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

net/publication/281131587

Review of Supercritical CO2 power cycle technology and current status of

research and development

Article  in  Nuclear Engineering and Technology · August 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.net.2015.06.009

CITATIONS READS

268 3,178

7 authors, including:

Yoonhan Ahn Seong Jun Bae

Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
25 PUBLICATIONS   673 CITATIONS    14 PUBLICATIONS   383 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Min Seok Kim Seong Kuk Cho

Hyundai Heavy Industries, South Korea Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
12 PUBLICATIONS   350 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   322 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

supercritical CO2 power cycles for landfill gas firing gas turbine bottoming cycle View project

Recent Advancement of Thermal Fluid Engineering in the Supercritical CO2 Power Cycle View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Min Seok Kim on 16 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/nuclear-

engineering-and-technology/

Review Article

REVIEW OF SUPERCRITICAL CO2 POWER CYCLE TECHNOLOGY

AND CURRENT STATUS OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

YOONHAN AHN a, SEONG JUN BAE a, MINSEOK KIM a, SEONG KUK CHO a,
SEUNGJOON BAIK a, JEONG IK LEE a,*, and JAE EUN CHA b
a
Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 373-1 Guseong-dong, Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon, 305-701, South Korea
b
Fast Reactor Technology Development Division, Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute, 305-353, DukJin-Dong 150, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon,
South Korea

article info abstract

Article history: The supercritical CO2 (S-CO2) Brayton cycle has recently been gaining a lot of attention for
Received 16 January 2015 application to next generation nuclear reactors. The advantages of the S-CO2 cycle are high
Received in revised form efficiency in the mild turbine inlet temperature region and a small physical footprint with a
19 May 2015 simple layout, compact turbomachinery, and heat exchangers. Several heat sources
Accepted 6 June 2015 including nuclear, fossil fuel, waste heat, and renewable heat sources such as solar ther-
Available online 13 August 2015 mal or fuel cells are potential application areas of the S-CO2 cycle. In this paper, the current
development progress of the S-CO2 cycle is introduced. Moreover, a quick comparison of
Keywords: various S-CO2 layouts is presented in terms of cycle performance.
Advanced power system Copyright © 2015, Published by Elsevier Korea LLC on behalf of Korean Nuclear Society.
Integral test loop
Layout study
Research review
Supercritical carbon dioxide cycle

1. Introduction neutron energy spectrum and the fluid type used for coolant.
The operating temperatures of Gen IV reactors are commonly
Since the early 2000s, numerous countries have cooperated to higher, which is ~500e900
C, compared with conventional
develop Generation IV (Gen IV) nuclear reactors. Sodium- water-cooled reactors, which operates ~300
C.
cooled Fast Reactor (SFR), Lead-cooled Fast Reactor (LFR), The main reason why Gen IV reactors have high operating
Gas-cooled Fast Reactor (GFR), Super-Critical Water-cooled temperatures is to increase the nuclear power plant efficiency
Reactor (SCWR), Very High Temperature gas-cooled Reactor which is currently lower than fossil fuel power plants.
(VHTR), and Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) were selected as Gen IV Increasing the reactor outlet temperature typically leads to a
reactor candidates. Characteristics of Gen IV reactors vary in higher turbine inlet temperature in the power conversion

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jeongiklee@kaist.ac.kr (J.I. Lee).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any me-
dium, provided the original work is properly cited.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2015.06.009
1738-5733/Copyright © 2015, Published by Elsevier Korea LLC on behalf of Korean Nuclear Society.
648 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

systems and potentially improves thermal efficiency accord- 2. S-CO2 power cycle
ing to the second law of thermodynamics.
Therefore, the Gen IV reactor thermal efficiency can be 2.1. The characteristics and benefits of the S-CO2 cycle
improved with an increase of reactor outlet temperature.
Furthermore, several related issues due to the low efficiency Fig. 1 shows the thermal efficiencies of various power con-
of current nuclear power plants can be solved as well. For version systems and heat sources with respect to the turbine
example, the cooling water requirement for existing nuclear inlet temperature range. The representative heat sources in
power plants is distinctively higher compared with those of Fig. 1 are geothermal energy, solar thermal energy, nuclear
other power plants and it is usually criticized not only from energy, coal, waste heat recovery, and liquefied natural gas
the economic point of view but also from the view point of (LNG). The power conversion systems in Fig. 1 are organic
environmental protection. Therefore, Gen IV reactors should Rankine cycle (ORC), steam Rankine cycle (steam turbine), air
not only enhance thermal efficiency but also minimize the Brayton cycle (gas turbine), combined cycle gas turbine
influence on the environment. (CCGT), and S-CO2 direct and indirect cycles. As shown in
To successfully utilize the high reactor outlet temperature, Fig. 2, the steam Rankine cycle can achieve high efficiency
interest in alternative power conversion systems is also under low turbine inlet temperature conditions because the
increasing. The steam Rankine cycle and gas turbine systems working fluid is compressed at a liquid state. In other words,
have been utilized by large size power plants for several de- liquid water is incompressible and requires less work for
cades. When the turbine inlet temperature is > 550
C, the compression. In contrast, the gas turbine utilizes air,
ultra-supercritical (USC) steam cycle is required to further compressible fluid, and a large amount of work is consumed
improve the efficiency of a steam Rankine cycle. However, the for the compression process. Therefore, the thermal efficiency
USC steam cycle inevitably suffers from material degradation of gas turbines is not significantly higher than that of a steam
due to high temperature and pressure operating conditions. Rankine cycle although the turbine inlet temperature is much
Therefore, when the USC steam Rankine cycle is coupled to a higher because the compressor requires a large amount of
nuclear power plant, the plant reliability can be a significant work. However, the material issue becomes significant at
issue if the system is composed only of existing materials. As a higher turbine inlet temperatures with gas turbines.
result, an alternative power conversion system which can As schematically shown in Fig. 2, the S-CO2 Brayton cycle is
operate in the mild turbine inlet temperature region the power conversion system which combines the advantages
(500e900
C) is essential to improve the next generation nu- of both steam Rankine cycle and gas turbine system. In other
clear power plant performance and safety at the same time. words, the fluid is compressed in the incompressible region
Among various candidates, the S-CO2 power cycle is consid- and the higher turbine inlet temperature can be utilized with
ered as one of the promising alternatives to potentially pro- less material issues compared with the steam Rankine cycle.
vide high efficiency in the Gen IV reactor operating The CO2 critical condition is 30.98
C and 7.38 MPa; the fluid
temperature region, better stability with conventional struc- becomes more incompressible near the critical point.
ture materials, and eventually improved safety and reliability
of the power conversion system. P$M
Z¼ (1)
r$R$T

Fig. 1 e Thermal efficiencies of power conversion systems and applications. CCGT, combined cycle gas turbine.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 649

Fig. 2 e Principles of power conversion system. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

The compressibility factor, Z, is defined as the molecular than any existing steam Rankine cycle (a few kPa) or gas
volumetric ratio of a fluid compared with ideal gas. It de- Brayton cycle (~100 kPa), and thus the fluid remains dense
scribes how much the fluid behaves like ideal gas. The fluid throughout the entire power system. Therefore, the volu-
behaves very close to an ideal gas when this factor is unity and metric flow rate decreases as the fluid density is higher,
is considered to be an incompressible fluid when it is zero. For resulting in 10 times smaller turbomachinery compared with
CO2 near the critical point, the compressibility factor de- the turbomachinery of a steam Rankine cycle.
creases to 0.2e0.5 as shown in Fig. 3, and the compression However, the cycle pressure ratio of the S-CO2 Brayton
work can be substantially decreased. In addition, as S-CO2 is cycle is much smaller compared with the steam Rankine cycle
less corrosive compared with steam at the same temperature, and the turbine outlet temperature is relatively high. There-
the S-CO2 cycle can potentially increase the turbine inlet fore, a large amount of heat must be recuperated to increase
temperature [1,2]. the thermal efficiency. In other words, the recuperation pro-
One of the main advantages of the S-CO2 Brayton cycle is cess in the S-CO2 Brayton cycle greatly influences the thermal
its compact turbomachinery. As the system operates beyond efficiency.
the critical point, the minimum pressure is higher (~7,400 kPa) The most efficient layout of the S-CO2 cycle is generally
agreed to be the recompressing layout until now, which was
suggested by Feher [3] and Angelino [4] and later revitalized by
Dostal et al [5] for the next generation reactor application.
However, according to recent studies, various optimized lay-
outs can be utilized for the S-CO2 power cycle depending on
the application [6]. This is because the S-CO2 cycle is similar to
a steam Rankine cycle in terms of layout while the S-CO2 cycle
is similar to a gas turbine system from the main component
design point of view.
One of the S-CO2 Brayton cycle characteristics is that the
specific heat of the cold side flow is two to three times
higher than that of the hot side flow in recuperators. It is
especially important for the S-CO2 cycle layout design and
also explains why the recompressing layout can have high
efficiency as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. In other words, the CO2
flow is split to compensate for the specific heat difference in
the low temperature recuperator and to maximize the heat
recuperation in the recompressing layout. Therefore, the
Fig. 3 e CO2 compressibility factor near the critical point waste heat is reduced and thermal efficiency can be
(30.98
C, 7.38 MPa). improved.
650 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

can be reduced up to four times compared with the conven-

tional steam Rankine cycle. (3) The competitiveness of the dry
air cooled S-CO2 cycle has been investigated by multiple re-
searchers [7,8]. Especially for a concentrated solar power (CSP)
application, several research programs including SunShot
(Washington, DOE, USA) and Australian Solar Thermal
Research Initiative (ASTRI, CSRISO, Action, Australia) empha-
sized the reduction of water consumption and competitive
performance when the complete or hybrid air cooling option is
utilized [7,9]. On the contrary, Moisseytsev and Sienicki [10]
claimed that an air cooling S-CO2 cycle would not be compet-
itive with a water cooling S-CO2 cycle for a 400 MWe SFR
application. Moisseytsev and Sienicki [10] claimed that the size
of the air cooling heat exchanger and the overall capital cost
excessively increase. Overall, the feasibility of the air cooled S-
CO2 cycle is not agreed upon by researchers. Yet, the positive
Fig. 4 e S-CO2 recompressing cycle layout. S-CO2, potential of the air cooled S-CO2 cycle can grow as the system
supercritical CO2. design becomes more sophisticated and the component level
technology becomes more advanced. (4) As the minimum
pressure is higher than the CO2 critical pressure (7.38 MPa), the
The operating condition is important in the S-CO2 heat purification system requirements are lower than those of the
exchangers. As a large amount of heat is recovered in recu- steam Rankine cycle to prevent air ingress. Thus, the power
perators to increase the thermal efficiency, high effectiveness conversion system can be much simpler. In the steam cycle
is required and therefore the capital cost increases when case, the low pressure in the condenser causes gas ingression
conventional Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers (STHE) are uti- and complex purification systems are required. (5) Among
lized. However, various compact heat exchangers with high various fluids, CO2 is relatively cheaper and less harmful when
compactness (up to 10 times compared with STHE), such as a an appropriate ventilation system is installed to prepare for a
Printed Circuit Heat Exchanger (PCHE), have been commer- sudden large release of CO2 from the power conversion system.
cialized and can be applied to the S-CO2 cycle directly.
The benefits of the S-CO2 cycle can be summarized as the 2.2. S-CO2 power cycle application
following. (1) The thermal efficiency can be increased up to 5%
point compared with the steam Rankine cycle. (2) The turbo- As discussed above, many potential advantages exist for the
machinery can be much smaller and the overall system size S-CO2 power cycle and it can be applied to various heat

Fig. 5 e T-s diagram of S-CO2 recompressing cycle. T, temperature; s, entropy; S-CO2, supercritical CO2.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 651

Fig. 6 e The comparison of steam, air, S-CO2 power conversion systems [11,12]. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

sources. For instance, since the S-CO2 cycle can be considered brief comparison of air, steam, and S-CO2 power conversion
as an alternative to the steam Rankine cycle, it can be applied systems and the potential application areas of the S-CO2 cycle
to nuclear energy ranging from pressurized water reactors are shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively.
(both large and small modular reactors) to the next generation
nuclear reactors and fusion reactor applications as well. Other 2.2.1. Nuclear application
than nuclear energy applications, the S-CO2 power cycle can The S-CO2 power cycle is being researched for application to
be utilized as a topping cycle for fossil fuel powered plants and sodium-cooled fast reactors [13,14]. The S-CO2 cycle can
a bottoming cycle of gas combined cycle plants. There are also replace a violent sodiumewater reaction with a mild
promising heat sources soon to be developed, which include sodiumeCO2 reaction and potentially increase the safety of
several renewable energy sources such as high temperature the nuclear system as well as thermal efficiency. Related to
fuel cells, concentrated solar power, and geothermal power. A the sodium reaction, the safety of the S-CO2 cycle has been

Fig. 7 e The potential application of S-CO2 cycle. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

652 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

investigated in KAERI. The ignition temperature of the temperature fuel cells, and geothermal energy. The S-CO2
NaeCO2 reaction was verified to be 595
C in terms of sodium cycle can potentially improve the economics of renewable
temperature [15]. In addition, numerical modeling is being energy systems significantly [27e30].
studied to predict the impact of a CO2 leak in a sodiumeCO2
heat exchanger and a related experiment is being designed for
the validation [16]. In contrast, the nitrogen Brayton cycle is
being studied as an alternative of the power conversion sys- 3. Various layouts of S-CO2 cycle
tem for a sodium-cooled fast reactor to inherently eliminate
the chemical reaction between sodium and the power con- 3.1. S-CO2 cycle literature review
version fluid in France. At high pressure conditions, the ni-
trogen Brayton cycle can also achieve performance Several layouts of S-CO2 cycle were suggested and compared
competitive to the superheated steam Rankine cycle. The by Angelino [4]. His original work focused on the condensation
economics of the nitrogen Brayton cycle for SFR application is cycle but some layouts such as the recompression cycle,
being investigated by the French Alternative Energies and partial cooling cycle, and precompression cycle were also
Atomic Energy Commission (CEA, Paris, France) because it can suggested in his work and they are still being investigated in
eliminate the expensive safety systems needed to detect and the S-CO2 cycle research field. He showed that the efficiency of
mitigate the sodium water reaction [17]. However, the nitro- the recompression cycle with 650
C turbine inlet temperature
gen Brayton cycle can only be utilized in the sodium-cooled is competitive to the reheat steam Rankine cycle. He sum-
fast reactor application and unfortunately other than the marized his work on the CO2 condensation cycle for two
nuclear application no immediate application area can be temperature range applications; one is for the mild tempera-
found. This limitation in the application area may become a ture range (450e550
C) with the benefits of simple layout and
substantial obstacle to establish a firm supply chain and gain compactness, the other is for the high temperature range
support from a wide spectrum of energy industries. In (650e800
C) with high efficiency as well as simplicity and
contrast, the S-CO2 power cycle can potentially be utilized for compactness. Dostal et al [5] revitalized the S-CO2 cycle for
Small and Medium sized Reactors (SMR) such as SMART, large nuclear applications and designed the recompression cycle
size conventional water-cooled reactors, and fusion reactor with a turbine inlet temperature of 550e750
C. For the S-CO2
applications as well as other energy sources such as coal, heat exchangers, he assumed the heat exchanger to be a
natural gas, and renewable energies [18e21]. printed circuit heat exchanger (PCHE) and estimated the
physical size of a S-CO2 cycle [3].
2.2.2. Coal power application After Dostal et al's [5] work, S-CO2 cycle research on various
The S-CO2 cycle is also considered to be a promising candidate heat sources including concentrated solar power (CSP), fuel
for the coal-fired power plant topping cycle to improve ther- cells, gas turbine exhaust heat recovery systems, and alter-
mal efficiency. Various power plant vendors and operators native power conversion systems of current power plants
including Pratt Whitney & Rocketdyne (PWR, California, USA) were conducted [27e30]. Most studies adopted the recom-
and Electricite De France (EDF, Paris, France) are studying S- pression cycle, which is known as the most efficient layout for
CO2 cycle design for application to coal power plants [22,23]. the S-CO2 cycle. However, relatively small specific work of the
This innovative layout can achieve competitive efficiency recompression cycle can limit the system performance,
compared with the conventional power conversion system as especially in the waste heat recovery systems. Kimzey [31]
well as capturing and storing CO2. In other words, the inno- compared performances of various S-CO2 bottoming cycle
vative S-CO2 topping cycle can produce the same amount of layouts, which can potentially maximize the output power
net electricity as a nonCO2 capturing steam power plant while from the exhaust gas of current gas turbines. Bae et al [20]
reducing the CO2 emission significantly. designed the cascade CO2 system that consists of a topping
S-CO2 recuperation cycle and a bottoming CO2 Rankine cycle
2.2.3. Exhaust/waste heat recovery application for the bottoming cycle application of fuel cells. Several S-CO2
The S-CO2 power cycle is expected to first be utilized and cycle layouts from Angelino's [4] work were compared by
commercialized for the exhaust/waste heat recovery applica- Martin and Dostal [32]. This study reviewed the wide spectrum
tion. The patents related to this application belong to Echogen of S-CO2 layouts including the topping and bottoming cycle
(Ohio, USA) and General Electric (New York, USA) [24,25]. The applications and suggests a S-CO2 layout classification for
exhaust gas temperature from a gas turbine or general topping further development of more innovative power systems with
cycle is usually > 450
C and the conventional steam Rankine S-CO2.
cycle utilizes this exhaust gas to improve the thermal effi-
ciency. The S-CO2 cycle can potentially replace the steam 3.2. S-CO2 cycle layout classification
Rankine cycle to further improve the thermal efficiency and it
can be utilized to recover waste heat from a small gas turbine Several S-CO2 cycle layouts have been analyzed in the previ-
as well, which it is not practically feasible with the steam ous studies [3,4,24,33,34]. However, the general classification
Rankine cycle [26]. of S-CO2 cycles has not been discussed thoroughly. Although
some advanced S-CO2 layouts were suggested in the litera-
2.2.4. Renewable energy application ture, these suggested layouts are simply a combination of
The S-CO2 cycle can be utilized for various heat sources several commonly utilized processes in power plant engi-
including solar thermal power, waste heat from high neering such as intercooling, reheating, and recuperation.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 653

Fig. 8 e S-CO2 cycle single flow layouts. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

Fig. 9 e S-CO2 cycle split flow layouts. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

Table 1 e The reference SFR system.

Reactor sodium inlet temperature (
C) 545 (Na-CO2) IHX sodium inlet temperature (
C) 526
Reactor sodium outlet temperature (
C) 390 (Na-CO2) IHX sodium outlet temperature (
C) 364
Reactor sodium mass flow (kg/sec) 508.0 Intermediate loop sodium mass flow (kg/sec) 484.5

IHX, intermediate heat exchanger; SFR, sodium-cooled fast reactor.

654 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

Table 2 e S-CO2 single flow layout design conditions.

Layout Recuperation Intercooling Reheating Interrecuperation Precompression Split-expansion
Turbine inlet temperature (
C) 500
IHX inlet temperature (
C) 275.9 249.7 334.5 314.6 281.1 270.0
CO2 mass flow rate (kg/sec) 354.4 315.5 339.0 430.7 363.1 364.2
Compressor inlet 32
temperature (
C)
Compressor inlet & outlet 7.5/25 6.16/7.5 7.5/25
pressure (MPa) 7.5/25
Turbine & compressor 92/88
isentropic efficiency (%)
HT/LT recuperator 95/95
effectiveness (%)

HT, high temperature; LT, low temperature; IHX, intermediate heat exchanger; S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

Table 3 e S-CO2 split flow layout design conditions.

Layout Recompression Modified Preheating Turbine Turbine Turbine
recompression split flow 1 split flow 2 split flow 3
Turbine inlet temperature (
C) 500
IHX inlet temperature (
C) 335.5 283.3 98.7 150.4 275.9 98.7
CO2 mass flow rate (kg/sec) 486.1 367.1 262.6 377.1 708.9 383.0
Compressor inlet temperature (
C) 32
Compressor inlet & outlet pressure (MPa) 7.5/25 5.0/7.5 7.5/25
7.5/25
Turbine & compressor isentropic 92/88
efficiency (%)
HT/LT recuperator effectiveness (%) 95/95
Flow split ratio (mH/mT) 0.31 0.4 0.5 0.43 0.5 0.46

HT, high temperature; LT, low temperature; IHX, intermediate heat exchanger; S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

Therefore, this study provides a general layout classification The split flow layouts are composed of recompression,
and compares various S-CO2 cycle layouts in a fair way. modified recompression, preheating, and turbine split flow 1,
In the closed Brayton cycle design, the recuperation pro- 2, and 3 as shown in Fig. 9. The difference between the
cess is generally required to improve the cycle efficiency by recompression layout and the others is the recuperation
minimizing the waste heat. Therefore the recuperation layout process. In the recompression layout, the flow is split and high
can be considered as the reference layout in S-CO2 cycle specific heat in the cold side flow is matched with the hot side
design. Other layouts are compared with the recuperation large flow with lower specific heat in the low temperature
layout. recuperator (LTR) to maximize the cycle efficiency. In the
The S-CO2 cycle layouts considered in this study are shown
in Figs. 8 and 9. The CO2 flow can be separated depending on
the application. Therefore, the cycle can be categorized
depending on whether the flow is split or not. Single (nonsplit)
flow layouts are composed of intercooling, reheating, pre-
compression, interrecuperation, and split expansion cycles as
shown in Fig. 8. The intercooling and reheating layouts are
adopted to minimize or maximize the compression or
expansion work, respectively. One of the major characteristics
of the S-CO2 cycle is its low pressure ratio because the limit of
minimum pressure in the system is influenced by the critical
pressure (7.38 MPa), which is relatively high compared with
the steam Rankine cycle (~0.07 MPa) or air Brayton cycle
(~0.1 MPa). As the exhaust CO2 temperature in the turbine is
still high due to the low cycle pressure ratio, the heat can be
recuperated in several ways. In the single flow layouts, the
interrecuperation, precompression, and split expansion lay-
outs are suggested depending on the position where the
Fig. 10 e The efficiencies of S-CO2 split flow layouts for
recuperation process occurs.
various flow split ratio. S-CO2, supercritical CO2.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 655

large. The transferred heat is limited by the CO2 temperature

change in the intermediate heat exchanger.

3.3. Performance comparison of S-CO2 cycle layouts

Twelve layouts are analyzed to investigate and compare S-CO2

cycles' performance. The boundary conditions to design the S-
CO2 cycle for SFR application is shown in Table 1 [35]. The
design conditions of each layout are listed in Tables 2 and 3. It
should be noted that pressure drop in the heat exchangers and
pipes is ignored for simplicity. As the S-CO2 cycle in this study
is for the SFR application, the turbine inlet temperature is
maintained at 500
C. Previous studies showed that S-CO2
cycle efficiency is sensitive not only to the temperature ratio
but also to the pressure ratio [3,36,37]. However, the
maximum pressure is limited due to the capital cost related to
the piping and measurement systems. The minimum pres-
Fig. 11 e Performance comparison of S-CO2 Cycle layout.
sure of the S-CO2 cycle significantly influences the cycle effi-
S-CO2, supercritical CO2.
ciency and operational stability of the S-CO2 cycle. As the inlet
condition approaches the critical point, the cycle efficiency is
improved [38,39]. In this study, the minimum and maximum
pressures are fixed at 7.5 MPa and 25 MPa, respectively, for the
modified recompression layout, the turbine expands below simple comparison. Since the flow split ratio influences the
the critical pressure to produce more work. Compressor 1 cycle efficiency, a sensitivity study was performed and the
compresses CO2 near the critical point and the other processes result is shown in Fig. 10. The optimum flow split ratio of each
are similar to the original recompression layout. S-CO2 split flow layout is determined when the cycle efficiency
In contrast, the other layouts, such as the preheating and is maximized.
turbine split flow 1, 2, and 3 layouts, maximize the tempera- The cycle efficiency and recuperator UA (overall heat
ture difference in the intermediate heat exchanger. For transfer rate times heat transfer area) ratio (compared with
example, in the waste heat recovery or cogeneration power the recuperation cycle) of the S-CO2 layouts are compared in
plant systems, large temperature change in the heat source is Fig. 11. To assess the recuperator size, the LMTD (Log Mean
proportional to the heat flowing into the power conversion Temperature Difference) method was used and the UA of each
system. In this case, more power can be produced even with a layout is compared. The recompression layout shows the best
lower thermodynamic efficiency when the absorbed heat is efficiency but requires the largest recuperator size.

Fig. 12 e The layout of SNL experiment loop. HTR, high temperature recuperator; LTR, low temperature recuperator; M/G,
motor generator alternator; MC, main compressor; RC, recompression compressor; SNL, Sandia National Laboratory; TB,
turbine [40].
656 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

Fig. 13 e The layout of KAPL experiment loop. CP, compressor; G, generator; KAPL, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory; M/G,
motor generator alternator; RCP, recuperator; TB, turbine [41].

4. S-CO2 power system development status study, the discussion focuses on the S-CO2 Brayton cycle
which can be applied to the next generation nuclear reactor
4.1. International development systems. The current development of the S-CO2 Brayton cycle
will be introduced.
While the research on the S-CO2 Bryton cycle is conducted at S-CO2 integral systems tests, which are composed of main
lab scale, the development of the S-CO2 Rankine cycle is components such as turbomachinery and heat exchangers,
relatively mature for commercialization. However, in this were designed and constructed in several research institutes

Fig. 14 e The layout of IAE experiment loop. CP, compressor; HTR, high temperature recuperator; IAE, Institute of Applied
Energy; LTR, low temperature recuperator; M/G, motor generator alternator; TB, turbine [42].
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 657

Table 4 e The design comparison of existing S-CO2 integral system loops.

Sandia National Lab (US) Knolls Atomic Power Lab (US) Institute of Applied Energy (Japan)
Turbomachinery type 2-TAC 1-TAC, 1-turbine 1-TAC (2-recuperaters)
Cycle layout Recompressing Simple recuperated Simple recuperated
Heat (kW) 780 834.9 160
Efficiency (%) 31.5 14.7 7
Mass flow rate (kg/sec) 3.5 (target) 5.35 (target) 1.4 (achieved)
2.7 (achieved) 3.54 (achieved)
T.I.T (
C) 537 (target) 300 (target) 277 (achieved)
342 (achieved)
Pressure ratio 1.8 (target) 1.8 (target) 1.4 (achieved)
1.65 (achieved) 1.44 (achieved)
Rotating speed (1,000 rpm) 75 (target) 75 (target) 69 (achieved)
52 (achieved) 55-60 (achieved)
Turbine efficiency (%) 86 (turbine 1) 79.8 65
87 (turbine 2) (power turbine)
79.7
(compressor driving turbine)

