Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Dynamic performance estimation of small-scale solar cogeneration

with an organic Rankine cycle using a scroll expander
B. Twomey*, P.A. Jacobs, H. Gurgenci
Queensland Geothermal Energy Centre of Excellence, The University of Queensland, Level 5, Bldg 45 Mansergh Shaw, Staff House Road, St. Lucia,
Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia

h i g h l i g h t s
< A scroll expander is modelled and parameter values are estimated experimentally.
< The scroll expander shows a maximum isentropic efciency of 59%.
< A dynamic model of a low-cost solar thermal cogeneration system is presented.
< The cycle thermal efciency is 3.47%.
< 1710 kWh electricity is produced per year as a by-product of heating water.

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 11 December 2011
Accepted 28 June 2012
Available online 13 December 2012

Small-scale solar thermal cogeneration shows promise as an effective way to get increased benet out of
a given solar availability, since it does not waste potential during summer after the water capacity is
heated. In this paper a scroll expander is tested in a small organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and used to
calibrate a static expander model. Validation of the scroll expander model shows agreement generally
within 10% for the shaft power, 5% for the rotational speed and 6 K for the exhaust temperature, with
some outliers at very low pressure ratios. This calibrated model is then incorporated into a larger
dynamic model of a solar thermal cogeneration system, designed for some larger dwelling unit or small
commercial establishment that requires a larger volume of hot water. An annual simulation is conducted
using a collector area of 50 m2, and the scroll expander shows a maximum isentropic efciency of 59%
while the ORC efciency is 3.47%. The total energy produced is 1710 kWh and the hot water available is
on average 2540 L/day. The maximum instantaneous power that can be produced by the system is 676 W,
and it is possible to shift the time period that the system is producing power to match the peak demand
period by adjusting the solar store volume.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Organic Rankine cycle
Dynamic modelling
Scroll expander
Solar cogeneration

1. Introduction
Amidst uncertain economic times and increasing electricity
costs, many home and small business owners are looking to invest
in renewable energy, and especially solar energy, as a stable
supplement. There are a number of emerging systems, but solar
power is typically generated by one of two methods. The rst is
photovoltaic (PV) solar capture that converts solar irradiance
directly to electricity and typically has an efciency between 12 and
20%. Solar thermal captures the irradiance as thermal energy and
has a heating efciency generally about 60%, so it is the better
choice for pure heating applications. To generate electricity, the

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 61 7 3365 7164.

E-mail address: b.twomey@uq.edu.au (B. Twomey).
1359-4311/$ e see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.06.054

heating efciency needs to be multiplied by a power conversion

efciency and the latter is low unless a high degree of concentration is used. The result is that for small installations, lowconcentration solar thermal is generally best for water and space
heating and PV is more effective to generate electricity.
Additionally, solar thermal panels are more effective during the
summer months than the winter, but the amount of hot water
required does not change much, so there is much wasted potential
during the summer when the capacity of water is heated. A solar
thermal power system may be competitive in applications that
need both electricity and heat, such as process heat for a brewery or
food processing plant, or water heating for a larger dwelling unit.
The goal of this study is to estimate the performance and
comment on the feasibility of a small-scale solar thermal cogeneration unit that uses cheap and available equipment, with a focus
on the scroll expander being used to extract energy in an organic

1308

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Rankine cycle. Such a cogeneration unit should utilise the high

thermal efciency of solar thermal collectors to provide water
heating, while generating electricity during the off-peak periods
when the suns potential would otherwise be wasted. Fig. 1 shows
one such system conguration which is the focus of this paper.
A solar thermal cycle heats a uid in the solar store vessel, which
is connected to a heat exchanger that is the evaporator for an ORC.
Hot water is produced when the ORC condenser cools the working
uid using a continuous stream of town supply water. The main
characteristics of the system are the following:
 Solar collectors: 50 m2 evacuated tube type
 Solar thermal cycle: Pressurised and well insulated closed-loop
cycle heating 800 L solar store of water with circulation pump
and controller
 ORC: Expansion of R134a through scroll expander, with evaporator utilising the solar store, and condenser utilising
a constant stream of town supply water.
Water is pumped through the solar thermal cycle to heat the
solar store. When the store reaches a temperature, Tst,max, determined by the optimum conditions of the ORC, the refrigerant cycle
pump is started. R134a heats up by passing through the solar store
heat exchanger, is expanded through the scroll expander, is
condensed in the lower heat exchanger, then returns through the
pump, completing the cycle. When the solar store drops to
a temperature, Tst,min dened by the ORC conditions, the refrigerant
cycle is stopped. The cycle may be started again if there is still
radiant emittance, but when the sun sets, the solar thermal cycle
will be available until the temperature drops to Tst,min, then deactivated until the next day.
This study builds on prior literature, which has mostly focused on
static solar models, and presents a daily dynamic model and annual
simulation of a solar thermal cogeneration system. The model gives
an estimation of the total power produced and hot water delivered,
as well as providing cycle efciency, solar utilisation and expander
efciency for different parts of the year. Positive outcomes would
indicate that the addition of low-cost ORC components to standard
solar thermal systems might be nancially worthwhile and has
benets which make it comparable to PV systems.
2. Recent ORC literature
In the rst international conference on ORC power systems held
in Delft, ORC 2011, there was some focus on solar thermal ORCs.
Dynamic model boundary

Evacuated tube
collectors

Solar storage
vessel

W
Qin

W
Scroll expander
Pump

To hot water
storage

Qout

Condenser

m
City supply water

Fig. 1. Solar ORC system conguration.

Wsh

Presentations on large- and small-scale systems, pilot plants,

combined heating and power and scroll expanders show agreement
that there is potential in very small-scale ORCs for cogeneration.
Oudkerk et al. [1] presented an evaluation of an ORC-based microCHP system, less than 50 kWe, involving a hermetic scroll expander.
Of the uids tested, R245fa was deemed as most suitable, and a scroll
expander isentropic efciency of 71% was achieved. The testers were
left desiring a more suitable expander with a higher maximum inlet
temperature and volume ratio in order to maximise the system.
Kosmadakis et al. [2] provided a comparison of a novel double-stage
expansion in a 2.5 kWe solar ORC. They found that the maximum
cycle efciency increased from 4.3% using single-stage expansion
without enhancements, up to 9.8% using a double-expander system.
A simulation model of an experimental small-scale ORC cogenerator
was presented on poster by Clemente et al. [3]. This model considered both scroll expander and piston-type expander, and determined a maximum expected scroll expander efciency near to 65%
and a maximum cycle efciency without recuperator of 7%. They also
noted that if the expansion ratio is lower than the best-efciency
one, which corresponds to the built-in volume ratio, the expander
efciency decreases rather quickly. Mikielewicz et al. [4] discussed
their experiences from operation of different expansion devices in
domestic micro ORCs. Three expansion devices were compared:
a rotating plate expander, scroll expander, and pneumatic engine.
They found that the pneumatic devices performed better with efciencies near 61e82% to the scroll expander at near 29e52%.
A performance and design optimisation study by Quoilin et al.
[5] based on low-cost solar ORCs provides modelling results for
solar thermal electricity generation for remote off-grid areas of
developing countries. An overall steady-state electrical efciency of
up to 8% was achieved at a nominal working point, and it was
pointed out that a dynamic model is needed to evaluate the yearly
energy output. A comparison of working uids showed that the
best performer was Solkatherm SES36, with R245fa also being
a good performer. A more complex solar Rankine cycle is presented
by Bao et al. [6]. This conguration consists of two collectors, two
expanders, a regenerator and an internal heat exchanger, and
utilises a zeotropic mixture Isopentane/R245fa at multiple mass
fractions to attempt to optimise the thermal efciency. The thermal
efciency of this system was found to be signicantly higher than
a single-stage system using pure Isopentane or R244fa.
Qiu et al. [7] give an overview based on market research of
a number of expansion devices for micro-CHP systems using
organic Rankine cycles and conclude that scroll expanders and vane
expanders are good choices for systems running at about 1e10 kW.
The authors also comment that scroll expanders can be scaled
down very well. Schimpf et al. [8] present a model of a solar assisted
combined heat pumpeorganic Rankine cycle-system. The analysis
showed that it seems plausible that the additional costs of an ORC
and advanced controls could be covered by the electricity generated. The authors note that the application of a combined system is
more suited to larger dwelling units like hotels, senior citizens
homes and multiple dwelling houses.
A solar organic Rankine cycle similar to that presented in this
paper is discussed by Saitoh et al. [9]. This paper focuses on the
electricity generation using a scroll expander during the summer,
and achieves a Rankine cycle efciency of 11%. Using the working
uid R113, a scroll expander efciency of 63% was achieved. Manolakos et al. [10] provide a design and experimental results from
a 2 kWe solar ORC system using evacuated tube collectors, scroll
expanders and R134a as a working uid. The system obtained
a maximum overall efciency of 4%. Oliveira [11] provides an
example layout of a combined heat and power solar thermal system
which utilises a Rankine cycle to produce work from solar heat, and
recovers useful heat from the condenser. Mathias et al. [12] use

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

a simple non-regenerative ORC with a scroll expander to produce

an isentropic efciency as high as 83%. It is demonstrated that the
highest isentropic efciency is attained when both the specic
volume ratio of the uid undergoing expansion is matched to the
built-in volume ratio of the expander, and when the volume ow
rate is matched to the rotational speed. An accompanying analytic
model showcases the improvement of having two expanders in
series, increasing the overall pressure ratio as high as 14.23, to give
an overall system efciency of 7.7%.
3. Scroll expander
A scroll expander has been identied as an appropriate device
for small-scale solar thermal cogeneration because it is compact
and inexpensive, low-power to suit small-scale scenarios, and
generally shows high efciency and has few moving parts. This
section presents a model of a scroll expander suitable for incorporation into a solar thermal ORC dynamic model, along with
parameter identication and experimental validation.
3.1. Model

(a) Adiabatic supply pressure drop (su e su,1): This process accounts
for all pressure losses between the expander inlet and the
suction chamber. It is approximated as an isentropic ow
through a converging nozzle as per Eq. (1) with throat area, Asu,
computed by parameter optimisation.

Asu
vthr;su


3
2
AUsu




_ p
m$c
5m$c
_ hsu;1  hsu;2 41  e
_ p $ Tsu;1  Tw ;
m$
(2)

where supply heat transfer coefcient AUsu is assumed to vary with

the mass ow rate according to:

 
_
m
;
AUsu AUsu;n $
_n
m

q


2 hsu  hthr;su

(1)

(b) Isobaric supply cooling-down (su,1 e su,2): Heat exchange is

observed between the uid entering the suction chamber and
a ctitious isothermal envelope, which is a lumped variable
representing the expander scrolls and shell. Supply heat
transfer is given by:

W in

(c) Internal leakage (su,2 e ex,2): Fluid that leaks inside the
machine undergoes no useful expansion and is a signicant
contributor to loss in the expander. All leakage paths are
lumped into a hypothetical area Aleak, which is computed by
comparison to ow through an isentropic nozzle of said throat
area:

su,2 M in
M

Qsu

in
M leak

ex,2
ex,1

fictitious isothermal envelope

Wloss

vthr;leak

(4)

The inlet pressure is Psu,2 and the outlet pressure is the

maximum between Pex,2 and Pcrit, leak. The critical pressure is
computed by considering the vapour as a perfect gas.
(d) Adiabatic and reversible expansion to the adapted pressure
(su,2 e in): The adapted pressure is related to the built-in
volume ratio of the expander rv, which is parameter that
must be identied. The relationship is:

vin rv $vsu;2 :

(5)

(e) Adiabatic expansion at constant machine volume (ad e ex,2): The

under- and over-expansion losses occur at this stage when the
adapted pressure is higher or lower, respectively, than the
system pressure at the expander outlet. In order to equalise
these pressures, the model assumes that some uid ows out
of or into the discharge chamber instantaneously when the
expansion chamber opens onto the discharge line.
(f) Isobaric exhaust cooling-down or heating-up (ex,1 e ex): Heat is
exchanged between the uid exiting the expansion chamber
and the isothermal envelope. This is modelled similarly as in
Eq. (2).






_
_ in hsu;2  hin vin Pin  Pex;2 :
W
in m

su
su,1



Aleak q
2 hsu;2  hthr;leak :

The internal power produced is a combination of the suction

power, expansion power and discharge power:

V=cte

s=cte

(3)

and AUsu,n is a parameter to identify.

_ leak
m

The scroll expander model used in this study is a semi-empirical

model developed by Lemort et al. [13] and the key process
descriptions and equations are included in this paper for
completeness. Fig. 2 depicts the processing of the uid as it ows
through the scroll expander in a number of hypothetical stages.

_
m

Q_ su

1309

ex
M
Qex

Q amb

Fig. 2. Conceptual scheme of the expander model by Lemort et al. [13]. From left to
right across the gure, there are three regions: the supply (su), internal (in), and
exhaust (ex). The cte notation in the gure indicates that the variable described
remains constant through the process.

(6)

Mechanical losses are lumped into a mechanical loss torque

parameter sloss, which is a parameter to identify. The expander
shaft power is then dened by:

2$p$N$sloss
_
_
W
:
sh W in 
60

(7)

To complete the heat balance over the expander, a global heat

transfer coefcient, AUamb, between the isothermal envelope and
the ambient is used to compute ambient losses:

Q_ amb AUamb Tw  Tamb :

(8)

Then, assuming that mechanical losses are directly added to the

isothermal envelope, the heat balance is completed:

1310

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

_
_
_
_
W
loss  Q ex Q su  Q amb 0:

squared, to match up with Dymolas calibration scheme. Table 2

presents a summary of the outputs and their weights. The estimated parameter values are shown in Table 3. The aforementioned
Dymola error function returned 3 0.0335. To put this in
perspective, Fig. 4 shows the difference between model outputs
and experimental outputs. The error was consistently high for cases
with a pressure ratio of 1.3, mostly between 13% and 20%. Apart
from at this pressure ratio, the error was generally below 8%.

(9)

3.2. Parameter estimation

This section describes the ORC test setup used to determine
values for the scroll expander parameters which were mentioned
in the previous section. The facility used was the QGECE lowpressure organic Rankine cycle at the University of Queensland.
The cycle is depicted in Fig. 3. A series of steady-state experiments
were conducted on the laboratory ORC by varying the pump speed,
load on the expander, and evaporator temperature, and averaging
the results for each case over a dened time period. The primary
recorded variables were expander shaft power, rotational speed,
and exhaust temperature. A complete record of the results is
available from the University of Queensland online technical
repository [14].
The simulation software DYMOLA (Dynamic Modeling Laboratory) [15] was used to model the cycle including the scroll expander
equations in Section 3.1. Dymola is a complete modelling and
simulation tool for complex dynamic systems in various engineering disciplines. It includes accurate uid models and some
basic libraries for thermal cycle modelling which have been
improved and adapted for organic Rankine cycle and solar thermal
modelling.
The scroll expander parameter values were estimated using the
Calibrate Steady State function in the Design library included with
Dymola. This calibrator works by minimising an error function based
on the sum of squares of the weighted differences between each
steady-state output variable and the corresponding model variable.
The inputs were selected based on their ability to be controlled
relatively independently from each other in the experimental rig,
and on how close they match with the model inputs. They were
_ pressure ratio of inlet to outlet rp, and
chosen to be mass ow rate m,
the inlet temperature Tsu. Three control values were selected for each
input, based on the operational limits of the test rig, to generate
a series of 27 test cases. The values are summarised in Table 1.
The outputs selected were the shaft work Wsh, rotational speed
N and outlet temperature Tex because they could be easily
measured in the test rig and the model. The weighting applied to
these variables was the inverse of the maximum recorded value

4. System modelling
In this section, a dynamic model of the cogeneration system
contained within the scope boundary in Fig. 1 is developed. The
model should be used to full the following objectives:
 Estimate the daily and annual power generation of the system
 Estimate the volume of hot water available to the establishment due to solar capture
 Determine the maximum temperature observed in the solar
thermal cycle to limit boiling
 Assess the compatibility of a scroll expander with this type of
system
 Observe sensitivity to a change of collector area, solar store
volume and ORC mass ow rate.
The model is based on one 24-h day cycle. In order to attain
annual results, a model for each month is given parameters based
on the average of all days in that month. Specic details are given in
the following subsections, and month-specic parameters given in
Table 4.
Within the system model, it is assumed that the piping in the
solar cycle is insulated according to AS 3500.4 Section 8.2 [16], to
the effect that heat loss from the pipes is negligible. The power
required by the solar circulation pump and controller are neglected
because they are small compared to the solar thermal energy, and
since they are used for heating, should not be included in electrical
efciency. Also, local heating and cooling effects, including thermal
stratication of storage vessels, are neglected for simplication of
analysis. This is a conservative approach since stratication effects
have a positive inuence on the efciency of solar systems [17]. It is

Electric element
heater

G
Oil return

Receiver

Coriolis
flow meter

Electrical resistor
network

Bldg. aux. water

Fig. 3. Diagram of the QGECE low-pressure ORC used for testing the performance of the scroll expander. Note that q represents temperature sensors.

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Table 1
Scroll expander test inputs.

1311

Table 3
Scroll expander parameters.

Variable

Input 1

Input 2

Input 3

Parameter

Description

Value

_
m
rp
Tsu

0.05 kg/s
1.3
80  C

0.06 kg/s
1.5
100  C

0.07 kg/s
1.7
120  C

Medium
AUamb
AUsu,n
AUex,n
Asu,thr
Aleak
rv
Vs,exp

Fluid medium
Overall heat transfer coefcient to ambient
Supply overall heat transfer coefcient
Exhaust overall heat transfer coefcient
Supply nozzle throat area
Internal leakage area
Built-in volume ratio
Swept volume in expander mode
Mechanical loss torque

R134a
0.5 W/K
35 W/K
0.1 W/K
50e6 m2
4.04e6 m2
1.57
53.1e6 m3
0.94 N m

also assumed that heat exchangers are designed and sized appropriately so that sufcient heat exchange is attained to produce
a heat exchange pinch point of DTpinch. Finally, it is assumed that the
scroll expander can be attached to a generator and synchronised to
an electrical grid with minimal inefciencies.
The system model was created in the Dymola environment,
using the Modelica language. Separate modules for each the solar
uid cycle, the scroll expander and the cooling heat exchanger were
developed and connected within a testbed module.
4.1. Solar insolation
The solar insolation is a direct input into the solar uid cycle
model, and is measured in W/m2. The value of irradiance follows
a half sine curve as in Eq. (10)

S 0;

S Smax $sin
S 0;

0  t < trise

ptetrise
tset etrise

trise  t  tset

(10)

tset < t < 24:

where t is time in hours after midnight. The peak solar irradiance,

Smax, is dened such that the total daily solar exposure, Ex, equals
the value given by the Bureau of Meteorology [18] for the average of
all days of a particular month in Brisbane, Australia, going back to
1990. The sun rise and set times are of the 15th day of every month,
as given by Geoscience Australia [19] for 2010. The parameters used
for each month are shown in Table 4.
4.2. Collectors
The collectors are modelled by the total collector efciency hcol,
which is a lumped parameter that describes the ratio of heat energy
addition to solar insolation incident on the collector, accounting for
different sources of losses. The total collector efciency is described
by characteristic curves given by Ecofys [17], as shown in Fig. 5. The
average daily ambient temperature is given by the Bureau of
Meteorology [18], and shown in Table 4.

sloss

The temperature of the solar store, Tst, can be calculated at any

time using equations of state such as those included in uid
packages in Dymola, and require two state variables, chosen for this
case as specic internal energy, ust, and store pressure, pst. Store
pressure is a constant given in Table 5 and specic internal energy is
calculated as per Eq. (11).

Ust

rst $Vst

The store internal energy, Ust, is calculated using an energy

balance over the store taking into account solar gain, heat transfer
to the ORC and standing heat losses:

dUst
Q_ sol  Q_ uhx  Q_ stand :
dt

The collectors, pipes, pump, and solar store are modelled

together in a single lumped control volume, dened as the solar
uid cycle. This is to distinguish it from the hot water component of
the system. Heat energy from the collectors is directly injected into
this control volume, and it is assumed that the solar storage vessel
represents an appropriate average of the energy held in all of the
solar cycle components. The cycle is dened by the parameters
shown in Table 5.

Table 2
Scroll expander test outputs.
Variable

Weighting

_
W
sh
N
Tex

(552)2
(1257)2
(385)2

(12)

Heat transfer to the ORC, Q_ uhx , is given by the scroll expander

model. Solar gain is given by the product of insolation, collector
area and collector efciency, as in Eq. (13).

Q_ sol S$Acol $hcol

(13)

Standing heat loss from the solar store is modelled as a rate

proportional to the temperature difference between the tank and
ambient, using values given in the industry guide by Ecofys [17] for
properly insulated tanks, as described in Eq. (14). The heat loss rate,
AUst, is given in Table 5.

Q_ stand AUst $Tst  Tamb

(14)

An output connector is added to the model with the value of Tst

to be fed directly to the scroll expander ow boundary model and
mass ow switch. The total solar exposure is also dened in the
model:

dEsol
S$Acol :
dt

4.3. Solar uid cycle

(11)

(15)

4.4. Condenser heat exchanger

The heat exchanger at the expander outlet has two purposes: to
condense the ORC uid and to heat the continuous supply of town
water to a sufciently high temperature. It is modelled using
a simple heat balance for counter-ow heat exchangers, as in Eqs.
(16) and (17).

_ org $Dhorg
Qlhx m

(16)

_ prc $Dhprc
Qlhx m

(17)

All inlet and outlet temperatures are set according to the

conditions, as shown in Table 6.
_ prc , is calculated and
The mass ow rate of the process stream, m
is dependent on the organic stream temperature as in Eq. (17).

1312

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Fig. 4. Check of scroll expander modelling against individual experimental test measurements.

4.5. ORC pump

The pump is not independently modelled as a component, but
the power required to maintain the cycle pressure difference and
mass ow rate is calculated and included in efciency and energy
calculations.



_
_ pump morg $ hpump;out  hpump;in
W

(18)

hpump

Enthalpy hpump,in is estimated using the Dymola equation of

state function with the two state variables being ORC condenser
pressure, p1 and bubble enthalpy for that pressure (also calculated
by Dymola). Assuming the pump behaves isentropically, hpump,out

is estimated by the same Dymola function, using state variables

of ORC evaporator pressure, p2, and bubble entropy at the
condenser pressure. The parameters p1, p2 and hpump are given in
Table 7.
4.6. Dynamic simulation
The dynamic simulation module incorporates the solar uid
cycle, scroll expander, cooling heat exchanger, ow boundary and
insolation models, as well as temperature and heat ow sensors
and switches. Fig. 6 shows how the components are connected. The
Tst output signal is used to turn the scroll expander mass ow on
_ n when Tst  DTpinch reaches
and off. The mass ow rate is set to m
Tst,max and set to zero if it falls below Tst,min. These temperatures
were chosen based on the range which produced the best expander

Table 4
Environmental inputs.
Month

Ex (kWh/m2/day)

Smax (W/m2)

Sun rise/set (24 h)

Tamb ( C)

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

6.8
6.1
5.6
4.7
3.8
3.4
3.7
4.5
5.6
6.1
6.7
6.9

780
736
715
645
553
514
551
636
738
754
782
781

0506/1848
0531/1833
0548/1806
0605/1732
0621/1708
0636/1701
0637/1710
0619/1726
0546/1741
0513/1755
0449/1816
0447/1839

25.3
24.9
23.5
20.8
17.9
15.3
14.3
15.3
18.1
20.6
22.7
24.2

Fig. 5. Characteristic efciency curve for evacuated tube collector [17].

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Table 5
Solar uid cycle parameters.

1313

Table 7
Dynamic testbed parameters.

Parameter

Description

Value

Parameter

Description

Value

Acol
Vst
pst
AUst

Evacuated tube collector area

Combined volume of solar thermal cycle
Pressure of solar cycle loop
Standing heat loss coefcient of store

50 m2
800 L
300 kPa
2 W/K

_n
m
Tst,max
Tst,min
DTpinch
p1
p2

Scroll expander nominal mass ow rate

Temperature maximum for expander activation
Temperature minimum for expander deactivation
Heat exchange pinch point temperature difference
ORC condenser pressure
ORC evaporator pressure
ORC pump efciency

0.07 kg/s
120  C
85  C
5 C
850 kPa
1500 kPa
0.6

hpump

performance from tests, and the condition that scroll exit temperature is greater than Thw DTpinch to aid water heating. The
nominal ORC mass ow rate is the highest value that will allow
a single continuous ORC period during the day without the need to
switch off and let the solar store recharge. The mass ow rate could
be adjusted seasonally in order to optimise the system. The
dynamic test bed parameters are shown in Table 7.
4.7. System metrics
Some key thermal power variables are dened here which are
useful to judge the effectiveness of the system. The net power
produced in this cycle is dened by:

dEcyc
_
_
W
sh  W pump :
dt

(19)

The cycles thermal efciency, hth, is the ratio of net work

produced to the heat input:

_
_
W
sh  W pump
:
Q_

hth

(20)

uhx

The second-law thermal efciency, hii, is an indicator of how

close the thermal efciency is to the highest value permissible
depending on the temperature range (Carnot efciency), as in
Eq. (21):

hii

th

:
1  Tlhx;min =Tuhx;min

(21)

The scroll expander effectiveness is generally measured using

isentropic efciency. This is the ratio of actual power produced to
the ideal power that would be produced if there was no entropy
increase for the same pressure ratio:

hs

_
W
sh

;
_ hin  hout;s
m$

(22)

where isentropic enthalpy, hout,s, is calculated using the Dymola

enthalpy function which requires two state variable inputs, being
the outlet pressure and the inlet entropy.
5. System performance
This section aims to determine the performance of the scroll
expander, nd the total energy generated by the system annually,
and discern the effects on the system of varying key parameters

Table 6
Cooling heat exchanger temperatures.
Heat exchanger passage

Temperature designation

Torg,in
Torg,out
Tprc,in
Tprc,out

Tex
Tsat
Tamb
Thw

such as ORC mass ow rate, collector area, and solar store volume.
Nominal hot water temperature is imposed: Thw 65  C.
The temperature of the solar store is the most important variable for which the performance of the ORC is dependent. Fig. 7
shows the solar store temperature over one day, for the months
of December, February, April and June. December and June are the
months with the highest and lowest solar exposure, respectively,
as in Table 4. August and October are omitted because they are
very similar to April and February. The maximum expected
temperature is 130  C, which conrms that the minimum working
pressure to prevent boiling in the solar thermal cycle using water is
278 kPa.
The scroll expander performance as a unit can be quantied by
its isentropic efciency, as described in Section 4.7. The expander
performs at between 57% and 59% isentropic efciency for all
months of the year. This is a respectable efciency for a power
expander, however, isentropic efciencies of up to 83% have been
reported in the literature [1,3,12]. Greater isentropic, and therefore system, efciency might be achieved by using a similar sized
scroll expander that has been purpose-built for expansion.
Modications to inlet and exit nozzles as in Mathias et al. [12]
and improved lubrication as in Wang et al. [20] might help
toward this goal.
The ORC performance is quantied by the peak expander power,
_
W
sh;max , rotational speed, Nmax, start and stop time, ton and toff,
daily net energy produced, Ecyc, and total daily volume of hot water
produced, Vprc. Table 8 shows the daily values for these variables for
the average day of each month. Refer to Fig. 9 for a visualisation of
the shaft power evolution over one day. It follows that the total
annual energy produced by this system is 1710 kWh. At a standard
rate for Brisbane of 22.7 c/kWh [21], this might equate to an annual
value of $388.17. For the additional equipment required to form the
ORC (the pump, scroll expander and piping), this system would
likely pay for itself over its lifetime. With scroll expander
improvements, the annual energy produced could signicantly
increase.
The cycle efciencies, as described in Section 4.7, do not vary
signicantly over the course of the year. Thermal efciency, hth,
remains fairly constant at 3.47%, and the second-law efciency, hii,
varies over the course of each day between 15.7% and 23.2%. Fig. 8
shows the daily trend for December, which has a similar shape to
other months.
The second-law efciency is low, and there is potential for
improvement.
It is evident that the pure electrical efciency of this conguration is lower than that for PV. However, the low efciency is
compensated for by the small costs associated with the additional
required equipment.
5.1. Parameter sensitivity
The three parameters most sensitive to change are ORC mass
_ org , collector area, Acol, and solar store volume, Vst.
ow rate, m

1314

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

Fig. 6. Flow diagram of the dynamic simulation module.

Table 9 shows some key effects of perturbing the former two

_ org affects
parameters for the month of December. Generally, m
the ORC efciency and is limited directly by solar store volume.
Acol scales the entire system but is restricted by the available roof
area. For both of these parameters, an increase in value gives
a modest increase in cycle energy, while only the collector area
greatly affects the hot water volume. These parameters could be
adjusted to tailor the system to particular energy and water
needs.

The third parameter, Vst, has the most interesting effect.

Increasing or decreasing it causes the performance curves to shift
backward or forward in the time domain, as can be observed in
Fig. 9. Volume Vst can therefore be adjusted to match the electricity
generation timeframe to the peak power usage, if appropriate. This
is advantageous because generally the value of electricity is higher
during peak, and peak demand does not usually coincide with peak
solar irradiation. The drawback is that a larger and more costly
storage tank is needed, with better insulation in order to adhere to
industry standards. However, there will be less thermal mixing in
a larger tank which could cause more distinct thermal stratication,
beneting the solar systems efciency.

Table 8
System performance for the average day in each month.

Fig. 7. Solar store temperature.

Month

_
W
sh;max
(W)

Nmax
(rpm)

ton
(24 h)

toff
(24 h)

Ecyc
(kWh/day)

Vprc
(L/day)

hsol (%)

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

676
663
660
660
660
660
660
660
660
664
674
675

1050
1030
1024
1024
1024
1024
1024
1024
1024
1032
1047
1049

0841
0908
0923
0946
1011
1031
1027
1001
0918
0847
0823
0824

1844
1820
1751
1659
1605
1546
1607
1648
1732
1747
1812
1833

6.05
5.46
4.99
4.17
3.34
2.96
3.20
3.90
4.86
5.34
5.89
6.11

3270
2950
2700
2270
1820
1610
1750
2120
2630
2890
3190
3300

51.0
51.4
51.3
51.2
50.9
50.3
50.1
50.1
49.9
50.4
50.5
50.8

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

1315

 The total energy produced is 1710 kWh and the total hot water
available is on average 2540 L/day
 The maximum instantaneous power observed is 676 W.

Fig. 8. Cycle efciency for December. The y-axis is capped at 0.30, just above the
Carnot efciency.

Additionally, it was noted that it is possible to shift the time

period that the system is producing power to match the peak
demand period by adjusting the solar store volume.
The expander isentropic efciency is quite good, and could be
further improved by mechanical modication as noted in the
literature, such as inlet and exit nozzle improvements and
improved lubrication. The electrical efciency metrics are
generally quite low, and the total energy produced is not
remarkable, but there is potential for improvement and the
energy produced is signicant enough to potentially cover the
low costs of the ORC equipment over its lifetime. Also, the
capability to shift electricity production to match demand could
be very advantageous in the solar energy market, where peak
electricity demand does not usually coincide with the days peak
solar irradiation.
References

Fig. 9. Vst parameter sweep.

Table 9
Parameter sensitivity.
Parameter

_
W
sh;peak (W)

Ecyc (kWh/day)

Vprc (L)

hsol (%)

Reference
_ org 0:06 kg/s
m
_ org 0:08 kg/s
m
Acol 40 m2
Acol 60 m2

675
561
798
660
719

6.11
5.44
6.58
4.93
7.06

3300
3189
3356
2682
3799

50.8
49.0
51.8
51.6
48.7

6. Conclusions
A scroll expander model was calibrated and implemented into
a larger dynamic model of a solar thermal cogeneration system
using evacuated tube collectors suited to some larger dwelling unit
or small commercial establishment. Using a model presented by
Lemort et al. [13], the scroll expander calibration shows agreement
generally within 10% for the shaft power, 5% for the rotational speed
and 6 K for the exhaust temperature, with some outliers at very
low pressure ratios.
When implemented into the dynamic simulation program, with
a collector area of 50 m2 and simulated over a year:
 The expander shows a maximum isentropic efciency of 59%
 The ORC rst-law thermal efciency is 3.47% and second-law
efciency varies between 15.7% and 23.2%

[1] J.F. Oudkerk, S. Quoilin, V. Lemort, Evaluation of an ORC-based micro-CHP

system involving a hermetic scroll expander, in: ORC (Ed.), First International
Seminar on ORC Power Systems, TU Delft, Netherlands, 2011.http://www.
orc2011.nl.
[2] G. Kosmadakis, D. Manolakos, G. Papadakis, Investigating the double-stage
expansion in a solar ORC, in: ORC (Ed.), First International Seminar on ORC
Power Systems, TU Delft, Netherlands, 2011.http://www.orc2011.nl.
[3] S. Clemente, D. Micheli, M. Reini, R. Taccani, Simulation model of an
experimental small scale ORC cogenerator, in: ORC (Ed.), First International
Seminar on ORC Power Systems, TU Delft, Netherlands, 2011.http://www.
orc2011.nl.
[4] D. Mikielewicz, J. Mikielewicz, J. Wajs, E. Ihnatowicz, Experiences from
operation of different expansion devices in domestic micro ORC, in: ORC (Ed.),
First International Seminar on ORC Power Systems, TU Delft, Netherlands,
2011.http://www.orc2011.nl.
[5] S. Quoilin, M. Orosz, H. Hemond, V. Lemort, Performance and design optimization of a low-cost solar organic Rankine cycle for remote power generation,
Solar Energy 85 (2011) 955e966.
[6] J.J. Bao, L. Zhao, W.Z. Zhang, A novel auto-cascade low-temperature solar
Rankine cycle system for power generation, Solar Energy 85 (2011) 2710e2719.
[7] G. Qiu, H. Liu, S. Riffat, Expanders for micro-CHP systems with organic Rankine
cycle, Applied Thermal Engineering 31 (2011) 3301e3307.
[8] S. Schimpf, K. Uitz, R. Span, Simulation of a solar assisted combined heat
pump-organic Rankine cycle-system, in: World Renewable Energy Congress
2011, Sweden.
[9] T. Saitoh, N. Yamada, S. Wakashima, Solar Rankine cycle system using
scroll expander, Journal of Environment and Engineering 2 (2007)
708e719.
[10] D. Manolakos, G. Papadakis, S. Kyritsis, K. Bouzianas, Experimental evaluation
of an autonomous low-temperature solar Rankine cycle system for reverse
osmosis desalination, Desalination 203 (2007) 366e374. 5th Conference on
Desalination Strategies in South Mediterranean Countries (EuroMed 2006),
Montpellier, France, May 21e25, 2006.
[11] A.C. Oliveira, A new look at the long-term performance of general solar
thermal systems, Solar Energy 81 (2007) 1361e1368.
[12] J.A. Mathias, J.R. Johnston Jr., J. Cao, D.K. Priedeman, R.N. Christensen, Experimental testing of gerotor and scroll expanders used in, and energetic and
exergetic modeling of, an organic Rankine cycle, Journal of Energy Resources
Technology e Transactions of the ASME 131 (2009) 1e9.
[13] V. Lemort, S. Quoilin, C. Cuevas, J. Lebrun, Testing and modeling a scroll
expander integrated into an organic Rankine cycle, Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 3094e3102.
[14] B. Twomey, Experimental test results from QGECE laboratory small-scale
organic Rankine cycle using a scroll expander, Technical Report 2012/03,
School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Queensland, 2012, Available
online: http://espace.library.uq.edu.au.
[15] Dassault Systemes, Multi-engineering Modeling and Simulation (2012),
Available
online:
http://www.3ds.com/products/catia/portfolio/dymola
(accessed 29.02.12).
[16] Standards Australia, AS 3500.4 Plumbing and Drainage e Heated Water
Services (2003).
[17] Ecofys, Planning and Installing Solar Thermal Systems: a Guide for Installers,
Architects and Engineers, Earthscan, 2005.
[18] Bureau of Meteorology, Monthly Mean Daily Global Exposure (2011),
Available online: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/index.shtml (accessed
24.11.11).

1316

B. Twomey et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 51 (2013) 1307e1316

[19] Geoscience Australia, Geodesy e Astronomical Information (2005), Available

online: http://www.ga.gov.au/bin/astro/sunrisenset (accessed 24.11.11).
[20] H. Wang, R.B. Peterson, T. Herron, Experimental performance of a compliant
scroll expander for an organic Rankine cycle, Proceedings of the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers Part A-Journal of Power and Energy 223 (2009)
863e872.
[21] Origin Energy, Electricity Tariffs (QLD) (2011), Available online: http://www.
originenergy.com.au/2087/Electricity-tariffs-QLD (accessed 28.02.12).

Glossary
A: area, m2
c: specic heat, J/(kg K)
E: energy, J, kWh
h: specic enthalpy, J/(kg K)
_ mass ow rate, kg/m2
m:
N: speed, rev/min
p: pressure, Pa
Q: heat energy, J
Q_ : heat power, W
r: ratio, e
S: solar insolation, W/m2
T: temperature,  C
t: time, s
U: heat transfer coefcient, W/(m2 K)
U: internal energy, J
u: specic internal energy, J/kg
V: volume, m3, L
v: specic volume, m3/kg
_ power, W
W:
Ex: daily solar exposure, kWh/m2/day
Greek symbols
D: difference, e
e: error, e
h: efciency, e

r: density, kg/m3
s: torque, Nm
Subscripts
amb: ambient
col: collector
crit: critical
cyc: cycle net
ex: expander exhaust
hp: heating and power
hw: hot water
ii: second law
in: expander internal
leak: expander leak
lhx: lower heat exchanger
max: maximum/peak
min: minimum
n: nominal
off: ORC stop
on: ORC start
org: organic uid stream
p: constant pressure
pinch: heat exchanger pinch point
prc: process hot water stream
rise: sun rise
sat: saturation
set: sun set
sh: shaft
sol: solar
st: solar store
stand: standing heat loss
su: expander supply
th: thermal
thr: throat
uhx: upper heat exchanger
v: volume property
w: isothermal envelope