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

net/publication/236633065

Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

System

Article  in  Energy Exploration & Exploitation · February 2007

DOI: 10.1260/014459807781036412

CITATIONS READS

13 1,192

2 authors:

Ozgur Balli Haydar Aras

1'st Air Maintenance Factory Directorate, Ministry of National… Eskisehir Osmangazi University
44 PUBLICATIONS   796 CITATIONS    34 PUBLICATIONS   1,284 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Thermodynamic analysis of T33 turbofan engine View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ozgur Balli on 23 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat
and Power (CHP) System

by

Ozgur Balli , Haydar Aras

reprinted from

ENERGY
EXPLORATION
&
EXPLOITATION
Volume 25 2007
Number 1

©2005
MULTI-SCIENCE PUBLISHING CO. LTD.
5 Wates Way, Brentwood, Essex CM15 9TB, United Kingdom
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 pp. 39–62 39

Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power

(CHP) System

Ozgur Balli a , Haydar Aras*,b

a
First Air Supply and Maintenances Center, TUAF, Eskisehir, Turkey
*, b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Engineering and Architecture Faculty,
Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey

ABSTRACT
This study deals with the energetic analysis of a combined heat and power
(CHP) system installed in Eskisehir City of Turkey. The mass and energy
balance relations are derived and applied to the components of CHP system and
overall CHP system. The performance characteristics of this CHP system are
evaluated in terms of energetic aspects. Considering total output energy, the
total energy efficiencies (electrical and thermal) of gas turbine cycle, heat
recovery steam generator(HRSG), steam cycle and CHP system are 95.3 %,
83.56 %, 76.7 % and 79.3 %, respectively. Based on total useful energy output
(excepting the stack gas, waste boiler loss, condenser line, medium pressure
steam collector energies), the total useful energy efficiencies of gas turbine
cycle, HRSG, steam cycle and CHP system are 82.3 %, 65.2 %, 18.5 % and
40.02 %, respectively.

Keywords: Combined Heat and Power System, Energy Balance, Energy

Analysis, Energy Efficiency.

INTRODUCTION
A development in the search for higher thermal efficiency for conventional power
plant has been the introduction of combined cycle plants (Khaliq and Kaushik, 2004).
The increase of the efficiency of conversion of chemical energy of the fuel is obtained
by the application of a gas-steam cycle (Zaporowski and Szczerbowski, 2003). As a
result, the efficiency of energy production can be increased from current levels that
range from 35 % to 55 % in the conventional power plants, to over 80 % in the
combined heat and power (CHP) systems (Rosen et al., 2005). The CHP system has
already become a well-known and substantial technology for power generation due to
its high efficiency in utilizing energy resources, low environmental emissions, short
duration of construction, low initial investment cost, low operation and maintenance
cost and flexibility of fuel selection, etc. Thus, the CHP systems are more attractive
and quite competitive in power market (Shin et al., 2002).
*
Corresponding Author. Tel.: +90 222 2393750/3386; fax: +90 222 2393613.
E-mail addresses: h_aras2002@yahoo.com, haras@ogu.edu.tr (H.Aras).
40 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

The successive energy crises have stimulated the study of more efficient ways or the
use of the available energy in fuels (Luz-Siveira et al., 2002). In the last 15 years, the
several CHP systems have been installed by the industrial sectors and government in
Turkey due to increasing in the demand electricity. One of these was installed in
Eskisehir city of Turkey. The installed characteristics of gas turbine and steam turbine
are given in Table 1(EEE, 2006). At ISO conditions (15 ˚C ambient temperature, 60 %
relative humidity, and 101.325 kPa atmospheric pressure); the design electrical output,
heat rate, heat consumption, firing temperature, exhaust temperature and exhaust mass
flow values of gas turbine model PG 6551(B) of this system are 39120 (kW),
11330.7(kJ/kWh), 443483.6(kJ/h), 1104 ˚C (1377.15K), 539 ˚C (812.15K) and 143.26
kg/s with the lower heating value (LHV) of natural gas, respectively (Taylor and
Crabos, 2002).
At local conditions; the measurement data of gas turbine in years 2005 and 2006 are
given Table 2. However, the heat recovery steam generator produces 14.458kg/s, 64.9
high pressure steam and 2.950kg/s,
. .5.5 bar low pressure steam and the power
capacities of steam turbines ( WHPST/ WLPST) are 8378.15 kJ/s and 7501.85 kJ/s. All
utilized power in this system is 450 kJ/s (EEE, 2006). The mean values of
measurement data are used in this study.
The main goals of this study are (I) to determine the thermodynamic equations,
mass and energy balance relations of the CHP system. (II) To analyze the energy
efficiencies of gas turbine cycle, HRSG, steam cycle and CHP system (gas/steam
cycle).

THE CHP SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND ASSUMPTIONS

A schematic of the combined heat and power system (CHP) is given Figure 1. The
system consists of an air heater and cooler (AHC), an air compressor (AC), a
combustion chamber (CC), a gas turbine (GT), gas turbine electrical generator (G1), a
heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), two steam turbines (HPST/LPST) with sing
electrical generator (G2) and medium pressure steam collector (MPSC).

Figure 1. Schematic of CHP System

 Table 1. Installed information of CHP System

Item Gas Turbine Steam Turbine Heat Recovery Steam Generator

Startup Date 17 September 1998 15 December 2001 15 December 2001
Manufacturer GEC ALSHTOM ALSHTOM POWER BABCOCK-WILCOX ESPANOLA
Turbine Type PG 6551 (B) TM2-299/655 ——-
Power Capacity 37 (MW) 18.5 (MW) ——-
Generator Voltage 11 (kV) 11 (kV) ——-
HP Steam Pressure ——- ——- 76 (Bar)
LP Steam Presure ——- ——- 6 (Bar)
HP Steam Temperature ——- ——- 499 (˚C)
LP Steam Temperature ——- ——- 199 (˚C)
HP Steam Capacity ——- ——- 59360 (kg/s)
LP Steam Capacity ——- ——- 13760 (kg/s)

Table 2. The measurement data about gas turbine PG 6551 (B)

Measurement Data Station ID. Unit Measurement Date Mean

31 Jan 30 Apr 31 May 31 Jul 31 Aug 31 Mar
2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007

.
Power Capacitiy WG1 (MW) 34.2 36.4 35 33.5 34 36.6 34.950
Fuel Pipeline Pressure P2.1 (Bar) 18.5 18.19 18.25 18.28 18.26 18.5 18.330
Combustion Inlet Fuel Pressure P2.2 (Bar) 23.25 23.15 23.18 23.15 22.94 22.96 23.105
Combustion Inlet Fuel Temp. T2.2 (˚C) 24 27 21 32 34 34 28.667
Compressor Inlet Temperature T1 (˚C) 1 6 14 19 16 10 11.000
Compressor Outlet Temperature T2 (˚C) 306 333 344 346 343 337 334.833
Compressor Outlet Pressure P2 (Bar) 9.2 10.16 9.74 9.4 9.53 10.08 9.685
Gas Turbine Outlet Tempereaute T4 (˚C) 561 536 551 536 554 546 547.333
41

.
Fuel Flow mf (kg/s) 2.72 2.82 2.79 2.74 2.79 2.96 2.803
42 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

During this study, several assumptions were made. These are;

1. The CHP system operates in steady state condition.
2. The ideal gas principles are applied to air and combustion gas.
3. The combustion reaction is complete.
4. Air compressor, gas turbine, LP and HP steam turbines are considered adiabatic.
5. The energies of kinetic and potential are neglect.
6. The energetic analyses are made with the LHV of natural gas. The natural gas
compositions are taken from the average values of second and third data measured
by Arin and Akdemir (2002). The natural gas compositions are given on Table 3.
7. The fixed parameters about the system are listed Table 5.

Table 3. Natural gas composition (Arin and Akdemir, 2002)

Companent Volume(%)* Mass(%) LHV(kJ/kg)

CH4 93.3401 88.03918 50000
C2H6 00.2109 00.25017 47525
C3H8 00.0290 00.03736 46390
C4H10 00.0124 00.01665 45775
N2 06.4076 11.65664 ——-
Total 100.00 100.00 44163.431

Table 4. Combustion gas composition

Companent Volume(%) Mass(%) R(kJ/kgK)

CO2 04.97729 06.98044 0.1889
H2O 09.93826 06.01954 0.4615
O2 09.94657 12.91227 0.2598
N2 75.13786 74.08773 0.2968
Total 100.00000 100.00000 0.2944044

Table 5. Fixed parameters of CHP system

Item Unit Value

To (K) 298.15
To (%) 101
ηMGT, MEG (%) 98
ηCC (%) 99
ηMST (%) 97
∆PCC,4-4’HRSG (%) 5
∆T4-4’ (%) 2
T5 (K) 396.05
P
. 5 (kPa) 103.20
We,axu (kj/s) 450
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 43

The combustion gases result from the assumed complete reaction of natural gas in
Table 3 with 100% of excess air. After a stoichiometric balance of the combustion, the
mass and the volume compositions are given in Table 4. The gas constant, air/fuel mass
ratio and LHV are 0.2944044kJ/kgK, 42.528 and 44163.431kJ/kg individually. The
stoichiometric balance of this reaction is given following;

(1)

THERMODYNAMIC METHODOLOGY OF SYSTEM PARAMETERS

Using the measurement data and fixed assumption parameters for this system, the other
thermodynamic parameters, be not measured, are obtained from thermodynamic
equations. These are:
Resulting in a 42.528 air/fuel mass ratio for this system, the specific heat capacity
equation of combustion gases are determined as a composition of the equations of each
component in its mass percentage. Thus;

(2)

The specific heat capacity of air is a function of temperature (Moran and Shapiro,
1995);

(3)

Specific heat ratio of air and combustion gases (Cohen et al., 1989; Silvera and Tuna,
2003);

(4)

(5)
44 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

Temperature of air compressor outlet (Cohen et al., 1989; Silvera and Tuna, 2003);

(6)

Temperature of combustion gases in turbine inlet;

(7)

The enthalpy of air stream (i = 1,2) and the enthalpy of combustion gases
(j = 3,4,4’,5) are calculated from Eqn.(8) and Eqn. (9), respectively (Silvera and Tuna,
2003; Cengel and Boles, 1996);

(8)

(9)

The air compressor and gas turbine works are obtained [Silvera and Tuna, 2003;
Cengel and Boles, 1996);

(10)

(11)

The fuel and air flow rates are calculated (Silvera and Tuna, 2003);

(12)

(13)

(14)
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 45

The outlet pressures of combustion chamber and gas turbine, gas side inlet and outlet
pressures of HRSG are;
(15)

(16)

(17)

The inlet temperature of HRSG is determined from;

(18)

The pressure ratio of air compressor and gas turbine are calculated from Eqn (19) and
Eqn.(20).

(19)

(20)

If the mechanical shaft yield efficiencies (ηMGT,ηMEG,ηMST) of air compressor to gas

turbine, gas turbine to gas turbine electrical generator, steam turbines to electrical
generator shaft are known, the mechanical shaft works of gas. turbine to air compressor
.
( WGTMS), gas turbine to gas. turbine electrical generator ( WGTMS), steam turbines to
electrical generator shaft (WGTMS), net gas turbine and electrical generator works are
calculated from Eqn.(21-25).

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24)

(25)
46 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

MASS AND ENERGY BALANCE EQUATIONS OF SYSTEM COMPANENTS

General mass and Energy Balance Equations
A general balance for a quantity in a system may be written as,
Input +Generation-Output Consumption=Accumulation
Here input and output refer respectively to quantities entering and exiting through
system boundaries, generation and consumption refer to respectively to quantities
produced and consumed with in the system, and accumulation refers to build up (either
positive or negative) of quantity with in the system.
For a general steady-state, steady-flow process, the mass and energy balance
equation can be written in the rate form as;

(26)

(27)

.
Where E is the rate of net energy transfer in by heat, work and mass (Hepbasli, 2005).
Energy, being subject to a conservation law (neglecting nuclear reactions) can be
neither generated nor consumed. But, a proportion of total energy entering in a non-
adiabatic system is not used by the system effectively. This quantity can be identified
as the “waste energy output or energy loss” resulting from heat or work loss. Eqn. (27)
can be written as following (Ozgener and Hepbasli, 2005);

(28)

The energy rate of air and steam (Cengel and Boles, 1996);

(29)

After the fuel become from the city distribution pipeline is heated, it is injected in the
combustion chamber of CHP system. The energy rate of injected fuel is calculated
from;
(30)

Mass and energy balance of CHP system components

The mass and energy balance equations for steady state, steady-flow process, and
constant-flow control volume systems are derived for CHP system and its components.
The mass and energy balances of CHP system components are given as following;
Compressor (AC):
(31)
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 47

(32)

Fuel Line:
(33)

(34)

Combustion Chamber (CC):

(35)

(36)

Gas Turbine (GT):

(37)

(38)

Exhaust Duct [ED (4-4’)]:

(39)

(40)

Gas turbine to air compressor mechanical shaft (GTMS):

(41)

Gas turbine to gas turbine electrical generator shaft (GTEGS):

(42)

Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG):

(43)

(44)
48 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

(45)

High pressure steam turbine (HPST):

(46)

(47)

Low pressure steam turbine (LPST):

(48)

(49)

Medium pressure steam collector line [MPSC (9-10)]:

(50)

(51)

High pressure pipe lines:

(52)

(53)

Low pressure pipe lines:

(54)

(55)

Gas turbine cycle (GTC):

(56)

(57)
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 49

(58)

Steam cycle (STC):

(59)

(60)

(61)

Steam turbines to steam turbine electrical generator shaft (STEGS):

(62)

Combined heat and power system (CHP):

(63)

(64)

(65)

The recovered heat by HRSG (Luz-Silveira et al., 2002);

(66)

The recovered heat flux in the form of steam is calculated (Luz-Silveira et al., 2002);
(67)

The energetic efficiencies and other thermodynamic parameters

Before the energy
. loss/waste energy output for each components
. of CHP system is
denoted with ED, it is presented as the total waste output (TWE)in this section. The total
. .
energy input and total output product energy is identified as TEI and TEO, respectively.
The energetic analyses of thermal systems are well established methods in field of
thermal science and engineering and design of power systems (Marrero et al., 2002).
These are:
The total energy efficiency of system and its components can be defined as the ratio
of total energy output to total energy input, as follows;
50 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

(68)

The useful energy efficiency is obtained from the values of net useful products
(Ozgener et al., 2005: Ozgener and Hepbasli 2005). The medium pressure steam
collector steam produced by this system is not used or sold in order to contenting the
corrosion preventive chemical compounds. The useful energy efficiency of system and
its components may be written as the ratio of total useful energy output (excepting total
waste energy output: stack gas, condenser line, and medium pressure steam collector
steam energy) to total energy input such as;

(69)

The electrical efficiency of total output products is calculated from (Zaporowski and
Szczerbowski, 2003; Tuma et al., 1999);

(70)

The thermal efficiency of total output products is obtained from (Zaporowski and
Szczerbowski, 2003; Tuma et al., 1999);

(72)

The proportion of HRSG energy recovered from the combustion gas energy can passes
through the water/steam. The convert efficiency of HRSG can be defined as the ratio
of the recovered heat by HRSG to the recovered heat flux in the form of steam (Luz-
Silveira et al., 2002);

(73)

Van Gool (1997) stated that maximum improvement in the exergy efficiency for a
process or system can be achieved when the exergy loss is minimized. Consequently,
he suggested that it is useful to employ the concept of an exergetic “improvement
potential” when analyzing different processes. Similarly, the maximum improvement
in the energy efficiency for a process can be achieved when the waste energy output or
loss is minimized. The energetic “improvement potential” can be written as following;

(74)
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 51

The several thermodynamic parameters such as the fuel depletion rate, relative
irreversibility and productivity lack are supposed to analysis the exergetic performance
evaluation of the thermal system (Xiang et al., 2004; Hepbasli, 2005; Ozgener et al.,
2005). Similarly, these parameters can be used to analysis the energetic performance
evaluation of thermal systems.
The fuel depletion rate can be written the ratio of the energy loss of i’th component
to total energy inputs such as;

(75)

The relative loss factor can be defined the ratio of the energy loss of ‘th component to
total waste (loss) energy outputs as;

(76)

(77)

The productivity lack can be obtained the ratio of the energy loss of ‘th component to
total energy outputs (products) as following;

(78)

(79)
52 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

Table 6. Fluid, mass, pressure, temperature and energy properties of stations of

CHP system.
. .
Station Fluid m(kg/s) P(kPa) T(K) E (kJ/s)
0 Air 0.000 101.325 298.150 0.000
1 Air 119.219 101.325 284.150 -1692.515
2 Air 119.219 1066.266 607.983 40277.105
2.1 Fuel 2.803 1833.000 298.150 123803.346
2.2 Fuel 2.803 2296.000 326.817 123824.99
3 Combustion gas 122.022 1012.953 1205.789 162842.545
4 Combustion gas 122.022 113.778 820.483 84353.183
4’ Combustion gas 122.022 108.360 804.074 81383.168
5 Combustion gas 122.022 103.200 396.050 15773.863
0’ Water 0.000 101.325 298.150 0.000
6 Sub satureted water 14.458 6980.000 358.350 3720.564
7 Super heated steam 14.458 6490.000 772.250 47849.185
8 Super heated steam 14.458 6460.000 764.250 47575.929
9 Super heated steam 5.650 2701.000 505.850 15323.535
10 Satureted steam 5.650 1790.000 505.850 10214.635
11 Super heated steam 8.808 396.900 438.150 23615.129
12 Satureted water 11.755 75.900 365.251 23930.359
13 Sub satureted water 2.950 580.000 355.750 712.127
14 Super heated steam 2.950 550.000 469.350 8080.758
15 Super heated steam 2.950 530.000 463.950 8049.459

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this study, using the thermodynamic methodology with the measurement data (Table
2) and fixed parameters (Table 5), the unknown data are calculated. The temperature,
pressure, mass flow rate and energy rate for CHP system fluids are given in Table 6
according to their state numbers specified in Figure 1.
For system components, total energy rates (input, output and waste), energy
efficiency, improvement potential, fuel depletion rate, relative loss factor and
productivity lack are calculated, as listed Table 7. For gas turbine cycle, HRSG, steam
cycle and CHP system in form of total and useful output products; total energy rates
(input, output and waste), energy efficiency (electrical and thermal), improvement
potential, fuel depletion rate, relative loss factor and productivity lack are obtained, as
listed Table 8.
 Table 7. Total energy rates, efficiency and other thermodynamic properties of CHP system components. Component
. . .
Component TEI(kJ/s) TEO(kJ/s) TWO(kJ/s) η1(%) IP(kJ/s) ϕ(%) χtotal(%)a χtotal(%)b δtotal(%)a δtotal(%)a
Combustion Chamber (CC) 164102.091 162842.545 1259.546 99.232 9.667 1.017 4.795 1.653 1.250 2.478
Exhaust duct(4-4’) 84353.183 81383.168 2970.014 96.479 104.572 2.399 11.307 3.898 2.948 5.843
HRSG 85815.859 71703.806 14112.054 83.555 2320.667 11.397 53.727 18.523 14.007 27.763
Pipeline(7-8) 47849.185 47575.929 273.256 99.429 1.561 0.221 1.040 0.359 0.271 0.538
Pipeline(14-15) 8080.758 8049.459 31.300 99.613 0.121 0.025 0.119 0.041 0.031 0.062
MPSC(9-10) 15323.535 10214.635 5108.900 66.660 1703.318 4.126 19.450 6.706 5.071 10.051
GTMS 42826.143 41969.620 856.523 98.000 17.130 0.692 3.261 1.124 0.850 1.685
GTEGS 35663.265 34950.000 713.265 98.000 14.265 0.576 2.716 0.936 0.708 1.403
STEGS 16371.494 15880.000 491.494 96.998 14.755 0.397 1.871 0.645 0.488 0.967
a
: When relative loss factor and productivity lack are calculated, the total waste energy and total energy output of CHP system are considered.
b
: When relative loss factor and productivity lack are calculated, the total waste energy and total energy output of CHP system (useful) are considered.
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007
53
 54

Table 8. The total energy rates, efficiency and other thermodynamic properties of the gas turbine cycle, HRSG, steam cycle and CHP
system in form of total and useful output products.

