EFFECT OF NATURAL GAS COMPOSITION ON THE

PERFORMANCE OF A MODEL GAS TURBINE COMBUSTOR

R. M. FLORES, J.H. CHEN, V. G. MCDONELL AND G. S. SAMUELSEN

COMBUSTION LABORATORY

ATS ANNUAL WORKSHOP, PITTSURGH, PA 8-10 NOV 1999

 OVERVIEW

• THE UCICL PROGRAM IS DIRECTED AT TWO ASPECTS OF

STATIONARY GAS TURBINE COMBUSTION
– FUEL COMPOSITION ISSUES
– DUAL FUEL ISSUES

• THE PRESENT POSTER EMPHASIZES GASEOUS FUEL

COMPOSITION EFFECTS

• DUEL FUEL ACTIVITIES ARE UNDERWAY IN PARALLEL

(RESULTS REPORTED AT COMBUSTION WORKSHOP VI)
– MACROLAMINATE INJECTOR MODULE
– DETAILED STUDY OF SPRAY INJECTED INTO CROSSFLOWS
– DESIGN CORRELATIONS
– EXPERIMENTS AT ELEVATED PRESSURE AND
TEMPERATURE
 INDUSTRIAL LIASONS

• GENERAL ELECTRIC

• PARKER HANNIFIN

• ROLLS ROYCE ALLISON

• SIEMENS WESTINGHOUSE

• SOLAR TURBINES

• UNITED TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH CENTER

MOTIVATION
 LEAN COMBUSTION SYSTEMS
– DRIVEN TO EDGE OF OPERATIONAL LIMITS TO MEET
EMISSIONS TARGETS
T
OPPORTUNITY
NOx
CO
HC’s
BLOWOUT

[ ] and T

FLASHBACK?
AUTOIGNITION?
LEAN EQUIVALENCE RATIO RICH

FUEL INJECTION

AIR
VARIABILITY IN NATURAL GAS COMPOSITION

TYPICAL CONCENTRATIONS OF FUEL CONSTITUENTS FOR NATURAL GAS IN THE U.S.*

CONSTITUENT MEAN MINIMUM MAXIMUM
METHANE 93.9 74.5 98.1
ETHANE 3.2 0.5 13.3
PROPANE
WITHOUT
WITH PEAKPEAK SHAVING
SHAVING 0.7 0 2.6
WITH PEAK
WITHOUT SHAVING
PEAK SHAVING 0.1 0 23.7
HEXANES 0.1 0 0.4
INERTS*
CO 2 0 3
H 2O 0.05 PPM 0.2 PPM

*GRI-92/0123
 OBJECTIVES

• DELINEATE THE EFFECTS OF FUEL COMPOSITION ON THE

OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF A MODEL COMBUSTOR

• RELATE THE VARIATION IN PERFORMANCE TO MIXING EFFECTS

AND/OR CHEMICAL KINETICS
 APPROACH

• DEVELOP AND APPLY A MODEL COMBUSTOR

WITH CHARACTERISTICS SIMILAR TO THOSE
IN PRACTICE

• FLEXIBLE FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM

• CO, NOX, STABILITY AND FUEL DISTRIBUTIONS

AS FUNCTIONS OF FUEL COMPOSITION AND
INJECTION STRATEGY
– FIXED FIRING RATES

• CORRELATE PERFORMANCE
– FUEL PROPERTIES
– FUEL DISTRIBUTION
EXPERIMENT
MODEL COMBUSTOR

• ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS
Sample
Probe • INLET TEMPERATURE OF 700K

• THREE DIMENSIONAL
TRAVERSE SYSTEM
Combustor • NOMINAL FIRING RATE OF 15 kW
Traverse
 FUEL INJECTION STRATEGY
40 mm
TOP VIEW

45°
CB
WJ

160 mm

80 mm

CB: CENTERBODY INJECTOR

40 mm WJ: WALL JET INJECTOR

45° 40 mm

PILOT
CB WJ
150 mm 25 mm

AIR
 UCICL ON LINE GC
FUEL BLENDING STRATEGY n Constituent MF
y(i) %
1 Methane CH4 96.975

• 100% NATURAL GAS 2

3
Ethane
Propane
C 2H6
C 3H8
0.982
0.109
4 iso-Butane C 4H10 0.014
5 n-Butane C 4H10 0.015

• 85% NATURAL GAS / 15% ETHANE 6

7
iso-Pentane
n-Pentane
C 5H12
C 5H12
0.004
0.004
8 C6 C 6H14 0.001
9 C7 C 7H16 0.001

• 80% NATURAL GAS / 20% PROPANE 10

11
C8
CO2
C 8H18 0.000
1.574
12 O2 0.000
13 N2 0.322

• 100% PROPANE Totals 100.00

Fuel Composition Flow Panel

System
Wall PILOT
CB WJ
Centerbody
Pilot

45 Brooks 0154

R
Natural Gas
45 30 AIR
R
Propane
65 Fuel Bypass
R Ethane
DIAGNOSTICS

BULK EMISSIONS FUEL DISTRIBUTION

SAMPLING SAMPLING
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
 NOX AND CO EMISSIONS (AT 15% O2) FOR 100% NATURAL GAS

NOx CO WITHOUT PILOT

NOX WITHOUT PILOT (ppm) CO (ppm)
100 100
35 120

% Centerbody
110
% Centerbody

80 30 80
100
90
25
60 60 80
20 70

40 40 60
15 50
40
20 10 20
30
20
PILOT
5
0 0
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56
10
CB WJ
0 0
Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio
NOx
NOX WITH 20% PILOT (ppm)
CO WITH 20% PILOT CO (ppm)
100 100
35 120
110
% Centerbody
% Centerbody

80 30 80
100 AIR
90
25
60 60 80
20 70

40 40 60
15 50
40
20 10 20
30

5 20
0 0 10
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0
Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio
 PERFORMANCE FUNCTION
100
WITHOUT PILOT FUEL: J-VALUE
J-Value

0.9
J = wNO ⋅ f ([NOX ]) + wη ⋅ g (ηC )
80

Centerbody
% Centerbody
0.8
X C
60 0.7

0.6

40 0.5
1.00
0.4
f ([NO X])

0.80 20 0.3
[NOX]LIMIT 0.2
0.60
0 0.1
0.40 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0
Equivalence Ratio
Equivalence Ratio
0.20

0.00 WITH 20% PILOT FUEL: J-VALUE

J-Value
100
00 NOX (ppm) 40
1

80 0.9

Centerbody
1.00

% Centerbody
0.8

0.80 ηC MINIMUM 60 0.7

g(ηC)

0.6
0.60
40 0.5

0.40 0.4
%

20 0.3
0.20
0.2

0.00 0 0.1
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0
99.97 99.98 99.99 100.00
ηC (%) Equivalence Ratio
Equivalence Ratio
PERFORMANCE FUNCTION
• J-VALUES AS A FUNCTION OF φ, FUEL SPLIT, & FUEL COMPOSITION
J-Value
100
100% NATURAL GAS 100
85%NG / 15% ETHANE
1

0.9
% Centerbody

80 80
0.8

0.7
60 60
0.6

0.5
40 40 0.4

0.3
20 20 0.2

0.1 PILOT
0 0 0
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 CB WJ
J-Value
100
80%NG / 20% PROPANE 100
100% PROPANE
1

0.9
% Centerbody

80 80 0.8

0.7 AIR
60 60 0.6

0.5
40 40 0.4

0.3
20 20 0.2

0.1

0 0 0
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56

Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio

DISCUSSION
POSSIBLE MECHANISMS

FUEL COMPOSITION

KINETICS MOMENTUM EFFECTS

NOX PATHWAYS TEMP STABILITY MIXING

EMISSIONS STABILITY EMISSIONS STABILITY

REACTION RATES

• ETHANE & PROPANE ADDITION YIELD FASTER REACTION RATES

– REACTION RATES UP TO 4 TIMES FASTER
– AUTO-IGNITION CONCERNS

Reaction Rate
(Batch Reactor, T=1800K, P=1atm, Adiabatic)
2500
100% CH4
2000 85% CH4 and 15% C2H6
80% CH4 and 20% C3H8
Reaction Rate

1500
( 1/Sec )

1000

500

0
0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
Equivalence Ratio

Calculated with Chemkin software, version 3.5

FUEL DISTRIBUTION
• CENTERBODY FUEL JET PENETRATIONS FOR
PROPANE AND NATURAL GAS  
0.38
X = DJET ⋅ q 0.425 ⋅  Y 
D
• LOW PENETRATION, ESPECIALLY FOR PROPANE 
 JET 

ñ JET ⋅ VJET
2
q=
WHERE:
ñAIR ⋅ VAIR
4 2
100%CB, 0.42 Eq, CH4

100%CB, 0.42 Eq, C3H8

3
Axial Dist (cm)

Quarl Exit

Fuel Distribution Measurement Plane

Centerbody Tip
0
0.00 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 0.40 0.48 0.56 0.64
Radial Dist (cm) AIR
Source: Patrick, M.A. (1965). Sheffield Univ. Fuel Soc. J. Vol. 16, pp.46-61.
FUEL DISTRIBUTION
• 2 - 4: FIXED φ (0.42) & FUEL SPLIT (80% CENTERBODY)
• 5 - 7: BEST PERFORMING CASES
J-Value
100
100% NATURAL GAS 100
85%NG / 15% ETHANE
1

0.9
% Centerbody

80 80
0.8

0.7
60 1 60 2
0.6

0.5
40 40 5
0.4

0.3
20 20 0.2

0.1
0 0 0
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56

J-Value
100
80%NG / 20% PROPANE 100
100% PROPANE
1

0.9
% Centerbody

80 80 0.8

0.7
60 3 60 4
0.6

0.5
40 40 0.4
7
0.3

20 6 20 0.2

0.1

0 0 0
0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.56

Equivalence Ratio Equivalence Ratio

FUEL DISTRIBUTIONS
• FIXED φ (0.42) AND FUEL SPLIT (80% CENTERBODY)
100% NATURAL GAS 85% NG / 15% ETHANE
23 23

21 21

19 19

17 17

15 15

13 13

11 11
MEASUREMENT
9 9
PLANE
7 7

5 5

3 3

1 1

80% NG / 20% PROPANE 100% PROPANE

23 23

21 21

19 19

17 17

15 15

13 13

11 11

9 9

7 7

5 5

3 3

1
1
FUEL DISTRIBUTIONS
• PROPANE AT FIXED φ (0.42) AND FUEL SPLIT (80% CENTERBODY)

23

21

19
MEASUREMENT
17
PLANE

15

13

11

5
SWIRLER
3

1
FUEL DISTRIBUTIONS
• FIXED φ (0.42) AND FUEL SPLIT (80% CENTERBODY)
85% NG / 15% ETHANE 80% NG / 20% PROPANE 100% PROPANE
23 23 23

21 21 21

19 19 19

17 17 17

15 15 15

13 13 13

11 11 11

9 9
9

7 7
7

5 5
5

3 3
3

1 1
1

• BEST PERFORMING CASES

85% NG / 15% ETHANE 80% NG / 20% PROPANE 100% PROPANE
φ = 0.42 AT 60%CB)
(φ φ = 0.42 AT 40%CB)
(φ φ = 0.40 AT 50%CB)
(φ
23 23 23

21 21 21

19 19 19

17 17 17

15 15 15

13 13 13

11 11 11

9 9 9

7 7 7

5 5 5

3 3 3

1 1 1
 SUMMARY & NEXT STEPS
• STABILITY LIMITS ARE IMPACTED BY THE FUEL COMPOSITION
– HIGHER HYDROCARBONS ENHANCE STABILITY
– APPEARS TO BE KINETIC GIVEN SIMILARITY IN MIXING
• COMBUSTION PERFORMANCE IS IMPACTED BY FUEL
COMPOSITION
– FUEL DISTRIBUTION?
– KINETICS?
• DIFFERENT FUEL INJECTION STRATEGIES MAY BE UTILIZED
TO RETAIN OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE AS THE FUEL
COMPOSITION CHANGES
NEXT STEPS
• RUN FULLY PREMIXED CASES TO ISOLATE KINETICS
• IMPLEMENT INTO GEN-II HARDWARE THAT IS MORE FLEXIBLE
AND CAN ACCOMMODATE DUEL FUEL EFFECTS AND FUEL
COMPOSITION EFFECTS SIMULTANEOUSLY
• ADD HIGHER HYDROCARBONS TO STUDY
• TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE EFFECTS