A Thermodynamic Analysis of Two Competing Mid-Sized Oxyfuel Combustion Combined Cycles

E. Thorbergsson, T. Grönstedt
{"title":"A Thermodynamic Analysis of Two Competing Mid-Sized Oxyfuel Combustion Combined Cycles","authors":"E. Thorbergsson, T. Grönstedt","doi":"10.1155/2016/2438431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A comparative analysis of two mid-sized oxy-fuel combustion combined cycles is performed. The two cycles are the Semi Closed Oxy-fuel Combustion Combined Cycle (SCOC-CC) and the Graz cycle. In addition, a reference cycle was established as the basis for the analysis of the oxy-fuel combustion cycles. The fuel for all three cycles is natural gas. A parametric study was conducted where the pressure ratio and the turbine entry temperature (also called combustor outlet temperature) were varied. The optimum net efficiency for the reference cycle is 56% at a pressure ratio of 26.2 and turbine entry temperature of 1400 C. The optimum net efficiency for the SCOC-CC was 46% at a pressure ratio of 57.3 and a turbine entry temperature of 1450 C . The optimum net efficiency for the Graz cycle was also 46% at a lower pressure ratio than the SCOC-CC, at 36.5 at the same turbine entry temperature of 1450 C. The main reduction in effifciency for the oxy-fuel combustion cycles comes from the O2 production and compression. The layout and the design of the SCOC-CC is considerably simpler than the Graz cycle while it achieves the same net efficiency. The fact that the efficiencies for the two cycles are close to identical differs from previously reported work. Earlier studies have reported around a 3% points advantage in efficiency for the Graz cycle, which is attributed to the use of a second bottoming cycle. This additional feature, possible to include in both cycles, is omitted to make the two cycles more comparable in terms of complexity. Even in its simplified form the Graz cycle requires the use of intercooling and steam cooling, in contrast to the SCOC-CC. The Graz cycle, however, has substantially lower pressure ratio at the optimum efficiency and has much higher power density for the gas turbine than both the reference cycle and the SCOC-CC.","PeriodicalId":30572,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Energy","volume":"347 1","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Energy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2438431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

A comparative analysis of two mid-sized oxy-fuel combustion combined cycles is performed. The two cycles are the Semi Closed Oxy-fuel Combustion Combined Cycle (SCOC-CC) and the Graz cycle. In addition, a reference cycle was established as the basis for the analysis of the oxy-fuel combustion cycles. The fuel for all three cycles is natural gas. A parametric study was conducted where the pressure ratio and the turbine entry temperature (also called combustor outlet temperature) were varied. The optimum net efficiency for the reference cycle is 56% at a pressure ratio of 26.2 and turbine entry temperature of 1400 C. The optimum net efficiency for the SCOC-CC was 46% at a pressure ratio of 57.3 and a turbine entry temperature of 1450 C . The optimum net efficiency for the Graz cycle was also 46% at a lower pressure ratio than the SCOC-CC, at 36.5 at the same turbine entry temperature of 1450 C. The main reduction in effifciency for the oxy-fuel combustion cycles comes from the O2 production and compression. The layout and the design of the SCOC-CC is considerably simpler than the Graz cycle while it achieves the same net efficiency. The fact that the efficiencies for the two cycles are close to identical differs from previously reported work. Earlier studies have reported around a 3% points advantage in efficiency for the Graz cycle, which is attributed to the use of a second bottoming cycle. This additional feature, possible to include in both cycles, is omitted to make the two cycles more comparable in terms of complexity. Even in its simplified form the Graz cycle requires the use of intercooling and steam cooling, in contrast to the SCOC-CC. The Graz cycle, however, has substantially lower pressure ratio at the optimum efficiency and has much higher power density for the gas turbine than both the reference cycle and the SCOC-CC.
两个竞争的中型氧燃料燃烧联合循环的热力学分析
对两种中等规模的氧-燃料燃烧联合循环进行了对比分析。这两个循环是半封闭式氧燃料燃烧联合循环(SCOC-CC)和格拉茨循环。此外,建立了一个参考循环作为分析氧燃料燃烧循环的基础。这三个循环的燃料都是天然气。在压力比和涡轮入口温度(也称为燃烧室出口温度)变化的情况下进行了参数化研究。在压力比为26.2、涡轮入口温度为1400℃时,参考循环的最佳净效率为56%。在压力比为57.3、涡轮入口温度为1450℃时,SCOC-CC的最佳净效率为46%。与SCOC-CC相比,在同样的涡轮入口温度为1450℃时,Graz循环的最佳净效率为36.5,在较低的压力比下,净效率为46%。SCOC-CC的布局和设计比格拉茨循环简单得多,同时实现了相同的净效率。事实上,这两个循环的效率几乎相同,这与之前报道的工作不同。早期的研究报告称,格拉茨循环的效率约有3%的优势,这要归功于第二个触底循环的使用。省略这个可能包含在两个循环中的附加功能,以使两个循环在复杂性方面更具可比性。与SCOC-CC相比,即使在其简化形式下,格拉茨循环也需要使用中间冷却和蒸汽冷却。然而,与参考循环和SCOC-CC相比,格拉茨循环在最佳效率下的压力比要低得多,对于燃气轮机来说,它的功率密度要高得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
28 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信