MEM 310 Design Project Assignment - Drexel Universitybrs32/MEM 310.pdfMEM 310 Design Project...
Transcript of MEM 310 Design Project Assignment - Drexel Universitybrs32/MEM 310.pdfMEM 310 Design Project...
MEM 310 Design Project Assignment
Prepared by
Bradley R. Schaffer Drexel University
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Submitted to: Dr. William J. Danley of MEM 310 - Thermodynamic Analysis I
on May 28, 2004
2
Abstract
With today�s soaring energy demands and continually increasing fuel costs, it is
detrimental to a company to overlook opportunities that would increase their power
plant�s efficiency. Companies that have high efficiencies in their plants are given an
upper hand in the market. Companies that don�t utilize the latest advancements in power
generation technology are jeopardizing their economic stability.
We�ve studied and simulated your system using our proprietary software that
utilizes the renowned Danley transfer functions and have concluded that the highest
efficiency obtainable is 41.06%. This was the optimal efficiency value that met all of
your company�s specifications.
In addition to testing the system that you specified, we also did further research
and analysis on improving this efficiency. These improvement options range from
simple additions to your current cycle to scaling up projects to meet future demands
greater than 550 megawatts. The end result of these improvements has the potential to
raise the overall efficiency of your plant above 50%.
3
Table of Contents
Abstract��������������������������������2
System Problem Statement������������������������..5
Solution��������������������������������7
Discussion and Conclusion������������������������..9
Recommendations for Future Analysis�������������������..12
References������������������������������..14
Appendix A: Steam Cycle Development������������������..22
Appendix B: Rankin Cycle Flow Diagram�.��.��������������.23
Appendix C: Additional Feedwater Heater Flow Diagram�����������..24
Appendix D: Combined Cycle Flow Diagram����������������..25
Appendix E: Thermal Efficiency Increases vs. Year��������������26
Appendix F: Transfer Function Links and Relations��������������27
Appendix G: Detailed Hand Calculations������������������.30
Appendix H: Temperature � Entropy Diagram�..��������������..33
4
Table of Figures
Table 1: Design Specifications����������������.........................15
Table 2: Optimized Design Specifications�����������������...16
Table 3: Transfer Function Specifications������������������17
Table 4: Rankine Cycle Component Mass Flow Rates�������������18
Table 5: Rankine Cycle State Temperatures & Pressures������...��...��..19
Table 6: Transfer Function Results��������������������...20
Table 7: Tabulated Additional Feedwater Heater Calculations���.������...21
5
System Problem Statement
The objective of this project was to produce a 550 megawatt vapor power plant
that meets certain criteria yet maintains a high efficiency. To begin this problem, a
complete analysis of the Rankine cycle must be completed. The simplest form of this
cycle consists of an isentropic pump, an isobaric boiler, an isentropic turbine, and an
isobaric condenser.
The cycle analysis starts with the condenser. The condenser is a heat exchanger
that acquires exhaust steam from the turbine and then removes heat from the exhaust until
it becomes a saturated liquid. This saturated liquid is then sent to the pump. The pump
then pressurizes the saturated liquid up to the turbine inlet pressure. After the liquid
leaves the pump, it is routed through a boiler which adds heat to the liquid, converting it
into a superheated vapor. At the final stage, the superheated vapor is sent through the
turbine which internally expands the steam and in return, the output shaft of the turbine
rotates. This mechanical energy is then used to turn the input shaft of a generator,
thereby producing electricity.
This is the simplest form of the Rankine cycle. This cycle will meet the output
requirement. However, it doesn�t meet the desired efficiency. The first attempt at
increasing efficiency was seen in the early 1920�s by implementing regeneration by the
use of feedwater heaters (See Appendix A). Feedwater heaters are heat exchanges that
use superheated steam bled from the turbine to heat the feedwater before it enters the
boiler. This increases the average temperature of heat addition which increases the
overall efficiency of the cycle (Cegel, 522). Feedwater heaters come in two types: open
and closed. The open feedwater heater mixes the superheated steam directly with the
6
feedwater. The advantage of this type is its simplicity and its high efficiency of heat
transfer. Conversely, the closed feedwater heater does not mix the two streams. The
advantage of this type is the superheated steam and the feedwater can be at two different
pressures. The disadvantage, however, is the complexity of closed feedwater heaters
creates a comparative cost disadvantage.
The second attempt at increasing efficiency was introduced in the late 1920�s by
using a reheat cycle (See Appendix A). The reheat cycle sends the exhaust from the high
pressure turbine back through the boiler before it enters the low pressure turbine. This
allows for greater high-pressure turbine inlet pressures without encountering moisture
problems. Higher boiler pressures mean higher feedwater temperatures entering the
boiler. This leads to a higher average temperature of heat addition which, in turn,
produces a higher efficiency (Cengel, 523).
The given specifications for the cycle dictate a maximum temperature of 600 oC, a
maximum reheat temperature of 460 oC, a maximum feedwater heater exit temperature of
210 oC, and a maximum pressure of 20 Mpa. The problem also states a minimum
condenser temperature of 55 oC (See Table 1). Using these values and accounting for the
turbine and pump inefficiencies, the absolute overall maximum efficiency can be
calculated. However, the major problem lies in the quality of the low pressure turbine
exhaust. It is specified to be a minimum of 98.5%. Using the given specifications yields
a quality less than this. Variables must be adjusted to raise this quality yet maintain a
high efficiency.
7
Solution
Once the transfer functions were properly connected, any changes made to the
variables instantly showed changes in both efficiency and the quality of the low pressure
turbine exhaust (See Appendix F). Knowing that the minimum quality was 98.5%,
variables could be changed one at a time until the desired quality was obtained.
The first variable that was experimented with was the maximum temperature.
When the maximum temperature was decreased, the efficiency dropped substantially but
no effect on quality was seen. The next variable that was modified was the condenser
temperature. The condenser temperature had to be increased to 94 oC in order to obtain
acceptable quality levels. This reduced efficiency by 5.01%. After the condenser
temperature was tested, changes in maximum pressure were explored. This produced the
same results that were seen when the maximum temperature was decreased. Efficiency
was decreased but no effect on quality was seen. The maximum reheat temperature was
the next variable that was modified. As this temperature increased so did the quality of
the steam. The final variable that was manipulated was the temperature of the open feed
water heater exit. When temperature was decreased, quality increased sharply yet
efficiency only fell slightly.
After experimenting with modifying individual variables, combinations of
variables were manipulated. The only combination that had the desired outcome of
higher quality was the minimum temperature and the open feedwater heater exit
temperature. The best combination that met all specifications was a lowered open
feedwater heater temperature of 165 oC and an increased condenser temperature of 60.5oC
(See Table 2).
8
The combination of lowered feedwater heater temperature and increased
condenser temperature produced a quality of 98.53%, and an efficiency of 41.06%. This
efficiency could have been increased further if the open feedwater heater temperature had
been lowered below 165 oC and the condenser temperature kept at 55 oC. However, this
wasn�t possible because the transfer function specified a minimum mid-temperature of
165 oC (See Table 3). Therefore, the condenser temperature had to be increased to
account for the final increase in quality.
9
Discussion and Conclusion Disregarding low pressure turbine exhaust quality, the overall maximum
efficiency of the cycle was 42.97%. When the quality requirements are taken into
account, the efficiency only dropped by 1.91%. This was the lowest possible drop in
efficiency and was accomplished through temperature adjustments in the feedwater
heater and the condenser.
Upon analysis of the variables and their impact on the cycle, the choice to modify
the temperatures of the feedwater heater and the condenser becomes clear. The following
analysis demonstrates how each variable impacts the cycle: The problem with the cycle
using the variables as given was that it didn�t meet the minimum steam quality upon
exiting the low pressure turbine. The factor that affects this quality was the entropy at
state 8 (See Appendix B). For a given condenser pressure, the quality increases
proportionally to the increase in entropy.
The first variable that was modified was the maximum temperature of the cycle.
Decreasing this value likewise causes a decrease in efficiency but does not affect quality.
The decrease in efficiency was due to the lowering of the average temperature at which
heat was transferred to the steam in the boiler. However, the maximum temperature has
no effect on the quality of the steam because it doesn�t affect the entropy of the steam
entering the low pressure turbine. The reheat cycle heats the steam that enters the low
pressure turbine to a specified temperature. This negates all changes in temperatures in
previous components.
The second variable that was modified was the condenser temperature. This had a
substantial effect on efficiency and also had an effect on quality. The efficiency
10
decreased because the average low temperature increased. However, the quality
increased due to the fact that as the condenser temperature rises, the decrease in sfg is
greater than the increase in sf. This produces an overall increase in the denominator that
is greater than the decrease in the numerator of the quality equation, thereby producing a
higher quality.
The third variable that was modified was the reheat temperature. As this
temperature decreased, both the efficiency and the quality also decreased. The reheat
cycle allows higher boiler pressures without causing moisture problems in the low
pressure turbine. The reheat cycle reheats the high pressure turbine exhaust before it
enters the low pressure turbine. This increase in temperature increased the entropy of the
superheated steam. The efficiency also increases due to the fact that as the maximum
pressure increases, the temperature of liquid entering the boiler increases which means a
higher average temperature of heat addition.
The final variable that was modified was the open feedwater heater exit
temperature. As this temperature decreased, efficiency also dropped, but quality went up.
The efficiency declined due to the fact that as this temperature decreases, the feedwater
entering the boiler decreases as well which produces a lower average temperature of heat
addition in the boiler. However, the quality of the steam rises because as the temperature
of the feedwater heater decreases, the pressure of the steam entering the reheat cycle
decreases. When steam is heated to a specified temperature, the entropy of the
superheated vapor after the reheat process is inversely proportional to its pressure.
In conclusion, there are only three variables that affect the quality of the low
pressure turbine exhaust. The first variable-- reheat temperature-- affects quality and
11
efficiency in an adverse way. The only two variables that will increase quality are
condenser temperature and open feedwater heater temperature. Although modifying
these two variables lowered efficiency, they were modified in such a way that limited this
decrease. This system�s efficiency was only reduced by 1.91%. This decrease in
efficiency can be recouped along with a gain in overall efficiency through the use of
additional components in the cycle, namely multiple feedwater heaters.
12
Recommendations for Future Analysis
One addition that could be added to the original cycle is an additional feedwater
heater (See Appendix C). This type of addition could be done during a routine
maintenance shut-down to minimize downtime. The addition of just a single feedwater
heater could boost efficiency as high as 42.89% (See Table 4). This is gain of 1.83%
over the original cycle.
The cycle that was chosen for this additional analysis was based on the original
system with the addition of a closed feedwater heater. The open feedwater heater was
designed to heat the feedwater to a mid temperature between the condenser and the
closed feedwater heater. The closed feedwater heater was designed to heat the feedwater
to the original systems feedwater heater temperature of 165 oC. The first feedwater
heater was chosen to be an open type for its secondary purpose as a feedwater deaerater.
This prevents any air that may have leaked into the lines through the condenser from
entering the boiler which would otherwise cause internal corrosion. The second
feedwater heater was chosen to be a closed type. The advantage of a closed feedwater
heater is the ability to have the steam that heats the feedwater at a different temperature
than the feedwater itself. This means that the third pump only has to pressurize the
saturated liquid produced by the steam, which means a smaller pump will be suitable for
this task. This is advantageous for two reasons: the pump can be smaller which will save
capital, and it will also require less input work.
Using the same values calculated in the first system, the increase in efficiency was
1.83%. This idea of increasing the number of feedwater heaters will continue to increase
the efficiency. However, with each additional feedwater heater, the change in efficiency
13
continually decreases. A cost-benefit analysis must be done to decide how many
feedwater heaters will optimize the cycle. Some of today�s larger power generation
plants use up to eight feedwater heaters (Cengel, 531).
A second improvement to the cycle would be a larger scaling-up operation. If the
demand exceeds the wattage that the original cycle was designed to supply, a second
generation system may need to be implemented to increase the overall net output of the
power plant. A combined cycle, which is a combination of the Rankine cycle and the
Brayton cycle is a valuable cycle to consider (See Appendix D). This cycle can produce
efficiencies in the 50 percent range (See Appendix E). This is a greater efficiency than
either cycle could obtain individually (Siemens).
14
References
1. Cengel, Yunus A., and Michael A. Boles. Thermodynamics: An Engineering
Approach. New York: Jack P. Holman, 2002.
2. Kutz, Myer. Mechanical Engineers' Handbook (2nd Edition). New York: 1998
3. �Combined Cycle Plant Ratings,� [Internet]. Siemens. (2004 [cited 20 May 2004]);
available from <http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com>
15
Table 1 Design Specifications
Design Specifications Maximum feedwater heater temperature 210 oC
Maximum pressure entering the High pressure turbine 20 MPa Minimum condenser temperature 55 oC
High pressure turbine adiabatic efficiency 89 % Low pressure turbine adiabatic efficiency 93 % Low pressure pump adiabatic efficiency 87 % High pressure pump adiabatic efficiency 89 %
Minimum steam quality entering the condenser 98.5 % Maximum steam temperature 600 oC
Maximum steam temperature exiting reheater 460 oC
16
Table 2 Optimized Design Specifications
Optimized Specifications Maximum feedwater heater temperature 165 oC
Maximum pressure entering the High pressure turbine 20 MPa Minimum condenser temperature 60.5 oC
High pressure turbine adiabatic efficiency 89 % Low pressure turbine adiabatic efficiency 93 % Low pressure pump adiabatic efficiency 87 % High pressure pump adiabatic efficiency 89 %
Minimum steam quality entering the condenser 98.5 % Maximum steam temperature 600 oC
Maximum steam temperature exiting reheater 460 oC
17
Table 3 Transfer Function Specifications
Transfer Function Specifications Low 0-100 oC Mid 165-260 oC
Reheat 440-500 oC High 575-625 oC
18
Table 4 Rankine Cycle Component Mass Flow Rates
Mass Flow Rate (Kg/hr) Condenser 1,194,480
Low Pressure Pump 1,194,480Open Feedwater Heater
Steam Inlet 254,880
Open Feedwater Heater Feedwater Inlet 1,194,480
High Pressure Pump 1,449,000Boiler 1,449,000
High Pressure Turbine 1,449,000Boiler (Reheat) 1,194,480
Low Pressure Turbine 1,194,480
19
Table 5 Rankine Cycle State Temperatures & Pressures
State Pressure & Temperature State Pressure (Mpa) Temperature (oC)
1 .02041 60.5 2 .70029 60.92 3 .70029 165 4 20 177.8 5 20 600 6 .70029 165 7 .70029 460 8 .02041 60.5
20
Table 6 Transfer Function Results
State qin Pump win Turbine wout 4 to 5 2816.45 KJ/Kg HP 24.03 KJ/Kg HP 762.56 KJ/Kg6 to 7 620.64 KJ/Kg LP 0.7922 KJ/Kg LP 762.53 KJ/Kg
qin 3327.963qout 1961.626nth 0.410563wnet 1366.337y 0.175819x8 0.9853
State P (kPa) T (C) hf hfg sf sfg vf x hs ha sa 1 20.4068 60.5 253.22 0.837423 0.001018 0 253.22 0.8374232 700.29 253.91 254.0122 0.8374233 700.29 165 0.001108 0 697.28 4 20000 718.6669 721.3096 5 20000 600 3537.755 6.5047876 700.29 2680.95 2775.199 6.5047877 700.29 460 3395.836 7.7979618 20.4068 60.5 253.22 2357.272 0.837423 7.064151 0.985 2575.914 2633.309 7.797961
21
Table 7 Tabulated Additional Feedwater Heater Calculations
State P (kPa) T (C) hf hfg sf sfg vf x hs ha sa 1 19.94 60 251.13 0.8312 0.001017 0 251.13 0.83122 158.744 251.2712 251.2886 3 158.744 113 474.01 0.001054 0 474.01 4 20000 494.9286 497.5143 5 20000 697.34 6 700.5 165 0.001108 0 697.34 7 20000 718.7238 719.1603 8 20000 699.2592 9 20000 600 3537.6 6.5048
10 700.5 2674.5 2769.441 6.504811 700.5 460 3396.5 7.803412 158.744 251.8 2976.12 3005.547 7.803413 19.94 60 251.13 2358.5 0.8312 7.0784 0.985 2583.2 2574.3 7.8034
y 0.087954z 0.073751
Qin 3410.247Qout 1947.5 nth 0.428927x 0.984997
22
Appendix A Steam Cycle Development
(Kutz, Fig 58.1, pg. 1766)
23
Appendix B Rankine Cycle Flow Diagram
24
Appendix C Additional Feedwater Heater Flow Diagram
25
Appendix D Combined Cycle Flow Diagram
26
Appendix E
Thermal Efficiency Increases vs. Year
(Kutz, Fig 58.2, pg. 1767)
27
Appendix F Transfer Function Relations
Low T to vf
Low T to P
Low T to sfg
Low T to sf
Low T to hf
Low T to hfg
T1
hfg1
hf1
sf1
sfg1
vf1
P1 P8
ha1 hf8
T8
28
Mid T to v f
Mid T to P
Mid P & sgto hg
Mid T to hf
T3
P7
hf3
P6
vf3
P3
P2
hg6
Mid P & Tto sg
29
High T & Pto sg
ReheatT & Pto hg
High T & Pto hg
T7 & P7
sg7
h5
hg7
ReheatT & Pto sg
sg8
T5 & P5
sg5 sg6
30
Appendix G Detailed Hand Calculations
State 1: T1 = 60.5 oC h1 = 253.23 kJ/kg v1 = 0.001018 m3/kg P1 = 20.406 kPa s1=0.8376 kJ/kg K State 2: T2 = 60.92oC P2 = 0.7005 MPa h2 = h1 + v1 (P2 � P1) = 254.01 kJ/kg
s2=s1
State 3: P2 = P3 and is saturated liquid h3 = 697.28 kJ/kg v3 = 0.001108 m3/kg s3=1.9925 kJ/kg K T3 = 165 oC State 4: P4 = 20.0 MPa h4 = h3 + v3 (P4 � P3) = 718.65 kJ/kg s4=s3 T4= 177.8 oC
State 5: P4 = P5 T5 = 600oC h5 = 3537.6 kJ/kg s5 = 6.5048 kJ/kg K State 6: P2 = P3 = P6 = P7 = 0.7005 MPa s5 = s6 h6 = 2680.95 kJ/kg T6= 165oC State 7: T7 = 460 oC h7 = 3395.7 kJ/kg s7 = s8 = 7.8167 kJ/kg K
31
State 8: P1 = P8 = 20.406 kPa hf = 253.23 kJ/kg hfg = 2357.4 kJ/kg sf = 0.8375 kJ/kg K sfg = 7.0661 kJ/kg K
8 f
fg
s - sx 0.985 98.5%s
= = =
h8 = hf + x hfg = 253.23 + 0.985 * 2357.4 h8 = 2575.9 kJ/kg T8=60.5 oC Adiabatic Efficiency Corrections for Pumps and Turbines
oai
osi
h-hh-h==
a
sP w
wη For Pumps/Compressors
osi
oai
h-hh-h==
s
aT w
wη For Turbines
i = inlet; o = outlet; s = isentropic; a = actual Low pressure pump nP = 87 % = 0.87 .87 = (h1 � h2s)/(h1 � h2a) h2a = 254.01 kJ/kg High pressure pump nP = 89 % = 0.89 .89 = (h3 � h4s)/(h3 � h4a) h4a =721.31 kJ/kg
32
High pressure turbine nT = 89 % = 0.89 .89 = (h5 � h6a)/(h5 � h6s) h6a = 2775.22 kJ/kg Low pressure turbine nP = 93 % = 0.93 .93 = (h7 � h8a)/(h7 � h8s) h8a = 2633.31 kJ/kg h3 = (1-y) h2a + y h6a y = 0.1759 qin = (h5 � h4a) + (1-y) (h7 � h6a) = 3328.0 kJ/kg qout = (1�y) (h8a � h1) = 1961.5 kJ/kg
outTh
in
q1 0.4106q
η = − = or 41.06%
33
Appendix H Temperature � Entropy Diagram
Rankine Cycle
s (kJ/kg K)
T (K
)