4.7 Article

Comparative study of two novel micro-CCHP systems based on organic Rankine cycle and Kalina cycle

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 183, 期 -, 页码 210-229

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2019.01.003

关键词

CCHP system; Organic Rankine cycle (ORC); Kalina cycle (KC); Thermodynamic analysis; Exergoeconomic optimization; Genetic algorithm (GA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With regard to the significant role of combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) systems in performance enhancement of power plants, two novel micro-CCHP systems are presented which are based on organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and Kalina cycle (KC) as topping cycles. Additionally, ejector refrigeration cycle (ERC) and vapor compression heat pump cycle (VCHPC) are utilized as the bottoming cycle of the power systems. To demonstrate feasibility of the recommended micro-CCHP systems, an exhaustive thermodynamic modeling and exergoeconomic analysis are employed as the most effective tools for performance evaluation of the systems. Also, to get better performance of the systems, single- and multi-criteria optimizations are carried out, using genetic algorithm. It is figured out that the KC-based micro-CCHP system has higher optimum thermal efficiency and total sum unit cost of the product (SUCP) than the ORC-based micro-CCHP system, while it had lower exergy efficiency. Regarding that, the optimum thermal efficiency for the ORC- and KC-based micro-CCHP systems are computed by 76.54% and 77.32%, respectively, whilst the optimum exergy efficiency for the ORC- and KC-based micro-CCHP systems are calculated by 48.37% and 31.2%, respectively. In addition, generator had the major exergy destruction rate among all components for both systems. Furthermore, the results of parametric study proved that higher thermal (energy) efficiency can be computed with increasing the heat source temperature, heater temperature, evaporation temperature, and terminal temperature difference of the recovery heat exchangers.

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

4.7
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