Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Research Paper

Experiment and optimization of a new kind once-through heat recovery

steam generator (HRSG) based on analysis of exergy and economy
Jinbo Li, Kunyu Wang, Lin Cheng ⇑
Center of Thermal Science and Technology, Shandong University, Ji’nan 250061, Shandong, China

h i g h l i g h t s

A novel U-typed once-through HRSG is presented for the low temperature heat source.

Heat utilization and exergy of HRSG are analyzed by experiments in a cement plant.

HRSG-flash system is modeled and validated to find the optimal system solution.

Exergy and economic research are conducted and contrasted for different system.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this work, we proposed a novel once-through heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) which could be
Received 14 January 2016 used for low temperature heat resource recovery. Experiments have been done in a cement plant under
Revised 11 January 2017 different conditions to study its thermal performance. Exergetic and economic analyses of the HRSG have
Accepted 6 April 2017
been performed. We also built a mathematical model based on the energy and mass balance equations.
Available online 8 April 2017
Moreover, a flash tank is implemented in this study and optimized researches are carried out to find the
best exergy efficiency of the HRSG. Multiple sets of optimized results are compared and experiments have
Keywords:
been done to show the rationality of the model. Results show that the HRSG is highly efficient in recov-
Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)
Exergy efficiency
ering energy from low temperature heat source. Higher feed water flow rate is more suitable for the
Flash system working conditions than the lower one. When the flow rate is around 16 m3/h and the diversion water
Operating optimization temperature is around 413 K, the highest exergy efficiency of the generating system and the HRSG can
Thermal equilibrium analysis be up to 44.43% and 54.61%, respectively. The economic analysis result shows that annual income can
be 121,242 € and the construction cost can be recovered in 1.1 years.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction sidering minimizing the generating cost or maximizing the annual

Energy shortage is a serious problem in social development.
Energy recycling has become the focus of the energy industry. Heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG) is one of the most important
parts in recovering waste heat. Analysis and optimization of HRSG
is a significant subject due to the increasing fuel prices and
decreasing fossil fuel resources [1,2].
Increasing thermal efficiency and steam quality of HRSG has
interested numerous researchers. The optimum application of
energy and the energy consumption management methods are
also very important. Hence, the thermodynamic [3], exergoeco-
nomic [4], exergetic [5,6] and exergoenvironmental [7] analysis
and optimizations have been used widely in thermal systems. Con-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cheng@sdu.edu.cn (L. Cheng).
cash flow of the plant, the structure of heating surface [1,8] is also
analyzed and optimized. Soft computing methods can be used to
optimize model parameters over a full range of input and output.
For design and operation of HRSG and other heat exchangers,
genetic algorithm (GA) [4], particle swarm algorithm (PSO) [9]
are the most widely used as optimization methods.
For the optimization of the heating surface and the specific
components of the HRSG, some scholars have put forward some
new models or methods. Feng et al. [10] have presented a new
algorithm model of multi-pressure HRSG. They analyzed the model
characteristics by changing different feed water/steam flowing
route and optimizing heat exchangers layout. Hanafizadeh et al.
[11] have presented part elimination lattice search (PELS) method
to optimize the HRSG inlet duct geometry. They also applied this
method to improve a 5 MW HRSG inlet duct and enhanced the flow
uniformity and efficiency. In and Sang [12] presented a new

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.04.025
1359-4311/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415
Nomenclature
c specific heat capacity
C cost (€)
CE unit price of electrical energy
_
Ex exergy flow rate (kW)
h specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)
K average investment cost of HRSG equipment
M_ mass flow rate (kg/s)
P pressure (MPa)
s specific entropy
T temperature (K)
vp specific volume (m3/kg)
_
W net power (kW)
gex exergy efficiency of the generating system (%)
gex, HRSG exergy efficiency of HRSG
gpump efficiency of the pump
approach to find the optimum design parameter of a single pres-
sure HRSG. It could maximize the exergy efficiency by minimizing
the unavailable exergy. Sharma and Singh [13] have done the
exergy analysis of the dual pressure HRSG for varying experimental
steam conditions and dead states. They concluded the HP evapora-
tor was major source of irreversibilities, which were useful to find
the thermodynamic states and reduce the exergy destruction.
Mansouri et al. [14] performed an economic and exergetic study
for a double pressure and two triple pressure HRSGs (with and
without reheat) in a gas-steam combined cycle power plant. They
estimated the exergy loss of each component of the HRSGs. The
result showed that an increase in the number of pressure levels
caused a tangible increase in exergy efficiency of the system.
Dumont and Heyen [15] built a mathematical model of an
advanced once-through HRSG. They used this model to study the
thermodynamic characteristics under high temperature and pres-
sure conditions. Rovira et al. [16] described a one-dimensional
model to simulated the performance of an once-through HRSG at
supercritical pressure. The model toke account the strong variation
of some thermal and transport properties of fluid and discussed
their influence. Vandani et al. [9] added a flash tank to recover
the energy content of blowdown water and made optimization
for extraction pressure. The results indicated that using blowdown
recovery technique, the net generated power and exergy efficiency
increased. Baig et al. [17] built a once-through multi-stage flash
distillation system. They have analyzed the effect of various design
and operating conditions on the performance ratio.
Most of the research and optimization of the HRSG were based
on theoretical studies and model calculation. Because of the fluctu-
ation of the working conditions in the actual production, the input
parameters are difficult to match the optimized ones, and it is
almost impossible to achieve the optimal results. Hence, analysis
and optimization should be based on experiments and operating
conditions. Hanafizadeh et al. [18] have done experiments to opti-
mize the HRSG inlet duct design. They also performed numerical
simulation to validate the experimental study and presented the
optimized inlet duct angle and movable plate length.
The cement industry is an industry that consumes a consider-
able quantity of resources and energy and has a very large influ-
ence on the efficient use of global resources and energy [19]. In
typical cement production process, the waste heat for the HRSG
comes from the grate cooler. It is the air mixed with cement clinker
particles after clinker cooling. The heat source can be divided into
three sections: high temperature air, intermediate temperature air
and low temperature air. For high temperature air, the tempera-
ture is about 500–900 °C, and it is mainly used as the secondary
403
Subscripts
0 environmental conditions
C condensate removal pump
dp diversion point
flash flash system
HRSG HRSG system
in inlet
out outlet
r rated parameter
s steam
w water
air and tertiary air respectively into the rotary kiln and calciner
[20,21]. For intermediate temperature air, the temperature is about
300–500 °C, and it is mainly used in cement plant double-pressure
and multi-pressure HRSG for waste heat power generation [22].
For the low temperature air in our experiment cement plant, in
addition to low temperature (less than 300 °C), it also has the char-
acteristics of small flow rate (less than 30,000 N m3/h) and high
dust content. Mixing it with intermediate temperature air will
reduce the quality of waste gas. Designing a single pressure HRSG
individually comes with high cost, poor economy and low effi-
ciency. Hence, this exhaust air in cement companies is directly dis-
charged into the atmosphere which results in low temperature
heat loss.
It is found from the literature survey that researchers focused
on the analysis and modeling of multi-pressure HRSG and super-
critical once-through HRSG. Once-through HRSG which is suitable
for low temperature conditions is in the blank stage. The present
work has been carried out to fill this gap by designing and building
a novel once-through HRSG-flash system. In the previous paper,
the author has analyzed the advantage of U-type HRSG heating
surface in inhibiting the particle deposition [23]. In this article,
we will analyze its experimental performance in terms of economy
and exergy and do operating optimization under low temperature
conditions. The following are the specific contributions of this
paper in the subject matter area:

To present a U-typed once-through HRSG for the low tempera-
ture heat source.

To verify its feasibility and analyze the utilization of waste heat
and heat exchange on different heating surfaces by experimen-
tal researches in a cement plant.

To construct HRSG-flash system model and optimize system
configurations to find the optimal cogeneration system
solution.

To conduct the exergy and economic aspects of the research and
contrast the results of different constructions.
2. Energy analysis and exergy analysis
The temperature profile of the HRSG and the energy consump-
tion of each heating element are estimated to study the HRSG per-
formance. For one heating surface, the energy balance equation of
exhaust gas and feed water are given in Eq. (1) [6]:
M _ w ðhw;out  hw;in Þ
_ g cg ðT g;in  T g;out Þ ¼ M ð1Þ
404 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

where M, _ T and h are the mass flow rate, absolute temperature and to Evaporator 1. After heated by 8 heating surfaces, it flows into
specific heat, respectively. Subscript (w) and (g) refer to water and the steam-water separator. Then saturated steam is used to per-
gas. It must be mentioned that the exhaust gas for the HRSG is the form work in low-pressure cylinder of steam turbine, while
hot air from grate cooler. Hence, the specific heat at constant pres- remaining water returns to tank for a new cycle of the experiment.
sure, cg is considered as temperature-related variable as follows [24]: There are 6 platinum resistance thermometers configured in the


 upper and lower parts of each heating surface to measure temper-
3:8371 9:4537 2
cg ðTÞ ¼ 1:04841  T þ T ature of gas, water and steam. In order to ensure the accuracy of
104 107 temperature measurement, the average value is taken as the



5:49031 3 7:9298 4 experimental temperature. A turbine flow meter is installed at
 T þ T ð2Þ
1010 1014 the feed water entrance of boiler and a vortex street flow meter
is installed at the outlet of steam-water separator to measure the
Exergy is defined as the maximum theoretical useful work,
feed water and steam production, respectively. Pressure sensors
which means the work obtained by heat source is completely
are installed on each entrance of evaporative heating surfaces to
cooled to ambient temperature. It is defined as follows [6]:
measure the pressure of saturated water. Detailed parameters of
_ ¼M
Ex _ ½ðh  h0 Þ  T 0 ðs  s0 Þ ð3Þ the measurement instruments are summarized in Table 1.

where s is the specific entropy and subscript (0) refers to environ- 3.2. Analysis of HRSG pitch point and approach point
mental conditions.
In reversible systems, it is also the theoretical work done by the The pinch point temperature is the difference between the sat-
temperature of waste heat completely cooled to the ambient tem- uration temperature and the gas temperature at the economizer
perature T0, which is obtained from infinite number of small Kano- inlet. We have chosen two experimental conditions to reflect the
cycle cumulative, as Eq. (4): pitch point temperature. The temperature of U-type HRSG heating
Z Z surfaces is shown in Table 2 and Fig. 2(a) and (b).
_ g T  T 0 dT
T g;in T g;in
_ ¼
Ex dEx ¼ cg M It can be seen from the figures that the pinch point temperature
T0 T0 T

 of the U-type once-through HRSG is 26.5 °C. The once-through
_ g T g;in  T 0  T 0 ln T g;in
¼ cg M ð4Þ HRSG is different from the drum HRSG. The feed water gradually
T0 completes the phase change in different heating surfaces instead
Exergy efficiency of the generating system is given by: of drum. When the feed water starts to change from simple fluid
X to steam/water mixtures, the transition curve is smooth without
_n
W obvious inflection point. It is shown as the curves between the
gex ¼ n
_
ð5Þ fourth and fifth red point in Fig. 2. When the pinch point tempera-
Ex ture decreases, the outlet gas temperature of the HRSG will decline.
P _ Then, the recovery of the waste heat from the exhaust gas will
n W n is the net power, as the following:
X X increase, as well as the output of power of the steam turbine and
W_n¼ M_ n ðhn  hc Þ ð6Þ the HRSG efficiency. However, it will increase the heat exchange
n n area of the HRSG and reduce the economic performance. Hence,
To calculate the exergy efficiency of HRSG, the following Eq. (7) the pinch point temperature is not allowed to be equal to 0 °C.
is given by: Otherwise, the heat exchange area of the HRSG will be infinite.
Approach point temperature refers to the difference between
_
Ex _
 Ex the water temperature at the economizer outlet and the saturated
gex;HRSG ¼ _ s;out _ w;in ð7Þ
Exg;in  Exg;out water temperature. If the approach point temperature increases,
the total heat transfer area of the HRSG will increase, and it will
where subscript (s) refers to steam. lead to increase of the investment cost. If the temperature is too
small, under the low load condition or during the start-up period,
3. Performance experiment of the U-type once-through HRSG the feed water may vaporize in the economizer, which is not
allowed for the single pressure or multi-pressure HRSG. Hence,
3.1. Introduction for experiment the selection of the approach point temperature is a difficult task,
because it can lead to economic or operational problems. The drum
According to the basic characteristics of the cement plant waste HRSG is not suitable for low load conditions.
heat, our research group has designed and installed a novel once- For our working conditions in the cement plant, the exhaust gas
through HRSG with U-type structure. It is consist of 8 heating sur- temperature is 200–300 °C, and mass flow rate is 20,000–
faces, named as Evaporator (EVA) 1–3 and Economizer (ECO) 4–8. 35,000 N m3/h, which are much smaller than the input parameters
The experimental apparatus picture and the schematic diagram of of the HRSG in combined cycle power plant. It is a typical low load
the heat-recovering system are shown in Fig. 1. The size of a single conditions. Therefore, our research group designed a once-through
heating surface is 2.5 m  2.5 m  2.5 m. It consists of 48 serpen- HRSG, which could avoid the choice of approach point tempera-
tine tube screens (£38 mm  3.5 mm each) and 2 headers. ture. For the once-through HRSG, the feed water is gradually chan-
The exhaust gas is extracted by an induced draft fan. During the ged into steam through the heating of the exhaust gas in the
experiment, the gas flows into HRSG from the flue entrance near heating surface. There is no obvious boundary between the econo-
Evaporator 1 and continues going downward vertically until reach- mizer and the evaporator. Hence, there is no obvious approach
ing the ash bucket at the bottom. After that, the movement direc- point temperature.
tion of gas is changed to upward. Then it flows through Economizer
4–8 and dust collector. At last, it is discharged into the atmosphere. 3.3. Experimental data and working process of the U-type once-
Feed water is supplied by two centrifugal pumps from a 32 m3 through HRSG
cylindrical tank and the rated flow is 32 m3/h. The flow direction
of water is opposite to that of exhaust gas to ensure contraflow In this article, thermal performance of the HRSG is studied
heat transfer. Therefore, the feed water flows from Economizer 8 under different working conditions shown in Table 3.
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415 405

F P T
Steam
turbine T T
P

EVA 1 T ECO 8
Steam-water P
separator EVA 1
EVA 2 T ECO 7
P
Condensate EVA 3 T ECO 6
Condenser pump P
Water tank ECO 4 ECO 5

Steam flow
Water flow
Gas flow F P T
P Pressure transmitter
T Temperature thermometer Feed water pump
F Flow meter

Fig. 1. Experimental apparatus picture and schematic diagram of the waste-heat-recovering system.

Table 1
Model, range and precision of experiment instrument.

Equipment Model Range Unit Precision

Thermal resistance Pt100 0–450 °C ±0.1 °C
Turbine flow meter LWGY-80 0–100 m3/h ±0.5%
Vortex street flow meter DY100 0–8.3 t/h ±0.75%
Pressure sensor 511 0–1.6 MPa ±0.3%

Table 2
Inlet parameters of different operating conditions.

Experimental Exhaust gas inlet temperature, Tg, _g

Exhaust gas mass flow rate, M Feed water inlet temperature, Tw, _w
Feed water mass flow rate, M
condition in(°C) (N m3/h) in (°C) (t/h)

A 286.50 23,800 96.6 4.56

B 333.15 23,900 74.3 5.17
406
300
280
260
240
Temperature T (°C)
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
0 200 400 600 800
Total heat transfer rate (kW)
(a)
Fig. 2. Temperature of feed water and exhaust gas on different heating surfaces: (a) condition A; and (b) condition B.
On the other, through the study in experiment, the measure
curves of temperature and steam production are obtained in
Figs. 3–5.
Fig. 3 shows that exhaust gas temperature of different heating
surfaces varies over time under test conditions. It can be seen that
temperature fluctuation of exhaust gas is obvious, especially for
the gas inlet temperature (EVA 1 Inlet). The reason is that the
exhaust gas is from the grate cooler. Temperature of the cement
clinker changes large, and exhaust gas temperature has the same
trend.
Fig. 4 shows the temperature of water/steam varies over time.
The comparison among feed water temperature turns out that
the stable temperature decreases from Evaporator 3 to Evaporator
1, while flue gas temperature and the quantity of heat exchange
have the opposite change. The reason is that in these three heating
surface, steam/water mixtures are the final products, whose tem-
perature is determined by steam pressure. For single-phase heat-
ing surface (ECO 4–8), the pressure loss can be ignored. However,
flow resistance of steam is much greater than that of feed water.
In evaporative heating surfaces, the pressure drop is obvious,
which leads to the temperature decrease rather than increase, even
though the feed water has absorbed more heat and gas tempera-
ture is higher than that in economizers. Steam production
increases in spite of the gradual lowering of the water-vapor tem-
perature from Evaporator 3–1. For the two operating conditions 1
and 2, the feed water pressure is 0.65 MPa, but there is a big gap
between the temperature and pressure of the final steam. The rea-
son is that when the flow rate is around 4 m3/h, the feed water
reaches saturated state in Economizer 5 and then the HRSG begins
to produce steam. With the gradual increase of the steam/water
mixture, the pressure drop caused by the steam is gradually
increased (0–0.23 MPa). When the flow rate is around 16 m3/h,
steam/water will not be generated until in Evaporator 3, the pres-
Table 3
Average flow rate of exhaust gas, feed water and steam of typical working conditions.
Parameters Unit Condition 1
_g
M N m /h3
32,222
_w
M m3/h 15.87
_s
M t/h 2.44
J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415
350
exhaust gas exhaust gas
300
feed water feed water
Temperature T (°C)
250
200
150
100
50
1000 1200 1400 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Total heat transfer rate (kW)
(b)
sure drop is less than that under condition 2. The final steam tem-
perature is decided by the pressure.
Fig. 5 shows the flow rate changing of feed water and steam
over time. It shows that the volume of feed water and steam is neg-
atively correlated. This is because the flow rate and the tempera-
ture of the waste heat are low and certain. The more feed water,
the more waste heat can be utilized and the thermal efficiency
can be higher. But the more feed water, the less steam can be gen-
erated. When the flow rate is around 16 m3/h, the mass flow of
steam is around 2.5 t/h. When the flow rate is around 4 m3/h,
the mass flow of steam is around 1.8 t/h. For the two operating
conditions 1 and 2, the flow rate and inlet temperature of exhaust
gas are almost the same, but the final steam production have a
great difference. This is because less flow rate and lower velocity
under condition 2 reduce the convective heat transfer coefficient,
which makes the waste heat in the exhaust gas poorly utilized.
It is obvious that temperature and flow rate tend to be stable
after 325 min. Averaging all data during 325–375 min and the
result is given in Tables 4 and 5.
3.4. Experimental results and analysis
Figs. 6 and 7 show released heat of exhaust gas and exergy
destruction in different heating surfaces. For both condition 1
and 2, these two parameters of the heating surfaces show the sim-
ilar trend. They both decrease gradually from Evaporator 1 to Econ-
omizer 8. The reason is that in the process of heat transfer, the
temperature difference between exhaust gas and feed water
decreases gradually, which is shown in Table 4. But for Economizer
8 under condition 2, the heat transfer and exergy destruction are
higher than those of Economizer 7. The water flow rate is around
4 t/h, and inlet water temperature is 90.61 °C. The inlet tempera-
ture difference between exhaust gas and feed water of Economizer
8 is 37.89 °C which is higher than that under condition 1 (9.75 °C).
Hence, the parameters are higher. From Fig. 6, it can be seen that
the highest heat exchange rate appears in Evaporator 1. From
Condition 2
Fig. 7, exergy loss in evaporator 1–3 is significantly higher than
that in the economizers. This is because feed water is in saturated
29,000
state in evaporators. The temperature difference between exhaust
4.02
gas and feed water is large, so as the irreversibility of the heat
1.82
exchange surface.
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415 407

350 350

300 300

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 EVA 1 Inlet 100 EVA 1 Inlet

EVA 2 Inlet EVA 2 Inlet
EVA 3 Inlet EVA 3 Inlet
50 ECO 4 Inlet 50 ECO 4 Inlet
ECO 5 Inlet ECO 5 Inlet
HRSG Outlet HRSG Outlet

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (min) Time (min)
(a) (b)
Fig. 3. Temperature curves of heat source under typical operating conditions: (a) condition 1; and (b) condition 2.

180 180

160 160

140 140

120 120

100 100

80 EVA 1 Outlet EVA 1 Outlet

80
EVA 2 Outlet EVA 2 Outlet
EVA 3 Outlet EVA 3 Outlet
ECO 4 Outlet ECO 4 Outlet
60 ECO 5 Outlet 60 ECO 5 Outlet
HRSG Inlet HRSG Inlet

40 40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (min) Time (min)
(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Temperature curves of water and steam: (a) condition 1; and (b) condition 2.

Table 6 shows the exhaust parameters of steam turbine which
are measured in the cement plant. Available steam power can be
given according to the result calculated in Eq. (8). Exergy efficiency
of generating system and HRSG are defined as the following Eqs.
(9)–(11). The result is shown in Table 7.
From the experimental results, low temperature waste heat can
be recovered by the U-type once-through HRSG. Under the exper-
imental condition, the power generated by the steam cycle is
327.35 kW, and the exergy efficiency of generating system can be
31.05%. When the feed water flow rate is low (condition 2), steam
production and available steam power are both low. Hence, utiliza-
tion of waste heat is poor.
4. U-type once-through HRSG-flash system model equation and
optimization
Through the analysis of pitch point and approach point temper-
ature, it is concluded that for the condition of low mass flow rate
and low temperature exhaust gas, the once-through HRSG can be
a good choice. For the once-through HRSG, the feed water is grad-
ually changed into steam through the heating of the exhaust gas in
the heating surface. During the low water flow experiment, steam/
water mixture can be produced in Economizer 5 or 6. When the
mixture flows through Economizer 4 and Evaporator 3–1 in turn,
it will have large pressure loss, which leads to low vapor pressure
and poor steam quality. Besides, the low water flow rate can also
lead to low convective heat transfer coefficient and low waste heat
utilization efficiency. Hence, in the experiment, we choose high
feed water flow rate. In the Economizer 4–8, the feed water can
fully utilize waste heat and steam/water mixture will be generated
in evaporating heating surfaces (Evaporator 1–3). In this way, large
vapor pressure loss is avoid and steam quality is improved, while
high temperature water contains much heat which is not fully
utilized.
In order to utilize this part of the waste heat and improve
exergy efficiency, a HRSG-flash system is designed. In this paper,
a bypass valve is installed and different water flow can be dis-
pensed into the heat recovery steam generator and the flash evap-
orator respectively with energy balance discipline. The water flow
408 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

50 3.0 7
2.5
45
2.5 6

40 2.0
2.0 5
Feed water flow (m3/h)

Feed water flow (m3/h)

35

Steam flow (t/h)

Steam flow (t/h)

4 1.5
1.5
30 Feed water
Steam 3 1.0
25 1.0
Feed water
2 Steam
20 0.5 0.5

15 1
0.0 0.0
10 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (min) Time (min)

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Flow curves of water and steam: (a) condition 1; and (b) condition 2.

Table 4
Exhaust gas and water/steam properties of different heating surface.

Heating surface Ta,in (°C) Ta,out (°C) Absorbed heat (kW) Exergy destruction rate (kW) Tw,out (°C) Tw,in (°C) Pw (MPa)
Condition 1
1 311.61 232.12 955.42 431.79 152.58 158.73 0.51
2 232.12 199.96 382.34 149.18 158.73 161.82 0.6
3 199.96 174.76 298.11 105.08 161.82 147.19 0.65
4 174.76 156.66 213.40 69.33 147.19 136.52 0.65
5 156.66 139.63 200.25 58.56 136.52 125.93 0.65
6 139.63 127.43 143.16 38.19 125.93 118.85 0.65
7 127.43 118.11 109.21 26.97 118.85 113.35 0.65
8 118.11 109.95 95.52 21.99 113.35 108.36 0.65
Condition 2
1 292.85 239.93 536.99 273.87 145.21 152.40 0.42
2 239.93 219.05 212.38 85.61 152.40 154.43 0.51
3 219.05 193.65 257.23 96.37 154.43 157.52 0.54
4 193.65 179.25 146.12 50.86 157.52 161.01 0.58
5 179.25 166.42 130.39 42.83 161.01 156.19 0.63
6 166.42 152.75 138.50 42.68 156.19 132.82 0.65
7 152.75 142.55 103.50 29.89 132.82 114.82 0.65
8 142.55 128.50 142.57 38.20 114.82 90.61 0.65

Table 5 steam temperature and pressure (Tw,in, Ts,out and Pw), the main
Ambient temperature and pressure parameters. characteristics and assumptions are made as the followings:
Parameters Unit Value
_ r Þ of steam is certain. Steam out-
For the HRSG, the rated flow ðM
put ðM _ s;HRSG Þ of the HRSG in the model is less than Dr. The pressure
T0 °C 25
P0 MPa 0.10 of flash steam (Ps,flash) is equal to that of supplementary steam.
h0 kJ/kg 104.93 For the HRSG-flash system, even though the temperature of the
s0 kJ/(kg K) 0.3672
feed water varies with position and condition of heating surfaces,
the water temperature of diversion point (Tw,dp) is less than the
saturated temperature (TP) corresponding with feed water pres-
to the heat recovery steam generator is completely converted to sure and more than the temperature of flash steam, which is calcu-
high temperature saturated steam, while the other to be low tem- lated through thermodynamic properties of water by IAPWS-IF97.
perature saturated steam through flash. The once-through HRSG- The feed water is diverged at the diversion point. Part of the
flash optimization model is constructed taking exergy efficiency water, after the shunt valve, re-enters the next heating surface of
of system as the optimization goal based on mass and energy con- the HRSG, and is heated to high pressure saturated steam. A certain
servation equations. amount of water flows into the flash tank through the shunt valve
and nozzle, resulting in low pressure saturated steam. The remain-
ing water after flash is conveyed to the water tank by the pump at
4.1. Objective function, parameters design and constraints the bottom of the flash tank, and continues the next round of cycle.
Ignore water-side pressure drop. The steps to adjust the results are
In this paper, a general calculation for thermodynamic perfor- given as:
mance of HRSG-flash system composed of the 8 heating surfaces 1. Select the diversion temperature point and apply the energy
is designed based on the existing experimental data. For given balance principle for the exhaust gas and water/steam in the
_ g Þ, water/
exhaust gas inlet temperature (Tg,in), mass flow rate ðM exchanger from the point to Economizer 8. Next, take the diversion
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415 409

1100 1100
1000 1000
900 900
800 800
Absorbed heat rate (kW)

Absorbed heat (kW)

700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Heat surface No. Heat surface No.
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Absorbed heat rate in HRSG components: (a) condition 1; and (b) condition 2.

400 400
Exergy destruction rate (kW)

Exergy destruction rate (kW)

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Heat surface No. Heat surface No.

(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Exergy destruction rate for HRSG components: (a) condition 1; and (b) condition 2.

Table 6 point of water temperature Tw,dp as a temperature reference to cal-

Exhaust steam parameters of steam turbine. culate the gas temperature Tg,dp at this point. It is shown in Eq. (8):
Parameter Value Unit _ w ðhw;dp  hw;in Þ ¼ M
M _ g cg ðT g;dp  T g;out Þ ð8Þ
Steam turbine vacuum degree, Pv 9 %
Internal efficiency of steam turbine, gt 85 % 2. Eq. (9) is based on the energy balance of the heat exchanger
Pump efficiency, gpump 85 % from Evaporator 1 to the diversion point to calculate the steam
Steam turbine exhaust temperature, Tk 49.4 °C production M _ s1 of HRSG.
Steam turbine exhaust enthalpy, hks 2265.58 kJ/kg
   
_ s;HRSG hs;out  hw;dp ¼ M
M _ g cg T g;in  T g;dp ð9Þ
Then, quantity of water to the flash system can be estimated as
Table 7 follows:
Available steam power and exergy efficiency of different conditions.
_ w;flash ¼ M
M _ wM
_ s;HRSG ð10Þ
Parameter Condition Condition Unit
1 2 3. Applying the first law of thermodynamic to the flash tank as
Available steam power, W _ 327.35 240.38 kW an adiabatic control volume, calculation formula of steam pro-
Exergy efficiency of generating system, 31.05 30.07 % duced by flash system is shown in Eq. (11).
gex
_ w;flash hw;dp ¼ M
M _ s;flash hs;flash þ ðM
_ w;flash  M
_ s;flash Þhw;flash ð11Þ
410 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

Steam power and exergy efficiency are calculated based on the 43.4
quantity of high pressure steam generated by HRSG and low pres-
sure steam from flash system. And optimal water temperature of 43.2
diversion point corresponding to the highest exergy efficiency
can be given in exhaustive method. 43.0

Exergy efficiency (%)

4.2. Results and analysis of model calculation 42.8

Flow diagram and the calculation results are shown in Figs. 8– 42.6
10 through FORTRAN programming calculation. It is obtained from
the following figures that: under a certain exhaust flow, different 42.4
selection of the feed water flow rate and water temperature at
diversion point cause different system exergy efficiency. There is 42.2
an optimal value. As shown in Figs. 9 and 10, the system exergy
efficiency is the highest when the flow rate is around 16 m3/h with
42.0
the diversion point water temperature about 413 K.
Fig. 9 shows the relationship between the flow rate of feed 10 12 14 16 18 20
water and system exergy efficiency. The increase of flow rate
Water flow rate (t/h)
means increase of velocity of flow and the heat transfer coefficient.
In this way, the waste heat can be utilized better and the outlet Fig. 9. Optimal exergy efficiency of HRSG-flash system on different water flow rate.
temperature of the waste gas decreases. More saturated steam
can be made, and the system exergy efficiency increases. When
the flow rate is around 16 m3/h, the system exergy efficiency is 44
the highest. Then when the flow rate is more than 16 m3/h, the
43
influence of heat transfer coefficient is very little. But the waste
heat is not enough and saturated vapor reduces. 42
System exergy efficiency (%)

As shown in Fig. 10, exergy efficiency presents a linear rise fol-

lowed by a downward trend, and the highest point (corresponding 41
water temperature of diversion point 413 K) is 43.4%. The reason is
40
that: when the temperature of diversion point increases to 413 K,
the feed water can be heated to a higher temperature before it is 39
diverged. Water flow rate and water temperature of the flash sys-
38

37
Start
36

35
Energy consumption 380 390 400 410 420 430 440
calculation of HRSG Temperature (K)

Fig. 10. Exergy efficiency changing with diversion point water temperature.

Diversion point water

temperature Tw,dp tem will increase, which leads to a higher system exergy efficiency.
When the temperature of diversion water is over 413 K, with the
increase of temperature, the water flow rate of the HRSG will
reduce and main steam output will fall. Most of the feed water
Exergy efficiency flows into the flash tank and becomes low pressure steam, which
calculation
reduce the quality of steam and system exergy efficiency.

5. U-type once-through HRSG-flash system experiment

Changing diversion point water validation
Tw,dp >Tp No temperature
Tw,dp=Tw,dp+1 In order to validate the optimization scheme of different condi-
tions, our group have designed and built a flash tank and connected
Yes it with the HRSG. The high temperature and high pressure spray
flash experimental system is shown in Fig. 11. The main body is
a cylindrical cylinder with a standard ellipsoidal head. It has a
Calculation result diameter of 2.5 m and a total height of 5.33 m. Its material is
Q345R, and the wall thickness is 30 mm, which can withstand
pressure up to 3 MPa. The tank and pipe are covered by insulation
material with a thickness of 100 mm. There are two water supply
End pipelines of the flash tank, which are symmetrically arranged on
upper and lower of the cylinder body. Hence, it can meet the liquid
Fig. 8. Flow chart of HRSG-flash system calculation. downward or upward jet requirements.
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415 411

F Flow meter LP cylinders T

P
P Pressure transmitter
Electric
T Temperature thermometer
valve
Pump
To HRSG T P

F P T

Nozzle
Shunt valve

Flash
Evaporator
HRSG

Valve
Water tank

Fig. 11. Schematic diagram and photo of spray flash evaporation experimental system.

The specific working process is as follows: The feed water is Table 8

heated in the HRSG to the target temperature. Through the calcu- Water flow rate and diversion point temperature of different experimental system.

lation of the amount of exhaust gas, water supply and temperature Water flow rate Temperature of diversion point (K)
parameters, we select the appropriate heating surface, and change (m3/h)
2# experimental 3# experimental 4# experimental
the opening of the valve between the heating surfaces. When the system system system
feed water flows out from this heating surface, it does not enter 11.70 426.25 418.96 407.08
the next heating surface directly, but flows through the shunt 15.90 434.97 420.34 409.67
valve. Part of the water, after the shunt valve, re-enters the next 17.90 424.43 409.05 400.22
heating surface of the HRSG, and is heated to saturated steam. A 19.70 418.46 402.95 395.19
certain amount of water flows into the flash tank through the
shunt valve and nozzle. Then flash occurs. Flash steam is trans-
ferred through the pipeline at the top of the tank. And it is used single flow rate condition, the result shows that there is an optimal
as supplementary steam in the low pressure cylinder of steam tur- diversion point temperature corresponding to the highest system
bine. The remaining water is conveyed to the water tank by the exergy efficiency. The experiment results are in good agreement
pump at the bottom of the flash tank, and continues the next round with the simulation ones. The result also shows that the optimal
of cycle. diversion point temperature decreases when the water flow rate
The connection mode and quantity of heating surfaces in the increases.
experiment are determined based on the theoretical calculation By means of analyzing the experiment condition of 15.9 m3/h
results and experimental conditions. The alternative locations of feed water using different experiment schemes, results of steam
diversion point are displayed as follows: and exergy efficiency are shown in Tables 9–11, separately.

2# experimental system: diversion point is between Evaporator 6. Result and discussion

3 outlet and Evaporator 2 inlet.
3# experimental system: diversion point is between Econo-
mizer 4 outlet and Evaporator 3 inlet.
4# experimental system: diversion point is between Econo-
mizer 5 outlet and Economizer 4 inlet.
Experiments are carried out based on the three improved
schemes above. Different feed water flow rates and diversion point
temperature are selected for the experiment validation. Production
of high and low pressure saturated steam is measured. The exergy
of system and the HRSG are calculated and contrasted with each
other. Table 8 describes the different conditions of the flow rate
and diversion point temperature. Optimized architecture of
HRSG-flash system is illustrated in Fig. 12.
Fig. 13 shows comparison of system exergy efficiency between
different feed water flow rate and diversion point temperature. It is
evident that system exergy efficiency has an upward trend when
the flow rate changes from 11.70 m3/h to 15.90 m3/h; but when
the flow rate changes from 15.90 m3/h to 17.90 m3/h and 19.70
m3/h, the system exergy efficiency decreases. Furthermore, for a
6.1. Exergy analyses results
As shown in Tables 4, 9 and 10, the low temperature waste gas
from grate cooler which was discharged into the atmosphere
directly is efficiently utilized through the U-type once-through
heat recovery steam generator. High-temperature saturated steam
production rate is 2.44 t/h, and the generated steam power is
327.35 kW, under working condition of feed water flow 15.9 m3/
h, hot air flow 32,222 N m3/h, inlet hot air temperature
311.61 °C. The exergy efficiency of generation system and HRSG
are 31.05% and 33.64%, respectively.
Available steam power and exergy efficiency have both sub-
stantial increase with configuration optimization based on numer-
ical model. As shown in Fig. 14, comparison is made between 3
schemes. From schemes 2 to 4, the temperature of the diversion
point decreases gradually. Available steam power of the HRSG
steam increases, while that of flash steam decreases.
Based on Tables 10 and 11 and Fig. 15, the overall quality of
steam is relatively improved (due to increased high pressure
412 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

High pressure High pressure

HRSG steam HRSG steam
EVA 1 ECO 8 EVA 1 ECO 8
Low pressure Low pressure
EVA 1 EVA 1
falsh steam EVA 2 ECO 7 falsh steam EVA 2 ECO 7
Shunt valve
EVA 3 ECO 6 EVA 3 ECO 6
Flash evaporator
Shunt valve ECO 4 ECO 5 Flash evaporator ECO 4 ECO 5

Condensated Condensated
water water
Water tank Water tank

Water flow Water flow

Steam flow Steam flow
Gas flow Feed water pump Gas flow Feed water pump

Optimized cogeneration system 2# Optimized cogeneration system 3#

High pressure
HRSG steam
EVA 1 ECO 8
Low pressure EVA 1
falsh steam EVA 2 ECO 7

Shunt valve EVA 3 ECO 6

Flash evaporator
ECO 4 ECO 5

Condensated
water Water tank

Water flow
Steam flow
Gas flow Feed water pump

Optimized cogeneration system 4#

Fig. 12. Optimized cement kiln waste-heat-recovering system.

steam) with the decreasing temperature of the shunt. Available
steam power, as well as exergy efficiency of system and HRSG all
increase and the optimal value is achieved in 4# experiment
schemes, being 44.43% and 54.61% respectively.
6.2. Economic analyses results
Economic analyses are important to determine whether heat
transfer equipment makes sense. As mentioned above, it is neces-
sary to do calculation on economic aspects of generation system to
have a better evaluation about the new once-through heat recov-
ery steam generator and its different configurations.
Cost estimation can have a major impact both on project prof-
itability and influences of the technical solution. The total capital
investment of the once-through HRSG-flash experimental system
Ctot contains three parts: the tube bundles cost Ct, the shell cost
Cs and the insulation cost Cins. The capital investment can be
expressed as:
C tot ¼ C t þ C s þ C ins ð12Þ
The size of a single heating surface is 2.5 m  2.5 m  2.5 m.
The tube bundles consist of 48 serpentine tube screens
(£38 mm  3.5 mm each) and 2 headers (£89 mm  6.0 mm
each). Hence, the tube bundles cost is calculated as follows:
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415 413

Table 11
44.0 Steam exergy and exergy efficiency of HRSG.

11.7 m3/h Experiment High-temperature Flash saturated HRSG exergy

15.9 m3/h schemes saturated steam (kJ/kg) steam (kJ/kg) efficiency (%)
43.5 17.9 m3/h
System exergy efficiency (%)

19.7 m3/h 1# 302.70 0.00 33.64

2# 258.72 201.03 51.09
43.0 3# 340.69 138.02 53.20
4# 396.67 94.73 54.61

42.5

550
42.0 500 HRSG steam
Flash steam
450 Total
41.5
400

Steam power (kW)

350
41.0
395 400 405 410 415 420 425 430 435 300
Temperature (K) 250

Fig. 13. System exergy efficiency of different flow rate and diversion point 200
temperature.
150

100
Table 9
50
Steam production of different experiment scheme.
0
Experiment HRSG saturated steam (t/ Flash saturated steam (t/ 1 2 3 4
schemes h) h)
Experiment scheme No.
2# 2.22 1.33
3# 2.63 0.91 Fig. 14. Available steam power of different optimized cogeneration system.
4# 2.91 0.63

60
HRSG
C t ¼ C pm1 ðwwt  lwt  Nwt þ whd  lhd  Nhd ÞNs ð13Þ HRSG generation system

where Cpm1 is the price of the tube structural material, wwt and whd
represent the tube weight per unit length of the serpentine tube 50
Exergy efficiency (%)

screens and headers, respectively. Nwt and Nhd are the number of
those. Ns is the heating surfaces number of the HRSG, Ns = 8.
For the shell and insulation material cost, it includes the follow-
ing parts: heating surfaces, flue duct, water tank and flash tank. 40
Shell cost and thermal insulation material cost formulas are as
follows:

C s ¼ C pm2  qm2 ðNs  Ass  tss þ Afd  tfd þ Afl  tfl þ Atk  t tk Þ ð14Þ
30
C ins ¼ C pins  tins ðNs  Ass þ Afd þ Afl þ Atk Þ ð15Þ

where Cp and q are the unit price and density of different materials, 1 2 3 4
respectively. Subscript (m2) and (ins) are the metal and insulation. Experiment scheme No.
A represents the total area and t is the thickness of shell metal or
insulation layer. Fig. 15. Exergy efficiency of different optimized cogeneration system.
The parameters of the waste-heat-recovering system structure
and materials for the economic analysis are shown in Table 12. _ w  DP w
M
C pw ¼ C t ð16Þ
The total capital investment of the heat recovery system are q  gpump e p
45346.23 € (without flash system) and 52153.10 € (with flash sys-
tem), respectively. where q is the fluid density and DPw is the pressure drop of feed
The annual operational cost can be devised into Cpw and Cpg. Cpw water in the whole cycle. gpump is the pump efficiency. tp is the
comes from pump work and it is expressed as: operating time per year. Ce is the price of the electrical energy.

Table 10
Available steam power and exergy efficiency of system.

Experiment schemes HRSG high-pressure saturated steam (kW) Flash saturated steam (kW) Total steam power (kW) System exergy efficiency (%)
1# 327.35 0.00 327.35 31.05
2# 297.83 157.94 455.77 43.23
3# 352.84 108.44 461.27 43.75
4# 390.40 74.43 464.83 44.43
414 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415

Cpg is caused by the induced draft fans and it is expressed as:
D_ g  DPg
C pg ¼  K  C e  tp
36; 00; 000  gf
where DPg is the exhaust gas pressure drop of HRSG. g is the total
pressure efficiency. K is the motor capacity factor.
Whether only HRSG or HRSG-flash system, the final product is
saturated steam used for electricity generation in the low pressure
cylinder of steam turbine. Hence, the system profit, Cga is the eco-
nomic benefits generated by waste heat power generation, which
is expressed in Eq. (18). Table 13 shows parameters about system
operational cost and profit calculation.
As it is shown in Table 14, with this heat recovery system, 200–
300 °C low temperature waste heat of the cement industry can be
ð17Þ recovered well with an annual income of 85,383 €. The construc-
tion cost can be recovered in 2.7 years. After flash system optimiza-
tion, the optimal results show that annual income can be 121,242 €
and only 1.1 years is needed to recover construction cost.
The U-type once through HRSG can make effective use of low
temperature waste heat from grate cooler to produce saturated
steam and to generate electricity. After incorporating flash tank
into waste heat system and configuration optimization of different
shunts, the corresponding exergy efficiency of system and HRSG
achieve the optimal values.

C ga ¼ ðW b þ W f Þ  gt  gg  C e  t p ð18Þ
7. Conclusion
where Wb and Wf are the net power done by boiler steam and flash
steam. gt and gg are the steam turbine efficiency and generator effi- Based on the above-mentioned results, related conclusions are
ciency, respectively. summarized as the following:
The experiment measurements system is shown in Table 1. The
measurement data includes the mass flow rate and the pressure 1. A novel U-type heat recovery steam generator is proposed,
drop of the HRSG and flash system in Tables 3–5. Taking the above which is efficient in recovering the low temperature waste heat
experimental analysis in Section 3 as the representative average originally emitted into the atmosphere. Experiments results
operating conditions of the waste heat recovery system for the year indicate that the heat transfer performance and exergy loss of
analysis, cost recovery is calculated. Assuming that it takes n years each heating surface in the heat recovery steam generator sys-
to start profit, and investment capital annual interest rate i is15%. tem go down with the decrease of heat source temperature.
The condition for achieving profitability is shown in Eq. (19) and Exergy loss of the remaining heat transfer surface, except Eva-
the economic analysis result of different systems is shown in porator 1 is small, which indicates low irreversibility of the heat
Table 14 [25]. surface. The exergy efficiency of the system and heat recovery
n steam generator can be 31.05% and 33.64% respectively in typ-
ið1 þ iÞ
ðC ga  C pw  C pg Þ P n C tot ð19Þ ical experimental condition.
ð1 þ iÞ  1 2. HRSG-flash system model is applicable and favorable to achieve
system exergy efficiency optimization based on mass and
energy balance equation. Optimized system schemes are stud-
Table 12 ied by numerical simulation and experiments. Exergy efficien-
Waste-heat-recovering system structure and materials parameters. cies of generation system and HRSG of the optimized HRSG-
Parameters Value Unit flash system are both higher than those when the HRSG sepa-
Cpm1 0.47 €/kg
rately operates. The corresponding optimal efficiency is
Cpm2 0.54 €/kg 44.43% and 54.61%, respectively. It is obviously that the utiliza-
Cins 53.98 €/m3 tion efficiency of waste heat is enhanced.
qm1, qm2 7850 kg/m3 3. The economic analysis results show that the application of the
tss, tfd 10 mm
HRSG makes an annual income of over 85,383 € and it takes
ttk 12 mm
tfl 30 mm no more than 3 year to recover the cost of building the boiler.
tins 100 mm After optimization, the annual income of the combined HRSG-
lwt 56.64 m flash system can be 121,242 € and the construction cost can
lhd 3.1 m be recovered in 1.1 years.
Ass 25 m2
Afd 30.91 m2
Atk 71.97 m2 With the rapid development of the industrial production, the
Afl 51.33 m2 quantity of the low temperature waste gases will increase and
the quality of the low temperature waste gases will decrease.
Hence, related researches in this paper provide a reference for
Table 13 once-through HRSG in low temperature conditions, which is of
The annual operational cost parameters of exhaust gas and feed water. great significance and economic value in the fields of cement, steel
Parameters Value Unit
and other industries.

Ce 0.09 €/(kW h)
tp 4800 h Acknowledgements
gf 85 %
K 1.1 – Funding for this research was provided by the National Basic
gf 95 % Research Program (973 Program) of China (Project No.:
2013CB228305).

Table 14 References
Economic performance and payback period of the heat recovery system.
[1] A. Behbahani-Nia, M. Bagheri, R. Bahrampoury, Optimization of fire tube heat
Experimental Ctot (€/yr) Cpw (€/yr) Cpg (€/yr) Cga (€/yr) n (yr)
recovery steam generators for cogeneration plants through genetic algorithm,
program
Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 2378–2385.
HRSG system 45346.23 1434.24 62117.28 85383.36 2.7 [2] P. Ahmadi, M.A. Rosen, I. Dincer, Greenhouse gas emission and exergo-
HRSG-flash system 52153.10 1434.24 62117.28 121242.5 1.1 environmental analyses of a trigeneration energy system, Int. J. Greenhouse
Gas Control 5 (2011) 1540–1549.
 J. Li et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 120 (2017) 402–415
[3] M. Mohagheghi, J. Shayegan, Thermodynamic optimization of design variables
and heat exchangers layout in HRSGs for CCGT using genetic algorithm, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 290–299.
[4] M. Ghazi, P. Ahmadi, A.F. Sotoodeh, A. Taherkhani, Modeling and thermo-
economic optimization of heat recovery heat exchangers using a multimodal
genetic algorithm, Energy Convers. Manage. 58 (2012) 149–156.
[5] V. Cenu, A. Badea, M. Feidt, R. Benelmir, Exergetic optimization of the heat
recovery steam generators by imposing the total heat transfer area, Int. J.
Thermodyn. 7 (2004) 149–156.
[6] H. Hajabdollahi, P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer, An exergy-based multi-objective
optimization of a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) in a combined cycle
power plant (CCPP) using evolutionary algorithm, Int. J. Green Energy 8 (2011)
44–64.
[7] A.G. Kaviri, M.N.M. Jaafar, T.M. Lazim, H. Barzegaravval, Exergoenvironmental
optimization of heat recovery steam generators in combined cycle power plant
through energy and exergy analysis, Energy Convers. Manage. 67 (2013) 27–
33.
[8] M.D. Durán, M. Valdés, A. Rovira, E. Rincón, A methodology for the geometric
design of heat recovery steam generators applying genetic algorithms, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 52 (2013) 77–83.
[9] A.M.K. Vandani, M. Bidi, F. Ahmadi, Exergy analysis and evolutionary
optimization of boiler blowdown heat recovery in steam power plants,
Energy Convers. Manage. 106 (2015) 1–9.
[10] H. Feng, W. Zhong, Y. Wu, S. Tong, Thermodynamic performance analysis and
algorithm model of multi-pressure heat recovery steam generators (HRSG)
based on heat exchangers layout, Energy Convers. Manage. 81 (2014) 282–
289.
[11] P. Hanafizadeh, S. Falahatkar, P. Ahmadi, M.M. Siahkalroudi, A novel method
for inlet duct geometry improvement of heat recovery steam generators, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 89 (2015) 125–133.
[12] J.S. In, Y.L. Sang, Optimization of heat recovery steam generator through
exergy analysis for combined cycle gas turbine power plants, Int. J. Energy Res.
32 (2008) 859–869.
[13] M. Sharma, O. Singh, Exergy analysis of dual pressure HRSG for different dead
states and varying steam generation states in gas/steam combined cycle
power plant, Appl. Therm. Eng. 93 (2016) 614–622.
415
[14] M.T. Mansouri, P. Ahmadi, A.G. Kaviri, M.N.M. Jaafar, Exergetic and economic
evaluation of the effect of HRSG configurations on the performance of
combined cycle power plants, Energy Convers. Manage. 58 (2012) 47–58.
[15] M.N. Dumont, G. Heyen, Mathematical modelling and design of an advanced
once-through heat recovery steam generator, Comput. Chem. Eng. 28 (2004)
651–660.
[16] A. Rovira, M. Valdés, M.A.D. Durán, A model to predict the behaviour at part
load operation of once-through heat recovery steam generators working with
water at supercritical pressure, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 1652–1658.
[17] H. Baig, M.A. Antar, S.M. Zubair, Performance evaluation of a once-through
multi-stage flash distillation system: impact of brine heater fouling, Energy
Convers. Manage. 52 (2011) 1414–1425.
[18] P. Hanafizadeh, M.M. Siahkalroudi, P. Ahmadi, Experimental and numerical
investigation of optimum design of semi industrial heat recovery steam
generator inlet duct, Appl. Therm. Eng. 104 (2016) 375–385.
[19] X. Sui, Y. Zhang, S. Shao, S. Zhang, Exergetic life cycle assessment of cement
production process with waste heat power generation, Energy Convers.
Manage. 88 (2014) 684–692.
[20] M.L.G. Reno, F.M. Torres, R.J.D. Silva, Exergy analyses in cement production
applying waste fuel and mineralizer, Energy Convers. Manage. 75 (2013) 98–
104.
[21] A. Atmaca, R.æ.K. Yumrutasß, Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analysis of
a cement plant: part II – application, Energy Convers. Manage. 79 (2014) 799–
808.
[22] S. Karellas, A.D. Leontaritis, G. Panousis, E. Bellos, E. Kakaras, Energetic and
exergetic analysis of waste heat recovery systems in the cement industry,
Energy 58 (2013) 147–156.
[23] J. Li, W. Du, L. Cheng, Numerical simulation and experiment of gas-solid two
phase flow and ash deposition on a novel heat transfer surface, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 113 (2017) 1033–1046.
[24] P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer, Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic
optimization of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant with a
supplementary firing unit, Energy Convers. Manage. 52 (2011) 2296–2308.
[25] H.B. Avval, P. Ahmadi, A.R. Ghaffarizadeh, M.H. Saidi, Thermo-economic-
environmental multiobjective optimization of a gas turbine power plant with
preheater using evolutionary algorithm, Int. J. Energy Res. 35 (2011) 389–403.