Choice of steam Turbine/Expander?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sofokles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Choice Steam
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the challenges of replacing a steam throttle with a steam turbine or expander to generate electricity from wet steam at a condensation line of 16 bar and 201.37°C. Concerns are raised about the efficiency of turbines with wet steam, as they typically operate poorly under these conditions, leading to potential erosion issues and lower power output. Calculations indicate that the theoretical power output could be around 384 kW, but the actual efficiency may significantly reduce this figure. The conversation also touches on the need for temperature regulation and the possibility of using a desuperheater to manage steam quality. Participants seek recommendations for companies that provide solutions for such steam turbine applications.
Sofokles
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi!

It's a real problem where we today have a steam throttle and would like to change it for a steam turbine/expander to provide some electricity.

The problem is that the steam is at condensationline:
16 [bar] – T=201,37 [C] – h=2793,65 [KJ/kg]– s=6,4216 [KJ/kg*K]

with an isentropic process over the turbine/expander the steam would get to:
p = 6.6673, v = 0.2693, t = 163, x = 0.9421, h = 2.6395e+003, s = 6.4216
you see that the steam will be wet!

the above gives the Power:
P= (efficiency) * 12 [kg/s] * 154.15 [kJ/kg]= 1849.8 kW
the efficiency will lower the power alot.

Now my question is if someone have solved something similar or know what to choose? Is it possible to use a steam turbine when the steam is this wet? Can a double screw expander be an alternative? We have to regulate the outlet to 163C, will this influence oour choice? What retailers exists?

Thank you very much for your help,

Martin
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The steam table I used gives me a different answer:

Inlet conditions:
16 bar(abs) - 201.4 C (sat) - h = 2792 kj/kg

Exhaust
6.667 bar (abs) - 163 C (sat) - h = 2760 kj/kg
Normally, when finding the exhaust state point, we have to use the enthalpy at the saturation line, quality x = 1, not after condensing some of the steam.

This gives a delta h of only 32 kj/kg. Or a theoretical steam rate of 21.88 kg/kw-hr.

With a flow of 12 kg/s or 720 kg/hr, the available energy I calculate is 720 kg/hr / 21.88 kg/kw-hr = 33 kw.

Please correct if someone finds a mistake...

My experience is with steam turbines. You may be hard pressed to get a turbine to do what you want at such a low flow.

As you know, a turbine doesn't actually follow isentropic expansion. A very small turbine might only be 30-55% efficient. The efficiency deficit is realized by the turbine creating less than theoretical power, and this results in a higher than theoretical exhaust temperature. One way to think of it is that all the heat that could be extracted from the steam was not. So if the turbine was exhausting steam at 6.667 bar(abs) at 170 C, it may be necessary to cool it down to saturation temperature somehow.

Wet steam coming into a turbine is not preferred; it would be considered severe duty. Exhausting saturated steam is not unusual. It is best to keep the moisture below 2-3% with these small single stage turbines or else you can start to have bucket erosion problems.
 
thank you for your answer!

What I have learned is that you can say that the turbine acts like an isentropic process and then in reality like you say it doesnt. If it is like you say that you should fallow the saturation line and delta h is 32 kj/kg. The effect would be 32 kj/kg*12 kg/s=384kW.

after the turbine I would really preffer wet steam than overheated. What the turbine should regulate against is the temperature so if the exhaust steam gets warmer with the losses it might be interesting to lower the pressure even more.

Do you know any company that makes solutions to this kinds of problems?
 
oops, I made a simple mistake with the steam flow. 12 kg/s = 43200 kg/hr. Which is a big difference in my mind. Sorry for that.

And yes, you're right, the theortical power would be as much as 384 kw as you said. Thanks for the correction, so the theoretical steam rate would be more like 112 kg/kw-hr.

Ok, it seems with this, you may be interested in a desuperheater. I am nowhere near an expert on these devices, but the first link I found on the subject may be a place to start.
http://www.documentation.emersonprocess.com/groups/public/documents/articles_articlesreprints/ag365652.pdf
 
Here's a video by “driving 4 answers” who seems to me to be well versed on the details of Internal Combustion engines. The video does cover something that's a bit shrouded in 'conspiracy theory', and he touches on that, but of course for phys.org, I'm only interested in the actual science involved. He analyzes the claim of achieving 100 mpg with a 427 cubic inch V8 1970 Ford Galaxy in 1977. Only the fuel supply system was modified. I was surprised that he feels the claim could have been...
TL;DR Summary: Heard in the news about using sonar to locate the sub Hello : After the sinking of the ship near the Greek shores , carrying of alot of people , there was another accident that include 5 tourists and a submarine visiting the titanic , which went missing Some technical notes captured my attention, that there us few sonar devices are hearing sounds repeated every 30 seconds , but they are not able to locate the source Is it possible that the sound waves are reflecting from...
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...
Back
Top