Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No.

2, 140–153

doi: 10.1093/ce/zky011
Advance Access Publication Date: 9 July 2018
Homepage: https://academic.oup.com/ce

Research Article
Energy- and exergy-based performance evaluation
of solar powered combined cycle (recompression

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

supercritical carbon dioxide cycle/organic Rankine cycle)
Harwinder Singh* and R.S. Mishra
Department of Mechanical, Production & Industrial, Automobile Engineering, Delhi Technological University,
Bawana Road, New Delhi-110042, India
*Corresponding author. E-mail: harrymehrok14@gmail.com

Abstract
Nowadays, the recompression supercritical carbon dioxide (R-SCO2) cycle has emerged as a promising option
for power conversion systems because of its boundless potential to tackle energy and environmental issues. In
this study, we examined the performance of the solar parabolic trough collector (SPTC) integrated combined
cogeneration system for the purpose of power generation as well as recovery of waste exhaust heat from the
R-SCO2 cycle with the help of the organic Rankine cycle (ORC). An exergy and energy analysis was performed for
a combined recompression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) by varying the input variables such as intensity of solar irradiation
(Gb), pressure at the inlet of SCO2 turbine (P5), mass flow rate of SCO2 (m  SCO ) inlet temperature of SCO turbine
2 2
(T5), inlet temperature of main compressor (T9) and effectiveness of the high- and low-temperature recuperator
( ε HTR and ε LTR ). Eight organic working fluids were considered for the ORC: R123, R290, isobutane, R1234yf, R1234ze,
toluene, isopentane and cyclohexane. The study revealed that R123-based R-SCO2-ORC demonstrates the highest
thermal and exergy efficiency: ~73.4 and 40.89% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2; 78.8 and 43.9% at P5 = 14 MPa; 63.86 and 35.57%
at T5 = 650 K; 74.84 and 41.69% at m  SCO = 7 kg / s; 85.83 and 47.82% at T9 = 300 K; 84.57 and 47.11% at ε HTR = 0.65;
2

85.06 and 47.38% at ε LTR = 0.65, respectively. Alternatively, R290 showed the minimum value of exergy and thermal
efficiency. As can be seen, the maximum amount of exergy destruction or exergy loss occurs in a solar collector
field, ~58.25% of the total exergy destruction rate (i.e. 6703 kW) and 18.99% of the solar inlet exergy (i.e. 20 562 kJ).
Moreover, R123 has the highest net work output, ~4594 kJ at T5 = 650 K and 6176 kJ at T9 = 300 K.

Key words: SPTC; recompression SCO2 cycle; ORC; exergy and thermal efficiency; exergy destruction rate; organic fluids

Introduction
The well-known features of the supercritical carbon diox- and prominent option as a working fluid because of its
ide (SCO2) Brayton cycle—simplicity, compactness, super- low cost, abundance in nature, nonflammability, nonhaz-
ior economy, sustainability, low  capital cost  due to the ardous nature and ability to resist at higher temperature
small size of equipment and plant footprint, enhanced [3]. SCO2 exhibits more reasonable values as compared to
safety, and high cycle  efficiency—make it an attractive other working fluids such as water and available gases
option for power generation plants [1, 2]. CO2 is a promising (i.e. ammonia and helium) at critical temperature (i.e.

Received 15 January, 2018; Accepted 24 April, 2018

© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of National Institute of Clean-and-Low-Carbon Energy
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, 140
provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
 Singh and Mishra  |  141

~31°C) and critical pressure (i.e. 7.38  MPa), respectively Furthermore, solar energy has been proven as an effi-
[4]. Feher [5] proposed a SCO2-based power cycle for elec- cient heat source for deployment in cogeneration, trigen-
tricity generation and concluded that the thermal effi- eration, or poly-generation plants to produce electricity
ciency of the cycle is around 55% under ideal working [16, 17]. Concentrating solar collectors such as the para-
conditions. Kulhánek and Dostál [6] compared different bolic trough collector, linear Fresnel reflector (LFR) and
configurations of the SCO2 Brayton cycle and found that solar concentrating dish are the most customary high-
both the R-SCO2 cycle and SCO2 cycle with partial cool- temperature devices for the operation of a recompression
ing show higher thermal efficiency in contrast to a sim- combined cycle in contrast to simple configuration of an
ple SCO2 cycle. Sarkar and Bhattacharyya [7] conducted a SCO2 cycle [18–21]. Many researchers investigated the use
study to optimize the thermal performance of the R-SCO2 of solar collectors for the operation of a simple and com-
cycle with and without reheating through sensitivity ana- bined power cycle. For instance, Gao et al. [22] investigated
lysis. They found an improvement in thermal efficiency the performance of solar based ORC under various work-
results with a decrease in minimum temperature and ing conditions such as the inlet temperature and turbine

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

with an increase in maximum temperature, and pres- pressure. They found that the efficiency increases with an
sure of the cycle. Turchi et al. [8] concluded that the SCO2 increase in inlet temperature as well as with the inlet pres-
Brayton cycle possesses the highest thermal performance sure when the system is held above the critical tempera-
as compared to the steam Rankine cycle based on energy ture. Mokheimer et al. [23] observed the exercise of various
efficiency. solar collectors in the combined-cycle function and found
Furthermore, some studies are available in the lit- that, for Saudi Arabian climate conditions, SPTC and LFR
erature regarding the application of the organic Rankine are the most sustainable solutions. Amelio et al. [24] exam-
cycle (ORC) for proper utilization of waste exhaust heat ined the application of solar collectors in a combined cycle
of the SCO2 Brayton cycle or in other configurations so that reduces the amount of fuel consumption in the com-
that overall performance of the cycle can be maximized. bustion chamber of the gas turbine. Their results revealed
Chacartegui et  al. [9, 10] conducted a study to utilize the that fuel consumption diminishes up to 22% at nominal
waste heat of ORC in power production and found that, conditions and 15.5% on a yearly basis.
on the basis of the turbine inlet temperature, the thermal Al-Sulaiman [25] performed energy and sizing analy-
efficiency of the combined-cycle layout can be enhanced sis of an SPTC integrated steam Rankine cycle (SRC) and a
by 7–12% as compared to the other selected layouts. Wang binary vapor cycle (SRC/ORC) with seven refrigerants and
and Dai [11] examined the performance of two different found that the R134a binary vapor cycle requires a smaller
combined cogeneration cycles, in which the ORC and tran- solar field size and also shows the best performance
scritical CO2 (tCO2) cycle act as bottoming cycles to recover among the other cycles considered. He also carried out
waste heat from the R-SCO2 cycle. Based on parametric an exergy analysis of these cycles and evaluated the exer-
investigations and exergoeconomic analysis, their results getic parameters and concluded that R134a gives the high-
revealed that the SCO2/tCO2 cycle has better performance est exergy efficiency, 26%, whereas R600a shows the least
than SCO2/ORC at a lower compression pressure ratio. value for exergy efficiency of the combined cycle, ~20─21%
Finally, they found from the results of optimization that [26]. Seidel [27] determined that, for a wide range of pres-
the SCO2/tCO2 cycle has an exergy efficiency comparable sure ratios, a concentrated solar power (CSP) integrated
with the SCO2/ORC. R-SCO2 cycle has the highest thermal efficiency among the
Sánchez et  al. [12] examined the utilization of waste other configurations. Turchi et al. [28] found that an R-SCO2
heat of the SCO2 cycle via the ORC with the use of hydro- cycle working at a temperature germane to CSP applica-
carbon mixtures and found that the mixture composition tion provides higher cycle efficiency in contrast to super-
directly affects the performance of combined cycle. Akbari critical steam cycles.
and Mahmoudi [13] studied the exergy performance of a Najjar and Sadeq [29] carried out a performance study
combined SCO2/ORC cycle and found that the exergy effi- in Saudi Arabia of an SPTC integrated supercritical organic
ciency increased up to 11.7%; their results also revealed Rankine cycle (SORC) in the environment of several sites
that isobutane and RC318 working fluids were the best and found that the availability of solar radiation in Jeddah
option in term of exergy efficiency. Besarati and Goswami is higher than other places. Their results also revealed
[14] concluded that the maximum overall efficiency can be that ammonia possesses the highest thermal efficiency as
achieved by a recompression SCO2/ORC cycle in contrast compared to R141b, propane, R143a and R500. Singh and
to a simple configuration. Apart from this, Tunc et al. [15] Mishra [30] have also analysed the performance of an SPTC
analyzed the thermal performance of a single-flash geo- integrated SORC system by using R600a, toluene, R152a,
thermal power-driven ORC by the application of differ- isobutene and cyclohexane. They found that R600a has
ent organic fluids such as isobutane, HCFC123, R134a and the highest exergy efficiency and minimum exergy losses
R12. Finally, their results revealed that isobutane gives the among the fluids analysed. Rashidi et al. [31] performed a
maximum thermal efficiency and power generation (i.e. parametric study of regenerative Clausius and ORC inte-
30% and 6626 kWe). grated with two feedwater heaters for R717 and water.
 142 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

They optimized their results with the help of an artificial system, thermodynamic analysis and optimization of the
neural network (ANN) and the artificial bee colony (ABC) R-SCO2 cycle and some experimental tests have been put
algorithm. They concluded that R717 has the maximum forward in recent years. However, few studies are available
value of specific network thermal and exergy efficiency on parametric analysis of SCO2-based combined cycles as
when compared with water. understood from the above mentioned literature work.
In addition, solar parabolic trough collector (SPTC) tech- Previously, Singh and Mishra [39] conducted a performance
nology has greater potential to generate electric power analysis of a SPTC-driven combined SCO2 cycle/ORC sys-
due to its higher commercial performance and reliability, tem but this current study replaces the simple configu-
and its suitability in India’s sunny climate.  The available ration of an SCO2 cycle by a recompression cycle, which
solar energy potential in India is 20 MW/km2 and the solar makes it completely different from the previous work. The
intensity is 6 kwh/m2 /day [32]. The concentrated solar use of a parabolic trough collector as an energy source also
power-driven SCO2 cycle also has some important merits: brings much novelity in itself, as it has an ability to provide
at dry cooling conditions, the SCO2 cycle possesses supe- a limited and sufficient temperature range for the opera-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

rior performance compared to a steam Rankine cycle, and tion of a combined cycle.
can operate with a thermal storage system economically Therefore, we conducted an energy- and exergy-based
[33]. The simple configuration of the SCO2 cycle is less effi- parametric analysis of a SPTC integrated combined R-SCO2
cient, but due to its design simplicity, it can potentially cycle/ORC system to determine the exergy and thermal
attract the commercial market. On the other hand, the efficiency and the net work output. The main design and
recompression cycle also has a simple design and can be operating parameters are as follows: intensity of solar irra-
employed in those applications that require high thermal diation, pressure at the inlet of SCO2 turbine, mass flow
efficiencies [33]. One more advantage of the recompres- rate of SCO2, inlet temperature of SCO2 turbine, inlet tem-
sion cycle is that more heat can be recovered than with perature of main compressor, and effectiveness of high-
the simple configuration due to flow splitting after the and low-temperature recuperator under the best operating
low-temperature recuperator (LTR) that decreases the heat conditions used to analyse the performance.
capacity of the high-pressure stream in the LTR, and con-
sequently the problem of pitch point can be avoided in the
recuperator [14]. 1  Technology description
In this direction, important research has been reported A combined recompression cycle is a combination of an
in recent years that concentrates specifically on the recom- R-SCO2 cycle (i.e. topping cycle) and an ORC (i.e. bottom-
pression SCO2 (R-SCO2) cycle. Cheng et  al. [34] performed ing cycle) as shown in Fig.  1. The geometrical data for
an optimization study based on sensitivity analysis of the the SPTC system and thermophysical properties of heat
R-SCO2 cycle and found that, by adjusting the maximum transfer fluid (HTF) flowing in the collector field have
pressure of 27.75 MPa and split flow ratio of 0.687, the effi- been adapted from Singh and Mishra [39]. Apart from
ciency of the cycle could be enhanced to 0.447. Ma et al. [35] this, CO2 is used as a working fluid in the topping cycle
developed a mathematical model for an R-SCO2 cycle with and it becomes incompressible under critical pressure
the application of main compression intercooling (MCIC) and critical temperature condition (about 7.38  MPa and
and concluded that its 2.65% efficiency could be improved 30.98°C, respectively) [40]. Also, recompression configura-
with the use of MCIC. Kim et al. [36] performed an effec- tion reduces the heat losses from the R-SCO2 cycle and
tiveness and pitch point temperature difference analysis enhances the thermal efficiency with the help of flow
to evaluate irreversibility in the recuperator of an R-SCO2 splitting in order to compensate the difference in spe-
cycle. Their results reveal that, at optimum conditions, the cific heats in the LTR [40]. The stream from the LTR is
efficiency of the R-SCO2 cycle is ~44.67%. Reyes-Belmonte split upstream of the heat exchanger (state 7ʹ); the main
et al. [37] optimized the performance of an R-SCO2 cycle for stream with high mass flow rate after passing through
a solar central receiver power plant based on the recupera- the heat exchanger (state 7ʹ–8) is cooled in the cooler
tors’ effectiveness and found that the cycle efficiency could unit (state 8–9) and then compressed up to high pressure
be between 43–49% for a turbine inlet temperature vary- in the main compressor (9–10); and finally, this heated
ing from 630–680°C. Wu et al. [38] carried out a parametric stream enters the LTR again (state 10) and exchanges its
and optimization study of a combined R-SCO2/absorption heat with the incoming stream (state 7). On the other
refrigeration cycle and concluded that the energy utiliza- side, another fraction of the split stream with low mass
tion factor and exergy efficiency of the combined cycle was flow rate goes directly to the recompressing compressor,
enhanced by 38.80 and 1.95%, respectively, for the optimal where it is compressed to the higher pressure side (state
design case. 9ʹ) and mixed with the main stream returned from the
Based on the aforementioned research, it has been LTR (state 10ʹ) prior to the high-temperature recupera-
observed that the parametric analysis of a SPTC inte- tor (HTR). Furthermore, flow splitting should be adjusted
grated combined R-SCO2 cycle/ORC system is crucial for so that the outlets for the recompressor and exiting cold
power generation along with the minimum wastage of stream of the LTR always remain the same [1]. Moreover,
heat. Research on the theoretical simulation of the SPTC other processes of the considered configuration are the
 Singh and Mishra  |  143

SPTC field

Inlet (1)
Outlet (3)

T
Tracker
Thermometer

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

Evaporator T

(2) Pump
(4)
(5)
SCO2 turbine (9)
(8') Main
Generator compressor
COOLER
(12)
(8') Heat
Recompressor (8)
(9') Recompression exchanger
SCO2 cycle Pump
ORC cycle
(10)
(6)
(9') (11)
(4) (10') (14)

(13)
(7) (7') ORC
High temperature Low temperature turbine
recuperator recuperator
Condenser (16)
(15)
Cooling water

Fig. 1  Schematic of the SPTC-driven combined R-SCO2 cycle/ORC system

same as in the simple configuration of the SCO2 cycle.

SPTC heat source 3 5
Figs 2 and 3 represent the temperature entropy diagrams
of the R-SCO2 cycle and ORC system. 6
2
Lastly, Table 1 represents the input data selected for the
4
considered system and Table  2 denotes the physical and Recompression-SCO2 cycle
Temperature

environmental properties along with safety data for all the

selected organic fluids. 7
9'
10 7'.8'
8
2  System modeling 9

This section deals with the modeling of a combined rec-

ompression cycle (i.e. R-SCO2 cycle and ORC). Modeling of
the solar parabolic trough collector (SPTC) system has been
discussed already in the study conducted by Al-Sulaiman Entropy
[26]. Therefore, the modeling of a combined recompres- Fig. 2  Temperature entropy (T-S) diagram of recompression SCO2 cycle
sion cycle has been conducted based on the exergy and
energy balance of each component included in the sys-
tem. However, the modeling of the recompression cycle a computational numerical method (Engineering Equation
follows the equations derived from previous research by Solver software, www.fChart.com). The following neces-
Sarkar [1] and results have been computed with the help of sary assumptions have been made for the analysis:
 144 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