. . .
Cycle/Item TEI TEO TWO Efficiency (%) IP ϕ χtotal χuseful δtotal δuseful
(kJ/s) (kJ/s) η1 ηe ηth (kJ/s) (%) (%)a (%)b (%)a (%)b

Gas Turbine Cycle 122132.471 116333.168 5799.303 95.3 28.6 66.6 275.372 4.684 22.079 7.612 5.756 11.409
Gas Turbine Cycle(useful) 122132.471 100559.305 21573.166 82.3 28.6 53.7 3810.628 17.422 82.133 28.317 21.413121.413
HRSG 85815.859 71703.806 14112.054 83.6 —— 83.6 2320.667 11.397 53.727 18.523 14.007 14.007
HRSG(useful) 85815.859 55929.943 29885.917 65.2 —— 65.2 10407.96 24.136 113.780 39.228 29.664 29.664
Steam Cycle 85815.859 65798.857 20017.003 76.7 18.5 58.2 4669.072 16.166 76.208 26.274 19.868 39.380
Steam Cycle(useful) 85815.859 15880 69935.859 18.5 18.5 —— 56994.41 56.48 266.257 91.797 69.416 137.588
CHP Cycle 127015.162 100748.857 26266.305 79.3 40.0 39.3 5431.783 21.212 100 —— 26.071 ——-
CHP Cycle (useful) 127015.162 50830 76185.162 40.0 40.0 —— 45696.74 61.526 ——- 100 ——- 149.882
a
: When relative loss factor and productivity lack are calculated, the total waste energy and total energy output of CHP system are considered.
b
: When relative loss factor and productivity lack are calculated, the total waste energy and total energy output of CHP system (useful) are considered.
Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 55

The efficiencies of gas turbine cycle, HRSG, steam cycle and CHP system are
obtained according to total energy outputs and total useful energy outputs and given in
Table 8. Figure 2a and 2b shows an energy flow diagram of gas turbine cycle in the
form of total and useful energy outputs to illustrate the energy balance, noting that loss
of gas turbine to electrical generator shaft(GTEGS), gas turbine to air compressor
shaft(GTMS), combustion chamber(CC), exhaust duct[ED(4-4’)], stack gases of gas
turbine cycle account for 0.584 %, 0.701 %, 1.031 %, 2.432 % and 12.915 % of total
energy input in gas turbine respectively. The remaining 82.3 % are utilized effectively.

Fig 2a. Energy flow diagram of the gas turbine cycle based on the energy input of
gas turbine (considering total products)

Fig 2b. Energy flow diagram of the gas turbine cycle based on the energy input of
gas turbine (considering useful products)
56 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

The convert efficiency of HRSG is obtained 73.45 %. Figure 3a and 3b shows an

energy flow diagram of HRSG in the form of total and useful energy outputs to
illustrate the energy balance, noting that loss of boundary and stack gases of gas HRSG
account for 16.44 % and 18.38 % of total energy input in HRSG. The remaining 65.2
% are utilized effectively.

Fig 3a. Energy flow diagram of the HRSG based on the energy input of gas turbine
(considering total products)

Fig 3b. Energy flow diagram of the HRSG based on the energy input of gas turbine
(considering useful products)

Figure 4a shows an energy flow diagram of Steam Cycle in the form of total energy
outputs to illustrate the energy balance, noting that loss of pipeline(14-15), pipeline(7-
8), steam turbine electrical generator shaft (STEGS), medium pressure steam collector
line[MPSC(9-10)] and HRSG boundary, account for 0.0365 %, 0.318 %, 0.573 %,
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 57

5.953 % and 16.445 % of total energy input in HRSG. The total steam cycle efficiency
is 76.674 %. The MPSC steam for process produced by this system is not used or sold
in order to contenting the corrosion preventive chemical compounds. The energies of
MPSC steam, condenser line (12) and stack gas subtract from the total energy
products, the only electrical power energy remains as total useful energy. In this
situation, the total loss of HRSG accounts for 81.469 % of total energy input in HRSG.
The remaining 18.504 % are utilized effectively. The energy flow diagram of Steam
Cycle in form of useful energy is illustrated in Figure 4b.

Fig 4a. Energy flow diagram of the steam cycle based on its energy
input.(considering total products)

Fig 4b. Energy flow diagram of the steam cycle based on its energy input
(considering useful product)
58 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

Figure 5a shows an energy flow diagram of CHP Cycle in the form of total energy
outputs to illustrate the energy balance, noting that loss of pipeline(14-15), pipeline(7-
8), STEGS, GTEGS, GTMS, CC, ED(4-4’), MPSC(9-10) and HRSG boundary,
account for 0.0246 %, 0.215 %, 0.387 %, 0.562 %, 0.674 %, 0.992 %, 2.338 %, 4.022
% and 11.11 % of total energy input in CHP system. The total CHP cycle efficiency
is 79.31 %. The energies of MPSC process steam, condenser line (12) and stack gases
subtract from the total energy products, the only electrical power energy remains as
total useful energy. In this situation, the total loss of CHP Cycle accounts for 59.98 %
of total energy input in CHP system. The remaining 40.02 % are utilized effectively.
The energy flow diagram of CHP Cycle in form of useful energy is illustrated in Figure
5b.

Fig 5a. Energy flow diagram of the CHP cycle based on its energy inputs
(considering total products)

Fig 5b. Energy flow diagram of the CHP cycle based on its energy inputs
(considering useful products)
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 59

CONCLUSION
This study presents a comprehensive energy analysis of Combined Heat and Power
(CHP) system and its essential such as air compressor, combustion chamber, gas
turbine, HRSG, high and low pressure steam turbines, medium pressure steam
collector ( to process steam), pipe lines and electrical generators. The assessments of
energy analysis are the first law efficiency, electrical efficiency, thermal efficiency,
improvement potential, fuel depletion rate, relative loss and productivity lack factor.
Some specific conclusions can be summarized;
• Considering the total output products, the first law efficiency of CHP system is
79.31 %.
• Considering the total useful output product that is only electrical power, the first
law efficiency of CHP system is 40.02 %. The MPSC steam for process
produced by this system is not used or sold in order to contenting the corrosion
preventive chemical compounds. The reasons of degreasing efficiency, the
energies of stack gas, MPSC and condenser line steam are abstracted from total
energy outputs.
• The values of temperature, pressure, mass and energy rates of the extracted
steam from HPST are 505.85K, 2701kPa, 5.65 kg/s and 15323.535 kg/s
respectively. In the future, a medium pressure steam turbine will be installed to
this system for increasing the efficiency of CHP system.

NOMENCLATURE

C. P : Specific heat capacity on constant pressure (kJ / kg.K)

E. : Energy rate (kJ / s)
ED : Waste/loss energy rate (kJ / s)
h : Enthalpy (°C,K)
IP : Improvement potential (kJ / s)
LHV : Low heating value of fuel (kJ / g)
m. : Mass rate (kg / s)
MPSC : Medium pressure steam collector
P : Pressure (kPa,bar)
Pr : Pressure ratio
R : Universal gas constant (kJ / kg.K)
T. : Temperature (°C,K)
TEI. : Total energy input (kJ / s)
TEO. : Total energy output (kJ / s)
T.WE : Total waste energy (kJ / s)
W : Work, power rate (kJ / s)

Greek Letters

χ : Relative loss factor (%)

δ : Productivity lack (%)
η1 : First law efficiency (%)
60 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

ηCE : Energy converts efficiency (%)

ηe : Electrical efficiency (%)
ηMEG : Mechanical yield efficiency of gas turbine to electrical generator
shaft (%)
ηMET : Mechanical yield efficiency of gas turbine to compressor shaft (%)
ηMST : Mechanical yield efficiency of steam turbines to electrical
generator shaft (%)
ηth : Thermal efficiency (%)

: Fuel depletion rate (%)
ξ : Specific heat ratio (%)
∆P : Pressure drop ratio (%)
∆T : Temperature drop ratio (%)

Subscrips

0 : Dead/environment state
ac : Air compressor
cc : Combustion chamber
CHE : Chemical
CHP : Combine heat and Power system
ED : Exhaust Duct
f : Fuel
G1 : Gas turbine electrical generator
G2 : Steam turbine electrical generator
gt : Gas turbine
gtc : Gas turbine cycle
GTMS : Gas turbine to air compressor mechanical shaft
GTEGS: : Gas turbine to electrical generator shaft
HPST : High pressure steam turbine
HRSG : Heat recovery steam generator
in : Input
LPST : Low pressure steam turbine
out : Output
RHS : Recovered heat flux in form of steam
RH : Recovered heat
sc : Steam cycle
STEGS : Steam turbine to electrical generator shaft
th : Thermal
ENERGY EXPLORATION & EXPLOITATION · Volume 25 · Number 1 · 2007 61

REFERENCES
Arin, S. and Akdemir S. (2002). Seralarda doğal gazın ısıtma amaçlı kullanılabilirli ği
(The usability of natural gas for heating purpose in greenhouse). Trakya
Üniversitesi Bilimsel Arastirmalar Dergisi, B Serisi, Cilt 3, No:1, pp.89-99.
ISSN1302647X. (in Turkish)
www.trakya.edu.tr./enstituler/fenbilimleri/dergi/arsiv/2002-1/12sel.pdf.
Cengel, Y.A. and Boles M.A. (1996). Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach.(in
Turkish). Literatur Yayıncılık. ISSN 9775-8431-91-9.
Cohen, H., Rogers, G.F.C. and Saravanamuttoo, H.I.H. (1989). Gas turbine theory.
Singapore.Longman Singapore Publishers Ltd.
EEE-Eskisehir Industrial Energy Auto-Production Group (2006).Combined Cycle
Power Plant Catalog. www.eee.com.tr
Hepbasli, A. (2005). Thermodynamic analysis of a ground-source heat pump system
for district heating. International Journal of Energy Research,vol. 29, pp.671-
687.
Khaliq, A. and Kaushik, S.C. (2004). Second-law based thermodynamic analysis of
Brayton/Rankine combined power cycle with reheat. Aplied Energy, vol.78 , pp.
179-197.
Luz-Siveira, J., Beyene, A., Leal, E.M, Santana, J.A. and Okada, D.(2002).
Thermoeconomic analysis of a cogeneration system of a university campus .
Aplied Thermal Engineering, vol.22, pp.1471-1483.
Marrero, I.O. Lefsaker, A.M. Razani,A. and Kim, K. J. (2002). Second law analysis
and optimization of a combined triple power cycle . Energy Conversion and
Management, vol.43, pp. 557-573.
Moran, M.J. and Shapiro H.N.(1995).Fundamentals of engineering thermodynamics.
New York. Wiley.
Ozgener, O. and Hepbasli A. (2005). Exergoeconomic analysis of a solar assisted
ground-source heat pump greenhouse heating system. Applied Thermal
Engineering, vol.25, pp.1459-1471.
Ozgener, L., Hepbasli A. and Dincer, I. (2005).Energy and exergy analysis of Salihli
geothermal district heating system in Manisa, Turkey. International Journal of
Energy Research, vol.29, pp.393-408.
Rosen, A.M., Le, N.M. and Dincer, I.(2005). Efficiency analysis of a cogeneration and
district energy system. Aplied Thermal Engineering, vol.25, pp. 147-159.
Shin, J.Y., Jeon, Y.J., Maeng, D.J., Kim, J.S. and Ro, S.T. (2002). Analysis of the
dynamic characteristics of a combined-cycle power plant. Energy, vol.27,
pp.1085-1098.
Silvera, J.L and Tuna, C.E. (2003). Thermoeconomic analysis method for optimization
of combined heat and power systems. Part I. Progress in Energy and Combustion
Science, vol.29, pp. 479-485.
Taylor, D.J and Crabos, O. (2002).Upgrade options for the MS6001 heavy duty gas
turbine. GER4217A. General Electric Company. GE Power System.
www.gepower.com./prod-ser/products/tech_docs/en/dowloads/ger4217a.pdf.
 62 Energetic Analyses of the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System

Tuma, M., Oman, J. and Sekavcnik. (1999), Efficiency of a combined gas-steam

process. Energy Conversion and Management, vol.40, pp.1163-1175.
Xiang, J.Y., Cali, M. and Santarelli, M. (2004)/ Calculation for physical and chemical
exergy of flows in systems elaborating mixed-phase flows and a case study in an
IRSOFC plant. International Journal of Energy Research, vol.28, pp.101-115.
Van Gool, W. (1997). Energy policy:fairly tales and factualities. In Innovation and
Technology-Strategies and Policies, Soares ODD, Martins da Cruz, Coasta
Pereira, Soares IMRT, Reis AJPS (eds). Kluwer:Dortrecht; pp.93-105.
Zaporowski, B. and Szczerbowski, R. (2003).Energy analysis of technological systems
of natural gas fired combined heat and power plants. Aplied Energy, vol.75, pp.
43-50.

View publication stats