Heat Transfer Engineering
Heat Transfer Engineering
To cite this article: Vladimir D. Stevanovic, Milan M. Petrovic, Sanja Milivojevic & Blazenka Maslovaric (2015) Prediction and
Control of Steam Accumulation, Heat Transfer Engineering, 36:5, 498-510, DOI: 10.1080/01457632.2014.935226
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Heat Transfer Engineering, 36:498–510, 2015
Copyright
C Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0145-7632 print / 1521-0537 online
DOI: 10.1080/01457632.2014.935226
Steam accumulators are applied as buffers between steam generators and consumers in cases of different steam production
and consumption rates. The application of the steam accumulator saves energy, reduces pressure fluctuations, and prevents
aging of tubes and pressurized vessels in steam generators. In this paper, modes of the steam accumulator operation are
analyzed and the general design of the steam accumulator control system is defined. Equilibrium and nonequilibrium
thermodynamic models of the steam accumulator are presented with the aim of predicting the steam accumulator capacity
and as support to the design of the control system. The equilibrium model is based on the mass and energy balance equations
of the total water and steam content in the accumulator, while the nonequilibrium model is based on the mass and energy
balance equations for each phase and closure laws of nonequilibrium evaporation and condensation rates. The steam
accumulator pressure transients are simulated for constant steam charging and discharging flow rates, and the influence of
the nonequilibrium condensation and evaporation rates on the steam accumulator capacity is shown. It is concluded that
the commonly used equilibrium thermodynamic approach to the steam accumulator design does not provide accurate results
in cases of rapid charging and discharging transients; therefore, there is a need for the application of the nonequilibrium
approach.
498
V. D. STEVANOVIC ET AL. 499
the steam consumption from the LPH (Figure 2) is assumed con- reduction station PRS in order to keep the pressure in the low-
stant. Diagrams show the accumulator charging in the periods pressure header (LPH) within the prescribed pressure interval.
of lower steam consumption and the accumulator discharging If the pressure in the low-pressure header (LPH) decreases
in the periods of higher consumption. In addition, the flow rate and the control valve in the PRS-AO is fully opened, the control
through the pressure reduction station in parallel connection circuit 1NIRC sends a signal for the opening of the control valve
to the accumulator is variable, where the minimal flow rates in the pressure reduction station PRS.
through the pressure reduction station coincide with instants of
steam accumulator maximum charging and discharging rates.
In the general case, consumptions from both the high- Control of the Steam Accumulator Charging
pressure header and the low-pressure header can be variable
and stochastic (i.e., not periodic as it is shown in Figures 3 and The control circuit 2NIRC (Figure 2) adjusts the control valve
4). For such cases, the only possible mode of operation that in the pressure reduction station PRS-AI, in the accumulator
Downloaded by [Narodna Biblioteka Srbije], [Vladimir Stevanovic] at 03:36 31 October 2014
provides utilization of the total accumulation capacity of the inlet steam pipeline, on the basis of the measured pressure in
steam accumulator is the variable steam accumulator charging the high-pressure header (HPH) in front of the accumulator and
and discharging rates, as well as variable flow in the steam ac- the measured pressure in the accumulator vessel.
cumulator bypass line with the pressure reduction station (PRS If the pressure in the high-pressure header (HPH) increases
in Figure 2). The control for such a general case of operation is above prescribed setpoint and the pressure in the accumulator
presented in the next subsection. is lower than the pressure in the HPH, the circuit 2NIRC sends
the signal for the opening of the valve in the PRS-AI.
If the pressure in the steam accumulator is equal or higher
Control System for the Steam Accumulator Operation than the pressure in the HPH or the pressure in the HPH is lower
than prescribed lower setpoint, the control valve in the PRS-AI
Measurement and control circuits for the control of the steam is being closed or it remains closed.
accumulator operation are shown in Figure 2. The charging of
the steam accumulator is controlled with the throttling valve in
the pressure reduction station PRS-AI, which is being positioned Control of the Steam Accumulator Discharging
with the control circuit 2NIRC. The accumulator discharging is
controlled with the control throttling valve in the pressure reduc- The control circuit 3NIRC (Figure 2) adjusts the control
tion station PRS-AO, which is being positioned with the control valve in the pressure reduction station PRS-AO in the accumu-
circuit 3NIRC. The position of the control throttling valve in the lator outlet steam pipeline based on the measured pressure in
pressure reduction station PRS, which is in parallel connection the header LPH after the accumulator and the pressure in the
to the steam accumulator, is determined by the control circuit accumulator vessel.
1NIRC. A description of these control circuits follows. If the pressure in the low-pressure header (LPH) decreases
below minimum setpoint and the pressure in the accumulator is
higher than the pressure in the LPH, the control circuit 3NIRC
Control of the Flow Through the Pressure Reduction Station sends a signal for the opening of the control valve in the PRS-
(PRS) AO.
If the pressure in the LPH increases above the maximum
The control circuit 1NIRC (Figure 2) adjusts the valve in setpoint, the circuit 3NIRC sends a signal for closing of the
the pressure reduction station (PRS) based on the measured valve in PRS-AO.
pressure in the high-pressure header (HPH) in front of the accu- If the pressure in the accumulator is lower than the pressure
mulator and the pressure in the low-pressure header (LPH) after in the LPH, the control valve in the PRS-AO does not open.
the accumulator toward the consumer. In addition, the signal
of the fully closed or opened position of the control valve in
the pressure reduction station PRS-AO after the accumulator is Control of the Steam Temperature at the Steam Accumulator
used. Inlet
If the pressure in the high-pressure header (HPH) decreases
below the specified setpoint value, the circuit 1NIRC sends The control circuit 2TICA (Figure 2) adjusts the valve for
a signal for the closing of the control valve in the pressure the control of the cold feedwater flow in the attemperator (valve
reduction station PRS in order to keep the pressure in the HPH 3 in Figure 2) based on the measured steam temperature after
within the prescribed interval. This signal has a priority over the attemperator, the measured steam accumulator pressure, and
other signals sent to the circuit 1NIRC. the signal on the position of the control valve in the PRS-AI.
If the pressure in the header LPH increases above the setpoint The measured temperature after the attemperator is compared
value and the valve in PRS-AO is fully closed, the circuit 1NIRC with the saturation temperature determined by the measured
sends a signal for the closing of the control valve in the pressure accumulator pressure. If the measured temperature is higher than
heat transfer engineering vol. 36 no. 5 2015
V. D. STEVANOVIC ET AL. 503
the saturation temperature, the control valve for the feedwater are calculated as ṁ P T 1 = ṁ c − ṁ e and ṁ P T 2 = ṁ e − ṁ c . The
flow control is being opened; otherwise it is being closed. volume balance is also applied:
If the control valve in the PRS-AI in front of the accumulator
is fully closed, the circuit 2TICA sends a signal for the complete V1 + V2 = V (5)
closure of the valve 3 in order to prevent feedwater injection in The evaporation rate is calculated as
the steam line when there is no steam flow.
The control of the steam temperature in the PRS by the con- ρ1 V1 h 1 − h
ṁ e = , for h 1 > h (6)
trol circuit 1TICA is similar to the already-described control by τe r
2TICA. The control of the water level in the steam accumulator and ṁ e = 0 if water is saturated or subcooled, that is, h 1 ≤ h .
vessel is performed by the circuit LICA (Figure 2). Similarly, the condensation rate is predicted as
ρ1 V1 h − h 1
Downloaded by [Narodna Biblioteka Srbije], [Vladimir Stevanovic] at 03:36 31 October 2014
ṁ c = (7)
MODELING OF THE STEAM ACCUMULATOR τc r
OPERATION
and ṁ c = 0 if water is saturated or superheated, that is, h 1 ≥ h .
A closure law for the calculation of evaporation and con-
Simulation of the steam accumulator charging and discharg-
densation relaxation times τe and τc is derived starting from
ing tests is performed with both nonequilibrium and equilibrium
the statement that the mass transfer rate of phase transition is
models.
determined by the product of the interfacial area concentration
ai and the phase transition mass flux ji ,
Nonequilibrium Model i = ai ji (8)
The steam accumulator model is based on the following mass where index i equals e or c. From Eqs. (6) and (7) it follows that
and energy balance equations. the phase transition rate is
Liquid mass balance: ρ1 h 1 − h
i = (9)
d M1 τi r
= ṁ 1B + ṁ P T 1 (1)
dt The expression for the relaxation time is derived from the
Steam mass balance: equality of the right-hand sides of Eqs. (8) and (9):
d M2
= ṁ 2B + ṁ P T 2 (2) ρ1 h 1 − h
dt τi = (10)
ji ai r
Liquid energy balance:
The phase transition mass flux is calculated by applying the
d H1 dp
= (ṁh)1B + ṁ P T 1 h + Q̇ 21 + V1 (3) coefficient of heat transfer k1i between the steam–water interface
dt dt and the surrounding water mass,
Steam energy balance: k1i |T1 − Tsat |
ji = (11)
d H2 dp r
= (ṁh)2B + ṁ P T 2 h − Q̇ 21 + V2 (4)
dt dt where the numerator in Eq. (11) represents the heat flux at the
In the preceding equations the liquid water inlet and outlet interface due to phase transition, T1 is the water temperature,
mass flow rates are calculated as ṁ 1B = ṁ 1,in − ṁ 1,out , and and Tsat is the saturation temperature determined by the pressure
consequently for the steam inlet and outlet mass flow rates are in the accumulator. Evaporation and condensation take place at
ṁ 2B = ṁ 2,in − ṁ 2,out . These mass flow rates are prescribed time the surface of the water pool and at the interface of bubbles
functions or depend on the difference between a calculated pres- within the water volume. The bubbles are formed during accu-
sure in the steam accumulator and a prescribed pressure in the mulator discharging due to adiabatic nucleation in superheated
volume connected with the steam accumulator (upstream and water. During accumulator charging, the bubbles are formed
downstream steam header, water storage reservoir, etc.). The in- due to steam injection in the water volume through perforated
let and outlet energy flow rates at the steam accumulator bound- tubes. Although these mechanisms of bubble formation are dif-
aries are calculated as (ṁh)1B = ṁ 1,in h 1,in − ṁ 1,out h 1,out for ferent, it is assumed that at a certain distance from the location
liquid water and (ṁh)2B = ṁ 2,in h 2,in − ṁ 2,out h 2,out for steam. of bubbles formation in a large water volume, their number will
The water and steam inlet enthalpies are specified according to be the same for the same steam volume fraction. Therefore, the
the operating conditions, while the outlet enthalpies are equal following derivation of the phase transition model holds both
to water and steam enthalpies in the accumulator vessel that for the evaporation and condensation. An approximate analysis
are calculated by the model balance equations. The liquid and of the amounts of phase transitions on the water pool surface
steam mass changes due to evaporation and condensation rates and at the bubbles interface shows that the former is negligible.
