Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy
Laboratory of Energetic Mechanics and Engineering (LEMI), Faculty of Engineering, University of Boumerdes, Independence Avenue, Boumerdes, 35000,
Algeria
Faculty of Mechanical and Process Engineering, University of Sciences and Technologies Houari Boumediene, BP 32 EL e Alia, Bab Ezzouar, 16111, Algiers,
Algeria
b
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 24 October 2014
Received in revised form
20 February 2015
Accepted 21 April 2015
Available online 15 May 2015
Design optimization of a (heat recovery steam generator) HRSG is essential due to its direct impact on
large power generation combined cycles. This study is aimed at giving a thermodynamic comparison
between the optimums of three congurations of HRSG operating at exhaust gas temperature (TOT) from
350 C to 650 C. The optimization results, using PSO (Particle Swarm Optimization) method, show that
adding another pressure level allows achieving a higher pressure at the inlet of high pressure turbine,
producing more steam quantities, destroying less exergy and nally producing more specic work
independently of TOT. For a given value of 600 C representative of TOT of recent gas turbines, an
addition of a pressure level is shown to increase the specic work of about 17 kJ/kg, representing a
benet of about 10% for the steam cycle, whereas a third pressure level results in 8 kJ/kg increase in the
specic work, corresponding to 4% in the steam cycle.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
HRSG (heat recovery steam generator)
Exhaust gas temperature
Combined cycle performance
Optimization
PSO (Particle Swarm Optimization)
technique
1. Introduction
Among improvements made to reduce the fuel consumption
and the greenhouse gas emissions of the (gas turbines) GT, especially CO2, the introduction of the (combined cycle) CC as a favorite
facility for electricity generation, reaching a thermal efciency of
60%. The bottoming steam cycle provides about 30e40 % of the
overall generated power, and any improvement could mainly be
done through optimizing HRSG (heat recovery steam generator).
In this context several studies were done, such as the one of
Franco and Casarosa [1] who investigated the possibility of
increasing efciency of CC for 60% and compared between HRSG
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mahmoudnadir82@hotmail.com (M. Nadir), ag1964@yahoo.
com (A. Ghenaiet).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.04.023
0360-5442/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
with one, two and three pressure levels with and without reheat,
considering three values of TOT (Turbine Outlet Temperature);
700 K, 773 K and 823 K. Khaliq and Kaushik [2] focused their work
to show the importance of GT reheat in improving the CC global
performance, especially the specic work. Also, Sanjay et al. [3]
studied the effect of reheated expansion when turbine blades
are cooled by a steam fraction extracted from HRSG. They showed
that with three pressure levels and steam reheat the thermal efciency may reach 62%. Bassily [4,5] optimized the whole CC in
which the steam cycle is reheated at two and three pressure levels,
resulting in an efciency enhancement of 1.9e2.1 % compared to
the design case. Polyzakis et al. [6] optimized and compared between the simple, intercooled, reheated and intercooled-reheated
GT when coupled to a simple steam cycle, and concluded that the
reheat is the most suitable solution. Godoy et al. [7] optimized CC
simple steam cycle by maximizing its exergetic efciency for a
wide range of power with the determination of HRSG optimal
surface.
686
2. Thermodynamic analysis
The diagrams of the three HRSG congurations are shown in
Fig. 1, they are of a natural circulation type. The diagrams of
temperature-transferred heat corresponding to those of Fig. 1 are
given by Fig. 2. For an easy presentation, only the modeling of HRSG
with three pressure levels and a reheat is shown.
The work produced by the steam cycle per a unit mass of
exhaust gas is written as follows:
(1)
u1, u2 and u3 represent the fractions of steam for the rst, second and third pressure level.
In general terms, the steady state exergy balance applied for a
given control volume is written as follows:
X
j
!
