Thermoeconomic optimization of heat recovery steam generators

design parameters

Ali Behbahani-niaa,*, Saeed Sayadia, Mehran Soleimanib

a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, No. 17, Pardis Street, Mollasadra
Avenue, Vanak Square, Tehran 19991-43344, Tehran, Iran
b
Fann Azmayan Pooyandeh (FAP) Company, No. 9, Moayyeri Dead End, Sassani Pour Street, Ketabi Square,
Tehran 15448-43811, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
In the present paper exergy and thermoeconomic analysis are applied to find design parameters optimum
values for water tube heat recovery steam generators in combined cycle power plants. Design variables
which are optimized in this paper are the pinch point and the gas side velocity. Optimization is carried out
based on two different objective functions. The first one is thermodynamic objective function which is the
summation of exergy loss due to the hot gas flowing out of the HRSG through the stack and exergy
destruction due to internal irreversibility inside the HRSG. The second one is thermoeconomic objective
function which is the summation of exergy loss and destruction in terms of expenses including the cost of
fuel and electricity and the capital cost of HRSG in terms of future value of money according to the
interest rate. The capital cost of HRSGs includes procurement and erection, piping and insulation,
electrical panels and wiring, control and instrumentation, insurance, tax, engineering, and supervision.
The effects of the pinch point and the gas side velocity on the components of the objective functions are
investigated. The values for the pinch point and the gas side velocity that make the objective function
minimum are called optimum values.

Keywords: HRSG; Combined cycle; Thermodynamic; Thermoeconomic; Pinch point; Optimization

                                                            
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 912 354 8379; fax: +98 21 8867 7274

E-mail address: alibehbahaninia@kntu.ac.ir (Ali Behbahani-nia)

- 1 - 
Nomenclature
A heat transfer surface area (m2) s entropy (kJ kg-1 K-1)
Ce cost of electricity ($ kWh-1) T temperature (K)
CP specific heat (kJ kg-1 K-1) U overall heat transfer coefficient (W m-2 K-1)
CRF Capital Recovery Factor V velocity (m s-1)
d diameter (cm) xk partial pressure of components in the gas (atm)
Ė exergy (kW) xke partial pressure of components in the environment (atm)
f' thermodynamic objective function
f thermoeconomic objective function Symbols
ff fouling factor (m2 K W-1) α cost factor used in thermoeconomic objective function
fg friction factor used in gas pressure drop function ΔP pressure drop (kPa)
G mass velocity (kg m-2 s-1) εg gas emissivity
H number of plant working hours per year (hr year-1) η fin effectiveness (%)
hc convective heat transfer coefficient (W m-2 K-1) ηexergy combined cycle power plants efficiency (%)
hf fin height (cm) μ viscosity (Pa s)
hi heat transfer coefficient inside tubes (W m-2 K-1) ρ density (kg m-3)
HL heat loss factor (1% heat loss means HL=0.99) σ Steffan Boltzman constant (5.669 × 10-8 W m-2 K-4)
hN non-luminous heat transfer coefficient (W m-2 K-1)
ho heat transfer coefficient outside tubes (W m-2 K-1) Subscripts
hs enthalpy of produced steam (kJ kg-1) 0 environmental conditions
hw1 enthalpy of feed water entering the economizer (kJ kg-1) Eco economizer
hw2 enthalpy of water leaving the economizer (kJ kg-1) Eva evaporator
i annual interest rate (%) f fin
k thermal conductivity (W m-1 K-1) g gas
kEco economizer unit price of surface area ($ m-2) g1 gas entering the superheater
kEva evaporator unit price of surface area ($ m-2) g2 gas entering the evaporator
kSH superheater unit price of surface area ($ m-2) g3 gas entering the economizer
Lf life time of the system (year) g4 gas leaving the stack
M molecular mass i inside tubes
・・・・
m mass flow rate (kg s-1) o outside tubes
Nd number of tube rows (deep direction) s steam
Nu Nusselt Number SH superheater
P pressure (kPa) t tube
Pr Prandtl Number w1 feed water entering the economizer
R gas constant (kJ kg-1 K-1) w2 water leaving the economizer
Re Reynolds Number

1. Introduction

Heat recovery steam generators are used in combined cycle power plants to recover waste heat from
gas turbine exhaust gas and to generate steam. The generated steam is then used to run a steam turbine
(Fig. 1). Higher efficiency, lower energy loss and longer expected life are factors that are associated with
these kinds of power plants and they can be used to compare them with other kinds [1].

A heat recovery steam generator is one of the most important components in combined cycle power
plants that strongly affects performance including efficiency of the power plant. The temperature profiles
across the heat recovery steam generator for a single pressure HRSG is shown in Fig. 2. The difference
between the saturation temperature of water and the gas temperature leaving the evaporator is called the
pinch point. Reduction in the pinch point leads to decrease in the HRSG exhaust gas temperature
translates to lower exergy loss. On the other hand, the pinch point reduction may be obtained by larger
heat transfer surface area which means higher capital cost and exergy destruction due to the pressure loss.
An optimum value for the pinch point may be found by trade off between these effects.

- 2 - 
 Another important parameter in the design of the HRSG is the gas side velocity. Increase in the gas
side velocity leads to higher heat transfer coefficient (smaller heat transfer surface area translates into
lower capital cost). On the other hand, this increase causes higher pressure loss. An optimum value for the
gas side velocity may be found by trade off between these two effects.

In various references, different methods are used to optimize heat recovery steam generators’ design
parameters. Some of these methods are based on designers’ experience and the others are based on
optimization techniques. In reference [2] the effect of the pinch point on the first and second law
efficiency of the HRSG is studied. In reference [3] optimal thermodynamic performance conditions for
heat recovery steam generators are calculated with the help of the genetic algorithm. In references [4, 5] a
two step method is suggested in which, the first step can be aimed to the minimization of the pressure
drop for a given heat flow. The second step leads to a reduction of the overall dimensions, maintaining
the imposed HRSG performance in terms of heat flow and pressure drop. In reference [6] appropriate
pinch point for heat recovery steam generators is suggested to be between 11°C and 28°C which is based
on designers’ experience.

As mentioned before, the optimum values of the pinch point and the gas side velocity may be found
by trade off between the capital cost and exergy losses due to different kinds of irreversibility. Any
methods based on pure thermodynamic objective functions may lead to unreasonable capital cost.

Although the references [7, 8] used the aforementioned concept, they failed to get to practical values
for the pinch point. In these two references an optimized pinch point is found based on thermoeconomic
method and it is between 0.3°C ands 0.9°C which is far from what is suggested by experience and seems
to be impractical and unreasonable.

In this paper, an optimum value for the pinch point is found based on the thermoeconomic method
and it seems more reasonable due to the following modification with respect to what is done in references
[7, 8].

1) In references [7, 8] a simple heat transfer approach is applied by considering a typical value for
overall heat transfer coefficient in the economizer, evaporator, and superheater. In this paper more
accurate heat transfer calculations are obtained, in which convective and non-luminous heat transfer
coefficients are found as a function of the HRSG geometry and thermophysical properties.

2) Pressure loss is an important factor in designing heat recovery steam generators which may reduce
gas turbine power generation. Destruction of exergy due to the pressure loss is not calculated in
references [7, 8]. In the present paper pressure loss is considered to affect the optimum value of the pinch
point. Moreover, the optimum value of the gas side velocity may be found by a trade off between the
pressure loss and the capital cost. Methods which do not include the pressure loss may not be used to find
an optimum value for the gas side velocity.

3) A comprehensive economic study is done in this paper to include all payments for constructing a
new HRSG. These payments include those of heat transfer area, casing, equipments, and other payments

- 3 - 
which are tabulated in the paper. Ignoring any of these payments as is done in references [7, 8] leads to
underestimating the HRSG capital cost. In the present paper economic study is done based on information
which has been provided by F.A.P. (Fann Azmayan Pooyandeh) as an internal report including all
expenses to construct heat recovery steam generators for three different projects in Iran.

The objective of the present work is to investigate the performance of the HRSG and find the
optimum values for the pinch point and the gas side velocity using the thermoeconomic method.

2. First and second law of thermodynamics analysis for the HRSG

The first step in the design of the HRSG is using the first law of thermodynamics to find some of
thermodynamic parameters using other known parameters. Some of the known parameters such as gas
mass flow are input design parameters. Others such as the pinch point and approach point are selected
based on designers’ experience which the former is going to be optimized in this paper.

Knowing the inlet gas mass flow and temperature, pinch point, and approach point the steam mass
flow may be calculated by taking a control volume around the superheater and evaporator as following:


 g C Pg H L Tg1  Tg 3  m
m  
 s h s  h w2  (1)

The HRSG exhaust gas temperature may be found by taking a control volume around the economizer
as following:


 g C Pg H L Tg 3  Tg 4  m
m  
 s h w 2  h w1  (2)

In a heat recovery steam generator inlet exergy consists of chemical and physical exergy of the inlet
hot gas. The chemical exergy of the gas may not be recovered and it will be exhausted to the atmosphere
through the stack. So, the inlet physical exergy of the hot gas is considered as the fuel exergy. This
physical exergy is used to generate high temperature and high pressure steam inside the HRSG. The
increase in exergy of the water is considered as the produced exergy.

Due to the irreversibility of the heat transfer process some of the fuel exergy is destructed. Also, the
outlet gas exhausts some of the fuel exergy to the atmosphere which is considered as the exergy loss.

According to the conservation of exergy, exergy destruction may be found by using the following
equation:

E Destruction  E Fuel  E Pr oduction  E Loss (3)

In which according to references [9, 10] the amount of E Fuel , E Pr oduction , and E Loss can be found as
followings:

- 4 - 
   T P 
  
 g C Pg Tg1  T0  T0  C Pg ln g1  R ln g1
E Fuel  m
T0 P0

 (4)
  

E Pr oduction  m   
 s h s  h w1  T0 s s  s w1  (5)

  T 
E loss  m  
 g C Pg Tg 4  T0  T0  C Pg ln g 4
T0

 (6)
  

In which according to Eq. (7) gas pressure entering the HRSG is equal to the pressure drop inside the
HRSG added to atmospheric pressure.

Pg1  P0  Pg (7)

Exergy destruction may be divided into two components; exergy destruction due to irreversible heat

transfer ( E Destructio
T  P
n ) and exergy destruction due to the pressure drop ( E Destruction ) which may be written as

following:

E Destruction  E Destructio
P  T
n  E Destruction (8)

 Tg1 
E Destructio
T
 
n  m g C Pg Tg 1  Tg 4  T0 C Pg ln
 m
Tg 4 
  
 s h s  h w 1  T0 s s  s w 1  (9)


Pg1
E Destructio
P
n  m g T0 R ln
 (10)
P0

Chemical exergy of the hot gas may be found using the following equations:

E Chemical   x k E Chemical
k
 g RT0  x k ln x k
m (11)

E Chemical
k
 m
 g RT0 ln x ek (12)

R 8.3145
R  (13)
M M

Exergy loss and destruction correspond to zero values of the pinch point and pressure loss, are
minimum values which are attainable and are called unavoidable exergy loss and destruction respectively.

3. Heat transfer

3.1. Heat transfer correlations

The overall heat transfer coefficient may be found using the following equation [6]:

- 5 - 
1  At 1   At  A do d   1 
    ff i    t   ln o   ff o     (14)
U  A i h i   A i   w A 200 k t di 

 h
 o



In which A t , A i and A w are defined in reference [6] and h i and h o may be found using the
following equations [11]:

Nu . k
hi  (15)
di

Nu  0.023 Re0.8 Pr 0.4 (16)

ho  hN  hc (17)

Tg4  Tt4
h N   g (18)
Tg  Tt

0.67
 d  2h f
0 .5
 T 
0.25
 k 
h c  C1C3C5   o   g
 T

  GC Pg    (19)
 do   f   C P 
 g 

 g can be found through appropriate diagrams presented in reference [12] and C1 , C3 , and C5 are

defined in reference [6].

3.2. Piping arrangement

The two main possible piping arrangements inside the heat recovery steam generators are presented
in Fig. 3. The staggered arrangement is usually used due to higher heat transfer coefficient [1].

3.3. Gas pressure drop

The exhaust gas should leave the gas turbine and then enter the HRSG at atmospheric pressure in an
ideal case, but in combined cycle power plants the outlet gas leaves the gas turbine with a higher pressure
to overcome the friction loss in the HRSG. Increase of pressure drop in the HRSG decreases the work
produced in the gas turbine. Therefore, pressure loss in the HRSG plays an important role in the HRSG
and it can easily decline the power generation. Eq. (20) may be used to calculate the gas side pressure
drop in the HRSG [6].

  G500N
2
Pg  f g  a d
(20)

12.2M
 (21)
Tg

Calculation procedure to find f g and a are illustrated in reference [1].

- 6 - 
4. Optimization

The first step to optimize a thermodynamic system is to determine a proper objective function. The
objective function can be a thermodynamic function such as the loss of available work or entropy
generation. Minimizing the loss of available work leads to maximizing the efficiency of the system. Such
an optimization may lead to an unreasonable capital cost that may make the system uneconomical and
impractical. Thermoeconomic optimization is a method that combines thermodynamics and economics to
overcome this difficulty. In thermoeconomic optimization method the objective function consists of
additive functions that evaluate exergy loss, equipments and other associated costs in terms of money. In
the present paper both of methods are applied to compare the results.

4.1. Thermodynamic optimization

The objective function defined in this section is the summation of exergy loss and exergy destruction
as seen in Eq. (22).

E Loss  E destruction
f  (22)
m
 g C p g T0

As mentioned before, the optimized value for the gas side velocity may be found by trade off
between the pressure loss and the capital cost. Therefore, a pure thermodynamic function such as Eq. (22)
may not be used to find an optimum value for the gas side velocity.

4.2. Thermoeconomic optimization

A thermoeconomic objective function consists of two components; the first one ( f 1 ) represents the

cost of irreversibility and the second one ( f 2 ) represents the capital cost of the HRSG.

 
f1  E Loss  E destruction exergy H Ce (23)

The capital cost of heat exchangers is usually found by knowing the cost of surface unit of heat
transfer area. The unit prices of heat transfer surface area are as following [13]:

k Eco  103.24 $
m2
Economizer

k Eva  86.38 $
m2
Evaporator (24)
k  218.96 $
Superheater
 SH m2

Furthermore, the capital cost includes procurement and erection of non-pressure parts (casing and
structure), control and instrumentation, electrical panels and wiring, processing equipments, piping and
insulation, insurance, tax, engineering, supervision, and other costs such as transportation etc. It is not
possible to have a general formula to find the exact values of these payments since they depend on many
different parameters. The method used in this paper is to consider any of these payments proportional to
the cost of the heat transfer surface area. Coefficients which are shown in Eq. (24) are extracted from the

- 7 - 
cost analysis report which was published by F.A.P. Co. to estimate the total cost of erecting heat recovery
steam generators for three different projects in Iran [13]. These coefficients are listed in Table 1.

The capital cost of heat recovery steam generators may be found by the Eq. (25).

f 2  k Eco A Eco  k Eva A Eva  k SH A SH  CRF (25)

In which CRF stands for the Capital Recovery Factor which may be found by the Eq. (26) [10].

i1  i  f
L

CRF  (26)
1  i L f  1

And  is the summation of coefficients which are listed in Table 1.

The non-dimensional form of the thermoeconomic objective function may be written as seen in Eq. (27).

f1  f 2 E  E destruction  . CRF
f  Loss  k A  k Eva A Eva  k SH A SH  (27)
 g C p g T0 H exergy C e
m m
 g C p g T0  g C p g T0 H exergy C e Eco Eco
m

In the above equation, combined cycle power plants efficiency is assumed to be 55% [7] and the cost
of selling electricity in Iran is assumed 0.03 $ kWh .

5. Results

5.1. Thermodynamic optimization

Initial information which is needed to design a sample HRSG including the gas and steam
specifications is given in Table 2. Also, some design parameters which are considered fixed are shown in
Table 3.

In Fig. 4 the exhaust gas temperature versus the pinch point is presented. It is seen that the exhaust
temperature increases by increasing the pinch point. Heat transfer area of the economizer, evaporator, and
superheater versus the pinch point are illustrated in Fig. 5. As seen, heat transfer area of the superheater
does not vary significantly, as the pinch point changes but increase in the economizer and evaporator
surface areas are considerable. The pressure loss versus the pinch point which is one of the most
significant diagrams, presented in Fig. 6. As seen, the pressure loss is increased by reducing the pinch
point. The thermodynamic objective function versus the pinch point is shown in Fig. 7. As seen, the
minimum value of the objective function corresponding to the optimum value of the pinch point is about
2.3°C. In references [7, 8] zero value is suggested for the pinch point based on thermodynamic objective
function which is due to neglecting the pressure loss inside the HRSG.

- 8 - 
5.2. Thermoeconomic optimization

The thermoeconomic objective function versus the pinch point is presented in Fig. 8. As seen, the
minimum value of the objective function corresponds to the pinch point 16.5°C. The calculated value
seems reasonable as compared to what is suggested by designers’ experience.

The second parameter which to be optimized is the gas side velocity which is defined as Eq. (28).
G
V (28)
0 A

In which  0 is the gas density at the ambient temperature and pressure. The gas side velocity as
defined in Eq. (28) is a parameter which represents the cross section of the gas channel. Increase in the
gas side velocity increases heat transfer coefficient. Therefore, in a specific HRSG, if the gas side velocity
increases, regarding growth in heat transfer coefficient, required heat transfer area for a known amount of
heat will decline. Therefore, through increasing the gas side velocity (or decreasing channel width) the
cost of procurement, erection, and other associated items decreases. On the other hand, gas side velocity
and pressure drop are proportional. In other words, an increment increase in the gas side velocity
increases exergy destruction and subsequently its cost due to the pressure drop increment. Thus,
increasing the gas side velocity affects both; positive (decline in the equipment costs) and negative
(increase in the irreversibility costs). Therefore, there should be an optimum value for the gas side
velocity.

Many designers use a uniform cross section along the whole HRSG which means a uniform gas side
velocity. In general, cross section of gas channel may differ in the economizer, evaporator, and
superheater. In this paper, by assuming a constant cross section surface area, a three dimensional diagram
may use to find optimum values of the design parameters. Fig. 9 represents the thermoeconomic objective
function versus the pinch point and the gas side velocity. As seen, the minimum objective function
corresponds to the pinch point 17°C and the gas side velocity 11.75m/s.

Assuming different cross section areas for the superheater, evaporator, and economizer, the objective
function versus the design parameters can not be plotted in a three dimensional diagram. So, the optimum
values of the design parameters and corresponding value of the objective function may be found using the
software which has been developed by authors and its results are listed in Table 4. These values were
obtained by changing the design parameters over the whole possible range.

In Fig. 10, 11, and 12 pie diagrams including different components of exergy in three different
temperatures are indicated. As cited before, as pinch point increase, the area required decrease. Therefore,
the gas pressure drop reduces. On the other hand, as pinch point increases exergy destruction due to heat
transfer increases. So, an increase in the pinch point leads to destructing exergy that is due to temperature
difference between gas and steam. Generally, the amount of generated exergy is more when the pinch
point is derived through thermodynamic optimization. In other words, the HRSG operating based on
thermoeconomic optimum pinch point causes more irreversibility in comparison with thermodynamic

- 9 - 
one, but from economic point of view, thermoeconomic optimum pinch point is more justified. It is seen
that in all of the cases, the unavoidable part of the exergy loss and destruction are considerable.

6. Conclusion

In this paper exergy analysis and thermoeconomic method are successfully applied to optimize a
specific HRSG which may use in combined cycle power plants. It is shown that although the
thermodynamic objective function may be used to find an optimum value for the pinch point, but the
calculated value does not seem reasonable as compared to values suggested by designers’ experience. The
thermoeconomic objective function may be used to optimize the pinch point and the gas side velocity.
The calculated value for the pinch point is about 16.5°C which seems more reasonable than what is seen
in references [7, 8].

The exergy analysis shows that a considerable part of the exergy loss and destruction is unavoidable.
Although it is shown that the exergy destruction due to pressure loss is considerable and must be
considered in any optimization methods

References

[1] V.Ganapathy, Waste Heat Boiler Deskbook, 1st ed., The Fairmont Press, India, 1991
[2] C.J. Butcher, B.V. Reddy, Second law analysis of a waste heat recovery based power generation
system, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 2355-2363
[3] M. Mohagheghi, J. Shayegan, Thermodynamic optimization of design variables and heat exchangers
layout in HRSGs for CCGT using genetic algorithm, Applied Thermal Engineering 29 (2009) 290-
299
[4] Alessandro Franco, Nicola Giannini, Optimum thermal design of modular compact heat exchangers
structure for heat recovery steam generators, Applied Thermal Engineering 25 (2005) 1293-1313
[5] Alessandro Franco, Nicola Giannini, A general method for the optimum design of heat recovery
steam generators, Energy 31 (2006) 3342-3361
[6] V.Ganapathy, Industrial Boilers and Heat Recovery Steam Generators, 1st ed., Marcel Dekker, New
York, 2003
[7] Alessandro Franco, Alessandro Russo, Combined cycle plant efficiency increase based on the
optimization of the heat recovery steam generator operating parameters, International Journal of
Thermal Sciences 41 (2002) 843-859
[8] C. Casarosa, F. Donatini, A. Franco, Thermoeconomic optimization of heat recovery steam
generators operating parameters for combined plants, Energy 29 (2004) 389-414
[9] Adrian Bejan, George Tsatsaronis, Michael Moran, Thermal design and optimization, ?th ed., John
Wiley & Sons, Canada, 1996

- 10 - 
[10] T. J. Kotas, The exergy method of thermal plant analysis, 4th ed., Krieger Publishing Company,
[where], 1995
[11] V.Ganapathy, Applied Heat Transfer, 1st ed., Pennwell Publishing Company, Tulsa, 1982
[12] Steven C. Stultz, John B. Kitto, Steam, its generation and use, 40th ed., The Babcock & Wilcox
Company, 1992
[13] M. Soleimani, Cost analysis of heat recovery steam generators, internal report, FAP Co., Tehran,
2006

- 11 - 
Figures

Fig. 1. Scheme of a combined cycle power plant

Fig. 2. Typical temperature profiles for a single pressure HRSG

Fig. 3. Piping arrangements in the HRSG

Fig. 4. HRSG exhaust gas temperature versus the pinch point

Fig. 5. Heat transfer surface area versus the pinch point

Fig. 6. The pressure drop versus the pinch point

Fig. 7. The thermodynamic objective function versus the pinch point

Fig. 8. The thermoeconomic objective function versus the pinch point

Fig. 9. The thermoeconomic objective function versus the pinch point and the gas side velocity

Fig. 10. Pie diagram for exergy components (pinch point is near zero)

Fig. 11. Pie diagram for exergy components (pinch point is thermodynamically optimized)

Fig. 12. Pie diagram for exergy components (pinch point is thermoeconomically optimized)

Tables

Table 1. Coefficients to estimate the cost of heat recovery steam generators

Table 2(a). Initial specifications to design heat recovery steam generators

Table 2(b). Turbine exhaust gas analysis

Table 3. Some of fixed design parameters

Table 4. Optimum values for the pinch point and the gas side velocity using thermoeconomic objective

function

- 12 - 
 Fig. 1
 

- 13 - 
 Fig. 2
 

- 14 - 
Fig. 3

- 15 - 
 210

205

Temperature of Exhaust Gases (oC)

200

195

190

185

180

175

170
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
o
Pinch Point ( C)

Fig. 4
 

- 16 - 
 20000

18000

16000

14000
Surface Area (m2)

12000

10000

Economizer
8000

6000
Evaporator
4000

2000
Superheater
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
o
Pinch Point ( C)

Fig. 5

- 17 - 
 20

18

16
Pressure Drop (kPa)
14

12

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
o
Pinch Point ( C)

Fig. 6
 

- 18 - 
 0.250

0.245

Thermodynamic Objective Function 0.240

0.235

0.230

0.225

0.220

0.215

0.210
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
o
Pinch Point ( C)
 
Fig. 7

- 19 - 
 0.500

Thermoeconomic Objective Function

0.475

0.450

0.425

0.400

0.375

0.350

0.325

0.300
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
o
Pinch Point ( C)

Fig. 8
 

- 20 - 
Fig. 9

- 21 - 
 Exergy Destruction dT
8.62%

Exergy Destruction dP
16.64%

Avoidable Exergy Loss

0.00%

Unavoidable Exergy Loss Exergy Production

9.22% 65.52%

Fig. 10

- 22 - 
 Exergy Destruction dT
Exergy Destruction dP 10.22%
2.75%

Avoidable Exergy Loss

0.45%

Unavoidable Exergy Loss

10.75%

Exergy Production
75.83%

Fig. 11

- 23 - 
 Exergy Destruction dT
11.26%
Exergy Destruction dP
1.42%

Avoidable Exergy Loss

3.36%

Unavoidable Exergy Loss

10.90%

Exergy Production
73.06%

Fig. 12
 

- 24 - 
Table 1
Item Associated value for α
Heat transfer area 1
Casing and structure 0.205
Processing equipments 0.216
Piping and insulation 0.078
Control and instrumentation 0.098
Electrical panels and wiring 0.093
Engineering and supervision 0.031
Tax 0.075
Insurance 0.115
Profit of the project 0.095
Other costs 0.125
Total 2.31

- 25 - 
Table 2(a)
Item Value
Steam pressure (Mpa) 10
o
Tw1 ( C) 125
o
Ts ( C) 489
o
Tg1 ( C) 592
mg (kg/s) 75
 

Table 2(b)
Item Value
CO2 (%) 3
H2O (%) 7
N2 (%) 75
O2 (%) 15

- 26 - 
Table 3
Item Value
Outside tube diameter (cm) 5
Inside tube diameter (cm) 4.5
Piping arrangement In line
Longitude and transverse pitch (cm) 4

- 27 - 
Table 4
Item Value
o
Pinch point ( C) 16.5
Gas velocity in the economizer (m/s) 12.2
Gas velocity in the evaporator (m/s) 11.7
Gas velocity in the superheater (m/s) 10.2
 

- 28 -