IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i20p5280-d426432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of Decision-Making Tool and Pareto Set Analysis for Bi-Objective Optimization of an ORC Power Plant

Author

Listed:
  • Marcin Jankowski

    (ORC Power Plants Research and Development Centre, West Pomeranian University of Technology, al. Piastów 17, 70-310 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Aleksandra Borsukiewicz

    (ORC Power Plants Research and Development Centre, West Pomeranian University of Technology, al. Piastów 17, 70-310 Szczecin, Poland
    School of Mechanical & Mining Engineering, The University of Queensland, Queensland 4072, Australia)

  • Kamel Hooman

    (School of Mechanical & Mining Engineering, The University of Queensland, Queensland 4072, Australia)

Abstract

Power plants based on organic Rankine cycle (ORC) are known for their capacity in converting low and medium-temperature energy sources to electricity. To find the optimal operating conditions, a designer must evaluate the ORC from different perspectives including thermodynamic performance, technological limits, economic viability, and environmental impact. A popular approach to include different criteria simultaneously is to formulate a bi-objective optimization problem. This type of multi-objective optimization (MOO) allows for finding a set of optimal design points by defining two different objectives. Once the optimization is completed, the decision-making analysis shall be carried out to identify the final design solution. This study aims to develop a decision-making tool for facilitating the choice of the optimal design point. The proposed procedure is coded in MATLAB based on the commonly used Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). By providing the capability to graphically identify the decisions taken, the tool developed in the study is called Tracking and Recognizing Alternative Design Solutions (TRADeS). Analysis of our data shows that certain regions of Pareto set points should be excluded from the design space. It was noted that in these regions a high rate at which one of the objectives moves away from its ideal value coincides with a low rate at which the second criterion approaches its ideal solution. Hence, it was recommended that the criteria weights corresponding to excluded regions of the Pareto set should be discarded when selecting the final design point. By comparing the results obtained using the proposed model to those of existing decision-making techniques, it was concluded that while the known approaches are appropriate for an easy and fast selection of the final design point, the presented procedure allows for a more comprehensive and well-rounded design. It was shown that our design tool can be successfully applied in the decision-making analysis for problems that aim at optimizing the ORC using two design criteria. Finally, the proposed software benefits from a generic structure and is easy to implement which will facilitate its use in other industrial applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcin Jankowski & Aleksandra Borsukiewicz & Kamel Hooman, 2020. "Development of Decision-Making Tool and Pareto Set Analysis for Bi-Objective Optimization of an ORC Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-27, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:20:p:5280-:d:426432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/20/5280/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/20/5280/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Altun, A.F. & Kilic, M., 2020. "Thermodynamic performance evaluation of a geothermal ORC power plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 261-274.
    2. Da Lio, Luca & Manente, Giovanni & Lazzaretto, Andrea, 2017. "A mean-line model to predict the design efficiency of radial inflow turbines in organic Rankine cycle (ORC) systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 187-209.
    3. Shao, Meng & Han, Zhixin & Sun, Jinwei & Xiao, Chengsi & Zhang, Shulei & Zhao, Yuanxu, 2020. "A review of multi-criteria decision making applications for renewable energy site selection," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 377-403.
    4. Hu, Shuozhuo & Li, Jian & Yang, Fubin & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2020. "Multi-objective optimization of organic Rankine cycle using hydrofluorolefins (HFOs) based on different target preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Behzadi, Amirmohammad & Arabkoohsar, Ahmad & Gholamian, Ehsan, 2020. "Multi-criteria optimization of a biomass-fired proton exchange membrane fuel cell integrated with organic rankine cycle/thermoelectric generator using different gasification agents," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    6. Feng, Yongqiang & Zhang, Yaning & Li, Bingxi & Yang, Jinfu & Shi, Yang, 2015. "Sensitivity analysis and thermoeconomic comparison of ORCs (organic Rankine cycles) for low temperature waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 664-677.
    7. Jankowski, Marcin & Borsukiewicz, Aleksandra & Wiśniewski, Sławomir & Hooman, Kamel, 2020. "Multi-objective analysis of an influence of a geothermal water salinity on optimal operating parameters in low-temperature ORC power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    8. Pourrahmani, Hossein & Moghimi, Mahdi, 2019. "Exergoeconomic analysis and multi-objective optimization of a novel continuous solar-driven hydrogen production system assisted by phase change material thermal storage system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    9. Wang, Zhiqi & Hu, Yanhua & Xia, Xiaoxia & Zuo, Qingsong & Zhao, Bin & Li, Zhixiong, 2020. "Thermo-economic selection criteria of working fluid used in dual-loop ORC for engine waste heat recovery by multi-objective optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. Li, Jian & Ge, Zhong & Duan, Yuanyuan & Yang, Zhen & Liu, Qiang, 2018. "Parametric optimization and thermodynamic performance comparison of single-pressure and dual-pressure evaporation organic Rankine cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 409-421.
    11. Roumpedakis, Tryfon C. & Loumpardis, George & Monokrousou, Evropi & Braimakis, Konstantinos & Charalampidis, Antonios & Karellas, Sotirios, 2020. "Exergetic and economic analysis of a solar driven small scale ORC," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 1008-1024.
    12. Fiaschi, Daniele & Manfrida, Giampaolo & Maraschiello, Francesco, 2015. "Design and performance prediction of radial ORC turboexpanders," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 517-532.
    13. Feng, Yongqiang & Hung, TzuChen & Zhang, Yaning & Li, Bingxi & Yang, Jinfu & Shi, Yang, 2015. "Performance comparison of low-grade ORCs (organic Rankine cycles) using R245fa, pentane and their mixtures based on the thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization and decision makings," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(P2), pages 2018-2029.
    14. Kosmadakis, George & Neofytou, Panagiotis, 2020. "Investigating the performance and cost effects of nanorefrigerants in a low-temperature ORC unit for waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    15. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(3), pages 337-369, September.
    16. Wang, Lingbao & Bu, Xianbiao & Li, Huashan, 2020. "Multi-objective optimization and off-design evaluation of organic rankine cycle (ORC) for low-grade waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Semmari, Hamza & Bouaicha, Foued & Aberkane, Sofiane & Filali, Abdelkader & Blessent, Daniela & Badache, Messaoud, 2024. "Geological context and thermo-economic study of an indirect heat ORC geothermal power plant for the northeast region of Algeria," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    2. Huijun Feng & Wei Tang & Lingen Chen & Junchao Shi & Zhixiang Wu, 2021. "Multi-Objective Constructal Optimization for Marine Condensers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Maciej Żołądek & Alexandros Kafetzis & Rafał Figaj & Kyriakos Panopoulos, 2022. "Energy-Economic Assessment of Islanded Microgrid with Wind Turbine, Photovoltaic Field, Wood Gasifier, Battery, and Hydrogen Energy Storage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-23, September.
    4. Shuozhuo Hu & Zhen Yang & Jian Li & Yuanyuan Duan, 2021. "A Review of Multi-Objective Optimization in Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) System Design," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-36, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shuozhuo Hu & Zhen Yang & Jian Li & Yuanyuan Duan, 2021. "A Review of Multi-Objective Optimization in Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) System Design," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-36, October.
    2. Hu, Shuozhuo & Yang, Zhen & Li, Jian & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2022. "Optimal solar thermal retrofit for geothermal power systems considering the lifetime brine degradation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 628-645.
    3. Niu, Jintao & Wang, Jiansheng & Liu, Xueling, 2023. "Thermodynamic and economic analysis of organic Rankine cycle combined with flash cycle and ejector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    4. Gürgen, Samet & Altın, İsmail, 2022. "Novel decision-making strategy for working fluid selection in Organic Rankine Cycle: A case study for waste heat recovery of a marine diesel engine," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    5. Xu, Weicong & Zhao, Ruikai & Deng, Shuai & Zhao, Li & Mao, Samuel S., 2021. "Is zeotropic working fluid a promising option for organic Rankine cycle: A quantitative evaluation based on literature data," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Jankowski, Marcin & Klonowicz, Piotr & Borsukiewicz, Aleksandra, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization of an ORC power plant using one-dimensional design of a radial-inflow turbine with backswept rotor blades," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    7. Bamorovat Abadi, Gholamreza & Kim, Kyung Chun, 2017. "Investigation of organic Rankine cycles with zeotropic mixtures as a working fluid: Advantages and issues," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1000-1013.
    8. Liu, Jian & Xu, Yantao & Zhang, Yaning & Shuai, Yong & Li, Bingxi, 2022. "Multi-objective optimization of low temperature cooling water organic Rankine cycle using dual pinch point temperature difference technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    9. Al Jubori, Ayad M. & Al-Dadah, Raya & Mahmoud, Saad, 2017. "Performance enhancement of a small-scale organic Rankine cycle radial-inflow turbine through multi-objective optimization algorithm," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 297-311.
    10. Feng, Yong-qiang & Wang, Yu & Yao, Lin & Xu, Jing-wei & Zhang, Fei-yang & He, Zhi-xia & Wang, Qian & Ma, Jian-long, 2023. "Parametric analysis and thermal-economical optimization of a parallel dual pressure evaporation and two stage regenerative organic Rankine cycle using mixture working fluids," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PA).
    11. Braimakis, Konstantinos & Karellas, Sotirios, 2017. "Integrated thermoeconomic optimization of standard and regenerative ORC for different heat source types and capacities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 570-598.
    12. Schifflechner, Christopher & Kuhnert, Lara & Irrgang, Ludwig & Dawo, Fabian & Kaufmann, Florian & Wieland, Christoph & Spliethoff, Hartmut, 2023. "Geothermal trigeneration systems with Organic Rankine Cycles: Evaluation of different plant configurations considering part load behaviour," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 218-233.
    13. Magdalena Santos-Rodriguez, M. & Flores-Tlacuahuac, Antonio & Zavala, Victor M., 2017. "A stochastic optimization approach for the design of organic fluid mixtures for low-temperature heat recovery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 145-159.
    14. Yang, Fubin & Cho, Heejin & Zhang, Hongguang & Zhang, Jian, 2017. "Thermoeconomic multi-objective optimization of a dual loop organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for CNG engine waste heat recovery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1100-1118.
    15. Ping, Xu & Yao, Baofeng & Zhang, Hongguang & Yang, Fubin, 2021. "Thermodynamic analysis and high-dimensional evolutionary many-objective optimization of dual loop organic Rankine cycle (DORC) for CNG engine waste heat recovery," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    16. Zhang, Yi-Fan & Li, Ming-Jia & Ren, Xiao & Duan, Xin-Yue & Wu, Chia-Jung & Xi, Huan & Feng, Yong-Qiang & Gong, Liang & Hung, Tzu-Chen, 2022. "Effect of heat source supplies on system behaviors of ORCs with different capacities: An experimental comparison between the 3 kW and 10 kW unit," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PB).
    17. Hu, Shuozhuo & Li, Jian & Yang, Fubin & Yang, Zhen & Duan, Yuanyuan, 2020. "Multi-objective optimization of organic Rankine cycle using hydrofluorolefins (HFOs) based on different target preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    18. Sun, Hongchuang & Qin, Jiang & Hung, Tzu-Chen & Lin, Chih-Hung & Lin, Yi-Fan, 2018. "Performance comparison of organic Rankine cycle with expansion from superheated zone or two-phase zone based on temperature utilization rate of heat source," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 566-576.
    19. Feng, Yong-qiang & Zhang, Fei-yang & Xu, Jing-wei & He, Zhi-xia & Zhang, Qiang & Xu, Kang-jing, 2023. "Parametric analysis and multi-objective optimization of biomass-fired organic Rankine cycle system combined heat and power under three operation strategies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 431-449.
    20. Kang, Lixia & Tang, Jianping & Liu, Yongzhong, 2020. "Optimal design of an organic Rankine cycle system considering the expected variations on heat sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:20:p:5280-:d:426432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.