heat transfer engineering vol. 36 no. 5 2015
504 V. D. STEVANOVIC ET AL.
That is, the results presented in the Results section and discus- Interfacial area concentration is calculated as the product of
sions with Figure 10 (shown later) show that the total steam the concentration of bubbles n and the area of the spherical
evaporation or condensation rate is in the range between 1 kg/s bubble surface:
and 10 kg/s in a horizontal cylindrical accumulator of length
Db 2
L = 11.9 m and diameter D = 2.9 m. The corresponding heat ai = n 4π (17)
transfer rate for the phase transition between the water volume 2
and all steam–water interface surfaces Q̇ P H is in the range be-
The bubble diameter is calculated on the basis of the critical
tween 1.7 and 17 MJ/s (for the accumulator pressure of 4 MPa
Weber number Wecr for bubbly flow [11]:
and corresponding latent heat of evaporation/condensation 1.7
MJ/kg). First it is assumed that the phase transition takes place W ecr σ
Db = (18)
only on the surface of the water pool, that is, the presence of ρ1 (u 2 − u 1 )2
bubbles in the water volume is neglected. For the stagnant water
Downloaded by [Narodna Biblioteka Srbije], [Vladimir Stevanovic] at 03:36 31 October 2014
In energy balances (3) and (4) the total enthalpies H1 and H2 and the quality derivative is
are replaced with corresponding products of masses and specific dx 1 v dM
Downloaded by [Narodna Biblioteka Srbije], [Vladimir Stevanovic] at 03:36 31 October 2014
Equations (1), (2), (24), (25), and (26) provide a set of five
first-order ordinary differential equations for the prediction of rV
water and steam masses, enthalpies, and steam accumulator dp (ṁh)1B (ṁh)2B + v M−v − h (ṁ 1B + ṁ 2B )
=
M −v dr M −v
V V
pressure, respectively. These equations are solved numerically dt M dh + − r dv
− r d(v −v)
−V
v −v dp
v −v dp
by using the Runge–Kutta method [14] for specified initial val- dp (v −v ) 2 dp
(32)
ues of dependant variables, that is, water and steam masses and
Equations (27) and (32) are solved numerically by using
enthalpies and initial steam accumulator pressure.
the Runge–Kutta method for specified initial values of the total
mass of water and steam and for the initial pressure in the steam
accumulator.
Equilibrium Model
Figure 6 Measured inlet steam mass flow rate during the test of steam accu- Figure 8 Condensation relaxation time calculated with Eq. (10) and the con-
mulator charging. stant empirical value 85 s.
with the steam mass flow rate of 30 t/h is reached after 408 s
and during this time 3400 kg of steam is accumulated. As shown
Figure 9 Pressure changes during accumulator charging and discharging with in Figure 10, the nonequilibrium model predicts lower capacity
steam mass flow rates 5 t/h, 10 t/h, and 30 t/h. and shorter charging and discharging periods than the equilib-
rium modeling approach. Hence, the equilibrium model gives
false information about the steam generator capacity, but this
of the accumulator volume in the case of accumulator charging divergence from the exact results obtained with the nonequi-
test, while in the case of discharging, test water initially fills librium model reduces with the decrease of steam accumulator
60% of the steam accumulator volume. The steam charging and charging and discharging flow rates, and vice versa—the di-
discharging flows are stopped when the accumulator pressure vergence of the equilibrium modeling results from the exact
reaches maximum (55 bar) and minimum (25 bar) values. The nonequilibrium results increases with the increase of the steam
results obtained with the nonequilibrium model presented here generator charging and discharging flow rates. In the case of
are shown together with the results of the equilibrium model. 30 t/h charging or discharging rate, the relative difference be-
The presented real pressure changes in Figure 9, predicted with tween calculated equilibrium and nonequilibrium charged or
the nonequilibrium model, show that in cases of charging the discharged steam mass, upon reaching the maximum/minimum
pressure decreases after reaching the maximum setpoint value setpoint pressure, is 14.5%; in the case of 10 t/h rate it is 6.2%,
and the stoppage of steam charging flow. After the relaxation and 4.3% in the case of 5 t/h charging and discharging rate.