S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

such as Sandia National Lab (SNL, New Mexico, USA), Knolls scale S-CO2 cycle test facility. However, a large size S-CO2 cycle
Atomic Power Lab (KAPL, New York, USA), and Institute of test facility of > 10 MW electric power can demonstrate high
Applied Energy (IAE, Kyoto, Japan) (Figs. 12e14). They efficiency with the utilization of conventional bearing and
commonly utilize similar turbomachinery features and PCHE sealing technology, which can minimize the performance
for the S-CO2 power cycle. SNL demonstrated the recom- degradation of S-CO2 turbomachinery. Therefore, a facility of >
pressing cycle with two TAC (turbineealternatorecompressor) 10 MW power is required to demonstrate the high efficiency of
type turbomachineries for the next generation reactor appli- the S-CO2 cycle.
cation and KAPL demonstrated the simple recuperated cycle
with two turbines (a power turbine and compressor-driven 4.2. Development progress in Korea
turbine) for the water-cooled reactor application. IAE con-
structed a small scale S-CO2 cycle test facility to investigate the In contrast to the cycle efficiency of a conventional power
small size turbomachinery and assess the cycle performance. conversion system, which highly depends on the turbine inlet
The design parameters of S-CO2 test facilities are shown in temperature and heat source, S-CO2 cycle efficiency is influ-
Table 4. Based on the experimental results from the S-CO2 enced by the low temperature regions such as a precooler and
integral system tests, several conclusions can be drawn. (1) a compressor. Therefore, the Korea Advanced Institute of
The thermal efficiency of the S-CO2 power cycle increases Science and Technology (KAIST) constructed a low pressure
when the compressor inlet temperature approaches the crit- ratio compressor test loop, S-CO2 Pressurizing Experiment
ical point. When the operating condition is slightly below the
critical point, no noticeable noise or vibration is observed. (2)
The design of bearings to balance the thrust loads is chal-
lenging for small scale S-CO2 turbomachinery (both for tur-
bines and compressors). (3) When the pressure of S-CO2
turbomachinery is maintained at high level, the windage loss
in the rotor increases and influences the compressor perfor-
mance. Therefore, the cavity pressure must be lowered to
2 MPa to decrease the CO2 density; (4) when a recompressing
cycle is designed for the SNL integrated system test, the
operation strategy must be strictly established as the outlet
flow of two S-CO2 compressors must balance to prevent flow
reversal. (5) To maintain the operational stability of integral
system operations, the CO2 inventory for the system loops
must be precisely measured and controlled. In addition,
caution is required for depressurization process because
Teflon type pipe joints can be damaged by the abrupt CO2
decompression process. (6) Heat exchanger, including PCHE,
performances are generally satisfactory. (7) The thermal effi-
ciencies of most power conversion systems improve as the
size increases and the S-CO2 cycle follows the same trend. In Fig. 15 e The layout of S-CO2 pressurizing experiment
other words, high efficiency is hardly demonstrated in a small (SCO2PE). S-CO2, supercritical CO2.
658 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

experimental data to compare with the transient analysis of

the S-CO2 cycle was obtained as well.
Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) con-
structed a S-CO2 Integral Experiment Loop (SCIEL) with the
cooperation of KAIST and POTECH. The schematic layout and
figure of SCIEL are shown in Figs. 17 and 18, respectively. The
SCIEL design parameters are listed in Table 5. The main dif-
ference of SCIEL compared with other S-CO2 cycle experiment
facilities is its high pressure ratio with two compression and
expansion stages. The efficiency of the Brayton cycle usually
depends not only on the turbine inlet temperature but also on
the cycle pressure ratio. However, the existing turbomachinery
in integral system test (IST) facilities was designed for a pres-
sure ratio < 2 due to the technical limits. However, as the S-CO2
power cycle can achieve high efficiency at a higher pressure
ratio, 2.7, SCIEL is designed to achieve a higher pressure ratio
Fig. 16 e S-CO2 pressurizing experiment (SCO2PE). S-CO2, with two stages of compression and expansion. The turbine
supercritical CO2. inlet temperature was determined to be 500
C for the sodium-
cooled fast reactor application, which is similar to SNL IST.
The major characteristic of SCIEL turbomachinery design is
(SCO2PE), to demonstrate the S-CO2 compressor performance, to control the thrust loads caused by the pressure difference of
as shown in Figs. 15 and 16. the compressor and the turbine impellers with two ap-
The KAIST research team demonstrated and observed proaches. The first unique approach is to separate the shaft of
similar phenomena as the international research institutions turbine and compressor and the second unique approach is to
[43]. While operating the compressor in various conditions utilize a twin impeller compressor, which has two identical
including the phase change, no perceivable noise or vibration impellers to minimize the thrust load acting on the shaft. In
was observed. In addition, experiments were conducted at addition, while the compressor impellers of existing ISTs are
various phases (gas, liquid, and supercritical state) and unshrouded, a shrouded impeller is utilized to balance the

Fig. 17 e The layout of S-CO2 integral experiment loop (SCIEL). HPC, high pressure compressor; HPT, high pressure turbine;
HTR, high temperature recuperator, LPC, low pressure compressor; LPT, low pressure turnine; LTR, low temperature
recuperator; M/G, motor generator alternator; S-CO2, supercritical CO2.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 659

Fig. 18 e S-CO2 integral experiment loop (SCIEL). DAS, data acquisition system; S-CO2, supercritical CO2.

Table 5 e The design parameters of S-CO2 Integral Experiment Loop (SCIEL).

Design variable Value Design variable Value
Maximum pressure (MPa) 20 Turbine/compressor efficiency (%) 85/65
TIT (
C) 500 HTR & LTR effectiveness (%) 74/54
Pressure ratio 1.8 (LPC), 1.5 (HPC) Cycle efficiency (%) 19.6
Compressor efficiency (%) 65 LPT (rpm) 83,000
Heater power (kW) 1,300 TAC (rpm) 100,000
CO2 flow rate (kg/sec) 4.8 LPC (rpm) 70,000

HTR, high temperature recuperator; LPC, low pressure compressor; LPT, low pressure turbine; LTR, low temperature recuperator; S-CO2, su-
percritical CO2; TAC, turbineealternatorecompressor; TIT, turbine inlet temperature.

