Changes in Natural Gas Composition and its Effect on Low

Emission Combustors
11/01/2009
by Robert Bland, Gas Turbine Efficiency
As traditional global sources of natural gas are exhausted, new nontraditional sources such as coal
bed methane and imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) will supply a bigger fraction of the total
demand.
Consequently, the variety and variability of compositions of natural gas in pipelines will increase
and differ by region. These changes in composition might result in increased concentrations of
higher hydrocarbons, producing changes to heating value and hydrocarbon dew point over
relatively short time scales. The variations in fuel compositions, if large enough, can have a
significant impact on the performance and operability of gas turbines, particularly for those with
Dry Low NOX (DLN) combustion systems.
Gas interchangeability traditionally has been based on the gas Wobbe number, which is a measure
of the volumetric energy density. Thus, if the gas is pure methane or a mixture of methane, inerts
and heavier hydrocarbons, as long as the Wobbe number is the same, then the gases are
considered interchangeable. Gas turbine manufacturers typically set other limitations on the levels
of the heavier hydrocarbons, keeping the delivered gas within a relatively narrow range of
compositions, which ensures that the systems meet performance and operability requirements.
This approach historically has succeeded in maintaining a workable level of gas consistency, but
that might change soon as these new nontraditional sources impact pipeline gas composition.
New gas sources, such as LNG, often have higher levels of the heavier hydrocarbons, ethane and
above than classically have been allowed in the pipeline. The LNG supplier wants to maximize
the energy content of the gas and has no local use for the higher hydrocarbons, such as chemical
plants, at the liquefaction facility. Conventional diffusion combustion systems on gas turbines are
relatively insensitive to these changes in fuel composition and probably will be largely unaffected
by this change in fuel supply. The lower NOX premixed combustors, specifically DLN
combustors, are considerably more sensitive to these factors.
DLN combustors by nature are not robust devices. To meet the low-emissions levels required, the
systems operate close to the lean flame extinction limit because NOX output from a DLN
combustor is primarily determined by the maximum flame temperature. For example, the required
emissions output of a simple-cycle turbine with a turbine entry temperature in the range of 2,6002,700 F, significantly above the melting point of metals, is essentially the same as for a domestic
gas water heater, which runs at a significantly lower temperature. Historically, any improvements
in robustness have been sacrificed to attain ever-lower emissions levels.
As a consequence of operating close to the physical flammability limit, DLN combustors are
sensitive to wide parameters. Figure 1 shows the effect of fuel composition on the speed at which
the flame propagates. Flame speed affects where the flame can exist in the combustor and how it
ignites the fresh fuel air mixture continually entering the combustor. The impact of composition
changes on this, and other fundamental characteristics of the combustion process can impact
many performance characteristics of the gas turbine combustion system, some of which are:

NOX and CO emissions,

Combustion dynamics, which can impact the durability of combustion systems
components,
Turndown and stability of the combustion system, which can lead to blowouts and
machine trips, and

Auto-ignition or flashback of flame into premixers, which can lead to catastrophic damage
to combustor and hot section components.

Constant Wobbe Index

Figure 2 shows such an incident on an ABB combustor where fuel composition changes produced
a significant impact on system performance. The heating value of the fuel suddenly drops, and the
emissions and dynamics respond adversely to the change.

With many DLN combustors, such as the GE 7FA+e DLN2.6, the fuel distribution can be
modified spatially by the use of a series of independently controllable fuel circuits. This allows
the system to be tuned for a specific set of circumstances, e.g., ambient conditions or fuel
composition. If the combustor encounters fuel compositions outside the narrow range for which it
was tuned, emissions or combustor dynamics can be affected adversely. If the variations are large
enough, it might not be possible to tune the systems to meet performance and regulatory
requirements.
There are two ways to address the issue. The first is for the original equipment manufacturers
(OEMs) or third parties to design combustors that are more robust to fuel quality. Siemens has
achieved this with its SGT6-5000F 9 ppm combustion system (ULN or Ultra Low NOX). Figure
3 shows the NOX output of the ULN compared with that of older 15/25 ppm NOX DLN
combustion systems, as the fuel Wobbe number (energy density) is increased. The ULN system is
insensitive to Wobbe number variation as a result of a more robust premixing technology.
This approach might not be a practical or cost-effective solution for some pre-existing DLN
combustion systems. In this case, it is necessary to expand the range of fuel compositions over
which the system can operate by a combination of fuel conditioning and continuous real-timing
tuning of the combustion systems to maintain system performance when faced with variations in
fuel compositions. This approach takes advantage of the combustion systems ability to operate
across a moderate range of conditions if correctly tuned for those conditions. In the past, tuning
was performed by a specialist coming to site and modifying the control system settings. This was
slow and expensive. In response, OEMs such as GE, Siemens and MHI, as well as third parties

such as GTE, have introduced local, near real-time monitoring and control systems. These
systems control the combustors, either based directly on the real-time emissions/dynamics data
Siemens, MHI and GTEor on synthetic modelsGEby modulating the combustor fuel flow
splits in response to excessive emissions or combustor dynamics. By continually monitoring the
system, changes can be made as frequently as necessary and the performance of the system
optimized. Figure 3 shows a number of the drivers and parameters affecting optimization.
In addition to real-time tuning, fuel conditioning and heating capabilities might be a requirement
to keep systems operating properly as pipeline fuel compositions change. If the fuel contains
heavier hydrocarbons greater than C4, then these can condense out in the fuel system. Liquids
that are not captured or evaporated prior to entering the combustor can easily auto-ignite when
mixed with the more than 700 F air present in an F-class gas turbine. Combustion will occur in
areas that were not designed for it, significantly damaging combustor and potentially downstream
hot gas path hardware.

To minimize such problems, an effective fuel-conditioning system is necessary. This takes the
fuel though the multiple stages of separating the majority of the liquid, coalescing out any
airborne droplets and finally heating the fuel to ensure it has an adequate dew point margin, to
pass through the fuel delivery system without cooling to a level where condensation of any of the
heavier constituents can take place.

Placing the fuel heater under the control of the auto-tuning system can provide another means of
controlling the fuel characteristics to address performance impacts arising from variations in fuel
composition. A possible addition to the fuel conditioning system is a fuel analyzer that can allow
the fuels composition and heating value to be measured in real time. This information can either
be fed directly into the control system and used to define the combustor fuel splits or recorded in
the historian to help understand factors affecting turbine operation.
The variability in fuel composition that will occur with increased use of nonstandard gas supplies
can adversely impact the performance of many gas turbines.
In some cases, new combustion hardware might be available to deal with these issues.
In others, available control and fuel-conditioning technologies exist that can mitigate the majority
of the effects on turbine performance.
Author
Robert Bland is chief technologist, combustion architectures, at Gas Turbine Efficiency. He
obtained a doctorate from the University of Sheffield and has 20 years of computational fluid
experience and 25 gas turbine patents.