ARTICLE IN PRESS

Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512

www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Second law-based thermodynamic analysis of water-lithium bromide

absorption refrigeration system
Muhsin Kilic, Omer Kaynakli
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Uludag University, TR 16059, Bursa, Turkey
Received 28 July 2004

Abstract

In this study, the first and the second law of thermodynamics are used to analyze the performance of a single-stage water-lithium
bromide absorption refrigeration system (ARS) when some working parameters are varied. A mathematical model based on the exergy
method is introduced to evaluate the system performance, exergy loss of each component and total exergy loss of all the system
components. Parameters connected with performance of the cycle–circulation ratio (CR), coefficient of performance (COP), Carnot
coefficient of performance (COPc), exergetic efficiency (x) and efficiency ratio (t)–are calculated from the thermodynamic properties of
the working fluids at various operating conditions. Using the developed model, the effect of main system temperatures on the
performance parameters of the system, irreversibilities in the thermal process and non-dimensional exergy loss of each component are
analyzed in detail. The results show that the performance of the ARS increases with increasing generator and evaporator temperatures,
but decreases with increasing condenser and absorber temperatures. Exergy losses in the expansion valves, pump and heat exchangers,
especially refrigerant heat exchanger, are small compared to other components. The highest exergy loss occurs in the generator regardless
of operating conditions, which therefore makes the generator the most important component of the cycle.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Absorption refrigeration system; Performance; Energy; Exergy

1. Introduction power input, while the second law optimization should

Absorption refrigeration systems (ARSs) have been
gaining popularity because, firstly, they operate on
environment friendly refrigerants conforming Montreal
and Kyoto Protocols. Secondly, they harness cheap
alternative energy sources, such as geothermal, biomass,
solar energy or a waste byproduct heat source. Therefore,
in recent years, research has been devoted to the improve-
ment of ARSs. The main way of improving efficiency is
through thermodynamic analysis and optimization [1–4].
The basis of thermodynamics is stated in the first and
second laws. The first law describes the conservation of
energy, while the second law is used to describe the quality
of energy and material. The first law optimization should
result in maximizing the coefficient of performance (COP),
thus providing maximum heat removal for minimum
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 224 4429183; fax: +90 224 4428021.
E-mail address: mkilic@uludag.edu.tr (M. Kilic).
result in maximizing the exergetic efficiency and minimiz-
ing entropy generation within the system, hence providing
maximum cooling for the smallest destruction of available
energy (exergy).
The exergy method, known as the second law analysis,
calculates the exergy loss caused by irreversibility, which is
an important thermodynamic property that measures the
useful work that can be produced by a substance or
the amount of work needed to complete a process [5]. The
exergy analysis is a powerful tool for thermodynamic
analysis of energy-conversion systems. The concept of
exergy is extensively discussed in the literature by Kotas [6],
Szargut et al. [7] and Bejan [8]. Aphornratana and Eames
[9] reported that the heat operated absorption refrigeration
systems are attracting increasing interest, as they can be
driven by low-temperature heat sources and employ
environment friendly working fluids. Furthermore, they
estimated the specific entropy field for temperatures
ranging from 10 to 200 1C and concentrations ranging

0360-5442/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2006.09.003
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1506 M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512

Nomenclature t efficiency ratio

u specific volume (m3 kg1)
ARS absorption refrigeration system c non-dimensional exergy loss
COP coefficient of performance
CR circulation ratio Subscripts
e specific exergy (kJ kg1)
E_ exergy rate (kW) A absorber
DE_ exergy loss rate (kW) c carnot
h specific enthalpy (kJ kg1) C condenser
I_ irreversibility rate (kW) D destruction
m_ mass flow rate (kg s1) E evaporator
N total number of components in the cycle G generator
p pressure (kPa) gen generation
Q_ heat transfer rate (kW) i input
s specific entropy (kJ kg1 K1) j number of components
S_ entropy generation rate (kW K1) o output
T temperature (1C) P pump
W _ pump power (kW) REV refrigerant expansion valve
RHE refrigerant heat exchanger
Greek letters SEV solution expansion valve
SHE solution heat exchanger
e effectiveness t total
Z efficiency 0 dead state
x exergetic efficiency 1..12 state points

from 20% to 70%. Furthermore, some of the papers Q_ SHE ¼ m

_ 10 ðh10  h11 Þ ¼ m
_ 8 ðh9  h8 Þ, (5)
include economical analysis [10,11].
In this study, after the first law thermodynamic analysis Q_ RHE ¼ m _ 2 ðh2  h3 Þ ¼ m _ 5 ðh6  h5 Þ, (6)
of the absorption refrigeration cycle for various operating  
conditions, exergy loss of the each component by second W_P¼m _ 7 ð h8  h7 Þ ¼ m_ 7 u7 pC  pE =ZP . (7)
law analysis is calculated separately. Apart from the other According to Bejan et al. [12], the exergetic balance
studies, variation of both first and second law efficiencies of applied to a fixed control volume is given by the following
the system, the non-dimensional exergy loss of each equation:
component and their contribution in the total exergy loss  
X X T0
of the system are discussed for different operating m_ i ei  _ o eo þ Q_ 1 
m _  E_ D ¼ 0.
W (8)
temperatures. T

2. System description and analysis

The schematic illustration of the single-stage ARS is

illustrated in Fig. 1. As seen from the figure, the
fundamental ARS contains a generator, an absorber, a
condenser, an evaporator, a pump, expansion valves, a
solution heat exchanger (SHE) and a refrigerant heat
exchanger (RHE). The energy balance equations for the
components of the ARS are expressed as follows:
Q_ G ¼ m
_ 1 h1 þ m
_ 10 h10  m
_ 9 h9 , (1)

Q_ A ¼ m
_ 6 h6 þ m
_ 12 h12  m
_ 7 h7 , (2)

Q_ C ¼ m
_ 1 h1  m
_ 2 h2 , (3)

Q_ E ¼ m
_ 5 h5  m
_ 4 h4 , (4) Fig. 1. The schematic illustration of the single-stage ARS.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512 1507

The first two terms are the sum of the exergy input and loss of each component is written as follows:
output rates of the flow, respectively. The third term is the
_ is DE_ j
exergy of heat, which is positive if it is into system. W cj ¼ . (21)
the mechanical DE_ t
 work
 transfer to or from the system, and
the last term E_ D is exergy destroyed due to the internal By using Eq. (21), the significance of each component’s
irreversibilities. When the kinetic and potential energies are contribution into the total exergy loss of the system can be
neglected, specific exergy (e) can be evaluated as found.
e ¼ ðh  h0 Þ  T 0 ðs  s0 Þ. (9) Parameters used to measure the performance of refrig-
erators such as coefficient of performance (COP), circula-
The exergy flow to the control region is always greater tion ratio (CR), exergetic efficiency (x) and efficiency ratio
than that from the control region. The difference between (t) can be expressed as [2,8]
the two, the rate   of loss of exergy, is called the
irreversibility rate I_ . The irreversibility rate is calculated Q_ E
COP ¼ , (22)
from the Gouy–Stodola relation, which states that the Q_ G þ W _P
irreversibility rate of a process is the product of the entropy
generation rate for all systems participating in the process _7
m
CR ¼ , (23)
and the temperature of the environment. Exergy is defined _1
m
as the maximum work potential of a matter or of a form of  
energy in relation to its environment. This work potential Q_ E 1  T 0 =T E
x¼   , (24)
can be obtained by means of reversible processes. However, Q_ G 1  T 0 =T G þ W _P
in reality there are only irreversible processes. The
irreversibility rate in a process can be calculated as follows: COP
X  t¼ . (25)
X COPc
I_ ¼ T 0 S_ gen ¼ T 0 m_ o so  m _
_ i si  Q=T . (10)
The Carnot coefficient of performance (COPc) is the
The principle exergy losses in a process leading to these maximum possible coefficient of performance of the ARS.
losses are due to dissipation (friction), heat transfer under COPc is defined as follows:
temperature difference and unrestricted expansion. For   
TG  TA TE
each individual component of ARS, the exergy loss rate COPc ¼ . (26)
TG TC  TE
equation is written as follows:
  For a single-stage absorption refrigeration cycle, the
DE_ G ¼ m_ 9 e9  m _ 1 e1 þ Q_ G 1  T 0 =T G ,
_ 10 e10  m (11) theoretical calculations of the CR and the COP have been
  performed with the known values of TG, TA, TC, TE and by
DE_ A ¼ m
_ 6 e6 þ m _ 7 e7  Q_ A 1  T 0 =T A ,
_ 12 e12  m (12) assuming the following conditions: (1) The systems are
  simulated under steady state conditions. (2) The pressure in
DE_ C ¼ m _ 2 e2  Q_ C 1  T 0 =T C ,
_ 1 e1  m (13) the generator, condenser, evaporator and absorber are
  equal to the vapor pressure of the working fluids. (3) The
DE_ E ¼ m _ 5 e5 þ Q_ E 1  T 0 =T E ,
_ 4 e4  m (14) pressure drops in all the heat exchangers and the pipelines
are negligible. (4) The solutions leaving the generator and
DE_ P ¼ m _ P,
_ 7 ð e7  e8 Þ þ W (15) absorber are in thermodynamic equilibrium at their
respective temperature and concentration as in the
DE_ SHE ¼ m
_ 8 ð e8  e9 Þ þ m
_ 10 ðe10  e11 Þ, (16)
generator and absorber. (5) The expansion process in the
DE_ RHE ¼ m
_ 2 ð e2  e3 Þ þ m
_ 5 ðe5  e6 Þ, (17) expansion device is at constant enthalpy.
The CR, COP, x, t values and concentrations of the
DE_ SEV ¼ m
_ 11 ðe11  e12 Þ, (18) solution in the absorber and generator have been
calculated for water-lithium bromide ARS for the follow-
DE_ REV ¼ m
_ 3 ðe3  e4 Þ. (19) ing ranges of temperatures: in the evaporator at 4 and 8 1C,
in the condenser at 35 and 40 1C, absorber temperature has
The total exergy loss rate of the absorption refrigeration
been assumed: TC+5 and at the generator from 80 to
cycle is the sum of the exergy loss rate in each component,
105 1C with 5 1C increments.
therefore
In this analysis, the properties of water/steam are
X
N obtained from the correlations provided by ASHRAE
DE_ t ¼ DE_ j , (20) [13]. The properties of lithium bromide solution, except for
j¼1
density and entropy, are obtained from the correlations
where N is the number of components in the ARS. The found in Talbi and Agnew [5] and Mostafavi and Agnew
ratio of the exergy loss rate in each component to the total [14]. The density and entropy of the H2O/LiBr solution is
exergy loss rate of the system is defined as non-dimensional obtained from the works of Kaita [15] and Chua et al. [16],
exergy loss of the component. The non-dimensional exergy respectively.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1508 M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512

3. Results and discussion loss rate occurred in the absorber (approximately 1.5 kW).
Since exergy loss rates in the pump and expansion valves
The simulation results of the first law analysis of the are very small, their effects on the total exergy loss rate are
ARS such as heat capacity of components and some inconsiderable. The non-dimensional exergy loss values of
performance parameters are presented in Table 1. In the each component are also seen in Table 2. The exergy losses
simulation, the parameters are taken as TE ¼ 5 1C, of the generator and absorber are important fractions of
TC ¼ 35 1C, TA ¼ TC+5 1C, TG ¼ 90 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ the total exergy loss in the system. The sum of non-
0.70 and ZP ¼ 0.95. The load in the condenser is slightly dimensional exergy losses of these two components is
higher than that in the evaporator. This is primarily due to 80.7%, which is remarkably a high value. Variation of the
superheating the inlet vapor in the condenser. The pump exergy loss of the components for various operating
work is quiet small as compared to the heat transfer rates temperatures is comprehensively examined below.
associated with the other components. Table 1 also shows Fig. 2 presents that the variation of the coefficient of
that the highest heat load occurs in the generator performance and circulation ratio, at different condenser
(approximately 13 kW) and the heat transfer rate of the and evaporator temperatures, versus generator tempera-
refrigerant heat exchanger is lower than that of the solution tures. As it can be seen from the figure, the COP increases
heat exchanger due to mass flow rate and temperature when the generator and evaporator temperatures increase.
difference between the fluids. The system experiences better cooling COP with a higher
Table 2 shows the simulation results of the second law evaporator temperature, since more cooling capacity can
analysis of the ARS. The generator has the highest exergy be produced from the evaporator under this operating
loss rate (approximately 2 kW), and the next largest exergy condition. In general, to obtain high COP values it is
necessary to operate the cycle at low values of the
circulation ratio, which implies high values of TG and TE
Table 1 and low values of TC and TA. It should be noted that the
Heat transfer rates of components and performance parameters of the COP initially exhibits significant increase with an increas-
system ing generator temperature, and then the slope of the COP
Components Heat transfer rates (kW) curves becomes almost flat. In other words, increasing the
generator temperature higher than a certain value does not
Generator (QG) 12.985 provide much improvement for the COP. When TG
Condenser (QC) 10.483
decreases, a rapid increase in CR is observed. The
Evaporator (QE) 10.000
Absorber (QA) 12.502 importance of the CR should be noted as it represents
Pump (WP) 0.00012 the required pumping energy. Furthermore, at the working
Solution heat exchanger (QSHE) 2.254 conditions of TC ¼ 35 1C, TE ¼ 8 1C and TC ¼ 35 1C,
Refrigerant heat exchanger (QRHE) 0.165
Performance parameters of the ARS
Coefficient of performance (COP) 0.770
Circulation ratio (CR) 9.578
Exergetic efficiency (x) 0.309
Efficiency ratio (t) 0.603

Table 2
Exergy loss rates of the components

Components Exergy loss rate, DE_ Non-dimensional

(kW) exergy loss, c (%)

Generator 2.002 45.68

Condenser 0.048 1.10
Evaporator 0.685 15.63
Absorber 1.533 34.98
Pump 0.00015 0.0034
Solution expansion — —
valve
Refrigerant 0.013 0.30
expansion valve
Solution heat 0.093 2.12
exchanger
Refrigerant heat 0.008 0.19
exchanger Fig. 2. Variation of COP and CR with generator temperature at different
Total 4.383 100 condenser and evaporator temperatures (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼
eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512
TE ¼ 4 1C with TG493 1C, and at TC ¼ 40 1C, TE ¼ 8 1C
with TG4101 1C, the solution is prone to crystallization.
Fig. 3 shows variations of the exergetic efficiency (x) and
the efficiency ratio (t) with the generator temperature at the
same conditions. Whereas, values of these parameters
(x and t) are dissimilar, their inclinations are similar. So,
both the exergetic efficiency and the efficiency ratio
decrease with an increase in the generator temperature
for the case of TC ¼ 35 1C and TE ¼ 8 1C, and both
parameters increase up to generator temperature of 90 1C
and then decrease for the case of TC ¼ 40 1C and
TE ¼ 8 1C. As the efficiencies of the first and second laws
are examined in general, it is seen that x increases up to a
generator temperature of 90 1C. Furthermore, COP value
also increases up to this temperature (see Fig. 2). At the
higher generator temperatures, while COP remains ap-
proximately stable, x decreases gradually. The reason for
this is that the increase in the generator temperature
negatively influences the x value as seen from Eq. (24). It
can be seen from Fig. 3 that the system experiences better
efficiency ratio at high condenser temperature and low
evaporator temperatures within some generator tempera-
ture ranges. Unlike the efficiency ratio, the system has
better exergetic efficiencies when operating with a low
condenser temperature and the high evaporator tempera-
ture within some generator temperature ranges. Within its
own generator temperature range, the exergetic efficiency
of the system initially increases and declines continuously
as the generator temperature increases. This is because a
Fig. 3. Variation of x and t with generator temperature at different
condenser and evaporator temperatures (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼
eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
1509
higher generator temperature means more external input
exergy supplied to the system, even though the latter can
drive more water vapor from water–lithium bromide
solution to create cooling. It also generates more exergy
losses in the generator, condenser and absorber as their
average temperatures rise up. This contributes negatively
to the exergetic efficiency of the system. However, rising
generator temperature generally increases the COP, in spite
of the decline due to the resulting decrease in the exergetic
efficiency. Since this negative effect of increasing the
generator temperature is more dominant on the exergetic
efficiency of the system, it decreases with increasing
generator temperature, while the COP stays almost
constant. This negative result on the exergetic efficiency
and the COP trades off the beneficial effect of a high heat
source temperature.
Fig. 4 shows the ratio of the exergy loss in the generator
to the total exergy loss of the system (non-dimensional
exergy loss of the generator) as a function of the generator
temperature. The non-dimensional exergy loss of the
generator decreases remarkably as the condenser tempera-
ture increases, but rises with an increasing evaporator
temperature. On the other hand, non-dimensional exergy
loss of the generator continuously decreases when the
generator temperature increases. The exergy loss of the
generator is an important fraction of the total exergy loss
in the system, basically due to the temperature difference
between the heat source and the working fluid. Therefore,
in order to decrease the total exergy loss of the system, the
Fig. 4. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the generator with
generator temperature at different condenser and evaporator temperatures
(TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1510 M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512

Fig. 6. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the condenser with

Fig. 5. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the absorber with
generator temperature at different condenser and evaporator temperatures
generator temperature at different condenser and evaporator temperatures
(TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
(TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).

generator should be regarded as a system component that

needs improvement.
The variation of the ratio of the exergy loss in the
absorber to the total exergy loss of the system with the
generator temperature at different evaporator and con-
denser temperatures is shown in Fig. 5. The non-dimen-
sional exergy loss of the absorber increases with increasing
condenser and generator temperatures. Moreover, a small
increase in the exergy loss rate of the absorber is observed
with the higher evaporator temperatures. The highest
exergy loss rate in the absorber is obtained at TE ¼ 8 1C,
TC ¼ 40 1C and TG ¼ 101 1C as 38.2%.
The variation of the ratio of the exergy loss in the
condenser and evaporator to the total exergy loss of the
system with the generator temperature is shown in Figs. 6
and 7, respectively. When temperatures of generator and
condenser increase, the non-dimensional exergy loss of the
condenser increases. But, an increase in evaporator
temperature causes relatively small effects on the non-
dimensional exergy loss of the condenser than the
condenser temperature. The non-dimensional exergy loss
of the evaporator decreases as the evaporator and
condenser temperatures increase as shown in Fig. 7. The Fig. 7. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the evaporator with
effect of condenser temperature on the exergy loss rate of generator temperature at different condenser and evaporator temperatures
the evaporator is higher than evaporator temperature as (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
well. It can be seen from Figs. 6 and 7 that, generally,
exergy loss in the evaporator is higher than that in the
condenser, and exergy losses are more sensitive to changes Figs. 8 and 9 show the variation of the ratio of the exergy
in the working conditions of the condenser and the loss in the solution and refrigerant heat exchangers to the
generator. total exergy loss of the system with the generator
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512 1511

Fig. 8. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the solution heat Fig. 10. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the pump with
exchanger with generator temperature at different condenser and generator temperature at different condenser and evaporator temperatures
evaporator temperatures (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95). (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).

the non-dimensional exergy loss of the SHE is severe at low

generator temperatures (Fig. 8). On the other hand, as it
can be seen from Fig. 9, if the evaporator temperature
decreases, the non-dimensional exergy loss of the RHE also
decreases. Generally, sum of the exergy losses in the RHE
and SHE is a small portion of the total exergy loss in the
system, and the exergy loss of the RHE is smaller than the
exergy loss of the SHE.
The variation of the ratio of the exergy loss in the
solution pump and refrigerant expansion valve to the total
exergy loss of the system with the generator temperature is
shown in Figs. 10 and 11, respectively. The non-dimen-
sional exergy loss of the pump increases as the condenser
temperature increases and evaporator temperature de-
creases. Moreover, when the generator temperature in-
creases, exergy loss rate in the pump decreases. Especially,
at the high condenser temperatures, exergy loss rate in the
pump dramatically decreases up to the generator tempera-
ture of 901C. As the non-dimensional exergy loss of the
pump is a very small fraction of the total exergy loss, its
effect on the exergy loss is negligible. It can be seen from
Fig. 11 that the non-dimensional exergy loss of the REV is
Fig. 9. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the refrigerant heat a small fraction of the total exergy loss in the system as
exchanger with generator temperature at different condenser and well. With increasing of the condenser temperature and
evaporator temperatures (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, decreasing of the evaporator temperature, the non-dimen-
ZP ¼ 0.95). sional exergy loss of the REV increases. If generator
temperature takes higher values, exergy loss rate in the
temperature. If the condenser temperature increases or the REV generally increases, but exergy loss rate remains
evaporator temperature decreases, the non-dimensional approximately stable at the rate of 0.25% for TE ¼ 8 1C
exergy loss of the SHE increases. Especially, the increase in and TC ¼ 35 1C. At low evaporator and high condenser
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1512 M. Kilic, O. Kaynakli / Energy 32 (2007) 1505–1512
Fig. 11. Variation of non-dimensional exergy loss of the refrigerant
expansion valve with generator temperature at different condenser and
evaporator temperatures (TA ¼ TC+5 1C, eSHE ¼ eRHE ¼ 0.70, ZP ¼ 0.95).
temperatures, generator temperature has relatively more
effect on the exergy loss rate compared to the other cases.
4. Conclusion
In this study, the first and the second law of thermo-
dynamics is applied to single-stage ARS. The exergy loss of
each component, the total exergy loss (DE_ t ) of all
components, the COP, x and t values of the ARS are
calculated from the thermodynamic properties of the
working fluids at various operating conditions by using
the developed mathematical model. The results show that
COP of the cycle increases with increasing generator and
evaporator temperatures, but decreases with increasing
condenser and absorber temperatures. Moreover, exergy
losses in the expansion valves, pump and heat exchangers,
especially in refrigerant heat exchanger, are very small
fractions of the total exergy loss in the ARS. Three
components that obtained the highest exergy loss are the
generator, the absorber and the evaporator.
In the parametric analysis of the system, it is shown that
a low condenser temperature yields a higher cooling COP
and higher exergetic efficiency. The system operating with
relatively high evaporator temperatures has better cooling
COP and experiences smaller exergetic efficiency than the
one having low evaporator temperatures. Increasing the
generator temperature can improve the cooling COP of the
absorption system, but as the heat source temperature
further increases, the COP of the system levels off. This
negative effect of increasing the heat source temperature is
more dominant on the exergetic efficiency of the system.
Consequently, this negative result on the exergetic effi-
ciency and the COP removes the beneficial effect of a high
heat source temperature.
The second law analysis used in this study facilitates the
identification of the system components with high exergy
loss. This study also shows that the analysis of thermal
systems based only on the first law is not entirely adequate.
In certain circumstances, while the efficiency of the first law
increases, the efficiency of the second law may decrease. In
this case, attention can then be focused on such compo-
nents that have high exergy loss to increase the second law
efficiency of the system.
Finally, this study draws attention to a detailed
thermodynamic analysis (first and second law) and leads
the way to improve thermal systems and their components.
Thus, the analysis can be applied as a useful tool for the
evaluation and improvement of the ARS systems.
References
[1] Misra RD, Sahoo PK, Gupta A. Thermoeconomic evaluation and
optimization of an aqua-ammonia vapour-absorption refrigeration
system. Int J Refrig 2006;29(1):47–59.
[2] Sözen A. Effect of heat exchangers on performance of absorption
refrigeration systems. Energy Convers Manage 2001;42(14):
1699–716.
[3] Saravanan R, Maiya MP. Thermodynamic comparison of water-
based working fluid combinations for a vapor absorption refrigera-
tion system. Appl Therm Eng 1998;18(7):553–68.
[4] Sun DW. Comparison of the performance of NH3–H2O, NH3–
LiNO3 and NH3–NaSCN absorption refrigeration systems. Energ
Convers 1998;39(5/6):357–68.
[5] Talbi MM, Agnew B. Exergy analysis: an absorption refrigerator
using lithium bromide and water as the working fluids. Appl Therm
Eng 2000;20(7):619–30.
[6] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Florida:
Krieger Publishing Company; 1995.
[7] Szargut J, Morris DR, Steward FR. Exergy analysis of thermal,
chemical, and metallurgical processes. New York: Hemisphere
Publishing Corporation; 1988.
[8] Bejan A. Advanced engineering thermodynamics. New York: Wiley;
1988.
[9] Aphornratana S, Eames IW. Thermodynamic analysis of absorption
refrigeration cycles using the second law of thermodynamics method.
Int J Refrig 1995;18(4):244–52.
[10] Misra RD, Sahoo PK, Sahoo S, Gupta A. Thermoeconomic
optimization of a single effect water/LiBr vapour absorption
refrigeration system. Int J Refrig 2003;26(2):158–69.
[11] Berlitz T, Satzger P, Summerer F, Ziegler F, Alefeld G. A
contribution to the evaluation of the economic perspectives of
absorption chillers. Int J Refrig 1999;22(1):67–76.
[12] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization.
New York: Wiley Inc; 1996.
[13] ASHRAE, Fundamentals handbook, New York: American Society
of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers; 1985.
[14] Mostafavi M, Agnew B. The impact of ambient temparature on
lithium bromide–water absorption machine performance. Appl
Therm Eng 1996;16(6):515–22.
[15] Kaita Y. Thermodynamic properties of lithium bromide–water
solutions at high temperatures. Int J Refrig 2001;24(5):374–90.
[16] Chua HT, Toh HK, Malek A, Ng KC, Srinivasan K. Improved
thermodynamic property field of LiBr–H2O solution. Int J Refrig
2000;23(6):412–29.