Efficient solution regeneration is crucial for the continuous operation of frost-free air-source heat pump (FFASHP). However, the lack of quantitative comparison of various solution regeneration methods at the same scale complicates the selection of regeneration method. To address this issue, this paper investigates five typical regeneration methods: air-driven evaporation (ADE), single effect distillation (SED), multi-effect distillation (MED), mechanical vapor recompression (MVR), and electrodialysis (ED). Models for the five regeneration systems are developed and verified. The effects of design parameters on these performance indices are analyzed, and global optimization is used to optimize the parameters. Based on this, the performance of the five regenerators is compared and analyzed. Finally, a case study is conducted to simulate the annual performance and calculate the lifecycle costs of the five regenerators. The results shows that the specific energy consumption of ADE, SED, MED, MVR, and ED system are 32, 105, 37, 12, and 432 kWh/t, respectively. ADE can utilize extremely low-grade thermal energy, but it is significantly impacted by climatic conditions. MED has a lower specific energy consumption compared to SED due to the utilization of latent heat. MVR employs a heat pump-like cycle, substantially improving the utilization of latent heat and significantly reducing specific energy consumption. ED has the highest specific energy consumption for the influence of concentration polarization. In terms of regeneration rates, ADE and ED have very low regeneration rates. Among the methods relying on boiling, the rates are relatively higher, with MED having the highest regeneration rate. In the case study, the lifecycle costs of ADE, SED, MED, MVR, and ED system are 2.5k, 17.1k, 26.7k, 38.9k, and 33.0k USD, respectively. The results shows that ADE is the most economical method for small-scale FFASHP.

中文翻译：

---

无霜空气源热泵 5 种溶液再生方法的性能分析与比较


高效的溶液再生对于无霜空气源热泵 （FFASHP） 的连续运行至关重要。然而，缺乏相同尺度下各种溶液再生方法的定量比较，使再生方法的选择变得复杂。为了解决这个问题，本文研究了五种典型的再生方法：空气驱动蒸发 （ADE）、单效蒸馏 （SED）、多效蒸馏 （MED）、机械蒸汽再压缩 （MVR） 和电渗析 （ED）。开发和验证了五个再生系统的模型。分析了设计参数对这些性能指标的影响，并使用全局优化来优化参数。基于此，对 5 个再生器的性能进行了比较和分析。最后，进行了案例研究以模拟 5 个再生器的年度性能并计算其生命周期成本。结果表明：ADE、SED、MED、MVR、ED系统的比能耗分别为32、105、37、12和432 kWh/t。ADE 可以利用极低品位的热能，但它会受到气候条件的显着影响。由于利用潜热，与 SED 相比，MED 的比能耗较低。MVR 采用类似热泵的循环，大大提高了潜热的利用率，并显著降低了单位能耗。ED 在浓度极化的影响下具有最高的比能耗。在再生速率方面，ADE 和 ED 的再生速率非常低。在依赖煮沸的方法中，煮沸率相对较高，其中 MED 的再生率最高。在案例研究中，ADE、SED、MED、MVR 和 ED 系统的生命周期成本为 2。分别为 5k、17.1k、26.7k、38.9k 和 33.0k 美元。结果表明，ADE 是小规模 FFASHP 最经济的方法。