(1) All the processes in the combined cycle are in steady (5) The process of expansion and compression is assumed
state. to be adiabatic.
(2) Drop in pressure in whole system is assumed to be
Thermodynamic relations for specific enthalpy balance in
neglected except in pump and turbine.
HTR and LTR are given by:
(3) Pump and turbine efficiency are considered to be
constant. (h4 – h9′ ) = (h6 − h7 ) (1)
(4) Negligible heat transfer with the surroundings except
in the cooler unit. (1 − y) (h10′ − h10 ) = (h7 − h7′ ) (2)
7'
Heat source (R-SCO2) Note that the hot side’s heat capacity is comparatively
30 bar 11 lower than the cold side’s; therefore the effectiveness of
HTR is shown below:
8

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

Temperature

ε.H = (T6 − T7 ) / (T6 − T9′ )

R123 (3)

12 Also effectiveness depends upon the heat capacity, which

6.76 bar 13
is the product of mass flow rate and specific heat capacity.
14 Condenser
15 Therefore the effectiveness of the LTR is as shown below:
16

ε.L = (T7 − T7′ ) / (T7 − T10 ) if minimum in hot side (4)

Entropy
or
Fig. 3  Temperature entropy diagram of R123-based ORC system
ε.L = (T10′ − T10 ) / (T7 − T10 ) if minimum in the cold side (5)
Table 1  Input data taken for combined recompression (R-SCO2-
ORC) cycle
Next, we consider important thermodynamic relations for
Isentropic efficiency of SCO2 turbine 90% [35] the components of the recompression SCO2 cycle used to
Isentropic efficiency of main compressor 89% [35] operate the cycle. The total specific heat provided in the com-
Isentropic efficiency of recompressor 89% [35] bined recompression cycle from the SPTC through the evapo-
ORC pump efficiency 85% [14] rator unit and the specific work output of each component
ORC turbine efficiency 87% [14] involved in the combined recompression cycle are given by:
Mass flow rate of SCO2 10 kg/s
Split mass flow rate 4 kg/s qi = (h5 – h4 ) (6)
Mass flow rate of ORC 5 kg/s
Minimum pinch point temperature 5°C [44] WR − SCO2 , turbine = (h5 – h6 ) (7)
SCO2 cycle high pressure 25 MPa [44]
Baseline ORC turbine inlet pressure 3 MPa
WORC, turbine = (h11 − h13 ) (8)
HTR effectiveness 95% [35, 37]
LTR effectiveness 95% [35, 37]
Heat exchanger effectiveness 95% [14] ( )
Wmain compressor = (1 − y ) × h1 0 – h9 (9)

Table 2  Input data of selected working fluids for ORC adapted froma [47–52]

Physical properties data Security Environmental properties

Weight Tb Tc Pc Lifetime
Working substance Type (kg/kmol) (°C) (°C) (MPa) Group (years) ODP GWP

R123 D 152.93 27.8 183.7 3.668 B1 1.3 0.020 77

R290 W 44.10 -42.1 96.68 4.247 A3 0.041 0 ~20
R1234yf I 114.04 -29.5 94.7 3.38 A2L 0.029 0 <1
R1234ze(E) I 114.04 -19.0 109.4 3.64 A2L 0.045 0 <1
Toluene D 92.138 110.6 318.6 4.1263 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Cyclohexane D 84.16 80.7 280.5 4.075 A3 n/a n/a n/a
Isobutane D 58.1 -11.7 134.7 3.63 A3 0.016 0 20
Isopentane D 72.1 27.8 187.2 3.38 A3 0.009 0 20

a
W = Wet, D = Dry, I = Isentropic, Tb = normal boiling temperature, Tc = critical temperature, Pc = critical pressure, ODP = potential of ozone depletion
relative to R11; GWP = potential of global warming relative to CO2.
 Singh and Mishra  |  145

 d, heat exchanger = (1 − y )(ex – ex ) – (ex – ex ) / ex

Ex (25)
 7’ 8 11 12  input
Wrecompressor = y × (h9′ – h8′ ) (10)
 d, ORC turbine = [(ex – ex ) – W
Ex O,turbine ] / ex input (26)
Wpump = (h12 – h14 ) (11)
11 13

 d, condenser = (ex – ex ) – (ex – ex ) / ex

Ex
Wnet ,R -SCO2 = WR -SCO2 turbine − Wmain compressor − Wrecompressor (12)  13 14 15 16  input (27)

Wnet,ORC = WORC, turbine – Wpump (13)  d, pump = [(ex – ex ) − W ] / ex

Ex
12 14 pp input (28)

Wnet, R-sco2 + Wnet,ORC

ηth, combined = (14) The exergy efficiency of the combined cycle can be
qi
expressed by the ratio of net output exergy to input exergy
Furthermore, exergy is defined as the maximum theoretical through the SPTC system.
work obtained directly from the system as it interacts with

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

the surroundings in equilibrium condition. Now, the steady- Wnet ,R − SCO2 + Wnet ,ORC
ηII = = 1 − ∑ Ex
 d, component (29)
state exergy balance of the control volume of each compo- exinput
nent associated with the combined cycle is given by [26]:

 To  . . .
∑ U  1 − T  Q U – W C.V. – ∑ i mi eXi – Exd = 0 (15)
 The results of the study were validated with a modified
U LS-3 SPTC using the model of Dudley et  al. [42] and the
NREL model of Forristall [43]. The collector efficiency for
Physical exergy per unit total mass flow rate in each state both the vacuum and air cases in the current model has
can be calculated by: been evaluated with the help of the performance equa-
tions of Dudley et al. The results of collector efficiency for
exph = (h – ho ) – To (s – so ) (16)
both cermet and black chrome coatings are calculated at
the present baseline simulated conditions as described
Now the total exergy input to the cycle can be calculated in Table  1; we found that the collector efficiency values
by assuming the constant outlet temperature of SPTC that closely match the results of previous models, as shown in
is utilized as a heat source and is defined as: Fig. 4.
This section also includes the validation of the com-
exinput = qi × (1 − To / T3 ) (17)
bined recompression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) as well as the
simple configuration of recompression SCO2 cycle as
In other words, exergy at the inlet point to the system shown in Tables 3 and 4. We found that results of the ther-
(exempt) is also considered as maximum useful work mal efficiency in the current model agreed well with the
obtained from the solar radiations, calculated by Petela’s predicted values from the literature [6, 8, 14, 44].
formula as defined below [26, 41]:

 1 T 
4
4 T  3  Results and discussion
exinput = A ap ⋅ G b ⋅ 1 +  o  −  o   (18)
 3  Tsu  3  Tsu   In this study, we conducted exergy and energy analysis on

the SPTC integrated combined R-SCO2 cycle/ORC system
The fraction of exergy destruction or irreversibilities in under baseline conditions. The effect of intensity of solar
each component of the combined cycle is defined as the irradiation, pressure at the inlet of R-SCO2 turbine, inlet
difference of input exergy and output exergy of the com- temperature at R-SCO2 turbine, mass flow rate of SCO2, inlet
ponent, and it can be calculated by: temperature of main compressor and effectiveness of HTR
and LTR on both exergy and thermal efficiency have been
 d,R −SCO2turbine = [(ex – ex ) – W
Ex 5 6 R − SCO2turbine ] / ex input (19) examined under the fixed simulated conditions illustrated
in Table 1.
 d, main compressor = [ W
Ex main compressor – (1 − y ) (ex10 – ex9 )] / exinput (20)

3.1  Effect of intensity of solar irradiation and

recompressor – y (ex9 ’ – ex8 ’ )] / ex input
 d, recompressor = [ W
Ex (21)
pressure at the R-SCO2 turbine inlet

 d, HTR = (ex − ex ) −
Ex  6 7 (ex4 − ex9’ ) / exinput (22) Fig. 5 shows the variation in exergy and thermal efficiency
with the variation in intensity of solar irradiation (Gb); we
 d, LTR = (ex − ex ) – (1 − y ) (ex – ex ) / ex observed that both thermal and exergy efficiency increase
Ex  7 7’ 1 0’ 10  input (23)
with an increase in Gb, which has been analyzed under
fixed baseline conditions such as pressure at the inlet of
 input – (ex5 – ex 4 ) / exinput (24)
 d,evaporator = ex
Ex 
R-SCO2 turbine (P5  =  25  MPa) and mass flow rate of SCO2
 146 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

76

74

72

70

68
Collector efficiency (%)

66

64

62

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

60
Forristall's NREL Model [43] (Vacuum case for cermet coating)
Forristal'sl NREL Model [43] (Vacuum case for black chrome coating)
58 Dudley et al. [42] (Vacuum case for cermet coating)
Dudley et al. [42](Air case for cermet coating)
56 Dudley et al.[42] (Vacuum case for black chrome coating)
Dudley et al. [42] (Air case for black chrome coating)
Current model (Air case for black chrome coating)
54 Current model (Air case for cermet coating)
Current model (Vacuum case for black chrome coating)
Current model (Vacuum case for cermet coating)
52
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400
Average temperature above the ambient (°C)

Fig. 4  Collector efficiency versus average temperature above ambient

Table 3  Validation of combined recompression cycle at the same simulated conditions

Working fluid Reference Thermal efficiency in reference Thermal efficiency predicted Error

Isobutane Besarati and Goswami [14] 0.5357 0.517 -3.4%

Table 4  Validation of simple recompression SCO2 cycle at T5 = 500°C

Thermal efficiency Thermal efficiency

Working fluid Reference predicted in references in current study Error

SCO2 Besarati and Goswami [14] 0.4421 0.4377 -0.9%

SCO2 Kulhánek and Dostál [6] 0.4419 -0.95%
SCO2 Turchi et al. [8] 0.4441 -1.4%
SCO2 Padilla et al. [44] 0.4424 -1.06%

(m SCO2 = 10 kg / s ), respectively. The optimum use of solar m2, respectively. Results also showed that R1234yf- and
collector rows present in the overall SPTC field can be R1234ze-based combined recompression cycles have a
achieved through enhancing the intensity of solar irradi- marginal difference between their efficiency values. As
ation that directly concentrates on the overall solar plant. can be seen, the efficiency value of R1234ze, R1234yf, tolu-
From Fig. 5, we see that the R123-based combined recom- ene, cyclohexane, isopentane and isobutane lies between
pression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) has the highest exergy and the R123 and R290 values, as shown in Fig. 5. In addition,
thermal efficiency followed by R1234ze, R1234yf, toluene, Fig. 6 illustrates the variation in exergy and thermal effi-
cyclohexane, isopentane and isobutene, with R290 hav- ciency of the SPTC integrated combined recompression
ing the minimum value. Notice that the exergy and ther- cycle (SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC). We found that the R123-based
mal efficiency of the R123 combined recompression cycle SPTC integrated combined cycle has the maximum value
varied from 73.4% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 86.75% at Gb = 0.95 of exergy and thermal efficiency among the other selected
kW/m2 and 40.89% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 48.33% at Gb = 0.95 refrigerants, increasing from 44.53% at Gb  =  0.5 kW/m2 to
kW/m2, respectively. On the other hand, exergy and ther- 70.83% at Gb = 0.95 kW/m2 and 24.81% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to
mal efficiency of the R290-based R-SCO2-ORC increase 39.46% at Gb = 0.95 kW/m2. R290-based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC,
from 72.22% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 86.17% at Gb = 0.95 kW/ however, has the lowest value of exergy and thermal effi-
m2 and 40.23% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 48% at Gb = 0.95 kW/ ciency, increasing from 43.47% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 70.28%
 Singh and Mishra  |  147

52 79.5
88 ηex (Isobutane) 44.1
ηex (Cyclohexane) 79
86 ηex (Isopentane) 50 78.5
ηex (Toluene) 43.65
84 ηex (R1234ze)
78

Thermal efficiency (%)

Exergy efficiency (%)
Thermal efficiency (%)
ηex (R1234yf)
Exergy efficiency (%)

82 48 43.2
ηex (R123) 77.5
ηex (R290)
80
77
46 42.75
ηth (Isobutane)
78 76.5
ηth (Cyclohexane)
ηth (Isopentane)
76 44 76 42.3
ηth (Toluene)
ηex (Toluene)
ηth (R1234ze)
74 75.5 ηex (R1234yf) ηex (R123) ηth (Toluene)
ηth (R1234yf)
42 ηex (R1234ze) ηth (R123) ηex (Cyclohexane) 41.85
ηth (R123) 75 ηth (R1234yf) ηex (R290) ηth (Cyclohexane)
72
ηth (R290) ηth (R1234ze) ηth (R290) ηth (Isopentane)
74.5 ηex (Isobutane) ηth (Isopentane) ηth (Isopentane)
70 41.4
40
1.400×107 1.600×107 1.800×107 2.000×107 2.200×107
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Inlet pressure of SCO2 turbine (Pa)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

Gb (kW/m2)
Fig. 7  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression cycle
Fig. 5  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression cycle versus the pressure at the inlet of R-SCO2 turbine
versus intensity of solar irradiation

75 90
ηex (Isobutane) ηth (Isobutane) ηth (R123) 64
48 ηex (Cyclohexane) ηth (Cyclohexane) ηth (R290)
ηex (Isobutane) 87
ηex (Isopentane) ηth (Isopentane)
70 ηex (Cyclohexane) 60
ηex (Toluene) ηth (Toluene)
ηex (Isopentane) 45 84
ηex (R1234yf) ηth (R1234yf)
ηex (Toluene) ηex (R1234ze) ηth (R1234ze) 56

Thermal efficiency (%)

Exergy efficiency (%)
81
65 42
Exergy efficiency (%)

ηex (R123)
Thermal efficiency (%)

ηex (R1234ze)
ηex (R290)
ηex (R1234yf) 78 52
ηex (R123) 39
60 ηex (R290) 75 48
ηth (Isobutane) 36
72
55 ηth (Cyclohexane) 44
ηth (Isopentane) 33 69
ηth (Toluene)
40
ηth (R1234ze)
50 30 66
ηth (R1234yf)
ηth (R123) 36
63
ηth (R290) 27
45 650 700 750 800 850 900
24 Inlet temperature of of SCO2 turbine (K)
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Gb (kW/m2) Fig. 8  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression cycle
versus inlet temperature at R-SCO2 turbine
Fig. 6  Exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC integrated combined rec-
ompression cycle versus intensity of solar irradiation other fluids have efficiency values between fluids such as
R123 and R290.

at Gb = 0.95 kW/m2 and 24.22% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2 to 39.15%

at Gb = 0.95 kW/m2. As observed, the SPTC integrated com- 3.2  Effect of inlet temperature at R-SCO2 turbine
bined recompression cycle has a comparatively lower value
and mass flow rate of SCO2
of exergy and thermal efficiency than the simple configur- The inlet or maximum cycle temperature is a crucial
ation (i.e. without SPTC), due to the maximum amount of parameter that helps maintain the optimum temperature
exergy destruction associated with the solar collector field. range for the combined recompression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC).
On the other hand, the effect of pressure at the inlet of the A  survey of the literature indicated that the inlet or high
R-SCO2 turbine on the exergy and thermal performance of temperature can be enhanced up to a certain limit of 750°C
a combined cycle under baseline conditions, for instance, so that the layer of oxide formation on the metal alloys
T5  =  652.8  K and m SCO2 = 10 kg / s, has also been analyzed could be prevented [45, 46]. Fig. 8 shows the effect of varia-
here. Fig. 7 demonstrates that R123-based R-SCO2-ORC has tions in inlet temperature at a R-SCO2 turbine on the exergy
the highest exergy and thermal efficiency among the other and thermal performance of the considered R-SCO2-ORC.
combined cycles: ~78.8% at 14 MPa increasing to 79.04% at With an increase in inlet temperature, exergy and ther-
23 MPa and 43.9% at 14 MPa increasing to 44.03% at 23 MPa, mal efficiency of R-SCO2-ORC also increase, as analysed
respectively. Alternatively, R290-based R-SCO2-ORC shows under fixed baseline conditions such as m SCO2 = 10 kg / s
the least value of efficiency, probably due to the presence and P5  =  25  MPa as shown in Fig.  8. The reason behind
of high exergy losses in this cycle in contrast to the other the increasing exergy and thermal efficiency is that,
considered cycles as shown in Fig. 7. The value of exergy as the inlet or high temperature of the turbine increases,
and thermal efficiency for R290 is ~75.73% at 14  MPa the enthalpy inflow to the turbine increases correspond-
increasing to 76.15% at 23  MPa, and 42.19% at 14  MPa ingly, resulting in an increase in the work output of the tur-
increasing to 42.42% at 23  MPa, respectively. However, all bine for certain heat input rate. However, work output of the
 148 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

recompressor and main compressor at the same time has Apart from this, the mass flow rate of working fluid
the reasonable value because it is affected moderately with also has a significant effect on the combined recompres-
the increasing turbine inlet temperature. Therefore, the sion cycle’s power generation and efficiency because, by
net work output increases in the recompression combined enhancing the mass flow rate, the heat transfer coefficient
cycle. Consequently, exergy and thermal efficiency increase increases and the pressure drop also increases and that
as the turbine inlet temperature increases. Another reason can enhance the requirement of pumping power. Fig.  11
for increasing exergy and thermal efficiency is that, as the shows the effect of the mass flow rate of SCO2 on exergy
inlet temperature of the turbine increases, the tempera- and thermal performance of the combined recompression
ture difference between heat addition and heat rejection cycle (R-SCO2-ORC), which was analyzed under the baseline
also increases, and as a result the efficiency of the cycle conditions P5 = 25 MPa and T5 = 652.8 K. We found that, with
increases [1]. We have observed that R123-based R-SCO2- the increase in mass flow rate of SCO2, thermal and exergy
ORC has the maximum value of exergy and thermal effi- efficiency of the considered combined recompression cycle
ciency, which increases continuously from 63.86% at 650 K also increased. R123-based R-SCO2-ORC illustrates the

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

to 86.59% at 920 K and 35.57% at 650 K to 48.24% at 920 K, maximum value of exergy and thermal efficiency, increas-
respectively. Alternatively, R290-based R-SCO2-ORC has the ing from 74.84% at 7 kg/s to 89.59% at 16 kg/s and 41.69% at
minimum value of exergy and thermal efficiency, increas- 7 kg/s to 49.91% at 16 kg/s, respectively. On the other hand,
ing from 63.13% at 650 K to 85.94% at 920 K and 35.17% at R290-based R-SCO2-ORC demonstrates the minimum value
650 K to 47.87% at 920 K, respectively, as illustrated in Fig. 8. of exergy and thermal efficiency, increasing from 74.32% at
In addition, the effect of inlet or high temperature on the 7 kg/s to 88.71% at 16 kg/s and 41.4% at 7 kg/s to 49.42% at
SPTC integrated combined recompression cycle (SPTC-R- 16 kg/s, respectively, as shown in Fig. 11. We also observed
SCO2-ORC) has been analyzed in Fig.  9. The study reveals that exergy and thermal efficiency of the SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC
that R123 has the maximum exergy and thermal efficiency, increase as the mass flow rate increases, as shown in Fig. 12.
increasing from 25.37% at 650  K to 70.68% at 920  K and Results revealed that R123-based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC pos-
14.14% at 650  K to 39.37% at 920  K, respectively. On the sesses the highest value of exergy and thermal efficiency,
other hand, R290 has the lowest value of exergy and ther- increasing from 58.77% at 7 kg/s to 71.41% at 16 kg/s and
mal efficiency, increasing from 24.76% at 650  K to 70.06% 32.74% at 7 kg/s to 39.78% at 16 kg/s, respectively. However,
at 920  K and 13.79% at 650  K to 39.03% at 920  K, respec- R290-based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC illustrates the lowest value
tively. As mentioned above, the exergy and thermal effi- of exergy and thermal efficiency, increasing from 58.3% at
ciency value of all other recompression combined cycles 7 kg/s to 70.57% at 16 kg/s and 32.48% at 7 kg/s to 39.31% at
lies between these two cycles. Moreover, the effect of inlet 16 kg/s, respectively, as shown in Fig. 12.
or high temperature of SCO2 turbine on the net work out-
put of R-SCO2-ORC also has been analyzed in Fig. 10. It has
been observed that R123 has the highest net work output 3.3  Effect of inlet temperature of main
compressor
of 4594 kJ at 650 K, increasing to 6231 kJ at 920 K, followed
by R1234ze, R1234yf, toluene, cyclohexane, isopentane and The effect of the inlet temperature of the main compres-
isobutane. R290 has the lowest value of net work output, sor on the exergy and thermal performance of the com-
increasing from 4542 kJ at 650 K to 6183 kJ at 920 K, as dem- bined recompression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) is discussed
onstrated in Fig. 10. under fixed simulated conditions in this section. As can

75 45
ηex (Isobutane) 6250
70 ηex (Cyclohexane)
ηex (Isopentane) R123 Cyclohexane
65 ηex (Toluene)
40 R1234ze Isopentane
ηex (R1234yf) R1234yf R290
60 5900
Thermal efficiency (%)

ηex (R1234ze) Toluene

Exergy efficiency (%)

55 35 Isobutane
Net work output (kJ)

ηex (R123)
ηex (R290)
50
30 5550
45 ηth (Isobutane)
ηth (Cyclohexane)
40 ηth (Isopentane)
ηth (Toluene)
25
35 5200
ηth (R1234yf)
30 ηth (R1234ze)
20
ηth (R123)
25 ηth (R290)
4850
20 15
15
10 10 4500
650 700 750 800 850 900 950 650 700 750 800 850 900 950
Inlet temperature of of SCO2 turbine (K) Inlet temperature of of SCO2 turbine (K)

Fig. 9  Exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC integrated combined rec- Fig. 10  Net work output of combined recompression cycle versus inlet
ompression cycle versus inlet temperature at R-SCO2 turbine temperature at R-SCO2 turbine
 Singh and Mishra  |  149

be observed from Fig.  13, the exergy and thermal effi- 47.15% at 327  K, respectively; its value is highest among
ciency of R-SCO2-ORC decrease as the inlet temperature the other considered working fluids such as R1234ze,
of the main compressor increases. The reason behind R1234yf, toluene, cyclohexane, isopentane and isobutane,
the decreasing efficiency is that the specific heat capac- and R290 possesses the lowest value of exergy and ther-
ity of CO2 decreases as the inlet temperature of the main mal efficiency, decreasing from 84.91% at 300 K to 84.12%
compressor increases (i.e. away from the critical point). at 327 K and 47.3% at 300 K to 46.86% at 327 K, respectively.
Therefore, specific enthalpy inflow decreases in the main The effect of inlet temperature of the main compressor
compressor. As a result, work output of the main com- on the SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC is also analyzed in this section.
pressor increases notably but work output of the recom- From Fig. 14, we found that R123-based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC
pressor and SCO2 turbine are not affected as much. Thus has the highest value of exergy and thermal efficiency,
the net work output decreases and hence the exergy and decreasing from 68.1% at 300  K to 66.98% at 327  K and
thermal efficiency also decrease simultaneously. In other 37.94% at 300 K to 37.31% at 327 K, respectively. R290 has
words, with the increase in inlet temperature of the main the lowest value of exergy and thermal efficiency, decreas-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

compressor, the difference between the maximum and ing from 67.24% at 300 K to 66.49% at 327 K and 37.46% at
minimum temperature of the cycle decreases correspond- 300 K to 37.04% at 327 K, respectively. Also the efficiency
ingly, resulting in a decrease in the efficiency of the cycle for all other fluids, i.e. R123 and R290, lies between the
[1]. From Fig.  13, we can see that both exergy and ther- values of these two fluids, as demonstrated in Fig. 14.
mal efficiency of R123-based R-SCO2-ORC decrease from Moreover, the effect of inlet temperature of the main
85.83% at 300 K to 84.64% at 327 K and 47.82% at 300 K to compressor on the net work output of the R-SCO2-ORC

90 52 87 ηex (R1234ze) ηth (R1234ze) 48

ηex (Isobutane) ηex (Isopentane) ηth (R123)
ηth (Isobutane) 51
ηex (Cyclohexane) ηex (Isobutane) ηth (R1234yf)
88 ηth (Cyclohexane)
ηex (Cyclohexane)
ηex (Isopentane) ηth (Isopentane) 50 86.5 ηth (Cyclohexane)
ηex (Toluene) ηth (Toluene) ηex (Toluene)
86 ηex (R1234ze) 49 47.5
Thermal efficiency (%)

ηth (R1234ze)
Exergy efficiency (%)

ηex (R1234yf)
Exergy efficiency (%)

Thermal efficiency (%)

ηth (R123) 86
84 ηex (R123) 48
ηex (R290)
ηth (R290) 47
82 85.5 47
46
80 45
85
78 44 46.5
ηex (R290)
43 84.5 ηex (R1234yf)
76 ηex (R123)
42 ηex (Isopentane) ηth (Isobutane)
74 41 84
ηex (Toluene) ηex (R290)
46
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 300 305 310 315 320 325
Mass flow rate of SCO2 (kg/s) Inlet temperature of main compressor (K)

Fig. 11  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression cycle Fig.  13  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression
versus mass flow rate of SCO2 cycle versus inlet temperature of main compressor

40 ηth (R1234ze) 42
68.1 ηex (Isopentane)
ηex (Isobutane) ηex (R123)
73.5 ηex (Cyclohexane) ηex (Cyclohexane) 41.5
ηex (Isopentane)
39 67.8 ηex (Isobutane)
ηex (Toluene) ηex (R1234yf) 41
ηex (R1234ze) 38 67.5 ηex (Toluene)
Thermal efficiency (%)

Thermal efficiency (%)

Exergy efficiency (%)

Exergy efficiency (%)

70 ηex (R1234yf) ηex (R290) 40.5

ηex (R123) 67.2
ηex (R290) 37 40
66.9
ηth (Isobutane)
66.5 36 ηex (R1234ze) 39.5
ηth (Isobutane) 66.6
ηth (Cyclohexane) ηth (R290)
ηth (R1234yf) 39
ηth (Isopentane) 35 66.3 ηth (R123)
63 ηth (Toluene) ηth (Isopentane)
ηth (R1234ze) 66 38.5
34 ηth (Toluene)
ηth (R1234yf) ηth (Cyclohexane)
65.7 38
ηth (R123)
59.5 33
ηth (R290) 65.4 37.5
32 65.1 37
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 300 305 310 315 320 325
Mass flow rate of SCO2 (kg/s) Inlet temperature of main compressor (K)

Fig. 12  Exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC integrated combined rec- Fig. 14  Exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC integrated combined rec-
ompression cycle versus mass flow rate of SCO2 ompression cycle versus inlet temperature of main compressor
 150 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

was studied in Fig. 15. As can be seen, the net work out- Fig. 17. We found that the efficiency of R123-based R-SCO2-
put decreases continuously as the inlet temperature of ORC increases as the effectiveness of LTR increases, and
the main compressor increases, and R123 has the high- it possesses the highest value of exergy and thermal effi-
est value of net work output, ~6176 kJ at 300 K and 6090 ciency among the other fluids, increasing from 85.06% at
kJ at 327  K. Alternatively, R290 has the lowest value of ε LTR  = 0.65 to 85.1% at ε LTR  = 0.92 and 47.38% at ε LTR  = 0.65
net work output, ~6109 kJ at 300 K and 6052 kJ at 327 K, to 47.41% at ε LTR = 0.92, respectively. Alternatively, R290 has
as shown in Fig. 15. the lowest value of exergy and thermal efficiency, increas-
ing from 84.39% at ε LTR  = 0.65 to 84.44% at ε LTR  = 0.92 and
47.01% at ε LTR  = 0.65 to 47.04% at ε LTR  = 0.92, respectively.
3.4  Effect of the effectiveness of the HTR and Also the efficiency value of all other fluids lies between
LTR these two fluids as mentioned above. Moreover, it is clear
The effect of the effectiveness of a high-temperature recu- from Figs 16 and 17 that the HTR effectiveness has more
perator (HTR) and low-temperature recuperator (LTR) on predominant effects on efficiency as it exchanges more

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

the exergy and thermal performance of combined recom- heat as well as exergy compared to LTR.
pression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) is discussed in this section. Moreover, the results of the study show that the R-SCO2-
As can be seen, an increase in the effectiveness of the ORC has higher exergy and thermal efficiency than a sim-
recuperator can increase the heat exchange and exergy ple configuration of a combined cycle (SCO2-ORC), mainly
gain, resulting in a decrease in the exergy destruction of due to the split of SCO2 flow in the recompression cycle
the recompression cycle. Thus, exergy efficiency increases.
On the other hand, with the increase in effectiveness of 85.05 48
ηex (Isopentane) ηex (R1234ze)
the recuperator, the input-specific exergy of the recom- ηex (Isobutane) ηex (R1234yf)
ηex (Cyclohexane) ηex (R290)
pression cycle decreases, whereas the net output-specific ηex (Toluene)
84.7
exergy remains uniform due to the unaffected cycle pres- 47.6

Thermal efficiency (%)

Exergy efficiency (%)

sure ratio, isentropic efficiencies and other operating con-

ditions with the change in effectiveness and hence exergy 84.35
efficiency increases [1]. From Fig.  16, we observe that as 47.2
the effectiveness of the HTR increases, exergy and ther-
84
mal efficiency increase, and R123-based R-SCO2-ORC has
the highest exergy and thermal efficiency, ~84.57% at
46.8
ε HTR  = 0.65 increasing to 85.01% at ε HTR  = 0.92 and 47.11% 83.65 ηth (R1234ze)
ηth (R123) ηth (R1234yf)
at ε HTR  = 0.65 increasing to 47.35% at ε HTR  = 0.92, respec- ηex (R123) ηth (Isobutane)
ηth (R290) ηth (Isopentane)
tively. Alternatively, R290 has the lowest value of exergy 83.3 ηth (Toluene) ηth (Cyclohexane) 46.4
and thermal efficiency, ~83.72% at ε HTR  = 0.65 increasing to
0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
84.32% at ε HTR  = 0.92 and 46.64% at ε HTR  = 0.65 increasing
HTR effectiveness
to 46.97% at ε HTR  = 0.92, respectively.
Furthermore, the effect of the effectiveness of LTR on Fig. 16  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression cycle
the exergy and thermal efficiency has been illustrated in versus HTR effectiveness

6180 85.12
Isobutane
6170 85.04 47.44
Cyclohexane
6160 Toluene 84.96
Isopentane 47.36
6150 84.88
R1234yf
6140 84.8
Net work output (kJ)

R1234ze
Thermal efficiency (%)
Exergy efficiency (%)

R123 47.28
6130 84.72
R290
6120 84.64 47.2
6110 84.56
6100 84.48 47.12
6090 84.4
84.32 47.04
6080 ηex (Toluene)
84.24 ηex (R1234yf) ηex (Isopentane)
6070 ηth (R290)
ηex (R290) ηex (Cyclohexane) 46.96
ηex (R123)
6060 84.16 ηth (R1234ze) ηth (Toluene)
ηth (R123)
ηth (R1234yf) ηth (Isopentane)
6050 84.08 ηth (Isobutane) 46.88
ηth (Cyclohexane) ηex (R1234ze) ηex (Isobutane)

300 305 310 315 320 325 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9

Inlet temperature of main compressor (K) LTR effectiveness

Fig. 15  Net work output of combined recompression cycle versus inlet Fig.  17  Exergy and thermal efficiency of combined recompression
temperature of main compressor cycle versus LTR effectiveness
 Singh and Mishra  |  151

Table 5  Thermodynamic properties of SPTC-driven R123-based combined recompression cycle at the selected stations [53, 54]

m P T h s
Selected stations Fluid type (kg/s) (MPa) (K) (kJ/kg) (kJ/kg-K)

SPTC receiver outlet (3) Syltherm 800 0.575 10 673.15 832.36 2.383
SCO2 turbine inlet (5) SCO2 10 25 652.8 819.08 2.4037
SCO2 turbine outlet (6) SCO2 10 13.2 588.8 759.81 2.4273
HTR outlet (7) SCO2 10 13.2 462.4 607.39 2.1355
LTR outlet (7’) SCO2 10 13.2 385.2 498.68 1.8772
Heat exchanger outlet (8) SCO2 6 13.2 327.8 342.60 1.4321
Main compressor outlet (10) SCO2 6 25 369.1 395.44 1.5272
Recompressor outlet (9’) SCO2 4 25 438.4 529.14 1.8907
LTR outlet (10’) SCO2 6 25 436.8 526.51 1.8847
HTR outlet (4) SCO2 10 25 532.3 665 2.1825

