School of Engineering

Mercer University
MAE 436 - Turbomachinery
Dr. Loren Sumner
Group: Joo Vitor Carvalho
Rodrigo Vergani
Theunis Marotta

Design Project
Gas Turbine Powered Neighborhood Grid

Introduction
Plant Scherer, a coal-fired steam power plant responsible for the emission of 27 million
tons of carbon annually, powers the state of Georgia. Having this panorama in mind, multiple
energy sources are being developed bringing great advantages to reduce emissions and raise the
power efficiency. This project consist in designing a small axial-flow gas turbine to power a
neighborhood area in Georgia to reduce the strong dependence on a single power plant and
consequently open a path to the development of clean energy alternatives with cost sharing
scheme among neighbors. For acquiring this objective, specifications such as the type of cycle
and its equipment will be discussed willing to find the best match for a high efficiency plant.
Design constrains:

Consider a neighborhood of 20 to 30 homes;

Assume an 1800 sq. ft. home on average for a 30 home neighborhood or

2700 sq. ft. for a 20 home neighborhood.

Assume that your plant contains a battery bank system that acts as a buffer
of energy to provide intervals of increased power when needed, and that it

is perfect, that is, no energy is lost, only sent to the grid or stored;
At a minimum, your power plant capacity should be able to deliver

continuous power equal to all seasonal averaged power demands.

The Maximum allowable turbine inlet temperature is 1100K;
A radial shield surrounding the gas turbine is required to protect against

possible projectiles due a catastrophic failure;

A safety screen over the air intake is required with a max air speed of 10

mph;
Size of plants is comparable to the average home in neighborhood.

Power Requirements

The use of electrical energy in a home is a part of a cycle, which allows us to use the
energy provided by a remote electric generator. We thereby take advantage of burning coal, oil,
natural gas or using nuclear energy to provide the energy we need at home.
In 2012, the residential sector accounted for 21% of total primary energy consumption
and about 20% of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States (computed from U.S Energy
information Administration 2013. The analysis is based on the U.S. Energy Information
Administrations (EIA) residential energy consumption surveys (RECS) 1980-2009. According
to RECS, U.S. households used 10.2 quadrillion Btu (quad) of site energy in 2009.
In addition, weather is the key factor causing annual fluctuation in energy consumption
associated with space heating and cooling demand. The summer of 2009 was cooler and the
winter of 2009 was warmer than during 1980. The average number of cooling degree-days
(CDD) and heating degree-days (HDD) declined by 6.6% and 4.7%, respectively. Therefore, we
expected weather to influence the changes in energy consumption in our decomposition analysis.
According to the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA), in 2013 the
state of Georgia consumed, in average, 1088 kWh of electricity with a number of 4,268,351
customers (Table 1).

State
South Atlantic
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
West Virginia

Number of
Customers
26,256,056
403,519
235,322
8,756,322
4,101,351
2,218,948
4,268,019
2,135,432
3,273,502
863,641

Average Monthly
Consumption
(kWh)
1,088
944
720
1,078
1,088
1,031
1,098
1,124
1,156
1,118

Average Price
(cents/kWh)
11.39
12.95
12.57
11.27
11.46
13.25
10.97
11.99
10.84
9.52

Average
Monthly Bill
(Dollar and
cents)
123.93
122.25
90.51
121.53
124.67
136.63
120.52
134.86
125.36
106.44

Table 1 - 2013 Average Monthly Bill- Residential - According to the United States Energy Information
Administration (EIA).

In this project, we considered a neighborhood with 30 homes. Moreover, a safety

factor of 2 was established in order to guarantee the appropriate functioning of the electric
power generation:
kWh
30 homes
month
=45.333 kW
days 24 h
30

month day

1088
=
P=W

=2 ( 45.333 kW )=90.666 kW
P=W
Ideal Cycle Investigation
The assumptions of ideal conditions will be taken to imply the following:
a) Compression and expansion process are reversible and adiabatic, i.e isentropic;
b) The change of Kinect energy of the working fluid between inlet and outlet of each
component is negligible
c) There are no pressure losses in the inlet ducting, combustion chambers, heat-exchange,
intercoolers, exhaust ducting, and ducts connecting the components.
d) The working fluid has the same composition throughout the cycle and is a perfect gas
with constant specific heats.
e) The mass flow rate of gas is constant throughout the cycle.
f) Heat transfer in a heat-exchange (assumed counterflow) is complete, so that in
conjunction with (d) and (e) the temperature rise on the cold side is the maximum
possible and exactly equal to the temperature drop on the hot side.
Use the following property values in our investigation:
-

Ta = 298K
Pa = 1 atm
= 1.4
Cp = 1.005 kJ/kg-K
= 1.227 kg/m3
Maximum temperature in the cycle = 1100K
Heat exchanger effectiveness = 0.80 (only non-ideal assumption)

Heat engines are designed for converting thermal energy to work, and their performance is
expressed in terms of the thermal efficiency, which is the ratio of the network produced by the
engine to the total heat input:

net
Q

Simple cycle (Brayton)

Figure 1- Schematic for a simple cycle.

Brayton cycle is the ideal cycle for gas-turbine engines in which the working fluid
undergoes a closed loop. That is the combustion and exhaust processes are modeled by constantpressure heat addition and rejection, respectively.
The Brayton ideal cycle is made up of four internally reversible processes:
-

1-2 isentropic compression (in compressor)

2-3 const. pressure heat-addition (in combustion chamber)
3-4 isentropic expansion (in turbine)
4-1 const. pressure heat rejection (exhaust)

Figure 2 - T-s and P-v diagrams for ideal Brayton cycle.

Thermal efficiency, specific power output, optimal r for the Brayton cycle is:

T3
Define: t= T 1
=

P2
, r= P1

Cp ( T 1T 2 ) +Cp(T 3T 4 )
net output
1
=
=1
required input
Cp(T 3T 2)
r

()

[ () ]

1
net
T 2 T 3 T4
1
=1 + =1r + t 1
C p T1
T 1 T1 T 1
r

r opt = ( t )

Heat Exchange Cycle

Figure 3 Heat exchange cycle representation

Thermal efficiency, specific power output, optimal r for the Heat Exchange Cycle is:

Define: c=r
=

Cp ( T 1T 2 ) +Cp(T 3T 4 )
net output
1
=
=1
required input
Cp(T 3T 2)
r

()

Efficiency ( considering the heat exchanger effectiveness ():

1c+t
=
t

t
c

( ct c )c

[ () ]

1
net
T T T
net=1 2 + 3 4 =1r +t 1 1
=
C p T1
T1 T1 T1
r

r opt = ( t )

For the graphs () was considered T3 = 1100K and T1 = Tatm = 298K and t = T3 / T1= 3.67.

Figure 4 Efficiency of the heat exchange cycle in function of pressure ratios

Figure 5 Specific work output of the heat exchange cycle in function of pressure ratios

Reheat Cycle
A substantial increase in specific work output can be obtained by splitting the expansion
and reheating the gas between the high-pressure and low-pressure turbines. That the turbine
works is increased is obvious when one remembers that the vertical distances between any of
constants pressure lines increases as the entropy increase.

Figure 6 Reheat cycle representation

Thermal efficiency, specific power output, optimal r for the Reheat Cycle is:
2t
2 tc +1
c
=
t
2t c
c
=2 tc +1
r opt =t

2t
c

2
3 ( 1)

Reheat and Heat exchange

Figure 7 Combined cycle: Reheat and Heat exchange cycle representation

Thermal efficiency and specific power output for the Reheat and Heat Cycle is:
2t
2 tc +1
c
=
2t
2 t
c

Efficiency considering the heat exchanger effectiveness,

2t
2 t c +1
c
=
t
t
2t
c c
c
c

=2 tc +1

2t
c

Figure 8 - Efficiency of the combined cycle in function of pressure ratios

Figure 9 - Specific work output of the combined cycle in function of pressure ratios

Comparison between cycles

On the graphs above was compared the efficiency and the specific work output between
the heat exchange cycle to the heat exchange and reheat combined cycle in function of pressure
ratios. As one can see, for every value stipulated for the pressure ratio, the efficiency and the
specific work output of the combined cycle is greater than the efficiency for the heat exchange
cycle. Consequently, the cycle that was chosen to be used in this project of the gas turbine was
the heat exchange and reheat combined cycle.

Figure 10 - Efficiency of the heat exchange cycle in comparison to the heat exchange and reheat combined cycle in
function of pressure ratios;

Figure 11 - Specific work output of the heat exchange cycle in comparison to the heat exchange and reheat
combined cycle in function of pressure ratios.

