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

net/publication/300004989

Linearized Transfer Function Model of Industrial Heavy Duty Gas Turbine

Plants

Conference Paper · March 2016

CITATIONS READS

2 3,248

3 authors, including:

Mohamed mustafa Mohamed iqbal Venkatesan Vijaya

PSG Institute of Technology and Applied Research Coimbatore Sri Ramakrishna Institute of Technology
35 PUBLICATIONS 121 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 6 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed mustafa Mohamed iqbal on 08 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)

Linearized Transfer Function Model of Industrial

Heavy Duty Gas Turbine Plants
Sarumathi S, Mohamed Iqbal M, Venkatesan V
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Sri Ramakrishna Institute of Technology
Coimbatore, Tamilnadu, India
E-mail ID: sarusumathi@gmail.com
Abstract—Electrical power generation from renewable source
such as solar, wind, biomass is emerged because of rapid
depletion of fossil fuel. In grid connected operation gas turbine
generators play a vital role in grid connected system for electric
power generation. Due to the severe load fluctuation and set point
variation in grid connected operation, stability of the heavy duty
gas turbine power plant is affected. Secondary controllers are
required to eliminate the steady state error and improve the
system response. Synthesis and analysis of controllers for higher
order system like heavy duty gas turbine in real time
environment would be tedious and expensive. Therefore an
attempt has been made in this paper to identify an equivalent
transfer function model, which would be very suitable for real
time analysis of the industrial gas turbine plant. The step
response of the linearized transfer function model of various
industrial gas turbine plants are being compared with that of the
MATLAB/Simulink model, based on time domain specifications
and performance index criteria. It is witnessed that the linearized
transfer function model developed in this paper retains the
original characteristics of the industrial heavy duty gas turbine
plants. The linearized identified in this paper will reduce the
hardware complexity and founds suitable for analysing the
controller response in real time environment.
Keywords—Industrial heavy duty gas turbine; linearized transfer
function model; MATLAB/simulink; time domain specifications;
performance index criteria
I. INTRODUCTION
In the current scenario there is a rapid depletion in fossil
fuel that makes fossil fuel as an unreliable source. There are
other adverse issues like climatic change, increasing
concentration of CO2 emissions inevitably lead to the
promotion of renewable energy sources. Renewable energy
sources such as solar, wind and biomass play a vital role in
extraction of electrical energy. India has enough opportunity
of harnessing power from renewable sources. The cumulative
achievement of grid interactive and off grid interactive
renewable source in India is about 37413.70MW and
1219.61MW respectively as on 30.09.2015 [1]. Gas turbine
becomes the main traces for power generation due to their long
life and fuel flexibility [2]. Specific requirement of gas
composition and tar concentration in biomass is required for
the successful generation of electricity using gas turbine [3].
Hence biomass plant makes the feasible option for meeting the
current energy demand.
Rowen proposed a simplified mathematical representation
of Heavy Duty Gas Turbine (HDGT) plants with capacities
ranging from 18.2 MW to 106.7MW capacity [4]. The
dynamic behaviour of gas turbine plant was analysed and
model parameters were identified with the available
operational and performance data [5]-[7]. It is witnessed that
the transient behaviour should be predicted in advance for the
safe and reliable operation of the system. Droop governor was
found to be suitable for the grid connected operation of the gas
turbine plant [8]. Basic parameters required for gas turbine
plant is identified and presented in [9],[10]. The model of the
gas turbine plant had been validated using field test, based on
the ambient temperature and frequency dependency of the
turbine power [11].
The dynamic models of various HDGT plants were
analysed for combined cycle operation [12]- [15]. Based on
the field survey on 84 biomass gasifier power plants in
Tamilnadu, India, it was identified that an inefficient control
has influenced the operation of the plants [16]-[17]. Hence,
Stability becomes the main concern in the grid connected
operation of the power plant [18], [19]. Gas turbine plant may
cause severe instability problems under load fluctuation and
may lead to an inevitable plant shut down. Due to severe load
fluctuation and set point variation, it was found that the gas
turbine speed does not reach the desired response and more
steady state error prevails in the system even with the presence
of speed governor control. Therefore the Secondary controllers
such as Proportional- Integral – Derivative (PID) and soft
computing controllers are required to reduce the steady state
error. Many researchers had attempted to develop various
controllers for gas turbine plant and analysed the response
[20]-[23]. Therefore the higher order transfer function should
be simplified based on the mathematical approaches to reduce
the hardware complexity [24]. In order to realize the behaviour
of higher order industrial HDGT and analyse its response with
controllers, Linearized Transfer Function Model (LTFM) has
been identified and presented in this paper.
II. MODELING OF INDUSTRIAL HEAVY DUTY
GAS TURBINE
Rowen developed the mathematical model of HDGT plant
in the year 1983 [4]. Figure 1 represents the functional block
diagram for a single shaft HDGT with the fuel system and
controllers. Speed controller, temperature controller and

978-1-4673-8207-6 542 Volume-7

 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)

acceleration controller are the primary controllers of HDGT ( )

= (2)
( )
model. Model parameters of HDGT with Controller
parameters are mentioned in Table A.1. These three controllers ( )
are input to Low Value Selector (LVS). Fuel system actuator = (3)
( )
and valve positioner are the function block of fuel system
dynamics. Gas turbine includes combustor delay and torque Torque is also the linear function of parameters such as
function. lower limit of fuel flow (Wfl) and rated speed (Nrated) of the
Temperature Error
turbine as given in Equation 4. Actual speed of the gas turbine
is determined by the rotor time constant (T1).
Temperature
controller 2 = 1.3 − + 0.5 ( − ) (4)

Fuel supply signal (Wfl) and turbine speed (N) are linear
Speed
Fuel Gas
Turbine
function of the exhaust temperature of the gas turbine as given
LVS System
Governor dynamics dynamics in Equation 5. The transfer function model of temperature
Speed controller is shown in Fig. 3. Using thermocouple and
Error Turbine radiation shield the exhaust temperature of the gas turbine is
Acceleration Torque
controller measured and compared with reference temperature. The
temperature is compared with respect to rated value and error
Acceleration error
is given to the temperature controller. The temperature
controller becomes active when the error value exceeds the
temperature set point.
Fig. 1. Functional block diagram of single shaft HDGT

Speed governor controlling modes are either of droop or 1= = − 700 1 − + 550 (1 − ) (5)
isochronous control which works under part load condition.
To
Transfer function of speed controller is shown in Fig. 2. In LVS
case of droop governor the output is proportional to error in F1 K +
k 1 - +1
T s+1 +1
speed and for isochronous control the rate of change of output
is proportional to error in speed. The speed deviation from the N
Thermo +
reference speed (Nr) and actual speed (N) drives the speed Radiation
couple Temperature
shield
governor whose transfer function model is given in Equation Reference
controller
1. temperature

Fig. 3. Transfer function model of Temperature controller

Ref.
speed
The acceleration controller is used to limit the rate of rotor
( + 1) acceleration during start up. Gas turbine speed is the input
+ signal to the acceleration control. To reduce the fuel flow and
+ To LVS limit the tendency to over speed acceleration controllers are
- used during normal operation. The speed gets differentiated to
Speed
governor obtain the value of acceleration and compared with the
Speed reference value. The error in acceleration is given to the
acceleration controller. The block diagram of acceleration
controller loop as shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 2. Transfer function model of Speed controller
Differentiator

( ) ( ) To LVS
= (1) - 100
( ) s
Speed
Based on the fuel demand signal (Wd), the gas turbine fuel +
system generates the fuel supply signal (Wf). The fuel system Acceleration
is associated with two components namely valve positioner Reference controller
and fuel system actuator whose transfer function models are acceleration
given in Equation 2 and 3. The torque characteristics of the gas
turbine are linear with respect to fuel supply signal (Wf) and Fig. 4. Transfer function model of acceleration controller
turbine speed (N) as given in Equation 4.

978-1-4673-8207-6 543 Volume-7

 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)

The output of these three controllers is given to the input of rate under no load condition ( ), load torque ( ), fuel
Low Value Select. The output of LVS is minimum of three flow lower limit ( ), and rated speed signal ( ) are
inputs from the controllers. Necessary control action is taken considered and the transfer functions for Unit I are obtained as
accordingly from the output of LVS. expressed in Equations from 6 to 10 respectively
III. SIMPLIFIED MODEL OF HEAVY DUTY GAS ( )
TURBINE PLANT (s) = = (6)
( ) . .

The transfer function model of HDGT plant has been ( ) . .

identified by Rowen in 1983 [1]. Speed temperature and (s) = = (7)
( ) . .
acceleration are the primary controllers for the gas turbine
plant. The acceleration controller will be active only during ( ) . . . .
(s) = = (8)
starting and heavy load disturbance. The acceleration ( ) . .
controller can be neglected when the frequency variation is not
greater than ±1 percentage. Gas turbines are predominantly ( ) . . . .
(s) = = (9)
( ) . .
controlled by the set point, and the controller will take control
action only when the exhaust temperature exceeds the limit.
( ) . . . .
Therefore the speed controller is then considered to be the (s) = = (10)
( ) . .
predominant controller over acceleration and temperature
controllers.
Based on the response, the simplified model of gas turbine
Similarly, the LTFM for Unit II, Unit III, Unit IV can be
was identified as shown in Fig. 5. The model parameters of
found with the same procedure as mentioned above then the
field test parameter based HDGT plants have been furnished in
Linearized Transfer Function Model (LTFM) of 5001M field
Table A.1.
test parameter based HDGT has been obtained by
superposition and expressed in Equations from 11 to 14. The
details of various gas turbine plants are shown in Table A.2.
+ Valve
Speed Positioner
Governor
+ . . . .
e + ( )= (11)
. .
1
( + ) 1-wmin +
+
. . . .
( )= (12)
- Load torque . . .
- (TL)
. . . .
1 ( )= (13)
F2 . . .
+1
N + . . . .
Rotor Turbine
Fuel
( ) = (14)
Dynamics Dynamics . . . .
System

By using LTFM of the HDGT plants, the step response

have been obtained and compared with that of the respective
Fig. 5. Simplified transfer function model of HDGT plant Simulink model (SM). Various time domain specifications
namely rise time ( ), Maximum peak overshoot ( ),
Development of controllers and analysing the response in Settling time ( ) and Steady state error ( ) and performance
real time environment would be tedious and expensive for index criteria such as Integral of time multiplied with Absolute
higher order systems like HDGT plants. Therefore the LTFM Error ( ), Integral of Absolute Error ( ), Integral of
is identified using linearization principle to reduce the Squared Error ( ), and Integral of Time multiplied with
hardware complexity and realizing the performance of real
Squared Error ( ) as given in Equations from 15 to 18 are
time system as presented in section IV.
also obtained during simulation results. The simulation results
IV. LINEARIZED MODEL OF HEAVY DUTY GAS are compared as discussed in Section V.
TURBINE PLANT
= | | (15)
The higher order transfer function needs to be linearized
such that it retains the original characteristics of the system, = | | (16)
since most of the real time system leads to higher order
transfer function which makes analysis and development of = | | (17)
I
controllers as the complex one.
By the linearization procedure the superposition of transfer
I = | | (18)
function is obtained for various input signal against the output
signal. Input signals namely reference speed ( ), fuel flow

978-1-4673-8207-6 544 Volume-7

 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

SM
The step response of LTFM and SM of various field test 1 LTFM
parameter based HDGT plant have been obtained using
0.8
MATLAB for an unit step disturbance. The total simulation

S p e e d in p .u
time is upto 10 second. The settling time is obtained for 5% 0.6
tolerance in steady state value. The step response of various 0.4
field test parameter based have been obtained for Unit I, II, III
and IV with LTFM and SM as shown from Fig. 6 to 9 0.2

respectively. 0

1.2 -0.2
SM 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 LTFM Time in sec
Fig. 9. Step response of Unit IV using SM and LTFM
0.8
The time domain specification as mentioned in section 4
S p e e d in p .u

0.6
are obtained from the step responses and presented in Table I.
0.4 The performance index criteria as formulated in Equation from
0.2 15 to 18 are obtained during simulation and shown in Table II.
0
TABLE I. TIME DOMAIN SPECIFICATIONS OF SM AND LTFM
-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Time domain Specifications
Time in sec

Fig. 6. Step response of Unit I using SM and LTFM Units

System
considered
Mp Tr Ts Ess

SM (p.u) (sec) (sec) (p.u)

LTFM
1 SM 0.0034 1.4419 1.2805 0.037
Unit- I
0.8 LTFM 0.0038 1.4412 1.2800 0.037
S p e e d in p .u

0.6 SM 0.1486 2.1945 5.177 0.0429

Unit –II
0.4 LTFM 0.1483 2.1949 5.179 0.0426

0.2 SM 0.1170 1.3079 3.0642 0.0222

Unit - III
0 LTFM 0.1172 1.3002 3.0552 0.0219

SM 0.0069 2.937 2.2005 0.034

-0.2 Unit - IV
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LTFM 0.0069 2.931 2.2042 0.034
Time in sec

Fig. 7. Step response of Unit II using SM and LTFM TABLE II. PERFORMANCE INDICES OF SM AND LTFM

Performance indices
SM
LTFM Units
1 System
considered

0.8
S p e e d in p .u

0.6 SM 0.5066 0.9645 0.2144 2.041

Unit- I
LTFM 0.5062 0.9643 0.2146 2.041
0.4
SM 0.829 1.605 0.6034 3.445
0.2 Unit - II
LTFM 0.829 1.645 0.6037 3.452
0
SM 0.4977 0.9524 0.1965 1.551
-0.2 Unit - III
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LTFM 0.4970 0.9512 0.1962 1.554
Time in sec
SM 0.7021 1.151 0.3451 1.675
Fig. 8. Step response of Unit III using SM and LTFM Unit - IV
LTFM 0.7028 1.155 0.3451 1.670

978-1-4673-8207-6 545 Volume-7

 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)
On analysing the time domain specifications, the settling
time of LTFM is found to be almost same as that of SM. The
steady state error by both the LTFM and SM are also found to
be same. The dynamic responses in terms of and are
also same for both LTFM and SM. Further the performance
indices namely , , , of LTFM mimics the
SM. It is witnessed that the LTFM retains the original
characteristics for industrial HDGT plant and suitable for
realizing the performance in real time environment.
VI. CONCLUSION
In order to reduce the complexity of controller
development and analysis of higher order HDGT plants, an
attempt has been made in this paper to identify the LTFM of
various industrial HDGT based on the field test parameter.
LTFM has been identified by linearization concept using
MATLAB. The time domain specifications namely maximum
peak overshoot, rise time, settling time and steady state error
of the LTFM are found to be almost same as that of the higher
order response. Further the responses have been validated
using performance indices. It is witnessed from the simulation
results that the LTFM developed in this paper retains the
original characteristics of the industrial HDGT plants. The
LTFM proposed in this paper are suitable for controller
development and real time performance analysis of the HDGT
plants.
REFERENCES
[1] Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India.
Available online at http://www.mnre.gov.in
[2] Mohammad Reza Bank Tavakoli, Behroozvahidi and Wolfgang
Gawlik, “ An educational guide to extract the parameters of
heavy duty gas turbines model in dynamic studies based on
operational data”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 24,
no. 3, pp. 1366-1374, 2009.
[3] Mohammad Asadullah, “Barriers of commercial power
generation using biomass gasification gas, Renewable and
sustainable Energy Reviews”, pp. 201-215, 2013.
[4] W.I. Rowen, “Simplified mathematical representations of heavy-
duty gas turbines”, Journal of Engineering for Power, vol. 105,
pp. 865-869, 1983.
[5] L.M. Hajagos and G.R. Berube, “Utility experience with gas
turbine testing and modelling”, IEEE transactions on power
systems, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 671-677, 2001.
[6] L.N. Hannett and AfzalKhan, “Combustion turbine dynamic
model validation from tests”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 152-158, 1993.
[7] J.H. Kim, T.W. Song, T.S. Kim and S.T. Ro, “Model
development and simulation of transient behavior of heavy duty
gas turbines”. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and
Power, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 589-594, 2001.
[8] S. Balamurugan and R. Joseph Xavier, “Selection of governor
for heavy duty gas turbine power plant”, In National Conference
on Modern trends in Electrical and Instrumentation system, , pp.
365-371, 2005
978-1-4673-8207-6
[9] Hamid Asgari, XiaoQi Chen and RaaZeshSainudiin,
“Considerations in modelling and control of gas turbines—a
review”, International Conference on Computer Intelligence and
Application, pp. 84-89, 2011.
[10] Qusai Z. AI- Hamdan and MunZer S.Y. Ebaid, “Modeling and
simulation of a gas turbine engine for power generation”, Journal
of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, vol. 128, no. 2, pp.
302-311, 2006.
[11] PouyanPourbeik and FhedZisaniModau, “Model development
and field testing of a heavy-duty gas-turbine generator”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 664-672,
2008.
[12] JohnMantZaris and Costas Vournas, “Modelling and stability of
a single-shaft combined cycle power plant”, International
Journal of Thermodynamics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 71-78, 2007.
[13] Naoto Kakimoto and KaZuhiro Baba, “Performance of gas
turbine-based plants during frequency drops”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1110-1115,
2003.
[14] H. E. M. A Shalan, M.A. MoustafaHassan and A.B.G. Bahgat,
“Comparative study on modeling of gas turbines in combined
cycle power plants”,International Middle East Power Systems
Conference, paper ID.317, pp. 970-976, 2010.
[15] HadiGhorbani, Ali Ghaffari and Mehdi Rahnama, “Constrained
model predictive control implementation for a heavy-duty gas
turbine power plant”, WSEAS Transactions on Systems and
Control, vol. 3, no.6, pp. 507-516, 2008.
[16] M. Mohamed Iqbal and R. Joseph Xavier, “Factors influencing
the operation of the biomass gasifier power plants”, Proceedings
of second World Renewable Energy Technology, 2011.
[17] M. Mohamed Iqbal, R. Joseph Xavier, D. Arun Kumar, G. Raj
Kumar, P. Selva Kumar and C.Tamilarasan, “A sample survey
on biomass gasifier power plants”, International Conference on
Emerging Technologies in Renewable Energy, 2010.
[18] S. Lakshmi Sankar and M. Mohamed Iqbal, “ANSI and IEC
standards Based Short Circuit Analysis of a Typical 2*30 MW
Thermal Power Plant”, Middle East Journal of Scientific and
Research, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 1617-1625, 2015.
[19] M. Mohamed Iqbal and R. Joseph Xavier, “A review of
controllers for isolated and grid connected operation of biomass
power plants”, International conference on Renewable Energy
Technologies, pp. 366-371, 2011.
[20] M. Mohamed Iqbal and R. Joseph Xavier, “Fuzzy Self-tuning
PID Controller for Speedtronic Governor Controlled Heavy
Duty Gas Turbine Power Plants”, Electric Power Components
and Systems, vol. 42 no. 14, pp. 1485-1494, 2014.
[21] S.Balamurugan, R. JosephXavier and A. Ebenezer Jeyakumar,
“Control of Heavy-duty Gas Turbine Plants for Parallel
Operation Using Soft Computing Techniques”, Electric Power
Components and Systems, vol. 37, no. 11, pp. 1275-1287, 2009.
[22] F. Jurado, M. Ortega, A. Cano and J. Carpio, “Neuro-fuzzy
controller for gas turbine in biomass-based electric power
plant”, Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 60, no.3, pp. 123-
135, 2002.
[23] S.Balamurugan, R. JosephXavier and A. Ebenezer Jeyakumar,
“ANN controller for Heavy Duty Gas Turbine Plants”, vol. 12,
no. 3, pp. 1765-1771, 2008.
[24] S. Panda, J. S. Yadav, N. P. Padidar and S. Ardil, “Evolutionary
techniques for model order reduction of large scale linear
systems”, International Journal of Applied Science, Engineering
and Technology, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 22-28, 2012.
546 Volume-7
 2016 International Conference on Innovations in information Embedded and Communication Systems (ICIIECS’16)

APPENDIX
TABLE A.1. MODEL PARAMETERS OF HDGT PLANT TABLE A.2. MODEL PARAMETERS OF FIELD TEST PARAMETERS
FOR HDGT PLANT

Parameter Description Fuel

Valve
Governor transfer system
K1,K2,T1 Radiation shield parameters;K1=0.8;K2=0.2;T1=15 positioner Gain
System function coefficients time
coefficients
T2 Thermocouple time constant;T2=2.5 constant
W X Y Z a b c K Ts
T3,T4 Temperaturecontroller parameters;T3=450;T4=3.3
Unit I 30 0 0.05 1 1 0.05 1 0.68 0.2
Wmin Minimum fuel flow rate of no load condition in
p.u.;Wmin=0.23 Unit II 31.09 1.059 3.05 1 1 0.05 1 0.725 0.2

TL Load torque in p.u;TL=1 Unit III 45.0 1.25 2.50 1 1 0.05 1 0.760 0.2

Wfl Fuel flow limiter in p.u;Wfl=0.23 Unit IV 26.02 3.213 5.00 1 1 0.20 1 0.716 0.1

Nrated Rated speed in p.u;Nrated=1

T1 Rotor time constant;=12.2 to 25.2
TR Turbine rated exhaust temperature,TR=950
TX Turbine exhaust temperature
Wf Per unit fuel flow
N Per unit turbine rotor speed
Nr Per unit reference speed
S Laplace operator
E Error signal
Wd Fuel demand signal in p.u.

978-1-4673-8207-6 547 Volume-7

View publication stats