Performance analyses and optimization of a regenerative supercritical carbon dioxide power cycle with intercooler and reheater

Year 2021, , 1 - 6, 30.12.2021

Asım Sinan Karakurt , Ibrahim Furkan Ozel , Semih İskenderli

https://doi.org/10.14744/seatific.2021.0001

Abstract

Supercritical CO2 (sCO2) power cycles play an important role in energy production as they are more efficient and more compact than conventional energy production systems. Therefore, they are widely used in different systems such as nuclear systems, renewable energy systems, heat recovery systems, fossil power plants, submarines, and some commercial and navy ships that produce a wide range of power operating in different temperature ranges. It has become very popular especially in recent years due to its widespread use and technical capabilities. This study analyses the effects of some design parameters (pressure ratio and temperature ratio) on the performance criteria (net work, thermal efficiency, back work ratio, and total entropy generation) and draws some optimum working conditions by means of the purpose of using. Results show that to obtain an optimum system according to maximum thermal efficiency or maximum net work the design range for the compression ratio for temperature ratio (α) 2, is between 5.224 and 6.449, for α=2.75, 8.408 and 12.57, and for α=3.5, the design range is between 11.35 and 16.

Keywords

Parametric Optimization, Performance Analyses, Supercritical CO2 Cycle

References

• Ahn, Y., Bae, S. J., Kim, M., Cho, S. K., Baik, S., Lee, J. I., & Cha, J. E. (2015). Review of supercritical CO2 power cycle technology and current status of research and development. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 47(6), 647–661.
• Bashan, V., & Gumus, E. (2018). Comprehensive energy and exergy analysis on optimal design parameters of recuperative supercritical CO2 power cycle. International Journal of Exergy, 27(2), 165.
• Guelpa, E., & Verda, V. (2020). Exergoeconomic analysis for the design improvement of supercritical CO2 cycle in concentrated solar plant. Energy, 206, Article 118024.
• Gumus, E. (2019). Alternative to Ship Diesel Engine: SCO2 Power Cycle. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 7(2), 117–126.
• Gumus, E., & Bashan, V. (2020). Comparative energy and exergy analysis and optimisation study on the supercritical CO2 recompression power cycle. International Journal of Exergy, 32(2), 130.
• Guo, J.-Q., Li, M.-J., Xu, J.-L., Yan, J.-J., & Ma, T. (2020). Energy, exergy and economic (3E) evaluation and conceptual design of the 1000 MW coal-fired power plants integrated with S-CO2 Brayton cycles. Energy Conversion and Management, 211, Article 112713.
• Herranz, L. E., Linares, J. I., & Moratilla, B. Y. (2009). Power cycle assessment of nuclear high temperature gas-cooled reactors. Applied Thermal Engineering, 29(8–9), 1759.
• Karakurt, A. S., Bashan, V., & Ust, Y. (2020). Comparative maximum power density analysis of a supercritical CO2 Brayton power cycle. Journal of Thermal Engineering, 6(1), 50–57.
• Manente, G., & Costa, M. (2020). On the Conceptual Design of Novel Supercritical CO2 Power Cycles for Waste Heat Recovery. Energies, 13(2), 370.
• Reyes-Belmonte, M. A., Sebastián, A., González-Aguilar, J., & Romero, M. (2017). Performance comparison of different thermodynamic cycles for an innovative central receiver solar power plant. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1850(1), Article 160024.
• Siddiqui, M. E., & Almitani, K. H. (2020). Proposal and thermodynamic assessment of s-CO2 brayton cycle layout for improved heat recovery. Entropy, 22(3), 305.
• Wang, K., He, Y.-L., & Zhu, H.-H. (2017). Integration between supercritical CO2 Brayton cycles and molten salt solar power towers: A review and a comprehensive comparison of different cycle layouts. Applied Energy, 195, 819–836.
• White, M. T., Bianchi, G., Chai, L., Tassou, S. A., & Sayma, A. I. (2021). Review of supercritical CO2 technologies and systems for power generation. Applied Thermal Engineering, 185, Article 116447.
• Zhu, Q. (2017). Innovative power generation systems using supercritical CO2 cycles. Clean Energy, 1(1), 68–79.