4.7 Article

Comparison of the performance of two different Dual-loop organic Rankine cycles (DORC) with nanofluid for engine waste heat recovery

期刊

ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 99-109

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2016.07.081

关键词

Dual-loop organic Rankine cycle; Engine; Waste heat recovery; Nanoparticle; Nanofluid

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi [2014GXNSFGA118005]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [51076033]
  3. Guangxi Science and Technology Development Plan [1598007-44, 1598007-45]
  4. project of outstanding young teachers' training in higher education institutions of Guangxi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To recover the heat from engine exhaust, coolant liquid and high-temperature loop, two different Dual loop organic Rankine cycles (DORC) are studied in this paper. The two systems differ for the number of stages of heat recovery from engine exhaust, and both include high temperature loop and low temperature loop in each system. R123, R245fa, ethanol, R141b, and water are the candidate working fluids of HT loop, and R143a is the working fluid of LT loop. Because the coolant water in engines has lower temperature, it is more difficult to recover its heat. Therefore, in this study, graphene nanoparticles and carbon nanotubes are added to coolant water to enhance its heat transfer. Net output power, thermal efficiency, and exergy efficiency are selected as the objective functions. Results show that the single stage system (S1) is a little better than the other. Water-based S1 performs the best and the net output power, the thermal efficiency, and the exergy efficiency are 96.92 kW, 14.13% and 64.04%, respectively. High evaporation pressure and turbine inlet temperature are better for performance optimization. And when the coolant water contains 0.5 wt% carbon nanotubes, system reaches the max net output power increment of 3.84 kW. (C) 2016 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

4.7
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