Thermodynamic analysis and multi‑objective optimization performance of solid oxide fuel cell–Ericsson heat engine–reverse osmosis desalination
MetadataShow full item record
CitationShakouri, O., Assad, M. E. H., & Açıkkalp, E. (2021). Thermodynamic analysis and multi-objective optimization performance of solid oxide fuel cell–Ericsson heat engine–reverse osmosis desalination. Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 145(3), 1075-1090. doi:10.1007/s10973-020-10413-7
This paper targets to consider a hybrid cycle consisting of a solid oxide fuel cell and an Ericsson thermal engine that provides drinking water by connecting to a reverse osmosis desalination unit. First, a parametric assessment was performed on the target functions, including power, exergy destruction density, and fresh water production. After conducting studies on the composition of these target functions, three scenarios are defned for the simultaneous optimization of the mentioned functions. The frst scenario targets to optimize the exergy destruction density (Exd) and the fresh water production (mf ). In this scenario the exergy destruction and fresh water production have a better condition in the FUZZY approach, that the maximum value of the exergy destruction density and fresh water production are 450.879 (W m−2) and 2.078 (kg s −1), respectively. The second scenario attempts to optimize the power (P) and the fresh water production (mf ). According this scenario the power has the highest value in the FUZZY that is equal to 531.965 (KW), besides the fresh water production achieves to a maximum value in TOPSIS which it value is 0.365 (kg s −1). The third scenario considers optimizing the power (P), the fresh water production (mf ), and the exergy destruction density (Exd). The power (P) has permanent value in three decision-making which is equal 311.105 (KW), also the fresh water production (mf ) is 1.816 (kg s −1) in three decision-making and besides the exergy destruction density (Exd) has a constant value in three decision-making which is 30.439 (W m−2). In all three scenarios, the decision-making methods, such as TOPSIS, FUZZY, and LINMAP were appropriate to specify the ultimate solution between the beam fronts.