Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Exergy analysis and investigation for various feed water heaters of direct steam
generation solarthermal power plant
M.K. Gupta a, *, S.C. Kaushik b
a
b

Mechanical Engineering Department, Ujjain Engineering College, Ujjain, M.P. 456010, India
Centre for Energy Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, 110016, India

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 8 April 2009
Accepted 12 September 2009
Available online 29 October 2009

The energy and exergy analysis has been carried out for the different components of a proposed
conceptual direct steam generation (DSG) solarthermal power plant (STPP). It has been found that the
maximum energy loss is in the condenser followed by solar collector eld. The maximum exergy loss is
in the solar collector eld while in other plant components it is small. The possibilities to further improve
the plant efciency are identied and exploited. For minimum exergy loss in receiver the inlet
temperature of water to the receiver, which is governed by the number of feed water heaters (FWHs),
bleed pressure and mass fraction of bleed steam, must be optimum. The only one FWH has been
proposed in conceptual DSG STPP. In order to evaluate the optimum bleed pressure and mass fraction of
bleed steam to maximize the STPP efciency, the investigations are carried out for various bleed pressure
and mass fractions of bleed steam of proposed conceptual DSG STPP having one FWH. The investigations
for bleed pressure and mass fraction of bleed steam are also carried out by incorporating two and three
FWHs. It has been found that there will be signicant improvement in efciency by using three FWHs
and further gain in efciency is possible by making provision for more FWHs.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Energy and exergy analysis
Solarthermal power plant
Feed water heaters
Bleed pressure

1. Introduction
Energy conservation is a key goal of economy and it will
continue to be in near future. The most effective way to meet the
energy demand is to use energy more efciently. The exergy
analysis [1,2] method is a useful tool for promoting the goal of more
efcient energy-resource use, as it enables the locations, types and
true magnitudes of wastes and losses. The exergy analysis shows
the true measure of loss which is evident from the results of energy
and exergy analysis reported for various types of thermal power
plants of various capacities [36]. The popularity of exergy analysis
method has grown consequently and is still growing [711]. Habib
and. Zubair [7] quantied irreversible losses in components of
a regenerative Rankine cycle power plant and concluded that
maximum irreversible loss takes place in boiler, and regenerative
feed water heating reduces irreversible loss in boiler and whole
plant. Singh et al. [3] carried out the energy and exergy analysis for
the system components of a typical 50 kW solarthermal power
plant (STPP) under given operating conditions. The typical 50 kW
STPP uses thermic uid in solar collector eld. The high

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mk_gupta70@rediffmail.com (M.K. Gupta).
0960-1481/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2009.09.007

thermodynamic quality of solar radiation has led the researchers to

explore the efcient conversion of concentrated solar energy into
electrical energy by using thermodynamic power cycles. Solar
thermal power generation is one of the promising aspects [12] of
solar energy utilization. Techno-economic feasibility of parabolictrough based MW scale STPP with some incentives from the
government, has been well proven by the successful operation of
about 354 MW capacity solar electricity generation scheme in
California, USA [13]. The feasibility of the direct steam generation
(DSG) process in horizontal parabolic-trough collectors had already
been proven [14]. The rst conceptual and pre-commercial 5 MWe
capacity DSG STPP has been presented by Zarza et al. [15]. The only
one feed water heater (FWH) has been proposed in conceptual DSG
STPP, while in a conventional fossil fuel based thermal power plant
feed water preheating is done to improve the plant efciency [7].
The objective of the present study is to carry out the energy and
exergy analysis of the proposed conceptual design of 5 MWe DSG
STPP [15,16] to pinpoint the location and magnitude of the process
irreversibilities in system. For minimum exergy loss in receiver of
DSG STPP the inlet temperature of water which is governed by the
number of FWH, bleed pressure and mass fraction of bleed steam,
must be optimum. Thus, the investigations are carried out for
various bleed pressure and mass fractions of bleed steam of
proposed conceptual DSG STPP having one FWH in order to

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

evaluate the optimum bleed pressure and mass fraction of bleed

steam to maximize the STPP efciency. Further, the investigations
are also carried out by incorporating two and three FWHs.
2. Description of 5 MWe DSG STPP
The 5 MWe DSG STPP [15,16] is composed of a DSG parabolictrough solar collector eld connected to a superheated steam
Rankine power cycle (Fig. 1). The solar collector eld consists of
seven parallel rows of ET-100 collectors and each row is composed
of 10 collectors: 3 collectors for preheating water, 5 collectors for
water evaporation and 2 collectors for superheating steam. Table 1
gives the parameters of the ET-100 parabolic-trough collector and
design-point parameters for the solar collector eld. The design
point of solar collector eld is solar noon on June 21st. The solar
collector eld produces superheated steam at 410  C and 70 bar.
Fig. 2 shows the temperatureentropy plot of plant cycle. The steam
generated from solar collector eld enters the high-pressure
turbine (HPT) via pipeline-1 and it is divided in two streams at
outlet to HPT. The one stream is sent to inlet of the low-pressure
turbine (LPT), while another stream is used for feed water heating
and deaeration in a feed water tank/deaerator operated at 5.6 bar.
The exhaust steam from low-pressure turbine is condensed in
steam condenser with the help of cooling water from the cooling
tower. The condensate is pumped by condensate extraction pump
(CEP) to ejector and deaerator. Degasied water is then sent to the
solar collector eld inlet through pipeline-2 by the collector feed
water pump (CFP).
3. Energy and exergy analysis
Exergy is a generic term for a group of concepts that dene the
maximum work potential of a system, a stream of matter or a heat
interaction; the state of the (conceptual) environment being used
as the datum state. In an open ow system there are three types of
energy transfer across the control surface namely work transfer,
heat transfer, and energy associated with mass transfer or ow. The
work transfer is equivalent to exergy in every respect as exergy is
maximum work, which can be obtained from that form of energy.
The exergy ExQ of heat transfer Q from the control surface at
temperature T is determined from maximum rate of conversion of
thermal energy to work Wmax. The Wmax is given by
Q

Wmax Ex

Q 1  Ta =T

1229

Table 1
Parameters of the ET-100 parabolic-trough collector and design-point parameters
for the solar collector eld [14,15].
Number of parabolic-trough modules per collector
Number of collectors in a row Nc
Number of collector rows in collector eld Nr
Gross length of every module
Aperture width B
Overall length of a single collector L
Inner/outer diameter of steel absorber pipe Di/Do
Inner/outer diameter of glass cover Dci/Dco
Net collector aperture area per collector
Optical efciency ho at peak/ design point
Direct solar irradiance
Geographical longitude of the site
Geographical latitude of the site f
Ambient temperature Ta
Incidence angle of solar radiation

8
10
7
12.27 (m)
5.76 (m)
98.5 (m)
0.055/0.07 (m)
0.125/0.130 (m)
548.35 (m2)
0.765/0.74
875 (W/m2)
5 580 W
37 240 N
20 C
13.7

potential and physical exergy Exph. The kinetic and potential energy
are again equivalent to exergy. The physical specic exergy j
depends on initial state of matter and environmental state and is
given by b  ba, where b h  Ta s, sufx a refers to the environmental state, h is specic enthalpy; s is specic entropy and Ta is
environmental/ambient temperature.
Energy analysis is based on the rst law of thermodynamics,
which is related to the conservation of energy. Exergy analysis is
a method that uses the conservation of mass and conservation of
energy principles together with the second law of thermodynamics
for the analysis, design and improvement of energy systems. Exergy
analysis is a useful method; to complement not to replace energy
analysis. Unlike the mass and energy the exergy is not conserved.
The rst law of thermodynamics or energy balance for steady ow
process of an open system is given by

Ei

n
X

Qj

Eo Wnet

(2)

j1

11
1

(1)

Exergy of steady ow stream of matter is sum of kinetic,

Pipe-line 1
11

1 kg

2, 3, 7

10

y7 kg

10
Pipe-line 2

1-y7 kg

Condenser

Solar collector-field

LPT

HPT

6
4

5
5

FWH

CFP
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of DSG STPP [15,16].

6
CEP

S
Fig. 2. Temperatureentropy plot of DSG STPP.

1230

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

where Ei and Eo are respectively the energy associated with mass

entering and leaving the system, Qj is heat transfer to system from
source at Tj, and Wnet is net work developed by the system.
The exergy balance for steady ow process of an open system is
given by

Exi

ExQ

Exo ExW IR

(3)

where Exi and Exo are respectively the exergy associated with mass
inow and outow, ExQ is exergy associated with heat transfer, ExW
is exergy associated with work transfer and IR is irreversibility of
process. The irreversibility may be due to heat transfer through
nite temperature difference, mixing of uids and mechanical
friction. Exergy analysis is an effective means, to pinpoint losses
due to irreversibility in a real situation.
The energy or rst law efciency hI of a system or system
component is dened as the ratio of energy output to the energy
input of system or system component i.e.

hI

Desired output energy

Input energy supplied

(4)

(5)

The percentage energy loss lc of system or system component is

calculated as the ratio of energy loss in the system or system
component to the energy entering in the whole system. Similarly
the percentage exergy loss or efciency defect dc of system or
system components is dened as the ratio of exergy loss IRc in the
system or system component to the exergy Exinput entering in the
whole system. The dc is given by

dc IRc =Exinput  100

(6)

(8)

where TS y5600 K is apparent black body temperature of sun.

The energy absorbed Qa by receiver/absorber of solar collector
eld is given by

Qa ho Ib rb BLNc Nr ho QI

(9)

The heat energy Qa is transferred to water as useful heat gain

rate Qu by water owing through receiver tube and remaining
amount Qa  Qu is lost from the receiver to ambient as heat loss Ql.
The Qu is given by

(10)

The exergy Exa of heat absorbed by receiver at mean receiver

temperature Tr is given by

Exa Qa 1  Ta =Tr

(11)

The exergy gain Exu by water owing through receiver is

given by

Exu m10 j11  j10  m10 h11  h10  Ta s11  s10 

(12)

The mean receiver temperature Tr is calculated by

Ql Ul pDo Tr  Ta LNc Nr

(13)

The heat loss coefcient Ul is correlated in terms of Tr by

calculating the Ul for various values of Tr ranging from 523 to 723 K.
The Ul for a Tr is given by

3.1. Analysis of conceptual DSG STPP

The analysis for the individual components of DSG STPP (Fig. 1)
has been carried out by ignoring the kinetic and potential energy
change and assuming steady state operation. The energy Ej and
exergy Exj at state point j are represented respectively by mjhj and
mjjj. Table 2 shows the relations for the energy loss, hI, exergy loss
and hII for DSG STPP and its components by choosing each
component in Fig. 1 as a control volume. The total energy input to
DSG STPP is the energy QI received by the collector system or falling
on the aperture plane of collector. The QI by considering only the
beam component of solar radiation is given by

QI Ib rb BLNc Nr

ExI QI 1  Ta =TS

Qu m11 h11  m10 h10 m10 h11  h10

The exergy or second law efciency is dened as

Desired output
exergy output
hII

Maximum possible output

exergy input

where Ib is beam radiation falling on horizontal surface, the tilt

factor rb for beam radiation is rb cos q/cos qz, the minimum
angle of incidence q for NS horizontal axis tracking
is cos q sin fsin d cos fcos dcos u2 cos2 dsin2 u1=2 , zenith
angle qz is cos qz sin d sin f cos d cos f cosu and the declination
angle in degrees is given by d 23:45sin360=365284 n.
The total exergy input to DSG STPP or the exergy ExI received by
the collector system is calculated by

(7)

Ul q0loss =pDo Tr  Ta
where q0loss
for a Tr is

(14)

is heat loss rate per unit length of receiver tube. The Ul

calculated iteratively [17] by solving the following

equations:



4
q0loss q0co s pDco hw Tco  Ta ec pDco s Tco
 TS4

(15)

q0loss q0ci co 2pkc Tci  Tco =lnDco =Dci

(16)



. 1 D  1
0
0
o
4

1
qloss qrci pDo s Tr4  Tci
er Dci ec

(17)

Table 2
Relations for energy and exergy analysis of DSG STPP.
Components

Energy loss

Irreversibility

hI/100

hII/100

Collector
Receiver
Collector-receiver
Pipeline-1
HPT
LPT
Condenser
CEP
Deaerator
CFP
Pipeline-2
Whole-plant

QI  Qa
Qa  Qu
QI  Qu
m11h11  m1h1
m1h1  m2h2  WHPT
m3h3  m4h4  WLPT
m4h4  m5h5
WCEP(m6h6  m5h5)
m6h6 m7h7  m8h8
WCFP(m9h9  m8h8)
m9h9  m10h10
QI(WT  WP)

ExI  Exa
Exa  Exu
ExI  Exu
m11j11  m1j1
m1j1  m2j2  WHPT
m3j3  m4j4  WLPT
m4j4  m5j5
WCEP(m6j6  m5j5)
m6j6 m7j7  m8j8
WCFP(m9j9  m8j8)
m9j9  m10j10
ExI(WT  WP)

Qa/QI
Qu/Qa
Qu/QI
m1h1/m11h11
WHPT/(m1h1  m2h2)
WLPT/(m3h3  m4h4)

Exa/ExI
Exu/Exa
Exu/ExI
m1j1/m11j11
WHPT/(m1j1  m2j2)
WLPT/(m3j3  m4j4)

(m6h6  m5h5)/WCEP
m8h8/(m6h6 m7h7)
(m9h9  m8h8)/WCFP
m10h10/m9h9
(WT  WP)/QI

(m6j6  m5j5)/WCEP
m8j8/(m6j6 m7j7)
(m9j9  m8j8)/WCFP
m10j10/m9j9
(WT  WP)/ExI

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

The Ts is sky temperature and wind heat transfer coefcient hw

is taken 25 W/m2 K. The emmissivity ec of glass cover is taken equal
to 0.88 and the emmissivity er of cermet selective coating of
receiver [18] in terms of Tr is taken equal to er 0.00042Tr  0.0995.
The correlation for Ul in terms Tr obtained is

Ul 9:64479  0:0429686Tr 0:0000541032Tr2

(18)

The thermodynamic analysis of components related to Rankine

cycle of DSG STPP is carried out as per the analysis available in
thermodynamics textbooks. The state at inlet point 1 to HPT is
specied and exit state 2 is determined by using the mentioned exit
pressure p2 and isentropic efciency of HPT equal to 0.71. The work/
energy output WHPT of HPT is calculated by WHPT 0.88
(m1h1  m2h2) by assuming the hI of HPT equal to 0.88. The exit
state 2 from HPT is taken as state 3 at inlet to LPT and exit state 4
from LPT is determined by using the mentioned exit pressure p4
and isentropic efciency of LPT equal to 0.78. The work output WLPT
of LPT is calculated by WLPT 0.90 (m3h3  m4h4) by assuming the
hI of LPT equal to 0.90. The exergy output of HPT and LPT are
respectively equal to WHPT and WLPT. The exit state 5 from the
condenser is saturated water at condenser exit pressure p5. The hI
and hII for condenser have not been dened because there is no well
dened output. The exit state 6 to CEP is evaluated by assuming the
isentropic efciency of the CEP equal to 0.62. The work input WCEP
to CEP is calculated by WCEP (m6h6  m5h5)/0.85 by assuming the
hI of CEP equal to 0.85. The exit state 2 from HPT is also taken as
state 7 of bleed steam at inlet to deaerator. To determine the state 8
at exit to the deaerator the hI of the deaerator is assumed equal to
95%. The exit state 9 to CFP is evaluated by using the isentropic
efciency of the CFP equal to 0.62. The work input WCFP to CFP is
calculated by WCFP (m9h9  m8h8)/0.85, assuming the hI of CFP
equal to 0.85. The net work output of the whole plant is difference
of turbine work output W T and pump work input WP, where the W T
is WHPT WLPT and the WP is WCEP WCFP.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Energy and exergy analysis of proposed conceptual plant
Table 3 shows the mass ow rate, enthalpy and entropy of
water/steam at each thermodynamic state point represented in
Fig. 1 or Fig. 2 corresponding to design point [15,16] of proposed
conceptual DSG STPP. The physical exergy Exph at each state point is
calculated and is also tabulated in Table 3. The various quantities
obtained from the analysis are:
QI 34750.8 kW, Qa 25715.59 kW, Qu 22257.78 kW, Ql 34
57.81 kW, ExI 32932.59 kW, Tr 689.8 K, Ul 5.748 W/m2 K
Exu 10215.13 kW,
WHPT 2860.97 kW,
Exa 14792.62 kW,
Table 3
Thermodynamic parameters at different state points for 5 MWe DSG STPP
[ha 84.03 kJ/kg, sa 0.2965 kJ/kg K at 1 bar and 293 K].
State-points

p bar

T C

h kJ/kg

s kJ/kg K

m kg/s

Exph kJ/s

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

65
5.6
5.6
0.1525
0.1
5.6
5.6
5.6
84.46
80
70.6

402.51
172
172
54.317
45.8
45.91
172
139.2
141.1
129
407.6

3174.3
2790.19
2790.19
2351.8
191.8
192.69
2790.19
585.8
599.2
547.3
3177

6.5026
6.867
6.867
7.2458
0.6491
0.6502
6.867
1.73
1.742
1.616
6.472

8.464
8.464
7.083
7.083
7.083
7.083
1.381
8.464
8.464
8.464
8.464

10765.22
6610.414
5531.848
1640.601
31.577
35.598
1078.566
691.970
775.628
648.821
10863.95

1231

WLPT 2794.60 kW, WCEP 7.42 kW, WCFP 133.43 kW and

Wnet 5514.73 kW.
Table 4 shows the percentage energy loss, rst law efciency,
irreversibility, percentage exergy loss and the second law efciency
of each components of the proposed conceptual 5 MWe DSG STPP.
The rst and second law efciencies of whole plant are respectively
15.87% and 16.75%. The second law efciency of turbines is low due
to the low isentropic efciency of turbines. It is evident from Table 4
that the major energy loss is in the condenser (44.02%) followed by
collector eld (35.95%), while in other components the energy loss
is small. the irreversibility and exergy loss are mainly in the
collector eld and smaller in other components. The energy loss in
condenser is 44.02% while exergy loss in condenser is only 4.88%.
The amount of work that can be produced from heat rejected in
condenser will be negligible. Hence the exergy analysis makes it
easier to go for improvements in those components where the
exergy loss is more. It can also be concluded that there is potential
for improvement in deaerator (open FWH) because the rst law
efciency of deaerator is 95% while the second law efciency is
62.11%.
4.2. Improvement potential and further analysis
It is evident from results of exergy analysis that large exergy
losses in the decreasing order take place in collector and receiver.
The exergy loss in collector can be reduced by increasing the
concentration ratio of collector which is limited due to material and
design considerations and the exergy loss in receiver can be
reduced by keeping optimum mean temperature of receiver or heat
energy collection. For the maximum exergetic efciency of a PTC
row the inlet temperature of collector uid (water) circulating
through the receiver must be optimum for the same exit temperature of collector uid. The energy efciency of heat energy
collection of PTC row decreases with increase in mean temperature
of heat energy collection, but the energy efciency of Rankine cycle
block of plant increases. Thus, for the maximum combined efciency of DSG STPP the inlet temperature of collector uid (water)
circulating through the receiver must be optimum. The inlet
temperature of water to PTC row of DSG STPP depends on
temperature of feed water pre heated by steam bleed from turbine
stage. The proposed conceptual design of DSG STPP has only one
FWH. For optimum inlet temperature of water to PTC row as well as
for less exergy loss in FWH the number of FWHs must be more than
one and bleed pressure as well as corresponding bleed mass fraction of steam must be optimum. Hence, further analysis has been
carried out to investigate the effect of changing the bleed mass
fraction and bleed pressure of steam on efciency of DSG STPP. The

Table 4
Comparative results of exergy and energy analysis of various components for 5 MWe
DSG STPP.
Components

Energy
loss kW

Irreversibility
kW

Energy
loss %

Exergy
loss %

hI %

hII %

Collector
Receiver
collectoreld
Pipe-line1
HPT
LPT
Condenser
CEP
Deaerator
CFP
Pipeline-2
Whole-plant

9035.21
3457.81
12493.02

18139.97
4577.49
22717.46

26
9.95
35.95

55.08
13.90
68.98

74
86.55
64.05

44.91
69.05
31.02

22.85
390.13
310.51
15299.28
1.11
259.86
20.01
439.28
29236.06

98.74
1293.83
1096.64
1609.02
3.39
422.19
49.77
126.81
27417.86

0.066
1.123
0.894
44.02
0.003
0.748
0.058
1.264
84.13

0.30
3.93
3.33
4.88
0.01
1.28
0.15
0.38
83.25

99.91
88
90

85
95
85
91.33
15.87

99.09
68.86
71.82

54.19
62.11
62.69
83.65
16.75

1232

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

analysis has also been carried out by proposing incorporation of

two FWHs and three FWHs in the conceptual 5 MWe DSG STPP.
Analysis has been carried out for the same solar radiation
intensity by assuming same useful heat gain. For the purpose of
analysis it has been assumed that state of steam generated at exit to
PTC row is kept same by changing the mass ow rate of water. The
pressure drop and heat loss are also assumed same through pipelines and condenser. The expansion line from boiler pressure pB to
condenser pressure pC has been assumed same and having isentropic efciency of expansion equal to 0.75 for both turbines
combined. Thus, it is not required to determine the state at exit to
HPT or inlet to LPT. The total work of expansion in both turbines
combined is calculated by taking the rst law efciency of both
turbines combined equal to 0.90. The procedure followed is to
evaluate the thermodynamic state at all points starting from PTC
row exit to PTC row inlet after undergoing various processes in
thermodynamic cycle based on single open FWH (deaerator), or
two FWHs (one deaerator and other closed), or three FWHs (one
deaerator and others closed). For a calculated particular inlet
temperature of water to PTC row, the mass of steam generated is
calculated by

m1 Qu =h11  h10

(19)

4.3. Bleed pressure optimization for single open FWH

Fig. 3 shows the variation of efciency of DSG STPP for the case
of a single open FWH (Fig. 1) for various values of bleed pressure p7
and bleed mass fraction y7 of total ow at HPT inlet. The state point
7 for steam extraction may be in HPT or LPT as shown by dotted line
in Fig. 1. Though for the safety in open FWH/deaerator the pressure
in deaerator should be less than 9 bar but for conceptual understanding we have taken the higher bleed pressure range for
simulation. It is evident (Fig. 3) that efciency does not follow
monotonous trend with bleed pressure and bleed mass fraction. For
a particular bleed mass fraction if bleed pressure increases then the
efciency rst increases attains peak and then decreases. At lower
bleed pressure if bleed mass fraction is more, then the efciency
decreases and even it may be negative due to large pump work
because the vapour forms in the deaerator with increase in bleed
mass fraction. For lower range of bleed pressure it may be observed

15
.1

15
.3

(20)

It is evident (Table 5) that the optimum bleed mass fraction

corresponding to a bleed pressure is equal to the bleed mass fraction which makes the water leaving FWH saturated. The optimum
bleed mass fraction increases with bleed pressure. It can be seen
that for higher efciency (15.879%) the bleed pressure should be in
lower range, and highest efciency is attained at bleed pressure
equal to 4.1 bar and the bleed mass fraction equal to 0.1767. The
improvement in efciency for single FWH is not signicant by
changing the bleed pressure, as the irreversibility in FWH increases
more or less equal to reduction in irreversibility in PTC row.
4.4. Bleed pressure optimization for two FWH with and without
drip pump
Fig. 4 shows the DSG STPP having two FWHs with and without
drip pump. There are two extraction points to bleed the steam. The
extraction point B for closed FWH is in LPT while the extraction
point A for deaerator may be in HPT or LPT. The maximum
permissible amount of steam for feed water preheating should be
extracted from point B, as here the exergy of steam is low. The
maximum permissible bleed mass fraction for deaerator makes
feed water leaving the deaerator saturated. The temperature of feed
water leaving the closed FWH should be less than the temperature
of extracted steam. The maximum permissible bleed mass fraction
for closed FWH makes feed water leaving the closed FWH either
saturated or to attain the temperature equal to 5 less than the
temperature of extracted steam, whichever is possible. If we use an
open FWH for extraction point B then due to lower pressure/
saturation temperature vapour forms for higher bleed mass fractions which require large pump work. Thus, the FWH utilizing
steam extracted from point B must be closed one. For the

Table 5
Optimum and maximum bleed mass fractions for single FWH for various bleed
pressure p7.

15
.1

14 .9

15

15
.3

14
.9

15

.1
15

.1
15

15

9
14 .

15

1
15 .

1 FWH

14 .9

15

14 .9

14 .9

y7max h8 =0:95  h6 =h7  h6

15
.5

1
15 5 .6 15 .7
.5

.3
15

0.05

14 .9

15
.3

12

-3

15
.3

1511
.555.1
4 .912
.615

.3
15

15
.5

Bleed mas s frac t ion y7 (k g/ k g)

15. 7

0.1

15 .6

.9
1145
5.5.1.6
115
15

0.2

0.15

.5
15

15

Variation of efficiency I , IIx0.94 (%) [I T=875 W/m 2, Ta=293 K]

0.25

that particular efciency can be achieved for two different bleed

mass fractions. It can be seen that higher efciency is attained in
the pressure range 36 bar and bleed mass fraction in the range
from 0.11 to 0.17. The efciency reduces with higher bleed mass
fraction and higher bleed pressure, but the efciency is close to
optimum for lower bleed mass fraction and lower bleed pressure.
Thus there is wide choice for bleed pressure of single open FWH.
Table 5 shows the maximum efciency and corresponding
optimum bleed mass fraction y7opt for various bleed pressure p7.
The simulation to evaluate y7opt for a p7 has been carried out for
various values of y7 up to 0.03 more than y7max, where y7max for a p7
is amount of steam extracted to make the feed water leaving the
open FWH at state 8 to be saturated. The y7max is determined by

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bleed pressure p7 (bar)

Fig. 3. Variations of efciency with bleed pressure and bleed mass fraction of DSG
STPP with single open FWH.

p7 bar

y7max kg/kg

y7opt kg/kg

Maximum hI %

1.1
1.6
2.1
2.6
3.1
3.6
4.1
4.6
5.1
5.6
6
11
16
21
26

0.1090
0.1273
0.1411
0.1521
0.1615
0.1695
0.1767
0.1831
0.1890
0.1944
0.1984
0.2355
0.2603
0.2794
0.2950

0.1090
0.1273
0.1411
0.1521
0.1615
0.1695
0.1767
0.1831
0.1890
0.1944
0.1984
0.2355
0.2603
0.2794
0.2950

15.714
15.789
15.831
15.856
15.870
15.877
15.879
15.878
15.875
15.869
15.863
15.753
15.616
15.469
15.319

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

1 kg
3

LPT

5
6

FWH

1-yA kg

CFP

FWH
CEP
yB kg

7m
1-yA kg
E

1-yA-yB kg

Condenser

10

yB kg

yA kg

yB kg

yA kg

Solar collector-field

HPT

Condenser
With drip
1-yA-yB kg
pump

11

5
6

7
C

CEP

yB kg

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of DSG solarthermal power plant with two FWHs (a)
without drip pump (b) with drip pump.

degasication other FWH for extraction point A must be open type.

Fig. 5 shows the variation of yB, yA and efciency with pB and pA. The
bleed pressure pB for point B is taken in the range 0.22.4 bar, while
the bleed pressure pA for point A is taken in the range 2.59 bar. In
order to achieve maximum efciency for given values of pB and pA,
we have considered the maximum permissible bleed mass fraction
yB and yA respectively for closed FWH and deaerator. The values of
yA and yB for given values of pB and pA for the DSG STPP with two
FWHs without drip pump are calculated by:

yA h8 =0:95  h7 =hA  h7

(21)

yB 1  yA h7  h6 =0:95hB  hC

(22)

It can be seen (Fig. 5) that yB increases with increase of pB for

a pA, which is due to the fact that at higher pB the temperature of
bleed steam will be more. Thus, more quantity can be bleed to heat
the feed water leaving closed FWH to reach the temperature 5 less
than the temperature of bleed steam. The yB decreases little with
increase of pA for a pB, because the temperature of feed water at
inlet to closed FWH increases with increase of pA. The yA decreases

1.5
1
Bleed pres s ure pB (bar)

0.5

0.04
3

2
1.5
1
0.5

0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06

0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
6

0.04

0.1
0.08
0.06

Variation of efficiency I (%) [I T=875 W/m 2, Ta=293 K]

16
16

16 .1
16

(23)

yB 1  yA h7  h6 =0:95hB  hC h7  h6 

(24)

h7m 1  yA  yB h7 yB hE =1  yA

(25)

First the initial value of yA is assumed and yB and h7m are

determined. The obtained values of yB and h7m are used to evaluate
the new value of yA and iteration is carried out till the convergence
is obtained. It is evident (Tables 6 and 7) that yA reduces due to
higher temperature of feed water entering the deaerator and yB
reduces due to lesser amount of feed water from CEP by using drip
pump in comparison to without drip pump. The efciency
improves slightly with drip pump and improvement is more for
higher pB. The highest thermal efciency (16.17%) can be achieved
by keeping pB equal to 1.2 bar along with other corresponding

0.12

Variation of yA [I T=875 W/m 2, Ta=293 K]

0.1
4
0.08
0.0
0.12
0.06
0.1
0. 14
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.14
0.1
0.12 0.14
0.16
0.18
0.18
0.16
3
4
5
6
7
8

2 15 .8
15 .9
1.5
1 6
1
0.5

yA h8 =0:95  h7m =hA  h7m

pB bar

0.14

0.14

with increase of pB for a pA, because of the higher yB. The yA

increases with increase of pA for a pB, because of the higher saturation temperature of feed water leaving deaerator for higher pA. It
can be seen that the efciency hI for a pB rst increases and then
decreases with increase of pA. Thus, there is optimum pA for a pB. It
can be seen (Fig. 5) that higher efciency can be achieved by
keeping the pB in the range 0.61.2 bar with corresponding pA in
the range 6.58 bar. Table 6 shows the variation of maximum efciency and corresponding optimum pA, yB, and yA for various values
of pB. For a pB the efciency is evaluated for various pA to ascertain
the optimum pA which maximizes the efciency for that pB. The
bleed pressure pB for point B is taken in the range 0.22.5 bar for
the simulation, while the bleed pressure pA for point A is taken in
the range 0.1 bar more than pB to 9 bar. The highest thermal efciency (16.13%) can be achieved by keeping pB equal to 0.9 bar along
with other corresponding optimum parameters.
Table 7 shows the variation of maximum efciency and corresponding optimum pA, yB, and yA for various values of pB for DSG
STPP having two FWHs with drip pump. The heater drip leaving the
closed FWH at state C is mixed with feed water leaving closed FWH
by using a drip pump, instead of discharging it to condenser. The
values of yA and yB for given values of pB and pA for the DSG STPP
with two FWHs with drip pump are iteratively calculated by:

Table 6
Optimum parameters for two FWH without drip pump for various bleed pressure pB
in low pressure closed FWH.

Variation of yB [I T=875 W/m 2, Ta=293 K]

2 0.14

16.1

16.133

16.1
16
5
6
7
Bleed pressure pA (bar)

1233

16.1
16

Fig. 5. Variations of parameters with bleed pressures of DSG STPP with two FWHs.

0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.2
2.5

Optimum parameters corresponding to pB

pA bar

yA kg/kg

yB kg/kg

4.7
5.3
5.8
6.3
6.6
7
7.3
7.6
7.9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

0.17191
0.16649
0.16253
0.16000
0.15641
0.15450
0.15215
0.15021
0.14859
0.14548
0.14174
0.13822
0.13488
0.13172
0.12869
0.12580
0.12302
0.12035
0.11778
0.11288
0.10608

0.01555
0.03107
0.04283
0.05237
0.06060
0.06772
0.07413
0.07994
0.08524
0.09033
0.09519
0.09978
0.10412
0.10825
0.11220
0.11598
0.11962
0.12312
0.12650
0.13293
0.14190

Maximum hI %

15.972
16.042
16.082
16.106
16.121
16.129
16.133
16.134
16.133
16.129
16.124
16.117
16.110
16.101
16.091
16.081
16.071
16.059
16.048
16.023
15.985

1234

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

Table 7
Optimum parameters for two FWH with drip pump for various bleed pressure pB in
low pressure closed FWH.
pB bar

Maximum hI %

Optimum parameters corresponding to pB

0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.2
2.5

pA bar

yA kg/kg

yB kg/kg

4.7
5.3
5.8
6.3
6.7
7
7.3
7.6
7.9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

0.17178
0.16624
0.16217
0.15957
0.15690
0.15395
0.15154
0.14955
0.14789
0.14474
0.14096
0.13740
0.13403
0.13083
0.12778
0.12485
0.12205
0.11935
0.11674
0.11180
0.10492

0.01527
0.02996
0.04076
0.04932
0.05650
0.06274
0.06822
0.07312
0.07755
0.08177
0.08577
0.08951
0.09303
0.09635
0.09951
0.10251
0.10538
0.10813
0.11077
0.11575
0.12262

15.973
16.046
16.090
16.118
16.138
16.152
16.161
16.168
16.173
16.176
16.177
16.177
16.176
16.174
16.171
16.168
16.164
16.160
16.155
16.145
16.128

Table 8
Optimum parameters for three FWH for various bleed pressure pB in low pressure
closed FWH.
pB bar

0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.2
2.5

optimum parameters. It can be concluded that the efciency by

having two FWHs in general improves over the single FWH case.
4.5. Bleed pressure optimization for three FWH
In this arrangement (Fig. 6) one more closed FWH, which
preheats the feed water leaving the deaerator by bleeding the
steam from state point D is also proposed. The pressure pD is higher
than pA, and the heater drip from state point E is discharged to
deaerator. Table 8 shows the variation of maximum efciency for
various values of bleed pressure pB and corresponding optimum pA,
pD, yB, yA and yD for DSG STPP having three FWHs. For the simulation the bleed pressure pB for point B is taken in the range 0.2
2.5 bar, the bleed pressure pA for point A is taken in the range
0.1 bar more than pB to 8 bar and the bleed pressure pD for point D
is taken in the range 0.1 bar more than pA to 12 bar. For a pB and pA
the efciency is evaluated for various pD to ascertain the optimum

Optimum parameters corresponding to pB

pA bar

pD bar

yB kg/kg

yA kg/kg

yD kg/kg

3.1
3.4
3.6
3.7
3.9
4
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
5
5.1
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.5
5.7

12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12

0.01339
0.02696
0.03741
0.04605
0.05348
0.06005
0.06597
0.07138
0.07637
0.08102
0.08538
0.08949
0.09339
0.09711
0.10065
0.10405
0.10731
0.11046
0.11349
0.11927
0.12732

0.10617
0.10205
0.09793
0.09305
0.09115
0.08786
0.08697
0.08452
0.08238
0.08050
0.07881
0.07731
0.07595
0.07471
0.07359
0.07256
0.07001
0.06917
0.06839
0.06700
0.06380

0.18299
0.17606
0.17171
0.16960
0.16552
0.16354
0.15969
0.15782
0.15599
0.15418
0.15241
0.15067
0.14896
0.14727
0.14561
0.14398
0.14398
0.14237
0.14079
0.13769
0.13467

Maximum
hI %
16.504
16.559
16.587
16.601
16.606
16.606
16.603
16.597
16.589
16.580
16.569
16.558
16.546
16.533
16.520
16.507
16.493
16.479
16.465
16.436
16.392

pD which maximizes the efciency for those pB and pA. For a pB the
efciency is evaluated for various pA at corresponding optimum pD
to ascertain the optimum pA which maximizes the efciency for
that pB. The values of yA, yB and yD for given values of pB, pA and pD
for the DSG STPP with three FWHs are calculated by following
sequence of equations:

yD h9a  h9 =0:95hD  hE

(26)

yA h8 =0:95  yD hE  1  yD h7 =hA  h7

(27)

yB 1  yA  yD h7  h6 =0:95hB  hC

(28)

It is evident (Table 8) that by using three FWHs there is significant improvement in efciency. The highest thermal efciency
(16.60%) can be achieved by keeping pB equal to 0.7 bar along with
other corresponding optimum parameters.
5. Conclusion

1 kg

11

HPT
A

9a
E

FWH

CFP
yD kg

y B kg

y A kg

10

Condenser
With drip
pump

yD kg

Solar collector-field

LPT

1-yA-yB-yD kg

7
1-yA-yD kg

yB kg

CEP
C

Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of DSG solarthermal power plant with three FWHs.

The energy and exergy analysis has been carried out of

a conceptually proposed direct steam generation (DSG) solar
thermal power plant (STPP) having only one feed water heater
(FWH). The major energy loss has been found to occur in condenser
followed by collector eld. The exergy analysis shows that collector
eld is main source of exergy destruction. The exergy loss in
condenser is insignicant, because in the condenser the low quality
energy is lost. Thus, the exergy analysis provides a more accurate
measurement of the actual inefciencies in the system and the true
location of these inefciencies. The results of exergy analysis of DSG
STPP point out that collector and receiver require improvement. To
reduce exergy loss in collector, material constraints play an
important role and hence, extensive work in this direction is to be
carried out to make STPP a real success. To reduce the exergy loss in
receiver of DSG STPP the temperature of water at inlet to row of
parabolic-trough collector must be optimum. Only marginally
change in efciency has been observed by changing the bleed mass
fraction and bleed pressure of DSG STPP with single FWH and the
optimum bleed pressure has been found to be 4.1 bar with
maximum efciency equal to 15.879%. The optimization has also

M.K. Gupta, S.C. Kaushik / Renewable Energy 35 (2010) 12281235

been carried out by incorporating two and three FWHs. The

maximum efciency equal to 16.134% can be achieved by using the
two FWHs without drip pump. It has been found that by using three
FWHs there is signicant improvement in maximum efciency
(16.606%). and for higher efciency at least three FWHs are must.
Further enhancement in efciency of DSG STPP is possible by
making provision for more number of FWHs.
References
[1] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Butterworths; 1985.
[2] Bejan A. Advanced engineering thermodynamics. Wiley Interscience Pub;
1988.
[3] Singh N, Kaushik SC, Mishra RD. Exergetic analysis of a solar thermal power
system. Renewable Energy 2000;19:13543.
[4] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC. Exergetic utilization of solar energy for feed water
preheating in a conventional thermal power plant. International Journal of
Energy Research 2009;33:593604.
[5] Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Khanmohammadi S. Exergy analysis of a 420 MW
combined cycle power plant. International Journal of Energy Research
2008;32:17583.
[6] Mago PJ, Srinivasan KK, Chamra LM, Somayaji C. An examination of exergy
destruction in organic Rankine cycles. International Journal of Energy
Research 2008;32:92638.
[7] Habib MA, Zubair SM. Second-law-based thermodynamic analysis of regenerative-reheat Rankine-cycle power plants. Energy 1992;17:295301.
[8] Habib MA, Said SAM, Al-Zaharna I. Optimization of reheat pressures in
thermal power plants. Energy 1995;20:55565.
[9] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC. Exergetic performance evaluation and parametric
studies of solar air heater. Energy 2008;33:1691702.
[10] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC. Performance evaluation of solar air heater for various
articial roughness geometries based on energy, effective and exergy efciencies. Renewable Energy 2009;34:46576.

1235

[11] Gupta MK, Kaushik SC. Performance evaluation of solar air heater having
expanded metal mesh as articial roughness on absorber plate. International
Journal of Thermal Sciences 2009;48:100716.
[12] Beerbaum S, Weinrebe G. Solar thermal power generation in India a technoeconomic analysis. Renewable Energy 2000;21:15374.
[13] Price H, Lupfert E, Kearney D, Zarza E, Cohen G, Gee R, et al. Advances in
parabolic trough solar power technology. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering
2002;124:10925.
[14] Eck M, Zarza E, Eickhoff M, Rheinlander J, Valenzuela L. Applied research
concerning the direct steam generation in parabolic troughs. Solar Energy
2003;74:34151.
[15] Zarza E, Rojas ME, Gonzalez L, Caballero JM, Rueda F. INDITEP: The rst precommercial DSG solar power plant. Solar Energy 2006;80:12706.
[16] Eck M, Zarza E. Saturated steam process with direct steam generating parabolic troughs. Solar Energy 2006;80:142433.
[17] Dufe JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. New York,
U.S.A.: Wiley; 1991.
[18] Odeh SD, Morrison GL, Behnia M. Modelling of parabolic trough direct steam
generation solar collectors. Solar Energy 1998;62:395406.

Nomenclature
hj: enthalpy at state point j (J/Kg)
kc: thermal conductivity of glass cover (W/m K)
mj: mass ow rate at state point j (Kg/s)
n: day of the year
pj: pressure at state point j (N/m2)
Tc: temperature of glass cover (K)
Tj: temperature at state point j (K)
B: aperture width (m)
yj: bleed mass fraction at state point j
f: latitude of location
jj: specic physical exergy at state point j
u: hour angle
s: Stefans constant