548

Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research J SCI IND RES VOL 69 JULY 2010
Vol. 69, July 2010, pp. 548-553

Thermodynamic analysis of gas turbine powered cogeneration systems

Adrian Irimescu* and Dorin Lelea
Politehnica University of Timisoara, 300222 Timisoara, România, Bl. Mihai Viteazul 1

Received 30 December 2009; revised 11 April 2010; accepted 15 April 2010

This study proposes an integrated model for thermodynamic analysis of gas turbine powered cogeneration systems,
covering simple cycle and overall cogeneration efficiency, load control by using inlet guide vanes, inlet fogging and supple-
mentary firing. The model can be further developed for other applications (air cooling, steam injection, and trigeneration of
power, heat and cooling).

Keywords: Cogeneration, Gas turbine, Thermodynamic analysis

Introduction combustion heat is lost through combustion chamber

Gas turbines in cogeneration applications are walls. Major difference for real working conditions,
generally used in refineries or industries (pulp and paper, compared to ideal Brayton cycle, is that air compression
ceramics, food and drink, chemical and pharmaceuticals). and combustion gases expansion do not occur under
Cogeneration plants are also used for supplying power isentropic conditions. Compressor inlet pressure (p1) is
and heat for local district heating in an efficient manner. only slightly lower than atmospheric levels (p0), intake
Compared to gas or diesel engines, gas turbines have an pressure drop (∆pi) being in the range of 10-20 mbar.
excellent reliability, very high availability1 (95-96%) and Larger pressure drops can be encountered if intake filters
lower maintenance costs 2. All major gas turbine become clogged.
manufacturers have their own simulation software
developed in-house, for a similar turbine arrangement3. p1 = p0 − ∆pi …(1)
Research for gas turbines is mainly focused on gas flow,
and computational fluid dynamics (CFD)4,5. Studies on Pressure ratio (r) determines air pressure after
thermodynamics of gas turbines generally concentrated compression (p2).
on improving thermal efficiency of a certain component6-
10, developing different control strategies 11,12 or new
p2 = r ⋅ p1 …(2)
hybrid cycles for operating gas turbines13-15.
This study presents development of a thermodynamic where p2, air pressure after compression in Pa; r, pressure
model of gas turbine powered cogeneration system, a ratio.
new multi-parameter integrated approach, providing For an isentropic process, air temperature after
plant owners with a tool for comparing different compression (T2’) can be calculated as
cogeneration systems.
ka −1
Proposed Thermodynamic Model  p  ka
Gas turbine thermodynamic modeling can be based T 2' =  2  ⋅ T1 …(3)
upon Brayton cycle (Fig. 1). Compressor and turbine both  p1 
function as essentially adiabatic machines, only major
loss of heat occurring at exhaust stage. A small part of where T2’, temperature in K of compressed air under
isentropic conditions; ka, heat capacity ratio of air; T1,
*Author for correspondence inlet air temperature. Compressed air temperature can
E-mail: iamotors@yahoo.com be calculated as
 IRIMESCU & LELEA: THERMODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF GAS TURBINE POWERED COGENERATION SYSTEMS 549

Fig. 2—Gas turbine powered cogeneration system

where p4, pressure in Pa of exhaust gases exiting e turbine;

∆pe, exit pressure loss. Similar to the case of compression,
turbine exhaust temperature can be calculated as

Fig. 1—Gas turbine Brayton cycle

  k g −1 
   p4  kg   …(8)
T4 = T3 ⋅ 1 − η t ⋅ 1 −   
1 …(4)    p3  
T2 = T1 + ⋅ (T 2' − T 1 )    
ηc

where T2, temperature in K of compressed air entering where T4, temperature (K) of exhaust gases; ηt, turbine
combustion chamber; η c, compressor’s isentropic isentropic efficiency; kg, heat capacity ratio of flue gases.
efficiency. Pressure drop across combustion chamber Power required driving compressor (Pc) and power
(∆pc) is usually around 2%. Turbine inlet pressure (p3) produced by turbine (Pt) exhibit mechanical losses
can be calculated as quantified with a mechanical efficiency (ηm). Pc and Pt
can be calculated as
p 3 = p 2 − ∆p c …(5)
1
where p3, turbine entry level pressure in Pa; ∆pc, pressure Pc = ⋅ m& a ⋅ c pa ⋅ (T2 − T1 ) …(9)
drop across the combustion chamber. Relative air-fuel
ηm
ratio can be calculated as
Pt = η m ⋅ m& g ⋅ c p g ⋅ (T3 − T4 ) …(10)
 η b ⋅ Qi 
λ =
1
⋅ − 1 …(6)
AFR  c p ⋅ (T 3 − T 2 )  where Pc, power required to drive compressor, W; ηm,
s  g 
mechanical efficiency; m & a , air flow, kg/s; cpa, constant
where λ , relative air-fuel ratio; η b, combustion pressure specific heat for air, J/kg K; Pt, power produced
efficiency; Q i , fuel lower heating, J/kg; AFR s ,
by turbine, W; m & g , flue gas flow, kg/s. Fuel heat input
stoichiometric air-fuel ratio; cpg, flue gas constant
pressure specific heat, J/kg K. (Qf) can be calculated as
By expelling hot exhaust gases into atmosphere,
useful heat is lost and a minor pressure loss occurs (∆pe), …(11)
Q f = m& f ⋅ Qi
usually in between 10-40 mbar. Pressure loss is higher
for cogeneration systems due to the presence of heat
recovery aggregate. where Qf, fuel heat input, W; m& f , fuel mass flow, kg/ s.
For thermal engine, gas turbine shaft efficiency (simple
p4 = p0 + ∆pe …(7) cycle efficiency, SCE) is calculated as
550 J SCI IND RES VOL 69 JULY 2010

Pt − Pc …(12)
η sc =
Qf

where ηsc, gas turbine’s SCE.

For cogeneration systems (Fig. 2), overall thermal
efficiency ( η ) can be substantially increased by
recovering heat contained in exhaust gas stream.

Qr = η he ⋅ m& g ⋅ c pg ⋅ (T4 − T5 ) …(13)

where Qr, heat flux from exhaust gases, W; ηhe, heat

exchanger efficiency; T5, stack temperature, K.
For a gas turbine powered cogeneration plant, η can
be calculated as

Pt − Pc + Qr …(14)
η=
Qf
Fig. 3—Electrical efficiency for different firing temperature and
Industrial applications of gas turbines in a pressure ratio levels
cogeneration scheme usually involve steam generation.
Saturated steam production as a result of different
working parameters can be evaluated as

Qr …(15)
m& s =
c pw ⋅ (Tsat − T0 ) + rw

where m & s , production of saturated steam, kg/s; c ,

pw
specific heat of water, J/kgK; Tsat, saturation temperature
at a given pressure level, K; rw, latent heat of vaporization,
J/kg.
Present thermodynamic model can be used for a
First-law analysis of gas turbine powered cogeneration
systems and help plant owners make right choice of
aggregates that best suit their needs.

Results and Discussion

Gas turbine performance is mainly influenced by two
working parameters (pressure ratio and firing
temperature). A high pressure ratio combined with high
firing temperature increases shaft efficiency and ensures
high electrical efficiency levels (Fig. 3). For low firing
temperatures, an optimum pressure ratio can be easily
identified, while for higher turbine inlet temperature Fig. 4—Overall cogeneration thermal efficiency for different firing
levels, increased pressure ratios ensure highest SCE. All temperature and pressure ratio levels
 IRIMESCU & LELEA: THERMODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF GAS TURBINE POWERED COGENERATION SYSTEMS 551

Saturated steam, t/h

Firing temp., °C
Fig. 6—Saturated steam production for different firing
temperatures for GT1

Shaft specific output, kl/kg

Efficiency, %

Ambient temperature, °C
Fig. 5—Exhaust temperature for different firing temperature and Fig. 7—Simple cycle efficiency, overall cogeneration thermal
pressure ratio levels efficiency and specific shaft output at 1 atm and 80 % humidity for
GT1
calculations were done without considering fuel
Table 1—Comparison of two gas turbine models
compression, and any power needed to run auxiliary
equipment is incorporated within mechanical losses. Gas turbine GT1 GT2
Power and SCE ratings are given by gas turbine Type Industrial Aero-derivative
Pressure ratio 11.3 21
manufacturers for standard working conditions of 1 atm Fuel heat input, MW 36.1 39.3
pressure, 15°C and a level of 60% relative humidity (RH). Electrical output, MW 10.76 13.68
By employing cogeneration of heat and power, η Steam production 24.67 22.56
increased ( > 80%) (Fig. 4). Again, for low firing (saturated, 12 barg), t/ h
Simple cycle 29.8 34.79
temperatures, an optimum pressure ratio was identified
efficiency, %
for maximum η. High turbine inlet temperature and Overall cogeneration 81.27 78.02
pressure ratio levels ensured high efficiency. In certain thermal efficiency, %
cases, exhaust gas temperature is more important, for
required steam quality. A simple analysis identified best steam pressure is 10-20 bar gauge pressure (barg). As
fitted working scenario that ensured a certain exhaust pressure increases, more heat is required for producing
temperature (Fig. 5). High SCE does not necessarily steam. After selecting appropriate type of prime mover,
ensure high overall cogeneration efficiency (Table 1). a certain operating strategy was developed for GT1 for
While second gas turbine (GT2) having a higher SCE, η a given steam quality (Fig. 6). Surrounding environment
of cogeneration system was lower than that for industrial and its temperature and humidity levels are major factors
aggregate (GT1) and with production of less steam. As for gas turbine for cogeneration systems (Fig. 7).
in most cases, GT1 is better suited for industrial Based on proposed thermodynamic model,
applications such as ethanol plants. Usually saturated simulation software was developed for calculating
552 J SCI IND RES VOL 69 JULY 2010
Fig. 8—Power increase by inlet fogging
electrical and overall cogeneration thermal efficiency,
with several input values (gas turbine and heat exchanger
characteristics, atmospheric pressure, temperature and
humidity values). Preliminary economical forecast was
based upon results provided by thermodynamic analysis,
and best choice of a certain type of gas turbine was
evaluated. For greater precision, a library of gas turbine
performance provided by manufacturers was better
suited, given highly complex gas turbines operation.
Another key factor is part load operation. Load control
is also a very important factor, as part load operation is
becoming a more common strategy to adapt power
production to momentary demand16. By cooling or
warming inlet air, a certain degree of load variation was
achieved with simple control systems.
One possibility for cooling inlet air in warm regions
is using inlet fogging17,18. Inlet fogging upstream of
compressor resulted (Fig. 8) in relative power gain when
intake air got cooled as a direct effect of evaporation.
Also, for cold ambient air, water injection is inefficient.
However, in warm climate and relatively dry conditions
(50°C and 30 % RH), a maximum quantity of 11.3 g
water was injected for every 1 kg of air, resulting in a
Fig. 9—Electrical efficiency at various load values and different
ambient temperatures, 1 atm and 60 % humidity for GT1
temperature drop of 15.8°C. Even though by adding
water, molar mass of air was decreased; temperature drop
lead to an increase of air density by 4.5%. Under these
conditions, by keeping same relative air-fuel ratio and
for same turbine speed, power delivery increased up to
10% with inlet fogging.
During part load operation, fuel flow reduced,
resulting in decreased turbine inlet temperature (T3) and
also a significant drop in simple cycle efficiency
(Fig. 9). Below 40% load, efficiency dropped sharply.
An interesting phenomena is that calculated efficiency
exhibited a larger variation for different ambient
temperatures (-40 to 60°C), for loads between 30 and
40%, while at loads higher than 60%, efficiency variation
was below 4%.
Cogeneration facilities require a certain level of
exhaust temperature for steam production. For this
reason, inlet guide vanes (IGV) were used during part
load operation to reduce compressor intake pressure (p1).
As a result, same volumetric gas flow was maintained,
but because of lower air density, less power was produced
with same firing temperature. A major flaw of this control
system is that it produced a large drop in simple cycle
 IRIMESCU & LELEA: THERMODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF GAS TURBINE POWERED COGENERATION SYSTEMS
Simple cycle efficiency, %
Cogeneration efficiency, %
Load, %
Fig. 10—Simple cycle and cogeneration efficiency during part load
operation for GT1
efficiency (Fig. 10). For this reason, supplementary firing
was used, even if this increases overall complexity and
cost of cogeneration system.
Another advantage of supplementary firing system
is that more steam can be produced. When IGV control
was employed, at 20% load for gas turbine, only around
50% of steam could be supplied, as compared to full
load operation. By comparison, using supplementary
firing ensured same steam flow for any gas turbine load
value. A slightly higher overall thermal efficiency was
noticed at light load for IGV system in comparison to
supplementary firing (Fig. 10), due to higher exhaust
temperature as a direct result of maintaining maximum
turbine inlet temperature (T 3) at part load, so that
maximum steam quantity can be produced. Relatively
small gain (1-3%) is more than insignificant when
considering major loss in simple cycle efficiency at part
load. By using the model to evaluate these
thermodynamic parameters, additional cost of installing
supplementary firing with higher electrical efficiency was
compared for employing a simpler IGV control system,
with major drawback of a lower simple cycle efficiency
during part load operation.
Conclusions
Proposed thermodynamic model simulated gas
turbine operation for various conditions, with a wide
range of ambient pressure, temperature and relative
humidity levels. Different situations (supplementary
firing, inlet cooling and fuel compression) were
incorporated in case studies. Model is capable of
simulating effect of load control technologies such as
inlet fogging and can provide a basis for the choice of
different control systems using developed software.
553
References
1 Hunt J, Gas turbine CHP O&M in practice - experience from
the UK, Canada, Sweden and Germany, Cogener On-Site Power
Prod, 9 (2008) 35-43.
2 Irimescu A, Calin L & Jadaneant A, Aspects concerning the
efficient use of biogas obtained from sewage water discarded
by the beer industry, J Environ Prot Ecol, 10 (2009) 1137-1145.
3 Gülen S C & Smith R W, Second law efficiency of the Rankine
Bottoming Cycle of a combined cycle power plant, J Eng Gas
Turbines Power, 132 (2010) 011801 (10 pages).
4 Singh S N, Seshadri V, Singh R K & Mishra T, Flow character-
istics of an annular gas turbine combustor model for reacting
flows using CFD, J Sci Ind Res, 65 (2006) 921-934.
5 Temel U N, Öztürk A & Pinarbasi A, Wedge type vane diffuser
flow measurements in a low speed centrifugal compressor, J Sci
Ind Res, 67 (2008) 788-796.
6 Al-Hamdan Q Z & Ebaid M S Y, Modeling and simulation of a
gas turbine engine for power generation, J Eng Gas Turbines
Power, 128 (2006) 302-311.
7 Yang C, Yang Z & Cai R, Analytical method for evaluation of
gas turbine inlet air cooling in combined cycle power plant, Appl
Energy, 86 (2009) 848-856.
8 Krishnan V, Bharani S, Kapat J S, Sohn Y H & Desai V H, A
simplistic model to study the influence of film cooling on low
temperature hot corrosion rate in coal gas/syngas fired gas tur-
bines, Int J Heat Mass Transfer, 51 (2008) 1049-1060.
9 Cao Y, Jin X, Meng G & Fletcher J, Computational modular
model library of gas turbine, Adv Eng Software, 36 (2005)
127-134.
10 Cerri G, Giovannelli A, Battisti L & Fedrizzi R, Advances in
effusive cooling techniques of gas turbines, Appl Therm Eng,
27 (2007) 692-698.
11 Centeno P, Egido I, Domingo C, Fernandez F, Rouco L &
Gonzalez M, Review of gas turbine models for power system
stability studies, in 9th Spanish Portuguese Congr Elect Engg
(Marbella, Spain) 2005.
12 Yee S K, Milanovic J V & Hughes F M, Overview and com-
parative analysis of gas turbine models for system stability stud-
ies, IEEE Trans Power Syst, 23 (2008) 108-118.
13 Stiller C, Thorud B, Bolland O, Kandepu R & Imsland L, Con-
trol strategy for a solid oxide fuel cell and gas turbine hybrid
system, J Power Sources, 158 (2006) 303-315.
14 Yang J S, Sohn J L & Ro S T, Performance characteristics of a
solid oxide fuel cell/gas turbine hybrid system with various part-
load control modes, J Power Sources, 166 (2007) 155-164.
15 Komatsu Y, Kimijima S & Szmyd J S, Performance analysis for
the part-load operation of a solid oxide fuel cell–micro gas tur-
bine hybrid system, Energy, 35 (2010) 982-988.
16 Vael F, Peak practice: choosing a brand new engine for variable
load generation, Power Eng Int, 17 (2009) 46-49.
17 Gareta R, Romeo L M & Gil A, Methodology for the economic
evaluation of gas turbine air, cooling systems in combined cycle
applications, Energy, 29 (2004) 1805-1818.
18 Gajjar H, Chaker M, Dighe A & Meher-Homji C B, Inlet fog-
ging for a 655 MW combined cycle power plant design, imple-
mentation and operating experience, in Proc ASME Turbo Expo
Power Land Sea Air (Atlanta, Georgia, USA) 2003, 853-861.