pressure distribution of the inner and outer shroud at the compared with other power conversion systems. The main
same time. benefit of the S-CO2 cycle is the small size of the overall sys-
Currently, the compressor test loop of SCIEL has been tem and its application includes not only the next generation
constructed and the preliminary experiment in the super- nuclear reactors but also conventional water-cooled reactors,
critical phase was performed. The heat exchangers of SCIEL coal power plants, and several renewable energy sources.
are PCHE type, which is similar to the existing ISTs around the Various layouts were compared and the recompression
world. The turbine and the heater are planned to be added to cycle shows the best efficiency. The layout is suitable for
generate electricity in 2015 and the high pressure compressor application to advanced nuclear reactor systems. However,
and high pressure turbine will be installed for the final stage of for the bottoming cycle applications, the specific work should
SCIEL construction. be compared because other layouts might be more favorable.
Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) is constructing a As S-CO2 cycle performance can vary depending on the layout
separate experiment loop for low temperature heat source configuration, further studies on the layouts are required to
applications such as a waste heat recovery system. The design design a better performing cycle.
power capacity is on the magnitude of tens of kW and the To evaluate the S-CO2 cycle performance, various coun-
layout is a simple cycle without recuperation process. The tries constructed and demonstrated S-CO2 integral system
heater capacity is 647 kW and the turbine inlet temperature is test loops and similar research works are ongoing in Korea as
< 200
C. well. However, to evaluate the commercial S-CO2 power sys-
tems, development of a large scale (> 10 MW) prototype S-CO2
system is necessary. The research activities are focused on a
5. Summary large scale S-CO2 power system and various foreign research
institutions and Korean researchers are attempting to realize
The S-CO2 cycle can achieve relatively high efficiency within the future power system that can significantly transform the
the mild turbine inlet temperature range (450e600
C) energy industry around the world.
660 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1

Conflicts of interest [14] Y. Ahn, J.I. Lee, Study of various Brayton cycle designs for
small modular sodium-cooled fast reactor, Nucl. Eng. Des.
276 (2014) 128e141.
All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
[15] H.Y. Jung, Y.H. Yoo, J.I. Lee, M.H. Wi, J.H. Eoh, An
experimental study on the ignition temperature of
Acknowledgments sodiumeCO2 reaction with an implication of safety of a SFR
with S-CO2 Brayton cycle, in: International Congress on
This research was supported by the National Research Foun- Advanced Nuclear Power Plants, Charlotte (NC), April 6e9,
dation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT, 2014.
and Future Planning. [16] H.Y. Jung, J.I. Lee, M.H. Wi, Numerical studies of CO2 leak
modeling in sodiumeCO2 heat exchanger in the SFR coupled
with the S-CO2 Brayton cycle, in: International Topical
Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics, Chicago
references (IL), Aug 30eSep 4, 2015.
[17] N. Alpy, L. Cachon, D. Haubensack, J. Floyd, Gas Cycle testing
opportunity with ASTRID, the French SFR prototype, in:
[1] H.J. Lee, H. Kim, C. Jang, Compatibility of candidate structural Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Boulder (CO), May
materials in high-temperature S-CO2 environment, in: 24e25, 2011.
Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Pittsburgh (PA), Sep [18] H.J. Yoon, Y. Ahn, J.I. Lee, A. Yacine, Potential advantages of
9e10, 2014. coupling supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle to water cooled
[2] G.S. Was, P. Ampornrat, G. Gupta, S. Teysseyre, E.A. West, small and medium size reactor, Nucl. Eng. Des. 245 (2012)
T.R. Allen, K. Sridharan, L. Tan, Y. Chen, X. Ren, C. Pister, 223e232.
Corrosion and stress corrosion cracking in supercritical [19] J. Lee, J.I. Lee, H.J. Yoon, J.E. Cha, Supercritical carbon dioxide
water, J. Nucl. Mater. 371 (2007) 176e201. turbomachinery design for water-cooled small modular
[3] E.G. Feher, The Supercritical Thermodynamic Power Cycle, reactor application, Nucl. Eng. Des. 270 (2014) 76e89.
Douglas Paper No. 4348, IECEC, Miami Beach (FL), 1967. [20] S.J. Bae, J. Lee, Y. Ahn, J.I. Lee, Preliminary studies of compact
[4] G. Angelino, Carbon dioxide condensation cycles for power Brayton cycle performance for small modular high
production, ASME Paper No. 68-GT-23, J. Eng. Power 90 (1968) temperature gas-cooled reactor system, Ann. Nucl. Energy.
287e295. 75 (2015) 11e19.
[5] V. Dostal, M.J. Driscoll, P. Hejzlar, A Supercritical Carbon [21] B. Halimi, K.Y. Suh, Computational analysis of supercritical
Dioxide Cycle for Next Generation Nuclear Reactors, MIT- CO2 Brayton cycle power conversion system for fusion
ANP-TR-100 [Internet], Massachusetts Institute of reactor, Energy Conversation Management 63 (2012) 38e43.
Technology, Cambridge (MA), 2004. Available from: http:// [22] G.A. Johnson, M.W. McDowell, Supercritical CO2 cycle
hdl.handle.net/1721.1/17746. development at Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, in:
[6] Y. Ahn, S.J. Bae, M. Kim, S.K. Cho, S. Baik, J.I. Lee, J.E. Cha, Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Boulder, Colorado, May
Cycle layout studies of S-CO2 cycle for the next generation 24e25, 2011.
nuclear system application, in: Transactions of the Korean [23] Y.L. Moullec, Conceptual study of a high efficiency coal-fired
Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Pyeongchang, Korea, Oct power plant with CO2 capture using a supercritical CO2
30e31, 2014. Brayton cycle, Energy 49 (2012) 32e46.
[7] C.S. Turchi, Z. Ma, T.W. Neises, M.J. Wagner, [24] M.A. Lehar, V. Michelassi, System and Method for Recovery
Thermodynamic study of advanced supercritical carbon of Waste Heat from Dual Heat Sources, 2013. US 20130247570
dioxide power cycles for concentrating solar power systems, A1.
J. Sol. Energy Eng. 135 (2013) 41007e41013. [25] T.J. Held, S. Hostler, J.D. Miller, Heat Engine and Heat to
[8] D.J. Gavic, Investigation of Water, Air, and Hybrid Cooling for Electricity Systems and Methods with Working Fluid Mass
Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycles, Master Thesis, Management Control, 2012. US 8096128 B2.
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison (WI), 2012. [26] D. Bella, A. Francis, Gas turbine engine exhaust waste heat
[9] H. Guregenci, W. Stein, A. Beath, M. Blanco, E. Sauret, 2014, recovery navy shipboard module development, in:
The Case for Supercritical CO2 Radial Turbine Development Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Boulder (CO), May
within the Australian Solar Thermal Research Initiative 24e25, 2011.
(ASTRI) Program, Proceedings of the 52nd Annual [27] T. Neises, C. Turchi, A comparison of supercritical carbon
Conference, Australian Solar Energy Society (Australian dioxide power cycle configuration with an emphasis on CSP
Solar Council), Melbourne, Australia, May 2014. applications,, Energy Procedia 49 (2014) 1187e1196.
[10] A. Moisseytsev, J.J. Sienicki, Investigation of a dry air cooling [28] S.J. Bae, Y. Ahn, J. Lee, J.I. Lee, Various supercritical carbon
option for an S-CO2 cycle, in: Supercritical CO2 Power dioxide cycle layouts study for molten carbonate fuel cell
Symposium, Pittsburgh (PA), Sep 9e10, 2014. application, J. Power Sources 270 (2014) 608e618.
[11] Y. Kato, T. Ishizuka, K. Nikitin, An advanced energy system [29] D. Sanchez, J.M. Munoz de Escalona, R. Chacartegui, A. Munoz,
with nuclear reactors as an energy source, in: 13th T. Sanchez, A comparison between molten carbonate fuel
International Conference on Emerging Nuclear Energy cells based hybrid systems using air and supercritical carbon
Systems, June 3e8, 2007. Istanbul, Turkiye. dioxide Brayton cycles with state of the art technology,
[12] Siemens, Technical Data from Siemens Gas Turbine Package Journal of Power Sources 196 (2011) 4347e4354.
SGT5-PAC 4000F [Internet]. 2009. Available from: http://www. [30] A.S. Sabau, H. Yin, L.A. Qualls, J. McFarlane, Investigation of
energy.siemens.com/hq/pool/hq/power-generation/gas- supercritical CO2 Rankine cycles for geothermal power
turbines/SGT5-4000F/sgt5-4000f-application-overview.pdf. plants, in: Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Boulder (CO),
[13] A. Moisseytsev, J.J. Scienicki, Investigation of alternative May 24e25, 2011.
layouts for the supercritical carbon dioxide Brayton cycle for [31] G. Kimzey, Development of a Brayton Bottoming Cycle Using
a sodium-cooled fast reactor, Nucl. Eng. Des. 239 (2009) Supercritical Carbon Dioxide as the Working Fluid, Electric
1362e1371. Power Research Institute Report, Palo Alto (CA), 2012.
 N u c l E n g T e c h n o l 4 7 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 6 4 7 e6 6 1 661

