Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2014: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition

GT2014
June 16 20, 2014, Dsseldorf, Germany

GT2014-25222

EXPLOITING WASTE HEAT IN SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED COMBINED HEAT AND

POWER PLANTS USING STEAM INJECTION

Stephan Arnold
Institute of Thermal Turbomachinery
and Machinery Laboratory (ITSM)
University of Stuttgart
Stuttgart, Germany
s.arnold@dungs.com

Markus Schatz
Institute of Thermal Turbomachinery
and Machinery Laboratory (ITSM)
University of Stuttgart
Stuttgart, Germany
schatz@itsm.uni-stuttgart.de

ABSTRACT
Combined heat and power generation (CHP) is a way of providing both electric power and thermal heat for industrial and
domestic facilities at high fuel efficiencies. Often small and
medium sized gas powered internal combustion (IC) engines,
rated at electric power outputs of 50 600 kW, are used for such
applications. During the time when the available thermal heat is
used, the fuel efficiency of such CHP plants is very high, but it
drops to the efficiencies of simple power generation when there is
no heat demand, e.g. during summer. In these cases, the exhaust
heat is blown off, especially as CHP units are mainly heat-lead,
i.e. designed to cover the heat demand rather than the demand for
electrical power. Moreover, as the cooling water heat rejection is
also more difficult at elevated ambient temperatures, these units
are then operated at part load or even switched off, hence having
a lower degree of capacity utilization.
The approach of the work presented here is to replace the
turbocharger system commonly used for IC engines and to use
an electric driven compression device instead, while the turbine
serves to generate additional electric power from the exhaust gas.
Furthermore, for periods with low thermal heat demand,
steam is generated from the turbine exhaust heat. The steam is
injected in front of the turbine in order to increase the turbine
work output further. Thus, at least part of the exhaust heat available is used and the power output as well as the electric efficiency
is increased. In the present work, two configurations of the de-

Now:

scribed setup using a medium sized gas powered IC engine CHP

unit are modeled in order to assess the impact on plant performance and the characteristics of such a facility. In both cases the
engine cooling circuit is integrated. Depending on the configuration used, the plant power output increases by up to 7% only
because of the power turbine. Additional steam injection to use
the waste heat increases the power output further. The relative
electric efficiency increase with steam injection is in the range
of 3 5%. Apart from the higher output of electric power, this
approach allows longer operating hours to be achieved, as the
exhaust heat available is utilized and the heat load for the cooling water circuit is reduced.

NOMENCLATURE
c
velocity [m/s]
cp
specific heat [J/kgK]
g
gravity [m/s2 ]
h
specific enthalpy [J/kg]
j
specific dissipation [J/kg]
m
mass flow [kg/s]
P
Power, Power consumption [W]
p
pressure [Pa]
Q
Heat flow [J/s]
q
specific heat [J/kg]
R
gas constant [J/kgK]
T
temperature [K]
v
specific volume [m3 /kg]

Karl Dungs GmbH & Co. KG, Combustion Controls, Urbach, Ger-

many

Copyright 2014 by ASME

wt
wv
y
z

specific technical work [J/kg]

specific pressure-volume work [J/kg]
specific pressure-work [J/kg]
elevation [m]
heat capacity ratio [-]
difference, delta [-]
efficiency [%]
pressure ratio [-]

Compared to the separated generation of heat and power,

CHP allows to save up to one third of the primary energy [2].
However, this is only valid when the exhaust heat available is actually used to cover a thermal heat demand. When there is no
heat demand, as it is the case in small consumer units like apartment buildings during hot periods, e. g. in summer, the exhaust
heat is usually blown off and even additional power is needed for
engine cooling. In this case the efficiency of combined heat and
power generation drops to the efficiency of simple power generation. Moreover, such plants then operate at part load or even shut
down, so that electrical power has to be provided from the grid.
In this paper a method to increase the power output as well as the
operating hours of CHP units at efficiencies above that of simple
power generation during periods of low thermal heat demand is
presented.
In figure 1 a typical cumulated heat demand profile for housing areas in Germany is shown [3]. The normalized heat demand
(100% corresponds to the maximum heat demand) is plotted for
the number of days it occurs. From figure 1 it is evident, that
the demand is less than 50% of the maximum heat demand during more than two thirds of the year, and even less than 25%
for about one third of the year. Using a heat-lead CHP plant designed to cover a normalized heat load of 50% would roughly
result in the following plant operation: three months of operation at full load together with an additional boiler, three months
of operation at full and part load and three months shutdown because of the low heat demand. Thus, if the excess heat which
is basically exhaust heat could at least partly be recovered, it
would be possible to run the whole plant at higher load and / or
for longer hours.
One approach for this problem is the installation of a combined turbine and generator set downstream of the turbocharger
turbine [4]. This is known as electro-turbo-compounding. However, this approach also results in an increased backpressure for
the IC engine and hence in a higher charge-cycle work, which in
turn directly affects the IC engine power output and efficiency.
As the engine backpressure the allowable pressure drop across
the turbine, the amount of heat which can be converted into electric power in the turbine is also limited, hence only a small part
of the exhaust heat can be recovered.
Using a Rankine Cycle would allow to recover a large part
of the waste heat at a comparably low increase of backpressure
across the heat exchanger situated in the exhaust system. Nevertheless, due to the high latent heat of water, an efficient process
would require high pressure levels. This can be avoided using
an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC). For this process, organic fluids are used that feature a lower latent heat than water and can
be operated at lower pressure levels than the classical Rankine
cycle working with steam [5]. However, this advantage of the
ORC firstly is offset by corrosion and sealing problems, the solution of which is more difficult than for steam processes [2].
Secondly water / steam in comparison with some ORC media, e.

Subscripts
C
compressor
c1
Configuration 1
c2
Configuration 2
in
input parameter
out
output parameter
s
isentropic
T
turbine
t
total state

state variable at 100% load

Acronyms
BC
Boundary conditions
CHP
Combined heat and power
ECC
Engine cooling circuit
EEG
Engine exhaust gases
G
Generator
HBF
Heating backflow
HEX
Heat exchanger
HRSG
Heat recovery steam generator
IC
internal combustion
ORC
Organic Rankine Cycle
resp.
respective
STIG
Steam Injected Gas Turbine
TC
Turbocharger
TIT
Turbine inlet temperature
TOT
Turbine outlet temperature

INTRODUCTION
Combined generation of heat and power (CHP) is a very effective way to increase the fuel utilization and hence to reduce
primary energy consumption as well as CO2 -emissions. In order
to minimize heat transmission losses and to avoid high costs for
the construction and maintenance of large district heating systems, small and medium combined heat and power (CHP) plants
with electric power outputs in the range of 50 600 kW are usually set up for small districts or housing blocks. These units are
often equipped with gas powered, turbocharged internal combustion (IC) engines, although recently some studies have been dealing with the application of microturbines for cogeneration [1].

Copyright 2014 by ASME

Heat Demand [%]

g. propane, butane or silicone oil, is environmentally harmless

and safe in handling under ambient conditions.
In this paper, an alternative system for waste heat recovery is
presented, in which both methods presented above are basically
combined [6, 7]. It is suggested here to replace the turbocharger
of the IC engine with two separate systems, an electric driven
compressor for the charging process and a power turbine combined with a generator in the engine exhaust system. As the
temperature drop across the turbine is restricted by the allowable
pressure drop, during times of low thermal heat demand, steam
is generated from the waste heat still available in the exhaust and
injected in front of the turbine, similar to the well-known STIGprocess [8]. The engine cooling circuit is used to preheat the
feedwater. This method is very similar to the steam assisted turbocharging presented recently by Fu et al. [9], however, in the
present study the turbine power output is used to generate electric power. The injection of steam into microturbines has already
been studied (see e. g. [10] or [11]), however at limited steam
fractions due to the limitations imposed by the combustion process. As these limitations are not applicable in the process presented here, much higher steam mass fractions can be applied.
In this paper, two different CHP configurations with steam
injection are analyzed. The first configuration allows the injected
water to be recovered, while in the second configuration, the
steam is discharged together with the exhaust gases. The engine
used for both configurations is rated at small and medium electric power outputs of 50 600 kW. Of course, part load operation
conditions in transitional periods should be possible.
While an economic evaluation of this method based on the
operating costs, based on the situation in Germany, has been done
in [7], the capital cost and payback period have not been considered yet. It has been found that the revenues achieved with the
additional electric power generated are higher than the increase
of operating costs due to the higher consumption of natural gas
and the feedwater, thus the method allows a cost effective operation of the CHP plant for longer hours at higher loads than the
actual heat demand.
However, the results of the economic analysis will not be
shown here, as the legal situation in Germany and the subsidy
policy is quite complex and certainly not applicable for most
other countries.

100
75
50
25
0
0

50

100

150 200 250

Days of the year

300

350

FIGURE 1. CUMULATED HEAT DEMAND CURVE FOR HOUSING AREAS IN GERMANY AND OPERATING MODES FOR A
CHP PLANT DESIGNED TO COVER 50% OF THE HEAT DEMAND.

chosen temperature limits. In configuration 2 heat output temperatures above the chosen temperature limits are partly traded
off by an increased water consumption because no recovery of
the injected water is implemented. The authors of this paper
are aware of the fact that a discharge of the injected steam together with the exhaust gases is a major disadvantage. In [12] it
is shown, that the costs of feedwater for steam injection into a gas
turbine without water recovery amount to about 5% of the total
fuel costs. However, the amount of water needed can be supplied by reverse-osmosis plants, possibly at operating costs that
are only slightly above those incurred with a condensator [13].
Both configurations, in comparison to usual CHP units, do
not use a turbocharger to compress the combustion air/fuel-airmixture. Instead, the expansion of the exhaust gas or the exhaust
gas/steam mixture, respectively, is done in a proper power turbine which is directly connected to a generator. To charge the IC
engine, an electric driven positive displacement device is used to
compress the fuel-air-mixture. Here it is assumed that the compressor compresses both air and natural gas which is mixed in
front of the compressor (station 0).
The mixing-process of engine exhaust gases and steam is not
examined in detail in this work. Because of the ratio of steam
mass flow and engine exhaust gas mass flow (m 9 /m 3 0.1942)
an injector-mixer according to the venturi principle can be used
to inject steam into the exhaust gas at the same pressure. Moreover, the engine performance is not affected by the different setups under study here, hence it will not be modelled in detail.
There is an identical set of components compressor, engine, mixer and turbine in both configurations. Therefore, it is
possible, in consideration of different inlet conditions, to use the
same calculation routines for these components independent of
the configuration modeled.
In this section, the modeling and calculation methods for all
components used are presented.

MODELING
Two different CHP configurations are examined here. The
first configuration (Fig. 2) features a condenser to recover the
water used generation of steam thus operating in a closed water
circuit. In the second configuration (Fig. 3), which is an improved design based on configuration 1, no water recovery is
considered and the steam is discharged together with the exhaust
gases. The improvement was made because of several difficulties of configuration 1 with heat output temperatures below the

Copyright 2014 by ASME

chimney

With the assumption of an isentropic change it results in

engine
compressor

turbine

mixer

 1

RT0

wv01s =
C 1 ,
1

HEX/condenser

reservoir

and with an isentropic efficiency s , defined as

condensate
seperator

HRSG

s, C =
gas-air-mixture / exhaust gas
steam-exhaust-gas-mixture
steam
water

mixer
turbine

cooler

waste HEX

HEX 1

Q = Q in = Q out .

HEX 3
HEX 2

Q = m c p T.

FIGURE 3. BLOCK DIAGRAM OF CONFIGURATION 2 WITH

INCLUDED STATION NUMBERS ALONG THE CHP UNIT

(6)

Mixer An ideal, isobaric mixer for steam and the engine

exhaust gases (EEG) is assumed. Furthermore, the injection
pressure of the steam is set equal to the pressure of the EEG. The
temperature of the mixture depends on the chemical composition and on the moisture of the EEG as well as on the steam mass
flow. For the modeling the temperature of the EEG, T3 , is needed
apart from the steam temperature, however, this temperature is
unknown. The only information provided by the manufacturer
of the CHP unit under consideration here was the turbine outlet
temperature (TOT) of the turbocharger T5 . With the assumption
of an isentropic efficiency s,T and a turbine pressure ratio T the
engine exhaust gas temperature T3 , defined as

1
  1

1
. [15]
T3 = T5 1 s, T 1
(7)
T

Modeling of the components

Compressor Usually a turbocharger is used in IC engine
based CHP plants. To minimize control-engineering problems
which might occur in a combined turbine, compressor and generator setup, it was decided to uncouple the charging process
from the expansion in the turbine and to use an electric driven
compressor. A positive displacement device is used instead of
a turbo-compressor, also because of the lower rotational speed
necessary. Moreover a positive displacement device provides a
stable performance curve in most operating points and a linear
increase of volume flow with compressor speed and virtually independent from pressure range.
A roots-type supercharger was selected because of the typical pressure ratio of C = 2 [14]. The electric power consumption of the compressor is given by the pressure-volume work
wv01 [15]

can be determined.
Heat losses in the piping between HRSG and steam injection
are neglected, therefore

Z 1

p dv .

(5)

With the definition of the specific heat c p and the temperature

difference T of the flow media (a specified minimum temperature difference between the different fluids is set) the heat flow
becomes

gas-air-mixture / exhaust gas

steam-exhaust-gas-mixture
steam
water

wv01 =

(4)

Heat Exchangers and Cooler There are different heat

exchangers (HEX) (water-water-HEX, water-air-HEX, air-airHEX, HRSG (heat recovery steam generator) and a waste heat
HEX that is used as condenser) in both configurations. With the
assumption of lossless working HEX and a counter current flow,
the heat exchangers and the cooler can be modeled based on the
conservation of energy. Therefore

engine
G HRSG

(3)

PC = m C wv01 .

chimney

wv01s
,
wv01

the electric power consumption of the compressor is given by

FIGURE 2. BLOCK DIAGRAM OF CONFIGURATION 1 WITH

INCLUDED STATION NUMBERS ALONG THE CHP UNIT

compressor

(2)

(1)

T9 = Tsteam, HRSG .

(8)

Copyright 2014 by ASME

For an ideal, isobaric mixer the heat of the mixture is given

The normalized temperature level for the used heat output

for configuration 1 is set to Tout, c1 = 0.5219 and for configuration 2 to Tout, c2 = 0.5575 (the normalization procedure is explained in the next section). At this point, it is considered that
configuration 2 can deliver heat output on a higher temperature
level than configuration 1.
The electric efficiency is defined as nearly equal to the mechanical effciency. Therefore a high generator efficiency is assumed. With this assumption

by
Q 3 + Q 9 = Q 4 .

(9)

Based on the heat balance in eq. 9, the mixing temperature

T4 can be calculated from

m 3 c p, 3 (T3 T4 ) = m 9 (h9 h4 ) and

m 4
T4 = T3
(h9 h4 ) .
m 3 c p, 3

(10)
(11)

mech =

Turbine Similar to the compressor, an isentropic efficiency s, T is assumed for the turbine. Generally the first and
second law of thermodynamics are applied [15]:
wt45 + q45 = (h5 h4 ) +

1 2
c5 c24 + g (z5 z4 )
2

(12)

(13)

For an adiabatic process of gaseous fluid, assuming equal velocities at turbine inlet and outlet, eq. 12 and 13 reduce to
wt45 = ht5 ht4 = h5 h4 = c p (T5 T4 ) .

(14)

To determine the power output of the turbine PT in this paper, it

is necessary to calculate the turbine outlet temperature T5 based
on the turbine inlet temperature T4 :

T5 = T4 1 s, T 1

1
T

 1

(15)

The turbine power is calculated as a function of eq. 14 from

PT = m T wt45 .

(16)

System Efficiencies There are two relevant system efficiencies. On the one hand the thermal efficiency therm and on
the other hand the electric efficiency el . The thermal efficiency
in this paper is defined as

therm =

Q used
Q input (fuel)

(18)

Modeling procedure The equations presented in the

previous subsections are valid for ideal, pure gases. Because the
compressor as well as the turbine have to deal with gas mixtures
(air and natural gas or exhaust gas and steam, respectively) the
equations have to be modified to be applicable. For ideal mixtures especially for the turbine, it is necessary to model a variable
composition of the exhaust gas and the steam injected in front of
the turbine. To model the gas properties of the mixture, the mass
fraction of the steam and the composition of the exhaust gas has
to be known in order to calculate the gas mixture properties, e. g.
the specific heats c p , cv and the enthalpy h of the mixture. For the
compressor a model of a mixture of air and natural gas is used
taking the material properties of the two parts of the mixture and
considering them in the ratio of their mass proportions.
The gas properties and inlet or outlet conditions for both turbine and compressors are mutually dependent. Especially for the
turbine, the inlet conditions are directly dependent on the outlet
conditions, which determine the available steam mass flow to be
injected. Therefore the calculation procedure for these two components has to be done iteratively. The schematic program flow
charts for both configurations are shown in figure 4 and figure 5
starting from the relevant boundary conditions (BC). The engine
performance (station 2) is not modelled. It is only used to derive
to the boundary conditions in front (station 1) and behind (station 3) the engine, based on the data given by the engine manufacturer. Therefore the engine is not represented in the schematic
program flow charts in figure 4 and figure 5.

and for the second law

h5 h4 = y45 + q45 + j45 .

Pel
Pshaft
el =
.

Qinput (fuel)
Qinput (fuel)

Boundary Conditions
Because both configurations are based on the same IC engine, the boundary conditions are basically identical. All temperatures, pressures and mass flows shown here are normalized
based on the corresponding values given at the engine outlet and
based on the engine power and heat output at 100% load ( ). The
resulting values for the boundary conditions are presented in table 1.

(17)

Copyright 2014 by ASME

steam
massflow

BC

compressor
(iterative)
compressor
power
consumption

HRSG +
turbine
(iterative)

RESULTS OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN

The results will be presented separately for configuration 1
and configuration 2. For both configurations the results without steam flow were calculated in a first step as reference state.
Thereafter, the maximum steam mass flow for the configuration
was determined. The steam mass flow limit was defined at the
point where condensation occurs within the turbine exhaust flow.
For configuration 1 the calculations were done without condensation in the waste HEX located behind the HRSG and hence
without water recovery first before considering partial water condensation and recovery in a second step. Altogether, four different nominal operating points of the engine were studied, namely
100%, 75%, 50% and 25% load.

waste heat

waste HEX /
condenser

turbine
performance

engine
cooling circuit

heat buffer

heating circuit
/ condenser
cooling circuit

heat output

Configuration 1
Configuration 1 is a very simple set-up with only one HEX
which will also be used as a condenser here and a reservoir where
the heat from the engine cooling system and the exhaust gas is
delivered to the heating system. Figure 6 shows the course of
turbine output with increasing steam injection. The steam mass
flow is limited by the appearance of condensation in the turbine
exhaust flow. The maximum steam mass flows calculated at the
different performance levels under consideration are given in table 2. For the calculation of the turbine power output the mass
flow of injected steam was increased incrementally from m 9 = 0
to the maximum values stated in table 2.
Figure 6 shows the increase of net turbine power output
PT, net = PT, gross PC as a function of steam injection rate.
Note that the use of a power turbine already increases the
overall power output of the CHP plant by 2.41% to 7.05%, depending on the engine load. However, using a power turbine
without steam injection would not solve the problem of the unused heat and cooling system heat rejection in periods with low
thermal heat demand.

FIGURE 4. SCHEMATIC PROGRAM FLOW OF CONFIGURATION 1 STARTING FROM THE GIVEN BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

compressor
power
consumption

BC

compressor
(iterative)

turbine
performance

HRSG
(iterative)

steam
preheating

steam
massflow
preheating
circuit with
enginge
waste heat

waste heat

heating circuit

cooler power
consumption

TABLE 1.

heat output

FIGURE 5. SCHEMATIC PROGRAM FLOW OF CONFIGURATION 2 STARTING FROM THE GIVEN BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

A compressor pressure ratio C = 2 and an isentropic efficiency of s, C = 0.81 was chosen [6]. For the turbine the pressure ratio was set to T = 2.5 and the isentropic efficiency to
s, T = 0.8. The remaining temperature difference between the
different fluids in the heat exchangers usually was set to 10 K except for the cooling fan system in configuration 2, for which 5 K
was assumed.

DIMENSIONLESS BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Variable

Value

Description

T0 /T3

0.4015

compressor inlet temperature

TECC /T3

0.5219

maximum temperature in the ECC

TFW /T3

0.4254

fresh water temperature

THBF /T3

0.4442

heating backflow (HBF) temperature

p0 /p3

0.3579

compressor inlet pressure

TABLE 2. MAXIMUM STEAM MASS FLOW OF CONFIGURATION 1 BEFORE CONDENSATION IN THE MIXER OCCURS

Engine load

100%

75%

50%

25%

m 9 /m 3

0.1852

0.1545

0.1143

0.0677

Copyright 2014 by ASME

PT, net /Pengine

0.10

el [%]
55.0

100%
75%
50%
25%

0.08
0.06

50.0
45.0

0.04

40.0

0.02

35.0

0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

30.0
0.00

0.25

FIGURE 6. NET TURBINE POWER OUTPUT OF CONFIGURATION 1 AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

100%
75%
50%
25%
0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 7. ELECTRIC EFFICIENCY OF CONFIGURATION 1 AS

A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE
LOADS

Q out /Pengine
0.50

The power output increases further with increasing steam

mass flow reaching peak values about 21 24% below the maximum steam mass flow rate, depending on the operation point.
This results in an overall plant output increase of 3% 9%. At
higher steam mass flow rates the steam overheat has to be reduced because all available heat in the exhaust flow is extracted
in the HRSG, hence the mass flow can only be increased at the
cost of a reduced steam temperature. This in turn directly affects
the turbine inlet temperature and thus power output. The relative
increase of turbine power output increases for lower loads. The
reason for this is that the engine exhaust temperature increases at
lower loads thus allowing higher steam injection rates relative to
the exhaust gas flow rate. At low load (25%), the relative mass
fraction of injected steam is about 3.6% higher than at nominal
load (100%).
Based on the calculated turbine power output the change of
the electric efficiency can be determined. The course of electric
efficiency with steam injection, shown in figure 7 is similar to
the turbine output shown in figure 5. In figure 7 the electric efficiency has a similar course as the turbine performance shown in
figure 6. However, the curve slope up to the peak efficiency depends on the load point. At lower loads, the efficiency improves
much stronger, the absolute increase of electric efficiency ranges
from 1.76 percentage points at 100% to 2.3 percentage points at
25% load (a relative increase of the electric efficiency of about
3.6%5.5%).
As turbine power output and electric load are both independent of the question whether condensation occurs in the waste
HEX, the results obtained here apply to both variations of configuration 1.

100%
75%
50%
25%

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 8. HEAT OUTPUT OF CONFIGURATION 1 WITHOUT

CONDENSER AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

shown in figure 8. For all operating points the curves obtained

are only offset, with increasing steam mass flow the thermal heat
output decreases linearly to a minimum as more and more heat is
delivered to the steam. The minimum thermal heat output level is
determined by the defined minimum heating water temperature
needed to supply the heat-consuming units and is reached at a
steam mass flow which is lower than the steam mass flow at the
maximum power output. This system behavior results from the
fact that the waste HEX (see figure 6) is deactivated if the exhaust gas temperature behind the HRSG is too low. At this point,
the thermal heat is only taken from the engine cooling system.
The thermal efficiencies calculated for this configuration are
shown in figure 9. In general the course of thermal efficiency
corresponds to the thermal heat output. The efficiency level increases with decreased load. The highest thermal efficiency is
achieved at the lowest nominal engine power and vice versa because of the higher relative waste heat level of the engine at lower
loads. The thermal efficiency drops from about 33% to 13% at

Thermal Heat Output and Thermal Efficiency without Water Recovery The calculated thermal heat output
without condensation in the waste HEX for water recovery is

Copyright 2014 by ASME

therm [%]
50.0

Q out /Pengine
0.50

100%
75%
50%
25%

40.0
30.0

0.40
0.30

20.0

0.20

10.0

0.10

0.0
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.00
0.00

0.25

100%
75%
50%
25%
0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 9. THERMAL EFFICIENCY OF CONFIGURATION 1

WITHOUT CONDENSER AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS
FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

FIGURE 10. HEAT OUTPUT OF CONFIGURATION 1 WITH

CONDENSER AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

full load and from about 47% to 20% at low load, which corresponds to the heat flow of the engine cooling system. This heat
flow, however, still has to be rejected at low heat demand.

Configuration 2
Based on the results obtained for configuration 1, the system has been adjusted in order to provide a possibility to reject
the heat from the engine cooling system or use it to preheat the
feedwater for the HRSG, see figure 2. Because of the low temperature level and the increased complexity of the system, water
recovery has not been considered further. While in configuration 1, only the power consumption of the compressor and the
feedwater pump had to be considered, configuration 2 features
an additional cooling device for which a fan is necessary. Thus,
the net turbine power output of configuration 2 reduces to

Thermal Heat Output and Thermal Efficiency with

Water Recovery The thermal heat output of configuration 1
with condenser (see figure 10) is completely different to the case
without water recovery, shown in figure 8. When the steam mass
flow is recovered, the thermal heat output jumps to a higher level
as soon as steam injection begins. The high thermal heat output
is misleading however, as it is a result of a large mass flow and
the correspondent heating water temperature is actually at values
below the defined minimum heating water temperature and cannot be used for heating purposes. This is due to the low partial
pressure at the saturation point in the exhaust gas and the correspondingly low saturation temperature. As a consequence, a
relatively large cooling water flow is needed, yet only low temperatures are achieved at high heat output.
With increasing steam injection rate the thermal heat output reduces linearly. With higher steam mass flow, the partial
pressure of the steam increases, which results in higher saturation temperatures, however, not high enough to supply a heat
consumer, as the defined minimum heating water temperature is
still not achieved. The heat output reaches a minimum at the
steam mass flow at which the turbine power output has its maximum. At this point, the steam in the exhaust gas is saturated
and a further increase would lead to condensation upstream of
the condenser.
As a consequence, water recovery is possible in cases without any heat demand, because of the low temperatures in the condenser. However, the heat released during condensation has to
be rejected on top of the heat from the engine cooling system.
Therefore, water recovery is not considered to be efficient and
useful in the present context.

PT, net = PT, gross (PC + Pcooler ) .

(19)

As in configuration 1, the maximum steam mass flow is limited to the point where condensation occurs in the mixer. The
maximum steam injection rates calculated for configuration 2 are
shown in table 3. Compared to the results for configuration 1
given in table 2, higher steam injection is possible because of
the feedwater preheating from the engine cooling system for all
operation points except for the low load case.
The level of the gross turbine performance is up to 1.6%
higher compared to configuration 1, which can be attributed to
the higher steam mass flow rate obtained in this configuration.
The steam injection rate is up to 1.4% higher compared to that
of configuration 1. However, the net performance, shown in figure 11, is about 15% lower because of the power consumption of
the additional cooling fan. The overall plant output increases by
TABLE 3. MAXIMUM STEAM MASS FLOW OF CONFIGURATION 2 BEFORE CONDENSATION IN THE MIXER OCCURS

Engine load

100%

75%

50%

25%

m 9 /m 3

0.1942

0.1592

0.1177

0.0714

Copyright 2014 by ASME

PT, net /Pengine

0.10

el/mech [%]
55.0

100%
75%
50%
25%

0.08
0.06

50.0
45.0

0.04

40.0

0.02

35.0

0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

30.0
0.00

0.25

FIGURE 11. NET TURBINE POWER OUTPUT OF CONFIGURATION 2 AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

100%
75%
50%
25%
0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 12. ELECTRIC / MECHANIC EFFICIENCY OF CONFIGURATION 2 AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT
DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

Q out, HEX 3 /Pengine

0.50

1.98% 6.17% with use of a power turbine without steam injection.

At low steam mass flow rates, the net turbine power output
increases linearly as long as the heat available from the cooling
system exceeds that transferred to the feedwater. However, at
intermediate steam mass flows, the heat taken by the feedwater
preheating equals the heat delivered from the engine cooling system. Thus, the feedwater temperature after HEX 1 is reduced and
more heat is taken from the HRSG. This in turn affects the heat
exchanger between engine cooling system and thermal heat supply circuit (HEX 2 waste HEX HEX 3) and the mass flow
of the circuit has to be reduced which results in a lower heat exchange in HEX 2. As a consequence, the fan of the additional
cooling device has to run at higher speed to reject the excess heat
remaining within the engine cooling system, which leads to the
observed reduction of net turbine output.
As for configuration 1, the peak of turbine power output and
efficiency is not at the maximum steam mass flow but at a steam
mass flow 23 26% lower than the maximum steam injection
rate. The relative improvement of turbine power output is in the
range of 2.2 7.0%, depending on the operating point.
The maximum electric efficiency for configuration 2, shown
in figure 12 is lower than for configuration 1. The increase of the
electric efficiency with steam injection is about 1.5 1.7 percentage points, a relative increase of the electric efficiency of about
3.0 4.3%.
The heat output of HEX 3, shown in figure 13, is dependent
on the heat transferred in HEX 1 and HEX 2. It drops to zero at
the steam mass flow rate at which the turbine power output increases again because the required cooling fan power is reduced,
see figure 11. The reason for this is that the temperature in the
waste HEX falls below a temperature needed to achieve the defined minimum heating water temperature in HEX 3. The excess
heat from the engine cooling system is rejected using the cooling
fan only.

100%
75%
50%
25%

0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 13. HEAT OUTPUT OF CONFIGURATION 2 AS A

FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE
LOADS

The maximum heat transferred to the feedwater and heating

water is restricted by the chosen heating backflow temperature
THBF . For the level of THBF chosen here, there is no operating
point at which the operation without engine cooling unit is possible.
Nevertheless, it is possible to have zero thermal heat output
for this configuration. On the other hand, the minimum heating
water temperature is achieved at all thermal heat demands, so the
heat can effectively be used, in contrast to the heat available in
configuration 1 with water recovery.
The resulting thermal efficiency of configuration 2 is shown
in figure 14. Again, the peak thermal efficiency occurs for low
load operating point. With increasing steam mass flow, the thermal efficiency drops faster than at configuration 1. At those
points where the heating water mass flow is reduced because
of the maximum heat transfer to the feedwater in HEX 1, the
slope of the thermal efficiency curves increases. At zero thermal

Copyright 2014 by ASME

therm [%]
50.0

heat, the CHP plant only generates electric power, thereby using engine cooling and engine exhaust heat to generate steam to
maximize power output.

the thermal heat demand in configuration 2 is higher compared

to configuration 1 with water recovery, because the steam in the
exhaust gas is not recovered. Using the engine cooling system to
preheat the feedwater, a higher steam mass flow can be injected
into the exhaust flow, thus increasing turbine power output. To
be able to run the plant a zero thermal heat demand, a separate
cooling device is necessary. The power consumption of the cooling fan must be considered in the energy balance. Because of
the higher heating water output temperature configuration 2 is
more practicable and a useful possibility to use the waste heat of
a CHP plant in periods of low thermal heat demand. Configuration 2 allows to increase the electrical output and maintain the
electric efficiency of the plant at a higher level.
Further studies are needed in order to evaluate the potential
of the suggested method of steam injection. Especially the question of the impact of minimum heating water temperature on the
overall performance and efficiency should be studied. An economic analysis of the proposed method has been done for the
situation in Germany in [7]. However, because of the complex
situation, the results can not be transferred to other markets.

CONCLUSIONS
In the present paper, the idea of using the exhaust heat of
CHP plants to generate steam at times of low heat demands has
been studied. The basic goal was to increase the plant power
output while decreasing the thermal heat to be consumed in order
to reduce the amount of heat discharged and hence to keep the
plant efficiency at higher levels.
It has been shown that already by using a power turbine instead of a turbocharger, the power output of the CHP plant can
be increased at configuration 1 by 2.41% to 7.05% and at configuration 2 by 1.98% to 6.17%, depending on the load point.
In configuration 1 a simple set-up for steam injection, yet
with water recovery was modeled. The electric efficiency is increased further by 1.76 2.3 percentage points compared to the
case without steam injection depending on the operating point
of the engine. However, an actual demand of thermal heat is
still necessary, especially because the heat of the engine cooling system cannot be rejected. Water recovery using a condenser
actually aggravates the problem, because it results in an even increased heat delivery at temperatures below the minimum heating water temperature, so that it is not even suitable to cover a
low thermal heat demand. As a consequence, configuration 1 is
not practicable.
Configuration 2 has been set up according to the conclusions
drawn from the study of configuration 1. A separate cooling device has been provided, moreover the steam is discharged together with the exhaust gas. The electric efficiency is increased
further by 1.5 1.7 percentage points compared to the case without steam injection depending on the operating point of the engine. The temperature in the heat exchanger circuit used to cover

REFERENCES
[1] Gonzalez, M., Padilla, R., and Willinger, R., 2004. Combined heat and power technologies: application studies of
options including micro gas turbines. ASME Paper GT
2004-53909.
[2] Schaumann, G., 2010. Kraft-Warme-Kopplung, 4 ed.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.
[3] Federal Statistical Office of Germany, 2012. Sample census
additional inquiry 2010; existence and structure of housing units, housing situation of households. Article number: 2055001109004.
[4] Dowman-Tucker, P., 2013. Making gensets greener.
Cogeneration & On-Site Power Production, Nov./Dec.,
pp. 3035.
[5] Liu, B., Chein, K., and Wang, C., 2004. Effect of working
fluids on organic rankine cycle for waste heat recovery.
Energy, 29, pp. 12071217.
[6] Fechter, L., 2012. Waste heat recovery in small and middle sized CHP plants using steam injection. Report, Institute of Thermal Turbomachinery and Machinery Laboratory (ITSM), University of Stuttgart.
[7] Arnold, S., 2013. Depth consideration of utilization of
waste heat in chp plants of small and medium power using steam injection. Diploma Thesis, Institute of Thermal
Turbomachinery and Machinery Laboratory (ITSM), University of Stuttgart.
[8] Cheng, D., and Nelson, L., 2002. The chronological development of the cheng cycle steam injected gas turbine
during the past 25 year. ASME Paper GT2002-30119.
[9] Fu, J., Liu, J., Wang, Y., Deng, B., Yang, Y., Feng, R.,

100%
75%
50%
25%

40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.00

0.05

0.10
0.15
m 9 /m 3

0.20

0.25

FIGURE 14. THERMAL EFFICIENCY OF CONFIGURATION 2

AS A FUNCTION OF STEAM MASS FLOW AT DIFFERENT ENGINE LOADS

10

Copyright 2014 by ASME

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

and Yang, J., 2014. A comparative study on various turbocharging approaches based on ic engine exhaust gas energy recovery. Applied Energy, 113, pp. 248257.
Jong Jun Lee, Mu Sung Jeon, T. S. K., 2010. The influence
of water and steam injection on the performance of a recuperated cycle microturbine for combined heat and power
application. Applied Energy, 87, pp. 13071316.
Paepe, W. D., Delattin, F., Bram, S., and Ruyck, J. D.,
2012. Steam injection experiments in a microturbine a
thermodynamic performance analysis. Applied Energy,
97, pp. 569576.
Paepe, M. D., and Dick, E., 2001. Technological and economical analysis of water recovery in steam injected gas
turbines. Applied Thermal Engineering, 21, pp. 135156.
Poullikkas, A., 2005. Operating cost and water economy
of mixed air steam turbines. Applied Thermal Engineering, 25, pp. 19491960.
Grote, K.-H., and Feldhusen, J., eds., 2011. Dubbel:
Taschenbuch fur den Maschinenbau, 23., neu bearb. u. erw.
aufl. ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.
Yahya, S. M., 2005. Turbines, Compressors and Fans. Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Dehli,
India.

11

Copyright 2014 by ASME