Real Cycle Investigate

To improve the estimates of cycle performance by including the effects of irreversibility

of real components, the sources of non-ideal performance and departures from reversibility are:
1. Losses (entropy production) in the compressor and the turbine.
2. Stagnation pressure decrease in the combustor.
3. Heat transfer: Because of these irreversibilities, it is needed more work, hc (the
changes in kinetic energy from inlet to exit of the compressor are neglected), to
drive the compressor than in the ideal situation. We also get less work, ht, back
from the turbine. The consequence is that the network from the engine is less than
in the cycle with ideal components.
Using the following loss specifications:

Compressor polytropic efficiency: c =0.85 ;

Turbine polytropic efficiency: t =0.85 ;
Mechanical transmission efficiency: m =0.99 ;
Combustion efficiency: b =0.98 ;

Heat exchanger effectiveness: 0.80 ;

Pressure losses:
1. Pha is5 o f the delivery pressure;
2. Pb is6 of the delivery pressure;

Phg is5 of the exit pressure.

3.

Embedded Equations:

=T ( r

T 012
t =

1
c

C p ( T 012 )
m

P02=r Pa
P03=P02 (1 P a Pb )
P06=

P04=

Pa
1 Pb
P 03
(1 P b)

P 03

P06

1/2

P05=P04 (1 Pb)

[ ( ) ]

T 034 =T 03 1

P 04
P03

g1
t
g

LPT = LPT =C p ( T 034 ) ; T 034 = T 056

T 06 =T 04 =T 03 T 034
T 05=T 03=1100 K
T 07 =T 02 + ( T 03T 07 )

Neglecting combustion temporality;

Input heat transfers.
q73=C p ( T 03T 07 )
q 45 =C pg ( T 05T 04 )

max =

LPT ( r ) + LPT ( r ) TC ( r )
q73 ( r )q 45 (r )

Figure 12 Efficiency of turbines in relation to pressure ratio

maximun =20.5 at r=5

The efficiency depends only on the pressure ratio and the nature of the gas. Figure 12
shows the relation between efficiency and pressure ratio when = 1.3333 (specific heat ratio).

Combustion Analysis for single rise

First Combuster:
T 07 =854.3 K inlet temperature
T 03T 07=245.7 K temperature rise
Using the graph of Figure 13, we found:

Figure 13 - Graph of combustion temperature rise versus fuel/air ratio

Second Combuster:
T 04 =931.8 K
T 05T 04=168.2 K

Using the graph of Figure 13, we found:

Combuster efficiency:

with r=5 ; SFC ( 5 )=0.4964 kg / KWh

Thermal efficiency:

Figure 14 - Efficiency of combustors in relation to pressure ratio

with r=5 ; combustion (Thermal efficiency )=17.6

Design Choice
For design choice was used r = 5 and increase in to provide sufficient overall
power ( combustion =17.6 ;

Define:

Equations:

Unit size and inlet velocity:

Compressor Design
For the compressor design, we calculate the rotational speed and annulus dimensions,
estimating number of stages, and computing air angles for each stage.

The rotational speed can be found as:

=

U
rm
FORMULA 1. Relation between rotational speed, blade speed and annulus ratio.

Rotational Speed.
U Blade Speed.
rm Annulus ratio

The annulus ratio is given by:

rm = (rr + rt) / 2
FORMULA 2. Annulus ration given by the relation between blade-root radius and blade-tip radius

Where,
rr = Blade root radius.
rt = Blade tip raius.
Annulus Dimension will be given by the area of the annulus:

m
Ca
A=

= (rt2 rr2)

FORMULA 3. The annulus dimension is given by the relation between the rotor ratio and the stator ratio

To know the number of stages (n) in the design project, it is necessary to do the
following relationship:
n=

To
Tos

FORMULA 4. The number of stages according to the stage temperature rise (FORMULA 7) and the variation of the
temperature between two stages.

Where,
To

= T02 T01

In a situation that the air approaches the rotor at a velocity Ca and an angle 1 from axial
direction, combining C1 vectorially with the blade speed U gives the velocity relative to the
blade, V1, at an angle 1 from the axial direction. Therefore, we will have the following relation:

U
Ca
Therefore,

= tan 1 + tan 1

U
1 = tan-1 ( Ca

tan 1)

FORMULA 5. Relation between Rotor and stator blade angles at the air approaches.

In the same situation, the air passes through the rotor, which increase the absolute
velocity of the air, the fluid leaves the rotor with relative velocity V2 at an angle 2 determined by
the rotor blade outlet angle. We are going to have the following relation:
U
Ca

= tan 2 + tan 2

Therefore,
U
2 = tan-1 ( Ca

tan 2)

FORMULA 6. Relation between Rotor and stator blade angles when the fluid leaves the rotor.

The reduction in work capacity can be accounted for by use of work-done factor ,
which is a number less than a unity. The actual stage temperature rise then given by:

( 2)
tan ( 1 )tan

. U .Ca
Tos=
FORMULA 7. Stage temperature dependent on the work-done factor

The degree of reaction provides a measure of the extent to which the rotor contributes to
overall static pressure rise in the stage. The degree of reaction is given by:

( 2)
tan ( 1 )+ tan

Ca .
=

FORMULA 8. Degree of reaction in a stage.

Annulus Size Computations

The inner and outer radius related to the annulus can be found stage by stage using the
following formulas:
T 02=T 01+ T os
The we can apply:
T 2 =T 02

C2
2Cp

Where,
C2 =

Ca
cos ( 2 )

To calculate the local pressure we use:

P2=P01

T2
T 01

( )

c
1

The last variable is the density:

2=

P2
R T2

Finally, we are ready to calculate the annulus radius:

r t 2=

2 4 r m Ca

And,
r r 2=2r m r t 2
This process should be repeated for the stator and stage-by-stage. It is important to observe the
changes in the radius to relate this property with the final work output.

Constant mean radius: 14.122

Inlet (cm)
Exit (cm)

Tip radius
15.692
14.599

Hub radius
12.553
13.646

Blade hight
3.138
0.953

Results

Stage
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Tos
(K)
23.98
18.55
15.4
13.44
12.86
12.55
12.38
12.3
12.25
12.22
12.21
12.2
12.2
12.2
12.2
12.2
12.2
12.2
12.2
255.7
4

0.858
0.694
0.604
0.556
0.53
0.516
0.509
0.505
0.502
0.501
0.501
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5

1
(deg)
83.93
82.52
81.43
80.71
80.27
80.01
79.87
79.8
79.75
79.73
79.72
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7

2
(deg)
81.56
79.58
78.06
77.04
76.42
75.86
75.75
75.7
75.66
75.65
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64

2
(deg)
69.47
75.86
77.94
78.83
79.25
79.47
79.58
79.64
79.7
79.69
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7
79.7

3
(deg)
60.85
70.16
73.13
74.39
74.99
75.29
75.45
75.53
75.58
75.6
75.61
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64
75.64

Rt2
(cm)
15.497
15.383
15.292
15.217
15.149
15.085
15.028
14.975
14.926
14.881
14.84
14.803
14.768
14.736
14.706
14.678
14.652
14.628
14.606

Rr2
(cm)
12.748
12.862
12.953
13.028
13.096
13.159
13.217
13.27
13.319
13.364
13.404
13.442
13.477
13.509
13.539
13.567
13.593
13.617
13.639

Rt3
(cm)
15.481
15.352
15.257
15.18
15.112
15.051
14.996
14.945
14.899
14.856
14.814
14.781
14.748
14.717
14.689
14.662
14.638
14.614
14.593

Rr3
(cm)
12.765
12.893
12.988
13.065
13.132
13.194
13.249
13.3
13.346
13.388
13.428
13.464
13.497
13.528
13.556
13.583
13.607
13.63
13.652

Turbine Design

Advantages pressure gradient:

i)
ii)

No diffusion limitation (fewer stages).

0.5 degree of reaction for all stages.

The primary concern of the turbine design is the efficiency.

The primary concern of the turbine design is the efficiency.

(rather than blas stall as in compressor)

Gas is nozzle to increaded Kinect energy

The Kinect energy B removed by rotor blades

Figure 1: Flow velocity triangle convection

From Geometry
U
=tan 2tan 2
Ca
U
=tan 3tan 3
Ca

The Euler turbomachinery is given by:

= U (C2 - C3)

s= U Ca (tan2 + tan3)
The first law for stages is:
s= Cp (T03 + T01)
T

U Ca
Cp

0s =

(tan2 + tan3)

To find the total-to-total stage efficiency we use:

= (T01 T03) / (T01 T03)

It is the appropriate efficiency if the stage is followed by others in a multi-stage turbine

because the leaving kinetic energy (C32/2) is utilized in the next stage. Also, it is relevant if the
stage is part of a turbojet engine, because the leaving kinetic energy is used in the propelling
nozzle.
Doing a relation between P03, P01 and T03, T01,
P03/P01 = (T03` / T01)

/ -1

Where T03 is the static temperature reached after an isentropic expansion from p01 to p03
We can find,
T

0s

It is possible to conclude that

T01 [1 (P03 / P01) -1 /

depends on blade angles, gas velocities, and T

0s.

In turbine design, there are three dimensionless parameters found to be useful. The first one is
the temperature drop coefficient ( ) which express the work capacity of a stage.

2 Ca
U

(tan 2 + tan 3)

The second dimensionless parameter is the degree of reaction ( which express the
fraction of the stage expansion that occurs in the rotor, and it is usual to define it in terms of
static temperature (or enthalpy) drop rather than pressure drops. The degree of reaction can be
expressed by:

Ca
2U

(tan 3 tan 2)

The third dimensionless parameter is the flow coefficient (), and it express the ratio
Ca
U . Threfore,
= 2

(tan 2 + tan 3)

(tan 3 tan 2)

Now, it is possible to express the gas angles in terms of ,

tan 3 =

1
2

1
( 2

+2 )

tan 2 =

1
2

1
( 2

-2 )

or,

Setting

3 = tan 3 -

2 = tan 2 +

=0.5 we have,
1

= tan 3 tan 2

3 = 2 and 2 = 3

, and as follows:

Finally,
= 4 tan 3 2

= 4 tan 2 + 2

Limitations

Shockwave development at mid-chord or convex side at rotor blade. To avoid

shockwave, MW2 < 0.75.
Nozzle exit can be slightly supersonic with Mc2 < 1.2.
Nozzle exit is shocked, P = Pc.
Expansion to P2 occurs in a short distance past the Trailing Edge (E.T).
Stators:
Pmin = Pc
Therefore,
Pmin = P01 (

+1
( -1)/2
;
2 )

With =1.333 ,
Pmin = P01 (0.5397)

Flare Angle Check:

The blade height (h) can be found from:

h=

AN
Um

U m=2 r m
A=

Um h

The annulus flare angle is given by:

1
(h r h s )
2
1
1
hs hr
3
2

Where the annulus flare angle is limited as < 25o.

Turbine Design Steps:

1) Choose rm U
Choose number of stages T
Use the Smith chart with
XU .
2)

and desire

0s

to provide . Check Ca value, Ca =

and All blade angles ( =0.5

3) Compute annulus size (inlet and exit of stage).

4) Check flare angle. ( < 25o).
5) Check Ma numbers at blade tip.
Mc2 < 1.2 Nozzle exit.
Mw2 < 0.75 L.E of rotor.

Results
High Pressure Turbine
2 Repeating Stages with Symmetrical Blading (50% degree of reaction)
Blade angles (degree):
2
3
2
3
66.937
7.204
7.204
66.937
rotor speed: 19,910
rpm
axial velocity:
296.389mph
mean radius: 14.122
cm
Stage efficiency: 0.88

tip radius
(cm)

hub radius
(cm)

hub-tip
ratio

area
(m2)

gas
density
(kg/m3)

stag. T

Inlet

14.383

13.861

0.521

Exits:
Stage 1
Stage 2

tip radius
(cm)
14.674
14.970

hub radius
(cm)
13.551
13.248

hub-tip
ratio
0.504
0.487

Stage 1
Stage 2

flare angle
(degrees)
6.116
12.995

nozzle
Mach
0.632
0.672

L.E
Mach
0.123
0.131

0.005

1.678

area
(m2)
0.007
0.009

gas
density
(kg/m3)
1.218
0.884

Low Pressure Turbine

2 Repeating Stages with Symmetrical Blading (50% degree of reaction)
Blade angles (degree):
2
3
2
3
67.291
10.939
10.939
67.291
rotor speed: 17522.3
rpm
axial velocity:
281.05mph
mean radius: 15.17
cm
Stage efficiency: 0.87

110

stag. T
1006
920

area
(m2)

gas
density
(kg/m3)

13.172

hub-tip
ratio
0.4813586
96

0.012

0.719

Exits:
Stage 1
Stage 2

tip radius
(cm)
15.950
16.552

hub radius
(cm)
12.215
11.553

hub-tip
ratio
0.417
0.380

area
(m2)
0.027
0.038

gas
density
(kg/m3)
0.308
0.223

Stage 1
Stage 2

flare angle
(degrees)
6.116
12.995

nozzle
Mach
0.676
0.736

L.E
Mach
0.131
0.143

tip radius
(cm)

hub radius
(cm)

Inlet

14.897

References
1- United States Energy Information Administration. 2013 Average Monthly Bill -

Residential. <http://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/pdf/table5_a.pdf>;
2- Open Gas-Turbine Cycle. <http://www.sfu.ca/~mbahrami/ENSC%20461/Notes/Brayton

%20Cycle.pdf>
3- H. Cohen, G. F. C. Rogers and H. I. I. Saravanamutto (1996) Gas Turbine Theory, 4th ed.,
Longmans, Harlow.

stag. T

110

stag. T
1006
920