1

Performance evaluation of working fluids based on Fuzzy logic

for Solar ORC

3
4
5

M. Alvesa,* E. Loraa, J. Palacioa, A. Martnezb

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

Excellence Group in Thermal and Distributed Generation, Department of

Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Itajub, Itajub, Brazil
e-mail: senaubar@yahoo.com.br

Centro de Estudios de Refrigeracin, Universidad de Oriente, Santiago de Cuba,

Cuba

Abstract
This paper brings a performance evaluation based on fuzzy logic to select organic fluids for
Solar ORC applications. Through a model capable to size solar ORC machines, and adopting
13 of the most common fluids, various machines were designed, performing an evaluation
performance of each. Adopting a Fuzzy logic inference based on technical and economic
parameters. The results point out for each temperature range, the most suitable working fluid.
However, R-245fa for low temperature ranges (60-160 C) show a coverage factor of 63%.
Keywords: Organic Rankine cycle, modeling, working fluid, fuzzy logic.
Introduction
Energy is fundamental to any human being, used to meeting our basic needs, such as
transportation, food and the own maintenance of life, therefore world energy demand is
expected to increase continuously. In order to minimize the negative impact on environment,
in the last few years, a large endeavor have been made to use more efficient energy
conversion processes and extend the market share of renewable energies [1-3]. As a result,
the interest for low grade heat recovery grew dramatically in the past decades [4].
Among the proposed solutions, the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) system is the most widely
used due to its simplicity and the availability of components [4]. Basically, the working fluid
is an organic component, allowing fitting different temperature heat sources, and unlike
traditional power cycles, local and small scale power generation is achievable [5].
Consequently ORC applications are investigated massively, such as: waste heat recovery,
solar energy, combined heat and power, geothermal systems, energy recovery from exhaust
gases, bottoming cycle combined with gas turbines or other high temperature cycles [1-8].
For some areas and specially for solar thermal electric generation would be able to overcome
disadvantages from conventional steam Rankine cycle, hence the water steam temperature
drops below 370 C the thermal efficiency becomes uneconomically low [9].

44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57

Nevertheless, the choice of the working fluid is of crucial importance and has been the object
of an abundant literature [10]. Still, this work is focused on outcome an optimized working
fluid for low temperature based on fuzzy logic for a fixed output with a technical and
economical inference features.
The first part of this paper describes the Solar ORC system which the simulation model is
based on. In the second part, all of the sub-models of the different components and the global
model, which is built by interconnecting then, are present. In the third part, the analyses
method is present, introducing all fluid data, and fuzzy inferences. The last part of the paper
present the results of the simulation, evaluating the performance of a Solar ORC for different
fluids and investigates the performance of the system though a fuzzy logic to points out the
best fluid for its temperature range.

Nomenclature
A Area, m
b Corrugation depth, m
Bo Boiling number, Bo = q/Gc
C Constant
Cp Specific heat, J/(kg.K)
d Diameter, m
Dh Hydraulic diameter, Dh = 2b, m
f Friction factor
F Fluid, FluidProp table
Fm flow rate, kg/s
g Acceleration due to gravity, m/s2
Gc Mass flux, Gc=Fm/((Nt-2).b.W), kg/(ms)
Gp Mass flux, Gp=4.Fm/(.d), kg/(ms)
h Convective heat transfer, W/(mK)
h Specific enthalpy, J/kg
hl Enthalpy of vaporization, J/kg
I Solar irradiation, kW/m
k Thermal conductivity, W/(mK)
l Length, m
n Number of
Nt Number of plates
Nu Nusselt number, Nu = h.Dh/k
P Pressure, Pa
PP Pinch point, C
Pr Prandtl number, Pr = .Cp/k
Q Heat transfer rate, W
q Heat flux, W/m
Re Reynolds number, Re=.G.Dh/
T Temperature, C
U Heat transfer coefficient, W/K
w Power, W
W Heat exchanger plate width, m
x Thickness, m
58
59

