A Comparative Evaluation of Advanced Combined Cycle AlternativesSource: Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power:;1991:;volume( 113 ):;issue: 002::page 190Author:O. Bolland
DOI: 10.1115/1.2906544Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Abstract: This paper presents a comparison of measures to improve the efficiency of combined gas and steam turbine cycles. A typical modern dual pressure combined cycle has been chosen as a reference. Several alternative arrangements to improve the efficiency are considered. These comprise the dual pressure reheat cycle, the triple pressure cycle, the triple pressure reheat cycle, the dual pressure supercritical reheat cycle, and the triple pressure supercritical reheat cycle. The effect of supplementary firing is also considered for some cases. The different alternatives are compared with respect to efficiency, required heat transfer area, and stack temperature. A full exergy analysis is given to explain the performance differences for the cycle alternatives. The exergy balance shows a detailed breakdown of all system losses for the HRSG, steam turbine, condenser, and piping.
keyword(s): Cycles , Pressure , Steam turbines , Heat recovery steam generators , Exergy analysis , Firing (materials) , Temperature , Heat transfer , Exergy , Pipes AND Condensers (steam plant) ,
|
Show full item record
| contributor author | O. Bolland | |
| date accessioned | 2017-05-08T23:35:31Z | |
| date available | 2017-05-08T23:35:31Z | |
| date copyright | April, 1991 | |
| date issued | 1991 | |
| identifier issn | 1528-8919 | |
| identifier other | JETPEZ-26686#190_1.pdf | |
| identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/108541 | |
| description abstract | This paper presents a comparison of measures to improve the efficiency of combined gas and steam turbine cycles. A typical modern dual pressure combined cycle has been chosen as a reference. Several alternative arrangements to improve the efficiency are considered. These comprise the dual pressure reheat cycle, the triple pressure cycle, the triple pressure reheat cycle, the dual pressure supercritical reheat cycle, and the triple pressure supercritical reheat cycle. The effect of supplementary firing is also considered for some cases. The different alternatives are compared with respect to efficiency, required heat transfer area, and stack temperature. A full exergy analysis is given to explain the performance differences for the cycle alternatives. The exergy balance shows a detailed breakdown of all system losses for the HRSG, steam turbine, condenser, and piping. | |
| publisher | The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) | |
| title | A Comparative Evaluation of Advanced Combined Cycle Alternatives | |
| type | Journal Paper | |
| journal volume | 113 | |
| journal issue | 2 | |
| journal title | Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power | |
| identifier doi | 10.1115/1.2906544 | |
| journal fristpage | 190 | |
| journal lastpage | 197 | |
| identifier eissn | 0742-4795 | |
| keywords | Cycles | |
| keywords | Pressure | |
| keywords | Steam turbines | |
| keywords | Heat recovery steam generators | |
| keywords | Exergy analysis | |
| keywords | Firing (materials) | |
| keywords | Temperature | |
| keywords | Heat transfer | |
| keywords | Exergy | |
| keywords | Pipes AND Condensers (steam plant) | |
| tree | Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power:;1991:;volume( 113 ):;issue: 002 | |
| contenttype | Fulltext |