NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF PRESSURE LOSS AND HEAT TRANSFER IN A NATURAL-DRAFT STACK

MISS SUTIDA PHITAKWINAI

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MASTER OF SCIENCE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING SIRINDHORN INTERNATIONAL THAI-GERMAN GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING (TGGS) GRADUATE COLLEGE KING MONGKUTS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY NORTH BANGKOK ACADEMIC YEAR 2007 COPYRIGHT OF KING MONGKUTS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY NORTH BANGKOK

Name Thesis Title

: Miss Sutida Phitakwinai : Numerical Analysis of Pressure Loss and Heat Transfer in a Natural-Draft Stack Major Field : Mechanical Engineering King Mongkuts University of Technology North Bangkok Thesis Advisor : Assistant Professor Dr. Pumyos Vallikul Academic Year : 2007 Abstract Natural-draught stacks are the most widely used in a steam-generating boiler, industrial furnace and the gases. Designing and constructing stacks to provide the correct amount of natural draft involves a number design factor, many of which require trial-and-error reiterative method. In this thesis, the fluid flow will be analyzed in terms of available draft resulting from stack effect and pressure loss that are determined at four different mass flow rates. In order to achieve a better knowledge of the stack process, the numerical techniques have been used as a useful tool. Pressure losses and exit temperature for the four cases agree well with the results obtained in the empirical-solution within 1%. Thus, the CFD help the industry reduced commissioning times and costs for design and construct. (Total 78 pages)

Keywords : Natural-draft, Stack , FLUENT

______________________________________________________________Advisor ii

: : Natural-draft : : . : 2550

Natural-Draft Stack - (Trial and Error) Available Draft Stack Effect 4 CFD 4 1 CFD ( 78 )

: , (FLUENT)
_____________________________________________ iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Assistant Professor Dr.Pumyos Vallikul of King Mongkuts University of Technology North Bangkok for his helpful guidance, suggestion and encouragement throughout this study. I am grateful to Patkol Public Co., Ltd., who took care of me along 4 months of our visit internship their guidance and suggestion and provides the data for this thesis. I am indebted to Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering of King Mongkuts University of Technology North Bangkok for license of FLUENT 6.3 software. I would like to thank to my teachers, my family, my friends and the staff of the Sirindhon Thai-German Graduate School, King Mongkuts University of Technology North Bangkok for their helpful suggestion and valuable assistance throughout the entire research.

Sutida Phitakwinai

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract (in English) Abstract (in Thai) Acknowledgements List of Tables List of Figures Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Objectives 1.3 Scope of the study 1.4 Methodology 1.5 Utilization of the study 1.6 Literature Review Chapter 2 Theory: Stack effect 2.1 Mathematical modeling 2.2 Stack effect in a natural-draft stacks 2.3 Stack effect in the household fireplace Chapter 3 Analyses of flow through system component 3.1 Flow resistance 3.2 Dynamic viscosity model 3.3 Numerical simulation Chapter 4 Problem definition and results 4.1 Problem Definition 4.2 Methodology 4.3 Calculation Results 4.4 Numerical Simulation Chapter 5 Conclusion References Appendix A Laminar and Turbulent Velocity Profiles Appendix B Discharge Coefficient Appendix C Flow across Tube Bundles Appendix D Static Mixer Biography Page ii iii iv vi vii 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 8 8 10 12 17 17 17 20 29 29 32 32 38 45 47 49 54 60 71 78

LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9 4-10 C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 D-1 D-2 Page 14 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 38 41 41 63 64 64 66 73 75

Stack effect of chimney Gas composition & Mixture volume fraction Available Draft Major losses: the C1, C2, C3 and C4 cases Minor losses: the C1, C2, C3 and C4 cases Total pressure losses Data for internal convection heat transfer analyses Data for external convection heat transfer analyses Exit temperature Total pressure losses of stack Exit temperatures of stack Constants c0 and n of Eq.C-7 Correlation factor c1 for Eq.C-9 Constant c2 and exponent m of Eq.C-10 Geometry and Boundary conditions of tube bundles Mixer geometrical and fluid properties of static mixer Mean Velocity magnitudes (m/s)

vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1-1 Schematic of a natural-draft stack 2 1-2 Configuration of the boiler 4 1-3 Schematic arrangement of burners and heat recovery sections in the case-study boiler 5 1-4 Schematic of the experimental system 6 1-5 Schematic of the boiler being studied (unit : mm ; MP-monitor port) 7 2-1 Stack effect in a natural-draft stacks 11 2-2 Geometry of the chimney (unit : m) 13 2-3 Pressure loss within chimney 15 2-4 Contour of static pressure in chimney 15 2-5 Contours of velocity magnitude in chimney 16 2-6 Contours of temperature in chimney 16 3-1 The fit of the viscosity model Eq.3-1 to the available viscosity data 18 3-2 Circular Tube Geometry 20 3-3 Grid of the Circular Tube 20 3-4 Friction factor for fully developed flow through a Circular Tube 21 3-5 Nusselt number for fully developed flow through a Circular Tube 21 3-6 Flow across the circular Tube (unit : m) 22 3-7 Nusselt number for flow across a circular pipe 22 3-8 Geometry of 90 mitered bend without guide vanes and with guide vanes 23 3-9 Grid of 90 mitered bend without guide vanes and with guide vanes 23 3-10 Loss coefficient for a 90 mitered bend without vanes 24 3-11 Loss coefficient for a 90 mitered bend with vanes 24 3-12 Geometry of (a) Sudden contraction and (b) Sudden expansion (unit : m) 25 3-13 Grid of (a) Sudden contraction and (b) Sudden expansion 25 3-14 Loss coefficients for a sudden contraction and a sudden expansion 26 3-15 Geometry of 90 Smooth Bend 26 3-16 Loss coefficient for a 90 smooth bend 27 3-17 Geometry of a Gradual conical expansion (unit : m) 27 3-18 Grid of a Gradual conical expansion without internal vanes(a) and with internal vanes (b) 27 3-19 Loss coefficients for gradual expansion without vanes and with vanes 28 4-1 Schematic diagram of the stack system 29 4-2 Detail stack dimensions 31 4-3 Locations of major losses 33 4-4 Description of Minor Loss 35 4-5 Distributed temperature locations 37 4-6 Grid Generation of stack (36743 nodes and 171038 tetrahedral elements) 40 4-7 Static pressure (the case C1) 42 4-8 Velocity magnitude (the case C1) 43 4-9 Static temperature (the case C1) 44 A-1 The pipe geometry 50 A-2 The relation of pressure and distance 51 A-3 Laminar velocity profiles 51 A-4 Turbulent velocity profiles 51 vii

LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED) Figure A-5 Laminar and Turbulent Velocity Profiles B-1 Orifice pressure tap location B-2 The orifice pipe geometry B-3 Velocity Vectors at = 0.4 B-4 Velocity Vectors at = 0.6 B-5 Pressure contours at = 0.4 B-6 Pressure contours at = 0.6 B-7 Orifice discharge-coefficient Chart C-1 The in-line arrangement C-2 The staggered arrangement C-3 Geometry of the in-line arrangement C-4 Geometry of the staggered arrangement C-5 Temperature contours of XL = 1.5 C-6 Pressure contours of XL = 1.5 C-7 Velocity vectors of XL = 1.5 C-8 Turbulence intensity contours of XL = 1.5 C-9 Friction factor for in-line tube arrangement C-10 Friction factor for staggered tube arrangement C-11 Nusselt Number for in-line tube arrangement D-1 A six-element static mixer D-2 Velocity Streamline at Re = 0.15 D-3 Contours of the axial velocity at Re = 0.15 D-4 The influence of Reynolds number and aspect ratio on the Z factor D-5 Pressure drop within a six element Kenics Mixer for Re = 0.15 D-6 Pressure drop within a six element Kenics Mixer for Re = 0.15, 1, 10 and 100 Page 52 55 57 57 58 58 58 59 61 61 65 66 67 67 68 68 69 69 70 73 74 74 75 76 76

viii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction Natural-draught stacks are still widely used in steam-generating boilers, industrial furnaces and household fireplace (in colder countries). Designing and constructing the stacks to provide correct amount of natural draft involves a number design factor, many of which require trial-and-error and reiterative methods. In order to achieve a better knowledge of the stack process, in this thesis, computational fluid dynamics simulation (CFD) has been used as a useful tool to analyze the flow resistance and heat transfer process along an artificial small scale household stack and a large scale industrial stack. At present days, forced draft stacks are used in most industries; they are usually designed and come together at the first place with the new plant or processes. The stacks are desired to exhaust just enough amounts of waste gases from an individual furnace or process. However, in some situations, there are processes where additional waste gases are generated without any force drafted devices designed to exhaust such gases. It is therefore needed to design/modify the stack in order to support the additional loads those excess the exiting positive forced draft stack, exploiting the natural-draft concept. The driving potential of the flow through the natural-draught stack is called the stack effect. This is caused by difference in densities between higher density of the cold environment gas and the lower density of the hot gas within the stack. The calculation procedure to solve for the pressure difference created by the stack effect is based on the fluid statics. The solution obtained is the function of the pressure difference and the height of the stack. When there is flow through the stack and system connected to it, the pressure difference obtained from the stack effect balances with the pressure drop along the system caused by the flow resistances. In this thesis, the flow situation through an artificial household fireplace and the stack connected to it is simulated. The stack effect is simulated numerically and compared with the analytical solution (see chapter 2). In chapter 3, a real industrial type stack is analyzed into components. Flow resistance and heat transfer process of each component are analyzed. The CFD- and the empirical-solutions are calculated and compared. It is shown from the numerical simulation that each classical formula represents the stack effect and flow resistance losses very well. However, in some situations the minor loss coefficients depend on both kinetic and viscous dissipation losses, e.g. flow through the gradually expansion fitting. In such case, the minor loss coefficient can be found vary from different from one report to other report. The CFDsimulation is then being an important mean to simulate and predict the kind of situations. 1.2 Objectives 1.2.1 To study buoyancy driven flow in a natural draft stack using computational fluid dynamics simulation.

2 1.2.2 To analyze flow resistances and heat transfer processes on components of the stack system. 1.3 Scope of the study 1.3.1 Two types of stacks are studied, they are a stack of small scale fictitious stack using in household fire place and an industrial type stack of 135-m-height. 1.3.2 The simulation software FLUENT is used in this thesis. 1.3.3 The components of the stack system considered are 90 mitered bend with vanes and without vanes, a sudden contraction, a sudden expansion, 90 bend and a typical conical diffuser. 1.3.4 Minor loss coefficients of the components will be determined via the CFDsimulation and compared with the empirical values. 1.3.5 The empirical friction factor correlation and the internal and external flows Nusselt number correlations for the fully developed flow are verified via the CFDsimulation results. 1.3.6 For the industrial stack, effect of pressure losses and heat transfer are studies based on four different mass flow rates: 568808, 606067, 537268, and 545262 kg/hr. The inlet gas temperature for the corresponding mass flow rates are 200, 218, 186 and 194 oC. 1.3.7 Schematic diagram and dimension of the industrial stack is shown in Figure 1-1

FIGURE 1-1 Schematic of a natural-draft stack (unit : m)

3 1.4 Methodology 1.4.1 Study of Stack effect Buoyancy driven flow in a natural draft stack (stack effect) is studied using computational fluid dynamics simulation and compare with the analytical solution. The analytical solution is based on static fluid analysis. The comparative study is done on a fictitious household fireplace. The height of the stack will be used as an independent variable and pressure developed to drive the flow is the dependent variable. 1.4.2 Analyses of the industrial stack The CFD and the analytical stack effect calculation techniques are applied to an industrial stack analyses. Minor losses Pressure losses due to the fluid flow through the smooth pipe (internal flow) and flow across the cylindrical (external), a 90 mitered bend with vanes and without vanes, a sudden contraction, a sudden expansion, 90 bend, a typical conical diffuser are determined both via CFD technique and empirical formula. The comparative study is advanced in order to verify the obtained solutions. Fully developed flow resistances and heat transfer process The comparative studies between the CFD technique and the empirical correlations for resistances and heat transfer processes in fully developed flows are also applied. Pressure losses along the piping system where the flow is assumed to be fully developed are calculated via the CFD-simulation technique. The pressure losses with the flow geometry are used determined friction factor and the corresponding Reynolds number. The friction factor-Reynolds number obtained will be compared with the standard empirical friction factor correlation. Local heat transfer along the stack piping system is calculated by CFDtechnique. The resulting heat transfer together with flow properties are used to calculate Nusselt-Reynolds-Prandtl number correlation. The obtained correlations are compared with the standard empirical correlations, to verify the simulation results. 1.4.3 Application of the CFD-Simulation Calculation results of the total pressure losses and heat transfer from the industrial stack are determined at different given mass flow rate and inlet temperature as given in 1.3.6. The results will be used as operating data for the stack at a gas separation plant in Rayong. 1.5 Utilization of the Study 1.5.1 Gain insight into the influence of stack draft on pressure losses and heat transfer behavior. 1.5.2 Help the industry to design and construct of the stack. 1.5.3 Reduced commissioning times and costs. 1.6 Literature surveys Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) have been applied successfully to simulate combustion process within the fuel, within furnace or boiler and along the natural draft stack. For the analyses of for through the stacks, the effects of interested are pollution formation, stack effect, heat and mass transfer along the flow as function of stack height.

4 For the pollution formation proposed, CFD has been used to study the effect of chimney height on boiler flue gases reaction and pollution formations [1], the study, however, used the commercial software FLUENT as a simulation tool. The results show that the pollutant emissions and thermal behavior are sensitive to draught produced by the chimney and there is and optimum chimney height, that corresponds to minimum are pollution emission. In other situation when high temperature combustion is involved, NOx are formed. M.A. Habib , M. Elshafei and M. Dajani [2] studied the NO distribution in the combustion chamber and the exhaust gas at various operating conditions of fuel to air ratio with varying either the fuel or air mass flow rate, inlet air temperature and combustion primary air swirl angle. The results have shown that the furnace average temperature and NO concentration decrease as the excess air factor k increases for a given air mass flow rate. Fix value of mass flow rate of fuel, that increasing k in a maximum value of thermal NO concentration at the exit of the boiler. As the combustion air temperature increases, furnace temperature increases and the thermal NO concentration increases sharply. NO concentrations at exit of the boiler have a minimum value at around swirl angle of 45.

FIGURE 1-2 Configuration of the boiler [2] Swirl effects that have been used to reduce pollution formation are sometimes generated by tangential fired boiler. The flow field in such situation is very complicated. Luis I. Diez , Cristobal Cortes and Javier Pallares [3] simulated the fluid and particle flow through the tangentially-fired boiler by analyses with 3D nurmerical to predicted gas temperature, species concentration and NOx emissions reduction when overfire air operation is adopted.

FIGURE 1-3 Schematic arrangement of burners and heat recovery sections in the case-study boiler [3] Heat and mass transfers are also of important effects in natural draft stack. They appear in the cooling tower operation. N. Williamson, S. Armfield and M. Behnia [4] simulated the heat and mass transfer inside a natural draft wet cooling tower by determine the extent of the non-uniformities across its. The model was a twodimensional axisymmetric two-phase. The effect of tower inlet height on radial nonuniformity is small but the model is very sensitive to changes in water flow rate. At small fill depths the water temperatures entering the rain zone tend to be higher, which in turn slightly increases the heat transfer rate. Simulation of gas phase reaction system also can be found in heat utilization combustion system. J.J. Ji *, Y.H. Luo and L.Y. Hu [5] simulated the natural gas within the traveling grate boiler by analyzed with large eddy simulation. Under the condition of two typical air distribution modes, dynamic pressure signals at various flow rates. Determined influence factors on the unsteady combustion and the occurrence in boiler.

FIGURE 1-4 Schematic of the experimental system [5] When solid combustion is involved, the problem does not govern by the NavierStokes equations hence some numerical model has to be developed for this purposed. Most commercial CFD software such as FLUENT can not be used in this situation. F.Chejne, J.P.Hernandez, W.F.Florez and A.F.J.Hill [6] simulated the combustion of piled coal particles, which using a time-dependent mathematical model and a numerical algorithm, to predicted the profiles of unburned solid fraction along the bed height, the gas combustion, heat of reaction, gas temperature and the coal (solid phase) temperature. When the combustion process starts, the radius of the unburned core and the height of the bed will change rapidly being this behavior typical of all violent combustion. The temperature increases, it reaches a point where the reaction rates are extremely high. Other large scale solid combustion simulation was advanced by Fang Qing-yan, Zhou Huai-chun, Wang Hua-jian, Yao Bin, and Zeng Han-cai [7]. They studied the flexibility of a 300 MW Arch Firing (AF) coal-fired boiler when burning low quality coals. They used a water-cooled suction pyrometer to measure gas temperature, species concentration and char sampling along the furnace elevation. The results indicate that the flexibility of boiler under a moderate boiler load is better than a high boiler load.

FIGURE 1-5 Schematic of the boiler being studied (unit : mm ; MP-monitor port) [7] One of the most important effects applied in natural draft stack system is the stack effect. Numerical simulation to verify the effect has not been found. This is because the effect include as part within the Navier-Stokes equations. In this thesis, CFD will be used to simulate the stack effect and the results are compared with the classical solution one. In addition the CFD will also be used as a tool to verify the loss coefficients, which most of them are usually available in engineering hand books, other than use to simulate the whole system. With this approach of using the CFD, it avoids the time to analyses the system. The CFD will be used only once to calculate the loss coefficients and/or heat transfer coefficients. Those obtained coefficients will in turned be used in the analyses of the system in the classical engineering calculations.

CHAPTER 2 THEORY: STACK EFFECT

2.1 Mathematical modeling For the prediction of the non-reacting thermal turbulent flow field, equations of mass, momentum and energy conservation along with the standard k- turbulence model [8] are employed. 2.1.1 Conservation of Mass (Continuity Equation): ( u i ) = 0 Eq.2-1 xi 2.1.2 Momentum Equation: u (u i ) + (u i u j ) = P + u i + j 2 ij u i + u i u j t x j xi x j x j xi 3 x j x j Eq.2-2 These Reynolds stresses, ui u j , must be modeled in order to close Eq.2-2 for variable-density flows. 2.1.3 Energy equation: v v (E ) + (v(E ) + (E + p )) = (k eff T + (Teff v )) Eq.2-3 t where keffis the effective conductivity (k + kt , where kt is the turbulent thermal conductivity, defined according to the turbulence model being used). The two terms on the right-hand side of Eq.2-3 represent energy transfer due to conduction, and viscous dissipation, respectively. 2.1.4 Buoyancy-driven flow Since the flow is Buoyancy-driven, the density in the buoyancy term in the momentum equation is set to be ( o )g o (T To )g Eq.2-4 where o is the density of the flow, To is operating temperature, and is the thermal expansion coefficient. Eq.2-4 is obtained by using the Boussinesq approximation to eliminate from the buoyancy term. The density appears elsewhere are set to be a constant o. By doing this we can get faster convergence than by setting up the problem with fluid density as a function of temperature. 2.1.5 Boussinesq Approach and Reynolds Stress Transport Models The Reynolds-averaged approach to turbulence modeling requires that the Reynolds stresses in Eq.2-2 be appropriately modeled. A common method employs the Boussinesq hypothesis [9] to relate the Reynolds stresses to the mean velocity gradients: u u j 2 k + t u k ij Eq.2-5 ui u j = t i + x x k j xi 3 The Boussinesq hypothesis is used in the k- models. The advantage of this approach is the relatively low computational cost associated with the computation of

9 the turbulent viscosity, t. In the case of the k- models, a additional transport equations (for the turbulence kinetic energy, k, and either the turbulence dissipation rate,) is solved, and t is computed as a function of k and . The disadvantage of the Boussinesq hypothesis as presented is that it assumes t is an isotropic scalar quantity, which is not strictly true. 2.1.6 k- Turbulence Model : The turbulence kinetic energy, k, and its rate of dissipation, , are obtained from the following transport equations [9,10] (k ) + (ku i ) = + t k + G k + G b YM Eq.2-6 t x i x j k x j and
2 + C1 (G k + C 3 Gb ) C 2 x k k j Eq.2-7 In these equations, Gk represents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the mean velocity gradients. Gb is the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to buoyancy. YM represents the contribution of the fluctuating dilatation in compressible turbulence to the overall dissipation rate. C1, C2, and C3 are constants. k and are the turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and , respectively. 2.1.7 Modeling the Turbulent Viscosity The turbulent (or eddy) viscosity, t, is computed by combining k and as follows: k2 Eq.2-8 t = C ( ) + (u i ) = + t t xi x j

where C is a constant. 2.1.8 Model Constants The model constants C1 , C2 ,C , k and have the following default value C1 = 1.44, C2 = 1.92, C = 0.09, k = 1.0, = 1:3 2.1.9 Modeling of turbulent production in k- models The term Gk, representing the production of turbulence kinetic energy, is modeled identically for the standard, RNG, and realizable k- models. From the exact equation for the transport of k, this term may be defined as u j Eq.2-9 Gk = u iu j xi To evaluate Gk in a manner consistent with the Boussinesq hypothesis, Gk=tS2 where S is the modulus of the mean rate-of-strain tensor, defined as
S 2 S ij S ij

Eq.2-10 Eq.2-11

2.1.10 Effects of Buoyancy on Turbulence in the k- Models When a non-zero gravity field and temperature gradient are present simultaneously, the k- models in the software FLUENT account for the generation of

10 k due to buoyancy ( Gb in Eq.2-5), and the corresponding contribution to the production of in Eq.2-6. The generation of turbulence due to buoyancy is given by T Gb = g i t Eq.2-12 Prt xi where Prt is the turbulent Prandtl number for energy and gi is the component of the gravitational vector in the ith direction. For the standard and realizable k- models, the default value of Prt is 0.85. In the case of the RNG k- model, Prt =1/, but with 0 = 1/Pr = k/Cp. The coefficient of thermal expansion, , is defined as 1 = Eq.2-13 T P For ideal gases, Eq.2-11 reduces to t Gb = g i Eq.2-14 Prt xi In the software FLUENT 6.3, the effects of buoyancy on the generation of k are always included when you have both a non-zero gravity field and a non-zero temperature (or density) gradient. While the buoyancy effects on the generation of k are relatively well understood, the effect on is less clear. In the software FLUENT, by default, the buoyancy effects on are neglected simply by setting Gb to zero in the transport equation for in Eq.2-6. 2.2 Stack effect in a natural-draft stacks The stacks are a system for venting hot flue gases or smoke from a steamgenerating boiler, industrial furnace and the gases to the outside atmosphere. It is almost vertical to ensure that the hot gases flow smoothly, drawing air into the combustion through the stack effect. The space inside a stack is called a flue. When coal, oil, natural gas, wood or any other fuel is combusted in a stack, the hot combustion product gases that are formed are called flue gases. Those gases are generally exhausted to the ambient outside air through stacks. The combustion flue gases inside the stacks are much hotter than the ambient outside air and therefore less dense than the ambient air. That causes the bottom of the vertical column of hot flue gas to have a lower pressure than the pressure at the bottom of a corresponding column of outside air. That higher pressure outside the stacks is the driving force that moves the required combustion air into the combustion zone and also moves the flue gas up and out of the stacks. That movement or flow of combustion air and flue gas is called natural draught/draft, natural ventilation, or stack effect. The taller the stack, the more draught or draft is created. Figure 2-1 the gauges represent absolute air pressure and the airflow is indicated with light grey arrows. The gauge dials move clockwise with increasing pressure [11].

11

FIGURE 2-1 Stack effect in a natural-draft stacks 2.2.1 Stack effect equation The stack effect [12] which varies with height and the mean temperature of the column of hot gas can be calculated from Eq.2-15. The effect is the static draft produced by a stack, at sea level, with no gas flow. Eq.2-15 provides an approximation of the pressure difference, P, (between the bottom and the top of the flue gas stack that is created by the draft: gHPatm 1 1 P = Eq.2-15 R g Tatm Ti where: P = available pressure difference, in Pa Rg = Gas constant Patm = atmospheric pressure, in Pa H = height of the flue gas stack, in m Tatm = absolute outside air temperature, in K Tg = absolute average temperature of the flue gas inside the stack, in K 2.2.2 The stack gas constant Since the stack gas is a mixture then the gas constant, R g , is based on averaged molar weight of the gaseous species constituted the mixture. The value of R g is
Rg = R M

Eq.2-16

12 where R is the universal gas constant (= 8.314103 J/kmolK) and M is the average molecular weight of the stack gas in kg/kmol. Given the mole fractions, Yi , of the stack gas, the average molecular weight [13] can be calculated from M = Yi Wi Eq.2-17
i

2.3 Stack effect in the household fireplace 2.3.1 Modelling of a household fireplace stack A fictitious household fireplace (see Figure 2-2) is studied in this section. The stack is a square duct of 0.210.21 m2. We assume that the wall of the stack is lining with 1-cm-thick insulator of conductivity 0.054 W/mK. The stack effect given in Eq.2-15 is used to calculate natural draft pressure as a function of the stacks height. The pressure at the stack exit is 101.3 kPa, the hot gas temperature at the exit is assumed to be a free jet of 218oC and that the outside wall temperature along the stack is constant. Given that the ambient temperature is at 35oC. Geometry of the fire place and the stack are given in Figure 2-2. Stack gas compositions uses in this case are similar to those in the industrial stack to be mentioned in chapter 4. It will be shown that, for a case study number C2 = 599792 kg/hr, the molecular weight and gas constant are M = 33.1 kg/kmol and R = 251.23 J/kgK respectively. The stack effect can then be calculated as a function of the stack height as 1 H (9.8)(101.3 10 3 ) 1 p stack = 251.23 308 491 The values of driving pressure caused by the stack effect at different heights are listed in Table 2-2. The values are compared with the results obtained by CFDsimulation obtained as following. Simulated the chimney model in turbulent flow by The stack effect Pstack and dimension of chimney and assume friction factor [14] to find velocity which follow by PD Eq.2-18 f = 1 2 v av L 2 In the CFD-simulation, the pressure loss is the solution to the boundary condition problem. Below are boundary conditions to the above of governing equations. Table 2-1 shows the boundary condition to the above problem. Pressure drops are made between the pressure at the plane inside the fireplace at the stack surface and the exit pressure.

13

Outlet

Inlet
FIGURE 2-2 Geometry of the chimney (unit : m) 2.3.2 Boundary conditions of chimney Fluid Material Fluid Properties: Density Viscosity Inlet Velocity Temperature Outlet Pressure (Pgauge) Wall Temperature Height of the stack Constant Temperature =35C Varies height of the chimney at 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4 Varies velocity 218 C 0 Pa Air 0.824 2.64 10-5 kg/m3 N.s/m2

14 2.3.3 Numerical method The numerical model has been built within Fluent, a general purpose CFD code. The mesh geometry was produced using GAMBIT. The mesh of the chimney height 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 and 4 m have total of 320, 480, 640, 800, 960, 1120 and 1280 hexahedral elements respectively. The code has been used to solve the steady Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations closed with the standard k- turbulence model with buoyancy terms included in both k and transport equation. The semiimplicit method for pressure linked equations (SIMPLE) was employed with second order upwind discretisation employed for the advective terms. A segregated implicit solver was used. The solution is regarded as converged when the maximum value of normalized residuals of any equation is less than 5 10-5. TABLE 2-1 Stack effect of chimney Height (m) 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 mass flow rate (kg/s) 0.1236 0.1515 0.1748 0.1955 0.2142 0.2314 0.2473 V (m/s) 3.403 4.168 4.813 5.381 5.895 6.367 6.807 Pressure losses (Pa) Theory CFD-simulation 4.772 4.198 7.158 7.913 9.544 9.211 11.930 11.523 14.316 12.891 16.702 16.560 19.088 19.155

Table 2-1 shows the driving pressure caused by the stack effect (the theory) and the pressure loss calculated by the CFD-simulation. The pressure losses from the CFD-simulation are greater than those created by the stack effect. The pressure is the average value across a plane is used. Pressure at local points across any plane calculated from the CFD-simulation is not uniform. It has been found form the solution that at the below cross-section local pressure are partly negative pressure and partly are positive pressure. The overall trend is however acceptable. The plot of table 2-2 is shown in Figure 2-2. Solutions to the CFD-simulation problem are also shown in term of pressure, velocity and temperature contour (see Figure 2-3 to 2-5 respectively)

15

25 20 Pressure losses 15 10 5 0 1 1.5 2 2.5 Height

FIGURE 2-3 Pressure Losses within chimney

Empirical solution

FLUENT
3 3.5 4

FIGURE 2-4 Contour of static pressure in chimney

16

FIGURE 2-5 Contours of velocity magnitude in chimney

FIGURE 2-6 Contours of temperature in chimney

CHAPTER 3 ANALYSES OF FLOW THROUGH SYSTEM COMPONENT

In this chapter, a real industrial type stack is analyzed into components. Flow resistance and heat transfer process of each component are discussed. The CFDsimulation and the empirical-solutions are calculated and compared. 3.1 Flow resistance When flow occurs, a portion of the stack effect is used to establish gas velocity and the remainder is used to overcome the resistance of the connected system. The flow resistances cause pressure drops (losses) along the piping system. There are two types of pressure losses; the major and the minor losses; those values will be determined below. It is of important to first to look into the flow property, the viscosity used in the analysis. 3.2 Dynamic viscosity model It is well known that viscosity is very sensitive to temperature. In our study, conditions designed in the stack analysis are given at different temperature. We use mathematical model to predict the viscosity of the stag gas at different temperature. The effect of temperature on viscosity of gas can be closely approximated using an empirical formulae, the Sutherland equation [15], can be expressed as CT 3 / 2 = Eq.3-1 T+S The parameters C and S are constants and depend on the gas being considered. In this calculation we assume that the stack gas has the viscosity equal to that of air at the same temperature. Then the values for C and S are obtained from least square fit of the model Eq.3-1 to the already available air viscosity data. Figure 3-1 shows the fitting result, the dots are data available and the solid line is the model. The model allows us to calculate the viscosity at a particular temperature. It is found from the curve fitting, Figure 3-1, that the value of C and S are 1.2210-6 and 11 respectively. The constants depend on of system of unit. The unit of viscosity is Ns/m2 and the temperature is in absolute temperature, K.

18

FIGURE 3-1 The fit of the viscosity model Eq.3-1 to the available viscosity data 3.2.1 Energy equation We consider the energy equation for steady flow between two locations as is given in Eq.3-2 [16,17] P1 v12 P v2 + + z1 = 2 + 2 + z 2 + hL Eq.3-2 g 2 g g 2 g where hL is the head loss between section 1 and 2 with the assumption of a constant horizontal (z1=z2). It has not the elevation difference between pressure taps because both pressure at a common elevation. For a constant-density fluid, this reduces Eq.3-2 to the form 2 P1 P2 v12 v 2 + hL = Eq.3-3 g 2g 3.2.2 Major loss The major loss occurs at the sections where the pipe is straight with constant cross-sectional area. In addition, the flow along the section of the piping system is fully developed or the velocity profile is unique. In practice, it is found convenient to express the pressure loss for all types of fully developed internal flows as [18] 2 L Vavg Ploss,major = f Eq.3-4 D 2 f L and D Vavg is the Dracy friction factor. are length and diameter of the pipe respectively. is the density of the mixture. is the average velocity.

19 The friction factor can be evaluated using empirical formula, usually expressed implicitly. An approximate explicit relation used in this work is given by S.E. Haaland in 1983 [18,19]; 6.9 / D 1.11 1 Eq.3-5 = 1.8 log + f Re 3.7 is the roughness of the pipe. Re is the Reynolds number. Vavg D Re = Eq.3-6 is the dynamic viscosity 3.2.3 Minor losses The fluid in a typical piping system passes through various fittings, valves, bends, elbows, tees, inlets, exits, enlargements, and contractions in addition to the pipes. These components interrupt the smooth flow of the fluid and cause additional losses because of the flow separation and mixing they induce. In a typical system with long pipes, theses losses are minor compared to the total head loss in the pipes (the major losses) and are called minor losses[18]. The minor losses are calculated from Eq.3-7 Ploss , min or = gh L hL is the minor head losses in meter (m). The minor head losses are based on the kinetic energy of the flow, depending mainly on the shape of the components, and can be evaluated as V2 hL = KL Eq.3-8 2g KL is the loss coefficient It will be shown in the calculation result of the next section that for this problem, the minor losses contribute most of the pressure loss to the piping system. 3.2.4 Nusselt number and convection heat transfer coefficient The convective heat transfer coefficients are calculated from the correlation for Nusselt numbers within pipe of fully developed flow [15] are given by and external to the tube, are defined by: 4/5 Nu i = 0.023 Re D Pr 1 / 3 Eq.3-9 For external flow across the stack, the Nusselt number correlation
5/8 Pr 1 / 3 Re D N u o = 0.3 + Eq.3-10 1 + 2 / 3 1/ 4 282,000 1 + (0.4 / Pr ) The convective heat transfer coefficient for any part of the piping system are calculated from k Eq.3-11 h = Nu D

0.62 Re D

1/ 2

4/5

20 3.3 Numerical simulation 3.3.1 Flow Inside a Circular Tube For fully developed of internal flows, the friction factor and Nusselt number correlations are given in Eq.3-5 and 3-9. In this section the values are determined directly from CFD-simulation. For a circular pipe (Figure 3-2), a fully developed flow can be simulated and the velocity as well as pressure field for all grid points (Figure 3-3) can be determined. The pressure drop along a length is calculated by using the velocity and pressure solutions and substitute into the equation defining friction factor as shown in Eq.3-4 Another dimensionless parameter used in analyzing fluid flow and constitutes the friction factor correlation is Reynolds number which is defined by VD Re = Eq.3-10

FIGURE 3-2 Circular Tube Geometry Wall 8m Inlet R=0.1 m Axis FIGURE 3-3 Grid of the Circular Tube For any fully develop flow situations the Re can be found from the simulation parameters. Pairs of the friction factor and Reynolds number determining from the numerical experiment are plot against the empirical formula friction factor Eq.3-4. CFD-simulation also gives local temperature distribution along the flow. This temperature distribution allows one to calculate heat transfer dissipated to the wall. When local heat flux is known, the convective heat transfer coefficient, h, can then be determined. The convective heat transfer coefficient is related to the Nusselt number through Eq.3-11. The Nusselt and Reynolds numbers obtained from CFD-simulation is plot against the ones obtained from the correlation Eq.3-9 and shows in Figure 3-5. Outlet

21
0.1 Laminar f=64/Re Smooth pipe Colebrook 0.01

Friction Factor

0.001 1.00E+03

1.00E+04

1.00E+05

1.00E+06

1.00E+07

1.00E+08

Re
FIGURE 3-4 Friction factor for fully developed flow through a Circular Tube
10000

1000

Nu
100

Correlation Eq.3-9

Fluent
10 1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06

Re FIGURE 3-5 Nusselt number for fully developed flow through a Circular Tube

3.3.2 Flow Across a Circular pipe External flows are unconfined, free to expand no matter how thick the viscous layers grow [13]. Although boundary layer theory and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) are helpful in understanding external flows, complex body geometries usually require experimental data on the forces and moments caused by the flows. Another common external flow involves fluid motion normal to the axis of a circular cylinder. As shown in Figure 3-4, the free steam fluid is brought to rest at the forward stagnation point, with an accompanying rise in pressure.

22

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 3-6 Flow across the circular Tube (unit : m) External flow (see Figure 3-6) correlation for Nusselt number, Eq.3-10, is plot against the Reynolds number and compared with the values obtained by CFDsimulation. The result is shown in Figure 3-7. The dot line is empirical formula while the line is the numerical results from CFD-simulation. The results agree very well.
1000

Nu

100

Correlation Eq.3-10
Fluent

10 1.00E+03

1.00E+04

1.00E+05

1.00E+06

Re FIGURE 3-7 Nusselt number for flow across a circular pipe

23 3.3.3 90 mitered bend with vanes and without vanes

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 3-8 Geometry of 90 mitered bend without guide vanes and with guide vanes

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 3-9 Grid of 90 mitered bend without guide vanes and with guide vanes The pressure loss through the 90 mitered bend reduces considerably when the guide vanes are introduced that help direct the flow with less unwanted swirl and disturbances. The empirical values for the losses for each case are 1.1 and 0.2 respectively. The plots of discrete values of minor loss coefficients, calculated from CFD-simulation, against the velocity square are plotted in the Figure 3-10 and 3-11. The plots are then fitted with straight line equations, resulting in the value of slope for each case. It is shown in the Figure 3-9 (a) and (b) shown that the values of the coefficients are 1.13 and 0.21 respectively which agree well with the empirical formula

24
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 without vanes 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-5

(Pin-Pout)/(Density*g) 10 -5

Slope = 1.1387

2.5

3.5

v^2/(2g) 10

FIGURE 3-10 Loss coefficient for a 90 mitered bend without vanes

(Pin-Pout)/(Density*g) 10 -5
3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 50 100 150
-5

Slope = 0.212

vanes 200

v^2/(2g) 10

FIGURE 3-11 Loss coefficient for a 90 mitered bend with vanes 3.3.4 Sudden contraction and Sudden expansion Sudden contractions in a duct or pipe may also be dealt with in this way, provided that there is little or no loss between the upstream large-section conduit and the vena contracta formed within the smaller conduit just downstream of the junction [19], as shown in Figure 3-12 (a). As a fluid flows from a smaller pipe into a larger pipe through a sudden enlargement (see Figure 3-12(b)), its velocity abruptly decreases, causing turbulence, which generates an energy loss [20]. The amount of turbulence, and therefore the

25 amount of energy loss, is dependent on the ratio of the sizes of the two pipes. The minor loss is calculated from the Eq.3-8. There are approximation equations for the sudden expansion and sudden contraction fitting. The equations for the loss coefficient of sudden expansion and sudden contraction [17] are

K SE
and

2 Din = 1 2 D out

Eq.3-12

D2 K SC = 0.51 out Eq.3-13 2 Din It can be seen from the empirical formula that the values of both coefficients merge at high value of d/D (Figure 3-12).

(a)

(b)

FIGURE 3-12 Geometry of (a) Sudden contraction and (b) Sudden expansion (unit : m)

Axis 100 m Inlet

Din Dout

Outlet

Wall
(a) Dout (b) FIGURE 3-13 Grid of (a) Sudden contraction and (b) Sudden expansion The energy losses for both are graphed in Figure 3-14. It also occurs because of the change in pipe diameter. Figure 3-13, we see that the energy loss from a sudden contraction is somewhat smaller. In general, accelerating a fluid causes less turbulence than decelerating it for a given ratio of diameter change.

Inlet

Din

Outlet

26
1.2 1 0.8
Empirical of Sudden contraction
Empirical of Sudden expansion
sudden contraction
sudden expansion

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6

0.8

d/D

FIGURE 3-14 Loss coefficients for a sudden contraction and a sudden expansion 3.3.5 90 Smooth Bend Outlet

Inlet

FIGURE 3-15 Geometry of 90 Smooth Bend A bend or curve in a pipe, as in Figure 3-15, always induces a loss larger than the simple straight-pipe Moody friction loss, due to flow separation on the curved walls and a swirling secondary flow arising from the centripetal acceleration [20]. The smooth-wall loss coefficients K in Figure 3-16, are for total loss, including Moody friction effects. The separation and secondary flow losses decrease with R/D, while the Moody losses increase because the bend length increases.

27
0.23 0.22 0.21 0.2

K
0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

R/D

FIGURE 3-16 Loss coefficient for a 90 smooth bend 3.3.6 Gradual conical expansion

FIGURE 3-17 Geometry of a Gradual conical expansion (unit : m)

Outlet
(a)

Inlet

Outlet

Inlet

(b) FIGURE 3-18 Geometry of Gradual expansion without internal vanes (a) and with internal vanes (b)

28 If the transition from a smaller to a larger pipe can be made less abrupt than the square-edged sudden expansion, the energy loss is reduced. This is normally done by placing a conical section between the two pipes as shown in Figure 3-17. The sloping walls of the cone tend to guide the fluid during the deceleration and expansion of the flow steam. Therefore, the size of the zone of separation and the amount of turbulence are reduced as the cone angle is reduced. The energy loss for a gradual enlargement is calculated from Eq.3-8. Plot the minor loss against the velocity square of the gradual expansion without internal vanes and with internal vanes. Figure 3-19 that the plots are then fitted with straight line equation, the resulting in the value of slope are the loss coefficients (K) are 0.3838 and 0.3787 respectively.
350 300 250

Head Loss

Slope=0.3838
200 150

Slope=0.3787
100 50 0 0 200 400 600 800 without vanes with vanes

v^2/2g
FIGURE 3-19 Loss coefficients for gradual expansion without vanes and with vanes

CHAPTER 4 PR0BLEM DEFINITON AND RESULTS

4.1 Problem Definition In this project a new 135-m-high stack system is to be constructed to replace the old 40-m-high stack. The new stack is to connect to the old system on the top of the old stack foundation; the connecting point is 11.95 m from the ground (Figure 4-1). Given the height of the stack, the first requirement in this project is to verify that the mass flow rates induced by the stack effect meet the amounts of mass flow rates for four operating conditions (see Table 4-1). The second requirement is that the temperature drop of the stack gas for all cases should be less than 5oC. In this section, geometrical descriptions, gaseous inlet conditions, and parameters to calculate convective heat transfer are given.

FIGURE 4-1 Schematic diagram of the stack system (unit : m)

30 4.1.1 Geometrical Descriptions Geometrical description of the stack and system connected to it is shown below in Figure 4-2. Note that the dimensions given in the Figure 4-2 are for the internal diameters for each section. 4.1.2 Inlet conditions Four inlet cases for the stack gas conditions are studied, the atmospheric conditions are however similar for all cases. The inlet gases are different in temperature, gaseous mixing fractions and total mass flow rates and the atmospheric condition are given in the Table 4-1. 4.1.3 Atmospheric conditions The atmospheric pressure and temperature at the stack exit are set to be 101 kPa and 35 oC respectively; at the ground level the temperature is set to be 40oC. The cross wind velocity is assumed to be varied linearly with the height above the ground. In this report we assume that the velocity at the ground level is 5 m/s and at the top of the stack are 20 m/s. 4.1.4 Requirements 4.1.4.1 Mass flow rates of the stack gas at different inlet conditions are required. It is the constraint that the mass flow rates, caused by the stack effect, must be greater than the constraint values at different gaseous inlet conditions. The constraint values for mass flow rates and the corresponding inlet conditions for the stack gas are listed at the last part of Table 4-1. 4.1.4.2 For the heat transfer analyses, the exit temperature of the flow is required. This temperature drop is due to the heat losses from the flow between the inlet to the exit of the piping and stack system. It is assumed that convection is of the only mode of heat transfer involving the losses. Note that the entire system is insulated to prevent the heat losses.

31

Left top = front view Left = top view Top = side view

FIGURE 4-2 Detail stack dimensions

32 TABLE 4-1 Gas composition & Mixture volume fraction Gas Molecular Weight Volume Fraction : C1=568808 kg/hr Volume Fraction : C2=606067 kg/hr Volume Fraction : C3=537268 kg/hr Volume Fraction : C4=545262 kg/hr CO2 N2 CH4 C2H6 C3H8 C4 C5+ H2S H2O O2 Ar

44.01 28.01 16.04 30.07 44.10 0.0 25.38 56.12 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.0

0.0 34.06 18.02 32.00 39.95 0.0 0.01 9.56 8.22 0.67

36.90 46.30 0.04 0.01 0.00

0.0

0.0

0.01 10.93 5.24 0.56

16.38 61.86 0.01 0.00 0.00

0.0

0.0

0.00 9.61 1.68 0.22

11.17 15.72 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.0

0.0

0.00 9.61 11.38 0.77

4.2 Methodology Theoretical background and methodology used to analyze the flow and heat transfer processes in the problem will be presented in this chapter. In the analysis of the flow processes, phenomena driving and dissipating the energy of the flow are discussed. Stack effect resulting in natural draft to the stack system, adds energy to the flow whereas friction in the form of the major loss dissipates the energy. Another form of the energy loss is minor loss. Minor losses vary with kinetic energy of the flow, occurring at fittings within the piping and the stack system. The last form of energy loss is in the form of the heat transfer process, resulting in the temperature drop along the flow. The stack effect, flow resistance (major and minor losses) and heat transfer process are discussed in detail in following sections. 4.3 Calculation Results 4.3.1 Stack effect calculation The atmospheric pressure and temperature are assumed to be 101 kPa and 35oC respectively. The stack gas temperature is averaged over the inlet and the exit temperatures, 218 and 214oC. The inlet stack temperature is the temperature of the exhaust from the process entering the stack system and is fixed at 218oC. On the other hand, the exit temperature given is the constraint that the acid gaseous component within the stack will not condense before leaving the stack system and assumed to be lesser that 5 oC. With the constraint number in mind, we set the exit temperature to be 214oC and use this number to calculate the available pressure. It will be shown later in the heat transfer analyses that this figure is an acceptable value. The height of the stack is fixed at 135 m above the sea level. Then by using Eq.2-15, the values of draft generated by the stack effect at the design temperatures of 200, 218, 186 and 194 oC are calculated and summarized in Table 4-2.

33 Table 4-2 shows the data for the assumed atmospheric temperature and pressure used; the volume fraction of the mixture and molecular weight for each gas; the given inlets gas temperature and the assumed exit gases temperature. The last line shows the calculation results of the desire available drafts for the stack for all cases: C1 = 568808 kg/hr, C2 = 606067 kg/hr, C3 = 537268 kg/hr and C4 = 545262 kg/hr respectively. TABLE 4-2 Available Draft Results Mass flow rate (kg/hr) Int. gas temperature (oC) Avg. gas temperature (oC) Avg. Molecular Weight Gas constant (J/kgK) Available Draft (Pa) C1 C2 C3 C4 568808 606067 537268 545262 200 218 186 194 198 216 184 192 31.52 33.1 30.2 30.4 263.78 251.3 275.2 273.5 545.05 641.25 515.9 537.6

4.3.2 Calculation of Major losses There are six major losses in the piping system. The lengths to each section are 15, 17, 22, 27, 18 and 40-m while the internal diameters to each section are 3, 4, 5.4, 7.6, 9 and 4-m consecutively. Figure 4-3 shows schematic drawing of the piping system; the marks locate the sections of piping system producing major losses. Within the calculation procedure, the averaged velocity, mass flow rate through the piping system was gradually increased from an appropriate initial value to the velocity at which the total pressure losses match with the available draft is reached. The resulting velocity, therefore, gives mass flow rate corresponds to the available draft calculated in section 4.3.1.

FIGURE 4-3 Locations of major losses

34 Fluid properties are evaluated at the average temperatures between the inlet and the exit temperatures. The inlet temperatures to the four cases C1, C2, C3 and C4 are 200oC, 218oC, 186 oC and 194 oC respectively. For these values, we assume the exit temperatures to by 4oC for all cases. We find later that those assumed values for the exit temperature of all cases are the reasonable ones. With the assumed exit temperatures for all cases, the average temperature over the entire piping system can be calculated and is used as the temperature to determine the fluid properties, e.g. density and viscosity. The averaged temperature for all cases from the case C1, C2, C3 and C4 are 198, 216, 184 and 192 oC respectively. TABLE 4-3 Major losses: the C1, C2, C3 and C4 cases Sec. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 D (m) 3.00 4.00 5.40 7.60 9.00 4.00 Analysis of major losses: Vavg(m/s) C1 C2 C3 C4 27.4 28.8 26.2 26.8 15.4 16.2 14.7 15.1 8.4 8.9 8.0 8.2 4.2 4.4 4.0 4.1 3.0 3.2 2.9 2.9 15.4 16.2 14.7 15.1 Ploss (Pa) C2 C3 30.9 24.9 7.8 6.3 2.1 1.7 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 18.4 14.8

L(m) 15.00 17.00 22.00 27.00 18.00 40.00

C1 27.5 6.9 1.9 0.4 0.1 16.4

C4 25.9 6.5 1.7 0.3 0.1 15.4

Table 4-3 shows the dimensions for each sections of the pipe generating the major losses. The conservation of mass and energy equations give velocities and pressure losses at each section. It can be noticed that the highest value for major losses is at the piping section where the velocity is maximum. Whereas minimum pressure loss is at the section of largest diameter where the loss is negligible small compared with the losses at other sections. 4.3.3 Calculation of minor losses As shown in the Figure 4-6 below, there are ten minor losses in the system. The first four fittings are sudden contraction (number 1-4). The fitting number 5 is sudden expansion. To keep the expansion loss to its minimum value; it is designed with expansion angle of 8o. Bending at the fitting number 6 and 8 are 90o bends with long radii. Fitting number 9 is a sudden contraction and fitting number 10 is assumed to be a 90o bend with guide vanes. The guide vanes are used in order to ease the flow. As shown in Table 4-4, it can be seen that the largest minor loss occur at gradually expansion, fitting number 7. The pressure loss across the gradually expansion is greater than 200 Pa. for most cases except C3. The effect of the expansion loss can also be seen at the sudden expansion at fitting number 5 where the pressure losses give figure around 100 Pa. The losses due to the expansion of the fluid dominate other minor losses along the flow. Comparing to the flow past contractions, the minor loss due to the expansion is always much greater, indicating that it is difficult to efficiently decelerate a fluid. Note that the losses may be quite different if the expansion is gradual. For very small angles, the diffuser is excessively long and most of the head loss is due to the wall shear stress as in fully developed flow. For moderate or large angles, the flow

35 separates from the walls and the losses are due mainly to a dissipation of the kinetic energy of the jet leaving the smaller diameter pipe. In fact, for moderate or large values of expansion angle,, the conical diffuser is perhaps unexpectedly, less efficient than a sharp-edged expansion which has K = 1. There is an optimum angle for which the loss coefficient to be minimum.

FIGURE 4-4 Description of Minor Loss TABLE 4-4 Minor losses: the C1, C2, C3 and C4 cases Analysis of minor losses vav(m/s) C1 C2 C3 C4 C1 6.1 1.9 0.5 0.1 Ploss(Pa) C2 6.8 2.1 0.6 0.1 C3 5.5 1.7 0.5 0.1 C4 5.7 1.8 0.5 0.1 91.1 18.2

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Description gradual contraction gradual contraction gradual contraction gradual contraction

0.02 27.4 28.8 26.2 26.8 0.02 15.4 16.2 14.7 15.1 0.02 0.02 8.4 4.2 8.9 4.4 8.0 4.0 8.2 4.1

sudden expansion 1.00 15.4 16.2 14.7 15.1 96.9 108.7 87.5 90o Long Radius 0.20 15.4 16.2 14.7 15.1 19.3 21.7 17.5 gradual expansion sudden contraction

0.40 36.4 38.4 34.8 35.8 217.1 243.7 196.1 204.2

90o Long Radius 0.20 36.4 38.4 34.8 35.8 108.5 121.8 98.0 102.1 0.10 12.6 13.3 12.1 12.4 54.2 60.9 49.0 51.0 12.3

90o Bend wanes 0.20 12.6 13.3 12.1 12.4 13.1 14.7 11.8

36 At the long radius elbow, fitting number 8, the values of the pressure loss are also of great values around 100 Pa. The high value of the loss is due to the turning effect at the elbow where the flow separates. The effect is more pronounce when the velocity of the flow is high. This can be seen by comparing the losses through two different size long radius elbow, the fitting number 6 and number 8. Although the loss coefficients for the two elbows are equal, the values of the pressure losses are significantly apart. The different varies to the order of square of the flow velocity (see Eq.3-8). TABLE 4-5 Total pressure losses Flow analysis of the piping system Cases Mass flow (kg/h) Major losses(Pa) Minor losses(Pa) Total loss C1 568808 53.2 517.7 570.9 C2 606067 59.7 581.1 640.8 C3 537268 48.1 467.7 515.8 C4 545262 49.9 487 536.9 As shown in Table 4-5, the minor losses are much greater than the major losses. This indicate that the kinetic energy dissipation due to separation of the flow at the fittings along the piping system dominate the pressure losses. The total pressure losses of the two cases are set to be equal to the draft produced by the stack effect. The resulting mass flow rates for the all cases are larger than the desired mass flow rates which are given in the last line of Table 4-1. It can then be concluded that the available draft created by the stack effect for both cases are enough to pull the flow at the design flow rates through the stack and the system connected to it. 4.3.4 Calculation of stack gas temperature distribution Exit stack gas temperature distribution for all cases: C1, C2, C3 and C4 are to be determined. Figure 4-5 shows the sections of the piping system to be analyzed for heat transfer, given the inlet temperature for all cases at 200 oC, 218 oC, 184 oC and 196 oC respectively. At the external environment, the air is at the temperature of 30 o C. Velocity of the cross wind is assumed to vary with the stack height the value for each elevated level starting from the horizontal pipe passing across each section to the end of the stack are 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, and 20 m/s from the horizontal section to the top vertical section. These are overestimated wind speeds for an ordinary calm day. Since the maximum allowable temperature drop is limit to 5 degree Celsius, the assumed over estimated cross wind speeds play as a safety factor for heat transfer analyses.

37

FIGURE 4-5 Distributed temperature locations This calculation divided the piping and stack into six sections where heat is being lost from each section. Temperatures at the end of each section and at the stack exit are calculated using Eq.2-4, given the inlet temperature. All sections are assumed to be straight and the flow is in the fully developed flow. Figure 4-5 shows the location along the stack where those temperatures are to be determined for both two cases. External and internal fluid properties are assumed constants and equal to the properties of air at the same conditions. Those values necessary for the analyses are kinematics viscosity, dynamic viscosity, Prandlt numbers, conduction coefficients and heat capacity at constant pressure. The material properties needed for evaluating conduction through the piping and insulators are the pipe and thickness insulator thickness and conductivities for both materials. These values are assumed to be constant for our heat transfer analyses. The values of the properties used in our analyses are shown in Table 4-6 and 4-7. TABLE 4-6 Data for internal convection heat transfer analyses Data for internal convection heat transfer Case C1 C2 C3 C4 int (Pas) 2.59E-05 2.64E-05 2.55E-05 2.57E-05 kint (W/mK) 3.76E-02 3.88E-02 3.67E-02 3.72E-02 Print 0.698 0.696 0.699 0.698 Cpint (J/kgK) 1023 1026 1021 1021

38 TABLE 4-7 Data for external convection heat transfer analyses

ext kext Prext ksteel kins

Data for external convection heat transfer m2/s 1.61E-05 equal for all cases W/m 0.0259 C1 0.7282 C2 C3 W/m 15 C4 W/m 0.054

The mass flow rates used to calculate heat losses for each case the value shown in Table 4-6 and 4-7 which are the design values. It is found in Table 4-8 that the temperature differences are less than four degree Celsius for all cases which are less than the 5-degree maximum limits. TABLE 4-8 Exit temperature Cases C1 C2 C3 C4 Tinlet 200 218 186 194 Heat transfer analysis results T1 T2 T3 T4 199.1 198.0 197.3 196.9 217.3 216.3 215.7 215.3 184.9 183.7 182.9 182.4 192.9 191.7 190.9 190.3 T5 196.6 215.1 182.1 190.0 Texit 196.5 215.0 181.9 189.9

4.4 Numerical Simulation In order to verify the calculation results obtained in the previous sections. We apply computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to simulate the entire flow field for both fluid and heat transfer processes. It is also of important to compare the minor loss coefficients given by the empirical formula with those obtained from the numerical formulation. 4.4.1 Numerical method Three-dimensional simulations of the turbulent fully develop flows of fluid in the stack were carried out using the commercial CFD software FLUENT 6.3. The mesh geometry was produced using GAMBIT. The mesh used for all subsequent computations in this analysis contains 36743 nodes and 171038 tetrahedral elements. The code has been used to solve the steady Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations closed with the standard k- turbulence model with buoyancy terms included in both k and transport equation. The semi-implicit method for pressure linked equations (SIMPLE) was employed with second order upwind discretisation employed for the advective terms. A segregated implicit solver was used. The solution is regarded as converged when the maximum value of normalized residuals of any equation is less than 5 10-5.

39 4.4.2 Boundary conditions Fluid Material Fluid Properties: Density C1 C2 C3 C4 Viscosity C1 C2 C3 C4 CP C1 C2 C3 C4 Thermal Conductivity C1 C2 C3 C4 Inlet Mass flow rate C1 C2 C3 C4 Outlet Pressure (Pgauge) Wall Temperature Thermal Conductivity Surround temperature 35 C 0.054 W/m.K 35 C 568808 606067 537268 545262 0 kg/hr = kg/hr = kg/hr = kg/hr = 158.00 kg/s at T = 200 C 168.35 kg/s at T = 218 C 149.24 kg/s at T = 186 C 151.46 kg/s at T = 194 C Air 0.815 0.824 0.805 0.796 kg/m3 at kg/m3 at kg/m3 at kg/m3 at T = 200 C T = 218 C T = 186 C T = 194 C

2.59 x 10-5 2.64 x 10-5 2.55 x 10-5 2.57 x 10-5 1023 1026 1021 1021 J/kg.K J/kg.K J/kg.K J/kg.K

N.s/m2 N.s/m2 N.s/m2 N.s/m2

3.76 x 10-2 3.88 x 10-2 3.67 x 10-2 3.72 x 10-2

W/m.K W/m.K W/m.K W/m.K

40 4.4.3 Grid Generation

FIGURE 4-6 Grid Generation of stack (36743 nodes and 171038 tetrahedral elements)

41 TABLE 4-9 Total pressure losses of stack No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Description gradual contraction gradual contraction gradual contraction gradual contraction sudden expansion 90o Long Radius gradual expansion 90o Long Radius sudden contraction 90o Bend w/vanes Total C1 30.47586 9.8414 2.96833 0.20205 30.57043 3.03965 224.488 147.1904 74.17158 44.44629 536.9181 Pressure loss (N/m2) C2 C3 34.08849 28.00372 11.01037 9.04358 3.31983 2.73129 0.22155 0.18445 30.6265 30.52179 3.32364 2.84314 225.0526 224.0996 195.872 113.7157 83.11383 68.01786 56.02881 45.71716 608.5691 496.8746 C4 51.56643 16.45117 5.306894 0.807671 11.62673 1.256489 104.0643 9.924027 100.9851 16.60808 517.0866

The static pressure and velocity obtained from the CFD simulation are shown in Figure 4-7 and 4-8. The pressure and velocities at the different points are used to calculate the head losses along the stack system. The summation of the losses (total losses) is shown in Table 4-9 of all cases: C1, C2, C3 and C4. Theses values are comparable to those values of stack effect shown in Table 4-2 or the total losses shown in Table 4-5. TABLE 4-10 Exit temperatures of stack No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Description Inlet T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 Outlet C1 200 199.8008 199.2718 198.9273 198.7363 198.6332 198.1942 Temperature (C) C2 C3 218 186 217.8025 185.8071 217.278 185.2955 216.9361 184.9625 216.7465 184.7781 216.6442 184.6783 216.207 184.2557 C4 194 193.8098 193.3053 192.9768 192.7949 192.6966 192.28

The temperature distribution within the stack system is shown in Figure 4-9. The temperature at each particular point, as shown in the Figure 4-5, is listed in Table 4-10. The temperature drops, for all cases, are within allowable values (less than 5C). Theses temperature obtained from the CFD simulation are agree well with the empirical solutions shown in section 4.3.4.

42 4.5 Pictorial results

FIGURE 4-7 Static pressure (the case C1)

43

FIGURE 4-8 Velocity magnitude (the case C1)

44

FIGURE 4-9 Static temperature (the case C1)

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

At present days, Natural-draft stacks are used in most industries; they are usually designed and come together at the first place with the new plant or processes. Designing and constructing the stacks to provide correct amount of natural draft involve a number design factor, many of which require trial-and-error and reiterative methods. In order to achieve the better knowledge of the stack process, computational fluid dynamics simulation (CFD) has been used as a useful tool to analyze. We studied the literature surveys, which are guidelines to apply this thesis. This thesis studies the buoyancy driven to flow in a natural draft stack using computational fluid dynamics simulation and analyzes flow resistances and heat transfer processes on components of the stack system. Simulated the fluid flow through a square duct of 0.210.21 m2 household fireplace for validate the commercial CFD software FLUENT 6.3. The stack effect obtained from CFD-simulation compared with the analytical solution. Pressure losses from CFD-simulation are closed to ones created by the stack effect. The results shown that the effect of the height will be used as an independent variable and pressure developed to drive the flow is the dependent variable. The analysis of flow through components of stack system is analyzed by using CFD-simulation. Simulated the fluid flow through the smooth pipe (internal flow) and flow across the cylindrical (external), a 90 mitered bend with vanes and without vanes, a sudden contraction, a sudden expansion, 90 bend, a gradually conical expansion are determined pressure losses and local heat transfer. Pressure losses and heat transfer together with properties of fluid are used to calculate Friction factor and Nusselt number correlation. Compare the results from CFD-simulation and the empirical-solutions. The results shown that loss coefficients of components obtained from CFD-simulation are agreed well with the empirical solution over the range of interest. The error value is under-tolerances and can be accepted. It may be cause from the parameters input. For the analyses of four mass flow rates flow through the industrial stack of 135m-height. Four different mass flow rates: C1=568808 kg/hr, C2=606067kg/hr, C3=537268 kg/hr and C4=545262 kg/hr. The inlet gas temperature for the corresponding mass flow rates are 200, 218, 186 and 194 oC respectively. Simulated the flow to determine pressure losses and exit temperature for four cases within the stack and piping components system. The results shown that pressure losses and exit temperature for four cases are obtained form CFD-simulation are agree well with the results obtained in the empirical solution within less than one percent. The draft created by the stack effect for all cases C1, C2, C3, and C4 are enough to drive the flow through the stack system. Therefore, the effects of pressure losses and heat transfer on the temperature drop of the stack gas are acceptable for all cases. The comparative study is done on a household fireplace, the piping system and stack in an industrial type stack of 135-m-heigh. The CFD-simulation is then being an important mean to simulate and predict the kind of situations. Therefore, the computational fluid dynamics simulation (CFD) has been used as a useful tool to

46 analyze the flow resistance and heat transfer process along an artificial small scale household stack and a large scale industrial stack because the results from this program approach to the theory.

REFERENCES
1. Moghiman M. Measurements and Modeling of Flue Height Influence on Air Pollution Emissions and Thermal Efficiency of Natural-Draught Gas Fired Boilers. Masters Thesis, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 2002. 2. Habib A., Elshafei M. and Dajani M. Influence of Combustion Parameters on Nox Production in an Industrial Boiler. Journal of Computer & Fluids. 37 (2008) : 12-23. 3. Diez L.I., Cortes C. and Pallares J. Numerical Investigation of NOx Emissions from a Tangentially-fired Utility Boiler under Conventional and Overfire Air Operation. Journal of Fuel. 87 (2008) : 1259-1269. 4. Williamson N., Armfield S. and Behnia M. Numerical Simulation of the Flow in a Natural Draft Wet Cooling Tower-The Effect of Redial Thermofluid Fields. Journal of Thermal Engineering. 28 (2008) : 178189. 5. Ji J.J, Luo Y.H. and Hu L.Y. Study on the Mechanism of Unsteady Combustion Related to Volatile in a Coal Fired Traveling Grate Boiler. Journal of Applied Thermal Engineering. 28 (2008) : 145-156. 6. Chejne F., Hernandez J.P., et al. Modelling and Simulation of Time-Dependent Coal Combustion Processes in Stack. Journal of Fuel. 79 (2000) : 987 997. 7. Fang Qing-yan, Zhou Huai-chun, et al. Flexibility of a 300 MW Arch Firing Boiler Burning Low Quality. Masters Thesis, Faculty of Mining and Techology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2007. 8. FLUENT 6.3 Documentation. Labanon : Fluent,Inc., 2006. 9. Hinze J.O. Turbulence. New York : McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., 1975. 10. Hoffmann K.A. and Chiang S.T. Computational Fluid Dynamics. 4th ed. Wichita-Kansas : A publication of Engineering Education System., 2000. 11. Beychokb B. and Milton J. Stack Effect. England : WoodHead Publishing Limited, 2005. 12. ASME : STS-1-2006, Steel Stack. 13. Ozisik M.N. Heat Transfer : A Basic Approach. United States of America : McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., 1985. 14. Munson B.R., Young D.F. and Okiishi T.H. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics 5th ed. United States of America : John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte.Ltd., 2006. 15. Holman J.P. Heat Transfer. Singapore : McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1989. 16. Bennett C.O. and Myers J.E. Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer. 3rd ed. Singapore : McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1983. 17. Miller R.W. Flow Measurement Engineering Handbook. United States of America : McGraw-Hill company, 1986. 18. White F.M. Fluid Mechanics. 6th ed. United States of America : McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., 2008. 19. Potter M.C. and Wiggert D.C. Mechanics of Fluid. United States of America : Prentice-Hall international Inc., 1997.

48 20. Douglas J.F., Gasiorek J.M. and Saffield J.A. Fluid Mechanics. England : Prentice-Hall, 2001.

APPENDIX A Laminar and Turbulent Velocity Profiles

50 A.1 Laminar Flow The fully developed laminar flow profile is parabolic for pipe Reynolds numbers below 2000 and unaffected by wall roughness. The average pipeline velocity is onehalf the centerline velocity, and the relationship between point and maximum velocities is given by r 2 v = v max 1 Eq.A-1 R

R 2 P v max = Eq.A-2 where 4l Thus, we begin by developing the equation for the velocity profile in fully developed laminar flow. If the flow is not fully developed, a theoretical analysis becomes much more complex.
A.2 Turbulent Flow The turbulent profile is not fixed geometry, but rather changes with wall roughness and Reynolds number. Turbulent velocity profile in a smooth pipe can be written as u yu * = v u* where y = R-r is the distance measured from the wall u is the time-average x component of velocity u* = (w/)1/2 is termed the friction velocity Eq.A-3

FIGURE A-1 The pipe geometry

51 A.3 Boundary condition Solver Fluid Materials Material Properties : Density Viscosity Inlet Axisymmetric Water 998.2 kg/m3 1.003 10-3 kg/m-s The fluid flow is fully developed flow and varies velocities standard wall P(gauge) = 0

Wall Outlet A.4 The results

Turbulent

Laminar

FIGURE A-2 The relation of pressure and distance The graph shown the pressure will be drop along a pipe and the pressure drop along pipe of turbulent more than laminar. A.4.1 Velocity Profiles: developing and fully developed

FIGURE A-3 Laminar velocity profiles

FIGURE A-4 Turbulent velocity profiles

52 Figure A-3 and A-4 shown the laminar velocity profiles and the turbulent is be fully developed faster than the laminar.

FIGURE A-5 Laminar and Turbulent Velocity Profiles The velocity profile for laminar flow in a pipe is quite different from the velocity profile for turbulent flow. A.5 Fully-developed laminar inlet profiles /*************************************************************\ /* UDFs for fully-developed laminar inlet profiles *\ /*************************************************************\ #include "udf.h" DEFINE_PROFILE (inlet_x_velocity, thread, index) { real x[ND_ND]; /* this will hold the position vector */ real y; face_t f; begin_f_loop(f, thread) { F_CENTROID(x,f,thread); y = x[1]; F_PROFILE(f, thread, index) = 10. - y*y/(.05*.05)*10.; } end_f_loop(f, thread) }

53 A.6 Fully-developed turbulent inlet profiles /*************************************************************\ /* UDFs for fully-developed turbulent inlet profiles *\ /*************************************************************\ #include "udf.h" #define YMIN 0.0 #define YMAX 2600 #define UMEAN 38.48 #define B 1./10. #define DELOVRH 0.5 #define VISC 2.64-05 /* profile for x-velocity */ DEFINE_PROFILE(x_velocity, t, i) { real y, del, h, x[ND_ND], ufree; /* variable declarations */ face_t f; h = YMAX - YMIN; del = DELOVRH*h; ufree = UMEAN*(B+1.); begin_f_loop(f, t) { F_CENTROID(x,f,t); y = x[1]; if (y <= del) F_PROFILE(f,t,i) = ufree*pow(y/del,B); else F_PROFILE(f,t,i) = ufree*pow((h-y)/del,B); } end_f_loop(f, t) } /* constants */

APPENDIX B Discharge Coefficient

55 Discharge Coefficient B.1 Theory

FIGURE B-1 Orifice pressure tap location Bernoullis energy equation between locations 1 and 2 gives 2 2 P1 v1 P2 v 2 Eq.B-1 + + gz1 = + + gz 2 1 2 g 2 2g In practice has not the elevation difference between pressure taps because both pressure at a common elevation. For a constant-density fluid, this reduces Eq.B-1 to the form 2 P1 P2 v 2 v12 = Eq.B-2 2g Eq.B-2 is reduced to the flow-rate units by applying the mass flow continuity equation between planes 1 and 2. This mass balance simply states that the mass of fluid entering plane 1 equals the mass leaving at plane 2 and stays within the confines of the steam tube; & m = 1 A1v1 = 2 A2 v2 Eq.B-3 and for a constant-density fluid

Q = A1v1 = A2 v 2
Substituting Eq.B-4 into Eq.B-2 P1 P2

Eq.B-4

Eq.B-5 2g Planes 1 and 2 are circular, with measured pipe and bore diameters at flowing temperature of D1 and D2, Eq.B-5 can be rewritten as

[1 ( A / A ) ]v
2 2 1 2

2 2

P1 P2

[1 (D

2 / D1 ) v 2 2g

Eq.B-6

56 For a given primary element, the discharge coefficient is derived from laboratory data by rationing the true and theoretical flow rates. The true flow rate is determined by weighing or volumetric collection of the fluid over measured time interval, and the theoretical flow is calculated with 2 D2 P 5 Qtheo = 3.512407 10 Eq.B-7 1 ( D2 / D1 ) 4 where = D2/D1 Eq.B-7 can be rewritten as
Qtheo = 3.512407 10
5

D2

2 4

Eq.B-8

The discharge coefficient is then defined as ture flow rate C= theoretical flow rate

Eq.B-9

The discharge coefficient corrects the theoretical equation for the influence of velocity profile (Reynolds number), the assumption of no energy loss between taps, and pressure tap location. The discharge coefficient equation, for D< 2.3 in is calculated with C = 0.5959+0.03122.10.1848+0.039[4/(1-4)]0.03373/D+91.712.5/Re0.75 Eq.B-10 The discharge coefficient equation, for D>2.3 in is calculated with C = 0.5959+0.03122.10.1848+0.09[4/D(1-4)]0.03373/D+1.712.5/Re0.75 Eq.B-11 The discharge coefficient equation, for D and D/2 taps is calculated with C = 0.5959+0.03122.10.1848+0.039[4/(1-4)]0.01583+91.712.5/Re0.75 Eq.B-12 The discharge coefficient at infinite Reynolds number (C) is calculated with C = 0.5959+0.03122.10.1848+0.039[4/(1-4)]0.01583 Eq.B-13

57 B.2 Boundary Conditions

(a)

(b) FIGURE B-2 The orifice pipe geometry Fluid Materials Material Properties : Density Viscosity Inlet Wall Outlet = D2/D1 : Water 998.2 kg/m3 1.003 10-3 kg/m-s turbulent fully developed flow and varies velocities standard wall P(gauge) = 0 vary at 0.4, 0.5, 0.6

B.3 The results and discuss Determine Discharge coefficient by vary to find differential pressure and Substituting it into Eq.B-8.

FIGURE B-3 Velocity Vectors at = 0.4

58

FIGURE B-4 Velocity Vectors at = 0.6 Figure B-3 and B-4 shown = 0.6 have a velocity more than = 0.4. Thus the increase, the velocity will increase because the area is smaller.

FIGURE B-5 Pressure contours at = 0.4

FIGURE B-6 Pressure contours at = 0.6 The pressure first increases and then decrease to a minimum at the vena contracta. Figure B-5 and B-6 shown = 0.4 have a pressure drop more than = 0.6. Thus the increase, the pressure will decrease because the area is larger.

59 Plot Orifice discharge-coefficient with Reynolds number

FIGURE B-7 Orifice discharge-coefficient Chart After simulated bring the result to computed the Discharge Coefficient for turbulent flow in smooth pipe. And then plotted the result compare to the exact solution, the result from Fluent program closed to the exact solution. The error value is under-tolerances and can be accepted. The vena contracta = 0.6 have discharge coefficient more than = 0.5 and = 0.4. Thus the increase, the discharge coefficient will increase because the area is larger. And the Reynolds number increase, the discharge coefficient will decrease.

APPENDIX C Flow across Tube Bundles

61 Flow across Tube Bundles C.1 Theory

FIGURE C-1 The in-line arrangement

FIGURE C-2 The staggered arrangement Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of tube bundles have numerous applications in the design of heat exchangers and industrial heat transfer equipment. For example, a common type of heat transfer consists of a tube bundle with one fluid passing through the tubes and the other passing across the tubes. Frequently used tube bundle arrangements include the inline and the staggered arrangements, illustrated in Fig.1a and b respectively. The tube bundle geometry is characterized by transverse pitch ST and the longitudinal pitch SL between the tube centers; the diagonal pitch SD between the centers of the tubes in the diagonal row sometimes is used for the staggered arrangement. To define the Reynolds number for flow through the tube bank, the flow velocity is based on the minimum free-flow area available for flow, whether the minimum area occurs between the tubes in a transverse row or in diagonal row. Then the Reynolds number for flow across a tube bank is defined as DGmax Eq.C-1 Re = where = umax = maximum mass flow velocity Eq.C-2 Gmax is the mass flow rate per unit area where the flow velocity is maximum, and D is the outside diameter of the tube, is the density, and umax the maximum velocity based on

62 the minimum free-flow area available for fluid flow. If u is the flow velocity measured at a point inside the heat exchanger before the fluid enters the tube bank, then the maximum flow velocity umax for the in-line arrangement shown in Figure C-1 is determined from ST ST / D u max = u = u Eq.C-3 ST D ST / D 1 For the staggered arrangement shown in Figure C-2, then the maximum flow velocity umax is determined from ST ST / D 1 u max = u = u Eq.C-4 2(S L D ) 2 SL / D 1 The maximum mass flow rate Gmax, defined by Eq.B-2, also can be calculated from
G max = M Amin

Eq.C-5

where M = total mass flow rate through the bundle in kilograms per second Amin = total maximum free-flow area The flow patterns through a tube bundle are so complicated that it is virtually impossible to predict heat transfer and pressure drop for flow across tube banks. Experimental investigations indicate that for tube bundles having more than about N = 10 to 20 rows of tubes in the direction of flow, and the tube length large compared to the tube diameter, the entrance, exit, and edge effects are negligible. For such cases, the Nusselt number for flow across the bundle depends on the following parameters: SL ST Re Pr D D And the geometric arrangement of the tubes, namely, whether the tubes are aligned or staggered. We now present the heat transfer and pressure drop correlations for flow across the tube bundles. C.1.1 Heat Transfer Correlations Grimson correlated heat transfer data for air reported by several investigators for both inline and staggered tube arrangements, for tube bundles having 10 or more transverse rows in the direction of flow with an expression in the from hm D DGmax = co k for air in the range 2000 < Re < 40000. This expression has been generalized to fluids other than air by including the Prandtl number effect in the form
n

Eq.C-6

63

hm D = 1.13c0 Re n Pr 1 / 3 k
for 2000 < Re < 40000, Pr > 0.7, and N 10. Here Re defined as DGmax Re =

Eq.C-7

Eq.C-8

The values of constant c0 and the exponent n are listed in Table C-1. All physical properties in Eq.C-7 are evaluated at the mean film temperature. TABLE C-1 Constants c0 and n of Eq.C-7

Arrangement Staggered

SL D
co

ST D
1.25 n 0.556 0.568 0.572 0.592 0.592 0.586 0.570 0.601 co 0.497 0.505 0.460 0.416 0.356 0.275 0.250 0.299 0.357 0.518 0.451 0.404 0.310 0.348 0.367 0.418 0.290 1.50 n 0.588 0.554 0.562 0.568 0.580 0.608 0.620 0.602 0.584 co 0.446 0.478 0.519 0.452 0.482 0.440 0.100 0.101 0.229 0.374 2.0 n 0.571 0.565 0.556 0.568 0.556 0.562 0.704 0.702 0.632 0.581 3.0 co 0.213 0.401 0.518 0.522 0.488 0.449 0.421 0.0633 0.0678 0.198 0.286 n 0.636 0.581 0.560 0.562 0.568 0.570 0.574 0.752 0.744 0.648 0.608

0.6 0.9 1.0 1.125 1.250 1.50 2.0 3.0 In-line 1.25 1.50 2.0 3.0 Source : Grimison

Kays, London, and Lo examined experimentally the effects of the row number on the heat transfer coefficient for a variety of tube arrangements. For tube bundles having less than N = 10 transverse rows in the direction of flow, there was some reduction in the heat transfer coefficient. Based on the results of their experiments, the heat transfer coefficient hN for N < 10 could be determined by utilizing the following relation: hN = c1 hN 10 for 1 N 10 Eq.C-9

Table C-2 lists the values of the correlation factor c1 for both in-line and staggered tube arrangements, with N varying from 1 to 9. The results depend only slightly on the Reynolds number.

64 TABLE C-2 Correlation factor c1 for Eq.C-9 N 1 2 3 4 In-line 0.64 0.80 0.87 0.90 staggered 0.68 0.75 0.83 0.89 Source : Kays, London, and Lo [15] 5 0.92 0.92 6 0.94 0.95 7 0.96 0.97 8 0.98 0.98 9 0.99 0.99

More recently, Zukauskas reviewed the work of various investigators and proposed the following correlation for the heat transfer coefficient for flow across tube bundles:
Pr hm D Eq.C-10 = c 2 Re m Pr 0.36 Pr k w where Prw is the Prandtl number evaluated at the wall temperature, and
n

0 n = 1 4

for gases for liquids

which is valid for 0.7 < Pr < 500 and N 20. For liquids, the physical properties are evaluated at the bulk mean temperature, since the viscosity correction term is included through the Prandtl number ratio. For gases, the properties are evaluated at the film temperature and viscosity correlation term (Pr/Prw)n is omitted. The coefficient c2 and the exponent m were determined by correlating the experimental data for air, water, and oil reported by numerous investigators. Table C-3 lists the recommended values of c2 and m of Eq.C-10. TABLE C-3 Constant c2 and exponent m of Eq.C-10 Geometry Re 10 to 102 102 to 103 103 to 2105 2105 to 106 10 to 102 102 to 103 103 to 2105 Staggered 103 to 2105 2105 to 106 Source : Zukauskas [16]. c2 m Remarks 0.8 0.40 Large and moderate longitudinal pitch, can be regarded as a single tube 0.27 0.63 0.21 0.84 0.9 0.40 About 20 percent higher than that for single tube 0 .2 0.60 ST ST <2 0.35 S SL L 0.40 0.60 ST >2 SL 0.022 0.84

In-line

65 Before calculating the heat transfer, we must recognize that the air temperature increases as the air flows through the tube bank. Therefore, this must be taken into account when using q = hA(Tw T ) Eq.C-11 As a good approximation, we can use an arithmetic average value of T and write for the energy balance T + T + 2 & q = hA Tw +1 Eq.C-12 = mC p (T , 2 T ,1 ) 2 C.1.2 Pressure Drop Correlations 2 NGmax P = f Z Eq.C-13 2 where f G N Z (Z = friction factor = umax = maximum mass flow rate velocity, kg/(m2s) = number of tube rows in direction of flow = correlation factor for effect of tube bundle configuration = 1 for a square or equilateral triangle tube arrangements)

C.2 Geometry and Boundary conditions of tube bundles The model shown below simulates a heat exchanger tube bundle in cross flow. This simple geometry is chosen because it offers the opportunity for comparison of the CFD results with experimental correlations.

FIGURE C-3 Geometry of the in-line arrangement

66

FIGURE C-4 Geometry of the staggered arrangement

Fluid Materials Material Properties : Density Viscosity Cp k Inlet

Water 998.2 kg/m3 1.003 10-3 kg/m-s 4182 J/kg-K 0.6 W/m-K The bulk temperature of the cross-flow water (T) = 300 K The temperature of the tube wall (Twall) = 400 K P(gauge) = 0 1.25, 1.5 1.25, 1.5 1 ST/D SL/D SD/D cm cm cm

Wall

Outlet Transverse pitch (ST) Longitudinal pitch (SL) Diameter XT XL XD

67 C.3 The results and discuss The results of the CFD simulation of the tube bundle exposed Re = 300 and Re = 60000 water fluid flow are show below. C.3.1 In-line tube and Staggered arrangements

In-line arrangement Re = 300

Staggered arrangement

In-line arrangement Re = 600000

Staggered arrangement

FIGURE C-5 Temperature contours of XL = 1.5 Figure C-5 shows the water temperature increases as fluid flows through the tube bank, because the heat transfer from wall of tube bank into water. Laminar flow can transfer heat to the fluid better than Turbulent flow.

In-line arrangement Re = 300

Staggered arrangement

In-line arrangement Re = 600000

Staggered arrangement

FIGURE C-6 Pressure contours of XL = 1.5

68 Figure C-6 shows the pressure contours of the water passing through the tube banks. The region of maximum pressure is the core tubes of the bundle.

In-line arrangement Re = 300

Staggered arrangement

In-line arrangement Re = 600000

Staggered arrangement

FIGURE C-7 Velocity vectors of XL = 1.5 Figure C-7 shown the center areas between tube banks have the maximum velocity because the water flow passes the small area.

In-line arrangement

Staggered arrangement

FIGURE C-8 Turbulence intensity contours of XL = 1.5 Figure C-8 shows the turbulence intensity contours that are indicated the coefficient of mixing in tube banks. The red colure in figure is the maximum coefficient of mixing and the blue is the minimum coefficient of mixing.

69

0.1
XL=1.25
XL=1.5

Friction Factor

0.01 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000 Reynolds Number

FIGURE C-9 Friction factor for in-line tube arrangement

1000
XL=1.25 XL=1.5

Friction Factor

100

10

1 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07 Reynolds Number

FIGURE C-10 Friction factor for staggered tube arrangement Figure C-9 and C-10 show the friction factor f for in-line arrangement with square tube and staggered arrangement with equilateral triangular tube. In theses figures xT = ST/D, xL = SL/D, and xD = SL/D denote, respectively, the dimensionless transverse pitch, longitudinal pitch, and diagonal pitch. Reynolds numbers are increasing, friction factor will be decrease because pressure drop are increased.

70

100000 10000
Nusselt Number

1000 100
exact

10 1 100 1000 10000 100000

XL=1.25
XL=1.5

1000000

10000000

Reynolds Number
FIGURE C-11 Nusselt Number for in-line tube arrangement Figure C-11 show the Nusselt Number for in-line arrangement and staggered arrangement. In theses figures, we can see that when Reynolds number increase, the heat transfer also increase. XL =1.25 transfer heat better than XL = 1.5 because XL=1.25 has a small area to transfer heat from the wall of tube bank into the fluid.

APPENDIX D Static Mixer

72 STATIC MIXER Mixing is a common unit operation in a large number of processes, and it is used in many different applications where a defined degree of homogeneity of a fluid is desired. Common mixing devices are dynamic mixers for agitated tanks in batch operations and static mixers for inline mixing in continuous operations. Static mixers have been utilized over a wide range of applications such as continuous mixing, blending, heat transfer processes, chemical reactions, etc. A static mixer consists of a contacting device with a series of internal stationary mixing elements of specific and patented geometry, inserted in a pipe. Some of the advantages of static mixers over dynamic mixers are that they have no moving parts, low maintenance, low space requirements, no moving parts and a short residence time. D.1 Theory D.1.1 Governing Equations. For steady incompressible flow, the mass conservation equation can be written as u i =0 Eq.D-1 xi and the momentum conservation equation can be written as (u i u j ) p ij Eq.D-2 + = + g i + Fi x j xi x j In the absence of a gravitational body force and any external body force, the two last terms on the right side of Eq.D-2 are zero. The stress tensor, ij, in Eq.D-2 is given by u u j 2 u k Eq.D-3 ij= i + ij x xi 3 x k j Considering the conservation of mass for incompressible flow, uk/xk=0, gives u u j Eq.D-4 ij= i + x xi j D.1.2 Pressure drop and Z factor The pressure drop over the static mixer was computed for the repeating unit of two mixer elements, and converted to a pressure per meter. The pressure drop for empty tube, Pet , under laminar flow conditions is calculated as l v x Eq.D-5 Pet = 32 D2 When considering the pressure drop for the static mixer, Psm , a common approach is to define a dimensionless number comparing the pressure drop over a static mixer with that over an empty pipe of the same length as the static mixer. The dimensionless number, referred to as the Z factor, is essentially the increase in energy input required when the static mixer is installed in the pipe. The Z factor is P & Z = Z (Re) = sm Eq.D-6 Pet At Re 10, the correlation of Wilkinson and Cliff given by

73
Re 32 At Re 100, the correlation of Grace given by Z = 7.19 +
Z = 3.24 1.5 + 0.21 Re

Eq.D-7

Eq.D-8

D.2 Geometry and fluid properties Mixer geometrical Diameter (D) Segment (element) length (L) Plate thickness Entrance length Exit length Overall length Fluid properties Density () Viscosity()

5.08 cm 7.62 cm 0.3175 cm 10.16 cm 10.16 cm 66.04 cm 1.20 g/cm3 500 cP

FIGURE D-1 A six-element static mixer Static mixer consists of left- twisting and right-twisting helical elements placed at right angles to each other (Figure D-1). Each element twists through an angle of 180. The complete mixer consists of a series of elements of alternating clockwise and counterclockwise twist arranged axially within a pipe so that the leading edge of an element is at right angles to the trailing edge of the previous element. D.3 Boundary conditions Inlet Re = 0.15 Re = 1 Re = 10 Re = 100 Outlet Pressure outlet Blade Wall vx = 0.0012 m/s , vy = vz = 0 vx = 0.0082 m/s , vy = vz = 0 vx = 0.082 m/s , vy = vz = 0 vx = 0.82 m/s , vy = vz = 0 0 Pa No-slip No-slip

74 D.4 Results and discussion D.4.1 Velocity flied

FIGURE D-2 Velocity Streamline at Re = 0.15

Plane 1

Plane 2

Plane 3

Plane 4

Plane 5

Plane 6

FIGURE D-3 Contours of the axial velocity at Re = 0.15 Figure D-3 shows contours of the axial velocity at various intersections in a tube equipped with six 180 degree elements. Red denotes high velocities and blue denotes low velocities. These elements divert the flow of material radically towards the pipe walls and back to the element, regardless of the velocity.

TABLE D-1 Mean Velocity magnitudes (m/s)

75

Average velocity magnitude (m/s) Re First 0.15 1 10 100 Second Third Fourth Fifth 0.00139 Sixth 0.001274 0.001395 0.001399 0.001393 0.001399

0.009529 0.009552 0.009516 0.009553 0.009492 0.008708 0.095411 0.095703 0.095299 0.095559 0.09511 0.087808

1.038486 1.043984 1.035072 1.036251 1.039134 0.926304

D.4.2 Z factor The Z factor was found to be constant for static mixer at low flow rates, but as the Reynolds number increased and the inertial forces became significant the Z factor increased. The increase in Z factor occurs at the flow rates above a Reynolds number of 10 for static mixer, see Figure D-4.
11 10 9 Z factor 8 7

Fluent
6 5 0.1 1 Re 10 100

Wilkinson and Cliff

FIGURE D-4 The influence of Reynolds number and aspect ratio on the Z factor The computed values of the Z factor for the static mixer fit the correlation of Wilkinson and Cliff well. D.4.3 Pressure drop A liner least-squares regression on the simulation results at Re = 0.15 provides a correlation of the form: l v x Z = 7.50 or Psm = 239.9 Eq.D-9 D2

76
30
Fluent

25
Pressure drop (Pa)

Wilkinson and Cliff Eq.(D-9)

20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 Positions 4

FIGURE D-5 Pressure drop within a six element Kenics Mixer for Re = 0.15 In Figure D-5, the simulation data for Re = 0.15 is plotted along with Eq.D-5 and D-9. The pressure profile within the Kenics mixer for Re = 0.15 is shown in Figure D-5. The pressure drop is approximately linear over the mixer elements, with a pressure drop of 21.1117 Pa over six elements, excluding the open tube entrance and exit regions. These results are compared to pressure drop correlations available in the literature, which correlate the experimentally determined pressure drop in the mixer with an open tube pressure drop corresponding to similar conditions. Pressure drop data was also obtained from the simulations corresponding to higher Reynolds numbers (Re = 1, 10, 100). A plot of the total pressure drop over the six mixer elements with Re is shown in Figure D-6.
1.0E+05

1.0E+04
Pressure Drop (Pa)

1.0E+03

1.0E+02

Fluent Wilkinson and Cliff

Eq.4-9 Eq.4-6

1.0E+01 0.1 1 Re 10 100

FIGURE D-6 Pressure drop within a six element Kenics Mixer for Re = 0.15, 1, 10 and 100

77 Figure D-6 shows the Reynolds number increase, the pressure drop will increase. The correlation of Wilkinson and Cliff Eq.D-7, D-6 and D-9 provides a good fit of the simulation data from the Fluent program.

78 BIOGRAPHY Name : Miss Sutida Phitakwinai Thesis Title : Numerical Analysis of Pressure Loss and Heat Transfer in a NaturalDraft Stack Major Field : Mechanical Engineering Biography Miss Sutida Phitakwinai studied in bachelor level in Food engineering, faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology at Rajamangala Institute of Technology. And, she got bachelor degree in 2003 with GPA 3.45. Now she got the scholarship from Rajamangkala Institute of Technology to study the master degree in Computeraided Mechanical Engineering at TGGS, KMUTNB. She has internship in Patkol Public Co., Ltd. for one semester. She receives many guidance, suggestion and provides the data which usefully to this thesis.