Microturbine Performance Testing and Heat Transfer Analysis · • PP1 –Full scale production package –Indoor setup with inlet ducting –Outdoor setup with inlet louvers •

Microturbine Performance Testing andHeat Transfer Analysis

Michael P. Thake, Jr.Gas Turbine Industrial Fellow, Energy Systems, Ingersoll Rand

Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Aerospace Engineering, The Ohio State University

UTSR Fellowship Program, Summer 2010

Industrial Mentor: Jeffrey P. ArmstrongManager, Core Technologies, Energy Systems, Ingersoll Rand

Academic Advisor: Jeffrey P. Bons, Ph. DProfessor, Department of Aerospace Engineering, The Ohio State University

Industrial Mentor: Brian R. FinstadManager, Life Cycle and Recuperator Engineering, Energy Systems, Ingersoll Rand

Insert Footer2

Outline

• Microturbine Performance Testing

– Motivation

– Test Setup

– Results and Discussion

• Heat Transfer Analysis

– Motivation

– Model

– Results and Discussion

• Acknowledgments

UTSR Summer 2010 Presentation

Insert Footer3

MICROTURBINE PERFORMANCE TESTING


Insert Footer4

Motivation

• Need for a redesign of major subsystems of current

microturbine (MT250)

– Easier to service and maintain

– Improve performance

– Simplify manufacturing

• Result is the Generation 3 microturbine (G3)

– Reliable engine core assembly remained unchanged

– Redesigned enclosure, casing and fuel/cooling

subsystems

• Must test a production of the G3 for risk identification,

performance improvement and endurance


Insert Footer5

Test Setup

• PP2

– Simplified, easily accessible test cell for engine only

• PP1

– Full scale production package

– Indoor setup with inlet ducting

– Outdoor setup with inlet louvers

• Instrumentation

– Normal monitoring instrumentation

– 36 additional thermocouples and resistance temperature

detectors

– 4 additional pressure taps

– Emissions and fuel measuring devices


Insert Footer6

Test Setup (cont.)

• Subject the G3 core engine to 40 cold cycles, 460 hot cycles,

and 506 hours of operation at 103% power

• Goals

– No significant performance drop-off running under typical

field conditions

– No repairable conditions found in the core engine static

hardware (cracks, excessive distortion) after final inspection

• Test Schedule

– 5 hot cycles and 1 cold cycle per day

– Each cycle lasts 1 hour with ~3 hours for cooling

– Average last 10 minutes of data


Insert Footer7

Minor Setbacks

• Clogging due to assembly error which admitted lose

insulation into recuperator

– Test results are measuring worst case conditions and

hotter temperatures

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

No

rmal

ize

d R

ecu

pe

rato

r In

let

Pre

sssu

re(P

_me

asu

red

-P

_no

min

al)/

P_

no

min

al

Hours

Recuperator Back Pressure vs. Hours


Insert Footer8

Performance Data

• Recuperator Inlet Temperature is key

– Monitors engine health

– Limiting temperature

0.9

0.91

0.92

0.93

0.94

0.95

0.96

0.97

0.98

0.99

1

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

No

rmal

ized

Rec

up

erat

or

inle

t Te

mp

eraa

ture

(TA

60_c

orr

ecte

d/T

A60

_ma

x)

Cycles

TA60 (corrected to 100% Power, 59F, 14.696 psi, no back pressure)

TA60_corr

TA60_2_corr

PP2

PP1indoor config

PP1outdoor config


Insert Footer9

HEAT TRANSFER ANALYSIS


Insert Footer10

Motivation

• No previous theory-based heat transfer model

– Predictions derived from correlation curves from

measured water and exhaust gas temperatures at inlet

and outlet of cogen

• Need for a robust model

– Adapt to changing inlet conditions and properties

without knowing exit conditions

– Implement into cycle analysis tool

Enables part-power analysis

Account for fuel changes, alt. changes, geometries

– Use as a model to provide customers with reliable heat

recovery data


Insert Footer11

Model

• Calculate pressure drop across air- and water-side

• Calculate mass flows and velocities

• Calculate exhaust gas, water, and material properties

• Setup heat transfer model (tube and fin)

• Calculate convective heat transfer coeff. of each

component independently

• Calculate resistivity of each component and combine

• Calculate effectiveness and heat transfer

q = ε*m_dotair*Cpair*(Tin,air-Tin,water)


Insert Footer12

Heat Recovery

• Low inlet water temperatures → heat recovery

sensitive to inlet water flows rates

• High inlet water flow rates → heat recovery sensitive

to inlet water temperatures


10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Inle

t W

ate

r Fl

ow

(G

PM

)

Inlet Water Temperature (°F)

Outlettemperature above

205 °F operating limit

Insert Footer13

Parametric Studies

0.0000

0.1000

0.2000

0.3000

0.4000

0.5000

0.6000

0.7000

1.02E+06

1.04E+06

1.06E+06

1.08E+06

1.10E+06

1.12E+06

1.14E+06

1.16E+06

1.18E+06

50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

ηH

HV

Hea

t R

eco

very

(BTU

/ho

ur)

% Power

Heat Recovery and HHV Efficiency vs. Power59 °F Ambient, 70 GPM, 120 °F Inlet Water, Sea Level

0.6300

0.6320

0.6340

0.6360

0.6380

0.6400

0.6420

0.6440

0.6460

0.6480

9.50E+05

1.00E+06

1.05E+06

1.10E+06

1.15E+06

1.20E+06

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

ηH

HV

Hea

t R

eco

very

(BTU

/ho

ur)

Altitude(feet)

Heat Recovery and HHV Efficiency vs. Altitude59 °F Ambient, 70 GPM, 120 °F Inlet Water, 100% Power

Test Gas Type q_calc η_HHV

# BTU/hour

1 Natural 1.16E+06 0.6324

2 Anaerobic 1.17E+06 0.6333

3 Landfill 1.19E+06 0.6340


Insert Footer14

Acknowledgments

• My experience at Ingersoll Rand provided me with an immeasurable

amount of knowledge in electrical, mechanical and heat transfer

systems, which has made me well-rounded and has given me the

confidence to be a great engineer. Without the guidance, patience, and

work ethic of all the engineers, technicians, managers, and support

staff, my experience would not have been possible.

• Thank you to everyone at Ingersoll Rand, especially my mentors Jeff

Armstrong and Brian Finstad, who helped me grow and gave me some

fascinating projects to work on. Thank you also to Gary Manter, who

performed a large portion of the shear setup and testing.

• I would also like to thank the Gas Turbine Industrial Fellowship

Program, University Turbine Systems Research Program, South

Carolina Institute for Energy Studies, Clemson University Research

Foundation and the Department of Energy under the cooperative

agreement DE-FC26-02NT41431 for this great opportunity.


Documents

Microturbine Performance Testing and Heat Transfer Analysis · • PP1 –Full scale production package –Indoor setup with inlet ducting –Outdoor setup with inlet louvers •