X
X
T0
mi exi
me exe Exd 0
1
Qj W
Tj
e
i
(2)
For 1 kg of exhaust gas, by considering a control volume corresponding to the whole steam cycle and by neglecting the exergy
of heat transfer, equation (2) becomes:
(3)
(4)
exdr
exd
exn
(5)
exn represents the net exergy carried into the control volume:
(6)
u3 he
SH 3P
hi
EV 3P
u3 he
RH
hi
RH
u3 he
SH 3P
he
EV 3P
(8)
ESH
3P
ERH
Tse SH 3P Tse
TOT Tse EV
EV 3P
(9)
3P
Tse RH Tsi RH
Tg2 Tsi RH
(10)
Tg4 Tsi
EV 3P
DTP3P
(11)
u3 he
EC 3P
hi
EC 3P
(12)
Equations 7e12 represent a system of 6 equations with 6 unknowns which are: u3,Tse SH 3P,Tse RH,Tg2,Tg4 and Tg5, which are
solved by using a numerical method.
687
Fig. 1. Diagrams of HRSGs congurations: a) HRSG 1P, b) HRSG 2P, c) HRSG 3P.
ESH
2P
Tse
Tse
Tg5 Tse EV
SH 2P
ESH
EV 2P
EV 2P
2P
DTP2P
(14)
u2 he
SH 2P
hi
EV 2P
(15)
u3 u2 he
EC 2P
hi
EC 2P
1P
Tse
(13)
Tg7 Tsi
For the rst pressure level, similar relations as for second level
still apply. By knowing the evaporator exit steam temperature, the
exit temperature of superheater is obtained from the denition of
effectiveness:
(16)
SH 1P Tse
Tg8 Tse EV
EV 1P
(17)
1P
Tg10 Tsi
EV 1P
DTP1P
(18)
u1 he
SH 1P
hi
EV 1P
(19)
u3 u2 u1 he
EC 1P
hi
EC 1P
(20)
688
Fig. 2. The temperature-transferred heat diagram: a) HRSG 1P, b) HRSG 2P, c) HRSG 3P.
(21)
hth
CC
WGT WSC
QGT
(22)
hex
CC
WGT WSC
ExGT
(23)
3. Optimization
This study addresses a global non-linear problem of optimization with constraints, thus, the following illustrates its mathematical formulation and the algorithm of the used PSO method. A
problem of optimization is mainly constituted of an objective
function, optimization variables and constraints.
3.1. Objective function and optimization variables
For a given GT, the values of TOT and specic work are xed,
and hence the optimization of CC only requires the steam cycle
specic work per unit mass of exhaust gas to be maximized.
689
8
Maximize f X with f X Wsc X
>
>
>
> X p1 ; p2 ; p3 ; ESH 1P ; ESH 2P ; ESH 3P ; ERH ; DTP1P ; DTP2P ; DTP3P
>
>
>
>
under the following constraints :
>
>
>
>
x 0:88 0
>
>
<
Tse SH 1P 853K 0; Tse SH 2P 853K 0 and Tse SH 3P 853K 0
Ts
>
e RH 853K 0
>
>
>
>
Tg11 353K 0
>
>
>
>
> DTP1P 10K 0; DTP2P 10K 0 and DTP3P 10K 0
>
>
>
0:85 0; ESH 2P 0:85 0; ESH 3P 0:85 0 and ERH 0:85 0
E
>
: SH 1P
p3 160bar 0
vt1
w vtk c1 ut1 Pbest
k
t
k
Xkt c2 ut2 Gbest
t
k
Xkt
(24)
(25)
Fig. 3. PSO method owchart.
690
Table 1
Computing time.
1P
2P
3P
N 50
N 100
N 200
N 300
21 s
23 s
33 s
39 s
54 s
48 s
58 s
91 s
89 s
77 s
125 s
110 s
the model and the real data is presented in Table 3. The latter shows
that the calculated values are close to the real data and that the
difference between them is acceptable. The light difference is due
to some aspects not considered by the present model such as
auxiliary equipment consumption.
Fig. 5 gives, for several TOTs, the evolutions of the optimal values
of pressure at inlet of HP (High pressure) turbine. As shown, the
Table 2
Main data of gas turbine PG9371FB [34].
Parameter (unit)
Gas turbine
Pressure ratio
Turbine inlet temperature ( C)
Exhaust gas mass ow rate (kg/s)
Exhaust gas temperature ( C)
Net output (MW)
Steam cycle
1st level pressure (bar)
2nd level pressure (bar)
3rd level pressure (bar)
1st level steam mass ow rate (kg/s)
2nd level steam mass ow rate (kg/s)
3rd level steam mass ow rate (kg/s)
Maximal steam cycle temperature ( C)
Stack temperature ( C)
Condenser pressure (bar)
Net output (MW)
Value
18.5
1427
657.5
644
285.3
4.2
25.3
142.5
12.63
12.76
86.7
565
96
0.12
145.5
691
Table 3
Model validation.
Parameter (unit)
Real data
Model results
Power (MW)
1st level mass ow rate (kg/s)
2nd level mass ow rate (kg/s)
3rd level mass ow rate (kg/s)
Maximal steam cycle temperature ( C)
Stack temperature ( C)
145.5
12.63
12.76
86.7
565
96
146.21
13.01
13.51
88.07
564.9
94.8
692
Fig. 9. Steam temperature at inlet HP turbine: a) HRSG 1P, b) HRSG 2P, c) HRSG 3P.
693
about 1/8 and 1/7 respectively, in relation to the total fraction of 3P.
For HRSG 2P and for the same TOT, the fraction of the 1st level
represents about 1/5 in relation to the total fraction of 2P.
The evolution of destroyed exergy with TOT is illustrated by
Fig. 13. It is clear that for HRSG with the highest pressure level, the
destroyed exergy is the lowest. For all TOT values, steam cycle with
three pressure levels destroys less exergy as compared with 2P and
1P. Steam cycle with one pressure level destroys more exergy
namely for low TOT, where for example for values less than 450 C
it destroys more than 40% of the exergy supplied at the HRSG. Also,
this gure shows that the destroyed exergy rate decreases when
TOT is increased.
To summarize, the pinch point tends to the lowest possible
value and the superheater effectiveness tends to the highest
possible value, but they are limited by the heat exchange area. This
result has already been shown by other studies considering a single
TOT value. However, the present study has shown that for TOT
higher than 600 C, superheater effectiveness is also constrained by
the maximal steam cycle temperature. Adding another pressure
level allows achieving higher pressure, producing more steam
quantities, destroying less exergy and nally producing more specic work.
Fig. 12. Steam fractions of different levels: a) HRSG 2P, b) HRSG 3P.
694
5. Conclusion
A thermodynamic optimization has been undertaken for
different HRSG conguration 1P, 2P and 3P with reheat, considering
several values of exhaust gas temperature and several constraints
that represent the state of art of combined cycles. The results show
that adding another level of pressure leads to improving the steam
cycle performance independently of TOT. Concerning the optimization method, PSO algorithm was used successfully in HRSG
optimization, moreover, this method is easy to implement
comparing with the other methods. Concerning the design parameters, the following conclusions can also be drawn:
Adding a pressure level, allows reaching higher optimal pressures and producing higher steam fractions for all considered
TOTs.
Steam fractions at LP and IP levels are lower than those of HP
level.
Optimal superheater effectiveness tends to a maximum, but it is
constrained by the limit of temperature.
Pinch point tends to its lowest value, but it is constrained by the
exchange area.
References
[1] Franco A, Casarosa C. On some perspectives for increasing the efciency of
combined cycle power plants. Appl Therm Eng 2002;22:1501e18.
[2] Khaliq A, Kaushik SC. Second-law based thermodynamic analysis of Brayton/Rankine combined power cycle with reheat. Appl Energy 2004;78:
179e97.
[3] Sanjay Y, Singh Onkar, Prasad BN. Energy and exergy analysis of steam
cooled reheat gasesteam combined cycle. Appl Therm Eng 2007;27:
2779e90.
[4] Bassily AM. Modeling, numerical optimization, and irreversibility reduction of
a dual-pressure reheat combined cycle. Energy 2005;81:127e51.
[5] Bassily AM. Modeling, numerical optimization, and irreversibility reduction of
a triple-pressure reheat combined cycle. Energy 2007;32:778e94.
[6] Polyzakis AL, Koroneos C, Xydi G. Optimum gas turbine cycle for combined
cycle power plant. Energy Convers Manag 2008;49:551e63.
[7] Godoy E, Scenna NJ, Benz SJ. Families of optimal thermodynamic solutions for
combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plants. Appl Therm Eng 2010;30:
569e76.
s M, Rapuan JL. Optimization of heat recovery steam generator for
[8] Valde
combined cycle power plants. Appl Therm Eng 2001;21:1149e59.
[9] Franco A, Russo A. Combined cycle plant efciency increase based on the
optimization of the heat recovery steam generator operating parameters. Int J
Therm Sci 2002;41:843e59.
[10] Xiang W, Chen Y. Performance improvement of combined cycle power plant
based on the optimization of the bottom cycle and heat recuperation. J Therm
Sci 2007;16:84e9.
[11] Mohagheghi M, Shayegan J. Thermodynamic optimization of design variables
and heat exchangers layout in HRSGs for CCGT, using genetic algorithm. Appl
Therm Eng 2009;29:290e9.
[12] Bracco S, Siri S. Exergetic optimization of single level combined gas-steam
power plants considering different objective functions. Energy 2010;35:
5365e73.
s M, Duran MD, Rovira A. Thermoeconomic optimization of combined
[13] Valde
cycle gas turbine power plants using genetic algorithms. Appl Therm Eng
2003;23:2169e82.
[14] Koch C, Cziesla F, Tsatsaronis G. Optimization of combined cycle power plants
using evolutionary algorithms. Chem Eng Process 2007;46:1151e9.
[15] Bassily AM. Analysis and cost optimization of the triple-pressure steam-reheat
gas-reheat gas-recuperated combined power cycle. Int J Energy Res 2008;32:
116e34.
[16] Kotowicz J, Bartela Q. The inuence of economic parameters on the optimal
values of the design variables of a combined cycle plant. Energy 2010;35:
911e9.
[17] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic optimization of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant with a supplementary
ring unit. Energy Convers Manag 2011;52:2296e308.
nchez C, Mun
~ oz M, Valde
s M, Dura
n MD. Thermoeconomic opti[18] Rovira A, Sa
mization of heat recovery steam generators of combined cycle gas turbine
power plants considering off-design operation. Energy Convers Manag
2011;52:1840e9.
Nomenclature
cp: Specic heat capacity [kJ/kg K]
E: Effectiveness of exchanger
Ex: Exergy [kJ]
ex: Specic exergy [kJ/kg]
f: Fitness function
Gbest: Global best solution
h: Steam or water specic enthalpy [kJ/kg]
N: Number of particles in population
Pbest: Best solution for each particle
Q: Heat supplied [kJ/kg]
T: Temperature [K]
p: Pressure [bar]
Pop: Population
V: speed of particle vector
W: Inertia weight
W: Specic work [kJ/kg]
x: Vapor fraction at turbine exit
X: Optimization variables vector
DTP: Pinch point [K]
h: Efciency
u: Steam to gas ratio
Subscripts
d: Destroyed
dr: Destroyed rate
e: Exit
EC: Economizer
EV: Evaporator
g: Gas
HP: High pressure
i: Inlet
j: Thermal exchange frontier with the outside environment
695