M. A. Habib ^{1}
email: mahabib@kfupm.edu.sa
I. AlZaharnah M. ElShafei S. A. M. Said N. Merah
Department of Mechanical Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
S. AlAnizi M. Y. AlAwwad M. Hajji
Department of Consulting Services, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran 31311, Saudi Arabia
Inﬂuence of Boiler Load Swing Rates on Effective Stresses of Drum Boiler Riser Tubes
In this paper, different rates of steam ﬂow (swing rates) are used to demonstrate the transient changes in both the drumboiler steam pressure and the wall temperature levels in addition to stresses in the walls of steam risers. A _{M}_{A}_{T}_{L}_{A}_{B} code was written to integrate the nonlinear dynamic governing equations for solving the water volume, the drum pres sure, and the steam quality at the exit of the riser tubes. The same code is also used for calculating the steam riser inner and outer wall temperatures based on the inner wall heat transfer coefﬁcient. The temporal riser pipe pressure and the inner and outer pipe wall temperatures have been incorporated into an _{A}_{N}_{S}_{Y}_{S} model for calculating the effec tive combined thermal and pressurecaused stresses numerically. The combined effective stress ﬂuctuation for the highest swing rate (40%) is found to be too low to induce any damage in the riser tube. The controlled pressure level has been compared with an actual pressure reading from an existing drum boiler under operating conditions for the purpose of validating the control parameters employed in the study. An optimization method for reducing the steam pressure overshoot level in the boiler is also proposed. DOI: 10.1115/1.4001653
Keywords: boiler dynamics, boiler control, drum boiler, riser tube, effective stresses
1 Introduction
Steam generators that are commonly used in many industrial processes may experience rapid and dynamic changes in the steam demand. The rapid increase in steam demand results in a rapid decrease in drum pressure. The decrease in drum pressure is nor mally met by a corresponding rise in the ﬁring rates, thus, heat ﬂux along the riser and downcomer tubes are increased and may result in tube overheating due to an increase in the riser wall temperature and therefore riser effective stresses. The problem impact is not only due to the cost of replacing defective parts, but also due to the frequent need of system shutdown and the possible imminent safety hazards. To avoid such a problem, limits of boiler load swing rates to control boiler ﬁring in order to prevent tubes overheating, high pressure ﬂuctuations, and effective stresses are to be investigated. A research in the area of boiler performance under dynamic operation includes optimization of control methods to avoid sud den changes in thermal and mechanical stresses. It also includes research during boiler startup and boiler swing. Dynamic simu lation models of boilers provide a very cost effective tool to study plant transient characteristics with the aim to improve the design and control strategies to meet stringent operational requirements. The dynamic performance of boilers and steam generators has been a major subject of study, and several investigations have been conducted on controlling their performance. Maintaining ac ceptable levels of working thermomechanical stresses in compo nents of boilers and steam generators during startup, shutdown, and load changing is one of the main criteria employed for opti mizing the operational performance of boilers and steam genera tors. Controlling the internal pressure and the associated steam
^{1} Corresponding author. Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the J OURNAL OF P RESSURE V ESSEL T ECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received July 27, 2009; ﬁnal manuscript received April 21, 2010; published online October 20, 2010. Assoc. Editor: Hyunjae Park.
temperature change rates during the heating and cooling changes
is necessary for minimizing the developed stresses in the walls of
boiler components. Motivated by a modelbased control, Astrom and Bell 1 de veloped a nonlinear dynamic model for drum boilers. The model describes the complicated dynamics of the drum, downcomer, and riser components. The model is based on physical parameters of the plant such as the boiler conﬁguration, the operating param eters, and the state variables. The goal was to develop a model which captures the key dynamical properties over a wide operat ing range. Kim and Choi 2 developed a model for water level dynamics in the drumriserdowncomer loop of a natural circula tion drumtype boiler. The model is based on basic conservation rules of mass, momentum, and energy, together with the constitu ent equations. The work provides an investigation of the response of water level dynamics to changes in steam demand and/or heat ing rate. The results were compared with those of Astrom and Bell 1 . Like the model by Astrom and Bell 1 , the assumption of metal temperature being equal to the steam saturation temperature and the linear variation of the steam quality along the riser tubes is employed. Franke et al. 3 utilized the _{M}_{O}_{D}_{E}_{L}_{I}_{C}_{A} software for
modeling the thermoﬂuid processes of a simple drum boiler dur ing the startup period. The model was based on mass and energy conservation equations together with property relations for liquid and vapor phases. The model was applied to a 70 MW coalﬁred boiler, considering important components such as the furnace, economizer, superheaters, headers, spray water injection, and long pipes. A drum boiler startup simulation program for controlled and natural circulation boilers was developed by Li et al. 4 . The model is based on the principles of mass, energy, and momentum conservations. The simulation results were compared with experi mental measurements. On the control side, Silva et al. 5 described the application of
a predictive adaptive controller to the regulation of superheated steam temperature in a commercial boiler. The objective of the investigation was testing the use of a predictive adaptive control ler for the regulation of superheated steam temperature in the presence of load changes. The work of Kruger et al. 6 proposed
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
Copyright © 2010 by ASME
DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 0613011
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
a quadratic programming optimization to ﬁnd the optimal refer
ence values for boiler ﬁring rate, steam pressure, and steam tem perature during startup. Wang et al. 7 provided an investigation on intelligencebased hybrid control for power plant boiler. A hy brid classical/fuzzy control methodology was presented to inte grate lowlevel machine control and highlevel supervision for the steam temperature process of the power plant boiler. The results showed that the steam temperature can be stably maintained whenever disturbances are large or small, and a better control performance as compared with traditional methods was achieved 7 . Gough 8 applied an advanced control of steam superheat temperature on a utility boiler. The paper described an adaptive predictive model to the control of the superheater steam tempera ture. It was proposed to use a variable speed water pump and a control system for the pump speed to account for the varying pressure difference between water feed and drum pressure. Some research papers accommodated the working stresses of boilers in the control design and analysis of boilers and steam generators. A new control solution aiming at improving the startup procedures of boilers and explicitly taking the thermal stress values of critical components into account has been pre sented by Kruger et al. 6,9 . The presented boiler model has shown that it is possible to obtain boiler models using only state variables, which can be measured or only a few additional non measurable states. An online optimization of drum boiler startup was investigated by Franke et al. 3 . The cost function of the optimization model was taken to be in terms of the deviations of the steam pressure and steam ﬂow rates from their reference val ues, while the thermal stress was taken as an output constraint. Examples of an improved main steam temperature control and operation of a drum boiler turbine bypass system were presented by Peet and Leung 10 to demonstrate the value of dynamic capability to maintain the steam temperature deviation over wide load ranges or during rapid load changes, which can increase the permissible rate of load change due to thermal stress limitations. Taler et al. 11 developed a new method for determining thermal stresses in boilers during startup. They presented a new method of transient temperature ﬁeld identiﬁcation in the drum on the basis of measured temperature changes at locations on the outer insulated surface of the drum. The method’s accuracy was dem onstrated by a comparison of thermal distributions obtained by FEM. An analysis of transient temperature and stress distribution
in boiler components during startup and shutdown operations has
been presented by WJ glowski et al. 12 . The thermal stresses have been determined indirectly on the basis of measured tem perature values taken at selected points on the outer surface of a construction element. Monitoring of boilers’ thermal and strength operation conditions allowed ﬁnding the dangerous loads on power boiler’s pressure elements during the boiler startup and shutdown operations. From the above literature review, it can be seen that none of the authors addressed the speciﬁc problem of thermal stress variation due to swing rate in the boiler riser tubes. Most of the research works that dealt with thermal stress variations in boilers and heat ers have done it for startup and shutdown operations only. The
problem of the effect of different swing rates on thermal and
pressurecaused stresses has not been explicitly addressed, nor has this stress ﬂuctuation effect on the tube’s life studied. The objec tive of this research paper is to analyze the combined thermal and pressureinduced stress response of the drum boiler riser tubes due
to rates of heating load that vary under controlled conditions with
the changed rates of the steam ﬂow rate. The nonlinear dynamic
governing equations are integrated simultaneously using MATLAB for solving the water volume, the pressure, and the steam quality
at the exit of the riser tubes. The inner and outer temperatures of
the riser tubes are calculated after solving for the heat transfer
coefﬁcient at the inner wall of the riser tubes at different time steps. For different swing rates of steam ﬂow, the combined stresses are computed. A FEM model has been used for calculat
0613012 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010
Table 1 The physical and steady state boiler operational data at MCR
Drum saturation pressure kPa 
4996.6 
Drum saturation temperature °C 
263.9 
Steam mass ﬂow kg/s 
66.5 
Total energy input MW 
208.2 
V _{d} = volume of drum m ^{3} 
40 
A _{d} =water surface area of drum m ^{2} 
20 
m _{d} =mass of drum kg 
140,000 
V _{r} =total volume of riser tubes m ^{3} 
37 
D _{i} =inner diameter of a riser tube 
0.0672 
D _{o} = outer diameter of a riser tube 
0.0762 
m _{r} =total mass of riser tubes kg 
160,000 
V _{d}_{c} = volume of downcomer tube m ^{3} 
11 
C _{p} = C = specific heat of metal kJ/ kg K 
0.5 
ing the combined effective stresses in the riser tubes. The possi bility of damage induced by resulting temperature and stress variations is investigated. An optimized control approach is intro duced in the study.
2 Modeling
2.1 Dynamic Model of the Drum Boilers. The boiler under
consideration here is of the watertube natural circulation type. The operational and physical data of the drum boiler used in the study are presented in Table 1. The main components of the boiler are the steam drum, the downcomer, and the riser tubes Fig. 1 , which represent the complete water circulation loop. Most of ther mal energy is added to the ﬂuid while ﬂowing in the riser tubes and thus boiling takes place. The following are the governing equations. The system consid ered includes the drum, riser, and downcomer. The governing equations 1 consist of the conservation of mass and energy of the total system, the equations governing the phase change in the drum including the steam and water volumes inside the drum, and the rate of steam condensation and the equations for the ﬂow circulation in the riserdowncomer loop, which describe the trans port of mass, energy, and momentum. Thus, a set of nonlinear differential equations representing the time dependence of the state variables of the pressure P , total volume of water V _{w}_{t} , and
steam quality at the exit of the riser tube x can be presented in a matrix form as follows:
Fig. 1 Construction of the boiler furnace: water circulation loop
Transactions of the ASME
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
^{a}
^{a}
a 31 0
11
21
^{a} 12 ^{0}
^{a} 22 ^{0} a
33 dP / dt
dV
_{w}_{t} / dt
dx
/ dt
= m˙ _{f}_{w} − m˙ _{s}
˙
˙
Q
Q
+ m˙ _{f}_{w} h _{f}_{w} − m˙ _{s} h _{s}
− x˙ h _{f}_{g} m˙ _{d}_{c}
The model derived parameters are given by
^{a} 21 ^{=} ^{V} wt ^{h} w
^{a} 11 ^{=} ^{V} wt
_{w} P
+ V st
_{s} P
_{w}
h _{w}
p ^{+} ^{} ^{w} p
a _{1}_{2} = _{w} − _{s}
+ V st h s
_{s}
h _{s}
p ^{+} ^{} ^{s} p
a _{2}_{2} = _{w} h _{w} − _{s} h _{s}
_{} − V _{t} + m _{m}_{t} C _{p}
Table 2 The thermal model constants † 15 ‡

