Advanced search
1 file | 801.88 KB Add to list

Comparison of moving boundary and finite-volume heat exchanger models in the modelica language

(2016) ENERGIES. 9(5). p.1-18
Author
Organization
Abstract
When modeling low capacity energy systems, such as a small size (5–150 kWel) organic Rankine cycle unit, the governing dynamics are mainly concentrated in the heat exchangers. As a consequence, the accuracy and simulation speed of the higher level system model mainly depend on the heat exchanger model formulation. In particular, the modeling of thermo-flow systems characterized by evaporation or condensation requires heat exchanger models capable of handling phase transitions. To this aim, the finite volume (FV) and the moving boundary (MB) approaches are the most widely used. The two models are developed and included in the open-source ThermoCycle Modelica library. In this contribution, a comparison between the two approaches is presented. An integrity and accuracy test is designed to evaluate the performance of the FV and MB models during transient conditions. In order to analyze how the two modeling approaches perform when integrated at a system level, two organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system models are built using the FV and the MB evaporator model, and their responses are compared against experimental data collected on an 11 kWel ORC power unit. Additionally, the effect of the void fraction value in the MB evaporator model and of the number of control volumes (CVs) in the FV one is investigated. The results allow drawing general guidelines for the development of heat exchanger dynamic models involving two-phase flows.
Keywords
SYSTEMS, VALIDATION, FLUID, dynamic validation, Modelica, organic Rankine cycle (ORC), dynamic modeling

Downloads

  • energies-09-00339.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 801.88 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Desideri, Adriano, et al. “Comparison of Moving Boundary and Finite-Volume Heat Exchanger Models in the Modelica Language.” ENERGIES, vol. 9, no. 5, 2016, pp. 1–18.
APA
Desideri, A., Dechesne, B., Wronski, J., van den Broek, M., Gusev, S., Lemort, V., & Quoilin, S. (2016). Comparison of moving boundary and finite-volume heat exchanger models in the modelica language. ENERGIES, 9(5), 1–18.
Chicago author-date
Desideri, Adriano, Bertrand Dechesne, Jorrit Wronski, Martijn van den Broek, Sergei Gusev, Vincent Lemort, and Sylvain Quoilin. 2016. “Comparison of Moving Boundary and Finite-Volume Heat Exchanger Models in the Modelica Language.” ENERGIES 9 (5): 1–18.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Desideri, Adriano, Bertrand Dechesne, Jorrit Wronski, Martijn van den Broek, Sergei Gusev, Vincent Lemort, and Sylvain Quoilin. 2016. “Comparison of Moving Boundary and Finite-Volume Heat Exchanger Models in the Modelica Language.” ENERGIES 9 (5): 1–18.
Vancouver
1.
Desideri A, Dechesne B, Wronski J, van den Broek M, Gusev S, Lemort V, et al. Comparison of moving boundary and finite-volume heat exchanger models in the modelica language. ENERGIES. 2016;9(5):1–18.
IEEE
[1]
A. Desideri et al., “Comparison of moving boundary and finite-volume heat exchanger models in the modelica language,” ENERGIES, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1–18, 2016.
@article{7205004,
  abstract     = {When modeling low capacity energy systems, such as a small size (5–150 kWel) organic Rankine cycle unit, the governing dynamics are mainly concentrated in the heat exchangers. As a consequence, the accuracy and simulation speed of the higher level system model mainly depend on the heat exchanger model formulation. In particular, the modeling of thermo-flow systems characterized by evaporation or condensation requires heat exchanger models capable of handling phase transitions. To this aim, the finite volume (FV) and the moving boundary (MB) approaches are the most widely used. The two models are developed and included in the open-source ThermoCycle Modelica library. In this contribution, a comparison between the two approaches is presented. An integrity and accuracy test is designed to evaluate the performance of the FV and MB models during transient conditions. In order to analyze how the two modeling approaches perform when integrated at a system level, two organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system models are built using the FV and the MB evaporator model, and their responses are compared against experimental data collected on an 11 kWel ORC power unit. Additionally, the effect of the void fraction value in the MB evaporator model and of the number of control volumes (CVs) in the FV one is investigated. The results allow drawing general guidelines for the development of heat exchanger dynamic models involving two-phase flows.},
  articleno    = {339},
  author       = {Desideri, Adriano and Dechesne, Bertrand and Wronski, Jorrit and van den Broek, Martijn and Gusev, Sergei and Lemort, Vincent and Quoilin, Sylvain},
  issn         = {1996-1073},
  journal      = {ENERGIES},
  keywords     = {SYSTEMS,VALIDATION,FLUID,dynamic validation,Modelica,organic Rankine cycle (ORC),dynamic modeling},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {339:1--339:18},
  title        = {Comparison of moving boundary and finite-volume heat exchanger models in the modelica language},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en9050339},
  volume       = {9},
  year         = {2016},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: