Energy Systems - Analysis, Design and Optimization (41416) Mini Project 1 Mathematical Models

Zosia Sobiech (s104645@student.dtu.dk) Daniele Sciannandrone (s104813@student.dtu.dk) Carlos Quiroz Melgar (s104589@student.dtu.dk) Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Copenhagen, Spring Semester 2011

1. Abstract
The purpose of this project is to create a mathematical model for the unit 1 of Avedrevrket (AVV) Cogeneration plant in Denmark, determine the efficiency and utilization factors as functions of load, and to determine the relationship between heat used for district heating and nominal electric power. The P-Q curves of the plant were plotted, defining the operation limits and the region of operation of the plant. Also, changes in efficiency and utilization factor of the plant were calculated, plotted and analyzed. Finally, we analyzed two possible scenarios for replacing the boiler of the plant with gas turbines. An appropriate arrangement of turbines was selected in order to transform the plant from the actual simple steam cycle configuration to a combined cycle plant, showing the increases in efficiency and power output.

2. Introduction
In 21st century civilization is so developed that we cant imagine life without electricity and hot water, its a basic facility for people from developed countries. One of the methods of heat and electricity production is to use Cogeneration plants. This kind of plants allows to produce both electricity and heat in one cycle. Cogeneration plants, also known as combined heat and power plant (CHP) are used for simultaneous production of electricity and heat from one fuel. The first CHP plant was designed and built by Thomas Edison in the end of 19th century in New York [COGEN]. Cogeneration is an environmentally-friendly method. It frequently uses waste heat and waste products, while the emission of CO2 and NOx is decreasing as technology permits to reach efficiencies near to 60% [COGEN_TERM]. Because of the production of heat additionally to electricity, Cogeneration plants reach better efficiency compared with traditional power plants. Common power plants waste about 65% of the fuel through heat loss [COGEN_TERM], so CHP plants result clearly much better according to the economical and efficiency points of view. This reports aim is to show up the characteristics of the AVV 1 power plant, based on simulated operational data. The other important task is to select new with gas turbines to repower the plant by building up a combined cycle. In the report, we explain the process for selecting the appropriate gas turbines of the future combined cycle and finally, show the 1

improvements in efficiency and electrical power for the repowered plant. As a background for our work, we include in Table 2.1 [BEE] a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of various types of co-generation systems. Table 2.1 Advantages and disadvantages of various cogeneration systems
Variant Back pressure Advantages -High fuel efficiency rating Disadvantage -Little flexibility in design and operation -more capital investment -low fuel efficiency rating -moderate part load efficiency -limited suitability quality fuels for low

Steam turbine & fuel firing in boiler

-simple plant -well- suited to low quality fuels

Gas turbine with waste heat recovery boiler

-Good fuel efficiency -simple plant -low civil const. cost -less delivery period

Combined gas & steam turbine with waste heat recovery boiler

-Optimum fuel efficiency rating -low relative capital cost -less gestation period -quick start up & stoppage -less impact on environment -high flexibility in operation

-average to moderate part-load efficiency -limited suitability quality fuels for low

Diesel Engine & waste heat recovery Boiler & cooling water heat exchanger

-high power efficiency -better suitability as stand power source

-low overall efficiency -limited suitability quality fuels for low

3. Method
3.1. P-Q diagram P-Q diagram is a characteristic diagram of a Cogeneration plant. On the x-axis there is the ratio between the actual and the nominal heat power used for district heating; on the y-axis it is represented the ratio between the actual and the nominal electrical power transferred to the net. Usually it is represented by an area of all possible operational conditions of the plant. The behavior of the plant in particular conditions was analyzed, in order to obtain the four main curves that delimit the operation region. The behavior of the plant in all intermediate points inside the operation region was not analyzed, since it was assumed that all points inside are possible to be reached by specific combinations of values for P and Q. The lines that limit the operation region represent: 2

a. Plant in full condensing asset with variation of the heat load in the boiler from minimum to maximum value; b. Plant with maximum heat load in the boiler with variation of the asset from full condensing to full back pressure; c. Plant in full back pressure asset with variation of heat load in the boiler from minimum to maximum value; d. Plant with minimum heat load in the boiler with variation of the asset from full condensing to full back pressure. Data used was provided by simulations with DNA software. The variation of the asset is done by (i) opening valves of district heating heat exchangers and (ii) closing valves at the inlet of low pressure turbine. In this way part of the steam flow starts to flow in the heat exchangers until it reaches the maximum value when low pressure turbine valves are completely closed.

3.2 Thermal efficiency and utilization factor A typical diagram for power plants is the variation of the thermal efficiency against the variation of load (electrical power transferred to the net). In the case of a cogenerative plant it is difficult to define a unique load; actually they are designed to provide electrical energy to the net and heat to district heating. There are two variables almost independent (limits exist for minimum and maximum electrical power produced for a given heat transferred to district heating, see section 5.1) so a 3D plot should be used to obtain a surface of thermal efficiency. To avoid the use of hard-to-view plots, the chosen procedure was to draw different curves of thermal efficiency with different heat loads. From data provided by DNA simulations of the plant, configurations in which the same amount of heat was transferred to district heating were chosen and the behavior of the thermal efficiency against the electrical power transferred to the net was drew. The same procedure was adopted to draw curves of utilization factor. In case of Q=0 thermal efficiency and utilization factor curves coincide; this can be shown by simple consideration of definitions of two parameters:

P H

P+Q H

equation 3.1

Where, P is the electrical power transferred to the net, Q is the heat for district heating and H is heat consumption in the boiler.

3.3. Gas Turbine Selection Upgrading the Unit 1 in Avedrevrket with the use of gas turbines makes it necessary to analyze which parts should or should not be replaced. The actual configuration shows the use of high pressure steam for preheating of water, which is a considerable lose of energy that in other way could be used for increasing the energy production. These preheaters are located out from the boiler, so we decided to analyze two possible scenarios that involve these installations: a. The gas turbines will replace only the boiler of the plant, while the four (4) water preheaters (FH1, FH2, FH3, FH4) will still be used. b. The gas turbines will replace the boiler AND the four water preheaters. In the case a, maintaining the preheaters means that the water entering to the new HRSG(s) will still have a temperature of 274.7 C (from data file AVC.DAT), so the temperature in the chimney of the HRSG will have to be higher than that value. For defining the appropriate gas turbines to be used, we defined 285C as the temperature in the chimney. In the case b, the energy transferred from the hot gases of the gas turbine(s) has to deliver enough energy to replace the fuel used in the boiler, and also to replace the heat transferred to the water in the four preheaters. It means that the total energy to transfer is equal to 602.907 MJ/s plus 91.525 MJ/s (energy transferred to the water in the four preheaters), to make a total of 694.432 MJ/s. Also, due to the fact that the preheaters are not going to be used, then the water pumped from the feedwater tank will enter directly to the new HRSG with a temperature of 180.18C, which means that the temperature in the chimney has to be above it. We defined 200C as the temperature in the chimney for making the selection of the gas turbines. In order to choose the appropriate type and number of gas turbines for replacing the installations indicated, we followed the next procedure: Define the value of HEAT to replace with the heat transferred from the hot gases of the gas turbine(s). For the case a, we selected the highest value of HEAT CONSUMPTION of the boiler, among the information provided in all the data files. This value represents the energy transferred from the fuel combustion to the steam produced. The value is 602.907 MJ/s and was found in the data file AVC.DAT. For the case b, we included the heat that is transferred to the water in the preheaters, which as indicated previously is 694.432 MJ/s. Find an appropriate combination of gas turbines with enough temperature of their outlet hot gases for transferring the energy indicated in the previous step. This energy will be transferred to the steam cycle in the HRSG that will form the combined cycle. The energy transferred from the hot gases to the steam is calculated according to equation 4.1: Qhg = mhg * Cp * (Thg Tout) 4 equation 3.2

Where: mhg is the hot gases mass flow, Thg is the temperature of hot gases after the turbine (K), Tout is the temperature of the hot gases in the chimney of the HRSG (K ), and Cp is the specific heat of the average temperature of hot gases in the HRSG (kJ/kgK). For calculating Cp, we used the curves for hot gases from combustion as function of temperature [KTH,2010], shown in Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.1 Specific heat for gases from combustion as function of temperature

Being known the amount of energy necessary from the HRSG, we selected among all the available models, the appropriate gas turbines whose hot exhaust gases could transfer to the steam the energy indicated in both cases defined.

3.4. Combined Cycle Electrical Power The inclusion of the gas turbines in place of the boiler (and feedwater preheaters) makes of the Avedrevrket plant a combined cycle power plant. For both of our cases of study, we have assumed that the electric power produced in the steam cycle doesnt change. Then the total power of the upgraded plant is calculated by equation 3.3. Ptotal = PST + n * PGT equation 3.3

Where, PST is the power of the steam turbine (invariable in all cases, 261.5 MW), n is the number of gas turbines, PGT is the power of the selected gas turbine. 5

4.5. Efficiency of the Combined Cycle The efficieny of a combined cycle is calculated according to the equations 3.4 and 3.5. ncc = (PGT + PST) / Qf Qf = PGT/nGT equation 3.4 equation 3.5

Where: PGT is the electrical power produced by the gas turbine(s), PST is the power generated by the steam turbine, Qf is the heat in the fuel fed to all the gas turbine(s) and nGT is the efficiency of the gas turbine(s).

4. Results
4.1. P-Q diagram In Figure 4.1 is represented the P-Q diagram for the considered plant.

Figure 4.1 P-Q diagram for the Unit 1 of Avedrevrket CHP plant The bold black lines represent the operational limits of the plant. All the region inside those limits are possible points of operation (as a combination of values por P and Q). The black and white squares shown represent data obtained from the base simulations. 4.2 Thermal efficiency and utilization factor In figure 4.2 are represented thermal efficiency and utilization factor for the considered plant.

Figure 4.2 Thermal efficiency and Utilization factor for AVV Unit 1

4.3. Gas Turbine Selection As detailed in section 3.3, from all the proposed available gas turbines, we tried different combinations of units that could meet the need of energy transferred to the steam in the HRSG. For case a, we found that the combination of 03 gas turbines ANSALDO V94.3A (285 MW) is the most suitable for this application. The data of the selected turbines is showed in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 Specifications for Ansaldo gas turbines (source: 2009 GTW Simple Cycle Specs)

The hot gases of this arrangement of gas turbines transfer 664.233 MJ/s to the steam in the HRSG(s), which is enough to cover the requirement of 602.907 MJ/s. The excess of energy could be used to produce more power in the steam cycle, or if it is not possible, it could be controlled by limiting the temperature in the outlet of gas turbines or by increasing drainages in the steam cycle. For case b, we found that the combination of 02 gas turbines SIEMENS SGT5-8000H (340 MW) is the most suitable for this application. The data of the selected turbines is showed in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Specifications for Siemens gas turbines (source: 2009 GTW Simple Cycle Specs)

As explained before, the hot gases of this arrangement of gas turbines should transfer enough energy to replace the boiler and the four preheaters that use high pressure steam. The energy transferred to the steam in the HRSGs is 773.998 MJ/s, which covers the necessary 694.432 MJ/s. Again, the excess of energy from the gas turbines could be used to increase the power production in the steam cycle, or if it is not possible, it could be controlled by limiting the outlet temperature of the gas turbines or by increasing the drainages in the steam cycle.

4.4. Combined Cycle Electrical Power Using equation 3.3 and the results from section 4.3, the new power of the upgraded plant is determined for both cases proposed. For case a: Steam Turbine Power: Gas Turbine Power (ANSALDO V94.3A): 261.5 MW 3 x 285 MW

Total power of the new combined cycle is 1116.5 MW. For case b: Steam Turbine Power: Gas Turbine Power (SIEMENS SGT5-8000H): 261.5 MW 2 x 340 MW

Total power of the new combined cycle is 941.5 MW. For calculating the auxiliary services consumption, we assume that the steam cycle maintains its consumption of 11964.705 kW (obtained from data file AVC.DAT) even after the installation of the combined cycle, while for the gas turbines we assume an auxiliary consumption of 1000 kW for each turbine, which is an acceptable value according to the existant experiences. Therefore, the total auxiliary consumption of the new plant will be approximately 13.965 MW.

4.5. Efficiency of the Combined Cycle With previous results, and using equations 3.4 and 3.5, the thermal efficiency for the upgraded plant for both analyzed cases is shown. For case a: PGT = 3 x 285 MW PST = 261.5 MW nGT = 0.396

The calculated efficiency for the new combined cycle is 51.70%. 8

For case b:

PGT = 2 x 340 MW

PST = 261.5 MW

nGT = 0.390

The calculated efficiency for the new combined cycle is 53.98%.

5. Discussion
5.1. P-Q Diagram From the plot in figure 1 can be seen that the maximum electrical power is produced when the total heat transferred to district heating is equal to zero (point [0,1]). This is obvious since in this condition the plant works in full condensing mode and can completely exploit the pressure jump between the high pressure turbine inlet and the condenser. When valves of district heating are opened and valves of low pressure turbine are closed, the amount of steam passing through the low pressure turbine decrease until it becomes equal to zero; in that situation, with full heat load in the boiler, the maximum amount of heat to district heating is transferred (point [1,0.86]). By decreasing the heat load in the boiler similar curves could be drew, covering the whole area. A lower limit exists in the heat load in the boiler since it isn't designed to operate too far from nominal conditions. One interesting observation is that it is impossible to work at maximum electrical load and maximum heat provided to district heating: if part of the mass flow goes to the district heating, a part of work is lost from the low pressure turbine; this explains why the upper line slightly decrease with increasing of the heat load transferred to district heating. Finally we can say that with a fixed Q, lower and upper limits exist of the total electrical power transferred to the net and regulation range decrease for high value of Q: for 100% of heat to the district heating theres only one possible value of electrical power produced. 5.2. Thermal Efficiency and Utilization Factor As it can be seen from figure 2, thermal efficiency increase with electric load and slightly decrease with the heat load but its value doesnt change a lot and settles on a value of 37% with no big variations for high loads. On the other hand the utilization factor has a different behavior: its value is high for low loads and decreases with increasing of electrical output. Actually this behavior can be explained by simple mathematical considerations on the definition of the utilization factor.

P+Q Q Q = + = .1 + H H P

From the formula it can be seen that utilization factor is the sum of the thermal efficiency and another term which is the ratio of a constant term (Q is constant for each line) and a term which increase with the load. For high electrical loads the utilization factor decreases and tends to be equal to the thermal efficiency. The higher is the value of Q, the higher is the importance of the second term. 9

For small value of produced electrical power, the utilization factor tends to be equal to

Q ; H

the total heat transferred to the district heating over the heat consumption: the plant works like a boiler used to produce only heat and the utilization factor becomes the efficiency of that boiler, including all heat losses in the plant. Those mathematical considerations are useful to understand if what has been got makes sense; actually, there are technical limits of the produced electrical power and produced heat. 5.3. Gas Turbine Selection The upgrading of a power plant implies to maintain or increase the previous power output or any other characteristic decided by the owner, dont use much more space than the previous installation and also, as in any other project, one of the main objectives is to maintain the cost of the works as low as possible. We selected 02 cases of study. In case a we decided to replace only the boiler of AVV1, and in case b we decided to replace also the feedwater preheaters. As mentioned in section 4.3, for the case a we decided to select 03 gas turbines ANSALDO V94.3A (285 MW) as the replace option, and 02 gas turbines SIEMENS SGT5-8000H (340 MW) for the case b. Even though during the analysis of all the other gas turbines, we found some options that were closer to match the heat needs from the hot gases, we decided not to take them because some technical considerations. For example, for case a we had the option to use 09 turbines Ansaldo V64.3A (75 MW) that could transfer 611 MJ/s of heat, very close to the requirement of 602.907 MJ/s (for our selected option, the transferred heat is 664.233 MJ/s), but installing 09 small turbines instead of 02 big ones clearly takes more investment, space and maintenance costs, among others. For case b we also had the option of the turbine Ansaldo V64.3A (773.998 MJ/s of transferred heat, compared with the objective of 694.432 MJ/s), but it would have been necessary to install 08 units, which as in the previous case, is a clear disadvantage for an upgrading work. Of course, due to the location of the plant in Denmark, and in order not to introduce extra and unnecessary equipment with the upgrading, we were careful to select gas turbines that match the nominal frequency of the Danish system, 50 Hz.

6. References
[COGEN] http://cogeneration.net/cogenerationexplained/ [COGEN_TERM] http://cogeneration.net/terms.htm [BEE] http://www.bee-india.nic.in/ [KTH,2010] Sustainable Power Generation course, Fall 2010, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.

10

11