Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic optimization of a dual pressure

combined cycle power plant with a supplementary ring unit
Pouria Ahmadi , Ibrahim Dincer
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario, Institute of Technology (UOIT), 2000 Simcoe St. North, Oshawa,
Canada ON L1H 7K4

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 13 March 2010
Received in revised form 5 December 2010
Accepted 11 December 2010

Keywords:
Combined cycle power plant
Energy
Exergy
Efciency
Optimization
Thermoeconomics
Genetic algorithm

a b s t r a c t
In this paper, a combined cycle power plant (CCPP) with a supplementary ring system is rst thermodynamically analyzed through energy and exergy. The optimal design of operating parameters of the plant is
then performed by dening an objective function and applying a generic algorithm (GA) type optimization
method. In order to optimally nd the design parameters, a thermo-economic method is employed. An
objective function representing the total cost of the plant in terms of dollar per second is dened as the
sum of the operating cost related to the fuel consumption and the capital investment for equipment purchase and maintenance costs. Subsequently, different parts of the objective function are expressed in terms
of decision variables. Finally, the optimal values of decision variables are obtained by minimizing the objective function using a GA. Moreover, the inuences of changes in the demanded power and fuel cost are
studied by considering three different output powers (i.e., 160, 180 and 200 MW). To validate the present
model, the results of the present simulation code are compared with the actual data. The results show that
the average difference between the model results and the actual data is about 1.41%. Moreover, various
cases are investigated to determine how to decrease the objective function (cost, mass owrate, etc.) for
the optimized design and operating parameters (fuel cost, power output, etc.).
Crown Copyright 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Combined cycle power plants (CCPPs) are attractive in power
generation due to their higher thermal efciency than individual
steam or gas turbine cycles. Therefore, the optimal design of such
cycles is of great importance due to increasing fuel prices and
decreasing fossil fuel resources [1]. The main challenge in designing a combined cycle is proper utilization of a gas turbine exhaust
heat in the steam cycle in order to achieve optimum steam turbine
output. According to the benets of CCPP, the number and output
power of such cycles have increased recently. Combined cycles
have the higher thermal efciency as well as output power in comparison with gas turbine cycle and steam cycles. Higher efciencies
of combined cycle power plants (CCPPs) compared to Brayton or
Ranking cycles have made them quite attractive for power generation. Based on these advantages and less emissions, CCPPs have
widely been used all around the world.
It is important to note that exergy analysis appears to be a potential tool in analysis, design and performance improvement of
power plants. Exergy can be dened as the amount of obtainable
work for a system when reaches to a state of thermodynamic equi-

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 289 6009505.

E-mail address: pouria.ahmadi@uoit.ca (P. Ahmadi).

librium with the surroundings through reversible processes [2].

The main goal of exergy analysis is to quantitatively detect and
evaluate the thermodynamic inefciencies of the process under
consideration [24]. During the past decade many researchers
have carried out the exergy analysis for power plants. Dincer and
Al-Muslim [5] analyzed a Rankine cycle reheat steam power plant
to study the energy and exergy efciencies at different operating
conditions with varying boiler temperature, boiler pressure, mass
fraction ratio and work output from the cycle. Rosen and Dincer
[6] performed a study of industrial steam heating process through
exergy analysis. The results suggested that exergy analysis should
be used as the central tool in process optimization when the use of
large quantities of the steam in energy centers is contemplated.
Barzegar et al. [7] performed the exergy, exergoeconomic and
exergoenvironmental analysis of a CCPP. The results showed that
combustion chamber had the greatest exergy destruction and also
had the greatest cost of exergy destruction in comparison with
other components of the cycle. Rosen and Dincer [8] performed
an exergoeconomic analysis of power plants and applied it on a
coal red electricity generating station. They found that the ratio
of thermodynamic loss rate to the capital cost is a signicant
parameter in evaluating the plant performance, which may lead
to a successful trade-off in the design of the plant. Ahmadi et al.
[4] carried out energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analyses of a
steam power plant in Iran. They also considered the effect of the

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2010.12.023

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

2297

Nomenclature
c
cf
C_
cp
_
Ex
_ d
Ex
h
LHV
_
m
T
_ net
W
Z
Z_

DP

Cost per exergy unit [$/MJ]

Cost of fuel per energy unit [$/MJ]
Cost ow rate ($/s)
specic heat at constant pressure [kJ/kg.K]
Exergy ow rate [MW]
Exergy destruction rate [MW]
Enthalpy (kJ/kg)
Lower heating value [kJ/kg]
Mass ow rate [kg/s]
Temperature (K)
Net power output [MW]
Capital cost of a component [$]
Capital cost rate [$/sec]
Pressure loss (bar)

Greek Letters
g
Efciency
c
Specic heat ratio
u
Maintenance factor
n
Coefcient of fuel chemical exergy
Subscripts and superscripts
a
Air

load variations and ambient temperature in order to nd the

exergy destruction in each component of the cycle. Moreover,
some exergy and exergoeconomic analyses have been carried out
for CHP plant and other thermal systems [913]. Therefore, it
shows the importance of exergy and exergoeconomic in thermal
systems. Although exergy and exergoeconomic analyses are of
great importance and indispensable in thermal systems, they cannot nd the optimal design parameters in such systems. Therefore;
using an optimization procedure with respect to the thermodynamics laws along with thermoeconomics is essential [14].
Sayyaadi [15] performed an exergoeconomic optimization of a
1000 MW light water reactor power generation system using a
genetic algorithm. He considered ten decision variables. Moreover,
it was shown that by optimization techniques considered in his
research fuel cost of optimized system is increased in comparison
to the base case plant, nevertheless this shortcoming of optimized
system is compensated by larger monetary saving on other economic sectors. Dincer et al. [16] found the optimum temperatures
in a shell and tube condenser with respect to exergy. The optimization problem used in that study was dened subject to condensation of the entire vapor mass ow and it was solved based on the
sequential quadratic programming (SQP) method. Ahmadi et al.
[17] optimized a combined cycle power plant using (SQP). The
objective function of that study was introduced as total cost of
the plant in terms of dollar per second, which was dened as the
sum of the operating cost, related to the fuel consumption.
To the best of our knowledge, optimization of a dual pressure
combined cycle power plant with supplementary ring has not
been analyzed and optimized with a genetic algorithm. The primary objective of this study is to develop a thermodynamic model,
conduct a thermoeconomic optimization and use the actual data
obtained from the Neka combined cycle power plant in the north
part of Iran near the Caspian Sea for comparison purposes. Therefore, the key objectives are to conduct both exergy and exergoeconomic analyses and optimization of a CCPP through energy and
exergy, undertake parametric studies to investigate how system
inputs and outputs are affected by the operating conditions,
compare the model results with the actual data for validation
purposes, and develop an optimization program to determine the

c
CC
DB
ev
ec
f
F
g
GT
HP
HRSG
j
k
LP
P
p
o
PP
r
w
x
CCPP
CRF

Compressor
Combustion chamber
Duct burner
Evaporator
Economizer
Fuel
Fuel for a component
Combustion gases
Gas turbine
High pressure
Heat recovery steam generator
jth stream
kth component
Lower pressure
Product of a component
Pump
Ambient condition
Pinch point
Pressure ratio
water
Molar fraction
Combined cycle power plant
Capital recovery factor

best design parameters of the cycle. In this regard, the optimization

procedure is considered to be a powerful scheme which is used
wide spared recently called evolutionary algorithm (i.e., genetic
algorithm). The design parameters of this study are selected as:
compressor pressure ratio (rA), compressor isentropic efciency
(gAC), gas turbine isentropic efciency (gGT), gas turbine inlet
temperature (TIT), duct burner mass ow rate (mDB), High pressure
stream (HP), Low pressure stream (LP), HP main steam temperature (THP), LP main steam temperature (TLP) HP pinch point temperature difference (PPHP), LP pinch point temperature difference
(PPHP), condenser pressure (PCond), steam turbine isentropic
efciency (gST) and pump isentropic efciency (gpump). The
objective function representing the total cost of the plant in terms
of dollar per second is dened as the sum of the operating cost
related to the fuel consumption and the capital investment for
equipment purchase and maintenance costs. To have a good
insight into this analysis, a sensitivity analysis for fuel cost and
net output power is carried out. In summary, the following are
the specic contributions of this paper to the subject matter area:
 A complete modeling of a dual pressure CCPP with supplementary ring (SF) is performed.
 To have good verication results, the modeling output of the
cycle is compared with actual CCPP data taken from a power
plant.
 Both exergy and exergoeconomic analyses of this system are
carried out and linked to the optimization.
 A complete objective function representing the fuel cost, cost of
exergy destruction, purchase cost and maintenance cost are
considered for optimization study.
 A modied version of evolutionary algorithm (i.e., genetic algorithm) is used for objective optimization. The code, which is
developed based on genetic algorithm, is employed for nding
the set of optimal solution with respect to aforementioned
objective function.
 A sensitivity analysis of change in design parameters with
change in unit cost of fuel or investment cost is performed.
 The effects of net output power on the design and operating
parameters are studied.

2298

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

 Combustion reaction equations:

2. Energy analysis
To nd the optimum physical and thermal design parameters
of the system, an optimization program is developed in Matlab
software. The steam and gas temperature prole in a combined
cycle power plant (CCPP), input and output enthalpy and exergy
of each line in the plant were estimated to study the optimization
of the plant. The energy balance equations for various parts of the
CCPP (Fig. 1) are as follows:
 Air compressor:

TB TA 1

gAC

ca 1
ca

rc

yAr Ar
yCO2 k  x1 xCO2  yCO
yN2 xN2  yNO
k  y1
2

1
yO2 xO2  k  x1 
2

where Cpa is considered to be a temperature variable function as follow [1]:

! yCO2 CO2 yN2 N2 yO2 O2 yH2 O H2 O yNO NO yCO CO

yH2 O xH2 O


1

_ AC ma C pa T B  T A
W

C Pa T 1:04841 

kCx1 Hy1 xO2 O2 xN2 N2 xH2 O H2 O xCO2 CO2 xAr Ar



3:8371T

5:49031T 3
1010

104
!

9:4537T 2

7:9298T 4

k  y1 yCO yNO


4
2
2

yAr xAr
nfuel
k
nair
 Gas turbine:

107
!

1014

 Combustion chamber (CC):

8
2
39
 1c cg =
<
g
p
C
5
T D T C 1  gGT 41 
:
;
pD

_ GT mg C pg T C  T D
W

8
9

_ f LHV m
_ g hC 1  gcc m
_ f LHV
_ a hB m
m

_ GT  W
_ AC
_ Net W
W

PC
1  DPcc
PB

_ f m
_a
_g m
m

Fig. 1. Schematic ow diagram of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant.

10

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

where Cpg is taken as a temperature variable function as follow [2]:

C Pg T 0:991615



6:99703T
105

2:7129T
107

1:22442T

10

11
 Duct burner:

_ g hD m
_ f ;DB LHV m
_ g m
_ f ;DB h11 1  gDB m
_ f ;DB LHV
m

12

where LHV is the lower heating value of the natural gas and gDB is
the duct burner efciency and taken as 93% [18,19].
 Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG):
A dual pressure HRSG is considered here as a common type for
the CCPPs. By applying the energy balance for gas and water in
each part of the HRSG the gas temperature and water properties
will be calculated by solving the following equations:
High-pressure superheater:

_ ST
_ w;LP h6  m
_ w h19 W
_ w;HP h10 m
m

13

High-pressure evaporator:

_ s;HP h9  h8
_ g cp T 12  T 13 m
m

14

High-pressure economizer:

_ g cp T 13  T 14 m
_ s;HP h8  h7
m

15

Low-pressure superheater:

_ s;LP h6  h5
_ g cp T 14  T 15 m
m

16

Low-pressure evaporator:

_ s;LP h5  h4
_ g cp T 15  T 16 m
m

17

Deaerator evaporator:

_ s;LP h3  h2
_ g cp T 16  T 17 m
m

18

Condensate pre-heater:

_ s;LP h2  h1
_ g cp T 17  T 18 m
m

19

The combinations of energy and mass balance equations are

numerically solved, and the temperature prole in the gas and
water/steam side of HRSG are predicted.
 Steam turbine (ST):
By applying the energy balance for a steam turbine, as shown in
Fig. 1, the following relation is obtained:

_ =W STis
gST W STact

_ ST
W

20
21

The performances of combined cycle power plant, including the

thermal efciencies for topping cycle, bottoming cycle, and overall
efciency are calculated as given below respectively [1]:
Gas turbine cycle efciency:

gGT

W GT  W Comp

Q in;top

gST

W ST  W pump
Q in;bot

22

23

Combined cycle plant efciency:

gCCPP

The additional fuel is burnt in the supplementary ring to increase the temperature of the exhaust gas that passes through
the HRSG. In a duct burner:

_ w;hp h10 m
_ w;hp h6  m
_ w h19
m

Steam turbine cycle efciency:

10

2299

W GT  W Comp W ST  W pump
Q in;CCPP

24

The combinations of energy and mass balance equation are numerically solved and the temperature and enthalpy of each line of the
plant are predicted. In this analysis, some assumptions are made
as follows, e.g., [18,19]:
 All the processes are steady-state and steady ow.
 The principle of ideal-gas mixture is applied for the air and
combustion products.
 The fuel injected to the combustion chamber is assumed to be
natural gas.
 Heat loss from the combustion chamber is considered to be 3%
of the fuel lower heating value [20]. Moreover, all other components are considered adiabatic.
 The dead-state conditions are P0 = 1.01 bar and T0 = 293.15 K.
3. Exergy analysis
Exergy analysis is a method that uses the conservation of mass
and conservation of energy principles together with the second law
of thermodynamics for the analysis, design and improvement of
energy and other systems. The exergy method is a useful tool for
furthering the goal of more efcient energy-resource use, for it enables the locations, types and magnitudes of wastes and losses to
be identied and meaningful efciencies to be determined [14].
Today there is a much stronger emphasis on exergy aspects of systems and processes. The emphasis is now on system analysis and
thermodynamic optimization, not only in the mainstream of engineering but also in physics, biology, economics and management.
As a result of these recent changes and advances, exergy has gone
beyond thermodynamics and become a new distinct discipline because of its interdisciplinary character as the conuence of energy,
environment and sustainable development.
According to the literature, exergy can be divided into four distinct components. The two important ones are the physical exergy
and chemical exergy. In this study, the two other components
which are kinetic exergy and potential exergy are assumed to be
negligible as the elevation and speed have negligible changes
[21,22]. The physical exergy is dened as the maximum theoretical
useful work obtained as a system interacts with an equilibrium
state. The chemical exergy is associated with the departure of
the chemical composition of a system from its chemical equilibrium. The chemical exergy is an important part of exergy in combustion process. Applying the rst and the second law of
thermodynamics, the following exergy balance is obtained:

_ Q
Ex

_ i exi
m

_ W Ex
_ D
_ e exe Ex
m

25

where subscripts e and i are the specic exergy of control volume

_ D , is the exergy destruction. Other terms
inlet and outlet ow and Ex
in this equation is as follows [2224]:



_ Q 1  T  Q_ i
Ex
Ti

26

_
_ W W
Ex

27

exph h  h  T  S  S

28

2300

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

_ Q and Ex
_ W are the corresponding exergy of heat transfer
where Ex
and work which cross the boundaries of the control volume, T is
the absolute temperature (K) and () refers to the ambient conditions respectively.
The total exergy rate becomes

_ Ex
_ ph Ex
_ ch
Ex

29

_ mex.
_
where Ex
The mixture chemical exergy is dened as follows [21]:

exch
mix

"
n
X

X i exchi RT0

i1

n
X

#
X i LnX i GE

30

i1

where GE is the excess free Gibbs energy which is negligible at low

pressure in a gas mixture.
For the evaluation of the fuel exergy, the above equation cannot
be used. Thus, the corresponding ratio of simplied exergy is dened as the following [1,5,20,21]:

n exf =LHVf

31

where exf is a fuel exergy. Due to the fact that for the most of usual
gaseous fuels, the ratio of chemical exergy to the LHV is usually
close to unity, one may write [21,24]:

nCH4 1:06

32

nH2 0:985

For gaseous fuel with CxHy, the following experimental equation

is used to calculate n [21]:

y 0:0698
n 1:033 0:0169 
x
x

33

In the present work, for the exergy analysis of the plant, the
exergy of each line is calculated at all states and the changes in
the exergy are determined for each major component. The source
of exergy destruction (or irreversibility) in combustion chamber
is mainly combustion (chemical reaction) and thermal losses in
the ow path [24,25]. However, the exergy destruction in the heat
exchanger of the system i.e. HRSG is due to the large temperature
difference between the hot and cold uid. The exergy destruction
rate and the exergy efciency for each component for the whole
system in the power plant (Fig. 1) are shown in Table 1.

ator of a system with information that is useful to the design and

operation of a cost-effective system, but not obtainable by regular
energy or exergy analysis and economic analysis [26]. When exergy costing is not applied, authors should use a different term (e.g.,
thermoeconomics). Thermoeconomics is a more general term and
characterizing any combination of a thermodynamic analysis with
an economic one [27,28]. In order to dene a cost function which
depends on optimization parameters of interest, component cost
should be expressed as functions of thermodynamic design parameters [28]. The rst study in this regard was proposed in the paper
called CGAM problem.
For each ow line in the system, a parameter called ow cost
rate C ($ s1) is dened, and the cost balance equation of each component is written as

C_ e;k C_ w;k C_ q;k

C_ i;k Z_ k

34

Here, the cost balances are generally written so that all terms
are positive. one can write the following [22]:

X
X
_ k cq;k E_ q;k
ci E_ i k Z_ k
ce E_ e k cw;k W

35

C_ j cj Ej

36

In this analysis, it is worth mentioning that the fuel and product

exergy should be dened. The exergy product is dened according
to the components under consideration. The fuel represents the
source that is consumed in generating the product. Both the product
and fuel are expressed in terms of exergy. The cost rates associated
with the fuel (C_ F ) and product (C_ P ) of a components are obtained by
_ For example, in a turbine, fuel is difreplacing the exergy rates (E).
ference between input and output exergy and product is the generated power of the turbine.
In the cost balance formulation (Eq. (35)), there is no cost term
directly associated with exergy destruction of each component.
Accordingly, the cost associated with exergy destruction in a component or process is a hidden cost. Thus, if one combines the exergy balance and cost accounting together, one can obtain the
following equation:

E_ F;K E_ P;K E_ D;K

37

Accordingly, the expression for the cost of exergy destruction is

dened as:

4. Exergoeconomic analysis

C_ D;k cF;k E_ D;k

4.1. Economic model

Further details of the exergoeconomic analysis, cost balance

equations and exergoeconomic factors are in detail discussed elsewhere [4,7,8,14,20].
In addition, several methods have been suggested to express the
purchase cost of equipments in terms of design parameters in Eq.
(35). However, we have used the cost functions as suggested by
Ahmadi et al. [17] and Rosen et al. [29]. Nevertheless, some modications have been made to tailor these results to the regional
conditions in Iran and considered the ination rate. To convert
the capital investment into cost per time unit, one may write

Exergoeconomics or thermoeconomic is the branch of engineering that appropriately combines, at the level of system components, thermodynamic evaluations based on an exergy analysis
with economic principles, in order to provide the designer or operTable 1
The exergy destruction rate and exergy efciency equations for plant components.
Components

Pump

Exergy destruction
P
P
E_ D;HRSG i;HRSG E_  o;HRSG E_
_
_ED;T P E_  P E_  W
i;T
e;T
_ P
_ED;P E_ i;p W

Compressor

ED,AC = EA  EB  EW,AC

Combustion
chamber
Gas turbine

ED,cc = EB + Ef,cc  EC

Duct burner

ED,DB = ED  E11 + Ef,DB

P
P
E_ D;C i;C E_  e;C E_

HRSG
Steam turbine

Condenser

ED,GT = EC  ED  WGT

Exergy Efciency
_

E6 E1
gHRSG E10E11E
18
_
_
ge;s W t =Ei;T  E_ e;T
ge;p E_ i;p  E_ o;p =W_ p
2 E1
gAC EW
AC
EC
gcc EB E
f ;cc
GT
gGT EW
C ED
E11
gGT ED E
f ;DB





_
Z k Z k  CRF  u=N  3600

in;Cond

39

where Zk is the purchase cost of kth component in dollar. The capital

recovery factor (CRF) depends on the interest rate as well as estimated equipment life time. CRF is determined using the following
relation [7]:

CRF

gCond 1  PED;Cond E

38

i1 in
1 in  1

40

Here, i, is the interest rate and n is the total operating period of the
system in years.

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

In Eq. (39), N is the annual number of the operation hours of the

unit, and u (1.06) [17] is the maintenance factor. Finally, in order
to determine the cost of exergy destruction for each component,
the value of exergy destruction, ED,k, is computed using exergy balance equation as given in the previous section.
5. Optimization (objective function, design parameters and
constraints)
5.1. Denition of objective function
According to the previous section, a new objective function
which is sum of the fuel cost and the cost of exergy destruction
as well as purchase cost is considered and minimized using the genetic algorithm. Hence, the objective function is described as
follows:

C_ Tot C_ F

Z_ k C_ D

41

_ f ;cc m
_ f ;DB  LHV
where C_ F cf m

42

Here, Z_ k ; C_ F and C_ D are purchase cost of each component, fuel cost

and cost of exergy destruction respectively. Moreover, Cf is fuel cost
which is considered to be 0.003$/Mj in our analysis [17].
5.2. Design parameters
The design parameters of this study are selected as: compressor
pressure ratio (rAC), compressor isentropic efciency (gAC), gas turbine isentropic efciency (gGT), gas turbine inlet temperature (TIT),
duct burner mass ow rate (mDB), High pressure stream (HP), Low
pressure stream (LP), HP main steam temperature (THP), LP main
steam temperature (TLP) HP pinch point temperature difference(PPHP), LP pinch point temperature difference (PPHP), condenser pressure (PCond), steam turbine isentropic efciency (gST)
and pump isentropic efciency (gpump). Therefore, these decision
parameters should be selected in the way the objective function
is minimized.
5.3. Constraints
Each optimization problem needs some reasonable number of
constrains dened due to the physical limitations. In this particular
optimization study, a list of constraints selected is given in Table 2.
These constraints are applied to our present code as written in
the Matlab program. The search domain is dened between
these constraints by a genetic algorithm method for optimization
study. As a result, each optimized design parameter lies within this
range.

Table 2
The list of constraints for optimization [7,20].
Constraints

Rationale

TIT < 1550oK

rComp < 22
gComp < 0.9
gGT < 0.9
Pmain < 110 bar

Material temperature limit

Commercial availability
Commercial availability
Commercial availability
Commercial availability
Commercial availability
Commercial availability
Super heater temperature limitation
Thermal efciency limitation
Material temperature limitation
To avoid formation of sulfuric acid in exhaust gases
Second law of thermodynamic limitation

gST
gp
mDB < 2 kg/s
5 bar < PCond < 15 bar
Tmain
T 18  120  C
5 C < PP < 30 C

2301

5.4. Evolutionary algorithm

5.4.1. Genetic algorithm
In recent years, optimization algorithms have received increasing attention by the research community as well as the industry. In
the area of evolutionary computation (EC), such optimization algorithms simulate an evolutionary process where the goal is to
evolve solutions by means of crossover, mutation, and selection
based on their quality (tness) with respect to the optimization
problem at hand [30]. Evolutionary algorithms (EAs) are highly relevant for industrial applications, because they are capable of handling problems with non-linear constraints, multiple objectives,
and dynamic components properties that frequently appear in real
problems [31]. Genetic algorithms (GAs) are an optimization technique based on natural genetics. GAs were developed by Holland
[32] in an attempt to simulate growth and decay of living organisms in a natural environment. Even though originally designed
as simulators, GAs have proven to be a robust optimization technique. The term robust denotes the ability of the GAs for nding
the global optimum, or a near-optimal point, for any optimization
problem. The basic idea behind GAs could be described in brief as
follows. A set of points inside the optimization space is created by
random selection of points. Then, this set of points is transformed
into a new one. Moreover, this new set will contain more points
that are closer to the global optimum. The transformation procedure is based only on the information of how optimal each point
is in the set, consists of very simple string manipulations, and is repeated several times. This simplicity in application and the fact
that the only information necessary is a measure of how optimal
each point is in the optimization space, make GAs attractive as
optimizers. Nevertheless, the major advantages of these GAs are:
 Constraints of any type can be easily implemented.
 GAs usually nds more than one near-optimal point in the optimization space, thus permitting the use of the most applicable
solution for the optimization problem at hand.
The basic steps for the application of a GA for an optimization
problem are summarized in Fig. 2 [30]. A set of strings is created
randomly. This set, which is transformed continuously in every
step of the GA, is called population. This population, which is created randomly at the start, is called initial population. The size of
this population may vary from several tens of strings to several
thousands. The criterion applied in determining an upper bound
for the size of the population is that further increase does not result
in improvement of the near-optimal solution. This upper bound for
each problem is determined after some test runs. Nevertheless, for
most applications the best population size lies within the limits of
10100 strings .The optimality (measure of goodness) of each
string in the population is calculated. Then on the basis of this value an objective function value, or tness, is assigned to each
string. This tness is usually set as the amount of optimality of
each string in the population divided by the average population
optimality. An effort should be made to see that the tness value
is always a positive number. It is possible that a certain string does
not reect an allowable condition. For such a string there is no
optimality. In this case, the tness of the string is penalized with
a very low value, indicating in such a way to the GA that this is not
a good string. Similarly, other constraints may be implemented in
the GA. A set of operators, a kind of population transformation
device, is applied to the population. These operators will be discussed. As a result of these operators, a new population is created,
that will hopefully consist of more optimal strings. The old population is replaced by the new one. A predened stopping criterion,
usually a maximum number of generations to be performed by
the GA, is checked. If this criterion is not satised a new generation

2302

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

Coding of
parameter space

Random creation of
initial population
Generati

Evaluation of population

New population

Finesses

(Replacement of old one)

Is Number of
Generation
exceeded?

Table 3
Input parameters of HRSG thermal modeling for the HRSG at Neka CCPP (with duct
burner).
Input
Inlet gas temperature: 773.15 K
Inlet gas ow rate: mg = 500 kg/s
Inlet water temperature = 320 K
_ w = 76.11 kg/s
Total water ow rate: m
Inlet water enthalpy hw = 185 kJ/kg
Ambient temperature: To = 293 K

300
200
100

rh

or
H

Su

pe

ap
Ev

ea

at
o

te
r

er
om
P

on
Ec
P

ea
rh
pe

Su
LP

iz

te
r

r
at
o

or

to

ap
Ev

LP

ea
er

at
or

Ev
a

po

no

ra

m
iz

er

Ec
o

To verify the modeling results, one of the most signicant parts

at CCPP (so-called:HRGS) is considered and the results of HRSG are
compared with the corresponding measured values obtained from
an actual running HRSG (Neka combined cycle power plant) in
North of Iran. The list of input values for thermal modeling of HRSG
at Neka CCPP is shown in Table 3. The gas temperature variation of
Neka dual pressure HRSG with duct burner obtained by the simulation program and the corresponding measured values are shown
and compared in Fig. 3. The results show that the average of differ-

400

6.1. Modeling verication

Typical power Plant

500

St
ac

6. Results and discussion

Simulation

600

LP

is started, otherwise the GA terminates. It is now evident that

when the GA terminates, a set of points (nal population) has been
dened, and in this population more than one equivalently good
(optimal) point may exist. As it was discussed, this advantage of
the GAs permits the selection of the most appropriate solution
for the optimization problem.

Temperature (C)

Fig. 2. Genetic algorithm owchart.

Fig. 3. Variation of hot gas temperature for various heat transfer elements of HRSG
at Neka CCPP (comparison of modeling results with measured values).

ence between the numerical and the measured values of parameters at various sections of HRSG was about (1.14%) with the
maximum of 1.36% in LP superheater. This veries the correct
performance of the developed simulation code to model the thermal performance of HRSG as well as the whole plant.
6.2. Number of generation
The genetic algorithm optimization is applied to obtain the
CCPP optimum design parameters. Fig. 4 shows the convergence
of the objective function with number of generation (40 in our case
study at which there was no noticeable change in the value of the
objective function). From this gure, it can be concluded that the

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

should be selected in the way that both combustion chamber

and duct burner mass ow rate have the minimum value. On the
other hand, by decreasing the mass ow rate the amount of impact
by emissions is reduced, and also the total efciency of the cycle is
decreased.

2.1

Total Cost Rate ($/s)

2303

2.05
2
1.95

6.4. Sensitivity analysis

1.9
1.85
0

20

40

60

80

100

Number of Generations

Fig. 4. Variation of objective function of the system with number of generation

(Cf = .003$/MJ).

developed genetic algorithm has a good and powerful convergence

rate. It has two important benets: (i) lower running time of the
computer and (ii) better optimization results.
6.3. Optimization results
By applying the developed genetic algorithm code for this problem and considering both objective function and constraints the
optimal design parameters of the combined cycle are found. The
optimal decision variables of the plant are shown in Table 4. It
can be concluded that by selecting these design parameters the
objective function dened in Eq. (41) has the lowest value. It is
worth mentioning that in the objective function (i.e., Eq. (41), fuel
cost has the signicant effect. Therefore, the design parameters

Table 4
Optimal design parameters of the dual pressure combined cycle power plant.
Decision variable

Value

rC

11.40
0.855
0.877
1383.80
0.80
16.34
25.55
98.10
10.40
542.20
222.86
14.30
0.825
0.781

gC
gGT
TIT (K)
mDB (kg/s)
PPHP (C)
PPLP (C)
HP (bar)
LP (bar)
HPTemp (C)
LPTemp (C)
PCond (kPa)

gPump
gST

To have a good insight into this real optimization problem, the

sensitivity analysis has been performed. In this part, two important
factors are considered. These two signicant factors are unit cost of
fuel and net output power of the combined cycle power plant.
Thus, by change in these two cases and applying the genetic algorithm the sensitivity analysis is performed. It should be noted that
to nd the optimal design parameters for each unit cost of fuel and
output power the new optimization procedure is applied. Hence,
each optimal value is the best one for each cost and output power.
The benet of this method is to predict the trend of design
parameters when any changes in the unit cost of fuel and output
power are occurred.
Unit cost of fuel: as it was discussed before, the unit cost of fuel
has an essential rule in the objective function. Therefore, any
changes in this parameter can affect the value of objective function
as well as the design parameters. It means that when the unit cost
of fuel increases, the optimal design of the cycle should be selected
in the way that other terms in the objective function, i.e., Eq. (41)
decrease. In order to investigate the effects of fuel price of optimum design parameters, the simulation and optimization procedures are repeated with different input values. For instance, by
increase in the Cf the mass ow rate of the combustion chamber
and duct burner should be decreased by an increase in the compressor isentropic efciency. Figs. 517 show the effect of changes
in the unit cost of fuel. Figs. 5 and 6 show that at a constant output
power both gas turbine isentropic efciency and compressor isentropic efciency increase by any increment in unit cost of fuel. The
reason is that when the unit cost of fuel is increased, rst term in
the objective function increases, and other terms decreases respectively. When the output power increases at a constant unit cost of
fuel, some parameters should be changed in order to achieve the
required power. As we know, the changes in Gas Turbine Inlet temperature (TIT) is not drastic due to the material limitation. Therefore, it can be assumed that TIT is xed. By increasing the output
power, the mass ow rate must be increased. Increase in the mass
ow rate is caused by two ways, rst by an increase of the air mass
ow rate and second the fuel mass ow rate. Since an increase of
the fuel mass ow rate leads to an increase in the rst term in
the objective function (Cf mf LHV); it should be selected as low as

Fig. 5. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of compressor isentropic efciency gComp.

2304

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

Fig. 6. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of
gas turbine isentropic efciency gGT.

200 MW

180 MW

160 MW

Air Comp Pressure Ratio (rc)

13
12.5
12
11.5
11
10.5
0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

Unit Cost of Fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 7. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of
compressor ratio rComp.

possible. On the other hand, at constant unit cost of fuel, by increase in the output power, if the compressor pressure increases,
the compressor outlet temperature increases which leads to increase of the compressor work as well as increase in the exergy
destruction. Hence, genetic algorithms are utilized to optimize
the objective function. Therefore, the optimal values for
compressor pressure ratio decreases by an increase in the output
power at a constant unit cost of fuel.
According to the literature information [7,20], increasing the
isentropic efciency leads to a decrease in the cost of exergy

Gas Turbine Inlet Temperature (K)

200 MW

Fig. 9. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of
duct burner mass ow rate.

destruction. Therefore, the last term in Eq. (41) is decreased. It

can be concluded that study of the variation of the optimal decision
variables versus fuel unit cost reveals that by increasing the fuel
cost, the optimal decision variables generally result in a more
thermodynamically efcient design. As it is shown, the values of
decision variables rComp, gComp, gGT and TIT increase with increasing
the fuel unit cost. Increasing the inlet gas turbine temperature
plays a crucial rule in decreasing the exergy destruction of the
combustion chamber. On the other hand, according to the cost of
exergy destruction which is proportional to the exergy destruction,
the last term of the objective function decreases. Moreover, an increase in the turbine inlet temperature, TIT, reduces the exergy
destruction in the combustion chamber and turbine. Since increasing TIT results in higher exhaust temperature of exhaust gases, the
constraint T18 > 120 C does not cause any limitation for rising TIT.
However, due the fact that any increase in TIT affects the turbine
investment cost, TIT only increase within a certain limit. Thus,
these changes result in decrease in the objective function. Fig. 9,
shows the effect of change in the duct burner mass ow rate versus
unit cost of fuel. As it is shown, by increase in the unit cost the
mass ow rate of the duct burner is decreased due to the fact that
the objective function should be decreased respectively. Since the
mass ow rate has a positive effect on increasing the rst term
of the objective function, the genetic algorithm tends to optimally
nd the design parameters which result in a decrease in the duct
burner mass ow rate. Also, this reduction in the mass ow rate
can decrease the environmental impacts as discussed earlier [7,20].
One of the most important parameters in designing the heat
recovery steam generators is the pinch temperature difference.
The pinch temperature is dened as a temperature difference

180 MW

160 MW

1405
1400
1395
1390
1385
1380
0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

Unit Cost of Fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 8. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of gas turbine temperature TIT.

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

2305

Fig. 10. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of high pressure pinch temperature (PPHP).

Fig. 11. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of low pressure pinch temperature (PPLP).

Fig. 12. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of HP steam turbine temperature.

between the outlet gas from the evaporator and the saturation
temperature. A smaller pinch temperature corresponds to a larger
heat transfer surface area and more costly system as well as higher
exergy efciency and lower operating cost. A good HRSG is a system in which its pinch temperature has the minimum value. However, based on the second law of thermodynamic this temperature
cannot be zero. Therefore, decrease in the pinch temperature
results in decreasing the HRSG cost of exergy destruction [1,7].
The HRSG has both high- and low-pressure pinch temperatures.

Figs. 10 and 11 show the effect of pinch temperatures on unit cost

of fuel. It is shown that at constant output power, increasing the
unit cost of fuel results in a decrease in the pinch temperature
due to increasing the HRSG exergy efciency as well as decreasing
the HRSG cost of exergy destruction.
Figs. 12 and 13 show the variation of super heater temperatures
versus unit cost of fuel. As shown in these gures, the increase in
the unit cost of fuel causes increasing both HP and LP superheater
temperatures. As it was discussed earlier, increasing the unit cost

2306

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

200 MW

180 MW

160 MW

LP SH Temperature (C)

250
245
240
235
230
225
220
0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

Unit Cost of Fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 13. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of LP steam turbine temperature.

200 MW

180 MW

160 MW

HP drum pressure (bar)

115
113
111
109
107
105
103
101
99
97
95

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

Unit Cost of Fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 14. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of HP drum pressure.

Fig. 15. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of LP drum pressure.

of fuel leads to an increase in the rst term in the objective function. Thus, a developed genetic algorithm code should select the
design parameters in the way to decrease the objective function.
Therefore, any increments in the superheater steam temperature
result in a decrease in the last term of the objective function.
Because higher steam turbine inlet temparture causes more output
power in the Ranking cycle. Moreover, increasing the main steam

temperature from HRSG results in a increase in the HRSG efciency

as well as reducing its exergy destruction.
Moreover, the effect of changes in the unit cost of fuel on HP
drum pressure and LP drum pressures are shown in Figs. 14 and
15. It is obvious that at constant output power by increase in the
unit cost of fuel both HP and LP drum pressures are increased in
order to decrease the last term in the objective function. Increaseing

2307

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

200 MW

180 MW

160 MW

Condenser Pressure (bar)

0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0.01

Unit Cost of Fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 16. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of condenser pressure PCond.

drum pressures, results in decreasing the HRSG cost of exergy

destruction and hence the objective function. The main purpose of
increasing the drum pressure is to produce steam with a higher enthalpy as well as exergy. In addition, higher drum pressure causes
the steam temperature and mass ow rate to increase which provides higher steam turbine power output. That is why a high pressure pump is used in such HRSGs. Fig. 16 shows the effect of
changes in the condenser pressure on the unit cost of fuel. While
the unit cost of fuel increases, the condenser pressure decreases
in order to decrease the objective function. Also, decrease in the

Fig. 17. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value
of steam turbine isentropic efciency gST.

200 MW

condenser pressure results in an increase in the total exergy efciency of the cycle. Therefore, it has a positive effect on both objective function and the combined cycle efciency. Finally, the effects
of steam turbine isentropic efciency and pumps efciency on the
unit cost of fuel are shown in Figs. 17 and 18. Increasing the unit
cost of fuel results in an increase in both turbine and pump isentropic efciencies. In this case, more efcient devices result in increasing the exergy efciency as well as reducing the cost of exergy
destruction. Therefore, the main aim of increasing the efciency
is to decrease the last term in the objective function. It reveals that
while the unit cost of fuel increases, the more efcient devises are
needed to reduce the irreversibilities.
Another important parameter in CCPPs is the net power output.
Therefore, in order to have a good insight into this study, three different power outputs are considered. Hence, for each power output
a new run of the genetic algorithm is done to nd the best optimal
design parameters. Figs. 518 show the effect of changes in the
design parameters on the net power output. Figs. 59, show that
optimal decision variables (except for rc) generally increase as
the net electrical power rises. When the net output power increases, the devices should be selected thermodynamically to produce the necessary output power. For instance, Fig. 8 shows that at
constant unit cost of fuel, increasing the net output power results
in increasing the gas turbine inlet temperature. It is worthwhile to
mention that increasing the net output power results in increasing
both combustion chamber mass ow rate and duct burner mass

180 MW

160 MW

Pump Isentropic Efficiency

0.85
0.845
0.84
0.835
0.83
0.825
0.82
0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

Unit Cost of fuel ($/MJ)

Fig. 18. The effects of unit cost of fuel and net power demand on the optimal value of pump isentropic efciency gpump.

2308

P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer / Energy Conversion and Management 52 (2011) 22962308

ow rate. Hence, the rst term in the objective function tend to be

increased. Therefore, genetic algorithm is used to nd the optimal
design parameter which can compensate this rise in the objective
function. Furthermore, as discussed in the previous section,
increasing the TIT results in decreasing the cost of exergy destruction as the last term in the objective function. The same result is
obvious for the pinch temperature difference. Figs. 10 and 11 show
that at constant unit cost fuel, increasing the output power leads to
decrease the pinch temperature. It is due to the fact that the power
output can be increased by increasing the HRSG efciency and
decreasing the pinch point temperature difference. In this case,
more energy is obtained from the GT exhaust gases across the
HRSG. The same result is obtained for superheater steam temperature as shown in Figs. 11 and 12. These gures show that increasing the net power output has the direct effect on the objective
function due to an increase in the injected mass ow rate to the
combustion chamber and duct burner. As a result, the optimal design parameters are selected in which the other terms in the objective function decrease. This is achieved by applying a developed
genetic algorithm under the above mentioned constraints.
7. Conclusions
In the present study, a comprehensive modeling of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant has been conducted. In order to
validate the model results, we compare with the actual data obtained from a combined cycle power plant. Therefore, the comparisons show that the model results are in good agreement with the
actual data. Moreover, exergy and exergoeconomic analyses for the
CCPP are performed. The optimization method used is genetic algorithm, as developed in the Matlab program. Moreover, a new objective function representing the sum of the fuel cost and the cost of
exergy destruction as well as purchase cost is considered and minimized using a genetic algorithm. The optimum design parameters
obtained for the plant show a trade-off between thermodynamic
and economic optimal designs. For example, from the thermodynamical point of view, the decision variable gT should be selected
as high as possible while this leads to an increase in capital cost.
It should be noted that any change in the numerical values of a
decision variable not only affects the performance of the related
equipment but also changes the performance of other equipment
as well. It is concluded that by increasing the fuel price the numerical values of decision variables in the thermoeconomically optimal
design tend to those of the thermodynamically optimal design.
References
[1] Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Khanmohammadi S. Exergy analysis of a 420 MW
combined cycle power plant. Int J Energy Res 2008;32:17583.
[2] Kurt H, Recebli Z, Gredik E. Performance analysis of open cycle gas turbines. Int
J Energy Res 2009;33(2):28594.
[3] Cihan A, Hachafzoglu O, Kahveci K. Energyexergy analysis and
modernization suggestions for a combined-cycle power plant. Int J Energy
Res 2006(30):11526.
[4] Ameri M, Ahmadi P, Hamidi A. Energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of
a steam power plant (a case study). Int J Energy Res 2009;33:499512.

[5] Dincer I, Al-Muslim H. Thermodynamic analysis of reheats cycle steam power

plants. Int J Energy Res 2001;25:72739.
[6] Rosen MA, Dincer I. A study of industrial steam process heating through exergy
analysis. Int J Energy Res 2004;28:91730.
[7] Barzegar Avval H, Ahmadi P, Ghaffarizadeh AR, Saidi MH. Thermo-economicenvironmental multiobjective optimization of a gas turbine power plant with
preheater using evolutionary algorithm. Int J Energy Res 2010. doi:10.1002/
er.1696.
[8] Rosen MA, Dincer I. Exergoeconomic analysis of power plants operating on
various fuels. Appl Therm Eng 2003;23:64358.
[9] Balli O, Aras H Hepbasli A. Exergetic performance evaluation of a combined
heat and power (CHP) system in Turkey. Int J Energy Res 2007;31:84966.
[10] Balli O, Aras H, Hepbasli A. Exergoeconomic analysis of a combined heat and
power (CHP) system. Int J Energy Res 2008;32:27389.
[11] Kwak HY, Byun GT, Yong-Ho Kwon, Hyup Yang. Cost structure of CGAM
cogeneration system. Int J Energy Res 2004;28:114558.
[12] Reddy B, Butcher C. Second law analysis of a natural gas-red gas turbine
cogeneration system. Int J Energy Res 2009;33(8):72836.
[13] Rosen MA, Dincer I. A study of industrial steam process heating through exergy
analysis. Int J Energy Res 2004;28:91730.
[14] Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy: energy, environment and sustainable
development. Elsevier; 2007.
[15] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. Exergoenvironmental analysis and optimization of a
cogeneration plant system using multimodal genetic algorithm (MGA). Energy
2011;35(12):516172.
[16] Haseli Y, Dincer I, Naterer GF. Optimum temperatures in a shell and
tube condenser with respect to exergy. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2008;51:
246270.
[17] Ahmadi P, Almasi A, Shahriyari M, Dincer I. Multi-objective optimization of a
combined heat and power (CHP) system for heating purpose in a paper mill
using evolutionary algorithm. Int J Energy Res; in press. doi:10.1002/er.1781.
[18] Ahmadi P, Naja AF, Ganjehei S. Thermodynamic modeling and exergy
analysis of a gas turbine plant (case study in Iran). In: Proc. of 16th int
conference of mechanical engineering, Kerman, Iran, ISME 2243; 2008
[19] Avval HB, Ahmadi P. Thermodynamic modeling of combined cycle power plant
with gas turbine blade cooling. In: Proc. of the second Iranian thermodynamic
congress, Isfahan, Iran; 2007.
[20] Meigounpoory MR, Ahmadi P, Ghaffarizadeh AR, Khanmohammadi SH.
Optimization of combined cycle power plant using sequential quadratic
programming. ASME 2008. Heat transfer summer conference collocated with
the uids engineering; 2008. p. 109-14.
[21] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Butterworths: London;
1985.
[22] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. New York:
Wiley; 1996.
[23] Kanoglu M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Understanding energy and exergy efciencies
for improved energy management in power plants. Energy Policy
2007;35:396778.
[24] Ahmadi P. Exergy concepts and exergy analysis of combined cycle power
plants (a case study in Iran). B.Sc. Thesis, Energy Engineering Department,
Power & Water University of Technology (PWUT), Tehran, Iran; 2006.
[25] Ameri M, Ahmadi P. The study of ambient temperature effects on exergy losses
of a heat recovery steam generator. In: Proceedings of the international
conference on power engineering, Hang Zhou, China; 2007. p. 5561.
[26] Tsatsaronis G. Denitions and nomenclature in exergy analysis and
exergoeconomics. Energy 2007;32:24953.
[27] Rosen MA, Dincer I. Thermo-economic analysis of power plants: an application
to a coal red electrical generating station. Energy Convers Manage
2003;44:274361.
[28] Valero A, Lozano MA, Serra L, Tsatsaronis G, Pisa J. Frangopoulos CA. CGAM
problem: denition and conventional solution. Energy 1994;19(3):27986.
[29] Roosen P, Uhlenbruck S, Lucas K. Pareto optimization of a combined cycle
power system as a decision support tool for trading off investment vs.
operating costs. Int J Therm Sci 2003;42:55360.
[30] Ghaffarizadeh A. Investigation on evolutionary algorithms emphasizing mass
extinction. B.Sc. Thesis, Shiraz University of Technology-Shiraz, Iran; 2006.
[31] Goldberg DE. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine
learning. Reading (MA): Addison-Wesley; 1989.
[32] Holland JH. Adaption in natural and articial systems. Ann Arbor, The
University of Michigan Press; 1975.

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.