Design of the GEC "Erith" 500MW Turbines, 1965
- Thread starter Shannow
- Start date
- Status
The link works. Interesting article. I found the shape of the LP turbines interesting, is the steam introduced in the middle at the narrowest point? I found the re-heat function interesting as well.
Although not formally educated in turbomachinery, I am still fascinated with them. I have spent most of my career in electronics engineering with FADECs for jet engines.
I have always been fascinated with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump, a 55,000 BHP fuel pump. Often referred to as a turbo-pump with a rocket engine attached to it.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Although not formally educated in turbomachinery, I am still fascinated with them. I have spent most of my career in electronics engineering with FADECs for jet engines.
I have always been fascinated with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump, a 55,000 BHP fuel pump. Often referred to as a turbo-pump with a rocket engine attached to it.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Yes, the LP section is double flow . The last stage of blading on the LP turbine sees steam near its saturation point. Craig Generating Station near Craig,CO has three GE turbo/generator sets.I believe they are D8s. Shortly after going on line in 1979, operational errors on Unit 2 led to a complete loss of oil flow to the turbine/generator. We loaded the bearings on a worn out looking twin engine Martin or Convair at the Yampa Valley Regional Airport near Hayden,CO for rebabbitting by GE at a location back east. I think it was the #2 bearing journal that had to be turned down in place. I believe Tri-State G&T( a very nice company to work for) has an undersized bearing in stock just for that application. In fact, if I recall correctly, the company has a complete set of bearings for the turbine/generators. GE is the gold standard for steam turbine/generators. I know the circle W people will disagree. Regards
Very cool! I love to read up on that stuff, and especially see the old write-ups and pics.
The turbines I deal with are the other end of the spectrum- Expansion turbines. They take ~400-700psig process gas and spit it out at 3-5psig, but much colder. On the other end of the turbine shaft are centrifugal booster compressors spun by the turbines, that take medium pressure back up to head pressure again (~300-700psig).. and the refrigeration loop goes round-n-round. What turns to liquid goes to storage.
The turbines I deal with are the other end of the spectrum- Expansion turbines. They take ~400-700psig process gas and spit it out at 3-5psig, but much colder. On the other end of the turbine shaft are centrifugal booster compressors spun by the turbines, that take medium pressure back up to head pressure again (~300-700psig).. and the refrigeration loop goes round-n-round. What turns to liquid goes to storage.
Link works fine, thanks. It's humbling to view the document ... the engineering is very extensive and complicated.
I see it's a British document - did they do much of the early design? And what fuels are used.
I see it's a British document - did they do much of the early design? And what fuels are used.
Originally Posted By: JetStar
The link works. Interesting article. I found the shape of the LP turbines interesting, is the steam introduced in the middle at the narrowest point? I found the re-heat function interesting as well.
Although not formally educated in turbomachinery, I am still fascinated with them. I have spent most of my career in electronics engineering with FADECs for jet engines.
I have always been fascinated with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump, a 55,000 BHP fuel pump. Often referred to as a turbo-pump with a rocket engine attached to it.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Love the way the "cool" (relatively speaking) turbopump exhaust gasses are injected circumferentially at the top of the rocket bell in order to form a "cool" (again, relatively) boundary layer between the main rocket exhaust and the metal rocket bell. Which is also cooled by LOX pumped through hundreds of hand- welded tubes.
Stennis Space Center in Mississippi (where NASA ground tests most of its engines) has an F1 engine on a stand at their visitor center, which is located at the mile 2 Mississippi visitor information center on Interstate 10. Well worth the stop just to see the F1 engine, the Saturn 1b engine, and other stuff outside before you even get into the visitor center proper.
The link works. Interesting article. I found the shape of the LP turbines interesting, is the steam introduced in the middle at the narrowest point? I found the re-heat function interesting as well.
Although not formally educated in turbomachinery, I am still fascinated with them. I have spent most of my career in electronics engineering with FADECs for jet engines.
I have always been fascinated with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump, a 55,000 BHP fuel pump. Often referred to as a turbo-pump with a rocket engine attached to it.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Love the way the "cool" (relatively speaking) turbopump exhaust gasses are injected circumferentially at the top of the rocket bell in order to form a "cool" (again, relatively) boundary layer between the main rocket exhaust and the metal rocket bell. Which is also cooled by LOX pumped through hundreds of hand- welded tubes.
Stennis Space Center in Mississippi (where NASA ground tests most of its engines) has an F1 engine on a stand at their visitor center, which is located at the mile 2 Mississippi visitor information center on Interstate 10. Well worth the stop just to see the F1 engine, the Saturn 1b engine, and other stuff outside before you even get into the visitor center proper.
Originally Posted By: NJC
Link works fine, thanks. It's humbling to view the document ... the engineering is very extensive and complicated.
I see it's a British document - did they do much of the early design? And what fuels are used.
NJC, although Hero officially invented the steam turbine, Charles Parson was the modern day inventor of the modern steam turbine.
The document I posted was a GEC (note, not GE) design for their Erith machines, the design anf factory for which was bought by CE Parsons in the 70s, and sold as Pasrons machines...quite different to Parsons traditionals...King's North and Wallerawang had both GEC and Parsons nameplates...the Parsons engineers would fit the GEC "badge" when the machines were playing up.
http://birminghamhistory.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=2901&page=4
Engineering continued on right through the lives of the machines. That particular design had L-2 blade problems that were problematic, and investigated throroughly by people like Neville Reiger, and Andrew Kucyper, some of the smartest people that I've ever had the pleasure of working with.
This was before my time
http://www.sti-tech.com/dl/vibnfr.pdf
But one of the vibration modes that they discounted as a problem popped up in the mid 2000s, and extremely high cycle failures occurred again.
Turbines just run on steam, the steam generator takes the fuel. A few of them (Stations have from 2-4 machines) were coal fired, one nuke, and I think there was oil.
Last one running in the world was closed this week.
Link works fine, thanks. It's humbling to view the document ... the engineering is very extensive and complicated.
I see it's a British document - did they do much of the early design? And what fuels are used.
NJC, although Hero officially invented the steam turbine, Charles Parson was the modern day inventor of the modern steam turbine.
The document I posted was a GEC (note, not GE) design for their Erith machines, the design anf factory for which was bought by CE Parsons in the 70s, and sold as Pasrons machines...quite different to Parsons traditionals...King's North and Wallerawang had both GEC and Parsons nameplates...the Parsons engineers would fit the GEC "badge" when the machines were playing up.
http://birminghamhistory.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=2901&page=4
Engineering continued on right through the lives of the machines. That particular design had L-2 blade problems that were problematic, and investigated throroughly by people like Neville Reiger, and Andrew Kucyper, some of the smartest people that I've ever had the pleasure of working with.
This was before my time
http://www.sti-tech.com/dl/vibnfr.pdf
But one of the vibration modes that they discounted as a problem popped up in the mid 2000s, and extremely high cycle failures occurred again.
Turbines just run on steam, the steam generator takes the fuel. A few of them (Stations have from 2-4 machines) were coal fired, one nuke, and I think there was oil.
Last one running in the world was closed this week.
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Yes, the LP section is double flow . The last stage of blading on the LP turbine sees steam near its saturation point.
Those ones are about 6% wet exiting the last row of blades.
HP turbine, where the density is highest are an impulse machine, taking 2,600psi steam at 1005F. Energy is extracted, and the steam expands to a bit over 600psi, 600F. Is then reheated to 1005F, and as it taked more space, goes through a double flow intermediate, and then multiple Low Pressure turbines...in practice, those turbines generally only had 2 off LPS, 3 was costly.
The area of the annulus needs to be big enough to let all the steam expanded out to less than a half psi absolute flow into the condenser...150lb/second through each flow.
Yes, the LP section is double flow . The last stage of blading on the LP turbine sees steam near its saturation point.
Those ones are about 6% wet exiting the last row of blades.
HP turbine, where the density is highest are an impulse machine, taking 2,600psi steam at 1005F. Energy is extracted, and the steam expands to a bit over 600psi, 600F. Is then reheated to 1005F, and as it taked more space, goes through a double flow intermediate, and then multiple Low Pressure turbines...in practice, those turbines generally only had 2 off LPS, 3 was costly.
The area of the annulus needs to be big enough to let all the steam expanded out to less than a half psi absolute flow into the condenser...150lb/second through each flow.
Originally Posted By: JetStar
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Sweet, nice article.
http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/documents/F-1_Engine.pdf
Sweet, nice article.
Thanks for posting...very interesting read. Always been fascinated by turbines of all types.
I share your fascination with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump JetStar! What an amazing piece of machinery. Extreme hot & cold so close together: Fire & Ice.
I would so have enjoyed seeing an Apollo rocket lift off as a kid! Truly historic and an engineering feet. Phenominal pressure, size, mass, velocity, acceleration, tempertures, fuel flow, etc.....just amazing technology.
I would so have enjoyed seeing an Apollo rocket lift off as a kid! Truly historic and an engineering feet. Phenominal pressure, size, mass, velocity, acceleration, tempertures, fuel flow, etc.....just amazing technology.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
HE turbine design is a fascinating topic. Thank you so much for sharing Shannow! My great grandfather was involved extensively in turbine design for GE with a large swath of patents in cooling system innovation bearing his name. It is subsequently a topic I have a great fondness for
The GEC document was one given to me by a guy who was a rigger on the first such unit installed in Australia...worked his way through operations and into lower management.
He gave it to me on his retirement as he felt that I was the only one who cared about his old girls...my first day as turbine engineer was putting one back together when the previous incumbent took a redundency on a downsize.
He gave it to me on his retirement as he felt that I was the only one who cared about his old girls...my first day as turbine engineer was putting one back together when the previous incumbent took a redundency on a downsize.
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
I share your fascination with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump JetStar! What an amazing piece of machinery. Extreme hot & cold so close together: Fire & Ice.
I would so have enjoyed seeing an Apollo rocket lift off as a kid! Truly historic and an engineering feet. Phenominal pressure, size, mass, velocity, acceleration, tempertures, fuel flow, etc.....just amazing technology.
I was there for Apollo 16- April 1972, age 8. Darn near jumped off the hood of the family's '66 Plymouth Satellite when the wall of sound hit... details of the trip are fading with all the years, but that part is still vivid. Somewhere in the stuff we saved after mom and dad passed is a super-8 home movie of the liftoff. Need to get that converted to digital.
I share your fascination with the Saturn F1 turbo-pump JetStar! What an amazing piece of machinery. Extreme hot & cold so close together: Fire & Ice.
I would so have enjoyed seeing an Apollo rocket lift off as a kid! Truly historic and an engineering feet. Phenominal pressure, size, mass, velocity, acceleration, tempertures, fuel flow, etc.....just amazing technology.
I was there for Apollo 16- April 1972, age 8. Darn near jumped off the hood of the family's '66 Plymouth Satellite when the wall of sound hit... details of the trip are fading with all the years, but that part is still vivid. Somewhere in the stuff we saved after mom and dad passed is a super-8 home movie of the liftoff. Need to get that converted to digital.
Apollo. What memories.
We lived on the Space Coast at that time in a sleepy little town called Eau Gallie. You could ride up the Banana River and get very close to the launch pad. MUCH closer than the observation platform at the Space center!
Saw many a launch from that choice seat.
Makes the space shuttle look like fireworks!
We lived on the Space Coast at that time in a sleepy little town called Eau Gallie. You could ride up the Banana River and get very close to the launch pad. MUCH closer than the observation platform at the Space center!
Saw many a launch from that choice seat.
Makes the space shuttle look like fireworks!
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Apollo. What memories.
We lived on the Space Coast at that time in a sleepy little town called Eau Gallie. You could ride up the Banana River and get very close to the launch pad. MUCH closer than the observation platform at the Space center!
Saw many a launch from that choice seat.
Makes the space shuttle look like fireworks!
I've seen two shuttle launches, the closest from atop the instrument mast of a survey ship Port Canaveral during a break in installing some equipment. That distance was about 6 miles and it was impressive, but nothing close to what I remember as a kid when those 5 F1's lit off. That was earth-shaking. Sadly, the one I saw from P-Can turned out to be the last flight of Columbia.
Apollo. What memories.
We lived on the Space Coast at that time in a sleepy little town called Eau Gallie. You could ride up the Banana River and get very close to the launch pad. MUCH closer than the observation platform at the Space center!
Saw many a launch from that choice seat.
Makes the space shuttle look like fireworks!
I've seen two shuttle launches, the closest from atop the instrument mast of a survey ship Port Canaveral during a break in installing some equipment. That distance was about 6 miles and it was impressive, but nothing close to what I remember as a kid when those 5 F1's lit off. That was earth-shaking. Sadly, the one I saw from P-Can turned out to be the last flight of Columbia.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Yes, the LP section is double flow . The last stage of blading on the LP turbine sees steam near its saturation point.
Those ones are about 6% wet exiting the last row of blades.
HP turbine, where the density is highest are an impulse machine, taking 2,600psi steam at 1005F. Energy is extracted, and the steam expands to a bit over 600psi, 600F. Is then reheated to 1005F, and as it taked more space, goes through a double flow intermediate, and then multiple Low Pressure turbines...in practice, those turbines generally only had 2 off LPS, 3 was costly.Our IP turbine was integral with the HP turbine and steam left the IP in the cross-over pipe and entered the LP section. I believe Tri-State G&T has extended their major turbine inspection/repair outages out to . five or more years. You sound very knowledgeable about steam turbines. Regards to you and all our friends in one of our most reliable allies. Sorry to hear about your recent terrorist attack. It's those home-grown nuts that are hard to anticipate. I have expected we would have a big to do at one of our major sporting events. We are way over due. Regards again.
The area of the annulus needs to be big enough to let all the steam expanded out to less than a half psi absolute flow into the condenser...150lb/second through each flow.
Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Yes, the LP section is double flow . The last stage of blading on the LP turbine sees steam near its saturation point.
Those ones are about 6% wet exiting the last row of blades.
HP turbine, where the density is highest are an impulse machine, taking 2,600psi steam at 1005F. Energy is extracted, and the steam expands to a bit over 600psi, 600F. Is then reheated to 1005F, and as it taked more space, goes through a double flow intermediate, and then multiple Low Pressure turbines...in practice, those turbines generally only had 2 off LPS, 3 was costly.Our IP turbine was integral with the HP turbine and steam left the IP in the cross-over pipe and entered the LP section. I believe Tri-State G&T has extended their major turbine inspection/repair outages out to . five or more years. You sound very knowledgeable about steam turbines. Regards to you and all our friends in one of our most reliable allies. Sorry to hear about your recent terrorist attack. It's those home-grown nuts that are hard to anticipate. I have expected we would have a big to do at one of our major sporting events. We are way over due. Regards again.
The area of the annulus needs to be big enough to let all the steam expanded out to less than a half psi absolute flow into the condenser...150lb/second through each flow.
- Status
Similar threads
