R. P.

Roy
Mem. ASME
e-mail: roy@asu.edu

A Computational Model of a
Power Plant Steam Condenser

M. Ratisher
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Arizona State University,
Tempe, AZ 85287

V. K. Gokhale
Salt River ProjectNavajo Generating Station,
Page, AZ 86040

A computational model of a power plant steam condenser which incorporates the effects
of air in-leakage and removal on the performance of the condenser is reported. The
condenser interior space is modeled as a porous medium. A quasi-three-dimensional
approach is taken in which the steady-state steady-flow conservation equations for the
steam-air mixture mass, momentum, thermal energy, and air mass fraction are solved for
a series of two-dimensional grids perpendicular to the circulating water flow direction.
The air removal system is explicitly modeled. The computational model is used to calculate the performance of the steam condenser of a 750-MWe unit at 100 percent load.
Some of the calculated variables are compared with measurements obtained in the condenser. The effects of changing various operating parameters on the condenser performance at 100 percent load are also studied. DOI: 10.1115/1.1348336

Introduction
Accurate prediction of steam condenser performance is important because the power generated by a steam turbine depends
strongly on the condenser pressure. Numerous papers have been
published in recent years on the topics of theoretical modeling of
steam condensers and practical prediction of condenser performance. Theoretical condenser models are based on basic principles such as the Navier-Stokes and energy equations for the
flowing fluid. Methods of practically predicting condenser performance, on the other hand, typically rely on empirical relations and
design data.
The empirical models of steam condenser performance, for example, 1,2, will not be reviewed here because our approach is
more akin to the theoretical models that have been developed.
Al-Sanea et al. 3 reported a two-dimensional condenser model
in which the steady-state conservations equations for mass, momentum, and air concentration were solved by the commercial
CFD code PHOENICS. The condenser interior space was modeled as a porous medium. Steam inflow, air inflow, and the outflow of steam-air mixture were fixed, meaning that the air concentration at vent pipe exit was known a priori. A similar approach
was adopted by Caremoli 4.
The British utility company PowerGen developed the EPOC
code for modeling steam condensers 5. The model was quasithree-dimensional in that two-dimensional x, y conservation
equations for the fluid mass and momentum were solved at a
number of planes perpendicular to the condenser tube length. The
effect of air blanketing on the steam condensation rate was included by specifying each control volume as having either a low
air concentration where condensation was unaffected or a high air
concentration where condensation was totally inhibited. A threshold value of air concentration at which condensation became totally inhibited had to be chosen. The air concentration could not
exceed this value.
Zhang et al. 6 developed a quasi-three-dimensional condenser
model in conjunction with a measurement program in a power
plant condenser which included steam temperature and pressure,
and circulating water outlet temperature at several locations. The
condenser interior space was modeled as a porous medium. The
space was divided into 16 computational slabs, each slab representing the region between a successive pair of tube support plates
where the flow field was treated as two-dimensional. The steadystate, steady-flow conservation equations for the steam-air mixture
Contributed by the Advanced Energy Systems Division for publication in the
JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received by the AES
Division, July 19, 1999; revised manuscript received October 25, 2000. Associate
Editor: A. M. Jacobi.

mass, momentum, and air mass fraction were solved. Steam was
considered to be saturated at its local partial pressure, and
the steam-air mixture was assumed to behave as an ideal gas.
One measured pressure in each slab was used as the reference
value in the model to achieve proper distribution of the steam
condensation rate. In an extension of this work 7, the inlet
steam flow rates to the slabs were redistributed until the pressure
drop between the inlet and the vent pipe was identical for all
slabs. This work is adopted as the starting point for the present
study.
In this paper, we report the work performed in the following
sequence: the steam condenser of a 750-MWe unit at the Navajo
Generating Station NGS of Salt River Project in Page, Arizona
is briefly described; the computational model for analyzing the
performance of this condenser is described; the condenser air removal system model is presented; the computational domain, the
boundary conditions, and the computational approach are described; the measurements made at NGS are listed; and, finally,
the computational results are presented and compared with the
measurements available.

The NGS Condenser

The condenser has two sections, the low-pressure LP section
and the high-pressure HP section, Fig. 1. Exhaust steam from
the low-pressure turbine enters the condenser from the top. Circulating water enters at the LP section end and exits from the HP
section end.
Arrangement of the upper and lower tube bundles on each side
of the condenser is shown schematically in Fig. 2. At the center of
each bundle is a vent pipe spanning the length of the condenser.
Steam-air mixture enters each tube bundle around its periphery
and flows inward. The uncondensed mixture, upon reaching the
center of the bundle, enters the vent pipe through orifices distributed along its length. The orifice size decreases in the direction of
circulating water CW flow, thus imposing a pressure drop across
the orifice which increases in this direction. This increases the
local pressure outside the vent pipe in the CW flow direction and
promotes condensation even as the CW becomes warmer. There
are 15 tube support plates. In both the LP and the HP section, the
region between the first two tube plates counting from the CW
inlet end contains the air cooler section. The steam-air mixture in
the HP section of the vent pipe flows out of the pipe and around a
baffle, thus allowing the mixture to come in contact with a few
additional rows of tubes these comprise the air cooler, and then
enters the LP section of the vent pipe. The steam-air mixture
exiting the LP vent pipe flows through a similar arrangement and
then proceeds to the air removal system.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology Copyright 2001 by ASME

MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 81

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 1 Geometric and operating parameters of the NGS

condenser

Fig. 1 Side view of the condenser

Table 1 contains some of the geometric and operating parameters of the NGS condenser. In the NGS plant, circulating water
exiting the condenser is piped to cooling towers.

The Model
Since the condenser is symmetric when viewed from either end,
Fig. 3, it suffices to model one-half of it either side A or side B.
Exceptions to this symmetry are the locations of the auxiliary
turbine exhausts. For simplification of the model, these exhausts
are combined with the main steam exhaust. The total mass flow

Fig. 2 Arrangement of the upper and lower tube bundles on

each side A, B; also the computational domain

82 Vol. 123, MARCH 2001

1
The computational results presented in this paper corresponds to one vacuum
pump in operation. Cases of no pump in operation and two pumps in operation are
considered in the parametric study.

rate of the auxiliary turbine exhausts is approximately seven percent of the main steam exhaust flow rate. Also shown in Fig. 3 is
the replacement, in the computational model, of the diverging
condenser neck by a constant-area section for simplicity.
The steam in the steam-air mixture entering the condenser is
wet steam. We represent wet steam as saturated steam at its local
partial pressure mixed homogeneously with the appropriate
amount of water at saturation temperature, depending upon the
local quality. In our model, when the wet steam passes over a
condenser tube, a portion of the wet steam flow joins the condensate inventory and the remainder continues past the tube. The
portion that joins the condensate inventory consists of the condensate resulting from saturated steam condensing on the tube, and
the water at the local saturation temperature that had been mixed
with the saturated steam that condensed. The rate of condensation
of the saturated steam is determined by the rate at which thermal

Fig. 3 View of the condenser from the circulating water inlet

end

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

energy is transferred to the circulating water flowing through the

condenser tube. No thermal energy is transferred to the circulating
water when the saturated water portion joins the condensate inventory. If the variation of pressure in the condenser space is not
accounted for by the model, the result will be constant quality
steam flow past the condenser tubes.1
The inclusion of the thermal energy equation in the conservation equation set should be noted. Its use in the computation is
discussed later in the paper.
The condenser interior space is modeled as a porous medium. It
is divided into 16 slabs or subdomains numbered 0 through 15
beginning at the CW inlet end, each of which represents the
region between two successive tube plates. In each slab, the
steam-air mixture flow is considered to be two-dimensional x, y
as the tube plates restrict flow in the axial z direction. Although
the CW temperature increases monotonically in the axial direction, its temperature within each slab is assumed to be at a uniform average temperature.
Conservation EquationsWet Steam-Air Mixture. The
steady-state, steady-flow, two-dimensional, local volumeaveraged equations in a slab are:
Continuity (Mass Conservation) Equation

u
v
x
y

m
source

sink

(1)

x and y-component momentum equations written in the conservative form 8

u2
uv
x
y

eff

eff
x x
x
y
y

F
x

u source
source
m

uv
v2
x
y

v source
source
m

h source
source
m

pipe,out
sourcem

The sink terms are comprised of saturated steam condensation

and transfer of the associated entrained water to the condensate in
each control volume, and the flows into vent pipe from the control
volumes adjacent to the pipe.

w m
pipe,in
sinkm
c m

Momentum Equations. Because the flow from the vent pipe to

the corresponding air cooler section is in the axial z direction,
the x and y velocity components of each source flow are zero.

sinkv sink

h sink
sink
m

(8)

v source0
m
source

(9)

(10)

(11)

(3)

F gravity,x

F
x F drag,x

(12)

F gravity,y

F
y F drag,y

(13)

Thermal Energy Equation

pipe,out
h pipe,out
sourceh source m

(14)

h
w m

pipe,in
sinkh sink m
c h s m

(15)

Air Mass Fraction Equation

pipe,out
pipe,out
source source m

(4)

pipe,in
sink sink m

(16)
(17)

Auxiliary Equations
Steam Condensation Rate. The volumetric rate of saturated
steam condensation in a control volume is obtained as

source
source
m

D
x
x
y
y

u source0
m
source

u
v
x
y

(7)

From the HP section air cooler, the flow enters the LP section vent
pipe. From the LP section air cooler, the flow enters the pipe
leading to the air removal system. These are treated as sink terms
and allow mass to be properly balanced.

Air Mass Fraction Equation written in the conservative form

(6)

The sources associated with the forces are

w v m
pipe,in
sinkv sink m
c v m

k eff h

k eff h
p
p
v

u
x
cp x
y
cp y
x
y

Continuity Equation. The source terms represent the flows

from the vent pipes into the appropriate control volumes in the air
cooler sections i.e., the terms are nonzero for these control volumes only.

w um
pipe,in
sinku sink m
c um

(2)

Thermal Energy Equation written in the conservative form

uh
vh
x
y

The Source and Sink Terms. Several volumetric source and

sink terms appear in the conservation equations.

For the sink terms

u sink
sink
m

eff

eff
y x
x
y
y

F
y

The dependent variables in Eqs. 15 are the velocity components u and v , pressure p, enthalpy hall for the wet steam-air
mixture, and the air mass fraction .

sink sink

Pressure variation is accounted for in our model.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

c
(5)

UA surf
hfg

T s T o T s T i
T s T o
ln
T s T i

(18)

Heat transfer from the steam/air mixture to the circulating water

in condenser tubes is assumed to be only in the radial direction.
MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 83

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Therefore, a one-dimensional resistance model may be used to

calculate an overall clean heat transfer coefficient
U clean

1
R TOTAL,clean

(19)

where
R TOTAL,cleanR INNERR METALR OUTER

(20)

The resistance components are calculated from standard expressions 9. Of the components, R METAL has the smallest value,
while R INNER and R OUTER are of the same order of magnitude with
the latter typically being somewhat larger.
The fouling resistance is incorporated via the use of a cleanliness factor CF
UU cleanCF

(21)

where CF is taken to be 0.85.

Heat Transfer Coefficients. The tube inner surface heat transfer coefficient is calculated from the Dittus-Boelter correlation.
All circulating water properties are obtained at the average of the
inlet and outlet temperatures for the control volume.
The condensation heat transfer coefficient at the tube outer surface, h o , is calculated from Fujiis 10 modification of the Nusselt correlation for condensation. The effect of vapor shear is accounted for by this modification. The effect of condensate
inundation is represented by the expression 11

m
gen
h o h o
m
drain

Fig. 4 A schematic diagram of the air removal system

s 1 a

(22)

Effective Viscosity and Thermal Conductivity of the Fluid.

These are given by

with n0.223.
Fluid Properties. All wet steam/air mixture properties are calculated from the general relation
function p,h,

(23)

The partial pressure of steam is obtained as

p s p

M a 1
M a 1 M s

s x g 1x f

(25)

provided the quality, x, is known.

Air properties are evaluated from ideal gas relations for air at
its partial pressure and the saturated steam temperature.
The wet steam-air mixture specific enthalpy calculated by the
thermal energy Eq. 4 is
hh s 1 h a

(26)

The specific enthalpy of air evaluated from ideal gas is substituted

into Eq. 26 to obtain the wet steam specific enthalpy h s . The
corresponding steam quality can now be calculated
x

h s h f
h g h f

eff t

(30)

k effkk t

(31)

It is assumed that the turbulent viscosity and turbulent thermal

conductivity are about two orders of magnitude larger than the
corresponding molecular values. For example

t 150

(24)

Properties for saturated steam and water are evaluated at the

steam partial pressure using routines provided in the ASME 1967
IFC steam table. Wet steam properties, including specific volume,
can be calculated from

(29)

and Prt

(32)

c p t
0.9
kt

(33)

c p t
0.9

(34)

Equation 33 gives
k t

The multiplication factor in Eq. 32 does not affect the computational results significantly when in the 100200 range of values.
The insensitivity of the solution to several-fold changes in the
values of t and k t has been documented earlier 6.
Vent Pipe Flow Rate. The mass flow rate through a vent pipe
segment of length L v p is expressed as 12
m
v p K v p p v p

(35)

(27)

Using the wet steam condensation process model described earlier, the steam quality changed only slightly in the course of its
flow through the condenser.
The wet steam-air mixture density is calculated as

s a

(28)

Other specific properties of the mixture, such as entropy and internal energy, can be calculated as
84 Vol. 123, MARCH 2001

Fig. 5 Model of an air ejector stage

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 6 Steam and circulating water outlet temperature measurement locationsside A

where K v p , the pipe admittance, is

K vp

2 d v5 p
9 f Lvp

(36)

The friction factor, f, for the pipe is taken to be twice the value for
fully developed flow in a steel pipe. This is a conservative estimate to account for the fact that the flow is not fully developed.
The volume flow rate from the condenser interior space into a
vent pipe through an orifice is calculated as 12
qCA orifice2 p orifice

(37)

with C0.6.
Condenser Air Removal System. The air removal system is
shown schematically in Fig. 4. During normal operation, the
steam-air mixture flows out of the LP section air cooler into a pipe
leading to the two-stage air ejector and a vacuum pump. A second

Fig. 7 Pressure measurement locations side A

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

vacuum pump is available for use during startup of the unit. The
second vacuum pump is included in a parametric study reported
later in the paper.
We also introduce an external air cooler as an option in a
parametric study. Circulating water is supplied to this air cooler
to condense an additional amount of steam from the steam-air
mixture before it proceeds to the air removal system. This lowers
the condenser pressure under conditions of significant air inleakage.
Air Ejector Model. For each air ejector stage, a simple
model 13 which has been shown to agree well with experiments
is used. Figure 5 shows the model. The equations used are:
conservation of energy and air mass fraction for the stage, energy
balances across the nozzle and the diffuser, conservation of momentum in the mixing section, and nozzle and diffuser isentropic

Fig. 8 Axial distribution of mixed-mean circulating water

temperature

MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 85

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

isentropic efficiencies are used as tuning parameters to reconcile

the calculated pressure with the measurement. The higher the efficiencies, the lower the suction pressure achievable for a given
motive steam flow rate.
External Air Cooler. As mentioned earlier, this is a hypothetical component which is introduced for a parametric study. For
simplicity, its performance is characterized by its effectiveness. The effectiveness is defined as the ratio of the actual steam
condensation rate to the maximum possible steam condensation
rate. The maximum possible steam condensation rate reduces the
steam partial pressure to the saturation pressure corresponding to
the CW inlet temperature.

The Computational Domain

Fig. 9 Steam-air inlet flow rate for each computational slab

efficiencies. The equations are solved for the ejector stage suction
pressure location 3. A perfect intercondenser is assumed in the
sense that steam condensation takes place at the cooling water
inlet temperature and the partial pressure of the steam is reduced
to the corresponding saturation pressure. The main condensate is
split between the tube sides of the ejector condensers and the
gland steam condenser to serve as the cooling fluid.
Assuming that the air in-leakage rate to the condenser is
known, the performance of the air removal system can be characterized by the suction pressure that it can achieve. This pressure
was measured at the plant. The air ejector nozzle and diffuser

The domain measures 4.27 m in the x direction and 8.0 m in the

y direction, Figs. 2 and 3. The computational steam inlet plane
was chosen such that the calculated flow field at the plane where
the condenser neck ends and the tube bundle space begins will be
minimally affected by the simplified neck configuration.
Boundary Conditions. The boundaries of the computational
domain may be divided into two groups: internal and external.
The external boundaries are the steam inlet plane, the condenser
walls and floor, and the symmetry plane. The entries to and exits
from the vent pipes constitute the internal boundaries. These are
incorporated via the source and sink terms in the governing
equations.
Steam Inlet Plane. The steam-air mixture enters the condenser
at this plane with a known total mass flow rate, steam quality, and

Fig. 10 Contours of a air mass fraction, and b steam condensation rate per computational cell kgs for
Slab 1

86 Vol. 123, MARCH 2001

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 11 Contours of a air mass fraction, and b steam condensation rate per computational cell kgs
for Slab 9

air mass fraction. In both the LP and HP sections, the pressure is

required to be uniform at this plane. That such uniformity of pressure exists was verified by measurements at the plant. The only
other constraint on the pressure is

2p
0
y2

(38)

This is equivalent to drawing a straight line through the first and

second grid points from the boundary, and obtaining the value at
the boundary by extrapolation.
Condenser Walls and Floor. The walls are considered to be
impermeable. The no-slip condition is not used at the wall
instead, an extrapolation similar to the pressure is used to obtain a
fictitious velocity at the wall. Wall shear stress is neglected because its effect on the flow field would be small compared to the
drag due to the tubes.
Symmetry Plane. The x-component of velocity u, and the derivatives with respect to x of v , p, h, and are set to zero at this
plane.

medium, and the source and sink terms. Additionally, a linearized

equation set representing the air removal system2 is solved.
An outer iteration loop is employed to converge to the correct
distribution of flow to each slab at the steam/air mixture inlet
plane. The slabs are solved in succession from the CW inlet end to
the CW outlet end. After each outer iteration, the steam/air mixture inlet flow to the slabs are redistributed to achieve a uniform
pressure distribution at the inlet plane of LP and HP sections of
the condenser.
An inner solution scheme is used for each slab. The equations
solved are:
i the pressure equation, derived from the mass conservation
equation;
ii the momentum equations;
iii the pressure correction equation;
iv the velocity correction equations;
v the thermal energy equation; and
vi the air mass fraction equation.
An iterative scheme is not used because at small air mass fractions, the air mass fraction discretization equation violates one of
the criteria for convergence of iterative solutions 14

Computational Approach
Governing Eqs. 15 are discretized over a two-dimensional
x, y staggered grid typically 1936. The discretization expands on the derivation of the SIMPLER algorithm of Patankar
14, the expanded derivation accounting for the porosity of the
Journal of Energy Resources Technology

a p
2

(39)

The air removal system is modeled by a set of nonlinear equations 9.

MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 87

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 12 Fluid velocity vectors for a Slab 1, and b Slab 9

A direct method of solution for the elliptic system of equations is

used. The coefficient matrix being sparse, a routine which utilizes
LU decomposition of a sparse matrix is employed.

Measurements
Measurement instruments were installed in the NGS condenser
during the early period of the project. The instruments were as
follows:
Steam temperaturethis was measured by resistance temperature detectors RTDOmega in selected condenser tubes
which were plugged. With no water flow in these tubes, the local
fluid temperature inside each tube would equal the steam temperature outside. The uncertainty in the RTD measurements was estimated to be 0.2C. The RTDs were installed a few inches downstream of the CW inlet S in Fig. 6a and a few inches upstream
of the CW outlet S in Fig. 6a. Figure 6a shows side A of the
condenser only.
CW temperatureRTDs were used for this measurement also. The CW inlet temperature was measured at one
location on each side A, B of the condenser. The locations
where the CW outlet temperature was measured on side A are
shown in Fig. 6b, these being locations just upstream of the tube
outlets.
Temperature in air removal systemthe steam/air mixture temperature at the inlet to this system was measured by
RTD.
88 Vol. 123, MARCH 2001

Pressure in the condenserFigure 7 shows the pressure tap

locations on side A of the condenser. A digital manometer Meriam was used, the uncertainty in the measured pressure being
0.04 kPa.
Pressure in the air removal systemThe steam/air
mixture pressure at the inlet to this system was also measured
by a digital manometer Meriam with an uncertainty of 0.04
kPa.

Computational Results
Figure 8 shows the axial distribution of CW temperature from
the inlet end to the outlet end. The location of the partition between the LP and HP sections is also shown. Figure 9 shows the
calculated steam-air mixture mass flow rate at the inlet plane of
each of the 16 computational slabs. The highest flow rate is at the
CW inlet end of the LP section. The next highest flow rate is at
the CW inlet end of the HP section. We note again that the pressure at the inlet plane is uniform in each of the two sections but
has different values in them.
As indicated in Table 1, the case being studied has a significant
air in-leakage rate. We present first the air mass fraction and
steam condensation rate results for slab 1. This is followed by the
results for slab 9. These slabs were chosen rather than slabs 0 and
8 because the latter contain the air coolers and hence, would be
expected to differ from the other slabs.
The deleterious effect of air on condensation of steam is
significant only when the air mass fraction is sufficiently high.
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 13 Contours of pressure Pa for a Slab 1, and b Slab 9

Pierce and Rennie 5 found that a tube bundle can be divided

into two regions: one which is essentially unaffected by the presence of air, and one in which air greatly inhibits steam condensation. The extents of the regions, of course, vary along the bundle
axis. As the steam-air mixture flows inward through a tube
bundle, the air mass fraction increases in the freestream. If it
reaches a high value before the mixture has penetrated deep into
the bundle, then a large part of the heat transfer surface in the
bundle interior will contribute only minimally to the condensation
of steam. Such an interior region is usually referred to as an air
bubble. In Fig. 10a, air mass fraction contours at four values
0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, and 0.1are shown for slab 1. If 0.1 is chosen as an arbitrary but reasonable value of air mass fraction to
mark the beginning of an air bubble, the presence of an air bubble
is seen at the interior of each upper, lower tube bundle. Figure
10b shows the steam condensation rate per computational cell

contours for slab 1 at three levels: 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 kg/s. The
condensation rate increases from essentially zero to 0.06 kg/s over
a small distance near the bundle periphery. It decreases from 0.06
to 0.02 kg/s also over a small distance in the interior. This is
consistent with the calculated location of air bubble in each tube
bundle.
Table 3 Circulating water temperaturea at inlet, b at
outlet

Table 2 Steam temperatures near the circulating water outlet

plane

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 89

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 4 Steam-air mixture pressurea above tube bundles,

b below tube bundles

Table 5 Air removal system inlet pressure and temperature

Table 6 Effect of air removal capacity on condenser pressure

all pressures in kPaa LP section location: SUB 1, b HP
section location: SUB 6

Figures 12a and b are plots of the steam-air mixture velocity vectors for slab 1 and slab 9, respectively. In each case,
the fluid enters at the top with a uniform downward velocity,
flows around the tube bundles, and enters them from the periphery. In Fig. 12a, a region is seen near the center of each
bundle where the fluid velocity is very small. This is inside
the calculated air bubble. This region has shrunk considerably in
Fig. 12b.
Figures 13a and b show the calculated pressure contours in
Pascals for some regions of slab 1 and slab 9, respectively. The
contours are spaced 250 Pa apart. Only those regions are shown
where the pressure gradient is significant. Significant pressure gradient is maintained deeper into the tube bundles in slab 9, indicating appreciable fluid velocity since the velocity is proportional
to the square-root of the pressure drop. This is consistent with the
velocity vector plots in Figs. 12a and b.
The results shown for slabs 1 and 9 are typical of slabs in the
LP section and HP section, respectively, of the condenser. They
suggest that the LP section back pressure is more sensitive to the
air in-leakage rate and the efficacy of the air removal system than
is the HP section back pressure.

Comparison With Test Data

The RTDs that were installed for measuring steam temperature
near the CW inlet plane failed. Table 2 compares the calculated
and measured values near the CW outlet plane. The agreement is
generally good.
Tables 3a and b contain, respectively, the measured CW
inlet temperature and the calculated and measured CW outlet temperatures. In Table 3b, the agreement is good except for the
locations 30W and 60W. Both these locations are inside the predicted air bubble where the steam condensation rate is low and so
is the calculated rise in CW temperature. The RTD data, however,
do not reflect this. This discrepancy, to some extent, may be due
to the relatively coarse grid in our computation. It has been suggested that transition to high air mass fraction typically occurs
over two to three tube rows and this can be difficult to resolve in
some locations with the present grid.
The calculated steam-air mixture pressures are in better agreement with the measured pressures for the LP section compared to
the HP section, Tables 4a and b. The pressure taps above and
below the tube bundles had been located so as to measure pressure
variation, if any, in the CW flow direction. No such variation is
apparent from the measured data, and little variation is seen from
the calculation.
Table 5 compares the calculated and measured steam-air mixture pressure and temperature at the air removal system inlet. The
agreement is generally good.

Parametric Study
Table 7 Effect of air removal capacity on total condenser and
cooling tower irreversibility rate MW

Figure 11a shows the air mass fraction contours at three values 0.0001, 0.001, and 0.01 for slab 9. The contour corresponding to 0.1 is calculated to be very close to the vent pipe in both
bundles and is not shown. Figure 11b shows that the sharp drop
in steam condensation rate occurs very close to the vent pipe in
both bundles. Thus, the air bubble is essentially nonexistent in
slab 9 and the available heat transfer surface area is utilized far
more effectively in this slab compared to slab 1.
90 Vol. 123, MARCH 2001

The parameters studied for their effects on condenser performance are: air in-leakage rate, circulating water inlet temperature, tube cleanliness factor, external air cooler effectiveness, and the number of vacuum pumps in operation air
removal capacity. For brevity, only the effects of the air inleakage rate and the number of vacuum pumps in operation on
i the HP section and LP section pressures, and ii the total
system condenser plus cooling tower irreversibility rate are
presented here. Three air in-leakage rates are considered: 51
scfm 0.0295 kg/s, 20 scfm 0.0116 kg/s, and 10 scfm 0.0058
kg/s.
Tables 6a and b contain the calculated results for the LP and
HP section pressures. The highlighted values correspond to the
normal operating condition at 100 percent load. The failed cases
are conditions where the air in-leakage rate is beyond the capability of the air removal systemi.e., the high condenser pressure
causes a plant trip. It should be noted that, in the parameter range
considered, while the LP section pressure is significantly affected
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

by the number of vacuum pumps in operation, such is not the case

for the HP section pressure. This is consistent with the computational results presented earlier.
Table 7 shows the calculated results for the total irreversibility
rate. The deleterious effect of air accumulation on condenser performance can be seen.

Concluding Remarks
A computational model of a power plant steam condenser is
developed. The model is capable of analyzing the effects of air
in-leakage and removal rates on the performance of the condenser.
The steady-state steady-flow balance equations for the wet
steam-air mixture mass, momentum, thermal energy, and air
mass fraction are solved on a series of two-dimensional grids.
The condenser interior space is modeled as a porous medium.
The wet steam is represented as saturated steam at its local
partial pressure mixed homogeneously with the appropriate
amount of water at saturation temperature depending upon the
local quality. A simple model for wet steam condensation is
introduced.
The computational results are compared with the limited
measurements available. It is found that a condenser which
lacks sufficient air removal capacity at any given air in-leakage
rate will not make proper use of its heat transfer surface area. A
large part of the area will be used to condense a small portion of
the entering steam. The heat transfer surface area will be used
more effectively if the air removal system can maintain a low
enough air mass fraction to avoid inhibition of steam condensation. Furthermore, the condenser performance is degraded as
buildup of air occurs in that the system irreversibility rate increases. Given the significant impact of a small rise in condenser
pressure on the power generation capacity of a steam turbine unit,
a condenser model needs to be able to predict this effect in order
to be useful.
Representation of the wet steam-air mixture as containing saturated steam, entrained water droplets of appropriate size distribution, and air will constitute a significant improvement of the
model. This work is left for the future.
The configuration of the condenser steam inlet region was
simplified in this study for computational simplicity. A more
precise representation of this region and inclusion of the low
pressure turbine exhaust path in the model could be worthwhile
improvements.
More detailed and accurate measurement of pressure, temperature, and perhaps air concentration distribution will also be helpful
for further improvement of the model.

Acknowledgments
This research was funded by Salt River Project, Phoenix, Arizona. The able assistance of Mr. Richard Schumm of Salt River
Project Research and Development Department is gratefully acknowledged.

Nomenclature
heat transfer surface area per unit volume of tube
A surf
bundle space m1
c p steam-air mixture specific heat at constant pressure
J/kg/K
d v p vent pipe diameter m
D mass diffusivity of air in steam-air mixture
h wet steam-air mixture specific enthalpy J/kg
h f g latent heat of evaporation J/kg

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

hs
Lvp
k
kt
m

m
drain
m
gen

m
sink

m
source
m
w

M
p
ps
Prt
u
v

wet steam specific enthalpy J/kg

vent pipe segment length m
steam-air mixture thermal conductivity W/m/K
turbulent thermal conductivity W/m/K
volumetric rate of saturated steam condensation
kg/m3/s
rate of condensate drain from tube kg/s
rate of condensate generation on tube kg/s
volumetric mass sink kg/m3/s
volumetric mass source kg/m3/s
volumetric transfer rate of water in wet steam to condensate inventory kg/m3/s
molecular weight
steam-air mixture pressure Pa
steam partial pressure Pa
turbulent Prandtl no. dimensionless
x-component of steam-air mixture velocity m/s
y-component of steam-air mixture velocity m/s
porosity dimensionless
air mass fraction dimensionless
steam-air mixture viscosity kg/m/s
turbulent viscosity kg/m/s
wet steam-air mixture density kg/m3
any property

Subscripts
a
f
g
s

air
saturated water
saturated steam
wet steam

References
1 Tsou, J. L., 1990, Condenser Performance Prediction Calculation Procedure, American Power Conference, Chicago, IL.
2 Tsou, J. L., 1994, New Approaches to Condenser Performance Analysis,
American Power Conference, Chicago, IL.
3 Al-Sanea, S., Rhodes, N., Tatchell, D. G., and Wilkinson, T. S., 1983, A
Computer Model for Detailed Calculation of the Flow in Power Station Condensers, Condensers: Theory and Practice, The Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series No. 75, Pergamon Press, pp. 7088.
4 Caremoli, C., 1983, Numerical Computation of Steam flow in Power Plant
Condensers, Condensers: Theory and Practice, The Institution of Chemical
Engineers Symposium Series No. 75, Pergamon Press, pp. 8996.
5 Pierce, D. L., and Rennie, E. J., 1993, Improving Condenser Performance
Using the EPOC Code, EPRI Condenser Technology Conference, St. Petersburg, FL.
6 Zhang, C., Sousa, A. C. M., and Venart, J. E. S., 1993, The Numerical and
Experimental Study of a Power Plant Condenser, ASME J. Heat Transfer ,
115, pp. 435445.
7 Zhang, C., 1994, Numerical Modeling Using a Quasi-Three-Dimensional
Procedure for Large Power Plant Condensers, ASME J. Heat Transfer , 116,
pp. 180188.
8 Roache, P. J., 1972, Computational Fluid Dynamics, Hermosa Publishers, Albuquerque, NM.
9 Ratisher, M., 1998, Development of a Computational Model for Prediction of
Power Plant Steam Condenser Performance, M.S. thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
10 Fujii, T., 1981, Vapor Shear and Condensate Inundation: An Overview,
Power Condenser Heat Transfer Technology, eds., P. J. Marto and R. H.
Nunn, Hemisphere, pp. 193223.
11 Butterworth, D., 1981, Inundation without Vapor Shear, Power Condenser
Heat Transfer Technology, eds., P. J. Marto and R. H. Nunn, Hemisphere,
New York, NY, pp. 271277.
12 White, F. M., 1986, Fluid Mechanics, Second Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York,
NY.
13 Rao, S. P. R., and Singh, R. P., 1988, Performance Characteristics of SingleStage Steam Jet Ejectors Using Two Simple Models, Chem. Eng. Commun.,
66, pp. 207219.
14 Patankar, S. V., 1980, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow, Hemisphere,
New York, NY.

MARCH 2001, Vol. 123 91

Downloaded 16 Sep 2011 to 129.5.32.121. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm