Accepted Manuscript

Performance Analysis of a Combined Organic Rankine Cycle and Vapor

Compression Cycle for Power and Refrigeration Cogeneration

Kyoung Hoon Kim, Horacio Perez-Blanco

PII: S1359-4311(15)00406-8
DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.04.062
Reference: ATE 6582

To appear in: Applied Thermal Engineering

Received Date: 1 October 2014

Revised Date: 18 April 2015
Accepted Date: 20 April 2015

Please cite this article as: K.H. Kim, H. Perez-Blanco, Performance Analysis of a Combined Organic
Rankine Cycle and Vapor Compression Cycle for Power and Refrigeration Cogeneration, Applied
Thermal Engineering (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.04.062.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Performance Analysis of a Combined Organic Rankine Cycle and Vapor

Compression Cycle for Power and Refrigeration Cogeneration
Kyoung Hoon Kim a and Horacio Perez-Blanco b, *
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology,

PT
61 Daehak-ro, Gumi, Gyeongbuk 730-701, Korea,
b
Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University,
204 Reber building, University Park, PA 16802-1412, USA

RI
* Corresponding author. Tel: 1-814-865-7842, Fax: 1-814-863-4848,
E-mail hpb1@psu.edu

SC
Abstract

A thermodynamic analysis of cogeneration of power and refrigeration activated by low-grade

sensible energy is presented in this work. An organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for power production

U
and a vapor compression cycle (VCC) for refrigeration using the same working fluid are linked
in the analysis, including the limiting case of cold production without net electricity production.
AN
We investigate the effects of key parameters on system performance such as net power
production, refrigeration, and thermal and exergy efficiencies. Characteristic indexes
proportional to the cost of heat exchangers or of turbines, such as total number of transfer units
M

(NTUtot), size parameter (SP) and isentropic volumetric flow ratio (VFR) are also examined.
Three important system parameters are selected, namely turbine inlet temperature, turbine inlet
pressure, and the flow division ratio. The analysis is conducted for several different working
D

fluids. For a few special cases, isobutane is used for a sensitivity analysis due to its relatively
high efficiencies. Our results show that the system has the potential to effectively use low grade
TE

thermal sources. System performance depends both on the adopted parameters and working
fluid.

Keywords: organic Rankine cycle, vapor compression cycle, low grade source, thermal
EP

efficiency, exergy efficiency

C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nomenclature

cps isobaric specific heat of source fluid, kJ/kg·K

E exergy flow, kW
EEV flow of exergy input at evaporator, kW
Ein flow of exergy input of source fluid, kW
h specific enthalpy, kJ/kg

PT
m mass flow rate, kg/s
ms mass flow rate of source fluid, kg/s
NTUtot total number of transfer unit of heat exchangers

RI
P pressure, bar
Pcd exit turbine pressure, bar. Also, condenser pressure, bar.
Pcr critical pressure, bar

SC
Pe evaporator pressure, bar
Ph boiler pressure, bar
QBO heat flow addition at boiler, kW
QEV refrigeration capacity at evaporator, kW

U
QCD heat removal rate at condenser, kW
rp flow division ratio
AN
rpc critical flow division ratio
rs mass flow ratio of working fluid to source
s specific entropy, kJ/kg·K
SP size parameter, m
M

T temperature, °C
Tcd condensing temperature, °C
Tcr critical temperature, °C
D

Tcs cooling space temperature, °C

Tcw cooling water temperature, °C
TE

Te evaporating temperature, °C
TIP turbine inlet pressure, bar
TIT turbine inlet temperature, °C
EP

Ts source temperature, °C
Tsout outlet source temperature, °C
UAtot total heat transfer capacity of heat exchangers, kW/°C
VFR isentropic volume flow ratio
C

Vin volume flow rate at expander inlet, m3/s

Vs,out volume flow rate after isentropic expansion, m3/s
AC

Wc compressor power, kW
Wnet net power production, kW
Wp pump power, kW
Wt turbine power, kW

∆hs specific enthalpy drop due to isentropic expansion in the expander, J/kg
∆Tm logarithmic temperature difference of a heat exchanger, °C
∆Tpp pinch temperature difference, °C
ηc compressor isentropic efficiency
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ηex exergetic efficiency

ηp isentropic efficiency of pump
ηt isentropic efficiency of turbine
ηth thermal efficiency

Superscripts/Subscripts

PT
0 reference state for thermodynamic properties
s source

RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1. Introduction

The UNFCCC Copenhagen Accord and Cancun Agreements (UNFCCC 2009, 2010) on climate
policy recognize that deep cuts in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are needed so as
prevent increases in global temperature greater than 2ºC above preindustrial levels. The
required emission reductions are substantial in the 2050 time horizon, which will lead to a

PT
major transformation of the energy and economic systems worldwide [1]. Therefore,
alternative energy sources have to be part of global energy solutions, and efficient use of low-
grade energy source such as geothermal energy, biomass combustion, or waste heat from
various industrial processes will become increasingly important. Waste energy is also

RI
considered as carbon neutral, since it implies no additional emissions and it is energy that
would otherwise be wasted. In recent years, the ORC and refrigeration systems using binary

SC
mixtures as working fluids have attracted much attention as they both harbor high probability
of achieving high efficiency in converting low-grade thermal energy to more useful forms of
energy [2-5].
ORC is a mature technology for low-temperature power generation. One major challenge

U
for ORCs is temperature matching to the thermal energy source stream while heat is
transferred to the ORC working fluid stream. Temperature matching to the source stream is
AN
important in minimizing the irreversibilities caused by heat transfer across a finite temperature
difference. When the ORC is driven by a single phase-stream, temperature mismatching in the
ORC evaporator is inevitable as the source exhibits a linear temperature profile, while the
M

evaporating fluid exhibits constant temperature, or nearly so. Dai et al. [6] used a genetic
optimization algorithm and identified isobutane and R236ea as efficient working fluids. Tranche
et al. [7] investigated comparatively the performance of solar ORC using various working fluids.
D

Volume flow rate, mass flow rate, power ratio as well as thermal efficiency were used for
comparison. Hung et al. [8] examined Rankine cycles using organic fluids categorized into three
TE

groups of wet, dry and isentropic fluids. Kim and Han [9] carried out a thermodynamic
performance analysis of transcritical organic Rankine cycles. Gao et al. [10] performed the
analysis of a supercritical organic Rankine cycle system driven by exhaust heat using 18 organic
working fluids. Li et al. [11] conducted an exergoeconomic analysis and performance
EP

optimization of a condenser for a binary mixture in ORC systems. Walraven et al. [12]
investigated comparatively the performance of ORC and Kalina cycles. Wang et al. [13]
proposed a theoretical model based on an ideal ORC to analyze the influence of working fluid
C

properties on the thermal efficiency.

Combined heat and power (CHP) systems and combined power and refrigeration systems
AC

are also becoming attractive due to the energy, economic, and environmental policies for
pursuing stable electricity supply, sustainable development and environmental pollution
mitigation [14]. Raj et al. [15] presented a review of renewable-activated cogeneration
technologies. Feidt and Costea [16] presented a comparison of various CHP system
configurations when different thermodynamic criteria are considered. The analysis confirms
that the first-law efficiency criterion is only representative of the system thermal losses. Exergy
efficiency, which takes into account the irreversibilities as well as quality of the thermal energy,
allowed for a more precise optimization and comparison of performance of different thermal
systems. Heberle and Brueggemann [17] analyzed the combined generation of heat and power
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

generation from geothermal resources at temperatures below 450K using ORC in series and
parallel circuits. Dai et al. [18], Li et al. [19], Habibzadeh et al. [20] presented a thermodynamic
study focused on a thermal system combining the ORC and an ejector refrigeration cycle. Zhang
and Lior [21], Pouraghaie et al. [22], Demirkaya et al. [23] carried out a thermodynamic analysis
of another combined power and cooling cycle, combining the ORC and absorption cycles using
ammonia-water mixture as the working fluid.

PT
Aphornratana and Sriveerakul [24] proposed a concept of an alternative heat-powered
refrigeration cycle which combines an ORC and a VCC using a free-piston expander-compressor
arrangement in which the compressor and expander are integrated in the same unit. The two
systems would use the same working fluid and they would also share the same condenser.

RI
Wang et al. [25] proposed a thermally activated cooling cycle consisting of an ORC and a VCC.
The system could be powered by solar thermal, geothermal or various waste heat streams. The

SC
shaft of the expander in the ORC and compressor in the VCC were directly coupled to reduce
two-way energy conversion losses. Although there are thermally activated cooling technologies
such as absorption cycles, they are generally used for large scale industrial applications as
absorption chillers and the coefficient of performance (COP) is generally low for single- stage

U
absorption cycles. The proposed ORC-VCC has some potential advantages over other thermally
activated cooling systems.
AN
The total heat transfer requirement and the expander size are important technical and
economic factors in ORC systems. To evaluate the expander size, Macchi [26] used two
thermodynamic properties: the expander size parameter (SP) and the isentropic volume flow
M

ratio (VFR). He reported that the physical significance of SP is given by its proportionality to
actual turbine dimensions and VFR accounts for the compressibility effects in a more
generalized way than other equivalent parameters of pressure ratio or Mach numbers. To
D

evaluate the cost of heat exchangers, the total heat transfer capacity (UA)tot has been used,
since it is considered to approximately reflect the heat transfer area of heat exchangers in the
TE

ORC system based on the hypothesis that the heat transfer coefficients for different ORC fluids
tend to be fairly similar [10, 26-28].
In this work, cogeneration of power and refrigeration via combined ORC and VCC using
various working fluids is analyzed. System performance as given by net power production,
EP

refrigeration, and the relevant indexes (SP, VFR and (UA)tot) already described. In addition,
thermal and exergy efficiencies are projected. The most important design parameters are
selected as turbine inlet temperature and pressure, and the flow division ratio defined as the
C

ratio of mass flow rate in the ORC to that in the condenser. When the flow division ratio
reaches its critical value, no net power is produced, namely all the power produced is internally
AC

consumed within the cycle. Hence, the system becomes in practice a heat-activated
refrigeration cycle.

2. System Analysis

The schematic diagram of the combined ORC and VCC is shown in Figure 1. Low-grade heat is
supplied to the system as sensible energy in the boiler. The coolant enters the condenser at
temperature Tcw and the working fluid leaves the condenser as saturated liquid at Tcd (state 1) at
saturation pressure Pcd , namely the intermediate pressure of the system. The flow division ratio,
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

rp, is defined as the ratio of mass flow rate in the ORC to that at the condenser. Then, out of 1 kg
of the fluid exiting the condenser, rp kg of fluid flows to the ORC and the remaining (1 - rp) kg
flows to the VCC. In the VCC, the fluid is throttled to the evaporator pressure (state 2), and
leaves the evaporator as saturated vapor at temperature Te (state 3) and saturation pressure Pe,
which is the low system pressure. Then, the fluid is compressed to the pressure Pcd by the
compressor (state 4). In the ORC, the fluid pressure is increased by the pump to the turbine inlet
pressure Ph which is the highest pressure of the system (state 6). The fluid flowing out from the

PT
recuperator enters the boiler (state 7). In the boiler, thermal energy is supplied at temperature Ts
and the fluid is evaporated and superheated to a temperature Th at a pressure of Ph (state 8). The
fluid is expanded in the turbine to a pressure Pcd and enters the recuperator (state 9). In the

RI
recuperator, the stream 9 temperature is reduced to that of state 10, preheating the heater inlet
stream from 6 to 7. The fluid streams from the compressor and the recuperator, both at the same
pressure Pcd, are mixed and then flow into the condenser (state 5). It is assumed that the

SC
minimum temperature differences between hot and cold streams in the heat exchangers should be
greater than the prescribed value of the pinch temperature difference, ∆Tpp. The thermodynamic
properties at points 4, 6 and 9 can be obtained in terms of the isentropic efficiencies of
compressor, pump and turbine, ηc, ηp and ηt, respectively.

U
AN
Important cycle variables such as rates of heat addition in the boiler QBO, of heat rejection in
the condenser QCD, refrigeration capacity QEV, turbine power Wt, pump power Wp, compression
power Wc and net power production Wnet, can be obtained as follows:
QBO = rs ms (h8 − h7 ) = mCD rp ⋅ (h8 − h7 )
M

(1)

QCD = s ms (h5 − h1 )
r
(2)
rp
D

rs (1 − rp )
QEV = ms (h3 − h2 ) (3)
TE

rp
Wt = rs ms (h8 − h9 ) (4)
W p = rs ms (h6 − h1 ) (5)
rs (1 − rp )
EP

Wc = ms (h4 − h3 ) (6)
rp
Wnet = Wt − W p − Wc (7)
C

where h is the specific enthalpy, ms the mass flow rate of source fluid, and rs the mass flow ratio
AC

defined as the ratio of mass flow rate of working fluid in the ORC to that of the source fluid,
namely:

c ps (Ts − Ts ,out )
rs = (8)
h8 − h7
where Ts,out is the source fluid boiler outlet temperature.
The flow division ratio rp is defined as the ratio of mass flow rate at the pump to that at the
condenser. Let us define the critical flow division ratio rpc as the value of rp when the ORC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

generates power exactly matching the power required to drive the pump and compressor so
that Wnet = 0. Then rpc can be determined as follows;

h4 − h3
rpc = (9)
(h1 + h4 + h8 ) − (h3 + h6 + h9 )

PT
Therefore, the flow division ratio should be greater than the critical value to generate both
power and refrigeration, and there is no net power generation when rp equals the critical value
rpc.

RI
In ORC systems the total heat transfer capacity UAtot can be regarded as proportional to the
cost of heat exchangers, as already mentioned. The UAtot can be evaluated by the following
equations

SC
 Q  Q Q Q Q
UAtot = ∑  i  = BO + RC + CD + EV (10)
i  ∆Tm , i  ∆Tm, HE ∆Tm, RC ∆Tm,CD ∆Tm, EV

U
where RC indicates refrigeration and ΔTm represents the mean logarithmic temperature
AN
difference of the maximum and minimum temperature differences occurring in each heat
exchanger, ΔTmax and ΔTmin as
M

∆Tmax − ∆Tmin
∆Tm = (11)
ln(∆Tmax / ∆Tmin )
D

In this paper, the dimensionless total number of transfer units NTUtot is defined as the total
heat capacity of the heat exchangers to the heat capacity of the source fluid as
TE

UAtot
NTU tot = (12)
ms c ps
EP

where cps is the isobaric specific heat of the source fluid.

To evaluate the expander size, two thermodynamic properties, namely the size parameter
C

SP and the isentropic volumetric flow ratio VFR have been used, defined as [26, 10, 28]
Vs ,out
AC

SP = (13)
∆hs
4

V
VFR = s ,out (14)
Vin

where Vin and Vs,out are the volume flow rates of the working fluid at the inlet and outlet of the
expander after an isentropic expansion, respectively, and Δhs is the specific enthalpy drop
calculated for an isentropic expander.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The exergy is a property of a stream defined as the maximum useful work available when
the stream evolves reversibly to reach equilibrium with the environment. The exergy of the
working fluid can be evaluated as
E = m[h − h0 − T0 (s − s0 )] (15)
where m is the stream mass flow rate, s the entropy per unit mass of fluid, and subscript 0
denotes the reference dead state. Then, the rate of exergy input into the system by the source

PT
fluid Ein and the rate of exergy associated with the withdrawal of heat at the evaporator from
the cooled space EEV, are evaluated as follows:

RI
  T 
Ein = ms c ps Ts − T0 − T0 ln s  (16)
  T0 

SC
T 
EEV = QEV  0 − 1 (17)
 Tcs 

U
where cps is the isobaric specific heat of the source fluid, and Tcs the temperature of the cooled
space. The thermal efficiency ηth is defined as the ratio of the usable energy of power and
AN
refrigeration to the heat input, and the exergy efficiency ηex is defined as the ratio of the usable
exergy of power and refrigeration to the exergy input. Hence, the efficiencies are given by:

W + Q EV
M

ηth = net
(18)
Q BO
W + E EV
ηex = net
D

(19)
E in
Eight working fluids are considered in this study: R143a, R22, R134a, R152a, propane,
TE

ammonia, isobutane, and butane, which are sequenced by their critical temperature. The
thermodynamic properties of the working fluids are calculated using the Patel-Teja equation of
state [29-30]. As reference states, entropy and enthalpy were assigned null values at the
EP

condenser exit (saturated liquid, state 1). This convention was adopted for convenience and the
chosen references do not influence the results of the analysis. What defines cycle performance
are the differences in entropy and enthalpy, rather than their absolute values.
C

The basic data of each fluid, needed to calculate the thermodynamic properties are given in
AC

Table 1, where M, Tcr, Pcr, and ω are molecular weight, critical temperature, critical pressure,
and accentric factor, respectively [31]. The temperature-entropy diagrams for the working
fluids are shown in Fig. 2.

3. Results and Discussion

The source fluid adopted here is air at Ts = 150oC with a mass flow rate of 1 kg/s. The boiler,
recuperator and condenser are considered to be operated under the condition that the minimum
temperature difference between the hot and cold streams in the heat exchangers reach the
prescribed pinch value of ∆Tpp = 10oC. Other basic data for analysis are given in Table 2.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.1 Performance of the refrigeration mode

In this section, it is considered that the working fluid enters the turbine as a superheated
vapor. The flow division ratio equals the critical value, so only refrigeration is produced. The
critical flow division ratios (rpc) are plotted against the turbine inlet pressure (TIP) in Fig. 3 for
various working fluids. For a fixed value of condenser pressure, the critical flow division ratio

PT
decreases with increasing TIP, since the specific turbine work increases as TIP increases, and
therefore a smaller mass flow rate is required in the ORC for the same compression work in the
VCC. For a fixed TIP, the rpcs of R143a, ammonia or R22 are high, while those of butane or

RI
isobutane are low. It can be seen from the figure that working fluids with higher critical
temperatures generally show lower rpcs, with the notable exception of ammonia.

SC
Figure 4 displays the effects of TIP on the mass flow ratio rs for the various working fluids.
The mass flow ratio (rs) is defined as the ratio of the mass flow rate of working fluid in the ORC
to that of the source fluid and is evaluated from the energy balance boiler (Fig.1, Eq. (8)).
Several factors are at work in Eq.8: when the inlet and outlet temperatures of the working fluid

U
and the inlet temperature and mass flow rate of the source fluid are specified, its outlet
temperature decreases with increasing mass flow rate of the working fluid. When the temperature
AN
difference between the streams in the heat exchanger reaches the prescribed pinch value ∆Tpp, the
mass flow rate of the working fluid reaches a maximum. Then, as the TIP increases (Fig.4), the
mass flow ratio decreases, reaching a minimum that depends on the working fluid. The existence
of the minimum stems from the following considerations: when the TIP is low, the refrigerant at
M

the boiler inlet (Fig.1, state 7) is in saturated liquid-vapor state. As the TIP increases, the
saturation temperature of the working fluid and thus the outlet temperature of the source fluid
increase, decreasing the mass flow ratio. When the TIP is high, the refrigerant at the boiler inlet
D

(Fig.1, state 7) becomes a compressed liquid and the outlet temperature of the source fluid
decreases with increasing TIP in the counter flow heat exchanger, in such way that the mass flow
TE

ratio increases. This two opposing trends result on a minimum boiler mass flow ratio as TIP
increases. For a fixed TIP, the mass flow ratios of R143a or R22 are high, while the ratios of
ammonia or butane are quite low.
EP

The refrigeration capacity QEV varies with TIP as shown in Fig. 5 for the various working
fluids. With increasing TIP, QEV increases monotonically for R143a, R22, R134a, R152a, and
ammonia. The profiles for butane, isobutane, and propane exhibit a maximum, due to the effects
C

of the mass flow ratios. Generally speaking, the refrigeration capacities are large for low TIPs in
the case of working fluids of high critical temperatures such as butane or isobutene. Conversely,
AC

fluids of low critical temperature such as R134a or R152a

exhibit large refrigeration capacities at high TIPs.
The explanation for these diverging behaviors can be traced to Fig. 3. This figure shows
that that the flow division ratio, rp (rpc in this case) behaves like a convex parabolic curve with
respect to TIP for the working fluids with relatively high critical temperature such as butane, but
it decreases monotonically for the working fluids with relatively low critical temperature such as
R134a. The mass flow ratio rs increases with increasing TIP as the subcooled boiler load
increases. These opposing trends result in the complex nonlinear behaviors of the refrigeration
capacity of Fig. 5. Qev generally increases with increasing TIP, mainly due to the increased
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

critical flow division ratio. For working fluids with relatively high critical temperatures (e.g.
butane) it behaves like a parabolic curve, because the critical flow division ratio behaves like a
convex parabolic curve. The refrigeration capacity for R134a shows an inflexion, mainly due to
the increased boiler load to bring the liquid to saturation for high TIPs.

PT
Variations of the thermal efficiency vs. TIP are shown in Fig. 6 for various working fluids.
Generally, the thermal efficiency increases monotonically with increasing TIPs in the subcritical

RI
pressure region. However, for working fluids of high critical temperature such as butane or
isobutane, the thermal efficiency reaches a maximum in the subcritical pressure region. For a
fixed TIP, the higher the critical temperature, the higher thermal efficiencies are, except for

SC
ammonia. It is remarkable that the range of possible efficiencies is large, varying from 40 to
70% for the given TIP range. In all cases, the thermal efficiencies are well below that assigned
by Carnot to a reversible, heat-activated cycle, (about 2 in this case).

U
For a fixed source temperature and no power production, the exergy efficiency is
proportional to the refrigeration capacity, QEV. Figure 7 shows the how the thermal and exergy
AN
efficiencies are related. In general, thermal end exergetic efficiencies are proportional to each
other, to a point. When the thermal efficiency rises above 40%, (i.e. at high TIPs) the exergy
efficiency of R134a or R152a increases faster than the thermal efficiency, while those of
isobutane or butane actually decrease. For butane and isobutane, the TIP for the maximum
M

exergy efficiency is lower than that for the maximum thermal efficiency. For these two
refrigerants, it can be shown that as TIP increases, the refrigeration capacity decreases. Yet, the
boiler heat input decreases even more steeply, and the thermal efficiency keeps on gaining.
D

Since the exergy output decreases with refrigeration capacity, the net effect for these refrigerants
is reflected in Fig.7: the thermal efficiency increases but the exrgetic efficiency decreases with
TE

TIP. For all the other refrigerants, the refrigeration capacity keeps on gaining with TIP, and so
does the exergetic efficiency. The thermal efficiencies are much higher than the exergetic ones
for these cases (by a factor of about 10), which can be interpreted as this cycle being capable of
EP

extracting large quantities of available energy from the relatively low temperature waste heat,
while converting it to refrigeration that, whereas of considerable societal value, has relatively
low availability.
C

To appraise the overall viability of an ORC system, resort is had to a number of parameters
generally regarded as acceptable indicators. The total heat transfer capacity UAtot, has been used
AC

in the past as an index of the relative cost of similar heat exchangers constructed of the same
materials [28]. Variations of the dimensionless total number of transfer units NTUtot , defined as
the ratio of UAtot to the thermal capacity of source fluid ms·cps, are plotted against the TIP in Fig.
8 for all the working fluids. Since the product ms·cps is nearly constant, UAtot is essentially
proportional to NTUtot for the purposes of this analysis. When the working fluid is butane,
isobutane, ammonia or propane, the number of transfer unit decreases with increasing TIPs.
However, the number of transfer units stays constant or actually increases for R134a, R22 or
R143a. Butane offers the possibility of comparatively low NTUstot.
As the reader might recall from the preceding sections, the size parameter SP accounts for the
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

actual turbine dimensions and the isentropic volume flow ratio VFR accounts for the effects of
the compressibility through the expansion [27]. Figure 9 displays the variations of the size
parameter and of the volume flow ratio for various working fluids. Small values of SP and of
VFR are preferred, in that they point to a small turbine with an expansion close to reversibility.
It can be observed from the figure that the VFR decreases with increasing SPs, which also
coincides with decreasing TIPs. So, cycles closer to reversible expansion call for larger
compressors, although the effect is less intense for R143a and for R22. Generally, fluids of high

PT
critical temperatures show large SPs at high TIPs, while ammonia, R152a, or propane exhibit
smaller SPs at at high TIPs. Also, working fluids of low critical temperature exhibit low VFRs.
The fluids associated with high thermal efficiencies and small NTUtot, namely butane and

RI
isobutane, tend to result on large SPs and VFRs. By comparison, ammonia shows lower VFRs
than isobutane or butane for the same SPs.

SC
3.2. Performance of Cogeneration, Superheated Vapor

This section of the paper focuses only on isobutene, , that generally exhibits high efficiencies.
This fluid enters the turbine as a superheated vapor with fixed value of TIT = 130oC (Fig.1, state

U
8). The temperature-entropy diagrams for the combined ORC-VCC are shown in Fig. 10 for
various TIPs. It can be seen from the figure that for a fixed TIT, the entropy at the turbine inlet
AN
increases with decreasing TIP, resulting on a turbine exit temperature that increases with
decreasing TIPs. Thus, at the recuperator inlet (Fig.1, state 6), the working fluid temperature
increases with decreasing TIP (states 9a, 9b, 9c and 9d)) and the fluid from the pump (state 6)
upon exiting the recuperator (state 7, all) may be a saturated mixture when TIP is rather low, for
M

example, when TIP equals 10 bar (state 7a).

Figures 11and 12 show the effects of TIP on the refrigeration capacity QEV and the net power
D

production Wnet respectively, for various flow division ratios. For a fixed flow division ratio, QEV
decreases with increasing TIP due to the decrease in the mass flow ratio rs as shown in Fig. 4.
TE

For the condition of critical flow division ratio, QEV has a maximum value at a TIP of about 20
bar. For a fixed TIP, QEV decreases with increasing flow division ratio due to the decreasing
evaporator to condenser mass flow ratio. Concerning Fig.12, a peak value exists for Wnet with
EP

respect to TIP for a fixed flow division ratio. The magnitude of the peak increases with
increasing flow division ratios and reaches the maximum value when the flow division ratio
becomes unity.
C

The effect of TIP on the thermal and exergy efficiencies is shown in Figs 13-14, with the
flow division ratio as parameter. The thermal efficiency increases with TIP for a fixed flow
AC

division ratio. Whereas the specific refrigeration, specific net work, and specific heat input
decrease with increasing TIP for a fixed flow division ratio, the decrease of heat input is
dominant among them, which explains the thermal efficiency increase. The exergy efficiency
(Fig.14) has a well-defined peak with respect to TIP for a fixed flow division ratio. For a fixed
TIP, the thermal efficiency decreases whereas the exergetic efficiency increases with increasing
flow division ratios. It appears that for this cycle, a TIP in the order of 20 bar in conjunction
with large flow division ratios leads to optimal exergy use.
At the peak, the system outputs the largest amount of exergy for the given input, which is
constant. The exergy peak occurs substantially at 20 bars. This can be explained because the
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

thermal efficiency defined as Eq. (18) is proportional to QEV and inversely proportional to the
heat flow addition at the boiler, QBO. For the condition of superheated vapor at the turbine inlet,
Figs. 11-12 show that the refrigeration capacity decreases slightly with increasing TIP, however,
the net power production also has a peak value with respect to TIP substantially at 20 bar. The
latter effect is more dominant than the former. Therefore, the exergy efficiency has a peak with
respect to TIP as is shown in Fig. 14.

PT
Fig. 15 shows the effects of TIP on the total number of transfer units NTUtot for various flow
division ratios. The total number of transfer units decrease with increasing TIP or with increasing

RI
flow division ratios. Therefore, for a fixed flow division ratio, high TIPs lead to high thermal
efficiencies and require a small total number of transfer units. For a fixed turbine inlet pressure, a
low flow division ratio leads to high thermal efficiency but requires a large number of transfer

SC
units. The preceding observations show that producing refrigeration (decreasing rp values) leads
to increased thermal efficiencies but requires additional NTUs. Remarkably, the optimal
exergetic efficiency requires a TIP of about 20 bar, resulting on a well-defined limit for the
NTUs.

U
AN
3.3 Performance of Cogeneration, Saturated Vapor

In this section, we consider cases where isobutane enters the turbine as a saturated vapor. The
temperature-entropy diagrams are shown in Fig. 16 for various turbine inlet temperatures (TIT’s)
M

for the critical flow division ratios. Recall in this case that the ORC produces power just to meet
the requirements of the pump and of the compressor. The turbine exit temperature (state 9)
increases with TIT, however, the increase is not remarkable. Because of this behavior, preheating
D

of the working fluid in the recuperator is insignificant, and the working fluid consequently enters
the boiler at a relatively low temperature.
TE

The effects of TIT on the QEV for various flow division ratios are shown in Fig. 17. For a
fixed flow division ratio, QEV decreases with increasing TIT, since at the evaporator, (h3 - h2)
remains constant but the mass flow rate of the working fluid per unit mass flow rate of the
EP

source, rs, decreases with increasing TIT. For a fixed TIT, the refrigeration capacity decreases
with increasing flow division ratio due to the decrease of mass flow rate at the evaporator. It is to
be noted that when the flow division ratio equals unity, there is no refrigeration, since the
evaporator receives no refrigerant. For the critical flow division ratio, the refrigeration capacity
C

(Eq. 3) has a peak value with respect to TIT, since an increasing contribution due to (1/rp - 1), is
counterbalanced by a decreasing contribution due to rs, as given by Eq.(3).
AC

Fig. 18 shows the effects of TIT on the net power Wnet. For a fixed flow division ratio, Wnet
exhibits a peak value with respect to TIT, since it has an increasing contribution of turbine power
as TIT increases, and a decreasing contribution due to the decreasing amount of input thermal
energy by the waste heat source fluid. For a fixed TIT, Wnet becomes zero when the flow division
ratio reaches the critical value, and increases with increasing flow division ratio, reaching a
maximum value when the flow division ratio becomes unity. At that point, only power is
produced, with no accompanying refrigeration.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The profiles of thermal and exergy efficiency (Eq.18) vs. TIT are shown in Figs. 19-20. For a
given flow division ratio, the thermal efficiency increases with TIT, Fig.19. This can be
explained as follows. For a fixed flow division ratio, the refrigeration capacity QEV decreases
with increasing TIT (Fig.17) while the net power production Wnet has a peak value with respect
to TIT (Fig.18). Hence, one would expect either a decreasing efficiency or a peaking one with
TIT. However, the boiler heat input decreases with increasing TIT, lending a dominant positive
slope to the plot. The exergy efficiency, Eq.19, exhibits a peak value with respect to TIT for a

PT
fixed flow division ratio (Fig.20). The peak occurs for TITs in the range of 75-100 C.
The peaks of Fig. 20 occur for saturated vapor at the turbine inlet, because as shown in Figs.
17-18 the refrigeration capacity decreases slightly with increasing turbine inlet temperature

RI
(TIT), but the net power production has a peak value with respect to TIT (Fig.18). The latter
effect being more dominant than the former, the exergy efficiency has a resulting peak with
respect to TIT as is shown in Fig. 20. This means that increasing the refrigeration duty is more

SC
advantageous from the viewpoint of energy, but increasing the power generation duty is more
advantageous from the viewpoint of exergy, irrespective of the economic viewpoint.

Figure 21 shows the effects of TIT on the total number of transfer units NTUtot for various

U
flow division ratios. The total number of transfer units decreases with increasing TIT or
increasing flow division ratios. Therefore, for a fixed flow division ratio, high turbine inlet
AN
temperatures lead to high thermal efficiencies and require small NTUs. For a fixed turbine inlet
temperature, small flow division ratios lead to high thermal efficiencies but require large NTUs.

4. Conclusions
M

The thermodynamic performance of the cogeneration of power and refrigeration by an

organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and vapor compression cycle (VCC) utilizing low grade sensible
D

energy is analyzed. The cases of pure refrigeration and cogeneration, including the cases of
saturated and superheated vapor at the turbine inlet are investigated in the subcritical pressure
TE

regions. The eight working fluids considered are: R143a, R22, R134a, R152a, propane,
ammonia, isobutane, and butane. A systematic investigation of the effects of system
parameters on performance such as specific refrigeration, net work production, thermal and
exergy efficiencies, total number of transfer units, and size parameter and volume flow ratio for
EP

the turbine of the system led to a selection of dominant parameters. The three important
parameters are the turbine inlet temperature, the turbine inlet pressure, and the flow division
ratio.
C

In the case of pure refrigeration, our results show that the working fluids with higher critical
temperature, except ammonia, show higher thermal efficiency, and the refrigeration per unit mass
AC

of source fluid is large for working fluids of high critical temperature. In that regard, butane or
isobutane are good candidates for refrigeration at low turbine inlet pressures. Generally,
flammability is not regarded as a desirable characteristic for some working fluids, which arises
the consideration of low critical temperatures such as those of R134a or R152a. Those
compounds tend to exhibit better refrigeration performance at high turbine inlet pressures. The
NTUs have high values for R134a, R143a or R22. Whereas the former two may yet find
acceptance for heat recovery cycles suitable configured, the latter is in the process of being
eliminated as a viable option due to ozone layer considerations.
In the case of cogeneration, results show that the exergy efficiency has a peak value with
respect to both TIT and TIP. The Second Law trends are met in that TITs or TIPs lead to high
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

thermal efficiencies while requiring small NTUs. Small flow division ratios lead to high thermal
efficiencies, but require large NTUs. Isobutane offers good thermal efficiencies, and we carried
out a sensitivity analysis of performance versus TIP and TIT, further elucidating how those
variables influence performance and size of the ORC-VCC.
The work presented here covers the behavior of the cycle of Fig.1 from sole power
generation (rp=1) to sole refrigeration (rp=rpc). Generally, the production of power from waste
heat preserves exergy more effectively than the production of refrigeration. Whereas the topic is

PT
not investigated here, it can be speculated that power production via thermal cycles requires heat
rejection, and that matching high-grade heat energy to power production and waste heat to
refrigeration could very well be a preferred option from an exergy viewpoint. Significantly, the

RI
exergy efficiency peaks at TIPs of 20 bar and at TITs of about 100 C for all the flow division
ratios of this study.
The combined ORC-VCC cycle exhibits the potential to efficiently utilize low-grade thermal

SC
sources. The present study provides relevant information towards judicious selection of working
fluid and operational conditions. Such selection is bound to lead to energy savings over other
fluids and conditions, and reduced investment costs.

U
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research
Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (No.
2010-0007355).

PT
References

[1] Ciscar J., Saveyn B., Soria A., Szabo L., Regemorter D. V., Ierland T. V., A Comparability

RI
analysis of global burden sharing GHG reduction scenarios. Energy Policy 55 (2013) 73-81.
[2] Dresher U., Brueggemann D., Fluid selection for the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) in biomass
power and heat plants. Applied Thermal Engineering 27 (2007) 223-228.

SC
[3] He Y. L., Mei D. H., Tao W. Q., Yang W. W., Liu H. L., Simulation of the parabolic trough solar
energy generation system ith organic Rankine cycle, Applied Energy 97 (2012) 630-641.
[4] Kim K. H., Han C. H., Kim K., Effects of ammonia concentration on the thermodynamic
performances of ammonia-water based power cycles. Thermochimica Acta 530 (2012) 7-16.

U
[5] Kim K. H., Han C. H., Kim K. Comparative exergy analysis of ammonia-water based Rankine
cycles with and without regeneration. Int. J. Exergy (2013) in press.
AN
[6] Dai Y., Wang J., Gao L., Parametric optimization and comparative study of organic Rankine
cycle (ORC) for low grade waste heat recovery. Energy Conversion and Management 50 (2009)
576-582.
[7] Tranche B. F., Papadakis G., Lambrinos G., Frangoudakis A., Fluid selection for a low-
M

temperature solar organic Rankine cycle. Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 2468-2476.
[8] Hung T. C., Wang S. K., Kuo C. H., Pei B. S., Tsai K. F., A study of organic working fluids on
system efficiency of an ORC using low-grade energy sources. Energy 35 (2010) 1403-1411.
D

[9] Kim K. H., Han C. H., Analysis of Transcritical organic Rankine cycles for low-grade heat
conversion. Advanced Science Letters 8 (2012) 216-221.
TE

[10] Gao H., Liu C., He C., Xu X., Wu S., Li Y., Performance analysis and working fluid selection
of a supercritical organic Rankine cycle for low grade waste heat recovery. Energies 5 (2012)
3233-3247.
EP

[11] Li Y. R., Du M. T., Wu S. Y., Peng L., Liu C., Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of a
condenser for a binary mixture of vapors in organic Rankine cycle, Energy 40 (2012) 341-347.
[12] Walraven D., Laenen B., D’haeseleerW., Comparison of thermodynamic cycles for power
production from low-temperature geothermal heat sources, Energy Converse and Management
C

66 (2013) 220-233.
[13] Wang D., Ling X., Peng H., Liu L., Tao L. L., Efficiency and optimal performance evaluation
AC

of organic Rankine cycle for low grade waste heat power generation, Energy 50 (2013) 343-
352.
[14] Tsai W. T., Regulatory compliance and environmental benefit analysis of combined heat and
power (CHP) systems in Taiwan. Energies 6 (2013) 557-565.
[15] Raj N. T., Iniyan S., Goic R., A review of renewable energy based cogeneration technologies.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (2011) 3640-3643.
[16] Feidt M., Costea M., Energy and exergy analysis and optimization of combined heat and power
systems. Comparison of various systems. Energies 5 (2012) 3701-3722.
[17] Heberle F., Brueggemann D., Exergy based fluid selection for a geothermal organic Rankine
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

cycle for combined heat and power generation. Applied Thermal Engineering 30 (2010) 1326-
1332.
[18] Dai Y., Wang J., Gao L., Exergy analysis, parametric analysis and optimization for a novel
combined power and ejector refrigeration cycle. Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 1983-
1990.
[19] Li X., Zhao C., Hu X., Thermodynamic analysis of organic Rankine cycle with ejector. Energy
42 (2012) 342-349.

PT
[20] Habibzadeh A., Rashidi M. M., Galanis N., Analysis of a combined power and ejector-
refrigeration cycle using low temperature heat. Energy Conversion and Management 65 (2013)
381-391.

RI
[21] Zhang N., Lior N., Methodology for thermal design of novel combined refrigeration/power
binary fluid systems. Int. J. Refrigeration 30 (2007) 1072-1085.
[22] Pouraghaie M., Atashkari K., Besarati S. M., Nariman-zadeh N., Thermodynamic performance

SC
optimization of a combined power/cooling cycle. Energy Conversion and Management 51
(2010) 204-211.
[23] Demorkaya G., Padilla R. V., Goswami D. Y., Stefanakos E., Rahman M. M., Analysis of a
combined power and cooling cycle for low-grade heat sources. Int. J. Energy Research 35

U
(2011) 1145-1157.
[24] Aphornratana S., Sriveerakul T., Analysis of a combined Rankine-vapor-compression
AN
refrigeration cycle. Energy Conversion and Management 51 (2010) 2557-2564.
[25] Wang H., Peterson R., Harada K., Miller E., Ingram-Goble R., Fisher L., Yih J., Ward C.,
Performance of a combined organic Rankine cycle and vapor compression cycle for heat
activated cooling. Energy 36 (2011) 447-458.
M

[26] Macchi E., Perdichizzi A., A efficiency prediction for axial-flow turbines operating with non-
conventional fluids, J. Eng. Power Trans. ASME 103 (1981) 718-724.
[27] Invernizzi C., Iora P., Silva P., Bottoming micro-Rankine cycles for micro-gas turbines, Applied
D

Thermal Eng. 27 (2007) 100-110.

[28] He C., Liu C., Gao H., Xie H., Li Y., Wu S., Xu J., The optimal evaporation temperature and
TE

working fluids for subcritical organic Rankine cycle, Energy 38 (2012) 136-143.
[29] Yang T., Chen G. J., Guo T. M., Extension of the Wong- Sandler mixing rule to the three-
parameter Patel-Teja equation of state: Application up to the near-critical region. Chem. Eng. J.
EP

67 (1997) 27-36.
[30] Gao J., Li L. D., Zhu Z. Y., Ru S. G., Vapor-liquid equilibria calculation for asymmetric systems
using Patel-Teja equation of state with a new mixing rule. Fluid Phase Equilibria, 224 (2004)
213- 219.
C

[31] Yaws C. L., Chemical properties handbook, McGraw-Hill (1999).

AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

List of Tables

Table 1. Basic data of working fluids.

Table 2. Basic calculation conditions for the system

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1. Basic data of working fluids

Substance M(kg/kmol) Tcrc(K) Pcr(bar) ω

R143a 84.041 346.25 37.58 0.253

PT
R22 86.468 369.30 49.71 0.219

RI
R134a 102.031 380.00 36.90 0.239

R152a 66.051 386.60 44.99 0.263

SC
propane 44.096 396.82 42.49 0.152

ammonia 17.031 405.65 112.78 0.252

isobutane 58.123
U
408.14 36.48 0.177
AN
butane 58.123 425.18 37.97 0.199
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2. Basic calculation conditions for the system

symbol description data unit

Ts source temperature 150 °C
Tcw cooling water temperature 25 °C

PT
Tcd condenser temperature 40 °C
T0 reference dead state temperature 25 °C

RI
∆Tpp pinch temperature difference 10 °C
Tcs cooling space temperature 15 °C

SC
Te evaporator temperature 5 °C
ηp isentropic efficiency of pump 80 %
ηt
U
isentropic efficiency of turbine 80 %
AN
ηc isentropic efficiency of compressor 80 %
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

List of Figures

Fig. 1 Schematic of the combined ORC-VCC system.

Fig. 2 Temperature-entropy diagrams for the working fluids.
Fig. 3 Variation of the critical flow division ratios with turbine inlet pressure.
Fig. 4 Variation of the mass flow ratio with turbine inlet pressure.
Fig. 5 Variation of the refrigeration capacity with turbine inlet pressure.

PT
Fig. 6 Variation of the thermal efficiency with turbine inlet pressure.
Fig. 7 Exergy efficiency vs. thermal efficiency for all refrigerants.
Fig. 8 Variation of the total number of transfer units with turbine inlet pressure.

RI
Fig. 9 Volume flow ratio vs. size parameter.
Fig. 10 ORV-VCC state points in T-S chart for various turbine inlet pressures, isobutane.
Fig. 11 Refrigeration capacity vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.Fig. 12 Net power production

SC
vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
Fig. 13 Thermal efficiency vs turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
Fig. 14 Exergy efficiency vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.

U
Fig. 15 Total number of transfer unit vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
Fig. 16 ORV-VCC state points in T-S chart for various turbine inlet temperatures, isobutane.
AN
Fig. 17 Refrigeration capacity vs turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
Fig. 18 Net power production vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
Fig. 19 Thermal efficiency with turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
Fig. 20 Exergy efficiency vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
M

Fig. 21 Total number of transfer units vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Boiler 8 Turbine

QBO

9
Recuperator
7

10

PT
4 5

6
Compressor

RI
3 Condenser
QCD

QEV Evaporator Pump

SC
Receiver
Expansion rp
2 valve
1-rp 1

Fig. 1 Schematic of the combined ORC-VCC system.

U
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

160
1: R143a
2: R22 8
140 3: R134a
4: R152a 7
5: propane 5
120 6: ammonia

PT
Temperature [ C]

7: isobutane 3 4 6
o

8: butane
100 2

RI
80
1
60

SC
40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Entropy [kJ/kgK]

U
Fig. 2 Temperature-entropy diagrams for the working fluids.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1.0
R143a
R22
0.9 R134a
Critical flow division ratio, rpc
R152a
propane

PT
0.8 ammonia
isobutane
butane
0.7

RI
0.6

0.5

SC
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 3 Variation of the critical flow division ratios with turbine inlet pressure.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3.0
R143a propane
R22 ammonia
2.5 R134a isobutane
R152a butane
Mass flow ratio at boiler, rs
2.0

PT
1.5

RI
1.0

0.5

SC
0.0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 4 Variation of the mass flow ratio with turbine inlet pressure.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

200

Refrigeration capacity, QEV [kW]

150

PT
100 R143a
R22

RI
R134a
R152a
50 propane
ammonia
isobutane

SC
butane
0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 5 Variation of the refrigeration capacity with turbine inlet pressure.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

80

70

Thermal efficiency, ηth [%] 60

PT
50

40

30

RI
20 R143a propane
R22 ammonia
10 R134a isobutane

SC
R152a butane
0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 6 Variation of the thermal efficiency with turbine inlet pressure.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

8
R143a
R22
7
R134a High TIP
Exergy efficiency, ηex [%]
6 R152a
propane

PT
5 ammonia
isobutane
4 butane

RI
3

1 Low TIP

SC
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Thermal efficiency, ηth [%]

U
Fig. 7 Exergy efficiency vs. thermal efficiency for all refrigerants.
AN
M
D
TE
CEP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

18

16

14

PT
12
NTUtot

R143a
10 R22

RI
R134a
8 R152a
propane
6 ammonia
isobutane

SC
butane
4
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 8 Variation of the total number of transfer units with turbine inlet pressure.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

10

9 high TIP R143a

R22
8 R134a
R152a
7 propane

PT
ammonia
6 isobutane
butane
VFR

RI
3

2 low TIP

SC
1

0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030

SP [m]

U
Fig. 9 Volume flow ratio vs. size parameter.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

140 isobutane
o combined 8d 8c 8b 8a
Ts = 150 C
120 o
ORC-VCC
TIT = 130 C
o 9a
100 Tcd = 40 C
9b

PT
Temperature [ C]

o
Te = 5 C 9c
o

80 7b
7c 9d
7d 7a
60 Organic Rankine Cycle
(ORC)

RI
6 10
40 5 TIP
1 4
Vapor Compression Cycle 10 bar(a)
20 (VCC) 15 bar(b)
2 20 bar(c)
3

SC
0 25 bar(d)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

o
Entropy [kJ/kg C]

U
Fig. 10 ORV-VCC state points in T-S chart for various turbine inlet pressures, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

160 rpc 0.8

rp 0.6 0.9
140 0.7 1.0
Refrigeration capacity, QEV[kW]
120

PT
100

80

60

RI
40

20

SC
0
10 15 20 25 30
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 11 Refrigeration capacity vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
CEP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

30 rpc 0.8
rp 0.6 0.9
0.7 1.0
Net power production, Wnet [kW]
25

PT
20

15

RI
10

SC
0
10 15 20 25 30
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 12 Net power production vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
CEP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

80
rpc 0.8
0.6 0.9
0.7 1.0
Thermal effficiency, η th [%] 60 rp

PT
40

RI
20

SC
0
10 15 20 25 30
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 13 Thermal efficiency vs turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

35

30

Exergy efficiency, η ex [%] 25

PT
20

15

RI
10

5
rpc 0.7 0.9

SC
rp
0.6 0.8 1.0
0
10 15 20 25 30
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 14 Exergy efficiency vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

16
rpc 0.8
14 rp 0.6 0.9
0.7 1.0
12

PT
10
NTUtot

RI
6

SC
4

10 15 20 25 30
Turbine inlet pressure [bar]

U
Fig. 15 Total number of transfer unit vs. turbine inlet pressure, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

140 isobutane TIT o

o
Ts = 150 C 90 C(a)
o
120 o 100 C(b) 8d
Tcd = 40 C o
110 C(c) 8c
o
100 Te = 5 C o
120 C(d) 8b

PT
Temperature [ C]

combined 8a
o

80
ORC-VCC

60 Organic Rankine Cycle

(ORC) 9
7

RI
6
40 510
1 4
20 Vapor Compression Cycle
(VCC)

SC
0 2 3

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

o
Entropy [kJ/kg C]

U
Fig. 16 ORV-VCC state points in T-S chart for various turbine inlet temperatures, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

200
rpc 0.8
rp 0.6 0.9
0.7 1.0
Refrigeration capacity, QEV[kW]
150

PT
100

RI
50

SC
0

80 90 100 110 120 130

o
Turbine inlet temperature [ C]

U
Fig. 17 Refrigeration capacity vs turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

40
rpc 0.8
rp 0.6 0.9
0.7
Net power production, Wnet [kW]
1.0
30

PT
20

RI
10

SC
0

80 90 100 110 120 130

o
Turbine inlet temperature [ C]

U
Fig. 18 Net power production vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

70
rpc
60 0.6
0.7 rp
Thermal efficiency, ηth [%] 0.8
50 0.9

PT
1.0
40

30

RI
20

10

SC
0
80 90 100 110 120 130
o
Turbine inlet temperature [ C]

U
Fig. 19 Thermal efficiency with turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
CEP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

35

30
Exergy efficiency [%]
25

PT
20

15

RI
10

5
rpc 0.7 0.9
rp

SC
0.6 0.8 1.0
0
80 90 100 110 120 130
o
Turbine inlet temperature [ C]

U
Fig. 20 Exergy efficiency vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

14
rpc 0.8
rp 0.6 0.9
12 0.7 1.0

PT
10
NTUtot

RI
6

SC
4

80 90 100 110 120 130

o
Turbine inlet temperature [ C]

U
Fig. 21 Total number of transfer units vs. turbine inlet temperature, isobutane.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

1. Waste heat utilization can reduce emissions of carbon dioxide.

2. The ORC/ VCC cycle can deliver power and/or refrigeration using waste heat.

PT
3. Efficiencies and size parameters are used for cycle evaluation.

4. The cycle performance is studied for eight suitable refrigerants. Isobutane is used for a

RI
sensitivity analysis.

5. The work shows that the isobutene cycle is quite promising.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC