Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Research Paper

Mathematical procedure for predicting tube metal temperature in the T

second stage reheater of the operating flexibly steam boiler
⁎
Norbert Modlińskia, , Krzysztof Szczepanekb, Daniel Nabagłob, Paweł Madejskic,
Zbigniew Modlińskia
a
Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Mechanical and Power Engineering, Department of Boilers, Combustion and Energy Processes, 27 Wybrzeze
Wyspianskiego St, 50-370 Wroclaw, Poland
b
PGE Group Conventional Power Generation, 1 Ciepłownicza St, 31-587 Kraków, Poland
c
AGH University of Science and Technology in Kraków, The Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics, Department of Power Systems and Environmental Protection
Facilities, 30 Mickiewicza St, 30-059 Kraków, Poland

H I GH L IG H T S

• Mathematical procedure of reheater metal temperature prediction was developed.

• Procedure couples CFD simulations with 1-D Heated Pipe Flow Model.
• Steam flow nonuniformity caused by design and uneven heat flux was considered.
• Predictions were compared with measurements received from the monitoring system.

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Deployment of renewables introduces new regimes of large scale boiler operation. The units are required to
Boilers operate at flexible rather than baseload mode. One of the requirements is to reduce the minimum load of the
CFD existing boilers which adds thermal stress to pressure parts. Significant operational issue is the local overheating
Flexible operation of the heat exchangers material due to lower steam flow rates and poor heat dissipation conditions. The problem
Heat exchanger
is particularly intensified in low-pressure reheaters. The current paper demonstrates a novel computational
method of predicting tube metal temperature of specific reheater platens. The proposed numerical procedure
incorporates coupling of CFD simulations of the boiler fire side with 1-D pipe flow model in the heat exchanger.
Simulation results are compared to measurement data. The numerical method can be used to make decision on
the modification strategy of the reheater design to achieve uniform temperatures of the tube metal in each platen
by restriction orifices adjustment.

1. Introduction
Increase in variable electricity supply from renewable sources of
energy places new requirements on the coal power plants. These fa-
cilities are increasingly required to balance power grids by compen-
sating for the variable electricity production from renewable power
units. Conventional power generation companies are forced to operate
at flexible rather than baseload mode. One of the requirements is to
reduce the minimum load of the existing boilers which adds thermal
stress to boiler pressure parts. Typical operational issues is the local
overheating of the heat exchangers material due to lower steam flow
rates and poor heat dissipation conditions resulting often in tube
rupture. The boiler pressure elements that are generally susceptible to
overheating in such conditions are both the platen and pendant type
heaters of primary and secondary steam. The problem is intensified in
low-pressure reheater where the steam side heat transfer coefficient is
particularly small.
The main role of the reheater is to increase the temperature of the
low-pressure steam flowing inside the tubes via heat transfer from the
flue gas. Relatively large portion of the thermal boiler power is re-
covered in the reheater region, what makes them one of the most
crucial heat exchangers in the boiler. Reheater reliable and efficient
operation is the critical aspect of the power unit efficient operation.
Thermal failures of reheaters essentially increase long-term

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: norbert.modlinski@pwr.edu.pl (N. Modliński).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.10.063
Received 6 June 2018; Received in revised form 21 September 2018; Accepted 15 October 2018
Available online 16 October 2018
1359-4311/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
N. Modliński et al.
operational costs. To avoid tube damage boiler operators and designers
need information on the possible metal temperature of the reheater
platens. The online monitoring of the boiler elements has become a
standard many years ago and measurements can be helpful in de-
picturing the condition of heat exchangers tubes. However once the
measurement of metal overheating has been observed it is usually as-
sociated with deterioration of tube metal structure and possible crack
damage. The potential retrofitting strategy of endangered heat ex-
changers cannot be predicated on the temperature monitoring system
only. Possible design modifications need to be supported by mathe-
matical procedure capable of properly predicting temperature dis-
tribution among each tube panel. These local values depend on the
complex phenomena of heat extraction from the boiler fireside by the
heat exchanger. Mathematical procedure capable of producing such
thermal data must couple the 3-D heat flux distribution absorbed from
the hot flue gases with the steam flow in the reheater platens.
Trustworthy methodology can be used to indicate design modifications
within the pressure parts. Our case study is focused on the effect of
restriction orifices diameter which are often used to achieve controlled
flow process resulting in relatively uniform steam outlet temperature in
each platen of the reheater.
Many researchers have analysed heat transfer calculation in the
superheater or reheater region as a part of design and performance
study. We can draw distinction between three major modelling ap-
proaches found in the literature. The first subject group describes 0-D
lumped models of heat exchanger problems. Only average inlet and
outlet temperatures of the flue gas and working medium are considered.
Model based on Log-Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD) method was
used to calculate the surface area of a superheater during heat recovery
steam generation optimization in [1]. Similar method was used to es-
tablish heat transfer rate from the flue gas to the superheaters to im-
prove the efficiency of the coal fired power plant [2]. Ganapathy [3]
examined how pinch and approach points affect the Heat Recovery
Steam Generator size and steam production using LMTD approach. Guo
et al. [4] adopted the ε-NTU (Effectiveness-Number of Transfer Units)
method to calculate the outlet temperature of the exhaust gas and the
superheated steam. A thermodynamic analysis of waste heat power
generation system was carried out. The ε-NTU method was adopted to
calculate the outlet temperature of the exhaust gas and the superheated
steam. Moghari et al. [5] used a similar approach in thermal analysis of
economizers, evaporators and superheaters in a D-type boiler. Ad-
ditionally zonal method was incorporated to account for uneven in-
cident heat flux distribution originating from combustion process.
Second subject group describes detailed analysis of transient and
steady state heat transfer in the exchangers based on Finite Volume or
Finite Element Method. Typically a small section of the superheater is
chosen for numerical analysis. Madejski and Taler [6] carried out a CFD
(Computational Fluid Dynamics) and structural analysis of the super-
heater located in the combustion chamber of the CFB (Circulating
Fluidized Bed) boiler at different loads. In other work [7] the model
developed using Control Volume based Finite Element Method allowed
to carry out calculations for steady state operation of the superheater
and appeared to be a very effective method of calculating the tem-
perature of tubes with complex cross-section shapes. Steam and tube
wall temperature were computed in the superheater using a method
proposed in the paper and compared with the results obtained by
coupled CFD simulation. In [8] temperature and stress calculations
have been conducted in the cross section of single tube of the platen
superheater using Finite Element Method. The model accounted for
non-uniformity of heat flux distribution.
The previous two calculation methodologies do not consider 3-D
heat flux distribution which greatly affects the heat transfer. The third
subject group incorporates Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations
to accommodate the influence of the furnace related phenomena on the
subsequent superheaters and reheaters operation. However this implies
the necessity of 3-D reactive flow simulations in the whole combustion
855
Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865
chamber including the superheater and reheater region. Flow pattern
and gases temperature depend on boiler operating conditions (thermal
load, activity of specific burners or deposit formation tendency on
evaporator and heaters surface). CFD application to pulverized coal
combustion was extensively applied and surveyed in other publications
[9–12]. Currently the boiler CFD models are mainly focused on the
combustion aspects which strongly determines the water/steam side.
Simultaneous processing of the directly coupled 3-D boiler flow fields
with heat transfer on the flue gas and working medium side would
demand considerable computational resources. For that purpose more
applicable models were developed. The superheater platens are tradi-
tionally considered as very thin or 0-thickness flat walls [13] with ap-
plied thermal boundary conditions (for example temperature and
emissivity). In the standard approach no coupling between steam and
fire side is applied. For pendant and pure convective tube bundles the
basic methodology for heat exchanger simulations is based on the
porous media method, first proposed by Patankar and Spalding [14]. It
was applied to large scale boilers by several authors [15,16]. Tube
bundles are represented as porous media region simulating the influ-
ence of the geometry on the flow. The flow resistance and heat ex-
traction is modelled over the physical region occupied by the heat ex-
changer. The thermal considerations are applied via heat sink source
term in the energy equation based on the input data describing heat
exchanger power at different flow conditions. Park et al. [17] coupled
the CFD code simulating coal combustion in the furnace with the 1-D
off-line boiler model for steam–water side consideration. The CFD input
heat source terms are obtained from an independent algorithm in-
corporating lumped models of heat exchanger. Drosatos et al. [18] si-
mulated a convective section of 330 MWe boiler using the Macro Heat
Exchanger Model (MHEM) [19] based on ε-NTU method. The model is
capable of estimating the steam temperature in each computational
cell. The necessary CFD-based MHEM input heat transfer rate data was
obtained from the external Gatecycle software. Akkinepally et al. [20]
used the CFD code to simulate the effect of residual swirl on the tem-
perature distribution and velocity field in the crossover pass of the
tangentially fired boiler. Additionally the thermally coupled steam-flue
gas computation was conducted with the use of 1-D pipe flow module of
Comsol commercial software. Only a small section of the crossover pass
was investigated covering a single final reheater tubes platen to mini-
mize the computational resources.
The current paper describes a coupled 3-D and 1-D mathematical
procedure of pendant reheater tube metal temperature prediction in a
225 MWe front fired boiler. The novelty of the present work is based on
steam temperature prediction in each platen taking into account the
steam flow nonuniformity caused by restriction orifices, pressure var-
iation along the distributing header of the reheater and uneven heat
flux distribution originating from furnace combustion process. The tool
is capable of predicting the effect of hardware design changes to the
final stage of reheater in the form of ‘what if’ questions. The retrofitting
strategies (e.g. modification of orifices diameter) can be numerically
evaluated before the best solution is implemented. A validation study is
presented by comparison of measured metal temperature with simula-
tions.
2. Case study boiler
The evaluations were performed for a drum type radiant unit in-
stalled at the PGE Group power plant in Rybnik (Poland) utilising bi-
tuminous coal. The case-study boiler (OP-650) is a front-wall pulverized
coal unit with maximum capacity of 225 MWe. The boiler produces 650
tons of steam per hour. Main and reheat steam parameters are (540 °C,
14 MPa) and (540 °C, 2.3 MPa) respectively. The boiler is a dual-pass
type with unique air/fuel supply system.
General scheme of OP-650 boiler low-emission installation with the
firing system is depicted in Fig. 1. 12 swirl burners are located on the
front wall in two rows (6 in Burner Level 1 and 6 in Level 2).
N. Modliński et al.
Fig. 1. General OP-650 boiler low-NOx installation (a) and the firing system (b).
Fig. 2. Swirl burner design and bottom air supply system.
Combustion air is separated into primary, secondary and tertiary air as
demonstrated in Fig. 2. Swirl vanes fixed at 45° angle are mounted in
primary air-coal mixture tube to ensure burner stability. Additional
diluted coal-air mixture is provided through 12 injection nozzles lo-
cated in a single row above vortex burners (Burner Level III) as shown
in Fig. 1. Approximately 40% of fuel and primary air is transported to
the top level. Burners design details are shown in Fig. 2.
Coal is supplied through five pulverizers (notation A to E in Fig. 1).
During normal operation at least one pulverizer is always out of service
to reassure undisturbed fuel supply in case of unexpected break-down.
Over-Fire Air (OFA) ports are located on two levels (Fig. 1) to complete
the oxidation of any unburned combustibles and assure minimum NOx
formation. 10 OFA1 ports and 10 OFA2 ports are installed on front and
rear wall respectively. To minimize unburned carbon in bottom ash and
rear wall corrosion 20 air nozzles were installed on the front wall of the
ash pit (Fig. 3).
General schematic of the working medium flow path is
856
Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865
demonstrated in Fig. 3. The water is initially heated about 50 °C below
its boiling point in the two stage economizer (ECO1, ECO2) and enters
the drum. It than flows into the lower part of the drum, mixing with
saturated water. Water flows from the steam drum through unheated
downcomer tubes. Through the lower headers it is distributed in mul-
tiple vertical riser tubes – evaporator. Because the water is in saturation
state we can assume that the temperature inside these surfaces is con-
stant. These tubes comprise most of the furnace volume. The water-
steam mixture flows into the boiler drum, where the final separation of
water and steam takes place. The superheaters are used for heating
high-pressure steam to a high temperature. Temperature of the steam
flowing inside the superheaters (SH1, SH2, SH3, SH4, SH5 in Fig. 3)
depends on the heat absorbed from the flue gas. Thus, enthalpy of the
steam flowing inside the superheaters depends on the heat transfer rate
from the flue gas. To decrease the evaporator surface some areas of the
walls are covered with superheaters. In the described boiler a reheating
is applied to improve the cycle efficiency. The steam after partial
N. Modliński et al.
Fig. 3. General schematic of the 225 MWe boiler showing arrangement of heat
exchangers.
expansion in high pressure turbine is returned back to boiler for re-
heating to a high temperature (RH1 and RH2 in Fig. 3) and then fed
back to large in size low pressure turbine.
The current work is mainly focused on the second stage reheater
(RH2 in Fig. 3) operation. The pressure drop through the reheater
should be kept as low as possible due to turbine heat rate consideration
[21]. Relatively large diameters of tube is used (44.5 mm). The heat
transfer coefficient of low-pressure reheater steam side is low. An
overheating of the material can easily occur. This effect is even stronger
when boiler operates at lower loads when the steam velocities are
lower. Additionally normal operating conditions of the reheater depart
significantly from the ideal design conditions. One of the main pro-
blems is caused by nonuniform absorption of heat in tubes causing local
overheating. Restriction orifices are supposed to compensate the effect
of uneven flue gas temperature field and generate uniform steam
temperature among specific platens.
The analysed second stage reheater (RH2) has previously experi-
enced tube rupture and is currently equipped with monitoring system
registering metal temperature of individual platens. The system will be
used for validation study of the developed mathematical procedure.
857
Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865
3. Mathematical model
3.1. Second stage reheater modelling approach
The considered second stage pendant-type reheater (RH2) is ar-
ranged in the back-pass of the boiler. It consists of 157 parallel, vertical
flat platens of tubes (Fig. 4). Within each platen there are four links
connected to headers splitting into two pipes and the steam flows in
parallel through eight tubes. The RH2 reheater consists of two sym-
metrical segments fed by two pairs of headers. Set of orifices was in-
stalled in the tubes to restrict the flow in platens absorbing relatively
low heat flux and promote high flow rates in platens experiencing high
thermal load as a way to prevent local metal overheating.
The main objective of the mathematical model is to calculate outlet
steam and metal temperature at each platen of the reheater. As pre-
viously mentioned the detailed description of reheater geometry within
the full scale boiler CFD model incorporating coupled flue gas and
steam flow fields would bring enormous computational cost and not
guaranteeing accuracy of the results. More practical approach is ne-
cessary. In this research we utilize the porous media based Macro Heat
Exchanger Model (MHEM) [18,19] using the ε-NTU approach [22]
described in Section 3.3. The flow resistance and heat transfer is
modelled over a volume that corresponds to the physical region occu-
pied by the heat exchanger (Fig. 4). We divide the total volume of the
reheater into user defined number of sub-volumes called micro-ex-
changers (Fig. 4). In our case value of 52 appeared to be a good com-
promise between accuracy and computational effort. Each micro-ex-
changer represents 3 platens of tubes and is described as porous
medium to determine pressure loss and heat sink in the flue gas flow.
MHEM is applied simultaneously to each micro-exchanger during the
CFD simulations by dividing the micro-exchanger into 20 macro-cells
consisting of finite number of CFD control volumes. Representation of
the reheater in the CFD model computational domain is demonstrated
in Fig. 4.
The applied modelling approach is summarized in Fig. 5. In the first
step a heat rate data preparation is necessary as an input to MHEM,
which generates NTU table for each macro-cell. The LMTD model was
utilised to prepare this information as described in later Section 3.3.
Initially assuming uniform steam flow rate through each micro-ex-
changer the CFD model is run until convergence. The MHEM provides
absorbed heat flux distribution data, which is used in the 1-D Heated
Pipe Flow Model (HPFM, Section 3.4). The 1-D model solves parallel
flow problem allowing to calculate mass flow, pressure drop and steam
exit temperature in each micro-exchanger (corresponding to specific
platen). This information is in return used as an input to the CFD based
MHEM model to account for the influence of steam side heat absorption
on the fire side flow field. Several super iterations are carried out until
no visible difference in the flow field is observed.
3.2. Macro heat exchanger model (MHEM)
The MHEM allows to take into account the heat exchangers with
complex geometries within the furnace CFD simulation. The heat ex-
changing area is treated as a volume in which heat is transferred be-
tween two fluids. The flow resistance generated by the tube banks are
represented by a pressure sink terms in the momentum equations and
the heat absorption as a heat source term in the enthalpy equation. The
MHEM is typically applied to convective tube banks and pendant hea-
ters. The total computational domain of the heat exchanger section is
divided into a number of sub-volumes, named macros, both in the
steam flow and flue gas direction. Each macro is represented by a
specific number of computational control volumes depending on the
applied mesh size. For each one of these volumes, the governing
equations for flow and heat transfer is solved. The detailed description
of MHEM theory and practical application to 330 MWe lignite boiler
was given in [17].
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

