Analysis and simulation of modified

ammonia/water absorption cycle

for power and cooling applications
..............................................................................................................................................................

Dereje S. Ayou1, Rajagopal Saravanan2, Joan Carles Bruno1 and Alberto Coronas1 *
1
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, CREVER Group of Applied Thermal Engineering, Avda.
Paisos Catalans, 26, 43007 Tarragona, Spain; 2Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Institute for Energy Studies, Anna University, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai 600025,
India
.............................................................................................................................................
Abstract

Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014

Combined production of power and cooling can improve energy utilization efficiency significantly. In this
paper, a new ammonia/water combined absorption power and cooling cycle is proposed for simultaneous
generation of power and cooling. This cycle is a combination of absorption refrigeration and Kalina power
cycles. The performance of the cycle was evaluated by using several performance-indicating parameters
such as overall thermal efficiency, effective first law efficiency and power/cooling ratio. The influence of
key operating parametersgenerator, sink and evaporator temperatures on the cycle performancewas
investigated. The proposed combined absorption cycle has an energy consumption that is lower by
around 12% than that when using the separate cycles (regenerative ORC and single-effect ammonia/water
absorption refrigeration cycle) at the base-case conditions considered.

Keywords: Kalina power cycle; absorption cycle; combined power and cooling; power/cooling ratio;
effective first law efficiency
*Corresponding author:
alberto.coronas@urv.cat Received 14 January 2013; revised 4 April 2013; accepted 9 April 2013
................................................................................................................................................................................

1 INTRODUCTION expander. It is due to the interesting characteristic a binary

In recent years, the ever increase in global energy demand and
greenhouse gas emissions requires an increased use of sustainable
energy sources such as solar thermal energy, biomass and waste
heat energy for power and cooling applications. The use of low-
and medium-temperature thermal sources such as solar thermal
energy, biomass or biogas to produce refrigeration and mechanic-
al power is well known; absorption refrigeration cycles and Kalina
cycles both using ammonia/water (NH3/H2O) mixture as
working fluid are good examples of these systems. Absorption
cycles for mechanical power such as the Kalina cycle consist of
components used also in absorption refrigeration cycles as absor-
bers, generators (desorbers); thus, the combination of both
systems is not only possible but also presents some advantages
from the technical performance perspective with a higher effi-
ciency than the separated production of power and refrigeration,
which means a better use of primary energy resources.
Goswami [1] proposed a new cycle later analysed in Sadrameli
and Goswami [2] intended primarily for power generation while
simultaneously producing a cooling output. The combined
cooling output is gained from a heat exchanger following an
NH3/H2O mixture offers as a working fluid: at constant pressure,
NH3-rich vapour can start to condense at temperature below the
saturation temperature of a lower concentration, in NH3, liquid
[3]. The use of low heat-source temperatures below 2008C is one
of the characteristics of this cycle. Since this cycle uses the expand-
er exhaust gases through a cooler transferring sensible heat to the
chilled fluid (such as water), the refrigeration output is relatively
small. Erickson et al. [4] proposed an NH3/H2O absorption cycle
configuration, which produces power and refrigeration inter-
changeably. The dual-function cycle consists of a heat recovery
unit, desorber, recuperator, absorber, turbine, condenser and
evaporator. This cycle ensures that the available heat source (waste
heat) is fully utilized year-round, by converting it to power and/or
refrigeration. Therefore, the capital equipment is utilized effect-
ively throughout the year. A dual-function cycle derived from a
double-effect absorption cycle has been proposed by Ziegler; with
this cycle, it is estimated to produce 1.2 MW of cooling and
100 kW of power using 1 MW of thermal energy when the cycle
operates as pure absorption refrigeration cycle and pure sorption
power cycle, respectively [5]. The main advantage of all these con-
figurations is the possibility to use low-grade heat sources such as

International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26

# The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com
doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctt032 i19
D.S. Ayou et al.
solar thermal energy, geothermal heat or waste heat. Other refer-
ences for absorption cycles suitable for simultaneous production
of power and refrigeration are also available in the literature [6].
Although other types of mixtures (like ammonia/lithium
nitrate, ammonia/sodium thiocyanate and organic fluids) can
be used, NH3/H2O mixture is the commonly used working fluid
for combined absorption cycles [6 8]. The main advantage of
these non-conventional working fluids in the combined absorp-
tion cycles is that they can be used to overcome some of the
drawbacks, such as the costly rectification process, associated
with the conventional NH3/H2O working fluid. At the Group of
Applied Thermal Engineering-CREVER, we have been analysing
the thermodynamic performance of the non-conventional
working fluids for combined absorption cycles [7].
The objective of this paper is to systematically study a modified
basic NH3/H2O absorption cycle configuration using NH3 as
refrigerant and H2O as absorbent to simultaneously produce re-
frigeration and mechanical power using renewable resources such
as thermal solar energy, biomass or biogas with a single system
able to cover different demand profiles of power and refrigeration.
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE CYCLE
CONFIGURATION
Figure 1 shows the schematic diagram of the cycle configuration
proposed and analysed in this paper. The cycle is the result of
Figure 1. Modified ammonia/water cycle for combined power and cooling applications.
i20 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26
the combination of absorption refrigeration and Kalina power
cycles. The system operates at two pressure levels, those given by
the condenser at high pressure and the evaporator at low pres-
sure. An NH3/H2O mixture, referred as the basic solution
(state 1), is pumped to the system high pressure (state 2) and
split into three streams (state 3A, 3B and 3C), which recovers
heat internally before re-mixed (state 7) and enter into the
low-temperature generator (Generator 1). The basic solution is
partially boiled in Generator 1 and separated into liquid (state
16) and vapour stream (state 9), which is further purified in
reflux condenser (state 10). The liquid condensate leaving the
reflux condenser (state 26) is re-mixed with the basic solution
leaving Generator 1 (state 8) in the low temperature separator.
Then, the liquid solution (state 16) is boiled in the high-
temperature generator (Generator 2) and separated into vapour
(state 18) and liquid (state 22) streams. The liquid solution is
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
throttled to the system low pressure (state 23 24) after exchan-
ging heat with basic solution.
The vapour from the high-temperature separator begins the
power sub-cycle process (state 18 19 20 21) by being super-
heated to the highest temperature in the cycle (state 19). It then
expands in the turbine to generate power (state 20). The turbine
exhaust is then cooled in recovery heat exchanger (state 20 21)
by preheating the part of the basic solution (state 3B 5), and
the remaining basic solution is pre-heated by the recovered heat
from the reflux condenser (state 3C 6) and weak solution in the
solution heat exchanger (state 3A 4). The purified vapour
(state 10) begins the refrigeration sub-cycle process (state 10

11 12 13 14 15) after condensing in the condenser is sub- (n) Optimum split ratio is 0.277 (the split ratio is defined as
cooled (state 11 12) in the condensate pre-cooler by heating the
vapour leaving the evaporator (state 14 15) and then throttled
(state 12 13) in the expansion valve before it produces the
cooling effect in the evaporator (state 13 14). The three streams
(state 15, 21 and 24) mix to regenerate the basic solution (state
25), which is cooled in the absorber to state 1, and this com-
pletes the whole cycle process.
3 THERMODYNAMIC MODEL
The thermodynamic model for the analysis and simulation of
the cycle is established based on simplifying model assumptions,
energy and mass balances for each component in the cycle.
Properties of the NH3/H2O mixture are calculated using the cor-
relations from the work of Tillner-Roth and Friend [9]. This
property data source is available in the Engineering Equation
Solver EES software as external library [10]. The physical equa-
tions describing the components of the cycle have been estab-
lished using also the EES program.
3.1 Model assumptions
The following assumptions were used in the thermodynamic
model:
(a) The system operated under steady-state steady flow
condition.
(b) No pressure changes except that through flow restrictors,
expander (turbine) and pump.
(c) State points (Figure 1) at 1, 11, 16, 22 and 26 are saturated
liquid.
(d) State points (Figure 1) at 9, 10, and 18 are saturated
vapour.
(e) Temperature difference (DT) between high-temperature
generator (Generator 2) and low-temperature generator
(Generator 1) is 10 K, t8 t17 2 10.
(f ) The saturated liquid and vapour leaving the reflux conden-
ser are in equilibrium at the reflux condenser temperature
and pressure.
(g) Partial vaporization is allowed in the evaporator, as total
evaporation requires large temperature glide, vapour
quality q14 0.95.
(h) The absorber and condenser exit temperatures are 58C
above the sink temperature.
(i) Flow restrictors are adiabatic.
( j) Temperature of the super heater is 450 K.
(k) Concentration of the purified vapour leaving the reflux
condenser is 0.999.
(l) Isentropic pump and turbine efficiencies are 80 and 85%,
respectively.
(m) Minimum temperature difference between the cold and
hot streams at the warm end of the reflux condenser is
10 K.
Analysis and simulation of modified ammonia/water absorption cycle
the ratio of the mass flow rate of the basic solution to the
recovery heat exchanger to the mass flow rate of the basic
solution from the absorber).
(o) Reference environment temperature (for exergy calcula-
tion) is 293 K.
Steady-state mass and energy balances for the components of
the cycles are established as follows:
Global mass balance:
X X
m_ in m
_ out 1
where m
_ denotes the mass flow rate (kg/s); in, inlet; out, outlet
Mass balance for ammonia:
X X
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
_ in zin
m m_ out zout 2
where z is the ammonia mass fraction (kg/kg).
Energy balance:
X X
0Q _ W_ _ in hin 
m m
_ out hout 3
where Q_ is the thermal power (kW); W, _ mechanical power
(kW); h, specific enthalpy (kJ/kg).
The mechanical power only appears in the energy balance of
the pump and turbine.
3.2 Performance parameters
Overall thermal efficiency (%), hth, is defined as the ratio
between the total useful energy outputs (net mechanical power
output, W _ net , and cooling effect, Q_ eva ) to the external energy
inputs to the system (generators and super heater thermal power
_ gen2 and Q
inputs are Q_ gen1 , Q _ sh , respectively):
W_ net Q _ eva
hth 4
_ gen1 Q
Q _ gen2 Q_ sh
where W _ net is the mechanical power output from the turbine,
reduced by the mechanical power input to the pump. The
overall thermal efficiency in Eq. (4) is only based on the first law
of thermodynamics and from the concept of cost-benefit ana-
lysis for energy conversion systems. In this definition, equal
weights are assigned for the thermodynamic quality of the dual
outputs (mechanical power and cooling). This leads to an over-
estimation of energy (first law) efficiency, in some cases closer or
even higher than the thermodynamic limit [6, 11].
An appropriate and thermodynamically consistent way to
account the quality of the cooling output in the definition of
energy efficiency (can also be in exergy efficiency) produced by
the combined absorption cycle is to replace the cooling output
of the cycle by the exergy associated with the cooling output (or
divide the cooling output by a COP of a reversible refrigeration
cycle). This is equivalent to replacing the cooling output, in the
energy efficiency definition, by the minimum mechanical power
International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26 i21
D.S. Ayou et al.

required to produce the same amount of cooling effect by using Table 1. Base-case performance summary for the proposed absorption
a reversible refrigeration cycle. However, in practice, the actual _ 1 1 kg=s basis for
cycle for power and cooling applications (m
(real) power input required to produce the same cooling effect is calculation).
quit high due to the internal and external irreversibilities inher- Useful dual output (kW)
ent in real refrigeration cycle processes. Therefore, in order to Cooling capacity (Q _ eva ) 180.84
weigh the cooling output of the cycle realistically, the exergy Net mechanical power (W _ net ) 22.04
associated with the cooling output must be divided by reason- Thermal power (kW)
Absorber heat duty (Q _ abs ) 451.45
able second law efficiency for a refrigeration cycle, which is
Condenser heat duty (Q_ con ) 181.28
equivalent to dividing the cooling capacity by a practical COP. Low-temperature generator heat input (Q _ gen1 ) 245.24
Accordingly, thermodynamically consistent and realistic energy High-temperature generator heat input (Q _ gen2 ) 216.89
(first law) efficiency is defined as follows. It is referred as effect- Reflux condenser heat duty (Q _ rec ) 171.15
ive first law efficiency by Vijayaraghavan et al. [11]. Recovery heat exchanger heat duty (Q _ rhx ) 48.66
Condensate pre-cooler heat duty (Q_ cpc ) 21.66
Solution heat exchanger heat duty (Q _ shx ) 255.00
W_ net Ex
_ eva =href
hI;eff 5 Superheater heat input (Q _ sh ) 11.80
_Qgen1 Q_ gen2 Q _ sh Total driving heat input (Q _ in ) 473.93

Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014

Mechanical power (kW)
Turbine (W _ turbine ) 23.61
where hI,eff (%) is the effective first law efficiency and href is the _ pump )
Solution pump (W 1.57
second law efficiency for vapour compression refrigeration cycle Exergy flow (kW)
(which is assumed to be 40% in this work [11, 12]). Cooling exergy output (Ex _ eva ) 20.82
Performance indicator
Overall thermal efficiency hth (%) 42.81
Effective first law efficiency hI;eff (%) 15.64
Power/cooling ratio R (-) 0.122

Table 2. The base-case stream characteristics for the proposed absorption

cycle.
State point t (8C) p (kPa) z (kg/kg) m
_ (kg/s) h (kJ/kg) s (kJ/kg K)

1 35.0 285 0.414 1 53.14 0.930

2 35.2 1349 0.414 1 54.72 0.931
3A 35.2 1349 0.414 0.359 54.72 0.931
3B 35.2 1349 0.414 0.277 54.72 0.931
3C 35.2 1349 0.414 0.364 54.72 0.931
4 119.4 1349 0.414 0.359 764.69 2.897
Figure 2. The effect of generator temperature on cycle useful outputs.
5 73.1 1349 0.414 0.277 230.64 1.468
6 103.6 1349 0.414 0.364 524.63 2.273
7 104.0 1349 0.414 1 529.53 2.286
8 120.0 1349 0.414 1 774.77 2.922
9 113.6 1349 0.911 0.238 1915.49 6.429
10 46.9 1349 0.999 0.156 1670.18 5.805
11 35.0 1349 0.999 0.156 508.05 2.038
12 5.8 1349 0.999 0.156 369.21 1.565
13 210.5 285 0.999 0.156 369.21 1.580
14 210.0 285 0.999 0.156 1528.51 5.992
15 19.9 285 0.999 0.156 1667.35 6.503
16 113.6 1349 0.306 0.844 406.50 1.852
17 130.0 1349 0.306 0.844 663.47 2.502
18 130.0 1349 0.830 0.099 2016.90 6.583
19 177.0 1349 0.830 0.099 2136.29 6.864
20 82.4 285 0.830 0.099 1897.47 6.982
21 52.0 285 0.830 0.099 1405.33 5.546
22 130.0 1349 0.236 0.745 483.88 1.961
23 54.8 1349 0.236 0.745 141.66 1.022
24 55.0 285 0.236 0.745 141.66 1.026
25 61.6 285 0.414 1 504.60 2.337
Figure 3. The effect of generator temperature on cycle efficiencies and power/
26 46.9 1349 0.744 0.082 298.96 1.678
cooling ratio.

i22 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26


The exergy associated with the cooling (kW), Ex_ eva , is calcu-
lated as the exergy change across the evaporator [12]:
_ eva m
Ex _ 13 h13  h14  T0 s13  s14 
where T0 is the reference (or dead state) temperature (K); s, spe-
cific entropy (kJ/kg K).
Power/cooling ratio, R, is defined as the ratio of the net mech-
anical power output of the system per the cooling effect pro-
duced in the evaporator:
_ net
W
R 7
Q_ eva
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The thermodynamic performance evaluation of the proposed
combined absorption cycle is performed for a generator tem-
perature (t17) between 105 and 1508C. The effect of the sink
Figure 4. The effect of generator temperature on cycle useful outputs at several
evaporator temperatures: (a) cooling capacity; (b) net power output.
Analysis and simulation of modified ammonia/water absorption cycle
temperature on the system performance is evaluated for a tem-
perature range between 20 and 408C. The evaporator tempera-
ture is also varied between 210 and 108C. A 1 kg/s of basic
6 solution through the pump is taken as a basis for calculation. To
account the quality of the useful outputs of the combined cycle
(mechanical power and cooling effect), effective first law effi-
ciency of the system is calculated at different generator, sink and
evaporator temperatures. The assumed reference environment
temperature (T0 293 K) was considered.
The influence of generator temperature on the cycle useful
output such as power produced, cooling capacity, overall
thermal efficiency, effective first law efficiency and power/
cooling ratio is shown above in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. The
cycle has an optimum value for the overall thermal efficiency
around the generator temperature of 1308C at the baseline case
(tabs tcon 358C and teva 2108C) considered in the cycle
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
simulation. The base case performance summary for the pro-
posed absorption cycle for power and cooling applications
is shown above in Table 1, and the corresponding stream
characteristics for the proposed absorption cycle is provided
above in Table 2. For a particular operating condition, there is
a minimum generator temperature to operate the cycle.
Figure 5. The effect of DT on (a) cycle useful outputs (mechanical power and
cooling) and (b) cycle efficiencies and power/cooling ratio at the base-case
condition.
International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26 i23
D.S. Ayou et al.
Figure 6. The effect of the sink temperature on (a) cycle useful outputs
(mechanical power and cooling) and (b) cycle efficiencies at several generator
temperatures.
Accordingly, there is a corresponding minimum heat source
temperature to fire the system. For the considered baseline case,
the generator temperature must be greater than 1008C. When
the generator temperature increases from 105 to 1508C, the net
power output cooling capacity, overall thermal and effective first
law efficiencies are also increased due to higher heat input.
As expected, the cooling capacity of the cycle increases and
net power out decreases with the increase in evaporator tem-
perature from 210 to 108C (Figure 4). Since the low pressure of
the system increases as the evaporator temperature increases, the
turbine pressure ratio decreases as a result; the mechanical
power output of the cycle decreases. Even though the specific en-
thalpy difference across the evaporator decreases the cooling
capacity of the cycle increases because the mass flow rate of the
rectified vapour increases at a faster rate than the decrease in the
specific enthalpy difference across the evaporator. The generator
temperature influence on the power output at higher evaporator
temperature has less compared with that of the lower evaporator
temperature.
The effect of DT (temperature difference between high-
temperature generatorGenerator 2 and low-temperature gen-
eratorGenerator 1) on cycle useful outputs, cycle efficiencies
i24 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
Figure 7. The effect of the evaporator temperature on (a) cycle useful outputs
(mechanical power and cooling) and (b) cycle efficiencies at several sink
temperatures.
and power/cooling ratio at the base-case condition is shown in
Figure 5. As the DT increases, the amount of heat supplied at
high-temperature generator also increases whereas the heat sup-
plied in the low-temperature generator decreases, leading to
higher power output and lower cooling capacity. From the
figures, it is observed that there is an optimum DT where both
overall thermal efficiency and effective first law efficiency is
maximum at the base-case condition.
As seen from Figure 6a, the cooling capacity of the cycle
decreases significantly as the sink temperature increases from 20
to 408C. Since the high pressure of the system increases as the
sink temperature increases, the amount of vapour desorbed (for
constant generator temperature) in both generators decreases.
But, the specific enthalpy difference across the turbine increases,
consequently the net power output shows slight variation with
an optimum value around 308C. The influence of sink tempera-
ture on the overall thermal efficiency has a higher compared
with the effective first law efficiency due the marginal variation
in the net power output compared with the cooling capacity
(Figure 6b).

Figure 8. The effect of the expander (turbine) isentropic efficiency on (a) cycle
useful outputs (mechanical power and cooling) and (b) cycle efficiencies and
power/cooling ratio at the base-case condition.
The variation of the net power output, cooling capacity,
overall thermal efficiency and effective first law efficiency with
sink and evaporator temperatures at the base-case condition is
illustrated in Figure 7. In contrary to the overall thermal effi-
ciency of the cycle shown in Figure 7b, the cycle shows higher ef-
fective first law efficiency at lower evaporator temperature
(suitable for refrigeration application). A similar trend is
observed for the effect of sink temperature on overall thermal
and effective first law efficiencies.
Figure 8 illustrates the effect of the expander (turbine) isen-
tropic efficiency on cycle useful outputs, cycle efficiencies and
power/cooling ratio at the base-case condition. It is found that
the turbine efficiency has higher impact on the net power
output and power/cooling ratio compared with other perform-
ance parameters as expected. It is found that at the optimum
condition of generator temperature at 1308C, sink temperature
of 308C, evaporator temperature of about 2108C, a net power
output of 22.04 kW and cooling capacity of 180.84 kW could be
attained with the overall thermal and effective first law efficien-
cies of the combined cycle 42.81 and 15.64%, respectively.
Analysis and simulation of modified ammonia/water absorption cycle
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
Figure 9. Schematic diagram of regenerative organic Rankine cycle.
Table 3. Inputs and assumptionsfor regenerative organic Rankine cycle.
Turbine inlet temperature (8C) 177
System high pressure (kPa) 1349
System low pressure (kPa) 285
Net mechanical power output (kW) 22.04
Working fluid: n-Pentene
Steady-state steady flow condition
No pressure changes except through turbine and pump
State point 7 (Figure 9) is saturated liquid
Degree of subcooling at the exit of the condenser (state point 4,
Figure 9) is 58C
Minimum temperature difference at the cold end of the regenerator is 108C
Isentropic pump and turbine efficiencies are 80 and 85%, respectively
The modified and analysed combined power and cooling
cycle is compared with other optional systems for separate pro-
duction of power (using regenerative organic Rankine cycle with
n-Pentane as working fluid) and refrigeration (single-stage NH3/
H2O absorption refrigeration cycle) having the same power and
cooling capacity. The regenerative organic Rankine cycle used in
the analysis is shown in Figure 9, and the input parameters and
assumptions made are given in Table 3. The simulation result at
the base line condition is presented in Table 4. The heat input
required for the cycle to produce the same amount of power
output, 22.04 kW, is around 160 kW yielding the thermal effi-
ciency of 13.78%. For separate production of cooling capacity of
180.84 kW at 2108C evaporator temperature with a cycle of
COP of 0.48, the driving heat input required for single-effect
ammonia absorption refrigeration system is 376.75 kW. Total
driving heat input required for the separate production of power
and refrigeration is 536.66 kW. Therefore, the proposed com-
bined absorption cycle has an energy consumption that is lower
by around 12% than that when using the separate cycles (regen-
erative ORC and single-effect ammonia/water absorption re-
frigeration cycle) at the base-case conditions considered.
International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26 i25
D.S. Ayou et al.
Table 4. Simulation results of Regenerative Organic Rankin Cycle.
Thermal power (kW)
Condenser heat duty (Q _ con )
Evaporator heat input (Q_ eva )
Preheater heat input (Q _ prehe )
Regenerator heat duty (Q _ reg )
Super heater heat input (Q _ sh )
Total driving heat input (Q _ in;ORC )
Mechanical power (kW)
Turbine (W _ turbine )
Circulation pump (W _ pump )
Thermal efficiency hth (%)
5 CONCLUDING REMARKS
A new modified ammonia/water absorption cycle is proposed
for the cogeneration of mechanical power and cooling. It can be
driven by small-scale Parabolic and Fresnel collectors or other
suitable sustainable energy resources. The cycle performance is
investigated using both overall thermal and effective first law ef-
ficiencies, and they are found to be 42.81 and 15.64%, respect-
ively, for the base case (sink and evaporator temperatures of 30
and 2108C) with the optimum generator temperature of
1308C. The mix of power and cooling produced by the cycle can
be adjusted to meet the seasonal requirement for cooling. A
study is conducted to investigate the effect of the sink and evap-
orator temperatures on the cycle performances. The power
output of the cycle is slightly sensitive for the variation of sink
temperature at the operating conditions analysed. But, the sim-
ultaneous cooling effect is highly sensitive for the sink tempera-
ture variation. When the quality of the cooling effect is
considered, a higher energy conversion efficiency is attained at
conditions suitable for refrigeration application (,08C).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
D.S.A. thanks the AGAUR (Catalan Government) for the
fellowship.
i26 International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies 2013, 8, i19i26
FUNDING
137.87 This research project was financially supported by the Spanish
93.89 Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (ENE2009-14177)
29.25 and the Catalan Government (2009SGR-33).
52.40
36.77
159.91 REFERENCES
22.94
0.90 [1] Goswami DY. Solar thermal power status and future directions. In:
13.78 Proceedings of the 2nd ISHMT-ASME Heat and Mass Transfer Conference,
New Delhi, 1995. Murthy S. and Jaluria Y (eds.), Tata McGraw Hill,
p. 57 60.
[2] Sadrameli SM, Goswami DY. Optimum operating conditions for a com-
bined power and cooling thermodynamic cycle. Appl Energy
2007;84:254 65.
Downloaded from http://ijlct.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on December 26, 2014
[3] Demirkaya G, Padilla RV, Goswami DY, et al. Analysis of a combined power
and cooling cycle for low-grade heat sources. Int J Energy Res
2011;35:1145 57.
[4] Erickson DC, Anand G, Kyung I. Heat-activated dual-function absorption
cycle. ASHRAE Transact Symp 2004;110:515 24.
[5] Ziegler F. Novel cycles for power and refrigeration. In: Proceeding of the 1st
European Conference on Polygeneration Technologies and Applications,
Tarragona, Spain, 2007. ISBN: 978-84-96294-37-0.
[6] Ayou DS, Bruno JC, Saravanan R, et al. An overview of combined absorp-
tion power and cooling cycles. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2013;21:728 48.
[7] Ayou DS, Bruno JC, Saravanan R, et al. New working fluids for a combined
power and cooling cycle. In: Proceeding of the 6th Heat Powered Cycles
Conference, Alkmaar, the Netherlands, 2012.
[8] Vijayaraghavan S, Goswami DY. Organic working fluids for a combined
power and cooling cycle. J Energ Res-ASME 2005;127:125 30.
[9] Tillner-Roth R, Friend D. A helmholtz free energy formulation of the
thermodynamic properties of the mixture fammonia waterg. J Phys
Chem Ref Data 1998;27:63 6.
[10] EES. Engineering Equation Solver. F-chart software, www.fchart.com;
1992 2012 (January 2012, date last accessed).
[11] Vijayaraghavan S, Goswami DY. On evaluating efficiency of a combined
power and cooling cycle. J Energ Res-ASME 2003;125:221 7.
[12] Zhang N, Cai R, Lior N. A novel ammonia-water cycle for power and re-
frigeration cogeneration. In: Proceedings of IMECE04 ASME International
Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Anaheim, California USA,
2004. IMECE2004-60692.