See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/312265679

Exergy analysis of a dual-evaporator refrigeration systems

Conference Paper  in  AIP Conference Proceedings · January 2017

DOI: 10.1063/1.4968264

CITATIONS READS
2 174

3 authors, including:

Matheus Dwinanto Prajitno Prajitno

Universitas Nusa Cendana Universitas Gadjah Mada
7 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Refrigeration, optimization, heat exchanger View project

Heat Transfer View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Matheus Dwinanto on 30 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Exergy analysis of a dual-evaporator refrigeration systems
Matheus M. Dwinanto, Suhanan, and Prajitno

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 030011 (2017); doi: 10.1063/1.4968264

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4968264
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1788/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Effect of water temperature and air stream velocity on performance of direct evaporative air cooler for thermal
comfort
AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 030024 (2017); 10.1063/1.4968277

Effect of ambient temperature on the performance characteristics of automotive air conditioning system using
R1234yf and R134a: Energy and exergy-based approaches
AIP Conference Proceedings 1778, 030004 (2016); 10.1063/1.4965738

Experimental evaluation on the use of capillary tube and thermostatic expansion valve with heat recovery hot
spot water heater in air source refrigeration system
AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 030023 (2017); 10.1063/1.4968276

The effect the effectiveness of the liquid suction heat exchanger to performance of cold storage with refrigerant
R22, R404A and R290/R600a
AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 030067 (2017); 10.1063/1.4968320

Group Photo: International Conference on Engineering, Science and Nanotechnology 2016 (ICESNANO 2016)
AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 010002 (2017); 10.1063/1.4968248

Performance analysis of the electric vehicle air conditioner by replacing hydrocarbon refrigerant
AIP Conference Proceedings 1788, 030015 (2017); 10.1063/1.4968268
 Exergy Analysis of a Dual-Evaporator Refrigeration
Systems
Matheus M. Dwinanto1, a) Suhanan1,b) and Prajitno1, c)
1
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Gadjah Mada,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding author: m2dwir3fri@gmail.com
b)
suhanan@ugm.ac.id
c)
prajitno@ugm.ac.id

Abstract. A performance analysis based on exergetic performance coefficient (EPC) criterion was carried out for a dual-
evaporator vapor compression refrigeration system. The influence of the condensing and evaporating temperature on the
EPC, the coefficient of performance (COP), the second law efficiency and the destruction of exergy will be presented. It
is found that the evaporating and condensing temperatures have strong effects on EPC in the system. Condensing
temperature increases will decrease EPC, COP, and second law efficiency, while evaporating temperature increases will
increase the EPC, COP, and second law efficiency. The EPC increases and the total exergy destruction decreases with
decreasing temperature difference between the evaporator and refrigerated space and between the condenser and ambient
temperature. The EPC can be used for selection of optimal design parameters and the procedures given in this paper for
exergy analysis of a dual evaporator vapor compression refrigeration systems has been applied to actual systems.

INTRODUCTION
Thermodynamic processes in refrigeration systems release large amounts of heat to the environment. Heat
transfer between the system and the surrounding environment takes place at a finite temperature difference, which is
a major source of irreversibility for the cycle. Irreversibilities cause the system performance to degrade. Energy
(first law) analysis is still the most commonly used method in the analysis of the thermal system. The first law is
concerned only with the conservation of energy, and it gives no information on how, where, and how much the
system performance is degraded. Exergy analysis is a powerful tool in the design, optimization, and performance
evaluation of energy system. Exergy analysis also helps in taking account the important engineering decision
regarding design parameters of a system [1]. The first law of thermodynamics is related to energy and work losses,
while the second law of thermodynamics (exergy analysis) takes entropy into account via irreversibilities [2] and as
a result, exergy analysis is useful for improving the efficiency of energy-resource use, since it quantifies the
locations, types, and magnitude of losses [3]. Exergy analysis can be applied to small subsystems [4]. Therefore, it
enables a distributed exergy destruction map over the whole system by which one can find the component with the
highest exergy destruction. An important objective of exergy analysis for systems that consume power such as
refrigeration is finding the minimum power required for a certain desired result. Arora and Kaushik [5] did a
detailed exergy analysis of an actual VCR cycle. They developed a computational model to calculate the COP,
exergy destruction, exergy efficiency, and the efficiency defects for R502, R404A, and R507A for temperature in
the range of -50 to 0qC and condenser temperature range of 40 – 55qC. They concluded that 507A is a better
substitute to R502A than that of R404A.
The first serious discussion and analysis of two evaporator refrigeration system were performed by Stoecker [6].
In another major study, a mathematical programming approach to optimize a refrigeration cycle comprising two
evaporators operating at two different temperatures for different types of refrigerant mixtures was developed by
Churi and Achenie [7]. As a result of this study, it was realized that the multi-evaporator cycle could give higher

International Conference on Engineering, Science and Nanotechnology 2016 (ICESNANO 2016)

AIP Conf. Proc. 1788, 030011-1–030011-8; doi: 10.1063/1.4968264
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1452-5/$30.00

030011-1
efficiencies compared to the single evaporator cycle. As noted by Li and Su [8, 9] a two evaporator refrigeration
system has a larger surface area for heat recovery and this situation causes a reduction of compressor work.
Therefore, it can be said that two or more evaporators in a refrigeration system show better performance than one
evaporator system. The simulation model developed by Zhu et al. [10] is aimed at the optimal control analysis of
multi-evaporator variable refrigerant flow air conditioning system both in cooling and heating modes. The results
obtained from this study showed that the AGM-I is more applicable then a generic simulation model for multi-
evaporator VRF system. On the other hand, the AGM-II is more applicable for the one evaporator VRF system.
In the study, the main objective is to investigate the actual performance of a dual evaporator vapor compression
refrigeration system based on exergetic performance coefficient (EPC) using R134a as a refrigerant. Exergetic
performance coefficient is defined as the ratio of exergy output to the total exergy destruction rate (or loss rate of
availability), which was applied to various energy system for their performance evaluations [11].

EXPERIMENTAL SET UP AND EXERGY ANALYSIS

A dual-evaporator vapor compression refrigeration system (DERS) consists of a single condenser, dual-
evaporator, single compressor with multiple expansion devices and a back pressure valve. Schematic of the
experimental set up showing measurement system and instrumentation is presented in Fig. 1, and pressure-enthalpy
and temperature-entropy diagram refrigeration unit with the dual evaporator for R134a is presented in Fig. 2.
Experimentally measured parameters were: pressure and temperatures at the state indicated with solid circles, power
to the hermetic compressor, total power to the system including fans, mass flow rate of the refrigerant, volume flow
rate of air through the heat exchangers of the condenser and both evaporator. Experimental studies were carried out
at full conditions, which were for cooling modes. Temperatures at various locations (compressor, condenser, both
evaporators, both thermostatic expansion valves, back pressure valve, mixing chamber and both cabinets) are
measured with T-type (copper-constantan) thermocouples having 0.5 mm diameter with an accuracy of ± 0.1qC.
Two pressure gauges used to measure the evaporation and condensation pressures at the inlet and outlet of the
compressor. Another pressure gauge is placed at the outlet of the condenser to measure the pressure drop in the
condenser section. Four pressure gauges are placed at the inlet and outlet of the both evaporators to measure the
pressure drop in the both evaporators section. The location of all of the pressure gauges and thermocouples are
shown in Fig. 1. The mass flow rate of refrigerant was measured by a rotameter.
Concerning Fig. 1, the back pressure valve that is provided at the outlet of evaporator#2 helps to keep the
required pressure in evaporator#2. Also, it reduces the pressure of vapor at its outlet by throttling process (h16 = h17).
The mass flow rate m2 through evaporator #2 is enough to take its cooling load. The remaining mass flow m1 passes
through evaporator#1 taking care of its load. The pressure ratio to be maintained for the unit is again based on the
condenser pressure and the evaporator pressure corresponding to the lowest temperature evaporator (here
evaporator#1). The coefficient of performance (COP) of the refrigeration system becomes [12]:

COP
Qevap#1  Q evap# 2 
(1)
Wcomp

Exergy analysis of a process is a supplement to energy analysis, used to assess the work potential of the input
and output material and heat streams, and to determine the location and magnitude of irreversibility losses. The aim
in an exergy analysis is usually to determine the exergy destructions in each component of the system and to
determine exergy efficiencies. The components with greater exergy destructions are also those with more potential
for improvements. Exergy destruction in a component can be determined from an exergy balance on the component.
It can also be determined by first calculating the entropy generation and using [13]:

Exdest T0 S gen (2)

Where T0 is the dead-state temperature or environment temperature. In the refrigerator, T0 is usually equal to the
temperature of the high-temperature medium TH. Exergy destruction for each component of the cycle are as follows:
For compressor
 T0 ( s2  s1 )
Exdest,comp T0 S gen,12 m (3)

030011-2
For condenser
§ Q cond ·
Exdest ,cond T0 S gen,3 4 m T0 ¨¨ s 4  s3  ¸ (4)
© TH ¸¹

The expansion through the thermostatic expansion valve is a throttling process; thus, the quality and specific entropy
at state 13 and 15 are, respectively [14]:
For thermostatic expansion valve#1
h12  h f 13
x13 (5)
hg13  h f 13
and
s13 s f 13  x13 ( s g13  s f 13 ) (6)
then
Exdest,tev #1 T0 S gen,1213  1 T0( s13  s12 )
m (7)

FIGURE 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup

For thermostatic expansion valve#2
h14  h f 15
x15 (8)
hg15  h f 15
and
s15 s f 15  x15 ( s g15  s f 15 ) (9)

030011-3
 FIGURE 2. Pressure-enthalpy and temperature-entropy diagram of dual evaporator for R134a

then
Exdest,tev # 2 T0 S gen,1415  2T0 ( s15  s14 )
m (10)

For evaporator#1
§ Q evap#1 ·
Exdest ,evap#1 T0 S gen, 67 m 1T0 ¨¨ s7  s6  ¸¸ (11)
© TL1 ¹

For evaporator#2
§ Q evap# 2 ·
Exdest ,evap# 2 T0 S gen, 47 m 2T0 ¨¨ s7  s4  ¸¸ (12)
© TL 2 ¹
For back pressure valve
Exdest ,bpv T0 S gen,1617  2T0 ( s17  s16 )
m (13)
For mixing chamber
Exdest,mc >m s19  (m 1s18  m 2 s17 )@T0 (14)

The total exergy destruction in the cycle can be determined by the difference between the exergy supplied
(power input) and the exergy recovered (the exergy of the heat transferred from the low-temperature medium):

Exdest ,total Wcomp  ExQ evap (15)

where
ExQ evap ExQ evap#1  ExQ evap# 2 (16)

§ T ·
ExQ evap#1 Q evap#1 ¨¨1  0 ¸¸ (17)
© TL1 ¹

§ T0 ·
ExQ evap# 2 Q evap# 2 ¨¨1  ¸ (18)
© TL 2 ¸¹

The minus sign is needed to make the result positive. Note that the exergy of the heat transferred from low-
temperature medium is, in fact, the minimum power input to accomplish the required refrigeration load, Q evap :
Wmin ExQ evap (19)

030011-4
The second law efficiency (or exergy efficiency) of the cycle is defined as:

ExQ evap
K II (20)
Wcomp

To have information about the exergy destruction of the DERS, it is additionally required to have another
performance criterion. Therefore, this study introduced a performance criterion named exergetic performance
criterion (EPC) that gives information about the total exergy destruction rate (or loss rate of availability) to produce
a certain amount of exergy output. The EPC is related to the second law efficiency by [11]

K II
EPC (21)
1  K II

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To see the results of EPC analysis for a DERS some important parameters are given and discussed. The
thermodynamic analysis of the DERS has been performed based on the following assumptions:
(i) Steady state, steady flow operation.
(ii) Chemical, kinetic and potential energy and exergy of the components are omitted.
(iii) Pressure drops in the pipe networks are neglected.
(iv) Saturated states at the single condenser and dual evaporator outlets.
The case model parameters for the analysis of the DERS are chosen as given in Table 1. Effects of condensing
and evaporating temperature on total exergy destruction, COP, the second law of efficiency and EPC of the system
are shown in Fig. 3 – 6.

TABLE 1. Case model parameters for analysis of DERS

Parameters Unit Value
Cooling load evaporator#1 kW 0.9
Cooling load evaporaot#2 kW 0.4
Ambient temperature, T0 qC 31

The total exergy destruction and COP in DERS as a function of the evaporator#1, evaporator#2 and condenser
temperatures are depicted in Fig. 3. The total exergy destruction and COP are influenced remarkably by both
evaporator temperatures, where the total exergy destruction increases with the decrease of both evaporator
temperatures and decreasing COP. In addition, as the condenser temperature increases the total exergy destruction of
the refrigeration system increases and decreasing COP. It is obvious because the higher the temperature difference
between the ambient and the condenser causes the higher exergy losses.
Figure 4 depicts relation of total exergy destruction and exergy efficiency as a function of evaporator and
condenser temperatures. From the curves in Fig. 4, it is apparent that the effect of evapotaror#2 total exergy
destruction on exergy efficiency can be ignored when it is compared to that of evaporator#1 total exergy destruction
at the temperature range studied. The exergy efficiency is not influenced remarkably by evaporator#2. However it
increases with the increase of evaporator#1 temperature. Conversely, exergy efficiency decreases with the increasing
value of condenser temperature. The main factor affecting exergy destruction in evaporator#1 and evaporator#2 is
the entropy flow because of keeping constant the capacities of evaporator#1 and evaporator#2 as 0.9 kW and 0.4
kW, respectively. As the evaporator temperature increases, this causes the entropy flow across the evaporators to
decrease as shown from the T-s diagrams in Fig. 2. Therefore, the total exergy destruction in the evaporators
decreases as the evaporator temperature increases.

030011-5
 FIGURE 3. Relation of total exergy destruction and COP as a function of evaporator and condenser temperatures

FIGURE 4. Relation of total exergy destruction and K II as a function of evaporator and condenser temperatures

The EPC and COP in DERS as a function of the evaporator#1, evaporator#2 and condenser temperatures are
depicted in Fig. 5. The EPC and COP are influenced remarkably by both evaporator temperatures, where the EPC

030011-6
and COP decrease with the decrease of both evaporator temperatures. However, the EPC and COP increase with the
decrease of condenser temperature.

FIGURE 5. Relation of EPC and COP as a function of evaporator and condenser temperatures

FIGURE 6. Relationship of EPC and K II as a function of evaporator and condenser temperatures

030011-7
 Figure 6 depicts relationship of EPC and exergy efficiency as a function of evaporator and condenser
temperatures. From the curves in Fig. 6, it is apparent that the effect of evapotaror#2 EPC on exergy efficiency can
be ignored when it is compared to that of evaporator#1 EPC at the temperature range studied. The exergy efficiency
is not influenced remarkably by evaporator#2. However it increases with the increase of evaporator#1 temperature.
Conversely, EPC and exergy efficiency decreases with the increasing value of condenser temperature. The common
characteristic of the figure is that EPC increase with increasing evaporator temperature and decrease with increasing
condenser temperature.

CONCLUSIONS
In this work, an analysis based on exergetic performance criterion (EPC) is presented for the investigation of the
effects of the condensing and evaporating temperatures on the total exergy destruction, the coefficient of
performance, and the second law efficiency of a dual evaporator vapor compression refrigeration system. It is found
that the condensing and evaporating temperatures have strong effects on the EPC, the second law efficiency and
COP of the system. The EPC, the second law efficiency and the COP increases, and the total exergy destruction
decrease with decreasing temperature difference between the evaporator and refrigerated space and between the
condenser and ambient temperature. The EPC can be used for selection of optimal design parameters and the
procedures given in this paper for exergy analysis of a dual evaporator vapor compression refrigeration systems has
been applied to actual systems.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank the Ministry of Research, Tech., and Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia and
LPPM University of Nusa Cendana for supporting this research and paper through The Grant 2016.

REFERENCES
1. R. Yumrutaş, M. Kunduz and M. Kanoğlu, Int. J. Exergy 2, 266–272 (2002).
2. I. Dinçer and Y. A. Cengel, Entropy 3, 116–149 (2001).
3. I. Dinçer and M. A. Rosen, Ren. Sust. Energy Reviews 9, 169–189 (2005).
4. A. Bejan, Int. J. Energy Research 26, 545–565 (2002).
5. A. Arora and S. C. Kaushik, Int. J. Refrigeration 31, 998–1005 (2008).
6. W. F. Stoecker, ASHRAE Trans. 9(1B), 241–249 (1985).
7. N. Churi and L. Achenie, Comp. Chem. Eng. 21(97), 349–354 (1997).
8. C. J. Li and C. C. Su, Appl. Therm. Eng. 23(12), 1503–1514 (2003).
9. C. J. Li and C. C. Su, 2005, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25(4), 519–532 (2005).
10. Y. Zhu, X. Jin, Z. Du, B. Fan and S. Fu, Int. J. Refrigeration 36, 1602–1615 (2013).
11. Y. Ust, B. Sahin and A. Kodal, Appl. Energy 84, 1079–1091 (2007).
12. R. S. Khurmi and J. K. Gupta, A Textbook of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning (Eurasia Publishing House,
Ltd, New Delhi, 2003), pp. 203–206.
13. I. Dinçer, and M. Kanoğlu, Refrigeration systems and applications (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York,
2010), pp. 161–165.
14. M. J. Moran, and H. N. Shapiro, Fundamentals of engineering thermodynamics (John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
New York, 2006), pp. 464.

030011-8
View publication stats