Next Article in Journal
Optimizing Hole Cleaning in Horizontal Shale Wells: Integrated Simulation Modeling in Bakken Formation Through Insights from South Pars Gas Field
Previous Article in Journal
Service Restoration Strategy for Distribution Networks Considering Multi-Source Collaboration and Incomplete Fault Information
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sensitivity Analysis in Simple Cycles for Hydrogen Liquefaction

by
Kevin M. Omori
1,
Ramón Mazon-Cartagena
2,
María J. Fernández-Torres
2,
José A. Caballero
2,
Mauro A. S. S. Ravagnani
1,*,
Leandro V. Pavão
1 and
Caliane B. B. Costa
1
1
Chemical Engineering Graduate Program, State University of Maringa, Av. Colombo 5790, Maringa 87020-900, PR, Brazil
2
Institute of Chemical Process Engineering, University of Alicante, Ap. Correos 99, 03080 Alicante, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2025, 13(10), 3076; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103076
Submission received: 20 August 2025 / Revised: 12 September 2025 / Accepted: 22 September 2025 / Published: 25 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Energy Systems)

Abstract

Due to the increase in global energy demand, as well as environmental concerns, hydrogen presents itself as a promising energy source. Liquid hydrogen is more suited for long-distance transportation, but hydrogen liquefaction is an energy-intensive process, and many studies have been published proposing more efficient liquefaction cycles. In this study, simple hydrogen liquefaction cycles like Claude, pre-cooled Linde–Hampson (PLH), single mixed refrigerant (SMR), and dual mixed refrigerant (DMR) were assessed regarding the influence of the cycle’s high pressure on energy efficiency, exergy destruction, and its distribution along the equipment. Among the main results, Claude presented the best specific energy consumption (SEC) of 16.47 kWh/kgLH, followed by DMR with an SEC of 17.30 kWh/kgLH, SMR with 17.58 kWh/kgLH, and finally PLH, with an SEC of 45.07 kWh/kgLH. The exergy efficiency followed the same pattern as the SEC, with Claude having the lowest exergy destruction, followed by DMR and SMR with close exergy destruction, and finally PLH. Nonetheless, although cycles were not optimized in evaluating the effect of increasing the high pressure, which constrains the direct applicability of the result found, especially in the pre-cooled cycles, the analysis provides valuable insights into the sensitivity of cycle performance. The method and its findings provide the basis for further studies, including optimization steps.
Keywords: hydrogen liquefaction; process simulation; hydrogen liquefaction cycles; Claude cycle; pre-cooled Linde–Hampson cycle; mixed refrigerant cycles hydrogen liquefaction; process simulation; hydrogen liquefaction cycles; Claude cycle; pre-cooled Linde–Hampson cycle; mixed refrigerant cycles

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Omori, K.M.; Mazon-Cartagena, R.; Fernández-Torres, M.J.; Caballero, J.A.; Ravagnani, M.A.S.S.; Pavão, L.V.; Costa, C.B.B. Sensitivity Analysis in Simple Cycles for Hydrogen Liquefaction. Processes 2025, 13, 3076. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103076

AMA Style

Omori KM, Mazon-Cartagena R, Fernández-Torres MJ, Caballero JA, Ravagnani MASS, Pavão LV, Costa CBB. Sensitivity Analysis in Simple Cycles for Hydrogen Liquefaction. Processes. 2025; 13(10):3076. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103076

Chicago/Turabian Style

Omori, Kevin M., Ramón Mazon-Cartagena, María J. Fernández-Torres, José A. Caballero, Mauro A. S. S. Ravagnani, Leandro V. Pavão, and Caliane B. B. Costa. 2025. "Sensitivity Analysis in Simple Cycles for Hydrogen Liquefaction" Processes 13, no. 10: 3076. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103076

APA Style

Omori, K. M., Mazon-Cartagena, R., Fernández-Torres, M. J., Caballero, J. A., Ravagnani, M. A. S. S., Pavão, L. V., & Costa, C. B. B. (2025). Sensitivity Analysis in Simple Cycles for Hydrogen Liquefaction. Processes, 13(10), 3076. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103076

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop