Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Volume 2014, Article ID 781503, 13 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/781503

Research Article
Effective Parameters on Performance of Multipressure
Combined Cycle Power Plants
Thamir K. Ibrahim1,2 and M. M. Rahman1,3
1

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tikrit, Tikrit, Iraq
3
Automotive Engineering Centre, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia
2

Correspondence should be addressed to M. M. Rahman; mustafizur@ump.edu.my

Received 3 August 2013; Accepted 9 March 2014; Published 4 May 2014
Academic Editor: B. V. S. S. S. Prasad
Copyright 2014 T. K. Ibrahim and M. M. Rahman. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
A parametric analysis is performed for numerous configurations of a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power plant, including
single-pressure, double-pressure, triple-pressure, triple-pressure with reheat, and supplementary triple-pressure with reheat. The
compression ratio of the gas turbine and the steam pressure of the steam turbine are taken as design parameters. The thermodynamic
model was developed based on an existing MARAFIQ CCGT power plant and performance model code developed using the
THERMOFLEX software. The results show that the highest overall power and thermal efficiency occur for the supplementary
triple pressure with reheat CCGT configuration. The overall efficiency increases with an increase of the compression ratio to 18
20, depending on the configuration of the CCGT, and then decreases with any further increase of compression ratio. The triplepressure with reheat CCGT configuration has the highest overall thermal efficiency. The specific fuel consumption decreases with
an increase of the compression ratio to 1820, and the triple-pressure with reheat CCGT has the lowest specific fuel consumption.
The simulation model gives good results compared with the MARAFIQ CCGT power plant. Consequently, it can be stated that the
compression ratio and steam pressure strongly influence the overall power and thermal efficiency of CCGTs.

1. Introduction
The combination of the Brayton cycle for gas turbines (GTs)
and the Rankine cycle for steam turbines (STs) is suitable
for attaining efficient CCGT power plants. The Brayton
cycle generates high temperatures and discards heat at a
temperature that can be used easily by the Rankine cycle plant
as a source of energy. Air and steam are the most frequently
operating fluids for CCGT power plants [1]. Kaushik et al.
[2] studied the performance of a CCGT power plant through
simulation and modeling. The activities of the GT at part
load were studied and discussed. The CCGT plants represent
the result of a sensitivity study on ambient temperature
and GT performance [3, 4]. The optimum values of entire
thermal efficiency and output of power with the values of
the decision variable are demonstrated for CCGT plants
[5]. The emulator of the CCGT cogeneration plant was
created by Khaliq and Kaushik [6]. The simulator is based on

the computational model working on the principle of power

plant modeling. This simulator comprises two portions; one
of the portions deals with the simulation of the flow of
fluid within the power plant, whilst the second simulates the
regulating system of the plant [7]. Many investigations have
been done on heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) but a
comparison of the different types of HRSGs was not found
in any search. Srinivas [8] introduced optimization modeling
of the double-pressure reheated HRSG to attain the greatest
presentation of the CCGT and then compared and validated
the model against the available data. In addition, Sarabchi and
Polley [9] structured the thermodynamic optimization of a
single-pressure united rotation. The functioning features of
a triple-pressure reheat HRSG utilizing Gate cycle software
were evaluated by Shin et al. [10]. They revealed that different
performances of the HRSG are due to multiple configurations of the HRSG with deviations dependent upon the
ambient temperature. Bassily [11] set price optimization and

2
evaluation as significant methods for enhancing the entire
thermal efficiency of a triple-pressure steam-reheat CCGT.
Bassily [12] arithmetically optimized and evaluated doubleand triple-pressure CCGT plants.
The arithmetical cost optimization, as well as the modeling of the triple-pressure reheat steam commercial CCGT
plants, was investigated by Bassily [13]. There is an extraordinary amount of research on optimizing and modeling CCGT
plants for a number of configurations of HRSGs [14, 15].
Mohagheghi and Shayegan [16] developed computer code to
examine the competence for a variety of types of HRSGs:
single-pressure, dual-pressure, dual-pressure with reheat,
triple-pressure, and triple-pressure with reheat. From the
thermodynamics optimization of the HRSG, they obtained
a high rate of generating power in the steam cycle. The
modeling of HRSG was formerly based on successive equation solving and chronological methodology, but this was
involved time-consuming and complicated methods [17].
Thus, a computer program was created that is able to produce
the equations so that the functioning of the HRSG can be
estimated [16]. Arrieta and Lora [18] considered a multipleshaft configuration and gathered two Siemens AG 501F
GTs, attached to triple-pressure reheated with accompanying
steam turbine and supplementary firing HRSGs. With the
utilization of Gate cycle software, the thermodynamic simulation obtained satisfactory results.
The outcomes revealed that the overall power output
and thermal efficiency have an impact of additional firing,
and, additionally, they showed variations in the ambient
temperature. Considering the operational manner of CCGT
power plants, it appears that about one-third of the total
power is generated by the ST cycle and two-thirds by the GT
cycle. Thus, the orientation value of the power production
of a gas turbine is 200 MW when the ST cycle generates
about 100 MW [19, 20]. For most installed plants, the outlet
temperature of the exhaust gases of the GT is around 850 K,
while the highest HRSG pressure is between 120 and 165
bars [21]. Consequently, a comparative study of effective
parameters (compression ratio and steam pressure) on the
overall power output, steam mass flow rate, overall thermal
efficiency, and heat rate requires managing the parameters
of the system. Thus, the aim of the present study is to
develop a strategy to enhance the overall performance of
multiconfigurations of CCGTs, utilizing the effect of the
compression ratio and steam pressure and comparing the
results with data from real combined cycle plants.

2. Description of the Triple-Pressure Reheat

Combined Cycle
Generally, heat recovery steam generators have a different number of pressure levels and supplementary firing
(duct burner). The HRSGs can be single-pressure combinecycle (SPCC), dual-pressure combine-cycle (DPCC), triplepressure combine-cycle (TPCC), triple-pressure with reheat
combine-cycle (TPRCC), and supplementary triple-pressure
with reheat combine-cycle (TPRBCC), as shown in Figure 1.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

The multiple pressure levels are used to increase the
energy recovered from the exhaust gas of the GT and decrease
the energy loss from the CCGT. Five different configurations
of CCGT systems are chosen in this study. Each of the
CCGT configurations has the same GT specification. The
GT cycle specifications are similar to a real CCGT power
plant, such as the MARAFIQ CCGT power plant in Saudi
Arabia. In addition to the three GT and auxiliary systems,
the SPCC consists of three single-pressure HRSGs and a
steam turbine. The DPCC configuration consists of three
dual-pressure HRSGs and a condensing steam turbine. The
TPCC configuration consists of three triple-pressure HRSGs
and a condensing steam turbine. The TPRCC configuration
consists of three triple-pressure reheat HRSGs and a condensing steam turbine. The TPRBCC configuration consists
of three supplementary triple-pressure reheat HRSGs and a
condensing steam turbine.
A triple-pressure reheat HRSG with supplementary firing
unit and a condensing steam turbine can be described
as a complex triple-pressure CCGT plant. As shown in
Figure 2, the configuration of three GTs and three HRSGs
connected with one ST was associated with the unit in this
model. Energy and mass balances are presented because
a more significant and complex configuration is identified
with a supplementary triple-pressure reheat CCGT plant. A
schematic diagram of the triple-pressure reheat combined
cycle with a supplementary firing unit (TPRBCC) power
plant in the midst of a simple GT cycle is depicted by Figure 3.
This would produce a turbine inlet temperature of 1600 K. The
majority of the air at 1 is compressed to a higher pressure
at 2. At this point, the air enters the combustion chamber
(CC) and undergoes combustion by utilizing additional fuel.
This results in combustion gas at 3. Expansion of the gas at 3
subsequently takes place at the chimney or HRSG at 4. Heat
is transferred to the steam once the gas at 4 enters the HRSG
before exiting the stack temperature at 5.
In the HRSG, expansion of the steam at the outlet of the
high-pressure superheater at 6 occurs in the high-pressure
steam turbine (HPST), resulting in a lower-pressure and
temperature at 7. In the reheat section, steam at 7 is reheated
to a higher temperature at 8. There, further expansion of
the steam in the intermediate-pressure steam turbine (IPST)
to a lower-pressure at 10 occurs. Followed by this is the
expansion of the superheated steam at the outlet of the
intermediate-pressure section of the HRSG at 9, in the IPST
to a lower-pressure and temperature at 10, where it enters
into the low-pressure steam turbine. At the outlet of the
low-pressure section of the HRSG at 11, the superheated
steam and steam at 10 undergoes further expansion in the
low-pressure steam turbine (LPST) to lower-pressure and
temperature at 12. From the low-pressure steam turbine at 2
bar, steam is extracted before being fed to the open feedwater
heater (deaerator) at 13. At 12, and the steam with lowpressure and low-temperature undergoes condensation in
the condenser to transform it into saturated water at 14.
The resulting water at 15 is the outcome of saturated water
flowing out of the condenser at 14 and subsequently mixing
with steam at 13 inside the deaerating condenser. At 15, the

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

3
Tg1
Tg2

Tss

Tap

Temperature (K)

Tpp
Tg4

Ts

Tw2

Tw1

Economizer

Evaporator

Tg5

Tg6

Tg7

Tap

Tpp

Low-pressure (LP)

Tap

Tpp
TsLP

TssLPT

Tw2LP

High-pressure (HP)

Tg3

Tg5
TssIP Tap

Tpp

TsIP

Tw2IP

Tg1

Tg2
TssHP

Tpp
TsHP
Tw2HP

Tg8

Tw1HP

Tw1IP

Tw1LP

Low-pressure
(LP)

TsHP
Tw2HP

(b)

Tg6

ap

Tpp

Heat transfer

Temperature (K)

Temperature (K)

Tg10

TssHP

Tw1LP

Superheater

Tg4

Tg7

Tg1

Tw1HP

TsLP
Tw2LP

(a)

Tg8

Tap

TssLP

Heat transfer

Tg9

Tg3

Tg4

Tg3

Tg2

Intermediatepressure (IP)

Tg11
Tap

Tg5

TssIP Tap

Tg9
Tpp
Tg10 T
ssLP Tap
T
Tpp
Tw2IPsIP
TsLP
Tw1IP
Tw2LP

Tg4

Tpp

TsHP
Tw2HP

TssIP

Tw1HP

Tw1LP

Low-pressure
(LP)

High-pressure
(HP)

Tg7

Tg6

Tg1
T
Tg3 g2
T
TssHP ssRH

Intermediate- High-pressure Reheat

(RH)
pressure (IP)
(HP)

Heat transfer

Heat transfer

(c)

(d)
Tg2 Tg1

Tg3
Tg5 Tg4
TssRH
TppTssHP
Tg7 Tg6
T
TssIP Tap TsHP
TssIP
Tg9 g8
Tpp
Tw2HP
Tg10 T
Tg11
ssLP Tap
TsIP
Tpp
Tw1HP
Tw2IP
Tap
TsLP
Tw1IP
Tw2LP
Tw1LP
Low-pressure
(LP)

Intermediate- High-pressure Reheat

(RH)
pressure (IP)
(HP)
Heat transfer

(e)

Figure 1: A typical temperature versus heat transfer diagram of HRSG combined cycle: (a) single-pressure, (b) dual-pressure, (c) triplepressure, (d) triple-pressure reheat and, (e) supplementary triple-pressure reheat.

saturated water exiting the deaerating condenser is pumped

to a higher pressure at 1LP . Saturated water at 2LP is the
result of the heating to which water at 1LP is exposed in
the low-pressure economizer section of the HRSG. The water

then enters the low-pressure steam drum (D1). In the lowpressure superheater of the HRSG, the saturated steam at the
outlet of drum D1 at LP is superheated. Steam at LP is
produced as a result. The low-pressure steam turbine becomes

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

GT/HRSG unit 1

TO IPE

11
ECO

LPB

DA

HPE1
A

LPS

IPB

4
TO IPT

GT/HRSG unit 2

22

TO IPE

DA

31

LPB

26

HPE1
A

26

LPS

IPB

CC
GT

T
31 HPS

HPB

HPE2

13 TO LPT

ECO

1 TO HPT
RH

IPS

22

IPB

10
TO IPT

15

C
GT/HRSG unit 3

CC

GT

62

TO IPE

DA

71

HPE1

LPB

66

ECO
62

66

LPS

B
IPE

16

8
TO IPT

16

15

CC

GT

Hot RH
4

41 TO HPT

RH

C
To cold RH
HPT
5

Unit 1: HPS
3
41
1

71 HPS

HPB

HPE2

9 TO LPT
IPS
IPB

Condensate return

Unit 3: HPS

3 TO HPT
RH

IPS

B
IPB

11 HPS

HPB

HPE2

7 To LPT

IPT

10

LPS
DA-21

LPT

8
IPS

Unit 2: HPS

13

7
9

C: compressor

CC: combustion chamber

DA: deaerater

ECO: economizer

GT: gas turbine

HPB: high-pressure boiler

HPE: high-pressure economizer

HPS: high-pressure steam

HRSG: heat recovery steam generator

HPT: high-pressure turbine

IPE: intermediate-pressure economizer

IPS: intermediate-pressure steam

IPT: intermediate-pressure turbine

LPB: low-pressure boiler

LPS: low-pressure steam

LPT: low-pressure turbine

RH: reheat

Figure 2: A schematic diagram of the MARAFIQ CCGT power plant.

the recipient of the steam at LP where it undergoes expansion until it enters the condenser pressure at 14. At the outlet
of drum D1, the saturated water is pumped to the pressure of
drum D2 at 1IP . In the intermediate-pressure economizer

section of the HRSG, water at 1IP undergoes heating until it

claims a saturated condition. Before being partly evaporated
in the HRSGs intermediate pressure evaporation section, the
saturated water at 2IP undergoes heating.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

5
Stack
5
Feed water pump
16

Tw1LP

LP economizer

Tw2LP

LP evaporator

Pump

LP steam
D1
drum

TsLP

TssLP

LP superheater

msLP

Booster pump

Tw1IP 17
IP economizer

Tw2IP

IP evaporator

Pump

IP steam
drum

TsIP

D2

mw

IP superheater
Tw1HP

Booster pump
18

15

Tw2HP

HP economizer
HP evaporator
HP superheater

msIP

TssIP

19

Pump

HP steam
drum

D3

TsHP

Reheat steam
4b = Tg1
msRH

TssHP

Duct burner

6
Fuel
2

GT

C
1

CC

Gas turbine
3

Exhaust gases
4

msHP

HPST

Air

10

IPST

11
Condenser
12

LPST

Deaerating
condenser
14
13

Figure 3: A schematic diagram of the supplementary firing triple-pressure steam-reheat combined cycle power plant.

At the top of drum D2 at IP , the saturated vapor is superheated to a higher temperature at IP in the intermediatepressure superheater section of the HRSG. The intermediatepressure steam turbine becomes the recipient of the steam,
which experiences expansion until it reaches the condenser
at 14. At 1HP , the saturated water present at the outlet of
drum D2 is pumped to the pressure of drum D3. In the highpressure economizer section of the HRSG, water at 1HP
undergoes heating to acquire the saturated water condition.
In the high-pressure section of the HRSG, the saturated
water is heated and partly evaporated. The high-pressure
superheater section of the HRSG is the place where the
saturated vapor at the top of drum D3 at HP , is superheated
to a higher temperature at HP . The steam expands into the
reheat section at 7 after the superheated steam at HP enters

the HPST. In the reheat section of the HRSG, the steam at 7

is superheated to a higher temperature at 8, which has some
impact on the duct burner. Before being pumped to 16, all
the steam at 12 will go through the process of condensation
in the condenser to water at 14. The temperature transfer
diagram for the CCGT power plant with a simple GT cycle
is illustrated in Figure 1(e). The temperature-entropy diagram
for the CCGT is shown in Figure 4.

3. Thermodynamic Model and Analysis

Because of higher overall thermal efficiencies than individual
steam or gas turbine cycles, the CCGT plants preferred
as an attractive development in power generation [22, 23].
Hence, due to escalating fuel prices and decreasing fossil

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

TssHP

TssRH

TsHP
Temperature (K)

Tw2HP

Tw1HP

Tw2IP

TsIP

Tw1IP
Tw2LP

TsLP

TssIP
TssLP

Tw1LP

(10) The terminal temperature difference (TTD) in the

HP, IP, and LP superheaters (temperature difference
between flue gas and superheated steam) are taken as
20 C.
(11) The degree of superheat (DSH) in the LP and IP
superheater (temperature difference between superheated steam and the saturated steam) is taken as
60 C.
(12) The temperature difference between steam and outlet
cooling water in the condenser is taken as 15 C.
(13) Isentropic efficiency of steam turbine is taken as 90%.
(14) Pressure drops in the combustion chamber, HRSG,
and condenser are neglected.

Entropy (kJ/kgK)

Figure 4: Temperature-entropy diagram for supplementary firing

triple-pressure reheat HRSG combined cycle.

(15) Heat losses in the combustion chamber, HRSG, turbines, and condenser are neglected.
(16) All the processes are steady state and steady flow.
(17) The fuel injected into the combustion chamber was
natural gas.

fuel resources, the optimal design of CCGT plants is vital

[24]. In order to ascertain the mass flow rate of steam
generated at the drums, the thermodynamic properties of
each state, the electrical output of the system, and the thermal
energy of a process, a thermodynamics analysis is applied
to each case study. Assumptions have been made of the
processes being steady state and steady flow. Moreover, it
is assumed that the impact of potential and kinetic energy
on the system is negligible. The variation of enthalpy and
temperature for different substances has been accounted for
by the formulations of ideal gases. Steam tables have been
used for water [25]. During the analysis of the combined
cycle, the following assumptions have been made depending
on the real data for the MARAFQ CCGT power plant [26, 27].
(1) Atmospheric conditions are taken as temperature
288 K, pressure 1.01325 bar, and relative humidity
60%.
(2) Turbine inlet temperature (TIT) in gas turbine cycle
is 1600 K.
(3) Isentropic efficiencies of compressor and gas turbine
are 83.5%.
(4) Heat loss from the combustion chamber is considered
to be 3% of the lower fuel heating value [28]. Moreover, all other components are considered adiabatic.
(5) Maximum temperature of steam cycle is 833 K.
(6) The condenser pressure is taken as 0.12 bar.

3.1. Gas Turbine Model. The network of the gas turbine

(Gnet ) is calculated by
Gnet = TIT (1

1
( 1)/

( 1)/

1 (

(1)

),

where is the specific heat of flue gas, is the specific

heat of air, which can be fitted by (2) for the range of 200 K <
T < 800 K, and is the mechanical efficiency of the
compressor and turbine [29]:
= 1.0189 103 0.13784 + 1.9843 104 2
+ 4.2399 107 3 3.7632 1010 4 ,

(2)

where = (2 + 1 )/2 in Kelvin.

The specific heat of flue gas is given by [30]
= 1.8083 2.3127 103 + 4.045 106 2
1.7363 109 3 .

(3)

The output power from the turbine (P) is expressed as

= 4 Gnet ,

(4)

(7) The rotational speed is assumed to be constant for the

steam and gas turbine cycle at 3600 rpm.

where 4 is the mass flow rate of the exhaust gases through

the gas turbine, which is expressed as in

(8) The pressure of high-pressure (HP) steam is taken as

100 bar.

4 = + .

(9) The pinch points in HP, intermediate-pressure (IP),

and low-pressure (LP) evaporators (minimum temperature difference between the flue gas and the
saturated steam) are taken as 15 C.

(5)

The specific fuel consumption (SFC) is determined by [3133]

SFC =

3600
.
Gnet

(6)

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

The heat supplied is also expressed as

3.3. Condenser Model. The heat rejected from the condenser

is expressed by

add = [TIT 1 (1 +
[

( 1)/

)] .
]

(7)

The gas turbine efficiency (th ) can be determined by [2934]

th =

Gnet
.
add

(8)

cond = (12 14 ) .

3.4. Pump Model. The condensate water from the condenser

is extracted by the pump and is raised to the economizer
pressure. The corresponding work for 3 levels is given by
= V16 (LP ) + ( LP )

3.2. Steam Turbine Cycle Model. It is assumed that the ST efficiency and the pump efficiency are represented by and ,
respectively. The ideal and actual processes are represented on
the temperature-entropy diagram by solid and dashed lines,
respectively, as shown in Figure 4 [29].
Duct Burner. The duct burner is used to burn additional fuel
in the supplementary firing, which leads to an increase in the
temperature of the exhaust gas that passes through the HRSG.
In a duct burner,
4 4 4 + LHV = ( 4 + ) 4 4
+ (1 ) LHV,
(9)

V17 (IP LP ) + ( IP LP )

Heat Recovery Steam Generator Model. The analysis of the

HRSG unit is based on the pinch and approach point. From
Figure 1(e), it is clear that the energy balance for the highpressure steam evaporator side of the HRSG gives [35, 36]

2HP = HP .

Therefore, the network for the steam turbine power plant is

expressed as
snet = st .

10 10
11

LP (LP 2LP )
.
11 1

The performance of a combined cycle gas turbine power

plant, including the thermal efficiencies for the gas turbine
cycle, steam turbine cycle, and overall efficiency, is calculated
by the following equations [21].
The efficiency for the steam turbine power plant is defined
as

(11)

(12)

Steam Turbine Model. By performing the energy balance for

a steam turbine, as shown in Figure 4, the following relation
is obtained [36]:
ST = HP 6 RH 7 + RH 8 + IP 9
+ LP 7 12 ,

(13)

where is the water mass flow rate and is determined by

= HP + IP + LP .

st =

snet
.
av

(18)

The overall thermal efficiency of the combined cycle gas

turbine power plant is expressed as [24, 28, 3742]
all =

3 Gnet + snet
.
3 add

(19)

4. Results and Discussion

The heat available with exhaust gases from gas turbine is given
by
av = (1 1 11 11 ) 1 .

(17)

(10)

The temperature of the exhaust gases at the exit from the lowpressure economizer of the HRSG could be found by considering the energy balance of the low-pressure economizer
(Figure 1(e)):
11 =

(16)

V18 (HP IP ) .

where is the duct burner efficiency and is taken as 93%

[17], = 4 + , and 1 = 4 ; the result from (9) is the
1 .

4 = HP + ,

(15)

(14)

The effect of the compression ratio and steam pressure

on the overall thermal efficiency and power output in the
CCGT is demonstrated and validated against the real power
plant of MARAFIQ in Saudi Arabia. The MARAFIQ CCGT
power plant comprises three GT units and three HRSG units
connected by a steam turbine unit. The effect of the steam
cycle high-pressure on the overall thermal efficiency of the
CCGT of the different configurations of the HRSG is shown
in Figure 5. It was observed that the overall efficiency of the
configuration increased with increasing steam pressure of
the HRSG. All the configurations had the overall efficiency
enhanced. With the exception of the SPCC configuration
for HRSG, the overall efficiency of the cycle increased for
the DPCC, TPCC, TPRCC, and TPRBCC, which makes
them suitable for power plants. The comparison between the
simulated overall power outputs of the CCGT configurations
versus the real results from the MARAFIQ CCGT power
plant is shown in Figure 6. It is also evident that the increase
in the steam pressure of the HRSG leads to an increase in
the overall power output of the cycle. In addition, compared
with other configurations, the TPRBCC configuration has

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

0.56
450
HRSG exhaust temperature (K)

Overall thermal efficiency

0.55

0.54

0.53

330

60

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

80
100
120
Steam cycle high-pressure (bar)

140

160

900

Overall power outputs (MW)

880
860
840
820
800
780
60

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

80
100
120
Steam cycle high-pressure (bar)

12

140

160

TPRCC
TPRBCC
MARAFIQ CCGT real data

Figure 6: Comparison between simulated overall power outputs

of the CCGT configuration versus practical results by MARAFIQ
CCGT power plant.

16

20

24

28

32

Compression ratio
SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

TPRCC
TPRBCC

Figure 5: Effect of steam pressure of HRSG on overall thermal

efficiency of the CCGT power plants configurations.

40

390

360

0.52

0.51
40

420

TPRCC
TPRBCC

Figure 7: Effect of the compression ratio on exhaust temperature of

the HRSG configurations.

the highest power. In comparison with the MARAFIQ CCGT

power plant, the power output from the TPRBCC power
plant is much higher. This is due to the assumption that
the simulation model is based on complete combustion [21].
Furthermore, the operating method and type of fuel used
contribute to increased losses for the real power plant.
The effect of compression ratio on the exhaust temperature of the HRSG configurations is shown in Figure 7.
It is evident that, with an increase in the compression ratio
for all the configurations of CCGT, there is an increase in the
compression ratio which may also cause an increase in the
exhaust gas temperature of the HRSG [14]. There is a much
lower temperature of the exhaust gases from the HRSG in the
TPRBCC configuration, compared with the higher exhaust
gas temperature in the SPCC configuration. With the SPCC
configuration, less energy is recovered from the exhaust gases
that have passed through the HRSG.
Figure 8 shows the effect of the compression ratio on the
steam mass flow rate of the CCGT power plant configurations. When the compression ratio increases from 10 to 30,
there is a decrease in the steam generated in the ST cycle by
about 140 kg/s. The reduction in the exhaust gas temperature
after the increase in the compression ratio is the main
reason behind this. The number of pinch points determines
the mass generated steam, which are one for SPCC, two
for DPCC, and three for TPCC, TPRCC, and TPRBCC.
Therefore, the amount of steam generated increases with
the number of pressure levels. Bassily [12] discussed similar
trends in the results. In every case, other factors, such as
pressure, determined the effect of the mass generated steam.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

350

Steam mass ow rate (kg/s)

300

250

200

150

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

28

32

TPRCC
TPRBCC

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

Figure 8: Effect of the compression ratio on the steam mass flow

rate of the CCGT power plants configurations.

500

Power output (MW)

The phasing out of steam at the various configurations,

temperatures, and pressures determines the steam generated
[13].
The comparison between the simulated power outputs of
the GT and ST configurations versus the real power plants
of MARAFIQ CCGT in Saudi Arabia is shown in Figure 9. It
was observed that, when the compression ratio reached the
value of 12.6, the GT power output decreased with further
increases in the compression ratio. The increase in the
compression ratio led to a decrease in the steam turbine
power output. This is because of the opposite effect of the
compression ratio on the steam generated in the ST power
plant [1, 17, 19, 40]. The increase in the compression ratio leads
to a decrease in the steam generated in the HRSG (Figure 8).
This is due to reduced temperature of exhaust gases from
the GT and the increased temperature of the exhaust gases
from the HRSG. The amount of energy recovered is reduced
from the exhaust gases in the HRSG [28, 37]. The simulation
results are in agreement with the real power plants of
MARAFIQ CCGT.
The effect of the compression ratio on performance of
the CCGT power plants for different configurations of the
HRSG is shown in Figure 10. The effect of compression
ratio on the overall thermal efficiency of the CCGT plants
configurations is shown in Figure 10(a). There is an increase
in the overall thermal efficiency with an increase in the
compression ratio. However, the thermal efficiency starts
to decrease with increasing compression ratio after the
compression ratio has reached a value of 1820. This is
due to the reduction in the power of the GT cycle with
increasing compression ratio [42]. In addition, the increase
in the compression ratio results in the decrease of the
steam generated in the HRSG. Secondly, a lower overall
thermal efficiency is obtained in the SPCC, whereas a higher
overall efficiency is obtained in the TPRCC configuration.
Figure 10(b) shows the effect of the compression ratio on the
heat rate of the CCGT power plant configurations. It was also
observed that increasing compression ratio was matched with
a decreasing heat rate. However, after the compression ratio
reached 1820, an increase in the heat rate was observed with
further increases in the compression ratio. The effect of the
compression ratio on the specific fuel consumption of the
CCGT power plant configurations is shown in Figure 10(c).
It is evident that higher specific fuel consumption occurred
with the SPCC configuration, whereas lower specific fuel
consumption occurred with the TPRCC at a compression
ratio of 18. The simulated overall power output of the CCGT
configurations was compared with real results from the
MARAFIQ CCGT in Saudi Arabia, together with the effect
of compression ratio and presented in Figure 11. The increase
in the compression ratio of the GT cycle for all configurations
resulted in the reduction of the overall power output. Highest
overall output was obtained with the TPRBCC, and lowest
overall output was obtained with the SPCC. The TPRBCC
configuration power plant has a much higher overall power
output compared with the MARAFIQ CCGT, because the
real CCGT plant has many losses due to leakages, incomplete
combustion, and control problems.

400

300

200

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

Gas turbine
SPCC
DPCC
TPCC
TPRCC
TPRBCC
MARAFIQ CCGT

28

32

Steam turbine
SPCC
DPCC
TPCC
TPRCC
TPRBCC
MARAFIQ CCGT

Figure 9: Comparison between simulated power outputs of the

GT and ST configuration versus practical results from MARAFIQ
CCGT power plant with effect of the compression ratio.

10

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Overall thermal efficiency

0.53

0.52

0.51

0.50

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

28

32

TPRCC
TPRBCC

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

(a) Overall thermal efficiency

0.049
Specific fuel consumption (kg/kWh)

Heat rate (kJ/kWh)

7200

7100

7000

6900

6800

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

28

32

TPRCC
TPRBCC

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

(b) Heat rate

0.048

0.047

0.046

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

28

32

TPRCC
TPRBCC

(c) Specific fuel consumption

Figure 10: Effect of the compression ratio on performance of different configurations of the CCGT power plants.

4.1. Uncertainty Evaluation. According to Holman [43],

experimental errors found in the MARAFQ CCGTs output
power have been dealt with by carrying out a comprehensive error investigation. Table 1 shown below lists down

error readings pertaining to both the CCGT power plants

recorded from various instruments, whereas Table 1 lists
down the readings having the maximum possible error in
them.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

11
Table 1: Uncertainties of instruments and properties.

Name of
instrument

Range of
instrument

Variable
measured

Thermocouple

0120 C

Pressure gage

020 bar

Pressure gage

0140 bar

Ambient
temperature
Compressed
air pressure
Superheated
steam
pressure

Item number

Least division in
measuring
instrument

Min. and max.

values measured in
experiment

Uncertainty
error (%)

0.2 C

14.4444.9 C

0.0991

0.1 bar

14.615.96 bar

0.6544

0.2 bar

88.1121.2 bar

0.2024

5. Conclusions

Overall power output (MW)

900

800

700

600

12

16
20
24
Compression ratio

28

32

TPRCC
TPRBCC
MARAFIQ CCGT

SPCC
DPCC
TPCC

Figure 11: Comparison between simulated overall power outputs

versus practical results from MARAFIQ CCGT power plant with
effect of the compression ratio.

Equation (20) represents the assessment of uncertainty of

the CCGT:
CCGT
CCGT
= (

) 21 + (
) 2 + (
) 2 ,
1

(20)

where = Least division of the pressure of the superheat

steam; = Least division compression ratio; 1 = Least
division temperature.

The performance of CCGT power plants is checked by

parametric analysis. A new methodology of thermodynamic
model was launched to check the performance of a working
CCGT plant, called the MARAFIQ CCGT plant. Different
parameters are used for different purposes, but steam pressure is the major parameter used to get the maximum energy
from the exhaust. To obtain maximum thermal efficiency
as well as power generation, multiconfigured parameters
are designed. Parametrical analysis is done to learn about
the performance of CCGT plants, using the parameters of
compression ratio and steam pressure. It is observed that,
as the steam pressure of the HRSG is increased, the overall
thermal efficiency, as well as power generation, of the CCGT
plant is increased for the SPCC, TPCC, DPCC, TPRCC,
and TPRBCC configurations. The thermal efficiency was
increased with an increase of the compression ratio until
19; after that, the overall thermal efficiency decreases. The
performance of the MARAFIQ CCGT plant, together with
a running performance for CCGT power plants, is checked
by the parameters discussed above. It is concluded that
the compression ratio has the most effect on the CCGT
configuration, overall thermal efficiency, and power output.
Furthermore, the TPRCC configuration had the highest
thermal efficiency, whereas the TPRBCC configuration had
the highest overall power output.

Nomenclature
:
:
:
:
:
1 :
:
:
:
:
p:

The specific heat of the air (kJ/kgK)

The specific heat of the fuel (kJ/kgK)
The specific heat of flue gas (kJ/kgK)
The fuel-air ratio
Enthalpy (kJ/kg)
The heat loss factor in the heat recovery
steam generator
The air mass flow rate (kg/s)
The fuel mass flow rate (kg/s)
The mass flow rate of the exhaust gases
through the gas turbine (kg/s)
The water mass flow rate (kg/s)
Pressure (bar)

12

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

add :
av :

The heat supplied (kJ/kg)

The heat available with exhaust gases
from gas turbine cycle (kJ/kg)
The heat rejected from the condenser
cond :
(kJ/kg)
:
The net power output of the turbine
(MW)
Compression ratio
:
:
Temperature (K)
1 :
Compressor inlet air temperature (K)
The average temperature (K)
:
s :
The saturation steam temperature (K)
1 :
The temperature of water entering the
economizer (K)
The temperature of water entering the
2 :
evaporator (K)
V :
Specific volume of the water (m3 /kg)
Gnet :
The network of the gas turbine (kJ/kg)
:
The work of the pump (kJ/kg)
snet :
The work net of the steam turbine cycle
(kJ/kg)
The work of the steam turbine (kJ/kg)
st :
CCGT /CCGT : Uncertainty of the CCGT
:
Least division of the pressure of the
superheat steam
Least division compression ratio
:
1 :
Least division temperature.
Greek Symbols
:
:
:
:
:
:

Turbine efficiency
Specific heat ratio of air
Specific heat ratio of gases
Isentropic compressor efficiency
The supplementary firing efficiency
The mechanical efficiency of the
compressor and turbine
: The water pump efficiency
st : The steam turbine efficiency
th : The thermal efficiency of the gas turbine.

Abbreviation
CCGT:
DPCC:
GT:
HP:
HPST:
HRSG:
IP:
IPST:
LP:

Combined cycle gas turbine

Dual-pressure combined cycle
Gas turbine
High-pressure
High-pressure steam turbine
Heat recovery steam generator
Intermediate pressure
Intermediate-pressure steam turbine
Low-pressure

LPST:
SPCC:
ST:
TIT:
TPCC:
TPRBCC:
TPRCC:

Low-pressure steam turbine

Single-pressure combined cycle
Steam turbine
Turbine inlet temperature
Triple-pressure combined cycle
Supplementary triple-pressure with
reheat combined cycle
Triple-pressure with reheat combined
cycle.

Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank University Malaysia Pahang
for providing laboratory facilities and financial support under
Doctoral Scholarship scheme (no. GRS100332).

References
[1] R. Kehlhofer, B. Rukes, F. Hannemann, and F. Stirnimann, Combined-Cycle Gas and Steam Turbine Power Plants, PennWell,
Houston, Tex, USA, 3rd edition, 2009.
[2] S. C. Kaushik, V. S. Reddy, and S. K. Tyagi, Energy and exergy
analyses of thermal power plants: a review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 18571872, 2011.
[3] S. Boonnasa and P. Namprakai, Sensitivity analysis for the
capacity improvement of a combined cycle power plant (100
600 MW), Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 28, no. 14-15, pp.
18651874, 2008.
[4] T. Srinivas, A. V. S. S. K. S. Gupta, and B. V. Reddy, Thermodynamic modeling and optimization of multi-pressure heat
recovery steam generator in combined power cycle, Journal of
Scientific and Industrial Research, vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 827834,
2008.
[5] R. Carapellucci and A. Milazzo, Repowering combined cycle
power plants by a modified STIG configuration, Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 15901600, 2007.
[6] A. Khaliq and S. C. Kaushik, Thermodynamic performance
evaluation of combustion gas turbine cogeneration system with
reheat, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 24, no. 13, pp. 1785
1795, 2004.
[7] R. K. Sullerey and A. Ankur, Performance improvement of gas
turbine cycle, International Journal of Turbo and Jet Engines,
vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 209219, 2008.
[8] T. Srinivas, Thermodynamic modelling and optimization of a
dual pressure reheat combined power cycle, SadhanaAcademy Proceedings in Engineering Sciences, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 597
608, 2010.
[9] K. Sarabchi and G. T. Polley, Thermodynamical optimization
of a combined-cycle plant performance, in Proceedings of
the International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and
Exposition, The Hague, The Netherlands, June 1994.
[10] J. Shin, Y. Son, M. Kim, J. Kim, and Y. Jeon, Performance analysis of a triple pressure HRSG, KSME International Journal, vol.
17, no. 11, pp. 17461755, 2003.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

[11] A. M. Bassily, Enhancing the efficiency and power of the triplepressure reheat combined cycle by means of gas reheat, gas
recuperation, and reduction of the irreversibility in the heat
recovery steam generator, Applied Energy, vol. 85, no. 12, pp.
11411162, 2008.
[12] A. M. Bassily, Modeling, numerical optimization, and irreversibility reduction of a triple-pressure reheat combined cycle,
Energy, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 778794, 2007.
[13] A. M. Bassily, Numerical cost optimization and irreversibility
analysis of the triple-pressure reheat steam-air cooled GT commercial combined cycle power plants, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 40, pp. 145160, 2012.
[14] M. Valdes, M. D. Duran, and A. Rovira, Thermoeconomic
optimization of combined cycle gas turbine power plants using
genetic algorithms, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 23, no. 17,
pp. 21692182, 2003.
[15] A. Franco and C. Casarosa, Thermoeconomic evaluation of the
feasibility of highly efficient combined cycle power plants,
Energy, vol. 29, no. 1215, pp. 19631982, 2004.
[16] M. Mohagheghi and J. Shayegan, Thermodynamic optimization of design variables and heat exchangers layout in HRSGs
for CCGT, using genetic algorithm, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 29, no. 2-3, pp. 290299, 2009.
[17] V. Ganapathy, Wast Heat Boiler Deskbook, Fairmont Press,
Indian Trail, NC, USA, 1991.
[18] F. R. P. Arrieta and E. E. S. Lora, Influence of ambient temperature on combined-cycle power-plant performance, Applied
Energy, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 261272, 2005.
[19] A. Franco and A. Russo, Combined cycle plant efficiency
increase based on the optimization of the heat recovery steam
generator operating parameters, International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 843859, 2002.
[20] T. K. Ibrahim and M. M. Rahman, Study on effective parameter
of the triple-pressure reheat combined cycle performance,
Thermal Science, vol. 17, pp. 497508, 2013.
[21] M. Edris, Comparison between single-shaft and mutli-shaft gas
fired 800 MWel combined cycle power plant, Applied Thermal
Engineering, vol. 30, no. 16, pp. 23392346, 2010.
[22] R. Carapellucci, A unified approach to assess performance of
different techniques for recovering exhaust heat from gas turbines, Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 50, no. 5, pp.
12181226, 2009.
[23] M. Tajik Mansouri, P. Ahmadi, A. Ganjeh Kaviri, and M. N.
Mohd-Jaafar, Exergetic and economic evaluation of the effect
of HRSG configurations on the performance of combined cycle
power plants, Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 58, pp.
4758, 2012.
[24] M. Ameri, P. Ahmadi, and S. Khanmohammadi, Exergy analysis of a 420 MW combined cycle power plant, International
Journal of Energy Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 175183, 2008.
[25] Y. A. Cengel and A. Michael, Thermodynamics. An Engineering
Approach, Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, India, 2008.
[26] H. Barzegar Avval, P. Ahmadi, A. R. Ghaffarizadeh, and M. H.
Saidi, Thermo-economic-environmental multiobjective optimization of a gas turbine power plant with preheater using evolutionary algorithm, International Journal of Energy Research,
vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 389403, 2011.
[27] P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer, and M. A. Rosen, Exergy, exergoeconomic and environmental analyses and evolutionary algorithm
based multi-objective optimization of combined cycle power
plants, Energy, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 58865898, 2011.

13
[28] M. Ghazi, P. Ahmadi, A. F. Sotoodeh, and A. Taherkhani, Modeling and thermo-economic optimization of heat recovery heat
exchangers using a multimodal genetic algorithm, Energy
Conversion and Management, vol. 58, pp. 149156, 2012.
[29] T. K. Ibrahim and M. M. Rahman, Parametric simulation of triple-pressure reheat combined cycle: a case study, Advanced
Science Letters, vol. 13, pp. 263268, 2012.
[30] T. K. Ibrahim, M. M. Rahman, and A. N. Abdalla, Optimum
gas turbine configuration for improving the performance of
combined cycle power plant, Procedia Engineering, vol. 15, pp.
42164223, 2011.
[31] M. M. Rahman, T. K. Ibrahim, and A. N. Abdalla, Thermodynamic performance analysis of gas-turbine power-plant, International Journal of Physical Sciences, vol. 6, no. 14, pp. 3539
3550, 2011.
[32] T. K. Ibrahim, M. M. Rahman, and A. N. Abd Alla, Study on the
effective parameter of gas turbine model with intercooled
compression process, Scientific Research and Essays, vol. 5, no.
23, pp. 37603770, 2010.
[33] M. M. Rahman, T. K. Ibrahim, M. Y. Taib, M. M. Noor, K. Kadirgama, and A. B. Rosli, Thermal analysis of open-cycle
regenerator gas-turbine power-plants, WASET, vol. 68, pp. 94
99, 2010.
[34] M. M. Rahman, T. K. Ibrahim, K. Kadirgama, R. Mamat, and
R. A. Bakar, Influence of operation conditions and ambient
temperature on performance of gas turbine power plant,
Advanced Materials Research, vol. 189193, pp. 30073013, 2011.
[35] J. I. Manassaldi, S. F. Mussati, and N. J. Scenna, Optimal
synthesis and design of Heat Recovery Steam Generation
(HRSG) via mathematical programming, Energy, vol. 36, no.
1, pp. 475485, 2011.
[36] P. Ahmadi and I. Dincer, Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic optimization of a dual pressure combined cycle
power plant with a supplementary firing unit, Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 22962308, 2011.
[37] F. Haglind, Variable geometry gas turbines for improving the
part-load performance of marine combined cyclescombined
cycle performance, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 31, no. 4,
pp. 467476, 2011.
[38] F. Basrawi, T. Yamada, K. Nakanishi, and S. Naing, Effect of
ambient temperature on the performance of micro gas turbine
with cogeneration system in cold region, Applied Thermal
Engineering, vol. 31, no. 6-7, pp. 10581067, 2011.
[39] A. de Sa and S. Al Zubaidy, Gas turbine performance at varying
ambient temperature, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 31, no.
14-15, pp. 27352739, 2011.
[40] E. Godoy, N. J. Scenna, and S. J. Benz, Families of optimal thermodynamic solutions for combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT)
power plants, Applied Thermal Engineering, vol. 30, no. 6-7, pp.
569576, 2010.
[41] N. Woudstra, T. Woudstra, A. Pirone, and T. V. D. Stelt,
Thermodynamic evaluation of combined cycle plants, Energy
Conversion and Management, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 10991110, 2010.
[42] S. Sanjay, Investigation of effect of variation of cycle parameters
on thermodynamic performance of gas-steam combined cycle,
Energy, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 157167, 2011.
[43] J. P. Holman, Experimental Methods for Engineering, pp. 60166,
Mc Graw Hill, New York, NY, USA, 8th edition, 2012.

International Journal of

Rotating
Machinery

The Scientific
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Engineering
Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Advances in

Mechanical
Engineering

Journal of

Sensors
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

International Journal of

Distributed
Sensor Networks
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Advances in

Civil Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Volume 2014

Submit your manuscripts at

http://www.hindawi.com

Advances in
OptoElectronics

Journal of

Robotics
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Volume 2014

VLSI Design

Modelling &
Simulation
in Engineering

International Journal of

Navigation and
Observation

International Journal of

Chemical Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Advances in

Acoustics and Vibration

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Volume 2014

Journal of

Control Science
and Engineering

Active and Passive

Electronic Components
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

International Journal of

Journal of

Antennas and
Propagation
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Shock and Vibration

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014

Electrical and Computer

Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com

Volume 2014