3.9 Article

Thermodynamic Evaluation of a Direct Expansion Ground-Sourced Heat Pump with Horizontal Ground Heat Exchangers Using Advanced Exergy Analysis

Publisher

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S2010132521500371

Keywords

Carbon dioxide; ground source heat pump; transcritical cycle; direct-expansion; advance exergy; horizontal

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study conducts advanced exergetic analysis on a horizontal direct-expansion ground sourced CO2 heat pump operating in a transcritical cycle. The results indicate that, for system improvement, the compressor and ground heat exchanger play key roles, while the expansion valve has less impact on system enhancement.
This paper deals with the advanced exergetic analysis of a horizontal direct-expansion ground sourced CO2 heat pump operating in a transcritical cycle. The cycle is thermodynamically modeled in Engineering Equation Solver (EES) considering the pressure drops in both high and low temperature heat exchangers, and the system is to provide a fixed heating load. Conventional exergy analysis orderly suggests a compressor, expansion valve, gas cooler and ground heat exchanger to be considered for system improvement, while tracing exergy destruction of all components in detail demonstrates true improvement potential of each and all components and the system as a whole and offers a different order. Advanced exergy analysis points out that the compressor is directly and indirectly responsible for 56% of the overall exergy destruction generated in the cycle, confirming the detrimental role of this component in the system. The second influential component is recognized to be a ground heat exchanger accounting for 20% exergy destruction of the compressor as well as submitting 89% avoidability in its own exergy destruction, and expansion valve proves to be the last option for system improvement according to this analysis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available