Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Available ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Availableonline
onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

The
The 12th
12th International
International Conference
Conference Interdisciplinarity
Interdisciplinarity in
in Engineering
Engineering

Performance
Performance analysis
analysis of of aa gas
gas turbine
turbine combined
combined cycle cycle power
power plant
plant
with
Manufacturing waste heat
Engineering recovery
Society in
International Organic
with waste heat recovery in Organic Rankine Cycle
Conference Rankine
2017, Cycle
MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
2017, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain
a a,
Dan-Teodor
Dan-Teodor Bălănescu
Bălănescua,, Vlad-Mario
Vlad-Mario Homutescu
Homutescua, **
Costing models for capacity optimization in Industry 4.0: Trade-off
0F

0F

a
”Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University of Iasi, Blvd Dimitrie Mangeron no.43, Iasi, 700050, Romania
a
”Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University of Iasi, Blvd Dimitrie Mangeron no.43, Iasi, 700050, Romania
between used capacity and operational efficiency
Abstract
Abstract A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb
Gas-steam combined cycle power systems a
currentlyofare
University the most
Minho, advanced
4800-058 power
Guimarães, systems operating with fossil fuels since offer
Portugal
Gas-steam combined cycle power systems currently are the most advanced
Unochapecó, power systems operating with fossil fuels since offer
the highest efficiency level and lowest pollution.b
Even so,89809-000
amount ofChapecó, SC,
waste heat Brazil
released with flue gas into the atmosphere is still
the highest efficiency level and lowest pollution. Even so, amount of waste heat released with flue gas into the atmosphere is still
significant. A typical way to recover it is heat production but this solution is not viable when there is no heat demand. The
significant. A typical way to recover it is heat production but this solution is not viable when there is no heat demand. The
interest in this case is for production of additional power. A possible solution is to add an organic Rankine cycle unit downstream
interest in this case is for production of additional power. A possible solution is to add an organic Rankine cycle unit downstream
the gas-steam combined cycle power plant, which thus is converted into a gas-steam-organic combined cycle power plant. The
the gas-steam combined cycle power plant, which thus is converted into a gas-steam-organic combined cycle power plant. The
Abstract
performance of such a power system, based on Orenda OGT15000 gas turbine with 16.5 MW output in simple cycle, is analyzed
performance of such a power system, based on Orenda OGT15000 gas turbine with 16.5 MW output in simple cycle, is analyzed
in the paper. Besides, the fuel savings and their cost are assessed. Two organic working fluid were considered, namely R134a and
in the paper.
Under Besides, the
thestudy
concept fuel savings and their cost are assessed. Two will
organic
beworking fluid wereincreasingly
considered, namely R134a and
R123. The showsofthat
"Industry
efficiency4.0",
of theproduction
power plant processes
increases by roughly pushed
1.1 % whento be interconnected,
the ORC unit is added. Taking into
R123. The study
information shows
based on athat efficiency
real time of the
basis and,power plant increases
necessarily, much by roughly
more 1.1 % In
efficient. when the
this ORC unit
context, is added.
capacity Taking into
optimization
account the current concerns regarding the fossil fuel depletion, the estimated fuel savings could be considered significant.
account
goes the current
beyond concerns regarding
the traditional the fossilmaximization,
aim of capacity fuel depletion, the estimated fuel
contributing alsosavings could be considered
for organization’s significant.
profitability and value.
Indeed,
©
© 2018 lean
2019 The
The management
Authors.
Authors. Publishedand continuous
by Elsevier
Elsevier Ltd. improvement approaches suggest capacity optimization instead of
© 2018 The Authors. Published
Published by by Elsevier Ltd.
Ltd.
maximization. The
This is an open access study
articleof capacity
under the CCoptimization and costing
BY-NC-ND license models is an important research topic that deserves
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review
contributions from both under
the responsibility
practical and of the 12th International
theoretical perspectives. Conference
This paper Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
presents and discusses a mathematical
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 12th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
model for capacity management based on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
Keywords: Gas turbine; steam turbine; waste heat recovery; organic Rankine cycle; efficiency
developed and
Keywords: Gas it wassteam
turbine; usedturbine;
to analyze idlerecovery;
waste heat capacityorganic
and toRankine
designcycle;
strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
efficiency
value. The trade-off capacity maximization vs operational efficiency is highlighted and it is shown that capacity
optimization might hide operational inefficiency.
1. Introduction
1. 2017
© Introduction
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
Currently, gas-steam combined cycle power plants are the most efficient and least pollutant units for power
2017.
Currently, gas-steam combined cycle power plants are the most efficient and least pollutant units for power
generation. They could operate with thermal efficiencies up to 60 % [1] and the perspective to reach 61 % is very
generation. They could operate with thermal efficiencies up to 60 % [1] and the perspective to reach 61 % is very
promisingCost
Keywords: [2]. Hence,
Models; gas-steam
ABC; combined
TDABC; Capacity cycle power
Management; plantsOperational
Idle Capacity; representEfficiency
the most
advanced technology for power
promising [2]. Hence, gas-steam combined cycle power plants represent the most advanced technology for power

1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +40-727-372515; fax: +40-232-232337.
* The
Corresponding
cost author.
of idle Tel.: +40-727-372515;
capacity fax: +40-232-232337.
is a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
E-mail address: mariohomutescu@gmail.com
E-mail address: mariohomutescu@gmail.com
in modern production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
in several©ways:
2351-9789 tons
2018 The of production,
Authors. available
Published by Elsevier Ltd.hours of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an Afonso.
* Paulo open access
Tel.:article under
+351 253 510the761;
CC BY-NC-ND
+351 253license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC fax:
BY-NC-ND 604 741
license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection
E-mail and peer-review
address: under responsibility of the 12th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 12th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review
2351-9789 © under
2019responsibility
The Authors. of the scientificbycommittee
Published Elsevier of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 12th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
10.1016/j.promfg.2019.02.248
 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528 521
2 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

generation based on fossil fuels. In typical configuration, a gas-steam combined cycle system consists of a gas
turbine engine (GTE) and a bottoming steam Rankine cycle (SRC) power unit, wherein a part of the waste energy
from the gas turbine exhaust is recovered (in a heat recovery steam generator - HRSG) and converted into additional
power (in a steam turbine). Due to the heat recovery in SRC, the heat rejected into the atmosphere (the waste heat)
decreases significantly. This explains why performance of gas-steam combined cycles power plant are higher than
performance of conventional power systems with gas or steam turbines.
The performances of the Rankine cycle could be improved by using organic fluids instead of steam as working
agent. Thus, the steam Rankine cycle turns into an organic Rankine cycle (ORC). Due to the thermophysical
properties of the organic working fluids, ORC are able to generate power from low temperature sources of heat (in
the range
80 – 300 °C) with higher efficiency than conventional (steam) Rankine cycles [3, 4]. A summary of formulations
and data referring to the most relevant properties of pure fluids and mixtures currently taken into account in studies
on ORC is presented in [5]. Depending on application, the most suitable organic working fluids are selected by
taking into account environmental, technical and safety criteria, as described in [6]. Recommendations for
preliminary assessment of the potential working fluids and ORC configurations are performed in [7]. A comparison
of performances of SRC, ORC and steam-ORC is given in [8].
The development of the ORC technology was increasingly growing after 1970. Currently, the installed capacity is
roughly 2.7 GW [9]. The studies developed so far show that ORC systems have lower sustainability than power
plants generating power from renewable sources (hydro, wind and geothermal) but much higher than power plants
operating with fossil fuels [10].

Nomenclature

AER air excess ratio wST specific work of steam turbine (kJ/kg)
AFRs stoichiometric air-fuel ratio (kg air/kg fuel) wOT specific work of ORC turbine (kJ/kg)
AFS annual fuel saving (Nm3) ΔT pinch point temperature difference (K)
AFSC annual fuel saving cost (Euro) η efficiency – generic notation (%)
FC fuel consumption (Nm3/h) ηhe efficiency of heat exchangers (%)
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg) ηi,c isentropic efficiency of the compressor (%)
HHV higher heating value of natural gas (kJ/Nm3) ηi,gt isentropic efficiency of the gas turbine (%)
LHV lower heating value of natural gas (kJ/Nm3) ηi,st isentropic efficiency of the steam turbine (%)
ṁ mass flow (kg/s) ηi,ot isentropic efficiency of the ORC turbine (%)
p absolute pressure (bar) ηm mechanical efficiency of turbines (%)
P output power (kW) θ fraction of cooling air mass flow
PNG price of natural gas (Euro/MWh) ν pressure loss coefficient
SFC specific fuel consumption (Nm3/kWh) ρf absolute density of natural gas (kg/Nm3)
t, T temperature / absolute temperature (°C) / (K) ς combustion efficiency coefficient
wGT specific useful work of gas turbine (kJ/kg) τ annual operating hours (h)
Subscripts
1g gas turbine exhaust / HRSG inlet flue gas a air, compressor inlet
2g HRSG outlet flue gas / HRB inlet flue gas e HRSG economizer
3g HRB exhaust flue gas g flue gas
1r HRB inlet organic fluid GSCC gas-steam combined cycle unit
2r HRB exhaust organic fluid / ORC turbine inlet GSO CCgas-steam-organic combined cycle power plant
3r ORC turbine exhaust GTE gas turbine engine
4r ORC condenser outlet HRB heat recovery boiler
1s HRSG inlet water HRSG heat recovery steam generator
2s HRSG drum k combustion chamber
3s HRSG outlet steam / steam turbine inlet os organic fluid superheating process
4s extraction steam s HRSG steam superheater
522 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528
Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 3

5s steam turbine exhaust / condenser inlet SRC steam Rankine cycle

There are several applications involving the usage of ORC systems as waste heat recovery units for power
generation: reciprocating internal combustion engines, air conditioning systems, gas turbine engines or other. The
performance of a dual-loop ORC for additional power generation from the waste heat of an engine is analyzed in
[11]. Possibility to recover waste heat from the flue gas of a 900 kW diesel engine in an ORC unit and the usage of
the recovered energy in a hybrid powertrain is studied in [12]. Recovery in an ORC system of the waste heat
discharged into the atmosphere by the condenser of an air-conditioning unit is analyzed in [13]. Carcassci and
Winchler [14] presented a thermodynamic analysis of an ORC cycle connected with an intercooled gas turbine while
Clemente et al [15] studied the possibility to recover the waste heat from the exhaust of a small scale gas turbine, of
100 kWe, in an ORC system. The same recovery solution is analyzed in [16] but for a medium size gas turbine. The
use of ORC as bottoming cycle for medium and large scale power units with gas turbine was analyzed in [17]; six
organic working fluids were considered in the study.
As presented above, both SRC and ORC are currently taken into account for performance enhancement by
generating additional power from waste heat. Aiming to even greater performance, the use of both SRC and ORC as
waste heat recovery systems – not separately but connected – was analyzed in the paper. Thus, SRC is the bottoming
cycle for gas turbine (Brayton) cycle (the typical gas-steam combined cycle configuration) while ORC is the
bottoming cycle for SRC. This configuration corresponds to a gas-steam-organic combined cycle (GSO CC) power
plant.

2. Layout of the analyzed power plant

Configuration of the analyzed GSO CC power plant is presented in Fig. 1. The flue gas exhausted from GTE
passes successively HRSG of SRC unit and the heat recovery boiler (HRB) of ORC unit. The waste heat recovered
in HRSG and HRB is converted into power in the steam turbine of SRC unit and in the expander of ORC unit, which
is an organic fluid turbine. The typical configuration of turbines studied for integration in ORC units is radial, which
is the most convenient for low expansion ratios. Optimization of turbine design is analyzed in [18]. Maksiuta et al.
[19] describes the process of turbine selection in the case of a 3 MW ORC. Results of an experimental study on the
performance of a radial turbine for ORC units are presented in [20]. The tests were performed with air and the
turbine was scaled for operation with R123 on the basis of experimental results.
GSO CC power plant analyzed in the paper is based on Orenda OGT15000 gas turbine engine. Main
specifications of this gas turbine engine, operating in single cycle, are presented in table 1, in accordance to [21, 22].
They are used as reference in the study.