1 

CO 0.65 CO 0.65 

C _{1} 1.136 C _{2} 0.9 C _{3} 667.2 C _{4} 0.7 
0.6683 

0.2 

1058 

0.7 


2 

C _{5} 0.3 
0.3 C _{5} = 0 for vertical tubes and =0 for horizontal tubes if Fr is greater than 0.04 


3 


t _{m} p 
_{R}_{e} _{=} G 1 − x D _{i} 
12 




4 

F _{k} is a ﬂuid dependent parameter =1 for water 
5
Fr is the Froude number =
G ^{2}
_{l} ^{2} gD _{i}
13
a 31 = w
h _{w} p
−
xh _{f}_{g}
_{w} p
_{}_{} 1 − ¯ V _{r} + _{}_{} 1 − x h _{f}_{g}
_{s}
h _{s}
p ^{+} ^{} ^{s} p
+ _{s} + x _{w} − _{s} h _{f}_{g} V _{r}
¯
_{} _{p} − V r + m mt C p
t _{m} p
_{} ¯ V _{r}
6
G = mass flux = ^{m}^{˙} ^{r} and D _{i} is the pipe diameter
A
r
BO is the boiling number = ^{q} ^{} Gh fg
14
15
a _{3}_{3} = 1 − x _{s} + x _{w} h _{f}_{g} V _{r}
¯
x
7
where ¯ is the average value of the void fraction along the riser tube, V _{r} is the volume of the riser tubes, m _{m}_{t} is the total mass of the system, and t _{m} is the metal temperature. _{w} , _{s} and h _{w} , h _{s} are the density and speciﬁc enthalpy of water and steam; h _{f}_{g} is the speciﬁc enthalpy of evaporation h _{f}_{g} = h _{s} − h _{f} .
2.2 Thermal Model. The following equations are used to cal
culate the inside and outside wall temperatures of the riser tube:
q D _{o} = ^{T} ^{o} ^{−} ^{T} ^{i}
^{R}
pipe
and
q D _{o} = ^{T} ^{o} ^{−} ^{T} ^{s}
^{R}
conv
8
where q is the heat ﬂux at the outside surface of the tubes, D _{o} is the pipe outer diameter, T _{i} and T _{o} are the wall temperatures at the inner and outer walls of the tube, T _{s} is the water saturation tem perature, and R _{c}_{o}_{n}_{v} and R _{p}_{i}_{p}_{e} are the resistances of the inner water ﬁlm and the pipe wall per unit length. They are calculated from the following relations:
R pipe = ^{l}^{n} ^{} ^{D} ^{o} ^{/} ^{D} ^{i} ^{}
^{2}
^{} ^{K} pipe
and R _{c}_{o}_{n}_{v} =
1
D _{i} h
^{} ^{9} ^{}
with K _{p}_{i}_{p}_{e} as the thermal conductivity of the pipe material and h is the heat transfer coefﬁcient of the water ﬁlm inside the tube. K _{p}_{i}_{p}_{e} is kept constant throughout the time domain of the solution. It should be noted that Eq. 8 is solved under steady state condi tions. This assumption is justiﬁed by the high capacity of water in the system. For calculating the heat transfer coefﬁcient including convec tion evaporation and nucleate boiling terms and is expressed as 13
10
where h _{L} is the single phase heat transfer coefﬁcient and is calcu lated from the Dittus–Boelter equation 14
11
where Re is the Reynolds number of the ﬂow inside the tube and Pr is the Prandtl number for water. Pr is kept constant throughout the time domain of the solution.
Nu = 0.023 Re ^{0}^{.}^{8} Pr ^{0}^{.}^{4}
h = h _{L} c _{1} CO ^{c} 2 25 Fr _{l} ^{c} 5 + c _{3} BO ^{c} 4 F _{k}
CO = convection number = _{} ^{1} ^{−} ^{x}
x
0.8 w 0.5
s
16
where _{w} is the density of liquid phase and _{s} is the density of the vapor phase. x is the steam quality, and the constants C _{1} , C _{2} , C _{3} , C _{4} , and C _{5} are given in Table 2.
2.3 Steam Pressure Control and Optimization Scheme. The boiler control system uses a threeterm control strategy. The demanded heating power Q t is determined based on the devia tion of the drum pressure P _{d} t from the pressure set point. The control law is given by
17
E _{p} t = P _{s}_{p} − P _{d} t
Q t = Q _{i} + k _{q}_{p} · E _{p} t + k _{q}_{i} · _{} 0 t E _{p} t dt + k _{q}_{d} · ^{d}^{E} ^{p} ^{} ^{t} ^{} dt
where P _{s}_{p} is the drum pressure set point; P _{d} t is the measured drum pressure; Q _{i} is the initial heat ﬂow; and k _{q}_{p} , k _{q}_{i} , and k _{q}_{d} are the proportional, integral, and derivative control parameters, respectively.
To maximize the swing rate, within the operation constraints, the problem is formulated as a constrained optimization problem, where an objective function is minimized with respect to the con trol parameters and the steam demand. The objective function is the weighted sum of several performance objectives. The swing rate is taken to be the percent change in steam load over a period of 1 min. The performance objectives include the following:
• The maximum percent overshoot/undershoot of the heating power.
• The maximum percent overshoot/undershoot of the drum pressure.
• The weighted sum of the square of the difference between the drum pressure and the drum pressure set point. The weighting values are exponentially increasing with time to penalize drum pressure oscillations.
• Weighted reward value for large swing rate large steam load .
18
The performance is calculated over a period starting from the new steam load value. Several operational constraints were also imposed, including upper and lower limits of the ﬁring rate, drum
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 0613013
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
level and drum pressure, and maximum rate of feed water. The optimization problem is then solved using a genetic algorithm GA . A genetic algorithm is a method for solving both con strained and unconstrained optimization problems that is based on natural selection, i.e., the process that drives biological evolution. The genetic algorithm repeatedly modiﬁes a population of indi vidual solutions. At each step, the genetic algorithm selects indi viduals at random from the current population to be parents and uses them to produce the children for the next generation. Over successive generations, the population evolves toward an optimal solution 15 .
2.4 Combined Stress Problem. The ﬁnite element method
has been employed for solving the heat conduction equation to determine the temperature distribution in the riser pipe wall. Re sulting temperature proﬁles are integrated numerically for ﬁnding the effective thermal stresses in the wall. Grid size independency tests have been conducted for ﬁnding the optimum number of elements and for obtaining results with maximum accuracy. The riser pipe wall was divided into SOLID98 _{A}_{N}_{S}_{Y}_{S} elements. The SOLID98 ANSYS element is a tennode tetrahedral coupledﬁeld solid version of the eightnode SOLID5 _{A}_{N}_{S}_{Y}_{S} element 16 . The element has a quadratic displacement behavior and is well suited to model either regular or irregular meshes. Each of the ten nodes has six degrees of freedom at each node. The effective stresses in the cylinder wall are calculated from the solved obtained tempera ture and pressure distributions, according to the von Mises theory 17,18
where
2
^{} effective ^{=} ^{} ^{} _{}
+ _{l} ^{2} + _{r} ^{2} − _{} _{l} + _{} _{l} + _{l} _{r} ^{1} ^{/} ^{2}
_{} = _{} _{−} _{T} + _{} _{−} _{P}
_{r} = _{r} _{−} _{T} + _{r} _{−} _{P}
19
20
21
22
where _{} , _{r} , and _{l} are the tangential, radial, and longitudinal stresses, respectively, and where _{} _{−} _{T} , _{r} _{−} _{T} , and _{l} _{−} _{T} are the ther mal tangential, radial, and longitudinal stresses, respectively, and given as
_{l} = _{l} _{−} _{T} + _{l} _{−} _{P}
_{} =
r ^{2} + r _{i}
1 − r ^{2} ^{} ^{2} − r _{i}
E
2
^{r}
o
2
r o T rdr + _{} r r T rdr − T r ^{2} _{}
^{} r i
i
23
_{r} =
r ^{2} − r _{i}
1 − r ^{2} ^{} ^{2} − r _{i}
E
2
^{r}
o
2
r o T rdr + _{} r r T rdr _{}
^{} r
i
i
_{z} =
1 − ^{}^{}
E
2
^{r}
^{2} − r _{i} ^{2} _{r}
o
r o T rdr _{} − T _{}
i
24
25
where E is the modulus of elasticity, is Poisson’s ratio, and _{} is the thermal expansion coefﬁcient of the riser tube material. The tangential, longitudinal, and radial stresses caused by pressure stresses, _{} _{−} _{P} , _{r} _{−} _{P} , and _{l} _{−} _{P} , are given as
r − P = r ^{r} ^{2} _{o} ^{i} 2 − ^{} r ^{P}
_{2} _{} 1
i
− P = r ^{r} ^{2} _{o} ^{i} 2 − ^{} r ^{P}
_{2} _{} 1
i
− ^{r} ^{o} _{}
r
2
^{2}
+
^{r}
r
2
o
^{2}
_{}
26
27
28
The transient thermal stresses part of the total stresses of the riser tube are calculated based on the identiﬁed inner and outer wall temperatures of the tube using Eqs. 23 – 25 . The temperature
_{l} _{−} _{P} = 0
0613014 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010
Time (s)
Fig. 2 Steam ﬂow rate reading of the current boiler
histories are determined at different time points from the values of heat transfer coefﬁcients at the inner surface of the tube using Eqs. 8 and 9 . Both the tube pressure and the inner and outer wall temperatures were employed in the FEM simulation.
3 Solution Procedure
The present model solves the differential equations of pressure, quality, and total water volume. Equation 1 was solved simulta neously using an explicit method with a time step of 1.0 s for a total time of 1500 s. The coefﬁcients in these equations were obtained from Eqs. 2 – 7 . In order to integrate the differential equations of the system, a MATLAB subroutine was developed. The computed pressure and temperature values were then used to nu merically calculate the effective von Mises stresses Eq. 19 at each time step.
4 Results and Analysis
4.1 Validation. Measurements of boiler operating conditions
were conducted for a typical Saudi Aramco boiler having the steady state conditions of drum pressure of 4480 kPa and steam
ﬂow rate of 44.7 kg/s. The boiler having the maximum continuous
rating MCR operating conditions as shown in Table 1 is con
nected to a gas turbine steam cogeneration unit through a pressure
header. Due to an upset in the gas turbine unit tripped gas tur bine , the header pressure dropped. This is followed by an in crease in the steam ﬂow rate from other boilers including the
boiler under concern, which resulted in a pressure drop in the
steam drum of this boiler. As the drum pressure drops, the control
system responds to recover the pressure drop toward the set point value by increasing the fuel ﬂow rate. The variations in the steam
ﬂow rate are given in Fig. 2. As shown by the ﬁgure, the steam
ﬂow rate increases at around 12,000 s by around 60% in almost
700 s i.e., 5.1% per minute of the operating value or around 3.4% of the MCR value. The results of the ﬁeld data were used for validating the present nonlinear dynamic system under the condi tions of a closed loop system. Thus, the steam ﬂow rate of the ﬁeld results Fig. 2 was supplied as input data for the nonlinear
dynamic model and the response of the drum pressure was calcu lated. The results are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Figure 3 provides the calculated and measured drum pressure, while Fig. 4 provides a close up view. The results show that the procedure provides good agreement, and the variations in the pressure are well captured by the present model, particularly in the region from 0 to around
17,000 s. The rest of the time period indicates some discrepancies. These discrepancies are attributed to the rise of the pressure set point in the experimental side. Although this rise was taken into account in the present calculations, but the exact new value of the pressure setpoint was not known. As well, it should be noted that the small oscillations appearing in the steady state region up
Transactions of the ASME
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Time, s
Fig. 3 Calculated and experimental results of response of drum pressure to variations in steam ﬂow rate
stream of 12,600 s and in the vicinity of 20,000 s are related to system noise in the experiments and therefore are not presented by the present computational procedure.
4.2 Calculated Operating Conditions and Thermal Stresses. Thermal stresses of the riser tubes were calculated at different values of swing rates in the steam ﬂow rate exiting the boiler. The steam ﬂow rate was increased to 40% using different schemes of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 40% per minute. These corre spond to 3.4%, 6.7%, 13.4%, and 26.8% of the MCR value per
minute. Thus, 8 5%,
were applied. The variations in the steam ﬂow rate corresponding to these step rises are shown in Fig. 5. The calculations include drum pressure, inner and outer wall temperature, and effective thermal stresses of the riser walls. Equation 1 was used for the calculation of drum pressure, steam quality, and riser wall tem perature. Equation 1 was also used to calculate drum pressure and steam quality. Equation 8 was used to calculate the riser wall temperature, and Eqs. 23 – 25 were used to calculate the effective thermal stresses. The response of the drum pressure to the variations in the steam ﬂow rate is shown in Fig. 6. The increase in the steam ﬂow rate results in a pressure drop in the steam drum. As the pressure drops in the steam drum of the boiler, the control system responds to recover the pressure drop toward the set point pressure by increasing the fuel ﬂow rate. The pres sure oscillates around the steady state value and stabilizes at around 500 s. The ﬁgure shows that the overshooting in the drum pressure increases as the step rise in the steam ﬂow rate increases and ranges between 130 kPa and 80 kPa around the steady state value. Figure 7 presents the inner and outer wall temperatures of the riser wall. The inner wall temperature oscillates within 3.2 K and
4 10%, 2 20%, and 1 40% step rises
Time (s)
Fig. 5 Input schemes of steam ﬂow rate
the outer wall temperature oscillates within 4.8 K before stabiliz ing at the steady state value but also reﬂect the variations in the steam quality as it affects the heat transfer coefﬁcient. The in crease in temperature on the inner wall occurs at a rate of about 110 K/h, and on the outer wall, at an approximate rate of 170 K/h. The rate of change on the outer wall is comparable to that of a typical startup operation, which was estimated at 167 K/h for the drum inlet 19 . The present temperature change occurred at the steady state temperature of 545 K, while the typical startup oc curred at 360 K. Furthermore, the temperature rise in this case is very low to cause any kind of thermal shock. The next question to be considered is how the different swing rates affect the stress distribution in the riser tube and the service life of this component. Figure 8 presents the effective stresses at the inner and outer surfaces of the riser wall tube. These stresses are the combined effects of the variations in the pressure and temperature across the walls. The highest values of maximum stress 53.5 MPa and stress range 6 MPa occur at the inner wall and are due to 40% step rise. The stresses due to pressure are dominant in this transi tion zone about 80% . Even though the amplitude of the stress cycle is low, the cycling of thermal and mechanical stresses even with low amplitudes is always feared because they may cause premature fatigue failure. The effect of the present stress reversals on the fatigue life of the riser tube is examined in the following:
The stress amplitude is estimated at 3 MPa from the following:
a = ^{} max ^{−} ^{} min
2
_{=} 53.5 − 47.5
2
The mean stress _{m} is taken here as the steady state stress of 51.5 MPa. To include the mean stress effect for asymmetric cycles,
11000 
11500 
12000 
12500 
13000 
13500 
14000 

Time, s 
Time (s) 
Fig. 4 Calculated and experimental results „ close view … of re sponse of drum pressure to variations in steam ﬂow rate
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
Fig. 6 Pressure proﬁles at the inner wall of the riser tube in response to variations in steam ﬂow rate
DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 0613015
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Time (s)
a Inner wall
Time (s)
b Outer wall
Fig. 7 Temporal temperature proﬁles at inner and outer walls in response to variations in steam ﬂow rate
Goodman’s approach 19 is used to estimate the equivalent stress amplitude _{a}_{e}_{q}
^{} aeq ^{=}
^{a}
^{3}
=
1 − ^{} ^{m}
^{S} ut
_{1} _{−} 51.5
345
= 3.53 MPa
The ultimate strength S _{u}_{t} = 345 MPa of A 178 at room temperature
is used here because carbon steel strength is not affected by tem
peratures below 645 K 700°F 19 . The estimated stress amplitude is very low and is not expected to cause any fatigue damage. The endurance limit for steels with S _{u}_{t} less than 550 MPa 80 ksi and at temperatures less than 645 K 700°F is approximately 70 MPa 10 ksi 20 . This will result in
a safety factor as high as 20. As shown above, the stress variation in the riser tube due to swing rate is not expected to result in tube failure, provided that the boiler and tube were initially at steady state and that the startup and shutdown cycles were taken care of in the design of the boiler system. Thus, the stress level caused by swing rates as high as 40% may not be a limiting factor. Figure 9 presents the wall temperature distribution at 10 s, 60 s, and 120 s. These results show that the swing rate does not affect the temperature distribution across the wall of the riser tube at the initial stages; however, as the time progresses, the wall gains higher temperatures for the higher swing rates, although the tem perature distribution remains similar. Figure 10 presents the cor responding wall stress distributions at 10 s, 60 s, and 120 s. These
0613016 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010
b
Time (s)
Outer wall
Fig. 8 Temporal combined pressure and thermal stress pro ﬁles at the inner and outer walls in response to variations in steam ﬂow rate
results show that the value of swing rate does not signiﬁcantly affect the stress level, especially in the region before the midwall thickness.
4.3 Control Optimization. The inﬂuence of the optimization
of the control system on the effective stresses of the riser tube is
shown in Fig. 11. The two control systems are compared. The ﬁrst is the current control system. The second is developed in the present work to provide minimal overshooting in the boiler oper ating parameters. The control used is given by Eq. 18 for fuel ﬂow rate, which is a proportionalintegralderivative PID  controller. Sensitivity to k _{q}_{p} , k _{q}_{i} , and k _{q}_{d} was conducted and the optimized weighted control parameters are found as 300, 0.0179, and 0, respectively, while the control parameters of the current boiler are 60, 3, and 0, respectively. These parameters were evalu ated based on the ﬁeld measurements. The results of Fig. 11 show that the stress ﬂuctuation is minimized with the optimized control system, making its effect on the life of the tube even less signiﬁ cant.
5 Conclusions and Remarks
This research paper presented a study on the effect of swing rate on effective combined pressurecaused and thermally induced stresses in riser tubes of drum boilers. The differential equations describing dynamics of the drum boiler were integrated using a MATLAB subroutine. Experimental ﬁeld data were used for validat ing the subroutine results and a reasonable level of accuracy was found. Different schemes for increasing the steam ﬂow swing rate
1 40% . The
were employed 8 5%, 4 10%, 2 20%, and
Transactions of the ASME
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Radius, (rri)/(rro)
a at 10 seconds
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Radius, (rri)/(rro)
b at 60 seconds
1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Radius, (rri)/(rro)
c at 120 seconds
1
Fig. 9 Wall temperature distributions at 10 s, 60 s, and 120 s
heat transfer coefﬁcient at the inner wall is evaluated using a thermal model that includes the effects of convection evaporation and nucleate boiling, and the pipe wall resistance is calculated for estimating the temporal inner and outer wall temperatures. Both the steam pressure and the riser tube inner and outer wall tem peratures were introduced in a ﬁnite element model for ﬁnding the effective combined stresses. The temperature distribution across the wall of the pipe due to the swing rate values is similar at different time stages, and the levels between the thermal stresses at the inner and outer walls increase as the time progresses with higher values of swing rate. The combined temperature and pressureinduced stress ﬂuctuations in the riser tube due to swing rate were found to be too low to result in a riser tube damage, provided that the boiler and tube were initially at steady state and that the startup and shutdown cycles were taken care of in the design of the boiler system. The proposed control strategy for minimizing the overshoot temperature and stress responses was found to be successful in reducing both the peak values and the rise time.
Acknowledgment
The authors wish to acknowledge the support received from King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals and Saudi Aramco during this study.
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Radius, (rri)/(rro)
a at10 seconds.
0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Radius, (rri)/(rori)
c at120 seconds
Fig. 10 Wall stress distributions at 10 s, 60 s, and 120 s
Nomenclature
A _{r} riser pipe inner area m ^{2}
C _{P} speciﬁc heat of metal kJ/kg C
D 
diffusion coefﬁcient m ^{2} / s 

E 
modulus of elasticity, Eqs. 23 – 25 kN / m ^{2} 

G 
mass ﬂux kg / m ^{2} s 

h 
speciﬁc enthalpy kJ/kg ; heat transfer coefﬁ cient kW / m ^{2} C 

g 

gravitational acceleration m / s ^{2} 
h _{f}_{w} speciﬁc enthalpy of feedwater kJ/kg h _{f} speciﬁc enthalpy of saturated liquid water kJ/kg h _{g} speciﬁc enthalpy of saturated water vapor kJ/kg h _{s} speciﬁc enthalpy of steam leaving the boiler kJ/kg h _{w} speciﬁc enthalpy of saturated water kJ/kg
h _{f}_{g}
speciﬁc condensation enthalpy h _{f}_{g} = h _{g} − h _{f} kJ/kg
k 
dimensionless friction coefﬁcient in the downcomerriser loop 
K 
thermal conductivity kW/mC 
Q 
heat ﬂow rate to the risers kW 
m˙ _{d}_{c} downcomer mass ﬂow rate kg/s m˙ _{f}_{w} mass ﬂow rate of feedwater supplied to the drum kg/s
DECEMBER 2010, Vol. 132 / 0613017
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Time (s)
b Outer wall
Fig. 11 Current and optimized controlled combined thermal and pressureinduced stresses for the 40% increase in steam ﬂow rate
m˙ _{s} mass ﬂow rate of steam exiting the boiler
kg/s m˙ _{s}_{d} steam ﬂow rate through the liquid surface in the drum kg/s
m˙ _{r} mass ﬂow rate through riser kg/s
Nu Nusselt number
P drum pressure kPa
Pr Prandtl number
q _{} heat ﬂux kW / m ^{2} Re Reynolds number r _{i} riser pipe inner radius m
r _{o} riser pipe outer radius m
t _{d} residence time of the steam in the drum s
T time s
T _{d} residence time of the steam in the drum s
T _{s} riser tube steam temperature °C
T _{o} riser tube outer wall temperature °C
T _{i} riser tube inner temperature °C
t _{m} metal temperature °C
t _{s} steam saturation temperature °C
R 
riser pipe radius m 
V 
volume m ^{3} 
V _{d} drum volume m ^{3}
V _{d}_{c} downcomer volume m ^{3}
V _{r} volume of riser tubes m ^{3}
0613018 / Vol. 132, DECEMBER 2010
V _{s}_{t} total volume of steam in the system m ^{3} V _{t} total volume of the drum, downcomer, and risers; V _{t} = V _{s}_{t} + V _{w}_{t} m ^{3} V _{w}_{d} volume of water under the liquid level m ^{3} V _{w}_{t} total volume of water in the system m ^{3} x steam quality
Greek Symbols volume fraction of steam in the riser thermal expansion coefﬁcient ¯ average volume fraction of steam in the riser Poisson’s ratio dynamic viscosity kg/ms _{w} saturated water density kg / m ^{3} _{s} saturated steam density kg / m ^{3} _{l} liquid phase density kg / m ^{3} _{v} vapor phase density kg / m ^{3} _{l} longitudinal stress kN / m ^{2} _{} tangential stress kN / m ^{2} _{r} radial stress kN / m ^{2}
References
1 Astrom, K. J., and Bell, R. D., 2000, “DrumBoiler Dynamics,” Automatica, 36, pp. 363–378. 2 Kim, H., and Choi, S., 2005, “A Model on Water Level Dynamics in Natural Circulation DrumType Boilers,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer, 32 , pp.
786–796.
3 Franke, R., Rode, M., and Krüger, K., 2003 . “OnLine Optimization of Drum Boiler Startup,” Proceedings of the Third International Modelica Conference,
