Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Performance analytical function and exergy efficiency of organic rankine cycle (ORC) in ocean thermal
Received 31 August 2011 energy conversion (OTEC) are derived and optimized in this paper. Firstly, the state function correspond-
Received in revised form 3 December 2011 ing to every point in ORC and depending strongly on the temperature of the evaporator and condenser
Accepted 17 December 2011
is successfully achieved, where the suitable working fluids include, but not limited to, ammonia, r134a,
Available online 2 February 2012
etc. And then the system net power output function is achieved based on the characteristics of the ORC,
which is mainly decided by the warm seawater temperature, warm seawater mass flow rate, evaporator
Keywords:
temperature, condenser temperature, etc. After that, a further optimization is carried out to maximize
ORC
Optimization design
the net power output of ORC. Results show that ammonia is a good choice for ORC utilized in OTEC from
Exergy analysis net power output viewpoint. In addition, thermal efficiency and exergy efficiency at maximum net power
OTEC output are also given as reference. Finally, the preliminary design criteria of ORC in OTEC illustrates that
Ammonia or r134a the design of the ORC in a certain scale should choose its corresponding reasonable heat exchanger since
it is a choke point for the larger maximum net power output.
© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0141-1187/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apor.2011.12.006
F.M. Sun et al. / Applied Ocean Research 35 (2012) 38–46 39
the state function corresponding to every point in ORC is success- h1 = −0.0101te2 + 1.1263te + 498.7285 [kJ/kg] (8)
fully set up by utilizing the cycle characteristics and a curve-fitting The enthalpy of saturated ammonia liquid (Point 3)
method. Further theoretical optimization to maximize the net
power output of ORC is carried out. Consequently, performance h3 = 4.6821tc − 762.9083 [kJ/kg] (9)
analytical function and exergy efficiency of ORC in OTEC are derived And by using dh = Tds + vdP then (Point 4)
and analyzed. Finally, some optimization design criteria of ORC for
OTEC will be given. h4 = h3 + v3 (P1 − P3 ) [kJ/kg] (10)
(Point 2)
2. ORC modelling
h2 = h3 + (tc + T0 ) · (s2 − s3 ) [kJ/kg] (11)
2.1. Cycle description where T0 = 273.15 [K] represents the absolute temperature of 0 ◦ C.
In addition,
ORC is named for its use of an organic working fluid,
which allows rankine cycle to have a heat recovery from lower P1 = 0.3394te2 + 13.8111te + 443.0038 [kPa] (12)
40 F.M. Sun et al. / Applied Ocean Research 35 (2012) 38–46
P3 = 0.2733tc2 + 15.7271tc + 428.7508 [kPa] (13) Thus, the ORC net power output can be written as follows
(1) The scope of application for using curve fitting method to In the expression, A((tc )opt , (te )opt ) = ((tc )opt + T0 ) · (a1 (te )2opt +
solve state function of every point in ORC:
a2 (te )opt + a3 (tc )opt + a4 ), B((tc )opt , (te )opt ) = b1 (tc )2opt + b2 (te )2opt +
g1 (X) = te − 15 ≥ 0, g2 (X) = 30 − te ≥ 0, g3 (X) = tc − 3 ≥ 0, b3 (te )opt + b4 (tc )opt + b5 . Where, ci (i = 1, 2, . . ., 6), ai (i = 1, 2, 3, 4)
and bi (i = 1, 2, . . ., 5) are constant coefficients, varied with working
g4 (X) = 15 − tc ≥ 0 and g5 (X) = te − tc > 0. fluid medium. Such as ammonia and r134a, whose corresponding
coefficient values are shown in Table 1.
(2) From the energy balance (Q̇c − Q̇cwf = (UA)c (Tm )c − And, we can also get the following optimal operating condition
ṁwf (h2 − h3 ) = 0) at the condenser, then we have the following values
heat balance function, which is the satisfied condition for optimiza- twsi − (te )opt · (1 − e˛ )
tion design: (t)opt = twsi − (29)
e˛
tcsi − (tcsi + twsi − (twsi − te · (1 − e˛ ))/e˛ ) · eˇ Also by using the energy balance at the condenser (Q̇c = Q̇cwf ),
f1 (X) = − tc = 0.
1 − eˇ then the mass flow rate of cold seawater at maximum net power
output is
3.2. Unconstrained optimization design A((tc )opt , (te )opt )
ṁcs = ṁws · (30)
B((tc )opt , (te )opt )
Constraint functions f1 (X), g1 (X), g2 (X), g3 (X) and g4 (X) are
weighted approach, then the constrained optimization prob- The ORC thermal efficiency at maximum net power output is
lem is converted to non-constrained optimization problem as A((tc )opt , (te )opt )
follows. r = 1 − (31)
te B((tc )opt , (te )opt )
Design variable: X = . Find: min F(X) .where
tc te ,tc ,k →0,Rk →∞ From this equation, it is known that ORC thermal efficiency at
Penalty Function is maximum net power output is only decided by the warm and cold
seawater temperature at the inlet, twsi and tcsi , for a given working
1
1
2
4
1 fluid. However the maximum net power output obtained in expres-
F(X) = + Rk (fi (X)) + k (22)
Ẇnet (X) gj (X) sion (28) depends on the performance of heat conductance and heat
i=1 j=1 capacity at constant pressure as well as the warm and cold seawater
temperature at the inlet, twsi , tcsi and mass flow rate of warm sea-
3.3. Solve optimization design water ṁws . These conclusions are consistent with Khaliq’ results
[6].
Assume the (te )opt and (tc )opt locate in the range of 15 ≤ te ≤ 30
[◦ C], 3 ≤ tc ≤ 15 [◦ C], so optimization design is simplified as
3.5. Exergy analysis of the ORC cycle
Find: min {F(X)}where Penalty Function is
te ,tc ,Rk →∞
Reference Nag and Dai’s research [16,17], the exergy efficiency
1
1
2
of the power generation cycle in ORC for OTEC is given as
F(X) = + Rk (fi (X)) (23)
Ẇnet (X) Ein − Io
i=1 x,r = (32)
Ein
By solving the heat balance equation f1 (X) = 0, then we know the
following equation as te + tc = tcsi + twsi , thus (te )opt can be approxi- where the item Ein = Ein,ws + Ein,cs represents the sum of the
mated as exergy in OTEC for ORC, Ein,ws = ṁws · [(hwsi − h sds ) − Tsds (swsi −
ssds )], Ein,cs = ṁcs · [(hcsi − hsds ) − Tsds (scsi − ssds )], Io is the sum
(te )opt = (tcsi + twsi ) − (tc )opt (24) of the exergy losses in all the components and the exergy loss
Then optimization design is further simplified as through exhaust, where Tsds + tsds + 273.15, tsds is the temperature
Find: of the system when it is in the dead state, here it is assumed as
same as ambient temperature, that is tsds = 20 [◦ C]. Meanwhile,
max Ẇnet (tc ) (25) psds = 0.10135 [MPa]. And the exergy of each state point in ORC
tc
can be considered as Ei = ṁ · [(hi − hsds ) − Tsds (si − ssds )]. Thus the
3.4. Optimization design results exergy loss in each component of the power generation cycle is
given below.
By solving ∂(Ẇnet (tc ))/∂tc = 0, we can get (tc )opt as follows Evaporator
2
(tc )opt = c1 tcsi 2
+ c2 twsi · tcsi + c3 twsi + c4 tcsi + c5 twsi + c6 (26) Ieo = Ein,ws − Eout,ws + Ein,e − Eout,e (33)
2
(te )opt = −c1 tcsi 2
− c2 twsi · tcsi − c3 twsi + (1 − c4 )tcsi + (1 − c5 )twsi − c6 Ito = Ein,t − Eout,t − Wt (34)
(27) Condenser
Table 1
Constant coefficient for ammonia and R134a.
