See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318402919

THERMODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF STEAM TURBINES FOR INDUSTRIAL

APPLICATIONS

Conference Paper · June 2017

CITATION READS

1 5,360

1 author:

Jimmy Kumana
Kumana & Assocaites
50 PUBLICATIONS   83 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Sustainable production View project

Energy Efficiency in Industry View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jimmy Kumana on 13 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THERMODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF STEAM TURBINES
FOR INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS
Jimmy D Kumana, CEO, Kumana & Associates, Houston, Texas, USA
Presented at
39th Industrial Energy Technology Conference, New Orleans (June 20-23, 2017)
ABSTRACT
Steam turbines are a valuable component of
process plant utility systems for optimizing steam
supply reliability as well as sitewide energy
effciency. Although they are most common in the oil
refining, ammonia/urea, methanol, ethlylene, and
pulp/paper industries (generally in the size range of
10-60 MW), they can also have good economics in
smaller sizes as low as 3 MW, which would be more
suitable for the food processing industries.
The economics of any application depend upon
two factors – choosing the right type and size of
machine, and integrating it correctly with the process
thermal demand.
This article reviews the thermodynamic relation-
ships and design equations that link steam flow
conditions to power output, which are useful not only
for estimating preliminary economics, but also for
performance analysis of existing units.
INTRODUCTION
Any device that converts the chemical energy
contained in the fuel, via combustion, into
mechanical energy (also known as shaftwork) is
called a Heat Engine. There are many kinds of Heat
Engines, generally classified according to the
thermodynamic cycle that they follow, the most
common being:
Cycle name Heat engine type
Otto Internal combustion (recip)
Rankine Steam turbine
Brayton Gas turbine
The Rankine cycle is most commonly used in
fossil-fuel-fired utility-scale power generation
plants, but it also finds major application in smaller
scale installations at industrial manufacturing
facilities that seek to generate on-site power for
reasons of reliability (in the event of interruptions in
grid power supply) or for better economics.
Although both steam and gas turbines can play
an important role in the economic optimization of the
combined heat and power (CHP) utilities at industrial
manufacturing plants, this article will focus on steam
turbines only.
There are four generic operating modes for
steam turbines (see Figures 2a-d):
• Back-pressure or “let-down” steam turbines
(BPSTs), where the exhaust low pressure
steam is used for one or more process heating
duties. The usual objective is to provide the
process with the steam that it needs, with the
generated power being a corollary benefit that
mainly reduces the need for purchased power.
• Condensing steam turbines (CSTs), where the
exhaust steam is let down to the lowest
possible pressure at which it can be condensed
with the available cooling utility, or alterna-
tively vented to the atmosphere. In locations
where there is a ready supply of water, the
cooling medium is usually a CW closed loop
criculated through a cooling tower. In arid
regions such as the middle-east, north Africa,
or the US southwest, fin-fan air cooling may
be more economical.
• Extraction/condensing turbines (ECTs), from
which some steam is extracted at a high-
enough pressure for process heating
(cogeneration mode), and the balance is
condensed against a utility for extra power
generation (non-cogeneration mode).
• Induction turbines, which are supplied with
two sources of inlet steam at different
pressures and exhaust to a single pressure.
This usually happens when the process has
excess heat which is used to generate LP
steam in a “WASTED heat boiler”, or WHB.
In the version shown, some of the HP steam
may bypass the turbine and go straight to the
process, while the rest is condensed against a
cooling utility for extra power generation
(non-cogeneration mode). Many other
variations are possible)
Pure BPSTs are rarely, if ever, used in power
plants, but are very common in industrial facilities
where there is almost always a need for steam at
above-atmospheric pressure to drive the process, in
addition to electric power.
 Figure 1. Multistage steam turbine schematic [accessed on Internet]

Figure 2. From top, left to right (a) Pure back-pressure turbine in cogeneration mode, (b) Pure power
generation mode, (c) Extraction turbine in hydrid mode, (d) Induction turbine in hydrid mode.

They are ideal for continuous processes where
the energy demands are relatively stable 24/7. The
typical size range is 3 to 60 MW.
Because BPSTs produce two energy products –
steam and power, this mode of operation is called
cogeneration, with an effective heat rate in the range
of 4,500-5,500 Btu/kwh, which is about 2-3 times
better efficiency than the condensing mode, even
after taking into account both boiler and turbine
energy losses.
The condensing type of turbine is used exclu-
sively by pure Rankine Cycle power plants where
there is no demand for LP steam for process heating,
and the goal is to generate the maximum amount of
power for a given amount of fuel. Typical sizes are in
excess of 100 MW, with heat rates ranging from
11,000 to 16,000 Btu/kwh depending on factors such
as the pressure and temperature of the inlet steam, the
temperature of the cooling medium, and the turbine
isentropic efficiency.
Extraction and Induction turbines are less
common in industry, not only because they are more
expensive to buy and maintain, but are more difficult
to control. However, they can be a good choice in
certain special circumstances.
P-V Diagram for Water
3500
3000
2500
Pressure, psia
2000
1500
1000
2
500
1
4
0
0.01 0.1
Specific Volume, ft3/lb
Figure 3. Rankine cycle representation on the PV diagram.
THERMODYNAMIC THEORY
The role of the steam turbine in Rankine cycle
power generation is best understood by plotting the
thermodynamics of the process on the water/steam
PV diagram (Figure 3).
The expansion process that occurs in the turbine
is essentially an adiabatic process. In effect, the
enthalpy difference between the inlet and exhaust
steam is almost fully converted (neglecting frictional
losses) into mechanical energy (shaftwork), which
can then be used to drive a pump or compressor, or
an electric generator. This process is more conven-
iently followed on the enthalpy-entropy (H-S)
version of the Mollier diagram.
Figure 4 tracks the expansion of superheated 600
psig steam at 700oF as is passes through the turbine.
Two cases are shown. In the first case, the cogenera-
tion mode, the exhaust pressure is 50 psig, which is a
typical steam header pressure level used in many
chemical plants, pulp/paper mills, oil refineries, and
food processing companies.
As the HP steam drops in pressure, the volume
increases, but the temperature also falls. If the
temperature drop is too great, the steam may start to
condense inside the turbine casing, which can be very
dangerous in practice.
Rankine Cycle
1. BFW pumping
2. Stm gen in Boiler
3. ST expansion
+ power gen
4. Condensation
3
1 10 100
 Mollier Chart (H-S) for Steam

1580
Saturation
1200
Pr, psig
600

1530 Quality, % stm 300

150
Temp, F 50

1480

1430 800 1.0

1380 700
1

600
1330
Enthalpy, Btu/lb

500
1280
--12

400
1230
2

300
1180

215

2'
1130

Saturation
1080 line
97%

1030
3
92% Quality

980

930 3'

1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.10
Entropy, Btu/lb-F

Figure 4. Turbine expansion process on the H-S Mollier diagram [drawn using SteamTab 4.0].
Point 1 = Turbine Inlet, Point 2 = LP exhaust for process heating, Point 3 = Exhaust to CW condenser.
DESIGN AND RATING CALCULATIONS
Steam turbines typically rotate at speeds between
3,000 and 15,000 rpm, at which the formation of
water droplets can unbalance the turbine blades,
causing severe damage. Back-pressure turbines can
normally handle up to 3% moisture (i.e. a minimum
steam quality of 97%), while specially-designed
utility-scale power plant condensing turbines have
been known to handle as much as 10-12% moisture.
However, for process plants, it is prudent to avoid
normal operation at these extreme conditions, and try
to stay slightly above the exhaust steam dew point.
The actual path followed by the steam is
represented approximately by the line connecting
points 1-2 in Fig 4, but is impossible to determine a
priori.
So instead, we first determine the total enthalpy
change for isentropic expansion down to 150 psig
(line 1-2’), and then apply an efficiency factor ηT (the
isentropic efficiency), which is a combined indicator
of the original machine design and its present
mechanical condition:
H1 − H 2
ηT =
H1 − H 2 '
where H1 = Enthalpy of HP inlet steam, Btu/lb;
H2 = Actual enthalpy of exhaust LP stm, Btu/lb; and
H2’ = Enthalpy of exhaust LP steam assuming isen-
tropic expansion, Btu/lb.
The adiabatic power output then is
W/M = (H1 – H2)/3412 = ηT.(H1 – H’2)/3412
where W = work output in kW, and M = mass flow
rate of steam in lb/h.
Although the isentropic efficiency cannot be
determined a priori either, it can be estimated with
fair accuracy using empirical correlations based on
historical industry experience with similarly-built
turbines, usually available from the vendors.
Therefore, when purchasing steam turbines it is
strongly advisable to require all bidders to provide,
along with their price proposal, such a correlation for
each machine being offered.
Several articles in the literature do list operating
data points for real turbines, but they rarely disclose
all the critical information necessary to develop
generally applicable efficiency correlations. In the
event, the most convenient correlation seems to be
the one developed by Varbanov et al [Smith, 2005].
The isentropic turbine efficiency ηT has to be
estimated iteratively using the following equations
and empirical constants:
η T = W (a + b.W )
where parameters a and b are functions of W, as in
the table below.
Using these or similar correlations one can
derive the efficiency curves for common BPST and
CST configurations. In the author’s experience, a
practical optimum steam generating pressure for most
process plants is 600 psig, with about 200-250oF of
superheat (above that, capital costs for the boiler and
water treatment requirements rise rapidly). A slight
modification of the Varbanov constants (a = 1.26 DT
for W<2000 for BPSTs, and a = 3.9.DT – 463 at
W>2000 for CSTs) gives smoother transition values
at W = 2000 kW.
A turbine efficiency correlation for BPSTs
derived from the 3 data points in a 2008 EPA report
is compared against the Varbanov values in Figure 5.
The EPA correlation is far more conservative,
perhaps reflecting aging, but because it is based on
only 3 data points, the Varbanov equations are
considered more reliable, and are recommended in
the absence of machine-specific measured data.
There is a second kind of efficiency that is also
used: the overall or “cycle” energy efficiency, which
is calculated as a ratio of the useful energy output as
a fraction of the energy input:
3412.W + M.H
η= 2
M.H
1
These same equations can also be used for rating
purposes, viz. estimating the efficiency of existing
turbines. For extraction and induction steam turbines
the thermodynamic efficiency must be calculated
separately for each stage, and the overall efficiency
derived from the stage-efficiency values.
The isentropic efficiency is of more practical use
from an operational viewpoint, because it provides a
warning of developing mechanical problems. The
cycle energy efficiency is more useful for design and
decision-making purposes, such as calculating the
energy balance when conducting plant energy audits
or choosing between project alternatives.
 Steam Turbine Efficiency vs Size
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
Isentropic Eff
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
3 4 5 6
Figure 5. Steam turbine efficiency correlations
Since enthalpy cannot be measured directly, it
must be inferred from pressure and temperature
measurements using a steam properties database
For the illustrative example of Figure 4, the
isentropic efficiency at a flow rate of 100,000 lb/h
steam turns out to be 71.3%. So the actual work
output (ref. Table 2) from the turbine would be
W = M.(isentropic ∆H).ηT /3412
= 100000*(1350 – 1199)*0.713/3412 = 4.4 MW.
Notice that the steam exhaust condtion (Point 2
on Fig 4) lies well above the dew point, so there is
nothing to fear from condensation inside the turbine
casing.
Now let us see what would happen if we do the
same calculations in condensing mode, with an
exhaust pressure of 2.7 psia, and a dew point of
137oF. This is line 1-3’ in Figure 4. The isentropic
efficiency per Table 2 is now about 76.6%, and the
power output calculates out to be 9.3 MW, placing
the exhaust steam firmly in the wet zone, with 9%
moisture content (Point 3 in Fig 4). This is
dangerously close even to the higher mositure
tolerance of power plant turbines, and standard
industrial turbines of this size would not be able to
handle it. In short, it is not a feasible solution.
Furthermore, the Baumann rule [Olafsson, 2014,
citing DiPippo 2007] states that for every 1% in-
crease in average steam wetness in the turbine, there
will be a ~1% loss in turbine efficiency. So the actual
ouput of this machine would be closer to
9.3 x (1 – 0.09) = 8.5 MW
BPST, 600-150
CST, 600-5"Hg abs
BPST, EPA (2008)
7 8 9 10 11 12
Ln (kW)
These calculations are most easily performed
using an electronic spreadsheet linked to a steam
properties data base, as illustrated in Table 1. Such
an “Add-In” program is well worth the cost (~$250
per license for SteamTabTM) for anyone who has to
work with steam systems.
The cogeneration and power generation
processes are represented as Sankey diagrams in
Figures 6 and 7, using the data in Table 1, with the
width of the arrows roughly proportional to the
energy flows (in the interest of clarity they could not
be drawn exactly proportional). They are helpful
constructs to visualize energy flows through a
process or equipment item, making it obvious at a
single glance that the loss of energy from the input
HP steam (mostly to condensate) is far greater in the
power generation case than in the cogeneration case.
PART LOAD OPERATION
The final issue to consider is Part-Load
operation. Any one who has ever worked in a plant
knows that plants and equipment never operate at a
steady rate at or near design conditions; rather, part-
load operation is the norm, averaging 70-85% o the
design rate in most cases.
This person would also know that part-load
efficiencies are almost always lower than the full-rate
(design capacity) operation. Steam turbines are no
exception. It is therefore incumbent upon the corpo-
rate purchasing department to demand part-load
efficiency data from all vendors, and make sure this
information is stored safely in the company archives,
and copies are readily available in the libarary.
Table 1. Comparison of Cogeneration and Power generation operating modes.

