Aspen Plus® simulations using the Peng‐Robinson (PR‐EOS) and the COSMO‐SAC models were performed to study absorption power cycles (APCs) using mixtures of R‐134a with two ionic liquids, [C₂C₁im][Tf₂N] or [C₆C₁im][Tf₂N], and compared against an R‐134a organic Rankine cycle (ORC) operating under similar conditions. The PR‐EOS results were in agreement with calculations from a PR model fitted to the R‐134a + IL experimental phase equilibrium data. The APCs have similar efficiencies and outperform the ORC by 3%–46%, with the largest differences observed when operating with lower grade (lower T_H) heating sources, lower quality cooling (higher T_L), and lower subcooling in the pump inlet stream. The PR‐EOS and the Conductor‐like Screening Model Segment Activity Coefficient (COSMO‐SAC) results follow similar trends, but numerical discrepancies are observed in the cycle efficiencies and stream flow rates and compositions due to differences in solubilities and enthalpy changes between both models, suggesting that improvements are needed to increase the accuracy of COSMO‐SAC for these systems.

中文翻译：

---

余热发电：基于离子液体的吸收循环与有机朗肯循环

使用Peng-Robinson（PR-EOS）和COSMO-SAC模型进行AspenPlus®模拟，以研究R-134a与两种离子液体[C ₂ C ₁ im] [Tf]的吸收功率循环（APC）。₂ N]或[C ₆ C ₁ im] [Tf ₂ N]，并与在类似条件下运行的R-134a有机朗肯循环（ORC）进行了比较。PR-EOS结果与根据R-134a + IL实验相平衡数据拟合的PR模型的计算结果一致。APC的效率相似，并且比ORC的性能高出3％–46％，在使用较低等级（较低T _H）的热源，较低质量的冷却（较高的）时，观察到的差异最大。T _L），并降低泵入口流中的过冷度。PR-EOS和类似导体的筛查模型段活度系数（COSMO-SAC）结果遵循相似的趋势，但是由于两个模型之间的溶解度和焓变不同，在循环效率，流率和组成方面存在数值差异，表明需要改进以提高这些系统的COSMO-SAC的准确性。