Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

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

Thermal analysis of closed feedwater heaters in nuclear power plants

Mario Álvarez-Fernández a, c, *, Luis del Portillo-Valdés b, Cristina Alonso-Tristán c
a
Department of Mechanical Maintenance, Santa María de Garoña Nuclear Power Plant, 09212 Burgos, Spain
b
E.T.S. de Ingeniería, University of the Basque Country, Alameda de Urquijo, 48013 Bilbao, Spain
c
Escuela Politécnica Superior, University of Burgos, Avda. Cantabria, 09006 Burgos, Spain

h i g h l i g h t s

The formulation for the calculation of feedwater heaters in NPP is introduced.

The model has been validated in the Santa María de Garoña NPP.

The model has been tested looking for mal-function in feedwater heaters.

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

Article history: A model is introduced for the thermal analysis of closed feedwater heaters in which wet steam is
Received 15 March 2013 extracted from the steam turbine (and piped into the heater). Where the fluid flowing through the steam
Accepted 4 April 2014 turbine is wet steam, application of this model is of relevance to nuclear power plant diagnostics. At
Available online 16 April 2014
present, all feedwater heater calculations are performed by setting the stage moisture removal effec-
tiveness, on the assumption that the mass flows and/or the enthalpy rates of the steam bled from the
Keywords:
turbine are known values. Our model enables detection of multiple malfunctions, even where inaccurate
Closed feedwater heater
readings may have been registered in the control room at an earlier point in time. Furthermore, there is
Nuclear power plant
Overall heat transfer coefficient
no immediate need for on-site inspection, which is an important advantage in Boiling Water Reactor
Thermodynamic properties of wet-steam Power Plants where feedwater heaters are placed in high radiation dose areas.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Hence, the obvious importance of ensuring that any degradation

of the feedwater heaters and the steam turbines is kept to a min-
Feedwater heaters increase the Rankine cycle efficiency by imum when the facility is in operation. If the water leaving the
raising the temperature of the feedwater that is piped into the heaters is not of a specified temperature, or if the mass flow or
steam generator, in such a way that the necessary thermal energy specific enthalpy going to the heater from the extractions points is
transferred to the steam to increase the enthalpy of the system will higher than the specified level, more power will be wasted. Effec-
be lower. Furthermore, certain stages of the turbines installed in tive monitorization of the process can be a very useful tool for
nuclear power plants have a special geometry on the inactive side diagnostic purposes.
of their buckets, the purpose of which is to reduce the amount of Improvements to computer calculations applied to thermal
moisture present in the steam. Steam moisture is sent to the engineering, have led to the development of a great number of
feedwater heaters (returning to the condenser and, therefore, to the models that focus on the design of heat exchangers. They include
cycle). This is one of the main objectives of feedwater heaters the complex BelleDelaware method [1] or the so-called particle
installed in nuclear power plants and it defines the minimum swarm optimization technique [2] for optimal design, which has a
number that are needed, so that the steam quality can be kept over complete library of configurations, in order to select the one with
certain values to ensure the integrity of the static and dynamic the minimum drop in pressure [3]. Computational Fluid Dynamics
components of the steam turbine. (CFD) have also been successfully applied to heat exchanger
design [4].
Interesting papers can be found in the field of power plant di-
* Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical Maintenance, Santa María de
agnostics, although they are in general applicable to three-zone
Garoña Nuclear Power Plant, 09212 Burgos, Spain.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] feedwater heaters that are typical in conventional power plants
(M. Álvarez-Fernández). [5]. However, the most widely accepted procedure for calculating

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2014.04.006
1359-4311/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
46 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

Nomenclature rft feedwater fouling resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu)

rm tube material resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu)
A heat transfer surface area, m2 (ft2) rs shell-side film resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu)
Cp heat capacity at constant pressure, kJ/kg C (Btu/lbm F) rt feedwater film resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu)
do outside tube diameter, mm_ (in) t temperature,  C ( F)
F correction factor for the log mean temperature T _
tube thickness, mm (in)
difference calculation U overall heat transfer coefficient, W/m2  C (Btu/h ft2  F)
GTTD greater terminal temperature difference,  C ( F) X quality
h specific enthalpy or convection heat transfer Dp pressure drop, bar (psi)
coefficient, kJ/kg (Btu/lbm) or kW/m2  C (Btu/h ft2  F) Dtm log mean temperature difference,  C ( F)
k thermal conductivity, W/m  C (Btu/h ft  F) 3s stage moisture removal effectiveness
LTTD lesser terminal temperature difference,  C ( F)
m_ mass flow, kg/s (lbm/h) Subscripts
N number of shell-side passes c cold fluid (feedwater)
Nu Nusselt number d fluid from the previous heaters or other processes
p pressure (absolute), bar (psia) h hot fluid (steam)
Pr Prandtl number i inlet section
Q_ heat transferred, kW (Btu/h) o outlet section
R relationship between the temperature difference of 2 intermediate section (c2 or h2)
the hot and cold fluids (1)or 1 drain cooling zone
RT overall thermal resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu) (2) or 2 condensing zone
Re Reynolds number ;d On-design value
rfs shell-side fouling resistance, m2  C/W (h ft2  F/Btu)

the performance of closed feedwater heaters in the power industry, where, the greater terminal temperature difference, GTTD, and the
which was developed by the American Society of Mechanical Engi- lesser terminal temperature difference, LTTD, are calculated [13] in
neers, is called ASME PTC 12.1 [6]. The theoretical data used in the parallel flow heaters by:
development of this standard can be found in the specialized
literature [7]. However, if used in nuclear power plants, in which GTTD ¼ thi  tci (3a)
wet steam is extracted from the steam turbine, this procedure
would require data on steam quality and mass flow taken from LTTD ¼ tho  tco (3b)
direct measurements or from the thermal balance of the steam
turbine. There is plenty of published literature on this subject [8], and in counterflow heaters by:
including techniques to estimate steam quality by either radioac-
tive [9] or chemical [10] tracers. Recently, the Electric Power GTTD ¼ thi  tco (4a)
Research Institute (EPRI) published a paper [11] introducing a
system for in-situ measurement of steam wetness. The use of
tracers is a good solution for performance assessment, but not for LTTD ¼ tho  tci (4b)
real-time evaluation, where the aforementioned procedure could In Eq. (1), the correct factor, F, depends upon the particular flow
be applied in the future. However, these kinds of systems are not arragment in shell-and-tubes heat exchangers [14].
actually installed in modern facilities. In the case of nuclear power plants, the hot fluid inlet temper-
In the present paper, a new procedure is introduced, in order to ature, thi, is the saturation temperature at heater pressure; as this
estimate the enthalpy and the mass flow of the steam bled from the pressure is known by a pressure transmitter usually installed in the
turbine that passes into the feedwater heater, that may be applied heater, the temperature can be calculated by using the IAPWS (In-
to the diagnostics of these components in nuclear power plants. ternational Association for the Properties of Water and Steam)
formulation [15].
If Eq. (1) is resolved for a single zone (condensing) feedwater
2. Governing equations
heater, all temperatures in the preceding equations will be known,
and the value of the logarithmic log mean temperature difference,
Heat transfer in a feedwater heater can be formulated as:
Dtm, may be easily calculated. However, the single zone design is
Q_ ¼ UAF Dtm (1) not the normal design for power plant heaters with two or more
zones (desuperheating, condensing and drain cooling). The inter-
Each feedwater heater zone will have an individual heat transfer mediate temperatures of the cold fluid (feedwater) should there-
value, Q_ , the sum of which will equal total heat transferred by the fore be calculated, as will be discussed later, by using an indirect
feedwater heater. It will also have an overall heat transfer coeffi- procedure.
cient, U, and a heat transfer surface area, A. The value of the loga- In Eq. (1), the heat transfer surface area, A, can be calculated
rithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD), Dtm, may be from the geometry of the tubes, which are specifications that will
calculated for pure parallel-flow or counter-flow heat exchangers be supplied by the heater manufacturer. This value should be cor-
with the following equation [12]: rected, where tubes may have become plugged.
Finally, the overall heat transfer coefficient, U, is usually indi-
GTTD  LTTD
Dtm ¼ (2) cated by the manufacturer, but it should be noted that the value is
lnðGTTD=LTTDÞ greatly influenced by specific operating conditions. For
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 47

convenience, the overall heat transfer coefficient calculations are

presented in full in Appendix A. Note that this calculation requires
data on thermal conductivity, heat capacity at constant pressure
and steam viscosity, in order to calculate the shell-side film resis-
tance, rs, by using Eqs. (A.2a) and (A.5). The IAPWS formulation is
not valid for the calculation of these properties under wet steam
conditions, which is the case of nuclear power plants. Thus, some
simplification will be required, but with very little influence on the
final result: as explained further on, the calculations in this paper
consider that the shell-side film resistance is only influenced by
changes in the mass flow in the drain-cooling section.
A further coefficient was introduced some time ago for more
accurate adjustments in wet steam calculations: the stage moisture
removal effectiveness, 3 s. In these facilities, the blades have some
irregularities on their inactive surfaces (typically groves) where any
water still present in the wet steam is centrifuged and removed,
increasing the quality of the steam that will be used by the next
stage. A wet steam turbine blade with radial groves is shown in
Fig. 1.
Effectiveness is the relationship between the percent of total
flow to that stage that is removed as water and the percent of shell
moisture before moisture removal. Thus, moisture removal in the
turbine stage will be percentage effectiveness multiplied by the
moisture at the stage before moisture removal multiplied by the
total flow entering the following stage [16]. According to the labels
in Fig. 2:

1  Xðt2Þ
_ hi ¼
m _ ðt2Þ $
3 s $m (5)
1  Xhi
The effectiveness of moisture reduction, as the flow of steam
enters the turbine section, is:

m_ hi
3s > (6)
_ ðt2Þ
m

For convenience, Eq. (6) is calculated in full in Appendix C.

2.1. Balance of closed feedwater heaters in nuclear power plants in

on-design condition

The heaters in nuclear power plants are usually two-zone

counterflow feedwater heaters with a condensing zone and a
drain cooling zone (a separate structure, integrated inside the shell,
and completely separate from other components in the steam flow)
as shown in Fig. 3. At the bottom of the heater, a liquid seal is
Fig. 1. Blade removed from a low pressure turbine in a nuclear power plant.
located at the position of the heater drain valve, so that the highest
level is always below the tube bundle (so that cooling of the
The following parameters will be known: mass flow and ther-
condensed steam cannot take place) and the lowest level is always
modynamic properties of the steam coming from the previous
above the inlet to the cooling zone (so that only saturated liquid can
heater (m_ d and hd); mass flow and thermodynamic properties of
pass into this section). Conventionally, the level is held by a PI
the feedwater (m _ c , tci, tco, pci and pco), heater pressure (ph) and
controller, but recent models can be found in the literature to
thermodynamic properties of the steam leaving the heater (tho and
control the water level in the heater by optimizing the efficiency
pho). The pressure pco will be calculated from the drop in pressure
[17].
When the steam extracted from the steam turbine goes into the
feedwater heater, it is condensed and then subcooled. So, the
feedwater is heated in two zones: first, by the drain cooled steam,
and then, by the condensed steam. As the overall heat transfer
coefficients and heat transfer surface areas are different, the
calculation should be divided into two steps; the feedwater tem-
perature when leaving the drain cooled zone (entering the
condensed zone) will be unknown. Fig. 4 shows a schematic
drawing of a heater and plots the different parameters that are
needed to develop the thermal analysis and the temperature vari-
ations of the hot and cold fluid. Fig. 2. Turbine extraction to a feedwater heater.
48 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

Fig. 3. Sectional drawing of a feedwater heater typical of a nuclear power plant [HL: high level; WL: working level; LL: low level].

through the tubes: pco ¼ pci  Dpc, and pho from the drop in pressure overall transfer coefficient, U, and the heat transfer surface area, A.
through the shell: pho ¼ ph  Dph. If the first value is unknown, it can be determined by using the
Thus, the following variables will be unknown: mass flow and equations in Appendix A. The correction factor F(1) for the log mean
thermodynamic properties of the steam extracted from the turbine temperature difference calculation in the drain-cooling zone, when
and, in some cases, from other processes such as valves/turbine it is applicable, depends on the flow arrangement in this particular
seals, turbine shell drains, moisture removal provisions, and excess section [14] and it is usually supplied by the manufacturer, or can be
steam from steam seal regulator (m _ hi and hhi). The objective of this calculated according to the Bowman formulation [18]. The value of
study is to demonstrate how these variables may be calculated. the correction factor will be one in condensers and in 1-1 tube-and-
The mass flow leaving the heater remains unknown, but re- shell heat exchangers, so in the condensing zone F(2) ¼ 1.
quires no more than an easy mass balance calculation: In counterflow feedwater heaters, Eq. (2) should be divided into:
m_ ho ¼ m_ dþm _ hi .
In two-zone feedwater heaters, Eq. (1) should be divided into:
ðth2  tc2 Þ  ðtho  tci Þ
Dtm1 ¼ tc2
(8a)
Q_ ð1Þ ¼ Uð1Þ Að1Þ Fð1Þ Dtmð1Þ (7a) ln tth2
ho tci

Q_ ð2Þ ¼ Uð2Þ Að2Þ Fð2Þ Dtmð2Þ (7b) ðthi  tco Þ  ðth2  tc2 Þ
Dtm2 ¼ hi tco
(8b)
ln tth2 tc2
where, subscript (1) refers to its properties in the drain cooling
zone and subscript (2) refers to its properties in the condensing Obviously, the temperatures of the hot fluid at the inlet and at
zone. The heater manufacturer provides the specifications for the the intermediate section (between the condensing and the drain

Fig. 4. Feedwater heater, subsystems under consideration and variation of steam and feedwater temperatures.
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 49

cooling zones) will be equal and can be calculated as the heater transport properties of the feedwater in the drain cooling zone, (1),
pressure is known: thi ¼ th2 ¼ tsat(p ¼ ph). should be calculated from the pressure and temperature of the
The following equation may be used to calculate the heat water at the inlet section of the heater: pci;d and tci;d. The same
transfer values, Q_ : pressure may be used in the condensing zone, (2), and the tem-
perature can be taken from the average temperature between the
Q_ ¼ Q_ 1 þ Q_ 2 ¼ m
_ c ðhco  hci Þ (9) intermediate temperature, tc2;d and the final temperature, tco;d.
The overall heat transfer coefficient should be corrected for the
where, the specific enthalpy of the cold fluid at the inlet, off-design condition, by recalculating the values of the resistance
hci ¼ enthalpy(t ¼ tci,p ¼ pci), and the specific enthalpy of the cold coefficients, in cases where these coefficients are affected by
fluid at the outlet, hco ¼ enthalpy(t ¼ tco,p ¼ pco), can be calculated changes in the properties of the fluid or the mass flow. The resis-
by using the IAPWS formulation. tance coefficients used in off-design calculations will be those that
Combining Eqs. (7a), (7b), (8a), (8b) and (9), in the case of on- affect the drain cooling zone, as will be explained in the following
design conditions: section, where the influence of changes in the thermodynamic and


 transport properties of the steam and feedwater can be neglected,
th2;d  tc2;d  tho;d  tci;d because the (hot and cold) fluid is compressed-water that takes the
U1d A1 F1 t t
ln th2;d c2;d
thermodynamic state in on-design operation as its reference. Thus,
ho;d tci;d


 the overall resistance coefficient of drain cooling zone will be
thi;d  tco;d  th2;d  tc2;d

þ U2d A2 ¼ mc;d hco;d  hci;d RT1 ¼ rfs(1) þ rm(1) þ rft(1) þ rt(1) þ rs(1):
t
hi;d t
co;d
ln th2;d tc2;d    
do do do
(10) RT1 ¼ 3:522$105 þln
do  2T 2000k do  2T
The value of tc2;d can be calculated by iteration of Eq. (10), taking  0:835  
_
mc:d _ ho;d 0:55
m
into account that tco;d > tc2;d > tci;d. So, the values of the heat that is þ 5:2833$105 þ rtð1Þ;d þ rsð1Þ;d
m _c m_ ho
transferred in the condensing zone, Q_ 1;d , and the heat transferred
in the drain cooling zone, Q_ 2;d , can be solved by using Eqs. (7a) and (14)
(7b). The actual value of the overall heat transfer coefficient for each
The mass flow extracted from the turbine can be calculated zone could now be calculated, although a further variable has yet to
from: P
be introduced: the mass flow of the steam ðm _ ho ¼ m _ hi þ m_ d Þ.
Eqs. (7a), (8a) and (11) for the drain cooling zone and Eqs. (7b),
Q_ 1;d X
_ hi;d ¼
m  _ d;d
m (11) (8b) and (12) for the condensing zone allow us to define two
hh2;d  hho;d equations with five unknowns (mass flow, m _ hi , enthalpy of the
steam extracted, hhi, intermediate temperature, tc2, and overall heat
And the specific enthalpy of the steam entering the heater from
transfer coefficients, U1 and U2). But according to Eq. (14), the
the steam turbine:
overall heat transfer coefficient is a function of the mass flow of the

P  P
Q_ 2;d þ m_ hi;d þ m_ d;d hh2;d  m_ d;d hd;d steam, which means that, in reality, two equations with three un-
hhi;d ¼ (12) knowns are achieved:
_ hi;d
m
X  X 
Once the enthalpy hhi;d has been calculated, the quality of the _ hi hhi þ
m _ d hd Þ  m
ðm _ hi þ _ d hh2
m
steam can be solved by applying the IAPWS formulation:
ðthi  tco Þ  ðth2  tc2 Þ
Xhi;d ¼ quality(p ¼ ph; h ¼ hhi;d). Thus, Eq. (5) determines the ¼ U2 A2 (15)
hi tco
effectiveness of the moisture removal stage: ln tth2 tc2


m_ hi;d $ 1  Xhi;d  X  ðt  tc2 Þ  ðtho  tci Þ
3 s;d ¼   (13) _ hi þ
m _ d ðhh2  hho Þ ¼ U1 A1 F1 h2
m tc2
_ ðt2;dÞ $ 1  Xðt2;dÞ
m ln tth2
ho tci

(16)

2.2. Balance of closed feedwater heaters in nuclear power plants in

off-design conditions 2.2.1. Drain cooling zone
According to Appendix A, the shell-and-tube fouling resistances,
Obviously, when the heater manufacturer specifies the value of rfs and rft, and tube material resistance, rm, will be constants for a
the overall heat transfer coefficient, it refers to the design condition. particular feedwater heater. Furthermore, the feedwater film
In off-design conditions, this coefficient should be corrected with resistance, rt, can be calculated, because the instrumentation of the
the new feedwater thermodynamic properties and the mass flow heater will supply the actual mass flow. All those resistances may
(affecting feedwater film resistance, rt), and the new thermody- be calculated with Eq. (14).
namic properties and mass flow of the steam (affecting the value of Assuming that Ro1 ¼ rfs(1) þ rm(1) þ rft(1) þ rt(1), by substituting
the shell-side film resistance, rs). The other coefficients of the the value of rs(1), from Eq. (14), in Eq. (A.1), we have:
overall heat transfer coefficients are the fouling resistance values
(the effects of which increase with age, but are considered constant  20=11
in this paper) and the tube material resistance values. The last value m_ ho rs1;d
¼ (17)
should be corrected for loss of thickness or the build up of crud that _ ho;d
m 1=U1  Ro1
may influence the tube walls; for the purposes of this paper, the
geometry of the tubes will be considered constant. If the heat capacity at constant pressure is considered constant,
First of all, the values of these coefficients (see Appendix A) have which is a normal approximation for subcooled water, the rela-
to be calculated for on-design conditions. The thermodynamic and tionship m_ ho =m
_ ho;d can be rewritten as:
50 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

 3. Experimental analysis
m_ ho _ ho cph1 ðth2  tho Þ
m t  tho;d
¼
$ h2;d (18)
_ ho;d
m _ ho;d cph1;d th2;d  tho;d
m ðth2  tho Þ
Data supplied from a nuclear power plant were used in our
validation of the equations and methods proposed in this study: the
Considering the heat transfer rate of the cold fluid instead of the Santa María de Garoña Nuclear Power Plant (SMGNPP), situated in
hot fluid: the north of Spain. Its two trains of feedwater heaters are located in

 parallel and are schematically represented in Fig. 6.
m_ ho m_ c cpc1 ðtc2  tci Þ th2;d  tho;d The steam supplied from the reactor (boiling water reactor type,
¼
$ (19)
_ ho;d
m _ c;d cpc1;d tc2;d  tci;d
m ðth2  tho Þ BWR) is piped to the high-pressure (HP) turbine along four pipes,
each with control and stop valves. After the expansion in the HP
t t turbine (10 stages), the steam is passed along four pipes, two of
and, assuming that Y ¼ m_ 1 $ thi;d ho;d
c2;d tci;d
, and R1 ¼ th2  tho/tc2  tci, then
c;d
Eq. (16) can be rewritten as: which run into low-pressure (LP) turbine “A” and the other two into
LP turbine “B”.
 20=11 Between the HP turbine and the LP turbines, the pipes that run
rs1;d Y
¼ _c
m (20) into LP turbine “A” are connected to heater 12A and the pipes that
1=U1  Ro1 R1
run into LP turbine “B” are connected to heater 12B.
After these connections, the pipes run into four Moisture Sep-
Finally, isolating the value of the overall heat transfer coefficient,
arators (MS), where the steam quality is improved by moisture
U1 :
removal, and then on to heater 11A (from one of the MS in train “A”
"  11=20 #1 and one of the MS in train “B”) and heater 11B (in the same way).
R1 The seal steam used in the turbine valves and in the high pressure
U1 ¼ rs1;d _c
m þ Ro1 (21)
Y side of the HP turbine goes to heater 11A.
Then, the steam is expanded in LP turbines “A” and “B”. Each one
The overall heat transfer coefficient, U1, and the intermediate has two opposite flows going to the condenser (10 stages per flow).
feedwater temperature, tc2, can be calculated with Eq. (21) and Eq. The following extractions are in place during the steam expansion
(B.5a) or Eq. (B.5b) together with Eq. (B.6) by iteration. So, the mass through the LP turbines: in stage 12 to heaters 11A/B, in stage 14 to
flow extracted from the steam turbine can be calculated by Eq. (17), heaters 9A/B, in stage 16 to heaters 8A/B and in stage 18 to heaters
P 7A/B (located in the condenser). Several drains are placed in stages
recalling that m_ hi ¼ m_ ho  m _ d.
15, 17 and 19, in order to improve steam quality. The steam that is
piped to Heaters 7A/B has not been through the steam-seal regu-
lator (SSR), which is designed to be supplied by 10,000 lb/h
2.2.2. Condensing zone
(1.26 kg/s) of seal steam from the valves and the HP turbine. Fig. 6
The values of the intermediate feedwater temperature, tc2, and
also represents the different flows used for turbine and valve seals.
extracted mass flow, m _ hi , were calculated using the drain cooling
Finally, and not represented in Fig. 6, the steam drained from
zone formulation. Now, from Appendix B:
heaters 12A/B goes to heaters 11A/B, etc. The steam drained from
  heaters 7A/B goes directly to the condenser.
tco  tc2
U2 A2 ¼ Cc2 $ln 1  (22)
thi  tc2
3.1. Heaters 12A/B analysis
where Cc2 ¼ m _ c $Cpcð2Þ;d .
As explained above, heaters 12A/B are supplied with steam from
By isolating the steam extracted enthalpy, hhi, in Eq. (14), and
the HP turbine discharge. Very little degradation was reported for
substituting the value U2A2 for the one obtained in Eq. (22):
this particular turbine after each preventive maintenance inspec-
8   tion (every eight years), so its efficiency can be considered equal to
tc2
1 < ln 1  ttco
hi tc2 the design specification. The enthalpy of the extracted steam is
hhi ¼ _ c $Cpcð2Þ;d $
m   ½ðthi  tco Þ  ðth2  tc2 Þ
_ hi :
m ln thi tco therefore comparable to the design specifications.
th2 tc2
9 The model introduced in this paper was used to calculate the
 X  X = different parameters of these heaters using actual parameters
_ hi þ
þ m _d
m hh2  _ d hd Þ
ðm taken from operational processes over a 4-year period (2008e
;
2011). The model was implemented with these parameters and the
(23) Engineering Equation Solver (EES) [19] software programme. Ad-
justments for the nine tubes plugged into heater 12B were intro-
In the condensing zone, th2 and thi can be considered equal, duced. The registered values are presented in Table 1, alongside the
which means that the steam pressure is also considered constant values for the overall heat transfer coefficients (U1 and U2), and the
during the condensation process. This simplification is usually quality (Xhi) and mass flow ðm _ hi Þ of steam extracted to the heaters.
adopted. Furthermore, taking into account that ln(1  tco  tc2/ In cases where the registered parameters were wrong due to
thi  tc2) ¼ ln(thi  tco/th2  tc2), Eq. (23) can be rewritten as: instrumentation failure, the value is shown in italics alongside the
new value that appears between square brackets.
1 n  X  X o
The value of ph in heater 12A had been fluctuating from Aug-09,
hhi ¼ _ c $Cpcð2Þ;d ðtco tc2 Þþ m
m _ hi þ _ d hh2 
m _ d hd Þ
ðm
_ hi
m when it was 11.24 bars, until the 2010 refueling outage. After the
(24) outage and following calibration of the pressure transmitter, the
pressure readings returned to normal and registered stable values.
Eq. (24) shows the thermal balance of the condensing section of Hence, the selected value for the calculations was changed to 11.25
the feedwater heater. bars in Jan-10.
The schematic calculation described in these sections, for on- The outlet feedwater temperature in heater 12A from Nov-08 to
design and off-design conditions, is represented in Fig. 5. Mar-09 was an erroneous reading. As the temperature element was
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 51

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the model, including on-design and off-design calculations.

fixed in the 2009 refueling outage, the temperature readings for refueling outage. The pressure for the calculations was changed to
Jan-2009 (270  C) were changed to a value of 148.9  C in the 11.28 bars in Jul-08 and Jan-09.
calculations. In Fig. 7, the calculated values of the overall heat transfer co-
Finally, the pressure signal in heater 12B between 2008 and efficients U1 (drain cooling zone) and U2 (condensing zone) are
2009 was lost, until the pressure transmitter was fixed in the 2009 plotted, as are the values of the coefficients in the design condition

Fig. 6. Balance of Plant e Santa María de Garoña [HP: high-pressure turbine; LP: low-pressure turbine; HTR: feedwater heater; SSR: steam-seal regulator; SJAE: steam-jet air
ejectors; SPE: steam-packing exhauster; #: Stage; MU: make-up water; CST: condensed storage tank].
52 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

Table 1
_ c , tci, tco, ph and tho) and results obtained (U1, U2, Xhi and m
Parameters used for the calculations (m _ hi ). Column one shows the values specified by the manufacturer for on-design
operation.

Design Jan-08 Jul-08 Jan-09 Jul-09 Jan-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11

12A m_ c (kg/s) 342.8 342.6 344.3 343.3 345.1 344.2 345.5 345.5 346.3
tci ( C) 143.7 142.1 142.3 141.9 142.5 142.0 142.3 142.1 142.1
tco ( C) 182.9 175.8 176.8 180.9 181.3 180.9 180.4 180.5 180.6
ph (bars) 11.41 11.33 11.42 11.39 11.21 10.7 [11.25] 11.24 11.30 11.30
tho ( C) 149.3 148.9 149.1 270 [148.9] 146.6 145.6 147.5 148.1 148.1

U1 (W/m2 C) 2509.7 2386.9 2389.6 2373.2 2715.2 2806.3 2564.4 2473.5 2473.4

U2 (W/m2 C) 3929.1 2155.4 2270.5 3230.6 3564.5 3351.4 3223.8 3191.6 3245.6
Xhi () 0.87 0.71 0.73 0.83 0.92 0.94 0.86 0.84 0.85
m_ hi (kg/s) 30.9 32.3 32.3 32.5 28.6 27.7 30.2 31.3 31.3
12B m_ c (kg/s) 342.8 342.7 343.5 342.8 344.5 344.8 345.2 344.4 342.6
tci ( C) 143.7 141.5 141.7 141.5 141.7 141.5 130.9 136.2 137.8
tco ( C) 182.9 180.0 179.8 179.4 179.5 179.4 179.2 179.1 180.3
ph (bars) 11.41 11.27 0.95 [11.28] 0.93 [11.28] 11.30 11.36 11.31 11.29 11.34
tho ( C) 149.3 146.5 147.9 147.4 147.4 147.1 147.4 146.9 146.7

U1 (W/m2 C) 2509.6 2615.9 2466.3 2504.1 2526.0 2545.0 1867.2 2146.1 2267.3

U2 (W/m2 C) 3929.1 3089.3 3038.9 2928.0 2942.2 2873.0 3256.8 3064.9 3264.1
Xhi () 0.87 0.88 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.87
m_ hi (kg/s) 30.9 29.7 31.4 30.9 30.7 30.5 39.7 35.5 33.8

(taken from the heater specifications). A vertical straight line rep- heat transfer surface area in the condensing zone would be around
resents the dates on which the heaters were cleaned and inspected: 42 m2 higher than the designed one (on-design condition,
train “A” in 2009, and train “B”, in 2011. A2 ¼ 992,2 m2). Considering the dimensional characteristics and
The abnormally low values in January and in July, 2008, of the sectional drawing of the heater, shown in Fig. 10 and Fig. 3, the
overall heat transfer coefficient in the condensing zone of heater implication is that the first two sub-sections of the cooling section
12A should also be noted in comparison with the design coefficient. were not effective, causing a decrease in the feedwater tempera-
When the equations introduced in the present paper were applied, ture, as shown in Table 1.
in order to calculate the quality of the steam extracted from the After this particular issue was identified, possible heater ab-
turbine, a lower than expected value was also obtained. This value normalities were investigated. In August of 2008, an inspection of
and those of the overall heat transfer coefficients and the mass flow the level control valve of heater 12A noted that the position of the
of the extracted steam were obtained on the assumption of con- valve did not coincide with the position recorded in the control
stant transfer surface areas, A1 and A2; in other words, that the level room. Later on, a valve closure failure was recorded, in October,
of the heater is constant and equal to the level in the on-design when the heater level dropped to zero. It was possible to maintain
condition. the level by positioning the valve in manual and controlling the
Figs. 8 and 9 plot the values that represent the variations in level with the emergency drain valve. In November, the position
steam quality, Xhi, and the overall heat transfer coefficients, U1 and was changed, but was inaccurately calibrated, perhaps due to the
U2, as calculated by the model, versus the transfer surface area in constraints of working in an area with high levels of radiation
the condensing zone. The effect of the transfer areas in the overall doses. The levels were adjusted in the 2009 refueling outage
heat transfer coefficients and steam quality is clearly visible. (March), in the 2010 refueling outage (March) and in the 2011
On the assumption that steam quality undergoes no significant outage (May). If the other parameters were properly adjusted (the
variations, which is the normal situation in this heater, if the steam influence of the different parameters will be discussed in the next
discharged from the HP turbine remains approximately constant, section), the readings suggest that the level was too highly adjusted
then the operating data, which refers to data from January and July, in 2009 and was set too low (but closer to the design point) in 2011;
2008, leads us to the conclusion that the level in the heater was the calibration appears to be correct in the 2010 refueling outage.
lower than the design point. If we consider the steam quality of All these issues could be easily detected using the model
Xhi ¼ 0.87 registered in January, 2008, the resulting heat transfer described in this paper, even when inaccurate readings may have
surface area in Fig. 9 would be A2 ¼ 1,034.4 m2: meaning that the

Fig. 7. Overall heat transfer coefficients calculated by using the present method. The
dashed line shows the on-design operation values (U1 ¼ 2509.7 W/m2  C,
U2 ¼ 3929.1 W/m2  C). Fig. 8. Overall heat transfer coefficients modeled at different heater levels.
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 53

Fig. 9. Steam quality at the extraction point modeled at different heater levels.

Fig. 11. Simulation of heater temperatures with different levels (tci is supposed con-
been registered in the control room at an earlier point in time and stant) [TTD ¼ Terminal Temperature Difference; DCA ¼ Drain Cooler Approach].
with no on-site inspection.
Furthermore, the study has identified the importance of intro-
ducing the heater level and correcting the heat transfer surface However, the steam temperature drained from the heater, passing
areas. However, this parameter is not recorded on the computer (it onto the next one, decreases, which leads to a drop in the feedwater
has to be checked on the control room instrumentation), and the inlet temperature. This negative effect in the value of tho is very
point at which the steam cooling begins is not measurable: in case significative when high values of A2 are simulated. It means that, in
the level drops, it is not possible to quantify the cooling and fact, the terminal temperature difference will decrease when the
condensing sections by using the instrumentation. shell liquid level is reduced. The plot shows an experimentally
The feedwater outlet temperature and the steam outlet tem- demonstrated effect. Furthermore, the upper value of A2 will be one
perature were calculated with the model presented in this paper, that ensures the mechanical integrity of the drain cooler.
considering that the steam extracted from the turbine had design
values of mass flow and quality, even though the data recorded for 3.2. Sensitivity analysis
heater 12A in January of 2008 were used. The results are plotted in
Fig. 11, which shows the effect of the level. When the condensing The objective of the present model is to calculate the thermo-
zone transfer surface area, A2, is adjusted to higher values, the dynamic properties of wet steam extracted from turbines and piped
feedwater temperature increases slightly, increasing the Rankine to feedwater heaters in nuclear power plants. In the previous sec-
efficiency if the feedwater inlet temperature remains constant. tion, taking into consideration the resulting values at different

Fig. 10. Sectional drawing of heater 12A/B (tube plate) according manufacturer’s data.
54 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

times in heaters 12A and 12B, the importance has been highlighted Table 3
of introducing the real level (the real heat transfer surface areas). In Estimated errors in steam quality calculation due to inherent errors in measurement
apparatus.
fact, the problem with this particular issue is that the level was not
properly adjusted. If the real level were lower than the design value, _ c (kg/s)
m tci ( C) tco ( C) ph (bars) tho ( C) xhi () Error (%)
the steam quality value in the model would be lower than the 339.4 143.1 182.3 11.60 149.9 0.826 6.5
observed value. 346.1 144.3 183.5 11.66 148.7 0.918 7,5
However, this parameter has to be considered when a thermal
balance develops between the feedwater heaters. The remaining
parameters that are applied in the equations have a significant
other components of the plant have no influence on the mass flow
influence on the results. In this section, the influence of each
entering the heater. Heaters 11A and 11B are supplied by steam
parameter will be discussed.
from the LP turbine, the drained cooled steam from heaters 12A and
The parameters that applied to heater 12B in July of 2009,
12B and by the moisture removed from the MS. The other heaters
shown in Table 1, will be used as an example. If the calculated value
are therefore influenced by the mass flow coming from the MS.
for the on-design condition of steam quality, Xhi ¼ 0.87 (rather than
If individual flows into the heater are to be calculated, when the
the value of Xhi ¼ 0.84 that was obtained), is taken as the right
present model is applied to off-design operation, an additional
value, the measured values that achieve the on-design quality can
formulation is necessary, such as the Martin equation for turbine/
be re-calculated. For comparative purposes, Table 2 shows the
valve seals. This formulation will always include enthalpy as a
measured value of each instrumented parameter (as well as the
variable, which is affected by the efficiency of the turbine section
heat transfer surface area estimated from the manufacturer data,
where the extraction point is located. In the model, mass flow and
after nine plugged tubes in this particular heater at that time have
enthalpy are considered in terms of the mixture of all the steam
been discounted), the value that satisfies the on-design quality and
from the extraction points; in reality, the model can be applied
the discrepancy between them. without the introduction of this formulation. However, only the on-
In this particular power plant, the temperature is measured with
design operation has been considered here, in order to compare the
type “T” thermocouples with an error of 0.6 C(1 F) or 0.4%, the results with the reference values. If the model is used in actual
pressure is measured with pressure transmitters with an error of
operation, and the rest of the plant is not modeled, possible mal-
0.2%FS (Full Scale), and the flow is measured with flowmeters functions may be due either to the heater or to the turbine. This
with an error of 1%. All these error margins refer to inherent
area falls outside the scope of the present paper.
sensor error.
The thermal balance of the feedwater heater train was calcu-
With regard to the heat transfer surface area (either in the
lated with data from the manufacturer’s documentation for the
condensing zone or in the drain-cooling zone), its value should be
heaters and steam turbine, as shown in Table 4, in order to validate
the design value, except in those abnormal situations, such as the
the model presented in this paper. The model of the complete
one described in the previous section, or if a reduction in the
feedwater train was implemented in EES software. The results are
transfer capability is taken into consideration. But, in this latter
shown in Fig. 12, as well as the thermal balance supplied by the
case, the expected value [2] in Table 2 should be lower than the
manufacturer. Table 5 shows the main values for comparison, ob-
estimated one.
tained with the present model, and those supplied by the manu-
The other parameters, considered individually, could only
facturer in the thermal kit included in the SMGNPP documentation.
satisfy the design quality, if the measurement instruments recor-
Table 5 shows the values of mass flow, specific enthalpy and
ded outside the calibrated values. However, the sum total of
steam quality piped into Heaters 8 and 7 that are contained in the
inherent instrument error should be taken into account.
thermal kit supplied by the manufacturer, which are split into two
Taking this inherent error of the measurement apparatus into
parts: the steam extracted from the stage moisture removal pro-
consideration, the limit values for quality in the design condition
vision, and the steam extracted from the shell moisture removal
are represented in Table 3.
provision; the thermodynamic properties of the steam going to the
In conclusion, when the quality reading is within 6% of the
heaters were calculated by a simple energy balance of the two
designed value, the discrepancy can be justified by the inherent
flows. The calculations with the present model give the values for
error of process measuring instruments. Otherwise, the results
total steam extracted from the turbine and piped directly into the
should be investigated in the same way as in the previous section.
heater. Furthermore, all the mass flows represented in Table 5 are
This observation clearly supports the high accuracy of the
the sum of all flows entering or leaving heaters “A” and “B”.
calculation.
In general, the values of the steam flowing through and leaving
the heater, m _ hi and m
_ ho , are very similar, specially in the latter case.
3.3. Thermal analysis of the feedwater heater train The following consideration should be taken into account in the
other parameters: the calculations introduced in the present paper
As explained in Section 3, only heaters 12A and 12B are supplied
by the steam discharged from the HP turbine, which means that
Table 4
Table 2 Feedwater heater data used in the calculations as supplied by the manufacturer.
Sensitivity analysis from data measured and calculated in heater 12B in July of 2009.
[1]: Measured value according to data in Table 1; [2]: Value that satisfies the on- HTR12 HTR11 HTR9 HTR8 HTR7
design quality; [3]: Error. 2 
U1 (W/m C) 2509.7 2464.4 2538.2 2413.3 1811.4
U2 (W/m2  C) 3929.1 3696.5 3855.5 3446.7 2612.0
[1] [2] [3]
k (W/m  C) 27.69
A2 (m2) 984.3 992.5 0.8% A1 (m2) 113.8 267.6 281.4 353.0 668.0
m_ c (kg/s) 344.5 355.7 3.3% A2 (m2) 992.2 873.3 771.1 845.4 1168.0
tci ( C) 141.7 144.8 3.1  C do (mm) 15.88
tco ( C) 179.5 180.7 1.2  C T (mm) 2.54
tho ( C) 147.4 146.5 0.9  C Dph (bars) 0.34 0.32 0.34 0.31 0.14
ph (bars) 11.3 13.8 22.1% Dpc (bars) 0.86 0.86 1.07 1.11 0.48
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 55

Fig. 12. Thermal balance of feedwater heaters on the SMGNPP e 100% Load. (a) Supplied by the manufacturer. (b) Calculated with the method proposed in this paper.

were performed by using the IAPWS-97 formulation; the calcula- SMGNPP documentation and the values calculated by using the
tions supplied in the thermal kit were developed in 1966. present model.
It should be noted that the calculations in the thermal kit use Eq.
(5) to estimate the quality of the steam extracted from the turbine,
applying the assigned values of moisture removal effectiveness. In 4. Results and discussion
the model introduced in this paper, Eq. (23) is used to calculate the
quality value directly from the enthalpy value. In the particular case The main objective of the present paper is to present the
of heaters 12, 11 and 9, the effectiveness introduced in the thermal formulation needed to calculate the thermodynamic properties and
kit would be zero, which means that the quality will be equal to the the mass flow of the steam passing into the feedwater heaters that
quality of the steam flowing through the preceding stage in the are installed in nuclear power plants. As described in Sec. 2.1 and
SMGNPP, because moisture removal provisions are located in low Sec. 2.2, it is necessary to calculate these properties in on-design
pressure turbine stages from stage 15. The values of steam quality operation (using data supplied by the manufacturer), as well as
obtained by applying the present model are very similar to the another variables defined here, and use them as reference values in
values calculated in the SMGNPP thermal kit. Table 5 shows the % the off-design calculation. The steps to be followed are summarized
deviations between the values calculated from the figures in the in Fig. 5.

Table 5
Thermal balance of the feedwater heater train e 100% Load.

SMGNPP thermal kit Calculated Absolute variation in %

HTR _ hi (kg/s)
m _ ho (kg/s)
m hhi (kJ/kg) Xhi 3s (%) _ hi (kg/s)
m _ ho (kg/s)
m hhi (kJ/kg) Xhi _ hi
m _ ho
m hhi Xhi

12 61.25 61.25 2526.3 0.87 0.0 61.68 61.68 2518.2 0.87 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.0
11 94.34 155.59 1309.8 0.32 0.0 95.12 156.80 1304.7 0.32 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.0
9 26.24 181.83 2482.5 0.90 0.0 25.62 182.42 2535.3 0.93 2.4 0.3 2.1 3.3
8 31.91 213.74 1917.8 0.67 7.5 30.12 212.54 2016.7 0.72 5.6 0.6 5.2 7.5
7 41.23 254.97 1610.1 0.57 16.0 44.30 256.84 1518.3 0.53 7.5 0.7 5.7 7.0
56 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

The model uses the well-known log mean temperature differ- calculated at the design point of the unit may omit any possible
ence and NTU-effectiveness methods. Furthermore, Eq. (21) makes degradation of the stage moisture removal provisions.
it possible to calculate the feedwater temperature when the cold In the present model, the thermodynamic properties of the
fluid leaves the drain-cooling zone (goes into the condensing zone), steam entering the heater were unknowns. When these values are
even if the mass flow and the enthalpy of the steam bled to the calculated they become an important tool for the analysis of plant
heater are unknown. Then, these properties can be easily calculated efficiency. The model has been tested using the data available from
by applying the mass and energy balances to each zone. Impor- the SMGNPP thermal kit and actual operating data. In all cases, the
tantly, the model easily adapts itself to the simplifications adopted importance of accurate instrumentation of the process has been
by these methods: the overall heat transfer coefficient is constant emphasized and examples have been given of how to detect
throughout the heater, the flow rate of each fluid is constant, the instrumentation error.
specific heat of each fluid is constant, there is no vapor condensa- As a next step, subsequent research aims to complete the
tion or boiling liquid in part of the heater, heat losses are negligible, modeling of the Rankine cycle of a nuclear power plant, simulating
there is equal heat-transfer surface in each pass, and the temper- the expansions in all sections of the steam turbine [20] and cor-
ature of the shell-side fluid in any shell-side pass is uniform over recting the mass flow and the moisture content in each one.
any cross section [18]. All these simplifications can be assumed
taking into account that these calculations are done in the drain-
cooling zone (liquideliquid heat exchanger with a simple Acknowledgements
arrangement).
As a result, the method described here was applied to a real The authors wish to thank NUCLENOR for supplying operational
facility, in order to verify whether this tool is useful for predictive data recorded at the Santa María de Garoña Nuclear Power Plant,
maintenance applications. The formulation and procedures which were essential for validation of the equations and methods
currently used in the industry do not calculate the feedwater described in this paper.
heaters as individual components, so steam turbine performance in
the on-design condition has to be used (which is the biggest Appendix A. The overall heat transfer coefficient in closed
constraint of these methods). The present method is able to feed-water heaters
perform these calculations individually in each heater. However,
the results are non-measured variables, using the instrumented Heat transference in the heater, referred to as overall heat
parameters of the process. transfer, U, appears in Eq. (1). Its value can be calculated from the
For comparison and validation purposes, the on-design opera- following equation:
tion described in Sec. 3.3 was used, in which the individual analysis
of each heater is clear, instead of the traditional methodology, as 1
U ¼ (A.1)
shown in Fig. 12, where the flows going to the heater have to be rs þ rfs þ rm þ rft þ rt
introduced. Both methods show similar results, as indicated in
Table 5.
where, rs is the “shell side film resistance”, rfs is the “shell side
However, the main application of these calculations should be in
fouling resistance”, rm is the “tube material resistance”, rft is the
off-design operation, an issue that has been experimentally
“feedwater fouling resistance” and rt is the “feedwater film
examined in Sec. 3.1. Once the steam properties and the mass flow
resistance”.
have been calculated, the rest of the parameters involving the
The value of the “film resistances” can be calculated in tube-
heater performance can be easily defined. But the first are in
shell heaters by:
themselves very useful for diagnostic purposes, and are indepen-
dent of any particular operational condition. In Fig. 7 the overall 1
heat transfer coefficient of the heater in both zones and in both rs ¼ (A.2a)
ho Ef
heaters is lower than the designed one, because the instrumented
parameters were also different from the designed ones, as shown in  
Table 1. 1 do
rt ¼ (A.2b)
A further application could be the calculation of the steam hi di
properties and mass flow extracted from the steam turbines.
However, the inherent error of the measuring apparatus often leads where, subscript i indicates the tube side fluid, subscript o indicates
to non-coherent results, with operation of the steam turbines some the shell side tube, h is the convection heat transfer coefficient, d is
way off the design specifications. This issue has been discussed in the tube diameter and Ef is the fin efficiency [21].
Sec. 3.2 and as indicated, care should be exercised when applying In Eqs. (A.2a) and (A.2b), the convection heat transfer coefficient
the present method. can be calculated inside the tubes with the Rabas improved equa-
tion [22]:
5. Conclusion
Nui ¼ 0:015Re0:835
i Pri0:462 (A.3)
A model has been introduced for the thermal analysis of feed-
water heaters in which wet steam is extracted from the steam
and by the Kern equation outside the tubes [23]:
turbine (and piped into the heater). The model has relevant ap-
plications in nuclear power plants, where the fluid flowing through
Nuo ¼ 0:36Re0:55
o Pro0:33 (A.4)
the steam turbine is wet steam.
Up until now, the thermodynamic properties of the steam In Eqs. (A.3) and (A.4), Nu is the Nusselt number, Re is the
extracted from the heater were solved by applying the stage Reynolds number and Pr is the Prandtl number. Both equations are
moisture removal effectiveness. However, the values of this effec- used for the (single phase) cooling zone in the present paper.
tiveness, when available from the manufacturer in the thermal kits, The value of the “tube material resistance” can be calculated in
are often unrelated to the load. Furthermore, use of this parameter tubular heaters by:
 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58 57

 
do do Finally, the intermediate feedwater temperature will be:
rm ¼ ln (A.5)
2000k do  2T
tc2 ¼ 3 1 ðthi  tci Þ þ tci (B.6)
where, do is the outside diameter of the tube and T is the tube In the condensing zone, the value of the heat capacity flow rate
thickness. will be zero for the steam, Ch2 ¼ 0 (th2 ¼ thi). Thus, the equations in
Finally, the value of the “shell/feedwater fouling resistances” this particular case will be:
can be calculated by:
m_ c Q2;d
ro Cc2 ¼
 (B.7)
rfs ¼ (A.6a) mc;d tco;d  tc2;d
Ef

U2 A2
Ao NTU2 ¼ (B.8)
rft ¼ ri (A.6b) Cc2
Ai
The values of ro and ri are usually fixed value functions of the 32 ¼ 1  expðNTU2 Þ (B.9)
type of fluid. Values for the feedwater (ri) and the steam (ro) may be
found in the technical literature [24]. The impact of fouling resis- tco ¼ 3 2 ðthi  tc2 Þ þ tc2 (B.10)
tance on the feedwater heater performance over time has been
analyzed in Ref. [25].
In the case of heaters in steam power plants, both values are
usually ro ¼ 5,283$105 m2 C/W (0,0003 hft2F/Btu) in the draing Appendix C. The stage moisture removal effectiveness and
cooling zone, ro ¼ 0 m2 C/W in the condensing zone and the reduction of moisture
ri ¼ 3.522$105 m2 C/W (0.0002 hft2F/Btu) in both zones.
If a mass balance is applied to the turbine extraction in Fig. 2,
Appendix B. The NTU or heater effectiveness method applied considering only the liquid phase:
to off-design calculations
m _ t2 ð1  Xt2 Þ  m
_ t3 ð1  Xt3 Þ ¼ m _ hi ð1  Xhi Þ (C.1)
In the heater drain cooling zone, the feedwater heat capacity at Dividing by m_ t2 ð1  Xt2 Þ, and taking the value of the effective-
constant pressure can be calculated, in on-design condition, by: ness into account, 3 s, in Eq. (5):
Q _ t3 ð1  Xt3 Þ
m
Cpcð1Þ;d ¼
1;d  (B.1) ¼ 1  3s (C.2)
mc;d tc2;d  tci;d _ t2 ð1  Xt2 Þ
m
The value of the product C ¼ mC _ p in operating mode, referred The condition under which (1  Xt3) < (1  Xt2) will be:
to as the “heat capacity flow rate”, if no variations are considered in
the value of the heat capacity at constant pressure, will be: m _ t3
_ t2 ð1  3 s Þ < m (C.3)

_ c Q1;d _ t3 ¼ m
Finally, substituting m _ t2  m
_ hi into Eq. (C.3):
m
Cc1 ¼
 (B.2)
mc;d tc2;d  tci;d _ hi
m
3s > (C.4)
_ t2
m
In the case of steam flowing through the shell side:
P Incorporating this condition into Eq. (5), when the moisture in
ðm_ hi þ m _ ÞQ
Ch1 ¼
P 
d 1;d  (B.3) the next stage is reduced, then:
_ hi;d þ
m m_ d;d th2;d  tho;d
Xhi < Xt2 (C.5)
The value of the number of transfer units (NTU) [14] in the drain
cooling zone will be:
References
U1 A 1
NTU1 ¼ (B.4)
Cc1 [1] J.M. Ponce-Ortega, M. Serna-González, A. Jiménez-Gutiérrez, Use of genetic
algorithms for the optimal design of shell-and-tube heat exchangers, Appl.
And heater effectiveness, using the relationship for shell-and- Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 203e209.
tube heat exchangers [14]: [2] V.K. Patel, R.V. Rao, Design optimization of shell-and-tube heat exchanger
using particle swarm optimization technique, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010)
1417e1425.
1  exp½NTU1 ðC1  1Þ
31 ¼ (B.5a) [3] Y.A. Kara, Ö. Güraras, A computer program for designing of shell-and-tube
1  C1 exp½NTU1 ðC1  1Þ heat exchangers, Appl. Therm. Eng. 24 (2004) 1797e1805.
[4] M.M.A. Bhutta, N. Hayat, M.H. Bashir, A.R. Khan, K.N. Ahmad, S. Khan, CFD
2  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi31 applications in various heat exchangers design: a review, Appl. Therm. Eng. 32
(2012) 1e12.
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1 þ exp  NTU1 1 þ C12
6 7 [5] T. Barszcz, P. Czop, A feedwater heater model intended for model-based di-
31 ¼ 26
41 þ C1 þ 1 þ C1 $
2  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi7
5
agnostics of power plant installations, Appl. Therm. Eng. 31 (2011) 1357e
1367.
1  exp  NTU1 1 þ C1 2
[6] Closed Feedwater Heaters, PTC 12.1, American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers, New York, NY, USA, 2000.
(B.5b) [7] Y.A. Çengel, Heat and Mass Transfer: A Practical Approach, third ed., McGraw-
Hill, Boston, MA, USA, 2007.
where, C1 ¼ Cc1/Ch1. Eq. (B.5a) will be applicable to 1-1 shell-and- [8] A. Kleitz, J. Dorey, Instrumentation for wet steam, Proc. Instit. Mech. Eng. C J.
Mech. Eng. Sci. 218 (2004) 811e842.
tube heat exchangers (pure counter-flow heat exchangers) and [9] A. Leyzerovich, Wet-steam Turbines for Nuclear Power Plants, PennWell
Eq. (B.5b) to 1-2 shell-and-tube heat exchangers. Corporation, Tulsa, OK, USA, 2005.
58 M. Álvarez-Fernández et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 68 (2014) 45e58

[10] R. Fournier, M. Thibodeau, C.T. French, Measurement of steam generator or [17] C. Thanomsat, C. Taft, A. Annaswamy, Level control in feedwater heater sys-
reactor vessel moisture carryover using a non-radioactive chemical tracer, in: tems using nonlinear strategies, ISA Trans. 37 (1998) 299e312.
International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Proceedings, ICONE, 3, [18] R. Bowman, A. Mueller, W. Nagle, Mean temperature difference in design,
2009, pp. 459e467. Trans. ASME 62 (1940) 283e294.
[11] J. Hosler, An Assessment of Potential Nuclear Plant Applications for the EPRI [19] S. Klein, Engineering Equation Solver (v.8.596-3d), 2010.
Precise Enthalpy Measurement System, Technology Review 1000876, Electric [20] M. Álvarez-Fernández, C. Alonso-Tristán, A new model for the analysis and
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2005. simulation of steam turbines at partial and full load, J. Eng. Gas. Turbines
[12] Standards of the Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association, eighth ed., Power 133 (2011) 113002.
TEMA (Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association), Tarrytown, NY, USA, [21] G. Nellis, S.A. Klein, Heat Transfer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,
1998. 2009.
[13] A.J. Chapman, Fundamentals of Heat Transfer, Macmillan, New York, NY, USA, [22] T. Eckert, M. Hooker, Engineering Technical Traning Modules for Nuclear Plant
1987. Engineers: Heat Transfer Calculations, Mechanical Series: Module 6 1010783,
[14] W.M. Kays, A.L. London, Compact Heat Exchangers, third ed., McGraw-Hill, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1998.
New York, NY, USA, 1984. [23] G.F. Hewitt, G.L. Shires, T.R. Bott, Process Heat Transfer, CRC Press, Begell
[15] W.T. Parry, ASME International Steam Tables for Industrial Use: Based on the House, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1994.
IAPWS Industrial Formulation 1997 for the Thermodynamic Properties of [24] Standards for Closed Feedwater Heaters, sixth ed., Heat Exchange Institute,
Water and Steam (IAPWS-IF97), American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Cleveland, OH, USA, 1998.
New York, NY, USA, 2009. [25] M. Antar, S. Zubair, The impact of fouling on performance evaluation of multi-
[16] K.C. Cotton, Evaluating and Improving Steam Turbine Performance, Cotton zone feedwater heaters, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 2505e2513.
Fact, Rexford, NY, USA, 1993.