Professional Documents
Culture Documents
P. D. Fairchild
S. D. Labinov
A. Zaltash
B. D. T. Rizy
November II -16,200l
New York, New York
*Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the U.S. Department of
Energy under contract DE-AC05000R22725.
The submittedmanuscript has been authoredby a
contractor ofthe U.S. government under contract DE-
ACOS-OOOR22725.Accordingly, the U.S. Government
retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free license to publish or
reproducethe published form of this contribution, or allow
others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes.
EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL STUDY OF MICROTURBINE-BASED BCHP SYSTEM
P. D. Fairchild
S. D. Labinov
A. Zaltash
D. T. Rizy
Buildings Technology Center
Energy Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
MATHEMATICAL MODEL
As mentioned previously, the combined operation of a gas
rc 1 1I
Direct-Fired
Desiccant Unit
Indirect-Fired
Desiccant Unit
G,=G;AS-EA
(11)
CT= -P2
p, (12)
k -1
Applying linear analysis method results in -%--
kc- 1 --WC 1 C c -1
Aer APs AP, kc wp Ec v &?
-= -+-
(13) E, c - 1.
CT pz p,
For subsonicflow, the pressurechange at the turbines outlet causesa The changesin GO,Gfl Gr, T,, T,, and W, are assumed to be small.
similar pressurechangeat the turbine inlet: Theseparametersdo not changesignificantly with varying microturbine
backpressureat a given output power setting if the ambient temperature
AP, = AP, doesnot changesignificantly. Then
(14)
2 AGr - AG, AT4 AT, A Wpp
-- z-=0
then G, =-%-g G, =r,=T, wp (20)
where by Equations (9) and (18) and applying linear analysis results in Constant Engine Speed
the following relationship, again after manipulation similar to those to Another series of tests was conductedwhile the microturbine was
obtain Equation (17). maintained at constant engine speedand varying backpressurefor each
nominal power output. Due to the spacelimitations within this article,
Table 3 shows only the results at full power of 30 kW. Figure 4 shows
(23) the effect of turbine backpressureon the microturbineunit. Tables 1 and
2 showed that the engine speed increased with the backpressureto
maintain a constantpower output with identical efficiencies. However,
where the turbine efficiency backpressureeffect (Zl) is at a constant engine speed,the averageturbine efficiency dropped by
less than 2% and the averageturbine power output decreasedby less
/ 1-L than 6% of the values with damper fully open.
kT - 1 CT
ZI=Z-- Estimation of BCHP Overall System Efficiency
kr- (24)
kT Figure 5 shows the exhaust flow rates at various microturbine
&TkT -1 power output levels. These flow rates were calculated from the
measurednatural gas flow rates and excess air. Results show a close
If the changesin T4and Gr are assumedto be small, then agreementbetween the estimatedexhaust gas flow rate and the exhaust
flow rate provided by the microturbine mam&cturer at the full output
AE AP, zI setting of 30-kW. Figure 6 showsthe turbine efficiency (measured)and
--=-
(29 the BCHE system efficiency (calculated via the mathematical model).
E PI The BCHP system efficiency was estimated for the microturbine with
and without a recuperator. The BCHP efficiency with a recuperatoris
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS defined as
Figures7 and 8 show the turbine power output backpressureeffect compressorinlet temperature(T,), air flow (G,), and exhaust gas flow
(Z) and the turbine efficiency backpressureeffect (ZI) as Cmctionsof (Gr) were not constant,they did not changesignificantly (less than 5%)
turbine inlet temperature (TJ and expansion rate (8J for the caseof during these tests. However, the influence of these parameters on
subsonic gas flow. Results show that the dependenceof the turbine Equations (17) and (23) is considerable. In order to f?nd the direct
efficiency on backpressureis not as strong as that of the turbine output dependenceof these parameterson backpressure,the measuredvalues
power. An increasein backpressurewhile other conditions are kept the for these parameterswere used to deducecorrections in Equations (17)
same causes the temperature a&r the turbine to increase and, and (23). Then these correctionswere subtractedfrom measuredvalues
consequently,the air in the recuperator to heat to a higher temperature, of AWp/Wp and AE/E, correspondingly. Thus corrected experimental
which results in a decrease in fuel consumption. In all cases,the data were compared with model calculations based on constant
influence of backpressure decreases with increasing turbine inlet temperaturesand flow rates(Figure 9). Pleasenote that in Figure 9 only
temperature. The dependence of the backpressure effects on the the maximum backpressure was used to illustrate the maximum
expansion rate shows a minimum in the range of 3.5 to 6.0 at the difference between the theory and the measurements for relative
turbine inlet temperatureof 1120 K or 1556F. changesin power and efficiency. As shown, the correctedexperimental
During the experiments, measurements were taken with the and calculated data agree quite well. Further, the data show that the
exhaust backpressure changing Tom 0.3 to 7 in. WC (0.0007 to output power losses (decreasein power output) due to backpressure
0.017 atm) to determine the dependenceofoutput power and efftciency range from 3.5% for full output (30 kW) to 5.5% for one-third power
23
17
16
15
5000 15000 20000 25000
Nomina! Power Demand (W)
output (10 kW), while the efficiency losses (decreasein efficiency) microturbines power demand set at outputs of 30 kW (Ml load) to
range from 2.5 to 4.0%, correspondingly. 10 kW (one-third load) in 5-kW increments. For each power demand
setting, measurements were taken over an entire range of turbine
CONCLUSIONS backpressuresfrom 0..3to 7 in WC(0.0007 to 0.017 atm). In parallel
The BCHP experimentaI setup at ORNLs BTC, consisting of a with the experiments, a BCHP mathematical model was developedto
30-kW microturbine and therma recovery components, was used to describe basic thermodynamic and hydraulic processesin the system,
conduct a seriesof backpressuretests on the microturbine. Tests were heat and material balances,and the relationship of the balancesto the
conducted both with and without backpressureand with the systemconfiguration. The model was used to determine the efficiency
Constant Speed
,:,:.:,:.:.:
,:,;:,:.:,):.:,:,:,:,:,:,:
,:,:,:,:,:.:
:,:.,,,.,,,.
,ii,,i,,,.i
,-,-,,,,_,_,__,,,,,___::::::..:::::
::.1.,:,I,.x,l,:.:.:~.,;1111111::::.,,,,, ,_,,ii,.,.,j_,,,
::::::::_:. ,:,:-:,:,):,:.::,:
i,::,i:.:,:,:,:-,:.:,:,:,:,:,:,,,
::,:,:..;
::::,.,
:,.,,,., ._.. r~~~~~~::::::~:~,T~~~:
.......i....,.,_i___~./,,,.~,~,,,
~.,.,,.,,,.,, :::::.i..:...... :::_9og74 rpm
::;,,;,,,,,;,,~.,:,.,~,~~~~.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.~...:..,..~
:::::::.. -..,..~.,.i,i:~:,:(,:.:,:,:
.
126489 W
28646 W
Base Case
gfJi=J)4 rpm
28064 W
0.31
B
- 0.27
aJ
2g 0.25
ii 6 Air Flow
0.23 A Exhaust Gas Flow
ic
+ Manufacturer Exhaust Flow Data
0.21
0.19 $I, ;,
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Nominal Output Power (kW)
85
75
15
20
Power Output (kW)
Figure 6. Turbine and BCHP overall system efficiencies.
i. 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11
Expansion rate
Figure 7. Turbine power backpressure effect (Z) as functions of turbine inlet temperature and
expansion rate for the case of subsonic gas flow
0
2 6 7 8
Expansion rate
Figure 8. Turbine efficiency backpressure effect (21) as functions of turbine inlet temperature and
expansion rate for the case of subsonic gas flow
0.06
Figure 9. Experimental and calculated relative changes of microturbine output power and efficiency at
maximum relative backpressure as a function of power output
of energy conversion for an individual microturbine unit and for the REFERENCES
entire BCHP systemusing various system configurations and external 1. U.S. Department of Energy 2000, Strategic PIan For Distributed
loads. Linear analysis was used to obtain an analytical relationship Energy Resources, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
between the changesin thermodynamicand hydraulic parametersof the Energy and Office of Fossil Energy, Washington, DC.
BCHP system. Experimental results showed that the average turbine 2. Reid, R. C., Prausnitz, J. M., and Sherwood, T. K., 1977, The
efficiency dropped by less than 2% and the average turbine power Properties of Gasesand Liquids, McGraw-Hill, New York,
output decreasedby less than 6% ofthe values with ckamper~fitlfyopen, 3. Spiewak, S. A., 1987, Cogeneration andSn& Power Production
at a constantengine speed.It was found that the correctedexperimental Manual, Fairmont Press,Libum, Georgia.
and calculated data agree quite well. Further, the data show that the 4. Electric Power ResearchInstitute, 1983, Gas Turbine EvaIuation
output power losses (decreasein power output) due to backpressure (GATE) Computer Program, EPRI Research Project AP-2871-
range fkom 3.5% for 30 kW to 5.5% for 10 kW, while the efficiency CCM, Palo Alto, California.
losses(decreasein efficiency) range from 2.5 to 4.0%, correspondingly. 5. AGARD-LS-198, Mathematical Model of Gas Turbine Engines
and Their Components,1994.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 6. Bejan, k, 1996, Thermal Design and Optimization, John Whey
The authors would like to thank DOE for supporting this work. and Sons,New York.
This work was conducted by ORNL under DOE contract DE-ACOS- 7. McDonald, C. F., Low-Cost Recuperator Concept For
OOOR22725with UT-Battelle, LLC. Microturbine Applications, 2000, in Proceedings of ASME
TURBOEXPO 2000, ASME paper 2000-GT-167, Munich,
Germany.