Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Massardo
Mem. ASME
e-mail: massardo@unige.it
M. Scialo`
Dipartimento di Macchine,
Sistemi Energetici e Trasporti,
Universita di Genova,
Italia
Introduction
In the thermodynamic analysis of energy systems, the study is
generally focused on describing processes evolving into the system and deriving relationships between flow rates, energy exchange, sizing design, etc. The various alternatives are usually
compared on the basis of purely thermodynamic measures as efficiency, irreversibility or specific work. Gas turbine simple and
complex cycles have been analyzed in detail, from the thermodynamic point of view, in a number of publications 13. The results are usually shown on the classic efficiency versus specific
work diagram taking into account TIT Turbine Inlet Temperature and pressure ratio influence. Only sometimes has the economic analysis been carried-out in a very simplified way, after the
thermodynamic investigation.
The rapid development of new cycles based on gas turbine
technology in the last years evinces the importance of a complete
coupling between the thermodynamic and the economic analysis.
This complete analysis shows the influence of the most important
cycle parameters and the economic boundary conditions during
the design phase of advanced systems.
A thermoeconomic approach maybe used to solve this problem;
in fact, thermoeconomics is a technique, which combines thermodynamic analysis directly with economic aspects in order to optimize thermal systems like a gas turbine based cycles. There are
essentially two thermoeconomic techniques proposed in literature
and analyzed in detail by the authors in previous works 46.
The approach here used is similar to Thermoeconomic Functional
Analysis TFA 7, but employs an original, direct approach to
carry out the Direct Thermoeconomic Analysis DTA and Optimization DTO.
Simple steam plants 8 and simple regenerative gas turbine
cycle 8 have been studied using the TFA approach, while simple
and complex steam plants, simple gas turbine, and combined
cycles have been investigated using the DTA/DTO approach 5.
In this work the thermoeconomic analysis has been carried out
using an apt tool developed by the Authors TEMP code: the
modular organization of the code makes the DTA of several advanced gas turbine cycles obtainable in a fast and reliable way.
Thanks to the use of apt cost functions for the different compoContributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute IGTI of THE AMERICAN
SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS for publication in the ASME JOURNAL OF
ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Paper presented at the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exhibition, Indianapolis, IN, June
710, 1999; ASME Paper 99-GT-312. Manuscript received by IGTI March 9, 1999;
final revision received by the ASME Headquarters May 15, 2000. Associate Technical Editor: D. Wisler.
nents that compose the gas turbine based cycles compressor, expander, combustion chamber, regenerator, inter-cooler, etc. the
analysis is particularly well suited for cost versus efficiency and
cost versus specific work evaluation of advanced gas turbine
cycles. The different cycle configurations are presented and discussed in detail and compared to one other.
tricity price; fictitious units; environment unit; functional productive diagram; data of some heat exchangers geometry and metallurgy; etc.
Cost Evaluation
The thermoeconomic technique used here must have reliable
and updated cost functions of plant components. Determining
these functions is rather complicated since it is difficult to consider every factor that contributes to estimate the final purchase
cost of a component to its full extent. They must be related to
thermodynamic parameters of the plant and factors covering every
type of item. Furthermore, it must be possible to update them by
taking into account the progress of both performance improvement and market prices.
In particular for DTA there is a need to evaluate the capital cost
for each unit Purchased Equipment CostPEC as a function of
its product and the sizing variables. The following equation has
been used to evaluate the capital cost rate of a unit r:
Z r
r FCR r
,
3.6105 N
(1)
compressor:
combustor:
c1
a
39.5m
ln c
0.9 is c
a
25.6m
0.995ppercent
1exp 0.018Tmax26.4c2
turbine:
c1
(2)
(3)
g
266.3m
ln t
0.92 is
1exp 0.036Tmax54.4c2
(4)
proposed by El-Sayed and Tribus 12 and modified by Frangopoulos 8, have been updated by the Authors as shown by Agazzani
and Massardo 5 to take into account the influence of the allowable maximum temperature for the combustor and the expander.
The values of the coefficients c 1 and c 2 have been calculated by
using, as reference, the gas turbine costs reported by 1995 Gas
Turbine World Handbook, and verified using the last available
edition 13 of the Handbook as shown by Scialo` 10. The data
presented are applicable for industrial and aeroderivative gas turbines in the range of the GTW handbook data 1 MW250
MW. The subdivision of a gas turbine into three components is
very useful when considering the present thermoeconomic study
of advanced complex gas plants, in which the components can be
arranged differently than in the simple cycle gas turbine two ore
more compressors, two or more combustion chambers and expanders, etc..
Estimating the cost of purchased equipment is obviously the
first step in any detailed power system cost estimation. However,
in the thermoeconomic analysis, one should consider the capital
cost necessary to purchase the land, build all the necessary facilities, and install the required machinery and equipment. The sum
Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
Fig. 4 Simple cycle gas turbine: total and variable cost versus
efficiency and specific work
zone where pressure ratio values are low. In this case the influence
of the fuel cost is less important since the influence of capital
costs has increased.
The effect of an increase of fuel cost is quite evident: the minimum cost position increases the pressure ratio and the efficiency
to compensate the energy cost; the opposite when fuel cost is
reduced. The proximity of point B to points C is compatible with
the pressure ratio values published in literature for 60 MW heavy
duty gas turbines, where the minimization of the cost is one of the
most important goals.
Figure 2 shows the influence of the operating hours per year on
the thermoeconomic performance of the plant versus cycle pressure ratio. The difference between PEC and TCI analysis is evident, not only in the level of the costs, but also in the different
pressure ratio values that minimize the costs. When PEC is used,
the pressure ratio is about 15, and when TIC approach is used, the
value is between 8 and 10.
Figure 3 shows a new representation of the thermodynamic and
thermoeconomic performance of gas turbine plants. The results
are presented using the cost versus efficiency and cost versus specific work diagrams. In this case, both of the results obtained with
the PEC and TCI approaches are shown. When the cost versus
specific work curves are analyzed Fig. 3a, the influence of the
compressor pressure ratio is evident and the minimum cost is
practically coincident with the maximum specific work condition;
the influence of TIT and the type of analysis PEC or TCI is
evident too. The use of the TCI approach is noteworthy, since an
inversion of the curves is present when this approach is used
rather than the simplified one PEC. This inversion is due to the
simultaneous influence of installation and fuel costs at low pressure ratio and low efficiency values. Figure 3b cost versus efficiency shows a rapid increase of the cost when the pressure
ratio increases without a correspondent increase of efficiency, particularly for TCI analysis. In this case the TIT influence is more
evident, particularly in the different shape of the curves. Figure 4
shows the same diagram as in Fig. 3, where both capital and
Transactions of the ASME
variable costs are reported together with the total cost for both
PEC and TCI analysis. The shape of the total cost is strictly
correlated to the capital cost behavior, while the predominant influence of efficiency on variable costs is quite evident.
Fig. 5 Inter-cooled, regenerated and re-heated cycle: a simplified layout; b functional productive diagram
Fig. 6 Regenerated cycle: cost versus specific work and versus efficiency
Fig. 8 Inter-cooled cycle: cost versus specific work and versus efficiency
Inter-Cooled and Regenerated ICR Cycle. The thermoeconomic results are shown in Fig. 13; in this case the TIT effect
is noteworthy, minimum cost condition coincides with maximum
efficiency point for TIT1200C, while for TIT1400C the
pressure ratio at minimum cost is lower 9 than its value at maximum efficiency point 14. From the specific work point of view,
minimum cost conditions for both TIT values do not coincide with
maximum specific work; this condition has been obtained at very
high-pressure ratio values.
Transactions of the ASME
The comparison between nondimensional thermoeconomic performances of the cycles investigated is presented in Fig. 15: cost
versus efficiency and cost versus specific work.
All the nondimensional results have been obtained for
TIT1400C, N8000 hours per year and TCI approach. The
best cost performance can be obtained with an inter-cooled regen-
Fig. 12 Regenerated and re-heated cycle: cost versus efficiency and versus specific work TCI approach
Fig. 13 Inter-cooled and regenerated cycle: cost versus efficiency and versus specific work TCI approach
erated cycle, and in this case minimum cost coincides with maximum efficiency zone. Also using regenerated, inter-cooled,
regenerated/inter-cooled/re-heated cycles it is possible to obtain
good results. In these cases minimum cost conditions do not coincide with maximum efficiency values. A good result from the
cost and specific work point of view is shown by the inter-cooled,
regenerated and re-heated cycle in this case the curve is very flat
since the pressure ratio influence is weak. It is important to note
that re-heated cycles without inter-cooling are not good solutions
from the thermoeconomic point of view and that taking into account practicality, reliability, maintenance and the modest differences shown in Fig. 15 the intercooled cycle should be the more
attractive, free from the complexity of regeneration and reheat.
It is possible to conclude that, thanks to the thermoeconomic
analysis here presented the improvement of thermodynamic per-
Fig. 14 Re-heated, regenerated and intercooled cycle: efficiency versus specific work TCI approach
Conclusions
A computational modular approach for the thermoeconomic
simulation of gas turbine based cycles has been presented. Thanks
to the use of a robust, efficient and reliable tool TEMP, the
parametric thermoeconomic analysis of a large number of plants
has been carried out and the results presented and discussed. The
following main conclusions can be stated:
1 For the first time in the thermoeconomic field not only has
the purchased equipment costs PEC evaluation been considered,
but the influence of total capital investment TCI has been taken
into account also.
2 The thermoeconomic analysis using PEC is more dependent
on the fuel cost; the opposite is true for TCI analysis, where the
capital costs are more important.
3 The thermoeconomic results have been presented in a new
and useful way: cost versus efficiency, cost versus specific work,
and cost versus pressure ratio. This original representation enables
us to obtain and use a direct evaluation of the best thermoeconomic conditions of the plant.
4 The obtained results for simple cycle gas turbine plants confirm the maximum specific work condition in the range of minimum cost when PEC approach is used, taking also into account
the variation of fuel cost. By using the TCI technique, the minimum cost condition moves to very low-pressure ratio value and
low efficiency zone.
5 The subdivision of the gas turbine costs into three components has been essential for the thermoeconomic analysis of advanced gas turbine based cycles inter-cooled; regenerated; reTransactions of the ASME
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the University of Genoa, the
MURST CoFin 99 for the financial support granted to this research, and Dr. A. Agazzani for his valuable collaboration.
Nomenclature
Ce
FCR
GT
IC
N
PEC
R
Rh
TCI
TIT
r
is
electricity cost
annual fixed charge rate percent
simple cycle gas turbine
intercooled gas turbine
number of operating hours per year
purchased equipment cost $
regenerated gas turbine
re-heated gas turbine
total capital investment $
turbine inlet temperature K
maintenance factor
regenerator effectiveness
pressure ratio
isentropic efficiency
air, gas
compressor, turbine
low, high pressure compressor
low, high pressure turbine
total
References
1 Pilidis, P., and Mathieu, P., 1991, The Use of Gaseous Fuels on Aeroderivative Gas Turbines, ASME Paper 91-GT-44.
2 Wilson, D. G., and Korakianitis, T., 1997, The Design of High Efficiency
Turbomachinery and Gas Turbines, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.
3 Cohen, H., Rogers, G. F., and Saravanamuttoo, H. I. H., 1996, Gas Turbine
Theory, Longman, UK.
4 Agazzani, A., 1995, Ottimizzazione termodinamica, economica e di impatto
ambientale dei sistemi energetici, Ph.D. thesis, University of Pisa.
5 Agazzani, A., and Massardo, A., 1997, A Tool for Thermoeconomic Analysis and Optimization of Gas, Steam and Combined Plants, ASME J. Eng. Gas
Turbines Power, 119, pp. 885892.
6 Agazzani, A., Frangopoulos, C., and Massardo, A., 1998, Environmental
Influence on the Thermoeconomic Optimization of a Combined Plant with
No x Abatement, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 120, pp. 557565.
7 Frangopoulos, C. A., 1983, Thermoeconomic Functional Analysis: a Method
for Optimal Design or Improvement of Complex Thermal System, Ph.D.
thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
8 Frangopoulos, C. A., 1994, Application of Thermoeconomic Functional Approach to the CGAM problem, Energy, 19, No. 3, pp. 323342.
9 Massardo, A., and Lubelli, F., 1998, Internal Reforming Solid Oxide Fuel
CellGas Turbine Combined Cycles IRSOFC-GT: Part ACell Model and
Cycle Thermodynamic Analysis, ASME Paper 98-GT-577.
10 Scialo`, M., 1998, Thermoeconomic Analysis of Power Plants Based on Gas
Turbine Technology, in Italian, Master thesis, University of Genoa, Italy.
11 Chemical Engineering, 1998, McGraw-Hill, New York.
12 El-Sayed, Y. M., and Tribus, M., 1983, Strategic Use of Thermoeconomics
for System Improvement, in Efficiency and Costing: Second Law Analysis of
Processes, Gaggioli, R. A., ed., A.C.S. Symposium Series, No. 235, Washington, DC, pp. 215239.
13 Gas Turbine World Handbook, 1997, Gas Turbine World, 16,17,18, Pequot
Publishing Inc., Fairfield, USA.
14 Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., and Moran, M., 1996, Thermal Design and Optimization, Wiley, New York.