i Ammonia R134a
ai bi ci ai bi ci
Moreover, it should be noticed that the following assumptions examination is also introduced, and initial conditions are same
should be applied to the system. as aforementioned figure examination, mass flow rate of warm
seawater is given as ṁws = [1000, 7000] [kg/s]. As a result, the
• Turbine efficiency and pump efficiency are assumed as 85% in this optimal analytical results are (tc )opt = 10.8 [◦ C], (te )opt = 22.2 [◦ C],
case. r = 3.76 [%] with the help of Eq. (26), Eq. (27) and Eq. (31),
• The piping and other auxiliary are considered no heat losses in respectively. Meanwhile, the corresponding optimal numerical cal-
the system. culation results are shown as follows. In addition, thermodynamic
properties of the ammonia are evaluated by using the formulation
4. Results and discussion of Stewart, etc. [18].
It is known that there is a step error in numerical calculation,
4.1. Validity of the optimization design such as the abovementioned operating condition (t)opt of ORC in
OTEC. Normally, it can be solved by reducing the step size. However
By solving the heat balance equation f1 (X) = 0, te and tc can be this way will cost more time. Herein, it should be clear that if the
approximated as an equation of te + tc = tcsi + twsi . In order to check result analyzed by using the proposed optimization method can
the rationality of the analytical approximation, based on OTEC give a theoretical guidance to solve the step error issues for the
and ammonia as working fluid, one figure verification example numerical calculation.
is given, initial conditions are chosen as: (UA)e,c = 10,000 [kW/K], Fig. 4 shows the relationship between ṁws and (t)opt for the
tcsi = 5 [◦ C], twsi = 28 [◦ C], ṁws = 1000, 5000, 7000 [kg/s]. There- proposed results and numerical results with (t)step = 1 [◦ C] and
fore, figure examination can be built as follows. (t)step = 0.1 [◦ C], respectively. It should be noted that the proposed
Fig. 3 shows the relationship between te and f1 (X) in the case results (Fig. 4) are calculated by using analysis equation obtained
of tc = 6, 10, 14 [◦ C] with the condition of ṁws = 1000 (Fig. 3(a)), in this paper. While numerical results are calculated by using a
5000 (Fig. 3(b)) and 7000 [kg/s] (Fig. 3(c)), respectively. From this simulation program written by authors with Fortran. Hereinafter,
figure, it is shown that the results of te + tc and tcsi + twsi fit well in the definitions for both are also applied to the other discussions.
the condition of f1 (X) = 0. In the case of tc = 6 [◦ C], ṁws = 1000 [kg/s] The data of maximum power output max{Ẇnet } and the opti-
and tcsi + twsi = 33 [◦ C], which is shown in the figure, when f1 (X) = 0, mal temperature difference (t)opt are also given in Table 2 for
there is the result of te + tc = 27 + 6 = 33 [◦ C] = tcsi + twsi . Mean- comparison. And corresponding comparison diagram is shown in
while, the equation for other cases also has the same conclusion, Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. In Fig. 5(a–g), represent numerical results
which means that the analytical approximation for solving the with ṁws = [1000, 7000] [kg/s], respectively; Fig. 5(h) shows the
equation f1 (X) = 0 is rational. theoretical guidance numerical results based on (t)opt [◦ C]; (i) is
Furthermore, (te )opt and (tc )opt can be approximated as an the proposed results. It can be seen that the numerical results with
equation, (te )opt + (tc )opt = tcsi + twsi . And then the performance (t)step = 0.1 [◦ C] fit well with the theoretical guidance numerical
analytical functions can be derived for ORC as shown in the paper. results. This means that the theoretical optimization design in this
To check the validity of the optimal analytical results, the numerical paper provides a good guidance in helping the numerical calcula-
tion to find out the optimal temperature difference. Meanwhile it
Fig. 3. Relationship between te and f1 (X). Fig. 4. Relationship between ṁws and (t)opt .
F.M. Sun et al. / Applied Ocean Research 35 (2012) 38–46 43
Table 2
Comparison between numerical results and proposed results.
Fig. 6. Relationship between ṁws and (te )opt + (tc )opt , (te )opt and (tc )opt . Fig. 7. Relationship between te and Ẇnet .
44 F.M. Sun et al. / Applied Ocean Research 35 (2012) 38–46
Fig. 10. Relationship between ṁws and max{Ẇnet } with different twsi and tcsi .
