A

Original Contemporary Research

ON

Enhanced Modeling and

Integrated Simulation
of
Power Plant for Capacity
Enhancement
and Clean Power
Production BY
Dr RATNADIP R JOSHI
ratnadip.joshi@gmail.com
Cell Number: 09423332754
 INTRODUCTION
Process Synthesis and Optimization

The chemical industry has undergone significant changes during

the past 25 years due to the increased cost of energy, increasingly
stringent environmental regulations, and global competition in
product pricing and quality. One of the most important
engineering tools for addressing these issues is optimization.
Modifications in plant design and operating procedures have been
implemented to reduce costs and meet constraints, with an
emphasis on improving efficiency and increasing profitability.
Optimal operating conditions can be implemented via increased
automation at the process, plant, and company levels.

3
 Origin of the Research Problem

As the energy consumption is expanding and

resources of material and energy becoming more
expensive and less certain, substantial changes are
needed in many conventional chemical processing
plants. These have to incorporate a high degree of
energy integration and achieve greater efficiencies
through process modification, thus conserves material
and energy resources.

4
 Origin of the Research Problem Contd.

At the same time protection standards are tightening,

therefore, lower temperatures and pressures are desired.
Higher reaction rates, fewer stages and smaller plants will
reduce burden of material in the process, leading to safer
plants. With the growing consciousness about pollution, it
is essential to produce less effluent as well as to treat them
properly.

5
 Enhanced Modeling and Integrated
Simulation of Gasification in Power Plant for
Capacity Enhancement and Clean Power
Production

6
Overview of a gasifier for power production with relevant processes 7
Process Flow Diagram for simulation of the power plant
8
Overview of HE skid for power production developed using HYSYS 9
 Stages In Process Simulation
Apart from design considerations, IGCC performance depends on
numerous integration options and can be improved by process
optimization. These considerations include

•Gas turbine air extraction to the air separation unit (ASU).

• Increase the gas turbine power.
• High and low temperature heat recovery.
• Steam generation conditions.
• Utility balance.
•Co-production or poly generation including steam,
hydrogen, and other products.
• Optimization of operating conditions

10
 Model of Power Plant
Gas stream
•As gas turbines were modeled, gas streams had to be
considered. These contain:
•Air (as N2, O2 mixture).
•Gas fuel (containing CH4, C2H6, C3H8,
•n-C4H10, n-C5H12)

•Gas turbines
•This is a complex model consisting of three sections:
• a compressor;
•a combustion chamber with a pre-mixer for air and fuel;
and
• an expansion section

11
 Model of Power Plant
•Heat exchangers
•The exhaust gas of a gas turbine is hot enough to
generate steam at different pressure levels, for use as
process steam, in de-aeration or in steam turbines for
additional power generation. A fundamental model was
developed for the waste heat recovery section, consisting
of a series of heat exchanger models.

12
 Model of Power Plant
•Combustion reactions
•This model assumes the use of natural gas with the first 5
alkanes (methane, ethane, propane, n-butane and n-
pentane), identified as Cl,…,C5, respectively. The
combustion in air of each of these 5 hydrocarbons, is
described by an extent of reaction εi, i=1,…,5.

 3i 
 O2  iCO2  (i 1)H 2
 i 2i  2 12
C H 
O

•These extents were determined by the fuel gas

conversion being set to equal the combustion efficiency
for each natural gas component.

13
 Methodology

•The Gas Turbine combustion system is of Dual Fuel type -

designed to burn both Natural Gas and Diesel Oil with automatic
control. Fuel changeover shall be initiated manually through the
fuel selector switch or automatically by the fuel gas pressure
switch which is operated when the fuel gas pressure drops below a
preset value. Fuel Gas (Natural Gas) is presently the primary
source of Fuel for the power plant. This comes from offshore and
onshore Fuel Gas production facilities.

14
 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

•As part of detailed engineering for this extension Gas Turbine

Generator unit, a simulation study and calculations are carried out
for the following systems in this power plant , taking note of the
modifications in the systems arising out of installation of the fourth
Gas Turbine unit ,

•(i) Fuel Gas System

•(ii) Flare System
•(iii) Diesel Oil System

15
 Analysis on the basis of
process simulation study and calculations

1. High Pressure knockout vessel, gas conditioning skid and filters

have a rated capacity of 27400 Nm3 / hr where as available fuel
supply is 35630 Nm3 / hr. This constitutes the bottleneck, based on
the input data supplied. The capacity needs to be augmented to
increase the capacity of the plant beyond 400 MW.

• 2. The flow and pressure drop analysis of the system direct to

suction header indicates that under condition of bypass of tanks
is controlled solely by the orifice. An effective model was
developed when the same was controlled by a combination of an
orifice and a control valve.

16
 Analysis on the basis of process simulation
study and calculations
3.The maximum available fuel gas quantity is 55630 Nm3 / hr The full
amount of fuel gas available can not be utilised with the existing
gas conditioning skid in circuit.
4.Diesel Oil System :As per pressure drop calculation with a
recycle flow of 50m3/hr from tank back to pump ,the pressure
drop across the orifice under conditions of 1GTG to 4GTG’s
operating is from 48.432 m to 51.122 m i.e. within narrow range.
Therefore this scheme is practical to operate.
5.Gas hydrate formation is shown as possible scenario by the
simulation. Same is the case for FSNL condition at GTG4 inlet.

17
Effect of humidity on power generation-
winter conditions

18
19
Complete Optimized PFD of Four Gas Turbines 20
21
 Existing design capacities and design modifications in the system

Present Modified Power generation, MW

Components Actual usage Design
Design
of Fuel Gas in practice, usage Existing
Capacity Modified Plant
System Nm3/hr capacity Plant
, Nm3/hr
, Nm3/hr

Fuel Gas 49517 27400 35630

System
High Pressure
Knockout 47400 27400 35630
Vessel
Fuel Gas
Conditioning 47400 27400 35630
Skid
Fuel Gas 93 131
Filter 47400 27400 35630
Separator
Fuel Gas
Super Heaters 16600 9130 11900
(Each of
Three Units)
Pressure 58000
Control 29000 27400
(Two sets)
Valves
22
Simulation of fuel gas and high pressure knockout vessel
along with scrubbers

23
Simulation of heat conditioning skid

24
Simulation of gas turbine section with PRVs for
capacity augmentation
25
Comparison of Flow sheets with
3 GTGs and 4 GTGs
•Objective: 100 MW Power Generation:
•FDP-1 Fuel, 17% WC conditions:

26
 1. Analysis - With 3 GTGs:
•Maximum power that can be generated: 105 MW (35MW each)
•Required fuel supply: 35,630 Nm3/hr (31,000 kg/hr)
•Bottlenecks:
•1. The present High Pressure Knockout Vessel, Gas Conditioning
Skid, Filters are able to process a maximum of 27,400 Nm3/hr.
•2. Fuel Gas Super Heaters with 2 heaters are not sufficient. Third
Heater should be brought in operation. Three will operate partially
and this will hamper the efficiency by around 12%. In this case
there is no stand bye heater in the system, and 4th heater may
have to be provided as a stand bye

•Maximum power at present FDP-1 flow rate with design

capacities: 93 MW (31MW each)

27
 2. Analysis - With 4 GTGs
• Maximum power that can be generated: 112 MW (28MW each) or
• 113 MW (31X3=93 + 20= 113 MW)
•Full Load and partial one
•Available fuel supply: 35,630 Nm3/hr (31,000 kg/hr)
•Bottlenecks:
•1. The present High Pressure Knockout Vessel, Gas Conditioning
Skid, Filters are able to process a maximum of 27,400 Nm3/hr.
•2. Fuel Gas Super Heaters with 2 heaters are not sufficient. Third
Heater should be brought in operation. Three will operate partially
and this will hamper the efficiency of each Heater by around 12%.
•3. Direct flow is essential for the required power generation.
•4. With four GTGs, a maximum of 105 MW power can be
generated with present line conditions. PRVs are not able to run
4th GTG at full speed.

•Maximum power at present FDP-1 flow rate with design

capacities: 113 MW
28
 Effect of design modifications on power generation

Present Actual Modified Power generation, MW

Units in
Design usage in design Existing
Fuel Gas Modified
Capacity capacity Plant
System Plant
, kg/hr practice, , Nm3/hr
kg/hr

GTG-1 9000 8550 8494 35.5 35.42

GTG-2 9000 8550 8494 35.5 35.42
GTG-3 9000 8250 8494 34.0 35.42
Not Not
GTG-4
present
Not present 5518
present 23.22

29
 References

1Papoulias S A and I E Grossmann. A Structural Optimization Approach in Process Synthesis. Part I: Utility Systems.
Computers and Chemical Engineering. 1983; 7: 695-699.
2Falcetta M F and Sciubba E A. Computational, modular approach to the simulation of power plants. Heat Recovery
Systems & CHP. 1995; 15 (2): 131–145.
3Shisen Xu et al. Development of a novel 2-stage entrained flow coal dry powder gasifier. Applied Energy, 2014;
113:318–323.
4Briesch M S, Bannister R L, Diakunchak I S, and Huber D J, A combined cycle designed to achieve greater than 60 percent
efficiency, Transactions of the ASME. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 1995; 117:734–741.
5 Jussi Manninen and X.X. Zhu, Thermodynamic Analysis and Mathematical Optimisation of Power Plants,
Computers and Chemical Engineering, 1998; 22:S537–544
6Kotas, T.J., The exergy method of thermal plant analysis, London and Boston: Butterworths; ISBN 0408013508, 1985
7F Emuna, M Gadallaa,, T Majozi , D Boerc. Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) process simulation and
optimization. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 2010; 34 (1): 331–338.
8C Descamps, et al. Efficiency of an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plant including CO2
removal. Energy, 2008; 33: 874-881.
9C C Cormos, et al. Use of lower grade coals in IGCC plants with carbon capture for the coproduction of hydrogen
and electricity. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2009; 35: 556-567.
10Mohammad Mansouri Majoumerd, Han Raas, Sudipta De, Mohsen Assadi. Estimation of performance variation of
future generation IGCC with coal quality and gasification process – Simulation results of EU H2-
IGCC project. Applied Energy, 2014; 113: 452–462
11J C Meerman, M Knoope, A Ramírez, W C Turkenburg, A P C Faaij. The techno-economic potential of integrated
gasification co-generation facilities with CCS Going from coal to biomass. Energy Procedia, 2013; 37:6053– 6061.

30
 References

12H Christopher Frey and Yunhua Zhu. Improved System Integration for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
(IGCC) Systems. Environmental Science & Technology 2006; 40 (5):1693-1699.
13Jae Chul Lee, Hyeon Hui Lee, Yong Jin Joo, Chang Ha Lee, Min Oh, Process simulation and thermodynamic
analysis of an IGCC (integrated gasification combined cycle) plant with an entrained coal gasifier, Energy, 2014; 64:
58–68.
14M A Rodrıguez-Toral, W Morton, D R Mitchell. Using new packages for modelling, equation oriented
simulation and optimization of a cogeneration plant. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 2000; 24: 2667–2685.
15Ong’iro A, Ugursal V I, Al Taweel, A M. and Walkers J D. Modeling of heat recovery steam
generator performance. Applied Thermal Engineering, 1997; 17 (5): 427–446.
16Harker J H and Allen D A, The calculation of temperature and composition of flame gases. Journal of the
Institute of Fuel, 1969; 42:183–187.
17Gaydon A G and Wolfhard H G. Flames. Their structure, radiation and temperature, 4th ed., London: Chapman
and Hall, 1979.
18William Z Black and James G Hartley. Thermodynamics: Si Version, Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers,
Incorporated, 1996, ISBN-13 9780673996459
19Elisabetta Veca and Alessandra Adrover. Isothermal kinetics of char-coal gasification with pure CO2. Fuel, 2014;
123: 151–157.
20Najjar Y S H and Akyurt M. Combined cycles with gas turbine engines. Heat Recovery Systems & CHP, 1994;
14 (2): 93–103.
21Vincenzo Spallina, Matteo C Romano, Paolo Chiesa, Giovanni Lozza. Integration of coal gasification and
packed bed CLC process for high efficiency and near-zero emission power generation. Energy Procedia, 2013; 37:
662 – 670.

31
THANK
YOU

32