Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Thermodynamic performance analysis and algorithm model

of multi-pressure heat recovery steam generators (HRSG)
based on heat exchangers layout
Hongcui Feng, Wei Zhong , Yanling Wu, Shuiguang Tong
Institute of Thermal Science and Power System, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 4 November 2013
Accepted 24 February 2014
Available online 15 March 2014
Keywords:
Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)
Heat exchanger
Layout analysis
Thermodynamic performance

a b s t r a c t
Changes of heat exchangers layout in heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) will modify the amount of
waste heat recovered from ue gas; this brings forward a desire for the optimization of the design of
HRSG. In this paper the model of multi-pressure HRSG is built, and an instance of a dual pressure HRSG
under three different layouts of Taihu Boiler Co., Ltd. is discussed, with specied values of inlet temperature, mass ow rate, composition of ue gas and water/steam parameters as temperature, pressure etc.,
steam mass ow rate and heat efciency of different heat exchangers layout of HRSG are analyzed. This
analysis is based on the laws of thermodynamics and incorporated into the energy balance equations for
the heat exchangers. In the conclusion, the results of the steam mass ow rate, heat efciency obtained
for three heat exchangers layout of HRSGs are compared. The results show that the optimization of heat
exchangers layout of HRSGs has a great signicance for waste heat recovery and energy conservation.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In recent years, with soaring energy price and increasing
demand for reducing fuel consumption, much attention has been
paid to the utilization of industrial waste heat. Different grades
of waste heat are commonly available in metallurgy, oil, petrochemicals and other industries. The main carrier of waste heat resources is sensible heat in the ue gas, and the most frequent
approach for recovery is to produce steam that can be used directly
or further used to generate electricity. The design of HRSGs is organized at three levels: rst it put forward the overall strategy for
heat recovery, which enables to obtain pressure levels and the
main operating parameters of the HRSG; the second step involves
a general layout to meet the process requirements, including the
layout of heat exchangers and the net absorbed heat of each heat
exchanger; the third step leads to the detailed design of the geometric variables of the heat exchangers, such as tube types and
diameters, the number of tubes per row. The main goal is to increase heat efciency and decrease the equipment cost with the
prerequisite of guaranteeing safety and reliability. For specic values of the ue gas parameters, many different choices are possible
regarding the heat recovery scheme and the general layout of heat

Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 13989882228; fax: +86 571 87951058.

E-mail address: wzhong@zju.edu.cn (W. Zhong).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.02.060
0196-8904/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

exchangers. Therefore, the effects of heat exchangers layout are of

great importance to optimize the utilization of waste heat
resources.
A lot of efforts have been dedicated to the analysis and optimization of HRSG thermodynamic performance. Ahmadi et al. [1]
modeled the comprehensive thermodynamic modeling of a dual
pressure HRSG. They carried out a multi-objective optimization
to nd the best design parameters for that HRSG. Bassily [2,3]
modeled a dual and a triple pressure reheat Combined Cycle Power
Plant (CCPP) for changes of the minimum pinch point temperature
difference, temperature difference of the superheat approach, temperature and pressure of the steam turbine, gas outlet temperature
etc. Reddy et al. [4] used non-dimensional operating parameters to
analyze the entropy generation and to calculate the entropy generation number for single pressure HRSG heat exchangers. Based on
the second law of thermodynamics, Butcher et al. [5] presented the
effects of pinch point temperature difference and ue gas composition on the entropy generation rate and the second law efciency.
Valdes et al. [68] proposed a method for thermo-economic optimization of combined cycle gas turbine power plants based on
the application of inuence coefcients and genetic algorithm.
Sanjay [9] investigated the effect of HRSG conguration on exergy
destruction of bottoming cycle components and concluded that the
distribution of exergy destruction is sensitive to the type of
bottoming cycle conguration. Woudstra et al. [10] performed
a thermodynamic evaluation of CCPP with different steam

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

283

Nomenclature
g
s
i
j
i
o
Mg
Ms
M js
cpg
hs
P0
Ps
DT jpp

DT jsatw
DT jgo;B
DTmin
DTi
DTmin,i
Tg

gas
steam
the ith heat exchanger
the jth pressure level
inlet
outlet
ue gas mass ow rate (kg/s)
total steam mass ow rate of public economizer (kg/s)
steam mass ow rate of the jth pressure level (kg/s)
specic heat at constant pressure (kJ/kg K)
working uid enthalpy (kJ/kg)
ambient pressure (MPa)
working uid pressure (MPa)
pinch point temperature difference of the jth pressure
level (K)
water saturation temperature of the jth pressure level (K)
gas outlet temperature of the evaporator of the jth pressure level (K)
minimum temperature difference (K)
temperature difference of the ith heat exchanger (K)
the minimum temperature difference of the ith heat exchanger (K)
gas outlet temperature at the outlet of the economizer
(K)

bottoming cycles. The evaluation showed that the increasing number of pressure levels of steam generation will reduce the losses
due to heat transfer in the HRSG. In reference [11], a combined
power cycle with HRSG is analyzed. Through exergy analysis, the
exergy of the exhaust streams and the irreversibility of each component in the cycle are determined. In this paper [12], it is shown
that important relationships among optimal objective functions
and decision variables can be discovered consequently. Casarosa
et al. [13] studied thermodynamic optimization based on the minimization of the total HRSG cost, after the reduction to a common
monetary base of the costs of exergy losses and of installation. In
[14] a CCPP with a supplementary ring system is analyzed
through energy and exergy, the optimal design of operating parameters of the plant is then performed by dening an objective function and applying a generic algorithm (GA) type optimization
method. This paper [15] shows a methodology to achieve thermoeconomic optimizations of CCGT power plants taking into account
the frequent off-design operation of the plant. In [16] a complete
economic and thermodynamic study for dual pressure, triple pressure with and without reheat has been reported. Therefore, they
investigated the effect of the pressure levels of steam generation
in HRSG on exergy efciency of combined cycle. Mohagheghi and
Shayegan [17] combined with the genetic algorithm calculated
the optimal thermodynamic performance conditions for HRSGs.
Ahmadi et al. [18,19] performed the exergoenvironmental optimization of a CHP system, they showed that reducing the irreversibility of an HRSG increases the steam cycle efciency due to
increasing the produced steam temperature. In this study [20], a
comprehensive thermodynamic modeling of a dual pressure CCPP
is performed, an optimization study to nd the best design parameters is carried out. Behbahani-nia et al. [21] considered a small
cogeneration system including a gas micro turbine and a re tube
HRSG, the results show that the thermodynamic optimization does
not lead to major improvement of the total cost of the HRSG due to
decrease in the pinch point. In conclusion, the results show that the
use of several pressure levels in HRSGs increases the power
production in the steam cycle. The researches listed above mainly

Tacid
T0

gh
Q

acid dew point (K)

ambient temperature (K)
efciency of HRSG
heat rate (kJ/Nm3)

Subscripts and abbreviations

HRSG
heat recovery steam generator
HPS
high pressure superheater
HPB
high pressure evaporator
HPE
high pressure economizer
LPS
low pressure superheater
LPB
low pressure evaporator
LPE
low pressure economizer
ECO
economizer
EVA
evaporator
SH
superheater
PH
preheater
PECO
public economizer
RH
reheater
HE
heat exchange
PPTM
method of pinch point temperature difference
GOTM
method of gas outlet temperature
DSA
dichotomous search algorithm

focused on the analysis and optimized design of HRSG operating

parameters, and there is limited research on heat exchangers
layout.
This article presents a general model for analyzing the thermodynamic performance of a multi-pressure HRSG based on heat
exchangers layout, in which the minimum temperature difference
of each heat exchanger will replace the constraint of pinch point
temperature difference. Then, examples for dual pressure HRSGs
are analyzed.
2. Problem model
As shown in Fig. 1a, a dual pressure HRSG model is considered,
consisting of six heat exchangers (HPE, HPB, HPS, LPE, LPB, LPS). It
is assumed that the HRSG is at steady state, the heat transfer to the
surrounding is negligible, and there is no extraneous heat loss, the
reference ambient conditions for air is P0 = 0.101 MPa and
T0 = 293.15 K. The ue gas inlet temperature, the mass ow rate,
the ue gas composition, the water/steam temperature and the
pressure are given. According to the rst law of thermodynamics,
energy balance equations for each heat exchanger are established,
and the TQ prole is shown in Fig. 1b.
In practical cases, the heat exchangers layout will change due to
some factors. For example, a radiant heat exchanger can be placed

Fig. 1a. Schematic diagram of dual pressure HRSG 1.

284

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

Fig. 1b. The TQ prole of dual pressure HRSG 1.

Fig. 3b. The TQ prole of dual pressure HRSG 3.

the water/steam parameters are constant, different heat exchangers layout brings forward changes in DTi, so that results in the
changes of DTmin,i and different thermodynamic performance.
Therefore, an optimized design of HRSG heat exchangers layout
is of great importance for maximizing waste heat recovery.
3. Model equations
3.1. Control equations of the unit model
Fig. 2a. Schematic diagram of dual pressure HRSG 2.

Fig. 2b. The TQ prole of dual pressure HRSG 2.

in a high temperature zone, and evaporator would be placed before

superheater to protect it from high temperature, as shown in
Fig. 2a, its TQ prole is shown in Fig. 2b. Besides, to decrease
the gas outlet temperature of multi-pressure HRSG, the feed water
ow rate of LPE could be the sum of the feed water ow rate at different pressure levels, as shown in Fig. 3a, and the TQ prole is
shown in Fig. 3b. As depicted in Fig. 2b, when the ue gas and

Fig. 3a. Schematic diagram of dual pressure HRSG 3.

The control equation is the fundamental equation of any heat

balance calculation. Here a general calculation model for thermodynamic performance of a m-pressure HRSG composed of n heat
exchangers is built. For a given ue gas inlet temperature, mass
ow rate, composition of ue gas, water/steam temperature and
pressure, it follows that:
(1) In general, the heat exchanger types include: ECO, EVA, SH,
and also RH and PH. Moreover, in multi-pressure HRSG,
the feed water ow rate of LPE is the sum of feed water ow
rate in different pressure levels and LPE is a public
economizer.
(2) There are two meanings of heat exchanger number: for a
m-pressure (1, 2, . . .j, . . .m) HRSG with n heat exchangers,
on the ue gas side and on its ow direction, heat exchangers could be numbered as: 1, 2, . . .i, . . .n; on water/steam
side and on its ow direction, assume there are s heat
exchangers under jth pressure level, then they can be numbered as: 1, 2, . . .k, . . .s. Taking Fig. 1a as example, it is a dual
pressure (m = 2) HRSG with 6 heat exchangers (n = 6), on the
ue gas side, it can be numbered as i = 4 and on water/steam
side as j = 2, k = 1.
(3) As shown in Fig. 4, heat balance calculation model could be
built for each heat exchanger. Mg is given, cpg is assumed as
constant in given temperature zone, based on the rst law of
thermodynamics [22], by applying the energy balance for
ue gas and water/steam in each heat exchanger of the
HRSG, the ue gas temperature and water/steam properties
will be calculated by the following equations:

Fig. 4. Model of the ith heat exchanger.

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

DTjpp T jgo;B  T jsatw

285

As mentioned above, on ue gas side, the temperature difference between the ue gas inlet temperature and water/steam outlet temperature would be changed with the change of heat
exchanger layout. Therefore, the minimum temperature differences of each heat exchanger are the constraints:

DT i T gi;i  T jso;k P DT min;i

Fig. 5. Model of a public low pressure economizer.

j

M g cpg T gi;i  T go;i Mjs hso;k  hsi;k

n equations could be built for n heat exchangers.

Especially, in the case with public economizer, as described in
Fig. 5, the energy balance equation on ue gas side is given by:
1

M g cpg T gi;pub  T go;pub M 1s hso;1  hsi;pub    M js hso;1  hsi;pub



m
Mm
s hso;1

 hsi;pub

M s M 1s    M js    M m
s

2
3

3.3.2. Gas outlet temperature

Gas outlet temperature should be higher than acid dew point
temperature to prevent corrosion of heat exchangers; gas outlet
temperature is the ue gas outlet temperature of the nth heat
exchanger:

T g T go;n P T acid

Under high ue gas temperature, gas outlet temperature could

reach a low level, when Tg is lower than Tacid, Tacid would constraint
Tg, in order to make Tg higher than or equal to Tacid, we assume Tg is
equal to Tacid.

3.2. Correlate equations

4. Mathematical solution

Correlate equations describe the logical relationship of ue gas

and water/steam ow through HRSG heat exchangers.
On the ue gas side, the inlet temperature of ith heat exchanger
is the outlet temperature of (i1)th heat exchanger, and the outlet
temperature of ith heat exchanger is the inlet temperature of
(i + 1)th heat exchanger:

There are m steam mass ow rates M js and n gas outlet temperatures Tgo,i by the equations listed above, and the steps for calculating the (m + n) unknowns are as follow:

T gi;i T go;i1 ; T go;i T gi;i1

It is assumed that m pinch point temperature differences DT jpp

are the minimum temperature difference, we can get the gas outlet
temperature based on Eq. (7):

On water/steam side, under jth pressure level, the inlet temperature of kth heat exchanger is the outlet temperature of (k1)th
heat exchanger, and the outlet temperature of kth heat exchanger
is the inlet temperature of (k + 1)th heat exchanger:

T jso;k T jsi;k1 ; Pjso;k Pjsi;k1

T jsi;k T jso;k1 ; Pjsi;k Pjso;k1

8
< hj

so;k

; 1 6 j 6 m; 1 6 k 6 s

f T jso;k ;Pjso;k hsi;k1 f T jsi;k1 ;Pjsi;k1

j
j
: hj f T j ;Pj hj
si;k
so;k1 f T so;k1 ;P so;k1
si;k
si;k

;1 6 j 6 m; 1 6 k 6 s
6

3.3. Complementary equations

Heat balance calculation results can be obtained based on the
equations above, but constraints such as acid dew point temperature and pinch point temperature are not considered, so that complementary equation are increased to verify and validate the results.
3.3.1. The minimum temperature difference
In HRSG, temperature difference of each heat exchanger between the ue gas inlet temperature and water/steam outlet temperature are different between different heat exchanger type and
actual production requirements. The minimum value of each heat
exchanger temperature difference between the ue gas inlet
temperature and water/steam outlet temperature, which called
the minimum temperature difference, could be set to achieve the
maximum steam mass ow rate.
For evaporator under each pressure level, the minimum temperature difference is the difference between the ue gas outlet
temperature and the feed water temperature under given pressure,
called pinch point temperature difference:

(1) Calculation of the initial values (PPTM):

T jgo;B DT jpp T jsatw

10

For m steam outlet temperatures of evaporator and n energy

balance equations, m M js and (nm) Tgo,i are calculated; and the ue
gas inlet temperature Tgi,i are calculated by Eq. (4).
(2) The verication of constraints:
(a) Temperature difference: DTi would be checked based Tgi,i and
Eq. (8); if it does not satisfy the constraints, the initial values
of Mjs would be adjusted, which is shown in step (3a) in
detail; otherwise Tg would be checked.
(b) The acid dew point temperature: the gas outlet temperature
would be checked with Eq. (9). If Tg is lower than Tacid, Tg
need to be adjusted in step (3b); otherwise the calculation
process would complete.
(3) Adjustment of the initial value:
(a) The minimum temperature difference (method of iteration):
according to the energy balance equations, the ith heat
exchanger heat is equal to the kth heat exchanger under
jth pressure level:

Q i Q jk Mg cpg T gi;i  T go;i M js cjp;k T jso;k  T jsi;k

11

cjp;k

Assume
is specic heat at constant pressure in each heat exchanger; slopes of each section in TQ prole are the reciprocal of
Mjs times cjp;k , which can be written as:



T jso;k  T jsi;k =Q jk 1=M js cjp;k

12

In TQ prole, when DTi is lower than DTmin,i, DTi and Tgi,i need
to be increased with Eq. (8). Take Fig. 1b for example, parameters
are unchanged, when the temperature difference of heat exchanger
4 increases, M1s could be decreased, so that Q3 decreases, the slope

286

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

of Section 3 becomes bigger and it gets shorter, the slopes of LP

heat exchangers all become bigger and the gas outlet temperature
increases. We can use dichotomous search algorithm to adjust the
results, the steps are given as:
i. Assuming the ue gas to be an ideal gas and the values of cpg
the same in different temperature zone, heat balance calculation would be a system of linear equations. M js calculated
in step (1) would be decreased for certain percent (10%
e.g.) from LP in sequence, and the new steam mass ow rate
would be:

Mjs2 110%Mjs

13

ii. Plug the new steam mass ow rate into energy balance
equations to get new ue gas inlet temperature, if the results
obtained satisfy the constraints, DSA would be used for M jsn :

MjsD1 M js M js2 =2

14

iii. Put into energy balance equations for verication, to get new
ue gas inlet temperature, then verify the constraint, if the
results obtained satisfy the constraints, DSA would be used
for M jsn :
DSA would be used if the results calculated meet the requirement, or decreasing M jsn for certain percent (10% e.g.) until it meets
the demand of constraints. If it could not meet the demand to adjust M jsn , then M j1
would be adjusted and the steps are the same as
s
adjusting Mjsn .
(b) The gas outlet temperature (GOTM):
In step (2), Tacid would be the constraint when Tg calculated is
lower than Tacid, we rst assume Tg is equal to Tacid, then:







1
1
j
j
M g cpg T g1i  T g M1s hso  hsi    Mjs hso  hsi
 m
m
   Mm
s hso  hsi

15

To ensure the amount of HP Ms, assume M 1s is unknown, other

steam mass ow rates are calculated by the minimum temperature
difference constraint. For given water/steam parameters and Tg, M 1s
could be calculated, and temperature difference under 1st pressure
level would be changed, and the verication steps are the same as
above mentioned.
The specic steps of HRSG heat balance calculation are shown
in Fig. 6.
The efciency of HRSG is:

gHRSG T g1i  T g =T g1i  T 0

16

5. Results and discussion

Fig. 6. Flow chart of HRSG heat balance calculation.

Table 1
Parameters of a dual pressure HRSG.
Flue gas inlet temperature
Gas mass ow rate (Nm3/h)
Heat loss (%)
Dust content (g/Nm)
Flue gas composition (%)
CO2
H2O
N2
O2

350
1,000,000
0.5
9
0
0
75.42
24.58

5.1.1. The effects of heat exchangers layout on HRSG steam mass ow

rate
Fig. 7 shows the comparative analysis of steam mass ow rate
in different pressure levels in three heat exchangers layout. In
which the total steam mass ow rate Ms, high pressure steam
mass ow rate M 1s and low pressure steam mass ow rate M 2s
are all different with different heat exchangers layout: dual pressure HRSG with public economizer in layout 3 has the maximum
M 1s , while its M 2s and Ms are the smallest, steam mass ow rates of
layout 1 and layout 2 in different pressure levels are nearly the
same.

5.1. The effects of heat exchangers layout on HRSG thermodynamic

performance
Given three examples of dual pressure HRSG based on different
heat exchangers layout. As mentioned above, ue gas inlet temperature, mass ow rate, composition of ue gas, the water/steam
temperature and pressure in three examples are the same, other
parameters of dual pressure HRSG are shown in Table 1. Schematic
diagrams of three dual pressure HRSGs are shown in Figs. 1a3a
and corresponding TQ proles are Figs. 1b3b. According to the
general model for thermodynamic performance of multi-pressure
HRSG based on heat exchangers layout mentioned above, based
on the laws of thermodynamics, thermodynamic performance for
dual pressure HRSG based on three different heat exchangers
layout are shown in Tables 24.

5.1.2. The effects of heat exchangers layout on HRSG efciency

Fig. 8 presents the efciencies of HRSG in three different heat
exchangers layout HRSGs. Other parameters are given, in Tables
24, the gas outlet temperature Tg under layout 1 is the lowest,
and by Eq. (16), it has the highest efciency; the efciency of layout 2 and layout 3 are nearly the same, there are little differences
between them. The reason is because of the principle of cascade
utilization of energy, the layout of heat exchangers in layout 1
adherence to this principle better, while in layout 2 and layout 3
other factors such as the practical factors were considered; and
the small differences of heat efciency in three different layouts
illustrate the parameters would be the main factors for heat efciency of HRSG.

287

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

Table 2
Gas and water/steam properties of HRSG 1.
HE-No.

T jsi;i (C)

T jso;i (C)

P js;i (MPa)

M js;i (kg/s)

Tgi,i (C)

Tgo,i (C)

Mg (kg/s)

Q (kJ/Nm3)

1
2
3
4
5
6

218.6
218.6
161.8
110
161.8
110

320
218.6
230
213.6
161.8
156.8

2.16
2.16
0.55
2.37
0.55
0.6

19.89
20.47
12.06
20.89
12.49
12.67

350
335.5
272.2
266.9
204.1
176.8

335.5
272.2
266.9
204.1
176.8
127.6

176.03
172.11
154.36
153.03
135.36
127.75

64.40
35.96
83.63
6.77
85.30
19.24

Table 3
Gas and water/steam properties of HRSG 2.
HE-No.

T jsi;i (C)

T jso;i (C)

P js;i (MPa)

M js;i (kg/s)

Tgi,i (C)

Tgo,i (C)

Mg (kg/s)

Q (kJ/Nm3)

1
2
3
4
5
6

218.6
218.6
218.6
161.8
110
161.8

218.6
320
218.6
230
213.6
161.8

2.16
2.16
2.16
0.55
2.37
0.55

20.47
19.89
20.64
12.06
20.89
12.5

350
340.5
326.1
272.5
267.3
205

340.5
326.1
272.5
267.3
205
176.7

176.03
173.53
169.64
154.61
153.28
135.75

62.72
37.63
83.63
6.77
72.76
19.24

Table 4
Gas and water/steam properties of HRSG 3.
HE-No.

T jsi;i (C)

T jso;i (C)

P js;i (MPa)

M js;i (kg/s)

Tgi,i (C)

Tgo,i (C)

Mg (kg/s)

Q (kJ/Nm3)

1
2
3
4
5
6

218.6
218.6
161.8
156.8
161.8
110

320
218.6
230
213.6
161.8
156.8

2.16
2.16
0.55
2.37
0.55
0.6

21.83
22.92
10
22.92
11.19
31.33

350
334.2
271.4
267
204.7
176.8

334.2
271.4
267
204.7
176.8
129.3

176.03
171.75
154.14
153.06
135.53
127.75

62.72
37.01
83.63
5.65
85.30
21.12

Fig. 8. Heat efciency of three different heat exchangers layout.

Fig. 7. Steam mass ow rate in each pressure level of three heat exchangers layout.

5.1.3. The effects of heat exchangers layout on HRSG absorbed heat

rate of each heat exchanger
Figs. 911 depicts absorbed heat rate of each heat exchanger in
three different heat exchangers layout HRSGs. To match the minimum temperature difference of HRSGs heat exchangers under given water/steam parameters, absorbed heat rate would be
different in three different heat exchangers layout.
Therefore, in practical application, we could choose the optimum heat exchangers layout for HRSG to meet the demand of
practical production.

The ue gas temperature in the above example is relatively low,

according to the second law of thermodynamics, to decrease the
irreversibility of the heat transfer process, the effect of heat
exchangers layout is obvious; if the gas temperature is high enough, to get the same steam, the exergy would not be the limitation, so that heat exchangers layout may not have a signicant
effect on HRSG thermodynamic performance. Therefore, the practical conditions should be considered to decide whether the optimization of heat exchangers layout is feasible.
5.2. The effects of parameters on HRSG thermodynamic performance
Except for the effect of heat exchangers layout, parameter is
another key factor on HRSG thermodynamic performance. Under

288

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

Fig. 12. The TQ prole of the increasing of HP superheated steam pressure.

Fig. 9. Absorbed heat rate of HRSG 1.

Fig. 13. The TQ prole of the increasing of HP superheated steam temperature.

Fig. 10. Absorbed heat rate of HRSG 2.

5.2.1. The effect of HP superheated steam pressure P2s

As shown in Fig. 12, other parameters are constant, when P 2s in2
creases, hs rises and M 2s decreases by Eqs. (1) and (7), and the
slopes of sections ef and jk become bigger, which are shown as e0 f0
and j0 k; by equations of each heat exchanger and Eq. (8), M1s increases and the slopes of sections ab and gh become smaller, which
are shown as a0 b0 and g0 h0 .
5.2.2. The effect of HP superheated steam temperature T 2s
As presented in Fig. 13, other parameters remain unchanged,
2
when T 2s increases, hs rises and M 2s decreases by Eqs. (1) and (7),
and the slopes of sections ef and jk become bigger, which are
shown as e0 f0 and j0 k; Q2 decreases for decreasing M 2s , and in TQ
prole it is shown as ij gets shorten to i0 j0 ; by equations of each heat
exchanger and Eq. (8), M 1s increases and the slopes of sections ab
and gh become smaller, which are shown as a0 b0 and g0 h0 , Q5 increases for increasing M 1s , and in TQ prole it is shown as cd becomes longer to c0 d0 .

6. Conclusions

Fig. 11. Absorbed heat rate of HRSG 3.

given HRSG layout, with the variation of ue gas temperature, gas

mass ow rate, ue gas composition, superheated steam pressure
and temperature, feed water pressure and temperature in HRSG,
the quantity of waste heat recovery in ue gas is different. Take
HP superheated steam pressure and temperature for example, to
analyze their effects on HRSG thermodynamic performance.

In this article, a general model for analyzing the thermodynamic

performance of multi-pressure HRSG based on heat exchangers
layout is built based on the laws of thermodynamics, in which
the minimum temperature difference of each heat exchanger is
introduced to replace the constraint of pinch point temperature
difference, and three different heat exchangers layout of dual pressure HRSGs models are analyzed, the heat balance calculation results prove that the selection of heat exchangers layout has
signicant effects on the thermodynamic performance of HRSGs,
so that choosing the optimal layout of HRSGs based on the practice

H. Feng et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 81 (2014) 282289

requirements will of great signicance for waste heat recovery for

better energy conservation. In the following work, parameters and
layout could be considered together, and the genetic algorithm
could be used to nd the optimum solution of the whole system
to save more energy.
References
[1] Ahmadi P, Hajabdollahi H, Dincer I. 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
2011;8:4464.
[2] Bassily AM. Modeling, numerical optimization, and irreversibility reduction of
a dual-pressure reheat combined cycle. Appl Energy 2005;81:12751.
[3] Bassily AM. Modeling, numerical optimization, and irreversibility reduction of
a triple-pressure reheat combined cycle. Energy 2007;32:77894.
[4] Reddy BV, Ramkiran G, Kumar KA, Nag PK. Second law analysis of a waste heat
recovery steam generator. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2002;45:180714.
[5] Butcher CJ, Reddy BV. Second law analysis of a waste heat recovery based
power generation system. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 2007;50:235563.
[6] Valdes M, Rapun JL. Optimization of heat recovery steam generators for
combined cycle gas turbine power plants. Appl Therm Eng 2001;21:114959.
[7] Valdes M, Duran MD, Rovira A. Thermoeconomic optimization of combined
cycle gas turbine power plants, using genetic algorithms. Appl Therm Eng
2003;23:216982.
[8] Valdes M, Rovira A, Duran MD. Inuence of the heat recovery steam generator
design parameters on the thermoeconomic performances of combined cycle
gas turbine power plants. Int J Energy Res 2004;28:124354.
[9] Sanjay. Investigation of effect of variation of cycle parameters on
thermodynamic performance of gas-steam combined cycle. Energy
2011;36:15767.
[10] Woudstra N, Woudstra T, Pirone A, van der Stelt T. Thermodynamic evaluation
of combined cycle plants. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:1099110.

289

[11] Marrero AM, Lefsaker AR, Kim KJ. Second law analysis and optimization of a
combined triple power cycle. Energy Convers Manage 2002;43(4):55773.
[12] Pouraghaie M, Atashkari K, Besarati SM, Nariman-zadeh N. Thermodynamic
performance optimization of a combined power/cooling cycle. Energy Convers
Manage 2010;51(1):20411.
[13] Casarosa C, Donatini F, Franco A. Thermoeconomic optimization of heat
recovery steam generators operating parameters for combined plants. Energy
2004;29(3):389414.
[14] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. Thermodynamic analysis and thermoeconomic
optimization of a dual pressure combined cycle power plant with a
supplementary ring unit. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52(5):2296308.
[15] Rovira A, Snchez C, Muoz M, Valds M, Durn MD. Thermoeconomic
optimization of heat recovery steam generators of combined cycle gas turbine
power plants considering off-design operation. Energy Convers Manage
2011;52:18409.
[16] Tajik Mansouri M, Ahmadi P, Kaviri AG, Mohd Jaafar MN. Exergetic and
economic evaluation of the effect of HRSG congurations on the performance
of combined cycle power plants. Energy Convers Manage 2012;58:4758.
[17] Mohagheghi M, Shayegan J. Thermodynamic optimization of design variables
and heat exchangers layout in HRSGs for CCGT, using genetic algorithm. Appl
Therm Eng 2009;29:2909.
[18] Ahmadi P, Dincer I. Exergoenvironmental analysis and optimization of a
cogeneration plant system using multimodal genetic algorithm (MGA). Energy
2010;35:516172.
[19] Ahmadi P, Almasi A, Shahriyari M, Dincer I. Multi-objective optimization of a
combined heat and power (CHP) system for heating purpose in a paper mill
using evolutionary algorithm. Int J Energy Res 2012;36:4663.
[20] Ghazi M, Ahmadi P, Sotoodeh AF, Taherkhani A. Modeling and thermoeconomic optimization of heat recovery heat exchangers using a multimodal
genetic algorithm. Energy Convers Manage 2012;58:14956.
[21] Behbahani-nia A, Bagheri M, Bahrampoury R. Optimization of re tube heat
recovery steam generators for cogeneration plants through genetic algorithm.
Appl Therm Eng 2010;30:237885.
[22] Tosun I. The thermodynamics of phase and reaction equilibria. 1st ed. Oxford;
2013.