Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Because of the non-linear and non-explicit relationships between system parameters and incomplete
Received 14 March 2016 and/or complicated mathematical model, iterative approaches that work based on the experts' knowl-
Received in revised form edge to optimize or improve complex energy systems. Main focus on this study was to encode the
13 August 2016
iterative approach in the form of a fuzzy inference system, FIS, to maximize prot of a power plant
Accepted 14 August 2016
Available online 29 August 2016
through controlling the effective operating parameters, while the load of a power plant is changed. As a
benchmark power station, a 250 MW unit in the Shahid-Rajaei steam power was considered for opti-
mization. The prots of the power plant at various loads were estimated using exergoeconomic analysis;
Keywords:
Soft computing optimization tools
then, it was optimized through optimal regulating the ow rates of extracted steam from the high and
Power plant feed-water heaters low pressure turbines in an iterative procedure. The FIS worked based on the magnitude of the cost of
Fuzzy inference system exergy destruction of feed-water heaters. The faster computation time of the FIS compared to the GA,
Iterative exergoeconomic optimization make it as a suitable option for the real-time optimization in form of fuzzy controllers. Using the
Real-time optimization developed FIS, the prot of the power plant at 100, 80, and 60% of the nominal power was increased
153.0, 322.0, and 280.0 $ h1, respectively.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction energy and exergy analysis of some power plant were given by
Kaushik et al. [1]. Energy and exergy analysis of an ultra-super
There are several interactions between sub-components of the critical power plant was done by Hasti et al. [2]. They suggested
complex energy systems, including mass, energy, exergy, and an effort to reduce the irreversibilities of the furnace. Another
nancial interactions. In optimization, the designer must nd the exergy based study on the ultra-super critical power plant was
best inter-relationships between these interactions as well as the performed by Yang et al. [3]. The conventional and advanced exergy
foremost structural specications of sub-components. Over the last analyses were conducted to quantify the exergy dissipations of the
few decades, exergoeconomic (thermoeconomic) method of energy system and reveal the energy-saving ideas. They found that the
system analysis was developed to deal with the nancial charac- energy-saving ideas for both the whole of the system, and the in-
teristics of the energy and exergy interactions. In this regards, dividual component level are not in accordance with the magni-
exergy and economic analysis are combined in exergoeconomic tude of the reduced exergy destruction of the system. Egea et al.
approach to nd out the cost of exergy streams as well as the cost of used a black box model to nd the uncertainties in energy and
thermodynamic inefciencies. The knowledge of inefciency cost exergy analysis of a coal power plant [4]. They performed the
formation process may conduct designer to control the optimiza- method for ve loads within the range of 40e100% of full power by
tion procedure. using the sensitivity analysis for some effective parameters. It was
The exergy analysis has been extensively employed for assess- shown that LHV determination was the most important source of
ment and/or optimization of thermal power plants. Main re- the uncertainty in energy and exergy analysis.
searchers in this eld were reviewed and comparisons between On the other side, some researches were dedicated to a com-
bination of energy or exergy and economic analyzes i.e. exer-
goeconomics (thermoeconomics). Thermoeconomic analysis of a
* Corresponding author. coal-red steam power plant was conducted by Rosen and Dincer
E-mail addresses: hoseynsayyaadi@gmail.com (M. Baghsheikhi), sayyaadi@kntu. [5]. They showed that a correlation exists between the capital cost
ac.ir (H. Sayyaadi).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.044
0360-5442/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 869
and exergy destructions. Exergy and exergoeconomic evaluation of and investment cost rates of components into four parts: avoidable,
the Isfahan steam power plant was performed by Khanmohammadi unavoidable, endogenous and exogenous exergy destruction. They
et al. [6]. They determined the exergy destructions and the cost of believed that against the conventional exergy-based method, this
exergy destructions of plant's components through solutions of the method can nd the relationships between the components in
exergy and cost balances' equations. The maximum exergy de- addition to realize the sources and magnitudes of the irreversibil-
structions were found in the boiler and a box comprising from rst ities. So it is an efcient method to offer the correct improvement
preheater, condenser and cooling tower. In addition, they showed strategies. They performed this method into a trigeneration system
that increasing the number of feed water heaters from zero to six [8] and an electricity-generating facility [9]. Engine and turbo air
leads to signicant reduction of the price of electricity. Exergy and charger in Ref. [8] and gas turbine and combustion chamber in
thermoeconomic analysis of a thermal power plant in Turkey was Ref. [9] were the most important components of the systems to
conducted by Bollaturk et al. via EES package software [7]. The improve the terms of investment cost rates.
highest exergoeconomic factor was found in turbines, whereas the Exergetic and/or exergoeconomic optimization of thermal po-
maximum amount of exergy destruction and its cost were calcu- wer plants were also attended by researchers. In this regards, soft
lated in the boiler. In the recent year, some researchers also have computing techniques such as articial neural networks, ANN, and
presented new development in exergy and exergoeconomic anal- genetic algorithms, GA, have been employed. Wang et al. used the
ysis. For example, Akkalp et al. introduced an advanced exergy differential evolution in multi-objective optimization of a thermal
and exergoeconomic analysis to investigate the power generation power plant [10]. They applied the MODE algorithm to nd the
systems [8,9]. In this method, they divided the exergy destruction trade-off solutions in decision making problem. They reduced the
870 M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884
cost of electricity 2e4% while the efciency was increased up to They developed a fuzzy inference system for exergoeconomic
2%. Exergoeconomic operation optimization of a coal-red steam optimization of the CGAM problem, according to iterative hand
power plant in China was performed by Xiang et al. [11]. Two calculations that were already performed by Tsatsaronis and
strategies of global and local optimization were used and the re- Moran in Ref. [23]. It was trying to facilitate the application of
ductions of 2.5% and 3.5% in total annual cost and total investment iterative optimization technique by encoding the knowledge of
cost were achieved, respectively. Ameri et al. [12] used GA and experts in a computer program based on a method that was
exergy methods in optimization of steam cycle power plant and already presented in Ref. [22]. However, the method in Ref. [22]
reduced the cost of destruction about 17.11%. Optimum design of was not presented very briey so that it was very difcult for
the process variables in a combined-cycle power plant was found other researchers to continue the research and key concepts for
using GA by Koch et al. [13]. In that research, both process struc- any developments on method was missed. Later, Sayyaadi et al.
ture and process variables of a 240 MW combined cycle conju- [24] elaborated complete methodology of the FIS for exer-
gated with a 150 MW gas turbine were optimized. Bertini et al. goeconomic improvement of the CGAM cycle based on iterative
used a combination of fuzzy logic and genetic algorithm as a optimization procedure of Tsatsaronis and Pisa [25]. The meth-
coupled technique to optimize parameters of a combine cycle odology of Sayyaadi et al. [24], unlike the method of Cziesla and
plant in start-up condition [14]. Furthermore, they proposed a Tsatsaronis [22], does not require exact values of parameters such
software simulator to test the results in the real cases. They used a as exergoeconomic factor and relative cost difference, and sum of
tness approximation approach to reduce the calculation-time the cost of exergy destruction and capital investment for the plant
and load. Hajabdollahi et al. performed a multi-objective optimi- and its subcomponents. Methodology of [24] worked based on
zation of steam cycle power plant using a kind of genetic algo- approximated values for optimal exergetic efciency and relative
rithm, known as the NSGA-II and the articial neural network, cost difference and deviations of the actual estimated values of
ANN [15]. They regulated fteen design variables to optimize both these parameters for optimal estimated values. Therefore, it could
objective functions of total cost rate and thermal efciency. In be more suitable when incomplete thermal and economic
some states, it simultaneously led to 3.7% increase and 3.8% modeling exists as in this method, uses an approximated model
decrease in the thermal efciency and total cost rate, respectively. based on empirical correlations of optimal exergetic efciency and
Ghaffari et al. represented a combination of soft computing relative cost difference. The goal of that paper was to reach an
methods to model the dynamic behavior of a 440 MW steam optimum design conguration of the CGAM problem through
power plant. They used fuzzy rules for training the model from adjusting the decision variables, including turbine and compressor
eld data and genetic algorithm to optimize that. The comparison isentropic efciencies, compressor pressure ratio, and inlet/outlet
between their model and other thermodynamic methods vali- temperatures of turbine. Finally, the exergoeconomic objective
dated the good accuracy of the proposed approach [16]. On the function of the CGAM problem (the cost rate of the power as the
other side of researches, optimization of a 1000 MW nuclear po- product of the system) was optimized from 1964 $ h1 to 1324
wer plant (PWR) was performed by Sayyaadi et al. in two re- $ h1.
searches [17,18]. They used the genetic algorithm to improve the The traditional optimization tools are very time consuming so it
thermoeconomic performance of the system in single and multi- is difcult to utilize them in case that objective is an optimal real-
objective optimization approaches. Sayyaadi et al. performed this time response to variation of operational parameters of the plant,
method for a 1000 MW PWR nuclear power plant coupled with a i.e. load variations. Due to relativity long lags between their
desalination system [19,20]. The multi-objective optimization response and variation of operating parameters, it is difcult to
problem was done while the exergoeconomic and exergetic ob- integrate them into real-time optimal controllers of the power
jectives were optimized, simultaneously. In another research, they plant. The objective of this paper is designing a fuzzy inference
compared the conventional PWR nuclear power plant with two system, FIS, that can quickly optimize the performance of a power
similar hybrid PWR nuclear plants with the same loads from plant through controlling its operating variables in response to any
exergetic and economic aspects [21]. Ganjehkaviri et al. applied variation in electricity demands from the power station. The
exergoeconomic analysis for the modeling of a combined-cycle objective of the optimal control is to maximize the prot of the
power plant. Exergy destruction costs of components were plant through selling the electricity as the product of the power
calculated in this analysis. Furthermore, optimal values of design plant. In this regard, the goal is optimal controlling the performance
of parameters were obtained using the genetic algorithm in a of the power plant over its entire working regime. The real-time
multi-objective optimization problem [22]. optimization was performed through controlling the extracted
Application of iterative approach for optimization or improving steam ow rate in response to variations of the plant's load. Shahid-
energy systems is another option. This iterative procedure can be Rajaei power plant located in Qasvin, Iran was considered as the
computerized using fuzzy tools. The fuzzy tool employs the case study. In the rst part of current paper, the exergy and exer-
knowledge base of expert to optimize or improve energy systems. goeconomic analysis of the proposed power plant were carried out
In this regards, fuzzy tools have two advantages. First advantage is and irreversibilities of the various components of the power plant
that it does not use a complete mathematical model that required were obtained. Then, a new exergoeconomic procedure based on
by GA. This advantage is remarkable in optimizing of a very FIS was applied to optimize the dynamic operating mode of the
complex energy system that their mathematical model is too Shahid-Rajaei power plant.
complicated. On the other hand, optimization of complex energy Among numerous operating parameters, mass ow rate of
systems with complicated mathematical model is a very time- extracted steams from turbines were selected as optimal control
consuming process. The second advantage of fuzzy tools is that parameters. These extracted steams are directed to feed-water
they can be implemented for optimal control of processes through heaters for pre-heating the feed water. The FIS of this research
the use of a fuzzy controller. Therefore, a dynamic control of a can be converted to a fuzzy controller that alters ow rates of the
system in their entire working regime is possible so that the extracted steams so that the prot of the power plant is maximum
optimal performance of a system in all working regimes is guar- over the entire loading regime of the power station. Hence, the
anteed. The idea of the using the fuzzy inference system, FIS, in designed fuzzy system and its consequent fuzzy controller, will
optimization of a benchmark cogeneration system known as the control automatic valves that will be installed on connecting pipes
CGAM problem, was examined by Cziesla and Tsatsaronis [22]. of turbines and feed water heaters; therefore, the ow rates of
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 871
cedure presented by Tsatsaronis et al. [25]. Then, the designed FIS Modeling parameter Modeling results Power plant data Error (%)
was examined for different loading regimes of the Shahid-Rajaei _ 236.8 235.4 0.6
W Steam;net MW
power plant. Heat rate (kJ/kWh) 646.9 645.1 0.28
In summary, the novel outcome of this paper is providing the hThermal,net (%) 36.17 36.49 0.9
methodology of FIS in a more efcient manner as an alternative for
conventional optimization approaches. It will be shown that this
method is much faster in computation than the GA and it can
convert to optimal fuzzy controllers. It enables to optimize the X T
X X
Q_ 1 0 W_ m_ in ein m_ out eout E_ D (2)
prot of the power plant in real-time response to variation of the T out
in
plant's load. In addition, maximizing the prot of plant through
adjusting the ow rate of extracted steams in respond to variation The equations for exergy balance and exergetic efciency of the
of the electricity demand of the power station is another new power plant's components were indicated in Appendix A
approach that was concerned here. (Table A1). The performance specications of the power plant
from this model were indicated in Appendix A (Table A2).
The calculated thermal and exergetic efciencies of the pro-
2. Case study
posed power plant are 36.17% and 35.09% respectively. The com-
parison between results of modeling with actual operational data
Shahid-Rajaei power plant in the Qazvin county of Iran con-
was indicated in Table 1.
sisting of four separate steam units with 250 MW nominal capacity
for each unit was considered as the case study. Each unit consists of
seven turbines, including three high-pressure (HP) and four low 3.2. Economic model
pressure (LP). The condenser is Heller's type with minimum pres-
sure of 0.02 MPa supporting by a dry type cooling tower. The feed- One of the major parts of the plant economic is the evaluation of
water leaves the condenser passes through three low pressure the purchased equipment cost. The purchased equipment cost is
feed-water heaters, one deaerator, and two high pressure feed- evaluated based on vendor quotations, data bank of designing
water heaters. The main fuel is natural gas; however, the power company, experience of previous project, etc. On the other hand,
plant is also fueled by the Mazut (a heavy fuel oil), alternatively. The some empirical correlations have been developed to estimate
schematic ow-diagram of the power plant was illustrated in Fig. 1. approximate values of purchased equipment costs when there are
no aforementioned sources of data. This kind of empirical cost
3. Modeling equation is useful for modeling and optimization tasks as these
equations are user-friend for such tasks. Typical empirical corre-
3.1. Thermodynamic model lation for evaluation of the purchased cost of power plant equip-
ment, Z, as functions operating parameters were presented in
In the rst part of this research, the thermodynamic model, Appendix B (Table B1).
including energy and exergy analyzes was created and encoded in In exergoeconomic modeling of an energy system, as cost allo-
the EES software. This modeling was based on parameters and as- cation of exergy streams leads to a time rate form of cost ows, in
sumptions presented in Refs. [26,27]. exergoeconomic cost balance equation, the purchased cost of
The steady-state energy and exergy balance equations for the equipment needs to be converted to the time rate format. On the
power plant's components is based on the following equation: other hand, other costs, including operating and maintenance cost
and capital recovery factor are needed to be integrated into the
X X
m_ in hin m_ out hout W_ Q_ 0 (1) model. A simple model for evaluating the cost rate of equipment
in out associated with the capital investment and operating &
_
- WhenEx
maintenance cost as per methodology of [25] was given in P;k is constant:
Appendix B (Table B2).
Finally, the equation for investment and maintenance costs of C_ D;k cF;k Ex
_
D;k (7b)
the ith component per $ h1 is,
_
Z_ i Zi $b g=t (3) - WhenExF;k is constant:
In Eq. (3), b is the capital recovery factor assumed 18.2%, t is the C_ D;k cP;k Ex
_
D;k (7c)
annual operation time of the power plant at its nominal capacity
assumed as 8000 h. Also g1.092 considered for operating & where Ex _
D;k is exergy destruction in the k
ith
component. The unit
maintenance cost. cost of fuel,cF.k , and product, cP.k are [28]:
Another important factor in economic modeling of a power .
plant is the fuel cost. The cost rate of fuel is dened as follows, cF;k C_ F;k Ex
_
F;k (8a)
n
X m
X CCobjective Rimproved Cincreased (9)
CI OM
_
cj Ex Z_ k Z_ k _
cj Ex (5)
j j
k;in k;out The term Rimproved represents the increase in revenue of the
j1 j1
power plant resulted from the increasing the net generated power.
Where cj is the unit cost of exergy ($ kJ1) for the jth stream to/from The term Cincreased refers to the increase in the fuel consumption of
the component, Ex _ is exergy ow of the jth stream to/from the the unit resulted in decreasing the pre-heating of the main water
j
CI OM
stream. These two terms were dened as follows:
component (kW) and Z_ k and Z_ k are the related cost of capital
investment and operating and maintenance for the component kth Rimproved W_ net W_
net;design 1000 CCelectricity (10)
obtained using the economic model ($ h1).
.
C_F C_P C_D C_L (6) Cincreased m_ f ;net m_ f ;design CCgas rgas (11)
After that exergoeconomic performance of the system is eval- The unit cost of electricity (CCelectricity) and natural gas (CCgas)
uated by some exergoeconomic parameters of components, are assumed 0.027 $ kWh1 and 0.02$ m3.
including the exergy efciency(k), the cost, exergy destruction In this research as stated earlier, the mass ow rates of extracted
C_ D , relative cost difference (rk) and exergoeconomic factor (fk). As steams are intended to be controlled as the load of the power
the purchased costs of equipment do not alter during operation and station is changed; therefore, decision variables or controlling
the aim of this research is optimal control on performance of the variables are:
power plant, the last two factors (rk and fk) remain constant; hence,
they were not used in our evaluation. Parameters used in this study 1. An indicator of the mass ow of the extracted steam from HP1
include the exergy efciency (k) and the cost of exergy destruction turbine, EXTHP1
C_ D were dened as follows. 2. An indicator of the mass ow of the extracted steam from HP2
turbine, EXTHP2
Exergetic efciency of a sub-components [13]: 3. An indicator of the mass ow of the extracted steam from LP1
. turbine, EXTLP1
_
k Ex _ 4. An indicator of the mass ow of the extracted steam from LP2
P;k ExF;k (7a)
turbine,EXTLP2
5. An indicator of the mass ow of the extracted steam from LP3
Cost of exergy destruction [28]: turbine,EXTLP3
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 873
Table 3 power plant. This study demonstrated that these variables have
The specication of the designed FIS. meaningful relationships with the exergoeconomic variable and
FIS name Power plant exergy destruction rate of feed water heaters.
Type Mamdani
Objective function in this investigation was the difference be-
AND method Min tween the prot of the modied system (dened as the difference
OR method Max between incomes and costs of the power plant), and the corre-
Defuzzication method Centroid sponding prot of the base designed power plant. It is clear that
decreasing the mass ow rate of extracted steam lead to increase in
the ow rate of the steam passing through downstream turbines.
5.2. Method of application This leads to an increase in the net power of the turbines; conse-
quently, the incomes of the power plant will be increased. On the
The designed FIS system was employed in the case study power other hand, this decreases the pre-heating of the feed-water trav-
station (Shahid-Rajaei power plant) to optimize the ow rate of eling to the boiler; hence, the fuel consumption of the power plant
extracted steam entering to each feed-water heater, so that the fuel and its consequent costs will be increased. The rst effect in-
objective function stays at its optimal value while the load of the tends to increase the power plant prot, and the second one de-
power plant is changed. The logic of this FIS can be used to design creases it. As a result, there is an optimal value for this parameter,
fuzzy controllers of ow control valves that located between tur- and it could be a proper objective function for the power plant
bines and these heaters. It was experienced that mass ow rates of owners to get the maximum prot. In the design state of the power
closed feed-water heaters had a signicant role in net prot of the plant, this function was set to zero. The negative value of this
Fig. 3. Flow chart of the developed FIS for optimizing the prot of the proposed power plant.
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 875
parameter means that the prot of the power plant is decreased 80% and 100%, respectively. This led to remarkable prot for the
from the corresponding prot at the nominal design condition of owners of the power plant; considering that the overall plant
the plant. The positive value of the objective function implies that consists of four 250 MW units, the total prot of the plant could be
the current prot of the power plant is higher than its nominal multiplied by four.
value at design condition. The variation of the objective function (increasing the prot of
The simple schematic of the iterative optimization process of the the power plant compared to the corresponding prot of the based
designed FIS was illustrated in Fig. 3. In the rst run, exergetic and design plant) as well as extraction indexes, while the load of the
exego-economic variables were calculated using the EES software power plant varies in the range of 40e100% of the nominal power,
and extracted correlations for C_ D;HPFWH1, C_ D;HPFWH2 , C_ D;LPFWH1 , were depicted in Fig. 5a and b, respectively.
C_ D;LPFWH2 , C_ D;LPFWH3 , revenue function and based on decision
variables (EXTHP1,EXTHP2,EXTLP1,EXTLP2,EXTLP3) delivered to the FIS as
input variables in Matlab programming. In this state, initial values Table 4
Iteration steps of the FIS.
of decision variables were set to zero. Modied values of decision
variables were suggested by the FIS. These values had a positive Decision variable (1st step) Value Component C_ D $ : s1
effect on the objective function and fed back to the EES code for the EXTHP1 0.0 HP-FWH1 0.135
next step. This procedure continued until the signicant enhance- EXTHP2 0.0 HP-FWH2 0.175
ment of objective function was obtained or constraints of Table 2 EXTLP1 0.0 LP-FWH1 0.063
were satised. EXTLP2 0.0 LP-FWH2 0.076
EXTLP3 0.0 LP-FWH3 0.072
Objective function (US$ h1) 0.0
6. Results and discussion FIS offer DEXTHP10.0, DEXTHP21.0001 ,
DEXTLP10.0, DEXTLP20.0, DEXTLP30.0
The designed FIS was examined on the Shahid-Rajaei power Decision variable (2nd step) Value Component C_ D $ : s1
plant as the case study at three different loading including 60%, 80%
and 100% of the nominal capacity of the power plant. In the case of EXTHP1 0.0 HP-FWH1 0.152
EXTHP2 1.0001 HP-FWH2 0.169
100% loading i.e. the nominal operating condition of the power 0.0 LP-FWH1 0.064
EXTLP1
station, the iteration step of the FIS was indicated in Table 4. In the EXTLP2 0.0 LP-FWH2 0.076
rst iteration, the decision variables were set to EXTHP10 , EXTLP3 0.0 LP-FWH3 0.072
EXTHP20 , EXTLP10 , EXTLP20 , EXTLP30 ; accordingly, the prot Objective function (US$ h1) 16.59
DEXTHP10.0, DEXTHP21.0002 ,
(objective function) was set to 0.0 US$ h1. It is clear that decision FIS offer
DEXTLP10.0, DEXTLP20.0, DEXTLP30.0
variables and objective function were altered to EXTHP14.3 ,
EXTHP29 , EXTLP10 , EXTLP20 ,EXTLP30 and 149.98 US$ h1 in 47 Decision variable (7th step) Value Component C_ D $ : s1
steps. In each step of the iteration, the values of C_ D;k as indicated in EXTHP1 0.0505 HP-FWH1 0.238
Table 4, was used to evaluate the required change of extensions for EXTHP2 5.8461 HP-FWH2 0.114
that step. For example, in the rst step, Based on the calculated EXTLP1 0.0 LP-FWH1 0.069
Fig. 5a indicates that the maximum increasing prot from the 7. Assessment of the FIS
base design power plant was obtained when the load of the power
plant is 80% of the nominal load. To validate the quality and accuracy of the results obtained by
According to Fig. 5b, for obtaining the maximum prot at every this method, the genetic algorithm, GA, was employed to nd the
load, the extraction mass ow of the LP3 turbine should not be optimum state in EES software. The defaults tuning parameters of
changed from the corresponding value of the designed system. the GA sub-program of the EES software were used to nd the
However, the extraction mass ow of the HP2 should be changed to optimum regulation of the ow rates of the extracted steams (de-
90% of the related corresponding values of the designed system for cision variables of this research). The performances of the GA and
all loading prole of the power plant. The mass ow rates of other FIS to nd the optimal operating conditions of the Shahid-Rajaei
extractions, should be 90% of the corresponding values of the power plant at different loading condition were compared in
designed system, while the load increased up to 80% of full load; at Tables 5 and 6.
higher loads (>80%), those extractions should be adjusted to values Comparison of the results of Tables 5 and 6 reveals that the FIS is
indicated in Fig. 5b. faster than GA. In addition, the accuracy of the FIS is more than the
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 877
Table 7
GA result in various numbers of individuals.
Table 5
Results of the FIS.
Table 6
Results of the GA.
cost resources of a plant. It could be used in the optimization extracted steams. Such potential does not exist in GA tool. The
procedure of complex energy systems. Steam power plant is a kind computation time of the new approach (the FIS system) was
of complex energy system that optimization concept refers to a 1573e2790 times faster than the genetic algorithms; making it a
better state than current condition. Because of the incomplete or suitable tool for the real-time optimization.
the complicated mathematical model of this kind of energy sys- It can be concluding that the FIS is very efcient tool for real-
tems, experts' knowledge and experiences plays an important role time optimal response to variation of operating condition of an
in optimization of this kind of problems. This kind of knowledge energy system due to its very fast convergence compared to con-
base can be encoded to fuzzy inference systems, FIS, to optimize or ventional optimizers. In case of power plants, it would be imple-
improve system iteratively. mented as fuzzy controllers to control actuators of controlling
In this paper, an FIS as a new optimizing tool was introduced and valves as well as other controllers. Nevertheless, the performance
implemented on a 250 MW unit of the Shahid-Rajaei thermal po- of the FIS strongly depends on a knowledge base developed based
wer plant as a case study. The dynamic operation of the power plant on experts' experience and exergoeconomic knowledge. Such
was controlled through regulating the mass ow rates of extracted knowledge bases are essential to obtain the accurate fuzzy rules
steam from the turbines toward feed-water heaters. The objective and suitable shapes of membership functions. By applying the
of the optimization was the prot that power plant can acquire due ANFIS method in forthcoming researches, the development process
to altering these operating parameters (ow rates of extracted of fuzzy rules might be more automated.
steams).
The FIS was developed based on our knowledge regarding the Acknowledgement
exergoeconomic performance and features of the proposed power
plant. This FIS was developed to regulate the mass ow rates of The authors gratefully acknowledge fertile scientic support of
extracted steams so that the prot of the plant through reduction of Mr. Abdollah Mehrpanahi.
the cost of exergy destruction of feed-water heaters to be maxi-
mized. Applying this method led to an increase of the annual net Appendix A. Thermodynamic equations and data
prot of the power plant (for each unit) about 2242080 US$,
2575360 US$ and 1223840 US$ at 60%, 80% and 100% of full load Exergy balance equation (Eq. (2)) was applied to each compo-
(nominal load), respectively. nent of the proposed power plant (illustrated in Fig. 1). In addition,
It was shown that the FIS tool is much faster and more accurate based on exergetic analysis, the exergetic efciency analysis was
than the genetic algorithm, GA. In addition, it was discussed that performed on each component. Therefore, exergy balance equa-
the FIS tool has the capability to be used in designing fuzzy con- tions and expressions of the exergetic efciency for each compo-
trollers that could be used in installed ow control valves of nent were summarized in Table A1.
Table A1
The equations of exergy balance and exergy efciency of the component.
D Ex_
W
Ex_st _st _st _W E_ HPT2
5 Ex6 Ex6o Ex Ex_5 Ex_6 Ex_6o
st st st
D Ex_
W
Ex_st _st _st _W E_ HPT3
6o Ex8 Ex8o Ex Ex_6o Ex_8 Ex_8o
st st st
D Ex_
W
Ex_st _st _st _W E_ LPT1
8o Ex10 Ex10o E x Ex_8o Ex_10 Ex_10o
st st st
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 879
Table A1 (continued )
D Ex_
W
Ex_st _st _st _W E_ LPT3
12o E x14 E x14o Ex Ex_12o Ex_14 Ex_14o
st st st
D Ex_
_W E_ LPT4
W
Ex_st _st
14o E x16 E x Ex_14o Ex_16
st st
Ex_17 Ex_17o
D st st
Ex_st _st _W E_ C:P:
17o E x17 E x Ex_
W
Ex_18 Ex_17
D st st
Ex_st _st _st _st _st _
17 E x18 E x15o E x27o E x28 E LPFWH3 Ex_15o Ex_27o Ex_28
st st st
Ex_19 Ex_18
D st st
Ex_st _st _st _st _st _
18 E x19 E x13o E x26o E x27 E LPFWH2 Ex_13o Ex_26o Ex_27
st st st
Ex_20 Ex_19
st st
Ex_st _st _st _st _D
19 E x20 E x11o E x26 E LPFWH1 Ex_11o Ex_26
st st
D
Ex_st _st _st _st _
20 E x9o E x25o E x21o E Deaerator
m_ 20
Ex_21o Ex_20
st st
m_ 21o
m_ 21o m_ 20
Ex_25o Ex_9o Ex_21o
st st st
m_ 21o
Ex_21 Ex_21o
D st st
Ex_st _st _W E_ D:P:
21o E x21 E x Ex_
W
Ex_22 Ex_21
D st st
Ex_st _st _st _st _st _
21 E x22 E x7o E x24o E x25 E HPFWH2 Ex_7o Ex_24o Ex_25
st st st
Ex_23 Ex_22
D st st
Ex_st _st _st _st _
22 E x23 E x3o E x24 EHPFWH1 Ex_3o Ex_24
st st
Table A1 (continued )
In using exergy balances and expression of exergetic efciency Appendix B. Exergoeconomic equations and economic data
indicated in Table A1, it is necessary to have thermodynamic states
and properties at various locations indicated by numbers in Fig. 1. In the economic analysis of the power plant, it is required to
These required data were presented in Table A2. have the purchased cost of various equipment. The purchased costs
Table A2
Thermodynamic properties at different states and results of the exergy analysis of various components of the Shahid-Rajaei power plant.
Component Type State (as per Fig. 1) s (kJ kg1 K1) h (kJ kg1) m_ (kg s1) T (K) P (MPa) ex (kJ kg1) exD (kJ kg1) hex(%)
Boiler Input 23 2.667 1042 214.8 513.7 17.38 53497 355754 47
Output 1 6.515 3425 214.8 811.2 14.19 319564
Input 4 6.612 3096 196.8 622.8 3.779 222277
Output 5 7.27 3537 196.8 811.2 3.475 270578
HP1 Input 1 6.515 3425 214.8 811.2 14.19 319564 6855 91
Output 2 6.612 3096 17.455 622.8 3.779 9710
Output 4 6.612 3096 196.8 622.8 3.779 222277
HP2 Input 5 7.270 3537 196.8 811.2 3.475 270578 1906 96
Output 6 7.302 3327 11.91 707.9 1.753 13750
Output 6-o 7.302 3327 184.9 707.9 1.753 213580
HP3 Input 6-o 7.302 3327 184.9 707.9 1.753 213580 1451 97
Output 8 7.328 3097 11.81 592.2 0.7559 10827
Output 8-o 7.328 3097 11.81 592.2 0.7559 158717
LP1 Input 8-o 7.328 3097 173.13 592.2 0.7559 158717 3747 91
Output 10 7.383 2883 5.9478 481.2 0.2776 4080
Output 10-o 7.383 2883 167.18 481.2 0.2776 114688
LP2 Input 10-o 7.383 2883 167.18 481.2 0.2776 114688 1641 92
Output 12 7.416 2766 6.796 419.8 0.146 3802
Output 12-o 7.416 2766 160.4 419.8 0.146 89714
LP3 Input 12-o 7.416 2766 160.4 419.8 0.146 89714 1515 93
Output 14 7.447 2631 6.127 360.4 0.063 2543
Output 14-o 7.447 2631 154.26 360.4 0.063 64015
LP4 Input 14-o 7.447 2631 154.26 360.4 0.063 64015 2010 93
Output 16 7.491 2468 154.26 332.9 0.01967 36881
Condenser Input 16 7.491 2468 154.26 332.9 0.01967 36881 6109 e
Input 28 1.139 357.5 18.87 358.5 0.05865 358.1
Output 17 0.829 251.4 173.8 333 1.137 1547
LPFWH3 Input 17 0.829 251.4 173.8 333 1.137 1547 607.3 76
Output 18 1.084 339 173.8 354 0.9239 3512
Input 15 7.471 2631 6.127 359 0.05985 2500
Input 27 1.401 454.8 12.74 381.6 0.1359 497.6
Output 28 1.139 357.5 18.87 358.5 0.05865 425.4
LPFWH2 Input 18 1.084 339 173.8 354 0.9239 3512 627.5 82
Output 19 1.341 432.7 173.8 376.3 0.8315 6469
Input 13 7.439 2766 6.796 419.5 0.1387 3754
Input 26 1.619 540.2 5.9478 401.7 0.2584 358.5
Output 27 1.401 454.8 12.74 381.6 0.1359 528.8
LPFWH1 Input 19 1.341 432.7 173.8 376.3 0.8315 6469 519.6 86
Output 20 1.550 513.2 173.8 395.3 0.7483 9619
Input 11 7.406 2883 5.9478 480.9 0.2637 4039
Output 26 1.619 540.2 5.9478 401.7 0.2584 368.6
Deaerator Input 20 1.550 513.2 173.8 395.3 0.7483 9619 1790 84
Output 9 7.333 3097 11.81 592.1 0.7483 10811
Input 25 2.368 863 29.36 475.5 1.632 4741
Output 21 2.012 724.8 215.5 442.2 17.73 27891
HPFWH2 Input 21 2.012 724.8 215.47 442.2 17.73 27891 1493 88
Output 22 2.342 876.2 215.47 477 17.55 39318
Input 7 7.325 3327 11.91 707.3 1.665 13667
Input 24 2.748 1051 17.455 516.1 3.519 4127
Output 25 2.368 863 29.36 475.4 1.632 4875
HPFWH1 Input 22 2.342 876.2 215.47 477 17.55 39318 1186 82
Output 23 2.677 1042 215.47 513.7 17.38 53497
Input t 3 6.634 3096 17.455 621 3.59 19596
Output 24 2.748 1051 17.455 516.1 3.519 4230
M. Baghsheikhi, H. Sayyaadi / Energy 114 (2016) 868e884 881
Table B1
Equations of the purchased cost of major components of the power plant.
Te TiSH m_ T TiRSH
4SH=RSH 1 RSH : eRSH
Te m_ boiler TeRSH
T e 593+ C; P e 28bar; h1 0:9; a1 208582$kg 1 s1
a2 0:8; a3 150bar; a4 7; a5 5; a6 10:42+ C
Condenser Q_ [15]
ZCond a61 $ cond a62 :m_ CW 70:5$Q_ cond 0:6936$LnT CW Tb 2:1898
k$DTin
a61 280:74$m2 ; a62 746$kg 1 s1 ; k 2200Wm2 K 1
FWH !0:1 [29]
ZFWH 1000 0:02 3:3 Q 1
TTTD;i a 10DPt 0:08 10DPs 0:04 *
Turbine !3 [29]
1 886 1hTr
ZTurb 3000 1 5 exp T10:42 1 1hT;i WT0:7 **
Pump !3 [29]
ZPump 378 1 10:808 B0:71 ***
1hP;i
*Q is the rate of heat transfer in the FWH (kW); T TTD the difference between the saturated temperature of the steam extracted from the turbine and the temperature of the
outlet feed water in FWH (oC); DPt and DPs are the pressure drop of the feed water and the extraction steam of the FWH, respectively (MPa).
a6 for FWH1-2, and a4 for others.
** hTis the isentropic efciency of the turbine section; W is the output power (kW).
hTr0.95 for HP turbine, and hTr0.85 for others.
*** hPis the isentropic efciency of the pump; B the exergy of the product of the pump (kW).
summarized in Table B2.
Table B2
Cost balance and auxiliary-exergoeconomic equations of the power plant's components.
C_ 2 C_
1st F rule
_ st Ex
Ex _
2 1
C_ 6o C_
5st F rule
_ st
Ex _
Ex
6o 5
C_ 8o C_
6o F rule
_ st
Ex _ st
Ex
8o 6o
C_ 10 C_
8o F rule
_ st
Ex _ st
Ex
10 8o
Table B2 (continued )
C_ 12 C_
10o F rule
_ st
Ex _ st
Ex
12 10o
C_ 14 C_
12o F rule
_ st
Ex _ st
Ex
14 12o
Table B2 (continued )
Appendix C. Fuzzy data and rules and the second type of membership function is the triangular
membership function, TRIMF. Fig. (C1) illustrate a trapezoidal
Complete list of fuzzy rules used for developing the FIS for the membership functions (TRAPMF). Fig. C2 shows a typical
proposed power plant was given in Table C1. triangular membership function called TRIMF. These functions
are nominated by numeral indicators as indicated in the
Table C1
Complete list of fuzzy rules in the FIS for the power plant problem (100% load).
Table C2
Detail of membership functions in the FIS for the power plant problem (100% load).
Parameter Variation range Shape of MEMFUN Dened linguistic expression Numerical representation of MEMFUN
Parameter Variation range Shape of MEMFUN Dened linguistic expression Numerical representation of MEMFUN