4.5 Article

Thermodynamic Performance Evaluation of Concentrating Solar Collector with Supercritical Carbon Dioxide (sCO2) Base Nanofluids

期刊

ARABIAN JOURNAL FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
卷 45, 期 7, 页码 5729-5740

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13369-020-04527-1

关键词

Parabolic collector; Nanofluid; Thermodynamic analysis; Supercritical carbon dioxide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of supercritical carbon dioxide as a working fluid is an important alternative to enable the use of parabolic collectors in the high-temperature applications field. In the present paper, the effects of carbon black nanoparticles dispersed in supercritical carbon dioxide (sCO(2)) base fluid on the energetic and exergetic performance of parabolic trough collectors are theoretically investigated. Thermal modeling and performance analyses are performed through the developed model in the Engineering Equation Solver software. To present operating conditions of the system, all working fluids are tested under a pressure of 80 bar at a mass flow rate of 1.1 kg/s. In these analyses, the fluid inlet temperature, ambient temperature, and nanofluid concentration are determined as the variable indicators. Up to approximately working fluid inlet temperature of 705 K, the exergy efficiencies of the concentrating collectors using the sCO(2) nanofluids are higher than that of the concentrating collector using the sCO(2) base fluid. Additionally, the exergy efficiency increases in the systems using nanofluids with 2% and 4% concentration ratio are between 0.34-6.96% and 0.49-11.44%, respectively, according to the system using base fluid. Besides, at the working fluid inlet temperature values greater than 705 K, the exergy efficiency of the collector of using the sCO(2) working fluid is found higher than the collectors using the nanofluids. However, at the same working fluid inlet temperatures, the fluid outlet temperatures of the collectors with the sCO(2) nanofluids are higher than the system with sCO(2) working fluid.

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