Figure 6. Sankey Diagram for Cogeneration Case (data of Table 1)

 Figure 7. Sankey Diagram for Power generation Case (data of Table 1)

Steam Turbine part load efficiency

100
90
Relative Efficiency, %

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Relative Power, %

Figure 8. Approximate estimates of Part-Load Efficiencies [Kelhofer, 1997]

In the absence of actual vendor data on part-load
efficiency, the approximate correlation of Figure 8
can be used. The value of parameter α in the equation
is typically around 3, but can vary from machine to
machine, and also change over time due to wear.
Taking expected part-load operating profile into
account is vital when evaluating the economics of a
proposed steam turbine project.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The most common configurations and operating
modes of steam turbines were described. The
thermodynamics of the Rankine cycle were reviewed,
and illustrative calculations were performed for two
cases – BPST and CST – using both the Mollier
diagram, and an electronic spreadsheet.
A reliable methodology for estimating the
isentropic efficiency of turbines, critical to
performing such calculations, was presented. The
dangers of condensation inside the turbine casing,
and how to avoid them, were explained.
An approximate estimating chart for part-load
efficiencies was provided.
 REFERENCES
BPSTs are generally to be preferred for 1. Amarnath, K R, J D Kumana and J V Shah,
industrial applications where there is a demand for “Benchmarks for Industrial Energy Efficiency”,
process heating, because they offer superior system presented at Intersociety Energy Conference,
efficiencies, in the 75-80% range. Due to their lower Washington, DC (Aug 1996).
system efficiencies (typically 20-30%), CSTs are to
2. Kelhofer, Rolf, Combined Cycle Gas and Steam
be avoided in industrial plants except in special
Turbine Power Plants, PennWell Publishing Co,
circumstances such as when:
Tulsa, Ok, USA (1997), p226
• The fuel has a negative cost (i.e. it requires
3. Kumana & Associates, “Optimizing Energy
disposal for environmental or other reasons).
Efficiency in the Process Industries” a 3-day
Black Liquor in Kraft pulp mills is an example.
training course ( jkumana@aol.com).
• The process is a highly exothermic, and has the
4. Olafsson, Arni J., “Verification of Design
potential to generate excess steam at high
Models for Geothermal Plants”, MS thesis, Univ.
pressures and temperatures and zero fuel cost.
of Iceland (2014), p13.
Ammonia plants are an example.
5. Rana, A. H., and J. R. Mehta, “Energy and
• The electric grid supply is unreliable, and needs Exergy Analysis of Fully Condensing Steam
to be bolstered against excursions such as Turbine at Various Steam Load Conditions”
voltage sags which could disrupt the ChemTech, Vol 5, no. 2 (April-Jun 2013), pp
manufacturing operation. Remote areas with 957-963.
under-developed infrastructure are an example.
6. Smith, Robin, Chemical Process Design and
• Emergency back-up drives for critical duties, Integration, Ch 23, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, UK,
such as BFW pumps. (2005).
Steam turbines should be an important 7. SteamTabTM 4.0, Add-In software for ExcelTM,
component of every plant energy utility system ChemicaLogic Corp, Carlisle, Mass, USA.
because they offer the opportunity to cogenerate http://www.chemicalogic.com (2016).
electrical power on site at significantly lower cost
than it can be purchased at unsubsidized market 8. US Dept of Energy, Advanced Manufacturing
prices. Office, “Consider Installing High-Pressure
Boilers with Back-Pressure Steam Turbine
Generators”, Steam Tip sheet #22, Document
ABBREVIATIONS number DOE/GO-102012-3394 (Jan 2012).
Description
BFW Boiler Feedwater 9. US Environmental Protection Agency,
“Technology Characterization: Steam Turbines”,
BPST Back-Pressure Steam Turbine
report prepared by Energy and Environmental
Btu British Thermal Unit
Inc. (Dec 2008).
CHP Combined Heat and Power
CST Condensing Steam Turbine 10. US Environmental Protection Agency,
CW Cooling Water “Efficiency Metrics for CHP Systems”,
ECT Extraction-condensing Turbine www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccei/publications, (2007).
EPA US Environmental Protection
Agency
HP High pressure (for steam)
K Thousand
kW Kilowatt
LP Low pressure (for steam)
MM Million
MW Megawatt
WHB Waste(d) Heat Boiler

View publication stats