Fig. 4. Second stage reheater approximation via porous media and its physical representation in the CFD model computational domain.

The incorporated MHEM simulates the heat transfer in the area of (Cr). In the case of a cross-flow heat exchanger where the primary and
heat exchanger by using the number of transfer units (NTU) model auxiliary fluids are not mixed, we can use the following equation:
[21]. The heat transfer rate for each specific computational macro is
calculated by the following equation: NTU 0.22 0,78
ε = 1−exp ⎡− ·(1−e−Cr NTU ) ⎤
⎢
⎣ Cr ⎥
⎦ (3)
q = ε·Cmin ·(Tinletl,steam−Tinlet,fluegas) (1)

Cmin = min[(Cp ·ṁ ) fluegas , (Cp ·ṁ )steam] Heat capacity ratio, Cr, is defined as:
(2)

Effectiveness of each heat exchanger for the NTU model is only Cmin
Cr =
dependent on a couple of quantities, i.e. NTU and heat capacity ratio Cmax (4)

Prepare heat rate data

(table 1) from reheater
LMTD model

Run CFD Y Extract 3-D absorbed

Uniform steam flow rate heat flux (q) data of
simulations with Convergence?
in each micro-exchanger the reheater
MHEM

Update steam Run the rate 1-D

flow rate in each Heated Pipe Flow
micro-exchanger Model (HPFM)

In each micro-exchanger
Y we calculate:
1-D HPFM results - steam outlet temperature
changed?
- pressure drop
- steam flow rate
No
Stop

Fig. 5. Applied modelling approach diagram.

858
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

Table 1 calculations based on methodology incorporating accurate flue gas

Second stage reheater (RH2) thermal power (W) for different steam and flue measurement behind the economizer was implemented to calculate the
gas. RH2 inlet gas temperature. The physical properties of gas and water/
Flue gas (kg/s) Steam (kg/s) steam including density, enthalpy, specific heat capacity, viscosity, etc.
are obtained from the pressure and temperature using the IAPWS steam
84.9 169.7 tables [23]. The flue gas properties at the final reheater are obtained
from an overall enthalpy balance and complete combustion assumption
120.1 22198998.1 24243758.2
180.2 26187956.9 29166579.7 [24].
240.2 29332190.6 33190737.9 The function describing the overall heat transfer coefficient k is
defined by the following coefficient:

where Ψ
kRH2 = 1 Δxmetal 1
+ +
Cmax = max[(Cp ·ṁ ) fluegas , (Cp ·ṁ )steam] (5) kfluegas λmetal k steam (13)

The model requires several input parameters to carry out the heat
transfer calculations. The user must prepare the following data from
design information or separate 0-D heat exchanger model: thermal
power output for different steam and flue gas flow rates (Table 1). The
methodology of obtaining these values is demonstrated in Section 3.4.
This tabular information is used later to estimate NTU for each
specific macro by interpolation. Based on the above information we
calculate the total effectiveness of the reheater:
qtotal
εtotal =
Cmin,total ·(Tinlet,fluegass−Tinlet,steam)
From the following non-linear relationship:
εtotal = f(NTUtotal , Cr,total)
we find the value of NTUtotal for the reheater. In the next step the
NTUtotal is scaled for the single macro-heat exchanger NTUmacro using
the volume and heat capacity ratio:
where kfluegas is a total heat transfer coefficient from the flue gas side to
the outer surface, ksteam is a heat transfer coefficient from the inner
surface to the steam, Δxmetal is a tube thickness, Ψ is fouling factor and
λmetal is a tube thermal conductivity.
The convective heat transfer coefficient for the in-line tube ar-
rangement was taken from [25] and is served as:
λ fluegas 0.65 0.33
kfluegas,convection = 0.2·Cs Cz Refluegas Prfluegas
d (14)
(6) where the Refluegas and Prfluegas are Reynolds and Prandtl number of the
flue gas flow, Cs, Cz are model constants depending on the longitudinal
and transverse tube spacing as well as number of tubes in the flow di-
(7) rection, λfluegas is s thermal conductivity of the flue gas and d denotes
diameter of the pipe.
The radiative heat transfer coefficient from the hot flue gas layer to
the outer surface of the tubes is given by [25]:
4

NTUmacro
V
= NTUtotal macro
Cmin,total
kfluegas,radiation = σ·
εw + 1
·ε fg ·T3fg ·
1− ( )
Tw
Tfg
Vtotal Cmin,macro (8) T
2 1− Tw
fg (15)
The thermal power of a single macro heat exchanger is given by:
where σ is the Boltzmann constant, Tw is the tube outer surface tem-
qmacro = εmacro Cmin (Tinletl,steam−Tinlet,fluegas) (9) perature, εw is emissivity of the outer surface, Tfg is the temperature of
and the heat source in a single mesh cell is scaled proportionally to its the flue gas and εfg is the emissivity of the flue gas. The total heat
volume: transfer coefficient is obtained from the equation:

Vcell kfluegas = kfluegas,convection + kfluegas,radiation (16)

q cell = qmacro
Vmacro (10)
To determine the inside heat transfer coefficient in the reheater the
Increase in steam temperature in the macro-cell (Tout,steam) is de- following correlation is used [26]:
termined from the energy balance equation:
λ steam 0.8 0.4
qmacro = (Cp ·ṁ )steam Cmin (Tout,steam−Tin,steam) (11) k steam = 0.023· Resteam Prsteam
d (17)

where λsteam is the thermal conductivity of the flue gas, Resteam and
3.3. Log-mean temperature difference (LMTD) method Prsteam are Reynolds and Prandtl number of the steam flow.

The Log-Mean Temperature Difference Method was applied to

produce the heat rate input data to the MHEM (Table 1). The set of the
following nonlinear equations is being solved numerically for different
steam (ṁ steam ) and flue gas (ṁ fluegas ) flow rates:
⎧ qtotal = ṁ steam ·[Isteam (Texit,steam , pexit,steam)−Isteam (Tinlet,steam, pinlet,steam)]
⎪
qtotal = ṁ fluegas ·[Ifluegas (Tinlet,fluegas)−Ifluegas (Texit,fluegas)]
⎨ parameters as well as heat flux distribution. The 1-D Heated Pipe Flow
⎪ qtotal = kRH2·ARH2·LMTD(Tinlet,steam, Texit,steam, Tinlet,fluegas, Texit,fluegas)
⎩ Model solves parallel flow problem allowing to calculate mass flow,
(12)
where Isteam and Ifluegas are functions describing steam and flue gas
enthalpy, k is the overall heat transfer coefficient and ARH2 is the total
heat transfer surface area. LMTD is the function describing the log-
mean temperature difference of inlet and outlet streams temperature.
The three unknown values are the thermal power qtotal, and the steam
and flue gas exit temperatures (Texit,steam, Texit,fluegas). The steam inlet
temperature was taken from the DCS measurements. Full boiler design
3.4. 1-D heated pipe flow model
In order to estimate the metal temperature of the specific tube panel
represented by micro exchanger (Fig. 4) one must calculate the steam
temperature, which depends on the mass flow rate in each micro ex-
changer (3 platens). The steam mass flow rate in turn depends on design
pressure drop and steam exit temperature in each micro-exchanger.
Within the 1-D Heated Pipe Flow Model each i-th segment con-
taining 3 platens is treated as a single pipe. The heated pipe flow
module is based on the external in-house code. The governing equations
for the pressure drop are as follows:
ṁ i
wi =
Si ·ρi (18)

859
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

l ρ
pout i = pin i−⎜⎛ ⎛ξ f i + ξl⎞· i ·wi 2−ρi ·g·Hi⎞⎟
⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎝ d i ⎠ 2 ⎠ (19)

where w denotes velocity, m – mass flow rate, S – cross section area, ξf

and ξl – friction and local loss coefficient, ρ – density, d – pipe dimeter, l
– length of the pipe segment covered by the macro-cell, H – height of
fluid column, out/in stands for macro-cell outlet/inlet conditions.
Friction factor is extracted from Colebrook and White equation:

1 ⎛ 2.51 Ra ⎞
= −2·log ⎜ +
ξf Re ξf 3.71·d ⎟
⎝ ⎠ (20)

The steam enthalpy increase along its flow path is computed with
the absorbed heat flux (q) information in each macro-cell extracted
from the CFD solution:
qi
Isteamout i = Isteamin i +
ṁ i (21)

The steam temperature (t) corresponding to calculated enthalpy is

computed from the numerical steam tables [23]:

t outi = f(pin i , Isteamout i) (22)

To obtain the flow rate ṁ i in each of the 26 segments a problem of
flow through parallel pipes needs to be solved numerically for a given
total flow rate (mtotal
̇ ) and pressure at the outlet (pRH2):
pout i (ṁ i )−pRH2 = 0
26
∑ ṁ i = mtotal
̇
i=1
The local pressure drop coefficients including restriction orifices
were taken from [27]. The formula for static pressure variation in the
collecting header of the reheater was based on [21]. The steam enters
the inlet header uniformly but leaves the outlet header on one side
(Fig. 6) resulting in variation of static pressure. The flow scheme of the
reheater with the applied local pressure drop coefficients is demon-
strated in the Fig. 6.
Fig. 7. Heat transfer from flue gas to steam through the tube/deposit boundary.
3.5. Tube metal temperature calculations
The complexity of tube metal temperature prediction in coal fired
(23)
boiler is caused by nonhomogeneous heat absorption as well as deposit
formation phenomena. In real-life situation the thickness of the deposit
formed on the heat transfer surface is strongly non-uniform. Moreover,
the process is non-stationary and the accuracy of available ash beha-
(24)
viour models is still limited.
As deposit develops on a surface, insulating properties decrease the
net heat transfer rate through the ash layer while also causing the
surface temperature of the ash as well as metal temperature to increase.
Heat transfer rate depends mainly on deposit thickness and thermal
conductivity. A balance between absorbed heat flux (q) from the flue
gas and the conductive flux throughout the metal with deposit layer

Fig. 6. Second stage reheater (RH2) flow scheme with the local pressure drop coefficients.

860
N. Modliński et al.
describes the variation of the deposit surface temperature with the
deposit growth. A complex coupling exists between the deposit struc-
ture and surface temperature (Fig. 7) which can be approximated with
the following equation:
Tsurface−Tsteam
q= Δxmetal Δx ash 1 metal temperature. The operator may decide about altering operating
+ +
λmetal λ ash k steam
where q denotes absorbed heat flux calculated by the CFD-based
MHEM, k, Δx – the mean thermal conductivity and thickness of metal
and ash layer. Assuming ash layer thickness a surface temperature can
be estimated for a given temperature. Averaged properties typical for
different types of ash layers are given in [28].
From the heat balance equation the metal-deposit interface tem-
perature can be calculated with the following equation:
Tmetal = Tsteam +
(Tsurface−Tsteam) × ( Δxmetal
λmetal
+
1
k steam
Δxmetal Δx ash 1
λmetal
+ λ ash
+ k steam
3.6. Computational fluid dynamics
The mathematical model used here is based on commercial CFD
code FLUENT [19]. Simulation of the following processes takes place in
the furnace: turbulent flow, coal combustion, gas phase combustion,
particle transport and radiative transport. The gas phase is modeled
assuming an Eulerian approach, whilst for the solid phase, the La-
grangian approach is more suitable. Realizable k-ε model [29] was used
as a closure of turbulent Reynolds equations. The realizable k-ε model is
relatively widely used for engineering applications and provides better
performance in many industrial turbulent flows than the standard k-ε
model. The pulverized coal combustion process can be divided into two
parts, devolatilization and char combustion. A single-rate kinetic de-
volatilization model [30] is used to predict the volatiles yield rate,
which assumes that the rate of devolatilization is dependent on the
amount of volatiles remaining in the particle via a first-order reaction.
Eddy dissipation concept (EDC) [31] was used as a general concept for
treating interaction between turbulence and chemistry in flames. Char
undergoes heterogeneous oxidation to CO. The reaction rate is calcu-
lated on the assumption that the process is limited by the diffusion of
oxygen to the external surface of the char particle and char reactivity
[32].
Thermal boundary conditions at walls have been expressed in terms
of surface temperature and emissivity. It was assumed that the eva-
porator surface temperature is about 60° higher than the saturation
temperature corresponding to the pressure of 16 MPa in the boiler
drum. Calculations have been carried out for three emissivity values
equal to 0.5, 0.7, 0.9 at fixed wall temperature. All the presented figures
correspond to emissivity equal 0.7, which is a typical value found in the
literature [33]. We have to emphasize that during real boiler operation
temperature and emissivity vary with time and spatially due to water-
wall slagging and soot blowers operation. This phenomena can be in-
cluded in the simulations by implementing deposition model with
thermal properties sub-model [34].
The boiler CFD simulation were previously published and a detailed
modelling approach description with validation study was demon-
strated in [12].
4. Second stage reheater metal temperature monitoring system
Second stage reheater (RH2) is equipped with a dedicated mon-
itoring system of the metal temperature measurement. The thermo-
elements are located close to the reheater outlet header (Fig. 8) on the
outer surface of 7th tube. The thermocouples are installed in approxi-
mately every tenth out of 157 tube platens (16 measurements). They
allow for real time metal temperature analysis exposed to harsh fire side
Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865
conditions.
The monitoring system is connected to the power unit Distributed
Control System (DCS), where the boiler control processes and proce-
dures are provided. The real-time monitoring of the RH2 reheater is
implemented into DCS structure allowing unit operator to supervise it’s
(25)
conditions to maintain safe temperature limits on RH2. The used ma-
terial (10H2M – 10CrMo9-10 steel) requires temperature below 580 °C.
5. Simulation results, validation and discussion
Results have been demonstrated for two unit loads of 225 and
135 MWe which correspond to 100 and 60% of the nominal output. In
addition to load the two cases differ by burners configuration. At partial
and full load 4 and 5 mills are usually active. The detailed simulation
results of the front fired boiler were presented in previous work [11]. In
) this research we are mainly concerned with the RH2 reheater region
(27) (Fig. 3).
Fig. 9 demonstrates flue gas temperature distribution in the boiler
cross-section corresponding to RH2 reheater inlet window for different
boiler thermal output. Load and mill configuration strongly determine
the flue gas temperature and velocity field and thus affect the local wall
heat transfer coefficient on the surface of the tubes. We can expect that
the incident heat flux distribution correlates with the flue gas tem-
perature field in the cross-section shown in Fig. 9. The temperature
distribution pattern shows that at 60% load the potentially highest
thermal load of the reheater is located in the middle of the boiler. For
the nominal load the temperature contours are significantly different.
The maximum load is shifted from the middle to the vicinity of the side
walls. Additionally two high temperature peaks can be noticed in the
centre of the RH2 headers.
Fig. 10 presents the absorbed heat flux (kW) distribution along the
left header of the RH2 reheater for two boiler loads without the re-
striction orifices. Comparison with the temperature field at the inlet to
the reheater (Fig. 9) shows direct correlation. It implies that flue gas
temperature has a major influence on the heat absorbed by the in-
dividual RH2 platens.
As a response to uneven heat flux distribution a set of restriction
orifices with different diameter was installed to direct higher steam
flow rates into the platens where predominantly high heat flux was
expected. Choice of currently installed orifices diameter in specific re-
heater platens was done with a general assumption that the highest heat
flux is located in the middle of the boiler. Orifices with the largest
diameter were located in the centre while the small size orifices close to
the side walls. It implies highest steam mass flow rates through the
middle platens. This property is demonstrated in Figs. 11(b) and 12(b).
Simulations results of steam outlet temperature and mass flow rates
were presented for 26 micro-exchangers (out of 52 total) connected to
left-side inlet and outlet headers. One micro-exchanger lumps three
platens of the reheater. Computations were conducted with and without
numerical representation of restriction orifices. There is uniform static
pressure along the inlet header. The outflow from the outlet header is
situated on its side what results in non-uniform static pressure profile
due to variable velocity. Figs. 11(a) and 12(a) show that when no re-
striction orifices are present, the steam flow non-uniformity among RH2
platens mainly depends on the static pressure profile in the outlet
header. It is visible that steam temperature variability in each platen
due to uneven heat flux absorbed by the reheater has minor effect. It
appears that within the range of steam temperature fluctuations, the
influence of density on pressure differences is not significant. In case of
simulations with orifices the steam flow distribution is mainly influ-
enced by the pressure drop due to physical restrictions. For both loads
with restriction orifices (Fig. 11(b) and 12(b)) the maximum steam exit
temperatures are obtained in the platens near the side walls due to
limited steam flow rates. In case of 60% load this effect is even more
pronounced in comparison to nominal load. Insufficient steam
861
N. Modliński et al.
General data
580 °C – safe metal temperature limit
157 platens
16 thermocouples to DCS
Fig. 8. Location of second stage reheater (RH2) metal temperature monitoring system.
100% load
Fig. 9. Flue gas temperature (°C) at the inlet to the RH2 volume zone.
velocities and deteriorated heat transfer coefficient in the low-pressure
reheater promotes exceeding of the safe metal temperature limit. This
observation was confirmed by operating experience where local over-
heating of tubes near the side wall resulted in rupture and leakage.
Significant dependence of heat flux distribution on the boiler load
and operating conditions (Figs. 9–12) implies a complexity in the
choice of universal restriction orifices size guaranteeing relatively
uniform steam outlet temperatures for all possible cases. We can easily
solve a mathematical problem of choosing orifices diameter that will
result in even outlet steam temperature in each platen for a given heat
flux distribution as an objective function. Exemplary results of such
procedure are demonstrated in Fig. 13. For two boiler loads and dif-
ferent burner configurations individual sets of orifices were calculated
resulting in equal temperature exiting each platen of about 520 °C.
However the orifices chosen for nominal load would not perform well
862
Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865
DCS
1 8
2
7
3
6
4
5
60% load
in 60% case and vice versa (Fig. 13).
The monitoring system described in Section 4 was utilised to per-
form validation study of the developed numerical procedure (Figs. 14
and 15). The measured outer surface tube metal temperature was
compared with the numerical predictions. Thermo-elements are located
in 16 platens covering left and right headers of the reheater. The metal
temperature was calculated based on micro-exchangers and 1-D HPFM
results data covering the locations of measurements.
Figs. 14 and 15 prove the usefulness of the mathematical approach.
Measured trends are reproduced numerically with acceptable accuracy
for both cases. Tube metal temperature distribution among platens
given by the monitoring system (Figs. 14 and 15) correlates with the
simulated flue gas temperature contours in the cross-section entering
reheater zone (Figs. 9 and 10). For the nominal load (Fig. 14) the
maximum metal temperature was measured near the walls. This is the
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

Fig. 10. Absorbed heat flux (kW) distribution along the left header of the RH2 reheater. One micro-exchanger lumps together 3 platens. Case for no restriction
orifices.

area of high flue gas temperatures and low steam mass flow rates due to
high flow resistance. During partial load operation the maximum flue
gas temperature is situated in the middle of the cross-section which
implies metal temperature peak approximately in the symmetry plane
of the reheater. In the 60% load case the simulations did not perform
well enough in the near-wall region. The reason of the discrepancy
might be associated with the deposit formation phenomena at the re-
heater tubes and boiler side walls. No deposition model was in-
corporated in the current CFD study. Only constant deposit layer
thickness was assumed for tube metal temperature calculation.
The quantitative validation gives adequate results as well. The
maximum difference was 30 K for the nominal load and 55 K for the
60% output while the average differences were 13 K and 16 K respec-
tively. In our opinion these values are satisfactory when considering
general, inherent CFD inaccuracy.
6. Conclusions
A novel approach to simulate pendant heat exchangers performance
in the steam boilers was presented. It was applied to second stage steam
reheater which are particularly susceptible to overheating. The failures
are even more pronounced during boiler partial load operation asso-
ciated with the policy of increasing the coal units flexibility.
The mathematical approach links CFD simulations of the boiler in-
cluding the heat exchanger representation as porous medium with the
separate 1-D Heated Pipe Flow Model. Detailed furnace simulations
allow to incorporate absorbed heat profile in the analysis. The most
important functionality of the model is the capability to predict steam
temperatures and the tube metal temperature in different platens of the
reheater. This feature might be helpful in preparing design modification
strategy to avoid material overheating. In our case it was crucial to

Fig. 11. Simulation results demonstrating steam outlet temperature (°C) and mass flow rate (kg/s) distribution along the left header of the RH2 reheater at 100%
boiler load. Case with and without restriction orifices is presented. One micro-exchanger lumps together 3 platens.

863
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

18 0 18

Fig. 12. Simulation results demonstrating steam outlet temperature (°C) and mass flow rate (kg/s) distribution along the left header of the RH2 reheater at 60%
boiler load. Case with and without restriction orifices is presented. One micro-exchanger lumps together 3 platens.

analyse the correctness of currently installed restriction orifices. The deteriorating cooling of the tubes. Tube rupture due to overheating
designers have originally assumed that highest heat flux must be ab- suggested inappropriate orifice diameter selection. The simulation re-
sorbed by the central platens and the lowest in those near the boiler sults demonstrate high influence of operating conditions and thermal
walls. The orifices limit the steam flow through the platens next to walls load on the heat transfer profile. The method can easily calculate

Fig. 13. Diameters and corresponding resistance coefficients of currently installed restriction orifices compared to virtually modified. The modified orifices diameter
was computed for each operating conditions with the assumption of constant steam outlet temperature in each micro-exchanger.

864
N. Modliński et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 146 (2019) 854–865

600 [3] V. Ganapathy, Heat recovery steam generators: performance management and
225 MWe

Boiler symmetry plane

Temperature (°C)

improvement, in: J.E. Oakey (Ed.), Power Plant Life Management and Performance
580 Improvement, Woodhead Publishing, Oxford, 2011, pp. 606–634.
[4] Jiangfeng Guo, Xu. Mingtian, Lin Cheng, Thermodynamic analysis of waste heat
560 power generation system, Energy 35 (2010) 2824–2835.
[5] M. Moghari, S. Hosseini, H. Shokouhmand, H. Sharifi, S. Izadpanah, A numerical
540 study on thermal behavior of a D-type water-cooled steam boiler, Appl. Therm. Eng.
37 (2012) 360–372.
520 Measurement Simulation [6] P. Madejski, D. Taler, Analysis of temperature and stress distribution of superheater
tubes after attemperation or sootblower activation, Energy Convers. Manage. 71
500 (2013) 131–137.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 [7] P. Madejski, D. Taler, J. Taler, Numerical model of a steam superheater with a
Platen Number complex shape of the tube cross section using Control Volume based Finite Element
Method, Energy Convers. Manage. 118 (2016) 179–192.
Fig. 14. Reheater metal temperature (°C) measurement compared with simu- [8] M. Pronobis, W. Wojnar, J. Czepelak, Influence of non-uniform heating on the
lation results at 100% thermal boiler load. stresses in tubes of superheaters in boilers, Forsch. Ingenieurwes. 69 (2004) 29–37.
[9] R. Boyd, J. Kent, Three-dimensional furnace computer modeling, in: 21st
Symposium (international) on combustion, Munich, West Germany, 1986. pp.
590 265–274.
135 MWe [10] M. Xu, J. Azevedo, M. Carvalho, Modeling of a front wall fired utility boiler for
Temperature (°C)

570 different operating conditions, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 190 (2001)
3581–3590.
550
[11] N. Modliński, Computational modeling of a utility boiler tangentially-fired furnace
Boiler symmetry plane

530
510
490 Measurement Simulation
470
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Platen Number
Fig. 15. Reheater metal temperature (°C) measurement compared with simu-
lation results at 60% thermal boiler load.
orifices diameter for precisely defined boundary conditions. On the
other hand it is difficult to indicate universal reheater design promoting
such steam flow distribution among the platens that will guarantee
constant steam exit temperature and thus providing best conditions for
metal cooling in the whole spectrum of boiler set-up. However using the
demonstrated methodology it is possible to find an optimum design
solution compromising new regime of boiler operation.
The validation study was conducted by utilising the tube metal
surface temperature measurement extracted from the monitoring
system. The computations are in qualitative and quantitative agreement
with measurement. The temperature profile variations with operating
conditions and their values are reproduced with satisfactory accuracy.
Differences are visible mainly in the near-wall region. In addition to
inherent CFD inaccuracies, this might be associated with the deposit
formation phenomena and varying ash layer thickness on tubes and
water-walls which was not included in the CFD model at this stage of
research.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported under contract with PGE Group
Conventional Power Generation in Poland.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.10.063.
References
[1] A. Behbahaninia, M. Bagheri, R. Bahrampoury, Optimization of the fire tube heat
recovery steam generators for cogeneration plants through genetic algorithm, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 2378–2385.
[2] G. Tzolakis, P. Papanikolaou, D. Kolokotronis, N. Samaras, A. Tourlidakis,
A. Tomboulides, Simulation of a coal-fired power plant using mathematical pro-
gramming algorithms in order to optimize its efficiency, Appl. Therm. Eng. 48
(2012) 256–267.
retrofitted with swirl burners, Fuel Process. Technol. 91 (2010) 1601–1608.
[12] N. Modliński, P. Madejski, T. Janda, K. Szczepanek, W. Kordylewski, A validation of
computational fluid dynamics temperature distribution prediction in a pulverized
coal boiler with acoustic temperature measurement, Energy 92 (2015) 77–86.
[13] P.J. Edge, P.J. Heggs, M. Pourkashanian, P.L. Stephenson, Integrated fluid dy-
namics-process modelling of a coal-fired power plant with carbon capture, Appl.
140 160 Therm. Eng. 60 (2013) 456–464.
[14] S. Patankar, D.B. Spalding, A calculation procedure for the transient and steady
state behaviour of shell-and-tube heat exchangers, McGraw-Hill: Heat Exchangers:
Design and Theory Sourcebook, 1974.
[15] T. Le Bris, F. Cadavid, S. Caillat, S. Pietrzyk, J. Blondin, B. Baudoin, Coal com-
bustion modelling of large power plant for NOx abatement, Fuel 86 (2007)
2213–2220.
[16] L. Piez, C. Cortes, J. Pallares, Numerical investigation of NOx emissions from a
tangentially-fired utility boiler under conventional and overfire air operation, Fuel
87 (2008) 1259–1269.
[17] H.Y. Park, M. Faulkner, M.D. Turrell, P.J. Stopford, D.S. Kang, Coupled fluid dy-
namics and whole plant simulation of coal combustion in a tangentially-fired boiler,
Fuel 89 (2010) 2001–2010.
[18] P. Drosatos, N. Nikolopoulos, M. Agraniotis, G. Itskos, P. Grammelis, E. Kakaras,
Decoupled CFD simulation of furnace and heat exchangers in a lignite utility boiler,
Fuel 117 (2014) 633–648.
[19] ANSYS FLUENT, < www.ansys.com > .
[20] B. Akkinepally, J. Shim, K. Yoo, Numerical and experimental study on biased tube
temperature problem in tangential firing boiler, Appl. Therm. Eng. 126 (2017)
92–99.
[21] P. Basu, C. Kefa, L. Jestin, Boilers and Burners, Design and Theory, Springer-Verlag,
New York, 2000 ISBN-0-387-98703-7.
[22] F. Incopera, D. DeWitt, T. Bergmann, A. Lavine, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass
Transfer, sixth ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2007.
[23] W. Wagner, H.J. Kretzschmar, International Steam Tables Properties of Water and
Steam Based on the Industrial Formulation IAPWS-IF97, second ed., Springer Inc.,
2008.
[24] B.J. McBride, S. Gordon, M.A. Reno, Coefficients for Calculating Thermodynamic
and Transport Properties of Individual Species, NASA Report TM-4513, October
1993.
[25] VDI Heat Atlas, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2010.
[26] A. Zukauskas, Convective Heat Transfer in Cross Flow, Handbook of Single-Phase
Convective Heat Transfer, John Wiley Inc., New York, 1987.
[27] I.E. Idelchik, Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance, third ed., Begell House, 1996.
[28] D. Cundick, R. Blanchard, D. Maynes, D. Tree, L. Baxter, Thermal transport to a
reactor wall with a time varying ash layer, in: 5th US Combustion Meeting, San
Diego, CA, USA, 2007.
[29] T. Shih, W. Liou, A. Shabbir, Z. Yang, J. Zhu, A new k-ε Eddy-viscosity model for
high Reynolds number turbulent flows – model development and validation,
Comput. Fluids 24 (3) (1995) 227–238.
[30] A. Williams, R. Backreedy, R. Habib, J.M. Jones, M. Pourkashanian, Modeling coal
combustion: the current position, Fuel 81 (2002) 605–618.
[31] B.F. Magnussen, B.H. Hjertager, On mathematical models of turbulent combustion
with special emphasis on soot formation and combustion, 16th Symp. (Int'l.) on
Combustion, The Combustion Institute, 1976, pp. 719–729.
[32] M. Baum, P. Street, Predicting the combustion behavior of coal particles, Combust.
Sci. Technol. 3 (1971) 231–243.
[33] E. Karampinis, N. Nikolopoulos, A. Nikolopoulos, P. Grammelis, E. Kakaras,
Numerical investigation Greek lignite/cardoon co-firing in a tangentially fired
furnace, Appl. Energy 97 (2012) 514–524.
[34] N. Modlinski, Computational modeling of a tangentially fired boiler with deposit
formation phenomena, Chem. Process Eng. 35 (3) (2014) 361–368.

865