Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study presents a lab-scale, low temperature difference heat engine based on rapid thermal swing adsorption. The engine’s four step cycle consists of isochoric heating/desorption, isothermal expansion/desorption, isochoric cooling/adsorption, and isothermal compression/adsorption. Rapid temperature changes in the sorption bed are enabled by a loose packing of activated carbon into a heat exchanger. Four system configurations are tested, comparing pelleted vs. powdered activated carbon, and shell-and-tube vs. plate-and-frame heat exchangers. Each configuration is tested with a hot side temperature of 72 °C, cold side temperature of 13 °C and starting pressure of 3 bar, and is assessed based on cycle duration, work, power, and thermal efficiency. The ideal thermal efficiency under the operating conditions is 6.9 %. In practice, the device generates 215 J of work per cycle with a cycle time as low as 40 s; however, the thermal efficiency is low at an estimated 0.07 %. This highlights the impact of parasitic heat loss in indirect heating designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Juul et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: