ENERGICO is a complex system-design simulation tool that works by applying detailed chemistry technology to solve the toughest gas-turbine engineering problems related to emissions reduction and stability. By using ENERGICO to model and test new combustor designs, companies can save millions in gas turbine development costs and substantially reduce time-to-market when compared to traditional physical prototype testing.

2. Outline
● Challenges faced by today’s combustor designers
● Alternative strategies available to address the
challenges
● Announcing Energico
● Summary
2

3. RD software enables “virtual” experimentation
● RD’s software allows designers to visualize the effects of
chemistry on their engine designs
● Chemistry simulation can help determine key parameters that
can affect efficiency and emissions
● Exclusive developer and licensor of CHEMKIN
3

4. The Combustor Designer’s Dilemma
• Cost of Experiments
• Mechanism Size
• CFD Complexity
• Cost of Design Mistakes
• Design Complexity
• Fuel Options
• Emissions Regulations
• Fuel Consumption
• Design Cycle Time
• Design Resources
4

5. Global Issues Driving Change
● Low Emissions Regulations
– ICAO limits on nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO)
and Unburned Hydrocarbons
– New Soot/Particulate emissions regulations for commercial
aircraft in airports
International Civil Aviation Organization NOx Limits
● Fuel Flexibility
2003
– Alternative Fuels 2006
2009
– Opportunity Fuels 2012 (Proposed)
– Biofuels for carbon
dioxide (CO2) reduction
Certification Test Data
(Engine Size)
Source: ICAO Colloquium on Aviation Emissions, May, 2007
5

6. While Testing Costs Keep Going Up
Example: 250 MW Turbine
6

7. Diverse Fuel Sources Add Risk to Design
● Syngas from Integrated
Gasification Combined Cycle
(IGCC)
● Opportunity Fuels Syngas and Fischer-Tropsch
– Blast Furnace Gas
– Landfill Gas
● Coal-derived, F-T fuels
● Bio-fuels Bio-Diesel
– High in methyl esters
– Sources differ regionally and
are changing
● Oil-sand derived fuels
– High in aromatics Biomass and Waste Fuels
7

8. Design Changes Introduce Risk to Combustor
Stability
● Lean-premixed combustion with low
flame temperature slows burn rates
– Lean Blow Off (LBO) when mixing
overpowers burning
– Flashback in premixed systems when
flow velocity is less than flame velocity
– Ignition more difficult with lean mixtures
● Opportunity fuels can have inconsistent
composition and flow rate
– Fuel composition impacts stability
– Combustor experiences transient conditions
with rapid load changes
8

9. Today, Designers Use CFD and Extensive
Physical Testing
● Computational Fluid Dynamics
– Geometry resolution
– 3-D flow field representation
– Accurate prediction of mass flows
– Accurate heat transfer
– Simplified chemistry
● Performance and emission requirements drive
combustor testing
– 10-20 tests per typical combustor design
– $50k-200k per test in a physical prototype
9

10. Detailed Chemistry Drives Accurate
Simulation
● Traditional CFD and empirical approaches do not
accurately predict emissions and stability
NOx
NOx Measured
Measured
NOx NOx NOx NOx NOx NOx
NOx Under Predicted by CFD CO Over Predicted by CFD
10

12. Designers Say They Need:
● Fewer, better directed experiments
● The ability to simulate conditions that cannot be
experimentally tested
● A way to complete rapid evaluations of fuel and
operating condition effects
● An accurate applications engineering tool for
combustion stability assessment
12

13. Equivalent Reactor Networks (ERNs) are
Being Used to Abstract the Chemistry
Air
Flame
Air Mixing Recirculation
Post-flame
Pre-mixed
Fuel + Air
Equivalent
Reactor Network
Benefits of ERNs Drawbacks of ERNs
• ERNs use detailed chemistry • Can takes expert >1 month
to accurately simulate to create by hand
pollutant emissions • Difficult to map results back
• ERNs can identify regions onto combustor geometry
where emissions are formed
13

14. Energico Adds Chemistry to the Design
Flow
3-D CFD Solution
Automatically
create ERN
Map chemistry
results onto Map chemistry
geometry view results onto
geometry view
14

15. Combustor Flow Field Automatically
Divided Into Zones
● Zone creation algorithm eliminates manual analysis
and errors
● Designer can easily adjust and refine the algorithm to
capture flow/flame structures
● Energico accurately tracks all flows to “stitch”
together the zones into an ERN
15

16. “Instant” Equivalent Reactor Networks
● Automation supports commercial design timelines
– Creates ERNs in minutes rather than months
– Enables widespread use by combustor designers
● Accurately follows specific set of rules
– Correct-by-Construction
16

17. Viewing ERN Results on Combustor
Geometry Facilitates Design Modifications
NOx Production
Identify where NOx
emissions are formed
CO Concentrations
Identify where CO
emissions are quenched
17

18. Assess Lean Blow Off (LBO)
● Capture the flame
● Conduct detailed
chemistry analysis
locally in flame
– Chemistry rate from
reaction mechanism
– Mixing rate from CFD
● Determine how close
flame is to LBO
● Visualize flame within geometry to guide design
modifications
18

19. Energico has Completed a Rigorous
Validation Program on Real Turbine Designs
● RD conducted extensive internal benchmarking with
designs supplied from industry prior to release
● Three major gas turbine manufacturers involved in
Program
– Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
– Kawasaki Heavy Industries
– Large United States manufacturer
● Over 60% of power generation gas turbine market
represented by validators
● Program included validation of Energico on well
understood designs
– Emissions predictions
– Lean Blow Off assessments
19

20. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
● MHI is the largest gas turbine
manufacturer in Japan
● Energico Validation Summary:
– Energico predicted emissions well
within a 5% margin on natural gas
– Test cases on 25ppm NOx and less than 10ppm NOx cases
– Focused LBO testing on both fundamental experiments and
large scale combustor tests
● MHI Turbine Business Division Manager:
– “Energico can help MHI reduce costly and time consuming
experimental testing”
20

21. Kawasaki Heavy Industries
● Mid-size engine range up to 25MW
● Energico Validation Summary:
– Test cases focused on a parametric
variation of fuel/air ratio in production
combustor
– Emissions of NOx and CO predicted within 5% of
experimental data
21

22. US-based Gas Turbine Manufacturer
● 50MW to 400MW turbine systems
● Energico Validation Results:
– Compared emissions results from
experiments to Energico
– Emissions for NOx and CO within
1ppm of experimental data
– Fuel impacts on emissions predicted
(syngas from IGCC)
– LBO tool provides new data for effective simulation
● Team Leader, Combustor Simulation:
– “Energico is clearly superior to CFD for accurate emissions
results”
22

23. Sample Energico Validation Results
Class of Combustor NO CO
Fuel Type
(all CO less than 10ppm) Variance Variance
10MW Less than 10ppm NOx Natural Gas 1ppm 2ppm
25MW 25ppm NOx Natural Gas 2ppm 2ppm
250MW Less than 10ppm NOx Natural Gas 1ppm 2ppm
250MW 25ppm NOx Natural Gas 2ppm 2ppm
250MW 25ppm NOx Syngas 2ppm 2ppm
23

24. Current Industry Concerns
Combustor Sustainable
designs are fuels
becoming introduce
more complex combustion
uncertainty
Mechanisms
become more
detailed to
capture
required
effects
n
ENERGICO: Revolutionary Simulation Package
• Reduced Need for Physical Engine Testing
• Ability to take Advantage of Opportunity Fuels
• Increased Speed-to-Market for New Designs
• Reduced Field Failures with Capability to
Accurately Simulate Emissions and LBO
24