Proposal and Thermodynamic Assessment of S-CO2 Brayton Cycle Layout for Improved Heat Recovery

This article deals with the thermodynamic assessment of supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) Brayton power cycles. The main advantage of S-CO2 cycles is the capability of achieving higher efficiencies at significantly lower temperatures in comparison to conventional steam Rankine cycles. In the past...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2020-03, Vol.22 (3), p.305, Article 305
Hauptverfasser: Siddiqui, Muhammad Ehtisham, Almitani, Khalid H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This article deals with the thermodynamic assessment of supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) Brayton power cycles. The main advantage of S-CO2 cycles is the capability of achieving higher efficiencies at significantly lower temperatures in comparison to conventional steam Rankine cycles. In the past decade, variety of configurations and layouts of S-CO2 cycles have been investigated targeting efficiency improvement. In this paper, four different layouts have been studied (with and without reheat): Simple Brayton cycle, Recompression Brayton cycle, Recompression Brayton cycle with partial cooling and the proposed layout called Recompression Brayton cycle with partial cooling and improved heat recovery (RBC-PC-IHR). Energetic and exergetic performances of all configurations were analyzed. Simple configuration is the least efficient due to poor heat recovery mechanism. RBC-PC-IHR layout achieved the best thermal performance in both reheat and no reheat configurations (eta th = 59.7% with reheat and eta th = 58.2 without reheat at 850 degrees C), which was due to better heat recovery in comparison to other layouts. The detailed component-wise exergy analysis shows that the turbines and compressors have minimal contribution towards exergy destruction in comparison to what is lost by heat exchangers and heat source.
ISSN:1099-4300
1099-4300
DOI:10.3390/e22030305