Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/seta

Thermodynamic modeling and parametric study of a small-scale natural T

gas/hydrogen-fueled gas turbine system for decentralized applications
Alexandros Arsalis
Research Centre for Sustainable Energy (FOSS), University of Cyprus, Kallipoleos 75, Nicosia 1678, Cyprus

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: In this study a detailed thermodynamic model of a small-scale natural gas/hydrogen-fueled gas turbine system is
Gas turbine presented. The thermodynamic model includes both a basic thermodynamic analysis and an exergy analysis.
Natural gas Exergy analysis aims on the identification of exergy destruction in the various system components. Specifically,
Hydrogen combustion it is investigated how hydrogen addition in the fuel supply can affect exergy loss. Off-design modeling is also
Dual-fueled
implemented to realistically evaluate performance at part-load operation. A parametric study is conducted to
Thermodynamic modeling
Parametric study
examine the effect of hydrogen ratio on system performance. The hydrogen ratio is varied from 0 to 0.9, to
examine the behavior of the developed model at different hydrogen contents. The results suggest that hydrogen
addition to the natural gas fuel supply can change the operational behavior of the gas turbine cycle. Although net
electrical efficiency is only marginally increased as hydrogen ratio is increased (0.347 vs. 0.356), the exergetic
efficiency is more significantly affected, mainly due to the reduction of combustor losses as hydrogen content
increases (0.338 vs. 0.360). Also, hydrogen addition has a positive effect in terms of carbon emissions, since even
a tiny hydrogen injection at a hydrogen ratio of 0.1 (on a volumetric basis) results in a 6.1% reduction in CO2
emissions, as compared to methane-only fueling. Overall, the results suggest that even a small amount of hy-
drogen addition to the gas turbine cycle can have a significantly positive effect in terms of system efficiency and
operational cost.

Introduction can be injected to natural gas streams, directly or after modification to

Decentralized, small-scale power systems are gaining momentum to
create a more flexible energy system infrastructure. Several system
configurations have already been proposed as alternatives to electricity-
only, or in general, large-scale power stations [1,2]. Centralized sys-
tems occasionally create network congestion and transmission/dis-
tribution losses. On the other hand, on-site power generation results in
the generation of local emissions, and it could be problematic if the
system is located within larger cities/urban residential areas. Renew-
able energy sources eliminate emissions during power generation, but
renewable power supply can never match demand without energy
storage. Especially in the case of solar photovoltaic (PV) technology,
where electricity is only produced during daytime, storage or combi-
nation with other power technologies is required. One viable possibility
is the combination of natural gas-fired gas turbine cycles with PV
technology. In these combined systems, apart from the generation of a
portion of the electricity needed by the supplied electricity network
from the PV system, excess electricity can be converted to hydrogen and
mixed with the natural gas supply for combustion in the gas turbine
cycle. It has been suggested that hydrogen generated from electrolysis
synthetic methane. The latter is more complicated because it needs
integration to a CO2 stream for the methanation process [3]. So far, the
mixing of hydrogen to natural gas has received rather limited attention
in terms of detailed mathematical modeling, and most configurations
available in the literature, consider the re-generation of electrical en-
ergy via fuel cell technology. However, the possibility of injecting hy-
drogen to natural gas eliminates the need for an additional subsystem
(i.e. a fuel cell unit), provided hydrogen content is significantly lower
than natural gas content during combustion.
The thermophysical characteristics of hydrogen differ significantly
from natural gas, specifically hydrogen is lighter and more reactive
than methane [4]. Although the use of different fuels can create in-
stability to the operation of the gas turbine, since heat release variation
could favor thermo-acoustic combustion instability [5], it has also been
suggested that the operational window of a hydrogen-rich syngas-fired
gas turbine is similar to the one for natural gas, primarily because the
heating value of the two species is almost identical [6]. For hydrogen-
only combustion, the heating value is significantly higher than me-
thane, resulting in a reduction of the hot gas mass flow and the power
output of the gas turbine, although water vapor content in the exhaust

E-mail address: alexarsalis@gmail.com.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2019.100560
Received 23 February 2019; Received in revised form 22 October 2019; Accepted 24 October 2019
2213-1388/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

Nomenclature el, net Net electrical efficiency (−)

s Isentropic efficiency (−)
a, b, c, d , e Chemical reaction coefficients (−) Ratio of reduced efficiency to its design value (−)
Ef , in Energy rate of fuel (W) µ Mass flow rate ratio (−)
eai Excess air of species i (−) Pressure ratio (−)
G Ratio of reduced mass flow rate to its design value (−) Ratio of reduced pressure ratio to its design value (−)
H Enthalpy per mole of fuel (J/kmol) Total pressure recovery coefficient (−)
h̄ Specific enthalpy (J/kmol)
LHV Lower heating value (J/kmol) Subscripts/Superscripts
M Molecular weight (kg/kmol)
mi Mass flow rate of species i (kg/s) 1, 2, ...,k Streams
N Power output at off-design (W) a Air
N Ratio of reduced power output to its design value (−) b Combustor
n Rotating speed (rpm) c Compressor
n Ratio of reduced rotating speed to its design value (−) des Design (full-load operation)
ni Molar flow rate of species i (kmol/s) f Fuel
p Pressure (Pa) g Gas (vapor state)
rH2, vol Hydrogen ratio (−) gen Electric generator
S Entropy per mole of fuel (J/K-kmol) gt Gas turbine cycle
s̄ Specific entropy (J/K-kmol) i Species
T Temperature (oC, K) in Inlet
V Volumetric flow rate (m3/s) ref Reference state
v̄ Specific volume (m3/kmol) s Isentropic
W Power output (W) t Turbine
x Mass fraction (−)
x CH , i Standard specific chemical exergy for stream i (J/kg) Abbreviations
x q, i Specific physical exergy for stream i (J/kg)
y Mole fraction (−) EES Engineering Equation Solver
PV Photovoltaic
Greek symbols

Efficiency (−)

gas increases (with an increase in specific heat capacity) [7]. This in-
crease favors the generation of work at an identical turbine inlet tem-
perature, while the increased moisture content results to an increase in
turbine power output [6]. Also, small hydrogen contents in a natural
gas-based combustion process in a gas turbine cycle can have a positive
effect in terms of reducing unburned methane and CO emissions, in
addition to CO2 emission reduction [8]. A recent study suggested that a
natural gas-fueled gas turbine can be easily converted for hydrogen
fueling, with a modification of its control software, and without any
changes to the moving components [9]. The size and structure of the
combustion chamber of an existing natural gas-fueled gas turbine cycle
will not need to be modified in the case of hydrogen injection, because
hydrogen addition in the fuel allows reduction of natural gas at the
same time, provided the combustion temperature is kept fixed. Since
the energy density of hydrogen is higher than methane, the total fuel
flow rate entering the combustion chamber will be lower in comparison
to a methane-only system [10,11].
Currently, the open literature includes a very limited number of
studies on methane/hydrogen fueled gas turbine systems. Ebaid et al.
[12], studied an 100 MWe PV/hydrogen-fueled gas turbine hybrid

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the natural gas/hydrogen-fueled gas turbine cycle.

2
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

system. Simplistic assumptions were considered for the gas turbine
model to determine load consumption, in relation to the generation of
electricity from the PV system. The authors assumed that the gas tur-
bine would be fueled only with hydrogen and that the gas turbine
would operate only at design conditions with a fixed thermal efficiency
at 44%. Guandalini et al. [3], considered hydrogen injection to a cen-
tralized natural gas grid, in relation to large-scale wind turbine systems.
Although part-load operation was considered through regression func-
tions based on an industrial turbine, actual modeling of the gas turbine
cycle was not implemented.
The current study attempts to provide a detailed thermodynamic
modeling of a natural gas/hydrogen-fueled gas turbine system, using
both first and second law approaches. Also, the modeling includes both
design and off-design considerations, so that system operation at part-
load conditions will not be compromised by simplistic fixed conditions.
The developed system model sets a basis for future application-specific
systems, including PV modules, electrolyzer stacks, hydrogen storage
units, and heat integration and recovery to satisfy realistic load profiles.
A parametric study is conducted to examine the effect of hydrogen ratio
on key parameters, such as the power output, the fuel mass flow rate,
the heat input rate, the flue gas composition, the thermodynamic and
exergetic efficiencies, and the exergy destruction ratio. The parametric
study also investigates the effect of hydrogen injection in terms of CO2
emission reduction, which is a significant factor in the design of sus-
tainable energy systems.
System modeling of the gas turbine cycle
The mathematical modeling, including the calculation of all ther-
mophysical properties, and the associated parametric study are con-
ducted with the commercially available software Engineering Equation
Solver (EES) – Professional version. The values of the isentropic effi-
ciencies for the compressor and turbine depend on the load of the gas
turbine cycle power output. In this study a part-load model, based on
the methodology developed in [15,16], has been formulated to de-
termine part-load performance. Therefore, based on a selected load, the
value of the isentropic efficiency is calculated through data interpola-
tion.
Thermodynamic model
The total power output of the gas turbine is given by the sum of the
partial power outputs resulting from the combustion of methane and
hydrogen fuels:
Wgt = Wgt ,CH4 + Wgt ,H2 (1)
The generated net electrical power output resulting from the ex-
pansion of the hot flue gas in the turbine can be given as a function of
the enthalpies of the processes from air compression to turbine ex-
pansion. Through an energy balance of products and reactants for the
combustion of methane fuel, terms can be rearranged to solve for power
output:

System configuration Wgt ,CH4 = nCH4 ·((H3,CH4 H4,CH4 ) aCH4 ·(h¯2 h¯1))· gen (2)

h̄1 and h̄2 are the specific enthalpies of air at the compressor inlet
The system configuration is shown in Fig. 1. The combustor of the
and the compressor outlet, respectively. The above equation is solved
gas turbine cycle is fueled with natural gas and hydrogen, and the
for nCH4 to determine the molar flow rate of the methane fuel.
generated flue gas is expanded in the turbine to generate electricity via
The molar flow rate of air for methane combustion is given by:
an electric generator.
The following assumptions have been made for this study: na,CH4 = aCH4 · nCH4 (3)

The volumetric flow rate of air for methane combustion entering the
1. For calculation simplicity, natural gas is assumed to have the ther-
compressor is given by:
mophysical properties of methane.
2. A catalytic combustion process is assumed for the gas turbine cycle V1,CH4 = na,CH4 · v¯1 (4)
to allow complete chemical reaction of the fuel reactants.
3. The combustion temperature is fixed and therefore it remains con- Similarly, for hydrogen:
stant at part-load conditions, although at more realistic conditions, Wgt ,H2 = nH2 ·((H3,H2 H4,H2) aH2 ·(h¯2 h¯1))· gen (5)
this value would normally drop slightly and steadily with decreasing
load [6]. The reason of keeping the combustion temperature con- na,H2 = aH2 ·n H2 (6)
stant is to avoid mismatch of data calculation for the part-load
model, since data from the part-load model are fed to the thermo- V1,H2 = na,H2 · v¯1 (7)
dynamic model, and therefore variation of combustion temperature
would create inconsistency in the calculation of the isentropic effi- The total volumetric flow rate of air entering the compressor is the
ciencies with the part-load model. sum of the partial volumetric flow rates:
4. Ambient conditions are set at a pressure of 1 atm and a temperature V1 = V1,CH4 + V1,H2 (8)
of 15 °C. The pressure and temperature values at the inlet of the air
compressor are set equal to the ambient conditions. The fuel tem- The sum of the two partial volumetric flow rates is the total flow
perature is assumed to remain constant and equal to ambient con- rate of air needed to enter the combustor for the reactions with methane
ditions. and hydrogen.
5. The electric generator efficiency is fixed at 0.972 [13], for a gas The lower heating value of methane on a molar basis is given by:
turbine nominal power output of 12.9 MWe. The latter value is taken
from available manufacturer’s data for an industrial gas turbine Table 1
(Siemens SGT-400) [13]. A pressure ratio of 16.8 is assumed for the Values of the constant parameters in the thermodynamic model at design.
air compressor [13]. Parameter description Value
6. A constant pressure drop of 5% is assumed for the combustor pro-
pamb Ambient pressure 1 atm
cess [14].
Tamb Ambient temperature 15 °C
7. The model assumes that the gas turbine will respond to an electric Tf Fuel temperature 15 °C
load. Therefore, the electric load is treated as an input parameter. Electric generator efficiency 0.972
gen
Wgt Gas turbine power output 12.9 MWe
The above input values for the gas turbine cycle at design conditions Compressor pressure ratio 16.8
c
are tabulated in Table 1. b Combustor efficiency 0.95

3
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

LHVCH4 = h¯ CH4, ref 2·h¯ H2O, g , ref h¯ CO2, ref (9) cycle efficiency and fuel mass flow rate have been calculated, the part-
load isentropic efficiencies for the compressor and turbine are calcu-
Ef , in,CH4 = nCH4 · LHVCH4 (10) lated. The calculated data are then saved as a lookup table in the main
Similarly, for hydrogen: model of the gas turbine cycle, and are used through interpolation to
calculate performance at any given operating load condition.
LHVH2 = h¯ H2, ref h¯ H2O, g, ref (11) To avoid unrealistic operating schemes, the exhaust temperature of
the combustor is kept constant at all loads. On the other hand, the ro-
Ef , in,H2 = n H2 · LHVH2 (12) tating speed of the compressor and the turbine can be allowed to vary;
The total energy rate of fuel and the corresponding net electrical therefore they are reduced as the load decreases. Since it is assumed
efficiency, on an LHV basis, are given by: that the compressor and turbine are connected in a single shaft, the
rotating speed of the compressor is always assumed to be equal to the
Ef , in = Ef , in,CH4 + Ef , in,H2 (13) rotating speed of the turbine. The compressor rotating speed at full-load
conditions is fixed at 14,100 rpm, per manufacturer’s data [13]. The
Wgt
el, net = design data mentioned in the description below are those identified at
Ef , in (14) design.
The auxiliary equations for the thermodynamic model of the gas The fuel mass flow rate is defined as the difference between turbine
turbine cycle are given in Appendix A. These include the equations and compressor mass flow rates:
needed for the calculation of the reaction coefficients for the combus- m f = mt mc (22)
tion of both methane and hydrogen in the gas turbine cycle for both the
stoichiometric and actual reactions. Additionally, the mass balance and The gas turbine cycle efficiency ratio is [15]:
energy balance equations are given for the gas turbine cycle. = 3.18· N 4.69·N 2 + 3.69·N 3 1.18·N 4
gt (23)

Exergy analysis The power output ratio is defined as the ratio of off design to design
net power output for the gas turbine cycle:
An exergy analysis can provide an in-depth evaluation of the sources N
of irreversibility in an energy system. For the current system config- N =
Ndes (24)
uration, exergy analysis is used to reveal the trend of exergy destruction
when varying hydrogen content in the total fuel. The methodology for Similarly, for gas turbine cycle efficiency:
exergy analysis has been described in detail in a previous publication gt
[17]. The main equations are summarized in Table 2. gt =
gt , des (25)
The exergy destruction for each system component is calculated
through exergy balances. The exergy balances for the compressor, The previous equation is solved for gt to determine the off-design
turbine, and combustor are the following, respectively: efficiency of the gas turbine cycle. Similarly, the off-design mass flow
rate ratio is determined based on a curve function for the fuel con-
m1·xq,1 + Wc = m2· xq,2 + Xdes, c (15) sumption ratio [15]:
m3· xq,3 = m4 · xq,4 + Wt + Xdes, t (16) Gf = 0.288 + 0.624·N + 0.088·N 2 (26)
Xf + m2· xq,2 + mf ·x q, f = m3·xq,3 + Xdes, comb (17) mf
Gf =
The associated exergy destruction ratios for the above components mf , des (27)
are defined as [18]: For the compressor, the pressure ratio is defined for design and off-
Xdes, c design conditions, respectively:
yD, c =
Xf (18) p2, des
c, des =
p1, des (28)
Xdes, t
yD, t = p2
Xf (19) c =
p1 (29)
Xdes, comb
yD, comb = The ratio of reduced pressure ratio to its design value, the ratio of
Xf (20)
reduced rotating speed to its design value, the ratio of reduced effi-
The total rate of exergy destruction is the sum of component exergy ciency to its design value, and the ratio of reduced mass flow rate to its
destruction rates: design value, are the following, respectively [15]:

Xdes = Xdes, c + Xdes, t + Xdes, comb (21) c = c

c , des (30)

Part-load model
Table 2
Modeling equations used in the exergy analysis.
The gas turbine cycle must be able to respond to off-design condi-
tions, i.e. at power output below the nominal power output of Variable description Model equation

12.9 MWe. In a previous study, [15] the compressor and turbine mass Exergy rate of fuel (W)
Xf Xf = mCH4 · hCH4 + mH2·h H2
flow rates were provided to the model as input parameters and based on Exergetic efficiency (−) Wgt
2
those values two output variables were determined, namely isentropic 2 =
Xf
efficiency and pressure ratio. The study included typical curve functions XPH , i Physical exergy for stream i (W) XPH , i = mi ·x q,i
to approximate gas turbine cycle efficiency and fuel mass flow rate at XCH , i Chemical exergy of stream i (W) XCH , i = mi· x CH ,i
part-load conditions. However, since the modeling needs of the current Xi Total exergy of stream i (W) Xi = XPH , i + XCH ,i
study are different, it is assumed that after the part-load gas turbine

4
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

nc Table 3
nc =
nc, des (31) Values of the input parameters for the validation of the system model at design.

c Parameter description Value

c =
c , des (32) Tamb Ambient temperature 15 °C
gen Electric generator efficiency 0.972
T1
mc · p1 Wgt Gas turbine power output 12.9 MWe
Gc = c Compressor pressure ratio 16.8
(T1, des )
mc, des · T4 Turbine exhaust temperature 555 °C
p1, des (33)
The performance formulas for the compressor are applied to de-
termine the off-design to design ratio for the pressure ratio and the ratio = t
t
of reduced efficiency to its design value, respectively [15]: t , des (47)
2
c = c1· Gc + c2· Gc + c3 (34) mt ·
T3
p3
Gt =
(T3, des )
nc nc mt , des ·
c = (1 c4·(1 nc )2)· · 2 p3, des (48)
Gc Gc (35)
The performance formulas for the turbine are applied to determine
The constants c1, c2 and c3 are found with the following functions
the off-design to design ratio for the mass flow rate and the ratio of
[16]:
reduced efficiency to its design value, respectively [15]:
nc
c1 = DEN 2
mt T3, des t 1 nt
p 2·m·nc2 = · · 2
where = 1.4 0.4·
c2 = DEN
mt , des T3 t , des 1 nt , des
p·m·n c m2·nc3
c3 = (49)
DEN

DEN = p · 1 ( m
nc ) + n ·(n c c m) 2
(36) t = (1 t·(1 nt )2)·
nt
Gt
· 2
nt
Gt (50)
The values for the remaining constants are m = 1.06, p = 0.36 and
The value of t is 0.3.
c4 = 0.3.
Finally, a similar process to the compressor section is repeated for
Results and discussion
the turbine. Initially some parameters must be defined. For calculation
simplicity, at off-design conditions the condition set at design operation
This section starts with a validation of the system model with
for the pressure drop in the combustor is retained, i.e.:
available experimental data. Next the system model of the gas turbine
p3 = p2 · b (37) cycle is analyzed at design conditions, and then at off-design conditions.
The term b is a pressure loss coefficient for the combustor, set at a Finally, the results of the parametric study are presented in detail, with
typical value of 0.95 [14]. The equations below relate the turbine emphasis on the performance of the system and its effect on key
parameters to the compressor parameters parameters.

nt , des = nc, des (38)

Model validation
nt = nc (39)
The system model is validated against measured manufacturer’s
mt mc data extracted from a Siemens industrial gas turbine, namely SGT-400
= µ·
mt , des mc, des (40) [13]. The values of the input parameters for the validation are tabu-
lated in Tables 3 and 4, respectively. The graph in Fig. 2 shows the
= · (41)
t c
simulation data against the experimental data for different part-loads
where and µ are set as constants [15]. against turbine exhaust mass flow rate. The graph shows a good
agreement between the two data sets, and therefore it can be assumed
=µ=1 (42) that the system model has been modeled with adequate accuracy in
The pressure ratio at design and off-design conditions is defined as comparison to an actual system.
follows, respectively:
p3, des System performance
t , des =
p4, des (43) Operation at design conditions
p3 At design conditions it is assumed that the gas turbine system will
t = generate the nominal power output, i.e. 12.9 MWe. However, methane-
p4 (44)
For the turbine, the ratio of reduced pressure ratio to its design Table 4
value, the ratio of reduced rotating speed to its design value, the ratio of Values of the output parameters for the validation of the system model at de-
reduced efficiency to its design value, and the ratio of reduced mass sign.
flow rate to its design value, are the following, respectively [15,19]: Parameter description Value
t
t = Net electrical efficiency 0.348
(45)
el, net
t , des
T3 Turbine inlet temperature 1173 °C
nt m1 Compressor mass flow rate 39.68 kg/s
nt = m3 Turbine mass flow rate 40.42 kg/s
nt , des (46)

5
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

Table 6
Values of the key output parameters at design conditions.
Parameter description Value

el, net Net electrical efficiency 0.348

Wgt,CH4 Partial power output (methane) 12.47 MWe
Wgt,H2 Partial power output (hydrogen) 0.43 MWe
Ef ,in,CH 4 Energy rate of methane fuel 35.9 MW
Ef ,in,H2 Energy rate of hydrogen fuel 1.2 MW
Ef ,in Total energy rate of fuel 37.1 MW
mCH4 Fuel mass flow rate (methane) 0.717 kg/s
mH2 Fuel mass flow rate (hydrogen) 0.010 kg/s
mf Total fuel mass flow rate 0.727 kg/s

Fig. 2. Validation of the system model against manufacturer data (Siemens

industrial gas turbine SGT-400 [13]).

to-hydrogen ratio could vary, depending on the availability of hydrogen

at a particular time-segment. Therefore, a specific parameter could be
defined here, which can be easily varied, namely hydrogen ratio, i.e.
the ratio of hydrogen fuel flow rate to total fuel flow rate on a volu-
metric (or mole) basis:
v H2
rH2, vol =
vf (51)

For the reasons explained in the previous sections, a typical value

for this parameter at 10% is chosen to initially determine the thermo-
physical properties of the system at design conditions. For the streams
shown in Fig. 1, the values of temperature, pressure, mass flow rate,
and mole fractions are tabulated in Table 5. The key output parameters
of the system model are tabulated in Table 6.
Operation at off-design conditions
The set of values for isentropic efficiency for the compressor and
turbine are calculated with the part-load model and fed to the ther-
modynamic model; they are shown graphically in Fig. 3. The perfor-
mance of the system in terms of net electrical efficiency is shown gra-
phically in Fig. 4. Both figures suggest that as the load decreases,
isentropic and net electrical efficiencies deteriorate rapidly, suggesting
that system operation below 60% would be very inefficient and must be
avoided. This trend is also evident in Fig. 5, where fuel consumption
Fig. 3. Variation of compressor and turbine isentropic efficiencies for part-load
operation of the gas turbine cycle.
stops to decrease linearly with decreasing load at loads below 60%. A
similar trend is observed in the case of mass flow rate. As mentioned
earlier (Section “Part-load model”), the exhaust temperature of the
combustor in the computational simulations is kept constant at all loads
to avoid unrealistic results. Also, both the compressor and the turbine
are connected to the same shaft. However, these assumptions do not
allow an optimum reduction of the air mass flow rate, as the load is
reduced. More fuel is needed at part-load (especially at loads below
60%, as observed in Figs. 3 and 4) to achieve the desired power output
from the gas turbine cycle. Therefore, for a higher fuel consumption (in
relation to the generated power output), both net electrical and

Table 5
Thermophysical property values at design conditions.
Parameter description Stream

1 2 3 4

Tk Temperature at stream k (K) 288 708 1445 828

pk Pressure at stream k (Pa) 101,325 1,702,260 1,617,147 107,405
mk Mass flow rate at stream k (kg/s) 39.7085 39.7085 40.4356 40.4356
yCO2, k Mole fraction of CO2 at stream k 0 0 0.031 0.031
yH2 O, k Mole fraction of H2O at stream k 0 0 0.067 0.067
yN2, k Mole fraction of N2 at stream k 0.790 0.790 0.764 0.764
yO2, k Mole fraction of O2 at stream k 0.210 0.210 0.138 0.138

6
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

Fig. 7. Effect of part-load operation on total, methane, and hydrogen fuel

Fig. 4. Performance of the gas turbine cycle in terms of net electrical efficiency
consumption.
at part-load operation.

Fig. 8. Effect of part-load operation on the values of excess air for natural gas
Fig. 5. Fuel consumption and power output generation for the system at part-
and hydrogen fuels.
load operation.

Fig. 6. Variation of inlet air and exhaust flue gas for the system at part-load Fig. 9. Effect of hydrogen ratio variation on the values of partial power output
operation. (methane vs. hydrogen).

isentropic efficiencies will deteriorate at off-design conditions. more flue gas). Specifically, in Fig. 6, the mass flow rate curves for both
In Figs. 6 and 7, it is shown that low efficiency occurs at loads below the flue gas and air stop to decrease linearly below the load of 60%;
60%, because the system consumes more air (also more fuel, generating while the exact same effect also occurs for the fuel flow rate curves, as

7
A. Arsalis
Fig. 10. Effect of hydrogen ratio variation on total fuel mass flow rate.
Fig. 11. Effect of hydrogen ratio variation on the molecular composition of the
exhaust flue gas.
shown in Fig. 7. Therefore if the system must be operated at loads lower
than 60%, it must be recuperated for heat recovery, e.g. with a district
heating energy network [17,20]. In Fig. 8, it is shown that more air is
needed at part-load due to the system becoming less efficient with de-
creasing load. This trend is similar for both fuels.
Parametric study: Variation of hydrogen ratio
An important aspect for this study is the variation of hydrogen ratio.
Although hydrogen ratio would not typically exceed 0.1, in order to
examine the response of the system model at different hydrogen con-
tents, hydrogen ratio is varied from 0 to 0.9. The net electrical effi-
ciency remains almost constant as the value of hydrogen ratio is altered,
but other key parameters change significantly. In Fig. 9 it is shown how
partial power output is affected with increasing hydrogen ratio in the
total fuel. In Fig. 10 it is shown that as hydrogen content in the total
fuel increases, the total mass flow rate of fuel decreases, along with the
heat input rate. The mass flow rate of fuel is almost two times higher
without any hydrogen in comparison to a hydrogen ratio of 0.9.
Another important aspect of hydrogen ratio variation is the amount
of flue gas at the exhaust of the gas turbine, since flue gas would nor-
mally be released in the environment. Therefore it would be desirable
to reduce CO2 emissions at the lowest possible level [21]. In Fig. 11, it is
shown that the CO2 mole fraction with a hydrogen ratio of 0.1 and 0.5
drops by 6.1% and 24.2%, respectively, as compared to methane-only
fueling. Therefore even tiny hydrogen contents can result to a reduction
in CO2 emissions, which is also beneficial in terms of operational cost
and total lifecycle cost for the system [20].
In Fig. 12, the effect of varying hydrogen ratio on thermodynamic
8
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560
Fig. 12. Effect of hydrogen ratio variation on thermodynamic and exergetic
efficiencies.
Fig. 13. Effect of hydrogen ratio variation on exergy destruction ratio for every
system component.
and exergetic efficiencies is shown. The effect appears to be more sig-
nificant for exergetic efficiency, because it is entropy dependent. The
reason for this is more clearly identified in Fig. 13, where the exergy
destruction ratios for every system component are shown. Specifically,
it is observed that net electrical efficiency for the gas turbine cycle
improves slightly as hydrogen ratio is increased (0.347 and 0.356 for a
hydrogen ratio of 0 and 0.9, respectively). On the other hand, the im-
provement of exergetic efficiency is more evident, mainly due to the
significant reduction of combustor losses as hydrogen ratio increases
(0.338 and 0.360 for a hydrogen ratio of 0 and 0.9, respectively).
Therefore, hydrogen combustion results in a higher power output as
compared to methane-only combustion.
As the hydrogen content in the fuel increases, combustor losses are
significantly decreased. This is because the exergy destruction in the
combustor depends on the total mass flow rate of fuel entering the
combustor (as defined in equation (17)), since the total fuel mass flow
rate decreases with increasing hydrogen content, as already shown in
Fig. 10. In turn, the exergy destruction ratio for the combustor yD, comb in
equation (20) is also reduced. The combustion process becomes more
efficient, mainly owing to the higher energy density of hydrogen in
comparison to methane. On the other hand, for the compressor and
turbine, with increasing hydrogen content, losses increase because of
the need to increase the air inflow for combustion (see Fig. 8), but in
this case losses are marginal, and therefore hydrogen variation is rather
insignificant. This is because although the excess air for hydrogen
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

combustion is significantly higher than methane combustion, the
comparatively more efficient combustion of hydrogen decreases flue
gas generation, and therefore the flow rate of incoming air remains
practically unchanged. Finally, for a hydrogen ratio of 0.1, CO2 emis-
sions are reduced by 6.1% as compared to no hydrogen content in the
fuel, with a further reduction to 24.2% for a hydrogen ratio of 0.5.
Conclusions
This study presents a detailed thermodynamic model, considering
both first law and second law analyses, of a small-scale natural gas/
hydrogen-fueled gas turbine cycle, along with performance evaluation
at both design and off-design conditions. Evaluation of performance at
off-design conditions is very important, because in real-life conditions,
the system will operate mostly at off-design, with several part loads.
Therefore, it is necessary to develop a simulation model that determines
performance at off-design conditions, as accurately as possible, to cor-
respond to realistic operation.
The system model is validated against measured manufacturer’s
data from an industrial gas turbine and results show a good agreement
between the model and the reference data. In general, the results sug-
gest that hydrogen addition to the natural gas fuel supply could alter
significantly the operation of the gas turbine cycle. It is observed that
net electrical efficiency can slightly improve, as hydrogen ratio is in-
creased (0.347 and 0.356 for a hydrogen ratio of 0 and 0.9,
respectively). However, the improvement of exergetic efficiency is more
significant, mainly due to the high reduction of combustor losses, as
hydrogen ratio increases (0.338 and 0.360 for a hydrogen ratio of 0 and
0.9, respectively). Therefore, for the same amount of total fuel flow
rate, hydrogen combustion results in a higher power output, in com-
parison to methane-only combustion. Also, hydrogen addition affects
positively the system performance in terms of CO2 emissions, since even
a hydrogen ratio of 0.1 (on a volumetric basis) results in a 6.1% re-
duction in CO2 emissions, with a further reduction to 24.2% for a hy-
drogen ratio of 0.5, as compared to methane-only fueling. The devel-
oped model can be used as a basis for future more application-specific
studies in the field of decentralized power generation, combining var-
ious technologies (e.g. a PV-electrolyzer-gas turbine system).
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix A

At the air compressor exit the specific enthalpy is determined as follows [14]:
h¯s,2 h¯1
h¯2 = h¯1 +
c (52)
where h̄1 is the specific enthalpy at the inlet, and h̄s,2 is the isentropic specific enthalpy at the outlet (J/kg).
The stoichiometric reactions of methane and hydrogen with air are the following, respectively:
CH 4 + as,CH4 (0.21O2 + 0.79N2) bs,CH4 CO2 + cs,CH4 H2 O + ds,CH4 N2

H2 + as,H2 (0.21O2 + 0.79N2) bs,H2 H2 O + cs,H2 N2

The following expressions provide the conservation for carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen atoms, respectively, for methane fuel:
1 = bs,CH4
4 = 2·cs,CH4
as,CH4 ·2·0.21 = 2·bs,CH4 + cs,CH4
as,CH4 ·2·0.79 = 2·ds,CH4 (53)
Similarly, for hydrogen:
2 = 2·bs,H2
as,H2 ·2·0.21 = bs,H2
as,H2 ·2·0.79 = 2·cs,H2 (54)
The actual reaction of methane and hydrogen with excess air are the following, respectively:
CH 4 + aCH4 (0.21O2 + 0.79N2) bCH4 CO2 + cCH4 H2 O + dCH4 N2 + eCH4 O2

H2 + aH2 (0.21O2 + 0.79N2) bH2 H2 O + c H2 N2 + d H2 O2

The corresponding conservation expressions for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given as follows:
aCH4 = (1 + eaCH4 )· as,CH4
1 = bCH4
4 = 2· cCH4
aCH4 ·2·0.21 = 2·bCH4 + cCH4 + 2· eCH4
aCH4 ·2·0.79 = 2·d CH4 (55)

9
A. Arsalis Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560

aH2 = (1 + eaH2 )· as,H2

2 = 2· bH2
aH2 ·2·0.21 = bH2 + 2· d H2
aH2 ·2·0.79 = 2·c H2 (56)
The enthalpies of the reactants entering the combustor, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
H2,CH4 = h¯ CH4,2 + 0.21·aCH4 ·h¯ O2,2 + 0.79·aCH4 ·h¯ N2,2 (57)

H2,H2 = h¯ H2,2 + 0.21·aH2 · h¯ O2,2 + 0.79· aH2 ·h¯ N2,2 (58)

The enthalpies of the products exiting the combustor, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
H3,CH4 = bCH4 · h¯ CO2,3,CH4 + cCH4· h¯ H2O,3,CH4 + dCH4 ·h¯ N2,3,CH4 + eCH4 ·h¯ O2,3,CH4 (59)

H3,H2 = bH2 ·h¯ H2O,3,H2 + c H2·h¯ N2,3,H2 + d H2· h¯ O2,3,H2 (60)

Assuming no energy losses in the combustion process, an energy balance on the combustor, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, can be
applied:
H3,CH4 = H2,CH4 (61)
H3,H2 = H2,H2 (62)
The mole fractions in the combustion products for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
bCH 4
yCO2,3,CH4 = bCH4 + c CH 4 + dCH 4 + eCH 4
c CH4
yH2O,3,CH4 = bCH 4 + c CH4 + dCH4 + eCH 4
dCH4
yN2,3,CH4 = bCH 4 + cCH 4 + dCH 4 + e CH4
eCH 4
yO2,3,CH4 = bCH 4 + cCH 4 + dCH 4 + eCH 4 (63)
bH2
yH2O,3,H2 = bH2 + c H2 + dH2
c H2
yN2,3,H2 = bH2 + c H2 + dH2
dH2
yO2,3,H2 = bH2 + c H2 + dH2 (64)
The entropy of the products exiting the combustor, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
S3,CH4 = bCH4 ·¯sCO2,3,CH4 + cCH4·¯sH2O,3,CH4 + dCH4 ·¯s N2,3,CH4 + eCH4 ·¯sO2,3,CH4 (65)

S3,H2 = b H2 · s¯H2O,3,H2 + c H2·¯sN2,3,H2 + d H2· s¯O2,3,H2 (66)

The entropy of the products exiting the isentropic turbine, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
Ss,4,CH4 = bCH4 · s¯CO2, s,4,CH4 + cCH4·¯sH2O, s,4,CH4 + dCH4 ·¯s N2, s,4,CH4 + eCH4 · s¯O2, s,4,CH4 (67)

Ss,4,H2 = bH2 ·¯sH2O, s,4,H2 + cH2· s¯N2, s,4,H2 + d H2· s¯O2, s,4,H2 (68)
Considering an entropy balance on the isentropic turbine:
Ss,4,CH4 = S3,CH4 (69)

Ss,4,H2 = S3,H2 (70)

The enthalpy of the products exiting the isentropic turbine, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
Hs,4,CH4 = bCH4 · h¯ CO2, s,4,CH4 + cCH4· h¯ H2O, s,4,CH4 + dCH4 · h¯ N2, s,4,CH4 + eCH4 · h¯ O2, s,4,CH4 (71)

Hs,4,H2 = bH2 ·h¯ H2O, s,4,H2 + cH2· h¯ N2, s,4,H2 + d H2·h¯ O2, s,4,H2 (72)
The total enthalpy of the products exiting the isentropic turbine, per mole of fuel, is given by:
Hs,4 = Hs,4,CH4 + Hs,4,H2 (73)
The enthalpy of the products exiting the actual turbine, per mole of fuel, for methane and hydrogen, respectively, are given by:
H4,CH4 = H3,CH4 (H3,CH4 Hs,4,CH4 )· t (74)

H4,H2 = H3,H2 (H3,H2 Hs,4,H2 )· t (75)

where:
H4,CH4 = bCH4 ·h¯ CO2,4,CH4 + cCH4·h¯ H2O,4,CH4 + d CH4 ·h¯ N2,4,CH4 + eCH4 · h¯ O2,4,CH4 (76)

H4,H2 = bH2 ·h¯ H2 O,4,H2 + c H2·h¯ N2,4,H2 + dH2· h¯ O2,4,H2 (77)

10
A. Arsalis
The total molar flow rate of inlet air to the compressor is the sum of the partial molar flow rates needed for the combustion of methane and
hydrogen:
na = na,CH4 + na,H2
The resulting flue gas exiting the combustor can be related to the reactants with a molar flow rate balance, summing the flue gas flow rates from
the combustion of the two fuels:
n3 = nCH4,3 + nH2,3
The above equation can be analyzed as follows:
nCH4,3 = na,CH4 + nCH4
n H2,3 = na,H2 + n H2
The partial molar flow rates can be related to the corresponding mole fractions as follows:
ni,CH4,3 = nCH4,3· yi,3,CH4
ni,H2,3 = n H2,3· yi,3,H2
In the above equations i is the product species, i.e·H2O, CO2, O2, and N2.
A molar flow rate balance results in the following general expression:
ni,3 = ni,CH4,3 + ni,H2,3
The mole fractions are found with the following general expression:
ni,3
yi,3 =
n3
Assuming no change of composition in the flue gas during expansion in the turbine:
yi,4 = yi,3
When mass fractions must be determined, the following relations deriving from the composition relations for gas mixtures are used:
M4 = yi,4 ·Mi
i (85)
Mi
x i,4 = yi,4 ·
M4
References
[1] Arsalis A, Alexandrou AN. Design and modeling of 1–10 MWe liquefied natural gas-
fueled combined cooling, heating and power plants for building applications.
Energy Build 2015;86:257–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.10.025.
[2] Arsalis A, Alexandrou AN, Georghiou GE. Thermoeconomic modeling of a small-
scale gas turbine-photovoltaic-electrolyzer combined-cooling-heating-and-power
system for distributed energy applications. J Cleaner Prod 2018;188:443–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.001.
[3] Guandalini G, Campanari S, Romano MC. Power-to-gas plants and gas turbines for
improved wind energy dispatchability: energy and economic assessment. Appl
Energy 2015;147:117–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.02.055.
[4] Ströhle J, Myhrvold T. An evaluation of detailed reaction mechanisms for hydrogen
combustion under gas turbine conditions. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:125–35.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.04.005.
[5] Park J, Lee MC. Combustion instability characteristics of H2/CO/CH4 syngases and
synthetic natural gases in a partially-premixed gas turbine combustor: part I-
Frequency and mode analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;41:7484–93. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.02.047.
[6] He F, Li Z, Liu P, Ma L, Pistikopoulos EN. Operation window and part-load per-
formance study of a syngas fired gas turbine. Appl Energy 2012;89:133–41. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.11.044.
[7] Shih HY, Liu CR. A computational study on the combustion of hydrogen/methane
blended fuels for a micro gas turbines. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2014;39:15103–15.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.07.046.
[8] Juste GL. Hydrogen injection as additional fuel in gas turbine combustor. Evaluation
of effects. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2006;31:2112–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2006.02.006.
[9] Funke H, Keinz J, Boerner S, Hendrick P, Elsing R. Testing and analysis of the im-
pact on engine cycle parameters and control system modifications using hydrogen
or methane as fuel in an industrial gas turbine. Prog Propul Phys 2016;8:409–26.
https://doi.org/10.1051/eucass/201608409.
[10] Wright IG, Gibbons TB. Recent developments in gas turbine materials and
11
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 36 (2019) 100560
(78)
(79)
(80)
(81)
(82)
(83)
(84)
(86)
technology and their implications for syngas firing. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2007;32:3610–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.08.049.
[11] Bianchini A, Pellegrini M, Saccani C. Solar steam reforming of natural gas in-
tegrated with a gas turbine power plant. Sol Energy 2013;96:46–55. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solener.2013.06.030.
[12] Ebaid MSY, Hammad M, Alghamdi T. THERMO economic analysis OF PV and hy-
drogen gas turbine hybrid power plant of 100 MW power output. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2015;40:12120–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.07.077.
[13] Siemens. Industrial gas turbine SGT-400 2017. http://www.energy.siemens.com/
hq/en/fossil-power-generation/gas-turbines/sgt-400.htm. [accessed December 1,
2017].
[14] Klein S, Nellis G. Thermodynamics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press;
2012.
[15] Zhang N, Cai R. Analytical solutions and typical characteristics of part-load per-
formances of single shaft gas turbine and its cogeneration. Energy Convers Manage
2002;43:1323–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(02)00018-3.
[16] Wang W, Cai R, Zhang N. General characteristics of single shaft microturbine set at
variable speed operation and its optimization. Appl Therm Eng 2004;24:1851–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2003.12.012.
[17] Arsalis A, Alexandrou AN. Thermoeconomic modeling and exergy analysis of a
decentralized liquefied natural gas-fueled combined-cooling e heating-and-power
plant. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2014;21:209–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.08.
009.
[18] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran MJ. Thermal design and optimization. Wiley; 1996.
[19] Saravanamuttoo H, Rogers G, Cohen H, Straznicky P, Nix A. Gas turbine theory. 7th
ed. Pearson; 2017.
[20] Arsalis A, Alexandrou AN, Georghiou GE. Thermoeconomic modeling and para-
metric study of a photovoltaic-assisted 1 MWe combined cooling, heating, and
power system. Energies 2016;9:663. https://doi.org/10.3390/en9080663.
[21] Pilavachi PA, Stephanidis SD, Pappas VA, Afgan NH. Multi-criteria evaluation of
hydrogen and natural gas fuelled power plant technologies. Appl Therm Eng
2009;29:2228–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.11.014.