16.06.2013 Views

1. Introduction - Firenze University Press

1. Introduction - Firenze University Press

1. Introduction - Firenze University Press

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The discharge pressure of "LASTST" is fixed to be equal to the saturation pressure for an<br />

atmospheric temperature which is assumed to be 25 °C.<br />

Unlike the topping cycle, implementing design specifications as constraints does not work well for<br />

the bottoming cycle. It is found that implementing design specifications and optimization<br />

constraints separately for the bottoming cycle makes the optimizer convergence easy. The<br />

optimization constraints include vapor quality of the outlet stream from the de-aerator be equal to<br />

zero and the inlet pressure of the valve "B27" be greater than its outlet pressure.<br />

Table 2. Results of Optimization of Bottoming cycle<br />

Variables Units Before Optimization After Optimization<br />

Outlet pressure of HPPMP bar 100 104.9<br />

Outlet pressure of IPPMP bar 25 24.5<br />

Outlet pressure of LPPMP bar 5 8.6<br />

Discharge pressure of LPST bar 0.3 0.33<br />

Outlet pressure of CONDPUMP bar 0.2 0.29<br />

Split fraction of B29 (LPFW) 0.1663 0.2025<br />

Split fraction of B29 (LPIPFW) 0.083 0.060<br />

Split fraction of B14 (Stream 30) 0.3 0.2<br />

Split fraction of B25 (Stream 33) 0.95 0.94<br />

Outlet Temperature of air from ECON K 400.4 38<strong>1.</strong>15<br />

Outlet Temperature of HPSTM from HPSP K 460 501<br />

Outlet Temperature of IPSTM from HPSP K 460 485<br />

Efficiency 23.47 % 25.65 %<br />

Optimization of the bottoming cycle increases its efficiency (bottoming cycle efficiency is defined<br />

as the ratio of power output from the bottoming cycle to the product of fuel flow rate and heating<br />

value) from 23.47 % to 25.65 % - an increase of 2.18 percentage points. The total efficiency of the<br />

power plant thus increases by 2.92 percentage points. This is a significant improvement in the<br />

efficiency, which plays an important role in determining the feasibility of AZEP cycles, see also the<br />

discussion in the next section. A summary of results from the optimization of the topping and<br />

bottoming cycles is shown in Table 3.<br />

Table 3. Summary of Optimization of Top and Bottoming cycle<br />

Efficiency Before Optimization After Optimization Increment in Percentage points<br />

Top cycle 25.33 % 26.07 % 0.74<br />

Bottoming cycle 23.47 % 25.65 % 2.18<br />

Entire power plant 48.8 % 5<strong>1.</strong>72 % 2.92<br />

165

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!