Fig. 8. Relationship between ṁws and max{Ẇnet } with different working fluid.
thermodynamic properties of the r134a are from Japanese asso- Fig. 9 shows a comparison between the maximum net power
ciation of refrigeration and Japan Flon gas association [19]. As output max{Ẇnet } of ORC with different heat exchanger perfor-
demonstrated in the figure, the max{Ẇnet } of the proposed mance (UA)e,c and Ẇm of the Carnot case [2], which vary with mass
results and numerical results tally closely irrespective of ammo- flow rate of warm seawater. And the corresponding comparison
nia medium or r134a medium. It is thus clear that the theoretical data is shown in Table 3. As the ṁws increased, the maximum net
optimization function of maximum net power output for ORC is power outputs for both increased, however, the net power output in
not only valid, but also suitable for different fluid medium. Also ORC increased slowly, and the difference between them increased
we noticed that the maximum net power output with ammonia with the flow rates. When performance of evaporator and con-
is a little bit larger than that of r134a in OTEC. This result agrees denser is improved, or the value of (UA)e,c is increased, it is clear
well with the conclusions by other researchers that ammonia is that the maximum net power output of ORC is getting closer to the
a better working fluid for ORC in OTEC. Therefore in the follow- maximum net power of the ideal cycle. This means that the maxi-
ing part, we will mainly use ammonia as working fluid to discuss mum net power output of ORC increased with increasing the scale
the behavior of the ORC for OTEC. Meanwhile, the maximum net of the system. However there is a choke point, which is the heat
power output by Khaliq [6], who used an average entropic temper- exchanger performance of the system. Therefore, the design of the
ature and simplified rankine cycle (Carnot cycle) was lower than ORC in a certain scale should choose the corresponding reasonable
that obtained in this paper. We noticed that the te in their approx- heat exchanger for the larger maximum net power output.
imation method is smaller than that of the rankine cycle, which From the established theoretical method for maximizing the net
resulted in the decreased maximum net power output. power output of the ORC in Eq. (28), we can see that max{Ẇnet } is
Based on the above analysis and examination, it can be con- mainly decided by the following parameters: the mass flow rate
cluded that the equation achieved for maximizing the net power of the warm seawater ṁws , the warm and cold seawater temper-
output of the ORC in OTEC is rational, and which can be used for ature at the inlet, twsi and tcsi . Thus the effect of the variation of
both qualitative and quantitative analysis. each parameter on the maximum power output max{Ẇnet } can be
easily discussed while keeping other parameters constant, which
is shown in Fig. 10. From the figure we know that the max{Ẇnet }
increases with increasing of ṁws , say, the larger the mass flow
Fig. 9. Relationship between ṁws and max{Ẇnet } with different heat exchanger
performance. Fig. 11. Relationship between twsi and r with different tcsi .
F.M. Sun et al. / Applied Ocean Research 35 (2012) 38–46 45
Table 3
Comparison between maximum power output of ORC and Carnot cycle.
[13] Uehara H, Dilao CO, Nakaoka T. Conceptual design of ocean thermal energy [17] Wang JF, Dai YP, Gao L. Exergy analyses and parametric optimizations
conversion power plants in the Philippines. Solar Energy 1998;41(5):431–41. for different cogeneration power plants in cement industry. Appl Energy
[14] Uehara H, Ikegami Y. Optimization of a closed-cycle OTEC system. J Sol Energy 2009;86(6):941–8.
Eng 1990;112:247–56. [18] Stewart RB, Jacobsen RT, Renoncello SG. ASHRAE thermodynamic properties of
[15] Sun FM, Ikegami Y. Direct method to maximize net power output of rank- refrigerants. ASHRAE; 1986, 93–7, 262–82.
ine cycle in low-grade thermal energy conversion. J Therm Sci Eng Appl [19] Japanese Association of Refrigeration Japan Flon Gas Association, Thermophys-
2010;2:0210031–7. ical Properties of Environmentally Acceptable Fluorocarbons; 1986 [HFC-134a,
[16] Nag PK, Gupta AVSSKS. Exergy analysis of the Kalina cycle. Appl Therm Eng HCFC-123].
1998;18(6):427–39.