SRC 2g Gas Turbine Engine (GTE)

ST GT - Gas turbine
3s
G2 C - Compressor
5s 2s K - Combustion chamber
4s G1 - Electric generator
HRSG Steam Rankine Cycle (SRC)
HRSG - Heat recovery steam generator
C1 P3 P1…P3 - Pumps
P1 D P2 1s ST - Steam turbine
C1 - Condenser
D - Deaerator
1g
2r G2 - Electric generator
HRB

OFT
K Natural gas Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC)
G3 HRB - Heat recovery boiler
3r OFT - Organic fluid turbine
C2
Flue gas

3g C2 - Condenser
GT C
1r P4 - Pump
G1 4r G3 - Electric generator
GTE Air P4
ORC

Fig. 1. Layout of the gas-steam-organic combined cycle (GSO CC) power plant.
 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528 523
4 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

Table 1. Specifications of Orenda OGT15000 gas turbine. Table 2. Characteristics of natural gas.
Parameter Value Parameter Unit Value
Pressure ratio - 20 CH4 + C2H6 + C3H8 % 95.24 + 2 + 0.7
Turbine inlet temperature K 1348 N2 % 2.06
Exhaust gas mass flow kg/s 71 LHV kJ/Nm3 34240
3
Exhaust temperature K 693 HHV kJ/Nm 38007
Output kW 16500 ARFs kg of air/kg of fuel 16.72
3
Efficiency % 34.2 ρf, kg/Nm 0.711

The study was performed considering natural gas as fuel. Volumetric composition and characteristic parameters
of natural gas are indicated in table 2.

3. Method of analysis

In order to perform the analysis, the specific enthalpy and temperature of flue gas in the main points of GSO CC
should be determined. The fuel consumption of GTE should also be known. In this regard, the thermodynamic
analysis of GTE was performed; thermal processes, parameters of flue gas and performance indicators of GTE were
calculated. For validation of the calculation procedure, the calculated values of the exhaust gas mass flow, exhaust
temperature, output and efficiency of GTE in simple cycle mode were confronted with the values in table 1.
Specific heats at constant pressure were calculated with polynomial equations of five degree. Exhaust flue gas
mass flow and performance parameters of GTE – output, in kW, fuel consumption, in Nm3/h, and efficiency – were
calculated with the following formulas, which are typical for gas turbine engines with unidimensional flow (the
hypothesis of unidimensional flow is the fair assumption in the studied case):

 1 
m 1 g = m a ⋅ (1 − θ ) ⋅ 1 + ; (1)
 AER ⋅ AFRs 

ηm  1 
PGTE
= ⋅ m a ⋅ wGT ⋅ (1 − θ ) ⋅ 1 + ; (2)
100  AER ⋅ AFRs 

(1 − θ )
FC= 3600 ⋅ m a ⋅ ; (3)
AER ⋅ AFRs ⋅ ρ f

PGTE
ηGTE
= 100 ⋅ . (4)
 FC 
LHV ⋅  
 3600 

Calculation were made by considering the pressure ratio and turbine inlet temperature from table 1 as well as the
parameters in table 3. The calculated parameters are indicated in table 4. Due to the good agreement of the calculated
parameters of Orenda OGT15000 GTE with specifications in table 1, the procedure for GTE processes and
performance calculation was considered valid.
In the next step of the study, the output, efficiency and fuel consumption of GTE were recalculated with formulas
(2), (3) and (4) for GTE operation in combined cycle mode; the supplemental flue gas pressure drops caused by
HRSG and HRB passing were taken into account in this case. The performance parameters of SRC unit (output and
efficiency) and gas-steam combined cycle unit (output, efficiency and specific fuel consumption), were also
calculated as
524 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528
Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 5

Table 3. Parameters used in calculations. Table 4. Calculated parameters of OGT15000 GTE.

Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value
ṁa kg/s 70.82 AER - 4.30
ηi,c % 88 ṁg kg/s 71.09
ηi,gt % 91 T1g K 695
ηm % 99 PGTE kW 16490
ς - 0.99 ηGTE % 34.38
3
θ - 0.01 FC Nm /h 5043.74

ηm η
PSTU = ⋅  m 3 s ⋅ ( h3 s − h5 s ) − m 4 s ⋅ ( h4 s − h5 s )  = m ⋅  m 3 s ⋅ wST − m 4 s ⋅ ( h4 s − h5 s )  ; (5)
100 100

PSTU
η STU
= 100 ⋅ ; (6)
m 1g ⋅ ( h1g − h2 g )

= PGTE + PSTU ;
PGSCC (7)

PGSCC
ηGSCC
= 100 ⋅ ; (8)
 FC 
LHV ⋅  
 3600 

FC
SFCGSCC = . (9)
PGSCC

Subscripts 3s, 4s and 5s in formula (5) as well as subscripts 1g and 2g in formula (6) are correlated with the
points marked in Fig. 1. Steam mass flow ṁ2s, and flue gas temperature T2g, are obtained from the thermal balance of
HRSG. Extraction steam mass flow, ṁ3s, is obtained from the thermal balance of the deaerator. The parameters of
the gas-steam combined cycle unit and of its two components – GTE and SRC unit – were calculated with the
dedicated code BINAR.
For the ORC unit, the output, in kW, and efficiency, in %, were calculated as

ηm η
PORC = ⋅ m 2 r ⋅ ( h2 r − h3r ) = m ⋅ m 2 r ⋅ wOT ; (10)
100 100

PORC ηhe ⋅ PORC

ηORC =
100 ⋅ = . (11)
m 1g ⋅ ( h2 g − h3 g ) m 1r ⋅ ( h2 r − h1r )

Analysis of ORC was performed for two cases: R134a was considered the working fluid in ORC cycle in one
case and R123 in the other. Thermodynamic parameters of the two organic fluids were determined by using
SOLKANE v.8 software.
The performance indicators of GSO CC, namely output, in kW, efficiency, in %, and specific fuel consumption,
in Nm3/kWh, were calculated with formulas

PGSO
= CC
PGSCC + PORC ; (12)
 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528 525
6 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

PGSO CC
ηGSO= 100 ⋅ ; (13)
 FC 
CC

LHV ⋅  
 3600 

FC
SFCGSO CC = . (14)
PGSO CC

Annual fuel saving due to the ORC unit implementation, in Nm3, can be expressed as

AFS
= ( SFC GSCC
− SFCGSO CC ) ⋅ PGSCC ⋅τ , (15)

where τ is the number of annual operating hours.

This fuel saving leads to the annual fuel saving cost

AFS ⋅ HHV
AFSC = ⋅ PNG , (16)
3.6 ⋅106

expressed in Euro, where PNG is the price of natural gas for industrial consumers in Romania, in Euro/MWh; its
value is indicated in table 5 and was accounted in May 2018. The factor 3.6 · 106 is used for conversion from kJ to
MWh.

4. Results and discussions

The analysis of the performance of GSO CC power plant was performed by using in calculations the parameters
from table 5 in addition to parameters of GTE from table 3.

Table 5. Parameters assumed for the performance analysis of GSO CC power plant.
Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value
νHRSG, νHRB - 0.99 p4s bar 1.2 t3g °C 90
νe, νs - 0.95 p5s bar 0.05 t4r °C 33
νos - 0.98 ηi,st % 87 p2r (R134a / R123) bar 35 / 8
t1s °C 100 ηi,ot % 79 t2r °C 120
p3s bar 15.7 ηhe % 97 τ h 8160
t3s °C 320 ΔTHRSG K 25 PNG Euro/MWh 27.36

The results of analysis of GTE, SRC unit and gas-steam combined cycle unit are presented in table 6 while the
results of analysis of ORC unit and GSO CC power plant are presented in table 7.

Table 6. Calculated parameters of GTE, SRC unit and gas-steam combined cycle unit
Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value
3
T1g (t1g) K (°C) 699 (426) wST kJ/kg 833 FC Nm /h 5047.4
T2g (t2g) K (°C) 461 (188) ṁ2s kg/s 6.19 SFCGSCC Nm3/kWh 0.239
wGT kJ/kg 230.3 ṁ3s kg/s 0.698 PGSCC kW 21089
PGTE kW 16205 PSTU kW 4884 ηGSCC % 44.37
ηGTE % 34.10 ηSTU % 28.78
526 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528
Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 7

Table 7. Calculated parameters of ORC unit and GSO CC power plant.

Value Value
Parameter Unit Parameter Unit
R134a R123 R134a R123
t3r °C 64 73 SFCGSO CC Nm3/kWh 0.239 0.239
p4r bar 8.39 1.23 PGSO CC kW 21830 21871
wOT kJ/kg 26.03 26.92 ηORC % 10.98 11.59
ṁ1r = ṁ2r kg/s 28.75 29.33 ηGSO CC % 45.47 45.56
ΔTHRB K 42 21 AFS Nm3 56068 57197
PORC kW 741 782 AFSC Euro 16195 16521

It can be seen from table 4 and table 6 that GTE operation in combined cycle mode leads to a reduction of GTE
output of 285 kW (16205 kW versus 16490 kW) and a reduction of GTE efficiency of 0.28 % (34.10 % versus 34.38
%). These reductions are caused by the supplemental flue gas pressure loss in HRSG. But the benefit of operation in
combined cycle mode is significant: the steam turbine produces an additional output power of 4884 kW by
recovering GTE waste energy in SRC unit. Hence, 10.27 % are added to GTE efficiency (efficiency of gas steam
combined cycle unit is 44.37 % while efficiency of GTE is 34.10 %) due to the SRC unit.
Comparing the efficiency and specific fuel consumption of GSO CC power plant (in table 6) with efficiency and
specific fuel consumption of the gas-steam combined cycle unit (in table 7), one can see that addition of the ORC
unit downstream the SRC unit does not improve significantly the overall performance of the power system. Thus, the
influence of ORC use over SFC cannot be noticed whether SFC value is rounded to three decimals. ORC unit
contribution in overall efficiency of GSO CC power plant is only 1.10 % when R134a is used as organic working
fluid (45.47 % with ORC unit versus 44.37 % without ORC unit) and 1.19 % when R123 is the working fluid (45.56
% with ORC unit versus 44.37 % without ORC unit). In the first case (R134a), ORC unit produces 741 kW and has
an efficiency of 10.98 % while in the second case (R123), output and efficiency of ORC unit are 782 kW and 10.98
%, respectively; the contributions of GTE, STU and ORC in overall output of GSO CC power plant are shown in
Fig. 2. It can be observed that differences between the results obtained in the two cases – one corresponding to
R134a organic working fluid and the other to R123 – are insignificant. The efficiency of the ORC unit is low (less
than 11 % in both cases) because of the low temperature difference in the cycle – highest temperature is
t2r = 120 °C and lowest temperature is t4r = 33 °C, so the temperature difference is 87 K.
In spite of the low contribution to the improvement of the overall efficiency of the power system, the adding of
the ORC unit to the gas-steam combined cycle unit (downstream the SRC unit) should be considered of interest
since 741 / 782 kW are produced from waste heat, as recovered energy. Due to this fact, 56068 / 57195 Nm3 of
natural gas are saved in one year (as indicated by AFS values in table 7), which means an economy of 16195 / 16521
Euro (as indicated by AFSC values). In this approach, the use of ORC unit is not only of interest but even attractive.
Obviously, the viability of the analyzed power system could be decided only by detailed technical economic studies
that should be performed in the next step of the research on gas-steam-organic combined cycle power plants.

PORC = 741 kW PORC = 782 kW

PSTU = 4884 kW PSTU = 4884 kW

a) PGTE = 16205 kW b) PGTE = 16205 kW

Fig. 2. (a) output distribution in GSO CC power plant with R134a; (b) output distribution in GSO CC power plant with R123.
 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528 527
8 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

5. Conclusions

The study indicates a temperature of 188 °C for the flue gas released by the gas-steam combined cycle unit – the
heat source of the analyzed ORC unit. Validity of the calculation procedure for the flue gas parameters was
confirmed by the good agreement between specifications of the Orenda OGT1500 gas turbine engine and the
calculated performance parameters.
As consequence of the low temperature of the heat source, the ORC unit operates with a reduced working fluid
temperature difference, of 87 K (120 °C on the turbine inlet and 33°C in condenser). Therefore, the efficiency of the
ORC cycle is less than 11 % in both analyzed cases – with R134a organic working fluid and with R123,
respectively. The performances of ORC cycle are quasi similar in the two cases.
The adding of the ORC unit downstream the gas-steam combined cycle unit increases the overall efficiency of the
power plant by 1.10 % in the first analyzed case (with R134a as working fluid) and by 1.19 % in the second case
(with R123 as working fluid).
The output power of ORC is 741 kW when the working fluid is R134a and 782 kW when the working fluid is
R123. This leads to annual fuel savings of roughly 56000 Nm3 of natural gas in the first case and 57000 Nm3 in the
second case. The associated fuel savings costs are roughly 16000 Euro and 16500 Euro, respectively. This
recommends the analyzed waste heat recovery solution as an attractive one. In order to establish the viability of this
solution, detailed technical economic studies are mandatory.

Acknowledgements

This work was partly supported by the project POSCCE-A2-O2.2.1-2009-4-ENERED, ID nr. 911, co-financed
by the European Social Fund within the Sectoral Operational Program “Increase of Economic Competitiveness”.

References

[1] M. Valenti, Reaching for 60 Percent, Mechanical Engineering 124 (4) (2002) 35–39.
[2] D. Robb, CCGT: Breaking the 60 per cent efficiency barrier, Power Engineering International 18 (3) (2010) 28–32.
[3] G. Gyorke, U.K. Deiters, A. Groniewsky, I. Lassu, A.R. Imre, Novel Clasiffication of Pure Working Fluids for Organic Rankine Cycle,
Energy
145 (2018) 288-300.
[4] Y. Cao, Y. Gao, Y. Zheng, Y. Dai, Optimum Design and Thermodynamic Analysis of a Gas Turbine and ORC Combined Cycle with
Recuperators, Energy Conversion and Management 116 2 (2016) 32-41.
[5] E. Macchi, M. Astolfi, Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Power Systems: Technologies and Applications, Woodhead Publishing, United
Kingdom, 2016 (Chapters 4 and 5).
[6] H. Pop, V. Apostol, V. Badescu, M.H.K. Aboaltabooq, T. Prisecaru, E. Pop, M. Prisecaru, D. Taban 2018 Working fluid selection procedure
for ORC-based systems coupled with internal combustion engines driving electrical generators, in: Proceedings of the 8th International
Conference on Advanced Concepts in Mechanical Engineering – ACME 2018, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (In
press)
[7] A. Uusitalo, J. Honkatukia, Teemu Turunen-Saaresti, A. Gronman, Thermodynamic evaluation of the effect of working fluid type and fluids
critical properties on design and performance of Organic Rankine cycles, Journal of Cleaner Production 188 (2018) 253-263.
[8] X. Zhang, L. Wu, X. Wang, G. Ju, Comparative study of waste heat steam SRC, ORC and S-ORC power generation systems in medium-low
temperature, Applied Thermal Engineering 106 (2016) 1427-1439.
[9] T. Tartiere, M. Astolfi, A World Overview of the Organic Rankine Cycle Market, in: Proceedings of the IV International Seminar on ORC
Power Systems – ORC2017, Milano, Italy, September 13-15, 2017, Energy Procedia 129 (2017) 2-9.
[10] H. Zhang, X. Guan, Y. Ding, C. Liu, Emergy Analysis of Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) for Waste Heat Power Generation, Journal of
Cleaner
Production 183 2 (2018) 1207-1215.
[11] H. Huang, J. Zhu, W. Deng, T. Ouyang, B. Yan, X. Yang, Influence of Exaust Heat Distribution on the Performance of Dual-loop Organic
Rankine Cycles (DORC) for Engine Waste heat Recovery, Energy 151 2 (2018) 54-65.
[12] N. Lummen, E. Nygard, P.E. Koch, L.M. Nerheim, Comparison of Organic Rankine Cycle concepts for Recovering Waste Heat in a Hybryd
powertrain on a Fast Passanger Ferry, Energy Conversion and Management 163 (2018) 371-383.
[13] M. Asim, M.K.H. Leung, Z. Shan, Y. Li, D.Y.C. Leung, M. Ni, Thermodynamic and Thermo-economic Analysis of Integrated Organic
Rankine Cycle for Waste Heat Recovery from Vapor Compression Refrigeration Cycle, in: Proceedings of the World Engineers Summit –
528 Dan-Teodor Bălănescu et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 32 (2019) 520–528
Dan-Teodor Bălănescu and Vlad-Mario Homutescu / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 9

Applied Energy Symposium & Forum: Low Carbon Cities & Urban Energy Joint Conference – WES-CUE 2017, Singapore, July 19-21,
2017,
Energy Procedia 143 (2017) 192-198.
[14] C. Carcasci, L. Winchler, Thermodynamic analysis of an Organic Rankine Cycle for waste heat recovery from an aeroderivative intercooled
gas turbine, in: Proceedings of the 71st Conference of the Italian Thermal Machines Engineering Association – ATI2016, Turin, Italy,
September
14-16, 2016, Energy Procedia 101 (2016) 862-869.
[15] S. Clemente, D. Micheli, M. Reini, R. Taccani, Bottoming organic Rankine cycle for a small scale gas turbine: A comparison of different
solutions, Applied Energy 106 (2013) 355-364.
[16] C. Carcasci, R. Ferraro, Thermodynamic Optimization and Off-design Performance Analysis of a Toluene Based Rankine Cycle for Waste Heat
Recovery from Medium Size Gas Turbines, in: Proceedings of ASME Gas Turbine India Conference, Mumbai, India, December 1 (2012) 761-772.
[17] R.Chacartegui, D. Sanchez, J.M. Munoz, T. Sanchez, Alternative ORC Bottoming Cycles for Combined Cycle Power Plants, Applied
Energy
86 10 (2009) 2162-2170.
[18] B. Dong, G. Xu, T. Li, X. Luo, Y. Quan, Parametric Analysis of Organic Rankine Cycle Based on a Radial Turbine for Low-grade Waste
Heat
Recovery, Applied Thermal Engineering 126 (2017) 470-479.
[19] D. Maksiuta, L. Moroz, M. Burlaka, Y. Govoruschenko, Study on Applicability of Radial-Outflow Turbine Type for 3 MW WHR Organic
Rankine Cycle, in: Proceedings of the 4th International Seminar on ORC Power Systems – ORC2017, Milano, Italy, September 13-15, 2017,
Energy Procedia 129 (2017) 293-300.
[20] B. Ssebabi, R.T. Dobson, A.B. Sebitosi, Characterising a Turbine for Application in an Organic Rankine Cycle, Energy 93 2 (2015) 1617-
1632.
[21] ***, 2014 GTW Simple Cycle Specs, Gas Turbine World – 2014 Performance Specs, 44 1 (2014) 6-15.
[22] ***, Gas Turbine Technical Data, Power Engineering International, April issue (2012) 34-42.