Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

ASPEN simulation of cogeneration plants

Ligang Zheng
a

a,*

, Edward Furimsky

CANMET Energy Technology Center, Natural Resources Canada, 1 Haanel Drive, Nepean, Ontario, Canada K1A 1M1
b
IMAF Group, 184 Marlborough Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 8G4
Received 16 April 2002; accepted 3 August 2002

Abstract
A detailed ow sheet of the combined cycle cogeneration plant fuelled by natural gas was prepared. The
model for simulation of this plant was developed using the ASPEN PLUS software. The results generated
using this model were compared with the operating data of the commercial plant generating about 43.6
MW of electricity by gas turbine and 28.6 MW of electricity by steam turbine. The electricity is supplied to
the grid, whereas the low pressure steam is utilised locally for heating purposes. The key data generated
using the ASPEN model are in good agreement with the operating data.
Crown Copyright 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cogeneration; Electricity and steam; Natural gas; ASPEN PLUS

1. Introduction
Combustion of natural gas is the most ecient means for generating electricity from fossil fuels.
Thus, it was estimated by Geosits and Mohamed-Zadeh [1] that for a unit of electricity generated,
the emissions of CO2 , SOx and solid particulates are signicantly lower than those from coal
combustion. Relatively small size plants burning natural gas can be operated eciently. This
suggests that they can be sized to match the demand of industrial plants and/or communities. The
same cannot be achieved with plants burning coal. In this case, only large plants can be operated
eciently. However, more stringent environmental regulations can aect the operation of such
plants in the future. Natural gas burning plants oer the opportunity for ecient cogeneration of
steam or hot water for local consumption.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-613-947-0288; fax: +1-613-992-9335.

E-mail address: lzheng@nrcan.gc.ca (L. Zheng).

0196-8904/02/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 9 6 - 8 9 0 4 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 9 0 - 5

1846

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

Recently, CANMET has utilised the advanced system for process engineering (ASPEN) software to model and simulate a number of integrated gasication combined cycle (IGCC) power
plants employing Shell, Texaco, KRW and BGL gasiers [2]. The results generated using these
models were compared with industrial data. In every case, very good agreement between the
industrial data and those determined using the ASPEN models was obtained. Based on the experience gained during the simulation of IGCC plants, the model development was further expanded to include cogeneration plants [3]. A local cogeneration plant was selected for this project.
This plant is located on the site comprising three hospitals and a Health Sciences Centre. The
plant produces approximately 70 MW of electricity, all of which is supplied to the electricity grid.
The waste heat produced in the process is used to generate steam and hot water, which are
subsequently utilized by the hospitals and the Health Science Centre.
For the present work, ASPEN steady state simulation software was used to develop the model
of the cogeneration process. The simulation ow sheet for the process is divided into three main
sections: (1) gas turbine, (2) heat recovery steam generation (HRSG) and (3) steam turbine. This
division makes it possible to study and test each section individually.

2. Brief process description

A schematic diagram of the cogeneration plant is shown in Fig. 1. In the process, electricity
is produced by means of a GE LM-6000 gas turbine and two steam turbines. Natural gas and
excess air are fed into the gas turbine at 11,200 and 391,100 m3 /h, respectively. Also, control
steam is added in order to reduce the NOx emissions from the gas turbine. Complete com-

Fig. 1. Schematics of cogeneration.

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

1847

bustion of the fuel takes place inside the turbine under a ring temperature of 12001260 C,
resulting in an electric power output of 42 MW. The hot exit gases (mainly CO2 and H2 O) are
sent to the HRSG unit. The resulting output of the steam turbine is further increased by
maintaining a secondary ring reaction using the fresh feed of natural gas at 800 C. This
ring, utilizing about 7540 m3 /h of natural gas, constitutes the rst stage of the HRSG.
Subsequently, the product gases are utilized to supply heat to a system of three boilers and four
heaters, where steam is generated from the boiler feed water, and the ue gas exits through a
stack. Three types of steam are produced: (1) superheated high pressure (HP) steam (6200 kPa)
(2) intermediate pressure (IP) steam (690 kPa) and (3) low pressure (LP) steam (138 kPa). The
blowdown rate of the boilers is approximately 1%. The HP steam and a portion of the IP
steam are fed to the steam turbine, whereas the remainder of the IP steam is supplied to the
hospitals and Health Science Centre.
The steam turbine consists of a high pressure and a low pressure turbine. The HP steam
produced in the HRSG unit is fed to the high pressure turbine, producing an outlet stream of 4315
kPa pressure (NOx control steam) and generating 14 MW of electricity. Part of the IP steam from
the HRSG is subsequently mixed with the 4315 kPa steam and injected into the low pressure
turbine, while the remainder of the IP steam is sent to the Health Science Centre. The low pressure
steam turbine produces two LP steam output streams (138 and 10.3 kPa, respectively) while
generating an additional 18 MW of electrical power.

3. ASPEN PLUS simulation software

ASPEN PLUS is a process modelling software suitable for a variety of steady state modelling
applications. The ASPEN system is based on blocks corresponding to unit operations as well as
chemical reactors, through which most industrial operations can be simulated. By interconnecting
the blocks using material, work and heat streams, a complete process owsheet can be constructed. ASPEN PLUS includes several databases containing physical, chemical and thermodynamic data for a wide variety of chemical compounds, as well as a selection of thermodynamic
models required for accurate simulation of any given chemical system. Simulation is performed by
specifying: (1) ow rates, compositions and operating conditions of the inlet streams; (2) operating
conditions of the blocks used in the process, e.g. temperature, pressure, number of stages and (3)
heat and/or work inputs into the process. Based on these data, ASPEN calculates ow rates,
compositions and state conditions of all outlet material streams, as well as the heat and work
output of all outlet heat and work streams.

4. ASPEN model of the cogeneration plant

The ASPEN model of the cogeneration plant can be divided into three main sections: (1) gas
turbine, (2) HRSG and (3) steam turbine. Following is a summary of the principal steps involved
in modelling each of these sections. The stream and block names, which will be employed in the
discussion, are shown in the detailed ow sheet of the plant in Fig. 2.

1848

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

Fig. 2. ASPEN cogeneration power plant owsheet.

4.1. Gas turbine

The inlet air entering the turbine undergoes a series of compression steps, which are simulated
using three compressor blocks (GT-COMP1, 2 and 3). At each compression stage, work input is
required, and this is accomplished by adding a work stream to each compressor block (WGT-C1, 2
and 3). Following the last compression stage, the air stream (AIR7) is fed to the stoichiometric
reactor (GT-BURN), along with the inlet fuel, which had previously been compressed to 4823 kPa
(STREAM12), and the NOx control steam formed in the steam turbine section (STREAM11). The
mixture ows to a stoichiometric reactor (GT-BURN), where complete combustion of the methane
fuel takes place. The exit gases are mixed with compressed air (GT-COOL3) and undergo a ash

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

1849

operation in which all liquid formed is removed. The gases are then sequentially expanded in two
expansion stages (GT-TURB1 and 2), and work is generated in the process (streams WGT-T1 and
2). Prior to each expansion stage, the gas is mixed with compressed air (GTCOOL3 and 2). At the
end of the expansion process, the exit gas is heated (GT-HEAT) and subsequently mixed with fresh
fuel compressed to 689 kPa. The mixture enters another stoichiometric reactor (SFIRING), where
secondary ring occurs. The resulting hot gas is sent to HRSG.
4.2. Heat recovery steam generation
The hot gas from the gas turbine passes through a number of heat exchange steps and exits as
stack gas after having been cooled to <100 C. These steps are represented by blocks S2-HRSG to
LP2-HRSG. The cooling of the gas results in heat being released, which is then used to heat the
incoming feed water to form steam. The two systems are connected via heat streams as shown on
the ow diagram. The feed water is formed from LP steam (STREAM1) and condensate
(STREAM2), which pass through the deaerator (DEAERAT), with part of the resulting liquid
water stream being eventually fed to the HRSG (STREAM5). The remainder of the water
(STREAM6) is used as a cooling water source elsewhere. STREAM5 is then split into two parts:
one ows to the LPBOILER to generate LP steam (STREAM16) and the other enters another
heater (IPHEATER). After passing through IPHEATER, the stream is further split into a boiler
stream, which is used to generate IP steam (STREAM15) in IPBOILER, and a stream, which
enters HPPUMP and is split into two streams: one that enters the HPBOILER system (TOHPSPLT) and one that is sent to an IP steam desuperheater (STREAM19). After another split,
part of TOHPSPLT is routed to HPBOILER in which HP steam is formed and the other part is
sent to the attemporator. The HP steam formed in the boiler is superheated in SUPERHT1 and
subsequently routed to the attemporator, where it is mixed with the liquid stream from the
previous split. The mixed HP steam is superheated in SUPERHT2 and fed to the steam turbine
(STREAM14).
4.3. Steam turbine
The HP steam from the HRSG unit is rst split into two parts: one ows directly to the high
pressure steam turbine (TOSTTURB) and the other is routed to the 4300 kPa desuperheater
(HPTODEHT). The ow rate of the latter is normally zero in the summer. Both the high pressure
and low pressure turbines were modelled in two sections. The steam enters the rst section of the
high pressure turbine (STTURBH1) at 6200 kPa and exits at 4315 kPa. The outlet stream is split
into STREAM21, which ows to the 4300 kPa desuperheater, and the inlet stream into the second
stage of the high pressure turbine (STTURBH2). The outlet stream from the desuperheater is the
NOx control steam (STREAM11), which ows to the gas turbine. The outlet stream from the
second section of the high pressure turbine (at 690 kPa) is mixed with a portion of the IP steam
from the HRSG. The remainder of the IP steam eventually comprises the steam supplied to
OHSC and NDMC. The mixed stream is subsequently sent to the rst section of the low pressure
steam turbine (STTURBL1). The outlet pressure of the steam from the rst stage is 138 kPa; if
required, LP steam is withdrawn at this stage and used elsewhere in the process (LPSTEAM). The
remainder of the steam enters the second stage of the low pressure turbine (STTURBL2) and exits

1850

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

at the near vacuum pressure of 10.3 kPa. The outlet stream (STREAM25) ows into a cooling
system, where it is condensed and subsequently used as a cooling water source in other parts of the
process. The total work generated in the steam turbine is 32 MW (14 MW in the high pressure
turbine and 18 MW in the low pressure turbine).
5. Simulation results and discussions
The development of the model required a signicant database of the operating parameters of all
blocks and the properties of all streams identied in Fig. 2. Although it is not included, the
database may be provided on request. The model was able to generate several parameters (e.g.
ow of air, temperature, pressure etc.), which were otherwise not available. After verication,
these parameters agreed well with those subsequently determined during the operation. This
demonstrated the capability of the model to generate data on parameters that are not measured
during the operation.
The results generated using the ASPEN model are summarised in Tables 13. Only the essential
parameters are shown. The corresponding process data provided by the operators of the plant are
also included. This allowed comparison with the simulation results for the purpose of assessing
the validity of the ASPEN model. Table 1 lists the input data for the cogeneration process that
were used for the model development. The same ows were used during the plant operation. The
volumetric ow rates of streams GTFUEL and SFFUEL were given at 15 C and 101.3 kPa.
Although the actual temperatures and pressures of these streams were not known, these numbers
were used in the simulation. The data for the principal output streams are summarised in Table 2.
The temperatures were calculated by ASPEN from the pressures and ow rates supplied to the
Table 1
Process and simulation input data
Stream

Description

Flow rate
(m3 /h)

Temperature
(C)

Pressure
(kPa)

GTFUEL
SFFUEL
INLETAIR

Natural gas feed to gas turbine

Natural gas feed to HRSG for secondary ring
Air feed to gas turbine

391,100
11,200
7540

15
15
15

101.3
101.3
101.3

Table 2
Process and simulation steam output data
Stream

STREAM14
STREAM15
STREAM16
STREAM21
STREAM25

Description

HP steam from HRSG

IP steam from HRSG
LP steam from HRSG
HP steam from steam
turbine
LP steam from steam
turbine

Reference

ASPEN model

Flow rate Tempera(m3 /h)

ture (C)

Pressure
(kPa)

Flow rate Tempera(m3 /h)

ture (C)

Pressure
(kPa)

10,800
7430
3650
9500

482
170
126
432

6200
690
138
4315

10,730
7430
3650
9500

482
170
111
430

6200
690
138
4315

90,200

46.5

10.3

95,608

46.4

10.3

L. Zheng, E. Furimsky / Energy Conversion and Management 44 (2003) 18451851

1851

Table 3
Process and simulation electricity output data
Stream
Gas turbine

Steam turbine

Electricity output (MW)

Description
WGT-C1
WGT-C2
WGT-C3
WGT-T1
WGT-T2
High pressure
Low pressure

WST-HP1
WST-HP2
WST-LP1
WST-LP2

Reference

ASPEN model

42

43.6

14

13.4

18

15.2

model. The numbers show that the results generated using the ASPEN simulation are in good
agreement with the operating data.
The electricity outputs of the gas and steam turbines are summarised in Table 3. The outputs
generated using the ASPEN simulation are 43.6 and 28.6 MW for the gas and steam turbines,
respectively. These numbers are in good agreement with the theoretical values of 42 and 32 MW.
It can, therefore, be concluded that the model developed here is suitable for simulation of cogeneration processes of this type.
6. Conclusions and recommendations
The simulation ow sheet for the commercial cogeneration plant has been developed and
compared with a set of data from the operation. The key results generated by this model were
found to be in good agreement with the operating data. Based on these ndings, it is concluded
that the developed model is suitable for simulation of commercial cogeneration plants. The extensive database of the operating parameters can be obtained within a rather short period of time.
The model is a useful tool for preparing the operating strategy of the plant. The impact of parameters, e.g. the change of one or several parameters on the entire operation can be predicted.
The set of parameters ensuring optimal operation can be identied. The model can be readily
modied to suit the simulation of other cogeneration plants.

References
[1] Geosits RF, Mohamed-Zadeh Y. Coke gasication power generation. Options and economics, Power Gen.,
Americas 1993, Dallas, TX.
[2] Zheng L, Furimsky E. Computer models and simulation of IGCC power plants with Canadian coals. In:
Proceedings of the 24th international conference on coal utilization and fuel system, March 811, 1999, Clearwater,
FL. p. 493504.
[3] Hlavacek T, Zheng L, Furimsky E. ASPEN Simulation of Cogeneration Plants, CANMET Energy Technology
Center Report, 1994.