time the pressure reaches the new steady-state equilibrium con- This observation is consistent with the basic statement that the
dition at a value lower than 55 bar. In cases of discharging, equilibrium thermodynamic changes exist only under indefi-
the pressure increases after reaching the minimum setpoint of nitely slow state changes of the thermodynamic system that are
25 bar and the stoppage of the steam discharging flow. Af- imposed by infinitesimal disturbances. Results presented here
ter the relaxation time the pressure reaches steady equilibrium
state at a pressure level higher than 25 bar. This nonequilib-
rium effect is pronounced the most in cases, with the highest
charging and discharging rates 30 t/h, while it decreases with
the reduction of the steam inflow and outflow rates. Hence, in
the case with 5 t/h in and out flow rates the final steady-state
pressure slightly decreases from the boundary setpoints. The
results obtained with the equilibrium modeling approach show
that after reaching the maximum and minimum setpoint pressure
and boundary steam flow stoppage there is no further change
of pressure. This is obviously not the real situation, since the
evaporation and condensation processes cannot be conducted
with infinite phase transition rates. During charging the steam is
compressed, the pressure increases, and the water is subcooled,
that is, the water temperature is lower than the saturation temper-
ature. After the charging stoppage, steam continues to condense
until the water temperature reaches the saturation temperature. Figure 10 Steam mass that flows in and out of the accumulator during charging
During discharging the pressure in the accumulator decreases and discharging with mass flow rates 5 t/h, 10 t/h, and 30 t/h predicted with the
nonequilibrium (NEQ) and the equilibrium (EQ) modeling approach (the first
and water becomes superheated, that is, the water temperature numbers in parentheses are time instants when the maximum operating pres-
is higher than the saturation temperature. After the discharging sure 55 bar during charging and minimum pressure 25 bar during discharging
stoppage, water continues to evaporate until the water temper- are reached, while the second number presents the accumulated or discharged
ature reaches the saturation temperature. These nonequilibrium amount of steam).
generation. Steam is delivered from the high-pressure header to Re Reynolds number, Eq. (15)
the consumers and in periods of lower consumption the steam T temperature, K
accumulator is charged from this high-pressure header. Steam t time, s
is also delivered to consumers from the low-pressure header u velocity, m/s
and the steam accumulator discharges steam to this header in V volume, m3
periods of increased consumption. The possible modes of the Wecr critical Weber number, Eq. (18)
steam accumulator operation are presented and the proposed v specific volume, m3/kg
control system can satisfy conditions for the most general case x quality
of stochastic steam consumption. y normal distance form the interface, m
The steam accumulator charging and discharging transients
are simulated with both the nonequilibrium and equilibrium Greek Symbols
model. The nonequilibrium model is based on the mass and en-
ergy balance equations for each phase (liquid water and steam) α thermal diffusivity, m2/s
and nonequilibrium correlations for condensation and evapo- phase transition rate, kg/(m3-s)
ration rates. The equilibrium model is based on the mass and δ thickness, m
energy balance equations for the fluid inventory (steam–water λ thermal conductivity, W/(K)
mixture) in the accumulator. The nonequilibrium model is vali- μ dynamic viscosity, kg/(m-s)
dated against measured data. Performed numerical experiments ρ density, kg/m3
of the steam accumulator charging and discharging transients σ surface tension, N/m
show a divergence of the equilibrium model results from the ex- τ phase change relaxation time, s
act nonequilibrium results. The error of the equilibrium model
prediction increases with the increase of the steam accumulator Subscripts
charging and discharging flow rates. The increase of the accumu-
lation capacity due to the heat accumulation in the accumulator
B boundary parameter
vessel steel walls is estimated in the range between 10% and
b bubble
16%, where this effect is more dominant during slow transients.
c condensation
e evaporation
i interface
FUNDING
in inlet
PT phase-change parameter
This research was supported by the Ministry of Education, out outlet
Science, and Technological Development of the Republic of sat saturation
Serbia (grant 174014). w wall
1 water
NOMENCLATURE 2 steam
1i transfer between interface and water
2i transfer between steam and interface
a steam–water interface concentration, m2/m3
21 interficial transfer from steam to water, Eq. (21)
cp specific heat at constant pressure, J/(kg-K)
D diameter, m
g gravity, m/s2 Superscripts
Gi parameter, Eq. (20)
H total enthalpy, J saturated water
h specific enthalpy, J/kg saturated steam