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

net/publication/313715435

Design and Simulation of Solar Desalination Systems

Thesis · August 2011

CITATIONS READS

25 13,445

1 author:

Mohamed A. Sharaf Eldean

Suez University
43 PUBLICATIONS 1,450 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed A. Sharaf Eldean on 15 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Suez Canal University
Faculty of Petroleum & Mining Engineering
Engineering Science Department

Design and Simulation of Solar

Desalination Systems

Thesis Submitted for the Ph.D. Degree in Energy Engineering

To
Faculty of Petroleum & Mining Engineering
Suez Canal University
Egypt

By
Mohamed Abdel Wahab Sharaf Eldean
B. Sc., Arab Academy for Science & Technology, 1999
M. Sc., Suez Canal University, 2007
Egypt

2011
1
 Supervisory Committee

Design and Simulation of Solar

Desalination Systems

Thesis Submitted for the Ph.D. Degree in Energy Engineering

By

Mohamed Abdel Wahab Sharaf Eldean

B. Sc., Arab Academy for Science & Technology, 1999
M. Sc., Suez Canal University, 2007
Egypt

Supervision Committee: Signature

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Abd Elfatah Elzeky

Metallurgical And Material Dept, Faculty Of Petroleum & Mining
Engineering, Suez Canal University, Suez, Egypt.

Dr. Sayed O. Elhelieby

Engineering Science Dept, Faculty Of Petroleum & Mining Engineering, Suez
Canal University, Suez, Egypt.

Assco. Prof. Lourdes García Rodríguez

Energy Engineering Dept, Faculty of Engineering, University of Sevilla, Spain.

2
 Approval Sheet

Design and Simulation of Solar

Desalination Systems

Thesis Submitted for the Ph.D. Degree in Energy Engineering

By

Mohamed Abdel Wahab Sharaf Eldean

B. Sc., Arab Academy for Science & Technology, 1999
M. Sc., Suez Canal University, 2007
Egypt

Examiners Committee: Signature

Prof. Dr. Mansour Awad Mohamed

Solar Energy Dept, National Research Center, Cairo, Egypt.

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Reda Abd Elkader

Mechanical Engineering Dept, Port Saied University.

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Abd Elfatah Elzeky

Metallurgical And Material Dept, Faculty Of Petroleum & Mining
Engineering, Suez Canal University, Suez, Egypt.

Dr. Sayed O. Elhelieby

Engineering Science Dept, Faculty Of Petroleum & Mining Engineering, Suez
Canal University, Suez, Egypt.

3
Abstract
Clean, fresh drinking water is essential to human and other life needs like agricultures needs,
human needs and artificial needs. Access to safe drinking water has improved steadily and substantially
over the last decades in almost every part of the world. However, some observers have estimated that by
2025 more than half of the world population will be facing water-based vulnerability, a situation which
has been called a water crisis by the United Nations. Desalination provides such an alternative source,
offering water for irrigational, industrial and municipal use.
Desalination technologies can be classified by their separation mechanism into thermal and
membrane based desalination. Thermal desalination separates salt from water by evaporation and
condensation, whereas in membrane desalination water diffuses through a membrane, while salts are
almost completely retained. Thermal desalination includes multi-stage flash, multi-effect distillation,
mechanical vapor compression, and thermal vapor compression while membrane desalination contains
reverse osmosis, ion exchange, and electro-dialysis processes. Reverse osmosis and multi-stage flash are
the techniques that are most widely used in the world.
Desalination uses a large amount of energy to remove a portion of pure water from a salt water
source. Large commercial desalination plants using fossil fuel are in use in a number of oil-rich
countries to supplement the traditional sources of water supply. However; people in many other areas of
the world have neither the money nor the oil resources to allow them to develop on a similar manner.
Furthermore; problems relevant to the use of fossil fuels, in part, could be resolved by considering
possible utilization of renewable resources such as solar, biomass, wind, or geothermal energy. The
coupling of renewable energy sources with desalination processes is seen by some researchers as having
the potential to offer a sustainable route for increasing the supplies of potable water.
Solar energy can directly or indirectly be harnessed for desalination. Collection systems that use
solar energy to produce distillate directly in the solar collector are called direct collection systems
whereas systems that combine solar energy collection systems with conventional desalination systems
are called indirect systems. In indirect systems, solar energy is used either to generate the heat required
for desalination and/or to generate electricity that is used to provide the required electric power for
conventional desalination plants such as multi-effect (ME), multi-stage flash (MSF) or reverse osmosis
(RO) systems. For Middle East countries sun has a good presence beside a huge area of the desert. For
example the number of sun shine hours over Egypt is about 3600h/year with an amount of 6-
7kWh/m2/day as a global radiation.
Therefore utilization of solar energy as an alternative and renewable energy should be strongly
taken into consideration, especially, when new communities are established in the desert and remote
areas. For scientists, it is very important to decide or demonstrate the applicability of the solar
desalination system based on energy, exergy, cost, and thermo-economic analysis. The decision should
maintain different types, different configurations, and different techniques. To perform a reliable
analysis for this wide range of solar desalination processes and different configurations, a flexible
visualized computer program is required.
Therefore, the need to design and simulate solar desalination systems is very important and
essential. The main objective of this work is to develop software in order to design and simulate
different solar desalination systems such as Reverse Osmosis, Multi stage Flash, Multi Effect
Evaporation, Mechanical and Thermal Vapor Compression. The developed software is performed for
different calculations, different modifications, different comparisons, and different analysis. The
developed software has some features such as validity, generality, flexibility, easy to handle, and
executable. In this work, performing a survey about the importance of utilizing solar energy and

4
desalination is done. Designing & setting up the required software for the proposed processes are
performed. Carrying out the validation results is accomplished based on different techniques. As a
result, a developed software package (SDS) is constructed to design and simulate different types of solar
desalination processes. Also, solar assisted organic Rankine cycle for reverse osmosis with pressure
exchanger unit is considered attractive based on energy, exergy, and cost analysis. Multi effect
distillation with thermal vapor compression comes next based on the same indicators. Also, a
comparison for different techniques of combination between solar power cycle and desalination process
is performed. The results reveal that solar desalination technique without power generation is
remarkable while comparing with solar desalination technique with power generation.

5
Acknowledgment

First of all, I thank ALLAH the merciful, for helping me to complete this work,
and I hope this work be useful to my country Egypt.

Thanks a lot to…

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Elzeky, professor of metallurgical science, for his

supreme supervising and his support to the fulfillment of this work.

Prof. Dr. Sayed Othman ELhelieby, the head of engineering science

department, for offering all helps for the fulfillment this work.

Prof. Dr. Ahmed Safwat Nafey, thermal engineering in engineering science

department, for giving me a great opportunity to learn from his experience
along ten years of hard work.

Prof. Dr. Lourdes Garcia-Rodríguez, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain, for her

encouragements, experience and honest guidance throughout this work.

6
The Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Acknowledgment .................................................................................................................................. 6
The Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 7
List of Figures....................................................................................................................................... 9
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Nomenclature ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter 1: Introduction & Review .................................................................................................... 17
1.1 Water Shortage Problem ................................................................................................................. 17
1.2 Solar Desalination Systems as a Choice .......................................................................................... 17
1.3 Solar Thermal Power Cycles: Technology Overview ...................................................................... 19
1.4 Solar Powered-Rankine Cycles ....................................................................................................... 21
1.5 The Review Considerations ............................................................................................................ 23
Chapter 2: A New Visual Library for Design and Simulation of Solar Desalination Systems (SDS)
............................................................................................................................................................ 24
2.1 Types of Flow Sheeting Programs Used for Solar Systems ............................................................. 24
2.2 MatLab/SimuLink Software Tool ................................................................................................... 26
2.3 Simulation of Different Solar Desalination Units ............................................................................ 27
2.4 Solar Power Cycle for Desalination Processes: Case Study ............................................................. 34
Chapter 3: Exergy & Thermo-economic Analyses of Solar Organic Cycles Assisted Desalination
Processes ............................................................................................................................................. 36
3.1 Working Fluids Selection for Solar ORC ........................................................................................ 36
3.2 Solar ORC Assisted RO Desalination Process ................................................................................ 41
3.3 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Effect Distillation (MED) Desalination Process....... 60
3.4 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Effect Distillation-Vapor Compression (MED-VC)
Desalination Processes ......................................................................................................................... 74
3.5 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Stage Flash (MSF) Desalination Process ................. 86
Chapter 4: Comparison of Different Types of Solar Desalination Processes: Results & Discussions
............................................................................................................................................................ 93
4.1 Process Configurations ................................................................................................................... 93
4.2 Comparison Methodology .............................................................................................................. 95
4.3 Results and Discussions.................................................................................................................. 99
Chapter 5: Conclusion, Recommendations and Future Work ....................................................... 105
5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 105

7
5.2 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 107
5.3 The Future Work .......................................................................................................................... 107
The Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 108
Appendix-A ....................................................................................................................................... 108
Appendix-B ....................................................................................................................................... 112
Appendix-C ....................................................................................................................................... 133
Appendix-D ....................................................................................................................................... 137
References......................................................................................................................................... 143

8
List of Figures
Figure Page
(1.1) World solar radiation. 18
(1.2) Flow chart of renewable energies powered desalination processes. 18
(1.3) Photographs of PTC type for solar power generation. 20
Desalinated water costs for various combinations of desalination processes powered by
(1.4) 21
renewable energy sources.
POWERSOL concept: A solar-heated Rankine cycle drives either, a generator or the high
(1.5) 22
pressure pump of a reverse osmosis.

(2.1) Performance and design characteristics for common flow sheeting programs. 25
(2.2) Types of simulation programs used for solar desalination processes. 26
(2.3) SDS software library browser under MatLab/SimuLink interface. 27
Schematic display of Single Effect Evaporation (SEE) under MatLab-SimuLink software
(2.4) 31
environment.
(2.5) MED model environment designed using SDS package. 33

The selected fluids behavior on T-S diagram for different solar collectors (FPC, CPC, and
(3.1) 39
PTC)
Saturation pressures for different collectors with different working fluids at the saturation
(3.2) 40
temperature at the range of 35-100oC
(3.3) Schematic diagram of DVG solar ORC powered RO (basic cycle). 42
Total Water Price (TWP, $/m3) for cycles different working fluids & different steam operating
(3.4) 45
conditions with different collector types.
A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
(3.5) 47
recuperator unit.
A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
(3.6) 47
OFH unit.
A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
(3.7) 48
OFH and recuperator units.
(3.8) A schematic diagram of the RO process with different energy recovery units. 53
(3.9) Variation of thermo-economic product cost against the variation in productivity. 58
Variation of product stream exergy rate (MW) and power consumed (MW) by the RO-PEX
(3.10) 58
against the variation in fresh water production rate (m3/h).
(3.11) Data streams for solar ORC with RO-PEX configuration (145m3/h). 59
A schematic diagram of solar MED units for desalination:
(3.12) 63
Solar field, Boiler heat exchanger, Pump, MED.
Solar radiation data results based on hourly, daily average (11 hrs), and daily average (24 hrs)
(3.13) 64
variations.
A schematic diagram of solar MED components for desalination and power generation:
(3.14) 65
Solar field, Boiler heat exchanger, Pump, Turbine, Recuperator, MED.
The GR variations for different MED configurations due to the variations of effect numbers at
(3.15) 68
100m3/day based on SDMED technique.
(3.16) Effect of evaporators’ number and steam temperature on based on both techniques. 72
Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on thermo-economic product cost ($/GJ) for SDMED-PF
(3.17) 73
case study.
Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on the developed power by the turbine unit based on
(3.18) 73
PSDMED-PF technique.
A schematic diagram of solar MED-PF-TVC components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat
(3.19) 75
exchanger, (3) HTO pump, (4) MED-PF-TVC, (5) Water pump.

9
 A schematic diagram of solar MED-PF-MVC components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat
(2.20) exchanger, (3) HTO Pump, (4) Turbine, (5) Recuperator, (6) Condenser, (7) Pump (8) MED- 76
PF, (9) MVC.

Effect of CR and number of evaporators on both: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, and (b) Thermo-economic
(3.21) 78
product cost, $/GJ.
Effect of CR and number of evaporators on both: (a) Solar field area, m2, and (b) Total exergy
(3.22) 78
destruction rate, kW.
Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, and (b) Thermo-economic
(3.23) 81
product cost, $/GJ.
Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) Solar field area, m2, and (b) Total exergy
(3.24) 81
destruction rate, kW.
(3.25) Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) CR, and (b) GR. 82
The effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on thermo-economic product cost for both techniques
(3.26) 85
(MED-MVC & MED-TVC).
Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on the developed power for both techniques (MED-MVC
(3.27) 85
& MED-TVC).
A schematic diagram of solar MSF-BR components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat exchanger,
(3.28) 88
(3) Pump, (4) Brine heater, (5) MSF-BR.
A schematic diagram of solar MED-PF-MVC components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat
(3.29) exchanger, (3) HTO Pump, (4) Turbine, (5) Recuperator, (6) Condenser, (7) Pump (8) MSF- 88
BR.
(3.30) Effect of TBT and Nstg on: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, (b) cp, $/GJ, (c) Acol, m2, (d) GR. 90
The daily productivity effect on the thermo-economic product cost for both techniques
(3.31) 92
(SDMSF & PSDMSF).
(3.32) The effect of productivity on the developed power for both techniques (SDMSF & PSDMSF). 92

(4.1) A schematic diagram of SORC assisted RO-PEX and MED-PF-MVC desalination processes. 94
A schematic diagram of solar thermal power cycle assisted thermal desalination processes
(4.2) 95
(MSF-BR, MED-PF, MED-PF-TVC).
(4.3) A schematic diagram of solar PV powered RO system for 100m3/day. 104

10
List of Tables
Table Page
(1.1) Fresh water demand and desalination capacity in the Red Sea and south Sinai regions. 17
(1.2) Some of indirect solar desalination pilot plants implemented at different locations. 19
(1.3) CSP vs PV solar power generation. 21
(2.1) Data results for solar radiation model based on the specified location of operation. 28
A comparison between the SDS and reference results for Solar Rankine power cycle (direct
(2.2) 29
vapor generation operation).
(2.3) Specified design parameters of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant. 30
(2.4) SDS results of Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant vs. ROSA6.1. 30
(2.5) Comparison results of SDS Eoun Mousa MSF-BR plant. 31
(2.6) The SDS and ref [43] results comparison for SEE model. 32
(2.7) Data validation between SDS and ref [52] for MED model. 33
(2.8) Energy and thermo-economic results for solar powered RO-PEX technique. 34

(3.1) Properties list of the selected working fluids. 31

(3.2) Specified design parameters of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant. 41
Results of ORC/RO process with different working fluids and different types of solar
(3.3) 43
collectors.
(3.4) ICC and O&M costs for solar organic Rankine cycle components. 44
(3.5) ICC and O&M costs for RO desalination plant. 44
(3.6) Data results of Toluene (PTC) for different configurations under saturation operation. 50
(3.7) Data results of Toluene (PTC) for different configurations under superheat operation. 50
(3.8) Data results of Water (PTC) for basic configuration under superheat operation. 51
Data comparisons between different working fluids for recuperator configuration under
(3.9) 51
saturation and superheat operations.
(3.10) Specifications and design parameters of the considered processes. 54
(3.11) Energy and thermo-economic results for different configurations. 56
(3.12) The comparison percentages for different configurations based on thermo-economic results. 57
Specifications of MED desalination plant (all configurations) under winter operating
(3.13) 61
conditions for 100m3/day capacity.
(3.14) Data results for solar radiation model based on the specified location of operation. 64
(3.15) Design points considered for MED according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques. 66
(3.16) Data results for 1st technique operated by Water and HTO fluids. 67
(3.17) Data results for 2nd technique operated by Toluene and HTO fluids. 69
(3.18) Data results for both techniques based on 5000m3/d. 71
(3.19) Design points for SMED-PF-VC according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques. 76
(3.20) Data results for SMED-PF-TVC operated by Water and HTO fluids. 79
(3.21) Data results for SMED-PF-MVC operated by Toluene and HTO fluids. 82
(3.22) Data results for both techniques based on 4545m3/d. 84
(3.23) Specifications of Eoun Mousa MSF desalination plant (5000m3/day). 86
(3.24) Design points for MSF-BR according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques. 87
(3.25) Data results for 1st and 2nd techniques operated by Water and Toluene fluids. 91
(4.1) Specifications and design input data based on S-RO-PEX (1st method). 96
(4.2) Specifications and design input data based on S-MED-MVC (1st method). 96
(4.3) Specifications and design input data based on S-MED (1st method). 97
(4.4) Specifications and design input data based on S-MED-TVC (1st method). 97
(4.5) Specifications and design input data based on S-MSF-BR (1st method). 98
(4.6) Specifications of solar assisted thermal and mechanical desalination processes (2nd method). 98
(4.7) Data results for all solar desalination processes based on different operating conditions 100

11
 method.
(4.8) Data results for solar desalination processes based on the same productivity. 101
(4.9) Data results for solar desalination processes based on same solar field area. 101
(4.10) Data results for solar desalination processes based on the same TWP. 102
(4.11) Specifications and input data for PV-RO and CSP-RO systems (100m3/day). 103
(4.12) Data results for both systems (CSP Vs PV) combined with RO desalination unit. 104

12
Nomenclature
A Area, m2, Availability
Ae Effect heat transfer area, m2
Af Amortization factor, y-1
ACC Annualized capital cost, $/year
BHX Boiler heat exchanger
BPE Boiling point elevation, oC
BPR Boiling point ratio, oC
Bp Booster pump
C Cost, $
CC Capital costs, $
CPC Compound parabolic concentrator
CSP Concentrated solar power
Cp Specific heat capacity at constant pressure, kJ/kgK
cp Thermo-economic product cost, $/GJ
CSP Concentrated solar power
CR Compression ratio
D Distillate, kg/s
DCC Direct capital cost, $
DVG Direct vapor generation
dT Temperature drop between effects or stages, oC
Exin Exergy in, kW
Exout Exergy out, kW
FPC Flat plate collector
GR Gain ratio, Md/Ms
HPP High pressure pump
HTO Heat transfer oil
h Specific enthalpy, kJ/kg
I Exergy destruction rate, kW
ICC Investment capital costs, $
IDCC Indirect capital cost, $
IDVG Indirect vapor generation
i Interest rate, %
L Latent heat of vaporization, kJ/kg
LF Load factor
LT Life time, year
MED-PF Multi effect distillation parallel cross feed arrangement
MED-PF-MVC Multi effect distillation parallel cross feed mechanical vapor compression
MED-PF-TVC Multi effect distillation parallel cross feed thermal vapor compression
MSF-BR Multi stage flash brine recycle
Md Distillate mass flow rate, kg/s
NEA Non equilibrium allowance, oC
Neff Number of effects for MED process
Nstg Number of stages for MSF process
nv Number of pressure vessels
ne Number of elements

13
P Pressure, bar
PCF Pressure correction factor, kPa
PEX Pressure exchanger
PR Performance ratio
PTC Parabolic trough collector
PV photovoltaic
PWT Pilton wheel turbine
Q Thermal power, kW
RO Reverse osmosis process
RR Recovery ratio, %
SDS Solar desalination systems
SSA Specific solar field area, m2/(m3/day)
M. Mass flow rate, kg/s
MED Multi-effect distillation
MSF Multi-stage flash
MVC Mechanical vapor compression
N, n Number
Neff Number of effects
OC Operating cost, $
O&M Operating and maintenance costs
S Salinity ratio, g/kg (ppm)
SDS Solar desalination systems
SEMVC Single effect mechanical vapor compression
SETVC Single effect thermal vapor compression
S-ORC Solar organic Rankine cycle
SCC Specific chemical cost, $/m3
SEC Specific electrical cost, $/kWh
SHC Specific heating steam cost, $/MkJ
SLC Specific labor cost, $/m3
SPC Specific Power Consumption, kWh/m3
S-RO Solar reverse osmosis
S-MED Solar multi effect distillation
s Specific entropy, kJ/kgoC
T Temperature, oC
Tci Inlet collector temperature, oC
Tco Outlet collector temperature, oC
Tn Last stage temperature at stage n, oC
Tstg Stage temperature drop, oC
TAC Total annual cost, $/y
TCC Total capital costs, $
TBT Top brine temperature, oC
TDT Top distillate temperature, oC
TCF Temperature correction factor, oC
TPC Total plant costs, $
TST Top steam temperature, oC
Tsun Sun temperature, 6000K

14
TCC Total capital cost, $
TVC Thermal vapor compression
TWP Total water price, $/m3
U Overall heat transfer coefficient, W/m2oC
UPC Unit product cost, $/m3
V Volume, m3
Wt Turbine work, kW
Wp Pump work, kW
X Steam quality
Y Extraction percentage, %
Z Hourly costs, $/h
ZIC&OM Total investment and operating and maintenance cost, $/h
Subscripts
amb Ambient
av Average
b Brine
chm Chemical
col Collector
cond Condenser
comp Compressor
cw Cooling water
d Distillate product
ext Extraction
f Feed
i In
MED Multi effect distillation
o Out
orc Organic Rankine cycle
p Pump
rec Recuperator
reg Regeneration
ro Reverse osmosis
s Salt, steam
st Steam turbine
sat Saturation
sup Supper heat
t Turbine
v Vapor
w Water
Greek
ε Effectiveness
η Thermal efficiency, %
ηo Optical efficiency, %
ηg Generator efficiency, %
ηt Turbine efficiency, %
ρ Density, kg/m3

15
µ Dynamic viscosity, Pa.s
Π Osmotic pressure, kPa

16
 Chapter 1: Introduction & Review
1.1 Water Shortage Problem
Water and its natural resources are considered very important part for living on the earth. Water
is very important for the proceeding of the all life needs and in all life fields like agricultures needs,
human needs and artificial needs. But at the last few decades water shortage problems appeared at many
countries especially developing countries. Many remote areas of the world such as coastal desert areas in
the Middle East or some Mediterranean and Caribbean islands are suffering from acute shortage of
drinking water [1]. By the year of 2025, about 60% of the world population will be suffering from
serious water shortages. Moreover; common use of unhealthy water in developing countries causes 80-
90% of all diseases and 30% of all deaths [2].
For the North African countries, Egypt lays in a semi-arid to arid region where most of its
renewable fresh water is transported by the Nile River from the Ethiopian and Equatorial plateau. It is
anticipated that by the year 2025 water per capita will drop to about 600m3/y, thus approaching the
water poverty limit. The immediate answer is to turn towards non-conventional sources such as water
recycling, reuse of drainage water, treated industrial and sewage effluents, rainfall harvesting and
desalination [3]. As an example, the geographical locations of the Red Sea natural scenarios controlled
the distribution of the hotels, villages and resorts in a sporadic pattern over the long coastline, which
spreads along about 1500 km. A severe shortage of fresh water in the Red Sea region and south Sinai in
the year 2020 is depicted as shown in Table 1.1 [4]. Table 1.1 shows that the great gab between the
demand and the available fresh water is widening and the estimated water will be around 106 m3/day. As
a result, the desalination of the Red Sea water is the only option under the expected shortage of the Nile
water resources.

Table 1.1: Fresh water demand and desalination capacity in the Red Sea and south Sinai regions [4].
Year 2001 2020
South Sinai coast South Sinai coast
Fresh water source Red Sea coast m3/day Red Sea coast m3/day
m3/day m3/day
Nile water pipe-line 80,000 0 140,000 30,000
Fresh ground water 0 10,000 0 25,000
Seawater desalination 97,000 40,000 250,000 150,000
Estimated demand 500,000 125,000 1,000,000 600,000
Water shortage 323,000 75,000 610,000 395,000

1.2 Solar Desalination Systems as a Choice

Desalination of sea water considered the most important method to free water from salt and
simply makes it ready to be used in the human needs. However; desalination process consumes a huge
thermal energy based on the amount of productivity produced. The use of solar energy in thermal
desalination processes is one of the most promising applications of the renewable energies. Countries in
south Mediterranean basin (Egypt) usually have abundant seawater resources and a good level of solar
radiation, which could be used to produce drinking water from seawater. Figure (1.1) shows the good
presence of the solar radiation in Egypt. It is pinpointed on the figure that an amount of 6-
6.9kWh/m2/day of global radiation is in the Middle East countries [5]. Solar desalination can either be
direct; use solar energy to produce distillate directly in the solar collector, or indirect; combining

17
conventional desalination techniques, such as multistage flash desalination (MSF), vapor compression
(VC), reverse osmosis (RO), membrane distillation (MD) and electro-dialysis (ED), with solar collectors
for heat generation. Solar thermal energy coupled to a power cycle by using direct mechanical power
can also be employed [6]. Figure (1.2) shows a flow chart of renewable energies powered different types
of desalination processes [7]. It clear from the figure that solar energy can power thermal and electrical
desalination systems. Solar desalination is particularly important for locations where solar intensity is
high and there is a scarcity of fresh water.
Techniques of solar desalination are many and varying according to the size of the demanding of
fresh water and the size of solar energy presence. In this section; a review of using solar energy with
desalination techniques are investigated. Table 1.2 illustrates some of desalination processes combined
with solar energy. It is clear from literature that the possibility of utilizing reliable solar thermal power
with different types of distillation processes such as MED already exists. However, the technique of
such utilization with different working fluids needs more investigations. Moreover; the techniques that
are presented in literature are significantly at low capacities of operation. Therefore; it very important to
evaluate large capacities based on energy, exergy, cost and thermo-economic.

Figure (1.1) World solar radiation [5].

Figure (1.2) Flow chart of renewable energies powered desalination processes [7].

18
 Table 1.2: Some of indirect solar desalination pilot plants implemented at different locations.
Desalination process
Location Capacity Type of power Reference
type
3
MSF Safat, Kuwait 10m /day Solar collectors [8]
Solar
Al Azhar University in
MSF 0.2m3/day thermal collectors and [9]
Gaza
PV cells
MSF Berken, Germany 10m3/day -- [10]
Low concentration
MSF Gran Canaria, Spain 10m3/day [11]
solar collectors
Lampedusa Island, Low concentration
MSF 0.3m3/day [12]
Italy solar collectors
Flat plate and Parabolic
MSF La Paz, Mexico 10m3/day [13]
trough collectors
Parabolic trough
MSF Kuwait 100m3/day [14]
collectors
Parabolic trough
MSF+MED Al-Ain, UAE 500m3/day [15]
collectors
3
PV+RO 1m /day PV [16]

1.3 Solar Thermal Power Cycles: Technology Overview

Solar thermal power plants, often also called Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plants, produce
electricity in much the same way as conventional power stations. The difference is that they obtain their
energy input by concentrating solar radiation and converting it to high-temperature steam or gas to drive
a turbine or motor engine. Solar troughs as a concentrated solar power (CSP) (see figure (1.3)) can
concentrate the sunlight by about 70–100 times. Typical operating temperatures are in the range of 200–
400°C. Plants of 200 MW rated power and more can be built by this technology [18]. This technology
can provide a suitable and sufficient power to drive on membrane and thermal desalination technologies.
The CSP plants have some features:
 Concentrating solar power plants can generate electricity which can be used for membrane
desalination.
 Each square meter of the CSP’s reflector surface in a solar field is enough to avoid the annual
production of 150 to 250 kilograms (kg) of carbon dioxide (CO2).
 CSP plants can be used for combined heat and power.
 Thermal desalination methods like MED or MSF can be directly/indirectly powered by CSP,
either directly or in co-generation with electricity.
 CSP (Concentrated Solar Power) reduces emissions of local pollutants and considerably
contribute to global climate protection.
 A major benefit of CSP is that it has little adverse environmental impact, with none of the
polluting emissions or safety concerns associated with conventional generation technologies.

CSP is a domestic energy source of all MENA countries. The present increase of electricity costs can be
stopped and reversed in the medium term by introducing concentrating solar power for electricity and
seawater desalination at a large scale. CSP can be made available today at a cost of about 0.18 $/kWh
for a first, small CSP plant with about 5–10 MW capacity operating in solar only mode. In the time span
until 2010, the solar electricity cost of newly installed plants will drop to less than 0.100 $/kWh, in 2020
to 0.056 $/kWh and in 2030 it would be close to 0.050 $/kWh [18].

19
 A parabolic dish-shaped reflector is used to concentrate sunlight on to a receiver located at the
focal point of the dish. The concentrated beam radiation is absorbed into the receiver to heat a fluid or
gas (air) to approximately 750°C. This fluid or gas is then used to generate electricity in a small piston
or Stirling engine or a micro turbine, attached to the receiver. Parabolic trough systems represent the
most mature solar thermal power technology, with 354MWe connected to the Southern California grid
since the 1980s and over 2 million square meters of parabolic trough collectors operating with a long
term availability of over 99%. Supplying an annual 924 million kWh at a generation cost of about 12 to
15 US cents/kWh, these plants have demonstrated a maximum summer peak efficiency of 21% in terms
of conversion of direct solar radiation into grid electricity.
It is important to understand that solar thermal technology is not the same as solar panel, or
photovoltaic, technology. Solar thermal electric energy generation (CSP) concentrates the light from the
sun to create heat, and that heat is used to run a heat engine, which turns a generator to make electricity.
The working fluid that is heated by the concentrated sunlight can be a liquid or a gas. Different working
fluids include water, oil, salts, air, nitrogen, helium, etc. Different engine types include steam engines,
gas turbines, Stirling engines, etc. Heat engines can be quite efficient, often between 30% and 40%, and
are capable of producing about 10's up to 100's of megawatts of sufficient thermal power. However;
Photovoltaic, or PV energy conversion, directly converts the sun's light into electricity.
This means that solar panels are only effective during daylight hours because storing electricity
is not a particularly efficient process. Heat storage is a far easier and efficient method, which is what
makes solar thermal so attractive for large-scale energy production. Heat can be stored during the day
and then converted into electricity at night. Solar thermal plants that have storage capacities can
drastically improve both the economics and the dispatch ability of solar electricity. Table 1.3 shows a
comparison between CSP and PV solar power plants. Based on the comparison terms, CSP considered
more effective while coupling with wider types of desalination processes. Also, Figure (1.4) shows that
the specific cost for CSP with thermal desalination systems achieves lower results against the PV
operation. According to the available data in Table 1.3 and Figure (1.4), CSP operated by PTC technique
is considered in this study. The following table gives a brief comparison between solar thermal power
cycles against the Photovoltaic’s power cycles.

Parabolic trough
collector

Figure (1.3) Photographs of PTC type for solar power generation.

20
 Table 1.3: CSP vs PV solar power generation [19].
Parameter: CSP (thermal) PV (electric)
2
Resource quality 2400 kWh/m /yr 2445 kWh/m2/yr
Power type Thermal (indirect) Electrical (direct)
Desalination system to combined All types (MSF, MED, MED-TVC,
RO, MED-MVC and ED
with MED-MVC, RO, ED
Levelised cost of energy $/MWh 60-350 (214$ in 2030) 100-450 (303$ in 2030)
Construction period/life time 2/30 years 1/30 years
Capacity factor 23-50% 20%
Stirling, Rankine, gas turbines,
Heat engines N/A
steam turbines

Solar troughs and linear Fresnel as a concentrated solar power (CSP) (see figure (1.2)) can concentrate
the sunlight by about 70–100 times. Typical operating temperatures are in the range of 200–400°C.
Plants of 200 MW rated power and more can be built by this technology [7]. This technology can
provide a suitable and sufficient power to drive on membrane and thermal desalination technologies.
The CSP plants have some features:
 Concentrating solar power plants can generate electricity which can be used for membrane
Figure (1.4) Desalinated water costs for various combinations of desalination processes powered by renewable energy
desalination.
sources [20].

1.4 Solar Powered-Rankine Cycles

Power generation based on solar thermal medium temperature collectors are mature enough to
cover power demand around tens of MW based on Rankine cycle. In addition, a considerable additional
advantage is that a solar-heated thermodynamic cycle is able to provide low-grade thermal energy to
drive other applications as water or space heating as well as thermal energy at higher temperature for
driving an absorption chiller, a seawater distiller, etc. Furthermore; solar thermal systems have the
following additional advantages:
o Potential overall efficiency of solar thermal systems is higher than photovoltaic systems.
o Solar thermal systems permit thermal storage instead of batteries. That avoids costly
operational maintenance, toxic wastes and replacement problems.
o Many applications do not require electricity but mechanical power as pumping or reverse
osmosis desalination.
o The system is able to operate continuously with thermal energy backup.

21
Solar thermal collectors are able to generate shaft power by means of a Rankine, Brayton or Stirling
cycle or by other specially designed expansion system. Therefore; Rankine cycle is used in conventional
solar electricity a generation system which uses medium temperature solar collectors-parabolic trough
collectors. The use of solar-powered heat engines offers interesting potentials for small to medium size
communities in developing and isolated areas. Direct applications are: electricity production, water
pumping, reverse osmosis (RO) desalination, vapor compression chillers, etc. Except very small systems
for water irrigation pumping, none of above applications has been thoroughly analyzed or developed and
very few pilot systems exist. With regard to seawater desalination, only three designs of solar heat
engine-driven RO have been published and only one of them has been implemented [21]. The primary
advantages of an ORC power cycle for applications with troughs are [22]:
 ORCs operate at lower temperatures and thus we can reduce trough operating temperatures
around 390oC. This means that an inexpensive heat transfer fluid such as Therminol-VP1 may be
used.
 ORCs can be designed to use air-cooling for the power cycle. This and the fact that the power
cycle uses a hydrocarbon for a working fluid (instead of steam) means that the plant needs
virtually no water to operate. This means that the plants can be built in desert locations that have
limited water availability.
 ORC power cycles are simple and generally can be operated remotely. This helps to reduce
operating and maintenance costs which have been one of the key reasons for concentrated solar
power (CSP) technologies to increase in size.

Organic Rankine Cycles are not new technology. A recent resurgence of interest in ORCs as a viable
option for small-scale solar electricity generation has been spurred by the construction of the 1 MW
Saguaro parabolic trough ORC power plant [23]. A project entitled POWERSOL [24] (Mechanical
Power Generation Based on Solar Heat Engines), partially supported by the European Commission. The
project focuses on the technological development of a solar powered ORC for RO desalination process.
Figure (1.5) shows a schematic diagram of the process configuration implemented by [24].

Figure (1.5) POWERSOL concept: A solar-heated Rankine cycle drives either, a

generator or the high pressure pump of a reverse osmosis [24].

22
 D. Manolakos [25] presented an experimental evaluation of the performance under laboratory
conditions, of a low-temperature solar organic Rankine cycle system for reverse osmosis (RO)
desalination. The operation principle of the system is given briefly below. Thermal energy produced by
a solar collectors’ array evaporates the refrigerant (R134a) in the evaporator surface of Rankine engine.
The super-heated vapor is driven to the expander where the generated mechanical work produced from
expansion drives the RO unit high-pressure pump.
Zhang [26] presented an experimental study in order to investigate feasibility of CO 2-based
Rankine cycle powered by solar energy. The proposed cycle is to achieve a cogeneration of heat and
power, which consists of evacuated solar tube collectors, power generating turbine, heat recovery
system, and feed pump. The cycle recovers thermal energy, which can be used for absorption
refrigerator, air conditioning, hot water supply so on for a building. It is clear that solar ORC exhibits a
reasonable efficiency to be utilized power generation with different organic working fluids.

1.5 The Review Considerations

It is clear from literature that solar powered desalination technologies are varied. PV and CSP are
considered to power on different types of desalination systems. However; CSP is considered in this
study according to many features such as cost and the combination with all types of desalination
technologies. Rankine cycle is widely used. However, it needs more investigations besides considering
different techniques. Parabolic trough solar-thermal power generation is a proven technology. Organic
Rankine cycle (ORC) power plants are more compact and less costly than traditional steam cycle power
plants and are able to better exploit lower temperature thermal resources. Utilizing organic Rankine
cycles allows solar-thermal power generation to become a more modular and versatile means of
supplanting traditional fuels.
It is shown that solar desalination techniques are characterized as a complex processes. This is
because there are different techniques that are either thermal or membrane. Each of these configurations
consists of collective units which are connected by interactive streams. These streams differ according to
the working fluid. Therefore; to perform reliable analysis for this wide range of solar desalination
techniques and different configurations under different operating conditions, a flexible visualized
computer package has been constructed and developed in this work. This package is built up for design
and simulation of solar desalination systems (SDS). The package aids design and operation engineers to
perform different types of calculations such as energy, exergy, and thermo-economic. Additionally, the
package enables the designers to perform different modifications for any imaginary or existing system.
The aims of this work are pinpointed as follows:
 Developing a new flexible visualized computer package for design and simulation of different
types and different configurations of thermal and membrane solar desalination processes.
 Developing a reliable tool of analysis based on the first and second laws of thermodynamics
(energy, exergy and thermo-economics).
 Examining the reliability, flexibility, wide capability, and the validity of the developed package.
 Comparing thermo-economically between the studied solar desalination processes in order to
elect the most reliable process and technique.

23
Chapter 2: A New Visual Library for Design and Simulation of
Solar Desalination Systems (SDS)
2.1 Types of Flow Sheeting Programs Used for Solar Systems
Solar desalination processes consist of a number of interactive units. Using these units a wide
range of process configurations and types can be obtained. Generally, to understand the behavior of
these processes under different operating conditions, a flexible computer program is really needed.
Using such program, large number of flow sheeting problems can be manipulated. These problems can
be generally divided into three classes: (i) performance problems, (ii) design problems, and (iii)
optimization problems [27]. In the performance problem (Figure 2.1-a), the variables associated with the
feed streams to a process unit and all design parameters (such as solar collector area, heat exchanger
area, etc.) are assumed to be known. The variables associated the internal and output streams are the
unknowns. However, in the design problem, some design parameters (Figure (2.1-b)) and/or feed
variables are left unspecified and become unknown. A corresponding number of additional equations
(equality constraints) relating some of these variables are added, such that the total number of unknowns
equates the number of equations. A number of computer programs have been developed for solar and
desalination processes simulation, design and optimization. These computer programs were developed
through three stages. In the first stage, a special purpose programs (one-off program) are used to solve
problems related to a particular process (or unit) with a fixed configuration. The structure of these
programs is rigid, simple, and straightforward. All that the user has to supply is the data and the
executive handles the program in the same way, irrespective of the nature of the process simulated. The
disadvantage of such programs is that a model exists for only one process and any changes made to that
process might require extensive re-programming. However, the specialized program makes it much
easier to produce mathematical models of sufficient realism. A large number of the published programs
for design and simulation of distillation processes are of this type, e.g., these programs are developed by
[28] and [29]. In the second generation, the developed computer programs are nominated either general
purpose programs or modular programs (flow sheeting approach). These programs are developed to
overcome the problems and limitations of the first generation. In these programs, the mathematical
model is usually formulated in terms of a set of equations representing the unit processes. Each of these
sets of equations is regarded as an independent and self-standing module. In the field of power
generation plants, a modular computer program was developed by [30]. This program takes into account
the varying in power demands and in operating conditions, as well as varying cycle configurations. A
flexible computer program for thermodynamic power cycle calculations was also developed and
described by [31]. With this program, the designer can model different cycle schemes by selecting
components from an unseen library (under DOS) and connecting them appropriately. A developed
FORTRAN program to tackle steady-state simulation and data validation for multi stage flash
desalination process is developed by [32]. The process is carried out using an equation-oriented
approach in which the decomposition of the system leads to a sensitivity matrix. This type of programs
needs expert users to describe the process topology and to enter the required data. The third generation
of computer programming for desalination processes is the visual modular program approach. This
approach aids operators and designers to build up the process configuration and enter the required data
and parameters easily. A visualized program was developed for power station plants by [33]. This
program was based on a strong library of thermal units. Different configurations of power plants can be
considered by this program. Also, a commercial process simulation tool, ISPEpro, was developed by

24
Schausberger et al. [34] for studying the performance of a combined power and MSF desalination
process. The user defines process flow sheets graphically by icons. Uche et al. [35] developed an object-
oriented program for the analysis of power and desalination plants. This software was developed in the
form of building blocks for water and energy systems by using a multi-platform (Java language). VDS
program [36] is developed for design and simulation of different types and configurations of
conventional desalination processes. Object-oriented programming with Visual Basic was implemented
to offer a flexible reliable and friendly user-interface. A visual library was built by Mabrouk et al.
enables the user to construct different configurations by just clicking the mouse over the required units
(icons). The interface aids plant designers, operators and other users to perform different calculations
such as energy, exergy, and thermo-economics. In addition, the package enables designers to perform
different modifications of an existing plant or to develop a conceptual design for new configurations. A
matrix generation technique was used in this program. Large matrix representing the process
mathematical model was solved by a developed decomposition technique. This technique is called
“Variable Type by Variable Type (VTBVT) technique. In fact, this decomposition technique imposes
some limitations on the program generality and flexibility. So, the visual programming techniques of the
second generation provide a good solution for some problems related to the first generation programs.
These problems include interface, and data & configuration entry. However, nested recycle streams, and
the large size of the matrix representing the considered process are still imposing some limitations on
this program generation of solar heating and desalination systems. Now, with the rapid uprising of the
personal computer hardware and computational & graphics mathematical software, the third generation
of modeling and simulation programs for desalination processes is established. These programs are
based on the mathematical computations and modeling capabilities of some available commercial
programs. MatLab/SimuLink browser is one of the best powerful tool software introduced in the last
decades. Gambier [37] introduced the ability of MatLab/SimuLink to design library for multi stage flash
components. In Gamier demonstration, the physical properties, and heat transfer correlations, were
simulated individually in embedded MatLab/SimuLink blocks. The main objective of this chapter is to
demonstrate the developed modular computer program using MatLab/SimuLink environments for
different types and configurations of solar desalination units and processes. This modular program has
great capabilities to overcome previous programming problems and limitations such as the recycle
streams. Some units are modeled to present a good example of the proposed modular program.

Figure (2.1-a, b) Performance and design characteristics for common flow sheeting programs.

25
 Figure (2.2) Types of simulation programs used for solar desalination
processes.

2.2 MatLab/SimuLink Software Tool

SimuLink [38] is a general-purpose software program for dynamic systems. This program has
been selected to carry out the task of solar desalination modeling and simulation because it offers
excellent performance qualities for designing regulation algorithms. SimuLink encourages users to try
things out. User can easily build models from scratch, or modifying an existing model. For modeling,
SimuLink provides a graphical user interface (GUI) for building models as block diagrams, using click-
and-drag mouse operations.
With this interface, user can draw the models just as it would with pencil and paper (or as most
textbooks depict them). SimuLink includes a comprehensive block library of sinks, sources, linear and
nonlinear components, and connectors. User can also customize and create his own blocks. SimuLink
can also utilize many MatLab features. The Library Browser displays the SimuLink block libraries
installed on the user system. User builds models by copying blocks from a library into a model window.
SimuLink can also utilize many MatLab features. MatLab is a high-performance language for
technical computing. It integrates computation, visualization, and programming in an easy-to-use
environment where problems and solutions are expressed in familiar mathematical notation. Typical
uses include Math and computation Algorithm development Data acquisition Modeling, simulation, and
prototyping data analysis, exploration, and visualization scientific and engineering graphics application
development, including graphical user interface building.
MatLab is an interactive system whose basic data element is an array that does not require
dimensioning. In industry, MatLab is the tool of choice for high-productivity research, development, and
analysis. It supports linear and nonlinear systems, modeled in continuous time, sampled time, or a
hybrid of the two. Systems can also be multi-rate, i.e., have different parts that are sampled or updated at
different rates.

26
2.3 Simulation of Different Solar Desalination Units

Solar desalination flow sheets often contain the followings:

1. Solar power cycle (Rankine example) and contains:
 Solar radiation model to quantify the amount of thermal power.
 Solar filed (solar collectors) to collect and transfer the amount of thermal power.
 Boiler heat exchanger to transfer thermal power (in case of indirect vapor generation).
 Turbine expander unit for electricity generation.
 Condenser/Brine heater unit for preheating and heating processes.
 Pump to overcome the pressure losses in the cycle and to close the cycle.
2. Desalination plants which include:
 Membrane desalination technique (reverse osmosis, forward osmosis, ion exchange, and electro-
dialysis).
 Thermal desalination technique (multi stage flash, multi effect distillation, and thermal vapor
compression).
In general, solar desalination plants contain a lot of feedback streams, forward streams, different units,
and different types with different configurations for each type. Therefore, simulation and programming
for a solar desalination plant are tedious problems. Figure (2.3) shows the interface panel of the SDS
[39] library under MatLab/SimuLink tool box.

Main SimuLink
browser menu

Click to display

Blocks represent the plants/processes

Model description

Figure (2.3) SDS software library browser under MatLab/SimuLink interface [39].

2.3.1 Validity and reliability of the developed SDS program under SimuLink environment

Different solar desalination processes are considered in this section to show the reliability and
flexibility of the developed SDS package. Solar radiation model, organic Rankine cycle (ORC), reverse
osmosis (RO), multi stage flash (MSF), thermal and mechanical vapor compressions (TVC & MVC),
MED processes are considered as examples to show the scope of the package.

27
 a. Solar radiation model
Solar radiation models are highly useful to estimate the flux over solar plant location. Therefore,
it is very important to decide maximum and minimum flux over a specified period for the place of
operation. It would not be enough for the scientists or engineers in this location to depend on the
measured data only, but it would be important to use a useful theoretical model which could correctly
estimate and predict the solar radiation. In the absence of measured data, theoretical models are the only
available tool for solar radiation estimation. The correlations for daily global radiation (MJ/m2), monthly
global radiation (MJ/m2), and instant radiation in W/m2 for horizontal surfaces are obtained from El-
Sayed [40]. For solar radiation correlation model, input parameters include current hours, Julian day,
latitude angle, longitude, and altitude.
The model can estimate different solar angles for a specified location. (zenith, incidence,
azimuth, declination), sun set, sun rise times, day hours during the day light, solar time, equation of
time, and global radiation (monthly, daily, hourly, and instantaneously). Data results for the location of
operation are presented in Table 2.1. Solar radiation correlations are presented in the Appendix. The
results of Table 2.1 were obtained using the following parameters for Suez Gulf site: latitude angle =30o
N, and longitude =32.55o E. Correlations of the solar radiation model are presented in Appendix D.2.

Table 2.1: Data results for solar radiation model based on the specified location of operation.
Parameter: Data results
Location Suez Gulf region
longitude longitude: 32.55o E
latitude latitude: 30o N
Equation of time, min -11.25
Day hours 10.37
Declination-angle -20.138
Daily average solar radiation, MJ/m2 21.76
Monthly average of daily total radiation, MJ/m2 15.623
Extraterrestrial intensity, W/m2 1409.19
Sun temperature, K 5833.11
Sun rise time 6.814
Sun set time 17.19
Julian day 21of January

b. Solar field model validity

In this section, the validity of the solar field results under the SimuLink environment is
illustrated. Different types of thermal solar collectors are designed and modeled in the SDS library, such
as; flat plate collector (FPC), compound parabolic concentrator (CPC), and parabolic trough collector
(PTC). The PTC collector is illustrated in this chapter to examine the model validity. Specified input and
output parameters and variables are ; ambient temperature oC, solar radiation W/m2, collector width m,
collector length m, glass cover envelope m, and inner tube diameter m.
Variables such as mass flow rate kg/s, inlet collector temperature oC, enthalpy kJ/kg, and
thermo-economic streams are obtained. Also, the results include thermo-physical properties (pressure,
temperature, enthalpy, entropy), performance analysis (stream exergy, exergy destruction, thermal
power, thermal efficiency, and collector exergetic efficiency), and field design variables (total field area,
total field length, number of loops, area per each loop, and total number of solar collectors). Table 2.2
shows the results of the solar PTC block. The validity of these results is examined by comparing it with
that obtained by Torres [41].

28
 Table 2.2: A comparison between the SDS [39] and reference [41] results for Solar Rankine power cycle (direct
vapor generation operation).
Parameter: SDS [48]: ε=0 Ref [29] ε=0 SDS [29]: ε=0.8 Ref [29] ε=0.8
Working fluid Toluene
Evaporation temp, oC 300 300 300 300
Evaporation pressure, bar 32.75 32.757 32.75 33.737
Superheating temp, oC 300 300 380 380
Condenser pressure, bar 0.06215 0.0624 0.06215 0.0624
Working fluid flow rate, kg/s 0.5744 0.563 0.4511 0.442
Rejected power, kW 323.2 318.4 208.9 209.8
Rankine efficiency, % 22.82 23.37 31.33 31.78
PTC area, m2 681.3 672 500 514.3
ε: The effectiveness

c. Turbine model
Turbine model is developed by specifying the input parameters such as the power needed by the
load, turbine thermal, and generator efficiencies. The output variables are thermo-physical properties
(pressure, temperature, entropy, enthalpy…), thermo-economic streams, and mass flow rate. The mass
flow rate would replace the old value from the memory block after some iteration.

d. Recuperator & feed heater models

Recuperators are widely used for organic cycle’s operations. The presence of the recuperator unit
utilizes available energy in the turbine exhaust to preheat the working fluid stream entering the solar
field. Open feed heater is basically a mixing chamber, where the steam extracted from the turbine mixes
with the feed fluid exiting the pump. The mixture leaves the heater as a saturated liquid at the heater
pressure. This kind of regeneration not only improves the cycle efficiency, but also provides a
convenient means of de-aerating the feed fluid. The extracted pressure values are assigned based on each
working fluid property.

e. Condenser/Brine-heater model
Condenser/brine-heater model is simulated and designed to find out the total area, number of
tubes, overall heat transfer coefficient, heat rejection, and effectiveness. The block also calculates
thermo-economic and exergetic values in the output streams. Some data results for the condenser block
are illustrated in Table 2.2.

f. Pump model
Pump unit is modeled to calculate the power required across inlet and outlet streams and by the
pressure loss through the solar filed and condenser unit. The output stream from the pump unit will enter
the recuperator unit in case of regeneration, or the directly to the solar field in case without regeneration.

2.3.2 Validity evaluation of some desalination processes under SimuLink environment

a. Reverse Osmosis (RO) model

The mathematical model validity of RO is examined in this section. The real data for Sharm El-
Shiekh desalination plant [36] is used for this purpose. The model results are compared with the
ROSA6.1. [42] software program and Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant [36]. The plant design
parameters are presented in Table 2.3.

29
 Table 2.3: Specified design parameters of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant [36].
Variable Value
Feed flow rate, m3/h 468
Feed salinity, TDS, ppm 45000
Recovery ratio 0.30
# of stages 1
# of pressure vessels/elements 42/7
Feed temperature, oC 24-40
Fouling factor 0.85
Feed pressure, bar 67

Fresh water product Mp and the plant recover ratio are specified for design calculations of RO
desalination process. The fresh water product will decide the plant power, specific power consumption
SPC, the needed feed Mf, the required feed pressure ΔP, the product salinity Xd, the rejected brine Mb,
salt rejection percentage SR, and the pump horse power needed HP. The RO pump efficiency is about
80% and the feed flow rate salinity is specified as 45,000 ppm.
The input feed sea water temperature is fixed as 25 oC. The plant recovery ratio is specified as
30%. The results of the developed program show a good agreement with the other software results
(ROSA6.1, and [36]) as presented in Table 2.4. This indicates the validity of both the proposed RO
mathematical model and the SDS program. RO block is built as one block contains all equations needed
for the simulation process. It can then be copied and dragged with solar cycle or with any thermal
desalination process such as MSF plant as hybrid processes.

Table 2.4: SDS results of Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant vs. ROSA6.1 and [36].
Sharm El-Shiekh
Variable SDS [39] ROSA6.1 [42] Units
[36]
SPC 7.75 7.76 7.76 kWh/m3
HP 1131 1131.42 1130 kW
Mf 485.9 485.9 486 m3/h
Mb 340.4 340.36 340.23 m3/h
Xb 64180 62150 66670 ppm
Xd 250 283.83 200 ppm
SR 0.9944 -- 0.9927 --
ΔP 6850 6670 6700 kPa

b. Multi Stage Flash (MSF) model

Different configurations of MSF desalination processes (brine recycles MSF-BR, once through
MSF-OT, and brine mixing MSF-MX) can be manipulated by the developed SDS program under
SimuLink environment. For design mode, distillate product, blow down temperature, inlet sea water
temperature, top brine temperature, and number of stages are specified.
The process validity of MSF-BR (Eoun Mousa, Egypt with capacity of 5000m3/day [36]) is
examined by comparing the results the present SDS program. Both results are illustrated in Table 2.5. A
good agreement is obtained for both programs.

30
 Table 2.5: Comparison results of SDS Eoun Mousa MSF-BR plant [36].
Variables: Eoun Mousa MSF-BR [36] SDS
Total feed, kg/s 436.11 438.2
Capacity, kg/s 57.87 57.87
Make up, kg/s 183.33 184.2
Recycle flow rate, kg/s 510 507.8
Cooling water splitter ratio 0.42 0.42
Brine recycle splitter ratio 0.724 0.719
Top brine temperature, oC 110 110
Recycle blow down temperature, oC 48.05 49.7
Vapor temperature at last stage, oC 41 41.47
Sea water salinity, ppm 48620 48620
Area/Heat recovery stages, m2/# 488/17 440/17
Area/Heat rejection stages, m2/# 357/3 321/3

c. Single Effect Thermal and Mechanical Vapor Compression models

Single effect evaporation (SEE) has limited industrial applications. The system is used in marine
vessels and this because the system has a thermal performance ratio less than one, i.e.; the amount of
water produced is less than the amount of heating steam used to operate the system. However, it is
considered here just to examine the program validity for effect evaporation process. Figure (2.4) shows a
schematic diagram for the SEE system.
The main components of the process are the evaporator and the feed pre-heater condenser. The
evaporator consist of an evaporator\condenser heat exchanger tubes, a vapor space, un-evacuated water
pool, a line for removal of non condensable gases, a water distribution system, and a mist eliminator.
Table 2.6 demonstrates the obtained results by the present SDS program and by Dessouky [43]. Also,
results for a single effect thermal and mechanical vapor compression are illustrated in Table 2.6. Results
from the developed SDS program compared with the experimental results of Dessouky [43] and [36]
shows a good agreement under the same range of operating conditions.

SDS

Dessouky [43]

Figure (2.4) Schematic display of Single Effect Evaporation (SEE) under MatLab-SimuLink
software environment.

31
 Table 2.6: The SDS and Dessouky [43] results comparison for SEE model.
Single effect evaporation (SEE)
Variables: Dessouky [43] SDS
Steam mass flow rate kg/s 1.03 1.029
Brine mass flow rate kg/s 1.5 1.5
Total feed mass flow rate kg/s 12.3 12.31
Feed mass flow rate kg/s 2.5 2.5
Cooling water mass flow rate kg/s 9.8 9.806
Feed temperature oC 70 70.17
Vapor temperature oC 74.097 74.1
Distillate temperature oC 28 28.93
Condenser area m2 65.5 66.17
Evaporator area m2 135.9 135.8
Performance ratio 0.97 0.9719
*Product mass flow rate kg/s 1 1
*Seawater temperature 25 25
*Condenser effectiveness -- 0.92
*Feed salinity ppm 42000 42000
*Steam temperature oC 82 82
*Brine temperature oC 75 75
*Brine salinity ppm 70000 70000
Single effect thermal vapor compression (SETVC)
Variables: Dessouky [43] SDS
Steam mass flow rate kg/s 1.03 1.029
Brine mass flow rate kg/s 1.5 1.5
Total feed mass flow rate kg/s 12.3 12.31
Feed mass flow rate kg/s 2.5 2.5
Cooling water mass flow rate kg/s 9.8 9.806
Preheated feed temperature oC 70 69.2
Vapor temperature oC 74.097 74.1
Entrained vapor mass flow rate kg/s 0.37 0.373
Motive steam flow rate kg/s 0.678 0.68
*Product mass flow rate kg/s 1 1
*Seawater temperature 25 25
*Condenser effectiveness 0.9 0.9
*Steam temperature oC 82 82
*Brine temperature oC 75 75
*Brine salinity ppm 70000 70000
*Feed salinity ppm 42000 42000
*Motive steam pressure kPa 750 750
*Compression ratio 2.5 2.5
Evaporator area m2 39.8 41
Single effect mechanical vapor compression (SEMVC)
Variables: Mabrouk [36] SDS
*Product mass flow rate kg/s 17.36 17.36
Steam mass flow rate kg/s 17.36 17.36
Brine mass flow rate kg/s 31.25 31.25
Total feed mass flow rate kg/s 48.61 48.61
*Brine salinity ppm 70000 70000
*Feed salinity ppm 45000 45000
*Seawater temperature 27 27
Vapor temperature oC 60 60
Feed temperature oC 57.93 57.04
Steam temperature oC 96.2 96.17
Distillate blow down temperature oC 32.51 32.93
Brine blow down temperature oC 37.72 37.7
Inlet compressor pressure kPa 20.03 19.84
Outlet compressor pressure kPa 27.047 26.8
Compressor power kW 1081 1076
Specific power consumption kWh/m3 17.291 17.2

*: Specified variables

32
 d. Multi Effect Distillation models
A multi-effect distillation (MED) desalting system with unit capacity up to 5 MIGD is a strong
competitor to the multi-stage flash (MSF) desalting system due to its low specific energy consumption
and the low temperature steam required to operate the system [44]. The process of adding more
evaporators can be continued to a final (n) evaporator.
The vapor generated in the last evaporator (n) is directed to a bottom condenser where it is
condensed. The heating steam (heat source) is condensed in the first effect at the highest temperature.
This is called the n-effect distillation system. The temperature and pressure in each effect are decreased
by the increase of the effect number.
Different MED configurations and types are simulated and designed using SDS package. The
results show a very good agreement with some existing plants. Figure (2.5) shows a display of the MED
under SDS package. Also Table 2.7 shows the data results comparisons between SDS and Darwish [45].
Data comparison with reference [45] is implemented according to Sidem 12-effect units and 11
feed heaters. The unit given data are: n (number of effects) =12, output D=500 ton/h (139 kg/s),
TBT=65oC, Tb =38oC, Tf = 28oC, feed temperature at condenser exit=35oC, feed salinity Sf=46 g/kg, and
maximum salinity Sb=72 g/kg where f and b related to feed and brine respectively.

Model
run
MED plant
blocks
Library:
MED-FF
MED-BF
MED-FFH
MED-PF

Model
environment

Figure (2.5) MED model environment designed using SDS package.

Table 2.7: Data validation between SDS and Darwish [52] for MED model.
T brine oC T feed oC M brine kg/s M distillate kg/s S brine g/kg
Effect #
SDS Ref [45] SDS Ref [45] SDS Ref [45] SDS Ref [45] SDS Ref [45]
1 65 65 62 62 373.09 373.18 11.74 11.85 47.44 47.46
2 62.54 62.55 59.54 59.55 361.41 361.37 11.71 11.8 48.98 49.01
3 60.09 60.09 57.09 57.09 349.79 349.62 11.68 11.75 50.6 50.66
4 57.63 57.64 54.63 54.64 338.22 337.91 11.65 11.71 52.33 52.41
5 55.18 55.18 52.18 52.18 326.72 326.26 11.62 11.66 54.18 54.29
6 52.72 52.37 49.73 49.73 315.27 314.65 11.59 11.61 56.14 56.29
7 50.27 50.27 47.27 47.27 303.88 303.09 11.56 11.56 58.25 58.44
8 47.81 47.82 44.82 44.82 292.55 291.58 11.53 11.51 60.51 60.74
9 45.36 45.36 42.36 42.36 281.27 280.12 11.5 11.46 62.93 63.23
10 42.9 42.91 39.91 39.91 270 268.71 11.47 11.41 65.55 65.91
11 40.45 40.45 37.45 37.45 258.87 257.34 11.45 11.36 68.38 68.82
12 38 38 35 35 247.76 246.03 11.42 11.32 71.45 71.99

33
2.4 Solar Power Cycle for Desalination Processes: Case Study

In this section, a solar organic Rankine cycle for electricity and power generation is combined
with reverse osmosis desalination plant. The plant contains different units such as; solar PTC field,
turbine unit, condenser, and recuperator, pump, and RO block. RO desalination plant is operated with
pressure exchanger (RO-PEX) unit. A higher efficiency positive displacement power recovery devices
(pressure exchangers), that in the past were only used in small RO seawater units, are also slowly
gaining acceptance in large desalination plants.
Hydraulic efficiency of this type of equipment is in the range of 94-96% [46]. In this work, the
values of 80% and 96% are considered for booster pump and PEX unit respectively. Some of these
devices utilize pistons; another transfer energy through a direct contact between concentrate and the feed
stream. The process is modeled and designed under SimuLink environment. By specifying the fresh
water demand, the cycle design calculations are performed.

Table 2.8: Energy and thermo-economic results for solar powered RO-PEX technique.
Variables: SDS results:
RO-PEX section:
RO Mass flow rate, m3/h 486
RO brine loss flow rate, m3/h 340.2
Brine loss salinity, g/m3 63.56
Product salinity, g/m3 0.2682
PEX hydraulic power, kW 607.8
Booster pump power, kW 62.08
High pressure pump power, kW 332.1
High pressure pump pressure, bar 68.74
RO Specific Total cost, $/m3 0.68

Organic power cycle (ORC) section:

Site latitude angle =30o N, and longitude =32.55o E.
Working fluid Toluene
Solar field area, m2 1887
Solar field efficiency, % 73.61
Solar field thermal power, kW 1181
Developed turbine power, kW 394.18
Organic cycle flow rate, m3/h 6.235
Rankine efficiency, % 32.64
Specific power consumption, kWh/m3 2.704
Organic pump power, kW 8.89
Condenser power rejection, kW 774.6
Total cycle exergy destruction, kW 2538
Overall exergy efficiency, % 11.61
Total cycle exergy inlet, kW 2871
Total operating & maintenance cost, $/h 99.26
Thermo-economic product cost, $/GJ 66
Total water price, $/m3 0.71

The RO plant productivity is set as 3500m3/day. Salinity gradient is 45g/kg. Recovery ratio is
30%, number of elements per pressure vessels is 7/48, element area is 35.3m2, high pressure pump
(HPP) efficiency is 80%, and the fouling factor (FF) is set as 85%. The results are obtained. A typical
summer operating conditions are considered with global radiation of 850W/m2.The outlet collector
temperature is 340oC with Toluene as a working fluid. The turbine, pump, generator efficiencies are

34
85%, 75%, and 95% respectively. RO plant life time normally set as 20years with 5years for element per
vessel, and load factor is set as 90%. The developed model can perform energy, exergy, and cost and
thermo-economic analysis for the considered process. Some results are illustrated above in Table 2.8.
The RO section with PEX device exhibits a total area of parabolic trough collector (PTC
efficiency=73%) equal to 1887m2 with Toluene as a working fluid. This area would generate a thermal
power about 1887kW with outlet temperature 340oC. PEX operation reduces the required electric power
from the generator to reach 394kW instead of 1131kW in basic configuration. Lowering the required
power by the existence of PEX would lower all the dependent parameters (solar field area, pump power,
mass flow rate, condenser area, exergy destruction, and operational costs).
Based on the above comparisons, SDS program is developed for design and simulation of
different types and configurations of conventional and solar desalination processes. Embedded block
programming with SimuLink environment are used to develop a flexible reliable and friendly user-
interface. The desalination plant components such as heat exchangers, flash chambers, evaporators,
pumps, steam ejectors, compressors, reverse osmosis membranes, pipes, etc., are modeled and stored as
blocks in SimuLink visual library.
The library enables the user to construct different desalination techniques and configurations by
just clicking the mouse over the required units (blocks). The interface aids plant designers, operators and
other users to perform different calculations such as energy, exergy, and thermo-economics. In addition,
the package enables the designers to perform different modifications of an existing plant or to develop
the conceptual design of new configurations. Some operating desalination plants are simulated by the
present package to show its reliability and flexibility. The developed SDS package has some features
concluded in:
 Easy model construction.
 Easy to convert the designed code to be self executable and work under different computer
languages (Visual basic, Visual C, Visual C++, and Visual Fortran).
 The model allows users easily change to the plant variables and different operating conditions
with ultimate stream allowance.
 The developed program overcomes the problem appears in other techniques of simulation such
as sequential approach, matrix manipulation technique.
Based on the developed SDS, the upcoming chapters study the thermo-economic results of solar
powered different types of desalination systems. It became very easy to analyze and optimize the solar
desalination systems based on the developed package. Further information about the methodologies,
analysis, equations, working fluids thermo physical properties, desalination configurations and the
processes description are available in the Appendices.

35
 Chapter 3: Exergy & Thermo-economic Analyses of Solar
Organic Cycles Assisted Desalination Processes
3.1 Working Fluids Selection for Solar ORC

The use of solar energy to generate mechanical power, one can in principle employ the
thermodynamic power cycles commonly used for the generation of mechanical power from a heat
source. The general method of converting thermal energy into mechanical energy in this case is to apply
several processes on the working fluid of the power cycle. The selection of the more reasonable working
fluid that can be used with the solar operated Rankine cycle depends on many criteria the most
important of which is the maximum temperature of the cycle. Other criteria include the following [47];
 High molecular weight to reduce the turbine nozzle velocity.
 Reasonable pressure corresponding to boiling temperature of the fluid (high pressure requires
careful sealing to avoid leakage).
 Dry expansion, i.e., positive slope of the vapor saturation curve on T-S diagram, to assure that all
expansion states in the turbine exist on the superheat region.
 A critical temperature well above the maximum operating temperature of the cycle.
 Inexpensive, non-corrosive, non-flammable, and non-toxic fluid.
 Reasonable pressure at condensing temperature (usually about 30-40oC).

In many solar operated Rankine systems the maximum temperature does not exceed 400 oC and
thus water loses its advantages as a working fluid. Many organic fluids were found to satisfy the criteria
stated above. Literature [47] shows that the selection of organic fluids is variable, wide and based on
different criteria.
Some literatures built their choices based on molecular weight and P-T behavior [47]. Others
selected the organic fluid based on boiling point and melting point; while others made their selection
based on the thermal efficiency [48, 49].
For thermal efficiency; it is not recommended as the only reference for comparison and selection
of the organic fluids because the systems with high thermal efficiency may also have high irreversibility
and economically not favorable.
In this part; the selection of the organic fluids is based on the combination of all the above
criteria. Based on critical temperature which should be well above the collector operating temperature;
Butane, Isobutane, Propane, R134a, R152a, R245ca, and R245fa are selected to operate ORC with FPC.
Fluids like R113, R123, Hexane, and Pentane; are chosen for CPC type.
For PTC type; Dodecane, Nonane, Octane, and Toluene are suitable for this kind of collectors.
Table 3.1 shows a list of the considered working fluids grouped according to collector's operating
temperature.

36
 Table 3.1: Properties list of the selected working fluids.
Working fluid Molecular
Formula Tcritical oC Pcritical bar Collector type
(WF) weight, kg/mol
Butane C4H10 58.122 151.9 37.96 FPC
Isobutane C4H10 58.122 134.66 36.23 FPC
Propane C3H8 44.1 95 39.75 FPC
R134a C2H2F4 102.03 101 40.54 FPC
R152a C2H4F2 66.05 113.261 45.1675 FPC
R245ca C3H3F5 134.04 170 36.36 FPC
R245fa C3H3F5 134.048 153 35.7 FPC
Pentane C5H12 72.1488 196.6 33.7 CPC
R113 C2Cl3F3 187.37 213 32.42 CPC
R123 C2HCl2F3 152.93 182 35.63 CPC
Hexane C6H14 86.175 231 29.71 CPC
Dodecane C12H26 170.334 382 17.94 PTC
Nonane C9H20 128.25 321 22.7 PTC
Octane C8H18 114.22 296 24.92 PTC
Toluene C7H8 92.1384 318 41.26 PTC

The fluids selected for FPC (Table 3.1) are regrouped again based on the operating temperature
of the used collector. For R152a, R134a and Propane are not recommended to be in use with FPC
because these two fluids have a critical temperature not well above the collector design temperature
(80~100oC). At the same time, these fluids present an isentropic action (not dry and/or positive slope) on
the T-S diagram. However; the remaining fluids (Butane, Isobutane, R245ca, and R245fa) considered
suitable for FPC according to the critical temperature range (130-170oC) and the positive slope on T-S.
However; according to the molecular weight, R245ca presents the highest value about (134
kg/mol) followed by Butane and Isobutane. For condenser pressure, lowering it will increase the cycle
efficiency and also the cycle net work. To take advantage of the increased efficiencies at low pressure,
the condensers usually operate well below or near the atmospheric pressure. However, there is a lower
limit on the condenser pressure that can be used. It can’t be lower that the saturation pressure of cooling
water temperature (range of 30-35~40 oC i.e., Pcond=0.032~0.06 bar).
However; lowering the condenser pressure is not without any side effects; it creates the
possibility of air leakage into the condenser and will increase the moisture content at the final stages of
the turbine. Therefore, R245ca recorded suitable condenser pressure (about 1.51 bar) at temperature
about 35oC while Isobutane achieves condenser pressure about 4.72 bar at the same condenser
temperature. Also, R245ca, its lower saturation pressure at 100oC (about 7.8 bar) may be considered an
advantage when used in DVG process inside the absorber tubes of a FPC.
Therefore, R245ca is suitable for FPC from the molecular weight, critical temperature, and
condenser pressure. But R245ca shows an isentropic behavior on T-S diagram. On the other hand,
Butane shows dry (sharp positive slope than R245ca) behavior on T-S diagram. At the same time
R245ca considered more toxic than Butane. For these reasons Butane is considered for FPC. Figure (3.1-
a) shows a schematic diagram of the considered working fluids on T-S.
Figure (3.2-a) shows the saturation pressures for different collector types with different working
fluids at the saturation temperature at the range of 35-100oC. For CPC unit, Pentane, Hexane, R113, and
R123 are examined as working fluids. R113 has a highest molecular weight against the remaining (187.3
kg/mol) followed by R123, Hexane, Pentane respectively. However, regarding the condenser pressure,
Hexane recorded the minimum value (0.3064 bar) at saturation temperature equal 35oC, followed by
R113 with 0.654 bar. Pentane gives higher values little bit more than R113 and Hexane with a value of
1.011 bar. However; R123 gives the highest value for condenser pressure as 1.34 bar. Therefore, Hexane

37
is recommended for the operation of CPC with ORC. Also it is highly recommended to choose an
organic fluid with high critical temperature to achieve highest cycle efficiency and that’s another
advantage for Hexane against the remaining fluids for CPC operation. Figure (3.1-b) shows a schematic
diagram of the selected working fluids on T-S related to CPC collector. Figure (3.2-b) shows the
saturation pressures for CPC collector with different working fluids at the saturation temperature of the
range of 35-100oC.
Dodecane, Toluene, Nonane, and Octane are evaluated for PTC operation. They have high
critical temperature with accepted range for PTC to operate ORC. Dodecane gives the highest molecular
weight against the others with a value equal to 170.3 kg/mol, followed by Nonane, Octane, and Toluene
respectively. However, Dodecane gives very low value for condenser pressure at 35 oC (about 0.00043
bar). At this pressure value many aspects for safety are required and large condensers are needed.
Nonane comes next with respect to the condenser pressure by 0.0106 bar.
Octane achieves a suitable value for condenser pressure about 0.0336 bar but with lowest critical
temperature (about 296oC) value. Dodecane and Octane are not suitable for solar ORC due to very low
condenser pressure and low critical temperature respectively. Toluene gives a condenser pressure value
about 0.0648 bar. And that’s mean it is suitable for this selection. Although Nonane is recommended by
its molecular weight and critical temperature (little bit higher than Toluene), Toluene achieves the
recommended condenser pressure value at the same saturation temperature.
Also, Toluene achieves lower values of specific vapor volume (0.00117 m3/kg Vs 18.75 m3/kg),
this leading to a low condenser area followed by achieving low in economic evaluation. Figure (3.2-c)
shows the saturation pressures for PTC collectors with different working fluids at the saturation
temperature at the range of 35-100oC.
From the working fluid analysis, it is clear to elect Butane, Hexane, and Toluene to be work with
FPC, CPC, and PTC respectively in case of direct vapor generation (DVG). Pentane considered valuable
however; its effect on the condenser unit is not remarkable. Also, Nonane is not recommended for
Rankine condensation stage due to lower density meaning high specific vapor volume.

38
 FPC CPC
180 Butane 250 Hexane
R245ca
R123 R113
160 Isobutane
R245fa 200 Pentane
140
Temperature, C

Temperature, C
120 150
100
100
80
60 50

40 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
(a) Entrop, kJ/kgC (b) Entropy, kJ/kgC
PTC
400 Toluene
Nonane
300 Dodecane
Octane
Temperature, C

200

100

0
-2 -1 0 1 2 3
(c) Entropy, kJ/kgC

Figure (3.1) The selected fluids behavior on T-S diagram for different solar collectors (FPC, CPC, and PTC).

39
 FPC

R245ca
6
Pressure, bar

5 R245fa
4 Butane
3
2
Isobutane
1
0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
(a) Temperature, C
Pentane
R123 CPC Toluene PTC
2 0.1
1.8 Octane
1.6 R113 0.08 Nonane
1.4
Pressure, bar

Pressure, bar

1.2 0.06
1
0.8 0.04
0.6 Dodecane
Hexane
0.4 0.02
0.2
0 0
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
(b) Temperature, C (c) Temperature, C

Figure (3.2) Saturation pressures for different collectors with different working fluids at the saturation
temperature at the range of 35-100oC.

40
3.2 Solar ORC Assisted RO Desalination Process

3.2.1 Solar ORC/RO process: Basic Cycle

Although a small ORC is characterized by rather low efficiencies (8–12%), it is particularly easy
to manufacture. Another important advantage of ORC’s is that it can utilize waste heat from low-quality
exhausts or steam, which makes it suitable for a very large range of applications which include those
with low temperature waste heat sources [47]. Donghong Wei [50] presented a system performance
analysis and optimization of an organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system using HFC-245fa (1,1,1,3,3-
pentafluoropropane) as working fluid driven by exhaust heat.
The thermodynamic performances of an ORC system under disturbances have been analyzed.
Pedro J. Mago [51] presented an analysis of regenerative organic Rankine cycles using dry organic
fluids, to convert waste energy to power from low-grade heat sources. The dry organic working fluids
that selected for that investigation were R113, R245ca, R123, and Isobutane, with boiling points ranging
from -12oC to 48oC. The evaluation was performed using a combined first and second law analysis by
varying certain system operating parameters at various reference temperatures and pressures.
Delgado-Torres et al [52, 53, 54] gave a detailed analysis of low power (100kW) solar driven
Rankine cycles for medium range of operating temperatures. Toluene, Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane
(D4) and Hexamethyldisiloxane (MM) were considered working fluids for ORC. The direct solar vapor
generation (DVG) configuration of solar with ORC was analyzed and characterized with LS-3 and
IND300 parabolic trough collector (PTC) models. According to Torres results, PTC LS-3 type is
implemented for this study. The proposed configuration consists of the vapor generation within the
absorber tube of the parabolic trough. The power output from the turbine is used to drive the (RO) unit.
It is clear from literature that solar powered organic Rankine cycle is implemented however; such
systems should be evaluated based on exergy and thermo-economic analyses.
In this part, exergy and thermo-economic approaches are used to evaluate the operation of solar
ORC combined with RO desalination system. For more details, all the specific relations and the
mathematical models are illustrated in the appendix. The validity of the mathematical model is
examined in the past chapter. The real data for Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant [36] is used for this
purpose based on Suez Gulf region (latitude angle =30o N, and longitude =32.55o E). The plant design
parameters are presented in Table 3.2. Figure (3.3) shows a schematic diagram of the basic solar-ORC
powered RO process.

Table 3.2: Specified design parameters of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant [36].
Variable Value
Feed flow rate, m3/h 468
Feed salinity, TDS, ppm 45000
Recovery ratio 0.30
# of stages 1
# of pressure vessels 42
Feed temperature, oC 24-40
Fouling factor 0.85
Feed pressure, bar 67
# of elements 7
Element type FTSW30HR-380

41
 Figure (3.3) Schematic diagram of DVG solar ORC powered RO (basic cycle).

For design calculation based on the RO mathematical model; it should be noted that the distillate
product Md should be specified with plant recovery ratio. The distillate product will decide the plant
power capacity, specific power consumption SPC, the demanded feed, the required feed pressure, the
product salinity, the rejected brine, salt rejection percentage, and the pump horse power needed. The
proposed RO section has an element area fixed as 35.4 m2 while using FTSW30HR-380. The RO pump
efficiency is about 80% and the feed flow rate salinity is specified as 45,000ppm. The input feed sea
water temperature is fixed as 25 oC. The plant recovery ratio is specified as 30%. The assumptions and
specified parameters for the proposed cycle may be listed as follows:
 The isentropic efficiencies of the turbine, and the pump would be fixed as 85% and 75%
respectively.
 The value of 95% is assigned for generator unit.
 Condensation and inlet cooling water temperatures would be fixed at 35oC and 20oC
respectively.
 For climate conditions, solar radiation is maintained based on Suez Gulf region (latitude angle
=30o N, and longitude =32.55o E), and ambient temperature is maintained at 25.4oC.
 Feed water salinity is about 45,000ppm.
 Inlet seawater temperature to the RO module is depending on the outlet temperature value from
condenser/pre-heater unit.
 RO product will be set as 145.8m3/h.
 Other specifications of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant like fouling factor, recovery ratio,
and high pressure pump are presented in Table 3.2.
For DVG saturation operation; maximum operating temperature for FPC is set as 80 oC, and 130oC for
CPC and 300oC for PTC. However, for DVG superheat operation; the deference temperature between
saturation and superheat degrees is set as 20 oC for all collector types. The obtained results are illustrated
in Table 3.3.

42
 Table 3.3: Results of ORC/RO process with different working fluids and different types of solar collectors.
Saturation Superheat
Parameter Butane, FPC Hexane, CPC Toluene, PTC Butane, FPC Hexane, CPC Toluene, PTC
Tco=80 oC Tco=130 oC Tco=300 oC Tco=100 oC Tco=150 oC Tco=320 oC
Pev, bar 10.14 4.992 32.78 10.14 4.992 32.78
Acol, m2 2.111E+04 1.506E+04 6747 2.14E+04 1.696E+04 6734
Wt, kW 999.4 1065 1119 997.8 1054 1120
ηR, % 8.15 14.46 25.81 8.07 13.89 26
m., kg/s 28.31 13.94 5.75 26.16 13.8 5.24
Itotal, MW 16.48 11.65 4.951 16.7 13.18 4.94
ηex, % 5.22 6.5 14.04 5.2 5.85 14.06
SPC, kWh/m3 6.855 7.302 7.677 6.84 7.231 7.679
Water
Saturation Superheat
Parameter
FPC CPC PTC FPC CPC PTC
Tco=80 oC Tco=130 oC Tco=300 oC Tco=100 oC Tco=150 oC Tco=320 oC
Pev, bar 0.576 2.755 85.9 0.576 2.755 85.9
Acol, m2 1.864E+04 1.27E+04 5949 1.82E+04 1.626E+04 5851
X, quality 0.92 0.86 0.74 0.93 0.93 0.76
Wt, kW 1019 1084 1130 1022 1055 1131
ηR, % 8.89 17.68 29.93 10.17 13.34 30.47
m., kg/s 4.12 2.38 1.407 3.97 3 1.335
Itotal, MW 14.48 9.731 4.28 14.13 12.6 4.2
ηex, % 5.64 7.64 16 6.82 7.86 22.52
SPC, kWh/m3 6.988 7.437 7.748 7.01 7.24 7.756
Note: Tco: Outlet collector top temperature to the sink (turbine).

It is clear from the result table that saturation operation for Butane with (FPC) collector gives
lower values of collector area, and total exergy destruction than superheat operation. Therefore;
saturation operation for Butane (FPC) would give higher values of power output, Rankine efficiency,
mass flow rate, overall exergy efficiency, and specific power consumption than the superheat operation.
While comparing with the conventional working fluid (Water); Water (FPC) gives lower values against
Butane (FPC) with respect to evaporation pressure, collector area, mass flow rate, and total exergy
destruction.
Also; Water with (FPC) gives higher values with respect to power output, Rankine efficiency,
overall exergy efficiency, and specific power consumption. However, Water with (FPC) needs an
expansion wet turbine for dryness fraction of about 0.92 otherwise the superheat operation should be
implemented with the expense of reducing in overall exergy efficiency and increasing in collector area.
Saturation operation of Hexane (CPC) would give the same behavior as Butane results. That's mean,
lower values in collector area, and total exergy destruction than superheat operation. And that would be
followed by an increase in power output, Rankine efficiency, mass flow rate, overall exergy destruction,
and the specific power consumption. Water with (CPC) gives lower results in collector area, and total
exergy destruction than that of Hexane (CPC).
However; the steam quality 0.86 is lower than that of the FPC. But; Hexane (CPC) achieved
lower results than Butane (FPC) with respect to evaporation pressure, collector area, mass flow rate, and
total exergy destruction. At the same time Hexane (CPC) gives higher results than Butane (FPC) with
respect to power output, Rankine efficiency, overall exergy efficiency, and specific power consumption.
The same behavior exists for Water (CPC) results Vs Water (FPC) results regardless the quality of steam
produced at the turbine last stage. PTC operation is quite different against the other two types. Saturation
operation for Toluene (PTC) gives lower values than superheat ones with respect to Rankine efficiency,
overall exergy efficiency, and specific power consumption. At the same time saturation operation gives
43
higher results than superheat operation for Toluene (PTC) with respect to collector area, mass flow rate,
and total exergy destruction. Water with (PTC) produces more attractive results than Toluene with
(PTC) collector regardless the steam quality produced at the turbine last stage and the higher values of
evaporation pressure (higher values of evaporation pressure may cause problems to the collector sealing
and joints). From the above analysis it could be concluded that, Toluene (PTC-superheat) and Water
(PTC-superheat) considered valuable for the operation of Sharm El-Shiekh RO desalination plant.
Moreover; saturation operating condition for Toluene operation is quite remarkable with no need for
superheat.
Cost analysis is introduced based on two major parts. First of them is the solar organic Rankine
cycle, and the second is the RO desalination plant. There is no much precise information about the
current capital cost of ORC. By information obtained from literatures; solar collectors costs may be
evaluated as 150~200$/m2. The operation and maintenance costs for the case of these solar collectors
have been estimated to be 15% of the investment cost. Table 3.4 shows the investment capital costs
(ICC) and operation and maintenance costs (O&M) of solar Rankine cycle. For the RO, the operation
and maintenance costs have been considered as shown in Table 3.5 [55]. The investment and operating
& maintenance costs analyses are performed for each component, solar field, steam turbine, condenser,
and pump unit. For that purpose; the amortization factor is estimated based on the following relation
[56];

Where i is the interest rate and set as 5%, LTp is the plant lifetime and set as 20 years. For RO
section, cost analyses are estimated based on direct capital costs (DCC), indirect capital costs (ICC), and
the total capital costs (TCC). Table 3.5 [63] illustrates the costs for RO desalination section. Cost
analysis are performed based on USD ($) currency. The total water price (TWP, $/m3) for the ORC-RO
plant may be estimated based on the following relation:

Table 3.4: ICC and O&M costs for solar organic Rankine cycle components.
Parameter ICC, $ O&M, $ TCC, $/year , $/h Ref
Solar field 639.5×(Acol) 0.95 15%×ICCcol Af×(ICC+O&M)col TCCcol/8760
Steam turbine 4750× (Wt)0.75 25%×ICCst Af×(ICC+O&M)st TCCst/8760
*Recuperator 150× (Arec)0.8 25%×ICCrec Af×(ICC+O&M)rec TCCrec/8760 [55]
Condenser 150× (Acond)0.8 25%×ICCcond Af×(ICC+O&M)cond TCCcond/8760
Pump 3500× (Wp)0.47 25%×ICCpump Af×(ICC+O&M)pump TCCpump/8760
Note: All parameters in Table 3.4 are identified in the Appendix.

Table 3.5: ICC and O&M costs for RO desalination plant [56].
DCC, $ ICC, $ TCC, $ ACC, $/year O&M, $/year , $/h
0.8
CCswip=996×Mf ICC=27%× TCC=ICC+ ACC=TCC× OCpower=LF×0.06×SPC×Md =
CChpp=393000+10710×ΔPf DCC DCC Af OClabor=LF×0.01×Md (ACC+OCro)
CCe=Fe×Pp×Np+Fe×PVp×nv OCchm=LF×0.04×Md /8760
CCequip=CCswip+CChpp+CCe OCinsur=0.005×TCC×Af
CCsite=10%×CCequip OCmemb=Pp×Np/LTm
DCC=CCequip+CCsite OCro=OCpower+OClabor+
OCchm+OCinsur+OCmemb
Note: All parameters in Table 3.5 are identified in the Appendix.

44
 The results for DVG process for both steam operating conditions (saturation and superheat) are
shown in Figure (3.4). The figure shows that total water price (TWP, $/m3) for superheated steam under
FPC and CPC is higher than saturation operating conditions. This may due to the area added on the T-S
curve for each working fluid based on mass flow rate, power produced, and condenser area. Butane
(FPC)sat-sup gives the highest values among the other fluids followed by Water (FPC) sat-sup. And that is
referring to the massive effect of solar field costs (larger area means higher costs) compared with the
other unit’s costs. Hexane (FPC)sat-sup followed by Water (FPC)sat-sup comes next with an advantage for
Water (CPC)sat-sup. Toluene (PTC)sat-sup followed by Water (PTC)sat-sup give lowest values of total water
price (TWP, $/m3) with an advantage to Water (PTC)sat-sup operation. From the techno-economic
analysis of the considered cycles, it can be deduced that PTC is the best option in both steam operating
conditions.
It is quite clear that Water and Toluene are suitable for both operations. However, Water needs
expansion wet turbine for dryness fraction ranged between 0.7 and 0.95 for both operations. Moreover,
the evaporation high pressure (85.9 bar) considered not safe for the collector design requirements.
Between all units, solar collector field (based on area as a cost function) exhibits the largest effect on the
cycle specific cost, minimum exergy destruction, and overall exergy efficiency. Generally and for both
operations; increasing the collector evaporation temperature will cause an increase in turbine power,
Rankine efficiency, pump work, SPC, and reverse osmosis operating pressure; with decrease in collector
area, working fluid flow rate, condenser area, condenser heat load. Thus, according to the current
techno-economic framework, the PTC system is the best choice.

0.95
FPC
0.94 Water 0.9416
FPC Water
FPC CPC
0.93 0.941 FPC
0.9356 0.9392
CPC Water 0.9352
Water
TWP $/m3

0.9321 CPC
0.92 CPC
0.9261 0.9351
0.91
PTC Water
Water PTC
0.9 0.904 0.903
PTC
PTC 0.9034
0.9035
0.89

0.88
Saturation Super Heat
Figure (3.4) Total Water Price (TWP, $/m3) for cycles different working
fluids & different steam operating conditions with different collector types.

3.2.2 Solar ORC/RO process: Regenerative Cycles

There are many possible organic Rankine cycle configurations, several of which will be
considered. However, a particular design that is by far the most commonly observed in commercial
applications. Also, reverse osmosis (RO) is quite suitable for small to medium capacity systems and also
has good perspectives for cost reduction and improvement in efficiency in the near future. In this part,
the considered process power plant cycle consists of solar organic Rankine cycle (solar collector,
turbine, condenser, and pump). It is revealed from the previous part that Toluene is recommended and

45
considered to drive the solar ORC part as a DVG technique. The aim of this section may be concluded
into these points:
 Investigating and analyzing the design of solar Rankine cycle under different configurations, and
different types of operations.
 Saturation and superheat operations are used to examine the cycle configurations performance
with different working fluids (Water and Toluene for parabolic trough collector-PTC).
 Adding open feed heater (OFH) and recuperator units under saturation and superheat operation is
investigated. Also adding OFH with recuperator together is established for both operations
(saturation and superheat).
 Examining and comparing the results with the basic cycle (cycle without OFH or/and
recuperator) is evaluated.
Different schematic diagrams of the proposed cycles (Regenerative ORC+RO) are presented below. The
assumptions and specified parameters for the proposed cycle model may be listed as following:
 Rankine cycle gross work will be assigned by RO unit.
 Turbine, generator, and all Rankine pumps efficiencies would be fixed as 85%, 95%, and 75%
respectively.
 Condensation and inlet seawater temperatures would be fixed at 35 oC and 20oC respectively.
 Recuperator effectiveness will set at 0 for basic ORC, and 0.8 for regeneration case.
 For saturation operation; maximum operating temperature is set as 300oC for PTC. For superheat
operation the degree temperature of superheat is set to be higher than the saturation temperature
by 20oC for all collectors (PTC=300+20oC).
 Based on the unremarkable results in the previous section, Butane (FPC) and Hexane (CPC) are
eliminated from this comparison.

a. ORC/RO with recuperator unit

Figure (3.5) shows a schematic diagram of regenerative Rankine cycle (R-ORC). The
recuperator unit is added to the basic cycle components to preheat the inlet fluid stream entering the
collectors filed. The only departure from the basic Rankine cycle in the system shown in Figure (3.2) is
the presence of the recuperator unit which utilizes available energy in the turbine exhaust to preheat the
working fluid stream entering the solar field.

b. ORC/RO with OFH unit

Figure (3.6) shows a schematic diagram of organic Rankine cycle with Open Feed Heater (OFH)
unit (OFH-ORC). Open feed heater is basically a mixing chamber, where the steam extracted from the
turbine mixes with the feed fluid exiting from the pump. The mixture leaves the heater as a saturated
liquid at the heater pressure. Such kind of regeneration not only improves the cycle efficiency, but also
provides a convenient means of deaerating the feed fluid. The extracted pressure values are assigned
based as 0.8bar Toluene.

c. ORC/RO with OFH and recuperator

Figure (3.7) shows a schematic diagram of the 3rd configuration. This configuration is considered
the same as the basic one. Otherwise, adding open feed heater and recuperator unit together is the
difference. Before entering the solar field, the working fluid passes first through the recuperator then the
OFH. A portion of extracted steam is mixed with the preheated fluid from the recuperator unit. For each
working fluid, the value of extraction pressure is considered with value of recuperator effectiveness. For
Toluene, 0.8bar of extraction is operated with 0.8 of recuperator effectiveness.

46
 Turbine
Mechanical power to
drive RO

Solar field saturation and/or

RO plant
superheat
Recuperator
product

145.8 m3/h

Thermal stream for RO

Brine

Condenser

Pump

Figure (3.5) A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
recuperator unit.

Turbine.
Mechanical power to
drive RO

Solar field saturation and/or OFH RO plant

superheat
product

145.8 m3/h

Pump2 Thermal stream for RO

Brine

Condenser

Pump1

Figure (3.6) A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
OFH unit.

47
 Turbine.
Mechanical power to
drive RO

Solar field saturation and/or OFH RO plant

superheat
product
Recuperator
145.8 m3/h

Pump2 Thermal stream for RO

Brine.

Condenser

Pump1

Figure (3.7) A schematic diagram of solar Rankine cycle components for saturation and/or superheat with
OFH and recuperator units.

A methodology of energy, exergy and cost analysis for performance of different configurations of solar
organic Rankine cycle is presented in this part (more analyses are mentioned in the appendix). The
performance analysis of the energy part is concluded in Rankine efficiency, collector area, power
generation, and specific power consumption (SPC). The first law Rankine efficiency is calculated from
the following relation;

Collector area is a very effective parameter to judge the system performance causing an increasing or
decreasing in the plant total cost. The collector total area is estimated based on the collector energy
balance equation as a function of collector efficiency as following;
Acol=Qu/ Gb …(4)
Where Qu is the collector thermal power and (Gb) is the direct global beam over the collector area, and
Acol is the collector total area. The characteristics efficiency curve of the collector is presented in the
Appendix B.1.1. The collector energy equation may exist according to the following relation;

The required power input in kW to the RO high pressure pump (HPP) is estimated as;

Where ρf is the feed flow rate density, and ηp is the driving pump mechanical efficiency and is the
pressure difference across the RO module. The specific power consumption in kWh/m3 is estimated as;

The cycle flow rate in kg/s is presented as following;

48
 Where h is the specific enthalpy across the turbine, Y is the extraction percentage, and ηg is the
generator efficiency. The subscript b is referring to the bled steam from the turbine. Where, ti,o is
referring to inlet and outlet turbine conditions. Exergy and cost analyses are presented based on the
previous indicators that are presented in the Appendix. For Toluene (PTC), Tables 3.6, 3.7 summarize
the results obtained for saturation and superheat operations at different configuration. Toluene results
give a superior data related to Rankine efficiency, solar collector aperture area, exergy efficiency, and
total water price.
In Toluene case, the cycle mass flow rate is decreased causing an increasing in seawater
temperature stream to the RO leading to a significant increase in power generated. Saturation operating
conditions for the basic configuration considered competitive only against OFH and OFH+REC
configurations. Basic configuration gives lowest solar field area against the regeneration techniques
except recuperator configuration.
Recuperator configuration results a minimum solar filed area ranged as 5866m2. However,
recuperator configuration generates more power due to the decreasing of seawater stream temperature to
the RO module. The generated power would affect the plant SPC, TPCcost, and mass flow rate. Due to
this effect, TPCcost for recuperator configuration considered the lowest among the other configurations
causing a decrease in TWP $/m3 (from 1$/m3 in basic technique to 0.903$/m3 in recuperator technique).
Saturation results based on Rankine efficiency drive to assure that recuperator configuration
gives the highest value (30%) followed by the configurations of OFH+REC (25.92%), basic (25.81%),
and OFH (24.06%) respectively. The total exergy destruction rate explains the massive effect of total
solar filed area. As a result of increasing or decreasing the solar filed area, the exergy destruction rate is
followed. Due to this, recuperator gives the lowest values of exergy destruction rate through the process
units followed by OFH+REC, basic, and OFH respectively.
Moreover, recuperator configuration achieves maximum exergy efficiency among the other
configurations (16.99% Vs 14% in basic, 15.3% in OFH, and 16.8% in OFH+REC). Recuperator
configuration gives lowest values while comparing to TPCcost, SPC, and TWP. That is referring to the
effect of solar field area. Moreover, the total water price (TWP, $/m3) is considered the final judge on
process cycle from the side of techno-economic evaluation.
Superheat operation almost gives the same behavior but a significant changes are noticed. Solar
field area decreased against saturation operation and that affects on the cycle exergy destruction rate,
inlet exergy to the process cycle, exergy efficiency, and specific total plant cost. Recuperator
configuration gives the highest results in Rankine efficiency followed by the OFH+REC cycle, basic,
and OFH respectively. Also recuperator configuration achieves minimum inlet exergy and exergy
destruction rate among the other configurations (4.2MW Vs 5MW in basic technique). It is obvious that
Toluene (PTC) under superheat operation gives remarkable results with only recuperator configuration
against the other configurations.
Unlike organic fluids, Water is the working fluid of choice for the vast majority of large scale
fossil-fired Rankine cycle power plants. Water is well-suited for those high-temperature applications,
but it has its limitations that become more significant during lower temperature operation. It is the
unique properties of organic fluids that allow them to excel where water falters. The principle difference
between organic fluids and water is their behavior when expanding from a saturated or superheated state
through a turbine at low to moderate temperature (200-400ºC). The analysis shows that recuperator
configuration is not suitable for Water operation (saturated and superheat). Because the turbine outlet

49
conditions considered wet with quality ranged from 70% to 85%. At the same time, under the case of
PTC (Tevp=200oC & 300oC) steam superheat temperature should reach 465oC & 620oC to achieve quality
about 100% and that can't meet the PTC operation and its safety requirements. Moreover, evaporation
and superheated steam pressures give higher values in case of Water (at Tevp=300oC P=85.9bar) against
Toluene case. These terms are considered not safe for the collector absorber tubes. For these mentioned
reasons, recuperator, OFH and OFH+REC configurations wouldn't be used in Water analysis, only the
basic configuration (see figure (3.2)) is performed. Results for basic configuration are carried out for
superheat operation only. Also, Water results are established only for PTC technology. Parabolic dish is
suitable for water operation however; it needs a complicated tracking system. Also, holding a massive
tanks (filled with water) is not favorable and needs a special structure. Therefore; parabolic dish is not
considered in this work.
Basic configuration gives higher results based on Rankine 1 st and 2nd efficiencies. Based on
power generated by the HPP unit, basic configuration gives a little bit more power compared with the
other working fluids resulting an increasing in TPCcost, SPC, and TWP. This is due to that the solar field
area has a massive effect against the effect of generated power by the HPP unit. Water with PTC gives
attractive results (see Table 3.9) against the remaining fluids but the steam quality considered low about
77% and needs a large turbines. For that, Toluene for PTC with recuperator configuration gives superior
results regardless Water operation with steam quality less than 100%. Table 3.9 shows and summarizes
the results obtained only for recuperator configuration for Toluene and Water working fluids.

Table 3.6: Data results of Toluene (PTC) for different configurations under saturation operation.
Toluene (PTC, Saturation)
Parameter: Acol, m2 Wt, kW kg/s ηR, % Pext, bar εrec Y
Basic 6747 1119 5.75 25.81 -- -- --
OFH 7136 1115 7.38 24.06 0.8 -- 0.208
REC 5866 1130 5.8 30 -- 0.8 --
OFH+REC 6677 1121 6.9 25.92 0.8 0.8 0.04
Exergy and Cost
SPC,
Parameter: Icycle, MW ηex, % Exin, MW TWP, $/m3 TPCcost, $
kWh/m3
Basic 4.952 14.02 5.76 0.904 2.277×107 7.677
OFH 5.153 15.32 6.08 0.9047 2.279×107 7.648
REC 4.2 16.99 5.04 0.9035 2.276×107 7.753
OFH+REC 4.74 16.85 5.71 0.9048 2.28×107 7.689

Table 3.7: Data results of Toluene (PTC) for different configurations under superheat operation.
Toluene (PTC, Superheat)
2
Parameter: Acol, m Wt, kW kg/s ηR, % Pext, bar εrec Y
Basic 6734 1120 5.24 26 -- -- --
OFH 7180 1115 6.66 24 0.8 -- 0.1913
REC 5600 1134 5.31 31.57 -- 0.8 --
OFH+REC 6573 1123 6.1 26.47 0.8 0.8 0.005
Exergy and Cost
SPC,
Parameter: Icycle, MW ηex, % Exin, MW TWP, $/m3 TPCcost, $
kWh/m3
Basic 4.94 14.06 5.74 0.9039 2.277×107 7.679
OFH 5.18 15.25 6.11 0.9047 2.279×107 7.645
REC 3.96 18 4.83 0.9033 2.276×107 7.776
OFH+REC 4.7 17.5 5.7 0.9046 2.279×107 7.691

50
 Table 3.8: Data results of Water (PTC) for basic configuration under superheat operation.
Water (PTC, Superheat)
Parameter: Acol, m2 Wt, kW kg/s ηR, % Pext, bar εrec Y
Basic 5851 1131 1.335 30.47 -- -- --
Exergy and Cost
SPC,
Parameter: Icycle, MW ηex, % Exin, MW TWP, $/m3 TPCcost, $
kWh/m3
Basic 4.2 22.52 5.42 0.9034 2.276×107 7.756

Table 3.9: Data comparisons between different working fluids for recuperator configuration under saturation and
superheat operations.
Parameter: Collector ηR, % Icycle, MW TWP, $/m3 Quality, %
Toluenesat (εrec=0.8) PTC 30 4.2 0.9035 --
Toluenesup (εrec=0.8) PTC 31.5 3.96 0.9033 --
Watersup (Basic) PTC 30.47 4.2 0.9034 77

3.2.3 Solar ORC/RO process: RO-Energy Recovery Units

Toluene is the working fluid used in most of the solar pilot facilities [54]. Also, Toluene gives
superior results as presented in the previous sections. Therefore, it is selected to perform the analysis
presented in this section. Direct solar vapor generation (DVG) within the absorber tube configuration of
solar collector with ORC is analyzed and characterized with LS-3 parabolic trough collector (PTC)
models. The power output from the turbine is used to drive a (RO) unit with Pressure Exchanger (PEX)
configuration. In Delgado-Torres’s work, the organic Rankine cycle and the RO systems were not
modeled by the same simulation platform and the cost analysis wasn't considered in Torres [54] work.
Voros [55] investigated the solar energy exploitation for assisting the operation of reverse
osmosis seawater desalination plants. A hybrid solar-assisted steam cycle was designed in order to
provide the required shaft work to drive the RO high pressure pump. In Voros work, solar energy was in
share with conventional cycle and not stands alone. Moreover, Voros [55] work established for RO unit
with only Pelton Wheel Turbine (PWT) device. Sharaf et al [47] investigated the operation of RO
system with different operating conditions and different configurations of solar Rankine cycle. In
Sharaf’s work, energy, exergy, and cost analysis was performed only for RO basic configuration (PWT
and Pressure Exchanger (PEX) were not considered).
Mark Wilf [46] considered the configuration and operating parameters of RO desalination
systems. In this section, a combined solar ORC (solar collector, turbine, recuperator, condenser, and
pump), with a RO unit and different RO energy recovery configurations are considered. Using a thermo-
economic approach, a comparison for the considered configurations of energy recovery units (PWT, and
PEX) with RO desalination system is executed. The analysis and investigations are performed using the
developed Solar Desalination Systems (SDS) package [39] under same platform of MatLab/SimuLink
computational environments.
It is required to desalinate and produce a total capacity of 145.8m3/h from RO module (Sharm
El-Shiekh desalination plant-case study). The site data are specified as latitude angle =30o N, and
longitude =32.55o E. The developed SDS program is used to assemble and design the required solar
ORC-RO units. The RO high pressure pump (HPP), and PWT efficiencies were fixed at 80% and 96%
value was fixed for PEX. The input feed seawater temperature is assigned by the output preheated
stream from the ORC condenser unit.

51
 a. ORC-RO (RO-Basic configuration)
Figure (3.8-a) shows the process schematic diagram of the solar ORC with the basic
configuration of RO desalination system. The process consists of solar field, expansion turbine for
power generation, recuperator unit for regeneration, condenser unit for heat rejection and preheating
processes, and circulation pump unit. The condenser outlet stream (preheated seawater) is pumped into
the RO module for desalination process by a high pressure pump.

b. ORC-RO (RO-PWT configuration)

Figure (3.8) shows a schematic diagram of a combined RO desalination process with different
energy recovery units. Figure (3.8-b) illustrates the combined RO process with a Pelton Wheel Turbine
(PWT) unit. The rejected brine from RO unit with its high pressure will drive the PWT and that can
provide sufficient operational flexibility as a power recovery device. The value of 80% for PWT
efficiency is considered in this work. The advantage of the Pelton wheel is that the flat efficiency curve
in a wide range of concentrate flows, and concentrate exits the Pelton wheel at atmospheric pressure.

c. ORC-RO (RO-PEX configuration)

Figure (3.8-c) shows the process schematic diagram of the RO process with a pressure exchanger
unit (RO-PEX). A higher efficiency positive displacement power recovery devices (pressure
exchangers), that in the past were only used in small RO seawater units, are also slowly gaining
acceptance in large desalination plants. Hydraulic efficiency of such types of equipment is in the range
of 94-96% [36]. In this study, the values of 80% and 96% are considered for booster pump and PEX unit
respectively.
Some of these devices utilize pistons; other transfer energy through a direct contact between
concentrate and the feed stream. According to the Figure (3.8-c), feed (F) is split into two streams. One
stream (F1), which has a flow rate equivalent to the permeate flow (P), is pumped to the feed pressure
by the main high pressure pump (HPP). The second stream (F2), which flow rate is equivalent to the
concentrate flow, flows through pressure exchanger and exchanges pressure with the concentrate stream
(C).
The pressure of stream F2 at the exit from the pressure exchanger is a function of concentrate
pressure and efficiency of the pressure exchanger device. The pressure of stream F2 is lower by 3-5 bars
than the pressure of stream F1 at the discharge of the HPP [36]. The pressure of stream F2 is increased
to the pressure of stream F1by a Booster Pump (BP). Both streams (F1+F2) are combined at the entrance
to the membrane feed manifold. The pressure exchangers are positive displacement devices and
therefore have high transfer efficiency.
Splitting the feed stream, as in the case of operating a PEX, leads to a significant reduction of the
energy demand for the far smaller high pressure pump. Additionally, due to the high efficiency of the
PEX, an amount of about 36.8% of the input energy can be recovered from the energy contained in the
concentrate that leaves the modules with 37.4% of the initial value [57]. Nowadays PEX configuration
has been used in over 400 seawater reverse osmosis plants worldwide [58]. The general specifications
and the specified design parameters of the combined processes for two energy recovery configurations
for a RO desalination process are illustrated in Table 3.10.

52
 Turbine

Mechanical power to
Tco drive RO HPP

Solar field

Recuperator
product
145.8
m3/h
RO unit.

Condenser

RO Brine
Tcond Inlet HPP
seawater
Pump power

Product
Product Product
RO unit.
RO unit. RO unit.

BP
Brine
PEX
PWT
a. RO basic
configuration. Brine
Brine
c. RO PEX
b. RO PWT configuration.
configuration.

Figure (3.8) A schematic diagram of the RO process with different energy

recovery units.

53
 Table 3.10: Specifications and design parameters of the considered processes.
Parameter: ORC/RO-Basic ORC/RO-PWT ORC/RO-PEX
Gb, W/m2 850 850 850
Design point Tamb, oC 25 25 25
Tco/Tsup 300/340 300/340 300/340
Tcond, oC 35 35 35
ηt % 85 85 85
ORC ηp % 75 75 75
ηg % 95 95 95
εrec % 80 80 80

mp, kg/s 40.5 40.5 40.5

Xf, ppm 45000 45000 45000
RR 0.3 0.3 0.3
ne/nv 7/43 7/44 7/48
Ae, m2 35.3 35.3 35.3
RO plant ηHPP % 80 80 80
ηPWT % -- 80 --
ηPEX % -- -- 96
FF % 85 85 85

LTp, year 20 20 20
LTm, year 5 5 5
Cost LF % 90 90 90
i% 5 5 5

Based on the mathematical model for the considered process (see the Appendix for more details)
and the energy, cost, and thermo-economic analysis presented in Part I, the developed SDS program [39]
give the results illustrated in Tables 3.11 and 3.12. Table 3.11 shows that the required power for the HPP
of the RO process is 1.123MW. This power is obtained by a 5377m2 (site: latitude angle =30o N, and
longitude =32.55o E) of solar collector area and a mass flow rate of 4.934kg/s.
Also, Table 3.11 shows that the irreversibility of the basic configuration is 6MW. This amount is
distributed on the process components as shown in Table 3.12. The solar collector field irreversibility
rate considered the highest among the other units with percentage about 48.3% of the total
irreversibilities, followed by the RO plant with 45.4%, steam turbine with 2.8%; condenser and
recuperator units both give 1.2%, and the pump unit with a sharing percentage of about 0.4%.
The overall exergy efficiency is 9.38% due to the outlet exergy streams (product stream) over
inlet exergy streams (feed, pump power, and solar power to the system). The specific annual total costs
(Ct, $/m3) for this configuration is about 0.898$/m3, with total investment and operation & maintenance
costs (ZIC+O&M) about 131$/h. RO sector exhibits the largest percentage of (ZIC+O&M=131$/h) by 89.16%
followed by steam turbine unit with 8.44$/h and a percentage of 6.44%.
Solar field gives a percentage of 4.22%, recuperator unit with 0.018%, and condenser unit with
0.022%, and the pumping unit with a percentage of 0.111%. Thermo-economic unit product exergy cost
is about 58.7$/GJ with a total water price (TWP) about 0.89$/m3. The specific power consumption
(SPC) is about 7.7kWh/m3 and this considered high regarding to the other configurations. The PWT
efficiency is set as 80% the same as the efficiency of HPP unit. The consumed power (WHPP-WPWT)
would require about 3038m2 of solar collector field area with a percentage of decrease about 43.5%
against the basic configuration. The consumed power of this configuration is decreased by 43.5%
producing specific power consumption (SPC) about 4.35kWh/m3. To maintain the same operating

54
conditions for RO section (HPP pressure load should be=68 bar for all configurations) the number of
pressure vessels is then increased to become 44 instead of 42 as in basic plant.
According to the less in total solar field area comparing with the basic one, the total
irreversibility (3.763MW) would decrease against the basic configuration (6MW) with a percentage of
37.2%. RO section gives the highest exergy destruction of about 1.91MW with a percentage of 50.7%
followed by solar collector field with a percentage of 43.45%, steam turbine gives a percentage about
2.6%, recuperator and condenser units result together 2.84%, and the organic cycle pump unit gives
0.34%. This configuration exhibits larger exergy efficiency than of the basic one (11% against 9.3%)
with a percentage of increases about 15%.
The specific annual total costs for this configuration is about 0.683$/m3, with total investment
and operation & maintenance costs (ZIC+O&M) about 99.58$/h meaning by this a percentage of decreasing
equal to 24% against the basic configuration. RO sector costs about 91.2% of all the total
ZIC+O&M=99.58$/h, and this due to the additional costs of PWT drive, and the exceeding of permeators
numbers. Steam turbine is followed by a cost of 5.5$/h with a sharing percentage about 5.5%. Solar
collector field consumes about 3.215$/h with a percentage of 3.22%, followed by both recuperator and
condenser units with a percentage 0.035%, and the organic Rankine cycle pump unit with a percentage
of 0.11%. The plant total water price is about 0.69$/m3, and the unit product cost becomes 59.2$/GJ.
This configuration is favorable against the basic configuration due to many aspects such as total exergy
efficiency, total irreversibility, total solar collector area, specific power consumption (SPC) and total
water price (TWP).
Table 3.11 shows that the PEX configuration consumes very low power compared against the
past two configurations. The developed power by the Rankine cycle steam turbine is about 0.394MW
with a power decreasing percentage of about 65% against the basic configuration. This leads to specific
power consumption of about 2.7kWh/m3 with mass flow rate and total solar field area of about
1.732kg/s and 1887m2 respectively. To maintain the operating pressure over the HPP in RO section; the
number of pressure vessels become 48 instead of 42 as in the basic and 44 as in PWT configurations.
The reduction in the power is caused by splitting the sea water feed stream which in turn decreases the
total solar collector field area.
Therefore; the total irreversibility rates for this configuration is about 2.538MW which
representing a percentage of decrease of about 57.7% against the basic configuration. RO section
irreversibility has a large sharing with a percentage of about 54.5%, and the steam turbine gives about
2.36%, recuperator and condenser units together give about 2.5%, and the Rankine cycle pump unit
gives about 0.33%, and the solar field gives about 41.8%. The overall exergy efficiency is increased
from 9.3% for the basic to become 11.6% for this configuration. Also the total inlet exergy rate is
reduced from 6.59MW in the basic to become 2.87MW.
This is due to the reduction of the solar collector area against the basic configuration. The
specific annual total cost (Ct, $/m3) for this configuration is about 0.68$/m3, with total investment and
operation & maintenance costs (ZIC+O&M) of about 99.26$/h which leads to 24.2% less than the basic
configuration. The major costs belong to RO section which consumes about 93.94% followed by solar
collector field with 2.06%, steam turbine gives about 3.8%, and recuperator, condenser, and pump units
give about 0.023%. The expenditures of RO section exceeded due to the high prices of recovery units
however the total plant expenditures for this configuration considered the lowest against the other
configurations due to the high effect of solar collector cost. It is clear from tables (3.11, 3.12) that PEX
configuration appears lowest against the remaining configurations regarding to the solar collector area
cost, collector area irreversibility, total power, specific power consumption, cycle flow rate, total water
price, total capital costs, total investment and operating & maintenance costs. It is clear that solar

55
collector field produces larger irreversibility only in case of the basic RO; however; ROsection/PWT-PEX
produces larger exergy destruction due to the less in exergy inlet to the cycle. Moreover, larger costs are
belonging to RO section followed by steam turbine, and solar field respectively. ORC pump produces
the lowest cycle irreversibility rate in the range of 9-28kW for the considered configurations followed
by the recuperator and the condenser units respectively.
From Table 3.12, it is obvious that and regardless the final thermo-economic product cost cp, the
unit cost stream from pump unit to recuperator unit cp-rec is particularly high (about 2.07, 2.32, and
2.57$/GJ for basic, PWT, and PEX configurations respectively). The recuperator to solar collector
stream cost crec-col comes next and it decreases from the basic configuration down to PEX. Cooling sea
water cost stream is decreased from the basic down to PEX. The most important parameter is thermo-
economic unit product cost which is obviously less in basic followed by PWT, then the PEX
configuration. That's because the increase of power cost stream and at the same time the decreasing of
exergy of product stream as presented in exergy equations.
This effect is indirectly proportional of preheated inlet seawater stream from the condenser unit.
The exergy of the inlet seawater stream for the basic configuration considered the highest comparing
against PWT and PEX respectively. And that would follow a decreasing in product exergy stream,
moreover; that would increase the unit product cost of PEX followed by PWT then the basic one.
Although the operation & maintenance costs (ZIC+O&M) is notable less in PEX configuration but the
effect of unit power cost cw and product exergy Ep is highly effective. It is clear that the energy
conservation related to the RO section has a priority against the solar energy utilization. Because the
conservation in the RO section would reduce the total solar field area thence the capital costs.

Table 3.11: Energy and thermo-economic results for different configurations.

Energy
2 SPC,
Parameter: Acol, m Wt, MW kg/s ηR, % Pev, bar RO ΔP, bar
kWh/m3
Basic 5377 1.123 4.934 32.64 32.78 7.704 68.66
PWT 3038 0.634 2.788 32.64 32.78 4.35 68.74
PEX 1887 0.394 1.732 32.64 32.78 2.704 68.74
Thermo-economic (Exergy & Cost)
Parameter: Icycle, MW ηex, % Exin, MW TWP, $/m3 ZIC+O&M,$/h cp, $/GJ
Basic 6 9.38 6.593 0.898 131 58.7
PWT 3.763 11.06 4.231 0.683 99.37 59.2
PEX 2.538 11.61 2.871 0.572 83.45 66.6

56
 Table 3.12: The comparison percentages for different configurations based on thermo-economic results.
Parameter: RO-Basic RO-PWT RO-PEX
Icol 2.89 (48.3%) 1.635 (43.45%) 1.061 (41.8%)
Ist 0.173 (2.8%) 0.098 (2.6%) 0.06 (2.36%)
Irreversibility, Irec 0.072 (1.2%) 0.04 (1.063%) 0.025 (0.985%)
MW Icond 0.111 (1.85%) 0.067 (1.78%) 0.043 (1.6%)
Ipump 0.024 (0.4%) 0.013 (0.34%) 0.008 (0.335%)
Iro 2.725 (45.4%) 1.91 (50.7%) 1.384 (54.53%)
Zcol 5.53 (4.22%) 3.215 (3.22%) 2.045 (2.06%)
Zst 8.442 (6.44%) 5.5 (5.5%) 3.85 (3.8%)
Zrec 0.024 (0.018%) 0.015 (0.015%) 0.01 (0.01%)
ZIC+O&M,$/h
Zcond 0.03 (0.022%) 0.02 (0.02%) 0.013 (0.013%)
Zpump 0.146 (0.111%) 0.112 (0.11%) 0.09 (0.09%)
Zro 116.8 (89.16%) 90.77 (91.2%) 77.48 (93.94%)
Ccol-st 1.073 1.095 1.112
Cst-rec 1.073 1.095 1.112
Crec-col 1.295 1.171 1.03
Crec-cond 1.073 1.095 1.112
Thermo-economic
Ccond-p 1.073 1.095 1.112
streams, $/GJ
Cp-rec 2.07 2.32 2.573
Ccw 0.043 0.032 0.027
Cp 54.7 56.1 66.6
Cw 3.326 3.672 3.996

Based on the overall thermo-economic equation ( ), it is obvious

that the unit product cost is highly dependent on product exergy which is also depending on the product
mass flow rate. By increasing of water demand, the product exergy would increase related to the
increase of mass flow rate. Also the upper side in the overall thermo-economic equation (
) will increase but the effect of product exergy is massive and leads to a decrease in
the overall thermo-economic product cost.
The unit product cost for basic configuration is noticed less than PWT and PEX configurations
respectively. Although the basic configuration considered not recommended based on the consumed
power, total solar collector area, total water price, but the product exergy is the highest due to the effect
of the temperature of the preheated seawater from condenser unit. The preheated seawater leads to an
increase in product exergy which will decrease the thermo-economic unit product cost.
Figure (3.9) shows the effect of fresh water production rate (m3/h) on thermo-economic product
cost ($/GJ). Increasing the productivity would decrease thermo-economic unit product cost but also
would harvest much larger solar collector area and power from turbine unit. Figure (3.10) shows the
behavior of increasing the power consumption related to the productivity demand. Figure (3.11)
represents data results for each stream in solar ORC/RO-PEX configuration.

57
 160 138.7 RO-PEX

Thermo-economic product cost

140
120
100 83.6

$/GJ
80 66.6
55.74
60 45.1 40
40
20
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Product m3/h
Figure (3.9) Variation of thermo-economic product cost against
the variation in productivity.

RO-PEX
2
Ep MW Power MW
Exergy & Power MW

1.5

0.5

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Product m3/h

Figure (3.10) Variation of product stream exergy rate (MW) and power consumed (MW) by the
RO-PEX against the variation in fresh water production rate (m3/h).

58
 streams 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
p bar 32.78 32.78 0.062 0.062 0.062 32.78 1 68 -- 1 1 --
o
t C 143.1 340 198.4 70 35 38 20 22 -- 22 22.2 5727
h kJ/kg 330 987.6 774 571 121.6 126.8 84 91 -- 91 91 --
m. kg/s 1.732 1.732 1.732 1.732 1.732 1.732 135 135 -- 40.5 94.55 --
Ex kW 43.75 573.6 125.5 7 3 37.2 0 1367 394 346.1 0 1568
c $/GJ 1.03 1.112 1.112 1.112 1.112 2.573 0 0.027 3.99 66.6 0 0
o Solar field area=1887m2
o Recuperator area=3m2
o Condenser area=18m2

Figure (3.11) Data streams for solar ORC with RO-PEX configuration (145m3/h).

59
3.3 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Effect Distillation (MED)
Desalination Process

Solar desalination systems are classified into two categories: direct and indirect collection
systems. As their name implies, direct collection systems use solar energy to produce distillate directly
in the solar collector, whereas in indirect collection systems, two sub-systems are employed (one for
solar energy collection and the other one for desalination). Among the several options to connect a
seawater desalination system with a solar power plant the combination of a thermal desalination system
such as a Multi Effect Distillation (MED) and a solar trough field as the heat source is one of the most
promising [59]. The race for the second generation of the seawater desalination systems has been settled
with Reverse Osmosis (RO) and low temperature MED of horizontal tube evaporators. Both systems are
characterized by their low energy consumption as compared to the Multi Stage Flash (MSF) system,
[60]. Conventional MED desalting system uses about half of the MSF pumping energy, and almost the
same amount of thermal energy used by the MSF, if both have the same gain ratio [61]. However, a
recent trend of using low-temperature MED allows the use of low temperature (in the range of 70oC)
steam as heat source, and consequently of low exergy and low equivalent work. This can bring the MED
consumed equivalent mechanical energy close to that consumed by the efficient RO system. Recent
construction in Abu Dhabi of an MED plant with a 240,000 m3/day capacity shows a breakthrough in
large-scale MED plants [59]. In this part, investigation analyses are performed for different
configurations of MED with low capacity range (100m3/day) by using solar energy. Two different
techniques are studied in this part: The first technique utilizes the solar energy by using the concentrator
(PTC) to deliver thermal power via heat exchanger boiler to drive MED directly. And the second
technique utilizes the rest of the exhaust energy from solar Rankine cycle turbine unit to drive the MED
process. First effect for both techniques works as a brine heater for MED plant. Both techniques use
Therminol-VP1 [62] heat transfer oil (HTO) for indirect vapor generation via heat exchanger boiler. The
MED introduced in this work has a capacity about 100m3/day. The analyses are introduced based on
thermo-economic mathematical approaches. The comparison is made to evaluate the most economical
and reliable MED-configuration to be implemented with solar energy. The aim of this work may be
concluded into these points:
 Investigating and analyzing the design limitations of utilizing solar energy with different
configurations of MED process.
 Electing the most reliable MED configuration based on energy, exergy, cost and thermo-
economic analysis putting in mind the number of MED effects.
 Comparisons are introduced versus conventional operation (Water working fluid). The
design points are summarized according to typical winter operating conditions due to the
high demanded thermal load for such types of desalination processes (MED or MSF).

3.3.1 MED Process Configurations

MED plants utilize horizontal tube, falling-film evaporative condensers in a serial arrangement,
to produce through repetitive steps of evaporation and condensation, each at a lower temperature and
pressure, a multiple quantity of distillate from a given quantity of low grade input steam. Technically the
number of effects is limited only by the temperature difference between the steam and seawater inlet
temperatures (defining the hot and cold ends of the unit) and the minimum temperature differential
allowed on each effect [61].

60
 The low temperature operation aided by a comprehensive multi-disciplinary development and
design approach has made possible the utilization of economical and durable materials of construction
such as aluminum alloy for heat transfer tubes, plastic process piping and epoxy-painted carbon steel
shells which show a better resistance against corrosion when matched with aluminum alloy or titanium.
Also, the significant increase in heat transfer area, in addition to the thermodynamic superiority of MED
over the MSF process, results in a very low temperature drop per effect (1.5–2.5oC), enabling the
incorporation of a large number of effects (10–16) even with a maximum brine temperature as low as
70oC, consequently resulting in very high economy ratios (product to steam).
There are different schemes for supplying the feed seawater water to the evaporators, mainly
forward, backward, parallel, and mixed feed systems [44]. In the forward feed (MED-FF) arrangement,
the feed water (after leaving the bottom condenser) is supplied to the first effect of the highest
temperature. In the backward feed (MED-BF) arrangement, the feed water is directed from the end
condenser to the last effect, (of the lowest temperature) and the brine leaving the first effect is blown
down to the sea. Thus, the feed and vapor entering the effects have opposite flow directions. In the
parallel feed (MED-PF) arrangement, the feed leaving the condenser is divided and distributed almost
equally to each effect.
The choice of any of these feed arrangements affects the design and performance of the MED
desalting system, e.g. the evaporator arrangements, the required heat transfer areas of the effects, the
amount of vapor generated in each effect (evaporator), the amounts of vapor generated by boiling and by
flashing, the pumping energy, the gain ratio (distillate to heating steam ratio), and the cooling water to
distillate ratio. For forward feed with feed heaters (MED-FFH), cooling water enters an end condenser
to condense (last effect vapor output) and part of the leaving cooling water is pre-treated and becomes
feed water, and is heated successively as it flows in the feed heaters before entering the first effect (for
more details, see ref [44]).
In this work, all the above mentioned feed arrangements (see MED section in the Appendix) are
considered and compared to pin point the most reliable configuration. Moreover, the number of 16
effects is offered to ensure minimum temperature drop between effects. Top steam temperature is
maintained based on the type of technique presented (solar desalination and/or power and solar
desalination). The design limits for MED is maintained under winter operating conditions to dominate
stable operation along summer period. Dealing with solar energy is concerned with sun availability
during summer and winter periods. Table 3.13 illustrates the specifications and design limits that
considered for different MED configurations under winter operating conditions.

Table 3.13: Specifications of MED desalination plant (all configurations) under winter operating conditions for
100m3/day capacity.
Design point: MED-(BF, FF, FFH, PF)
Ambient temperature, oC 20
o
Seawater temperature, C 25
Brine blow down temperature, oC 40
Top steam temperature (TST), oC Depends on each technique
Sea water salinity, ppm 42,000
Brine blow down salinity, ppm 70,000
Condenser effectiveness 0.8
Condenser inner tube diameter, m 0.039
Condenser outer tube diameter, m 0.04
Number of effects 16
Number of feed heaters (in case of MED-FFH) 15
Effect inner tube diameter, m 0.0295

61
Effect outer tube diameter, m 0.03
Productivity, m3/day 100
Brine mass flow rate, kg/s calculated
Distillate profile mass flow rate, kg/s calculated
Feed mass flow rate, kg/s calculated
Cooling water mass flow rate, kg/s calculated
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s calculated
Vapor temperature through the effects, oC calculated
Brine temperature through the effects, oC calculated
Effects area, m2 calculated
Feed heaters area, m2 calculated
Condenser area, m2 calculated
Gain ratio calculated

3.3.2 Solar power cycle configurations

Operating conditions (TBT) of MED allow the use of Parabolic Trough Collector (PTC) in solar
power plants. Conventional PTC uses heat transfer oil as heat transfer fluid and the hot oil is stored in an
insulated tank. In solar PTC application to desalination, the heated oil could be sent to a boiler, which
would generate the steam required by a conventional MED plant. In this work, boiler unit with heat
transfer oil is used in the analysis. The storage element isn’t investigated in this work. There are two
methods of combining solar thermal power cycle with MED plants. The first is direct contact of PTC
field to the first MED effect, and the second is utilizing solar Rankine cycle for desalination and
electricity production by mean of using the exhausted steam from the turbine to operate the first effect.

a. Solar desalination with MED (SDMED)

Figure (3.12) shows a schematic diagram of the process units for the first technique. This
technique consists of a pump unit to overcome the pressure losses, solar collector field (PTC-LS-3 type
[54]) for thermal power delivering, boiler heat exchanger for vapor release and MED with 16 effects.
The organic HTO across the PTC would transfer its thermal power to the fluid (water) across the boiler
heat exchanger unit.
The generated steam would raise the preheated seawater brine to the desired temperature (TBT).
The rest of the working fluid (water) would be condensed again to the boiler heat exchanger unit. In this
part and based on previous studies [61], HTO is selected as a working fluid for PTC. Table 3.15 shows
and summarize the design points for this technique. The specifications and design parameters for this
technique are pin pointed as follows:
 Direct normal irradiance under winter operating conditions is assumed for Egypt-Suez Gulf
region (latitude: 30o N; longitude: 32.55o E)). It is estimated by reference [40] that the daily
average global radiation in a typical day in winter would be in the range of 21~22MJ/m2. To
dominate long operation along the day light (11 hrs), the solar radiation would be estimated and
fixed at 503W/m2 (21.4MJ/m2≈503.7W/m2). For all day operation (24 hrs), the daily average is
estimated as 252W/m2. Figure (3.13) shows the variations of solar radiation on the specified
location in 21 of January. Also, Table 3.14 illustrates some of the data results of the solar model
according to the location of operation. Designing the solar field based on lower values of solar
radiation such as winter conditions give the allowance to collect huge amount of solar radiation
based on larger expected area. Although the PTC operates at 850W/m2 but this value could cause
a very need to storage element (extra costs) during winter or may also not be able to operate the

62
 plant based on lower operation area. However, under summer conditions it will be expected that
there is an excessive energy due to large field area and it might be handled through bypassing
some loops in the solar field for maintenance operation.
 The distillate product is fixed at 100m3/day (1.157kg/s), and the inlet seawater feed temperature
stream is fixed at 25oC with a salinity about 42,000ppm. The outlet brine stream temperature is
adjusted as 40oC and the number of effects is fixed at 16 effects.
 According to pinch technology and the design operating temperature for the recommended
working fluid, the outlet collector temperature would be fixed at 350oC and the boiler heat
exchanger evaporator temperature will be adjusted at 75oC putting in mind the 1st effect
effectiveness and higher gain ratio.
 The efficiency of the positive displacement pump unit is about 75%.
 PTC configuration and design specifications are adjusted according to LS-3 type [61].

HTO loop Water loop

Boiler heat exchanger

Seawater loop
Cooling
water
MED:
BF
st
1 FF Distillate
effect FFH
Solar field PF End
condenser

Feed
Brine seawater
Pump

Pump

Figure (3.12) A schematic diagram of solar MED units for desalination:

Solar field, Boiler heat exchanger, Pump, MED.

63
 Figure (3.13) Solar radiation data results based on hourly, daily average (11 hrs), and daily
average (24 hrs) variations.

Table 3.14: Data results for solar radiation model based on the specified location of operation.
Parameter: Data results
Location Suez Gulf region
longitude longitude: 32.55o E
latitude latitude: 30o N
Equation of time, min -11.25
Day hours 10.37
Declination-angle -20.138
Daily average solar radiation, MJ/m2 21.76
Monthly average of daily total radiation, MJ/m2 15.623
Extraterrestrial intensity, W/m2 1409.19
Sun temperature, K 5833.11
Sun rise time 6.814
Sun set time 17.19
Julian day 21of January

b. Power & Solar desalination with MED (PSDMED)

This technique consists of two pumps for circulation and pressure drops, solar collector field (PTC),
boiler heat exchanger, turbine expander unit, recuperator for regeneration and de-superheating, and
MED with 16 effects. This technique is similar to the previous however; turbine and recuperator units
are added to this one for electricity and regeneration. Moreover, the first effect would operate as a brine
heater for MED and a condenser unit for the Rankine cycle. Figure (3.14) shows a schematic diagram of
the process units for the second technique. Table 3.15 shows and summarize the design points for this
technique. The specifications and design parameters for this technique are pin pointed as follows:
 Solar radiation and ambient temperature would be fixed at the same as the previous technique
(252W/m2 & 20oC).

64
 The distillate product is fixed at 100m3/day, and the inlet seawater feed temperature stream is
fixed at 25oC with a salinity about 42,000ppm. The outlet brine stream temperature is adjusted as
40oC and the number of effects is fixed as 16 effects. The brine blow down salinity is assumed as
70,000ppm.
 Due to the MED operating conditions (TBT) and boiler heat exchanger effectiveness, the
collector outlet temperature is maintained at 350 oC (HTO) to dominate a saturated vapor
(Toluene) that enters the turbine unit first stage in the range of 200oC. The outlet turbine
conditions would be maintained at 85oC (saturated temperature) putting in consideration the
recuperator unit effectiveness and the top steam temperature (TST oC).
 The efficiency of turbine, generator, recuperator and pump units is fixed at 85%, 95%, 80% and
75% respectively.
 PTC configuration and design specifications are adjusted according to LS-3 type [54].

HTO loop Toluene loop

Boiler heat exchanger

Electricity kW

Turbine
Seawater loop

Solar field Recuperator

Cooling
water
MED:
st
BF
1 FF Distillate
effect FFH
PF End
condenser
Pump
Feed
seawater

Pump

Figure (3.14) A schematic diagram of solar MED components for desalination and power generation:
Solar field, Boiler heat exchanger, Pump, Turbine, Recuperator, MED.

65
 Table 3.15: Design points considered for MED according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques.
Design point: 1st technique (SDMED) 2nd technique (PSDMED)
2
Gb, W/m 252 (winter) 252 (winter)
Tamb, oC 20 20
Tco, oC 350 350
ηt, % --- 85
ηg , % --- 95
ηp , % 75 75
Seawater condenser effectiveness 0.8 0.8
Recuperator effectiveness 0.8 0.8
Boiler heat exchanger 0.8 0.8
effectiveness
Boiler inner tube diameter, m 0.0127 0.0127
Boiler outer tube diameter, m 0.0129 0.0129
Tsea, oC 25 25
o
Tsteam, from boiler, C 75 200
Tb, oC 40 40
Feed salinity, ppm 42000 42000
Brine blow down salinity, ppm 70000 70000
No. of effects 16 16
Product mass flow rate, kg/s 1.157 1.157
Solar field mass flow rate per
1 1
loop, kg/s
Plant life time, year 20 20
Power generation cost, $/kWh 0.06 0.06

3.3.3 Results of SDMED & PSDMED techniques

a. Results of SDMED
As indicated earlier, this technique is established to desalinate seawater regardless the method of
power consumption and/or production. Therefore; the system is mainly contains solar collector field
(PTC LS-3), boiler heat exchanger (BHX), pump, and MED desalination plant. Turbine unit is not
present in this technique. HTO (hot saturated liquid) is maintained through the PTC collector, however;
pure water (dry saturated steam) is maintained between BHX and the first effect of MED process.
Generally, it is so clear form Table 3.16 that MED-PF considered very promising against the
remaining configurations. MED-FFH comes next and followed by MED-BF. MED-FF configuration
considered not applicable due the results obtained. Also results show that MED-BF cannot compete
against MED-PF and MED-FFH due to many aspects such as the salinity gradients in the first effect.
The salinity gradients in the first effect considered very high and would affect on the tubes and
the effect status generally (in this work, the salinity concentration of blow downstream from the first
effect would be around 69 to 70g/kg). MED-FF consumes large power trying to increase the feed
temperature stream that comes from the condenser unit to the desired TBT (from 36 oC up to 73oC). And
that’s explained larger area needed per effect and lower gain ratio.
Therefore; MED-BF, FF is eliminated from the comparison (based on this techniques results)
due to lower gain ratio, larger solar collector area, larger effects area, and larger total water price. MED-
PF noticed durable and reliable against MED-FFH by achieving lower solar collector area needed (1096
vs. 1005m2) meaning by this lowering control and maintenance issues. For both configurations (MED-
PF, FFH), the plant under the specified operating conditions (100m3/day) harvest about one solar PTC

66
(LS-3 type) with one loop. However, MED-PF achieves lower Reynolds number due to lower mass flow
rate across the solar field (about 0.372kg/s). Therefore; MED-PF gives lower exergy destruction rate per
solar collector against MED-FF (159 vs. 173.5 kW) due to the less in area needed. Also the same
behavior is obvious for all cycle’s units. Although the total effects heat transfer area for MED-PF
considered higher vs. MED-FFH but by adding the calculated heat transfer area of the feed heaters
(about 53m2) it becomes 835m2 vs. 853m2 giving an advantage to MED-PF configuration.
The Gain Ratio (GR) for MED-PF noticed higher than MED-FFH (15.2 vs. 13.93) due to the
minimum rate of steam needed (0.076 vs. 0.083kg/s). Total water price (TWP $/m3) is around 5.7 and
5.4$/m3 with a little bit advantage to the MED-PF configuration against MED-FFH. Moreover, thermo-
economic unit product cost ($/GJ) considered lower to MED-PF configuration against MED-FFH.
Related to this solar operation technique, MED-PF configuration considered the most reliable
one among the other configurations based on many terms such as total water price, areas, mass flow
rates, exergy destruction rates for each unit, and gain ratio and so on. However; reducing the number of
effects gives an advantage to MED-FFH configuration against the MED-PF.
Therefore; it depends on the designers’ decision about the reliable operating conditions, areas,
and cost. However; increasing the number of effects gives an advantage to the desalination plant by
reducing the TWP and increasing the GR. Figure (3.15) shows that by increasing the number of effects,
the GR will increase. It is obvious from Figure (3.15) that MED-PF and MED-FFH exhibits larger GR
against MED-BF and MED-FF respectively. Moreover; dealing with effects number less than 8~10
effects, MED-FFH is dominated however; going further than 10 effects MED-PF reveals more reliable
and dependable.
Table 3.16: Data results for 1st technique operated by Water and HTO fluids.
Parameter: MED-BF MED-FF MED-FFH MED-PF
Solar Collector field:
High pressure, bar 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Total solar field area, m2 1545 3408 1096 1005
Solar field flow rate, kg/s 0.572 1.262 0.406 0.372
Solar field Re number 1.1×104 2.75×104 1.073×104 7980
No. of collectors (LS-3)/No. of loops 2/1 6/1 1/1 1/1
Solar field width, m 11 27 10.5 8
Solar collector thermal efficiency, % 69.7 69.7 69.7 69.7
Solar collector thermal power, kW 271 598 192.5 176.5
Exergy destruction rate, kW 244.5 540 173.5 159
Exergy inlet rate, kW 370.2 816.3 262.6 240.7
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 3.837 3.677 3.911 3.931

Boiler heat exchanger unit:

Vapor pressure, bar 0.485 0.485 0.485 0.485
Area, m2 0.575 1.268 0.408 0.374
Outlet HTO temperature, oC 130 130 130 130
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s 0.1171 0.2583 0.083 0.076
Exergy destruction rate, kW 82.5 182 58.5 53.6
Cost stream to MED, $/GJ 5.65×10-3 4.82×10-3 6.05×10-3 6.16×10-3
Cost stream to pump, $/GJ 3.837 3.677 3.911 3.931

HTO pump unit:

Power, kW 0.428 0.95 0.304 0.278
Mass flow rate, kg/s 0.572 1.262 0.406 0.372
Exergy destruction rate, kW 0.212 0.4764 0.1507 0.138
Cost stream to PTC, $/GJ 4.289 4.058 4.406 4.437

MED section (16 effects):

Md, kg/s 1.157 1.157 1.157 1.157
Mf, kg/s 2.894 2.894 2.894 2.894
Mcw, kg/s 0.702 0.702 0.702 0.702

67
Ms, kg/s 0.1171 0.2583 0.083 0.076
Tf, oC 36.38 36.38 36.38 36.38
Td, oC 27.85 27.85 27.85 27.85
TBT, oC 73.53 73.53 73.53 73.53
TVT, oC 72.76 72.76 72.76 72.76
TFT, oC 36.38 36.38 69.92 36.38
Condenser area, m2 13 13 13 13
Total effects area, m2 1135.4 2486 800 835
Total feed heaters area, m2 --- --- 53 ---
GR 9.88 4.48 13.93 15.2
Exergy destruction rate, kW 5136 5168 5135 5134
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 5.65×10-3 4.82×10-3 6.05×10-3 6.16×10-3
Product cost stream, $/GJ 1.756 1.82 1.73 1.72

Performance & cost:

Specific thermal power consumption, kWh/m3 65.2 143.8 46.25 42.4
Total operating & maintenance cost, $/h 10.5 12.75 9.94 9.8
Total plant cost, $/y 2.345×105 4.226×105 1.88×105 1.79×105
Total water price, $/m3 7.139 12.87 5.75 5.47

18
MED-FFH
16 MED-PF
MED-BF
14
MED-FF
Gain Ratio (GR)

12

10

2
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Number of effects
Figure (3.15) The GR variations for different MED configurations due to the variations of
effect numbers at 100m3/day based on SDMED technique.

b. Results of PSDMED technique

In this technique; power is generated via turbine unit beside seawater desalination. Therefore; the
system is mainly contains solar collector field (PTC LS-3), boiler heat exchanger (BHX), turbine,
recuperator for regeneration, pump, and MED desalination plant. HTO (saturated liquid) is maintained
through the PTC collector, however; Toluene organic fluid (dry saturated steam) is maintained between
the organic Rankine cycle (ORC) and the first effect of MED process. Generally, it is so clear form
Table 3.17 that MED-PF shows very promising against the remaining configurations. MED-FFH comes

68
next and followed by MED-BF. MED-FF considered not applicable due the poor results obtained based
on energy, exergy, and thermo-economic terms. Also MED-BF can’t compete against MED-PF and
MED-FFH due to many reasons such as presented in the previous subsection. MED-FF consumes large
power trying to increase the feed temperature stream that comes from the end condenser unit to the
desired TBT (from 36oC up to 88oC). And that’s explained larger area needed per effect and lower gain
ratio. For the reasons that presented in the previous technique, MED-BF, and MED-FF are eliminated
from the comparison. MED-PF is considered reliable against MED-FFH by achieving lower solar
collector area needed (about 2.8% less area) meaning by this lowering control and maintenance issues.
For both configurations (MED-PF, FFH), the plant under the specified operating conditions (100m3/day)
harvest about two solar PTC (LS-3 type) with one loop.
Although the total effects area for MED-PF is considered higher vs. MED-FFH but by adding the
calculated area of the feed heaters (about 68m2) it becomes 548m2 vs. 505m2 giving an advantage to
MED-PF configuration. The Gain Ratio (GR) for MED-PF is higher than MED-FFH (2.45 vs. 2.38) due
to the minimum rate of steam needed (0.472 vs. 0.486kg/s). Total water price (TWP $/m3) is around
5$/m3 for both configurations with an advantage to the MED-PF configuration against MED-FFH.
Moreover; thermo-economic unit product cost ($/GJ) considered the same for both. Related to this solar
operation technique, MED-PF configuration is the most reliable one among the other configurations
based on many terms such as total water price, areas, mass flow rates, exergy destruction rates for each
unit, and gain ratio and so on.

Table 3.17: Data results for 2nd technique operated by Toluene and HTO fluids.
Parameter: MED-BF MED-FF MED-FFH MED-PF
Solar Collector field:
High pressure, bar 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Total solar field area, m2 2855 5762 1393 1353
Solar field flow rate, kg/s 1.157 2.334 0.564 0.548
Solar field Re number 3.28×104 6.56×104 1.608×104 1.608×104
No. of collectors (LS-3)/No. of loops 5/1 10/1 2/1 2/1
Solar field width, m 25 50 12 12
Solar collector thermal efficiency, % 69.7 69.7 69.7 69.7
Solar collector thermal power, kW 501.4 1012 244 237
Exergy destruction rate, kW 445.7 900 217 211
Exergy inlet rate, kW 684 1380 333.6 324
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 3.593 3.454 3.75 3.75

Boiler heat exchanger unit:

Vapor pressure, bar 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
Area, m2 1524 3.07 0.74 0.722
Outlet HTO temperature, oC 151.5 151.5 151.5 151.5
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s 0.9972 2.012 0.4864 0.472
Exergy destruction rate, kW 62 125 30.26 29
Cost stream to turbine, $/GJ 0.1026 0.076 0.1417 0.1435
Cost stream to pump, $/GJ 3.593 3.454 3.75 3.75

Turbine unit:
Power developed, kW 120 241 58.2 56.76
Outlet temperature, oC 111.2 111.2 111.2 111.2
Exergy destruction rate, kW 40.24 82 20 19.07
Cost of power, $/GJ 3.794 3.17 4.565 4.59
Cost stream to recuperator, $/GJ 0.1026 0.076 0.1417 0.1435

Recuperator unit:
Power rejected, kW 32 64.2 15.5 15
Area, m2 1 2 0.46 0.45
TST, oC 90.67 90.67 90.67 90.67

69
Preheated stream temperature, oC 101.9 101.9 101.9 101.9
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 2.517 1.845 3.493 3.54
Cost stream to MED, $/GJ 0.1026 0.076 0.1417 0.1435

Rankine pump unit:

Power, kW 1.162 2.346 0.566 0.55
Mass flow rate, kg/s 0.9972 2.012 0.4864 0.4727
Exergy destruction rate, kW 0.844 1.7 0.411 0.4
Cost stream to recuperator, $/GJ 38.57 28.3 53.73 54.46

HTO pump unit:

Power, kW 0.428 1.898 0.43 0.417
Mass flow rate, kg/s 0.572 2.334 0.564 0.548
Exergy destruction rate, kW 0.212 1.148 0.258 0.251
Cost stream to PTC, $/GJ 4.289 3.601 4.046 4.056

MED section (16 effects):

Md, kg/s 1.157 1.157 1.157 1.157
Mf, kg/s 2.894 2.894 2.894 2.894
Mcw, kg/s 0.6733 0.6733 0.6733 0.6733
Ms, kg/s 0.9972 2.012 0.4864 0.4727
Tf, oC 36.38 36.38 36.38 36.38
Td, oC 27.85 27.85 27.85 27.85
TBT, oC 88.23 88.23 88.23 88.23
TVT, oC 87.46 87.46 87.46 87.46
TFT, oC 36.38 36.38 84.61 36.38
Condenser area, m2 12.93 12.93 12.93 12.93
Total effects area, m2 987 1983 480 505
Total feed heaters area, m2 --- --- 68.7 ---
GR 1.16 0.58 2.38 2.45
Exergy destruction rate, kW 5076 5089 5072 5072
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 0.1026 0.0759 0.1417 0.1435
Product cost stream, $/GJ 1.749 1.799 1.72 1.72

Performance & cost:

Specific thermal power consumption, kWh/m3 71.13 143.5 43.7 33.7
Total operating & maintenance cost, $/h 13.4 17.64 11.1 11
Total plant cost, $/y 2.638×105 4.517×105 1.686×105 1.66×105
Total water price, $/m3 8.031 13.75 5.132 5.057

c. General comparisons: Case study

It is clear from the previous analysis that MED-PF configuration is reliable. However, MED-
FFH is dominated when less number of effects is operated (normally 8~12 effects). It is very important
now to decide which technique thermo-economically attractive. Consider an example of solar energy to
operate MED-PF plant with a capacity of 5000m3/day with 8 effects, and the top steam temperature is
maintained at 73oC (see reference [36]). The example specification is pointed as following:
 Sea water temperature 27°C.
 Salt concentration in feed, 45 g/kg.
 Required Distillate 5000m3/day.
 Brine temperature at the last effect, 40°C.
 Salt concentration at the reject stream, 70 g/kg.
For SDMED technique, the plant consumes about 1.009×105m2 solar collectors with 37kg/s mass flow
rate through the field, and the circulation pump consumes about 30kWe. The gain ratio is about 7.56
with evaporators total heat transfer area about 17425m2 of MED-PF effects. The product TWP is in the
range of 1.645$/m3 with specific power consumption about 2.179kWh/m3. For PSDMED technique, the
plant harvest about 1.32×105m2 solar collectors with 50.83kg/s mass flow rate through the field, and the

70
circulation pump consumes about 164.3kWe. The Turbine unit would supply about 5.381MWe to serve
the plant facilities and the rest might supply to the community grid. The gain ratio is about 1.26 with
evaporators total heat transfer area about 15061m2 of MED-PF effects. The product TWP is in the range
of 1.845$/m3 with specific power consumption (SPC) about 2.676kWh/m3. The GR considered very low
(1.257) in this technique. That’s because the effect of latent heat of vaporization of the toluene which is
considered very low compared against the water. Table 3.18 shows the data comparison between the
proposed techniques based on 5000m3/d parallel feed configuration.

Table 3.18: Data results for both techniques based on 5000m3/d.

1st technique: SDMED-PF 2nd technique: PSDMED-PF
2
Acol, m 1.009×105 1.32×105
SPC, kWh/m3 2.17 2.67
GR 7.56 3
TWP, $/m3 1.645 1.845
Cd, $/GJ 0.4878 0.4117
Total exergy destruction, MW 155.7 157.8
Overall exergy efficiency, % 31.82 33.1
Turbine power, MW -- 5.381
Ms, kg/s 7.65 46.05
Aeffects, m2 17425 15061

It is noticed that PSDMED gives higher values against the SDMED technique comparing based
on TWP ($/m3), solar field area and total exergy destruction rate. However; it considered attractive
based on the results of effects area, exergy efficiency, and the developed power by the organic turbine.
This is referring to the cost of power developed by the turbine unit to serve the auxiliaries (pumps, fans,
other facilities…) through the plant. Solar collector area might be drop by 48% under summer operating
conditions. There are an amount of 64,230m2 might be out of service for maintenance and cleaning
operations during the summer time. The effect of evaporators’ numbers (N eff) considered a vital tool to
judge the plant performance. Figure (3.16) shows the effect of evaporators’ numbers on SDMED
technique. The results are obtained based on SDMED case study (5000m3/d). It is pin pointed from
Figure (3.16-a) that increasing N eff would decrease the SPC kWh/m3. That is referring to the effect of
total feed flow rate and cooling water flow rate according to the increase of N eff. Reducing the mass flow
rates would decrease the required pumping power. Steam temperature has no significant effect on the
SPC however; increasing the steam temperature would little bit decrease the SPC. Thermo-economic
product cost ($/GJ) is also decreased by the increasing of the N eff (Figure (3.16-b)). Also the gain ratio
(GR) is increased as a direct effect of N eff. For Neff around 10, the GR would become 9. However, the
opposite behavior is significantly happened for evaporators’ area. Also, solar field area is gradually
decreased by the increase of Neff. Physically that’s happened due to the decrease of steam mass flow rate
across the heat exchanger unit. Figure (3.17) shows the effect of daily productivity on the system daily
productivity. It is shown from the figure that by increasing the productivity, the thermo-economic
product cost would decrease. That’s referring to the effect of GR of the system and the effect of product
exergy stream. Increasing the product exergy will decrease the thermo-economic cost. Figure (3.18)
shows the effect of the productivity on the developed power by the turbine unit in PSDMED technique.
It is become clear that the developed power by the turbine is increased due to the demanded increase in
the steam mass flow rate by the first effect of the MED. The increasing in the demanded steam would
increase the ORC mass flow rate thence increasing the power from the turbine unit. The advantage of
this technique (PSDMED) is that the powered developed may serve the auxiliaries in the cycle and the
rest of power is considered a gain to the main electricity grid.

71
Figure (3.16) Effect of evaporators number and steam temperature on based on both techniques: (a) SPC,
kWh/m3, (b) Thermo-economic product cost, $/GJ, (c) Solar field area, m2, (d) Gain ratio.

72
 1.8

Thermo-economic product cost, $/GJ

1.7

1.6

1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Productivity, m3/day
Figure (3.17) Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on thermo-economic product cost
($/GJ) for SDMED-PF case study.

5500

5000
Developed power, kW

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Productivity, m3/d
Figure (3.18) Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on the developed power by the turbine unit
based on PSDMED-PF technique.

73
3.4 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Effect Distillation-Vapor
Compression (MED-VC) Desalination Processes

Solar energy can positively operate and power MED-VC desalination processes according to
many reasons such as; low top brine temperature (TBT), low top steam temperature (TST), high gain
ratio, and lower specific power consumption comparing against multi-stage flash and/or reverse osmosis
desalination types. According to vapor compression type (mechanical or thermal), the combination
technique with concentrated solar power plant (CSP) would be determined from technique to another.
The following sub-sections explain the process techniques and the promise of coupling CSP plants with
MED-VC desalination process.

3.4.1 Solar SMED-PF-TVC: 1st technique

Firstly, multi-effect distillation parallel feed configuration (MED-PF) is recommended by the

authors to be operated with vapor compression type. In the parallel feed (MED-PF) arrangement, the
feed leaving the condenser is divided and distributed almost equally to each effect. Darwish et al. [45]
and Dessouky et al. [43] both gave more details about MED feed arrangement.
The efficiency of the MED process is enhanced by compressing the vapor from the last effect in
order to increase its temperature to drive the first evaporation effect. The Performance Ratio (PR) of a
MED process can be significantly increased by coupling a thermal vapor compression TVC unit. The
compressor acts as a steam ejector and requires motive steam at a pressure of 3–20bar.
Vapor is removed from one of the multi-effect (ME) evaporators at about 0.1bar and is
compressed to about 0.25bar [63]. Operating conditions (TBT) of MED-PF-TVC allow the use of
parabolic trough collector (PTC) in solar power plants. In solar PTC application to desalination, the
heated oil could be sent to a boiler heat exchanger (BHX), which would generate the necessary steam by
a conventional MED-TVC plant.
This technique consists of pump unit to overcome the pressure losses, solar collector field (PTC-
LS-3 type [54]) for thermal power, BHX for vapor release and MED-PF-TVC type with 5 effects. The
organic HTO across the PTC would transfer its thermal power to the fluid (water) across the BHX unit.
The generated motive steam is used to compress part of the vapor generated in the last effect by the
steam ejector.
The expanded motive steam and the recompressed vapor leaving the steam ejector are directed to
and condensed in the first effect. Part of the condensate returns to the boiler, and the other part join the
potable water product. The vapor formed in the first effect by boiling is directed to the second effect
where it acts as a heat source [64]. Figure (3.19) shows a schematic diagram of the process units for the
1st technique. Table 3.18 shows the design points and specifications for the 1 st technique. The
environmental conditions are selected based on Suez Gulf site: latitude angle =30o N, and longitude
=32.55o E.

74
 Steam loop

Steam ejector
HTO loop

Boiler heat exchanger (2)

1st MED (4):

effect PF
Solar field (1) Feed seawater

Pump Brine Distillate

(5)

Pump Seawater loop

(3)

Figure (3.19) A schematic diagram of solar MED-PF-TVC components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler
heat exchanger, (3) HTO pump, (4) MED-PF-TVC, (5) Water pump.

3.4.2 Solar SMED-PF-MVC: 2nd technique

The multi-effect distillation–mechanical vapor compression process (MED–MVC) is one of the

attractive techniques for remote and small population areas. The MED–MVC is compact and confined.
The system is driven by electric power; therefore, it is suitable for remote population areas. The MED-
MVC can also be driven mechanically by diesel engine. Another advantage of the MED-MVC system is
the absence of the down condenser and the cooling water requirements. The MED-MVC system is a
viable alternative to the reverse osmosis (RO) systems. The barrier to achieving this potential is the
absence of a specially designed steam compressor of a capacity comparable to that of the multi-stage
flash (MSF) unit capacity [65]. The MED–MVC system has specific power consumption similar to the
RO system, which may vary between 6–8kWh/m3. However, the MVC system reliability and its plant
factor are highly superior to the RO system with value close to 90%. Moreover, the system has much
simpler pretreatment system and limited operational problems related to fouling and scaling [43]. During
the last two decades, the compressor capacity is increased from values below 500m3/d to higher values
of 1000m3/d. This allowed for design of three effects MVC units capable of producing 3000m3/d.
However, more recently, the compressor capacity is increased to a higher value of 5000m3/d, which
gives a production capacity of 15000m3/d for a three-effect units [43]. It should be noted that the multi
effect units has the same power rating as the single unit and the increase in its capacity is approximately
proportional to the number of effects. To reduce the specific power consumption (SPC), the MVC unit is
added to the MED-PF with 16 effects. To operate such technique, solar organic Rankine cycle (S-ORC)
is dominated to develop the suitable power for vapor compressor. The process cycle consists of two
pumps for circulation and pressure drops, solar collector field (PTC), boiler heat exchanger, turbine
expander unit, recuperator for regeneration, and MED-PF with 16 effects. The end condenser is removed

75
and the feed seawater is preheated by the ORC condenser before entering the MED-PF plant. Figure
(3.20) shows a schematic diagram of the process units for the 2 nd technique. Table 3.19 shows and
summarize the design points for this 2 nd technique. Cost analyses related to MED-VC processes are
illustrated in the Appendix-C.

HTO loop Toluene loop Seawater loop

Boiler heat exchanger (2)

Electricity kW
Compressor (9)
Turbine
(4)
Vapor from
Solar field (1) Recuperator (5) last effect

1st MED (8):

Condenser (6) effect PF Distillate

Pump
(3)
Brine
Pre-heated
seawater
Pump
(7) Feed seawater

Figure (3.20) A schematic diagram of solar MED-PF-MVC components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat
exchanger, (3) HTO Pump, (4) Turbine, (5) Recuperator, (6) Condenser, (7) Pump (8) MED-PF, (9) MVC.

Table 3.19: Design points for SMED-PF-VC according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques.
Design point: 1st technique (SMED-PF-TVC) 2nd technique (SMED-PF-MVC)
Gb, W/m2 252 252
Tamb, oC 20 20
Tco, oC 350 350
ηt , % --- 85
ηg , % --- 95
ηp , % 75 75
Seawater end condenser effectiveness 0.8 ---
S-ORC condensation temperature, oC --- 35
Recuperator effectiveness --- 0.8
Boiler heat exchanger effectiveness 0.8 0.8
Boiler inner tube diameter, m 0.0127 0.0127
Boiler outer tube diameter, m 0.0129 0.0129
Tsea, oC 25 25
Motive steam pressure, kPa 2500 ---
Compression ratio (CR) 2 2
Tb, oC 46.8 46.8
Feed salinity, ppm 46000 46000
Brine blow down salinity, ppm 69000 69000
No. of effects 5 16

76
Product mass flow rate, kg/s 52.6 52.6
Plant life time, year 20 20
Power generation cost, $/kWh 0.06 0.06
Working fluids HTO-Water-Seawater HTO-Toluene-Seawater

3.4.3 Results of SMED-PF-TVC technique

The obtained results about this technicality SMED-PF-TVC to producing what equates 4545m3/d
exhibition through the next Table 3.20 was complete here. The results indicated that the complete area
for the solar station around 9.476×104m2 with total mass flow rate across the solar station reached at
33.76kg/s. That consumption performed for what about 170 modules of solar PTC heaters distributed on
8 rows. According for the solar area requested the total thermal power collected is about 1.664×10 4kW
with total exergy inlet 2.27×104kW and exergy destruction rate with 1.51×104kW.
The cost stream from the solar field to the boiler heat exchanger (BHX) unit reached at 3.345
$/GJ. Based on the quantitative motive steam designating and which informs 2500kPa, the informed
square area of the thermal BHX unit is around 57m2, and the degree heat of the steam according for the
pressing is around 225oC. The mass flow rate of the motive steam is about 6.545kg/s.
Based on the energy requested, and the meant solar field area, the informed power of the
recirculation organic pump is around 122kW. For MED-PF-TVC part (five effects), the assigned
productivity (52.6kg/s) exhibits about 168kg/s as a total feed seawater. The cooling water feed loss from
the end condenser is about 10.16kg/s, however, the feed water mass flow rate to the effects is 157.8kg/s.
The cooling feed water (10.16kg/s) is noticed very low according to many aspects such as increasing the
number of evaporators, decreasing the compression ratio, and increasing the end condenser
effectiveness.
For parallel feed configuration, the feed mass flow rate per each effect considered equivalent
about 31.56kg/s per effect. The motive steam mass flow rate is 6.545kg/s and entrained about 4.988kg/s
with an entrained ratio with a value of 1.312. The steam temperature reaches 60.33 oC with 1st effect top
brine temperature (TBT) about 58.47oC with 1st effect top vapor temperature (TVT) about 57.47oC. This
temperature loss is founded due to the effect of boiling point elevation (BPE). The end condenser area is
532m2 with total heat transfer area for the evaporators about 11024.61m2. The Specific Power
Consumption (SPC) for such technique is obtained less than 2 kWh/m3 with total water price in the
range of 1.3$/m3. Also the gain ratio is obtained in the range of 7.8~8 based on only 5 effects.
The effect of steam ejector is significantly high on the gain ratio according to the compression
ratio (CR) and the motive steam pressure. It is evident that without steam ejector at the same number of
effects (Neff=5) the gain ratio would become in the range of 3.5~4.
However, adding the steam ejector unit increased the gain ratio up to 8. Figures (3.21-3.22) show
the effect of CR and number of evaporators (Neff) on SPC, thermo-economic product cost, solar field
area, and total exergy destruction rate.
Figure (3.21-a) shows that by increasing the CR the SPC would increase, however, the
evaporators number increasing would decrease the SPC. Therefore, it is recommended to keep the CR to
minimum values related to the desalination plant specifications. In this work, the CR is fixed at value
equal to 2 with Neff=5.
Also Figure (3.21-b) shows the same behavior for thermo-economic product cost. The minimum
value of thermo-economic product cost (0.25$/GJ) is obtained at CR=2 and Neff=5. Also, Figure (3.22-
a, b) shows that minimum solar field area, and total exergy destruction rate that could be obtained at
minimum CR and Neff.

77
Figure (3.21) Effect of CR and number of evaporators on both: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, and (b) Thermo-economic
product cost, $/GJ.

Figure (3.22) Effect of CR and number of evaporators on both: (a) Solar field area, m2, and (b) Total exergy
destruction rate, kW.

78
 Table 3.20: Data results for SMED-PF-TVC operated by Water and HTO fluids.
Parameter: SMED-PF-TVC
Solar Collector field:
High pressure, bar 5.5
Total solar field area, m2 9.476×104
Solar field flow rate, kg/s 33.76
Solar field Re number 1×105
No. of collectors (LS-3)/No. of loops 170/8
Solar field width, m 113
Solar collector thermal efficiency, % 69.7
Exergy destruction rate, kW 1.51×104
Exergy inlet rate, kW 2.27×104
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 3.345

Boiler heat exchanger unit:

Motive steam pressure, kPa 2500
Area, m2 57
Outlet HTO temperature, oC 118.3
Motive steam temperature, oC 225.7
Motive steam mass flow rate, kg/s 6.545
Exergy destruction rate, kW 1320
Cost stream to MED, $/GJ 0.00153
Cost stream to pump, $/GJ 3.345

HTO pump unit:

Power, kW 122
Mass flow rate, kg/s 33.76
Exergy destruction rate, kW 80
Cost stream to PTC, $/GJ 4.744

MED-PF-TVC section (5 effects):

Productivity, Md, kg/s 52.6
Total feed seawater Mf, kg/s 168
Cooling flow rate Mcw, kg/s 10.16
Feed water to evaporators from end condenser, M fl, kg/s 157.8
Motive steam Mms, kg/s 6.545
Entrained vapor, Mev, kg/s 4.988
Total steam mass flow rate Mst, kg/s 11.53
Entrained vapor ratio 1.312
Compressed vapor pressure, kPa 20.25
Steam temperature Ts, oC 60.33
Pre-heated feed temperature Tf, oC 41.81
Distillate temperature from end condenser Td, oC 29.2
1st effect brine temperature TBT, oC 58.47
1st effect vapor temperature TVT, oC 57.47
1st effect distillate temperature TDT, oC 57.42
1st/nth effect pressure, kPa 17.68/10.12
End condenser area, m2 532.8
Total effects area, m2 11024.61
GR 8.037
Exergy destruction rate, kW 2.693×105
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 0.00153
Product cost stream, $/GJ 0.2522

Performance & cost:

Specific power consumption SPC, kWh/m3 1.58~2
Total Water Price TWP, $/m3 1.323

79
3.4.4 Results of SMED-PF-MVC technique

Results obtained for this technique are illustrated in Table 3.21. It is clear that the demanded
productivity would harvest about 1.437×104m2 of solar field with about 5.8kg/s mass flow rate across
the solar collector’s loops. Therefore, the solar field contains 25 collectors divided by one loop. Then,
the field width should figure as 75m length. Less in total solar field area means less in total exergy
destruction rate which become 2243kW through the solar field.
The power demanded from the desalination plant via vapor compressor is developed by the ORC
turbine. Based on the specified design operating conditions for this technique, the BHX area is 14m2,
with mass flow rate across the ORC about 4.1kg/s. The developed power by the turbine unit is about
765kW and that considered very low related to the total plant productivity (4545m3/d).
Recuperator and ORC condenser exhibits areas such 5 and 56 m2 respectively. The ORC pump
consumes about 21kWe however, the solar field recirculation pump consumes about 6kWe. For MED-
PF-MVC section, the total productivity 52.6kg/s needs about 157.8kg/s of feed seawater.
In this technique the end condenser unit is eliminated. Therefore, the feed water per each effect
become 9.86kg/s based on Neff=16 effect. The steam mass flow rate is maintained at 3.52kg/s and the
1st effect TBT is maintained at 59oC. The compression ratio (CR) reached at 1.94~2 with total
evaporators area about 9.261×105m2.
The total evaporator’s area considered too large because of the large number of evaporators
(Neff=16). Increasing the Neff would increase the gain ratio (GR=15). But it is significantly for this
technique that the SPC is about 4kWh/m3 with thermo-economic product cost with a value of 0.3$/GJ.
The effect of steam temperature and Neff on SPC and thermo-economic product cost is explained in
Figure (3.23-a, b).
It is clear that by reducing the steam temperature (80 down to 60 oC); at the same time increasing
the Neff (up to 16 effects) the SPC and thermo-economic product cost are decreasing gradually. The
same behavior is obtained for Figure (3.24-a, b) related to solar field area and total exergy destruction
rate. Minimum solar field area and total exergy destruction rate are obtained at minimum values of
steam temperature (60oC) and maximum values of Neff (16 effects).
However, increasing the Neff would increase the CR. But that effect is significantly low
compared with the effect of steam temperature. Steam temperature has a great influence on the CR
against Neff. However, Neff has a great influence on the GR compared against the steam temperature
(see Figure (3.25-a, b).

80
Figure (3.23) Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, and (b) Thermo-economic
product cost, $/GJ.

Figure (3.24) Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) Solar field area, m2, and (b) Total exergy
destruction rate, kW.

81
 Figure (3.25) Effect of Neff and steam temperature on both: (a) CR, and (b) GR.

Table 3.21: Data results for SMED-PF-MVC operated by Toluene and HTO fluids.
Parameter: SMED-PF-MVC
Solar Collector field:
High pressure, bar 5.5
Total solar field area, m2 1.437×104
Solar field flow rate, kg/s 5.815
Solar field Re number 9.835×104
No. of collectors (LS-3)/No. of loops 25/1
Solar field width, m 75
Solar collector thermal efficiency, % 69.7
Exergy destruction rate, kW 2243
Exergy inlet rate, kW 3442
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 3.319

Boiler heat exchanger (BHX) unit:

Vapor pressure, bar 32.75
Area, m2 14
Outlet HTO temperature, oC 151.2
Outlet steam temperature to the Turbine, oC 300
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s 4.103
Exergy destruction rate, kW 167
Cost stream to turbine, $/GJ 4.018
Cost stream to pump, $/GJ 3.319

Turbine unit:
Total power developed, kW 764.53
Exhaust temperature, oC 138.8
Exergy destruction rate, kW 147
Cost of power, $/GJ 6.39
Cost stream to recuperator, $/GJ 4.018

82
Recuperator unit:
Power rejected, kW 485
Area, m2 5
Outlet stream temperature to the condenser, oC 58.1
Outlet stream temperature to the BHX, oC 101.5
Cost stream to BHX, $/GJ 9.663
Cost stream to condenser, $/GJ 4.018

Condenser unit:
Power rejected, kW 1784
Area, m2 56
Cost stream to MED-MVC, $/GJ 0.0267
Cost stream to pump, $/GJ 4.018

Rankine pump unit:

Power, kW 21
Mass flow rate, kg/s 4.103
Exergy destruction rate, kW 19.5
Cost stream to recuperator, $/GJ 5.498
Outlet temperature stream to recuperator, oC 38

HTO pump unit:

Power, kW 6
Mass flow rate, kg/s 5.815
Exergy destruction rate, kW 3.665
Cost stream to PTC, $/GJ 3.523

MED-PF-MVC section (16 effects):

Productivity Md, kg/s 52.6
Total feed mass flow rate Mf, kg/s 157.8
Steam mass flow rate Ms, kg/s 3.525
Pre-heated feed temperature Tf, oC 28
Steam temperature TST, oC 60
1st effect brine temperature TBT, oC 59.91
1st effect vapor temperature TVT, oC 59.13
1st effect distillate temperature TDT, oC 58.88
Vapor compressor power, kW 471.2
Compression ratio 1.939
Total effects area, m2 9.261×105
GR 15
Exergy destruction rate, kW 1.322×105
Product cost stream, $/GJ 0.3183

Performance & cost:

Specific power consumption SPC, kWh/m3 4.18
Total water price, $/m3 0.94

3.4.5 General comparison: Case study

To distinguish between these two techniques, it is important to united most of the operating
conditions to give clear and real aspects about the best technique. Therefore, the design operating
conditions for both techniques are considered as following:
 Seawater temperature =25oC.
 Neff=4 effects.
 Compression Ratio CR=2.
 Steam temperature=60oC.
 Blow down brine temperature=46.8oC.

83
  Productivity=4545m3/d.
 Seawater salinity=46000ppm.
 Blow down salinity=69000ppm.
 Motive steam in case of MED-PF-TVC=25bar.
 Outlet collector temperature=350oC.

Table 3.22 shows the obtained results for both techniques based on the united design operating
conditions. It is obvious from the table that the 1st technique gives remarkable results against the 2 nd.
Except the solar field area, all performance parameters revels that SMED-PF-TVC considered attractive
based on GR, SPC, thermo-economic product cost (Cd), total water price (TWP), and even the area of
each effect. Although the 1st technique consumes larger area than the 2nd but the cost of pumping units,
turbine and the vapor compressor has a great influence on the total water price and the thermo-economic
product cost, hence the SPC. Also the steam mass flow rate for the 1 st technique is less by 40% than the
2nd technique casing an increase in GR for the 1st. Adding steam ejector unit improves the cycle
performances even with less numbers of evaporators. The steam ejector unit would optimize the MED
section by reducing the number of effects meaning by this reducing the surface area of the effect
resulting lower costs. Moreover; it increases the gain ratio of the MED section in order to reduce the
thermal load on the boiler heat exchanger unit.
Reducing the thermal load would reduce the total area demanded by the solar field i.e. reducing
the costs. The SPC, kWh/m3 is noticed attractive for MED-TVC against MED-MVC (2.44 Vs
9.68kWh/m3) because of using more pumps in the MED-MVC in addition using of the mechanical
compressor itself. Figure (3.26) shows the effect of daily productivity on the thermo-economic product
cost. The figure reveals that increasing the daily productivity would totally decrease the thermo-
economic product cost. That’s due to the effect of increasing the exergy rate of the product stream.
Furthermore; the figure shows that MED-TVC technique gives lower and remarkable results against the
MED-MVC as shown on the curve. Figure (3.27) shows the effect of daily productivity on the
developed power for both techniques. The figure curves reveal that the thermal power by MED-TVC is
massive compared with the electric power form the turbine unit of MED-MVC technique. It is become
possible to decrease the thermal power from the boiler unit by reducing the motive steam pressure.
Thence the thermal load that demanded by the solar field would decrease.

Table 3.22: Data results for both techniques based on 4545m3/d.

1st technique: SMED-PF-TVC 2nd technique: SMED-PF-MVC
2
Acol, m 117908.9 33181.5
SPC, kWh/m3 2.44 9.68
GR 6.44 3.82
TWP, $/m3 1.57 2.17
Cd, $/GJ 0.2578 0.4265
Mb, kg/s Profile 26.23 26.27 26.32 26.37 26.23 26.27 26.32 26.37
Ms, kg/s Profile 8.15 13.74
Mf, kg/s Profile 39.45 (for each effect) 39.45 (for each effect)
Tb, oC Profile 57.53 53.95 50.37 46.8 57.28 53.79 50.29 46.8
Tv, oC Profile 56.74 53.17 49.59 46.01 56.5 53 49.51 46.01
Td, oC Profile 56.7 53.12 49.56 46 56.17 52.56 48.93 45.31
P, kPa Profile 17.09 14.41 12.1 10.12 16.68 14.02 11.73 9.76
Sb, kg/kg Profile 0.06918 0.06906 0.068936 0.06881 0.06918 0.06906 0.06893 0.0688
Aeffects, m2 Profile 4995.76 5002.41 5011.95 5017.05 5008.45 5015.65 5025.3 5037.7

Note: shaded cells gives

nearly the same results.

84
 1.7

Thermo-economic cost, $/GJ

1.5

1.3

1.1
MED-MVC
0.9 MED-TVC

0.7

0.5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Daily productivity, m3/d
Figure (3.26) The effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on thermo-economic product cost for
both techniques (MED-MVC & MED-TVC).

25000

20000 Thermal load

Power, kW

15000

MED-MVC
10000
MED-TVC
Electrical load
5000

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Productivity, m3/d
Figure (3.27) Effect of daily productivity (m3/d) on the developed power for both
techniques (MED-MVC & MED-TVC).

85
3.5 Solar Thermal Organic Cycles Assisted Multi Stage Flash (MSF)
Desalination Process

Multi-Stage Flash (MSF) evaporation process is currently the workhorse of the desalination
industry with a market share close to 60% of the total world production capacity [66]. MSF process has
also a possibility for use with solar power. Operation temperatures of multi-stage flash distillation
systems allow the use of different solar collectors in solar powered plants [67]. A solar MSF
desalination system was tested in Kuwait with a capacity of a 10m3/d [68]. This system consists of a 220
m2 parabolic trough collector, and a 12-stage MSF desalination block. The thermal storage system was
used to level off the variation of thermal energy supply and allowed the production of fresh water to
continue during periods of low radiation and nighttime. The output of the system is reported to be over
ten times the output of solar stills for the same solar collection area (about 40kg/m2). Sharaf et al [69,
70] examined a small unit for water desalination by solar energy and flash evaporation process. The
system was built to produce an amount of 20kg of distillate water during the day light by the using a
solar flat plate collector (FPC). Lourdes-Garcia [67] concluded that the use of solar energy could
compete with a conventional energy supply in MSF distillation processes in some climatic conditions.
Results obtained in Lourdes-Garcia [67] work were useful in competitiveness evaluations of solar
against the conventional energies in MSF plants. Several medium capacity plants for MSF desalination
using solar energy have recently been implemented.
It is clear from literatures that the possibility of utilizing solar energy with different types of
distillation processes such as MSF already exists. However, such techniques didn’t imply solar organic
power cycle and the productivity is noticed not exceeded over 500m3/day. Moreover, thermo-economic
approach is not implemented for such processes. In this part, investigation analysis is introduced about
powering MSF-BR configuration with a capacity of 5000m3/day by using solar power cycles. Table 3.23
shows the specifications that considered in this study related to Eoun Mousa MSF desalination plant.
Two different techniques are studied in this work: The 1st technique is to utilize the solar power by using
the PTC concentrator to deliver a sufficient thermal power via heat exchanger boiler to power on the
MSF-BR directly through the brine heater. And the 2nd technique is to utilize the rest of exhaust power
from solar organic Rankine cycle (SORC) turbine to drive the MSF-BR brine heater. Both techniques
used Therminol-VP1 [62] heat transfer oil (HTO) for indirect vapor generation via heat exchanger
boiler. The 1st technique can’t produce electric power (only fresh water); however the 2 nd technique can
produce electric power and fresh water. Solar Desalination Systems (SDS) software package is used to
design and model the process units of the proposed techniques. Solar radiation under winter operating
conditions is assumed for Egypt-Suez Gulf region (latitude: 30o N; longitude: 32.55o E)).

Table 3.23: Specifications of Eoun Mousa [36] MSF desalination plant (5000m3/day).
Design point: Value:
Productivity, m3/day 5000
Top brine temperature, oC 110
Brine blow down temperature, oC 40
Top steam temperature, oC 113
Seawater temperature, oC 20 (winter condition)
Feed seawater splitter ratio 0.482
Seawater salinity concentration, ppm 48,620
Brine blow down concentration, ppm 70,900
Number of stages 20(17/3)

86
3.5.1 The 1st technique: SDMSF-BR

This technique consists of pump unit to overcome the pressure losses, solar collector field (PTC-
LS-3 type [54]), BHX unit for vapor release and brine-heater (BH) unit for thermal power transfer and
MSF-BR with 20 stages. Seawater inlet feed stream would be preheated across the MSF condenser tube
banks till reach the inlet point stream to the brine heater.
At the same time, the organic HTO across the PTC would transfer its thermal power to the fluid
(water) via BHX unit. The generated steam would raise the preheated seawater brine to the desired top
temperature (TBT). The rest of the working fluid (water) would be condensed again to the BHX unit.
Figure (3.28) shows a schematic diagram of the process units for the 1 st technique. Based on previous
studies [39], Therminol-Vp1 HTO is selected for PTC. Table 3.24 shows and summarize the design
points for this 1st technique.

3.5.2 The 2nd technique (PSDMSF)

This technique consists of pumps for circulation and pressure drops, solar collector field (PTC),
BHX unit, turbine expander unit, BH unit, and MSF-BR with 20 stages. Figure (3.29) shows a schematic
diagram of the process units for the 2nd technique. Table 3.24 shows and summarize the design points
for this 2nd technique.

Table 3.24: Design points for MSF-BR according to the 1st and the 2nd techniques.
Design point: 1st technique (SDMSF) 2nd technique (PSDMSF)
Gb, W/m2 252 (winter) 252 (winter)
Tamb, oC 25 25
Tco, oC 350 350
ηt , % --- 85
ηg , % --- 95
ηp , % 75 75
Tsea, oC 20 20
TBT, oC 110 110
Tb, oC 40 40
Feed salinity, ppm 48620 48620
No. of stages 40 (37/3) 40 (37/3)
Product mass flow rate, kg/s 57.7 57.7
Make up splitter ratio 0.482 0.482
Plant life time, year 20 20
Power generation cost, $/kWh 0.06 0.06

87
 HTO loop Steam loop

Boiler heat exchanger (2)

Seawater loop

Feed seawater
Solar field (1)

Distillate
Brine-heater MSF-BR
(4) (5)

TBT Brine
Pump
(3)

Figure (3.28) A schematic diagram of solar MSF-BR components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler
heat exchanger, (3) Pump, (4) Brine heater, (5) MSF-BR.

HTO loop Toluene loop

Boiler heat exchanger (2)

Electricity kW

Turbine
(4)

Solar field (1) Recuperator (5)

Seawater loop

Feed seawater

MSF-BR (8)
Condenser (6) Distillate

Pump
(3)
Brine

Pump
(7)

Figure (3.29) A schematic diagram of solar MSF-BR components: (1) Solar field, (2) Boiler heat exchanger,
(3) HTO Pump, (4) Turbine, (5) Recuperator, (6) Condenser, (7) Pump (8) MSF-BR.

88
3.5.3 The Techniques Comparison Results

Under the above specifications, and related to the analysis (exergy and thermo-economic) that
been performed in the Appendix. Figure (3.30) shows the results obtained for the two proposed
techniques (1st and 2nd techniques). The comparison is performed based on SPC, kWh/m3, thermo-
economic product cost, $/GJ, total solar field area Acol, m2, and the gain ratio (GR).
The effect of TBT and Nstg is quite clear related to the results obtained. For the SPC, increasing
the TBT would decrease the SPC for both techniques. However, the first technique gives significant
results considered lower against the second. Also increasing the Nstg would decrease the SPC but the
great effect on the SPC is caused by the TBT against the Nstg.
The same effect is caused by the TBT and the Nstg on the cp, $/GJ. By increasing the TBT and
the Nstg, the cp would significantly decrease. However, the first technique would result lower value
against the second one. The existence of turbine unit would increase the outlet exergy rate however, it
would increase the hourly costs causing an increase in the product cost in $/GJ.
Increasing the TBT would exceed the solar field area. However, increasing the Nstg would
decrease the solar field area. Solar field area is considered a vital parameter to judge the system
performance. In most cases, land area could be limited, therefore; lower solar field area is favorable. To
achieve minimum solar field area related to the first technique, the TBT should be operated at 90 oC and
Nstg=40 stages.
Related to the second technique, increasing the TBT would decrease the solar field area. This is
quite dominant by the ORC effect. To achieve minimum solar field area related to the second technique,
TBT would be maintained at 120oC with the operation of Nstg.
The gain ratio is a very important parameter to judge the system performance. Nstg is the main
parameter that would affect on the GR. For both techniques, increasing the Nstg would increase the GR.
However; the first technique significantly achieves higher favorable results than the second. This is
because the effect of latent heat of vaporization related to water (in the 1 st technique) and toluene (in the
2nd technique).
The values of 120oC and 40 are assigned for the TBT and Nstg respectively. The results related
to these new assumptions are illustrated in Table 3.25. Solar collector field area considered very
important parameter in this comparison according to its direct effect on both of cost and thermo-
economic results. PTC collector is chosen here based on LS-3 system where the module width is 5.67m,
length 100m, glass envelope diameter 0.1m, and inlet tube absorber diameter 0.0655m.
For field design especially with large capacities it is recommended to ensure that Reynolds
number between 1~9×104. In case of 1st technique, the field area is about 61680m2 with cycle flow rate
about 24.45kg/s leading to 110 collectors for 8 loops and Reynolds number about 9.45×104. This
exhibits a field width with 76m.
The 2nd technique gives larger area compared with the 1st due higher operating temperatures.
Moreover; the existence of turbine unit needs high and sufficient collector temperature. Because of
increasing the outlet collector temperature will permit to increase the evaporator temperature too.
The 2nd technique consumes about 93050m2, with cycle mass flow rate about 43.2kg/s, the field
width is about 50m with total 18 loops design, and Reynolds number equal 9.2×104 with 167 collectors.
In case of the 2nd technique, larger solar field area will be absolutely available under summer condition
and that will cause an excessive thermal power for the organic turbine.
Therefore; nearly about 51% of winter field area would be out of service during summer
conditions for maintenance operations. However; in the 1 st technique, there is no need for this operation
because there is no turbine unit in this technique. 1st technique has an advantage based on evaporation

89
pressure through the absorber tube (2.2bar) against the 2nd technique (32bar). Because higher values may
cause severe stresses on the absorber tube.
The gain ratio for the 1st technique is massively greater than the 2nd technique (11~12 vs. 1~2).
And that because, the 2 nd technique achieves higher mass flow rate due to higher outlet operating
conditions of the collector. Exergy analysis considered not far in values for both techniques with an
advantage for the 2 nd based on overall exergy efficiency and exergy inlet to the cycle. This because, the
exergy inlet is directly affected by the solar field and larger solar field area surly goes to the 2 nd
technique. At the same time larger area gives larger exergy destruction and larger exergy income to the
system.
Therefore, exergy efficiency is a useful tool to judge the system performance. However, hourly
operating & maintenance parameter ($/h) is noticed larger in the 2nd technique instead of the 1 st due to
two reasons; the existence of turbine unit and the effect of solar field area. That was clear and obvious in
total plant cost for both techniques (see Table 3.25). Specific total water price considered little bit lower
for 1st technique instead of the 2nd due to the largest solar field area exhibited by the 2nd technique.
Also the thermo-economic unit product cost considered the same (ranged between 1~1.1 and
$/GJ) however; there is a little bit advantage to the 2nd technique due the cost of power that developed
from the turbine work (4MW).

Figure (3.30) Effect of TBT and Nstg on: (a) SPC, kWh/m3, (b) cp, $/GJ, (c) Acol, m2, (d) GR.

90
 Table 3.25: Data results for 1st and 2nd techniques operated by Water and Toluene fluids.
Parameter: SDMSF (Water) PSDMSF (Toluene)
Evaporation pressure, bar 2.25 32.75
Total solar field area, m2 61680 93050
Solar field flow rate, kg/s 24.45 43.2
Solar field Re number 9.45×104 9.24×104
No. of collectors (LS-3)/No. of loops 110/8 167/18
Solar field width, m 76 50
Solar collector thermal efficiency, % 69.7 69.7
Boiler HEX area, m2 35 91.5
Outlet HTO temperature, oC 145 178
Boiler HEX mass flow rate, kg/s 24.45 43.2
Brine heater effectiveness, % 66.6 30
Brine heater area, m2 436 492
Organic cycle mass flow rate, kg/s 4.96 29.46
GR 11.67 1.96
Turbine power, MW -- 4.407
Total exergy destruction, MW 414.28 421
Total exergy efficiency, % 14.67 14.46
Total operating & maintenance cost, $/h 270 320
Total water price, $/m3 1.436 1.7
Thermo-economic unit product cost, $/GJ 1.103 1.1
SPC, kWh/m3 4.09 5

It is become clear from the related comparison that only desalination without power generation
constitutes lower (means favorable) in the following:
 Solar collector field area (almost half) meaning by this decreasing maintenance issues and
increasing the possibility to control the solar field.
 Pumping power requirements leading to less electricity demands and it could be recovered by
diesel engine or adding some panels of Photo Voltaic (PV) collectors.
 Exergy destruction rate and this is a very important term in the comparison because increasing
the rate of irreversibility will cause a significant decrease in total exergy efficiency. Although,
turbine unit would increase the exergetic efficiency of the power technique but its destruction
rate is also in the scope.
 Total plant cost which is noticed lower however; there is not a large deviation. This deviation
might be larger while comparing based on larger capacities (up to 5000~10000m3/day).

Increasing the power generation from the turbine unit is combined with the increasing of
desalinating plant capacity. The example of MSF-BR with a capacity of 30,000m3/day would harvest
about 6,12604m2 of solar field area and generating about 45MWe with overall exergy efficiency about
13.5%. This is indicated with larger irreversibility and hard work of control and maintenance issues.
Therefore; solar large capacities operation demand more economical considerations putting in minds the
existence of energy storage and/or energy backup system.
Figure (3.31) shows the effect of daily productivity on the thermo-economic product cost. It is
clear from the figure that the thermo-economic product cost is decreased by the increasing of the plant
productivity. The product exergy stream is considered the main cause of this increase. The exergy rate of
the product stream is considered a gain to overall system performance. Thence; it would cause a
decrease in the overall system product cost. Also, the effect of productivity (m3/d) on the rated power is
clarified in Figure (3.32). Increasing the productivity would increase the power rate and this may serve
to develop the excess power to the public grid.

91
 2.1

Thermo-economic cost, $/GJ

1.9

1.7

1.5

1.3 SDMSF
PSDMSF
1.1

0.9

0.7
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
3
Productivity, m /d
Figure (3.31) The daily productivity effect on the thermo-economic product cost for both
techniques (SDMSF & PSDMSF).

25000

20000 Thermal load

Power, kW

15000
Electrical load
SDMSF
10000
PSDMSF

5000

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Productivity, m3/d
Figure (3.32) The effect of productivity on the developed power for both techniques
(SDMSF & PSDMSF).

92
 Chapter 4: Comparison of Different Types of Solar
Desalination Processes: Results & Discussions
4.1 Process Configurations
To reduce the negative impacts from the conventional desalination plants, solar energy
considered an alternative solution to reduce the negatives from desalination processes to the
environment. To combine desalination processes with solar energy, there are many aspects should be
taken in consideration such as:
 The location of operation: It is very important to allocate solar desalination plants in the
Sunbelt area and near the saline water source (sea or well). In this study, solar radiation under
winter operating conditions is considered based on the site data of Suez Gulf region- Egypt
(latitude: 30o N; longitude: 32.55o E)).
 The amount of water production: It is very important to decide the amount of fresh water
production (small-medium-large capacities) based on the remote area need.
 The size area of the site: Size area of the site considered a vital parameter to decide the type of
solar desalination plant.
 The type of the technology: There are many techniques of combining the solar energy and
desalination processes such as direct vapor generation, indirect vapor generation, and
combination with organic Rankine cycle.
 The production cost: It is very important to decide the price of the fresh water production based
on the region of the sink (local and/or tourism sectors).
In this part, two case studies are performed to compare and elect the most reliable solar desalination
technique. The study is performed based on two different methods. The first method is to compare the
techniques based on individual operating conditions for each technique. And the second method is to
compare based on uniform operating conditions for all techniques. The aim of this work may be
concluded into these points:
 Solar desalination processes are compared based on uniform and different operating
conditions putting in consideration the design limits of each process.
 Electing the most reliable technique based on the aspects that mentioned above (productivity,
solar field area, total water price, and location of operation).
 The terms of comparison are solar field area m2, productivity m3/day, specific power
consumption kWh/m3, total exergy destruction rate MW, thermo-economic product cost
$/GJ, specific solar field area m2/(m3/day), and hourly costs $/h.

The techniques of combining solar power (organic) cycles with desalination processes are wide and
vary. In this work, two different techniques of combining solar power cycle with desalination
technologies are utilized.
The first is via mechanical power developed by solar organic Rankine cycle (SORC) and the second is
by thermal power transferred via boiler heat exchanger (BHX) unit between the solar field and the
desalination process. The first method usually performed for RO and MED-MVC technologies. The
second method is performed for thermal types of desalination processes such as MED, MED-TVC, and
MSF.

93
4.1.1 Solar organic Rankine cycle for RO and MED-MVC processes

Solar organic Rankine cycle (SORC) often contains: Solar parabolic trough collector (PTC),
boiler heat exchanger unit (BHX), circulation pump, turbine, generator, recuperator, and condenser/pre-
heater unit. In this technique, solar organic Rankine cycle (SORC) is utilized to develop the sufficient
power to operate the high pressure pump (HPP) in the RO and the vapor compressor in the MED-MVC.
Heat transfer oil (HTO) is used through the solar PTC field [54] to transfer the collected thermal power
via BHX unit to any process heat. Thence, HTO would transfer the thermal power to the organic oil
(Toluene) passes through the Rankine cycle. The generated power from the organic turbine would power
on the high pressure pump for the RO process and/or the mechanical vapor compressor for the MED-
MVC process. Also the pre-heated seawater from the Rankine cycle condenser unit goes directly to the
RO process and/or the first effect of the MED-MVC process. RO with pressure exchanger unit
configuration (RO-PEX) and MED parallel feed configuration (MED-PF) are confirmed in this study.
Figure (4.1) shows schematic a diagram of the SORC powered on the RO-PEX and MED-MVC
processes.

4.1.2 Solar thermal organic cycle for MED, MED-TVC and MSF-BR processes

In this technique, solar thermal power from the solar field is directly transferred to the BHX unit.
Thence, the thermal power would be transferred to the steam cycle to power on the thermal desalination
process. Such cycles often contain solar PTC collector with HTO which is directly fed towards the BHX
unit for thermal power transmission, and pump unit for circulation and to overcome pressure losses, and
the desalination process for fresh water production. Such configurations needn’t any turbine however it
would consume larger thermal power compared against the previous technique. Moreover, it also
consumes electricity for distillate, brine, seawater pumps and other facilities. Brine heater unit is added
in case of multi stage flash brine recycle configuration (MSF-BR). Multi effect distillation with parallel
feed configuration is considered for MED and MED-TVC. Figure (4.2) shows a schematic diagram of
the solar thermal power cycle assisted MED-PF, MED-TVC, and MSF-BR desalination processes.

Solar field block

Turbine

PTC solar Productivity

BHX ORC
collector RO-PEX plant
or
Condenser MED-PF-MVC plant

Seawater Brine outlet

Pump thermal
Pump unit stream
unit HTO stream
Organic stream

Figure (4.1) A schematic diagram of SORC assisted RO-PEX and

MED-PF-MVC desalination processes.

94
 Electricity from the main grid
to serve the auxiliaries

Solar field block

Productivity
Thermal desalination plants:
PTC solar MSF-BR
collector BHX or
MED-PF
or
Steam power MED-PF-TVC
stream
Seawater Brine outlet
thermal
Pump HTO stream
stream
unit Steam stream

Figure (4.2) A schematic diagram of solar thermal power cycle assisted thermal
desalination processes (MSF-BR, MED-PF, MED-PF-TVC).

4.2 Comparison Methodology

Desalination processes are different types, different configurations and different techniques.
Moreover, each type has its own operating conditions (productivity, salinity range, temperature, etc).
Therefore, in this section the comparisons are performed based on two main methods. The first is
performed based on individual operating condition for each type, and the second is performed based on
uniform operating conditions to give a clear judge about the most reliable technique.

4.2.1 Individual operating conditions

In this subsection, the proposed configurations are compared based on different operating
conditions (salinities, productivities, etc) and different design limits (number of stages or effects,
temperature drop, etc). For solar assisted RO (S-RO), it is required to desalinate and produce a total
capacity of 3500m3/day (Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant [36]). The number of pressure vessels is 42
and the element number is about 7 elements per each vessel. The element area is about 35.3m2 and the
feed seawater salinity is 45,000ppm.Solar assisted MED-MVC (S-MED-MVC) is performed based on a
capacity of 1500m3/day [71]. Parallel feed configuration is maintained for the use in MED process. The
number of effects isn’t exceeded above two effects and the compression ratio of the compressor is in the
range of 1.35. For solar MED (S-MED), solar thermal power plant is utilized to target a capacity of
4545m3/day [51]. The heating steam temperature is in the range of 70-73oC and the blow down brine
salinity is about 69,000ppm. The number of effects is maintained at four effects. For solar assisted
MED-TVC (S-MED-TVC), a capacity of 4545m3/day is targeted [72]. The top steam temperature (TST)
is in the range of 60oC for only four effects. The motive steam pressure is about 2500kPa and the ejector
compression ratio is about 2.165. A productivity of 32728m3/day is produced by solar thermal power
assisted MSF-BR type (S-MSF-BR) [43]. The top brine temperature (TBT) isn’t exceeded above 106 oC
and the total number of stages is about 24 stages. Tables 4.1-4.6 illustrate the specifications of all
introduced techniques according to different operating conditions.

95
 Table 4.1: Specifications and design input data based on S-RO-PEX (1st method).
Parameter: S-RO-PEX
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid ORC/Toluene [47]
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Inlet turbine condition/Condensation condition, oC 300/35
Seawater temperature, oC/Seawater salinity, ppm 20/45,000
Turbine, Generator, Pumps efficiency, % 85%, 95%, 75%
Recuperator effectiveness, % 80
Productivity, m3/day 3500
Recovery ratio, % 30
PEX, HPP, BP efficiencies, % 96%, 80%, 80%
Number of elements/Number of pressure vessels 7/42
Area of the element, m2 35.3
Fouling factor 0.85
Load factor 0.9
Membrane life time/Plant life time, year 5/20

Table 4.2: Specifications and design input data based on S-MED-MVC (1st method).
Parameter: S-MED-MVC
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid ORC/Toluene [47]
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Inlet turbine condition/Condensation condition, oC 300/35
Seawater temperature, oC 21
Seawater salinity/Brine blow-down salinity, ppm 42,000/70,000
Turbine, Generator, Pumps efficiency, % 85%, 95%, 75%
Recuperator effectiveness, % 80
Productivity, m3/day 1500
Top vapor temperature, oC 65
Compression ratio 1.35
Compressor efficiency, % 75
Adiabatic index 1.32
Number of MED effects, # 2
Effects temperature drop, oC 5
Feed, brine, distillate pumps efficiencies, % 75%, 75%, 75%
Load factor 0.9
Plant life time, year 20

96
 Table 4.3: Specifications and design input data based on S-MED (1st method).
Parameter: S-MED
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid Indirect vapor generation/steam
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Top steam temperature, oC 73
Brine blow down temperature, oC 36
Seawater temperature, oC 28
Seawater salinity/Brine blow-down salinity, ppm 46,000/69,000
Pump efficiency, % 75
Productivity, m3/day 4545
Number of MED effects, # 4 parallel feed configuration
Effects temperature drop, oC 9.3
End condenser effectiveness, % 59
Feed, brine, distillate pumps efficiencies, % 75%, 75%, 75%
Load factor 0.9
Plant life time, year 20

Table 4.4: Specifications and design input data based on S-MED-TVC (1st method).
Parameter: S-MED-TVC
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid Indirect vapor generation/steam
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Top steam temperature, oC 62
Brine blow down temperature, oC 46.8
Seawater temperature, oC 30
Seawater salinity/Brine blow-down salinity, ppm 46,000/69,000
Steam ejector compression ratio, CR 2.165
Motive steam pressure, kPa 2500
Expansion ratio, ER 250
Pump efficiency, % 75
Productivity, m3/day 4545
Number of MED effects, # 4 parallel feed configuration
Effects temperature drop, oC 4
End condenser effectiveness, % 66
Feed, brine, distillate pumps efficiencies, % 75%, 75%, 75%
Load factor 0.9
Plant life time, year 20

97
 Table 4.5: Specifications and design input data based on S-MSF-BR (1st method).
Parameter: S-MSF-BR
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid Indirect vapor generation/steam
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Top steam temperature, oC 116
Top brine temperature, oC 106
Brine blow down temperature, oC 40.2
Seawater temperature, oC 25
Seawater salinity/Brine blow-down salinity, ppm 42,000/70,000
Cooling water splitter ratio 0.5082
Chamber load, kg/s.m 180
Vapor velocity, m/s 12
Pump efficiency, % 75
Productivity, m3/day 32728
Number of MSF-BR stages, # 24 (21/3)
Stages temperature drop, oC 2.8
Feed, brine, distillate pumps efficiencies, % 75%, 75%, 75%
Load factor 0.9
Plant life time, year 20

4.2.2 Uniform operating conditions

In this method, all the operating conditions are uniformly confirmed. Productivity, salinity, solar
radiation, and efficiencies are maintained at the same values. This method is very important because it
gives a clear decision about the most effective technique. However, sometimes it becomes non realistic
because it takes the designer to assign non real data for some techniques. Table 4.6 demonstrates the
specifying parameters for the proposed types of solar desalination processes.

Table 4.6: Specifications of solar assisted thermal and mechanical desalination processes (2 nd method).
Parameter: Solar-RO, MVC, MED, TVC, MSF
Solar collector type/working fluid PTC-LS-3 [54]/Therminol-VP1 [62]
Developed power type/working fluid ORC/Toluene [47]
Solar radiation, W/m2 252 (winter)
Ambient temperature, oC 30
Capacity, m3/day 5000
Top solar collector temperature, oC 350
Top steam temperature, oC 60
Inlet turbine condition/Condensation condition, oC 300/35
Seawater temperature, oC/Seawater salinity, ppm 25/45,000
Brine blow-down temperature, oC/Blow-down salinity, ppm 40/65500
Power cost, $/kJ 1.6×10-5
Condenser’s efficiency, % 80
Pumps efficiency, % 75
Turbine, generator efficiencies, % 85, 95
Plant life time, year 20
Load factor 0.9
Fouling factor 0.85
Interest rate, % 5

98
4.3 Results and Discussions

Results are run out from SDS software package [39] based on the earlier two methods related to
some indicators putting in mind the design limits and the feasibility of the systems. The indicators are
listed as:
 Solar field area (Acol), m2 and Specific solar field area (SSA), m2/(m3/day).
 Specific power consumption (SPC), kWh/m3.
 Thermo-economic product cost (cp), $/GJ.
 Total exergy destruction rate (Itotal), MW.
 Total water price (TWP), $/m3.
 Gain ratio (GR=Mdistillate/Msteam).
 Area of desalination unit, m2.
 Operating hours cost, $/h.

4.3.1 Results of the1st method

The main criteria of this method that the investor/sponsor would be able to judge and elect the
process based on the above indicators regardless different specifications or design limits. The investor
that would like to construct or design a solar assisted desalination plant would judge the process based
on the above indicators regardless the differences in the specifications. Suppose that the investor wants
to elect the technology regardless the specifications. As shown from Table 4.7 that S-RO exhibits lower
solar field area meaning by this it is highly recommended to be operated in small remote areas (tourist
sector). Also it achieves lower results related to TWP, Itotal, SPC, operation costs and SSA. However, the
thermo-economic product cost is in the range of 65~72$/GJ and this is recorded highly comparing
against the remaining processes. Also it is noticed that the desalination processes that operated by SORC
(S-RO, S-MED-MVC) normally give high thermo-economic product cost comparing with the thermal
ones such as S-MSF-BR, TVC, and MED. That’s because the existence of organic turbine which cause
an increase in the thermo-economic product cost due to its operating cost and the cost of power
produced. It is clear now that the investor would elect the S-RO technique however there are many
limitations should be pinpointed:
 Use of Toluene is risky because it is flammable and toxic and has a negative impact on the
environment.
 Noise from the ORC operation related to the turbine existence.
 Hazards.
 Limited capacity within the range of 100-5000m3/day.
Therefore; Photovoltaic powered desalination may be useful on order to eliminate such tackles.
However; photovoltaic has its limitations regarding to the thermal operation of desalination systems. For
larger capacities, MED and MSF are dominant and reliable however; the irreversibility would become
massive and the solar field area becomes larger than S-RO case. As it shown from Table 5.7 that S-
MSF-BR consumes the largest area with a SSA about 20m2/(m3/day). Also the operating hours cost
reached about 1900$/h against 90$/h in the S-RO operation. But the TWP for S-MSF-BR still in the
acceptance range depending on the type of consumption sector. For thermal desalination types (only
MED, MED-TVC, MSF-BR), MSF and MED-TVC are attractive according to the lower values of GR,
TWP, and thermo-economic product cost. MED is less in construction (area of desalination sector is
about 6420m2) however; it would take the investor to sell the fresh production in the range of 2.8-3$/m3.
Therefore, it depends on investor or the designer to elect the best technique according to the sector of

99
consumption. Also, it is clear that S-MSF-BR and S-MED-TVC would be operated for industrial or
local sectors. S-RO would be constructed for tourist sector. Generally S-RO and S-MED-TVC gives
attractive results regardless the target of operation or the type of consumption sink.

Table 4.7: Data results for all solar desalination processes based on different operating conditions method.

4.3.2 Results of the 2nd method

It is clear from the previous method that the comparison couldn’t give a clear or a final decision to elect
the most reliable technique because there are a different design limits and productivity range. In this
method, all operating conditions (temperature drop, salinity, feed temperature…) are uniformed to give a
clear decision about the most reliable process regardless the sector of operation. The investor has to
inspect the following scenarios:
a) Productivity (5000m3/day): Suppose that the investor is concerned about the productivity
regardless the other indicators or terms.
b) Same solar field area: The investor has a limited area of operation.
c) Same TWP $/m3 (0.5<TWP<1): The investor care about the price of the production regardless
any other terms such as area or productivity.

In this scenario (Table 4.8), the RO productivity (5000m3/day) is assigned for all techniques. To ensure
a uniform case especially for thermal desalination techniques, the temperature drop between effects or
stages remains constant and has a range of 3.4oC to 3.45oC. It is found that S-RO gives the lower solar
area followed by S-MED-MVC. That’s explained by the operation of SORC which causes a significant
decrease in the solar field regardless the other aspects. However, the operation of S-MED-MVC would
consume much power based on the vapor compressor. Among all thermal processes, S-RO gives
enviable results based on total exergy destruction, SSA, TWP, and operating hour costs. Solar field
considered a key factor of increasing or decreasing the TWP, Itotal, and operating costs. Less solar field
area means, lower results in these parameter specially the Itotal. For thermal processes, S-MED-TVC
significantly attractive and gives first-rate results based on SSA, TWP, Itotal, and achieves higher GR. It
is obvious from Table 4.8 that at the same productivity S-RO comes as first order. Moreover, the
operation of SORC might be reducing the solar field area. Generally, S-MED-TVC is elected next after
the S-RO technique and elected first while comparing against the thermal desalination processes. Table

100
4.9 shows the data results obtained due to the limited solar field scenario. In this scenario, solar field of
10,754m2 is assigned for the comparison. This specified value (10,754m2) is resulted by the operation of
S-RO technique at productivity of 5000m3/day. For the same specified solar field area by the investor, S-
RO would produce 5000m3/day however; the remaining techniques would produce less moreover; the
TWP would be greater than the S-RO case. S-MED-MVC comes next after S-RO based on the
production (1334m3/day) however; the SPC considered the uppermost between all processes related to
the vapor compressor operation. But it achieves attractive results according to SSA, TWP, operating
costs, and thermo-economic product cost. S-MSF-BR gives the highest TWP (6.48$/m3) among the
remaining techniques. Also, it gives the highest value of total exergy destruction rate (Itotal=46MW).
However, it considered the less in desalination area condenser meaning by this less of complication.
According to the solar field scenario, S-RO and S-MED-MVC might be achieving attractive and
significant results. The remaining techniques might be favorable for larger capacities.

Table 4.8: Data results for solar desalination processes based on the same productivity.

Table 4.9: Data results for solar desalination processes based on same solar field area.

101
 Table 4.10 illustrates the data results for all process techniques based on the same TWP (0.5-
3
1$/m ). For such operation, it is quite difficult to uniform all processes under the same TWP because
each technique has it design limits that control the operating costs. In this scenario, the investor should
be concerned about the total water prices of production regardless any other aspects. The TWP is a very
important term because it concludes the costs of all process units. It is clear from Table 4.10 that S-RO
gives the minimum values of solar field area and operating costs.
However, thermal desalinating technologies are quite attractive based on the remaining
parameters such as productivity, and thermo-economic product cost. This scenario demands special
designs for thermal processes as noticed in number of effects and stages. Moreover, it becomes very
complicated referring to the increase in desalination area condenser. Surly it would give a massive
production with lower TWP however; it costs time and materials. Therefore; S-RO still dominant based
on solar field area and operating costs regardless the productivity.

Table 4.10: Data results for solar desalination processes based on the same TWP.

Based on the analysis performed in this chapter, the following pinpoints can be drawn:
 The results of the individual method revel that S-RO is quite attractive according to lower TWP,
lower SSA, lower SPC, and lower exergy destruction rate.
 The uniform method is performed according to three different scenarios such as the same
productivity, the same solar field area, and the same TWP.
 For all scenarios S-RO gives attractive results compared against the other techniques. Also it is
noticed that SORC could reduce the solar filed area.
 S-MED-TVC gives attractive results while comparing with thermal desalination processes.
 The second technique has an advantage concluded in developing power but depending on the
amount of distillate product and the outlet collector/boiler operating conditions.
 Generally, S-RO and S-MED-TVC are attractive mainly related to the solar filed area and TWP.
However, the remaining processes could produce a massive fresh water quantity regardless the
SPC or the solar field area.
 Solar thermal power is considered site and load specific. It is very important to decide the
location of operation and the load. Also, it is very important to enhance and optimize the
desalination system first before coupling with solar section.

102
4.3.3 CSP Vs PV Assisted RO: Case Study

In this part, it becomes very important to compare between CSP and PV for the assistance of RO
membrane desalination. As mentioned earlier, CSP powered ORC for the operation of RO-PEX gives
attractive results against the remaining thermal operations. Seawater desalination system that combines
with reverse osmosis (RO) powered by photovoltaic (PV) against CSP-RO to deliver 100 m3/day of
sweet water is investigated. Silicon cells are chosen for the PV array and the polyamide thin-film
composite seawater Film-tech membranes are selected for the RO system. The software SDS is adopted
to study the influences of the feed pressure on the performance of the system. Technical description of
the proposed system is presented in Table 4.11.

Table 4.11: Specifications and input data for PV-RO and CSP-RO systems (100m3/day).
RO system
Productivity, m3/day 100
Feed salinity, ppm 43500
Element area, m2 30
Fouling factor 0.85
Recovery ratio, % 20
High pressure pump efficiency, % 75
Pressure vessels/elements 3/7
PV system [73]
Number of cells in series 8
Area of the cells, m2 0.427
Maximum power rating, W 44.06
Rated voltage, V 16.5
Rated current, A 2.67
CSP-ORC system
Top ORC temperature, oC 300
Bottom ORC temperature, oC 35
ORC turbine efficiency, % 85
Solar field type/working fluid PTC-LS3/Therminol-VP1 HTO
Solar radiation, W/m2 650

For solar PV powered RO, the system contains the following:

o PV panels for power generation.
o Inverter unit for the conversion of DC to AC.
o Batteries.
o RO section (intake pretreatment unit, filter, motor, high pressure pump, RO membranes, and
accumulation tank).
For solar ORC powered RO, the system contains the following:
o PTC field (LS-3 type) with Threminol-VP1 heat transfer oil.
o Organic circulations pump with 75% efficiency.
o BHX unit with thermal effectiveness about 80%.
o Organic turbine (85% efficiency) with toluene organic fluid.
o Recuperator unit for heat regeneration and condenser unit for heat rejection with effectiveness
about 80%.
Figure (4.3) shows a schematic diagram of the PV-RO system. Figure (4.1) is introduced earlier for solar
ORC-RO system (CSP-RO). Results of the considered systems are illustrated in Table 4.12.

103
 Figure (4.3) A schematic diagram of solar PV powered RO system for
100m3/day [73].

It is obvious from Table 4.12 that CSP-RO system gives attractive results according to the design
and cost analysis. From the side of solar field area, CSP-RO achieved about 241m2 against 430~440m2
for the PV-RO system. Less area means less in controlling and maintenance issues. High solar area for
PV system is referring to lower efficiency of the PV modules (10%) compared with thermal one (73%).
However; the simplicity to assemble PV-RO system is remarkable against the CSP field. The total water
price (TWP, $/m3) is an effective term to judge the system applicability. It is clear that TWP of the PV-
RO system is a double value of the CSP-RO system. That’s because the high price of the PV panels.
Reducing the capital costs of the PV panels may reduce the TWP.
Thence it can compete with the thermal technologies. The possible way to reduce the TWP is to
increase the rate of technology construction by constructing many of PV-RO systems with higher
productivities for larger remote areas. It may be noted that PV powered RO system is suitable for areas
that have no access to water network and the local electric grid. A major advantage of the proposed
system is that it allows the membrane operation at constant pressure although batteries increase
maintenance requirements and also can cause environmental problems. The disadvantage of the system
is the sensitivity of the membranes to fouling by precipitation of sparingly soluble salts and to damage
by oxidized compounds in the feed water.

Table 4.12: Data results for both systems (CSP Vs PV) combined with RO desalination unit.
Parameter CSP-RO PV-RO [73]
Operating pressure, bar 46.16 47
Product salinity, ppm 530 500
Power, kW 35 35.4
SPC, kWh/m3 8.3 8.8
Solar field area, m2 241 410
Solar collector efficiency, % 73 9.9~10
TWP, $/m3 4.32 8.5

104
 Chapter 5: Conclusion, Recommendations and Future Work
5.1 Conclusion
The SDS software program is developed for design and simulation of different types and
configurations of conventional and solar desalination processes. The desalination plant components such
as heat exchangers, flash chambers, evaporators, pumps, steam ejectors, compressors, reverse osmosis
membranes, pipes, etc., are modeled and stored as blocks in SimuLink visual library. The library enables
the user to construct different desalination techniques and configurations by clicking the mouse over the
required units (blocks). The interface aids plant designers, operators and other users to perform different
calculations such as energy, exergy, and thermo-economics. In addition, the package enables the
designers to perform different modifications of an existing plant or to develop the conceptual design of
new configurations. Some operating desalination plants are simulated by the present package to show its
reliability and flexibility. The developed SDS package has some features concluded in:
 Easy model construction.
 Easy to convert the designed code to be self executable and work under different computer
languages (Visual basic, Visual C, Visual C++, and Visual Fortran).
 The model allows users easily change to the plant variables and different operating conditions
with ultimate stream allowance.

Related to the developed SDS package, different analyses for different solar desalination
processes are performed based on solar radiation data for Suez Gulf region- Egypt (latitude: 30o N;
longitude: 32.55o E)). For RO desalination plant, a case study is presented by operating Sharm El-Shiekh
reverse osmosis desalination plant (capacity of 145.8m3/h) with solar organic Rankine cycle. The
analyses are performed according to different types of operating conditions (saturation and superheat).
The investigations are performed based on energy, exergy, and cost analyses. The results of Butane,
Hexane, and Toluene are compared with the conventional working fluid (Water). Based on the analysis
performed in this work, the following conclusions can be drawn:
 Water and Toluene are suitable for both operations. However, Water needs expansion wet
turbine for dryness fraction ranged between 0.7 and 0.95 for both operations. Moreover, the
evaporation high pressure (85.9 bar) considered not safe for the collector design requirements.
Solar dish may be used for such type of operation however; it isn’t considered in this work.
Between all units, solar collector field exhibits the largest effect on the cycle specific cost,
minimum exergy destruction, and overall exergy efficiency.
 Recuperator configuration with higher values of recuperator effectiveness (εrec=0.8) gives a
superior results based on total solar field area, Rankine efficiency, exergy destruction, and
specific total cost. Basic configuration comes next and followed by OFH+REC configuration.
Therefore, recuperator unit has a massive effect on the cycle performance and it is recommended
to be added in the cycle for both operations (saturation and superheat).
 Different configurations of reverse osmosis energy recovery units powered by solar organic
Rankine cycle have been performed using the exergy and thermo-economic analysis. The
numerical results reveal that by the presence of PEX recovery unit, the needed solar collector
field area to generate a sufficient power will not exceed about 1887m2 with a percentage of
decreasing in the range of 65% against the basic configuration and PWT comes next with a
percentage of 43.5%. These results show that PWT comes next after PEX configuration which is
considered more economical than either stand alone.
105
Also, suggestions are pinpointed to combine between solar filed (PTC solar collectors) and different
configurations of MED (BF, FF, FFH, and PF) desalination plant (capacity of 100m3/day). The cycle is
compared with the proposed techniques according to the terms of energy, exergy, cost and thermo-
economic analysis. Based on the analysis performed in this work, the following conclusions can be
draw:
 Technical limitations for MED concluded in increasing number of effects up to 16~20 stages and
lowering the TBT in the range of 70~75oC. This may increase the gain ratio moreover; its effect
on total water price is still not noticed. Also, increasing the effects number would reduce the SPC
kWh/m3, the thermo-economic product cost $/GJ, condenser area m2, and seawater feed mass
flow rate.
 Both MED-FFH and MED-PF gives attractive results. However; MED-PF considered most
efficient when the number of effects is increased up to 16~18 effects. The use of feed heaters
enhances the GR, but adds more complexity, capital cost, and pumping energy.
 Toluene gives attractive results however, to develop much power (example of 11MWe), it is
recommended to increase outlet collector temperature to 300 oC at the same time increasing the
demanded fresh water productivity up to 20,000m3/day. Also; the designer should put in
consideration the controlling issues of the large area of the solar field.

The design of MED-PF-VC has the advantage of using a low-temperature heat source (steam or hot
water) when it operates at low TBT, and this can give much lower equivalent work or available
consumed energy than MSF units. Suggestions are pinpointed to combine between solar filed (PTC solar
collectors) and different techniques of MED-PF-VC (TVC and MVC) desalination plant (capacity of
4545m3/day). Based on the analysis performed in this work, the following conclusions can be draw:
 Decreasing the compression ratio down to a specified limit (CR=2) may increase the cycle
performance and would decrease the SPC kWh/m3 .
 Increasing the steam temperature will increase the SPC kWh/m3 and the CR.
 SMED-PF-TVC gives attractive results compared against SMED-PF-MVC technique. It
achieves lower SPC, steam flow rate, total water price and thermo-economic product cost
compared with SMED-PF-MVC technique.
 The existence of steam ejector unit may reduce the need of more evaporators to increase the GR.

MSF-BR distillation process is powered by solar thermal power instead of fossil fuel, however the
techniques studied in this field are still will not developed well. Based on the analysis performed in this
work, the following conclusions can be drawn:
 Technical limitations for MSF-BR concluded in increasing number of stages up to 40 stages and
lowering the TBT in the range of 90~120oC. This may increase the gain ratio moreover; its effect
on total water price is still not noticed.
 Toluene gives attractive results however, the second technique is favorable due to the obtained
data for exergy efficiency, and thermo-economic unit product cost. Toluene achieves minimum
collection area required to operate and power MSF-BR leading by this minimum exergy
destruction, and minimum operating and maintenance cost requirements.
 To develop much power (example of 45MWe), it is recommended to increase outlet collector
temperature to 350oC at the same time increasing the demanded fresh water productivity up to
30,000m3/day. However; the designer should put in consideration the control issues of the large
area of the solar field.

106
  Power and desalination technique is favorable against the stand alone desalination based on high
exergy efficiency, low exergy destruction. However; stand alone technique is favorable due to
lower solar field area and total water price.

As a final result, a comparison involving the considered techniques of solar assisted desalination
processes is performed. Solar thermal power by PTC technology is utilized as indirect vapor generation
with organic Rankine cycle for RO and MED-MVC desalination processes. Indirect vapor generation
without turbine unit is used for MED, MED-TVC, and MSF-BR processes. Based on the analysis
performed in this work, the following conclusions can be drawn:
 The comparison is performed based on two main methods. The first is to compare based on
individual design limits for each type. The other is to compare based on uniform parameters.
 The results of the individual method revel that Solar-RO is quite attractive according to lower
TWP, lower SSA, lower SPC, and lower exergy destruction rate.
 For all scenarios Solar-RO gives attractive results compared against the other techniques. Also it
is noticed that SORC could reduce the solar filed area.
 Solar-MED-TVC gives attractive results while comparing with thermal desalination processes.
 The second technique has an advantage concluded in developing power but depending on the
amount of distillate product and the outlet collector/boiler operating conditions.
 Generally, Solar-RO and Solar-MED-TVC are attractive mainly related to the solar filed area
and TWP. However, the remaining processes could produce a massive fresh water quantity
regardless the SPC or the solar field area.

5.2 Recommendations
The following recommendations are pin pointed as following:
 For solar ORC, Butane, Hexane, and Toluene working fluids are considered for FPC, CPC, and
PTC respectively.
 RO-PEX configuration is considered a power saver technique according to thermo-economic
results.
 MED-PF-TVC gives attractive results against the remaining thermal desalination processes
especially against MED-PF-MVC.
 Generally, solar powered RO-PEX is the most reliable desalination process according to thermo-
economic data results putting in mind the salinity range and the total productivity with the side of
MSF-BR.

5.3 The Future Work

The future work can be summarized as follows:

o Adding the Photovoltaic-desalination library to the SDS software.
o Using the developed SDS package to analyze hybrid desalination processes.
o Design and simulation of solar combined gas turbine and solar Stirling cycles.
o Adding a library of other renewable such as Wind, Geothermal.

107
The Appendix
Appendix-A
A. Working fluids: thermo physical properties
A.1 Water thermo physical properties
A.1.1 Density kg/m 3
The equation is applicable in the temperature range of 10 to 180oC and for salinity from 0 to 160 g/kg.
  0.5  ao  a1  Y  a2  (2  Y 2  1)  a3  (4  Y 3  3  Y )
Where:
ao  2.016110  0.115313    0.000326  (2   2  1)
a1  0.0541  0.01571    0.000423  (2   2  1)
a 2  0.006124  0.00174    0.000009  (2   2  1)
a3  0.000346  0.000087    0.000053  (2   2  1)
2t  200
Y
160
2 X  150

150

A.1.2 Dynamic viscosity

The Validity range of this correlation is 10-150 oC and 0-130 g/kg salt concentration.
  w  R
 w : Viscosity of pure water.
 R : Relative viscosity and =1 for pure water & > 1 for salt solution.
604.129
ln  w  3.79418 
139.18  t
o
t: Temperature in C.
 R  1  a1  X  a2  X 2
Where,
a1  1.474  10 3  1.5  10 5  t  3.927  10 8  t 2
a1  1.0734  10 5  8.5  10 8  t  2.23  10 10  t 2

A.1.3 Boiling point elevation

This equation is valid for X (salt concentration) from 20 to 160 g/kg for t (temperature) from 20 to
180oC.
BPR  ( B  C  X )  X

108
Where:
10 3  B  6.71  6.43  10 2  t  9.74  10 5  t 2
10 5  C  2.38  9.59  10 3  t  9.42  10 5  t 2
A.1.4 Specific heat capacity kJ/kg o C
CP  A  B  t  C  t 2  D  t 3
Where:
A  4206.8  6.6197  X  1.2288  10 2  X 2
B  1.1262  5.4178  10 2  X  2.2719  10  4  X 2
C  1.2026  10  2  5.3566  10 4  X  1.8906  10 6  X 2
D  6.8774  10 7  1.517  10 6  X  4.4268  10 9  X 2
X is the salinity ratio in kg/kg

A.1.5 Thermal conductivity W/m o C

k  A Bt  C t2
A  576.6  34.64  CA  7.286  CA 2
B  10 3  (1526  466.2  CA  226.8  CA 2  28.67  CA3 )
C  10 5  (581  2055  CA  991.6  CA 2  146.4  CA 3 )
And,
28.17  X
CA 
1000  X

A.1.6 Latent heat of vaporization kJ/kg

A.1.7 Saturation pressure bar

A.1.8 Specific enthalpy of dry saturated vapor kJ/kg

A.1.9 Specific enthalpy of saturated liquid kJ/kg

A.1.10 Specific entropy of saturated liquid kJ/kg o C

109
 A.1.11 Specific entropy of saturated vapor kJ/kg o C

A.2 Toluene thermo physical properties

A.2.1 Density for liquid and vapor phases kg/m 3

A.2.2 Dynamic viscosity for liquid and vapor phases kg/m 3

Toluene physical properties for liquid and vapor phases are obtained from the following correlations;

A.2.3 Specific enthalpy of dry saturated vapor kJ/kg

A.2.4 Specific enthalpy of saturated liquid kJ/kg

A.2.5 Specific entropy of saturated vapor kJ/kg o C

1.2.6 Specific entropy of saturated liquid kJ/kg o C

A.2.7 Saturation pressure bar

110
 A.3 Therminol-VP1 heat transfer oil thermo physical properties
A.3.1 Specific heat capacity kJ/kg o C

A.3.2 Pressure bar

A.3.3 Specific enthalpy kJ/kg

A.3.4 Specific entropy kJ/kg o C

For further information about the related working fluids (Hexane and Butane, please visit the following
links:
 www.therminol.com
 http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/

111
Appendix-B
B. Solar desalination units: Processes Mathematical models

The demanded power from desalination plants (block) permit the use of medium size of power
source from solar field in case of direct vapor generation technique. Therefore, solar desalination plants
(SDP) often contains the following:
o Low and/or medium temperature solar collectors (FPC, CPC, PTC).
o Solar field recirculation pumps.
o Control valves, sensors, flow meters, tanks, regulators, …
o Organic Rankine cycle (turbine, condenser, heat exchanger, recuperator …) in case of
producing electricity for mechanical parts.
o Desalination blocks (thermal, membrane and/or mechanical) depending on the technique
and the supplying method.
The application of solar energy to produce fresh water is receiving increased interest due to the need for
solving the water shortage problems in various areas of the world at the same time as conventional
energy sources used for obtaining water in different scenarios become depleted. Over the past few
decades, the reverse osmosis (RO) process of seawater desalination has gained much popularity. RO is a
membrane process, and was developed in direct competition with distillation processes. Its main feature
is that it requires no thermal energy but, rather, mechanical energy in the form of a high pressure pump.
Solar thermal energy coupled to a power cycle by using direct mechanical power can also be employed.
Solar troughs and linear Fresnel can concentrate the sunlight by about 70–100 times. Typical operating
temperatures are in the range of 350–450°C. Plants of 200MW rated power and more can be built by
this technology.

Figure (1) Linear and Parabolic troughs for solar concentrated thermal power.

The CSP technologies have some features:

 Concentrating solar power plants can generate electricity which can be used for membrane
desalination.
 CSP plants can be used for combined heat and power.
 Thermal desalination methods like multi effect distillation (MED) or multi stage flash (MSF) can
be powered by CSP, either directly or in co-generation with electricity.

112
  CSP reduces emissions of local pollutants and considerably contribute to global climate
protection.

Figure (2) CSP’s technology implementation for different types of thermal desalination
plants.

In this part, it is very important to highlight on the different mathematical models for different processes
of solar desalination plants. Solar radiation model, different types of solar collectors, different types of
energy units, different types of desalination plants are pinpointed and mathematically analyzed based on
approaches such as energy, exergy, thermo-economic, and cost.

B.1 Mathematical approaches

The mathematical approaches that used in the analysis for solar desalination plants are basically
preformed according to 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. For any system goes under steady state, the
mass, energy, and entropy balances equations under steady state condition should be developed as
following;

Unlike energy, which is conserved in any process according to the first law of thermodynamics, exergy
is destroyed due to irreversibility taking place in any process, which manifests itself in entropy creation
or entropy increase. The general form of the availability is defined by the following equation;

Where A2-A1=0 is the non-flow availability change in steady state condition,

is the availability transfer due to the heat transfer between the control volume and its surroundings,
is equal to the negative value of the work produced by the control volume

113
but in most cases the control volume has a constant volume, therefore Aw can be further simplified. And
I=Tamb×Sgen is the availability destruction in the process. The flow availability expressed as
. So the general form in steady state condition would become;

Thermo-economic is the branch of engineering that combines exergy analysis and economic
principles to provide the system designer or operator with information not available through
conventional energy analysis and economic evaluations but crucial to the design and operation of a cost
effective system. In a conventional economic analysis, a cost balance is usually formulated for the
overall system operating at steady state as following;

Where the cost rate according to inlet and outlet streams, and is the capital investment
and operating & maintenance costs. In exergy costing a cost is associated with each exergy stream.
Thus, for inlet and outlet streams of matter with associated rates of exergy transfer , power W, and
the exergy transfer rate associated with heat transfer Eq it can write as following;

Where ci,o,w,q denote average costs per unit of exergy in $/kJ for inlet ( i), outlet (o), power (w), and energy
(q) respectively.

Output streams:
 Mass
 Energy flow
 Exergy
 Cost

Process control volume

Input streams:
 Mass
 Energy flow
 Exergy
 Cost


Figure (3) Assumptions of flow streams across any process.

114
 B.1.1 Solar collectors
The collector is the heart of any solar energy system. The performance of such solar energy
systems is largely dependent on the portion of solar insolation that is transferred to the fluid, which also
depends on the working temperatures of this fluid. The useful portion of the insolation is a function of
the design of the collector, its tilt and its orientation. It is also function of the design fluid temperatures
and environmental parameters of the location such as air temperature, wind velocity, and insolation.
The solar collector instantaneous efficiency can be determined from its characteristic curve using
the solar irradiance, mean collector and ambient temperatures. The curve used for FPC, evacuated tube,
and CPC are expressed by Eq. (1) and the parameters given in Table 1. The corresponding efficiency
equation for the medium-high temperatures parabolic trough collectors (PTC) is given by Eq. (2).
…. (1)

…. (2)

Table 1: Efficiency parameters for different types of solar collectors [48].

Solar Operating
a1W/m2 a2 W/m2 a11 W/m2 a21 W/m2 a31 W/m2
collector temp, oC
FPC 2.9 0.0108 -- -- 0.768 80-100
CPC 0.59 0.0019 -- -- 0.665 120-170
PTC -- -- 4.5×10-6 0.039 3×10-4 0.75 >170-400

The collector total area is estimated based on the collector energy balance equation as a function of
collector efficiencies as;

Where Qu is the collector useful thermal power and (Gb) is the global solar flux over the collector area,
and Acol is the collector total area. The collector useful energy equation may exist according to the
following relation;
Where H is the enthalpy difference across the collector in kJ/kg.
The exergy destruction across the solar collector is presented as following;
 T 
I collector  Acol  Gb  1  amb   mcol
.
hi  ho  Tamb si  so col
 Tsun 
Where h represent the specific enthalpy, and s represents the specific entropy. Thermo-economic
analysis for solar collector to any unit is presented as following;

And the product cost rate in $/kJ from solar collector field to any other unit (…);

Where E is the exergy rate in kW.

B.1.2 Pump unit

Pump work in kW is calculated as:

115
Where pressure difference between the condenser low pressure and the turbine high is pressure, and
is the density of the working fluid, and is pump efficiency.
The pump outlet enthalpy is obtained via the following relation:

By knowing the environmental conditions (Tamb), the exergy destruction rate could be obtained from the
following relation:

And thermo-economically;

So; the unit product cost for the pump becomes;

Where, subscripts (w, p) denotes for power in kW and pump.

B.1.3 Turbine unit

For models based on design approach, it is very important to find out the mass flow rate through
the turbine by the knowing some parameters such as turbine efficiency, generator efficiency, and the
developed power by the turbine. The outlet enthalpy of the turbine kJ/kg;

Where ηt is the turbine efficiency and the subscript ( s, t) tends to isentropic state and turbine. The cycle
flow rate kg/s is presented as following;

Where ηg is the generator efficiency.

Based on exergy analysis, the exergy destruction rate in kW is developed based on the following
relation:

Steam turbine would maintain one auxiliary equation for two streams outlet (power stream cw, and
exhaust stream to any followed unit). For this, the unit product power for steam turbine can be
represented as follows;

B.1.4 Heat exchanger units

Heat exchanger units include condensers, boiler heat exchangers, recuperators, and so on. For
such units, it is recommended (based on design model) to assign the unit effectiveness ( ). The
following relations govern such units according to energy, exergy, and thermo-economic approaches.
Condenser heat rejection kW:

116
Based on exergy analysis, the exergy destruction rate in kW is developed based on the following
relation:

Thermo-economically, recuperator example is demonstrated as following:

Where subscripts …1 denotes hot side stream from unit (1) and …2 denotes cold side stream from unit (2).

B.1.5 Reverse osmosis desalination unit

Reverse osmosis (RO) is a filtration method that removes many types of
large molecules and ions from solutions by applying pressure to the solution when it is on one side of a
selective membrane. The result is that the solute is retained on the pressurized side of the membrane and
the pure solvent is allowed to pass to the other side. To be "selective," this membrane should not allow
large molecules or ions through the pores (holes), but should allow smaller components of the solution
(such as the solvent) to pass freely. Reverse osmosis is most commonly known for its use in
drinking water purification from seawater, removing the salt and other substances from the water
molecules. This is the reverse of the normal osmosis process, in which the solvent naturally moves from
an area of low solute concentration, through a membrane, to an area of high solute concentration. The
movement of a pure solvent to equalize solute concentrations on each side of a membrane generates a
pressure and this is the "osmotic pressure." Applying an external pressure to reverse the natural flow of
pure solvent, thus, is reverse osmosis. The process is similar to membrane filtration. However, there are
key differences between reverse osmosis and filtration.
The predominant removal mechanism in membrane filtration is straining, or size exclusion, so
the process can theoretically achieve perfect exclusion of particles regardless of operational parameters
such as influent pressure and concentration. Reverse osmosis, however involves a diffusive mechanism
so that separation efficiency is dependent on solute concentration, pressure and water flux rate.
Formally, reverse osmosis is the process of forcing a solvent from a region of high solute concentration
through a semipermeable membrane to a region of low solute concentration by applying a pressure in
excess of the osmotic pressure. The membranes used for reverse osmosis have a dense barrier layer in
the polymer matrix where most separation occurs. In most cases, the membrane is designed to allow
only water to pass through this dense layer, while preventing the passage of solutes (such as salt ions).
This process requires that a high pressure be exerted on the high concentration side of the membrane,
usually 2–17 bar (30–250 psi) for fresh and brackish water, and 40–70 bar (600–1000 psi) for seawater,
which has around 24 bar (350 psi) natural osmotic pressure that must be overcome. This process is best
known for its use in desalination (removing the salt from sea water to get fresh water), but since the
early 1970s it has also been used to purify fresh water for medical, industrial, and domestic applications.
Figure (4) shows a schematic photograph of the RO process.

117
 Figure (4) Schematic diagram of RO-PEX process.

The mathematical model for the proposed RO unit is written as follows [43]:
The feed flow rate Mf based on recovery ratio RR and distillate flow rate is:

The distillate product salt concentration Xd;

Where; Xf is the feed flow rate salt concentration, and SR is the salt rejection percentage; and the
rejected brine is found from;

The rejected salt concentration kg/m3 is estimated by;

The average salt concentration kg/m3is estimated as;

The temperature correction factor TCF is found by the relation below;

118
The membrane water permeability kw;

The salt permeability ks is;

Where FF is the membrane fouling factor. The calculations of osmotic pressure for feed side, brine side,
and distillate product side are found as follows;

The average osmotic pressure on the feed side;

The net osmotic pressure across the membrane;

The net pressure difference across the membrane;

Where Ae is the element area in m2, ne is number of membrane elements, and nv is the number of
pressure vessels. The required high pressure pump power input in kW to the RO is estimated as;

Where ρf is the feed flow rate density, and ηp is the driving pump mechanical efficiency. The specific
power consumption in kWh/m3 is estimated as;

Based on exergy balance for RO section;

Where hf, hb, and hp is calculated based on seawater specific heat capacity, salinity X, and feed seawater
temperature for each stream where;
, Where;

And;

Thermo-economic balance for the RO section;

For Pelton wheel recovery turbine (PWT);

For pressure exchanger unit (PEX);

By solving the above equations together, the following equation could maintain the overall thermo-
economic balance of the system.

119
 Present results of Sharm El-Shiekh desalination plant for SDS Vs ROSA6.1 and Mabrouk [36].
Variable SDS ROSA6.1 VDS Units
SPC 7.68 7.76 7.76 kWh/m3
HP 1131 1131.42 1130 kW
Mf 485.9 458.9 486 m3/h
Mb 340.1 340.15 340.23 m3/h
Xb 64180 62005 66670 ppm
Xd 250 283.83 200 ppm
SR 0.9944 -- 0.9927 --
ΔP 6850 6670 6700 kPa

Based on thermo-economic fundamentals as presented in the appendix; the thermo-economic

balance equations for each component in the combined processes (ORC/RO) should be presented as
following;
For Rankine cycle pump unit;

For solar collector; the relation should become;

And for steam turbine unit;

For recuperator unit, the relation becomes as following;

For condenser unit;

For high pressure pump of RO unit;

For RO module;

For Pelton wheel recovery turbine;

For pressure exchanger unit;

By solving the above equations together, the following equation could maintain the overall thermo-
economic balance of the system.

Where

Assuming that for any flow from the environment, external valuation of the unit exergo-economic cost is
performed. In this work, this involves seawater, and solar radiation (free) and external consumption.
Also, for any flow without later usefulness (losses), zero unit exergo-economic cost is assigned and this
involves brine blow down. Therefore, the overall equation will become as follows;

Where Ep is the exergy of the product stream from RO desalination plant.

120
 B.1.6 Multi stage flash (MSF-BR) desalination unit
Multi-stage flash distillation (MSF) is a water desalination process that distills sea water by
flashing a portion of the water into steam in multiple stages of what are essentially countercurrent heat
exchangers. The plant has a series of spaces called stages, each containing a heat exchanger and
a condensate collector. The sequence has a cold end and a hot end while intermediate stages have
intermediate temperatures. The stages have different pressures corresponding to the boiling points of
water at the stage temperatures. After the hot end there is a container called the brine heater. When the
plant is operating in steady state, feed water at the cold inlet temperature flows, or is pumped, through
the heat exchangers in the stages and warms up. When it reaches the brine heater it already has nearly
the maximum temperature. In the heater, an amount of additional heat is added. After the heater, the
water flows through valves back into the stages which have ever lower pressure and temperature. As it
flows back through the stages the water is now called brine, to distinguish it from the inlet water. In each
stage, as the brine enters, its temperature is above the boiling point at the pressure of the stage, and a
small fraction of the brine water boils ("flashes") to steam thereby reducing the temperature until
equilibrium is reached.
The equilibrium is stable, because if at some point more vapor forms, the pressure increases and
that reduces evaporation and increases condensation. In the final stage the brine and the condensate has
a temperature near the inlet temperature. Then the brine and condensate are pumped out from the low
pressure in the stage to the ambient pressure. The brine and condensate still carry a small amount of heat
that is lost from the system when they are discharged. The heat that was added in the heater makes up
for this loss. The heat added in the brine heater usually comes in the form of hot steam from an
industrial process co-located with the desalination plant. The steam is allowed to condense against tubes
carrying the brine (similar to the stages). The energy that makes possible the evaporation is all present in
the brine as it leaves the heater. The reason for letting the evaporation happen in multiple stages rather
than a single stage at the lowest pressure and temperature, is that in a single stage, the feed water would
only warm to an intermediate temperature between the inlet temperature and the heater, while much of
the steam would not condense and the stage would not maintain the lowest pressure and temperature.
Figure (5) shows a schematic diagram of MSF desalination process.

Figure (5) Schematic diagram of MSF brine recycle process.

The mathematical model based on design approach is presented as following [43]:

For known distillate product, feed stream to the mixer unit is obtained:

121
Total needed feed (Mft) based on 1st splitter ratio:

Therefore the rest of feed loss:

The brine blow-down loss:

Stage temp drop based on top brine temperature (TBT), last stage brine temperature (Tn) and number of
stages (N):

The recycle brine flow rate Mr and latent heat L is then calculated:

Then the salinity of the recycle stream is calculated Sr:

The outlet temperature of the distillate product Td could be calculated based on brine blow down
temperature Tn, non equilibrium allowance NEA, and boiling point ratio BPR.

The non-equilibrium allowance NEA and BPR are calculated by the following equations;
NEA  A  B  Tn  C  Tn2  D  Tn3
Where A=2.556, B= , and
BPR  ( B  C  S )  S
Where S is the stream salinity and,
103  B  6.71  6.43 102  Tn  9.74 105  Tn2
105  C  2.38  9.59 103  Tn  9.42 105  Tn2
For the heat recovery and rejection sections, the overall heat transfer coefficient based on vapor
temperature Tv:

The exergy destruction balance across the MSF plant can be introduced as following;

Where, Wp is the total pumping power required, E is the exergy rate, and subscripts (bo, fi, fo) denotes to
TBT, inlet feed, and outlet feed streams respectively. Thermo-economically, the balanced equations
should be presented as follows;

Where Cd is the distillate product cost $/h, Cbrine is the brine blow down cost and is specified as zero
cost, and Cfi. The unit specific cost of inlet seawater feed stream to the MSF condenser is considered the
same as outlet preheated stream entered the condenser/brine-heater unit (ccwi-cond=cfi). So the relation
would become as follows;

122
 B.1.7 Multi effect distillation desalination unit
Multiple-effect distillation (MED) is a distillation process often used for sea water desalination.
It consists of multiple stages or "effects". In each stage the feed water is heated by steam in tubes. Some
of the water evaporates, and this steam flows into the tubes of the next stage, heating and evaporating
more water. Each stage essentially reuses the energy from the previous stage. The tubes can be
submerged in the feed water, but more typically the feed water is sprayed on the top of a bank of
horizontal tubes, and then drips from tube to tube until it is collected at the bottom of the stage. The
plant can be seen as a sequence of closed spaces separated by tube walls, with a heat source in one end
and a heat sink in the other end. Each space consists of two communicating subspaces, the exterior of
the tubes of stage n and the interior of the tubes in stage n+1. Each space has a lower temperature and
pressure than the previous space, and the tube walls have intermediate temperatures between the
temperatures of the fluids on each side. Figure (6) shows a schematic diagram of the MED process.
There are some features of such kind of desalination process.
3
 Low energy consumption (less than 1.0 kWh/m ) compared to other thermal processes.
 Operates at low temperature (< 70 °C) and at low concentration (< 1.5) to avoid corrosion and
scaling.
 Does not need pre-treatment of sea water and tolerates variations in sea water conditions.
 Highly reliable and simple to operate.
 Low maintenance cost.
 24 hour a day continuous operation with minimum supervision.
 Can be adapted to any heat source including hot water or waste heat from power generation or
industrial processes.

Figure (6) Schematic diagram of multi effect distillation process.

The analysis introduced in MED section, is presented based on single effect evaporation module. The
first method used to desalt seawater in large quantities was the single effect desalting system consisting
of an evaporator-condenser combination (Fig. 7). Single effect evaporation (SEE) has limited industrial

123
applications. The system is used in marine vessels and this because the system has thermal performance
ratio less than one, i.e.; the amount of water produced is less than the amount of heating steam used to
operate the system. The main components of the unit are the evaporator and the feed pre-heater
condenser. The evaporator consist of an evaporator\condenser heat exchanger tubes, a vapor space, un-
evacuated water pool, a line for removal of non condensable gases, a water distribution system, and a
mist eliminator. A heat source (steam S) heats the incoming feed F to the evaporator from its entering
feed temperature Tf to its boiling temperature Tb, and evaporates part of it equal to D. The vapor D is
directed to the condenser where it condenses and heats the cooling water Msea from seawater
temperature Tsea to the feed temperature Tf. Part of Msea leaving the condenser is used as feed F while the
balance B (=Msea-F) is called brine blow-down and is rejected back to the sea. In the condenser of a
single-effect desalting system, a small portion of the latent heat given off by condensing the vapor D is
utilized to heat the feed-water F, while the balance D×L=F×Cp× (Tf-Tsea) is rejected back to sea. The
mathematical model for this type is illustrated as following:
Energy balance for the condenser unit based on the specified effectiveness ε:
Tf=ε×(Tv-Tsea)+Tsea
where Tv is the vapor temperature;
The distillate temperature is obtained from the same equation:
Td=Tv-( ε× (Tv-Tsea)
Mass and material balances;
Mf=Md× Sb/(Sb-Sf)
Mb=Md× Sf/(Sb-Sf)
And steam flow rate Ms could be obtained from the following relation;
Ms=Md/PR where PR is the performance ratio which is also obtained as following;

Where, BPE is the boiling point elevation as a function of brine temperature and salinity percent;
Cooling water blow down from the condenser unit is obtained from the following energy balance
relation;

Where the Tav is the average temperature for the feed seawater across the condenser unit ( )
Therefore; the total mass flow rate is then calculated;
Mft=Mcw+Mf
Heat Transfer areas for condenser and evaporator units (Ac, Ae) are obtained based on logarithmic mean
temperature LMT, latent heat L and overall heat transfer coefficient U;
For condenser unit;

124
Thermo-physical properties and overall heat transfer coefficient are calculated form the following
correlations:
 Boiling point elevation:

 Specific heat capacity:

 Latent heat of vaporization:

 The overall heat transfer coefficients for evaporator and end condenser units:

Figure (7) Schematic display of Single Effect Evaporation (SEE) process.

The exergy destruction rate is calculated based on the overall exergy balance equation:

Where, W and E represent the pumping power and exergy streams. And subscripts ( fp, bp, dp, s) denotes the
feed pump, brine pump, distillate pump and steam respectively. Thermo-economically, the MED process
streams can be presented as follows;

Where Cd is the distillate product cost $/h, Cbrine is the brine blow down cost and is specified as zero
cost, and Cfi. So the relation for thermo-economic distillate cost would become as follows;

Figures below show schematic diagrams of different MED configurations.

125
B.1.7-a MED forward feed configuration

B.1.7-b MED backward feed configuration

B.1.7-c MED parallel feed configuration

126
B.1.7-d MED forward feed configuration with feed water heaters

127
 B.1.8 Multi effect distillation thermal vapor compression desalination unit

The MED-TVC evaporator is basically an MED evaporator fitted with a thermo-compressor.

The purpose of the thermo-compression of the vapor is to take advantage of the pressure of the available
steam, when this pressure is sufficient (i.e. above 2 bar abs), to enhance the units' performance. The
incoming steam, called motive steam, is fed into the thermo-compressor through a sonic nozzle. Its
expansion will allow low pressure steam from a cell of the evaporator to be sucked out. Both steams will
be mixed in the thermo-compressor body. The mixture is then compressed to the pressure of the first
bundle through a shock wave. The latent heat of the sucked vapor is thus recycled in the evaporator and
is again available for desalination, leading to energy savings. The performance of a thermo-compressor
is expressed by the mass of sucked steam (in kg) per kg of motive steam. Figure (8) shows a schematic
diagram of multi effect distillation-thermal vapor compression process.

Figure (8) A schematic diagram of multi effect distillation thermal vapor compression process.

The most important and critical step in modeling the TVC desalination system is the evaluation of the
performance of the steam jet ejector. The main data required from analyzing the steam jet ejector is the
determination of the mass of motive steam required per unit mass of the entrained vapor (Ra), given the
pressure of the motive steam (Pms), discharge pressure (Pd) and the suction pressure or entrained vapor
pressure (Pev). There are a limited number of methods available in the literature to analysis the steam jet
ejector. However, these methods require tedious and lengthy calculation procedures. Additionally, most
of these methods are based on using many correction factors that depend heavily on the detail design of
the ejector. Dessouky, [43], developed the following relationships to evaluate the performance of the
steam jet ejector. The mathematical model of MED-TVC parallel feed configuration with feed water
heaters is introduced as follows:
Last effect vapor temperature is function of blow down brine temperature:

128
And the temperature drop between effects is then obtained based on the number of effects:

Where, Ts is the steam temperature, Tv is the vapor temperature.

Brine flow temperature profile is then obtained:

The corresponding saturation vapor pressure Pv kPa is obtained as follows:

The pressure drop in the demister in kPa/m (based on backing density , vapor velocity , wire diameter
, length of packing Lp) is evaluated from the correlation below:

The vapor pressure past the demister in kPa is then calculated:

For mass balance and material the distillate profile is calculated according to 1st effect productivity as a
function of latent heat and number of effects:

Then the distillate profile can be calculated:

Brine and salt balances could be calculated:

The motive steam mass flow rate that entered the steam ejector is then calculated from the energy
balance across the 1st effect:

The amount of entrained vapor mass flow rate Mev is then calculated from the entrainment ratio (Ra):

The total steam mass flow rate to evaporator:

The system performance parameters are calculated as follows:

Heat Transfer areas H.T.A for the evaporator is calculated based on the evaporator thermal load Qe:

Where, BPE is the boiling point elevation as a function of last effect brine temperature (Tb).
Heat transfer area for feed heaters Afh is calculated based on LMT:

The steam ejector mathematical model is obtained based on the following model:

129
The pressure of compressed vapor kPa Ps is function of vapor pressure and compression ratio (Cr) and
the entrained vapor from effect number n:

The high velocity at Nozzle exit (Vne) can be calculated based on enthalpy difference across
the ejector nozzle:

The entrainment ratio is obtained as following by calculating temperature and pressure correction
factors:

Where, Pms is the motive steam pressure in kPa, and Tv is the vapor temperature from effect number n.

The expansion ratio:

The nozzle cross section area (A1) based on the nozzle diameter Dn:

The area ratios (A1/ A3 & A2/ A1) and the areas (A3 & A2) of the nozzle outlet and the diffuser are then
calculated:

Nozzle outlet area m2:

Diffuser area m2:

130
 Figure (9) Pressure and velocity profiles inside the steam jet ejector.

B.1.9 Multi effect distillation mechanical vapor compression desalination unit

Mechanical vapor-compression desalination process (MVC) is the most attractive and valuable
among different single stage desalination processes. The MVC system is compact, confined, and does
not require external heating source, which is opposite to thermal, absorption, or adsorption vapor
compression. The system is driven by electric power; therefore, it is suitable for remote population areas
with access to power grid lines. Another advantage of the MVC system is the absence of the down
condenser and the cooling water requirements. This is because the compressor operates on the entire
vapor formed within the system. Other advantages of the system include:
o Moderate investment cost.
o Proven industrial reliability to long lifetime operation.
o Simple seawater intake and pretreatment.
o The system adopts the horizontal falling film tube configuration, which allows for high heat
transfer coefficient.
o The low temperature operation, 60oC, allows for reduced scaling and heat losses and minimum
requirement of thermal insulation.
o The system is modular type and it is simple to enlarge production volume by adopting additional
modules.
o High product purity.
o Simple system adjustment to load variations, through temperature manipulation.

131
 o Provide low power to water ratio without reducing the fuel utilization potential.

Figure (10) A schematic diagram of multi effect distillation mechanical vapor compression process.

The mathematical model of MED part considered the same as that presented in MED-TVC. Therefore,
the model is pinpointed on the mechanical vapor compressor unit. The specific volume of inlet vapor at
brine temperature is obtained as follows:

The compression ratio:

The compressor horse power needed:

Where, Ms is the steam mass flow rate in kg/s, is the isentropic index, and Pcomp is the pressure in kPa.

132
Appendix-C
C. Cost Correlations for Desalination Processes

C.1 Reverse Osmosis (RO) [56]

Direct capital costs DCC can be calculated based on the following steps:
Cost of seawater and intake pump (CCswip) pretreatment $/m3/day,

CCswip=996×Mf0.8 [56]
Cost of high pressure pump (CChpp) $,

CChpp=393000+10710×ΔPf [56]
Premeator price $,

Pp=1000
Pressure vessel price $,

PVp=1000
Number of premeators Np as a function of elements (ne) and pressure vessels (nv),

Np=ne×nv
Elements capital costs (membrane + pressure vessels),

CCe=Fe×Pp×Np+Fe×PVp×nv

Where, Fe=1 as a corrective factor,

The equipment capital cost is then calculated as follows:

CCequip=CCswip+CChpp+CCe

And the site cost is calculated from the following correlation:

CCsite=10%×CCequip [56]

Then the direct capital cost is calculated:

DCC=CCequip+CCsite

Indirect capital costs (ICC), total capital costs (TCC), annualized capital costs, and operating &
maintenance cost are then calculated as presented in the following table. Where, ACC is the annual
capital cost $/year, Af is the annualized factor 1/y.
OCpower: operating cost of annual power $/kWh
OClabor: annual labor cost $/m3
OCmtnce: annual maintenance cost $/m3
OCchmcal: annual chemical cost $/m3
OCinsurce: annual insurance cost
OCmbrne: annual operating cost of membranes

133
OCt=OCpower+OClabor+OCmtnce+OCchmcal+OCinsurce+OCmbrne: operating cost $/year
Zro: The hourly costs for the RO $/hr

ICC and O&M costs for RO desalination plant [56].

DCC, $ ICC, $ TCC, $ ACC, $/year O&M, $/year , $/h
0.8
CCswip=996×Mf ICC=27%× TCC=ICC+ ACC=TCC× OCpower=LF×0.06×SPC×Md =
CChpp=393000+10710×ΔPf DCC DCC Af OClabor=LF×0.01×Md (ACC+OCro)
CCe=Fe×Pp×Np+Fe×PVp×nv OCchm=LF×0.04×Md /8760
CCequip=CCswip+CChpp+CCe OCinsur=0.005×TCC×Af
CCsite=10%×CCequip OCmemb=Pp×Np/LTm
DCC=CCequip+CCsite OCro=OCpower+OClabor+
OCchm+OCinsur+OCmemb

134
 C.2 Multi Effect Distillation (MED)

For MED process, the following table summarizes the cost consideration that considered in this study.

Cost parameters for MED desalination plant [43].

Parameter: Correlation:
Interest rate, % 5
Plant life time, y 20
Amortization factor , 1/y
Direct capital costs, $ DCC=
Annual fixed charges, $/y
Annual heating steam costs, $/y
Annual electric power cost, $/y
Annual chemical cost, $/y
Annual labor cost, $/y
Total annual cost, $/y
Operating and maintenance costs, $
Hourly operating & maintenance costs in $/h
The total plant costs, $/y
Total water price $/m3

For the operation of vapor compressor with MED, the following correlation calculates the compressor
costs based on compression ratio (CR), compressor efficiency, steam mass flow rate Ms, and operating
hours (OH).
, Indirect capital cost [43]
, Total capital costs
, Hourly costs
The hourly cost for the steam ejector is calculated based on the following correlation,
, $/h [43]

135
 C.3 Multi Stage Flash (MSF)

For this part, investment and operating & maintenance costs analyses are performed for each
component, solar field, steam turbine, condenser, and pump units. For that purpose; the amortization
factor is estimated based on the following relation [43];

Where i is the interest rate and set as 5%, LTp is the plant lifetime and set as 20 years. For this MSF
part, cost analyses are estimated based on direct capital costs (DCC), indirect capital costs (ICC), and
the total capital costs (TCC). For MSF desalination plant, the annual fixed charges in $/y may
represented by [43] as following;

And IDCC is the indirect capital costs and equal to [43]. The operating and maintenance
costs are presented in $ as following;

And the annual chemical cost is obtained in $/y as;

Where, SCC is the specific chemical costs (0.025$/m3 [43]), and LF is the plant load factor and is fixed
about 0.9, and Dp is the distillate product. The annual labor costs in $/y is given as following;

Where, SLC is the specific labor costs (0.1$/m3). The total annual costs in $/y for MSF is calculated
according to the following,

And the unit product cost in $ is found as;

The operating and maintenance cost in $/h for MSF ( ) is found to be as following;

Then the total water price $/m3 should be found as;

136
Appendix-D
D. SDS Software Package

SDS software models, simulates, and analyzes solar desalination systems. It enables user to pose
a question about a system, model the system, and see what happens. With SDS, user can easily build
models from scratch, or modify existing models to meet your needs. It becomes very easy to solve real
problems in a variety of industries, including:
 Concentrated Solar Plants (CSP)
 Different types and configurations of desalination processes
 Different techniques of solar desalination systems
 Different thermal units
 Different analysis
SDS provides a graphical user interface (GUI) for building models as block diagrams, allowing user to
draw models as you would with pencil and paper. Also, it includes a comprehensive block library of
sinks, sources, linear and nonlinear components, and connectors. If these blocks do not meet your needs,
however, user can also create his own blocks (units). The interactive graphical environment simplifies
the modeling process, eliminating the need to formulate differential and difference equations in a
language or program.
SDS software is tightly integrated with the MATLAB environment. It requires MATLAB to run,
depending on it to define and evaluate model and block parameters. It can also utilize many MATLAB
features. For example, Simulink can use the MATLAB environment to:
 Define model inputs.
 Store model outputs for analysis and visualization.
 Perform functions within a model, through integrated calls to MATLAB operators and functions.

D.1 Multi-Stage Flash Brine Recycle (MSF-BR) Model: Case Study

To run the solar combined with MSF-BR desalination model, user has to log into the SDS path
then double clicking on the file name of the model (SDMSFbr_HTO.mdl).

Model path

Workspace

Model name

137
To assign the plant productivity m3/day, ambient temperature oC and solar radiation data, user has to
click on the model explorer icon then double clicking on the main block. The block parameters menu
will open and the user can easily assign the main input data. Also it is very easy to assign the data of the
location such as longitude, latitude, and the day number of the year.

Model run

Double click

Model
explorer icon

The main
block

Parameters that the user has to assign the

following:
 Ambient temperature, oC.
 Productivity, m3/day.
 Solar collector top temperature, oC.
 The top steam temperature for the
MSF plant, oC.

In the sub menu, user can easily find out the units and the sub-units that represent the proposed process.
In the following figure, the process units are PTC solar field, boiler heat exchanger unit, pump, brine
heater, and MSF-BR desalination plant. By double clicking on the blocks, user can easily specify the
operating conditions and the permitted design consideration for each unit individually. User also has the
ability to use the capabilities of the MatLab/SimuLink that included in the software tools. The tools are
concluded in to the following items:
 Users can easily copying the units and duplicate and pasting them.
 User can delete the unwanted units.
 User can take copies to clipboard with high permeation to edit and reform.
 Also printing the models and their sub models is easily available.
 User can redo his work for instant accident such as removing or deleting any parameter or unit.
 User can drive out his results through different ways such as “mat” files, matlab “workspace”,
or/and display block.
 Also, it is become easy for the user to handle the “mat” to an “excel sheet” or construct a new
figure.
Consider an example of MSF-BR desalination plant with a capacity of 32728m3/day. The input
parameters and specifications are illustrated in the following table. The process validity of MSF-BR
example is examined with Dessouky (Fundamental of salt water desalination, Book) and also illustrated
in Table below. The data results show a good agreement for the developed program (SDS) with
Dessouky [50] results.

138
32728m3/day MSF-BR
Top brine temperature (TBT), oC 106
Brine blow down temperature, oC 40.2
Feed seawater temperature, oC 25
Cooling water splitter ratio 0.5082
Sea water salinity, ppm 42000
Brine blow down salinity, ppm 70000
No. of stages 24 (21/3)
Chamber Load, kg/s.m 180
Vapor velocity, m/s 12
Weir coefficient 0.5

Design point results: Dessouky [43] SDS

Total feed, kg/s 1861 1862
Distillate flow rate, kg/s 378.8 378.8
Make up, kg/s 947 947
Brine recycle flow rate, kg/s 3384 3384
Brine blow-down flow rate, kg/s 568.2 568.2
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s 52.52 53.04
Top vapor temperature, oC 101.2 101.98
Top feed temperature, oC 97.75 97.78
Recycle blow down temperature, oC 48.25 48.42
Vapor temperature at last stage, oC -- 38.2
Recycle stream salinity, ppm 62170 62163
Stage length, m 2.56 2.58
Performance ratio 7.21 7.14

Click on this button to begin

exploring the model Model units

Model
Model tools
explorer

By double clicking on the block the

specification menu will appear
instantaneously

Specification blocks related to each unit

139
 Display blocks to
display the results

Click on the browser link to

display the current sub-block

Draw a figure
Save to excel sheet

Results represented
as in excel sheet
Double click on the
parameter (gate height, GH)
to explore as in excel sheet

Results represented as figure

Data results saved

to the workspace

140
 D.2 Solar Radiation model
Solar radiation model is a very effective tool to specify the solar energy over the location of operation.
The model code is presented as following [40]:
The declination angle throughout the year is defined as following:
 360
d  23.45 sin  284  n
 365 
Where n is the day of the year. The value of n for any day of the month d can be determined easily with
the aid of the table below.

The hour angle h is calculated from the following expression:

h  15LST  12
Where LST = Local Solar Time [hr].
The following equations are presented to calculate these angles:
cos H  cosl cosh cosd  sin l sin d
Since   90   H ,
sin   cosl coshcosd  sin lsin d
The relation gives the sun’s azimuth, :
1
cos    cos d sin l cos h  sin d cos l 
cos 
A summary of the sign convention is:
l: north latitudes are positive, south latitudes are negative
d: the declination is positive when the sun's rays are north of the equator, i.e. for the summer period in
the northern hemisphere, March 22 to September 22 approximately, and negative when the sun's rays are
south of the equator.
h: the hour angle is negative before solar noon and positive after solar noon.
: the sun's azimuth angle is negative east of south and positive west of south.

The solar models for the estimation of the total insolation on horizontal surfaces:

141
ASHREA correlations:
It1  (Gbn  cos( z))  Gd
Gbn  A exp(  B / cos( z ))
Gd  C  Gbn

Where,
A is the apparent solar irradiance at air mass zero, B is the atmosphere extinction coefficient, and C is
the diffuse radiation factor and z is the zenith angle. The following table shows the coefficients for
average clear day solar radiation calculations.

HOTTEL MODEL:

Unlike ASHREA model, which gives an estimate for both direct and diffuse radiation, the present model
is capable of estimating the direct irradiation only. The direct beam irradiation on horizontal surface is
given as following:

Where;

For tropical climate type:

a0=0.4237-0.00821(6-A)2
a1=0.5055+0.00595(6.5-A)2
k=0.2711+0.01858(2.5-A)2
Where A is the sea level parameter.

142
References
[1] Ali M. El-Nashar, The economic feasibility of small solar MED seawater desalination plants for
remote arid areas, Desalination 134 (2001) 173–186.
[2] Fath H. desalination technology: The role of Egypt in the region. Fifth International Water
Technology Conference, Alexandria, Egypt (2000).
[3] Hisham M. E1-Kady, F. E1-Shibini. Desalination in Egypt and the future application in
supplementary irrigation, Desalination 136 (2001) 63-72.
[4] Azza Hafez, Samir El-Manharawy “Economics of seawater RO desalination in the Red Sea region,
Egypt. Part 1. A case study”, Desalination 153 (2002) 335-347.
[5] http://www.oksolar.com/abctech/solar-radiation.htm.
[6] Hazim Mohameed Qiblawey, Fawzi Banat. Solar thermal desalination technologies. Desalination.
220 (2008) 633–644.
[7] Mohamed A. Eltawil, Zhao Zhengming, Liqiang Yuan. A review of renewable energy technologies
integrated with desalination systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (2009) 2245–
2262.
[8] Soteris A. Kalogirou, Solar thermal collectors and applications, Progress in Energy and Combustion
Science 30 (2004) 231–295.
[9] Moh’d S. Abu-Jabal, I. Kamiya, Y. Narasaki, Proving test for a solar- powered desalination system
in Gaza–Palestine, Desalination 137 (2001) 1–6.
[10] Kyritsis S. Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Renewable Energy Sources for Water
Production. European Commission, EURORED Network, CRES, EDS, Santorini, Greece; 10–12
June, 1996. p. 265–70.
[11] Valverde Muela V. Planta Desaladora con Energıa Solar de Arinaga (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria).
Departamento de Investigacion Nuevas Fuentes. Centro de Estudios de la Energıa; April, 1982.
[12] Palma F. Seminar on new technologies for the use of renewable energies in water desalination,
Athens, 1991. Commission of the European Communities, DG XVII for Energy, CRES (Centre for
Renewable Energy Sources) 1991.
[13] Manjares R, Galvan M. Solar multistage flash evaporation (SMSF) as a solar energy application on
desalination processes. Description of one demonstration project. Desalination 1979;31(1–3):545–
54.
[14] Delyannis EE. Status of solar assisted desalination: a review, Desalination 1987; 67:3–19.
[15] Hanafi A. Design and performance of solar MSF desalination system. Desalination 1991; 82 (1–3):
165–74.
[16] Banat F, Jwaied N. Economic evaluation of desalination by small-scale autonomous solar-powered
membrane distillation units. Desalination 2008; 220:566–73.
[18] A. Lamei, P. van der Zaag, E. von Münch, Basic cost equations to estimate unit production costs for
RO desalination and long-distance piping to supply water to tourism-dominated arid coastal regions
of Egypt, Desalination 225 (2008) 1–12.
[19] Patrick Hearps, Dylan McConnell. Renewable Energy Technology Cost Review. Melbourne
Energy Institute, Technical Paper Series (2011). www.energy.unimelb.edu.au.
[20] Veera Gnaneswar Gude a, Nagamany Nirmalakhandan b, Shuguang Deng. Renewable and
sustainable approaches for desalination. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010)
2641–2654.
[21] T.S. Saitoh and A. Hoshi, Proposed solar Rankine cycle system with phase change steam
accumulator and CPC solar collector. IECEC2002, paper no. 20150.

143
[22] Vahab Hassani, Henry W. Price, Modular trough power plants, Proceedings of Solar Forum 2001,
Solar Energy: The Power to Choose, APRIL 21-25, 2001, Washington, DC.
[23] Andrew C. Mcmahan, Design & optimization of organic rankine cycle solar-thermal power plants,
university of wisconsin-madison 2006.
[24] Lourdes García-Rodríguez, Julián Blanco-Gálvez, Solar-heated Rankine cycles for water and
electricity production: POWERSOL project, Desalination 212 (2007) 311–318.
[25] 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) 366–374.
[26] Rong Zhang, Hiroshi Yamaguchi, Katsumi Fujima, Masatoshi Enomoto and Noboru Sawada, A
Feasibility Study of CO2-Based Rankine Cycle Powered by Solar Energy, JSME International
Journal, Series B, Vol.48, No.3, 2005.
[27] A. S. Nafey, Simulation of solar heating systems—an overview, Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 9 (2005) 576–591.
[28] O.A. Hamed and S. Aly, Simulation and design of MSF desalination process. Desalination, 80
(1991) 1–14.
[29] S. Ithara and L.I. Stiel, The optimal design of multistage flash evaporators by dynamic
programming, Desalination, 4 (1968) 248–257.
[30] H. Sonnenschein, A modular optimizing calculation method of power station energy balance and
plant efficiency. J. Eng. Power, 104 (1982) 255.
[31] E. Perz, A computer method for thermal power cycle calculation. Trans. ASME, 113 (1991) 184–
189.
[32] Mahmoud Bourouis, Luc Pibouleau, Pascal Floquet, Serge Domenech, Darwish M. K. Al-Gobaisi,
Simulation and data validation of multi stage flash desalination plants, Desalination, 115 (1998) 1–
14.
[33] N. Woudstra and M. Verschoor, CYCLE-TEMPO, Delft University of Technology, 1995.
[34] P. Schausberger, G. Rheina-Wolbeck, A. Friedl, M. Harasek and E.W. Perz, Enhancement of an
object-oriented power plant simulator by seawater desalination topics. Desalination, 156 (2003)
335–360.
[35] J. Uche, L. Serra, L.Alberto, A. Valero, J. Turrgano and C. Torres, Software for the analysis of
water and energy systems. Desalination, 156 (2003) 367–378.
[36] A.A. Mabrouk et. al, A new visual package for design and simulation of desalination processes.
Desalination 194 (2006) 281–296.
[37] Adrian Gambier, Essameddin Badreddin, Dynamic modelling of MSF plants for automatic control
and simulation purposes: a survey. Desalination 166 (2004) 191–204.
[38] William J. Palm, SIMULINK, Introduction to MATLAB7 for Engineers, Version 7, 2005.
[39] M.A. Sharaf et. al, A New Visual Library for Design and Simulation of Solar Desalination Systems
(SDS), Desalination Journal, 2010.
[40] Moustafa M. Elsayed, Ibrahim S. Taha, Jaffar A. Sabbagh, Design of solar thermal systems,
Scientific publishing center King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, 57-61 (1994).
[41] Agustín M. Delgado-Torres et. al, Solar-powered Rankine cycles for fresh water production,
Desalination 212 (2007) 319–327.
[42] www.dow.com.
[43] Hisham T. El-Dessouky, Hisham M. Ettouney, Fundamental of salt water desalination, Kuwait
University, Elsevier 2002 (book).

144
[44] M.A. Darwish, Hassan K. Abdulrahim, Feed water arrangements in a multi-effect desalting system,
Desalination 228 (2008) 30–54.
[45] M.A. Darwish, Faisal Al-Juwayhel, Hassan K. Abdulraheim, Multi-effect boiling systems from an
energy viewpoint, Desalination 194 (2006) 22–39.
[46] Mark Wilf, Craig Bartels, Optimization of seawater RO systems design, Desalination 173 (2005) 1-
12.
[54-47] M.A. Sharaf et. al, Combined Solar Organic Rankine Cycle with Reverse Osmosis Desalination
Process: Energy, Exergy, and Cost Evaluations, Renewable energy 2010.
[48] Joan Carles Bruno, Jesu´s Lo´pez-Villada, Eduardo Letelier, Modeling and optimization of solar
organic Rankine cycle engines for reverse osmosis desalination, Applied Thermal Engineering 28
(2008) 2212–2226.
[49] Agustín M. Delgado-Torres, Lourdes García-Rodríguez, Preliminary assessment of solar organic
Rankine cycles for driving a desalination system, Desalination 216 (2007) 252–75.
[50] Donghong Wei, Xuesheng Lu, Zhen Lu, Jianming Gu, Performance analysis and optimization of
organic Rankine cycle (ORC) for waste heat recovery, Energy Conversion and Management 48
(2007) 1113–1119.
[51] Pedro J. Mago, Louay M. Chamra, Kalyan Srinivasan, Chandramohan Somayaji, An examination
of regenerative organic Rankine cycles using dry fluids, Received 18 October 2006; accepted 25
June 2007.
[52] Agustín M. Delgado-Torres, Lourdes García-Rodríguez, Vicente J. Romero-Ternero, Preliminary
design of a solar thermal-powered seawater reverse osmosis system, Desalination 216 (2007) 292–
305.
[53] Agustín M. Delgado-Torres, Lourdes García-Rodríguez, Status of solar thermal-driven reverse
osmosis desalination, Desalination 216 (2007) 242–251.
[54] Agustín M. Delgado-Torres, Lourdes García-Rodríguez, Comparison of solar technologies for
driving a desalination system by means of an organic Rankine cycle, Desalination 216 (2007) 276–
291.
[55] Voros N. G, Kiranoudis C. T, Maroulis Z. B, “ Solar energy exploitation for reverse osmosis
desalination plants”, Desalination 115 (1998) 83–101.
[56] Malek A, Hawlader MN, Ho JC. Design and economics of RO seawater desalination. Desalination,
105 (1996) 245–261.
[57] Peter Geisler, Wolfgang Krumm, Thomas Peters, Optimization of the energy demand of reverse
osmosis with a pressure-exchange system, Desalination 125 (1999) 167–172.
[58] Ian B. Cameron, Rodney B. Clemente, SWRO with ERI’s PX Pressure Exchanger device: a global
survey, Desalination 221 (2008) 136–142.
[59] Bernhard M, Zarza E. Advanced MED solar desalination plants: Configurations, costs, future-seven
years of experience at the Plataforma Solar de Almeria (Spain), Desalination 108 (1996) 51-58.
[60] Ophir A, Lokiec F. Advanced MED process for most economical sea water desalination.
Desalination 182 (2005) 187–198.
[61] M. A. Sharaf et. Al. Exergy and thermo-economic analyses of a combined solar organic cycle with
multi effect distillation (MED) desalination process. Desalination 272 (2011) 135–147.
[62] www.therminol.com.
[63] Diego-César Alarcón-Padilla, Lourdes García-Rodríguez. Application of absorption heat pumps to
multi-effect distillation: a case study of solar desalination. Desalination 212 (2007) 294–302.

145
[64] M.A. Sharaf, A.S. Nafey, Lourdes García-Rodríguez. Thermo-economic analysis of solar thermal
power cycles assisted MED-VC (multi effect distillation-vapor compression) desalination processes.
Energy 36 (2011) 2753-2764.
[65] El-Sayed YM. Thermo-economics of some options of large mechanical vapor-compression units.
Desalination, 125 (1999) 251–257.
[66] Hisham T. El-Dessouky, Hisham M. Ettouney, Yousef Al-Roumi, Multi-stage flash desalination:
present and future outlook, Chemical Engineering Journal, 73 (1999) 173-190.
[67] Lourdes Garcia-Rodriguez, Carlos G6mez-Camacho. Conditions for economical benefits of the use
of solar energy in multi-stage flash distillation. Desalination 125 (1999) 133-138.
[68] S.M.A. Mustafa, D.I. Jarrar and H.I. Mansy, Solar Energy, 35 (1985) 333.
[69] M.A. Sharaf et. al, Theoretical and experimental study of a small unit for solar desalination using
flashing process, Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 528–538.
[70] M.A. Sharaf et. al, Enhancement of solar water distillation process by surfactant additives,
Desalination 220 (2008) 514–523.
[71] Nafey AS, Fath H, Mabrouk A. Thermoeconomic design of a multi-effect evaporation mechanical
vapor compression (MEE–MVC) desalination process. Desalination 230 (2008) 1–15.
[72] Najem M, Darwish MA, F.A. Youssef. Thermovapor compression desalters: energy and
availability-Analysis of single- and multi-effect systems. Desalination 110 (1997) 223-238.
[73] P. Gandhidasan, Sultan A. Al-Mojel. Effect of feed pressure on the performance of the photovoltaic
powered reverse osmosis seawater desalination system. Renewable Energy 34 (2009) 2824–2830.

146
 ‫تصممي و مماثةل أنظمة التحلية ابلطاقة الشمس ية‬
‫ملخص الرساةل‬
‫ان الرقام املتعلقة ابملياه العذبة يف العامل تدعو للقلق‪ .‬فهي ال متثل أكرث من ‪ %3‬فقط من مجمل املياه املوجودة يف كوكبنا الريض‪ ،‬كام‬
‫أن ما يزيد عن ‪ %...7‬من هذه النس بة يه عىل هيئة جليد‪ ،‬و حوايل ‪ %8..2‬يه مياه جوفية‪ ،‬والمكية املتبقية بعد ذكل واليت ال‬
‫تتجاوز ‪ %6.7‬يه املسؤوةل عن تلبية احتياجات أكرث من س تة مليارات من البرش يف لك ما يتعلق ابلنشاط الزراع والصناع‬
‫وسائر الاحتياجات اليومية‪ .‬أما عن املياه يف الوطن العريب فبالرمغ من أنه يضم عرش مساحة اليابسة فانه يصنف عىل أنه من املناطق‬
‫الفقرية يف مصادر املياه العذبة‪ ،‬اذ ال حيتوى اال عىل أقل من ‪ %.‬فقط من لك اجلراين السطح للمياه‪ ،‬وحوايل ‪ %8‬من اجاميل‬
‫المطار يف العامل‪.‬‬
‫ان فقر الوطن العريب فامي يتعلق مبصادر املياه انعكس عىل التأمني املايئ للفرد واذلي جيب أن ال يقل عن ألف مرت مكعب س نواي‬
‫وفقا للمعدل العامل ‪ .‬حيث وصل متوسط حصة االنسان العريب يف جل البالد العربية اىل ما يقارب مخسامئة مرت مكعب يف العام‪ ،‬يف‬
‫حني أن أعداد ادلول العربية الواقعة حتت خط الفقر املايئ (أقل من ألف مرت مكعب للفرد س نواي) بلغت حوايل ‪ .1‬دوةل مهنا ‪.1‬‬
‫دوةل تعاين حشا حقيقيا يف املياه اذ ال تكف املياه سد االحتياجات الساس ية ملواطنهيا‪ .‬ومن هنا تنبع أمهية االلتفات اىل قضية املياه‪،‬‬
‫ووضع الس ياسات املتعلقة ابس تخداهما وترش يدها وزايدة مكياهتا‪.‬‬
‫ذلكل تعترب حتلية املياه أحد أمه مصادر احلصول عيل املياه ولكهنا يف ذات الوقت تس هتكل طاقة كبرية‪ .‬وعيل النقيض من مشلكة املياه‪،‬‬
‫فان الوطن العريب و خاصة مرص يقع يف النطاقات العاملية ملعدالت الاشعاع الشميس ان مل يكن أعالها حيث تتسم ظروفها املناخية‬
‫بوفرة الاشعة الشمس ية طوال العام وزايدة معدالهتا عن معدالت الشعة الساقطة عىل ادلول اليت تقع يف نفس دوائر العرض‪ .‬كام أن‬
‫ارتفاع معدالت االشعاع طوال العام مبرص يسمح ابس تخدامه يف ش ىت اجملاالت وابلخص حتويهل لطاقة كهرابئية ميكن لها أن تضع‬
‫مرص يف مصاف ادلول املنتجة واملصدرة للطاقة الكهرابئية‪.‬‬
‫ذلكل‪ ،‬فان اس تخدام الطاقة الشمس ية يف تكنولوجيا حتلية املياه يعترب من الطرق العملية و املس تحدثة واليت ابتت ذات أولوية يف‬
‫الوقت الراهن حلل مشلكة املياه يف ظل االرتفاع املتطرد يف أسعار الطاقه التقليديه بصفة عامه و الوقود الحفوري بصفة خاصه‪.‬‬
‫وذلكل‪ ،‬أُعتربت طرق التحليه ابس تخدام الطاقة الشمس ية من الطرق اليت زاد الهامتم بتطويرها يف العقود الخرية‪ .‬و بصفة عامة‪،‬‬
‫تعترب تقنيات التحلية الشائعة الس تخدام مثل الوميض متعدد املراحل‪ ،‬التقطري متعدد التأثري‪ ،‬ضغط البخار و الضغط المسوزي‬
‫العكيس من التقنيات ذات االنتاجية العالية للمياه احملاله (‪ 060666-.66‬م‪/3‬اليوم)‪.‬‬
‫وحلساب تلكفة املرت املكعب املنتج من الطاقة الشمس يه‪ ،‬تعرض الرساةل برانمج حاسويب متطور مت بناءه لتصممي وحمااكة أنظمة التحلية‬
‫ابلطاقة الشمس ية‪ .‬وبين الربانمج ليساعد مصمم احملطات الشمس ية احلرارية عيل تكوين الرتكيبات اخملتلفة لعمليات التحلية وكذكل‬
‫تنفيذ خمتلف العمليات احلسابية مثل حساابت اتزان الطاقة‪ ،‬االكسرييج و التلكفة االقتصادية من خالل واهجة متكن املس تخدم من‬
‫بناء و تكوين احملطة املطلوبة خاصة احملطات الشمس ية‪ ،‬وكذكل ادخال و اخراج البياانت اخلاصة بطريقة سهةل و ميرسة‪ .‬كام يساعد‬
‫الربانمج أيضا عيل اجراء أية تعديالت يف احملطة الصلية واقرتاح منوذج جديد من شأنه توفري الطاقة والوصول ابحملطة ايل أعيل‬
‫انتاجية و كفاءة ممكنة و بأقل تلكفة‪ .‬وقد مت متثيل و حمااكة مكوانت حمطات التحلية ابلطاقة الشمس ية مثل املبادالت احلرارية‪ ،‬جحرات‬
‫التبخري الفجايئ‪ ،‬اجملمعات الشمس ية‪ ،‬املضخات‪ ،‬املبخرات‪ ،‬الضواغط البخارية‪ ،‬حمطات التناحض العكيس‪ ...،‬أخل‪.‬‬

‫‪147‬‬
‫وقد مت حتويل املكوانت والوحدات ايل بلواكت ‪ BLOCKS‬و ختزيهنا يف مكتبة الربامج حيث يقوم املس تخدم ابنشاء خمتلف الرتكيبات‬
‫ابضغط عيل زر الفأرة ومن مث ادخال البياانت ايل الوحدة املس هتدفة‪ .‬وقد مت اس تخدام الربانمج يف دراسة أداء حمطات التحلية ابلطاقة‬
‫الشمس ية مثل التبخري الومييض‪ ،‬والتبخري متعدد التأثري‪ ،‬والضغط احلراري للبخار‪ ،‬والضغط املياكنييك للبخار‪ ،‬والتناحض العكيس‪.‬‬
‫وأيضا مت دراسة وحتليل عدد كبري من املوائع العضوية واليت تس تخدم يف حمطات الطاقة الشمس ية مع اماكنية تغيري التقنية املس تخدمة‬
‫مثل التوليد املبارش والتوليد الغري املبارش‪ .‬كام عرضت الرساةل كيفية اداء ومعل الربانمج وطريقة تشغيهل مع بيان بعض النتاجئ اكجراء‬
‫مثايل‪.‬‬
‫وقد تناولت الرساةل عدة اقرتاحات لتحسني الداء وخفض التلكفة‪ .‬واكن من أمه القرتاحات اختيار الطولوين يف تشغيل احملطات اليت‬
‫تعمل طبقا دلورة الرانكني ابس تخدام الطاقة الشمس ية‪ .‬كام مت اختيار واعامتد تقنية التناحض العكيس ابس تخدام املبادل الضغط و‬
‫اعامتد التبخري احلراري املتوازي كحل بديل عن التبخري الضغط مع اماكنية زايدة الوحدات ايل ‪ .7‬وحدة‪ .‬و بصفة عامة‪ ،‬وجد أن‬
‫حمطات التناحض العكيس يه النسب من انحية توفري الطاقة و اماكنية التشغيل مع الطاقة الشمس ية عيل الرمغ من أن النتاجيه‬
‫متوسطة (‪ .6666-.66‬مرت مكعب يوميا) مقارنة بتكنولوجيا التبخريالومييض متعدد املراحل‪ .‬وعيل الرمغ من أن التبخري الومييض‬
‫املتعدد املراحل يعط أعيل انتاجية اال أنه يس هتكل طاقة حراريه كبرية وابلتايل يس هتكل مساحــة أكرب ملوقع التشغيل الشميس‪ .‬وقد‬
‫بينت النتاجئ اخنفاض تلكفة املرت املكعب يف تقنية التناحض العكيس عهنا يف ابيق التقنيات مع وجود اماكنية يف اخنفاض مساحة‬
‫التشغيل وهــو المر املس هتدف خاصة يف تكنولوجيا الطاقة الشمس ية‪.‬‬

‫‪148‬‬
 ‫صفحة الموافقــــة‬

‫تصميم و مماثلة أنظمة التحلية بالطاقة الشمسية‬

‫رسالـــة مقدمـــة من‬

‫محمــد عبد الوهـــاب شرف الديـــن‬
‫ماجستير الهندسة الميكانيكية‪-‬جامعة قناة السويس‪7002-‬‬

‫للحصول علي درجة دكتوراه‬

‫في‬
‫الفلسفه في هندسة الطاقـــة‬

‫تمت الموافقة من لجنة الحكم و المناقشــة‬

‫‪ .‬أ‪.‬د‪ .‬منصور عوض محمد‬

‫أس تاذ بقسم الطاقة الشمس ية املركز القويم للبحوث القاهرة‬
‫‪ 8‬أ‪.‬د‪ .‬محمد رضا عبد القادر‬
‫أس تاذ بقسم القوي املياكنيكية لكية الهندسة جامعة بورسعيد‬
‫‪ 3‬أ‪.‬د‪ .‬محمد عبد الفتاح الزيك‬
‫أس تاذ بقسم هندسة الفلزات لكية البرتول و التعدين ابلسويس جامعة قناة السويس‬
‫‪ 1‬د‪ .‬س يد عامثن احللييب‬
‫أس تاذ مساعد و رئيس قسم العلوم الهندس ية لكية البرتول و التعدين ابلسويس جامعة قناة السويس‬

‫‪149‬‬
 ‫لجنـــة اإلشراف‬

‫تصميم و مماثلة أنظمة التحلية بالطاقة الشمسية‬

‫رسالـــة مقدمـــة من‬

‫محمــد عبد الوهـــاب شرف الديـــن‬

‫ماجستير الهندسة الميكانيكية‪-‬جامعة قناة السويس‪7002-‬‬

‫للحصول علي درجة دكتوراه‬

‫في‬
‫الفلسفه في هندسة الطاقـــة‬

‫تحت إشراف‬

‫أ‪.‬د‪ .‬محمد عبد الفتاح الزكــ‬ ‫‪.‬‬

‫أس تاذ بقسم هندســة الفلزات واملواد‪-‬لكية هندسة البرتول والتعدين‪-‬جامعــة قناة السويس‬

‫د‪ .‬س يد عامثن احللييب‬ ‫‪8‬‬

‫أس تاذ مساعد و رئيس قسم العلوم الهندس ية‪ -‬لكية البرتول و التعدين ابلسويس‪ -‬جامعة قناة السويس‬

‫د‪ .‬لورديس جارس يا رودرجيزي‬ ‫‪3‬‬

‫أس تاذ مساعد بقسم هندسة الطاقة‪-‬جامعة س يفيليا‪-‬أس بانيا‬

‫‪150‬‬
 ‫جامعــة قناة السويس‬
‫كليـــة هندســـة البترول والتعدين‪-‬السويس‬
‫قســـم العلوم الهندســـية‬

‫تصميم ومماثلة أنظمـــة التحليـــه بالطاقــــه الشمسيـــه‬

‫رسالة مقدمة من‬

‫محمد عبد الوهاب شرف الدين‬

‫مدرس مساعد‪-‬قسم العلوم الهندسيــه‪-‬كلية هندسة البترول والتعدين‬
‫ماجستيرالهندسة الميكانيكية‪-‬جامعة قناة السويس‪7002-‬‬

‫للحصول علي درجة‬

‫دكتوراه الفلسفه في هندســـة الطاقــه‬

‫من‬
‫قسم العلوم الهندسيه‪-‬كلية هندسة البترول والتعدين‬
‫جامعة قناة السويس‬

‫‪7022‬‬

‫‪151‬‬

‫‪View publication stats‬‬