International Scientific Journal

Authors of this Paper

External Links


In this study, thermal models for subcritical and supercritical geothermal powered organic Rankine cycles are developed to compare the performance of these cycle configurations. Both of these models consist of a detailed model for the shell and tube heat exchanger integrating the geothermal and organic Rankine cycles sides and basic thermodynamic models for the rest of the components of the cycle. In the modeling of the heat exchanger, this component was divided into sever¬al zones and the outlet conditions of each zone were found applying logarithmic mean temperature difference method. Different Nusselt correlations according to the relevant phase (single, two-phase, and supercritical) were also included in this model. Using the system-level model, the effect of the source temperature on the performances of the heat exchanger and the organic Rankine cycle was assessed. These performance parameters are heat transfer surface area and pressure drop of tube side fluid for the heat exchanger, and electrical and exergetic efficiencies of the integrated organic Rankine cycles system. It was found that 44.12% more net power is generated when the supercritical organic Rankine cycle is used compared to subcritical organic Rankine cycle.
PAPER REVISED: 2017-12-06
PAPER ACCEPTED: 2017-12-11
CITATION EXPORT: view in browser or download as text file
THERMAL SCIENCE YEAR 2018, VOLUME 22, ISSUE Supplement 3, PAGES [S855 - S866]
  1. DiPippo, R., Geothermal energy electricity generation and environmental impact. Energy Policy, 19(8), (1991), pp. 798-807.
  2. Cakici, D. M., Erdogan, A., & Colpan, C. O., Thermodynamic performance assessment of an integrated geothermal powered supercritical regenerative organic Rankine cycle and parabolic trough solar collectors. Energy, 120, (2017), pp. 306-319.
  3. Kanoglu, M., Exergy analysis of a dual-level binary geothermal power plant. Geothermics, 31(6), (2002), pp. 709-724.
  4. DiPippo, R. Ideal thermal efficiency for geothermal binary plants. Geothermics, 36(3), (2007), pp. 276-285.
  5. Phair, K. A., Getting the most out of geothermal power. Mechanical Engineering, 116(9), (1994), pp. 76.
  6. Kanoglu, M., & Bolatturk, A. Performance and parametric investigation of a binary geothermal power plant by exergy. Renewable Energy, 33(11), (2008), pp. 2366-2374.
  7. Erdogan, A., Cakici, D. M., & Colpan, C. O., Thermodynamic optimisation of a hybrid solar-geothermal power plant using Taguchi method. International Journal of Exergy, 23(1), (2017), pp. 63-84.
  8. DiPippo R. Geothermal power plants: principles, applications, case studies and environmental impact, Butterworth-Heinemann, UK, 2012.
  9. Moro, R., Pinamonti, P., Reini, M. ORC technology for waste-wood to energy conversion in the furniture manufacturing industry. Thermal Science, 12, (2008), pp. 61-73.
  10. Kaya, A., Lazova, M., Bağcı, Ö., Lecompte, S., Ameel, B., & De Paepe, M. Design sensitivity analysis of a plate-finned air-cooled condenser for low-temperature organic Rankine cycles. Heat Transfer Engineering, 38(11-12), (2017), pp. 1018-1033.
  11. Heberle, F., & Brüggemann, D., Exergy based fluid selection for a geothermal Organic Rankine Cycle for combined heat and power generation. Applied Thermal Engineering, 30(11), (2010), pp. 1326-1332.
  12. Tempesti, D., & Fiaschi, D., Thermo-economic assessment of a micro CHP system fuelled by geothermal and solar energy. Energy, 58, (2013), pp. 45-51.
  13. Wang, Z. Q., Zhou, N. J., Guo, J., & Wang, X. Y. Fluid selection and parametric optimization of organic Rankine cycle using low temperature waste heat. Energy, 40(1), (2012), pp. 107-115.
  14. Marion, M., Voicu, I., & Tiffonnet, A. L., Study and optimization of a solar subcritical organic Rankine cycle. Renewable Energy, 48, (2012), pp. 100-109.
  15. Kosmadakis, G., Landelle, A., Lazova, M., Manolakos, D., Kaya, A., Huisseune, H., & De Paepe, M. Experimental testing of a low-temperature organic Rankine cycle (ORC) engine coupled with concentrating PV/thermal collectors: Laboratory and field tests. Energy, 117, (2016), pp. 222-236.
  16. Barbazza L, Pierobon L, Mirandola A, Haglind F. Optimal design of compact organic Rankine cycle units for domestic solar applications. Thermal Science, 18(3), (2014), 811-822.
  17. Türkiye'de Termik Santraller, TMMOB, Ankara, 2017.
  18. Wang, E., Yu, Z., Zhang, H., & Yang, F. A regenerative supercritical-subcritical dual-loop organic Rankine cycle system for energy recovery from the waste heat of internal combustion engines. Applied Energy, 190, (2017), pp. 574-590.
  19. Dong, B., Xu, G., Luo, X., Zhuang, L., & Quan, Y., Analysis of the supercritical organic Rankine cycle and the radial turbine design for high temperature applications. Applied Thermal Engineering, 123, (2017), pp. 1523-1530.
  20. Hsieh, J. C., Fu, B. R., Wang, T. W., Cheng, Y., Lee, Y. R., & Chang, J. C., Design and preliminary results of a 20-kW transcritical organic Rankine cycle with a screw expander for low-grade waste heat recovery. Applied Thermal Engineering, 110, (2017), pp. 1120-1127.
  21. Shengjun, Z., Huaixin, W., & Tao, G., Performance comparison and parametric optimization of subcritical Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) and transcritical power cycle system for low-temperature geothermal power generation. Applied energy, 88(8), (2011), pp. 2740-2754.
  22. Vetter, C., Wiemer, H. J., & Kuhn, D., Comparison of sub-and supercritical Organic Rankine Cycles for power generation from low-temperature/low-enthalpy geothermal wells, considering specific net power output and efficiency. Applied Thermal Engineering, 51(1), (2013), pp. 871-879.
  23. Lazova M, Kaya A, Huisseune H, De Paepe M. Supercritical Heat Transfer and Heat Exchanger Design for Organic Rankine Applications. 11th International Conference on Heat Transfer, Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics Proceedings 2015, pp. 588-593.
  24. Kakac, S., Liu, H., & Pramuanjaroenkij, A. Heat exchangers: selection, rating, and thermal design, CRC press, 2012.
  25. Calli O, Colpan CO, Gunerhan H. Performance Assessment of a Biomass Fired Regenerative ORC System Through Energy and Exergy Analyses. In: Exergetic, Energetic, Environmental Dimensions, (Eds. I. Dincer, C.O. Colpan, O. Kizilkan), Elsevier, USA, 2017, pp. 253-277.
  26. Erdogan, A., Colpan, C. O., & Cakici, D. M. Thermal design and analysis of a shell and tube heat exchanger integrating a geothermal based organic Rankine cycle and parabolic trough solar collectors. Renewable Energy, 109, (2017), pp. 372-391.
  27. Zhang, C., Liu, C., Wang, S., Xu, X., & Li, Q. Thermo-economic comparison of subcritical organic Rankine cycle based on different heat exchanger configurations. Energy, 123, (2017), 728-741.
  28. Lazova, M., Huisseune, H., Kaya, A., Lecompte, S., Kosmadakis, G., & De Paepe, M. Performance evaluation of a helical coil heat exchanger working under supercritical conditions in a solar organic Rankine cycle installation. Energies, 9(6), (2016), 1-20.
  29. Harrison J. (eds.) Standards of the Tubular Exchangers Manufacturers Association, Eight Edition, New York, 2007.
  30. Incropera, F. P., Bergman, T. L., Lavine, A. S., Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. Seventh Edition, Wiley, 2012.
  31. Kandlikar, S. G., A general correlation for saturated two-phase flow boiling heat transfer inside horizontal and vertical tubes. ASME J. Heat Transfer, 112(1), (1990), pp. 219-228.
  32. Fang, X., Xu, Y., Su, X., & Shi, R., Pressure drop and friction factor correlations of supercritical flow. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 242, (2012), 323-330.
  33. Ishihara, K., Palen, J. W., & Taborek, J., Critical review of correlations for predicting two-phase flow pressure drop across tube banks. Heat Transfer Engineering, 1(3), (1980), 23-32.

© 2024 Society of Thermal Engineers of Serbia. Published by the Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, National Institute of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International licence