Design and performance analysis of a resorption cogeneration system
Design and performance analysis of a resorption cogeneration system
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/ijlct/ctt040
复制
发表时间：
2013-07
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Long Jiang;L. W. Wang;L. W. Wang;A. Roskilly;Ruzhu Wang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Long Jiang;L. W. Wang;L. W. Wang;A. Roskilly;Ruzhu Wang
作为一种传统的发电循环，朗肯循环的主要局限性是水（w）的蒸发（e）的吸热过程，其并不总是与热源的趋势非常吻合。卡林纳循环以水-氨为工质，通过调节吸收剂中氨的浓度，实现变加热过程，弥补了循环效率的损失。Goswami在Kalina循环的基础上提出了一种联合动力和制冷的发电循环，该循环具有合理的（火用）效率，但制冷过程的能量效率较低。本研究设计了一种新型的吸收式热电联产系统，该系统具有与戈斯瓦米循环相当的发电性能和更高的制冷性能。分析了系统的性能，计算了系统的火用。当系统不进行热回收时，η El和COP ref分别在0.072-0.126和0.33-0.53之间，当系统包括热回收循环时，其中考虑了金属和吸附剂的热容量，η El和COP ref分别在0.095-0.158和0.416-0.691之间。系统的最高值效率为0.82，比戈斯瓦米循环提高了50%。牛津大学出版社.
As a type of traditional cycle for electricity generation, the main limitation of the Rankine cycle is the endothermic process for the evaporation (e) of water (w), which does not always fit very well with the trend of the heat source. The Kalina cycle can make up the efficiency loss by using a working fluid of water-ammonia, which has a variable heating process by adjusting the concentration of ammonia in the water absorbent. Based on the Kalina cycle, a combined power and refrigeration generating cycle has been proposed by Goswami, which generally has reasonable exergy efficiency but suffers from the low energy efficiency for the refrigeration process. In this study, a new type of the resorption cogeneration system is designed, which features a comparable electrical generating performance and much higher refrigerating performance than the Goswami cycle. The performances are analysed, and the exergy of the system is calculated. When the system works without heat recovery, η El and COP ref range between 0.072–0.126 and 0.33–0.53, respectively; when the heat recovery cycle is included, in which the thermal capacity of the metal and the adsorbent of the adsorber are both considered, the η El and COP ref range between 0.095–0.158 and 0.416–0.691, respectively. The highest value exergy efficiency of the system is ∼0.82, which is an improvement by 50% when compared with that of the Goswami cycle. Copyright , Oxford University Press.