19th SYMPOSIUM ON INDUSTRIAL

APPLICATIONS OF GAS TURBINES

Considerations for an Optimized Inlet Filter System

by
Jim Benson
Camfil Farr Power System

Presented at the 19th Symposium on Industrial Application of Gas Turbines (IAGT)

Banff, Alberta, Canada - October 17-19, 2011
The IAGT Committee shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in technical papers or in symposium or meeting discussions.
 Agenda
• Why filters
• Aerosol
• Environments
• Filter Systems
• Filter Performance
• Economic Examples
 Why Filter
• FOD
• Erosion
• Corrosion
• Cooling Passage Plugging
• Fouling
Aerosols
Aerosols
Aerosols
 Environments

• Marine
• Offshore
• Coastal
• Desert
• Arctic
• Tropical
• Industrial
• Rural
• Urban
 Filtration Systems

• Self Cleaning • Static

• High concentration • Lower concentration
• Snow & Ice
 Filtration Systems
Environment Filter system recommendation Environment Filter system recommendation

Marine Static Tropical Static

 Vane separator  Vane
 Pre-filter  Pre-filter
 Coalescer  Coalescer
 Final filter  Final filter

Offshore Static
 Rain hood
Industrial Static Self-cleaning (high concentrations)
 Vane separator  Rain hood
 Rain hood
 Pre filter  Filter
 Pre-filter  2nd stage filter ( ≥H10)
 Final filter
 Filter
Coastal Static  Final filer (≥H10)
 Rain hood
 Vane separator
Rural Static Self-cleaning (high concentrations)
 Pre filter  Rain hood
 Final filter  Rain hood  Filter
 Pre-filter
 Final filter
Desert Self-cleaning
 Rain hood
 Final filter
Urban Static
Arctic Self-Cleaning  Rain hood
 Snow hood  Pre-filter
 Final Filter  Final filter
 Optional inlet heat
 Filter Parameters

• Pressure Drop
• Compressor Work
• Initial
• Avg. over life
• Efficiency
• Compressor Fouling
• Service Life
• Pressure Drop
• Age
• Scheduled Maintenance
 Filter Parameters
Efficiency
• Common Standards
• ASHRAE 52.2
• EN 779
• Particle count by size
• Rated per Std.
• ASHRAE 52.2
• MERV
• Minimum efficiency reporting value
• EN 779
• Average efficiency
• “F9”
Filter Parameters
Efficiency
 Filter Comparison
EN 779 F7 vs. F9 @ 0.4 um
F7 F9
Efficiency 90 % Efficiency 95 % (min)
Or Or
Inefficiency 10% Inefficiency 5%
10 out of 100 particles pass thru 5 out of 100 particles pass thru

F9 is 2x more efficient than an F7

 Filter Performance
Systems Performance
Economics Examples

Pressure Drop Example

• 125 Pa [0.5” wg] avg. Lower Pressure Drop
• Typical Power loss due Pressure Drop
• 1000 Pa => 1% Power loss
 Filter Performance
Systems Performance
Economics Examples
Power 30 Mw
Intermittent load operation 2000 hrs. per yr.
Output per year 60,000 Mw-hrs.
Power loss due high system DP of 0.5” w.g. over1 yr 0.25%
Output loss per 150 MW-hrs
Value of power $50/MW-hr
Value of loss power $7,500
Assumed inlet airflow 144,000 cfm
Assumed number of filter (2000cfm/filter) 72
Break even value per filter $104
 Filter Performance
Systems Performance
Economics Examples

Fouling Example
• Power loss –fouling due to higher efficiency levels
• Assume 0.5% reduction in compressor degradation
 Filter Performance
Systems Performance
Economics Examples
Power 30 Mw
Intermittent load operation 2000 hrs. per yr.
Output per year 60,000 Mw-hrs.
Power loss –fouling due to diff filter levels 0.5%

Output loss per 300 Mw-hrs./yr.

Value of power $50/Mw-hrs.
Value of loss power $15,000/yr.
Assumed inlet airflow 144,000 cfm
Assumed number of filter (2000cfm/filter) 72 filters

Break even value per filter ~$208/filter-yr

 Summary

• Filtration Protects GT
• Filtration Performance
• Environment
• Aerosol Contaminant
• Filter Selection
• Filtration affects GT Performance and Economics
Thank You