Abstract
In this article, a close look is taken at the state-of-the-art in steam turbine and steam (Rankine) cycle technology within the framework of conventional steam and gas turbine combined cycle power plants, specifically, the bottoming steam (Rankine) cycle of the latter. Using the second law of thermodynamics and the concept of exergy as a guide, cycle and technology factors are calculated to provide a simple but precise (and unassailable) yardstick to assess where the technology was, where it is at present, and how much farther it can go. In addition, the study takes a critical look at an emerging technology, supercritical CO2 cycle, that is being touted as a serious contender for steam turbine’s place in the fossil fuel-fired electric power generation portfolio—as a standalone system or as a waste heat recovery capacity (i.e., combined cycle).
Highlights
It would be presumptuous of the author to claim that this research contains never-before-seen, utterly innovative, and unique material on the subject matter, i.e., steam turbines
A crash course on conventional steam cycle thermodynamics and heat and mass balance analysis can be found in Chapter 2 of the same source
We looked at steam turbine technology as it stands today and how much further it can be taken
Summary
It would be presumptuous of the author to claim that this research contains never-before-seen, utterly innovative, and unique material on the subject matter, i.e., steam turbines. Based on 285/ 600/620 steam cycle, 8 FWHs, double-flow LP with 1,400 mm (55 in.) titanium LSBs, 303.4°C feed water inlet temperature and 45 mbar condenser pressure, the projected net efficiency is 45.9% LHV in an inland location (with 0.6% (wt) low sulfur fuel to ensure low flue gas exhaust temperature). -Equivalent Carnot efficiency, ηCE,RBC of 48.2% ± 0.5% -HRSG effectiveness, ηHRSG of 92.3% ± 0.4% -Steam turbine efficiency, ηST of 41.5% ± 0.3% -Bottoming cycle efficiency, ηRBC of 38.3% ± 0.4% -Technology factor (gross) of 79.4% ± 0.2% It was already pointed out (see Figure 3 and the accompanying discussion) that modern Rankine bottoming cycle TF is comparable to that of the modern conventional SC or USC steam power plant (based on net plant output). 25.0 227 43.83% 8,213 991 649 Unspecified 45 Multishaft 3P, reheat 180/600/600 41 0.48 262,364 90.4/93.4/91.5 2 × 43 in. (217 sqft) 811,120 64.8% 794,341 16,779 2.07% 63.5% 5,673
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
