Mathematical Modelling and Design of An Advanced Once-Through Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Mathematical Modelling and Design of An Advanced Once-Through Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Mathematical Modelling and Design of An Advanced Once-Through Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Abstract
The once-through heat recovery steam generator design is ideally matched to very high
temperature and pressure, well into the supercritical range. Moreover this type of boiler is
In a conventional design, each tube plays a well-defined role: water preheating, vaporisation,
superheating. Empirical equations are available to predict the average heat transfer coefficient
for each region. For once-through applications, this is no more the case and mathematical
models have to be adapted to account for the disappearance of the conventional economiser,
boiler and superheater. General equations have to be used for each tube of the boiler, and the
actual heat transfer condition in each tube has to be identified. The mathematical complexity
as well as the number of equations is increased. A thermodynamic model has been selected
and implemented to suit very high pressure (up to 240 bar), sub- and supercritical steam
properties. Model use is illustrated by two case studies : a 180 bar once-through boiler (OTB)
Keywords :Once-through boiler; heat recovery steam generator (HRSG); water flow pattern
1
Corresponding authors. Tel:+32 4 366 35 23 Fax: +32 4 366 35 25 ; E-mail address: [email protected]
1. Introduction
Nowadays combined cycle (CC) power plants become a good choice to produce energy,
because of their high efficiency and the use of low carbon content fuels (e.g. natural gas) that
reduces the greenhouse gases production. CC plants couple a Brayton cycle with a Rankine
cycle. The hot exhaust of the gas turbine (Brayton cycle) delivers energy to produce high-
pressure steam for the Rankine cycle. The equipment where the steam production takes place
High efficiency in CC (up to 58%) can be achieved for two main reasons:
We focus here on the second point. The introduction of several pressure levels with reheat in
the steam cycle in the HRSG allows recovering more energy from the exhaust gas (usually
available between 600°C and 700°C). Exergy losses decrease, due to a better matching of the
gas-cooling curve with the water/steam curve in the heat exchange diagram (Dechamps,
1998). Going to supercritical pressure with the OTB technology is another way to better
New improvements are announced in near future to reach overall cycle efficiency as high as
60%.
In the present work we propose a mathematical model for the simulation and design of the
once-through boiler. The modelling approach used for the simulation of a conventional boiler
has to be revised, since the heat transfer regime in each tube can not be fixed by the
equipment design. General equations have to be used for each tube of the boiler. Moreover
there is a more significant evolution of the water/steam flow pattern type due to the complete
water vaporization inside the tubes (in a conventional boiler, the circulation flow is adjusted
to reach a vapour fraction between 20% and 40% in the tubes and the vapour is separated in
the drum).
Changes of flow pattern induce a modification in the evaluation of the internal heat transfer
coefficient as well as in the pressure drop formulation. The right equation has to be selected
The uniform distribution of water among parallel tubes of the same geometry subjected to
equal heating is not ensured from the outset but depends on the pressure drop in the tubes.
The disappearance of the drum introduces a different understanding of the boiler’s behaviour.
2.Thermodynamic model
To estimate water and steam properties, we make use of "IAPWS Industrial Formulation for
the Thermodynamic Properties of Water and Steam" (Wagner et al, 1998). It replaces the
previous industrial standard IFC-67. This formulation provides a very accurate representation
of the thermodynamic properties of water and steam over a wide range of temperature and
The IAPWS Industrial Formulation 1997 consists of a set of equations for different regions
Figure 1 shows the 5 regions into which the entire range of validity of IAPWS-IF97 is
divided.
3. Mathematical Model
The model described hereafter should be applied to horizontal tube bundles (boilers with
vertical gas path, figure 6 shows a typical tube layout). It has been developed for once through
boilers but could also be used with conventional boiler. The complete set of equations
developed here after has to be applied to each tube row or part of tube row of the complete
tube bundle (for a tube bundle with 50 rows of tubes, the set has to be applied at least 50
times).
Heat transfer equations must be formulated for steady state, forced flow through tubes.
Mathematical models for conventional boilers are usually based on empirical equations
corresponding to each region of the boiler: the economizer, the boiler and the superheater.
Those three parts of boiler are clearly separated thus it is not difficult to choose the
appropriate equation. In a once-through boiler this separation is not so clear. We have first to
estimate the flow pattern in the tubes, and on this basis to select the appropriate heat transfer
equation. “Liquid single phase” and “vapour single phase” conditions are easily identified
from temperature and pressure data. According to Gnielinski (1993) the equation 1 applies for
(ξ / 8) ( Rel −1000) Pr α *d 1
Nu = = ; ξ= (1)
1 + 12,7 (ξ /8) Pr 2 / 3 −1 λ
(1,82log10 Re−1,64)
During vaporization different flow patterns can be observed, for which the rate of heat
transfer also differs. In stratified-wavy flow pattern incomplete wetting has an effect on the
heat transfer coefficient. A reduction appears for this type of flow pattern. Computing
conditions where a change in flow pattern occurs is useful. Steiner (1993) clearly exposed a
method to establish a flow pattern map in horizontal tube for given pressure and flow
conditions. This method has been used in this study. The different flow pattern in the
vaporisation zone of the OTB are given in figure 2. The heat transfer coefficient is estimated
from numerous data. It is a combination of convective heat transfer coefficient and nucleate
α ( z ) = 3 α ( z )3 + α ( z )3 (2)
conv B
−2.2
−2 0.37
α (z)conv 0.01 ρliq
= (1− x) +1.2x0.4 (1− x) (3)
α ρvap
lo
−2
0.67
αgo 0.7 ρliq
+ x0.01 1+8(1− x)
α ρvap
lo
n( p* )
q 1.6 p*6.5
α ( z ) B = ψ *18418* 2.692 p*0.43 +
15*104 1 − p*4.4
(4)
0.5 0.133 0.25
0.01 Ra G * 0.1 q
. 1− p
d 10−6 100 qcr , PB
0.66. p*
n = κ (0.8 − 0.13*10
with qcr , PB = 9.19 *106 p* 0.4 1 − p* ( )
p p
p* = =
pc 220.64
The correction coefficients ψ and κ are functions of the heat conduction (λws) of the tube
wall. They have to be applied when (λws) < 0.7 W/K, which is the case for HRSG (Table 1)
αGO is the heat transfer coefficient with total mass velocity in the form of the vapour.
The same set of equations can be used used for a conventional heat recovery boiler and a once
trough heat recovery boiler. The main contribution to the heat transfer coefficient is due to
convection, since the fumes temperature is rather low and the tube spacing is short. Radiative
heat transfer plays a secondary role. The effect of the turbulence has been introduced to
reduce the heat transfer coefficient in the first few rows of the tube bundle.
The main difficulty to evaluate the heat transfer coefficient for the fume side comes from the
fins that enhance the heat transfer, but could also produce other sources of resistance in the
heat transfer, such as fouling on the surface of fins or inadequate contact between the core
Several methods have been implemented in the model to evaluate the heat transfer coefficient
on the gas side. Equation 6 is a general equation, which evaluates the Nusselt number in cross
n
A
Nu = C Rem Pr l (6)
d d A
b
Values for parameters “C”, “m”, “n” and “l” are given in table 2.
ea da
Hr = l f 1+ 1 + 0.35ln (7)
2l f d
2α f
X = Hr (8)
ea λa
tanh( X )
ηf = (9)
X
Finally an apparent heat transfer coefficient is computed from equation 10:
A A
po fo
α =α * +η (10)
app f A f A
Some tube manufacturers supply specific correlations whose coefficients have been tuned to
match extensive data for their specific tube design. For instance, the tube manufacturer
α f = j * G * c p * Pr −2 / 3 (11)
d a 0,5 Tb 0,25
j = C1 * C3 * C5 *( ) *( ) (12)
d Ts
C1 = 0, 25Re−0,35 (13)
( −0,25l f / s f )
C3 = 0,35 + 0,65e (14)
2
C5 = 0,7 + 0,7 − 0,8e( −0,15 Nr ) * e( −lp / tp ) (15)
Finally the overall heat transfer coefficient is obtained from equation 16.
1 1 e 1
= + + (16)
α α A A
app λ* w α * i
A i A
Q = α * A * ∆T (17)
sl
We call ∆Tsl “semi logarithmic temperature difference” (equation 18). It is the best
compromise between pure logarithmic temperature difference that has no sense here (only one
tube) and pure arithmetic temperature difference that does not allow following the evolution
T +T
f1 f2
T = (19)
mf 2
Water flows in several parallel channels, submitted to slightly different heating patterns, thus
64
2 f = (laminar)
f ⋅ ρ ⋅V l Re
∆P = with (20)
2g d 0.3164
i f = (turbulent)
4 Re
The coefficient f depends on the Reynolds number for flow within the tube. In laminar flow,
the Hagen-Poiseuille law can be applied. In turbulent flow the Blasius equation is used. The
main difficulty is the evaluation of water pressure drop during transition boiling. The pressure
drop consists of three components: friction (∆Pf), acceleration (∆Pm) and static pressure (∆Pg).
∆P ∆P
= ⋅ Φ2 (21)
L L ftt
2 phases liquid
20 1
Φ2 = 1 + + (22)
ftt X X2
∆P 0,5 0,125
L liquid 1− x
0,875
ρ go ηlo
X= = (23)
∆P x ρlo η go
L vapor
The acceleration term is defined with equation 24 where ε is the volume fraction of vapour
x
2 x2 (1 − x )2 2 (24)
∆P = G * +
vap (
m ε *ρ 1− ε )* ρ
liq x
1
−1
1.18 (1 − x ) gσ ( ρl − ρ g )
0.25
x x 1− x
ε=
ρg
(1 + 0.12 (1 − x ) ) ρg
+
ρl
+
Gtot ρl0.5
(25)
It is recommended to discretize each tube in several short sections in order to obtain more
accurate results. Figure 5 shows local pressure drop evolution in a tube, as calculated by this
model. The main pressure drop is observed where vaporisation takes place.
The pressure drop in a tube bundle is given by equation 26. In this case the number of rows
(NR) plays an important role in the pressure drop evaluation. For solid fins and staggered
arrangement for tubes, the ESCOA correlation has been selected (ESCOA, 1979):
( f + a) ⋅ G 2 N r
∆P = (26)
ρb
1+ β 2 1 1
a= ρb − (27)
4 Nr ρ 2 ρ1
An
β= (28)
Ad
0.5
da
f = C2 * C4 * C6 * (29)
d
C2 = 0, 07 + 8 Re −0,45 (30)
( −0,7(l f / s f )0,2 )
tp
C4 = 0,11 0, 05
d (31)
(32)
4. Examples
The following examples are based on CMI boilers design. CMI Utility Boilers is a company
active in the design, construction, erection and commissioning of heat recovery boilers
associated with high capacity gas turbines used in combined cycle power plant.
Results have been obtained for an OTB of pilot plant size presented in figure 6. Main design
The simulation model has been implemented in VALI software (BELSIM, 2002). Each tube
or tube section can be represented by a separate simulation object. The graphical user
interface allows easy modification of the tube connections and the modeling of multiple pass
bundles (figure 8).The simulation of the OTB described here is performed by connecting at
least 42 modules, one for each tube row. Since VALI implements a numerical procedure to
solve large sets of non-linear equations, all model equations are solved simultaneously.
Other results were obtained for a superheater and a reheater of a conventional boiler. Boiler
This allowed comparison of the detailed modelling presented here, with the more global
Although our design tool has been developed to model once through boilers, there is no
limitation and it can also be applied to model conventional boiler. Figure 3 compares the
predicted evolution of heat transfer coefficient in each tube, with average values predicted
Economiser and vaporiser are well described with traditional empirical equations however the
extra modelling work required by the new method provides interesting information for
The example shown here allowed to understand some failures in the tubes of a super heater.
Figure 9 clearly shows that the fumes temperatures (shown in italic) does not evolve
homogeneously in the boiler. Gas temperature may vary by more than 30° across the flue
channel. Water temperature profiles also differ for parallel tubes thus pressure drops patterns
also differ. In order to balance the pressure drop in parallel tubes, the water flow rate has to
differ. The heat transfer might become degraded in some tubes, which results in overheating
The module is now used during the design to analyse the water temperature profile when
The mathematical model of the once-through boiler has been used to better understand the
behaviour of the boiler. Future mathematical developments have still to be done to improve
the OTB design. The criteria for flow stability have to be reviewed since it is certainly
different in an OTB design or in an assisted circulation boiler design. Automatic generation of
6. Acknowledgements
CMI Utility boilers (Belgium) has financially supported this work, and provided design data
7. Nomenclature
∆P pressure drop
P pressure (bar)
c p ⋅η
Pr Prandl number Pr =
λ
G*d
Re Reynolds number Re d =
η
T temperature (K)
ρ density (kg/m3)
ηf fin efficiency
8. References
BELSIM (2002) VALI III users guide, Belsim s.a., Saint-Georges-sur-Meuse, Belgium
Dechamps, P.J. (1998), Advanced combined cycle alternatives with the latest gas turbines,
Rizhu, Li, Huaiming, Ju (2002), Structural design and two-phase flow stability test for the
Wagner, W., Kruse (1998), Properties of Water and Steam / IAPWS-IF97, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, Germany
9. Figures
Mist
Annular
Plug or Slug
Wavy
Stratified
X-Martinelli parameter
Figure 3 : Internal heat transfer coefficient evolution in the once through boiler compared to average
25000
Internal heat transfer
20000
kcal/h/m²/K
coefficient
15000
VAPO
10000
ECO SUP
5000
formulation
450 700
400
600
350
TEMPERATURE (C)
500
LOAD (kW)
300
250 400
200 300
150
200
100
100
50
0 0
Subcooled Boiling Superheated
region region region
LOAD FUME IN WATER OUT
Figure 5 : local pressure drop evolution in a continuous flow path from inlet water to outlet superheated
steam
160 100
90
140
Pressure drop (mmH2O)
80
100
60
80 50
40
60
30
40
20
20
10
0 0
FUMES
Tube Material
ECOVAPO 15Mo3
10CrMo910
SUPERHEATER SA335T91
185986 kg/h A B C
81.740 bar
296.5 C 473.4 478.5 471.3
INLET
338.5 380.7 410.4
OUT LET
547.4 570.9 587.5
SHP2
OUTLET
κ 0.72 1 0.8
VDI C m n l
ECOVAPO SUPERHEATER
number of rows 36 6
tubes in parallel 2 2
tubes / row 13 13
length (m) 6 6
SUPERHEATER REHEATER
number of rows 8 8
tubes in parallel 2 4