4.5 Article

Toward Optimal Metal-Organic Frameworks for Adsorption Chillers: Insights from the Scale-Up of MIL-101(Cr) and NH2-MIL-125

期刊

ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/ente.201900617

关键词

dynamic modeling; infrared large temperature jump; metal-organic frameworks; refrigerant water

资金

  1. project TailorSorb - Tailored adsorbents for stationary adsorption thermal energy transformation [03SF0515A]
  2. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the funding priority Materialforschung fur die Energiewende

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) MIL-101(Cr) and NH2-MIL-125 offer high adsorption capacities and have therefore been suggested for sustainable energy conversion in adsorption chillers. Herein, these MOFs are benchmarked to commercial Siogel. The evaluation method combines small-scale experiments with dynamic modeling of full-scale adsorption chillers. For the common temperature set 10/30/80 degrees C, it is found that MIL-101(Cr) has the highest adsorption capacity, but considerably lower efficiency (-19%) and power density (-66%) than Siogel. NH2-MIL-125 increases efficiency by 18% compared with Siogel, but reduces the practically important power density by 28%. From the results, guidelines for MOF development are derived: High efficiencies are achieved by matching the shape of the isotherms to the specific operating temperatures. By only adapting shape, efficiencies are 1.5 times higher. Also, higher power density requires matching the shape of the isotherms to create high driving forces for heat and mass transfer. Second, if MOFs' heat and mass transfer coefficients could reach the level of Siogel, their maximum power density would double. Thus, development of MOFs should go beyond adsorption capacity, and tune the structure to the application requirements. As a result, MOFs could to serve as optimal adsorbents for sustainable energy conversion.

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

4.5
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