G.

Zhang
Post Doctoral Fellow.
Numerical Simulation of Different
A. C. M. Sousa
Types of Steam Surface
Professor,
Mem. ASME Condensers
A numerical procedure is developed to simulate the fluid flow and heat transfer
J. E. S. Venart processes in the shell-side of steam surface condensers. The governing equations are
Professor. solved in primitive variable form using a semi-implicit consistent control-volume
formulation in which a segregated pressure correction linked algorithm is employed.
Fire Science Center, The procedure is applied to three different types of surface condenser. The numerical
and Department of Mechanical Engineering, predictions are critically assessed by comparison to available experimental data for
University of New Brunswick, condensers, and in general, the solutions are in good agreement with the experimental
Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada data.

I Introduction
Failure and/or off-design performance of power plant steam
surface condenser, as pointed out by Diaz-Tous [6], have re-
sulted in substantial losses due to plant down-time and/or low
efficiency. Values of 3.8 and 1.5 to 2 percent are reported for
loss of unit availability and performance loss, respectively, of
installed power in the US utility industry. The costs of these
losses during the period 1974-1984 was estimated to be more
than US$ 18 billion (1974 US$). These losses indicate that there
is a clear need of design methods, which can predict the shell-
side flow distribution and heat transfer. This information is
of critical importance in performing analyses related to flow-
induced vibration, heat transfer rates and pressure losses,
which, eventually, will lead to enhanced unit performance and
reliability. For instance, an average 1-in. Hg increase of back
pressure costs US$ 1 million and US$ 2 million annually for
typical 600 MWe oil-fired and nuclear units, respectively.
To attain the goal of developing new methods, a viable
approach is through advanced numerical models, which are
based on governing differential equations and appropriate con-
stitutive relations. In this way the designer can investigate the
effects of different shapes of tube nest, placement of baffles,
steam lanes and venting points.
The open nonproprietary literature dealing with numerical
modeling of condensers is not extensive, and, in many cases,
critical details of the models and/or relevant results are omit-
ted. In the present work a numerical procedure is proposed,
which combines some of the features suggested by Davidson
and Rowe [5], Davidson [4], Caremoli [3], Al-Sanea et al. [1],
Shida et al. [11,12], and Takahashi et al. [13]. Davidson and
Rowe [5] and Davidson [4] outline the basis of the continuum
modeling approach for the thermal design of condensers, and
review some related work. Caremoli [3] describes the program
CALICO developed at Electricite de France, which uses a two-
dimensional, pseudo-transient numerical algorithm. Its pre-
dictions may prove useful in optimizing geometric parameters
with respect to flow-induced vibration. Al-Sanea et al. [1]
employ a commercial code to solve the partial-differential
equations governing the two-dimensional flow field and steam
concentration. The densities for the steam and air, possibly
for computational expediency, were assumed to be constant.
Shida et al. [12] and Takahashi et al. [13] analyze several
condenser configurations by using the numerical technique first
reported by Shida et al. [11], In this technique, the mesh is
based on a triangular pattern as in the finite element method,
and the calculations are performed using upwind two-step La-
grangian and Eulerian time-marching techniques.
The procedure developed employs coupled heat transfer and
fluid flow calculation techniques combined with a continuum
approach, where the steam/air mixture is assumed to be flow-
ing through a porous medium. Densities for steam and air vary
according to the local conditions, and in addition the procedure
incorporates a model, which can accommodate multipass con-
densers with the assumption that at the end of each pass, the
outlet cooling water temperature is well mixed and equal to
that into the next pass. The present study is a further extension
of recent work by Zhang and Sousa [16,17], in which single-
phase flow was modeled for a shell-and-tube heat exchanger
[16], and preliminary computations were carried out for a
condenser with a simple geometric configuration [17].
Three different steam surface condenser configurations as
described by Fuji et al. [8], Naviglio et al. [9], and Al-Sanea
et al. [1] are utilized in the evaluation of the code. The results
are compared with available experimental data so to bench-
mark the procedure and on a preliminary basis to validate the
program.

Contributed by the Petroleum Division for publication in the JOURNAL OF II Numerical Method
ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received by the Petroleum Di-
vision, July 20, 1990; revised manuscript received April 11, 1991. Two different approaches may be used for condenser mod-

Journal of Energy Resources Technology JUNE 1991, Vol. 113/63

Copyright 1991 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 eling: nodal equations, which call for the specification of the Mass Conservation Equation
local equations for each tube within the bundle, and continuum
models where the steam is considered to be flowing in a porous -?-((3pu)+j-tfpv)=-(3m . (2)
medium. For power plant condensers, however, the latter ap- ox dy
proach is the only viable one for engineering thermal-hydraulic Momentum Conservation Equations
analyses, since the first method may yield impractically large
computer requirements. Thus, the porous medium concept is 3 , , a , , d ( bu\ d ( ou
used in this study, and an isotropic porosity, 13, employed to
describe the flow volume reduction due to the tube bundle and
baffles, is defined as -(3^-pmu + 0Fu (3)
Volume occupied by the fluid 0 d d
(1) ,o s ,o s (o V\ d
(o dv

Total volume
- 3Puv) + - ( M = - ^ - j +- ^ -
This method has been shown by Rhodes and Carlucci [10] and -!3^-l3mv + f3Fv (4)
Theodossiou et al. [14] to describe adequately the flow in tube dy
banks. Conservation of Air Mass Fraction
The shell-side and water-side flows are treated as steady
state. On the steam side the model considers the fluid to be a
mixture of noncondensable gases (air) and steam, behaving as l ^U) + Ty ^V) = YX ( * fx) + Ty (* fy) (5)
a Newtonian fluid with constant viscosity. The mixture of
steam and noncondensable gases, for simplicity, is assumed to 2.2 Auxiliary Relationships
be a perfect gas, although other equations of state can be
considered, and its density varies locally according to the per- (/) Momentum Source Term. The local hydraulic flow
fect gas state equation. The steam is assumed at its saturation resistances, Fu and F, in the momentum equations caused by
temperature throughout the condenser. This assumption is the tube bundle and/or baffles, are related to the pressure loss
based on the observation reported by Bush et al. [2] that su- coefficients, and , by
perheating has little effect upon heat transfer. Fu = kuuUp (6)
The governing equations are the equations of conservation
Fv=^vUp (7)
of mass, momentum and air mass fraction, and they are solved
by a modified control-volume formulation based on the al- Since there is no general expression for the pressure loss in
gorithm suggested by Van Doormaal and Raithby [15], and to condensing tube banks, as a first approximation, the expres-
be described in Section 2.4. sions proposed by Rhodes and Carlucci [10] for the loss coef-
ficients and are used; namely,
2
2.1 Conservation Equations. The two-dimensional fu\ P(3 1-/
steady-state porous medium volume-averaged conservation iu=2 (8)
P-D,
equations of mass, momentum and air mass fraction, with
flow, heat and mass transfer resistances are written in the P(3 1-/3
Cartesian coordinate system, as follows: f. = 2ft P-Dr 1-A.
(9)

Nomenclature

A = heat transfer area [m ] P - tube pitch [m]

C = gas constant [m2/s2K] Pr = Prandtl no. = cp\x/k
cp = specific heat at constant p = pressure [Pa] local volume porosity
pressure [J/kg K] q = heat flux [W/m 2 ] A = porosity in tube bundle re-
D = diffusivity of air in vapor R = thermal resistance [m 2 K/W] gion
[m2/s] Rem = Reynolds no. for maximum V = dynamic viscosity [kg/m s]
D, = inner diameter of tube [m] He effective dynamic viscosity
=
flow area = pcMD0/psixc
D0 = outer diameter of tube [m] [kg/m s]
Re u = x direction Reynolds no. =
Fr = Froude no. = M2/ps2gD0 puD0/ii Hi = effective dynamic viscosity
, F = flow resistance forces in mo- Re = y direction Reynolds no. = [kg/m s]
mentum equations [N/m 3 ] pvD0/jx P density [kg/m 3 ]
fu, fv = friction factors <t> air mass fraction = pjp
T = temperature [K]
g = gravitational acceleration Up = velocity vector magnitude = > = l s s coefficients [m ']
[m/s2] (w 2 +i; 2 ) 1/2 [m/s]
k = thermal conductivity [W/m u = velocity component in x di- Subscripts
K] rection [m/s]' a air
L = latent heat of condensation V = volume [m3] C condensate
[J/kg] v = velocity component in y di- cs steam-condensate interface
M = mass velocity of steam rection [m/s] s steam
through maximum flow area x = main flow direction coordi- t tube wall
[kg/m 2 s] nate [m] u parameter in x-momentum
M' = steam condensation rate y = cross stream coordinate [m] equation
[kg/s] a = heat transfer coefficient at parameter in j-momentum
m = steam condensation rate per shell-side = q/(T-T,) equation
unit volume [kg/m 3 s] [W/m 2 K] w = cooling water

6 4 / V o l . 113, JUNE 1991 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The friction factors,/ andfv, and the porosity in the tube
bundle region, ft, are defined as
0.619 Re- ; Re < 8000
fu =
1.156 Re" 0 - 2647 ; 8000 < Re < 2*105
0.619 R e , / 0 " 8 ; Re < 8000
/ =
1.156 Re,r 0 ' 2 6 4 7 ; 8000 < Re < 2*105

*--J@
(ii) Mass Source Term. The mass condensation rate per
unit volume, m, can obtained by a simple energy balance equat-
Fig. 1 Grid arrangement
ing the phase change enthalpy with the heat transfer rate
* S -* W
mLV= (10) p = pCT=PaCaT+PsCsT (16)
R
where T is the saturation temperature determined by partial
where the cooling water temperature Tw is obtained from the
steam pressure, and C, Ca and Cs are the gas constants for the
heat balance between the steam and cooling water for each
mixture, air and steam, respectively.
control volume. The overall thermal resistance for each control
volume, R, is calculated from various semi-empirical heat (iv) Effective Viscosity. The concept of an effective vis-
transfer correlations, as described in the forthcoming. cosity is used, which is defined as the sum of the laminar and
For the water-side thermal resistance, the relationship sug- turbulent viscosity, namely,
gested by Dittus and Boelter [7] is employed; namely,
He = H + H, (17)
-^- = 0.023 R e / 8
Pr 04 For all simulations the turbulent viscosity, /*,, mainly to save
computer time in this exploratory stage of the study, is assumed
The wall resistance for each tube is obtained with the as- to be constant. Its value, based on previous work by Zhang
sumption of one-dimensional, steady-state conduction and Sousa [17,18], is kept at a range of 10 to 100 times the
dynamic viscosity, /x.
/},= [AJog(ZVA)]/(2*,) (12)
In this paper, since its purpose is to demonstrate the nu- 2.3 Boundary Conditions. The boundary conditions for
merical calculation method rather than to conduct a detailed the inlet, outlet and solid walls are:
analysis of the process, filmwise condensation is assumed. The
resistance due to condensation is calculated based on the work Inlet: The velocity and air mass fraction are specified at the
of Fujii et al. [8] inlet boundary.
Outlet: The pressure is fixed at the outlet and a mass imbalance
J_ correction scheme is used to update the normal outflow ve-
KX[ 1 +0.276/(x 4 Fr H)}lM Re m 1/2 k/D (13)
R, locity.
Walls: The shell walls of the condenser are assumed to be non-
where
K=0.% for in-line arrangement slip, impervious to flow, and adiabatic.
K= 1.0 for staggered arrangement 2.4 Solution Procedure. The discretization of the differ-
ential equations, equations (2)-(5), is carried out by integrating
X = 0.9 [l + \/(rH)]xn
liner piecewise profiles over the control volumes defined on a
Fr = M2/psg D0; H=cpc(Ts- Tw)/PrcL staggered grid as shown in Fig. 1. In this grid configuration,
the velocity components are stored on the center of the control
Re, = pcM D0/psjic; r= (pciic/ps/j,s)wl volume surfaces, while all other variables, such as pressure,
The fouling resistance (R/) is taken as 3.5*10~5 m 2 K/W as temperature, and air mass fraction are located on the center
suggested by Naviglio et al. [9] and the resistance due to the of the control volume. The control volumes for each velocity
presence of an air film is evaluated via a mass transfer coef- component and for the scalar quantities do not coincide; this
ficient as reported by Caremoli [3] arrangement has the convenient feature of storing the velocity
components at points where they are required for the calcu-
1/3 lation of their convective contribution. Also, the important
(14)
advantage of this type of grid is that the pressure difference
where between two adjacent grid points relates the driving force for
the velocity component located between these grid points.The
= 0.52 and 6 = 0.7 for Re,< 350 resulting discretized equations are solved in primitive variables
a = 0.82 and 6 = 0.6 forRe s >350 using the algorithm proposed by Van Doormaal and Raithby
[15]. Since these equations are coupled together and are highly
The overall resistance to heat transfer for each control vol- nonlinear, an iterative approach is used for their solution. A
ume, R, is the sum of the individual resistances just outlined; cyclic outer iteration is employed comprising the following
thus, R, when related to the outer surface of the tube, can be sequence of operations:
written as
(/') The momentum equations, equations (3) and (4) after
R = Rw-^ + R, + Rc + Rf+Rs (15) discretization, are solved based on a pressure field taken from
the previous iteration.
(Hi) Equation of State. The air and steam mixture is (ii) A Poisson equation for the pressure correction, derived
assumed to behave as an ideal gas; namely, from the continuity equation, equation (2), is solved, and at

Journal of Energy Resources Technology JUNE 1991, Vol. 113/65

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Vinyl tube
Steam
outlet - Cooling water
inlet

Cooling water
outlet

Fig. 2 Configuration of condenser no.1(a) in-line arrangement, (b) staggered arrangement

Table 1 Experimental and computational conditions for condenser con- (vi) The overall energy balance for cooling water, steam,
figuration no.1
and condensate is checked.
Arrangement of Tube In-line
2.5 Convergence Criteria. Based on numerical tests, the
Test No. Run No.3 Run No.6
convergence criteria for the overall computational procedure
Test
Conditions
Exp. Cal. Exp. Cal. have been specified as:
Inlet Pressure Pa 5476 b
5424 a 6481 b 6508 a j
a
(/) the Euclidean error norm for the momentum equations
Inlet Temperature C 34.48 34.27 37.55 37.59a|
is less than 10~5;
Inlet Velocity m/s 16.74 16.74 28.21 28.21 J (//) the total continuity error is less than 0.01 percent of the
1 Steam Outlet Pressure Pa 5365 b 5365 b 6345 b 6345 b l mass inflow.
a
Outlet Temperature C 34.11 34.07 37.16 37.123] III Experimental Condenser: Application Example
M'*10+3 kg/s 7.12 6.82 a 14.05 14.09 a l No.
Inlet Temperature C 7.75 7.75 10.72 10.72 I 3.1 Configuration of Condenser No. 1. The experimental
Water Inlet Velocity m/s 0.505 0.505 1.350 1.350 data of fluid flow and heat transfer in the steam surface con-
denser of Fujii et al. [8] is used as one test of the proposed
Outlet Temperature C 14.16 13.86 a 15.44 15.43 a
numerical method. This small steam condenser with a five-
pass layout was designed to study the heat transfer and pressure
8 Arrangement of Tube Staggered B loss in the steam side for the two tube banks of in-line and
staggered arrangements. Figure 2 shows the configurations of
I Test No. Run No.12 Run No.14 I
two tube banks. Each bank was composed of brass tubes of
I Test
Conditions
Exp. Cal. Exp. Cal. 1 14.0 mm o.d., and 10.4 mm i.d., and 100 mm heat transfer
Inlet Pressure Pa 3413 b 3414 a 4739 b 4694 a I length, the tubes were arranged in 15 rows normal to the
a
direction of the steam flow and with 22 mm normal spacing.
Inlet Temperature c 26.22 26.18 31.90 31.69 a
Steam temperature and bulk mean temperature of cooling water
Inlet Velocity m/s 16.85 16.85 27.22 27.22 entering and leaving the tubes were measured by copper-con-
Steam Outlet Pressure Pa 3371 b 3371 b 4560 b 4560b stantan sheath thermocouples of 16 mm diameter. The flow
rate of cooling water through each row was measured by 15
Outlet Temperature C 26.01 25.97 a 31.22 31.18 a
sets of an inverse U-tube water manometers and an orifice,
,
M *10 +:J
kg/s 4.59 4.67 a
10.10 9.18 a and was distributed uniformly within an accuracy of 2 percent.
Inlet Temperature C 7.70 7.70 8.01 8.01 The total condensation rate of the tube bank was evaluated
through the accumulation rate of the condensation in a meas-
Water Inlet Velocity m/s 0.634 0.634 1.186 1.186
uring glass tube attached to a drain separator.
Outlet Temperature C 11.36 10.91 a 11.91 11.52a
3.2 Results and Discussion. The experimental conditions
a - Predicted results; Saturation pressure. of four filmwise condensation test cases (run no.3, run no.6,
run no. 12 and run no. 14 (Fujii et al. [8])), as shown in Table
the end of each outer iteration loop, pressures and velocities 1 were chosen to evaluate the numerical model. In this case,
are corrected. the steam inlet velocity and outlet pressure are given, and the
steam inlet pressures are calculated from the outlet pressure
(Hi) The air mass fraction <j> is obtained from the discretized and pressure drop.
form of its transport equation, equation (5).
(iv) The temperatures of mixture and cooling water, den- (/') Grid-Independence Tests. Calculations were carried
sity, mass source term, and momentum source term are then out in grids of 40x20 in the main and cross-flow directions,
updated. respectively. To test the grid-independence of the solutions,
(v) A new cycle is started unless the prescribed accuracy three different grids, 21 x 10, 40x20 and 59x30, were used.
has been reached. Convergence trends indicated an asymptotic behavior. Com-

66 / V o l . 113, JUNE 1991 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 2 Grid-independence tests for condenser configuration Table 3 Predicted results with different turbulent viscosities
no.l (run no.12) for condenser configuration no.l (run no.12)
Mesh size 20x10 40x20 59x30 /*( 10/i 20/t 100/1
/W(Pa) 3410.8 3414.5 3415.9 Pinia , ( P a ) 3412.8 3414.5 3422.8
M'*10 3 (kg/s) 4.4666 4.4672 4.4675 M'*10 3 (kg/s) 4.4667 4.4672 4.4698
V-* ivJoutlet ( *-v 10.913 10.914 10.914 Ww)out!et ( C ) 10.913 10.914 10.915
CPU time (s) 7.4 19;3 38.4

Table 4 Predicted results with different inlet air mass fraction

for condenser configuration n o . l (run no.12)
4>m\a 0 0.15 0.5 2
(percent) (percent) (percent)
Pinlet 3414.5 3416.6 3416.8 3417.9
M'*10 3 (kg/s) 4.4672 4.4453 4.4085 4.2832
(* iv/outlet ( W 10.914 10.898 10.872 10.783

TUBE ROW NO.

Fig. 3 Steam and outer tube surface temperatures in condenser con-
figuration no.1 (run no.3)

Fig. S Layout of tube bundle In condenser configuration no.2

6
* T

between the heat obtained by cooling water and the heat re-
leased from condensed steam, which was always kept at a value
less then 1 percent.

(Hi) Influence of Turbulent Viscosity. Typical values of

the turbulent viscosity, /*,, are about 20 times the value of the
dynamic viscosity, JX. As shown in Table 3, predictions for
Run No. 12 with three different turbulent viscosities present
TUBE ROW NO. only slight differences when /i, is changed from 10 to 100 times
Fig. 4 Heat flux and shell-side heat transfer coefficient in condenser the value of the dynamic viscosity.
configuration no.1 (run no.3)
(iv) Effectsof Inlet Air Mass Fraction. As is well known,
air in steam condensers will lower the heat transfer rates, which
parison of the different grids was conducted for run no. 12, as will seriously affect the overall thermal performance. This is
depicted in Table 2, and it is found that the grid 40x20 is exemplified in Table 4 for Run No. 12, for which different inlet
sufficiently fine to yield a grid-independent solution. air mass fractions are considered. As indicated, an increase of
2 percent in the inlet air mass fraction yields to a decrease of
(ii) Predicted Results and Comparisons With Experimen- 4.5 percent of the steam condensation rate.
tal Data. The predicted results and their corresponding ex-
perimental conditions are listed in Table 1. The simulation is
in good agreement, with the maximum difference between IV Industrial Surface Condenser: Application Ex-
prediction and experiment being under 9 percent. This accuracy ample No. 2
is within the experimental accuracy, which, according to Fujii 4.1 Configuration of Condenser No. 2. The numerical
et al. [8], was of the order of 10 percent. The predicted results procedure proposed in this work was used to predict the two-
shown in Table 1 are averaged values either at inlet or outlet, dimensional fluid flow and heat transfer in an industrial surface
although the variables change little in the cross direction due condenser reported by Naviglio et al. [9]. The layout of the
to the configuration of this condenser. tube bundle for one-half of the condenser is depicted in Fig.
The variations of steam and outer tube surface temperatures 5. The whole tube bundle is composed of 3968 stainless steel
(T and T,) on the centerline are given in Fig. 3. The steam tubes arranged in a triangular pitch, the characteristic feature
temperature as shown in Fig. 3 is nearly constant across the of this condenser is one single central outlet for the extraction
tube bank, except at the inlet where a small decrease does of noncondensible gases. The calculation domain is limited to
occur. The outer tube surface temperature decreases in the the plane of symmetry passing through the corresponding ex-
tube axial direction since condensation occurs near tubes, The traction outlet. The geometrical and operating parameters are
heat flux (q) on the centerline is almost uniform across the listed in Table 5.
tube bundle. The centerline shell-side heat transfer coefficient,
a, defined as dividing heat flux (q) by temperature difference 4.2 Results and Discussion. The calculations were per-
between steam and outer tube (T Ti), decreases as shown in formed in a nonuniform mesh to accommodate the shape of
Fig. 4. In this experiment, the temperature rise of cooling water tube bundle. It was found that a grid of 30 x 18 in the main
is much smaller than the temperature difference between steam and cross-flow directions, respectively, was sufficient to yield
and cooling water, so, the heat flux {q) varies only slightly grid-independent solutions. The grid used for the simulation
along the tube axis. A futher check upon the accuracy of the is shown in Fig. 6. An average of 95 computational cycles was
calculation was conducted by verifying the energy imbalance found to yield adequate convergence.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology JUNE 1991, Vol. 113/67

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 5 Geometrical and operating parameters for condenser
configuration no.2
Geometrical parameters
Condenser length (m)
Tube outer diameter (mm)
Tube inner diameter (mm)
Tube pitch (mm)
Operating parameters
Inlet temperature of cooling water (C)
Inlet velocity of cooling water (m/s)
Inlet pressure of steam (Pa)
Inlet velocity of steam (m/s)
Fig. 6 Grid used for the simulation of condenser configuration no.2
Fig. 7 Velocity vector plot for condenser configuration no.2
P (KPa)
Fig. 8 Pressure distribution for condenser configuration no.2
The predicted vector velocity field is plotted in Fig. 7. It can
be clearly seen that flow deflection occurs away from the tube
bank. The flow turns towards the tube bundle due to the rear
wall and the suction effect of the tube bundle. The velocity in
the vicinity of the extraction is low as predicted by Naviglio
et al. [9], and the velocities decrease to very small values in
the middle of the tube bundle as the vapor condenses.
The contour map plots of pressure (p) and velocity (Up) are
presented in Figs. 8 and 9. The gradient of pressure is very
large in the venting region due the effect of the baffles. The
results show that the pressure drop from the inlet of the tube
bundle to the venting zone is of the order of 500 Pa. The
gradient of velocity is large in the vicinity of the tube bundle,
while the velocity is small inside the tube bundle due to the
condensation. The shell-side heat transfer coefficient (a) is
shown in Fig. 10, and its values in the vicinity of the tube
bundle are very large. Thus, as expected, the heat transfer rate
near tube bundle is larger then that inside of tube bundle.
Choice of the boundary condition at the tube bundle edge
plays an important role in the modeling of condensers. In the
study of Naviglio et al. [9], the simulation of the flow outside
the tube bundle and shell of the condenser was not implemented
6 8 / V o l . 113, JUNE 1991
Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Up (m/s)
7.3
19.05
17.65
26.0
20.0
1.19
7500 Fig. 9 Velocity distribution for condenser configuration no.2
45.0
a (KW/m2 K)
Fig. 10 Shell-side heat transfer coefficient distribution in condenser
configuration no.2
and a uniform pressure distribution around the bundle was
assumed. This may lead to large errors, as noted in the pre-
dictions by Al-Sanea et al. [1] and Caremoli [3] for an exper-
imental condenser and a nuclear power plant condenser,
respectively, the velocity vectors around the tube bundle are
nearly "parallel" to the tube bundle except near the rear wall,
where they are directed towards the tube bundle, as shown in
Fig. 7. In the work reported here no such restriction was im-
posed and full development of the flow was permitted.
V Experimental Condenser: Application Example
No. 3
5.1 Configuration of Condenser No. 3. The configura-
tion of condenser no.3 (geometry no.l) from Al-Sanea et al.
[1] is depicted in Fig. 11(a). Also, an alternative configuration
for condenser no.3 (geometry no.2), with a wider steam lane
between the tube bundle and rear wall, is shown in Fig. 11(b).
It presents an internal vent, and the tube bank is composed
of 400 tubes of triangular arrangement. It is assumed that the
horizontal centerline is a symmetry plane, so, the calculations
are performed only for one-half of the condenser. The geo-
metrical and operating parameters are listed in Table 6.
5.2 Results and Discussion. Nonuniform grids of 31 X 17
and 33 x 17 in the main and cross flow directions are used in
the calculations for geometry nos. 1 and 2, respectively. The
grids used for the simulations are shown in Fig. 12.
Figure 13 shows the velocity plots for geometry no.l (Fig.
13(a)) and geometry no.2 (Fig. 13(b)). As anticipated, the
steam velocity is very low near the venting region. Again there
is some deflection of the flow away from tube bank, a feature
that was also observed in the calculations of Al-Sanea et al.
[1]. Figure 14 compares the velocity distributions for geometry
no.l (Fig. 14(a)) and geometry no.2 (Fig. 14(b)). In these two
flow situations, the inlet mass flow rates are the same, 1.008
kg/s, with condensation rates of 1.006 kg/s and 1.004 kg/s,
respectively, indicating that 99.8 and 99.6 percent of the steam
is condensed in geometry nos. 1 and 2 of condenser no.3,
respectively. The velocities in the region opposite the inlet and
close to the line of symmetry in geometry no.2 are larger than
those in geometry no.l. Since the steam lane at the rear wall
of condenser is wider for geometry no.2 more steam enters
Transactions of the ASME
 Oj02m
* 0,3m* -a 07n> B ^

Tube bank j

Vent 1
Steam
inlet
(a) Geometry no.1

U (a) Geometry no.1

0.1m
3m+ 0.7m-

(b) Geometry no.2

Fig. 12 Grids used for the simulation of condenser configuration no.3

Steam
inlet

u (b) Geometry no.2

Fig. 11 Configuration of condenser no.3
(a) Geometry no.1

Table 6 Geometrical and operating parameters for condenser

configuration no.3
Geometrical parameters
Condenser length (m) 1.219
Tube outer diameter (mm) 25.4
Tube pitch (mm) 34.9
Operating parameters
Inlet temperature of cooling water (C) 17.8
Inlet velocity of cooling water (m/s) 1.19
(6) Geometry no.2
Inlet pressure of steam (Pa) 27670
Inlet velocity of steam (m/s) 12.05 Fig. 13 Velocity vector plots for condenser configuration no.3

this lane, and turns towards the tube bundle due to combined
effects of the rear wall and the "suction" of the tube bundle.
The lowest velocities on the centerline of condenser occur at
x = 0.8 and x=0.1 m for geometry nos. 1 and 2, respectively.
Figure 15 shows the pressure (p) distribution for geometry
no.1, while Figs. 16 and 17 present the distributions of shell-
side heat transfer coefficient (a) and heat flux (<?). The lowest
pressure, heat transfer coefficient and heat flux values occur
in the venting region. It is noted from the contour maps that
both the pressure and heat transfer coefficient distributions
are similar. In both distributions the gradients of pressure and
shell-side heat transfer coefficient are larger at the tube bundle
boundaries. Figure 17 shows that the highest heat flux occurs
on the first row of tubes as may be expected since the steam
velocity is highest there. The heat flux is largest at the tube
bundle periphery and falls rapidly to lower values in the venting
region. In Fig. 16, it can be seen that the shell-side heat transfer
coefficient decreases sharply from the tube bundle boundaries
to the inside of bundle.
VI Closing Remarks
The numerical procedure proposed in the present study has
shown its capability of predicting the performance of con-
densers of different geometries. The predictions have produced
physically meaningful results, but full benchmarking of the
procedure, however, requires further testing against experi-
mental data for condensers with different configurations and
operating conditions. This information will guide future de-
velopments of the model, particularly in what concerns the
constitutive relations. This particular aspect is of primary im-
portance, since vapor superheating, condensate subcooling,
flooding and condensation conditions will dictate the relations
for the heat transfer and pressure loss parameters to be em-
ployed.
Acknowledgment
Financial support for this work was received from the Uni-

Joumal of Energy Resources Technology JUNE 1991, Vol. 113/69

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


(a) Geometry no.1
(fj) Geometry no.2
Fig. 14 Velocity distributions for condenser configuration no.3
P (KPa)
Fig. 15 Pressure distribution for condenser configuration no.3 (ge-
ometry no.1)
versity of New Brunswick, and Natural Sciences and Engi-
neering Research Council of Canada (NSERC Grant No.
A1398), and a joint University Industry NSERC Cooperative
Research grant (NSERC Grant No. CRD-0039112).
References
1 Al-Sanea, S., Rhodes, N., Tatchell, D. G., and Wilkinson, T. S., " A
Computer Model for Detailed Calculation of the Flow in Power Station Con-
densers," Condensers: Theory and Practice, Institute of Chemical Engineers
Symposium Series, No. 75, Pergamon Press, 1983, pp. 71-88.
2 Bush, A. W., Marshall, G. S., and Wilkinson, T. S., "The Prediction of
Steam Condensation Using a Three Component Solution Algorithm," Pro-
ceedings of the Second International Symposium on Condensers and Conden-
sation, Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow Service, University of Bath, U.K., March
28-30, 1990, pp. 233-234.
3 Caremoli, C , "Numerical Computation of Steam Flows in Power Plant
Condensers," Numerical Methods in Thermal Problems, eds., R. W. Lewis and
K. Morgan, Volume IV, Pineridge Press, Swansea, U.K., 1985, pp. 315-325.
4 Davidson, B. J., and Rowe, M., "Simulation of Power Plant Condenser
Performance by Computational Method: An Overview," Power Condenser
Heat Transfer Technology, eds., P. Marto and R. Nunn, Hemisphere, Wash-
ington, 1981, pp. 17-49.
5 Davidson, B. J., "Condensers for Large Turbines," Aerothermodynamics
of Low Pressure Steam Turbines and Condensers, eds. M. J. Moore and C. H.
Sieverding, Chap. 8, Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, Washington, D.C.,
1987, pp. 217-251.
6 Diaz-Tous, I. A., "Keynote Address," Symposium on State-of-the-Art
Condenser Technology, eds., I. A. Diaz-Tous and R. J. Bell, Orlando, Florida,
1983, pp. 1:1-1:22.
7 0 / V o l . 113, JUNE 1991
Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
a (KW/m2 K)
Fig. 16 Shell-side heat transfer coefficient distribution for condenser
configuration no.3 (geometry no.1)
q(KW/i
Y(m)
0.22
X(m)
Fig. 17 Heat flux distribution for condenser configuration no.3 (ge-
ometry no.1)
7 Dittus, F. W., and Boelter, L. M. K., "Heat Transfer in Automobile
Radiators of the Tubular Type," Engineering, University of California, Berke-
ley, Vol. 2, 1930, pp. 443-461.
8 Fujii, T., Uehara, H., Hirata, K., and Oda, K., "Heat Transfer and Flow
Resistance in Condensation of Low Pressure Steam Flowing Through Tube
Banks," International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 15, 1972, pp.
247-260.
9 Naviglio, A., Sala, M., Socrate, S., Stefani, A., and Vigevano, L., "Dis-
tribution of Non-Condensable Gases Within the Tube Bundle of Surface Con-
densers," TEC 88-Conference, Recent Advances in Heat Exchangers, Grenoble,
France, December 10-13, 1988.
10 Rhodes, D. B., and Carlucci, L. N., "Predicted and Measured Velocity
Distributions in a Model Heat Exchanger," AECL-8271, Atomic Energy of
Canada Limited, Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories, Chalk River, Ontario, Jan.
1984.
11 Shida, H., Kuragasaki, M., and Adachi, T., "On the Numerical Analysis
Method of Flow and Heat Transfer in Condensers," Proceedings of the 7th
International Heat Transfer Conference, Munchen, Fed. Rep. of Germany, Vol.
6, 1982, pp. 347-352.
12 Shida, H., Kuragasaki, M., Soda, M., and Urabe, T., "A Computational
Method for Flow and Heat Transfer Analysis of Condensers," Proceedings of
the Second International Symposium on Condensers and Condensation, Heat
Transfer and Flow Service, University of Bath, U.K., March 28-30, 1990, pp.
245-255.
13 Takahashi, F., Harada, I., Fujitani, Y., and Koizumi, M., "Computation
of Steam Flows in Power Plant Condensers," Proceedings of the Second In-
ternational Symposium on Condensers and Condensation, Heat Transfer and
Fluid Flow Service, University of Bath, U.K., March 28-30, 1990, pp. 235-244.
14 Theodosiou, V. M., Sousa, A. C. M., and Carlucci, L. N., "Flow Field
Predictions in a Model Heat Exchanger," Computational Mechanics, Vol. 3,
1988, pp. 419-428.
15 Van Doormaal, J. P., and Raithby, G. D., "Enhancements of the SIMPLE
Method for Predicting Incompressible Fluid Flow," Numerical Heat Transfer,
Vol. 7, 1984, pp. 147-163.
16 Zhang, C , and Sousa, A. C. M., "Numerical Predictions of Steam and
Heat Transfer in a Condenser," Numerical Methods in Thermal Problems, eds.,
R. W. Lewis and K. Morgan, Vol. VI, Part 2, Pineridge Press, Swansea, U.K.,
1989, pp. 1368-1378.
17 Zhang, C , and Sousa, A. C. M., "Comparison of Different Turbulence
Models for Shell-Side Flow in a Model Heat Exchanger," International Journal
of Heat and Technology, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1989, pp. 99-110.
18 Zhang, C., and Sousa, A. C. M., "Numerical Simulation of Turbulent
Shear Flow in an Isothermal Heat Exchanger Model," ASME Journal of Fluids
Engineering, Vol. 112, 1990, pp. 48-55.
Transactions of the ASME