodynamic performance parameters of DORC system The logarithmic mean temperature difference is calculated as
follow:
Some parameters are chosen to evaluate the thermodynamic
performance of the DORC system. Dt0 Dt00
DT lm ¼ ð30Þ
The net output power of the HT cycle: ln ðDt 0 =Dt 00 Þ
_ net;HT ¼ W
W _ t1 W
_ p1 ð21Þ where Dt 0 and Dt00 are the maximum and minimum temperature
differences at the ends of the heat exchangers, respectively.
The net output power of the LT cycle:
_ net;LT ¼ W
_ t2 W
_ p2 4.1.1. Heat transfer and pressure drop in shell side
W ð22Þ
The shell side heat transfer coefficient is calculated by the Bell-
The total net output power of the DORC: Delaware method [41], which adopts some correction factors
based on the heat transfer factor for the ideal tube bank consider-
_ net ¼ W
W _ net;HT þ W
_ net;LT ð23Þ ing effects of baffle window flow, baffle leakage and bundle bypass.
The utilization of the heat source (UHS) is used to evaluate use The baffle plate is equidistant and the effect of adverse tempera-
degree of the exhaust, which can be calculated as: ture gradient in laminar flow is negligible in this paper.
The shell side heat transfer coefficient is given as:
UHS ¼ ðhexh;in hexh;final Þ=ðhexh;in hexh;min Þ ð24Þ
ashell ¼ aid jc jl jb ð31Þ
where hexh; min represents the enthalpy of exhaust’s acid dew-point.
where aid is the heat transfer coefficient for pure cross-flow in an
The thermal efficiency of the DORC:
ideal tube bank; jc ; jl ; jb are correction factors for baffle window
gth ¼ W_ net =Q_ total ¼ W_ net =ðQ_ e1 þ Q_ e2 Þ ð25Þ
The exergy efficiency of the DORC: Table 3
Some parameters of shell-and-tube heat exchanger.
.
gex ¼ W_ net =E_ total _ net E_ exh;in E_ exh;final þ E_ w1 E_ w2
¼W ð26Þ Parameter Value
Geometric dimensions (mm)
The total exergy destruction of the DORC system: Tube outer diameter 6
Tube inner diameter 5
I_ ¼ I_p1 þ I_i þ I_e1 þ I_t1 þ I_c1 þ I_p2 þ I_e2 þ I_t2 þ I_c2 ð27Þ Tube pitch 15
Pressure drop allowance (bar)
Exhaust side 0.1
4. Economic model Cooling water side 0.2
Working fluid side 0.3
The electricity production cost (EPC) is selected to evaluate the Fouling resistance (m2 K/W)
economic performance of the DORC system in this paper. The work Cooling water 1.7 104
Exhaust gas 1.7 104
in this part is mainly referred from the book [40], which is widely Working fluid 8.6 105
used for analysis, synthesis and design of chemical processes.
H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26 17
flow, baffle leakage effects and bundle bypass effects, respectively The pressure drop for tube-side fluid is calculated as follow:
[41]. And the corresponding values of the latter two correction fac-
DPtube ¼ DPi þ DPN ð42Þ
tors are 0.8 and 0.9.
The heat transfer coefficient for pure cross-flow in an ideal tube DP i represents the frictional pressure drop, for single-phase
bank is calculated as follow: fluid which is given by [44]:
0:14
GCp l f p G2 L
aid ¼ jH ð32Þ DP i ¼ ð43Þ
Pr 2=3 lw 2qD
where jH is the Colburn j-factor for an ideal tube bank, the subscript where the friction factor f p is calculated by Eq. (44) for fully devel-
‘‘w” stands for the property of the shell side flow at wall- oped flow.
temperature.
The shell side pressure drop is calculated by the following f p ¼ 0:316Re1=4 ; Re < 2 104
ð44Þ
equations: f p ¼ 0:184Re1=5 ; Re P 2 104
0:14
_ 2 Nc
m l DP N is the pressure drop of inlet and outlet connecting tube
DPbk ¼ 4f k ð33Þ
2Ac q
2 l w which is given by:
qv 2
_2
m DPN ¼ 1:5 ð45Þ
DPwk ¼ ð2 þ 0:6Ncw Þ ð34Þ 2
2Ab Ac q
4.1.2.2. Heat transfer and pressure drop for two-phase fluid. Accord-
Ncw
DPshell ¼ ½ðN b 1ÞDPbk Rb þ N b DPwk Rl þ 2DPbk Rb 1 þ ð35Þ ing to the Chen correlation [45], the heat transfer coefficient of
Nc
the two-phase fluid during the phase change process can be calcu-
where DPbk and DPwk represent the ideal friction pressure drops in lated by:
cross-flow and window flow, respectively. f k is the friction factor
aTP ¼ aLS F ð46Þ
for ideal tube banks; N cw and N c are the effective number of rows
crossed in window flow and cross-flow, respectively. N b is the num- The heat transfer coefficient assuming liquid phase flowing
ber of baffles; Rl and Rb are the correction factors for baffle leakage alone in the tube aLS is calculated from the Dittus-Boelter correla-
and bundle bypass [41] with corresponding values of 0.6 and 1, tion [45]:
respectively. 0:8
D kl
aLS ¼ 0:023 Gð1 xÞ ðPrl Þ0:4 ð47Þ
4.1.2. Heat transfer and pressure drop in tube side ll D
4.1.2.1. Heat transfer and pressure drop for single-phase fluid. The where G is the mass velocity; x is the vapor quality.
Petukhov correlation [42] is used to predict the heat transfer coef- The Reynolds number factor F is computed from [46]:
ficient for single-phase fluid in smooth tube
F ¼ 1:0; 1=X tt 6 0:1
ðf =8ÞRePr ð48Þ
Nu ¼ h i ð36Þ F ¼ 2:35ð1=X tt þ 0:213Þ0:736 ; 1=X tt > 0:1
0:5 2=3
12:7ðf =8Þ ðPr 1Þ þ 1:07
The Lockhart–Martinelli parameter Xtt is calculated as:
0:9 0:5 0:1
k 1x qv ll
a ¼ Nu ð37Þ X tt ¼ ð49Þ
D x ql lv
where a is the heat transfer coefficient; Nu is the Nusselt number; k where the subscript ‘‘v” and ‘‘l” represent the property of the vapor
is the fluid thermal conductivity. and liquid, respectively.
Re, Pr and the friction factor f in Eq. (36) is obtained by: The condensation heat transfer coefficient of zeotropic mixtures
qmD amix is obtained by [47]:
Re ¼ ð38Þ
l 1
¼
1
þ
YV
ð50Þ
amix amono aVS
lCp
Pr ¼ ð39Þ where Y V ¼ xCpv
DT glide
, amono is the condensing heat transfer coeffi-
k DHv ap
cient calculated with mixture properties using the Chen correlation
2
f ¼ ð1:82lgRe 1:5Þ ð40Þ for pure fluids.
aVS is the heat transfer coefficient assuming vapor phase to be
For supercritical fluid, the Krasnoshchekov-Protopopov correla- flowing alone in the tube, given by:
tion [43] is applied for the Nu calculation:
0:8
!0:35 GxD ðPr v Þ0:4 kv
0:33 0:11 aVS ¼ 0:023 ð51Þ
ðf =8ÞRePr Cp kb lb lv D
Nu ¼ h i
0:5
12:7ðf =8Þ ðPr2=3 1Þ þ 1:07 Cpw kw lw The frictional pressure drop of two-phase fluid inside the tubes
is obtained by [46]:
ð41Þ
DPi;TP ¼ DPi;LS /2LS ð52Þ
where a, Re, Pr and f calculations use Eqs. (37)–(40) and the
subscript ‘‘b” and ‘‘w” represent the property of the working where DPi;LS is the frictional pressure drop in the case of liquid
fluid at bulk-temperature and wall-temperature, respectively. phase flowing alone in the tube, calculated by Eqs. (43) and (44).
Cp is the averaged over cross-section specific heat under con- The two-phase friction multiplier /2LS is calculated by the fol-
stant pressure. lowing equations [46]:
18 H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26
Table 4
Coefficients for the calculation of bare module cost of components.
Components K1 K2 K3 C1 C2 C3 B1 B2 FM FBM
Pump 3.870 0.316 0.122 0.245 0.259 0.014 1.89 1.35 2.35 /
Turbine 2.705 1.440 0.177 / / / / / / 6.2
HEX 4.325 0.303 0.163 0.039 0.082 0.012 1.63 1.66 1.35 /
Table 5
Comparison of the present calculated results with Ref. [48]
Working fluid Thermal efficiency (%) Optimal thermal efficiency (%) Exergy efficiency of condensation process (%)
R134a/R32(0.7/0.3) Ref. 13.35 15.08 81.64
This work 13.89 14.85 79.90
RD (%) 4.04 1.53 2.13
Table 6
Comparison of the present calculated results with Ref. [29]
properties of fluids other than REFPROP, there exists a slight differ- in such a relative deviation. The subcritical model of LT cycle is
ence in the condensation pressure which is critical for the cycle compared with same status parameters in Ref. [29] using benzene
performance. And the properties of each state point also have a lit- as the working fluid. The present results are in good agreement
tle difference due to the use of different calculation softwares. All with those in Ref. [29]. Results are shown in Table 6. These small
these factors have an impact on the thermal efficiency, resulting errors are probably due to the difference of the software version.
In Ref. [29], REFPROP 8.0 is used, while REFPROP 9.0 is used in
the present study.
In this part, the net output power (W_ net ) and utilization of heat
source (UHS) are chosen as the evaluation indexes, in order to
select the optimal mixture ratios for further analysis. The variable
parameters are mass fraction of R123 (XR123) and evaporation pres-
sure in HT cycle (Pmax1).
Fig. 5. Net output power (Wnet) of the DORC system. Fig. 6. Net output power (Wnet) for D4/R123.
20 H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26
cycle (W_ net;LT ). But the former increases faster, so the total net
power also increases. The changes of these parameters with
respect to XR123 for D4/R123 can be intuitively reflected in the
Appendix. Vertically, since the HT cycle is a transcritical cycle, with
the increasing Pmax1, expansion power increases with a limited
rate, while the pump power increases rapidly. At a high pressure,
the increase of the former can’t offset the loss of the latter, result-
ing in the final decrease in W _ net;HT after the increment stage at the
lower pressure. Besides, temperature after the turbine (T5)
decreases, so does the temperature after IHE (T6), which makes
the heat transfer from HT cycle to LT cycle decrease leading to a
_ f 2 . The LT cycle is a subcritical cycle, so expan-
slight reduction of m
sion power and pump power change little, and W _ net;LT decreases
slightly. The above reasons lead to the change trend of net power.
Fig. 11. Effect of Tevap2 on net power, thermal efficiency and EPC.
Fig. 10. Effect of Pcond1 on net power, thermal efficiency and EPC.
Fig. 12. Effect of Tevap2 on TIC. Fig. 14. Effect of the IHE in LT cycle on TIC.
Fig. 13. Effect of the IHE in LT cycle on thermal efficiency. Fig. 15. Effect of Pmax1 on exergy efficiency.
24 H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26
Fig. 17. Contribution of components to total exergy destruction for different mixtures.
H. Tian et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 136 (2017) 11–26 25
respective proportions are 6.07–16.17% and 6.41–13.12%. The In most cases, the change of net power has the greatest
maximum proportions of the exergy destructions in the con- impact on EPC with the variation of operating parameters.
denser Con2, Con1 and pump Pum1 are less than 8%. The smallest MD2M/R123 (0.35/0.65) always provides the best eco-
exergy destruction is produced in the pump Pum2 with a tiny nomic performance with the smallest EPC of 0.603 $/
proportion of total exergy destruction. As a whole, the heat kW h at Tevap2 = 400 K, Tmax1 = 633.15 K, followed by D4/
exchange process in the IHE and evaporator as well as the non- R123 (0.3/0.7).
isentropic expansion process in the turbine contribute most to (3) The optimal Pmax1 is at the range of 6–9 MPa for all the mix-
the system exergy destruction. tures considering the exergy efficiency. D4/R123 (0.3/0.7)
performs relatively well, and its best exergy efficiency is
7. Conclusions 48.6%. D4/R123 (0.3/0.7) also has the smallest total exergy
destruction of 19.64 kW. The irreversibility in the IHE, tur-
In this study, the zeotropic siloxanes mixtures used in a dual- bine Tur1 and evaporator Eva1 contributes most to the total
loop organic Rankine cycle are proposed, which consists of a HT exergy destruction, which can serve as the parameter to be
cycle and a LT cycle. Based on the analysis above, some conclusions optimized in the further study.
are gained and listed below: (4) The cycle performance of D4/R123 (0.3/0.7) and MD2M/
R123 (0.35/0.65) is obviously superior to that of the other
(1) For three groups of mixtures, there exist optimal XR123 and mixtures. Considering thermodynamic and economic perfor-
Pmax1 to obtain maximum W _ net and UHS. D4/R123 (0.3/0.7) mance, D4/R123 (0.3/0.7) and MD2M/R123 (0.35/0.65) are
_ net of 21.6 kW at Pmax1 = 10 MPa. the best choices as the working fluid in HT cycle, respec-
obtains the maximum W
tively. In contrast, MDM/R123 (0.68/0.32) is not suitable
At Pmax1 = 11 MPa, D4/R123 (0.6/0.4) has the optimal UHS
due to the poorest performance both on thermodynamics
of 94.81%.
and economy.
(2) In the aspect of operating parameters, the mixtures have
different optimal Tmax1 and Tevap2. Besides, higher Pcond1 is
unfavorable to the cycle performance. D4/R123 (0.3/0.7)
performs relatively better in net power and thermal effi- Acknowledgments
ciency. Under the optimal Tmax1 of 633.15 K, it obtains
the largest net power of 21.66 kW at Tevap2 = 400 K and This work was supported by the National Natural Science
the highest thermal efficiency of 22.84% at Tevap2 = 445 K. Foundation of China (No. 51676133), the authors gratefully
acknowledge it for support of this work.