2010 Sixth International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC 2010)

Modeling of Combined Cycle Power Plant Based on a

Genetic Algorithm Parameter Identification Method
Lin Gao, Junrong Xia, Yiping Dai
Institute of Turbomachinery, School of Energy & Power Engneering
Xi’an Jiaotong University
Xi’an, China, 710049

Abstract—Classic combined cycle power plant models are often Voffset No-load fuel offset
too complex for power system dynamic analysis, and hard to
estimate the parameters accurately. The performances of wF Fuel flow rate
parameter identification procedures have been significantly wX Air flow rate through the compressor
reduced by high-dimensional searches and strong nonlinear δ Speed droop
relationships. A new non-linear model is proposed to be suitable
for the parameter identification procedure in this paper. An τ1 , τ 2 Pure time delay const
identification method based on an improved genetic algorithm
(GA) is used for the modeling of a 400MW combined cycle power
plant. The whole system is divided into six parts and an artificial I. INTRODUCTION
disturbance is recorded for the identification of each part. The
results show great consistence between identified model responses Compared to conventional thermal or nuclear power
and the experimental data. stations, the combined cycle power plants (CCPP) have many
powerful features that include high thermal efficiency, low
Keywords-paramenter identification; combined cycle power installation cost, wide range of burning fuels, and so on. Its
plant; gas turbine; steam turbine; dynamic modeling dynamic model is often needed for power system analysis but
not as ripe as that of steam turbine (ST) units.
NOMENCLATURE As in general combined cycle applications the gas turbine
C1 , C2 , C3 Const Parameters
(GT) is the main drive for power generation. To improve
overall efficiency, exhaust heat from GT is used to produce
E1 Burning time delay steam for the generation of additional electricity by a ST. Many
F1 , F2 , F3 Self-defined function, see Appendix for detail researchers [1, 2, 8] built mathematic models for GTs which is one
KGT Gas turbine output portion of the key part of the CCPP system. Most models are based on
Rowen’s heavy GT model [3]. IEEE working group [4] published
K ST Steam turbine output portion
their models of CCPP in 1994. Their GT model is also based
KVP Proportional parameter of fuel system on Rowen’s model which consists of many non-linear curves,
LF Fuel valve opening position calculations and transfer functions. They are hard to estimate
LIGV IGV position
for a practical GT unit. Suzakj [5] further considered the effect
of cooling air and turbine efficiency on the system dynamic
m EX Exhaust heat flux performance. Kunitomi [6] built a model of triple-pressure heat-
PGT Gas turbine output power recovery steam generator (HRSG) and STs based on Reference
PST Steam turbine output power [4]. They both make it more complex to model a given CCPP
in middle- or long-term simulations of power system. There are
TCD Compressor time const
many valves and control system models including in many
TEX Exhaust gas temperature HRSG and ST models, which are commonly without a
TEX 1 Measurement temperature of the exhaust gas regulation for normal operation conditions. The CCPP outputs
TF Fuel system time const are mainly regulated by the GT control systems. Therefore
simplified HRSG and ST models may needed and many
TH , TM HGRS & Steam turbine time const researchers, like Bagnasco [7], Zhang[8], Baba[9] and Luan[10],
TRS Radiation shield time const preferred to use simple double parameter transfer function to
TTC Thermocouple time const describe the dynamic behavior of the HRSG and ST systems.
TV IGV actuator time const A new non-linear model is presented based on former
TVP Fuel valve time const models to suitable for parameter identification modeling of
CCPPs. An improved GA-based parameter identification
vF Fuel demand signal
method was used for a 400MW CCPP and the simulation
vL IGV control signal

978-1-4244-5961-2/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE 3369

results are compared with the test data to verified the model A. Basic model for power system simulation studies
and the proposed modeling procedure. A great deal of work has been carried out in developing
accurate dynamic models of CCPPs. A basic model for a CCPP
II. CCPP MODEL can be developed from the work of Rowen[3], Bagnasco [7],
The objective is to develop a CCPP model for power Zhang[8], Baba [9], Luan[10], Sun[11] and Lalor[12].
system dynamic studies and should be suitable for parameter An outline of its structure is shown in Fig.1, with self-
identification modeling using test data. defined functions ( F1 , F2 , F3 ) given in the Appendix.

Speed Valve Combustion Compressor Speed

Positioner Fuel System Reaction Discharge Lag
Low Value 1 vF 1 wF 1 PGT
1 − Voffset Σ e − sE1 F1
Select + - sTVP + 1 sTF + 1 sTCD + 1
Torque
Voffset No load Fuel F2
PID PID
Load 1 wX
−1 PID F3 x −1
Ref. - Σ TV s + 1
+ IGV Controller IGV Actuator Speed
1 m EX
0.8 PST
δ 1
Speed K ( sTM + 1)( sTH + 1)
Temprature T
Ref. - + EX 1 1 + K RS
Σ Ref. Σ
Σ TEX
+ - sTTC + 1 + sTRS + 1
Speed Thermocouple Radiation Shield

Figure 1. Basic CCPP model

vF + KVP LF 1 + PGT
Low Value Σ K GT Σ
+
sTVP + 1 sTCD + 1 +
Select
Valve Compressor Speed
Positioner C2 Discharge Lag 0.5
PID PID
+
Load + K ST PST
C3 Σ e− sτ1
Ref. - Σ Speed ( sTM + 1)( sTH + 1)
-
+ +
C1 1 + Σ A ÷B =
1 IGV Controller
IGV Actuator
δ
Speed vL 1 LIGV m EX +
PID Func Σ
Ref. -
Σ
sTV + 1 +
+ 0.8
1
Speed Thermocouple Radiation Shield
Temprature + -
- TEX 1 1 K RS
Ref. Σ Σ
sTRS + 1 TEX e− sτ 2 Σ
sTTC + 1 + +
+

Figure 2. Proposed CCPP model

The model is for common single shaft and unfired CCPP,
with modulating inlet guide vanes (IGV) serves for exhaust
temperature controller. All parameters in the model are given in
per unit except for temperature and pressure, which are
measured in ℃ and mbar, respectively. The fuel flow is
negligible with respect to airflow, so that the GT exhaust flow
rate is assumed to be equal to the air flow through the
compressor. Acceleration control and ST control loops are
generally not available for normal operation conditions and are
also neglected in the model. The speed governor and the
temperature limit governor share the control of fuel request
signal by both feeding into a minimum selection block. Under
normal operating conditions, speed governor regulates the fuel
supply and serve as a simple droop governor.

3370
 There is a no-load fuel Voffset in a gas turbine, which is
generally 0.23 in previous models [7,8,12]. Here, we replace
the constant 0.23 with a variable Voffset for a wider range of
adaptability. PID controllers are added into each control loops
Two time constant and a gain model is used to represent the
dynamics of the HRSG and ST as those in [7][8] because they
generally respond only to the variation of exhaust gas from GT
under normal conditions.
B. Difficulties for identified the basic model parameters
Based on the given model structure, parameter
identification methods are widely used for practical system
modeling. But there are much difficulties for the basic model
parameters to be identified.
• It’s impossible to split the main system into many
small sub-systems for dependent identification, as
many key signals in the model can hardly be directly
measured. For example, the fuel flow rate w f is the
connection point of three sub systems (GT output, GT
exhaust gas, HRSG & ST) but no dynamic sensors are
available in practical systems.
• There are too many parameters in the model including
three self-defined functions. One parameter may cause
one additional dimension to the searching space. That
may greatly decrease the accuracy and increase the
difficulty of the identification methods. Many
parameters can be combined into several independent
parameters.
We have to identify dozens of parameters together for the
big GT-HRSG-ST sub-system. That will be a formidable
challenge to any of the identification methods.
C. Proposed model of CCPP
The basic model was changed to the model in relative
variation signals in order to eliminate some of the bias constant
and to simplify the simulation procedures. The relative
variation can be illustrated as
TABLE I. SUB-SYSTEMS OF CCPP PERAMETER IDENTIFICATION
No. Sub-model Input
1 Fuel valve vF , Speed
2 Gas turbine LF , Speed
3 Exhaust gas temperature measurement LF , Speed, LIGV
4 HRSG & ST LF , Speed, LIGV
5 IGV vL
A. Test procedures
For a practical CCPP, we could give a small disturbance in
speed reference in Fig.1. The speed governor will respond the
non-zero input and output a new fuel demand signal to change
the fuel valve opening degree. Then the GT output and exhaust
Measured Value - Steady State Value
Relative Variation Value =
Rated Value
Besides, there are some changes in the model structure:
• Power system frequency is required to maintain
constant so the speed of the CCPP unit will not
changed a lot and the terms of second or higher order
variations of speed are neglected.
• The fuel flow rate signal w f are an important signal in
the model. It is the connection point of three sub
system but hard to be measured in the practical CCPPs.
There a small lag between it and the fuel valve opening
position. We combined the small lag downstream with
each adjacent component. Therefore, the fuel valve
opening position become the signal feeding three sub-
systems and has sensitive record in practical units.
• We expanded three self-defined functions ( F1 , F2 , F3 )
and merged similar items to eliminate many parameters.
The model structure around the inlet of HRSG is
transformed equivalently to simplify the simulation
procedure.
Then we proposed the new CCPP model structure as Fig. 2
where Func ： y = ( x + x0 )0.257 − x00.257 where x and y are the
relative variation of component input and output respectively,
x0 is the steady state value in per unit.
III. MODEL PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION
The proposed model as Fig.2 can be divided into 5 sub-
systems whose parameters can be identified dependently with 7
parameters at most for each. The test signals and identified
parameters of each sub-system are shown in Table. 1.
Output Identification parameters
LF KVP , TVP
PGT K GT , TCD
TEX 1 K RS , TRS , TTC , C1 , C2 , C3 , τ 1
PST K ST , TM , TH , C1 , C2 , C3 , τ 2
LIGV TV
gas temperature will changed soon. The different exhaust gas
temperature leads the IGV governor to modify the IGV
positions. Finally the output of steam turbine will changed to a
new level after a relatively long time.
3371
 According to the previous test procedure, we could TABLE II. IDENTIFIED PARAMETERS OF PROPOSED MODEL
measure the variations of all the input and output signals Parameters Values Parameters Values
( vF , vL , LF , LIGV , LIGV , PGT and PST ) in Table I except for
rotation speed, which will remain synchronize with power KVP 0.74 TM 6.62 s
system frequency. Because the signals we used in the proposed TVP 0.11 s TH 39.10 s
model are relative variations, the speed in Table I will be
K GT 1.39 τ1 1.79 s
almost zero during the test procedure. Therefore, all the
prerequisites of the proposed model parameter identification TCD 0.81 s K RS 0.87
are available. C1 1.05 TRS 21.26 s

B. Parameter identification method C2 5.38 TTC 3.80 s

The parameter identification method we used here are K ST 0.33 τ2 1.36 s
based on the GA-based identification method proposed by
Gao[13, 14]. It is based on classic real-coding GA. They 1

Fuel valve position variation(%)

Test data
modified the selection operator, fitness function structure and 0 Identified model simulation
imported the adaptive searching space to improve the -1
performance for power system parameter identifications.
-2
The framework for CCPP parameter identifications can be -3
illustrated as Fig.3. The parameters of each sub-systems are -4
identified with proper input and output test data.
-5
Input Vector Output Vector -6
Practical Sub-System 0 20 40 60 80
Time(s)
Sampling Sampling
Figure 4. The variation of fuel valve position and its simulation results with
the identified parameters
Fitness
System Simulation
Function

Parameters Vector Fitness

Exhaust gas temperature variation(K)

(Error) 0
Improved Genetic Algorithm Test data
-2 Identified model simulation

Figure 3. Block diagram of identification method. -4

-6
IV. RESULTS
-8
We used the proposed identification model and method on
a 400MW single-shaft unfired CCPP with triple-pressure -10
0 20 40 60 80
HRSG and the natural gas as the fuel. Time(s)

The test procedure is conducted under synchronization

operation conditions where speed variations are much smaller Figure 5. The variation of Exhaust gas temperature and its simulation results
than the other signals and are ignored. Improved GA-based with the identified parameters
parameter identification procedures are conducted for all five
sub-systems of the proposed model. The identified parameters
CCPP Output Power Variation(MW)

0
are shown in Table II. Test data
-5 Identified model simulation
The identified model is verified with another series of test
data from the same CCPP system. The variations of fuel valve -10

position, exhaust gas temperature and system output power are -15
simulated with the test input and the results are compared with
-20
the test responses as shown in Fig.4 to 6.
-25
The simulation outputs are found consistent with the test
data. That may verifiy the effectiveness of the proposed -30
0 20 40 60 80
identification model and method. Time(s)

The pure delay time τ 1 and τ 2 are a little longer than

Figure 6. CCPP total power variation and its simulation results with the
common imaginations. That means the neglecting of each identified parameters
const parameter may cause a great effect on the sub-system
output and even may cause a failure under some situations.

3372
 V. CONCLUSIONS
A basic dynamic model of CCPP is built for power system
simulations in this paper and is modified to suit for parameter
identification for practical systems. The test and parameter
identification methods are proposed based on the identified
model. At most seven parameters can be identified for
dependent sub-system models. That improved the performance
of the identification greatly from those based on previous non-
linear models.
An improved GA-based identification method was used for
the test data of a 400 MW CCPP. The identified pure time
delay τ 1 and τ 2 of radiation and HRSG respectively are a little
longer than general understanding, that means the neglecting
of each time const may cause great deviation in sub-system
output signals. The identified model was simulated with
another series of input disturbance. The simulated results are
found consistent with the measured output.
APPENDIX
Model Equations:
F1 : Torque = 1.3( wF − 0.23) + 0.5(1 − n)
F2 : Tx = Tr + K1n 2 + K 2 n + K 3 LIGV + K 4 wF + K 5 where K i
(i=1,2,3,4,5) is const parameters.
F3 : Wx = n ⋅ ( LIGV )0.257
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks to the engineers in Guangdong Electric Power
Research Institute for their help for experiment and relative
material support.
REFERENCES
[1] N. Cui, B. Wang, Y. Deng, B. Li, W. Zhao, “Dynamic Simulation
Model for the Heavy Duty Gas Turbine Thermodynamic System”,
Proceedings of CSEE，vol. 28, no.2, pp. 110-117, 2008.
3373
[2] H. Zhang, W. Deng, J. Geng, “Nonlinear Modeling and Stability
Analysis of Gas Turbine Used for Electricity Generating”, Proceedings
of CSEE, vol. 27, no. 26, pp. 108-114, 2007.
[3] W. I. Rowen, “Simplified Mathematical Representations of Heavy-Duty
Gas Turbines”, ASME Journal of Engineering for Power, vol. 105, no. 4,
pp. 865-869, 1983.
[4] Working Group on Prime Mover and Energy Supply Models for System
Dynamic Performance Studies, “Dynamic Models for Combined Cycle
Plants in Power System Studies”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems,vol. 9, no.3, pp. 1698-1708, 1994.
[5] S. Suzakj, K. Kavata, M. Sekoguchi, M.Goto, “Mathematical Model
for a Combined Cycle Plant and Its Implementation in an Analogue
Power System Simulator”, IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter
Meeting 2000, Singapore, January 23-27, 2000.
[6] K. Kunitomi, A.Kurita, Y.Tada, S. Ihara W. W. Price, “Modeling
Combined-Cycle Power Plant for Simulation of Frequency Excursions”,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.18, no.2, pp.724-729, 2003.
[7] A. Bagnasco, B. Delfino, G. B. Denegri, S. Massucco, “Management
and Dynamic Performances of Combined Cycle Power Plants During
Parallel and Islanding Operation”, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol.2, pp.194-201, 1998.
[8] Q.Zhang and P. L. So, “Dynamic Modelling of a Combined Cycle Plant
for Power System Stability Studies”, IEEE Power Engineering Society
Winter Meeting 2000, vol.13, no. 2, pp. 1538-1543, 2000.
[9] K. Baba and N. Kakimoto, “Dynamic Behavior of a Combined Cycle
Power Power Plant in the Presence of a Frequency Drop”, Electrical
Engineering in Japan (English translation of Denki Gakkai Ronbunshi),
vol.143, no. 3, pp.9-19, 2003.
[10] Luan Xiaoming, Xu Xiangdong, “Dynamic modeling of combined cycle
power plants I power system simulations”, J Tsinghua Univ (Sci &
Tech), vol.46, no. 5, pp.687-690, 2006.
[11] H. Sun, X. Hou, “Reasearch on Parameter Test on Governing System of
Combined Cycle Units”, Gas Turbine Technology, vol.22, no.1, pp.33-
36, 2009.
[12] G. Lalor, J. Ritchie, F. Damian, J. O. Mark, “The Impact of Combined-
Cycle Gas Turbine Short-Term Dynamics on Frequency Control”, IEEE
Transactions on power systems, vol. 20, no. 3, 2005
[13] L. Gao, Y.Dai, J. Xia, “A New Framework for Power System
Identification Based on an Improved Genetic Algorithm”, IEEE
Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications, May 25-27,
2009, Xi'an, China
[14] L. Gao, Y. Dai, J. Xia, “Parameter Identification of Hydro Generation
System with Fluid Transients Based on Improved Genetic Algorithm”,
Fifth International Conference on Natural Computation, 14-16 August
2009, Tianjin, China