Subscripts

System and/or flow direction

amb Ambient conditions
c
Condenser
ch
Channel
e
Evaporator
g
Generator
hx
Heat exchanger
i
Inlet
in
Internal
m
Mean
max Maximal
min Minimal
ml
Mean log
net
Net
o
Outlet
orc
Organic rankine cycle
p
Pump
pd
Port duct
pl
Plate
ps
Pass
r
Possible of regeneration
sc
Solar collector
steel Material type - AISI 306
t
Turbine
Greek letters

Differential

Roughness coefficient

Efficiency, %

Viscosity, m/s

Density, kg/m

60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74

75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90

System description
This paper presents the early start implementation of a solar laboratory, LABS, at the Federal
University of Itajub (UNIFEI). The purpose is to develop a solar ORC system, with
parabolic through collector (PTC) technology, using a water-based mixture as heat transfer
fluid (HTF), for distributed energy generation (Fig. 1). Therefore the systems components
considered in this paper are based on commercial and available equipments.
The ORC module operates with the chosen working fluid, which is heated on the evaporator
by HTF from the solar collector field. The working fluid drives a turbine for power
generation, condensed into liquid in a water-cooled condenser and then pumped back to the
evaporator. The system considered a dry-expansion fluid (positive slope of the saturated
vapor curve in the TS diagram), sub-critical using a minimal value of superheating (equal to
1). Adopts a hypothetical turbine able to generate 5 kWe (net), limited at maximum
temperature of 160 C and maximum pressure of 30 bar.

Figure 1. Solar ORC diagram.

Model
This section describes the models of the different components of the ORC system under
investigation. Based on a steady-state model of the system presented in Fig. 1 is developed,
for the rating and sizing of the different components and to optimize the working conditions
for a fixed output power. All models proposed, consists as an semi-empirical model [4,8],
developed under MATLAB environment, using thermodynamic data from FluidProp
integrated within the model, which works with NIST references tables [11]. Therefore, was
assumed a constant irradiation level and environment conditions. Therefore, kinetic and
potential energy are neglected. Still, were considered pressure drop only on the equipments,
neglecting on piping.
Pump
The pump has a non-isentropic compression process with efficiency (p) of 75% for each of
the three pumps of the system. However, its power consumption (wp) depends on the fluid

91
92
93

properties and parameters, given by the flow rate (Fm,) and the enthalpy variation during the
process (h) respectively. The pump consumption is given by:
, =

94
95
96
97
98
99

, .

Turbine
Similarly, the turbine has an expansion process is non-isentropic with efficiency (t) of 85%;
therefore to obtain 5 kWe as net power in power generation (wt) is necessary to consider the
pump consumption:
= + ,1 + ,2 + ,3

100
101
102
103
104
105

114
115
116
117
118
119

(3)

Solar Collector
To dimension the solar collector field, length (lsc), area (Asc) and efficiency (sc) are the basic
parameter, which adopts commercial data. The solar collector is based on a compact
parabolic through collector (PTC) model, which have efficiency on the range of 50-65% for
HTF temperatures between 50 up to 170 C. This efficiency (sc) can be based on the HTF
mean temperature (Tm) and irradiation level (I) which is given by the equation [18]:
= B. (A. )2 + C. (A. ) + 0,002. + 59,8
= 2. 104 + 1. 104 . 1. 107 . 2
B = 2,0458 + 2,8. 103 . 1. 106 . 2
C = (2,5164 + 5,7. 103 . 3. 106 . 2 )

(4)

After obtaining the value of the solar collector efficiency (sc), is calculated the number of
solar collectors (nsc) required to operate the system. The calculation is based on the enthalpy
variation (h) from inlet and outlet, flow rate (Fm,sc), irradiation level (I), Area (Asc) and
efficiency of the solar collector.
=

120
121
122
123
124
125

(2)

Considering the inlet temperature and pressure is known, and the outlet pressure and
temperature are defined by condenser pressure drop and its operation above atmosphere
pressure, resulting in a known enthalpy variation (h), leading to the only unknown value,
the organic fluid flow rate (Fm,orc) , given as:
, =

106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113

(1)

. ,
. 105
. .

(5)

To be able to sizing the solar field pump capacity is necessary to estimate the pressure drop
inside the collectors. The equation is based on Darcy-Weisbach method and the turbulent
friction factor on Swamee-Jain [12]. For this calculation only the length of the solar field was
considered.

1,325

5,74 2
+ 0,9 )]
3,7.

[ln (

=
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136

137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148

0,0826. . . . 1,1. , 2
. 107
5

Figure 2. Three zones, evaporator and condenser scheme.

Each heat exchanger adopts a gasketed-plate with counter-flow, as base model. For each
zone, appropriate one-dimensional governing equations is used, therefore each zone is
characterized by a heat transfer area (A) and a heat transfer coefficient (U), which is based on
Kaka and Gut analyses, furthermore in the present work, was included a pressure drop
model to fit all working fluids operations design characteristics [13,14].
The heat transfer coefficient U is calculated by considering convective heat transfer; HTF and
working fluid sides and conductive with resistances in series.

1
x

1
1
+
+ )
h1 k steel h2

(8)

The respective heat transfer area of each zone is obtained by imposing the total heat flow of
the heat exchanger:
q = U. A. Tml

153

(7)

Heat exchangers
In ORC systems, the working fluid enters the evaporator in liquid state and exits as
superheated vapor. Conversely, the condenser is characterized by entering superheated vapor
and leaving in liquid state. Only the working fluid suffers a phase change during this process
As a consequence, both the evaporator and condenser can be described as composed by three
characteristic transformation zones, which is represented by the Figure 2 [4,8]:
1. Liquid Liquid (Liquid zone);
2. Liquid - Saturated mixture (Two-phase zone);
3. Liquid Vapor (Vapor zone).

U=
149
150
151
152

(6)

(9)

154
155
156

During single-phase heat transfer, the forced convection heat transfer coefficients are
evaluated by means of the non-dimensional relationship [13,14]:
= . 0,663 .

157
158
159
160
161
162
163

1
3

(10)

The exponent are set according to Saunderss recommendations for corrugated plate heat
exchangers with a 30 Chevron angle and also, for this simulation is considered the influence
of temperature-dependent viscosity [14]. However, during the evaporation process is
considered the overall boiling heat transfer coefficient [8]. This heat exchange coefficient is
calculated as:
2 = . . 0 0,5

164
165
166
167
168
169

Where Bo is the boiling number and hl is the all-liquid non-boiling heat transfer coefficient.
The coefficient C is based on experimental data [8], assigned specific values for each
transformation zones for the organic fluid and water sides, listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Coefficient C, for each zone.

Liquid zone
Organic fluid
Water
170
171
172
173
174
175

Vapor zone
0,11

The total pressure drop is composed of the flow resistance along the channel (Pch) and the
inlet pressure drop (Ppd) of the heat exchanger. Also for channel pressure drop is adopted a
specific friction factor, represented by [13]:

. 2
.
2.

1,441
0,206

(12)

(13)

The pressure drop at inlet can be estimated by:

179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188

Two-phase zone
2,453
0,2041

0,3

= 4. .

176
177
178

(11)

2
= 1,4. .
2.

(14)

Global
The global model of the cycle is built by interconnecting the models of the different subcomponents. The global model calculation routine starts performing the turbine function,
which calculates the mass flow of the ORC system and the turbine outlet temperature, the
next step is the calculation of heat flux demand for condenser sizing. After that, is estimated
the pump system consumption. Then, to size the evaporator the thermal demand of the ORC
module is match with the supplied heat by the solar collector field. This routine continues till
it converges to stable values, assuring the fowling constraints adopted:

189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238

a) Fix inlet turbine temperature using 1 K of superheating on the working fluid;

b) Pressure drops on evaporator impose the ORC module pumps outlet pressure;
c) Condenser works above ambient pressure and its pressure drops impose the turbine
outlet pressure;
d) Solar collector operates with maximum allowed flow.
The inputs of the global model are the irradiation level (I), net power (wnet), turbine inlet
temperature (Tt,i), type of organic fluid (F), pinch point (PP) of heat exchangers and
environmental conditions; pressure (Pamb) and temperature (Tamb). For this, are needed some
constructive parameters from heat exchanger and solar collector, and also the equipments
efficiencies. The outputs of the global model allows the full characterization of the ORC
system, like: intake and outtake temperature and pressure of each system, efficiencies, heat
flux, fluid flow rate, size of solar collector field and heat exchangers area.
Analysis method
An ORC system has many parameters that can be varied simultaneously, presenting a multidimensional surface on which an optimum can be found [15]. In the present study are
examined the effects of turbine inlet temperature and irradiation level for different organic
working fluids. The simulation model is able to size an ORC system based on standard
parameters. Therefore some assumptions are made as follows:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)

Solar collector mass flow range is 0.4 1.2 kg/s;

Ambient temperature is considered 25 C and pressure 1 bar;
Pinch point on the evaporator and on the condenser its assumed 3 K;
Condensing temperature is 30 C (minimal temperature);
The isentropic efficiencies for the turbine and pump are 85% and 75%, respectively;
Generator efficiency is 95%;
Net power output is 5 kWe.

To be able to create enough analysis data a based model routine was created. Basically its
manage all input data of the model, which first select the working fluid and according to the
fluid characteristics, a minimum turbine inlet temperature is select, and then an nominal
design irradiation of 300 W/m. As a result an ORC machine is sized to the given irradiation,
nominal temperature and working fluid, respecting the system constraints.
The next step is to increase by 10 C the inlet temperature of the turbine, and then run the
routine until reaches its maximum allowed temperature of the selected fluid. When this step
is accomplished, the nominal irradiation is increased by 100 W/m, and recalculated for all
the temperature range of the selected fluid, repeating the process until reaches 900 W/m. As
the next step, another fluid is selected, and the routine is repeated for every pre-selected fluid.
After all the analyses are completed, an ORC performance evaluation is done by Fuzzy logic.
Fluid pre-selection
Many parameters have to be considered for fluid selection and ORC thermal efficiency
calculation [3,8,15], however there three main parameters considered in this paper are:
maximum and minimum process temperature and the fluid saturation curve type. The upper
limit of the maximum process temperature is the fluid stability and material compatibility.
Therefore the maximum temperature analyzed in this paper is 160 C, aware that some fluids
might be able to operate in lower temperature range, according to its saturation curve. The

239
240
241
242
243

minimum temperature was set to 30 C. Fluids with positive saturation curve were selected.
Among the existing fluids, were select 13 fluids which are represented in Table 2 showing the
range of temperature and operating pressure for each fluid.
Table 2. Operational range, temperature and pressure of pre-selected fluids.

Fluid
R-113
R-245fa
R-245ca
R-365mfc
Butane (R-600)
Isobutene (R-600a)
Pentane (R-601)
I-pentane (R-601a)
N-pentane (R-601b)
Hexane
Isohexane
Cyclohexane
Benzene

244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258

Temperature [C]
Pressure [bar]
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
100
160
4.26
14.3
70
130
5.93
22.99
80
140
5.55
20.88
100
160
5.73
20.0
70
130
7.9
25.89
60
90
8.5
16.1
100
160
5.79
18.56
100
160
7.0
21.7
80
140
7.2
22.58
110
160
3.0
8.9
110
160
3.82
10.66
120
160
2.81
6.58
110
140
1.75
4.62

Fuzzy logic
The classical logic relies on something being either True or False, which is usually
assigned a value of 1 and 0, respectively. Fuzzy logic is a multivalued logic that allows a
more practical way to deal with uncertainties. Thus, for instance, an element can have an
assigned value between 0 and 1, which describes an approximate data to find precise
solutions for a given set [16,17]. Fuzzy logic can be divided into 3 main steps:
1. Fuzzifying Transformation of data into fuzzy values, which are limited between
"0" and "1". For this is assigned value "1" for best inference set considering all
fluids for a given fixed operational temperature and irradiation. Once the best value
is selected among then, the others fluids are normalized in function of the best
value adopted.
=

259
260
261
262
263

(15)

2. Inference The objective function is based on:

a) Highest overall efficiency;
=

264
265
266

(, )
(, )

b) Highest Carnot equivalent efficiency;

(16)

 =
267
268
269

1 ( )

c) Minimum solar field area;

=

270
271
272

(17)

(18)

d) Minimum system cost.

= ( )

(19)

273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282

3. Defuzzification Transformation of the fuzzy logic results in an intelligible result,

which in this case, is the best fluid for a determinate temperature range.
Hence, Tmin and Tmax, are respectively the condenser inlet and the solar collector outlet
temperature, in Kelvin. For each solar collector, is considered 7.17 m of unitary area (Asc).
The costs are based on equipment data [18]; to obtain the total estimated cost of the plant it
were used Table 3 data.
Table 3. Specific costs for equipment in a ORC solar plant [18].

Equipment

Specification
Unit Price (U$S)
Pressure up to 5 bar
507.00
Pressure up to 10 bar
818.50
Pressure up to 15 bar
Pump
1,029.00
Pressure up to 20 bar
1,231.50
Pressure up to 30 bar
1,492.50
Per unit installed
672.43
Heat exchanger
Plate
155.18
Per solar collector field installed - base
16,783.73
Solar Collector
Collector
1,137.95
Turbine
9,310.50
Generator
3,103.50
Pipes, connections, etc.
10,000.00
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294

Nevertheless, for this simulation, there will be always installed two units for heat exchanger
(condenser and evaporator), and also only one base for the solar collector. Still the use of
estimated cost allows standardizing in a common parameter the solar ORC plant cost, thus
simplifying their comparison between the machines using different fluid, temperature and
irradiation level; whereas will allow the more cost-effective equipement.
Results and discussions

295
296
297
298
299
300
301

The analysis of the 5 kWe ORC solar plant projects are exposed in two steps: the first one
presents the effect of irradiation level on the sizing for a specific fluid, R-245fa; as second, a
comparison is shown, based on a specific irradiation level, for different fluids. The model
allows visualization of the physical characteristics of the system, which are the most
important at the first step: number of solar collectors (Figure 3), mass flow (Figure 4),
evaporator (Figure 5) and condenser area (Figure 6).
100

Number of solar Collectors

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Irradiation [W/m]

302
303
304
305

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Figure 3. Number of solar collectors, in dependence on the project irradiation [W/m] and inlet turbine
temperature [C].

Mass Flow [kg/s]

0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Irradiation [W/m]

306
307
308
309

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Figure 4. Organic fluid flow [kg/s], in dependence on the project irradiation [W/m] and inlet turbine
temperature [C]

Evaporator Area [m]

14
12
10
8
6
4
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Irradiation [W/m]

310
311
312
313

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Figure 5. Relationship between the evaporator area [m], the project irradiation [W/m] and inlet turbine
temperature [C]

Condenser Area [m]

16
13
10
7
4
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Irradiation [W/m]

314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Figure 6. Relationship between the condenser area [m], the project irradiation [W/m] and inlet turbine
temperature [C]

In Figures 4, 5 and 6, with temperature increases the system became more efficient, requiring
a smaller flow rate, - 69.2%; and a smaller area of heat exchanger, - 67.7% to generate the
same amount of power, due to the increase of enthalpy. Therefore, the level of solar radiation
does not affect meaningfully the constructive parameters of the ORC module; which is less
than 7.1%. On the other hand, the amount of solar collectors (Figure 3) could deviate till
70%, which in the end will result in a higher specific power generation cost.
The overall efficiency of the system depends on the operational temperature and nominal
irradiation. As presented, solar collector efficiency decreases with increasing of work fluid
temperature and ORC cycle efficiency increases, bring to an optimum point [8]. In Figure 7 is
plotted the solar collector, the ORC module and the complete solar ORC system efficiency,
for an irradiation project of 600 W/m according to the operational temperature of each
machine.

14

61

11

60

59

58

ORC Efficiency [%]

Solar Collector Efficiency [%]

62

2
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Solar Collector Efficiency

ORC Efficiency

Figure 7. Behavior of efficiency as function of temperature [C] for a radiation of 600 W/m.

Thousands

The global efficiency of the Solar ORC system increases in an average grow rate of 26% till
the temperature of 100 C, however, on the range of 100 130 C, each 10 C represents
only a 7,6% of efficiency increasing. Figure 8 shows the profile of the total cost of the ORC
solar plant; hence the solar collectors and the heat exchanger have the greatest influence on
cost. The behavior implies a high cost at low temperatures due to the heat exchangers
requirement to compensate low exergy availability, with the working fluid temperature
increases; this influence decreases, reaching a 36.2% of disparity. The number of solar
collectors is influenced directly by the project radiation level, the lower the irradiation, higher
is the number of solar collectors, and the inverse is reciprocal.

Total Cost [U$S]

332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344

Solar ORC Efficiency

$220.00
$200.00
$180.00
$160.00
$140.00
$120.00
$100.00
$80.00
$60.00
70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Temperature [C]
Irradiation [W/m]

345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Figure 8. Total cost of the plant, according to project irradiation [W/m] and temperature [C].

On the next Figures (9, 10, 11 and 12), is shown separately all the inference data used to
optimize and select the best fluid. Therefore all fluids are plotted using an irradiation design
of 600 W/m, whereas each point represents a machine sized for the selected temperature. In
Figure 9, presents the results of the overall system efficiency for all fluids analyzed.

10
9

Efficiency [%]

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
60

80

100

120

140

160

Temperature [C]

353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364

R113
R245fa
R245ca
R365mfc
R601
R601a
R601b
R-600
R-600a
Hexane
Isohexane
Cyclohexane
Benzene

Figure 9. Efficiency as a function of temperature [C] for a radiation of 600 W/m.

The trend in Figure 9 is repeated for other levels of radiation. Can be inferred the most
efficient fluid for a given operating temperature range, being that these fluids are approaching
a trend line. The fluids that guarantee greater efficiency to the system are in order, according
to their respective operating temperatures: R-600a, R-600, R-245fa, R-245ca, R-601 and R601a. Also examined efficiency is the Carnot equivalent efficiency; actually the points
represent how close the real efficiency is from the ideal Carnot efficiency is. Exposed in
Figure 10, also presents the same fluid trend of behavior that is shown in curve of Figure 19,
however, features a maximum ceiling, being less than 30%.

Equivalent Carnot Cycle Efficiency [%]

35

R113
R245fa

30

R245ca
R365mfc

25

R601

20

R601a
R601b

15

R-600
R-600a

10

Hexane
5

Isohexane
Cyclohexane

60

80

100

120

140

160

Benzene

Temperature [C]

365
366

Figure 10. Equivalent Carnot Cycle Efficiency in function of temperature [C] for a radiation of 600 W/m.

367
368
369
370
371
372

In Figure 11 is shown the variation of net solar collector field area which tends to a minimal
area of 100 m; in Figure 12 is presented the total cost of the plant. In both Figures, 11 and
12, the elevation of temperature of working fluid implies in lower demand of solar collector,
which also results in lower investments costs.

Net Solar Collector Field Area [m]

1000

R113

900

R245fa

800

R245ca

700

R365mfc
R601

600

R601a

500

R601b

400

R-600

300

R-600a

200

Hexane

100

Isohexane
Cyclohexane

0
60

80

100

120

140

Benzene

160

Temperature [C]

373
374
375

Overall Cost [U$S]

Thousands

Figure 11. Solar field area versus temperature [C] for a radiation of 600 W/m.

260

R113
R245fa

220

R245ca
R365mfc

R601

180

R601a
R601b

140

R-600
R-600a

100

Hexane
Isohexane
Cyclohexane

60
60
376
377
378

80

100
120
Temperature [C]

140

160

Benzene

Figure 12. The plant's cost as a function of temperature [C] for a radiation of 600 W/m.

379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390

391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418

Applying fuzzy logic (equations 15 up to 19), using the results exposed in figures 9, 10, 11
and 12 is possible to evaluate which are the fluids with the best cost-effective performance
for the operational temperature range of the system. Figure 13 represents the end of the
second stage of the logic (before defuzzyfication) whose "1" represented in dark green
indicates convergence of the best criteria for such project, while the closer to zero, the
gradient modifies to yellow and then white, representing the least equipment indicated, in
addition there are two methodologies of interpretation:
1. Select the operating temperature of the system, then it is evaluating the highest value,
in the same row, select the working fluid for best performance;
2. From a working fluid find out which working temperature the fluid receives the best
score, thus allowing selecting the best operating conditions.

Figure 13. Best working fluid as a function of the operating temperature.

This means, the most indicated working fluid for the temperature range of 60-70 C is the R600a; for 80 C is the R-600; for 90-120 C is the R-245fa; for 130 C R-245ca; and for 140160 C is the R-601. Consequently whereas 1, means that the sized machine has the best
values inferred among the others sized machines with different fluid for same temperature
range. A value of 0.96 means that the system has 96% of agreement, and so on. This
means for example, for a 120 C, the ranking of the most indicated fluids are R-245fa, R601,
R-245ca, etc. however none of them matchs 100%.
Therefore among the select working fluids, there are three fluids which are more costeffective: R-600a, R-245fa, R-601 covering all temperature range. However only the R-245fa
has the highest scores and does so covers 64% of the temperature range.
Conclusion
In this work focused on the evaluation of working fluid for low temperature based on fuzzy
logic. Therefore a semi-empirical model was adopted; capable of sizing a 5 kWe solar ORC
system, using a parabolic cylinder technology, based on commercial and available
equipments for any dry-expansion working fluids. Each machine is sized to fit optimality for
each of 13 different working fluids; whereas are compared and analyzed under the same
given condition.
The fact that the system depend on a nominal irradiation affects extremely the number of
solar collectors. The ORC module performance depends on the organic fluid, operational
temperature and power usage, not suffering changes as a function of nominal irradiation,
concluding that the systems when installed in areas of higher incidence have a lower specific
installation cost which leads to a more competitive production energy cost.

419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468

Due to the use of organic fluids the system is linked to its thermal performance, therefore
such behavior implies, that these results are also valid for different heat sources for the same
temperature range. Also suggests temperature boundaries to obtain the best performance and
optimization among the pre-selected fluids.
The comparison between working fluids showed that the most cost-effective for low
temperature operation is R-245fa. However, to be able to cover integrally the temperature
range (60-160 C) with higher efficiency, is more suitable to use three different working
fluids R-600a, R-245fa and R-601.
Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank to CAPES, CNPq, FAPEMIG, ANEEL, CEMIG and CPFL for
their collaboration and financial support in the development of this work.
References
[1] ALVES, M. S.; LORA, E.; PALACIO, J., (2012). Sizing and parametric study of a
10kWel Solar Organic Rankine Cycle for Brazilian conditions. VII National Congress
of Mechanical Engineering
[2] RODRGUEZ, C. E. C. ; Palacios ; Venturini ; LORA, Electo Eduardo Silva ; COBAS,
Vladimir Melin ; SANTOS, D. M. ; DOTTO, F. R. L. ; GIALLUCA, V. . Exergetic
and economic comparison of ORC and Kalina cycle for low temperature enhanced
geothermal system in Brazil. Applied Thermal Engineering, v. 52, p. 109-119, 2013.
[3] DRESCHER, U., & BRGGEMANN, D. (2007). Fluid selection for the Organic
Rankine Cycle (ORC) in biomass power and heat plants. Applied Thermal Engineering,
27(1), 223228. doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2006.04.024
[4] QUOILIN, S., LEMORT, V., & LEBRUN, J. (2010). Experimental study and modeling
of an Organic Rankine Cycle using scroll expander. Applied Energy, 87(4), 12601268.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.06.026
[5] QUOILIN, S., BROEK, M., DECLAYE, S., DEWALLEF, P., & LEMORT, V. (2013).
Techno-economic survey of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) systems. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 22, 168186. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.01.028
[6] ESPINOSA, N., TILMAN, L., LEMORT, V., QUOILIN, S., & LOMBARD, B. (2010).
Rankine cycle for waste heat recovery on commercial trucks: approach, constraints and
modelling, 110. Retrieved from http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/handle/2268/62995
[7] QIU, G., SHAO, Y., LI, J., LIU, H., & RIFFAT, S. . B. (2012). Experimental
investigation of a biomass-fired ORC-based micro-CHP for domestic applications. Fuel,
96, 374382. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2012.01.028
[8] QUOILIN, S. (2011). Sustainable Energy Conversion Through the Use of Organic
Rankine Cycles for Waste Heat Recovery and Solar Applications. University of Lige.
[9] JING, L., GANG, P., & JIE, J. (2010). Optimization of low temperature solar thermal
electric generation with Organic Rankine Cycle in different areas. Applied Energy,
87(11), 33553365. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.05.013
[10] QUOILIN, S., DECLAYE, S., & LEMORT, V. (2010). Expansion machine and fluid
selection for the Organic rankine cycle. Conference on Heat Transfer, Fluid ,
(July). Retrieved from http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/handle/2268/62997
[11] VANKEIRSBILCK, I., & VANSLAMBROUCK, B. (2011). Organic Rankine Cycle as
efficient alternative to steam cycle for small scale power generation. Proceedings of
the , (July). Retrieved from http://www.orcycle.eu/publicaties_bestanden/HEFAT
2011 - ORC vs steam_final.pdf

469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486

[12] KELLY, B., & KEARNEY, D. (2006). Parabolic Trough Solar System Piping Model
Final Report Parabolic Trough Solar System Piping Model Final Report.
[13] KAKA, S., PRAMUANJAROENKIJ, A., & LIU, H. (2002). Heat exchangers:
selection, rating, and thermal design.
[14] GUT, J. A. W., & PINTO, J. M. (2003). Modeling of plate heat exchangers with
generalized configurations. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 46(14),
25712585. doi:10.1016/S0017-9310(03)00040-1
[15] DAI, Y., WANG, J., & GAO, L. (2009). Parametric optimization and comparative
study of organic Rankine cycle ( ORC ) for low grade waste heat recovery. Energy
Conversion and Management, 50(3), 576582. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2008.10.018
[16] EARL COX; (1994) The Fuzzy Systems Handbook : a Practitioner's Guide to Building,
Using and Maintaining Fuzzy Systems; Professional, 1994 ; ISBN 0-12-194270-8
[17] PEDRYCZ, W.; GOMIDE, F.; (2007), Fuzzy Systems Engineering : Toward HumanCentric Computing; Wiley/IEEE Press, 2007 ; ISBN 978-0-471-78857-7
[18] ALVES, M. S. (2013), Computational Modeling and Optimization of a Solar Organic
Rankine Cycle with Parabolic Trough Collector, Itajub - MG, 195 p. Dissertation
(Master sciences in Energy Conversion) Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Federal
University of Itajub.