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

ORC turbine inlet (11) R123 5 3 359.2 290.303 1.280
ORC turbine outlet(13) R123 5 0.676 312.7 240.277 1.294
Condenser outlet (14) R123 5 0.676 297.2 224.363 1.083
Heat exchanger inlet (12) R123 5 3 306.9 235.067 1.117

that helps compensate the difference between specific compressor (T9) increases. The current study revealed
heat in the LTR along with the maximum heat recupera- that R123-based R-SCO2-ORC has maximum exergy
tion in the topping layout (i.e. R-SCO2 cycle); in turn the efficiency under the fixed baseline conditions: ~73.4%
quantity of waste heat declined and, finally, the thermal at Gb  =  0.5 kW/m2; 78.8% at P5  =  14  MPa; 63.86% at
efficiency of the cycle will be improved [40]. The current T5 = 650 K; 74.84% at m SCO2  = 7 kg/s; 85.83% at T9 = 300 K;
study showed that the exergy and thermal efficiency of 84.57% at ε HTR   =  0.65; and 85.06% at ε LTR   =  0.65.
the R123-based combined recompression cycle is around Alternatively, R290-based R-SCO2-ORC possesses the
85.09% and 47.4%, respectively, significantly higher than least value of exergy efficiency due to the maximum
the exergy and thermal efficiency of a simple combined amount of exergy losses present in this cycle.
cycle (SCO2-ORC), i.e. 83.63% and 46.59%, which has been (2) The thermal efficiency of the R-SCO2-ORC also follows
observed under the same baseline or simulated condi- the same trend of exergy efficiency, and its value contin-
tions such as Gb  =  0.85 kW/m2, T5  =  652.8  K, P5  =  25  MPa, uously increases with the increase in quantity of input
and m (SCO2 ) 10  kg/s. Furthermore, the important thermo- or independent variables such as Gb, P5, T5, m SCO2 , ε HTR
dynamic properties such as temperature, pressure, mass and ε LTR except T9. Note that R123-based R-SCO2-ORC has
flow rate, enthalpy and entropy at the selected stations for the maximum value of thermal efficiency among the
R123-based R-SCO2-ORC are described in Table 5. other selected fluids: ~40.89% at Gb = 0.5 kW/m2; 43.9%
Lastly, the results of the study revealed that the maxi- at P5 = 14 MPa; 35.57% at T5 = 650 K; 47.82% at T9 = 300K;
mum amount of exergy destruction occurs in a collec- 47.11% at ε HTR   =  0.65; and 47.38% at eLTR   =  0.65. Again,
tor field, which is ~58.25% of the total exergy destruction R290-based R-SCO2-ORC has the lowest value of ther-
rate, ~6703 kW, possibly due to temperature and mate- mal efficiency. On the other hand, exergy and thermal
rial restrictions of SPTCs. Also, note that the total exergy performance of R1234ze, R1234yf, toluene, cyclohexane,
destructed in R123-based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC is ~32.59% of isopentane and isobutane lie between the two above-
the inlet exergy from the SPTC field (i.e. 20 562 kJ). mentioned fluids, with a marginal difference between
their efficiency values and comparable performance
under the specified range of each independent variable.
4 Conclusion (3) In addition, the exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC-
The  current study reveals the exergy and energy perfor- R-SCO2-ORC increase with the increase in Gb, T5 and
mance of the combined recompression cycle (R-SCO2-ORC) m SCO2 , except T9 due to its inverse effect on the per-
with the utilization of different organic fluids in the low formance of recompression cycle in contrast to other
temperature ORC. The following results are concluded independent variables. Results revealed that R123-
from this research work: based SPTC-R-SCO2-ORC has the highest exergy and
thermal efficiency: ~44.53 and 24.81% at Gb  =  0.5 kW/
(1) The exergy efficiency of R-SCO2-ORC increases with m2; 25.37 and 14.14% at T5  =  650  K; 58.77 and 32.74%
the increase in intensity of solar irradiation (Gb), inlet at m SCO2  = 7 kg/s; 68.1 and 37.94% at T9 = 300 K, respec-
or maximum pressure of R-SCO2 turbine (P5), inlet or tively. The exergy and thermal efficiency of SPTC-R-
high temperature at R-SCO2 turbine (T5), mass flow SCO2-ORC have comparatively less value than the
rate of SCO2 (m SCO2 ) and effectiveness of HTR and LTR simple configuration (i.e. R-SCO2-ORC), possibly due to
( ε HTR and ε LTR ). In contrast,  the efficiency of R-SCO2- the large amount of exergy destruction or exergy loss
ORC decreases as the inlet temperature of the main present in the overall solar collector field followed by
 152 | Clean Energy, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 2

the SCO2 turbine and evaporator: ~3905, 1278 and 1274 [3] Milani D, Luu MT, McNaughton R, et al. A comparative study
kW, respectively. Apart from this, the calculated value of solar heliostat assisted supercritical CO2 recompression
Brayton cycles: Dynamic modelling and control strategies. J
of the destructed exergy in SPTC is ~58.25% of the total
Supercrit Fluids 2017; 120:113–24.
exergy destruction rate (i.e. 6703 kW) and 18.99% of the
[4] Niu X-D, Yamaguchi H, Iwamoto Y, et  al. Optimal arrange-
inlet exergy coming from the SPTC field (i.e. 20 562 kJ). ment of the solar collectors of a supercritical CO2-based solar
(4) Last but not least, the R123-based R-SCO2-ORC shows the Rankine cycle system. Appl Therm Eng 2013; 50:505–10.
highest value of net work output, ~4594 kJ at T5 = 650 K [5] Feher EG. The supercritical thermodynamic power cycle.
and 6176 kJ at T9 = 300 K, whereas the R290 has the least Energy Convers 1968; 8:85–90.
value of net work output in contrast to other fluids. [6] Kulhánek M, Dostál V. Thermodynamic analysis and compari-
son of supercritical carbon dioxide cycles. In: Proceedings of
Supercritical CO2 Power Cycle Symposium, Boulder, Colorado, 24–25
Nomenclature May 2011. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KcvMoLYNYXxxkbXj
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg) JWjSSixKQr4DVhmnHqAFQk-R3mybERAXd3TieAus5QmQ/view
(2 June 2018, date last accessed).
y recompression split mass fraction

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

[7] Sarkar J, Bhattacharyya S. Optimization of recompression
T temperature (K)
S-CO2 power cycle with reheating. Energy Convers Manag 2009;
P pressure (Pa) 50:1939–45.
q inlet specific heat (kJ/kg) [8] Turchi CS, Ma Z, Neises TW, et  al. Thermodynamic study
w specific work output (kJ/kg) of advanced supercritical carbon dioxide power cycles for
To surrounding temperature (K) concentrating solar power systems. J Sol Energy Eng 2013;
TU particular state temperature (K) 135:041007.
[9] Chacartegui R, Sánchez D, Jiménez-Espadafor F, et  al.
s specific entropy (kJ/kg-K)
 d exergy destruction rate (kW) Analysis of intermediate temperature combined cycles with
Ex
a carbon dioxide topping cycle. In: ASME Turbo Expo 2008:
ex exergy (kW) Power for Land, Sea, and Air, Vol. 2, Berlin, Germany, 9–13 June
R-SCO2 recompression supercritical CO2 2008, 673–80.
ORC organic Rankine cycle [10] Chacartegui R, Munoz JM, Sánchez D, et al. Alternative cycles
m mass flow rate (kg/s) based on carbon dioxide for central receiver solar power
Q heat rate (kW) plants. Appl Therm Eng 2011; 31:872–9.
[11] Wang X, Dai Y. Exergoeconomic analysis of utilizing the tran-
Gb intensity of solar irradiation (W/m2)
scritical CO2 cycle and the ORC for a recompression supercrit-
A ap area of the aperture (m2)
ical CO2 cycle waste heat recovery: A comparative study. Appl
Tsu temperature of outer surface of sun Energy 2016; 170:193–207.
HTR high-temperature recuperator [12] Sánchez D, Brenes BM, Munoz JM, et  al. Non-conventional
LTR low-temperature recuperator combined cycle for intermediate temperature systems. Int J
Energy Res 2013; 37:403–11.
Greek letters [13] Akbari AD, Mahmoudi MS. Thermoeconomic analysis & opti-
mization of the combined supercritical CO2 (carbon dioxide)
ε effectiveness recompression Brayton/organic Rankine cycle. Energy 2014;
ηth thermal efficiency 78:501–12.
ηex exergy efficiency [14] Besarati SM, Goswami DY. Analysis of advanced supercrit-
ical carbon dioxide power cycles with a bottoming cycle for
concentrating solar power applications. J Sol Energy Eng 2014;
Subscripts
136:010904-1-7.
i inlet [15] Tunc M, Sisbot S, Camdalib U. Exergy analysis of electri-
e exit city generation for the geothermal resources using organic
o ambient conditions Rankine cycle: Kızıldere-Denizli case. Environ Prog Sustain
Energy 2012; 32:830–6.
U partcular state
[16] Baghernejad A, Yaghoubi M, Jafarpur K. Exergoeconomic opti-
mization and environmental analysis of a novel solar-trigen-
eration system for heating, cooling and power production
Acknowledgements purpose. Sol Energy 2016; 134:165–79.
The author (Harwinder Singh) acknowledges the support of Delhi [17] Calise F, d’Accadia MD, Macaluso A, et al. Exergetic and exer-
Technological University, New Delhi, India. goeconomic analysis of a novel hybrid solar–geothermal
polygeneration system producing energy and water. Energy
Conflict of interest statement. None declared. Convers Manag 2016; 115:200–20.
[18] Qiu Y, Li M-J, He Y-L, et  al. Thermal performance analysis of
a parabolic trough solar collector using supercritical CO2 as
References heat transfer fluid under nonuniform solar flux. Appl Therm
[1] Sarkar J. Second law analysis of supercritical CO2 recompres- Eng 2017; 115:1255–65.
sion Brayton cycle. Energy 2009; 34:1172–8. [19] Bellos E, Korres D, Tzivanidis C, et  al. Design, simulation
[2] Zhu Q. Innovative power generation systems using supercrit- and optimization of a compound parabolic collector. Sustain
ical CO2 cycles. Clean Energy 2017; 1:68–79. Energy Technol Assess 2016; 16:53–63.
 Singh and Mishra  |  153

[20] Cheng ZD, He YL, Qiu Y. A detailed non-uniform thermal cycle for an innovative central receiver solar power plant.
model of a parabolic trough solar receiver with two halves Energy 2016; 112:17–27.
and two inactive ends. Renew Energy 2015; 274:139–47. [38] Wu C, Wang SS, Feng XJ, et al. Energy, exergy and exergoeco-
[21] Guo J, Huai X. Multi-parameter optimization design of para- nomic analyses of a combined supercritical CO2 recompres-
bolic trough solar receiver. Appl Therm Eng 2016; 98:73–9. sion Brayton/absorption refrigeration cycle. Energy Convers
[22] Gao W, Li H, Xu G, et al. Working fluid selection and prelim- Manag 2017; 148:360–77.
inary design of a solar organic rankine cycle system. Environ [39] Singh H, Mishra RS. Performance analysis of solar para-
Prog Sustain Energy 2014; 34:619–26. bolic trough collectors driven combined supercritical
[23] Mokheimer EMA, Dabwan YN, Habib MA. Optimal integra- CO2 and organic Rankine cycle. Eng Sci Technol J 2018;
tion of solar energy with fossil fuel gas turbine cogeneration 21:451–464.
plants using three different CSP technologies in Saudi Arabia. [40] Ahn Y, Bae SJ, Kim M, et al. Review of supercritical CO2 power
Appl Energy 2017; 185:1268–80. cycle technology and current status of research and develop-
[24] Amelio M, Ferraro V, Marinelli V, et al. An evaluation of the per- ment. Nucl Eng Technol 2015; 47:647–61.
formance of an integrated solar combined cycle plant provided [41] Petela R. Exergy analysis of the solar cylindrical-parabolic
with air linear parabolic collectors. Energy 2014; 69:742–8. cooker. Sol Energy 2005; 79:221–33.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/article-abstract/2/2/140/5050906 by guest on 26 May 2020

[25] Al-Sulaiman FA. Energy and sizing analyses of parabolic [42] Dudley VE, Koib GJ, Mahoney AR, et al. Test results: SEGS LS-2
trough solar collector integrated with steam and binary vapor solar collector. Technical Report SANDIA94-1884. Albuequerque:
cycles. Energy 2013; 58:561–70. Sandia National Laboratories, 1994.
[26] Al-Sulaiman FA. Exergy analysis of parabolic trough solar col- [43] Forristall R. Heat Transfer Analysis and Modeling of a Parabolic
lectors integrated with combined steam and organic Rankine Trough Solar Receiver Implemented in Engineering Equation Solver.
cycles. Energy Convers Manag 2014; 77:441–9. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL),
[27] Seidel W. Model development and annual simulation of the 2003.
supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle for concentrat- [44] Padilla RV, Too YCS, Benito R, et  al. Exergetic analysis of
ing solar power applications. Master’s thesis. The University of supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles integrated with solar central
Wisconsin-Madison, 2010. receivers. Appl Energy 2015; 148:348–65.
[28] Turchi CS, Ma Z, Dyreby J. Supercritical CO2 for application in [45] Gibbs JP. Corrosion of various engineering alloys in supercrit-
concentrating solar power systems. In: Proceedings of SCCO2 ical carbon dioxide. Ph.D.  thesis. Massachusetts Institute of
Power Cycle Symposium 2009, RPI, Troy, New York, 2009. Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2010.
[29] Najjar YSH, Sadeq J. Modeling and simulation of solar thermal [46] Parks CJ. Corrosion of candidate high temperature alloys
power system using parabolic trough collector. J Energy Eng in supercritical carbon dioxide. Master’s thesis. Carleton
2017; 143:04016056-1-9. University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2013.
[30] Singh H, Mishra RS. Performance evaluation of the super- [47] Chys M, van den Broek M, Vanslambrouck B, et  al. Potential
critical organic rankine cycle (SORC) integrated with large of zeotropic mixtures as working fluids in organic Rankine
scale solar parabolic trough collector (SPTC) system: An cycles. Energy 2012; 44:623–32.
exergy energy analysis. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 2018; [48] Wang E, Yu Z, Zhang H, et  al. A regenerative supercritical-
37:891–9. subcritical dual-loop organic Rankine cycle system for energy
[31] Rashidi MM, Galanis N, Nazari F, et al. Parametric analysis and recovery from the waste heat of internal combustion engines.
optimization of regenerative Clausius and organic Rankine Appl Energy 2017; 190:574–90.
cycles with two feedwater heaters using artificial bees colony [49] Saleh B. Parametric and working fluid analysis of a com-
and artificial neural network. Energy 2011; 36:5728–40. bined organic Rankine-vapor compression refrigeration sys-
[32] Sarangi SK, Barpujari B, Dawar R. Emerging technology option tem activated by low-grade thermal energy. J Adv Res 2016;
for clean power generation - concentrated solar power (CSP). 7:651–60.
In: Petrotech-2009, New Delhi, India, 2009. [50] Tchanche BF, Papadakis G, Lambrinos G, et al. Fluid selection
[33] Neises T, Turchi C. A comparison of supercritical carbon diox- for a low-temperature solar organic Rankine cycle. Appl Therm
ide power cycle configurations with an emphasis on CSP Eng 2009; 29:2468–76.
applications. Energy Procedia 2014; 49:1187–96. [51] Nouman J. Comparative studies and analyses of work-
[34] Cheng WL, Huang WX, Nian YL. Global parameter optimiza- ing fluids for Organic Rankine Cycles – ORC. Master’s the-
tion and criterion formula of supercritical carbon dioxide sis. KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management,
Brayton cycle with recompression. Energy Convers Manag 2017; Stockholm, 2012.
150:669–77. [52] Vivian J, Manente G, Lazzaretto A. A general framework
[35] Ma Y, Liu M, Yan J, et al. Thermodynamic study of main com- to select working fluid and configuration of ORCs for low-
pression intercooling effects on supercritical CO2 recompres- to-medium temperature heat sources. Appl Energy 2015;
sion Brayton cycle. Energy 2017; 140:746–57. 156:727–46.
[36] Kim S, Cho Y, Kim MS, et al. Characteristics and optimization [53] Lemmon EW, McLinden MO, Huber ML. NIST Reference
of supercritical CO2 recompression power cycle and the influ- Fluid Thermodynamic and Transport Properties—REFPROP.
ence of pinch point temperature difference of recuperators. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and
Energy 2018; 147:1216–26. Technology, NIST Standard Reference Database 23.
[37] Reyes-Belmonte MA, Sebastian A, Romero M, et  al. [54] Klein SA. Engineering Equation Solver (EES), Academic
Optimization of a recompression supercritical carbon dioxide Commercial V7.714. F-Chart Software, 2006. www.fChart.com.