Thermal Design Optimization of HRSG PDF

Dissertation
Thermal Design and Optimization of

Heat Recovery Steam Generators and
Waste Heat Boilers
Ali Rezaie Navaie

Berlin 2017
Technische Universität Berlin

Institut für Energietechnik
Thermal Design and Optimization of
Heat Recovery Steam Generators and
Waste Heat Boilers
vorgelegt von
M. Sc.
Ali Rezaie Navaie
geb. in Sary, Iran
von der Fakultät III – Prozesswissenschaften
der Technischen Universität Berlin
zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades
Doktor der Ingenieurwissenschaften
- Dr. –Ing. -
genehmigte Dissertation
Promotionsausschuss:
Vorsitzende: Prof. Dr. Tetyana Morozyuk
Gutachter: Prof. Dr. -Ing. George Tsatsaronis
Gutachter: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Udo Hellwig
Tag der wissenschaftlichen Aussprache: 12.04.2017
Berlin 2017
To my lovely wife, Delara
my darling son, Kian
and
my beloved parents, Mahmood and Monir

Acknowledgements
This work was carried out during my stay as a doctoral student at the Institute
for Energy Engineering of the Technische Universität Berlin. At facing the
finishing time of my dissertation, I have to express my appreciation to all people
who helped, supported and accompanied me to complete this work.
First of all, I have to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to Professor

George Tsatsaronis who gave me a chance to be under his supervision in my
research work. Always, he had an open door and was passionate, creative,
generous, and helpful. I have to appreciate him for his excellent support and
patience during the past years. I am thankful to Professor Tetyana Morozyuk for
her willingness to chair my defense.
I place on record, my special thanks to the Professor Udo Hellwig, for his
supports and kind attentions to me to carry out my favorite research project
that is the design and technology of the boilers. This work was not possible
without his support. He has given me a lot of favors and helped me with all he
could whenever I needed.
I appreciate Mr. Alexis Hellwig who helped me during the time that I stayed in
Berlin. I use this opportunity to say my thanks to the colleagues, Michael Beyer,
Mario Nowitzki, Stefan Kohn, Marcel Kamin, Nicolai Sachno and the others for
the fruitful technical discussions. I am also grateful Mr. Max Hellwig for having
reviewed the writing and grammar of my thesis.
I would then thank my beloved brother, Amir Rezaie and my dear old friend,
Shahrokh Zehtabian for their constructive help and guide.
This work was not possible without the support and accompanying of my lovely
wife, Delara. Your sacrifices and encouragement have been the most important
and powerful motivator to my work. I would like to express my honest and
eternal gratitude towards you for your understanding, help and patience during
the past years. I never forget your encouragement and strong back at all levels.
The last but not the least, I would dedicate my special thanks to my solid
backing, my parents, Mahmood and Monir who I couldn’t be where I am
without them. I can hardly find meaningful words to appreciate my parents.
They gave me everything they ever could and supported me in every phase of
my life. I will never forget their great encouragement and strong back at all
levels.
Abstract
Heat recovery steam generators (HRSG) are important and critical equipment of
combined cycle power plants (CCPP) that connect the gas turbine system to the
steam cycle. The thermal design and the optimization of an HRSG are important
for achieving safe operation, higher efficiency and reduced product cost in a
combined cycle power plant. This work deals with the comprehensive
optimization of the thermal design and cost of an HRSG using a genetic
algorithm (GA). Based on actual and existing HRSG in most combined cycle
power plants, a water tube HRSG including two superheaters, one evaporator
and one economizer is considered in the optimization. A comprehensive
program was developed in Visual Basic for this purpose.
The optimization variables include the fin tube arrangement (transverse pitch,
longitudinal pitch, number of rows in flue gas direction, number of tubes on the
circumference of a header, in line or staggered tube arrangement), fin tube
specification (tube diameter, fin height, fin thickness, fin type (solid or serrated),
fin per meter, segment width of serrated fin) and also approach point, water
and steam velocity. On the other hand, the pressure at the exit of the gas
turbine, fin tube metal temperature, amount of desuperheater spray water
flow, steam pressure drop, guarantee of minimum HRSG thermal efficiency, gap
between fin tubes and overall dimension of HRSG (Length, width, height) have
been considered as the main constraints in the optimization.
The developed method selects and provides the best geometric parameter and
arrangement of finned tubes based on minimum capital cost and relevant
defined constraints. However, any other objective function such as minimum
flue gas pressure drop, minimum heat transfer surface area, maximum rate of
heat transfer, etc. could be defined as objective functions in the program and
optimized easily.
In order to test this method, the results of the optimized design have been
compared to an existing HRSG of a combined cycle power plant. All design
parameters and the HRSG arrangement could be easily determined based on
any optimization strategy and constraints. Moreover, the existing work could be
easily expanded to consider triple pressure HRSG.
Zusammenfassung
Abhitzekessel (AHK) sind wichtige und entscheidende Geräte in

Kombikraftwerken, die das Gasturbinensystem mit dem Dampfkreislauf
verbinden. Die wärmetechnische Berechnung und Optimierung eines AHK sind
wichtig für den sicheren Betrieb, höhere Wirkungsgrade und niedrigere
Produktkosten in einem Kombikraftwerk. Diese Arbeit behandelt die
Optimierung der wärmetechnischen Berechnung und Kosten eines AHK mit Hilfe
eines genetischen Algorithmus. Auf Grundlage von tatsächlichen, bestehenden
AHK in den meisten Kombikraftwerken, wird bei der Optimierung ein
Wasserrohr-AHK einschließlich zweier Überhitzer, eines Verdampfers und eines
Economisers angenommen. Für diesen Zweck wurde in Visual Basic ein
umfassendes Programm entwickelt.
Die Optimierungsvariabeln schließen die Rippenrohranordnung (Querteilung,
Längsteilung, Anzahl der Reihen in Rauchgasrichtung, Anzahl der um die
Sammler herum angebrachten Rohre, fluchtende oder versetzte Anordnung),
Rippenrohrgeometrie (Rohrdurchmesser, Rippenhöhe, Rippendicke, Rippenart
[vollrippe oder segmentierte Rippe], Rippen pro Meter, Segmentbreite der
segmentierte Rippen) und auch Approach Point, Wasser- und
Dampfgeschwindigkeit. Auf der anderen Seite wurden der Druck beim Austritt
aus der Gasturbine, Temperatur des Metalls der Rippenrohre,
Spritzwasserdurchflussmenge des Einspritzkühlers, Dampfdruckabfall,
Gewährleistung eines Minimums an thermischem Wirkungsgrad des AHK, Lücke
zwischen Rippenrohren und Gesamtmaße des AHK (Länge, Breite, Höhe) als
Hauptbegrenzungen der Optimierung berücksichtigt.
Das entwickelte Verfahren wählt und bietet die besten geometrischen
Parameter und die beste Anordnung von Rippenrohren auf Grundlage von
minimalen Kapitalkosten und entsprechenden festgelegten Nebenbedingungen.
Allerdings könnte jedwede andere Zielfunktion wie Mindestdruckabfall des
Rauchgases, Mindestoberfläche der Wärmeübertragung, höchste
Wärmeübergangszahl usw. in dem Programm als Zielfunktion festgelegt und
leicht optimiert werden. Um dieses Verfahren zu testen, wurden die Ergebnisse
des optimierten Entwurfs mit einem bestehenden AHK eines Kombikraftwerks
verglichen. Alle Entwurfsparameter und die AHK-Anordnung können leicht auf
Grundlage irgendwelcher Optimierungsstrategien und -nebenbedingungen
bestimmt werden. Darüber hinaus könnte die bestehende Arbeit leicht
erweitert werden, um Dreidruck-AHK zu berücksichtigen.
Contents
Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1. Brief description of combined cycle and cogeneration plants . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3. Individual design of an HRSG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.4. State of the art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2. Thermoeconomics and cost balance of HRSGs 12
2.1. Economic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2. Thermoeconomics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3. Cost balance of HRSGs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3. Thermal design of HRSG sections 17
3.1. Thermal design demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2. HRSG temperature profile, pinch point and approach point . . . . . . . . . 18
3.3. Necessity of using finned tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4. Thermal design simulation of the HRSG sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4.1. Input data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4.2. Water, steam and flue gas properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4.3. Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4.4. Overall heat transfer coefficient of HRSG sections . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.4.1. Average inside heat transfer coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.4.4.2. Average outside heat transfer coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
i
Contents
3.4.5. Pressure drop across fin tube bundle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.4.6. Pressure drop in the tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4. Constraints in the thermal design of HRSGs 37
4.1. General description of the constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2. Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.2.1. Allowable draft loss of the flue gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.2.2. Pinch point, Approach point and economizer steaming . . . . . . . . 39
4.2.3. Overall dimensions of heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . . . 40
4.2.4. Steam and water pressure drop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2.5. Constraints of the finning (fin tube manufacturing) . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.2.6. Fin tube and operating data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.2.7. Maximum spray water flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5. Optimization and genetic algorithm 44
5.1. Introduction to optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.2. Basic concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.3. Objective function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.4. Optimization constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.5. Operating conditions and hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.6. Optimization methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.6.1. Calculus methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.6.2. Search methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.6.3. Other methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
ii
Contents
5.7. Genetic algorithm used in the optimization of thermal design and

heat transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.8. Optimizing thermal systems with genetic algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.8.1. Optimization of systems, converting and transferring energy . . . 57
5.8.1.1. Heat exchangers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.8.1.2. Power generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5.8.1.3. Heat exchanger networks (HENs), design integration and

chemical plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
5.8.1.4. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration

(HVAC&R) systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
5.8.2. Other applications of genetic algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

5.9. Description of genetic algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5.9.1. Introducing the parameters of a genetic algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.9.2. General Description of the genetic algorithm method . . . . . . . . . 62
6. Optimization program 65
6.1. Modules of the program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.1.1. Thermal simulation of superheater no. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.1.2. Thermal simulation of superheater no. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
6.1.3. Thermal simulation of the evaporator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6.1.4. Thermal simulation of the economizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6.1.5. Water and steam property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6.1.6. Flue gas properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
6.1.7. Genetic algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.2. Definition of the optimization variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
iii
Contents
6.2.1. Approach point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.2.2. Tube diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.2.3. Fin type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.2.4. Fins per meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.2.5. Fin height and fin thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6.2.6. Steam and water velocities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6.2.7. Number of tubes on the circumference of a header . . . . . . . . . . 74
6.3. Objective function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7. Results and comparison 79
7.1. Input data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
7.1.1. Flue gas data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
7.1.2. Steam and water data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
7.2. HRSG optimization, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
7.2.1. Variation ranges of the optimization variables, case 1 . . . . . . . . . 81
7.2.2. Constraints and their range of variation, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
7.2.3. Optimization results and comparison, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
7.2.3.1. Optimization variables and thermal design results of the

HRSG sections, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
7.2.3.2. General data and cost (objective function) comparison of

the optimized and existing HRSGs, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
7.2.3.3. Comparison of the heat transfer surface in the existing and

optimized HRSGs, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
7.3. HRSG optimization, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
iv
Contents
7.3.1. Variation ranges of the optimization variables, case 2 . . . . . . . . . 99
7.3.2. Constraints and their range of variation, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
7.3.3. Optimization results and comparison, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
7.3.3.1. Optimization variables and thermal design results of the

HRSG sections, case2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
7.3.3.2. General data and cost (objective function) comparison of

the optimized and existing HRSG, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

optimized HRSG, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
8. Conclusion 115
Glossary 119
References 120
v
Nomenclature
Nomenclature
dimensionless pressure drop acceleration term
m² bare tube outside surface area
m² fin surface area
m² total inside surface area
m² total outside surface area
m² prime outside surface area
m²/m finned tube projected cross sectional area per unit

length of tube
m² cross sectional flow area of the ducts
m² net free area in a tube row
J/kg.K heat capacity at constant pressure
m outside diameter of fin
m tube inside diameter
m tube outside diameter
dimensionless fin efficiency
dimensionless fanning friction factor
dimensionless friction factor
dimensionless friction coefficient
kg/s.m² mass velocity
vi
Nomenclature
m fin height
W/m²·K average inside heat transfer coefficient
W/m²·K average outside heat transfer coefficient
W/m²·K average outside radiation heat transfer coefficient
W/m²·K average outside convection heat transfer coefficient
W/m²·K fluid thermal conductivity
dimensionless resistance coefficient for one 90° bend
dimensionless total resistance coefficient
dimensionless entrance resistance coefficient
dimensionless exit resistance coefficient
dimensionless total resistance coefficient
W/m²·K average fin thermal conductivity
W/m²·K average tube wall thermal conductivity
m roughness of tube wall
°C logarithmic mean temperature difference
m mean radiating length
m finned length of the tubes
m straight length of the tube
Kg/s flue gas mass flow rate
Kg/s water mass flow rate
vii
Nomenclature
dimensionless number of tube rows in the direction of flow
dimensionless number of tubes per row
dimensionless number of 90° elbow
1/m number of fins per unit length of tubes
bar pressure
bar total partial pressure of and
dimensionless prandtl number
W total heat transfer rate
mm bending radius
W/m²·K inside fouling resistance
W/m²·K outside fouling resistance
dimensionless reynolds number
m fin spacing
°C water or steam inlet temperature of each section
°C water or steam outlet temperature of each section
°C flue gas inlet temperature of each section
°C average outside fluid temperature
°C average fin temperature
°C flue gas outlet temperature of each section
m fin thickness
viii
Nomenclature
m tube wall thickness
m longitudinal pitch
m transverse pitch
m/s velocity
U W/m²·K overall heat transfer coefficient
m segment width of serrated fin
kg/m³ fluid density
kg/m³ flue gas inlet density
kg/m³ flue gas outlet density
kg/m³ average flue gas density at bulk temperature
mbar pressure drop across fin tube bundle
Pa pressure drop in the tube
Pa.s viscosity
dimensionless contraction factor
Btu/hr ft2 F radiation factor
ix
Abbreviations
Abbreviations
CCPP combined cycle power plant
ECO economizer
EVA evaporator
GA genetic algorithm
GT gas turbine
HRSG heat recovery steam generator
SH1 superheater no. 1
SH2 superheater no. 2
ST steam turbine
x
List of figures
List of figures
Figure 1.1 schematic diagram of a combined cycle power plant . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 1.2 heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 1.3 heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Figure 1.4 cross sectional view of a heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . 8
Figure 1.5 top view of a heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 2.1 schematic diagram of a combined cycle plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 3.1 temperature profile in the HRSG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 3.2 tube with serrated fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Figure 3.3 tube with solid fins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Figure 3.4 general Arrangement of HRSG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Figure 3.5 fin tube specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 3.6 fin tube arrangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 3.7 correction factor of the mean radiating length . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 3.8 flue gas radiation factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 3.9 moody’s friction factor diagram. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Figure 4.1 typical temperature profile of an HRSG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure 5.1 Heat transfer related articles using GAs reported in a review . 56
Figure 5.2 flow chart of a Genetic Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
xi
List of figures
Figure 6.1 regions and equations of IAPWS-IF97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Figure 6.2 single row and multiple row harp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Figure 6.3 thermal design and optimization program, Main page . . . . . . 76
Figure 6.4 thermal design and optimization program, optimization

variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Figure 6.5 thermal design and optimization program, Thermal design
data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Figure 7.1 heat transfer surface of the HRSG and its sections, case 1 . . . . 98
Figure 7.2 heat transfer surface of the HRSG and its sections, case 2 . . . 114
xii
List of tables
List of tables
Table 3.1 friction coefficient ( ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 3.2 resistance coefficient for a 90° bend ( ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Table 7.1 flue gas data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Table 7.2 water and steam data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Table 7.3 design variables and variation range for superheater no. 2 and
superheater no. 1, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Table 7.4 design variables and variation range for the evaporator and
economizer, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Table 7.5 constraints and their variation range, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Table 7.6 variables of existing and optimized superheaters no. 2,

case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Table 7.7 thermal design results of the existing and optimized

superheater no. 2, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Table 7.8 variables of existing and optimized superheater no. 1,
case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
superheater no. 1, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90
Table 7.10 variables of the existing and optimized evaporators, case 1 . . 91

evaporators, case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Table 7.12 variables of the existing and optimized economizers, case 1 . . 94
Table 7.13 thermal design result of the existing and optimized economizers,
case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Table 7.14 comparison of the existing and optimized HRSGs, case 1 . . . . 96
Table 7.15 design variables and variation range for superheater no. 2 and
superheater no. 1, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
xiii
List of tables
Table 7.16 design variables and variation range for evaporator and
economizer, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Table 7.17 constraints and their variation range, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Table 7.18 variables of the existing and optimized superheaters no. 2,

case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
superheaters no. 2, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 7.20 variables of existing and optimized superheater no. 1,

case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
superheaters no. 1, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Table 7.22 variables of the existing and optimized evaporators,
case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
evaporators, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Table 7.24 variables of existing and optimized economizer, Case 2 . . . . 110

economizers, case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Table 7.26 comparison of the existing and optimized HRSGs, case 2 . . . 112
xiv
Chapter 1 Introduction
CHAPTER 1
1. Introduction
Nowadays, extending the energy supply, design optimization and increasing the
efficiency are the main goals and targets of the industries and their future plans.
Due to the increase of human population, a continuously increasing amount of
electricity needs to be generated. There are various technologies for power
generation in the world, such as wind energy, water energy, steam turbines (ST)
and gas turbines (GT). In this regard, steam is used as the main source of energy
for processes, heating, chemical reactions, power generation, etc. in most
industries. On the other hand, the costs of the fuels are increasing continuously
in the entire world. Consequently development of new methods for electricity
and power generation, increasing efficiency and also cost optimization of power
plants are attractive subjects for engineers.
1
Some part of the world’s power is generated in thermal power plants by using
fired boilers and steam turbines.
But, combined cycle power plants (CCPPs) are more efficient in power
generation. CCPPs have currently the highest efficiency for power production.
The thermal efficiency of a CCPP can exceed 60% depending on the ambient
conditions and the design of its components. Gas turbines and steam turbines
are two main components of a CCPP. In a CCPP, the exhaust gas from the gas
turbine is used in a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) to produce steam.
Then, the produced steam is used in steam turbines for electricity production.
The gas turbine and the steam turbine produce approximately 65% and 35%
respectively of the total produced power in a CCPP. In a combined cycle,
Brayton and Rankine Cycles are linked by the HRSG, which is a very important
component and shall follow both the requirements of steam turbine and the
constraints of the gas turbine. Therefore, the HRSG has to be designed carefully
to fulfil the requirements of the steam cycle, without affecting the operation of
the gas turbine which is supposed to maximize the transferred heat, provide
expected and guaranteed thermal efficiency, and minimize the costs to improve
the overall performance of the CCPP. Any change in design of the HRSG directly
affects the CCPP efficiency, produced net power, production cost and some
other variables of the overall system. As an advantage of the current market,
several gas turbine systems are available with different operating parameters,
such as back pressure and exhaust gas temperature. The latter is very important
in HRSG design (in general, the exhaust gas temperature can range from 700 to
950K). For each selected gas turbine, a compatible design of the steam cycle
(combination of HRSG and steam turbine) is required. The thermal efficiency of
the steam cycle is strongly dependent on the HRSG thermal design.
Similar to thermal power plants, combined cycle power plants produce
thousands of megawatts of power. In combined cycle power plants, steam
pressure and temperature of the heat recovery steam generators have been
increased to produce more electricity. Multi-pressure HRSGs are designed and
developed to increase energy recovery. By using a modern HRSG, steam is
produced with similar parameters as in the steam boilers that are used in
thermal power plants. Also, any probable emissions of NOx, SOx and CO could
2
be reduced in the process of heat recovery. Apart from improving the gas
turbine technology in the recent decades, developing the HRSG was one of the
main targets of power plant engineering, in order to increase the efficiency and
reduce the cost. Engineers have spent plenty of time and carried out much
research and many optimization projects to increase the efficiency from a level
of 35% of the Rankine cycle to the 60% level in combined cycle plants.
Considering the wide range of the exhaust gas temperature and relevant
specifications, heat recovery steam generators play a very important role in the
CCPPs.
Apart from the gas turbine exhaust gas, waste gases are available in many
processes and could be recovered. Sometimes, these available waste gases are
used to heat other fluids. But, steam production is the main application of a
waste gas. In this regard, heat recovery steam generators are used in chemical
plants, refineries and cogeneration plants to produce the steam for both power
generation and plant internal consumption. Therefore, the terms waste heat
boiler and heat recovery boiler are considered synonyms.
The thermal efficiency of the steam cycle strongly depends on the HRSG’s
thermal design. For each selected gas turbine, a compatible design of a steam
cycle with a combination of HRSG and a steam turbine is required. These facts
demonstrate that the HRSG is one of the most critical equipment in a combined
plant and must be carefully designed. It should be considered when designing
an HRSG, the total cost would be very high, if the main target were to maximize
the thermal efficiency. Therefore, economic considerations play a very
important role in the design of HRSGs.
3
Fig. 1.1: Schematic diagram of a combined cycle power plant [11]
1.1. Brief description of combined cycle and cogeneration plants
Gas turbines are used in both combined cycle and cogeneration plants as an
important component. A gas turbine not only produces power, but also
supplies the thermal energy for the heat recovery boiler to produce steam.
Fig. 1.1 shows the general arrangement of an unfired HRSG. Nowadays, big
combined cycle plants are designed to produce hundreds of megawatts.
Refineries, chemical plants and many process plants use HRSGs to supply steam
in cogeneration plants.
Considering the improvement of gas turbines, developing HRSGs and also the
thermodynamic combination of the Brayton and Rankine cycles (including gas
turbine, HRSG and steam turbine) provides the most efficient electricity
generating system that is available now.
Focusing on the thermodynamic aspect, a combination of Brayton and Rankine

cycles leads us to thermal efficiencies above the 45% level that was the
maximum limit of the efficiency previously reached in large thermal power
plants. Both oil and natural gas could be fired in gas turbines. Similar to thermal
power plants, it could be expected that fuel supply is uncomplicated in a
combined cycle power plant.
4
To sum up, combined cycle plants have a number of advantages that are
summarized below:
- Combined cycle plants have short start-up times.

- Combined cycle plants can be built in shorter time than a large coal-fired
power plant.
- Combined cycle plants have higher efficiencies. They may exceed 60%.
- Emissions of NOx and CO are very low.
- Due to higher efficiencies and the small ratio of a Rankine cycle power to
total power output, cooling water requirements are lower. Cooling water
is not required for the Brayton cycle.
- Nowadays, large-capacity combined cycle plants are feasible.
Several gas turbine systems are available on the market. Hence, design
development and adaption of the HRSG design to a gas turbine is still an
attractive subject for research and development.
1.2. Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG)
A heat recovery steam generator is an inevitable part of a combined cycle and a

cogeneration plant.
Also, these steam generators are used in refineries, chemical plants and process
systems as waste heat boilers. Generally, these boilers have a similar function.
But, the main difference is based on whether the boiler is used for heat
recovery and steam production or for the process purposes such as cooling
waste gas or heating the process streams. Fig. 1.2 and 1.3 show the general
view of an HRSG including the inlet duct, heating surfaces, drum, stack, etc.
5
Fig. 1.2: Heat recovery steam generator [12]
6
Fig. 1.3: Heat recovery steam generator [13]
7
In combined cycle plants, natural gas is the main fuel burned. Therefore, clean
flue gas is expected. In general, water tube boilers with extended surfaces are
used for heat recovery and steam production. The range of inlet gas
temperatures of HRSGs varies from 700 to 950 K and flue gas pressure typically
is a little higher than atmosphere pressure. Both flue gas temperature and
pressure are the main and most important constraints that have to be
considered in the design of an HRSG. Fig. 1.4 shows the cross sectional view of a
double pressure HRSG with supplementary firing. Fig. 1.5 illustrates the top view
of an HRSG. It shows that steam enters the drum via riser tubes and riser
manifolds.
Fig. 1.4: Cross sectional view of a heat recovery steam generator [14]
8
Fig. 1.5: Top view of a heat recovery steam generator [15]
9
1.3. Individual design of an HRSG
On the recent market, there are several gas turbine systems that are
standardized. But, HRSG are expected to be designed individually for each CCPP.
The reasons include the following:
- The fuels are varied. Therefore, requirements of the relevant flue gas
should be considered in the HRSG design.
- Cycle optimization differs in the CCPP.
- Ambient conditions change and affect the GT output.
In CCPPs, HRSGs are always designed individually. However, various parts of an

HRSG are standardized for easy construction. But, HRSG design and optimization
is still an important item in CCPPs.
1.4. State of the art
Many authors have optimized CCPPs and defined optimal operation parameters
for HRSGs [1-6]. Franco and Russo [3] proposed a method based on hierarchical
strategy for optimization of HRSG operating parameters and efficiency
increasing of CCPP. Valdés et al. [5] carried out a thermoeconomic optimization
by considering the HRSG’s thermodynamic parameters as variables. Also, Valdés
et al. [6] conducted a thermoeconomic optimization of a CCPP using genetic
algorithms by considering the HRSG’s thermodynamic parameters as
optimization variables. Valdés et al. [7] performed an optimization of a CCPP
focusing on the operating parameters of the HRSG. Franco and Giannini [8]
developed a method for HRSG optimization focusing on decreasing draft loss
and increasing compactness based on a hierarchical strategy.
Manassaldi et al. [9] proposed a method to optimize the HRSG design based on
maximization of the net power, ratio between net power and material weight,
and net heat transfer. Durán et al. [10] proposed a method for developing the
design of an HRSG, which has three sections (economizer, evaporator and one
superheater) by obtaining a small heat transfer area and low pressure losses.
10
The cost optimization of an HRSG is always an important and more difficult topic
than the above-mentioned studies. The work reported here, considers cost
optimization and provides a comprehensive thermal design of an HRSG. A
genetic algorithm (GA) is used as the optimization tool. Because of the required
high steam temperature at the inlet to the steam turbine and the desired
control of this steam temperature, steam should be superheated in two
superheaters and spray water should be injected between them to control the
outlet steam temperature. In this work, four sections (two superheaters,
evaporator, and economizer) are considered for the HRSG design similarly to
the actual and existing HRSGs in power plants.
The contributions of this work can be summarized as follows:
- A comprehensive program using visual basic was developed for the

thermal design and cost optimization of an HRSG.
- A genetic algorithm was applied to the optimization module.
- The best values of pinch point and approach point were determined after
optimizing the HRSG.
- The best values of parameters and an optimal HRSG arrangement were
determined after minimizing the cost of HRSG.
- All geometric parameters in each HRSG section, including tube diameter,
tube arrangement (staggered or in-line), transverse pitch, longitudinal
pitch, number of tube rows, number of tubes on the circumference of
header, fin height, fin thickness, fin density, fin type (solid or serrated),
segment width, steam velocity and approach point were selected as
variables of optimization.
- Flue gas draft loss, steam and water pressure drops, tube wall
temperatures, fin metal temperatures, pinch point, approach point,
allowable gap between fins and the overall dimensions of the HRSG have
been set as the main constraints.
11
Chapter 2 Thermoeconomics and cost balance of HRSGs
CHAPTER 2
2. Thermoeconomics and cost balance
of HRSGs
Thermoeconomics and the cost balance of HRSGs are presented in this chapter.
2.1. Economic analysis
In thermal design projects, major costs (including capital investment, fuel cost,
cost of final product, etc.) shall be estimated properly [16]. In this regard,
various predictions, assumptions, and constrains such as technical
requirements, economic aspects and engineering techniques that are related to
the system must be considered by designers. Usually, the cost of the final
product is the main and most important factor that affects the thermal design
of a system or system component. The cost of each item is defined as the
amount of money that has to be paid to purchase or produce it. Considering
12
the competition on the market, minimizing the product cost is the target of the
overall analysis.
The market price of any product is affected by various factors such as
production costs, supply, demand, regulations and competition.
During the thermal design of a system or component, designers need to
consider the market price to optimize the design.
The total costs of a system or component is split into fixed costs and variable
costs.
Fixed costs mean those costs that are not related to the production rate. For
instance, insurance, depreciation and maintenance belong to the fixed costs.
On the other hand, variable costs mean those costs that are related to the
volume of output. Cost of material, fuel and electric power belong to the
variable costs. Accurate cost estimation would be the main issue and key factor
of a successful design to compete on the market. As a main rule in economic
considerations, cost estimation should be considered in all steps of the system
design.
After finalizing the design of the whole combined cycle plant (or cogeneration
plant), all thermodynamic parameters of the components are obtained. In a
CCPP, steam is the product of an HRSG. This work focuses on the cost
estimation and optimization of the HRSG product.
2.2. Thermoeconomics
Thermoeconomics is a branch of engineering that uses both exergy analysis and
economic principles to provide a cost-effective system [16]. The end user needs
to know the real cost of the product for a desired investment and competition
on the market. Thermoeconomic analysis can be considered for the entire
system or a single component. The output of thermoeconomics will be the
calculation of product cost, understanding the cost formation process and
optimizing the variables that belong to the component.
Principally, cost accounting of a system is conducted as follows:
13
- determining the actual product cost

- defining a reasonable and rational basis for pricing
- defining means of allocation and control of expenditures
- defining the information on which operating decisions may be based and
evaluated
In an economic analysis, a cost balance is defined by:
̇ ̇ (1)
A cost balance shows that the cost rate associated with the product is equal
to the sum of fuel cost rate , the cost rate associated with capital investment
̇ and the cost rate associated with operating and maintenance ̇ .
Fig.2.1: Schematic diagram of a combined cycle plant
2.3. Cost balance of HRSGs
Product cost accounting is part of the economic evaluations conducted for a

system. This work focuses on the economic optimization of the HRSG. Fig. 2.1
14
shows the schematic diagram of a CCPP. The HRSG is separately optimized for
cost. For an HRSG operating at steady state, the exhaust flue gas of the gas
turbine and the feed water are the two entering material streams, while the
exhaust flue gas of the HRSG and the steam are the exiting material streams.
Exergy costing was applied to the HRSG. The cost rate associated with each
exergy stream is given by:
̇ ̇ , (2)
where is the cost rate, is the average cost per unit of exergy, ̇ is the rate
of exergy transfer, ̇ is the mass flow rate and is the specific exergy of the
stream . Equation (3) shows the cost balance applied to the HRSG. The sum of
the cost rates related to the exiting streams is equal to the sum of the cost rates
related to the entering streams plus the contribution of the capital investment
as well as operating and maintenance costs, denoted by ̇ and ̇
respectively.
̇ ̇ (3)
̇ ̇ ̇ ̇ ̇ ̇ (4)
For the required auxiliary relation, equation (5) was chosen appropriately
(5)
Therefore, the average cost per unit of exergy for the product stream is:
̇ ̇ ̇
̇
(6)
The exergy of the stream entering the HRSG is provided by the combustion
chamber. By charging all investment and maintenance costs associated with the
15
gas turbine system and the costs of all exergy destructions within this system to
the net power generated by the same system, we obtain
(7)
Thus
̇ ̇ ̇
(8)
̇
In a specific application, the parameter , the average cost of fuel (e.g. natural
gas) is given. Also, after selecting a gas turbine system from the ones available
on the market, ̇ and are also given. The value of the parameter ̇ (and
) is usually provided by the company placing the order for an HRSG. The fuel
of the HRSG is supplied by the gas turbine and the product of the HRSG is fixed.
In addition, the cost of operation and maintenance is more or less fixed. These
facts lead us to focus on the minimization of the capital investment of the HRSG
as a target of the cost optimization.
16
Chapter 3 Thermal design of HRSG sections
CHAPTER 3
3. Thermal design of HRSG sections
For the desired cost optimization of the HRSG, the thermal design needs to be
carried out as accurately as possible. The thermal design simulation and the
heat transfer calculation of the HRSG are explained in this section.
3.1. Thermal design demand

HRSGs are used to absorb the maximum thermal energy and produce an
expected amount of steam for maximum recovery. HRSG design is a very exact
work which cannot be revised or corrected by additional considerations. In case
of any probable error, heating surfaces cannot be added to reach the expected
efficiency or defined output of steam generation. Hence, any fault should be
avoided in the design of the HRSGs. These facts lead us to focus on the accurate
thermal design of the HRSGs.
Some reasons that explain the importance of the HRSG design are given below:
17
- In case of any fault in the HRSG’s thermal design, a lot of heating surfaces
needs to be added to reduce the flue gas temperature and this is not
feasible.
- Inserting additional heating surfaces in the designed space is difficult.
- GT back pressure is given by GT manufacturer and needs to be limited to
never affect GT performance. Any additional heating surface or changing
the heating surface arrangements may increase the flue gas pressure
drop and affect the performance of the whole system.
- In general, the cost of the HRSG which is a very important component of
the CCPP is very high. Unreasonable design will unnecessarily increase
the cost of HRSG.
Apart from the above mentioned points, there are several reasons for the
importance of HRSGs thermal design when comparing the designs of HRSGs and
fired boilers. Some of these reasons are listed below:
- In unfired HRSGs, there is no luminous radiant heat transfer. But,

nonluminous radiation needs to be considered between the tubes.
- In HRSGs, it is necessary to use finned tubes for better heat transfer.
Consequently, the pressure drop would be higher in the HRSGs rather
than the fired boilers. Hence, there are many restrictions for the HRSG
design.
- Apart from the tube diameter and tube arrangement, different
parameters such as fin type, fin spacing, fin thickness and fin height
should be considered in the thermal design of HRSGs.
- Apart from tube material, fin material and fin temperature need to be
checked carefully.
3.2. HRSG temperature profile, pinch point and approach point

The starting point in the thermal design of an HRSG is the evaluation of its
steam generation and temperature profiles of the gas and steam. Due to the
low inlet gas temperature (700 - 950 K in an unfired HRSG) and the large ratio of
18
gas to steam flow, the thermal design of an HRSG would be different than that
of fired boilers. In this regard, the flue gas exit temperature is an important
factor for the HRSG. Due to the low temperature of the gas entering the HRSG,
less steam will be generated than in conventional steam generators with the
same gas flow. Therefore, the economizer duty in the HRSG will also be low. To
generate as much steam as possible, the HRSG should be designed to absorb
the maximum heat from flue gas.
In thermal design of the CCPP, the requirements of the HRSG are provided by
the plant designers. Steam generation capacity, operating parameters and
expected efficiency of the HRSG are usually provided by the company placing
the order for an HRSG. All of these parameters ned to be guaranteed by the
HRSG designers.
Fig. 3.1 shows the temperature profile of the HRSG. Comparing the HRSG
sections (superheaters, evaporator and economizer), the superheater
temperature profile can be obtained easily. The steam flow and the steam inlet
and outlet temperatures are specified. Therefore, the heat capacity of the
superheater, and consequently the inlet and outlet temperature of the flue gas
can be calculated easily.
Downstream the superheaters, the next stages of gas cooling are in the
evaporator and the economizer. Focusing on the temperature profiles of the
evaporator and economizer, the definition of two important variables that are
known as “pinch point” and “approach point” is very important. The pinch point
is the difference between the gas temperature leaving the evaporator and the
saturated steam temperature. The approach point is the difference between the
saturated steam temperature and the temperature of the water leaving
economizer. Selection of these two variables extremely affects the evaporator
and economizer size and also their specifications. Both pinch point and
approach point could be considered the most important parameters in the
thermal design of an HRSG. For a specified thermal performance, a bigger pinch
point leads to a smaller evaporator and a bigger economizer. On the other hand,
selecting a larger approach point leads to a bigger evaporator and smaller
economizer. In this regard, selecting the optimal values for pinch and approach
point is one of the most important objectives that needs to be considered by
19
designers. After selecting pinch point and approach point, the HRSG can be
designed and the surface areas of the HRSG sections are determined.
Fig. 3.1: Temperature profile in the HRSG
3.3. Necessity of using finned tubes

When comparing fired boilers to heat recovery steam generators, it becomes
obvious that an HRSG absorbs heat from the flue gas with medium temperature.
Consequently, a large amount of heating surface is required for steam
generation and steam superheating. It is not possible to design an HRSG with
plain tubes. Nowadays, finned tubes with closely spaced fins are the best
solution for the thermal design of HRSGs. Using finned tubes and considering a
20
counter flow arrangement are suitable features for the thermal design of the
HRSGs.
Figs. 3.2 and 3.3 show two types of finned tubes (with serrated and solid fins)
that are used in HRSGs. Comparing the serrated and solid fins, serrated fins
provide more heating surface and also a higher heat transfer coefficient (at the
same size). But they are suitable for clean gas that doesn’t contain particles.
Particles extremely reduce the heat transfer in tubes with serrated fins. Also,
the pressure drop of the gas is higher with serrated fins. Considering the higher
performance of serrated fins, most of the HRSGs are built with serrated fins.
But, the fin tip temperature and also the pressure drop need to be controlled
exactly. Solid fins are used for various gases. Fin cooling works better with solid
fins and the gas pressure drop is lower, too.
21
Fig. 3.2: Tube with serrated fins [17]
Fig. 3.3: Tube with solid fins [17]
22
3.4. Thermal design simulation of the HRSG sections
In order to simulate the performance of an HRSG, the LMTD method

(logarithmic mean temperature difference) has been used to calculate the heat
transfer in each section (superheaters, evaporator, and economizer). Both
convective and radiation heat transfers are considered in the thermal design of
each section. The geometric parameters of the finned tubes including outside
tube diameter, tube arrangement (staggered or inline), number of tube rows,
number of tubes on the circumference of a header, fin density, fin height, fin
thickness, fin type (solid or serrated fin), segment width, as well as steam
velocity inside the superheater tubes and the approach point are the variables
of optimization. The gas pass width and gas pass length needs to be the same
for all components. Therefore, the effectiveness-NTU method and an iteration
loop are considered for achieving the same length for all components.
Fig. 3.4: General arrangement of HRSG
23
3.4.1. Input data
The following input data are provided for the heat transfer calculations:
- Flue gas conditions including the mass flow rate, chemical composition, inlet
pressure and inlet temperature; the expected outlet temperature or
minimum required thermal efficiency of the HRSG is obtained from the
thermodynamic optimization of the CCPP and is used as the main
requirement and guaranteed variable of HRSG.
- The inlet water conditions are provided as input data including the mass flow
rate, inlet pressure and inlet temperature.
- The steam outlet conditions including the mass flow rate, temperature and
pressure are also provided.
3.4.2. Water, steam and flue gas properties
- Correlations and data taken from publications by the international

association for the properties of water and steam (IAPWS) [18] have been
used to calculate the water and steam properties. An individual module is
provided in the program to calculate water and steam properties like density,
specific heat, conductivity, viscosity, and enthalpy.
- Correlations taken from “The properties of gases and liquids” *19] have been
used to calculate flue gas properties. An individual module within the
program is provided to calculate flue gas properties like specific heat,
conductivity, and viscosity.
- An individual module within the program is provided to calculate the
enthalpy of flue gas based on ASME PTC4 [20].
3.4.3. Assumptions
Some assumptions for simulating an HRSG are given below
- Heat loss to environment is negligible.
24
- Finned tube specifications are considered based on the production

capabilities (such as length and diameter of finned tube).
- Metal properties are taken from ASME Sec. II [21].
- ASME Sec. I is used for tube wall strength calculations [22].
- Considering the erection requirements, width and length of all sections will
be the same.
- The maximum spray water flow will be 5% of the HRSG steam capacity.
3.4.4. Overall heat transfer coefficient of HRSG sections
The LMTD method has been has been taken into consideration for the heat
transfer calculation and the thermal design simulation based on following
equation:
(9)
with
⁄ (10)
In order to minimize the capital cost, the heat transfer calculations shall be
conducted as accurately as possible. The overall heat transfer coefficient of each
section is defined by the following equation [23]:
⁄ (11)
Considering the necessity of equal length and width of all four sections, the
required number of tube rows in flue gas direction would be non-integer and
need to be rounded accordingly. In this case, the effectiveness-NTU method is
used for rounding the number of tube rows. Details on the effectiveness-NTU
method and relevant calculations are given by Rohsenow [24] and Holman [25].
25
Considering the use of finned tubes in all sections of the HRSG, the calculation
of the overall heat transfer coefficient would be more complicated than that for
bare tubes. Fin efficiency plays an especially important role in the overall heat
transfer coefficient. There are various methods for calculating the outside heat
transfer coefficient of finned tubes. Both convection and radiation heat transfer
coefficients are considered in the calculation of flue gas heat transfer
coefficient. Annaratone [23] proposed a methodology for the calculation of the
finned tube heat transfer coefficient. Also, Manassaldi et al. [9] have used the
same method to calculate the overall heat transfer coefficient. Calculation of
the inside and outside heat transfer coefficients are presented in sections
3.4.4.1 and 3.4.4.2.
3.4.4.1. Average inside heat transfer coefficient
The average inside heat transfer coefficient is defined by the following equation
[24]:
(12)
The Reynolds number is obtained by the following equation
(13)
3.4.4.2. Average outside heat transfer coefficient
Both convection and radiation heat transfer coefficients are considered in the
calculation of the average outside heat transfer coefficient [23].
(14)
Figures 3.5 and 3.6 illustrate the geometry and arrangement of serrated and
solid finned tubes.
26
Fig. 3.5: Fin tube specification [26]
Fig. 3.6: Fin tube arrangement [26]
The average outside convection heat transfer coefficient is calculated by the

following equation [23], [26]:
(15)
For serrated fins, the coefficients are obtained from equation (16).
27
(16)
The coefficient has been calculated for inline and staggered arrangement by
equations (17) and (18) respectively.
(17)
(18)
Moreover, equations (19) and (20) are used to obtain coefficient for inline
and staggered arrangement respectively.
(19)
( ) (20)
For solid fins, coefficient is obtained from equation (21)
(21)
Equations (22) and (23) present the correlations to obtain coefficient for
inline and staggered arrangements respectively.
(22)
(23)
Also, equations (24) and (25) are considered to obtain coefficient for inline
and staggered arrangements respectively.
28
(24)
( ) (25)
In this regard, the Reynolds number is calculated with equations (26), (27) and
(28).
(26)
(27)
(28)
As per equation (11), fin efficiency is calculated to obtain the overall heat
transfer coefficient. The efficiency of serrated fins is calculated with equations
(29) – (34).
(29)
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)
For solid fins, fin efficiency is obtained from equations (35)-(37)
(35)
(36)
29
(37)
The average outside radiation heat transfer coefficient [26] is calculated with
equation (38)
(38)
The mean radiating length ( ) is obtained from equation (39). Fig. 3.7
illustrates the correction factor of the mean radiating length ( )
(39)
Fig. 3.7: Correction factor of the mean radiating length [26]
30
Also, Fig. 3.8 shows the outside radiation factor ( ). and are obtained
from equations (29) and (30). Both temperatures should be calculated in
Fahrenheit.
Fig. 3.8: Flue gas radiation factor [26]
3.4.5. Pressure drop across fin tube bundle
The flue gas pressure drop is a main constraint of the HRSG thermal design [9].
A relatively high allowable flue gas pressure drop leads to a lower heat transfer
area and lower costs. Equation (39) was used for the calculation of the flue gas
pressure drop across a fin tube bundle [26].
(39)
31
For serrated fins, the factors and were obtained from equations (40) and
(41):
(40)
(41)
Coefficient was calculated for inline and staggered arrangement with

⁄ (42)
⁄ (43)
Also, equations (44) and (45) were used to obtain the coefficient for inline
and staggered arrangement respectively.
⁄
(44)
⁄
(45)
For solid fins, factors and was obtained from equations (46) and (47):
(46)
(47)
32
Coefficient was calculated for inline and staggered arrangement with

⁄ (48)
⁄ (49)
Equations (50) and (51) were used to obtain the coefficient for inline and
staggered arrangement respectively.
⁄
(50)
⁄
(51)
For both serrated and solid fins, factor was obtained from equations (52) and
(53)
(52)
(53)
3.4.6. Pressure drop in the tubes
The pressure drop in the tubes [27] is obtained from equation (54)
33
(54)
The Colebrook equation is often used to calculate the friction factor in turbulent
flow [16].
⁄
(55)
√ √
Also, the friction factor has been developed by Moody [28]. Fig. 3.9 illustrates
Moody’s friction factor diagram
Fig. 3.9: Moody’s friction factor diagram [24]
Ref. [24] presents Moody’s friction factor correlation as equation (56)
(56)
34
Total resistance coefficient is obtained from equation (57)
(57)
where
Equation (58) is used to calculate the bends resistance coefficient
(58)
Friction coefficient ( ) and resistance coefficient for a 90° bend ( ) are

illustrated in tables 3.1 and 3.2 respectively
Table 3.1
Friction coefficient ( )
Tube diameter Tube diameter

(mm) (mm)
15 0.027 65, 80 0.018
20 0.025 100 0.017
25 0.023 125 0.016
32 0.022 150 0.015
40 0.021 200, 250 0.013
50 0.019 300,400 0.012
35
Table 3.2
Resistance coefficient for a 90° bend ( )
⁄ ⁄
1 8
1.5 10
2 12
3 14
4 16
6 20
36
Chapter 4 Constraints in the thermal design of HRSGs
CHAPTER 4
4. Constraints in the thermal design of
HRSGs
There are several important constraints in the thermal design of HRSGs. All
constraints limit the design of an HRSG. The main constraints to the thermal
design and optimization of HRSGs are explained in this chapter.
4.1. General description of the constraints
In combined cycle power plants, the flue gas exiting the gas turbine passes
through a heat recovery steam generator. To describe this briefly, there are two
separate steps of power generation in combined cycle power plants. Firstly, a
gas turbine generates power. Then, the exhaust gas of the gas turbine passes
through the heat recovery steam generator to generate steam for the steam
37
turbine. The steam turbine is the second stage of power generation in combined
cycle power plants. Therefore, the heat recovery steam generator connects the
gas and steam turbines and needs to follow all requirements of both.
The heat recovery steam generator is located behind a gas turbine. Therefore, it
must never create unacceptably high resistance to the gas cycle. In general, a
heat recovery steam generator must never affect the performance of the gas
turbine. On the other hand, a steam turbine is located behind the heat recovery
steam generator. Therefore, the requirements of the steam cycle must also be
fulfilled by the heat recovery steam generator. Satisfying the requirements of
both the gas and steam cycles is very important. In this chapter, general
constraints and thermal design limitations of such a heat recovery steam
generator are described.
4.2. Constraints
In the thermal design of heat recovery steam generators, there are many
important constrains that have to be considered together. The main constraints
of the HRSG thermal design and optimization are described in the following.
4.2.1. Allowable draft loss of the flue gas
The draft loss of the heat recovery steam generator is the main and most
important constraint that needs to be satisfied properly. The performance of
the gas turbine significantly depends on the back pressure. Each gas turbine
manufacturer specifies the maximum allowable back pressure behind gas
turbine. Therefore, optimization shall be carried out in the allowable range of
the flue gas pressure drop. It means that the sum of all pressure drops of flue
gas behind the gas turbine (including the pressure drop in all ducts, dampers,
the heat recovery steam generator and stack) must be less than the allowable
back pressure of the gas turbine. In this regard, the pressure drop in the heat
recovery steam generator that includes the fin tubes is very important and
needs to be calculated properly.
38
To decrease the pressure drop, the compactness of an HRSG needs to be

decreased. Therefore, the cost of the HRSG will increase. Typically, the pressure
of the flue gas leaving a gas turbine is a few mbar above atmospheric pressure
and the allowable back pressure is around 35 mbar. Therefore, finding an
optimum design that meets the back pressure requirements and minimizes the
cost is one of the main targets in the design of a heat recovery steam generator.
4.2.2. Pinch point, approach point and economizer steaming
Fig. 4.1 shows the typical temperature profile of a heat recovery steam
generator. The difference between the flue gas outlet temperature in the
evaporator and the saturated steam temperature is defined as the pinch. Also,
the difference between the economizer water outlet temperature and the
saturated steam temperature is defined as the approach. These two
temperature differences play a very important role in the thermal design of heat
recovery steam generators. Selecting the best and reasonable pinch and
approach points is one of the main constraints and limitations for designers.
The pinch point can affect the capacity of steam production. By decreasing the
pinch point, steam production can be increased. But the heat transfer surface
will increase as well and, therefore, the cost of the heat recovery steam
generator will increase too. Focusing on the approach, this value affects heat
absorption in the economizer. In the thermal design of an economizer, steam
generation must be prevented in it. An appropriate approach point needs to be
considered by designers to prevent steaming in the economizer. On the other
hand, this value limits the heating surface of economizers. If we consider a
specified amount of steam generation in a heat recovery steam generator, the
sum of the pinch and approach points will be constant.
If the pinch point decreases, the approach point needs to be increased
accordingly. This means a bigger evaporator and a smaller economizer need to
be provided. Considering the concept of the heat transfer in the evaporator and
a constant value of saturated steam temperature, the cost of the evaporator
can be increased significantly.
39
If the pinch point increases, the approach point needs to be decreased

accordingly. This means a smaller evaporator and a bigger economizer need to
be provided. But, with a larger heat transfer surface of the economizer,
steaming might occur in the economizer. To reduce the cost, designers prefer to
decrease the approach point and increase the pinch point. But steaming in the
economizer must be prevented and the flue gas pressure drop needs to be
checked. Considering the concept of heat transfer in evaporator and
economizer, heat recovery in an economizer is cheaper than heat absorption in
an evaporator. Optimizing both pinch point and approach point is a very
important design consideration.
Fig. 4.1: Typical temperature profile of an HRSG [29]
4.2.3. Overall dimensions of the heat recovery steam generator
The overall dimension of the heat recovery steam generator is an important

constraint that has to be considered in the thermal design of an HRSG. This
constraint affects the optimization. In this regard, the length of the fin tubes (or
height of the HRSG) is very important. Firstly, finning capability (the maximum
possible length of the tubes that can be finned) shall be considered.
Moreover, pre-requirements of the natural water circulation need to be
considered in optimization. The static head of the water depends on the height
40
of the steam drum. Therefore, a minimum acceptable height of the HRSG needs
to be considered to meet the requirements of water circulation. Consequently,
the minimum height of the heat recovery steam generator or the length of fin
tubes is considered as an important constraint to satisfy natural water
circulation. Also, maximum acceptable height of the HRSG is considered as a
constraint of the optimization.
Apart from the height of the HRSG, the width of the HRSG needs to be
considered as an additional dimensional constraint. In general, the ratio of the
height and width of the HRSG is very important. There are various
recommendations for the ratio of height and width of heat recovery steam
generators. This ratio prevents any unusual configuration of the heat recovery
steam generator. Therefore, a maximum and a minimum width of the HRSG are
considered as further constraints to achieve dimensions acceptable in an HRSG.
4.2.4. Steam and water pressure drop
The pressure drop of the steam is an important constraint to the thermal design
and optimization of the superheaters. The total steam pressure drop in both
superheaters needs to be limited during optimization. According to the design
judgment and relevant recommendations, the total steam pressure drop in the
superheaters needs to be less than ten percent of the drum pressure. The
allowable steam pressure drop limits the selection of tube diameter and also
the possibilities for tube arrangement in the relevant headers. By increasing the
steam pressure drop, the working pressure will be increased too. However, a
higher drum pressure affects the strength calculation of the HRSG and the
thickness of the drum and pressure parts will consequently increase.
Similar to the superheaters, the economizer water pressure drop needs to be
limited in thermal design and optimization. A high water pressure drop may
increase the water inlet pressure and also the design pressure of the
economizer.
In this work, the “number of tubes on the circumference of a header” has been
considered as a variable of optimization to satisfy the constraints of steam and
water pressure drop.
41
4.2.5. Constraints of the finning (fin tube manufacturing)
In the design of a heat recovery steam generator, finning capabilities (fin tube
manufacturing) shall be considered as an important item. By the modern high
frequency fin tube machines, finning of tubes from 1” to 8” is possible.
However, the maximum tube diameter used in HRSGs is 2.5”. Apart from tube
specifications, fin specifications affect the fin tube performance extremely. In
this regard, fin height, fin thickness and fin density would be in the ranges of 9 -
38 mm, 0.8 - 2.6 mm and 1 - 8 fins per inch, respectively. Two types of fins, solid
or serrated, are used in the thermal design of an HRSG. Depending on the fin
tube metal temperature, both carbon steel and alloy steel could be used for fin
tubes.
4.2.6. Fin tube limitations
The hot flue gas passes through fin tubes in a heat recovery steam generator.
Therefore, the metal temperatures of fin and tube are very important. As a
critical point, the fin tip is the hottest point of the fin tube and the fin tip
temperature is important in thermal design and optimization. The fin tip
temperature needs to be checked during optimization to prevent the fin from
burning. Fin material is selected based on the fin tip temperature. The allowable
working temperatures of the alloy steels are higher than the allowable working
temperature of carbon steel. But alloy steels are more expensive than carbon
steels.
A higher fin density or lower tube pitch could increase the rate of heat transfer.
But the metal temperature of both fin and tube will increase too.
All fin specifications and data including fin height, fin thickness, fin density and
fin type will affect the heat transfer, pressure drop of the flue gas and fin tube
temperature. Therefore, all parameters are considered optimization variables.
Comparing solid and serrated fins, serrated fins provide higher heat transfer
coefficient and pressure drop at the same specifications. But there are some
limitations to using serrated fins for a flue gas with high fouling resistance.
Considering the existing clean flue gas, usually provided through combustion of
42
natural gas, designers prefer serrated fins in heat recovery steam generators.
But, the pressure drop and fin tube metal temperature need to be checked.
Even with clean flue gas, the fouling factor needs to be considered in thermal
design and heat transfer calculation. In this regard, an appropriate minimum
gap between the edges of two fins of the finned tubes close to each other needs
to be considered too.
4.2.7. Maximum spray water flow
A desuperheater injects water between two superheaters to control the steam

outlet temperature. When injecting a large amount of water, the overall
efficiency decreases and a bigger desuperheater needs to be selected.
Therefore, the cost will increase. Also, the turn down ratio of the desuperheater
is very important. For an appropriate optimization, maximum spray water flow
is limited to 5% of the total steam flow.
43
Chapter 5 Optimization and genetic algorithm
CHAPTER 5
5. Optimization and genetic algorithm
In this work, both thermal design and optimization of HRSGs are studied. A
general description on optimization, methods of optimization, the genetic
algorithm and also the background of using the genetic algorithms are explained
in this chapter.
5.1. Introduction to optimization
Basically, optimization is not a new concept. Normally, we try to optimize by

looking to obtain the largest possible amount of goods or output per unit of
expenditure. This is what drives us in our daily lives. It would be preferable to
get the maximum output or product with the least amount of work. The price of
various consumer goods like televisions, automobiles, also advertisements,
engineering work and even education per dollar spent, is often offered to
44
provide a measure of related cost-effectiveness. Thus, a buyer of a big power

plant will use the available information for the best choice for their money.
The necessity of optimization is similarly very important in the design of thermal
systems. Nowadays, optimization has become crucial in engineering works and
the design of a thermal system. In modern systems, it is not enough to achieve
only a workable or feasible thermal system that provides the desired tasks,
meets requirements and follows the given constraints. At least, it is expected
that several workable designs be generated and the finally selected design
would be the one that appropriately minimizes or maximizes the requirements.
In general, many competing factors affect the performance and cost of a
system. If we consider that the governing parameters, which specify a system,
are varied, then the optimum design can often be achieved in quantities such as
capital cost, cost per unit of product, power per unit fuel input, efficiency,
energy consumption per unit output, and other features of the system. But,
various characteristics of the system may be of particular interest and the most
important ones may be considered in optimization.
For example, weight is important in airplane design, acceleration in
automobiles, energy consumption in cooling systems, flow rate in a system
pumping water and heat loss in insulation. Therefore, these parameters can be
chosen for minimization or maximization. In thermal systems, minimizing cost
and maximizing efficiency are usually the goals of the optimization.
Acceptable designs will be obtained from the allowable ranges of the design
variables by meeting the expected requirements and staying within the
constraints.
In general, different designs of a system could be achieved for the same
requirements and no unique solution results as a final design.
On the other hand, a designer tries to find the best solution by optimizing in
order to minimize or maximize a feature or quantity of particular interest to the
application. Local optima can be found at different points in the area of
acceptable designs. But, only one global optimum design that specifies the
minimum or maximum of the whole domain is needed.
In optimization, an optimum solution of the application is found and the final
design of the system will be obtained on the basis of this solution.
45
The design variables are generally used to then select more usual sizes,
dimensions, and standard items that are available from a supplier or
manufacturer. For instance, a tube diameter of 30.15 mm is optimal but not
acceptable. Instead, a standard tube diameter such as 31.8 or 38.1 mm is
selected as optimum value.
Also, a safety margin is included to allow for the inaccuracies and uncertainties
in the calculation, simulation and design as well as the probable fluctuations of
the operating conditions and any unforeseen conditions. The optimum solution
has to be in line with the limitations of the fabrication or material. Basically, the
final optimized system will be obtained by involving all the items mentioned.
Generally, a system’s hardware affects its optimization extremely. For instance,
arrangement, geometry, dimensions, materials and components are very
important in the optimization of a thermal system. The hardware refers to the
fixed sections of the system, i.e. those components that determine the overall
specifications of the system and cannot easily be varied. On the other hand, the
performance of a system depends on the operating conditions, such as
temperature, pressure, mass flow rate, heat input, etc.
Any cost of the system will affect the final cost of the product, i.e. the cost of
the component. Cost optimization of system components depends on the
component design and needs to be carried out carefully. In this case, the design
parameters of the heat transfer equipment may be considered as objects of
optimization.
In general, these parameters can vary within the system. But, the variations are
within the ranges that are determined by the hardware. Output and incurred
cost of the system could be optimized by defining the best and most acceptable
operating conditions and design parameters of the component.
5.2. Basic concepts
Basic concepts need to be followed to formulate the optimization of a thermal

system. The optimal design needs to meet the defined requirements and stay
within the constraints. Only then will it be considered as a best possible
candidate that is acceptable or workable. The search for an optimal design is
46
carried out in the area of acceptable designs. For instance, if several acceptable
designs of a heat recovery steam generator for a combined cycle power plant
are obtained by applying the design procedures, the best design among them
can be selected on the basis of specified criteria such as cost of the steam
production per unit of heat transfer area or unit exergy of the stream.
Basically, the conceptual design is fixed and a particular one is defined on the
basis of previous experience, environmental impact, available materials, etc.
Therefore, optimization is carried out for a specific conceptual design. Different
conceptual designs could be considered at the first stages of the design process.
However, if no acceptable design is obtained from a specific conceptual design,
the design optimization may be done with another and different conceptual
design.
5.3. Objective function
Any optimization requires specification of a quantity or function that has to be

minimized or maximized. This function is defined as the objective function for
optimization. The objective function shows the aspect or feature that is of
special interest in a given circumstance. Different costs including capital, initial,
maintenance and product costs are the most commonly used quantities that
have to be optimized. Many aspects could be employed in optimization. But, it
depends on the application of the thermal system.
Following characteristics are frequently optimized in thermal systems as an
objective function:
 rate of energy consumption

 costs incurred
 efficiency
 product cost
 overall profit
 heat transfer rate
 system performance, output delivered
 environmental effects
47
 safety
 weight, volume
Energy consumption is the most important objective function for thermal

systems and characterizes the efficiency of the system. Usually, it is considered
as energy consumption per unit of the product. Also, it is given in terms of the
energy rating of the system and specifies the power consumption for system
operation under given conditions.
Costs and profits are always important items in system design and optimization.
Economic optimization is one of the usual objectives that are considered in the
optimization of the thermal systems. In this regard, designers try to minimize
the costs or maximize the profits.
The output of the system is also of particular interest in many thermal systems.
However, if the designer wishes to maximize the output such as power
delivered by a power plant, then the associated cost will be increased and
should be an important consideration. Therefore, in many optimizations, the
objective function is defined as output per unit cost. Similarly, other
performance requirements are considered in terms of the unit costs too.
In some cases, the size of thermal systems may be optimized in order to
minimize the required amount of space. Also, efficiency, heat transfer rate,
system performance, safety, weight and several other such aspects are
important in various applications and may also be considered for optimization.
5.4. Optimization constraints
The constraints in a design problem or design optimization problem are related

to the limitations on the ranges of the variables, and to the basic conservation
principles that have to be satisfied.
In thermal systems, restrictions and limitations of the variables may arise due to
material properties, available space, equipment specification, process
specification, limitation, etc.
48
These constraints may restrict the dimensions of the system, the maximum
temperature in which components can operate safely, the allowable flow
pressure drop, mass flow rate, and so on.
For instance, a maximum allowable value of the temperature must be indicated
for the fin tip temperature of the finned tubes to prevent fin damage. Also,
sometimes the minimum acceptable values of the variable or physical
parameters restrict the design. Therefore, both minimum and maximum values
of the design variables need to be indicated. It is clear that the constraints will
limit the domain that is acceptable for design or optimum design of a system.
For instance, in heat treatment of a pressure vessel or HRSG, the minimum
temperature and time which are required for heat treatment will be defined by
relevant standard. On the other hand, the maximum allowable temperature
before the material might be damaged needs to be specified too.
In water tube boilers with natural circulation, a limitation on the height of the
boiler shall be considered to provide the required positive water-side pressure.
In the design of a thermal system, some constraints arise due to the
conservation laws, particularly the mass, momentum and energy conservation
laws. Under steady-state operative conditions, the inlet mass flow into the
system must be equal to the outlet mass flow. This restriction leads designers to
an equation that needs to be satisfied by the relevant design variables.
Therefore, restriction of the variable values may be employed in the
optimization.
Same as with the mass conservation law, energy balance considerations are
very important in the design of thermal systems and might limit the range of
heat flux, allowable temperatures, dimensions of the system, etc.
Usually, various constraints need to be taken into consideration during
modelling and simulation of the system, since the governing equations are
achieved based on the conservation principles. Thus, the optimized objective
function has already taken these constraints into account. In such cases, the
boundaries of the design domain need to be considered as additional
limitations.
49
5.5. Operating conditions and hardware
Optimization can be applied to a system to improve the design based on the

optimization of relevant hardware.
Mostly, optimization will focus on the system design so that the corresponding
hardware, such as dimensions, materials, components, etc. is optimized to
achieve the best and optimum design with respect to the defined objective
function.
But it is clear that performance and characteristics of the system are also
related to the operating conditions. Therefore, the conditions under which the
system performance will be optimized should be defined.
For instance, if the designer wants to maximize the efficiency of a steam boiler,
the boiler operating conditions (such as operating pressure and temperature)
need to be specified (i.e., 100 bar and 450°C respectively), at which this
condition the optimization will be met.
The operating conditions depend on each application and system. Generally, the
variation range of these conditions is fixed by the hardware. Therefore, if a
thermal heater is selected for the design of a furnace, the heat input and
temperature ranges are fixed by the specifications and requirements of the
heater.
In thermal systems, the operating conditions are commonly specified as
following variables:
 heat input rate

 temperature
 pressure
 mass flow rate
 volume flow rate
 velocity
 chemical composition
50
Thus, applied temperature and pressure, as well as chemical composition and

the rate of the heat input, may be varied over the allowable ranges for a system,
such as a steam boiler.
The volume or mass flow rate is chosen for a system like a heat recovery steam
generator.
In defining the selected inlet conditions for a chemical reactor, the chemical
composition is very important, for instance in a food extruder where the
moisture content is an important variable.
All mentioned variables specifying the operating conditions of a thermal system
may be fixed at different values within the ranges determined by the system
design and therefore affect the system’s thermal output.
In the optimization of a thermal system, determining the optimum operating
conditions and respectively the corresponding system performance is very
important. In many cases, optimization of the output or performance of the
thermal system is a last target.
5.6. Optimization methods
There are various methods to solve the mathematical optimization problems of

a thermal system. Each method has some limitations and also advantages over
the others. Generally, the selection of the optimization method depends on the
nature of the equations that represent the objective function and also the
constraints of the problem.
It also depends on whether the mathematical modelling is developed in terms
of explicit functions or the objective function (and also constraint’s variation) is
determined by numerical solutions.
Considering the complicated nature of thermal systems and also of relevant
designs, usually numerical solutions of the governing equations are employed
for thermal design and optimization.
However in some cases, detailed numerical results are provided through
modelling a system and are curve-fitted to achieve analytical or algebraic
equations to show the specifications of the system. Then, optimization of the
system design may be undertaken on the basis of these relatively analytical or
51
algebraic equations. The frequently used methods for optimization are

described in the following:
5.6.1. Calculus methods
In calculus methods, optimum determination is based on derivatives of the

objective function and constraints. In these methods, derivatives are used to
show the location of a minimum or a maximum.
In order to form the derivative, the equations or the expressions that formulate
the optimization problem need to be continuous. Therefore, these are
differentiable over the domain of design.
One of the important methods that use calculus for optimization is the method
of Lagrange multipliers. Basically, this method converts the preceding problem
of finding the minimum or maximum into the solution of a system of algebraic
equations, thus providing a way of finding the optimum.
Considering the complexities that commonly arise in the design of thermal
systems, the use of calculus methods for the optimization of thermal systems is
limited.
5.6.2. Search Methods
As the name suggests, these methods select the best solution from a number of
workable and acceptable designs. If just certain fixed values can be chosen as
design variables, the acceptable design may be obtained through different
combinations of these variables. If the variables can be continuously varied
based on their allowable ranges, a finite number of acceptable designs can be
found by this way. In such cases, a series of acceptable designs is found and the
optimum design can be selected from them.
The simplest approach is to calculate the objective function at uniformly spaced
locations of the domain and the optimum value will be selected. This simple
approach, known as exhaustive search, is not appropriate and is an inefficient
method for optimizing complex thermal systems. Therefore, it is not used for
practical optimization of thermal systems. However, sometimes the basic
52
concept of selecting the best design from a set of acceptable designs is used as
an important method especially if a detailed optimization of the system is not
undertaken. In this case, sometimes a non-systematic search for the optimum
design is carried out based on previous knowledge of the system. This method is
known as heuristic search.
In many practical thermal systems, the design variables are not continuous
functions but finite values may be assumed for the design variables over their
acceptable ranges. This matter is related to the limited number of materials and
components available and acceptable for the design of a thermal system. For
instance, finite numbers of components such as pumps, fans, compressors, heat
exchangers are generally available from the manufacturers at defined
specifications. However, in some cases, additional intermediate specifications
can be obtained custom made which are cheaper and more convenient.
Similarly, a finite number of different materials such as diameter and thickness
of the pipes and tubes may be considered for the equipment.
To obtain an acceptable optimum design, modelling, simulation, and evaluation
of the design are required.
To determine the effect of the various design variables on the objective
function, results from the simulation procedures are required and a systematic
searching strategy is necessary. Simulation runs need to be done to get closer to
the optimum design. In this case, any random or unsystematic searches with
many simulation runs carried out over the design domain are very inefficient
and impractical.
Search methods are used for a wide range of optimization problems, from very
simple problems including unconstrained single-variable optimization to very
complicated systems with many constraints and variables. It is clear that search
methods provide desired approaches to find the optimum design of thermal
systems and also to improve existing thermal systems.
In the work at hand, a genetic algorithm is applied as optimization method
which is explained in this chapter.
53
5.6.3. Other methods
Considering the strong need for system and process optimization in the recent
years, various optimization methods have been developed [30]. Many of these
methods are developed particularly for certain applications and may not be
suitable for the optimization of thermal systems.
In this regard, shape, trajectory, and structural optimization methods involve
specialized techniques for the optimization. A finite element method is
frequently linked with the relevant optimization strategy.
Also, a method called monotonicity analysis has been developed for design
optimization which monotonically increases or decreases the objective
functions and constraints. This method focuses on the constraints and the
effects that these have on the optimization.
In the recent decades, various other methods and relevant approaches have
been developed for the optimization of thermal systems and relevant processes
as well.
Among them artificial neural networks (ANNs), fuzzy logic, and genetic
algorithms (GAs) deserve to be mentioned. These methods are based on
artificial intelligence methods that are being developed in the optimization
works continuously.
A brief explanation of genetic algorithms is provided in this section and is
expanded in the next sections. In the field of artificial intelligence, genetic
algorithms are search methods that are based on evolutionary algorithms. The
procedure is similar to evolutionary biology and involves inheritance, selection,
crossover and mutation. The optimization begins with an initial population of
solutions, called individuals, and progresses through generations and fitness
that have been defined by an objective function. All individuals are evaluated
based on the fitness function. Then multiple individuals are selected from the
initial generation based on the degree of fitness and are modified to produce
the next population by using the genetic algorithm operators (crossover and
mutation). This new population is then used in the next generation and the
optimization is continued to the desired optimum point. Regarding other
54
methods such as ANN and fuzzy logic, more explanations are available in the
references [30] and [31].
5.7. Genetic algorithms used in the optimization of thermal design

and heat transfer
The use of genetic algorithms is increasing rapidly in the optimization of thermal

systems [32]. In thermal design and optimization at hand, a genetic algorithm
was selected as optimization method. In this section, a quick review of genetic
algorithms and their applications in thermal systems are presented.
The words ‘‘genetic algorithm” was introduced by Bagley [33] and the first
application of a genetic algorithm was published in 1967. Genetic Algorithms
were developed as an optimization method in the 1970s and some work was
done in the field of evolutionary computation. The first main work and use of a
genetic algorithm was done by Holland [34] and De Jong [35] in 1975. Later,
Grefenstette [36], Baker [37] and Goldberg [38] contributed significant
improvements of genetic algorithms in the 1980s. Goldberg published a book on
the application of genetic algorithms. In [39], additional history of genetic
algorithm methods is provided. However, using and applying a genetic
algorithm as an optimization method in the area of thermal design and heat
transfer is more recent. It is probably due to the difficulty and long
computational time of most numerical problems in the field of thermal systems
and the heat transfer community.
In the GA optimization procedure, several simulations typically need to be
performed. But the computational time for the simulation of a design applying
CFD analysis may be too long.
Anyhow, use of genetic algorithms in heat transfer started in the mid-1990s,
and is used more and more regularly nowadays. Researchers of heat transfer
can expect to see a significant increase in the application of genetic algorithms
to many complex problems of thermal design and heat transfer optimization.
Also, with the increasing availability of high performance computers, genetic
algorithms can be used more easily in the optimization of thermal systems.
Gosselin [32] has reviewed the works related to heat transfer, numerical
55
modelling and optimization as well as energy systems in major journals. The

time distribution of the relevant publications is shown in Fig. 5.1.
Gosselin presented the summary of the most important features for the
publications of thermal design problems. Also, it has found that the complexity
of the system modelling varies greatly in the range from simple analytical
equations to advanced CFD.
5.8. Optimizing thermal systems with genetic algorithms
Design and optimization of thermal systems is the first group of heat transfer
problems that have been addressed in literature for applying a genetic
algorithm [32].
Fig. 5.1: Heat transfer related articles using GAs reported in a review [32]
For instance, heat exchangers, heat and fluid flow networks, fin, porous media,
heat sinks, etc.
56
5.8.1. Optimization of systems, converting and transferring energy
Applications of genetic algorithms in optimizing systems for conversion and

transfer of energy, and in particular, thermal energy have been reviewed by
Gosselin [32] too.
He has found that the number of possible designs was typically quite large, and
genetic algorithms were helpful for optimization. In summary, genetic
algorithms have been applied for the design and optimization of heat
exchangers, heat exchanger networks, chemical plants, power plants, heat
transfer problems, as well as of heating, ventilation, air conditioning and
refrigeration systems. The use of genetic algorithms for some thermal systems
and pieces of equipment is described below.
5.8.1.1. Heat exchangers
Heat exchanger design should be adapted well to the entire system. Otherwise
they could not be operated properly and relevant costs would be high. Genetic
algorithms are suitable current optimizing methods for relevant designs.
Usually, correlations and analytical modelling including empirical relations are
used to design heat exchangers and evaluate their performance.
Various objective functions such as minimum cost, maximum heat transfer and
minimum pressure drop have been considered for the optimization with genetic
algorithms based on the best selection of tube diameter, tube pitch, number of
passes, tube arrangement, etc.
For instance, a shell-and-tube heat exchanger designed with a GA by Selbas et
al. [40]: Cost of the heat exchanger was minimized and the variables were tube
diameter, tube pitch, number of passes, shell outer diameter and baffle cut.
Also the capital and operation cost of the shell and-tube heat exchangers has
been minimized with a GA by Wildi-Tremblay and Gosselin [41]. The design
variables were tube pitch, tube arrangement, number of tube passes, baffle
spacing at the center, baffle spacing at inlet and outlet, baffle cut, tube-to-baffle
57
diametrical clearance, outer diameter of the tube bundle, shell diameter and
outer tube diameter.
In [42], the cost of shell-and-tube heat exchanger has been minimized with a
GA. Three design variables (shell diameter, tube diameter, baffle spacing) were
considered. [43] presented a GA to minimize the annual cost (exergetic and
capital costs) of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger. In [44], a plate fin heat
exchanger designed with a GA based on two objectives: the weight and the
operation cost. The NTU per unit of pressure drop of an intercooler and a
regenerator was maximized by a GA in [45].
5.8.1.2. Power generation
Genetic algorithms have been applied to the optimization of power generation

to minimize the cost, maximize performance, etc. Particularly, complex power
plants including various components and energy sources have been designed
and optimized by genetic algorithms. The main objectives of the relevant works
are usually increasing the thermal efficiency and power output and also
minimizing the relevant cost. For instance, Sirikum and Techanitisawad [46]
minimized the overall cost of a power plant expansion applying a genetic
algorithm.
In [47], the values of cooling, heating and power generation have been
maximized by using a GA based on economy, thermal efficiency and emissions.
The gas engine series and number, the gas turbine series and number, the gas
turbine side cold water mass flow share, the hot water supply temperature, the
gas turbine side hot water mass flow share, the pinch floor cooling device and
the cold water supply temperature were the optimization variables.
Gas turbine power plants with single, dual and triple pressure (with and without
reheating) have been optimized using a GA in [48]. Pressures and temperatures
of the cycles were varied by the GAs. Minimizing the energy generation cost and
maximizing the cash flow were two objectives.
In [49], a GA has been applied to maximize the internal efficiency of a steam
turbine. Angle and velocity of flow on different parts of the turbine were the
58
variables. A GA was used to minimize the operation cost of multi-device energy

supplier in [50].
In [51], processes of multi-production plants were optimized with a GA.
Minimizing the energy cost was the objective. Also, a cogeneration plant
optimization was performed with a GA in [52]. In [53], the total electrical power
generated in a cogeneration system was maximized with a GA.
5.8.1.3. Heat exchanger networks (HENs), design integration and

chemical plants
In addition to the thermal design of the heat exchangers as described in section

5.8.1.1, genetic algorithms have been used in design and optimization of HENs
and chemical plants [32]. Usually, the main objectives of the HENs problems are
to minimize the cost or to maximize the energy recovery of the design.
For example, Pettersson and Soderman [54] optimized a heat recovery system
that minimizes the total cost. The total cost was a function of the number of
heat exchangers, heat exchanger areas and the costs of cold and hot utilities.
The design variables were the fluid matches and also the area of the heat
exchangers.
In the design of retrofit large HENs, GAs were used to separate a large system
into smaller subsystems [55]. [56] minimized the cost of structural change for a
fixed hot/cold fluid network topology, and then the cost of exchangers
optimizes with a GA. [57] used GAs for the optimization of HENs. It was
performed to minimize capital cost and energy cost.
In [58], the morphology of a HEN including five heat exchanger layers was
optimized by applying a GA. The HEN with set performance was optimized to
minimize the required utilities. In [59], total exergetic and capital costs
(considering the heat transfer surface) of a HEN have been minimized with a GA.
Both temperature difference and position of the heat exchangers were the
design variables.
59
5.8.1.4. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration

(HVAC&R) systems
Designing heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration (HVAC&R)

systems and minimizing energy consumption, minimizing cost and maximizing
comfort are the main issues to address with GAs in HVAC&R systems [32].
For instance, [60, 61] minimized the total power required for an HVAC system
by applying a GA. Various design variables were considered such as number of
operating chillers, number of operating chilled water pumps, number of
operating cooling coils, number of conditioned rooms, number of operating
condenser water pumps, number of operating cooling tower fans, temperature
of chilled water supply, temperature of condenser water supply, etc. The
optimal design resulted in 800 kWh saved per day. In [62], the power
consumption in an HVAC system was minimized with a GA.
Energy consumption and predicted percentage of dissatisfaction (comfort zone)
were minimized simultaneously by a GA in [63]. Static duct pressure set point,
chiller water temperature, supply air temperature set point and required reheat
were the parameters determined with a GA. In Ref. [64], the power
consumption of a HVAC system was minimized. In [65], the energy consumption
of an air conditioning system was optimized.
5.8.2. Other applications of genetic algorithms
Various other design and optimization problems have been solved with genetic
algorithms [32].
Various conduction heat transfer problems have been solved by GAs. For
instance, the design of fins with GA was presented in references [66]-[73]. Also,
several design problems based on the heat conduction equation have been
solved with GAs in references [74]-[78]. In references [79]-[91], the designing of
thermofluid systems with GAs has been presented too. Ref. [92] presents the
design of a radiative enclosure with a GA. The difference between desired and
estimated heat flux profile over the designed surface was minimized.
60
Also, several inverse heat transfer problems have been solved with GAs.
Radiation, conduction and convection inverse heat transfer were the topic of
references [93]-[111].
5.9. Description of genetic algorithms
The basic principle of a genetic algorithm was first provided by John Holland
[40]. GAs began to be used in heat transfer determination approximately in the
mid-1990s, timidly at first but more and more regularly nowadays [32]. Genetic
algorithms are based on natural selection as it is known from biological
evolution. Stronger individuals could probably be the winners in a competing
environment. Genetic algorithms use a similar analogy of natural evolution too.
They work under the supposition that a probable solution of a problem is an
individual and can be represented by specified parameters. These parameters
are considered genes of a chromosome. As an advantage, a genetic algorithm
does not require analytical equations of the system. It analyses the system
behaviour based on the fitness value of each individual. Generally, the fitness
value correlates with the objective function of the problem and shows the
degree of “suitability” of each chromosome.
Some advantages of genetic algorithms are given here [112]:
• A genetic algorithm uses the value of the fitness function and doesn’t
require derivative information.
• A genetic algorithm searches within a wide range of samples for cost.
• A genetic algorithm deals with a large quantity of variables.
• Variables with extremely complex cost functions could be optimized by a
genetic algorithm.
• A genetic algorithm obtains a list of optimum variables, not only a single
solution.
• A genetic algorithm can encode the variables, therefore the optimization
could be done with the encoded variables.
61
• A genetic algorithm could work with any numerically generated data,

experimental data, or analytical functions.
5.9.1. Introducing the parameters of a genetic algorithm
A genetic algorithm is based on evolutionary processes, mathematics, and

computer terms. Main components of the genetic algorithm are defined and
explained in the following:
Gene: variables of optimization

Chromosome: an array of genes that is passed on the cost function
Individual: a possible result, a single member of a population that consists of a
chromosome and its cost function
Population: a group of individuals
Generation: one iteration of the genetic algorithm
Objective function: evaluation function of the solutions or the function to be
optimized
GA operators: including selection, crossover and mutation
Selection: the process of choosing parents for reproduction (usually based on
fitness)
Crossover: an operator that forms a new chromosome from two parent
chromosomes by combining part of the information from each
Mutation: a reproduction operator that randomly alters the values of genes in a
parent chromosome
Reproduction: generation with the GA operators or the creation of offspring
Additional terms are defined in the glossary section.
5.9.2. General Description of the genetic algorithm method
A genetic algorithm is one of the evolutionary algorithms that is used in

optimization and is based on the principle of Darwinian selection. In general, the
work of a genetic algorithm can be described in the following steps:
62
- A population of the individuals is randomly generated. The individuals are

obtained by the randomly generated genes.
- All individuals are evaluated by means of the fitness function and are sorted
based on the fitness value.
- GA operators (selection, crossover and mutation) are applied for
reproduction and generation of the next generation. Firstly, most appropriate
individuals (with higher fitness values) are selected as parents of the next
generation. Then, crossover and mutation operators are applied to generate
new generations. The population size of each generation is the same.
- As in the second step, the new generation is evaluated by means of the
fitness function. A new generation is formed by fitter parents. Therefore,
each new generation is expected to be fitter than the previous one.
- The above process is repeated until reaching the ending criteria, such as a
specified number of generations.
A detailed description and explanation of genetic algorithms can be found in

many references such as Goldberg [38] and Bentley [113].
A flowchart of a genetic algorithm is presented in fig.5.2. This flowchart shows a
general overview of a genetic algorithm.
63
Fig. 5.2: Flow chart of a Genetic Algorithm [112]
64
Chapter 6 Optimization program
CHAPTER 6
6. Optimization program
Similarly to most design and engineering projects, providing an accurate and
adequate program is necessary for the thermal design and optimization of
thermal systems. In this work, a comprehensive program has been developed
for the thermal design and optimization of heat recovery steam generators.
Visual basic was used to program it. In many process plants, there is a large
amount of a gas or waste gas that is cooled in a waste heat boiler. The
developed program is suitable for the thermal design and optimization of these
waste heat boilers, too. A general description of the program is provided below.
6.1. Modules of the program
In order to design and optimize an HRSG, the performance of the HRSG needs to
be simulated and the heat transfer will then be calculated accurately. Selecting
the optimization variables is very important in thermal simulation and
65
optimization. All variables that affect the objective function need to be selected
appropriately.
The steam temperature is an important operating condition that has to be
guaranteed by designer. Because of the desired control of the outlet steam
temperature, the steam should be superheated in two superheaters and spray
water should be injected between them to control the outlet steam
temperature. Therefore, four sections (two superheaters, evaporator, and
economizer) are chosen for the HRSG design (similar to actual and existing
HRSGs in power plants). The modules of the program are described below.
6.1.1. Thermal simulation of superheater no. 2
Superheater no. 2 is the first section of the HRSG. High-temperature flue gas
enters this section. Both radiative and convective heat transfer are significant in
this section and need to be calculated accurately. Temperatures of the fin tips,
fin surface and tube walls are the main constraints of this section. Therefore,
accurate calculation of the heat transfer is very important. Especially, the term
of the radiative heat transfer is significant and needs to be calculated accurately
to prevent overheating of the fin tube.
Generally, fin tubes are used in HRSGs for better heat absorption. The steam
pressure drop is the other important constraint that has to be considered in
superheater no. 2.
This module provides complete thermal design, heat transfer calculation,
geometry, arrangement, steam pressure drop, flue gas pressure drop and metal
temperature of both fin and tube. Finally, the cost of superheater no. 2 is
calculated as the main goal and requirement of the optimization.
6.1.2. Thermal simulation of superheater no. 1
Superheater no.1 is the second section of the HRSG. Similarly to

superheater no. 2, high-temperature flue gas enters this section. Therefore,
66
both radiative and convective heat transfer are significant and need to be
calculated accurately.
As explained in previous chapters, the gas pass width and gas pass length of all
sections shall be equal. Fitting superheater no. 1 in the same width and length
of superheater no. 2 is an important constraint of this section.
Moreover, the temperatures of the fin tips, fin surface and tube walls are the
next constraints of superheater no. 1. Similar to superheater no. 2, the radiative
heat transfer is significant and is calculated accurately to prevent overheating of
the fin tubes. Both flue gas and steam pressure drops are the next constraints of
this section.
geometry, arrangement, steam pressure drop, flue gas pressure drop, spray
water flow rate and metal temperature of both fins and tubes. The cost of
superheater no. 1 is finally calculated as the main goal and requirement of the
optimization.
6.1.3. Thermal simulation of the evaporator
The evaporator is the third section of the HRSG and medium-temperature flue
gas enters this section.
Generally, the convective heat transfer is significant, and the radiative heat
transfer is not negligible.
The pinch point is the main constraint of this section. It not only affects the
operation of the HRSG, but may also increase its cost significantly. Therefore,
the pinch point has to be optimized accurately. Fitting the evaporator in the
same width and length as superheater no. 1 is the next constraint of this
section. Moreover, the flue gas pressure drop and the temperatures of the fin
tips, fin surface and tube walls need to be satisfied as another important
constraint.
geometry, arrangement, pinch point, flue gas pressure drop, metal temperature
of both fins and tubes, as well as the investment cost of the evaporator.
67
6.1.4. Thermal simulation of the economizer
The economizer is the last section of the HRSG and low-temperature flue gas
enters this section. Heat transfer is accomplished by convection. Generally, the
radiative heat transfer is negligible and designers don’t consider it in
economizers.
The approach point is the main and most important constraint of this section.
The approach point not only affects the operation of the HRSG, but may also
increase its cost significantly. Therefore, the approach point has to be optimized
accurately. The pressure drop of the water is the next constraint of this section.
The pressure drop of the water affects the design pressure and the cost of the
economizer. Similar to the other sections, the economizer needs to have the
same width and length too.
Because of the low-temperature flue gas that enters the economizer, a large
heat transfer surface area is required here. Therefore, the flue gas pressure
drop would be high. The flue gas pressure drop is another important constraint
that has to be calculated accurately. Also, the temperatures of the fin tips, fin
surface and tube walls need to be satisfied as additional constraints of this
section. This module provides complete thermal design, heat transfer
calculation, geometry, arrangement, approach point, flue gas pressure drop,
metal temperature of both fins and tubes and the investment cost of the
economizer.
6.1.5. Water and steam properties
Water and steam flow inside the tubes of the HRSG sections (superheaters,
evaporator and economizer). All properties of both water and steam are
required for the accurate thermal design and heat transfer calculation.
Especially thermal conductivity, specific heat, viscosity, density and enthalpy of
water and steam are required for the heat transfer calculations and the relevant
iterations. Considering many iterations in the calculation of all sections,
accurate values of the properties are necessary for the convergence of the
calculations.
68
Data, information and correlations of the “The International Association for the
Properties of Water and Steam” (IAPWS-If97) [18] were implemented to
calculate the water and steam properties.
For different regions, a set of equations can be found in the IAPWS industrial
formulation. The range of pressure and temperature that are covered by each
set of equations are given here [18]:
273.15 K ≤ T ≤ 1073.15 K , p ≤ 100 MPa

1073.15 K ≤ T ≤ 2273.15 K , p ≤ 50 MPa
Various regions into which the entire range of validity of IAPWS-IF97 is divided
into are shown in fig. 6.1. Except for the boundary between regions 2 and 3, the
regions’ boundaries can be taken from fig. 6.1 and a separate equation defines
this boundary. Both regions 1 and 2 are individually covered by a fundamental
equation for the specific Gibbs free energy g(p,T). A fundamental equation for
the specific Helmholtz free energy f(ρ,T) covers region 3, where ρ is the density,
and the saturation curve by a saturation-pressure equation .
The basic equations represent the corresponding values from the "IAPWS
Formulation for the Thermodynamic Properties of Ordinary Water Substance for
General and Scientific Use" [114] for the main properties specific volume ,
specific enthalpy , specific isobaric heat capacity , and saturation pressure
. More details and complete explanations of the used functions are available
in IAPWS-If97 [18].
In general, all properties of water and steam are calculated in the module for
water and steam properties.
69
Fig. 6.1: Regions and equations of IAPWS-IF97 [18]
6.1.6. Flue gas properties
Accurate physical properties of the flue gas are required for the design and
analysis of thermal systems. In a heat recovery steam generator, the heat
transfer coefficient of the flue gas (fluid outside the fin tubes) affects the overall
heat transfer coefficient significantly. Any errors in the properties of the fluid
can result in a significant error in thermal design calculations and especially in
relevant iterations. Therefore, accurate physical properties have been applied in
the thermal design and heat transfer calculations of the HRSG. Relevant
properties are needed for the heat transfer parameters and its dimensionless
groups that occur in the equations of conduction, convection, and radiation (i.e.
Nusselt number, Prandtl number and Reynolds number). Especially thermal
conductivity, specific heat, viscosity, density and enthalpy of the flue gas need
to be calculated accurately in the heat transfer calculation.
The flue gas consists of the combustion products that exit the gas turbine and
the combustion product includes , , , , etc. In the module of the
70
flue gas properties, the physical properties of all these gases are calculated
separately and then the physical property of the flue gas is obtained by
considering the mixture.
Considering the large number of iterations in each module of the program,
accurate values of the properties are required for the convergence of the
calculations. Data, information and correlations of the “The properties of gases
and liquids” [19] were implemented to calculate the flue gas properties. In
general, all required properties of the flue gas are calculated in the module of
the flue gas properties.
6.1.7. Genetic algorithm
A genetic algorithm was used to optimize the thermal design and cost of the
heat recovery steam generator. A genetic algorithm module was developed for
the optimization. All genes, chromosomes, costs, fitness, selection, crossover,
mutation, etc. are defined and calculated in this module.
6.2. Definition of the optimization variables
A single-pressure heat recovery steam generator including four sections (two

superheaters, evaporator and economizer) was considered for optimization. It is
also possible to develop a program for a multi-pressure heat recovery steam
generator. In general, specification of the heating surface of all sections, fluid
velocity and approach point are defined as optimization variables (genes) that
are described below:
6.2.1. Approach point
The approach point is the most important variable affecting the optimization of
a heat recovery steam generator. Selecting the best value of approach point and
pinch point are the most important parameters that have to be defined by the
engineers. Selecting and optimizing the approach point needs to be done
carefully to minimize the cost, prevent steaming and control the pinch point.
71
6.2.2. Tube diameter
In thermal design and heat transfer calculations of the heat recovery steam
generator, the tube diameter affects the inside heat transfer coefficient, inside
pressure drop, outside heat transfer coefficient, outside pressure drop and also
the cost of each section. Therefore, the tube diameter needs to be considered
as an optimization variable.
Actually, optimization of the heat recovery steam generator needs to be carried
out for reasonable value and range of the variables. Considering the tubes
available on the market, standard tube diameters were assumed for all sections
and optimization was carried out using the standard values of tube diameter. It
might be possible to obtain better optimization results and lower cost with a
non-standard tube diameter (i.e. 35.9 mm). But this tube diameter is not
available and cannot be selected for a heat recovery steam generator.
6.2.3. Fin type
Both serrated fins and solid fins were explained in section 3. Comparing serrated
fins to solid fins (with the same fin specification), the heat transfer coefficient of
the serrated fins is higher than that of the solid fins. Therefore, a higher heat
transfer rate and lower costs are expected. But then the pressure drop of the
flue gas is higher too. Moreover, the fin tip temperature in the serrated fin is
higher. Therefore, the fin type is selected as another optimization variable.
6.2.4. Fins per meter
Basically, designers select extended heat transfer surfaces in heat recovery

steam generators to increase the heat transfer surface. The number of fins per
meter is an important factor that affects the heat transfer coefficient, the
overall heat transfer surface and the flue gas pressure drop. Also, this variable
should be selected based on the composition of the flue gas. In general, there
are no solid particles in the combustion product of natural gas. Thus, a higher
72
value of fins per meter is allowed. But for a fuel including sulphur and ash, the
number of fins per meter has to be limited. Moreover, manufacturer capabilities
limit the choices in fins per meter. By increasing the number of fins per meter,
the heat transfer rate and heat transfer surface increase. But also the flue gas
pressure drop increases accordingly. In the optimization of this heat recovery
steam generator, this parameter shall be selected exactly.
6.2.5. Fin height and fin thickness
For the design and optimization of the fins, both fin tip temperature and fin
surface temperature need to be checked carefully. Otherwise, fins will be
burned and the harps will be damaged. Fin height and fin thickness are two
important variables that affect the fin tip temperature and fin surface
temperature. Both fin height and fin thickness are important in the calculation
of the heat transfer coefficient, heat transfer surface and pressure drop of flue
gas. Therefore, fin height and fin thickness are considered as optimization
variables.
6.2.6. Steam and water velocities
Steam velocity affects both heat transfer and steam pressure drop. Based on
the judgment and recommendation of boiler designers, the allowable range for
steam velocity has been specified in table 7.3.
Water velocity also affects the heat transfer and water pressure drop in the
economizer. Based on the judgment and recommendation of boiler designers,
the allowable ranges for the steam and water velocities have been specified in
tables 7.3 and 7.4 respectively.
Generally, it is recommended that the water velocity should be around 1 m/s.
But to prevent steaming in the economizer, the water velocity needs to be
higher than 0.6 m/s.
73
6.2.7. Number of tubes on the circumference of a header
Actually, a heat recovery steam generator consists of several harps that

configure its sections. Fig. 6.2 shows the cross sections of different kinds of
harps. The number of tubes on the circumference of a header is very important
in the configuration of harps. This variable is important to manufacture the harp
and affects the tube arrangement of each section and also the relevant cost.
single row harp multiple row harp
Fig. 6.2: Single row and multiple row harp [12]
6.3. Objective function
In the optimization of the thermal design and cost of a heat recovery steam
generator, all sections (two superheaters, evaporator and economizer) are
designed and optimized together. In this regard, many constraints need to be
satisfied. The cost functions of the separate sections are totally different from
one another. This fact is part of the concept of heat transfer and individual
constraints to each section. Moreover, some general constraints limit the
optimization significantly. For instance, the total pressure drop of all the
components needs to be in the allowable range of gas turbine back pressure.
Therefore, all components need to be optimized at the same time. The sum of
74
the cost functions of the four sections has been considered as the objective
function.
The objective function (investment cost of heat recovery steam generator)
needs to be optimized properly by satisfying various constraints such as flue gas,
allowable pressure drop, steam pressure drop, water pressure drop, spray
water value, pinch point, allowable temperature of fin tube material and overall
allowable dimensions of the heat recovery steam generator.
According to an ASME - Sec. II [21], metal temperature limits the selection of
material for the fins and tubes. Especially considering the high metal
temperature in superheaters, an alloy steel is selected. Higher material cost is
expected for an alloy steel alloy. Due to the average metal temperature in
evaporator and economizer, carbon steel material is selected for evaporator
and economizer.
Usually manufacturers calculate the cost of heat recovery steam generators
based on the weight of the components. In this work, cost of the heat recovery
steam generator was calculated based on the total weight of the heat transfer
surfaces in each section. The cost of carbon steel material and alloy steel
material was assumed to be 7 USD/kg and 10 USD/kg, respectively.
The complete and comprehensive design of the heat recovery steam generator
allows engineers to consider any other cost formula and method to evaluate the
cost. Some screenshots of the developed program are shown in figures 6.3, 6.4
and 6.5.
75
Fig. 6.3: Thermal design and optimization program, main page
76
Fig. 6.4: Thermal design and optimization program, optimization variables
77
Fig. 6.5: Thermal design and optimization program, thermal design data
78
Chapter 7 Results and comparison
CHAPTER 7
7. Results and comparison
The proposed method was applied to the optimization of an HRSG that is
operated in a combined cycle power plant. The plant began its operation some
years ago and the design data, heat transfer area and operating parameters of
the HRSG are known.
Based on the discussion of the cost balance of the heat recovery steam
generator in chapter 2, the objective is to minimize the cost of the HRSG. In this
regard, both thermal design and cost of the heat recovery steam generator have
been considered to obtain the best parameters and variables of the
optimization.
As explained in chapter 4, all constraints that are related to the design,
manufacturing and operation of the heat recovery steam generator have been
79
considered in the optimization. The existing HRSG has been optimized for two
cases in 7.3 and 7.4. Different variation ranges of variables and constraints have
been considered in case 1 and case 2. Then the results were compared with the
data of the existing heat recovery steam generator.
Alloy steel was used in both superheaters of the existing boiler. For better
comparison, alloy steel was selected for both superheaters in the optimization
too. But carbon steel is sufficient for evaporator and economizer.
7.1. Input data
A high-pressure section of a heat recovery steam generator with a capacity of

241.4 t/h, a working pressure of 97.5 bar and a steam temperature of 523°C is
considered for optimization. The relevant HRSG consists of four sections: two
superheaters, an evaporator and an economizer.
7.1.1. Flue gas data
The data of the exhaust gas of the gas turbine are the main input data for
thermal design and optimization. Table 7.1 shows the flue gas data including
mass flow rate, inlet temperature, expected minimum outlet temperature, gas
composition and fouling resistance.
Table 7.1
Flue gas data
Mass flow rate, kg/s 409.56
Inlet temperature, °C 631.15
Minimum outlet temperature, °C 245.9
Composition, volume % : 3.49, : 8.15, : 75, : 13.36
Fouling resistance, m²·K/W 0.00052
80
7.1.2. Steam and water data
Table 7.2 shows the input data associated with steam and water including
steam production capacity of the heat recovery steam generator, working
pressure, superheater outlet temperature, inlet water temperature, fouling
factor and spray water flow.
Table 7.2
Water and steam data
Steam mass flow rate, kg/s 67.07
Steam pressure, Bar 97.5
Outlet steam temperature, °C 523
Inlet water temperature, °C 182.4
Fouling resistance, m²·K/W 0.000081
Spray water mass flow rate, kg/s 0.433
7.2. HRSG optimization, case 1
In the first case of optimization, the variation range of variables and constraints
is considered close to the parameters of the existing boiler. Design variables,
constraints, design parameters and thermal design of the existing and optimized
HRSGs are explained and compared below.
7.2.1. Variation ranges of the optimization variables, case 1
Table 7.3 and 7.4 show the optimization variables (genes) and relevant
acceptable range of variations for the all sections of case 1.
81
Table 7.3
Design variables and variation range for superheater no. 2 and
superheater no. 1, case 1
Superheater no. 2 Superheater no. 1
Variable From To From To
Tube diameter, mm 31.8, 33.7, 38.1 - 31.8, 33.7, 38.1 -

in line, in line,
Tube arrangement - -
staggered staggered
Fin height, mm 8 13 12 18
Fin thickness, mm 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 - 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 -
Fins per meter 100 140 180 260
Fin type solid, serrated - solid, serrated -
Transvers pitch, mm 55 120 55 120
Longitudinal pitch, mm 55 120 55 120
Steam velocity, m/s 10 25 7 20
Number of tube rows 1 4 1 4
Segment width, mm 4, 4.5 - 4, 4.5 -

number of tubes on the
circumference of a 2, 3 2, 3
header
82
Table 7.4
Design variables and variation range for the evaporator and economizer,
case 1
Evaporator Economizer
Tube diameter, mm 38.1, 44.5 - 31.8, 33.7, 38.1 -

in line, in line,
staggered staggered
Fin thickness, mm 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 - 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 -
Water velocity, m/s - - 0.6 1.5

1, 2, 3 2, 3
circumference of a header
83
7.2.2. Constraints and their range of variation, case 1
The most important constraints to the HRSG optimization and operation were
explained in chapter 4. Satisfying the mentioned constraints is very important in
the optimization and affects its result. Table 7.5 shows the main constraints of
optimization and their range of variations. In case 1, for a better comparison of
the optimized HRSG to the existing HRSG, the variation ranges of the constraints
were defined close and similar to the parameters of the existing HRSG. For
instance, the minimum and maximum allowable lengths of fin tubes were
considered close to the length of the existing HRSG. Optimization constraints of
the case 1 are shown in table 7.5.
Table 7.5
Constraints and their variation range, case 1
Constraint From To
Allowable flue gas draft loss, mbar - 13
Tube length, mm 14,000 20,000
Width of HRSG, mm 3,000 9,000
Carbon steel fin tip temperature, °C - 449
Alloy steel fin tip temperature , °C 450 650
Economizer water pressure drop, bar - 5
Pinch point, °C 8 22
Approach point, °C 12 27
Steam pressure drop, bar - 3

Maximum spray water flow as
- 5
percentage of total steam flow, %
84
7.2.3. Optimization results and comparison, case 1
The results of the HRSG optimization (case 1) are presented here. Firstly, the
optimization variables and thermal design result of each section are presented
in 7.2.3.1. Relevant optimized variables are compared to the parameters of the
existing heat recovery steam generator. The general data, cost (objective
function) of the optimized heat recovery steam generator are compared with
the data of the existing heat recovery steam generator in 7.2.3.2. Finally, the
heat transfer surfaces of the optimized HRSG (case 1) and existing HRSG are
compared in 7.2.3.3.
7.2.3.1. Optimization variables and thermal design results of the HRSG

sections, case 1
In the first case of optimization, the variables and thermal design result from
the HRSG sections (superheater no. 2, superheater no. 1, evaporator and
economizer) and are presented hereafter. Then, the optimized variables and the
thermal design result of each optimized section are compared to the
parameters of the existing HRSG. Tables 7.6 and 7.7 present the optimization
variables (genes) and thermal design results of the optimized and existing
superheater no. 2. Compared to existing superheater no. 2, fins per meter, fin
thickness and longitudinal pitch ( ) of optimized superheater no. 2 were
decreased, but fin height and transverse pitch ( ) were increased. Also,
serrated fin was selected in the optimization. In general, the costs of both
existing and optimized superheater no. 2 are approximately the same.
Superheater no. 2 is the first section of the heat recovery steam generator and
the hot flue gas passes through this section. Practically, fin tip and tube wall
temperatures are the most important constraints to superheater no. 2.
Considering the optimization results, all variables have been selected properly
to fulfil the requirements of the fin tube metal temperature. The fin tip and
tube wall temperatures are within the allowable ranges.
85
Table 7.6
Variables of existing and optimized superheaters no. 2, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit
superheater no. 2 superheater no. 2
Tube arrangement staggered staggered
Tube diameter, mm 38.1 38.1
Transverse pitch, mm 96 99.1
Longitudinal pitch, mm 90 79.4
Fin type - solid serrated
Fin height, mm 10 13
Fin thickness, mm 1.2 0.9
Fins per meter - 120 104
Segment width, mm 4 4
Number of rows, - 3 3
Steam velocity, m/s 15 16.2

- 3 3
86
Table 7.7
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized superheater no. 2, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit superheater superheater
no. 2 no. 2
Length of fin tube mm 15,700 15,916.2
Gas pass length mm 15,736 15,964.2
Gas pass width mm 7,536 7,086
Tubes per row - 78 71

Overall heat transfer
W/m²·K 61.8 56.9
coefficient,
Flue gas pressure drop, mbar 0.79 0.88
Heat transfer surface, m² 1,805.4 1939
Steam pressure drop bar 1.39 1.68
The optimization variables (genes) and thermal design results of the optimized
and existing superheaters no. 1 are shown in Table 7.8 and 7.9. Due to the
improved bundle arrangement and fin geometry of optimized
superheater no. 1, the overall heat transfer coefficient of the optimized
superheater no. 1 was increased by 25.5% compared to the overall heat transfer
coefficient of existing superheater no. 1. Therefore, the required heat transfer
surface has been decreased.
The number of rows in optimized superheater no. 1 is the main variable that
decreased significantly. As explained before, the same length and width are
considered for all sections. Therefore, finding the best transverse pitch and
rounding the number of rows is very important in superheater no. 1.
Considering the optimization variables, the transverse pitch of the optimized
HRSG is smaller than the transverse pitch of the existing HRSG. Therefore, the
number of tubes per row was increased in optimized superheater no. 1 and
consequently the number of rows was decreased too. Existing superheater no. 1
87
consists of three rows, while there are two rows in optimized superheater no. 1.
The total tube quantity of optimized superheater no. 1 is lower than the total
tube quantity of existing superheater no. 1. Moreover, fins per meter, fin
thickness and fin height of optimized superheater no. 1 are decreased in
comparison to existing superheater no. 1. Considering the lower heat transfer
surface, lower total tube quantity and also lower weight of the fins, the total
weight of optimized superheater no. 1 has been decreased to reduce the cost of
superheater no. 1 and obtain better fitness in this section. Similar to
superheater no. 2, the fin tip and tube wall temperatures are within the
allowable ranges.
88
Table 7.8
Variables of existing and optimized superheater no. 1, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit
Fin type - serrated serrated
Fin height, mm 15 13.2
Fin thickness, mm 1.2 1
Steam velocity, m/s 9.6 9.9

Number of tubes on the
circumference of a - 3 2
header
89
Table 7.9
Thermal design result of the existing and optimized superheater no. 1, case 1
Existing Optimized
no.1 no. 1
Length of fin tubes mm 15,700 15,916.2

W/m²·K 40.4 50.7
coefficient,
Heat transfer surface, m² 4,843.2 3,629.4
Tables 7.10 and 7.11 present the optimization variables (genes) and thermal
design results of the optimized and existing evaporators. Due to the necessity to
have the same length and width in all sections, transverse pitch must be
optimized properly and the number of rows should be rounded in the optimized
evaporator.
Considering the optimization variables, fins per meter and fin height are
decreased compared to the existing evaporator to reduce its weight and obtain
better fitness in this section. Compared to the variables of the existing
evaporator, the ratios ( ) and ( ) were decreased in the optimized
evaporator. Consequently, the factors and were increased in equations
(18) and (20) respectively. Therefore, the outside heat transfer coefficient has
been increased in equation (15). Due to the high value of the inside heat
transfer coefficient of the evaporator, the overall heat transfer coefficient of the
evaporator mostly depends on the outside heat transfer coefficient. Considering
the mentioned points, the overall heat transfer coefficient has been increased in
90
the optimized evaporator. By increasing the overall heat transfer coefficient of

the evaporator, the required heat transfer surface of this section was
decreased. Therefore, the cost of the evaporator has been decreased.
Table 7.10
Variables of the existing and optimized evaporators, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit
evaporator evaporator
Transverse pitch, mm 96 105
Segment width, mm 4 4.5
Water/steam velocity, m/s - -

- 3 3
91
Table 7.11
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized evaporators, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit

W/m²·K 49.2 54
coefficient,
and existing economizers are presented in Tables 7.12 and 7.13.
As in the evaporator and superheater no. 1, the length and width of the
economizer needs to be equal to the other sections. Therefore, finding the best
transverse pitch and rounding the number of the rows is very important for the
economizer too.
Considering the results of the economizer optimization, the optimized tube
diameter is smaller than that of the existing economizer. Based on the ASME
code [22], the thickness of the tube wall was decreased due to the smaller tube
diameter of the optimized economizer and therefore the cost of the economizer
was decreased too.
Compared to the existing economizer, fins per meter, fin thickness and fin
height of the optimized economizer were decreased. Compared to the existing
economizer, the ratios ( ) and ( ) were decreased in the optimized
economizer. Therefore, the factors and were increased in equations (18)
and (20) and the outside heat transfer coefficient of the economizer was
92
increased in equation (15). In general, the inside heat transfer coefficient of the
economizer is much higher than the economizer’s outside heat transfer
coefficient. Considering equation (11), the overall heat transfer coefficient of
the economizer mostly depends on the outside heat transfer coefficient.
Consequently, the overall heat transfer coefficient of the economizer has been
increased in the optimized economizer. The overall heat transfer coefficient of
the optimized economizer was increased by 27.3% compared to the existing
economizer. Increasing the overall heat transfer coefficient of economizer
affects the required heat transfer surface and consequently the cost of this
section was decreased. Therefore the weight and cost of the economizer were
decreased and a better fitness was obtained in this section.
93
Table 7.12
Variables of the existing and optimized economizers, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit
economizer economizer
Water velocity, m/s 0.67 1.09

Number of tubes on the
- 2 2
Approach point °C 21 16.17
94
Table 7.13
Thermal design result of the existing and optimized economizers, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit

W/m²·K 39.2 49.9
coefficient,
7.2.3.2. General data and cost (objective function) comparison of the

optimized and existing HRSGs, case 1
The general data and cost (objective function) of the existing and the optimized
HRSGs are compared in table 7.14.
In optimization case 1, the variation ranges of the constraints have been defined
close to the parameters of the existing HRSG. Therefore, the overall dimension
of the optimized and the existing HRSG are approximately the same. The length
of the optimized fin tube is only 1.3% more than the length of the existing fin
tube. Also, the gas pass length and gas pass width of the optimized and existing
HRSGs are close together.
95
Table 7.14
Comparison of the existing and optimized HRSGs, case 1
Existing Optimized
Unit
HRSG HRSG
Flue gas outlet temperature °C 245.9 244.9
Pinch point °C 9.1 13.82
Economizer water pressure drop bar 4.8 1.18
Total weight t 281 216
Capital cost (Objective function) USD 2,113,428 1,598,428
To achieve the guaranteed capacity, pressure and temperature of the high

pressure steam, the flue gas outlet temperature of the optimized HRSG should
be at least equal to the flue gas outlet temperature of the existing HRSG.
Considering the data of the Table 7.14, the flue gas outlet temperature of the
optimized HRSG (244.9°C) is lower than the flue gas outlet temperature of the
existing HRSG (245.9°C). Therefore, the guaranteed steam capacity will be met
in the optimized HRSG.
The pinch and approach points and their effects on optimization have been
explained in 4.2.2. Apart from the optimization of the heating surface and
reducing the cost of the HRSG sections, finding the optimum values of the pinch
96
point and approach point is the main goal of work at hand. Due to the water
phase change in the evaporator, the temperature of water and steam in the
evaporator is constant. For constant steam generation and a fixed thermal
efficiency, the total heating capacities of the evaporator and economizer have
to be constant. Therefore, the sum of the pinch point and approach point has to
be constant too. In general, the heat transfer in the economizer is cheaper than
the heat transfer in the evaporator. This fact leads designers to increase the
heating capacity of the economizer and decrease the heating capacity of the
evaporator. Comparing the pinch and approach points of the existing and
optimized HRSG, the pinch point of the optimized evaporator is larger than the
pinch point of the existing boiler. But the approach point of the optimized
economizer is smaller than the approach point of the existing economizer. This
fact shows that optimization program increased the heating capacity of the
economizer and reduced the heating capacity of the evaporator. It means that a
bigger economizer has been selected in the optimization to reduce the total
cost of the HRSG.
In 4.2.1, the flue gas draft loss has been explained as an important constraint
that affects the performance of the gas turbine. Considering table 7.14, the flue
gas draft loss of the optimized HRSG is lower than the flue gas draft loss of the
existing HRSG. Therefore, the flue gas pressure drop is acceptable and the
allowable back pressure of the gas turbine was met in the first case of the HRSG
optimization.
Both steam and water pressure drop are the other constraints explained in
4.2.4. Steam and water pressure drops of the optimized HRSG are 2.27 and 1.18
bar respectively. Therefore, both steam and water pressure drops are
acceptable and the optimization program meets the requirements of table 7.5.
Selecting better optimization variables, overall heat transfer has been increased
in optimized superheater no. 1, evaporator and economizer. Compared to the
existing HRSG, the heat transfer surface of these sections was decreased.
Therefore, the weight of the optimized HRSG and consequently its capital cost
were decreased significantly. Considering the data of table 7.14, total weight
and cost of the optimized HRSG have been decreased by 23.1 % and 24.3 %
respectively compared to the existing HRSG.
97

optimized HRSGs, case 1
For better comparison of the existing and the optimized HRSG, the heat transfer
surfaces of all the sections are shown in Fig. 7.2. Except superheater no. 2, the
heat transfer surfaces of all the sections were decreased in the optimized HRSG
by simply selecting better variables.
60,000
50,000
Heat transfer surface, m²
40,000
30,000
Existing HRSG
Optimized HRSG
20,000
10,000
0
1
SH2 2
SH1 3
EVA. 4
ECO 5
HRSG
HRSG and its sections, case 1
Fig. 7.1: Heat transfer surface of the HRSG and its sections, case 1
7.3. HRSG optimization, case 2
In 7.2, the first case of optimization was presented with the variation ranges of
variables and constraints that were considered close to the parameters of the
existing boiler. But based on engineering judgments, design recommendation
and manufacturing capabilities of the fin tubes, using a wider range of variables
98
and constraints compared to optimization case 1 is allowed and recommended.

In optimization case 2, the variation ranges of variables and constraints are
considered wider than in case 1. For instance, more fins per meter were
considered for the fin tubes. Design variables, constraints, design parameters
and thermal design of the existing and optimized HRSGs (case 2) are presented
in the following.
7.3.1. Variation ranges of the optimization variables, case 2
Table 7.15 and 7.16 show the optimization variables (genes) and relevant
acceptable ranges of variations for all sections of case 2. Compared to the
variation ranges of the optimization variables of case 1, higher values of tube
diameter, fins per meter, transverse pitch, longitudinal pitch, steam velocity and
number of rows were considered the optimization variables of case 2.
99
Table 7.15
Design variables and variation range for superheater no. 2 and
superheater no. 1, case 2
Superheater no. 2 Superheater no. 1
Tube diameter, mm 31.8, 33.7, 38.1, 44.5 - 31.8, 33.7, 38.1, 44.5 -
Tube arrangement in line, staggered - in line, staggered -
Fin thickness, mm 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 - 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 -
Steam velocity, m/s 10 30 7 40

number of tubes on
the circumference of a 2, 3 2, 3
header
100
Table 7.16
Design variables and variation range for evaporator and economizer,
case 2
Evaporator Economizer
Tube diameter, mm 33.7, 38.1, 44.5 - 31.8, 33.7, 38.1 -

in line, in line,
staggered staggered
Fin thickness, mm 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 - 0.8,0.9,1,1.1,1.2 -
Water velocity, m/s - - 0.6 1.5

1, 2, 3 2, 3
7.3.2. Constraints and their range of variation, case 2
The main constraints of the optimization (case 2) and their range of variations
are shown in Table 7.17. The variation range of the constraints affects the
optimization results significantly. Due to the wider range of constraints in case 2
of the optimization, it is expected to achieve a better fitness and lower cost than
case 1. Considering table 7.17, the acceptable range of the overall dimensions,
101
steam pressure drop, pinch point and approach point are wider than the
constraints of case 1. But due to the requirement of the gas turbine back
pressure, allowable flue gas draft loss is similar to optimization case 1 . As in
case optimization 1, the acceptable fin tip temperature was defined according
to the requirements of the ASME code [21].
Table 7.17
Constraints and their variation range, case 2
Constraint From To
Allowable flue gas draft loss, mbar - 13
Tube length, mm 14,000 22,000
Width of HRSG, mm 3,000 10,000
Fin tip temperature of carbon steel, °C - 449
Fin tip temperature of alloy steel, °C 450 650
Economizer water pressure drop, Bar - 5
Pinch point, °C 8 28
Approach point, °C 8 28
Steam pressure drop, bar - 5

Maximum spray water flow as
- 5
Percentage of total steam flow, %
7.3.3. Optimization results and comparison, case 2
The results of the HRSG optimization (case 2) are presented hereafter. In

7.3.3.1, the optimization variables and thermal design results of the HRSG
sections are presented. Also, the optimized variables are compared to the
parameters of the existing heat recovery steam generator. The general data,
cost (objective function) of the optimized heat recovery steam generator
102
(case 2) are compared with the data of the existing heat recovery steam
generator in 7.3.3.2. Finally, the heat transfer surfaces of the optimized (case 2)
and existing HRSG are compared in 7.3.3.3.
7.3.3.1. Optimization variables and thermal design results of the HRSG

sections, case 2
For the second case of optimization, the variables and thermal design results of
the HRSG sections (superheater no. 2, superheater no. 1, evaporator and
economizer) are presented hereafter. Then for each optimized section, relevant
optimized variables and thermal design results are compared to the parameters
of the existing HRSG.
design results of the optimized and existing superheaters no. 2. Compared to
existing superheater no. 2, number of rows, fins per meter, fin thickness,
longitudinal pitch ( ) and transvers pitch ( ) of optimized superheater no. 2
were decreased, but fin height was increased. Also, in line arrangement and
serrated fins have been selected in optimization. Due to the selection of the in
line arrangement in optimized superheater no. 2, both longitudinal pitch ( )
and transvers pitch ( ) of the optimized superheater no. 2 are smaller than the
longitudinal pitch and transvers pitch of existing superheater no. 2. But, the
ratio of ( ) has been increased in order to increase factor in equation
(19). Consequently the outside heat transfer coefficient will be improved in this
section.
The number of rows in optimized superheater no. 2 is the main variable that
decreased significantly. Considering the optimization variables, the transverse
pitch of optimized superheater no. 2 is smaller than the transverse pitch of
existing superheater No. 2. Therefore, the number of tubes per row has been
increased in optimized superheater no. 2. The optimized number of rows is
lower than the number of rows in existing superheater no. 2. Therefore, the
total quantity of tubes in optimized superheater no. 2 is lower than the total
quantity of tubes of existing superheater no. 2. Moreover, fins per meter and fin
103
thickness of optimized superheater no. 2 were decreased compared to existing

superheater no. 2. Considering above mentioned points, due to the lower total
quantity of tubes and also the lower fin weight, the total weight of optimized
superheater no. 2 was decreased to reduce the cost of superheater no. 2 and
obtain better fitness in this section. Considering the optimization results, all
variables have been selected properly to meet the requirements of the fin and
tube wall temperatures that are the main constraints of this section.
Table 7.18
Variables of the existing and optimized superheaters no. 2, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit
Tube arrangement staggered in line
Transverse pitch, mm 96 78
Fin type - solid serrated
Fin height, mm 10 13
Steam velocity, m/s 15 18

- 3 2
104
Table 7.19
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized superheaters no. 2,
case 2
Existing Optimized
no. 2 no. 2
Gas pass length mm 15,736 16,533

W/m²·K 61.8 55.88
coefficient,
and existing superheaters no. 1 are shown in Table 7.20 and 7.21. As explained
before, the same length and width will be considered for all sections. Therefore,
the best transverse pitch has been found in optimization case 2. Comparing the
parameters of the optimized and the existing superheater no. 1, tube diameter,
fin height, fin thickness and fins per meter of the optimized superheater no. 1
are smaller than the parameters of the existing superheater no. 1. The ratio
( ) has been decreased in optimized superheater no. 1. Therefore, factor
was increased in equations (18) and the outside heat transfer coefficient of
superheater no. 1 was increased in equation (15). Based on the ASME code [22],
the thickness of the tube wall and the weight of superheater no. 1 were
decreased due to the smaller tube diameter of optimized superheater no. 1.
Due to the better bundle arrangement and better fin geometry of optimized
superheater no. 1, the overall heat transfer coefficient of optimized
superheater no. 1 was increased by 43.6% compared to that of existing
superheater no. 1. The required heat transfer surface and weight of optimized
105
superheater no. 1 have been decreased. Consequently, the cost of this section
has been reduced. Similar to superheater no. 2, the fin tip and tube wall
temperatures are within the allowable range.
Table 7.20
Variables of existing and optimized superheater no. 1, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit
Steam velocity, m/s 9.6 12.2

circumference of a - 3 2
header
106
Table 7.21
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized superheaters no. 1,
case 2
Existing Optimized
no. 1 no. 1

W/m²·K 40.4 58.03
coefficient,
design results of the optimized and existing evaporators. Due to the necessity of
the same length and width of all sections, the transverse pitch has been
optimized properly and the number of rows has been rounded in the optimized
evaporator. Comparing the variables of the optimized and the existing
evaporators, the number of the rows is the main variable that has been
decreased in the optimization. It is related to the value of the optimized pinch
point. The pinch point of the optimized evaporator is significantly higher than
the pinch point of the existing evaporator. Therefore, the heat transfer in the
optimized evaporator is lower than the heat transfer in the existing evaporator
and a lower heat transfer surface is required for the optimized evaporator.
Consequently, weight and cost of the optimized evaporator are lower than
weight and cost of the existing evaporator.
107
Table 7.22
Variables of the existing and optimized evaporators, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit
Water velocity, m/s - -

- 3 3
108
Table 7.23
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized evaporators, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit

W/m²·K 49.2 46.22
coefficient,
and existing economizers are presented in tables 7.24 and 7.25. Similarly to the
evaporator and superheater no. 1, the length and width of the economizer need
to be equal to the other sections. Therefore, the best transverse pitch was
found through optimization and the number of rows was rounded properly.
Considering the ASME code [22], the thickness of the tube wall was decreased
due to the smaller tube diameter of the optimized economizer. Also, the fin
thickness of the optimized economizer is smaller than the fin thickness of the
existing economizer. Therefore, the weight and consequently the cost of the
economizer were decreased in optimization.
109
Table 7.24
Variables of existing and optimized economizer, Case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit
Water velocity, m/s 0.67 0.89

- 2 2
110
Table 7.25
Thermal design results of the existing and optimized economizers, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit

W/m²·K 39.2 35.79
coefficient,
Water pressure drop Bar 4.8 0.51
7.3.3.2. General data and cost (objective function) comparison of the

optimized and existing HRSGs, case 2
Table 7.26 presents the general data and cost (objective function) of the existing
and optimized HRSGs. In optimization case 2, the variation ranges of the
constraints have been defined wider than in optimization case 1. Therefore, the
better fitness was achieved in optimization. The flue gas outlet temperature of
the optimized HRSG (245.7°C) is lower than the flue gas outlet temperature of
the existing HRSG (245.9°C). Therefore, the guaranteed steam capacity will be
met in optimization case 2.
111
Table 7.26
Comparison of the existing and optimized HRSGs, case 2
Existing Optimized
Unit
HRSG HRSG
Flue gas outlet temperature °C 245.9 245.7
Flue gas pressure drop, mbar 12.68 12,38
Economizer water pressure drop bar 4.8 0.51
Total weight t 281 199.6
Capital cost (Objective function) USD 2,113,428 1,496,960
The heat transfer occurring in the economizer is cheaper than that occurring in
the evaporator. Also, the variation ranges of the approach point and pinch point
in optimization case 2 is wider than that in optimization case 1. In case 2, the
optimization program selected a lower approach point than in case 1.
Considering the data of according to tables 7.14 and 7.26, the approach point of
case 1 is 16.17°C, while the approach point of case 2 was reduced to 12.51°C.
Compared to the optimization case 1, the results show that optimization
program increased the heating capacity of the economizer and reduced the
heating capacity of the evaporator. This means that a bigger economizer was
selected in optimization case 2 to reduce total cost of the HRSG further.
112
Due to the requirement of the back pressure of the gas turbine, the flue gas
draft loss in optimization case 2 is lower than that of the existing HRSG.
Therefore, the flue gas pressure drop is acceptable and the allowable back
pressure of the gas turbine is met in the second case of HRSG optimization. Also,
both steam and water pressure drops are acceptable and the optimization
program met the requirements of table 7.17.
Compared to the existing and optimized HRSGs in case 1, better optimization
variables have been selected and a better fitness has been achieved in
optimization case 2. Therefore, the weight of the optimized HRSG in case 2 and
consequently the relevant capital cost decreased significantly. As per table 7.26,
total weight and cost of the optimized HRSG in case 2 were decreased by 28.9%
and 29.2% respectively compared to the existing HRSG.
As per tables 7.14 and 7.26, total weight and cost of the optimized HRSG case 2
were decreased by 7.6% and 6.3% respectively compared to optimization
case 1. The results of the second case of optimization show the effects of the
constraints and variables in optimization. By considering wider ranges of
constraints and variables, better fitness and lower cost were achieved in the
optimization of the HRSG.

optimized HRSGs, case 2
Fig. 7.3 illustrates the heat transfer surface of all sections of the existing and
optimized HRSGs in optimization case 2.
The heat transfer surface of optimized superheater no. 2 is approximately equal
to the heat transfer surface of existing superheater no. 2. Also, the heat transfer
surface of optimized superheater no. 1 and the optimized evaporator is lower
than the heat transfer surface of existing superheater no. 1 and the existing
evaporator. But compared to the existing economizer, the heat transfer surface
of the optimized economizer was increased in optimization case 2. This is due to
the effect of the approach point. Because of the cheaper heat transfer in the
economizer, the optimization program decreased the approach point and
113
increased the heat transfer of the optimized economizer. According to

table 7.26, the cost of the sections has been decreased significantly.
60,000
50,000
Heat transfer surface, m²
40,000
30,000
Existing HRSG
Optimized HRSG
20,000
10,000
0
SH2
1 SH1
2 EVA
3 ECO
4 HRSG
5
HRSG and its sections, case 2
Fig. 7.2: Heat transfer surface of the HRSG and its sections, case 2
114
Chapter 8 Conclusion
CHAPTER 8
8. Conclusion
Combined cycle power plants currently have the highest efficiency for power
production. In this regard, heat recovery steam generators are the main and
most important component of combined cycle power plants and cogeneration
systems. The role of heat recovery steam generators in combined cycle power
plants and industrial economy is profound. Suitable design and optimization of
heat recovery steam generators is one of the key factors to improve the
efficiency of combined cycle power plants.
In general, the optimization of heat recovery steam generators is divided into
two levels. The first level obtains the main thermodynamic and operating
parameters of the heat recovery steam generator, while the second level
provides the thermal and detail designs of the heat recovery steam generator
sections. The output of the first level is the input of the second level. Apart from
the thermodynamic parameters, economic considerations are very important in
HRSG design. Many authors proposed several methods for the thermodynamic
115
optimization of HRSGs and obtained the relevant optimized thermodynamic

parameters.
This work demonstrated both the thermal design and the cost optimization of a
heat recovery steam generator. Exergy costing was applied to a heat recovery
steam generator and the corresponding result leads us to focus on the
minimization of capital investment in the heat recovery steam generator as a
target of the cost optimization.
Four sections (two superheaters, an evaporator, and an economizer) were
included in the HRSG optimization. Two superheaters were included in the
HRSG design to prevent any simplification and also to optimize actual HRSGs
that are used in existing power plants. Actually, steam is superheated in the two
superheaters and spray water is injected between them to control the outlet
steam temperature.
A comprehensive program was developed for the thermal design of all the
sections of HRSG. Then, a genetic algorithm was applied to minimize the HRSG
cost.
HRSG steam generation and temperature profiles cannot be arbitrarily defined.
The thermal design of the HRSG should be based on the concepts of pinch point
and approach point that specify the temperature profiles of flue gas, water and
steam. Pinch and approach points affect both thermodynamic and economic
viewpoints of the HRSG optimization.
Usually, the values of pinch and approach points are derived from practical
experience. But in this work, the pinch and approach points are variables to be
optimized.
Approach point, water and steam velocity and also all geometric parameters of
each section (including tube diameter, tube arrangement [staggered or in-line],
transverse pitch, longitudinal pitch, number of tube rows, number of tubes on
the circumference of a header, fin height, fin thickness, fin density, fin type
[solid or serrated], segment width) were the variables of optimization.
Also, the main constraints (including minimum required thermal efficiency,
allowable flue gas draft loss, water and steam pressure drop, minimum
allowable gap between fin tubes, fin tip temperature, tube wall temperature,
116
minimum and maximum allowable values of pinch and approach points, overall
dimensions of the HRSG) were satisfied in the optimization.
Focusing on the thermal design of HRSG, this work obtains the best pinch point,
approach point, geometric parameters and arrangement of the HRSG to
minimize the cost. Moreover, the optimization program satisfies all of the
design constraints.
The proposed optimization method was applied to optimize an HRSG that is
operated in a combined cycle power plant. The existing HRSG was optimized
twice with different variation ranges of variables and constraints.
To show the capabilities of the optimization program, the variation range of the
variables and constraints of optimization case 1 were chosen close to the values
of the existing HRSG, while in optimization case 2, the variation range of
variables and constraints are chosen wider than case 1.
Compared to the existing HRSG, capital cost of the optimized HRSG in case 1
decreased by 24.3%. But cost of the optimized HRSG in case 2 decreased by
29.2%. The significant cost reduction was achieved by finding the best variables
of the HRSG.
Considering the optimization results, pinch point and approach point are the
main variables that have been significantly changed in the thermal design and
optimization of the HRSG. Comparing pinch point and approach point of the
existing and optimized HRSGs, the optimization program has reduced the
approach point and increased the pinch point of the optimized HRSG in both
cases of optimization. This optimization result is related to the heat transfer in
the evaporator. Optimized HRSGs have bigger economizers, but the total cost of
economizer and evaporator is lower. This leads designers to decrease the
approach point and increase the pinch point to reduce the cost of the HRSG.
Focusing on the heat transfer of each section, the product of the overall heat
transfer coefficient and the heat transfer surface affects the rate of heat
transfer. For similar variation ranges of variables and constraints, the overall
heat transfer coefficient should be increased by selecting the best fin tube
arrangements, geometry and specifications. Therefore, the heat transfer surface
will be reduced to minimize the weight and cost of the HRSG sections.
117
Serrated fins provide higher heat transfer coefficients than solid fins. Therefore,
serrated fins are preferred in all sections to improve the heat transfer
coefficients. But, the fin tip temperature, tube wall temperature and flue gas
pressure drop should be controlled by a suitable selection of the fin tube
arrangement and specifications.
The thickness of the fins is an important variable in cost minimization.
Considering the optimization results of both cases, fin thickness was reduced in
all sections of the HRSG. By selecting thinner fins, the heat transfer surface will
decrease slightly. But the weight of the fin tubes will decrease significantly and
lower cost is expected.
Increasing the number of fins per meter will increase the heat transfer surface
of the unit length of fin tubes. Therefore, the number of tubes will decrease and
a lower cost will be achieved in economizer and evaporator. In case of selecting
more fins per meter, the pressure drop of the flue gas should be controlled to
be kept below the gas turbine back pressure.
Considering the optimization results, a staggered tube arrangement and
serrated fins were selected in most sections. In this regard, lower ratios ( )
and ( ) are recommended to increase the overall heat transfer coefficient
and consequently minimize cost.
The results of optimization case 2 show the effect of variation ranges of
variables and constraints. Due to wider variation ranges of variables and
constraints, better fitness and lower cost were achieved compared to
optimization case 1. The optimization program selected a lower approach point
and more fins per meter in the second case of optimization to reduce the cost.
The lowest allowable approach point is recommended in optimization to
achieve minimum cost. But, steaming should be prevented in any case of
operation.
As an advantage of the existing work and the optimization program, the
complete thermal design of the HRSG was provided. Therefore, various
optimization strategies and objective functions (such as minimizing the flue gas
pressure drop) can be chosen by defining the objective function. Furthermore,
the program can be developed for the optimization of multi-pressure HRSGs by
adding modules for a second or third drum.
118
Glossary
GLOSSARY
Cost function: function to be optimized
Cost: output of the cost function
Crossover rate: a number between zero and one that indicates how frequently
crossover is applied to a given population
Elitism: the chromosome with the best cost is kept from generation to
generation
Evolution: a series of genetic changes in which living organisms acquire the
characteristics that distinguish them from other organisms
Evolutionary algorithm: any computer program that uses the concept of
biological evolution to solve problems; examples include genetic algorithms,
genetic programming, evolutionary strategies, and evolutionary programming
Fitness: opposite of cost; a value associated with a chromosome that assigns a
relative merit to that chromosome
Fitness function: has the negative output of the cost function; mathematical
subroutine that assigns a value or fitness to a set of variables
Genetic algorithm (GA): A type of evolutionary computation devised by John
Holland; it models biological genetic processes by including crossover and
mutation operators.
Mutation rate: percentage of bits in a population mutated in each iteration of
the GA
Optimization: the process of iteratively improving the solution to a problem
with respect to a specified objective function
Reproduction operator: the algorithmic technique used to implement
reproduction
Natural selection: The most-fit individuals reproduce, passing their genetic
information on to their offspring.
119
Reference
REFERENCES
[1] Attala L, Facchini B, Ferrara G. Thermoeconomic optimization method as
design tool in gas-steam combined plant realization. Energy Conversion and
Management. 42 (2001) 2163–2172.
[2] Dechamps P J. Incremental cost optimization of heat recovery steam

generators. ASME COGEN-TURBO. 1995.
*3+ Franco A, Russo A. Combined cycle plant efficiency increase based on the
optimization of the heat recovery steam generator operating parameters. Int. J.
Thermal Sci. 2002; 41:843–59.
[4] Casarosa C, Donatini F, Franco A. Thermoeconomic optimization of heat

recovery steam generators operating parameters for combined plants. Energy
2004; 29:389–414.
[5] Valdés M, Rapún J. Optimization of heat recovery steam generators for

combined cycle gas turbine power plants, Applied Thermal Engineering 21
(2001) 1149-1159.
[6] Valdés M, Durán MD, Rovira A. Thermoeconomic optimization of combined

cycle gas turbine using genetic algorithms. Appl Therm Eng 2003; 23(17): 2169–
82.
*7+ Valdes M, Rovira A, Durán MD. Influence of the Heat Recovery Steam
Generator Design Parameters on the Thermoeconomic Performances of
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Power Plants. Int. J. Energy 2004; 28:1243–1254.
[8] Franco A, Giannini N. A general method for the optimum design of heat
recovery steam generators. Energy 31 (15) (2006) 3342e3361.
120
Reference
[9] Manassaldi J, Mussati S, Scenna N. Optimal synthesis and design of Heat

Recovery Steam Generation (HRSG) via mathematical programming. Energy 36
(1) (2011) 475-485.
[10] Durán MD, Valdés M, Rovira A, Rincón E. A methodology for the geometric
design of heat recovery steam generators applying genetic algorithms. Applied
Thermal Engineering 52 (2013) 77-83.
[11] Rayaprolu K. Boilers for power and process. Boca Raton (Florida): CRC
Press; 2009.
[12] ALSTOM, Heat Recovery Steam Generators for combined-cycle power

plants,
http://www.mcilvainecompany.com/Decision_Tree/subscriber/Tree/Descriptio
nTextLinks/heat-recovery-steam-generators-hrsg.pdf
[accessed 20.04.2017]
[13] Babcock & Wilcox power generation group,

https://www.babcock.com/en/products/-
/media/7c6e4f303c294816afd85bee65564b63.ashx [accessed 20.04.2017]
[14] Victory energy, Heat Recovery Steam Generators,

http://www.victoryenergy.com/pdf/VEO_HRSG_BRO_WEB.pdf
[accessed 20.04.2017]
[15] Amec Foster Wheeler, Heat Recovery Steam Generators,

https://www.amecfw.com/documents/brochures-publications/brochures/heat-
recovery-steam-generators-brochures.pdf , [accessed 20.04.2017]
[16] Bejan A, Tsatsaronis G, Moran M. Thermal design and optimization. New

York: Wiley; 1996.
121
Reference
Press; 2009.
[18] Wagner W, Kretzschmar H. International Steam Tables, Properties of Water

and Steam Based on the Industrial Formulation IAPWS-If97. Berlin: Springer;
1988.
[19] Reid R C, Prausnitz J M, Poling B E. The properties of gases and liquids. 4th
ed. New York: Mc Graw-Hill; 1988.
[20] ASME PTC 4, Fired Steam Generators, Performance Test Codes. New York:
The American society of mechanical engineers; 2008.
[21] ASME boiler and pressure vessel code, Rules for Construction of Power
Boilers, Sec. II. New York: The American society of mechanical engineers; 2010
Edition.
[22] ASME boiler and pressure vessel code, Rules for Construction of Power
Boilers, Sec. I. New York: The American society of mechanical engineers; 2010
Edition.
[23] Annaratone D. Steam generators description and design. Berlin: Springer;

2008.
[24] Rohsenow WM, Hartnett J P, Cho Y I. Handbook of heat transfer. 3th ed.
New York: McGraw-Hill; 1998.
[25] Holman JP. Heat Transfer. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1986.
[26] ESCOA Corp, ESCOA Fintube Manual, Oklahoma, ESCOA, 1979.
[27] Crane Co., Flow of fluids through valves, fittings and pipe, Woodlands,
North America, Crane Co. 1999
122
Reference
[28] Moody, L. F. (1944). Friction Factors for Pipe Flow, Trans. ASME, 66, 671–
684.
Press; 2009.
[30] Yogesh J. Design and optimization of thermal systems. Boca Raton (Florida):
CRC Press; 2008.
[31] Kreith F. The CRC handbook of thermal engineering. Boca Raton (Florida):
CRC Press; 2000.
[32] Gosselin L, Tye-Gingras M, Mathieu-Potvin M. Review of utilization of

genetic algorithms in heat transfer problems. International Journal of Heat and
Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 2169–2188.
[33] Bagley JD. The behavior of adaptive systems which employ genetic and
correlation algorithms. Ph.D. thesis. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. 1967.
[34+ Holland JH, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, University of

Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1975.
[35] De Jong KA, An analysis of the behavior of a class of genetic adaptive

systems, Dissertation Abstracts International, vol. 36, no. 10, 1975, 5140B
(University Microfilms No. 76-9381).
[36] Grefenstette JJ, Optimization of control parameters for genetic algorithms,

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (1986) 122–128.
[37+ Baker JE, Reducing bias and inefficiency in the selection algorithm, in:
Genetic Algorithms and Their Applications: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Genetic
Algorithms, 1987, pp. 14–21.
123
Reference
[38] Goldberg D. Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine

Learning. Michigan: Addison-Wesley; 1996.
[39] Bäck T, Hammel U, Schwefel HP, Evolutionary computation: comments on

the history and current state, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 1
(1997) 3–17.
[40] R. Selbas, O. Kizilkan, M. Reppich, A new design approach for shell-and-tube

heat exchangers using genetic algorithms from economic point of view,
Chemical Engineering and Processing 45 (4) (2006) 268–275.
[41] P. Wildi-Tremblay, L. Gosselin, Minimizing shell-and-tube heat exchanger

cost with genetic algorithms and considering maintenance, International Journal
of Energy Research 31 (9) (2007) 867–885.
[42]A.C. Caputo, P.M. Pelagagge, P. Salini, Heat exchanger design based on

economic optimisation, Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (10) (2008) 1151–
1159.
[43] Y. Ozcelik, Exergetic optimization of shell and tube heat exchangers using a
genetic based algorithm, Applied Thermal Engineering 27 (11–12) (2007) 1849–
1856.
[44] H. Peng, X. Ling, Optimal design approach for the plate-fin heat exchangers
using neural networks cooperated with genetic algorithms, Applied Thermal
Engineering 28 (5–6) (2008) 642–650.
[45] I. Ozkol, G. Komurgoz, Determination of the optimum geometry of the heat

exchanger body via a genetic algorithm, Numerical Heat Transfer Part A –
Applications 48 (3) (2005) 283–296.
124
Reference
[46] Sirikum J, Techanitisawad A, Power generation expansion planning with

emission control: a nonlinear model and a GA-based heuristic approach,
International Journal of Energy Research 30 (2) (2006) 81–99.
[47] H. Li, R. Nalim, P.A. Haldi, Thermal-economic optimization of a distributed

multi-generation energy system – a case study of Beijing, Applied Thermal
Engineering 26 (7) (2006) 709–719.
[48] M. Valdes, M.D. Duran, A. Rovira, Thermoeconomic optimization of

combined cycle gas turbine power plants using genetic algorithms, Applied
Thermal Engineering 23 (17) (2003) 2169–2182.
[49] X. Qin, L. Chen, F. Sun, C. Wu, Optimization for a steam turbine stage
efficiency using a genetic algorithm, Applied Thermal Engineering 23 (18) (2003)
2307–2316.
[50] S. Obara, Operating schedule of a combined energy network system with

fuel cell, International Journal of Energy Research 30 (13) (2006) 1055–1073.
[51] N. Oldenburg, G. Gruhn, J. Stoldt, Capacity analysis of multi-product plants

integrating energy consumption, Applied Thermal Engineering 21 (13–14) (2001)
1283–1298.
*52+ G.A. Efthimeros, D.T. Tsahalis, Intensified energy-saving technologies

developed in EU-funded research: a review, Applied Thermal Engineering 20
(15–16) (2000) 1607–1613.
[53] D.A. Manolas, C.A. Frangopoulos, T.P. Gialamas, D.T. Tsahalis, Operation
optimization of an industrial cogeneration system by a genetic algorithm,
Energy Conversion and Management 38 (15–17) (1997) 1625–1636.
[54] F. Pettersson, J. Soderman, Design of robust heat recovery systems in paper

machines, Chemical Engineering and Processing 46 (10) (2007) 910–917.
125
Reference
[55] K.M. Bjork, R. Nordman, Solving large-scale retrofit heat exchanger network
synthesis problems with mathematical optimization methods, Chemical
Engineering and Processing 44 (8) (2005) 869–876.
[56] J. Jezowski, R. Bochenek, G. Poplewski, On application of stochastic

optimization techniques to designing heat exchanger- and water networks,
Chemical Engineering and Processing 46 (11) (2007) 1160–1174.
[57] M.A.S.S. Ravagnani, A.P. Silva, P.A. Arroyo, A.A. Constantino, Heat
exchanger network synthesis and optimisation using genetic algorithm, Applied
Thermal Engineering 25 (7) (2005) 1003–1017.
[58] J. Dipama, A. Teyssedou, M. Sorin, Synthesis of heat exchanger networks

using genetic algorithms, Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (14–15) (2008) 1763–
1773.
[59] X. Ma, P. Yao, X. Luo, W. Roetzel, Synthesis of multi-stream heat exchanger

network for multi-period operation with genetic/simulated annealing
algorithms, Applied Thermal Engineering 28 (8–9) (2008) 809–823.
[60] L. Lu,W.J. Cai, Y.C. Soh, L. Xie, Global optimization for overall HVAC systems
Part II problem solution and simulations, Energy Conversion and Management
46 (7–8) (2005) 1015–1028.
[61] L. Lu,W.J. Cai, Y.S. Chai, L. Xie, Global optimization for overall HVAC systems
Part I problem formulation and analysis, Energy Conversion and Management
46 (7–8) (2005) 999–1014.
[62] L. Lu, W. Cai, L. Xie, S. Li, Y.C. Soh, HVAC system optimization – in building
section, Energy and Buildings 37 (1) (2005) 11–22.
[63] N. Nassif, S. Kajl, R. Sabourin, Optimization of HVAC, control system

strategy using two-objective genetic algorithm, HVAC&R 11 (3) (2005) 459–486.
126
Reference
[64] L. Lu, W.J. Cai, Y.C. Soh, L. Xie, S. Li, HVAC system optimization – condenser
water loop, Energy Conversion and Management 45 (4) (2004) 613–630.
[65] X. Jin, H. Ren, X. Xiao, Prediction-based online optimal control of outdoor

air of multi-zone VAV air conditioning systems, Energy and Buildings 37 (9)
(2005) 939–944.
*66+ G. Fabbri, A genetic algorithm for fin profile optimization, International

Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 40 (9) (1997) 2165–2172.
[67] M. Younes, A. Potiron, A genetic algorithm for the shape optimization of

parts subjected to thermal loading, Numerical Heat Transfer Part A–
Applications 39 (5) (2001) 449–470.
*68+ M. Sasikumar, C. Balaji, Optimization of convective fin systems: a holistic

approach, Heat and Mass Transfer 39 (1) (2002) 57–68.
[69] K. Jeevan, G.A. Quadir, K.N. Seetharamu, I.A. Azid, Z.A. Zainal, Optimization
of thermal resistance of stacked micro-channel using genetic algorithm,
International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow 15 (1) (2005)
27–42.
*70+ G. Fabbri, Heat transfer optimization in internally finned tubes under

laminar flow conditions, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 41 (10)
(1998) 1243–1253.
*71+ G. Fabbri, Optimum profiles for asymmetrical longitudinal fills in cylindrical

ducts, International Journal of Heat andMass Transfer 42 (3) (1999) 511–523.
*72+ G. Fabbri, Optimization of heat transfer through finned dissipators cooled

by laminar flow, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 19 (6) (1998) 644–
654.
127
Reference
[73+ G. Fabbri, Optimum performances of longitudinal convective fins with

symmetrical and asymmetrical profiles, International Journal of Heat and Fluid
Flow 20 (6) (1999) 634–641.
[74] H. Pedro, M.H. Kobayashi, C.F.M. Coimbra, A.K. da Silva, Effectiveness of

complex design through an evolutionary approach, Journal of Thermophysics
and Heat Transfer 22 (1) (2008) 115–118.
[75] A.J. Goupee, S.S. Vel, Two-dimensional optimization of material

composition of functionally graded materials using meshless analyses and a
genetic algorithm, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering
195 (44–47) (2006) 5926–5948.
[76] J.V. Wolfersdorf, E. Achermann, B. Weigand, Shape optimization of cooling

channels using genetic algorithms, Journal of Heat Transfer – Transactions of
the ASME 119 (2) (1997) 380–388.
[77] M. Krol, R.A. Bialecki, Optimization of a window frame by BEM and genetic
algorithm, International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow 13
(5–6) (2003) 565–580.
[78] R.A. Bialecki, T. Burczynski, A. Dlugosz, W. Kus, Z. Ostrowski, Evolutionary

shape optimization of thermoelastic bodies exchanging heat by convection and
radiation, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 194 (17)
(2005) 1839–1859.
[79] E. Nobile, F. Pinto, G. Rizzetto, Geometric parameterization and

multiobjective shape optimization of convective periodic channels, Numerical
Heat Transfer Part B – Fundamentals 50 (5) (2006) 425–453.
[80] P. Wildi-Tremblay, L. Gosselin, Layered porous media architecture for

maximal cooling, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (3–4)
(2007) 464–478.
128
Reference
[81] M. Tye-Gingras, L. Gosselin, Thermal resistance minimization of a fin-and-

porous medium heat sink with evolutionary algorithms, Numerical Heat
Transfer-Part A 54 (4) (2008) 349–366.
[82] A.K. da Silva, L. Gosselin, Evolutionary placement of discrete heaters in

forced convection, Numerical Heat Transfer – Part A 54 (1) (2008) 20–33.
[83] T. Dias, L.F. Milanez, Optimal location of heat sources on a vertical wall
with natural convection through genetic algorithms, International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 49 (13–14) (2006) 2090–2096.
[84] R. Hilbert, G. Janiga, R. Baron, D. Thevenin, Multi-objective shape

optimization of a heat exchanger using parallel genetic algorithms, International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 49 (15–16) (2006) 2567–2577.
[85] T.S. Schmit, A.K. Dhingra, F. Landis, G. Kojasoy, A genetic algorithm

optimization technique for compact high intensity cooler, Journal of Enhanced
Heat Transfer 3 (4) (1996) 281–290.
[86] K. Foli, T. Okabe, M. Olhofer, Y.C. Jin, B. Sendhoff, Optimization of micro

heat exchanger: CFD, analytical approach and multi-objective evolutionary
algorithms, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 49 (5–6) (2006)
1090–1099.
[87] G. Fabbri, Heat transfer optimization in corrugated wall channels,

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 43 (23) (2000) 4299–4310.
[88] D. Rakshit, C. Balaji, Thermodynamic optimization of conjugate convection

from a finned channel using genetic algorithms, Heat and Mass Transfer 41 (6)
(2005) 535–544.
129
Reference
[89] H.W. Lee, Y.J. Teng, I.A. Azid, K.N. Seetharamu, Neuro-genetic optimization
of micro compact heat exchanger, International Journal of Numerical Methods
for Heat & Fluid Flow 17 (1) (2007) 20–33.
[90] B. Ozcelik, T. Erzurumlu, Determination of effecting dimensional

parameters on warpage of thin shell plastic parts using integrated response
surface method and genetic algorithmic, International Communications in Heat
and Mass Transfer 32 (8) (2005) 1085–1094.
[91] M. Cavazzuti, M.A. Corticelli, Optimization of a buoyancy chimney with a

heated ribbed wall, Heat and Mass Transfer 44 (4) (2008) 421–435.
[92] S.M.H. Sarvari, Optimal geometry design of radiative enclosures using the
genetic algorithm, Numerical Heat Transfer Part A – Applications 52 (2) (2007)
127–143.
[93] M.N. Ozisik, H.R.B. Orlande, Inverse Heat Transfer, Taylor & Francis, 2000.
[94] M.R. Jones, M.Q. Brewster, Y. Yamada, Application of a genetic algorithm to

the optical characterization of propellant smoke, Journal of Thermophysics and
Heat Transfer 10 (2) (1996) 372–377.
[95] H.Y. Li, C.Y. Yang, A genetic algorithm for inverse radiation problems,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 40 (7) (1997) 1545–1549.
[96] M.R. Jones, A. Tezukaa, Y. Yamada, Thermal tomographic detection of

inhomogeneities, Journal of Heat Transfer – Transactions of the ASME 117 (4)
(1995) 969–975.
*97+ M. Raudensky, J. Horsky, J. Krejsa, L. lama, Usage of artificial intelligence

methods in inverse problems for estimation of material parameters,
19–29.
130
Reference
[98] E. Divo, A. Kassab, F. Rodriguez, Characterization of space dependent

thermal conductivity with a BEM-based genetic algorithm, Numerical Heat
Transfer Part A – Applications 37 (8) (2000) 845–875.
[99] S. Orain, Y. Scudeller, S. Garcia, T. Brousse, Use of genetic algorithms for the
simultaneous estimation of thin films thermal conductivity and contact
resistances, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 44 (20) (2001)
3973–3984.
[100] S. Garcia, E.P. Scott, Use of genetic algorithms in thermal property

estimation. Part I: Experimental design optimization, Numerical Heat Transfer
Part A –Applications 33 (2) (1998) 135–147.
[101] S. Garcia, J. Guynn, E.P. Scott, Use of genetic algorithms in thermal

property estimation. Part II: Simultaneous estimation of thermal properties,
Numerical Heat Transfer Part A – Applications 33 (2) (1998) 149–168.
[102] A.R. Hanuska, E.P. Scott, K. Daryabeigi, Thermal characterization of

aerospace structures, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 14 (3) (2000)
322–329.
[103] S. Verma, C. Balaji, Multi-parameter estimation in combined conduction–

radiation from a plane parallel participating medium using genetic algorithms,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (9–10) (2007) 1706–1714.
[104] K. Daryabeigi, Heat transfer in high-temperature fibrous insulation,

Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer 17 (1) (2003) 10–20.
*105+ G.R. Liu, J.H. Lee, A.T. Patera, Z.L. Yang, K.Y. Lam, Inverse identification of
thermal parameters using reduced-basis method, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering 194 (27–29) (2005) 3090–3107.
131
Reference
[106] M. Raudensky, K.A. Woodbury, J. Kral, T. Brezina, Genetic algorithm in

solution of inverse conduction problems, Numerical Heat Transfer Part B –
Fundamentals 28 (3) (1995) 293–306.
[107] X. Xu, S. Wang, Optimal simplified thermal models of building envelope

based on frequency domain regression using genetic algorithm, Energy and
Buildings 39 (5) (2007) 525–536.
[108] S.W. Wang, X.H. Xu, Parameter estimation of internal thermal mass of
building dynamic models using genetic algorithm, Energy Conversion and
Management 47 (13–14) (2006) 1927–1941.
[109] P. Lauret, H. Boyer, C. Riviere, A. Bastide, A genetic algorithm applied to

the validation of building thermal models, Energy and Buildings 37 (8) (2005)
858–866.
[110] K.H. Cho, S. Kim, Y.J. Lee, A fast EIT image reconstruction method for the
two-phase flow visualization, International Communications in Heat and Mass
Transfer 26 (5) (1999) 637–646.
[111] Y.H. Guo, G.B. He, A.T. Hsu, Application of genetic algorithms to the
development of a variable Schmidt number model for jet-in-crossflows,
744–760.
[112] Randy L. Haupt, Sue Ellen Haupt, Practical genetic algorithms, second
edition, John Wiley & Sons,2004.
[113] Bentley P. An Introduction to Evolutionary Design by Computers: Morgan

Kaufmann; 1999.
132
Reference
[114] IAPWS, Revised Release on the IAPWS Formulation 1995 for the
Thermodynamic Properties of Ordinary Water Substance for General and
Scientific Use (2009).
[115] Kitto J B, Stultz S C. Steam Its Generation and Use. 41th ed. Ohio: Babcok
and Wilcox Co; 2005.
[116] Toffolo A, Lazzareto A. Evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective

energetic and economic optimization in thermal system design. Energy 27
(2002) 549–567.
[117] Kakaç S. Boilers Evaporators and Condensers. 1st ed. New York: Wiley;
1991.
[118] Boyce M P. Handbook for cogeneration and combined cycle power plant.
New York: ASME Press; 2002.
[119] Ganapathy V. Heat-Recovery Steam Generators, Understand the Basics,

Chemical engineering progress, 1996.
http://www.angelfire.com/md3/vganapathy/hrsgcep.pdf [accessed 06.07.2016]
[120] Ganpathy V. Industrial Boilers and Heat Steam Generators, Design

Applications and Calculations. 1st ed. New York: Marcel Deker Inc; 2002.
[121] Queipo N, Devarakonda R, Humphrey JAC, Genetic algorithms for

thermosciences research – application to the optimized cooling of electronic
components, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 37 (6) (1994) 893–
908.
133

Thermal Design Optimization of HRSG PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Thermal Design Optimization of HRSG PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Dissertation

Thermal Design and Optimization of

Ali Rezaie Navaie

Technische Universität Berlin

Ali Rezaie Navaie

geb. in Sary, Iran

von der Fakultät III – Prozesswissenschaften

der Technischen Universität Berlin

zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades

Doktor der Ingenieurwissenschaften

Vorsitzende: Prof. Dr. Tetyana Morozyuk

Gutachter: Prof. Dr. -Ing. George Tsatsaronis

Gutachter: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Udo Hellwig

Tag der wissenschaftlichen Aussprache: 12.04.2017

my darling son, Kian

my beloved parents, Mahmood and Monir

First of all, I have to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to Professor

Abhitzekessel (AHK) sind wichtige und entscheidende Geräte in

1.1. Brief description of combined cycle and cogeneration plants . . . . . . . . 4

1.2. Heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3. Individual design of an HRSG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

1.4. State of the art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2. Thermoeconomics and cost balance of HRSGs 12

2.1. Economic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.3. Cost balance of HRSGs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3. Thermal design of HRSG sections 17

3.1. Thermal design demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2. HRSG temperature profile, pinch point and approach point . . . . . . . . . 18

3.3. Necessity of using finned tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.4. Thermal design simulation of the HRSG sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.4.1. Input data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

3.4.2. Water, steam and flue gas properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

3.4.4. Overall heat transfer coefficient of HRSG sections . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.4.4.1. Average inside heat transfer coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3.4.4.2. Average outside heat transfer coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3.4.5. Pressure drop across fin tube bundle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3.4.6. Pressure drop in the tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

4. Constraints in the thermal design of HRSGs 37

4.1. General description of the constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

4.2.1. Allowable draft loss of the flue gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

4.2.2. Pinch point, Approach point and economizer steaming . . . . . . . . 39

4.2.3. Overall dimensions of heat recovery steam generator . . . . . . . . 40

4.2.4. Steam and water pressure drop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.2.5. Constraints of the finning (fin tube manufacturing) . . . . . . . . . . . 42

4.2.6. Fin tube and operating data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

4.2.7. Maximum spray water flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

5. Optimization and genetic algorithm 44

5.1. Introduction to optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.2. Basic concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

5.3. Objective function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

5.4. Optimization constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

5.5. Operating conditions and hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

5.6. Optimization methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

5.6.1. Calculus methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

5.6.2. Search methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

5.6.3. Other methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

5.7. Genetic algorithm used in the optimization of thermal design and

5.8. Optimizing thermal systems with genetic algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

5.8.1. Optimization of systems, converting and transferring energy . . . 57

5.8.1.1. Heat exchangers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

5.8.1.2. Power generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

5.8.1.3. Heat exchanger networks (HENs), design integration and

5.8.1.4. Heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration