Applied Thermal Engineering Vol. 16, No. 7, pp.

591MC4, 1996
Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
1359_4311(95)ooo41-0 1359-4311/96 $15.00 + 0.00

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF A
GENERATOR-ABSORBER HEAT-EXCHANGE HEAT PUMP

Srinivas Garimella,*t Richard N. Christensen1 and Daryl Lacy$

TDepartment of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, Western Michigan University,
Kalamazoo, MI 49008-5065, USA; and IMechanical Engineering Department, The Ohio State
University, 206 W. Eighteenth Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA

(Received in final form 22 September 1995)

Abstract-A generator-absorber heat-exchange (GAX) heat pump was modeled in this study using
OSU-ABSIM, a modular steady-state simulation program. While the thermodynamics of GAX cycles
have been investigated in the past, a comprehensive implementation-related performance evaluation of
this cycle is not available. Therefore, in the present study, the complete absorption system was analyzed
for the heating and cooling modes, including air-to-hydronic heat exchangers and a natural gas-fired
generator. Several significant variables that affect cycle performance were systematically investigated. The
effect of ambient temperature on system COP was determined for the cooling and heating modes. The
system cooling COP at the rating point was maximized by varying the heat-exchanger UA values. The
decrease in GAX overlap at low ambients, and the corresponding transformation to the absorber
heat-exchange cycle was also modeled; and the implications on system COP were investigated.
Furthermore, the role of an additional solution-solution heat exchanger at the low ambients in enhancing
COP was quantified. The results of this study can be used to determine the merits of this cycle versus
other absorption heat-pump alternatives. The comprehensive investigation of performance (including
off-design conditions) allows the evaluation of year-round performance, which can be used in conjunction
with climate data to establish the applicability to different geographic locations. Copyright 0 1996
Elsevier Science Ltd

Keywords-Heat pump; GAX system; heating and coding; simulation; cycle comparisons

INTRODUCTION

The generator-absorber heat-exchange (GAX) cycle was first introduced by Altenkirch in 1913 [l].
Several investigations of this cycle have been reported in the literature [2, 31. These investigators
have primarily focused on the ideal thermodynamic performance typically at standard rating
conditions. A substantial amount of additional information is required before decisions regarding
implementation of this cycle in an actual commercially operating system can be made. For example,
the payback of retrofitting existing space-conditioning systems with a GAX absorption system
depends not only on the performance at the rating point, but also the respective coefficients of
performance (COP) through the range of ambient temperatures in which the system is expected
to operate. The performance of such a system also depends substantially on the heat exchangers
that comprise the heat-pump system-larger heat exchangers typically reduce fluid stream
temperature differences, thereby improving system COPS. This COP increase is reflected in reduced
operating costs, at the expense of larger system first costs. Moreover, increases in overall
heat-transfer conductances (UAs) of different heat exchangers affect system COPS to different
extents. Thus, a judicious choice of a set of heat exchangers in a GAX heat pump requires that
the system performance be investigated for different combinations of heat-exchanger sizes. Similar
optimization/performance maximization studies also need to be performed to determine the
appropriate values of solution, hydronic and air flow rates. Another aspect of GAX heat-pump
performance that is not well documented is the effect of including a realistic gas burner in the
modeling of the system. Prior studies have typically modeled systems simply by coupling the high
temperature desorber in the system to a condensing steam line or an electrical heat input. These
approaches do not provide any information on the degradation of the system COP due to the
flue losses associated with the use of a gas-fired desorber. Furthermore, the adiabatic flame

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

591
592 S. Garimella et al.

temperature of the burner and the exit temperature of the flue gases directly affect the working
fluid temperatures that are feasible in the desorber. Substituting a constant steam condensation
temperature for this flue gas stream results in erroneous desorber working conditions.
The above-mentioned system implementation-related issues prompted the present study, in
which the ammonia-water GAX system is modeled as a function of heat-exchanger sizes, ambient
temperatures in the cooling and heating modes, and fluid flow rates, while accounting for realistic
flue losses.

CYCLE DESCRIPTION

The specific configuration of the cycle modeled in the present study is shown schematically in
Fig. 1. In this figure, the numbers at the inlets and outlets of the components refer to
thermodynamic state points, while the numbers enclosed in parentheses refer to components. The
cycle schematics are explained here for the cooling (summer) mode. Where appropriate, the
corresponding changes in the flow circuits for the heating (winter) mode are also explained.
Concentrated ammonia solution enters the gas-fired desorber (3) at state point 37. In this
component, gas burner input is supplied at 8 and the flue gases exit the desorber at state point
9. This heat input results in the desorbed vapor stream 12 and the dilute solution 36. This dilute
solution stream is hot enough to recuperatively desorb ammonia in the generator heat-exchanger
(solution-heated desorber) (2). Thus, the dilute solution 36 is cooled to state point 6 in component
(2). This component, modeled as an analyzer in this study, generates additional ammonia from the
solution entering at 3.5, while analyzing the water fraction from the incoming ammonia vapor 12.
The analyzed ammonia vapor exits this desorber at 43.
The cooled dilute solution 6 flows to the GAX absorber (5). The heat of absorption in this
component is used to generate the ammonia vapor stream 40 in the GAX desorber (14). In Fig. 1,
the GAX absorber and desorber are shown coupled by a hydronic stream 4-5. This coupling is
for simplification in modeling. The actual design could either utilize such a hydronic coupling loop
or incorporate direct heat transfer between the absorptiondesorption processes through a
heat-exchanger wall. The ammonia generated in (14) is mixed with the ammonia stream 43
(generated in the solution-heated desorber (2)) in the mixer (15). Similarly, the ammonia-water
solution 39 exiting the GAX desorber (14) is mixed with the solution stream 44 in the mixer (17)
to yield solution stream 35. In the GAX absorber (5) the absorption of vapor stream 32 into the
dilute solution stream results in solution 3 1, which flows to the solution-cooled absorber (absorber
heat exchange) (11). Further absorption of the vapor stream 26 into 31 occurs in this component,
which uses the cold ammonia-water solution 33 as the heat sink. This solution is heated to state
point 34 as it flows through (11).
A splitter (16) is located between the solution-cooled absorber and the GAX desorber. This
splitter sends a controlled flow rate of solution through the GAX desorber. This modification to
the commonly modeled GAX absorption cycle is introduced to enable better potential matching
of the GAX absorption and desorption heat duties as the ambient temperature changes. Also, the
solution stream 6 entering (5) is the most dilute in the entire cycle, while the solution stream 34
flowing toward the GAX desorber is the most concentrated stream in the cycle. This implies that
the mass flow rates of these streams differ in magnitude by the flow rate of the ammonia refrigerant
in the cycle. This mismatch in flow rates could result in non-ideal heat exchange because for a given
heat duty, the respective ATs in these two streams differ in proportion to the flow rate ratios. By
splitting the solution stream 34 into two flows 41 and 42, only an appropriate fraction of the flow
can be sent through the GAX desorber, thus yielding approximately equal stream ATs, which
results in optimal heat exchange. The fraction 42 that bypasses this desorber flows to the adiabatic
analyzer, discussed later in this section.
The final absorption of the ammonia vapor 30 to result in the concentrated solution 33 occurs
in the hydronically cooled absorber (12). Here, refrigerant 30 from the condensate precooler (10)
is absorbed into the solution stream 19 exiting the solution-cooled absorber. The heat of absorption
is rejected into the hydronic fluid stream 7-18. In the cooling mode, this heat duty is rejected to
the ambient stream 47-24 in the outdoor hydronic-air heat exchanger (19).
The ammonia-water vapor stream 17 generated by the desorber column flows to the adiabatic
analyzer (13). Here, the GAX desorber bypass stream 42 is used to analyze a portion of the water
 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 593

fraction from the vapor. The reflux from the analyzer 44 is combined with the solution from the
GAX desorber 39 and flows to the solution-heated desorber (2). The partially purified vapor stream
23 flows to the air-cooled rectifier (7). Any reflux 22 from the rectification process flows back to
the analyzer, The heat of rectification raises the air temperature from state point 14 to 25. The
nominally pure ammonia vapor 10 flows to the condenser (4). This condenser is also air-cooled.
Ambient air enters the condenser at state point 13 and gets heated by the reject heat to point 14,
which is also the inlet to the rectifier.

[8] MIXER 42

‘I-’
OUTDOOR
REFG-HYD HX 36 - f

[l] 28 PI
MIXER

EVAPORATOR

27
L

XXX 36
41
li L
,t
32 31
SOLUTION 1 _ 34 I’61 _ 42

SPLITTER

2 46
INDOOR
HYD-AIR HX
26 19
1,
!

47
30
HYD-AIR HX

Fig. 1. Generator-absorber heat-exchange cycle schematic (cooling mode).

594 S. Garimella et al.

The condensate 15 at the outlet of the condenser is a high-temperature, high-enthalpy liquid,

which would result in significant flashing if directly expanded to the evaporator pressure. Therefore,
a condensate pre-cooler (10) is introduced between the condenser and the expansion valve (6). This
heat exchanger cools the condensate stream 15-29 using the evaporator outlet vapor stream 3-30.
The condensate stream exiting the pre-cooler flows through the expansion valve (with a reduced
degree of flashing) and enters the evaporator (1) as a two-phase mixture 20. The evaporator is
actually modeled in this study as a desorber. This approach ensures that the change in saturation
temperature of the refrigerant due to the residual water fraction is simulated accurately. Thus a
vapor stream 28 and a low flow rate liquid stream 27 are generated in this desorber. At the outlet
of the desorber, these two streams are mixed in the mixer (9) to yield an ammonia-water stream
3 that is nominally > 99.5% NH3, and also > 95.0% vapor. This vapor stream is recuperatively
heated in the condensate pre-cooler to state 30 and then flows to the hydronically coupled absorber
(12). Evaporation in (1) cools the indoor hydronic stream from state point 1 to state point 2. The
indoor hydronic fluid stream is coupled to the indoor air coil (18), where the indoor air stream
is cooled from state 45 to state 46.
The cycle configuration described above can be referred to as a semi-hydronic heat-pump system.
All components carrying ammonia-water are located outdoors. In the summer (cooling mode), the
outdoor refrigerant-hydronic heat exchanger (1) functions as the evaporator and delivers the
cooling duty to the hydronic fluid, which, in turn, achieves indoor cooling through the indoor
hydronic-air heat exchanger (18). In the heating mode, however, it was decided that the outdoor
evaporation load would use a direct refrigerant-air coupling. Thus, the intermediate outdoor
hydronic loop is eliminated. This choice reduces the parasitic losses due to the pumping of the
highly viscous hydronic fluid at the cold ambient temperatures. Also, it eliminates the extra AT
required between the air and the refrigerant due to the intermediate hydronic loop. The
refrigerant-air heat exchange is thus carried out in the outdoor hydronic-air heat exchanger in the
heating mode, as shown in Fig. 2. (The outdoor hydronic-air heat exchanger is idle in the heating
mode.)
Heat rejection to the ambient in the cooling mode is achieved through a combination of
hydronic-air and refrigerant-air heat exchangers. Thus, the absorber (12) load is coupled to a
hydronic stream, which then transfers heat to the ambient through the outdoor hydronic-air heat
exchanger (19). (This heat exchanger is idle in the heating mode as discussed above.) The condenser
load is directly transferred to the outdoor air stream through the outdoor refrigerant-air heat
exchanger (4). (This heat exchanger functions as the evaporator in the heating mode as discussed
above.) In the heating mode, because hydronic fluid viscosity is not a significant issue for the
high-temperature components, namely the condenser, absorber and rectifier, these respective loads
are rejected through one series hydronic loop to the indoor hydronic-air heat exchanger. Thus,
the return hydronic fluid first gets heated by the absorber load, then the condenser load, and finally
the rectifier load. This total heating load is used to heat the indoor air stream from state point
25 to 18 (Fig. 2).
It can be seen from this discussion that the absorber is always hydronically coupled in both
modes. The condenser is hydronically coupled in the heating mode and air-coupled in cooling
mode. The evaporator is hydronically coupled in cooling mode and air-coupled in the heating
mode. This semi-hydronic configuration with partial component function switching and partial
hydronic fluid switching is believed to be the optimal arrangement from a system performance and
parasitic power reduction point of view.

CYCLE MODELING APPROACH

The thermodynamic performance of the GAX heat-pump system described above was modeled
using OSU-ABSIM, a steady-state, modular absorption system simulation program. This program
is based on ABSIM developed by Grossman et al. [4]. It offers a modular approach to cycle
analysis, where the components, fluid flow schemes and connections between these components are
specified according to the cycle schematics to compute cycle COP, delivered heat duty, and
delivered air temperature. In addition to these system performance measures, operating conditions
for each component are also computed. These component inlet and outlet conditions can be used
 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 595

t
RECTIFIER

13 CONDENSEF
OUTCOOR 23 221
REFG-HYD HX

15 *I 30

REFG. HX

PI

2u
I,

111 -28 PI
MIXER
1

EVAPORATOR

OUTDOOR 27
REFG-AIR HX

19
HYD. COOLED

25

Fig. 2. Generator-absorber heat-exchange cycle schematic (heating mode).

for detailed component thermal designs. OSU-ABSIM contains several enhancements over the
version developed by Grossman et al. For example, several additional primary and secondary fluid
property routines, flue gas properties and a burner module (which enable the calculation of actual
gas input-based COPS and the interaction between burner heat transfer and COP), were added.
Psychrometric properties of moist air were also added, which allows accurate modeling of
dehumidification in indoor/outdoor coils. These enhancements are further documented in
McGahey and Christensen [5] and McGahey et al. [6], and enable the simulation of any absorption
596 S. Garimella et al.

cycle from the outdoor ambient temperature to the indoor delivered air temperature in the heating
and cooling modes, with proper accounting of the burner combustion efficiencies.

SYSTEM PERFORMANCE MODELING RESULTS

The modeling of the GAX cycle using OSU-ABSIM requires initial input guesses for the sizes
(UAs) and the corresponding state points for all the components at the nominal operating
conditions. The achievement of a consistent and robust set of component inlet and outlet
conditions, (p, T, x, m, and quality) around the cycle requires a judicious choice of
thermodynamically allowable initial values. This was done with the aid of approximate hand
calculations and Duhring diagrams. Also, heat-exchanger UAs, approach temperatures, or
effectivenesses that are practically feasible and reasonable were specified using information on
similar absorption systems and component heat and mass transfer models and test data.
The converged closed-loop-cycle model at the design conditions was the starting point for
performance mapping with respect to ambient conditions. Performance simulation was conducted
over the range of ambients for which the system is required to be operable. The simulations were
conducted in both the heating and the cooling mode, with due consideration to the changes in flow
loops and/or heat-exchanger functions required for mode switching, as described above. It should
be noted that in the discussion that follows, the solution concentration at the outlet of the gas-fired
desorber was maintained at a constant value throughout the ambient range. The specific value
chosen was based on maintaining the solution temperature below 400°F. This control strategy
allows for the highest possible temperature lifts, while keeping the solution temperature low enough
to minimize elevated temperature corrosion of the desorber. To achieve this control objective, the
solution flow rate through the system is allowed to vary as the outdoor conditions change.

Cooling-mode performance results

The variation of the base-case system in the cooling mode is shown in Fig. 3. Here, the actual
gas input based COP (which accounts for the flue losses, i.e. burner efficiency) is plotted as a
function of ambient temperature. As expected, the COP varies from a maximum of 0.865 at 65°F
to 0.796 at lOYF, with a nominal value of 0.841 at the 95°F rating point. The component sizes
were chosen to result in a cooling capacity of five refrigerant tons (60,000 Btu/hr) at an ambient
temperature of 95°F. An additional goal of this study was to develop a system that would result
in the highest possible cooling mode COP (using reasonable heat-exchanger sizes). Therefore, after
the base-case system was analyzed over the expected cooling mode ambient range, the UA of each
component was varied over a wide range. Also, the respective flow rates of the hydronic fluid, air
flow rates, etc., were varied and the effect on COP documented. The base-case and the
maximized-COP-case system configurations are summarized in Table 1. Two sample cases of these
parametric studies are shown in Figs 4 and 5. In Fig. 4, the system COP is plotted as a function

I
3
(3 0.8 :

0.75
60 70 80 90 100 110
!
120
Ambient Temperature, F

??
After Maximization e Before Maximization 1

Fig. 3. Cooling-mode COP variation with ambient temperature.

 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 597

Table I. Cycle configuration-baseline and maximized COP cases (component

designations based on cooling mode)
Baseline UA Maximized COP
Component (Btu/min”F) UA (Btu/min”F)
Gas-fired desorber 0.90 1.40
Solution-heated desorber 8.30 8.60
GAX desorber-absorber 32.0/32.0 30.0/30.0
Hydronically cooled absorber 21.5 40.0
Solution-cooled absorber 27.5 21.5
Hydronically coupled condenser 65.0 98.0
Hydronically coupled evaporator 150 150
Rectifier 4.50 3.50
Refrigerant recuperative heat exchanger 6.50 6.50
Indoor coil IO8 150
Outdoor coil 90.0 100

of condenser UA. The dependence exhibited in this figure is typical of performance variation with
respect to most other heat exchangers in the system. It can be seen that as the heat-exchanger size
increases, the initial increase in system COP is high. However, as the size is further increased, and
the heat-exchanger effectiveness asymptotically approaches 1.O, further increases in heat-exchanger
size are not significantly beneficial to the system. Essentially, the temperature differences between
the fluids exchanging heat become vanishingly small, thus warranting no further increase in
heat-exchanger size. Similar graphs were plotted for all components in the cycle. The UA value
at which the slope of the curve changes from a steep positive value to a relatively flat dependence
was chosen as the most appropriate size. This choice would ensure that the maximum heat duty
that can be reasonably transferred is achieved without excessive heat-exchanger sizes. While this
is not a strictly quantifiable approach to heat-exchanger size selection, it has been used in previous
studies [5-71 to maximize system performance with reasonable heat-exchanger first costs. The base

a 0.88 -

8
D
$ 0.88 -
m”
5
a 0.84
5
B
a 0.82

0.8 i
0 100 200 300 400
Condenser UA, BTU/min F
Fig. 4. Effect of condenser size on system cooling-mode COP.

8
o.88
/
0.88 - 4
$ 0.84 -
aI
2
m 0.82 -
S
E 0.8
2
0.78
o t
0.78 /
0 2 4 6 8 10
Thousands
indoor Air Flow, cfm
Fig. 5. Effect of indoor coil air flow on system cooling-mode COP.
598 S. Garimella et al.

0.95

$ 0.9 L
3
s
e 0.85 /

/
0.75 ’
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Bypass Fraction at Splitter

eCOP@95F ECOP@~OF aCOP@ilOF

Fig. 6. Effect of GAX desorber bypass fraction on system cooling-mode COP.

case and the finally selected value for condenser size using this procedure are shown in Fig. 4. A
similar graph is plotted in Fig. 5 for the determination of indoor air coil flow rate. It can be seen
that the initially chosen value for the air flow rate (2250 cfm) was very close to the final selection
(2600 cfm) based on the parametric analysis.
In addition to the determination of the appropriate heat-exchanger sizes and stream flow rates
for maximum COP, the role of the splitter at the GAX desorber inlet (discussed above) was also
investigated. Figure 6 shows the variation of system COP as a function of the bypass fraction at
the splitter for three different ambient conditions. It can be seen that the dependence on this bypass
fraction is essentially similar at the three ambients that cover the expected range of operation.
Furthermore, as the bypass fraction is increased, the COP decreases. However, this decrease is not
very large over the entire range of flow fractions. For example, at 95”F, the COP changes only
by 9% as the bypass fraction is changed from 0.1 to 0.75. This dependence indicates that the choice
of the most suitable bypass flow should be made primarily based on the design requirements of
the adiabatic analyzer, rather than based on the potential heat duty matching between the GAX
absorber and desorber. It appears from these curves that the lowest physically feasible value of
bypass should be selected. Such a choice would not lead to a significant decrease in COP, while
ensuring that a sufficient solution flow rate is supplied to the adiabatic analyzer to effect adequate
mass transfer and adequately strip the water fraction from the vapor upstream of the rectifier. The
actual value of the bypass fraction will depend on the detailed design of the analyzer geometry,
which is beyond the scope of this study.
It was mentioned at the beginning of this discussion that one of the major objectives of this study
was to maximize cooling mode COP at 95°F. Figure 3, discussed above, shows the variation of
COP for the base case, as well as for the cycle configuration with the optimized heat exchangers.
This configuration includes the sizes of all components determined by using the above-mentioned
maximization procedure. It could be argued that the overall combination of heat-exchanger sizes
determined from the respective individual parametric analyses might not necessarily represent the
best combination as a system. To determine a truly optimized set of heat exchangers would require
a scheme that conducts optimization on an n-dimensional objective function surface (where n = the
number of independent variables which include component UAs and pertinent flow rates). Such
a study is not warranted at this stage, because it is not clear that the performance of each heat
exchanger can be adequately represented as a single UA value, as is done here to specify the
components in the simulation program. For example, a change in the UA of a given heat exchanger
would result in changes in stream flow rates, concentrations and temperatures around the entire
cycle with the consequent effect on fluid transport properties and non-dimensional flow parameters.
These changes would, in turn, affect the heat and mass transfer coefficients that are required for
accurate determination of the UA. Because this simulation technique does not account for changes
 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 599

in transport phenomena or heat-transfer coefficients, the potential errors in using the current
performance-maximization procedure are expected to be lower than the errors introduced by
representing the heat exchangers by a single UA value. The final configuration of heat-exchanger
sizes was validated by perturbing the individually maximized heat-exchanger sizes around the
finally selected values. It was found that no significant increases in system COP resulted with further
changes in component sizes. The performance of this system is also shown in Fig. 3.

Heating-mode performance results

The heating-mode performance of this GAX cycle was modeled by making changes in the flow
loops and component couplings, as shown in Fig. 2 and discussed in a previous section. The results
are discussed here under the following sub-categories:
?? GAX heating mode at relatively warm winter ambients;
?? LHX heating mode at cold winter ambients.
The GAX heating mode is discussed first, followed by an explanation of the changes in the flow
circuits for the LHX mode and the corresponding system performance.

GAX heating-mode results

The variation of heating-mode COP for the GAX cycle with ambient temperature and GAX
desorber bypass fraction is shown in Fig. 7. As expected, the COP decreases as the ambient
temperature is changed from 62 to 22°F. However, it is interesting to note that the COP at a
relatively low ambient of 22°F stays as high as 1.40. This implies that the system is able to draw
a significant heat duty from the outdoor air, even at these low temperatures. The small decrease
in system COP at low ambients can be understood from Figs 8 and 9. Figure 8 shows that over
the entire range of ambients from 62 to 22”F, the system high and low pressures remain relatively
constant. Figure 9 shows results for the GAX and LHX modes. The results for the GAX mode
are discussed here. LHX mode results will be discussed in the next sub-section. In the ambient range
covered, Fig. 9 shows that the refrigerant heat duties, i.e. the condenser and evaporator heat duties,
remain relatively constant. (The rectifier duty is shown to be constant through the ambient range
in this graph, demonstrating that the water fraction in the refrigerant vapor is approximately
constant.) In fact, the evaporator duty is almost equal to the condenser duty in this range, which
implies that the entire refrigerant flow rate generated in the desorbers and condensed in the
condenser is evaporated, thereby withdrawing heat from the ambient. Only at temperatures below

1.30
I I I I I I I
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.9

GAX Desottmr Bypass Flow Fraction

Fig. 7. GAX heating-mode COP as a function of GAX desorber bypass fraction and ambient temperature.
600 S. Garimella et al.

30 40 50 60 70
Ambient Temperature, F

R High Pressure 8 Low Pressure

Fig. 8. GAX heating-mode system pressures as a function of ambient temperature.

32°F does there appear a mismatch between condenser and evaporator duties. At this stage,
the refrigerant quality at the evaporator outlet is less than 100%. This departure from
complete evaporation reduces the heat duty withdrawn from the ambient, thus lowering the system
COP.
The other dependence depicted in Fig. 7 is the effect of the bypass fraction flow rate. At the
relatively higher ambients, the COP decreases at the higher bypass flow rates. Essentially, as the
bypass flow is increased, heat transfer in the GAX absorber-desorber decreases. This dependence
is similar to the results in the cooling mode (Fig. 6). Therefore, the lowest bypass flow that still
allows for adequate water-fraction removal in the adiabatic analyzer should be chosen. Figure 7
also shows that system COP is relatively independent of the bypass flow fraction at the lower
ambients. This can be explained by considering that as the ambient temperature decreases, the
GAX overlap decreases, thus decreasing the GAX component heat duty. This phenomenon is
demonstrated in the GAX heat-duty graph in Fig. 9. GAX absorberdesorber inlet and exit
temperatures are plotted in Fig. 10 to explain the decrease in overlap further. The system schematic
diagram (Fig. 2) showed that the GAX absorber and desorber are coupled using a hydronic loop.
Thus, heat transfer has to occur from the absorber to the hydronic fluid, and then from this

800
.c
E
3
I- 600
al

g
0 400

01
I !
-25 -15 -5 5 15 25 35 45 55 65
Ambient Temperature, F

e QGAXILHX a Qevap
E Qcond 0 Qrect I
Fig. 9. Refrigerant duties in the GAX/LHX heating modes.
 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 601

265
260
LL
- 255
I
2 250
5 245
E24CI
g 235
_a

20 30 40 50 60 70
Ambient Temperature, F

8 Desorb In e Desorb Out ??

Absorb In
a Absorb Out a Abs Hyd In x Abs Hyd Out

Fig. 10. Heating mode GAX absorber/desorber approach temperatures as a function of ambient
temperature.

hydronic fluid to the desorber. Figure 10 shows that the overall temperature difference (between
the absorber inlet and the desorber outlet) available for these respective heat-transfer phenomena
decreases from about 36°F at an ambient of 62°F to a AT of 22°F at the ambient temperature of
22°F. This decrease in the available temperature difference leads to the lower GAX duties at the
low ambients. Furthermore, it can be seen that at the low ambient of 22”F, the temperature
difference between the absorber solution outlet and the corresponding hydronic fluid is only 3.5”F
at the ambient temperature of 22°F. Also, the AT between the desorber outlet solution and the
corresponding hydronic fluid is only 2°F at this low ambient. These curves clearly demonstrate that
the GAX heat-exchange process cannot be continued below ambients of about 22”F, due to the
extremely close temperature pinches. Referring to Fig. 7, the implication of this phenomenon is
that the GAX heat-exchange process becomes less important in determining overall cycle COP.
The little heat transfer that can take place with the small approach temperature differences can
be accomplished by even a small flow rate of solution though the desorber. Therefore, variations
in this small heat duty as a function of bypass flow rate are relatively insignificant, which results
in the constant COP curves versus bypass flow in Fig. 7.

LHX heating-mode results

As discussed above, at low ambient temperatures, the degree of recuperative heat exchange
between the GAX absorber and desorber diminishes to the extent that these components effectively
shut down. At this point, the cycle is modified to represent an absorber heat-exchange cycle.
Therefore, in this modified cycle, desorption is accomplished in the gas-fired desorber and the
solution-heated desorber. Absorption occurs in the hydronically cooled absorber and the
solution-cooled absorber. While the GAX components are eliminated, one additional component,
the liquid heat exchanger, is added, as shown in Fig. 11. This component functions as the
recuperative solution heat exchanger that is commonly used in single-effect and double-effect cycles.
High-pressure solution exiting the solution-heated desorber still has a small potential for
transferring heat to the low-pressure solution exiting the solution-cooled desorber. This heat
transfer is realized in the liquid heat exchanger, hence the name liquid heat-exchange (LHX) cycle.
It should be noted that in this cycle, heat is transferred from the desorber column to the absorber
column, which is opposite to the direction of GAX heat exchange. The COP enhancement that
results from the use of this component depends on the degree of recuperation that occurs in this
component.
The COP of this cycle decreases with decreasing ambients, as shown in Fig. 12. It is worth noting,
however, that the gas input based COP of the system remains above 1.0, even at ambient
temperatures as low as -22°F. Thus, this cycle delivers performance higher than a gas furnace,
even at these low ambients. (Of course, the delivered heat duty might not match the high heating
602 S. Garimella et al.

TO/FROM
ANALYZER

DESORB

i’ll- LIQUID

r-a-
HEAT
GAS-FIRED EXCHANGER
DESORB

TO
ANALYZER

.
TO
SOLUTlON
COOLED
ABSORB

FROM SPLITTER
SOLUTION
COOLED .
ABSORB

NOTE: GAX ABSORBEWDESORBER SHUT DOWN

Fig. 11. Cycle modification for the winter cold ambient LHX mode.

loads, which would necessitate supplemental heating or increased burner firing rates.) The other
phenomenon that can be observed in Fig. 12 is that the COP decreases much more drastically with
decreasing ambients in the LHX mode than in the GAX mode. This is illustrated in Fig. 13, which
shows the steeper slopes of the high and low system pressure curves in this mode as compared to
the GAX mode pressure curves shown in Fig. 8. Figure 9, which shows the refrigerant duties as
a function of ambient, also explains this phenomenon. It was discussed earlier that the condenser
and evaporator duties are almost equal down to ambients of 32°F.

1.6

1.5 250

8 1.4
0

P
m 1.3
5
P
3 1.2

1.1

1.o

Ambient Temperature, OF

Fig. 12. Heating-mode GAX/LHX COPS as a function of ambient temperature.

 Performance of generator-absorber heat pump 603

300

._ 250
B ;
I 200 t
5
2
p! 150
a
E 100
v
cS 50

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Ambient Temperature, F

??
High Pressure e Low Pressure

Fig. 13. LHX-mode system pressures as a function of ambient temperature.

However, especially in the LHX mode, Fig. 9 shows that the evaporator duty decreases sharply
at low ambients. This sharp decrease reflects the decreasing quality of the refrigerant at the
evaporator outlet. Due to this incomplete evaporation, the heat duty entering the cycle from the
ambient is lower, which results in the lower COP.
It was mentioned above that the COP improvement due to the use of the liquid heat exchanger
depends on the recuperative duty in this heat exchanger. Figure 12 shows that the LHX duty
increases as the ambient temperature decreases. This is in direct contrast to the decreasing heat
duty at low ambients that is seen in the GAX mode. The increased recuperation at low ambients
in the LHX mode is instrumental in keeping COPS above 1.0, even at -22°F. This increased
recuperation can be explained on the basis of the variation of inlet solution temperature differences,
which is plotted in Fig. 14. For this counterflow heat exchanger, at an ambient temperature of 20”F,
the AT between the dilute solution inlet and the concentrated solution outlet is only about 2°F.
Similarly, the approach AT between the dilute solution outlet and the concentration inlet is only
about 1°F at the 20°F ambient. These extremely small ATs illustrate why the liquid heat exchanger
is only marginally effective in improving COP at the relatively high ambient temperatures.
However, these same ATs increase to about 17°F when the ambient temperature decreases to
-22°F. The higher ATs result in higher heat transfer, which justifies the utility of this heat
exchanger at the cold ambient temperatures. The consolidated performance of the GAX/LHX
cycles in the winter mode is summarized in Fig. 12.

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Ambient Temperature, F

??LHX Dil. Soln. In fir LHX Dil. Soln. Out

8 LHX Cont. Soln. In e LHX Cont. Soln. Out

Fig. 14. LHX approach temperatures as a function of ambient temperature.

604 S. Garimella et al.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive evaluation of an ammonia-water generator absorber heat-exchange cycle was

conducted in this study for the heating and cooling modes. In addition to analyzing cycle
thermodynamics at standard rating points, this study also investigated several implementation-re-
lated issues and the variation of cycle performance over a wide range of ambient temperatures.
An approach to the design of appropriately sized components to maximize system COP was also
described. This approach was used to select a cycle configuration that would maximize cooling
mode COP at a 95°F ambient, without excessively large heat exchangers. The study also focused
on explaining performance variation in the heating mode down to ambients of -22”F, which has
typically not received much attention from previous investigators. Component heat duties,
temperature overlaps, and approach temperature differences were discussed to explain these
performance variations. The role of control-related issues (and their respective effects on system
COP), such as desorber bypass fractions and the introduction of an additional solution heat
exchanger in the cycle were discussed. The study reported practically achievable gas input based
COPS by including flue losses in an actual gas burner instead of ideal thermodynamic COPS.
It was shown that an actual cooling mode COP of about 0.925 can be achieved at an ambient
of 95°F using the heat-exchanger size selection procedures outlined in this study. The heating mode
COP at 47°F is about 1.51 and stays at values > 1.0 for ambient temperatures as low as -22°F.
From the results of the analyses of the desorber bypass flow fractions, it was demonstrated that
the appropriate flow fraction and associated controls can be based on considerations of system
COP, as well as the detailed design of the adiabatic analyzer. In the cold ambient heating mode,
it appears that a small liquid heat exchanger between the solution-heated desorber and the
solution-cooled desorber offers significant performance benefits.

Acknowledgements-The research reported in this study was supported by the Gas Research Institute, Chicago, IL, through
Contract Number 5092-246-2481. The authors would also like acknowledge the technical suggestions and advice from Joe
Marsala and Kevin McGahey.

REFERENCES
1. E. Altenkirch, Reversible Absorptionsmaschinen, Zeritschrift fir die gesamte Kalte-lndustrie, XX, Jahrgang (1913).
2. B. A. Phillips, Development of an advanced-cycle absorption heat pump for residential applications. Proc. 2nd
DOEjORNL Heat Pump Conf., CONF-8804100 (1988).
3. R. Modahl and R. Hayes, Development and proof testing of advanced absorption refrigeration cycle concepts, phase
1 and lA, ORNL/Sub/86-17498/l, Oak Ridge, TN (1992).
4. G. Grossman, K. Gommed and D. Gadoth, Computer model for simulation of absorption systems in flexible and
modular form, ORNL/Sub/90-89673, Oak Ridge, TN (1991).
5. K. R. McGahey and R. N. Christensen, The modeling and optimization of a generator absorber heat exchange (GAX)
heat pump using the ORNL absorption system simulation. Heat Pump and Refrigeration Systems Design, Analysis, and
Applications, AES, Vol. 29. ASME (1993), pp. 57-63.
6. K. R. McGahey, S. Garimella, F. B. Cook and R. N. Christensen, Enhancement of the ORNL absorption model and
simulation of a double-effect absorption heat pump. Proc. International Absorption Heat Pump Conf. AES, Vol. 31.
ASME (1994), pp. 141-148.
7. H. C. Meacham, F. B. Cook and R. N. Christensen, Optimization of a ten ton double-effect absorption heat pump.
Heat Pump and Refrigeration Systems Design, Analysis, and Applications, AES, Vol. 29. ASME (1993), pp. 65-73.