Energy, oil & gas

Common problems

• Skewed gas flow into the HRSG — part of the tube bank takes far too much flow while the rest underperforms; heat recovery drops and the tubes wear unevenly
• Incomplete combustion in the furnace — CO and unburnt fuel leaving with the flue gas, together with high NOx
• Thermal stress in shells and tubes — large temperature differences cracking the joints
• Condenser performing below design — uneven vapor distribution, pockets of non-condensable gas
• Co-firing a new fuel — switching to NH₃, biomass or waste changes the entire temperature field and emission profile

Why simulation is needed

Equipment in this industry is very large and runs continuously, and downtime is extremely costly. Every change must be verified before it is made.

For alternative-fuel co-firing, simulation is very nearly the only way to assess the effect on the temperature field, emissions and equipment life in advance — trying it directly in the furnace is far too risky.

Simulation methods

• Solid, liquid and gaseous fuel combustion with NOx emission models
• Porous-medium approach for large-scale HRSG tube banks
• Multiphase evaporation–condensation for condensers and boilers
• Thermal radiation inside high-temperature furnaces
• Coupling the temperature field into structural stress analysis

What you receive

• Temperature, velocity and concentration fields at the key sections
• Assessment of flow uniformity into the tube bank, with quantitative indices
• Predicted NOx and CO emissions for each operating option
• Thermal loads for the stress analysis, delivered together with the model files