4.5 Article

Exergy Analysis and Performance Improvement of a Subcritical/Supercritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) for Exhaust Gas Waste Heat Recovery in a Biogas Fuelled Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Engine Through the Use of Regeneration

Journal

ENERGIES
Volume 12, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en12040575

Keywords

combined heat and power (CHP); regenerative organic Rankine cycle (rORC); the effect of the regenerator; exhaust gas; subcritical; supercritical; parametric optimization; exergy

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study, a subcritical and supercritical regenerative organic Rankine cycle (rORC) was designed. The designed rORCs assist a combined heat and power (CHP) engine, the fuel of which is biogas produced from anaerobic digestion of domestic wastes in Belgium. R245fa was selected as the working fluid for both the subcritical and supercritical rORC. During the parametric optimisation, the net power production, mass flow rate, exchanged heat in the regenerator, total pump power consumption, thermal and exergetic efficiencies of rORC were calculated for varying turbine inlet temperatures and pressures. After parametric optimisation of the rORC, the results were compared with the results of the previous study, in which only a simple ORC is analysed and parametrically optimised. Moreover, the effect of the regenerator was revealed by examining all results together. Finally, the exergetic analysis of the best performing subcritical and supercritical rORC was performed. Furthermore, the results of the present and previous studies were considered together and it is clearly seen that the subcritical rORC shows the best performance. Consequently, by using the subcritical rORC, the disadvantages of the using simple ORC (low performance) and supercritical cycle (safety, investment) can be eliminated and system performance can be improved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available