12

Int. J. Energy Technology and Policy, Vol. 3, Nos. 1/2, 2005

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants consisting of standard gas turbines and turbo expanders Hermann Haselbacher
Institute of Thermal Power Plants, Vienna University of Technology, Getreidemarkt 9, A-1060 Wien, Austria Fax: (0043) 1 58801 31399 E-mail: hermann.haselbacher@tuwien.ac.at
Abstract: The present study was done to investigate the performance differences in terms of thermal efficiency and specific power output of: combined cycle power plants with integration of low temperature regenerative heat, standard gas turbines operated in wet cycle mode, turbo expanders and steam turbines (here: alternatives) combined cycle power plants with integration of low temperature regenerative heat, wet cycle adjusted gas turbines and steam turbines (here: basic power plants or basic cycles) standard combined cycles.

The term adjusted means that the blading of either the compressor or the turbine of a standard gas turbine was modified to accommodate the mass flow difference between the two. The analysis shows that in terms of thermal efficiency the alternatives are equal to or better by about 5%-points than the basic power plants. On the other hand, the corresponding specific outputs are lower by about 25 to 30%. But the gas turbines of the alternatives are the existing standard designs (see above) and, therefore, less expensive. Comparing the alternatives with the standard combined cycles, it is observed that the alternatives have a thermal efficiency advantage of up to 20%-points and a specific output advantage of up to 50%. Both of them are due to the integration of low temperature regenerative heat by injection of hot water into the alternative cycles and the definition of the thermal efficiency as based on the fuel burnt. Keywords: thermodynamic cycle analyses; wet gas turbine cycles; low temperature external heat input; steam cycles; combined cycles; thermal efficiency; specific power output. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Haselbacher, H. (2005) Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants consisting of standard gas turbines and turbo expanders, Int. J. Energy Technology and Policy, Vol. 3, Nos. 1/2, pp.1223. Biographical notes: Hermann Haselbacher graduated from the Technische Hochschule Wien and the University of Illinois obtaining MS and PhD degrees in Mechanical Engineering. Subsequently, he worked with industrial firms in Austria, USA and Switzerland in the fields of hydraulic and thermal turbo machines and power plants including aircraft engines. From 1988 to 2003, he was Professor at the Vienna University of Technology and is now Professor Emeritus.

Copyright 2005 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

An earlier German version of this paper was presented at the VDI Conference Fortschrittliche Energiewandlung und anwendung 2003 (Fischer and Haselbacher, 2003).

13

Introduction

Gas turbine cycles with water/steam injection (wet gas turbine cycles, WGTC) have been the subject of numerous R&D projects because such power plants promise very high thermal efficiencies as well as high power densities relative to the size of the turbo machines employed (gren et al., 2002; Aronis and Leithner, 2000; Aronis et al., 2001; Hofstdter, Frutschi and Haselbacher, 1998; Fischer, Frutschi and Haselbacher, 2001; Frutschi, 1999). The most prominent representatives are known as humid air turbines (HAT) and steam injected gas turbines (STIG). In practical applications, water or steam has been injected into gas turbines for a long time, at first for the purpose of NOX reduction and later for power augmentation, but the amounts of water represent only a fraction of those that could be achieved thermodynamically. There are two reasons, both associated with the relatively great differences between the compressor and the turbine mass flows, why the potential of these power plants has not been exhausted up to now: first, because correspondingly adjusted standard gas turbines (GTs) have not been available and presumably will not be available in the medium term; second, because modifications to gas turbines cycles had not been considered so far. For example, in an experimental facility for testing the HAT concept, a portion of the compressed air is blown off so that the gas turbine can accept the injected water (gren et al., 2002). Obviously, great losses are associated with this procedure. In conclusion, alternative cycles will be required to realise WGTCs that do not depend on the availability of adjusted GTs. Starting from a WGTC originally proposed by TU Braunschweig, other such alternatives are developed and investigated here. Braunschweigs WGTC is characterised by the integration of external low temperature heat into a combined cycle power plant for which the acronym LOTHECO was coined. The special feature that distinguishes LOTHECO from HAT and STIG is the integration of low temperature heat from an external regenerative heat source. The low temperature heat is introduced into the GT-part of the combined cycle by injecting hot water into the compressed air where the water is vaporised at partial pressure conditions. The basic LOTHECO cycle as the HAT and STIG cycles uses an adjusted WGTC gas turbine. The alternative LOTHECO concepts consist of combinations of standard GTs and turbo expanders (E) in various parallel arrangements. Common to all of them is the admission of that portion of air or of the steam enriched air (wet air) which exceeds the gas turbine flow capacity to the expander. Within the frame of a thermodynamic parameter study, the basic and the alternative LOTHECO cycles have been evaluated with respect to their fuel based thermal efficiencies and their specific power outputs.

14

H. Haselbacher

Nomenclature
GT compressor GT combustor Condenser (steam turbine cycle) Condenser (water injection) Condensate pump Air expander Wet air expander Evaporator FPWI G GT HRSG PH ST TGT thot C Injection water feed pump Generator Gas turbine Heat recovery steam generator Preheater Steam turbine GT turbine Hot gas temperature Compressor pressure ratio

CGT COMBGT CONDST CONDWI CPST EA EWA EVWI

Cycles

3.1 Basic cycle

The basic LOTHECO cycle, slightly modified from the version of TU Braunschweig (Aronis and Leithner, 2000; Aronis et al., 2001), is shown in Figure 1. It consists essentially of the following three modules: the evaporator (EVWI) where the injected water is vaporised at partial pressure conditions the gas turbine (GT) power plant the steam turbine (ST) power plant which uses the exhaust heat of the gas turbine cycle.
Figure 1 Basic LOTHECO cycle (adjusted gas turbine)

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

15

3.1.1 Evaporator
Following compression in the GT compressor (CGT) and cooling in the preheater (PH), the air is ducted to the evaporator (EVWI), which consists of several units of injection coolers and surface heat exchangers. Water is injected into the coolers generating a vapor-air mixture, which passes through the surface heat exchangers where it is heated by the low-temperature external heat. At the same time, droplets of water not evaporated in the injection coolers are carried with the flow and evaporate in the surface heat exchangers. The number of injection cooler/surface heat exchanger units depends on the amount of water to be injected, on the pressure of the compressed air and on the temperature at which the external heat is supplied. The evaporator is designed for a vapor-to-air mixing ratio of 1:1, a compressor outlet pressure of 15 bars and a temperature of the external heat of 200C. The evaporator operates at lower mixing ratios and compressor outlet pressures as well. In the following cycle analyses, the temperature of the external heat was kept constant at 200C. Regarding the external low temperature heat, a preferred regenerative heat source would be solar energy. Geothermal energy, and heat rejected from industrial processes can also be considered. The temperature of the compressed wet air is then raised in the preheater placed between the evaporator and the combustor and supplied with heat from the compressor outlet air. Therefore, the specific fuel consumption of this power plant layout is lower than that of other arrangements.

3.1.2 Gas turbine

Gas turbine components that are exposed to the hot gas are cooled. For this purpose, a portion of the steam-air mixture is branched off just before the combustor, adequately cooled in a heat exchanger (CGC), and subsequently routed back into the turbine. The amount of cooling gas depends primarily on the temperature of the working gas at the inlet to the turbine, that is, the hot gas temperature. Additional parameters are: the cooling technology, that is, convective cooling, impingement cooling, film cooling, or transpiration cooling the materials (including coatings) used for the hot parts the pressures the temperature of the cooling gas the compositions of the hot gas and the cooling gas.

A useful parameter in the gas turbine cooling studies is the cooling gas fraction
xcool = & cool m & ref m

(1)

where mref is a characteristic mass flow of the cycle considered. In standard gas turbines without water injection, this is usually the compressor mass flow. However, with water injection, this would not be appropriate because the mass flow through the turbine can be considerably larger than that through the compressor. Therefore, in the present study, the cooling gas mass flow is referred to the mass flow at the turbine exit:

16

H. Haselbacher

xcool =

& cool m & T ) out (m

(2)

It is further assumed that xcool depends on the hot gas temperature thot only. In addition to its effect on the turbine, water injection has a great influence on the design of the combustor because high steam content in the combustion air can cause flame instabilities and excessive formation of carbon monoxide. Therefore, the amount of water injected is subject to limits on the steam-to-air ratio, which is the ratio of the steam mass flow to the air mass flow (considering the humidity of the ambient air):
=
& water m & air m

(3)

HAT test facilities have been operated without problems at steam-to-air ratios of 0.20. Further improvements in combustors are expected to allow steam-to-air ratios in the range of 0.30 to 0.40 (gren et al., 2002). The larger of these two values was assumed as limit in the present study.

3.1.3 Steam turbine cycle

The steam cycle shown in the plant diagram is a very simplified illustration. Components, such as feed water tanks, feed pumps, and so on, are not displayed at all and the steam turbines are represented by a single symbol. The live-steam parameters are determined by the temperature of the GT exhaust gas. In order to effectively utilise its energy, multi-pressure HRSGs are to be chosen. In this parameter study, a two-pressure system was applied. However, in future more detailed optimisations, three-pressure HRSGs should be considered. A special condenser (CONDWI) is arranged in the exhaust gas stream downstream of the HRSG where the amount of steam that is condensed is equal to the amount of water injected into the evaporator. The humidity in the ambient air and the water produced by combustion are discharged to the environment. By reclaiming the injection water, the water/steam part of the GT cycle is closed similar to the ST cycle, which reduces the dependence of the power plant operation on external water supplies. For example, the injection water can be recovered in a contact water condenser as described in detail by Lupandin et al. (2001).

3.2 Alternative cycles 3.2.1 Description of the cycles

The alternative LOTHECO cycles are characterised by parallel arrangements of standard GTs and expanders. Three versions, alternatives I, II and III, were identified which differ primarily with regard to the composition of the working media that drive the expanders. In the plant diagrams of the three alternatives, the EVWI, the HRSG and the ST power plants are not shown because they do not differ in principle from those of the basic LOTHECO cycle.

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

17

3.2.1.1 Alternative I
In the first alternative LOTHECO cycle, the excess air is not discharged but expanded in an air expander (EA) (Figure 2). The excess air is branched off upstream of the evaporator, subsequently heated in a recuperator (REC) by the GT exhaust gas and then expanded in the air expander EA. The exhaust air is fed into the heat recovery steam generator at a thermodynamically favourable point of the cycle.
Figure 2 LOTHECO alternative I (combination of standard GT and air expander)

3.2.1.2 Alternative II
The cycle diagram of the second alternative cycle is presented in Figure 3. Alternative II differs from the alternative I in that the excess air is enriched with steam in the evaporator.
Figure 3 LOTHECO alternative II (combination of standard GT and wet air expander)

18

H. Haselbacher

3.2.1.3 Alternative III

The gas turbine cycle of the LOTHECO alternative III is the most complex one of all the power plants investigated in this paper (Figure 4).
Figure 4 LOTHECO alternative III (combination of standard GT and wet air expander)

Alternative III was developed to raise the relative amounts of injected water, which are limited in the basic cycle and in alternatives I and II by the maximum allowable steam-to-air ratio of the combustion air. Since the composition of the working medium in the expander is irrelevant, its steam-to-air ratio can assume the value attainable in the evaporator. By modifying the air paths it becomes possible to maintain the maximum allowable steam-to-air ratio of the combustor air and simultaneously adapt the steam-to-air ratio of the expander air to the value that can be realised in the evaporator. The routing of the air is then as follows: A portion of the compressed air is branched off between the preheater and the evaporator and is mixed with the fraction of the wet air intended for the gas turbine. The flow control is such that the steam-to-air ratio required for stable combustion is obtained.

3.2.2 Injectable amounts of water

Two limits occur when water is injected into LOTHECO cycles: the maximum of the steam-to-air ratio WI determined by the evaporator the maximum of the allowable steam-to-air ratio COMB of the combustor.

In most cases, the limit of WI is larger than that of COMB. Therefore, the amount of injectable water is limited first of all by the steam-to-air ratio of the combustion air. For the purpose of comparing the cycles, a total steam-to-air ratio W is established that represents the ratio of the total amount of water to the total amount of air, which is equal to the compressor air flow. The basic LOTHECO cycle and alternative II are characterised by the steam-to-air ratios W, WI and COMB being equal since the water is injected into the total air flow.

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

19

The total steam-to-air ratios W of the alternatives I and III are different because of the division of the total air flow into two streams. Under the assumptions that: the mass flow through the gas turbine is constant independent of the gas composition the fuel mass flow is negligibly small,

simple equations are obtained for the determination of the total steam-to-air ratio. The first assumption is sufficient for estimates of the specific outputs and the thermal efficiencies at the design points of these plants. For alternative I, the total steam-to-air ratio is:

W =

COMB 1 + COMB

(4)

while, for alternative III, it is:

1 x cool = WI 1 ( 1 + WI ) COMB 1+ WI COMB

(5)

Equation (5) contains the cooling gas fraction xcool, which is a function of the hot gas temperature. That is, in contrast to the basic LOTHECO cycle and the alternatives I and II, the total steam-to-air ratio of alternative III depends, in addition to the steam-to-air ratios of evaporation and combustion, on a third basic parameter, namely the cooling gas fraction.

Thermodynamic cycle analyses

The main goal of the analyses was the comparison of the four WGTCs and standard combined cycles (without water/steam injection) in terms of thermal efficiency and specific output. The computations were performed with the aid of GateCycleTM 5.2.

4.1 Cycle parameters

The most important parameters used in the calculations, among them ISO ambient conditions, are summarised in Table 1. The compressor pressure ratio and the hot gas temperature were the independent variables.
Table 1 Ambient air Specifications of cycle parameters Temperature Pressure Relative humidity External heat Water injection Temperature Steam-to-air ratio W Steam-to-air ratio WI Steam-to-air ratio COMB C bar % C 15 1.013 60 200 * 1.00** 0.40

20
Table 1

H. Haselbacher
Specifications of cycle parameters (Continued) Pressure loss Polytr. efficiency Pressure ratio Hot gas temperature Pressure loss Polytr. efficiency Cooling gas fraction Cooling gas temperature % % C % % C % % % % % % bar bar % % C % % C % % bar % % 1.50 90 715 8001300 4.00

Evaporator GT compressor GT combustor GT turbine

250 1.50 1.50 2.00 90 88 90 40 4 0.50 0.25 5 0.50 0.25 10 0.50 0.25 0.04 99.0 98.5

Cooling gas cooler Preheater Recuperator Expanders Steam turbine

Pressure loss Pressure loss Pressure loss Polytr. efficiency Isentr. efficiency (total-to-total eff.) Min. steam content

Heat recovery steam High pressure steam generator Low pressure steam Pressure loss preheater (gas) Pressure loss preheater (steam) Subcooling preheater Pressure loss evaporator (gas) Pressure loss evaporator (steam) Temperature difference Pressure loss superheater (gas) Pressure loss superheater (steam) Condenser Condenser pressure Mech. efficiency Electr. efficiency Notes: * W results from WI and COMB (see Equations (4) and (5)) ** Applies only if allowed by COMB The compressor pressure ratio is increased in steps of 2 The hot gas temperature is increased in steps of 100C Is a function of the hot gas temperature! Is a function of the hot gas temperature!

4.2 Results: comparison of cycles

The results of the cycle analyses are shown in Figure 5. The small circles in the diagrams indicate design points of combinations of hot gas temperatures and pressure ratios according to Table 1. The heavy solid lines represent the isotherms of the hot gas, the light dashed ones lines of constant pressure ratio.

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

Figure 5 Thermodynamic comparison of the cycles

21

For clarity, only a few of the calculated design points of the LOTHECO cycles were entered into Figure 5. Lines of constant pressure ratio are given only for the pressure ratios 13 and 15, as they are sufficient to draw some initial conclusions. In addition to the design point performances of the various LOTHECO cycles (sets c to f), those of the simple cycle gas turbines (set a) and of the combined cycles without water injection (set b) are also displayed in Figure 5. It is observed that the thermal efficiency gains with LOTHECO relative to standard combined cycles amount to up to 20%-points. These result from the fact that the thermal efficiency definition used here is based only on the amount of fossil fuel burnt and not on the total heat input. In other words, the integration of the low temperature external heat is not taken into account. When the LOTHECO cycles are compared among each other, a great difference in terms of specific power output is noticed between the basic LOTHECO cycles (c) and the alternatives (d to f). The higher specific power of the basic LOTHECO cycles (c) is due to the total amount of the working medium being heated up to the hot gas temperature in the GT combustor and then expanded in the GT turbine. By contrast, in the alternative

22

H. Haselbacher

cycles (d to f), a portion of the working medium produces work in the expanders at lower temperatures. On the other hand, the alternative cycles II and III (e and f) have higher thermal efficiencies than the basic LOTHECO cycle. This is a result of the splitting of the working gas upstream of the combustor into two parts, one of which bypasses the combustor. The consequence, in turn, is a lower fuel consumption to heat the remaining working gas. An additional effect in alternative III is the comparatively higher total amount of injected water. Finally, a comparison of the contributions of the four-turbo machines (gas turbine, expander and two steam turbines) to the total output of the standard combined cycle and the four LOTHECO cycles is presented in Figure 6. The diagram indicates that the contributions of the GTs (including the expanders) increase in comparison to those of the steam turbines from the standard combined cycle to the LOTHECO basic cycle to the alternative LOTHECO cycles.
Figure 6 Contributions of turbo machines to power plant output

Conclusions

In summary, it can be said that no thermal efficiency penalties need to be accepted when existing turbo machines are employed in WGTCs. On the other hand, the specific outputs of these plants are significantly lower (by about 20 to 30%) than those of WGTCs with adjusted turbo machines. However, this drawback need not have negative economic effects since the standard GTs (even with some minor modifications of, for example, casings) and turbo expanders used in the alternative cycles can be considerably less expensive than not yet available WGTC gas turbines.

Performance of water/steam injected gas turbine power plants

23

The part-load performances of the various LOTHECO plants remain to be investigated. Depending on the kinds of the low temperature heat sources, their temporary unavailability cannot be excluded. It can be assumed, however, that LOTHECO plants with standard GTs designed for dry operation in the first place are economically better suited for dry operation than the plants with adjusted WGTC gas turbines.

Acknowledgement
The analysis presented here was performed within the frame of the EU financed project LOTHECO (EKN5-CT-2000-00063) and is part of the research into the development of combined cycle power plants with integration of low temperature external heat.

References
gren, N.D., Westermark, M.O., Bartlett, M.A. and Lindquist, T. (2002) First experiments on an evaporative gas turbine pilot power plant: water circuit Chemistry and humidification evaluation, ASME Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbine and Power, Vol. 24, pp.96102. Aronis, N. and Leithner, R. (2000) Neue Kombianlage mit integrierter Solarwrme, 3. Wissenschaftliches Symposium Solarenergieforschung in Niedersachsen, 2627 October, Hameln. Aronis, N., Doukelis, A., Kakaras, E. and Leithner, R. (2001) Combined-cycle power plant with integrated low-temperature heat, VGB Konferenz Neue Kraftwerkskonzepte zur Strom- und Wrmeerzeugung, February 1415, Essen. Fischer, A.C., Frutschi, H.U. and Haselbacher, H. (2001) Augmentation of gas turbine power output by steam injection, ASME Gas Turbine Conference, Paper No. 2001-GT-0107, New Orleans. Fischer, A.C. and Haselbacher, H. (2003) Realisierung von Gasturbinen-Kraftwerken mit Wasser/Dampf-Eindsung mittels Kombination von Standardgasturbinen und Turboexpandern, VDI-Energietechnik-Konferenz Fortschrittliche Energiewandlung und -anwendung, VDI-Bericht 1746, Dsseldorf, pp.93106. Frutschi, H.U. (1999) Highest efficiencies for electrical power generation with combined-cycle plants, ABB Review, No. 3, pp.1218. Hofstdter, A., Frutschi, H.U. and Haselbacher, H. (1998) Effects of steam reheat in advanced steam injected gas turbine cycles, ASME Gas Turbine Conference, Paper No. 1998-GT-584, Stockholm. Lupandin, V.V., Romanov, V.I., Krivusta, V.A. and Lupandin, V.V. (2001) Design, development and testing of a gas turbine steam injection and water recovery system, ASME Gas Turbine Conference, Paper No. 2001-GT-0111, New Orleans.