P. Fritzson, ed., Linköping, Sweden, Nov. 3–4, pp. 287–296. 4 Li, B., Chen, T., and Yang, D., 2005, “DBSSP—A Computer Program for Simulation of Controlled Circulation Boiler and Natural Circulation Boiler Start Up Behavior,” Energy Convers. Manage., 46, pp. 533–549. 5 Silva, R. N., Shirley, P. O., Lemos, J. M., and Goncalves, A. C., 2000, “Adap tive Regulation of SuperHeated Steam Temperature: A Case Study in an In dustrial Boiler,” Control Eng. Pract., 8 , pp. 1405–1415. 6 Kruger, K., Rode, M., and Franke, R., 2001, “Optimal Control for Fast Boiler StartUp Based on a NonLinear Model and Considering the Thermal Stress on ThickWalled Components,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Confer ence on Control Applications, Mexico City, Mexico, Sept. 5–7, pp. 570–576. 7 Wang, W., Li, H. X., and Zhang, J., 2002, “IntelligenceBased Hybrid Control for Power Plant Boiler,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 10 2 , pp. 280–
287.
8 Gough, B., 2000, “Advanced Control of Steam Superheat Temperature on a Utility Boiler,” ISA EXPO/2000 Technology Updates. 9 Kruger, K., Franke, R., and Rode, M., 2004, “Optimization of Boiler StartUp Using a Nonlinear Boiler Model and Hard Constraints,” Energy, 29 , pp.
2239–2251.
10 Peet, W. J., and Leung, T. K. P., 1995, “Development and Application of a Dynamic Simulation Model for a Drum Type Boiler With Turbine Bypass System,” International Power Engineering Conference, Singapore, Mar. 11 Taler, J., Weglowski, B., Zima, W., Gradziel, S., and Zborowski, M., 1999, “Analysis of Thermal Stresses in a Boiler Drum During StartUp,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 121 , pp. 84–93. 12 W J glowski, B., Taler, J., and Duda, P., 2003, “Monitoring of Thermal Stresses in Steam Generators,” Transactions of the 17th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology SMiRT 17 , Prague, Czech Re public, Aug., pp. 17–22. 13 Kandlikar, S. G., 1990, “A General Correlation for Saturated TwoPhase Flow Boiling Heat Transfer Inside Horizontal and Vertical Tubes,” ASME J. Heat Transfer, 112, pp. 219–228. 14 Dittus, F. W., and Boelter, L. M. K., 1930, Univ. Calif. Publ. Eng., 2 , pp.
443–461.
15 Kalyanmoy, D., 2001, MultiObjective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algo rithms, Wiley, Chichester, England. 16 Ansys, Incorporated, 2005, “Ansys Theory Reference, Release 10.0,” Canons burg, PA. 17 Jabbari, M., Mohazzab, A. H., and Bahtui, A., 2006, “One Dimensional Heat Source in Hollow FGM Cylinder,” ASME Paper No. PVP2006ICPVT11. 18 Fauple, J. H., and Fisher, F. E., 1981, Engineering Design—A Synthesis of Stress Analysis and Material Engineering, Wiley, New York. 19 Budynas, R. G., and Nisbett, J. K., 2008, Shighley’s Mechanical Engineering Design, McGrawHill, New York. 20 ASME, 2004, “Alternative Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels,” ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code: An International Code, Section VIII, New York.
Transactions of the ASME
Downloaded 20 Jan 2011 to 144.177.100.5. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.
Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.
Jederzeit kündbar.