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

net/publication/267646070

Fuel Gas Conditioning System Modularization and Optimization

Conference Paper · January 2009

DOI: 10.1115/POWER2009-81071

CITATIONS READS
0 89

1 author:

Bradford Kauffman
University of Central Florida
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Bradford Kauffman on 11 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 FUEL GAS CONDITIONING SYSTEM
MODULARIZATION AND OPTIMIZATION
Bradford A. Kauffman
Siemens Energy, Inc.

ABSTRACT

Siemens Energy, Inc. has developed a modular approach that standardizes the components and
configuration of the fuel gas conditioning system, while allowing for customization to meet
site-specific requirements. The intent of this approach is to:
• Lower engineering costs (design only has to be done once)
• Allow for interchangeability (long-lead components purchased for one project can be used
on another project if necessary)
• Simplify installation and commissioning at the site.

In the past, fuel gas conditioning system components have been purchased from various suppliers.
In cooperation with these suppliers we developed a modular fuel gas conditioning system that
would lower engineering costs, standardize design, and allow for interchangeability of
components. The result was the development of three standard fuel gas conditioning systems that
accommodate several combined cycle power plant sites.

Design 1 is for sites that require compression, but no pressure regulation. Design 2 is for sites that
require regulation, but little or no compression. Design 3 is for sites that require both compression
and pressure regulation.

Site specific customization is minimized, since the standard designs encompass most of the
foreseen site conditions. We have developed control technologies to accommodate high
variability in site gas pressures and minimize the impact of pressure spikes.

We also reviewed the optimum placement of the compressor gas cooler. Installing the cooler in
the recycle stream rather than as an aftercooler can reduce capital costs. Additionally, this
configuration improves gas turbine heat rate.

This paper will describe in detail the design of the fuel gas conditioning system, the various
applications, and the benefits to the customer.

OVERVIEW

At Siemens, we have developed a proprietary, fast start combined cycle power plant. We have
several potential clients and possible locations for deploying this plant design. The available fuel
gas pressures at the site boundary vary greatly between these sites:
• Site 1 – 175 to 330 psig
• Site 2 – 175 to 540 psig
• Site 3 – 330 to 540 psig
 • Site 4 – 205 to 825 psig
• Site 5 – 415 to 965 psig
• Site 6 – 275 to 600 psig

Our team was tasked with developing a modular approach that would allow us to standardize the
components and configuration of the fuel gas conditioning system as much as possible, while
allowing for some customization of the system to meet site-specific requirements.

The intent of this approach is to:

• Lower engineering costs, since most of the design work only has to be done once
• Allow for interchangeability of components (long- lead components purchased for one
project can be used on another project if necessary)
• Simplify installation and commissioning by standardizing design on components we have
had good experience with in the past
We particularly want to standardize on a specific reciprocating gas compressor frame which has
been used successfully in several past projects.

There are a number of different components in the fuel gas conditioning system:
• Gas conditioning
• Dew point heater (if required)
• Pressure regulation
• Gas compression
• Unit regulation
• Performance heating
• Metering and filtration

DISCUSSION

In this presentation I will focus on the fuel gas conditioning system components up to and
including the gas compressors:
• Gas conditioning
• Dew point heater (if required)
• Pressure regulation
• Gas compression
Only one potential combined cycle site has the possibility of requiring a dew point heater.

For past U.S. projects these systems have been purchased from four different suppliers. We
decided to take a cooperative approach with our suppliers to develop a modular fuel gas
conditioning system that would lower engineering costs, standardize design, and allow for
interchangeability of components. We began by sharing the background and goals of the project,
and then met together to come up with solutions.

2 Copyright © 2009 Siemens Energy, Inc.

The result was the development of three standard fuel gas conditioning system designs that
accommodate all currently foreseen inlet gas pressure scenarios.

Design 1
For fuel gas pressures at the site boundary from 175 psig to 540 psig:
• Examples: Sites 1, 2 and 3
• Requires gas compression, but no regulation.
• Entire system can be designed for 300# class (full flow relief valve not required).
• Requires three 33% gas compressors for site boundary pressures of 175-274 psig. At and
above 275 psig, only two 50% gas compressors are required.

Fuel gas compressor(s) can be automatically bypassed through the forward flow check valves if
the site boundary pressure is greater than 520 psig for an extended time period, and compressor(s)
will automatically shut down after a time delay. A high inlet pressure alarm would alert a high
pressure condition, since a pressure regulator is not in the fuel gas conditioning system. This
configuration can be used for gas inlet pressures up to 650 psig, which is the design pressure of the
compressors.

The minimum site boundary pressure is based on using a conservative pressure drop of 25 psig
through the gas conditioning equipment and downstream piping. However, when we encounter a
project with a site boundary minimum pressure that is close to the compressor quantity break point
(275 psig), we will consider reducing the gas conditioning and downstream piping pressure drop
by increasing the component size. This will reduce the pressure drop, increase the suction pressure
to the compressor(s), and possibly reduce the quantity of compressors required.

3 Copyright © 2009 Siemens Energy, Inc.

Design 2
For fuel gas pressures at the site boundary from 205 psig to 1480 psig:
• Example: Sites 4 and 5
• Requires regulation and gas compression, and may require a dew point heater (based on
pressure and gas composition).
• Design for 600# class up to regulators, 300# class downstream of regulators (use
worker/monitor arrangement to eliminate the need for a full flow relief valve).
• Requires three 33% gas compressors for site boundary pressures of 205-304 psig.
Requires two 50% gas compressors for site boundary pressures of 305-570 psig.

Fuel gas compressor(s) can be automatically bypassed through the forward flow check valves if
the site boundary pressure is greater than 570 psig for an extended time period, and compressor(s)
will automatically shut down after a time delay.

The minimum site boundary pressure is based on using a conservative pressure drop of 55 psig
through the gas conditioning equipment, dew point heater (if required), worker/monitor pressure
regulation and piping.

Design 3
For fuel gas pressures at the site boundary from 175 psig to 650 psig:
• Examples: Site 6
• Requires regulation and gas compression, but no dew point heater.
• Entire system can be designed for 300# class. Use single regulator for each GT (full flow
relief valve not required).
• Requires three 33% gas compressors for site boundary pressures of 175-274 psig. At and
above 275 psig, only two 50% gas compressors are required.

4 Copyright © 2009 Siemens Energy, Inc.

At site boundary pressures below 175 psig, additional standard compressors are needed to supply
the required flow to the gas turbines. The initial capital and installation cost for these compressors
may not be economically practical for many projects. The alternative is to use a larger compressor
frame than the standard.

Therefore, we have made a decision to use a 175 psig site boundary pressure as the minimum at
which we will consider taking on the fuel gas compression scope. Based on the current projects
now being considered, none have a site boundary pressure less than 175 psig. So we anticipate the
standard compressor design should cover over 95% of the potential projects we will bid.

The maximum working pressure of the gas compressor cylinders is 650 psig (maximum allowable
working pressure is 715 psig), so the regulator bypass configuration in Design 3 can only be
employed up to this inlet pressure. The suction scrubbers and discharge filters are rated at 700 psig
MAWP, so the safety relief valve on the compressor discharge can be set at no more than 675 psig,
and the PLC-based high discharge pressure shutdown on the compressor can be set at no more than
650 psig for safety reasons.

Each compressor has a head end suction valve unloader capacity control system, which
automatically reduces compressor capacity and brake horsepower (bhp) as the suction pressure
increases. This occurs over five incremental steps, down to 50% of the rated compressor flow
(100%, 87.5%, 75%, 62.5%, and 50%). This allows the compressor performance to be fine-tuned,
and reduces the auxiliary load when the actual site boundary pressure is significantly higher than
the minimum design pressure.

In addition to this capacity control on each compressor, there is a PLC-based lead/lag control logic
system linked between multiple compressors, allowing them to automatically start and stop based
on the optimum number of compressors required.

5 Copyright © 2009 Siemens Energy, Inc.

 The fuel gas conditioning system volume downstream of the gas compressors is also reviewed to
determine if one or more gas receivers are required, or if a larger pipe diameter is required. A
properly sized fuel gas conditioning system volume prevents excessive pressure spikes when a gas
turbine sheds load or shuts down unexpectedly. It also allows for more consistent discharge
pressure control with the compressor’s recycle valve, and smoother transitions between load steps
with the compressor head end unloader system.

As part of this study, we also reviewed the optimum placement of the gas cooler. In previous
designs, the compressed gas was sent through an aftercooler to provide a consistent gas
temperature to the combustion turbine. However, new enhancements in combustion turbine
design have improved stability over a wider range of gas temperatures, eliminating this
requirement.

We determined that using the cooler in the recycle stream rather than as an aftercooler resulted in
slightly lower capital costs overall. The increased cost of the downstream filters was more than
offset by the reduced cost of the coolers. Additionally, through Krawal simulation we found that
this configuration improved heat rate significantly, resulting in a net benefit of over $500,000 over
the life of the equipment for low site boundary gas pressures.

SUMMARY

In the past, fuel gas conditioning system components have been purchased from various suppliers.
In cooperation with these suppliers we developed a modular fuel gas conditioning system that:
• Lowers engineering costs
• Allows for interchangeability of components
• Simplifies installation and commissioning
• Allows for customization to meet site-specific conditions
The three standard fuel gas conditioning systems we have developed will accommodate the
majority of our combined cycle power plant sites.

This offers benefits to our customers in terms of lower cost, shorter equipment lead times, and
smoother installation and commissioning, while meeting all site requirements. And because of our
successful track record with the standardized gas system components, our customers can expect
high system reliability and availability.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank the following for their contributions to the development of the
modular systems described in this article: Dave Moss (UE Compression), Doyle Gould (Clark
Reliance), and Bob Bagwell (Neomark Corporation).

6 Copyright © 2009 Siemens Energy, Inc.

View publication stats