[32] K. Martin, V. Dostal, Thermodynamic analysis and [38] W.S. Jeong, J.I. Lee, Y.H. Jeong, Potential improvements of
comparison of supercritical carbon dioxide cycles, in: supercritical recompression CO2 Brayton cycle by mixing
Supercritical CO2 Power Symposium, Boulder (CO), May other gases for power conversion system of a SFR, Nucl. Eng.
24e25, 2011. Des. 241 (2011) 2128e2137.
[33] A. Moisseytsev, J.J. Sienicki, Analysis of Supercritical CO2 [39] S.A. Wright, R.F. Radel, T.M. Conboy, G.E. Rochau, Modeling
Cycle Control Strategies and Dynamic Response for and Experimental Results for Condensing Supercritical CO2
Generation IV Reactors [Internet]. ANL-GenIV-124, 2009. Power Cycles, Sandia Report, SAND2010-8840, [Internet].
Available from: http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs/2011/04/ Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (CA), 2011 [cited
65270.pdf. 2011 Jan]. Available from: http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/
[34] A. Moisseytsev, J.J. Sienicki, Extension of the supercritical access-control.cgi/2010/108840.pdf.
carbon dioxide Brayton cycle for application to the Very High [40] J. Pasch, T. Conboy, D. Fleming, G. Rochau. Supercritical CO2
Temperature Reactor, in: International Congress on recompression brayton cycle: complete assembly description
Advanced Nuclear Power Plants, San Diego (CA), June 13e17, (2012) SANDIA REPORT, SAND2012-9546, U.S.A.
2010. [41] E.M. Clementoni, L.C. Timothy, C.P. Sprague, Startup and
[35] J.E. Cha, T.H. Lee, J.H. Eoh, S.H. Seong, S.O. Kim, D.E. Kim, operation of a supercritical carbon dioxide brayton cycle.
M.H. Kim, T.W. Kim, K.Y. Suh, Development of a supercritical GT2013-94275, in: ASME turbo expo, San Antonio (TX), June
CO2 Brayton energy conversion system coupled with a 3e7, 2013.
Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 41 (8) (2009) [42] M. Utamura, H. Hasuike, K. Ogawa, T. Yamamoto,
1025e1044. T. Fukushima, T. Watanabe, et al., Demonstration of
[36] H.J. Yoon, Y. Ahn, J.H. Lee, J.I. Lee, Y.H. Jeong, Studies on the supercritical CO2 closed regenerative brayton cycle in a
application of supercritical carbon dioxide cycle to a small bench scale experiment. GT2012-68697, in: ASME turbo expo,
modular reactor, in: International Congress on Advanced June 11e15, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012.
Nuclear Power Plants, Nice, France, May 2e5, 2011. [43] S.G. Kim, CFD investigation of a centrifugal compressor
[37] Y. Ahn, J. Lee, S.G. Kum, J.I. Lee, J.E. Cha, S.W. Lee, Design derived from pump technology for supercritical carbon
consideration of supercritical CO2 power cycle integral dioxide as a working fluid, J. Supercrit. Fluids 86 (2014)
experiment loop, Energy 86 (2015) 115e127. 160e171.

View publication stats