0
TECHNICAL PAPERS: Gas Turbines: Industrial and Cogeneration

Parametric Analysis of Existing Gas Turbines With Inlet Evaporative and Overspray Fogging

[+] Author and Article Information
R. Bhargava

Universal Ensco, Inc., 1811 Bering Drive, Houston, TX 77057-3100

C. B. Meher-Homji

Bechtel Corporation, 3000 Post Oak Blvd. Houston, TX 77056

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 127(1), 145-158 (Feb 09, 2005) (14 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1712980 History: Received December 01, 2001; Revised March 01, 2002; Online February 09, 2005
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Tawney, R., Pearson, C., and Brown, M., 2001, “Options to Maximize Power Output for Merchant Plants in Combined Cycle Applications,” ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-0409.
Jones, C., and Jacobs, J. A., 2000, “Economics and Technical Considerations for Combined-Cycle Performance-Enhancement Options,” GE Publication GER-4200.
Kitchen, B. J., and Ebeling, J. A., 1995, “Qualifying Combustion Turbines for Inlet Air Cooling Capacity Enhancement,” ASME Paper No. 95-GT-266.
Meher-Homji, C. B., and Mee, T. R., 1999, “Gas Turbine Power Augmentation by Fogging of Inlet Air,” Proceedings of the 28th Turbomachinery Symposium, Turbomachinery Laboratory, Texas A&M University, Sept., Houston, TX.
Meher-Homji, C. B., and Mee, T. R., 2000, “Inlet Fogging of Gas Turbine Engines–Part A: Theory, Psychrometrics and Fog Generation and Part B: Prac-tical Considerations, Control and O&M Aspects,” ASME Paper Nos. 2000-GT-307; 2000-GT-308.
Kleinschmidt,  R. V., 1947, “Value of Wet Compression in Gas Turbine Cycles,” Mech. Eng. (Am. Soc. Mech. Eng.), 69, pp. 115–116.
Wilcox, E. C., and Trout, A. M., 1951, “Analysis of Thrust Augmentation of Turbojet Engines by Water Injection at Compressor Inlet Including Charts for Calculating Compression Processes with Water Injection,” NACA Report No. 1006.
Nolan, J. P., and Twombly, V. J., 1990, “Gas Turbine Performance Improvement by Direct Mixing Evaporative Cooling System,” ASME Paper No. 90-GT-368.
Hill,  P. G., 1963, “Aerodynamic and Thermodynamic Effects of Coolant Injection on Axial Compressors,” Aeronaut. J. pp. 331–348.
Arsen’ev,  L. V., and Berkovich,  A. L., 1996, “The Parameters of Gas-Turbine Units with Water Injected into the Compressor,” Thermal Engineering, 43(6), pp. 461–465.
Ingistov, S., 2000, “Fog System Performance in Power Augmentation of Heavy Duty Power Generating Gas Turbines GE Frame 7EA,” ASME Paper No. 2000-GT-305.
Chaker, M., Meher-Homji, C. B., Mee, T. R., and Nicolson, A., 2001, “Inlet Fogging of Gas Turbine Engines-Detailed Climatic Analysis of Gas Turbine Evaporative Cooling Potential,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, ASME Paper No. 2001-GT-526.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Effects of ambient temperature on gas turbine power output and heat rate
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of inlet evaporative and overspray fogging on turbine net work output ratio (W_N) as a function of (a) ISO specific work (W), (b) turbine inlet temperature (TIT), (c) overall cycle pressure ratio (PR).
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of inlet evaporative and overspray fogging on compressor work input ratio (W_C) as a function of (a) ISO specific work (W), (b) turbine inlet temperature (TIT), (c) overall cycle pressure ratio (PR).
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of inlet evaporative and overspray fogging as a function of ISO specific work (W) on (a) power output change (ΔP_N), (b) heat rate change (ΔHR) (c) fuel flow rate change (Δm_f)
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of inlet evaporative and overspray fogging (a) m_FW versus W, (b) ΔT_C versus W, (c) ΔP_N versus TIT, (d) m_fw versus TIT, (e) ΔHR versus PR, (f) m_fw versus PR, (g) ΔP_N versus W_N, (h) W_C versus W_N
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity–base case (a) power output change and (b) heat rate change. (Change shown with respect to the industrial gas turbine.)
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity–inlet evaporative fogging (a) power boost and (b) heat rate change. (Change shown with respect to the industrial gas turbine.)
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity on power boost—2% overspray fogging (aeroderivative gas turbines)
Grahic Jump Location
Effects of ambient temperature and relative humidity with 2% overspray fogging on (a) power boost and (b) heat rate change. (Change shown with respect to the industrial gas turbine.)
Grahic Jump Location
Power output change (a) base case, (b) inlet evaporative fogging, and (c) 2% overspray. A comparison of three classes of gas turbines.
Grahic Jump Location
Heat rate change (a) base case, (b) inlet evaporative fogging, and (c) 2% overspray. A comparison of three classes of gas turbines.
Grahic Jump Location
Effect of fuel flow rate (a) inlet evaporative fogging and (b) 2% overspray. A comparison of three classes of gas turbines.
Grahic Jump Location
Effect of fog water flow rate per unit power boost (a) inlet evaporation fogging and (b) 2% overspray. A comparison of three classes of gas turbines.
Grahic Jump Location
Effect on compressor temperature rise per unit specific power boost (a) inlet evaporative fogging and (b) 2% overspray. A comparison of three classes of gas turbines.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In