2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jece.2021.106473
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Energy, exergoeconomic and environmental optimization of a cascade refrigeration system using different low GWP refrigerants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To validate the constructed models of the cascade refrigeration system, the basic performance parameters of the system, including the exergy destruction rate of all components, COP, the exergy efficiency, and annual total cost, are compared with the results by Deymi (Deymi-Dashtebayaz et al, 2021). The refrigerating capacity, ambient temperature, condensation temperature of the hightemperature stage, evaporation temperature of low-temperature phase and cascade temperature difference are 10 kW, 25 °C, 40 °C, −50 °C, and 5 °C, respectively.…”
Section: Model Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To validate the constructed models of the cascade refrigeration system, the basic performance parameters of the system, including the exergy destruction rate of all components, COP, the exergy efficiency, and annual total cost, are compared with the results by Deymi (Deymi-Dashtebayaz et al, 2021). The refrigerating capacity, ambient temperature, condensation temperature of the hightemperature stage, evaporation temperature of low-temperature phase and cascade temperature difference are 10 kW, 25 °C, 40 °C, −50 °C, and 5 °C, respectively.…”
Section: Model Verificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, Aktemur and Ozturk 17 compared the system performance of three CRSs with R41 as LTC refrigerant based on energy and exergy analysis. Deymi‐Dashtebayaz et al 18 developed an energy‐exergoeconomic‐environmental model to study the operation efficiency of CRSs with R41 and R744 being as low‐temperature refrigerants. Aktemur et al 19 performed the comparative energy and exergy analysis on a CRS by adopting refrigerant pairs R41‐R423A, R41‐R1243zf, R41‐R601A, R41‐R1233d(E), R41‐R601, and R41‐RE170.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chae and Choi [11] showed that the COP is lower when the system is undercharged because the heat transfer capacity decreases. Deymi-Dashtebayaz et al, [12] proposed the Pareto front curve to obtain the optimal operational conditions and refrigerants considering maximum COP, maximum exergy efficiency and minimum total cost rate. R-41/R-161 and R-41/R-1234ze(E) present the highest COP and exergy efficiency and lowest total cost rate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%