He et al. 2013
A 2 × 600 MW air-cooled condenser, windless: the first large-ACC steady comparison
Tier 3: CFD, co-simulation or another model.
- What was compared
- The windless turbine back pressure, the heat transfer rate at the plant's own air flow and the air volume flow per cell of a 2 × 600 MW air-cooled steam condenser of 112 A-frame cells, at the plant's steam flow of 738.5 kg/s and 306 K ambient.
- Against
- He et al.'s CFD prediction for the plant (He et al., 2013, Section 2.1, Tables 2 and 3 and Section 3.1.1), which is another model and not a measurement. The plant's fan curve and bundle characteristic are not published and are taken from Kröger's Examples 6.2.2 and 8.1.4; the case is Tier 3.
- The agreement
- Given the plant's steam flow, the back pressure is 26.08 kPa against 26.8 kPa (−2.7%). At the plant's own air flow the heat transfer rate is 6.5% low, and the model's fan and losses deliver 31.3% more air per cell than the plant, so the two errors run in opposite directions.
- What it shows
- The comparison tests the whole air-cooled condenser chain at the scale of a large plant, and the heat-side deviation is attributable to Kröger's bundle in this chain. The fan curve, the bundle characteristic and the frontal area are not the plant's, so the case carries no model-form uncertainty.
- Source
- W. He, L. Yang, X. Du, Y. Yang, 'Performance prediction of an air-cooled steam condenser using UDF method', Appl. Therm. Eng. 50 (2013) 1339-1350Section 2.1 (plant), Table 2 (steam), Table 3 (windless back pressure), section 3.1.1 (fan flow and frontal velocity)