4.8 Article

Electrical circuit analogy for heat transfer analysis and optimization in heat exchanger networks

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 139, 期 -, 页码 81-92

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.11.021

关键词

Heat exchanger network; Electrical analogy; Equivalent thermal circuit; Optimization; Entransy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51422603]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB228301]
  3. Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of China [201150]
  4. Importation and Development of High-Caliber Talents Project of Beijing Municipal Institutions [YETP0112]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electrical circuit analogy is an effective method for the performance analysis of various heat transfer processes, whereas there is no equivalent thermal circuit for heat exchanger networks (HENs). In view of this limitation, and based on the concept of entransy-dissipation-based thermal resistance (EDTR), we introduce an equivalent thermal circuit to represent the heat transfer process in a heat exchanger, and then analyze the temperature variations of all the working fluids in each heat exchanger to establish the equivalent thermal circuits for such three basic layouts of HENs as multiple-loop, series, and parallel. The combination of these equivalent thermal circuits gives the overall equivalent thermal circuit for any HEN consisting of the three basic layouts. Accordingly, the inherent relationships, i.e., the constraint equations, of all the parameters in a HEN are built by circuitous philosophy. Based on these constraint equations together with the Lagrange multiplier method, we propose a mathematical method for the optimization of heat transfer performance in HENs. Finally, as an example, the heat transfer processes in a district heating system is analyzed and optimized by the newly proposed equivalent thermal circuit and the corresponding optimization method to show the applications. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据