GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

large solid particles (bigger than 10 microns), and

on occasion droplets, impact compressor blades at
high velocities. Over time the damage can be significant enough to change the aerodynamic characteristics of the compressor. In extreme situations,
where very poor intake systems are installed, catastrophic damage can occur.
Corrosion. Even relatively small quantities of
a corrosive substance entering a turbine can cause
substantial damage in a short period of time. For
example, one of the most common contaminants
associated with turbine corrosion is salt. This can
By Steven Howes, Altair Filter Technology Inc
be any metal alkali salt, but sodium chloride and
potassium chloride are the most common. A typical
OEM input limit for the total amount of sodium and
potassium in the air stream is 0.01 ppm (parts per
as-turbine (GT) inlet air systems usually million).
are supplied by the engine OEM (origiFouling. Some contaminants are predisposed to
nal equipment manufacturer) as part of collect on compressor blades. Reasons include: They
a complete turbine package. Competi- are sticky in nature, have a low melting point, or
tive pressures often dictate that
perhaps because another conintake and filtration packages be
taminant, such as oil mist, has
of a standard design, irrespecprecoated the blades. Whattive of where the plant will be
ever the reason, the build up
located. While this approach may
over time of such fouling
Average lifetime efficiency
be cost-effective and viable for
will impair compressor perforMaximum efficiency
some users, for others the specifmance.
Minimum efficiency
ics of their respective site environPlugging, a process similar
ments are such that a standard
to fouling, refers to the blocksolution is not appropriate and
age of blade cooling passages.
Filter life
may lead to operational problems.
Plugged cooling paths eventuCaveat emptor certainly pre- 1. Efficiency of a filter can change
ally force blades to operate at
vails here. To guard against mis- over its lifetime, illustrating the
a higher than desired temperaapplication of design alternatives, importance of carefully comparing
ture. Blade failure is a possibilusers must be aware of the intake alternative offerings when making
ity over time.
solutions available and how they purchasing decisions
The majority of inlet air filperform under various environtration systems will protect a
mental conditions. Bear in mind
turbine sufficiently to prevent
that while inlet air systems may appear similar, catastrophic failure. But the performance of systhe technologies employed and the resulting perfor- tems subjected to harmful contaminants can vary
mance characteristics can be very different.
significantly. Many have poor efficiencies against
Understanding these issues is important to the small and sub-micron particles, particularly when
asset owner purchasing a new inlet air system, and the filters are first installed. This frequently results
even more critical to the engineer responsible for ret- in accelerated fouling of the compressor blades, and
rofitting an existing system or component. Greater operators are left with a choice of accepting a reducknowledge of how various air intake components, tion in turbine output, or doing more maintenance.
such as filtration systems and power augmentation
Filtration efficiency can be difficult to undertechnologies, interact with each other and the local stand given the many different testing methods
environment enable better decisions. Those, in turn, should result
in increased plant output and avail- Avoid these five common errors in the design of GT
ability, and a reduction in intake- inlet air systems
related maintenance issues.
Using low first cost as the basis for design, thereby sacrificing
aerodynamics and inhibiting gas-turbine (GT) performance.
Filtration basics
Forgetting that a poorly designed inlet air cooling system adversely
impacts filter and/or compressor performance.
The main purpose of any filtration Specifying incorrect materials of construction for the inlet housing,
system is to protect the turbine from possibly causing compressor fouling or damage.
harmful airborne contaminants. Selecting an inappropriate type of filter or media for the intended
Typically, contaminants cause dam- service conditions, increasing O&M costs.
age in the following ways:
Installing improper weather protection, or not at all when needed.
Erosion occurs when relatively

Selecting gas-turbine
inlet air systems
for new, retrofit
applications

Filtration efficiency

COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

Rating filter performance

o understand filters and their application, it

is necessary to rate them for pressure drop,
dust holding capacity, and efficiency. These
factors are often abused in industry when only data
favorable to a particular filter is presented in sales
literature. To fairly evaluate filter effectiveness, several test procedures have been adopted by filter
manufacturers and users. For the kinds of dust
concentrations encountered in most industrial work
areas, including power, the standard most often
used for measuring filter efficiency is ASHRAE
(American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air Conditioning Engineers) Standard 52-76. It
addresses multiple test methods, the most important being:
1. Weight arrestance,
2. Dust spot efficiency, and
3. Hot DOP (Di-octyl Phthalate), also known as
MIL STD 282 (1958).
The weight arrestance test is simple. It
involves feeding a synthetic dust to a filter and
ratioing the weight of dust exiting the filter to the
weight of dust originally fed into the filter. Since
small particles have little mass, this method offers
almost no way of revealing small-particle collection efficiency. The method is used for low- and
medium- efficiency media filters. During testing,
pressure drop is observed until it reaches a final
value (usually 1 in. H2O). The number of grams of
dust, less that logged on a special high efficiency
filter behind the test filter, yields the filters final
dust holding capacity at 1-in.-H2O pressure drop.
Collection efficiency also depends on the weight of
dust collected on the test filter and the final filter.
Since dust weight is not logged until the test filter
becomes loaded, this method yields only an average efficiencyone averaged over the entire test
run. It gives no indication as to how long it took
for the filter to build to the final rated efficiency nor
does it offer any clue about starting efficiency.
Dust spot test. Where small-particle efficiency
is critical (most industrial oil smokes generate particles in the 0.01 to 2 micron size range), the dust
spot test is often used. Here standard ambient air is
passed through the test filter and the air stream has
special test filters in front of and behind the test filter to monitor the presence of airborne particulates.
Over time, both filters become soiled and are measured optically for relative soiling. These results are
then translated into a filter efficiency rating.

available. But it is equally difficult to pick out one

method as being superior to all others. The guidelines offered below may assist in your evaluations
of alternative filter offerings.
First, mass efficiency (also known as weight or
gravimetric arrestance) is of little value to the turbine engineer. Reason: These tests typically use
test dusts with a relatively large average particle
2

Hot DOP test. A common method for measuring the efficiency of high-efficiency filter media
is the hot DOP test. It involves boiling DOP and
injecting the vapor into the air stream in front of the
test filter. As the vapor condenses back to ambient temperature, it forms very uniform droplets of
about 0.3 micron diameter. Use of light scattering
instrumentation allows measurement of upstream
and downstream particle concentrations. HEPA
(high efficiency particulate air) filters, usually rated
for efficiencies in excess of 99.9% on 0.3 micron
size particles, are tested using this method.
To understand how misleading efficiency tests
can be, the table shows how certain filters would
respond to the three tests described above. For
example, assume a standard filter rated 65%
under ASHRAE 52-76 (dust spot). Locate the 6080% range in the center column. Now, look left
and right. Note that this same filter could be rated
95% efficient if measured by the weight arrestance
method or 35-40% efficient if measured by the
hot DOP method. The only types of filters that will
show high efficiency on the sub-micron particles
generated in the hot DOP test are HEPA filters and
electrostatic precipitators.
Comparing filter efficiency using different tests
ASHRAE weight
arrestance method, %

70-80
80-90
90-95
95
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable

ASHRAE dust
spot method, %

15-30
20-35
40-60
60-80
80-90
90-98
Not applicable

MIL-STD 282,
hot DOP method, %

0
0
15-25
35-40
50-55
75-90
95-99.999*

*HEPA filters test at -100% efficiency using the arrestance and dust spot methods

Finally, note that every filter configuration can be

tested individually for efficiency and pressure drop.
Standard filters generally have been tested for efficiency by particle size. Most standard filter combinations have been tested for pressure drops at
nominal air flow ratings. When units are specified
as being ducted for source capture, blower speeds
are preset at the factory to match specified field
conditions. Detailed specifications for all standard
unit configurations are listed by their respective
manufacturers.

size (greater than 5 microns, for example). This

makes it difficult to distinguish between a filter
that has good small particle performance, and one
whose performance is poor.
When comparing the efficiencies of filters from
different manufacturers, be sure your comparison is on a like-for-like basis. In particular, pay
attention to the air velocity used as the basis for
COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

the efficiency measurement. Is

it comparable to your operating
conditions? If the actual in-service
air velocity is, say, 50% greater
than the test velocity you should
anticipate significantly reduced
performance.
Additionally, is the efficiency
quoted a maximum, minimum or
an average lifetime value? Many
filters have a relatively low efficiency against small particulates
early in their service lives but
their performance improves as the
element becomes progressively
loaded with contaminants (Fig 1).
ations it is possible for a filter to
quoted maximum efficiency before
it is replaced.
For details on the various tests
used for determining filter efficiency, see the accompanying sidebar and companion table.
Pressure drop. Another major
consideration when selecting a
filtration system is its pressure
drop. Intake pressure lossthat
is, resistance to air flowwill
have a direct impact on turbine
efficiency and power output. A
common mistake is to only consider the clean or startup pressure drop. Of real value to plant
operations personnel is an understanding of how quickly pressure
drop will increase over time. To a
large extent, this depends on the
type of contaminants in the local
environment.
A given filter and filtration system will have inherent characteristics that can be tested to provide
an indication of relative performance. A typical test of a filters
dust holding capacity involves

Filter pressure drop

Pressure drop for filter changeout

Filter A

Filter B

Dust holding capacity (filter life)

2. Steep dust holding curve for

Filter A means a relatively small
amount of dust causes high pressure drop. B holds more dust for a
given pressure drop, lasts longer
Duration of
water spray
Cellulose-based filter

Filter pressure drop

The heat-rate penalty

associated with an
increase in the design
pressure drop of 1 in.
H2O across the inlet
air system for a baseload 150-MW gas
turbine means your
fuel costs will exceed
budget by more than
$70,000 annually.

Leading commercial filter

Test duration (time)

3. Test results of a lab experiment shows a typical cellulose filter

degrades quickly in a high-moisture
environment. Know operating conditions before buying
In certain situnever reach its

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

recording the increase in pressure drop as dust-laden air
is passed through the filter.
Using a standard dust test
such as ASHRAE 52-76 (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning
Engineers), different filters
can be subjected to the same
test in a comparative manner.
Although not foolproof, this
technique is recognized as giving a good indication of realworld performance.
The best filter will have a
shallow dust retention curve,
which means it has a high
specific dust holding capacity
(Fig 2). If users change filters
at a predetermined pressure
drop, they will maximize the
time between filter changeouts, reducing maintenance
and replacement-filter costs.
Alternatively, if the filters are
changed at a fixed time period, such as during the annual plant shutdown, the lower
average pressure loss over
the life of the filter will allow
greater power production and
higher revenuesprovided, of
course, that the plants maximum capability can be dis-

patched.
Running wet. Another factor to consider when

Relating filter efficiencies and standards

Type

Coarse
dust filter

Eurovent EN 779
class
class Efficiency, % Measured by

Standards

EU1
EU2
EU3
EU4

G1
G2
G3
G4

<65
65 <80
80 <90
>90

Synthetic
ASHRAE
dust weight
52-76,
arrestance Eurovent 4/5

Fine dust
filter

EU5
EU6
EU7
EU8
EU9

F5
F6
F7
F8
F9

40 <60
60 <80
80 <90
90 <95
>95

Atmospheric BS 6540,
dust spot DIN 24 185,
efficiency
EN 779

HEPA
filter

EU10
EU11
EU12
EU13
EU14

H10
H11
H12
H13
H14

85
95
99.5
99.95
99.995

Sodium
chloride
or liquid
aerosol

BS 3928,
Eurovent 4/5,
DIN 24 184
(DIN 24 183)

Ultra-low
EU15
penetration
EU16
air filter (ULPA) EU17

H15
H16
H17

99.9995
99.99995
99.999995

Liquid
aerosol

DIN 24 184
(DIN 24 183)

BS (British Standard) specifications generally have been replaced by ENBS (Euro norm/British Standard) specifications, which are commonly abbreviated EN. DIN are German standards

COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

User perspective

any plant managers and their key staff will

tell you that they didnt give much thought
to air filters the first time their companies
purchased gas turbines (GT), leaving specification and selection to the turbine manufacturer
and/or the engineer/constructor. Knowledge of
turbine inlet-air systems generally is acquired
on the job when performance issues arise.
Gabe Fleck, an electrical engineer for Associated Electric Cooperative Inc, Springfield, Mo, and
chairman of the 501D5/D5A Users group, says filtration is a learning process. Fleck says AECI has
no filtration problems per se, but that doesnt mean
there isnt room for improvement in the specification/verification process. The company recently
experienced a miscommunication with the vendor selected to supply replacement prefilters that
resulted in receiving high-efficiency filters instead of
low-efficiency filters. The mistake was discovered
after repeated unit trips on high differential pressure
suggested a laboratory review of the product. The
bottom line: The filters supplied were 85% efficient
based on a dust spot test rather than 85% efficient
based on an arrestance test. These and other filter
test procedures that you should become familiar
with are detailed in a companion sidebar.
This was not the only snafu encountered by
AECI regarding filters. In another case a new GT
was to be supplied by the turbine manufacturer
complete with G4 prefilters and F8 final filters.
What the utility received was G3 prefilters and F7
final filters. The message seems clear: To avoid
potential operating problems, sample a prefilter and
final filter from your next order and send them to a
lab to be sure you received what was specified.
Based on his experience, Fleck suggests that
when ordering filters you should specify a dust spot
or arrestance efficiency plus the maximum delta
p across the filter and a minimum dust holding
capacity at the final delta p. One of Flecks current
projects is to determine if the addition of a roughing
filter in front of the prefilters would be beneficial.
If you ask Alan Pearce his opinion on that it
would be an unqualified yes. But then Pearce, an
engineer assigned to the combined-cycle units at
Alabama Power Cos Barry Generating Station, has
experience in a climate that differs from Flecks.

reviewing the pressure-drop characteristics of

alternative offerings is the ability of a filtration
system to operate efficiently when wet. The difference in performance between a system designed
to run wet and one that is not, can be significant
(Fig 3). Running wet is not that unusual, given the
high levels of precipitation in many areas and the
increased use of inlet air cooling systems to boost
GT output.
Testing of various filter types has shown considerable variation in performance going from dry
4

GT inlet air systems are especially sensitive to local

environmental conditions as most industry veterans
have learned.
Pearce says Barrys experience with sheets of
a polyester filtration medium hung by clips in front
of the prefilters has been excellent. The medium
catches bugs and big airborne debris, allowing
prefilters to run a month longer and reduce their
replacement to three times annually from four. The
pre-prefilters for the sites four 7FA gas turbines
(GE Energy, Atlanta) are changed online monthly
and disposed of by incineration.
The Barry units have stainless steel inlet-air
housings supplied by Braden Manufacturing LLC,
Tulsa, Okla, that feature evaporative coolers behind
the filters. One of the changes Barry made to the
inlet air system was to redesign the frame structure supporting the prefilters. The OEMs design
required too many man-hours to change the 340
2-ft-square prefilters for each GT.
The original design required maintenance personnel to unscrew and replace two wingnuts for
each prefilter. Damaged threads, dropped wingnuts, bent studs, and other annoyances were eliminated by a galvanized steel structure that supports
a grid of hinged framesone per prefiltereach
equipped with a simple locking device. The downstream side of the prefilter frames has a gasket to
ensure a tight seal between the prefilters and final
filters. A work crew can replace prefilters on all four
GTs during a normal weekend shutdown. Work is
done off-line to prevent dust re-entrainment and
early fouling of final filters. Used prefilters are incinerated.
A compelling feature of the new prefilter grid
structure is that it permits the use of unframed
coalescing media which is half the cost of framed
prefilters. Pearce figures the modified prefilter
structure paid for itself in about a year, considering
the saving in manpower and material.
Final filters are changed out every two to three
years. The Barry staff uses a visual inspection and
a delta p target for scheduling filter replacement.
Philosophy is to maintain high performance by
changing all filters before they reach their maximum
capacity.
Bob Schwieger

to wet conditions. In some instances, the pressure

drop through a filter subjected to a relatively small
amount of water spray can increase by several hundred percent. This usually happens to filters with
cellulose fibers, which swell when wet. The high
delta p may remain for several hours after the
water spray has been stopped because the cellulose
fibers retain moisture.
Lab results are confirmed by field experience.
Many users report that early morning fog (a common cause of filters running wet) results both in
COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

The importance of proper filter

selection is obvious if you think
of a gas turbine as a huge vacuum cleaner.

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

taminants), and high-efficiency filters. There are
many different types of static filters, but prefilters
are normally pleated panels, while high-efficiency
elements tend to be bags or so-called mini-pleat
filters. Unlike a pulse system, a static filter does
not self-clean, and when the filters reach a certain
pressure drop they must be replaced. Prefilters are
changed more frequently than high-efficiency filters, which can last anywhere from 8000 to 24,000
hours depending on the environment (see User
perspective sidebar).
Pulse jet systems have higher capital costs than
static systems, as well as higher lifetime maintenance costs. They were originally developed to
protect turbines operating in the Middle East that
were subjected to frequent sand-storms. And in dry
areas, with high concentrations of airborne particles, they are very effective.
Over the last decade or so pulse filters have
gained acceptance as a more general filtration solution for GT applications, but the system does have
some shortcomings. In addition to the higher lifecycle cost noted above, pulse jets may work poorly
in areas with low or medium levels of airborne
particles. This is because a pulse filter relies on a
buildup of dust (known as a cake) on the surface of
the media to both improve filtration efficiency. In
areas with low or perhaps medium levels of dust,
a cake does not form, and many contaminants,
particularly small and sub-micron particles, penetrate the filter media. It is extremely difficult to
remove particles that have penetrated the media,
and because pulse elements are not designed to
operate as depth filters, the pressure drop can
increase rapidly. This is common in urban environments when the contamination is from automobile
and truck exhaust and oily in nature rather than
dusty.

an increase in pressure drop during the fogs occurrence and also for several hours after the fog has
cleared.
The importance of air velocity through the
filter, noted earlier, deserves greater scrutiny. A
filters operating velocity generally is defined as the
volumetric air flow divided by the filter face area.
Hence, a filter house with an air flow of 500,000
ft3/min and a filter face area of 1250 ft2 would have
a filter velocity of 400 ft/min. Performance data for
a filter normally is given at a nominal velocity,
which is chosen to be representative of the typical
in-service velocity.
The testing of filter characteristics are conducted at the nominal velocity and quoted in sales literature. When the actual in-service velocity is the
same, or close to, the nominal velocity, the filtration
system will perform as expected. But, for a variety
of reasons (typically, poor aerodynamic design of
the filter house and/or intake structure), some systems operate at velocities well above the nominal.
Result is an increase in pressure drop, a reduction
in specific dust holding capacity, and usually a
reduction in filtration efficiency.
To avoid this situation, all intake housings should
be analyzed for proper aerodynamics using computational fluid dynamics. Generic CFD analyses
generally are available for new intakes. But for retrofits to correct design deficiencies or an improper
design for actual conditions, have
a knowledgeable party conduct a
dedicated analysis. Pay particu- Filtration system selection guide
lar attention to the velocity profile Environment
Dust level
Weather protection
through the intake housing, speHot and dry
High
Weather hood
cifically the filtration system. A
Hot
and
dry
Low/medium
Weather
hood
well-designed system will have a
Humid
All
Weather
hood
relatively uniform velocity profile
Coastal
All
Weather
across the entire filter bank. This
hood/separator
velocity should be similar to the
High
rainfall
All
Separator
nominal velocity against which
Ice and snow High
Snow hood
performance data are quoted.
Ice and snow Low/medium Snow hood

How plant location

impacts system design
At the most basic level, the choice of filtration system comes down to either a static (barrier) or a
pulse (self-cleaning) design. Pulse systems usually
consist of some form of weather protection followed
by a deep-pleated cylindrical and/or conical filter.
The filters are periodically cleaned by means of a
reverse pulse of air.
Static systems typically consist of weather protection, prefilters (designed to capture coarse conCOMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

Filtration system

Pulse
Static
Static
Static, downstream
separator
Static
Pulse
Static, anti-icing

A pulse filter also is prone to pressure loss and

other problems in high-moisture environments
when the fabric has cellulose fibres woven into its
structure. Also, if the contaminants captured on the
filter media swell in humid conditions, the pressure
drop will increase further and the cake can become
difficult to remove.
For most situations, with the possible exception of
some desert and cold-climate environments, a static
system generally is the filtration solution with the
lowest life-cycle cost (table can help guide your selec5

Water load, gal/hr

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

tion). Nevertheless, to ensure optimum perform- cal situation. Reality is that some of the very large
ance, considerable care is required when specifying droplets will take much longer to evaporate, others
a static system for a particular environment.
will fall out of the air stream and still others will
For example, consider a costal location where, impinge on the duct wall. Over time, the mean
on a windy day, the concentration of salt in the water-droplet size increases because of normal fogatmosphere can be in the 0.05 to 0.5 ppm range ging-nozzle wear.
or about five to 50 times the amount GT manufacThe real estate saying location, location, locaturers allow into their enginesfor as far as five tion applies to the positioning of a fogging system
miles inland. Many standard static systems are as well. If it is being retrofitted, the obvious posiunable to cope with airborne salt (which is in the tion is upstream of the filters. However, if there is
form of a fine aerosol) and it will pass directly into not sufficient space between the nozzles and the
the compressor.
filtration system, the prefilters and high-efficiency
This situation can be neutralized with technol- filters will run wet and must be selected to accomogy borrowed from the offshore oil and gas indus- modate moisture.
try, which deals with atmospheric salt all the
Filters may run wet even if adequate space is
time. Perhaps the best solution within 500 yards available because of the high humidity of the air
of shore is to specify an inlet housing with effec- downstream of the fogging system. Suggestion:
tive weather protection, plus a
Avoid filters with cellulose
500
marine separator ahead of filter
fibres, as noted earlier, and
Leading marine separator
elements capable of coalescing
ones with cardboard frames,
400
any salt aerosols that penetrate
which lose their mechanical
300
the weather protection. A downintegrity when wet.
stream separator also should
If the fogging system is
200
be installed to remove any coaplaced downstream of the fillesced droplets that become reters, ensure against small
100
Typical weather hood or louver
entrained in the air stream to
parts coming loose and being
0
prevent their entry into the
ingested by the compressor.
0
250
500
750
1000 1250 Also, provide sufficient draincompressor.
Face velocity, ft/min
Problems with static systems
age from low points in the
usually can be traced to inad- 4. Marine separators are signifiductwork where water can
equate weather protection. The cantly more efficient at removing large
accumulate to prevent both
standard weather hoods supplied amounts of entrained water than a typi- corrosion and turbine ingeswith filtration systems often are cal weather hood or louver
tion. Finally, design the fogsuitable only for light rain. For
ging system to prevent the forlocales subject to heavy rains,
mation of large droplets which
the solution is a marine separator, which is capable could enter the compressor and erode blades.
of removing from 10 to 20 times more water than a
In a chiller system, no water is introduced
standard hood (Fig 4). For heavy snow, the only real directly into the system; the coolant removes heat
solution is to have an extended-area 90-deg hood. from the air via finned-tube heat transfer surface.
However, under some conditions, a chiller system
the potential to cause the formation of free
Marrying filtration and cooling has
water in the air stream. Reason: Even at moderateToday, power augmentation systems are installed ly low relative humidity, it is commonplace for the
on most gas turbines for merchant and utility ser- downstream temperature of air passing through the
vice. Here, the focus is on the three main types of chiller to fall below its dew point. When this occurs,
inlet cooling systems: fogging, chiller coils, and the air is no longer able to support the amount of
evaporative coolers. The engineer challenged with water vapor in it and condensation occurs.
system selection should factor into his or her analyThe amount of condensation can be considerable.
sis the interaction of the inlet cooling system with For example, a chiller coil that cools a 650-lb/sec
other components in the intake housing, including stream of air with a relative humidity of 50% from
filter media. Remember that all three systems can 95F to 50F will produce condensate at the rate of
introduce free water into the intake.
approximately 12 lb/secthats more than 5000
Fogging. With a fogging system, there is no gal/hr.
secret as to how the water gets into the air intake
Clearly, this amount of condensation must be
structure: It purposely injects micron-size droplets controlled, particularly because carryover from
directly into the air stream. These droplets typical- the chiller coil can consist of large droplets that
ly have an average particle size of about 10 microns would erode compressor blades. If a chiller sysand, under ambient conditions, would take around tem is in your future, be sure the drainage system
one second to evaporate.
within the coil is well-designed and of adequate
Thus, at an in-duct air velocity of 600 ft/min, an capacity. You should also plan to use filters that are
average-size water droplet will travel 10 ft before well suited for running wet because this will be a
it evaporates. For this example, the first point to fact of life.
consider is that anything within 10 ft of the fogOrientation of finned tubes is important, too.
ging system will get wet. Second, this is a theoreti- Vertical fins significantly reduce the amount of
6

COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004

entrainment coming off the back of a coil module

because water runs down the fins under gravity.
However, from the viewpoint of header connections
it often is more convenient to orient the tubes vertically and the fins horizontally.
Finally, pay close attention to air velocity: The
higher the velocity the more likely that entrainment will occur. A rule of thumb is that, below a face
velocity of about 300 ft/min very little entrainment
occurs, particularly if there is good in-coil drainage. It is not essential that the air flow through the
chiller be at a low velocity, but rather that the operating staff is aware that as the velocity increases,
more elaborate solutions are required to deal with
the carryover.
For example, you can protect the compressor
against ingestion of large water droplets by installing a mist/drift eliminator downstream of the coils.
Careful selection of a mist eliminator is prudent
because the effectiveness of any given design
depends on air velocity.
Location of the chiller coil relative to the filtration system is an important consideration as it
is for fogging systems and evaporative coolers. If
upstream of the filters in an area with a high or
medium level of contamination, the fins will quickly
foul, reducing thermal efficiency. One defense is to
install guard filters upstream of the coils. These
are merely prefilters (normally panels because of
space constraints) that provide a nominal level of
protection for the coils.
Evaporative coolers, like fogging systems,

GT INLET AIR SYSTEMS

introduce water into the intake duct. In theory,
if the system is functioning correctly, water is
retained within the confines of the evaporative
cooling module. However, in practice it is likely
that some carryover will occur. Thats why many
systems are fitted with downstream drift or mist
eliminators. But despite best efforts, carryover
sometimes passes through the mist eliminator for
one or more of these reasons: operating the system
beyond its design air velocity, degradation of cooling media, excessive water flow rate, and poorly
designed mist eliminator.
As with other GT inlet air cooling systems, positioning of the evaporative module is critical. Placing
the unit in front of the filters means they will operate wet and both the coolers cascading water and
media will collect much of the ingested contamination. Depending on the cleanliness of the ambient
air, this may or may not constitute a problem. Of
importance is where contaminants captured by the
wetted media are goingthat is, is it being retained
by the media or flushed away by the cooling water?
Either way, plant operators must ensure that the
buildup of contamination does not adversely impact
the performance of the evaporation module.
If the cooler is placed downstream from the
filtration system, it is essential that the issue of
water carryover be addressed. There have been
various reports of evaporative coolers being held
responsible for compressor blade erosion. Also, all
parts must be secure to prevent foreign-object damage to the compressor. CCJ

The Combined Cycle User Group has been formed in cooperation with the ASME
Power Division Combined Cycles Committee, the ELECTRIC POWER Conference and
other industry groups. It addresses issues concerning the interaction between all major
components of the combined cycle power plant - the gas turbine, HRSG and steam
turbine. These issues are critical at a time when many plants must operate on razor
thin margins and in modes for which they were not designed.
The group's annual meeting addresses topics such as:
Design aspects of the new breed of merchant plants
Construction techniques for new generation
Start up and commissioning issues
Operational considerations to maximize the return on investment while providing reliable power
Staffing ideas to keep your valued and best employees
Maximizing efficiency and output to respond to the day's demand requirements
HAPS - Impact on Design and Operation
Considerations of cycling base load designed CCGT Plants
Start up Emission impacts
Gray market equipment
Topics from the Floor
The Combined Cycle Users Group is developing a data base of power plants, a library of articles and a chat room where
members can exchange experiences. Trial membership is free of charge and is open to power plant owner/operators,
engineering companies, OEMs and other relevant stakeholders.

Join today on the web site www.combinedcycleusers.org or contact:

COMBINED CYCLE JOURNAL, Second Quarter 2004