Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x
DOI 10.1007/s12206-014-0643-z

Numerical prediction of characteristics of ash deposition in heavy fuel oil

heat recovery steam generator†
◆ ◆
Byoung-Hwa Lee1, , Min-Young Hwang1, , Chil-Yeong Seon2 and Chung-Hwan Jeon3,*
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan, Korea
2
Thermal & Fluid Research Team, Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction Co., Ltd., Korea
3
School of Mechanical Engineering, Pusan Clean Coal Center(PC3),Pusan National University, Busan, Korea

(Manuscript Received September 17, 2013; Revised December 31, 2013; Accepted February 3, 2014)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract

Resolving ash-related problems such as fouling and slagging is crucial to the operation of a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) in a
power plant using heavy fuel oil (HFO). This paper presents numerical predictions of ash particle deposition using a model implemented
with CFD code. The deposition model considers the force of gravity, elastic rebound, and adhesion forces acting at the moment of ash
particle impact, which determine if the particle bounces off or stays on the surface and accumulates into a deposit. The 2D simulation
results showed that ash deposition depends significantly on the particle size and velocity. The normal gravity force is a significant pa-
rameter that determines the position of deposition. The simulation results for ash deposition in an HFO-HRSG showed that ash deposits
are highest (~34%) in the first and second rows, where the particles hit first, after which deposition decreases. However, ash deposits in
the internal array increase again in the rear rows because rebounding particles decelerate and are deposited because of gravity, as con-
firmed by observations of actual deposit formation.
Keywords: Heat recovery steam generator; Deposition model; Impaction efficiency; Gravity force
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

vances in computational fluid dynamics (CFD), numerical

1. Introduction
simulation methods based on laboratory tests and field meas-
Heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) have been adopt- urements are being developed to predict ash deposition and
ed to re-collect waste heat from hot exhaust gas in order to slagging/fouling propensity for various types of boilers [6, 7].
generate steam [1]. However, exhaust gas may contain a large Lin et al. [8] used a commercial CFD code to develop a
amount of ash particles remaining after combustion, and these numerical deposition model based on ash-melting thermo-
substances are likely to stick to the fin tubes in the HRSG as analysis and critical moment theory for predicting ash particle
the exhaust gas flows in. Ash particle deposits on the tube sticking and rebounding in the thermal boundary layer as well
surface increase over time and may cause serious problems in as shedding of deposited particles from tube surfaces. Wacła-
equipment operation [2]. Thus, various attempts have been wiak and Tomeczek [9, 10] presented the results for 2D mod-
made to reduce ash deposition rates and remove ash deposits eling of powdery medium-temperature deposit formation on
from the tube surface with regard to the combustion pattern, super heater tubes in the form of the predicted deposit shape
burner design and image, etc. [3]. Ash particle transport and versus the time of boiler operation.
deposition involve complicated physical and chemical proc- Such models have been applied to super heaters of conven-
esses associated with various factors. Such processes may tional boilers, high-temperature HRSG, etc.; however, they
include chemical reactions in the flame front or hot flue gas, have not been used for the heavy fuel oil (HFO)-HRSG. HFO
particle motion in a complex turbulent flow field, etc., depend- boilers use heavy fuel oil, and waste heat is re-collected from
ing on the particle size, distribution, and rates [4]. The impor- the exhaust hot gas of these boilers as it passes through the
tant mechanisms for ash transport and deposition are inertial HRSG.
impact sticking, eddy impact, thermophoresis, condensation, The present study was aimed at modeling the deposition of
and chemical reaction [5]. Because of the recent rapid ad- medium-temperature particulates in HFO-HRSGs. A deposi-
tion model was developed based on the correlation of various
◆
These authors made equal contributions as first author. forces on the surface and used to predict the ash deposit be-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 51 510 3051, Fax.: +82 51 582 9818
E-mail address: chjeon@pusan.ac.kr havior within the HRSG.
†
Recommended by Associate Editor Tong Seop Kim
2890 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

2. Theoretical model du p (r p - r f )
= FD (u f - u p ) + FG + Fx . (1)
The Eulerian–Lagrangian approach was implemented to af- dt rp
ford a solution to the particle-laden flue gas flow problem.
The Eulerian model describes continuous phase behavior, The drag force acting on an ash particle is determined in
while particle trajectories are tracked by the stochastic La- terms of particle relaxation time (τp) as
grangian model. A two-equation realizable k–ε turbulent
model was employed to compute the gas flow field and heat CD Re d p2 r p
FD = , where t p =
transfer process in the furnace. Guha [11] noted that when t p 14 18m f
particle motion is significantly affected by turbulence, and the
fluctuating flow field velocities become important, Lagrangian and the relative Reynolds number is
calculations are needed. The Lagrangian approach provides a
more detailed and realistic model of particle deposition be- r f d p up - u f
cause the instantaneous equation of motion is solved for each Re = .
mf
particle moving through the field of random fluid eddies. The
turbulence model affects the particle trajectory through the
turbulent kinetic energy that is used to calculate the fluctuating The drag coefficient is given as
velocities. The available turbulence models are DNS (direct
numerical simulation), RANS (Reynolds-averaged Navier- a1 a2
CD = + + a3 (2)
Stokes), and LES (large eddy simulation). The DNS model Re Re2
describes theoretically that all turbulent flows can be simu-
lated by numerically solving the full Navier-Stokes equations where uf is the fluid phase velocity (m/s); up, the particle ve-
and resolving the whole spectrum of scales. Thus, the cost is locity (m/s); μf, the fluid molecular viscosity (Pa s); ρf, the
too prohibitive. The LES model solves the spatially averaged fluid density (kg/m3); ρp, the particle density (kg/m3); and dp,
Navier-Stokes equations. Large eddies are directly resolved, the particle diameter (m). The constants a1, a2, and a3 are func-
but eddies smaller than the mesh are modeled. It is less expen- tions of Re and are applicable to smooth spherical particles.
sive than DNS, but the amount of computational resources and We took the following values: a1 = -1662.5, a2 = 5.4167 × 106,
effort is still too large for most practical applications. The and a3 = 0.5191 [14].
RANS model solves the ensemble averaged Navier-Stokes To account for the rapid changes in temperatures near the
equations. All turbulent length scales can be modeled in cooled surface of the furnace wall, the thermophoretic force is
RANS, which is the most widely used approach for calculat- given by [15]
ing industrial flows. In addition, Bogard et al. [12] conducted
deposition experiments using molten materials, and their sim- 6p d p m f Cs ( K r + Ct K n ) 1 ¶T
ulation showed that the realizable k-ε turbulent model Fx = - (3)
r f (1 + 3Cm K n )(1 + 2 K r + 2Ct K n ) m& pT ¶x
(RANS) has a reasonable prediction. Lin et al. [8] also re-
ported that the realizable k-ε turbulent model can be repre-
sented to analyze the gas flow field and particle trajectory with where the Knudsen number Kn,= 2λ/dp, mean free path λ =
a deposition model. Therefore, we chose the realizable k-ε {(π2/2)·ug· p·(RT)1/2}1/2 , and Kr = k/kp , k is the fluid thermal
turbulent model among RANS models to represent the fouling conductivity (WK-1m-1); kp, the particle thermal conductivity
characteristics of the HFO-HRSG simulation. The radiative (WK-1m-1); mp, the particle mass (kg); and, T the local fluid
heat transfer was modeled using discrete ordinates. For the temperature (K). The values for the coefficients of thermal slip
wall-bounded internal flow, standard wall functions were used Cs, temperature jump Ct, and momentum exchange Cm are
to model the boundary layer effects. The turbulent dispersion 1.17, 2.18, and 1.14, respectively [15]. According to Ref. [16],
of ash particles in the continuous phase was predicted using inertial impaction is the process by which the majority of the
the discrete random walk model (DRWM) associated with a particles are transported to the deposition surface owing to
random eddy lifetime. sufficient inertia for traversing the gas stream lines and im-
pacting on the surface.
The impaction efficiency is defined as the ratio of the number
2.1 Particle trajectories
of particles that impact the tube surface to the number of parti-
The discrete phase particle trajectory technique in a Lagran- cles directed at the tube in the free stream. The predicted impac-
gian frame of reference was employed. The force balance tion efficiency is shown as a function of the generalized Stokes
equation in the x-direction can be written in terms of the drag number, which is defined for a cylinder in a cross flow as
force FD, (uf - up), gravitational force gx, and other forces (such
as the change in pressure gradient and thermophoretic force) r p d p2 u p
Fx , as follows [13]: Stkeff = y (4)
9m g D
 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900 2891

where ρp, dp, and up stand for the particle density, diameter,
and mean velocity, respectively. μg and D represent the dy-
namic gas viscosity and tube diameter, respectively. ψ is a
correction factor for particles that do not obey Stokes’s law,
and it can be computed for a given Reynolds number based on
the particle diameter and free-stream velocity. The impaction
efficiency is then calculated by Eq. (5) [17]:

-1
h imp = éë1 + b( Stkeff - a) -1 - c( Stkeff - a) -2 + d ( Stkeff - a) -3 ùû
(5)

where for Stk → 0.14, a = 0.125, b = 1.25, c = 1.4e-2, and d =

0.508e-4. The Fluent code can be used to obtain the mass flux
of ash particles striking the tube surface. This flux, along with
the mass flow of ash particles in the undisturbed flow, directed
at the tube diameter wide area allows the impaction efficiency
to be calculated by Eq. (6):

D
himp = (å i m& p.i Ai ) / (m& p ) (6)
s1
where mp,i is the mass flux of impacting ash particles (kg/cm
s); Ai , the tube surface (m2); ṁp, the mass flow of ash particles
in the free stream over the entire domain (kg/s); D, the tube
diameter (m); and, S1 the width of the inlet grid (m).
2.2 Deposition criteria
The current deposition model is based on the assumption that
particle deposition results from inertial impaction and the corre-
sponding particle capture efficiency of the surface. The capture
conditions include factors such as the normal elastic rebound
force on the particle surface, van der Waals force, and normal
component of the gravity force, as presented in Eq. (7) [9]:
ur ur ur
F s , n £ ( F vw + F G ).
The force of gravity may either improve or disfavor the
sticking of particles depending on the flow direction. The
deposition mechanism of the model is briefly presented in Fig.
1. The basic expression of the deposition mechanism is given
in Eq. (8):
0, if ( Fs , n > Fvw ± FG , n )
PF = . (8)
1, if ( Fs , n £ Fvw ± FG , n )
The definition for the probability of fouling (PF) indicates
the possibility of particle deposition: 1 indicates that the parti-
cles are stuck, whereas 0 indicates that they are rebounding.
For each expression of the forces, the normal elastic rebound
force is as given in Eq. (9):
FS , n = Kd p2 w1.2
p .
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram for deposition modeling on a tube surface.
2
K indicates the proportional constant depending on the elas-
ticity on the deposition surface and particles. The van der
Waals force (adhesion force) indicates the force generated by
tension between the surface and the particles and is repre-
sented by Eq. (10):
Bd p
Fvw = (10)
6d 2
where B is the particle coupling constant and δ is the distance
between the deposition surface and the particles.
(7) The force of gravity that affects the particles is represented
by Eq. (11):
1
FG = p d p3 r p g (11)
6
where g indicates the acceleration due to gravity.
Fig. 1 shows the interrelation expressions of PF based on
the directions of the flows and gravity. When FG is fixed
downward, the flows may occur in two different directions.
The particles may hit up and down in terms of the direction of
gravity, and the direction of Fs,n is determined according to the
impact location. The force Fvw is applied in the adverse direc-
tion of Fs,n, and the effect may be either positive or negative
depending on the direction of FG,n. The figure shows the inter-
relation of forces depending on the directions of flows, gravity,
and impact of Fs,n, Fvw, and FG,n.
The mass of the deposition particles, as represented by the
(9) PF interrelation expression, is calculated based on the surface
angle and area, as shown in Eq. (12):
2892 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

Tgas , surface
Main solver Deposition model (UDF)
§ Eulerian - Lagrangian
d particle
approach m& impact § Deposition mechanism

§ Flow field § Elastic rebound force

§ Temperature field § Gravity force

Fig. 3. Mesh and boundary conditions for three inline tubes.
§ Adhesion force
§ Particle trajectory m& rebound
- Eddy dissipation § Probability of fouling (PF)
Fs ,n £ FVW + FG ,n § Deposition mass rate
- Drag force
dm& p
-Thermophoretic force m& deposit = PF sin(g )
dA

Fig. 2. Numerical procedure for deposition model.

dm& p ,i
m&deposit = PF sin(g ). (12)
dA
Upper and lower : wall planes

Currently, one of the major difficulties with solving Eqs. (9) Outlet

and (10) is the accurate prediction of the constants. The con-

Flue gas
stants applied in this study are K = 1.0 (kg s-0.8 m-2.2), B = 1 × inlet

10-17 (kg m2 s-2), and , which are based on existing papers [9].
As noted by Wacławiak et al., these expressions have a fun- Sides: symmetry planes

damental flaw. Since the normal elastic rebound force and
gravity force are the square and cube, respectively, of each
particle’s diameter, the particles never rebound. When the
value of K is higher, the elastic rebound force is far higher
than the gravity force. Observation of an industrial environ-
ment showed that particles with a small diameter (30 μm or
smaller) are likely to be precipitated. To solve this problem,
small particles need smaller values of K, whereas relatively
large particles need large values. For this type of interrelation,
K(dp) was suggested to be as follows:
æ d ö
n
K (d p ) = G ç p ÷÷ .
ç d ref
è ø
In this study, we chose G = 1.0, dp = 20 μm, and n = 2 based
on existing studies [10].
2.3 Numerical procedures of Fluent code
The deposition model proposed in Fig. 2 was implemented
using Fluent user defined files (UDFs) [18] that were modifica-
tions of various procedures. The most important deposition flux
was calculated by a modified DEFINE_DPM_EROSION pro-
cedure, which defines the accretion or erosion rate depending on
the user’s modifications. This procedure utilizes the mass flow
of particles impacting faces of the surface and the area of the
faces to determine the angle of impaction. In the procedure, the
deposition efficiency is defined by the balance of the force of
gravity, elastic rebound force, and adhesion force.
3. Numerical condition
3.1 Conditions for three line tubes
Fig. 3 shows three inline tubes used to verify the developed
Gravity
force
Fig. 4. Simplified geometry and boundary conditions for 15 HRSG fin
tubes.
deposition model. Since model development involves valida-
tion and evaluation, the verification process was conducted
with the simplified configuration. The tubes used in this study
were 38 mm in diameter, arranged in three lines, and repre-
sented with the values of S1/D = 2 and S2/D = 2. Both sides
were on the symmetry plane, and the gravity force was in the
positive and adverse directions. During validation, the condi-
(13) tions of particle trajectory for three inline tubes (Section 4.1.1)
were particle velocity 7 m/s, and the particle sizes selected 10,
50, and 100 μm to examine and understand the behavior of
particle size and impaction efficiency. In addition, the condi-
tions of the parameter studies (Section 4.1.2) were particle
sizes 1, 7.5, 15, and 30 μm; the particle velocities were 1, 10,
and 30 m/s; and the total flow rate of the particles was 0.004
kg/s.
3.2 Conditions for HFO-HRSG
Fig. 4 shows the simplified geometry and boundary condi-
tions for the 15 fin tubes of the HRSG generated for this study
and a simple image of the HRSG. In this study, the 15fin tubes
represented only one-third of the total width; this was done
instead of generating the geometry for all of the fin tubes to
increase calculation efficiency and reduce the computation
time. At this time, the gas flow and particles have the same
direction and the particles seldom rebound toward the side
planes. Therefore, the boundary condition for side planes was
adapted as symmetry, and wall conditions were selected in the
upper and lower planes with the implemented fouling model
due to the rebounding effect. The fin density was set to 160
 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900
Table 1. Ash properties analysis for HFO-HRSG simulation.
Ash analysis (wt%)
MgO 17.4015
SO3 51.0805
V2O5 5.2025
NiO 1.3105
Al2O3 0.9030
SiO2 0.8395
Fe2O3 13.0295
Na2O 0.0305
CaO 0.0230
C 10.1795
Sum 100
Ash density (kg/m3) 2315
ea/m. Since the gap between fins had to be quite small with
many grids and meshes generated over the fin tube, the com-
putation time was long, and the calculation efficiency was low.
Since the fin tubes were uniform, calculating only one-third of
the fin tubes was assumed to cause no issues. The flow was
upward, and the gravity was in the adverse direction based on
the structure of an actual HRSG. The mesh within the gener-
ated geometry was hexagonal, with ~1.5 million meshes. The
temperature of the particles and flow was 800 K, the velocity
was 15 m/s, and the particle size was 1–30 μm based on the
Rosin–Rammler method. The total flow rate was 0.1 kg/s.
3.3 Fuel properties
Ash particles, which are commonly used in the HFO-HRSG,
were adopted for this study. Their properties are given in Ta-
ble 1.
With regard to research on ash deposition, the critical vis-
cosity temperature is important for calculating the sticky prob-
ability of ash particles [19]. Fact-Sage was used to understand
the properties; the critical viscosity temperature was taken to
be 2470 K [20]. The maximum temperature of exhaust gas
flowing into the HRSG was 800 K, so the melting temperature
of ash would not be reached. Thus, the dominant factors in
terms of ash particle deposition under this condition would be
inertial impaction by momentum and eddy impaction by tur-
bulent dispersion [5].
4. Results and discussion
4.1 Deposition characteristics for three inline tubes
4.1.1 Particle trajectory for inline tubes
Fig. 5 shows the particle trajectory characteristics of the
three inline tubes depending on the particle size. These cases
were intended to validate the deposition model and to examine
generally the rebounding effect for particle sizes. The results
confirmed that the trajectory among the tubes could be varied
2893
10 μm
(a)
50 μm
(b)
100 μm
(c)
Fig. 5. Trajectories of particles with diameters of (a) 10; (b) 50; (c) 100
μm and a velocity of 7 m/s.
depending on the particle size and that the particle size is an
important parameter for the trajectory. Actually, it was the
ideal case to understand the behavior of particle size, and these
were conducted without considering the turbulent dispersion.
Hereafter, the cases are considered with the turbulent disper-
sion through the discrete random walk model (DRWM), and
the results are compared as shown in Table 2. The gas and
particle velocity in the simulation was 7 m/s, and the particle
sizes were 10, 50, and 100 μm to investigate clearly the re-
bounding effect of particle size. Therefore, Fig. 5 shows that
no turbulent dispersion was applied in the simulation so that
the particle movement could be focused on. As shown in the
figure, relatively large particles (50 μm or greater) involved
particle rebounding. In contrast, 10 μm particles involved few
hits on the tube surface. The 50 μm particles reached the tube
surface, bounced upon it, hit the surrounding tubes, and
bounced again. For the 100 μm particles, which were the larg-
est considered in the simulation, the rebounding was quite
intense. Some of the particles jumped and passed by the sur-
rounding tubes or bounced more often than on tubes with
fewer impacting particles. The actual particle trajectory was
more complicated because few particles penetrated the space
between tubes because of turbulent flows. This simulation
showed that such rebounding could significantly affect the
efficiency of particle impaction on the tube surface.
Table 2 shows the impaction efficiency calculated based on
Fluent code and Eq. (5) applied to a single tube with the
abovementioned geometry. When Eq. (5) and Fluent code
without turbulent dispersion were used for fine particles (10
μm), no particles were deposited. However, deposition takes
place among particles of this size in practice [21]. To reflect
the characteristics of turbulent dispersion of such particles, the
discrete random walk model (DRWM) was used with Fluent.
As shown in Table 2, 10 μm particles were deposited when
the DRWM was used. The number of tries indicates the num-
ber of trajectories that were actually infused. The results
showed that larger particles increased the impaction effi-
2894 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

Table 2. Comparison of impaction efficiency on a single tube in a cross-flow as calculated by Eq. (5) in the literature and modeled in this simulation
with Fluent code, without Fluent code, and with the discrete random walk model.

Average impaction efficiency ηimp

Impaction efficiency
dp Stkeff number of tries in DRWM
(μm) number By Eq. (6)
By Eq. (5) By Ref. [9] 10 in Ref. [9] 10 in this work 30 in Ref. [9] 30 in this work
in this work
10 0.12 -0.001 0 0 0.202 0.28 0.192 0.285
30 0.94 0.4 0.33 0.315 0.374 0.4 0.375 0.41
50 2.54 0.66 0.67 0.525 0.631 0.67 0.623 0.6
100 9.8 0.89 0.83 0.84 0.887 0.904 0.887 0.87

2.3 the tube surface temperature was 770 K.

1m/s
(a)
10m/s
(b)
30m/s
(c)
Fig. 6. Distribution of flow velocity in the three inline tubes.
ciency; the results of this simulation correspond to those of
existing studies [9].
4.1.2 Parameter studies: effects of velocity, particle size, and
gravity direction
The models verified with regard to the impaction efficiency
were used for deposition parameter studies on the effects of
velocity, particle size, and gravity direction. As noted earlier,
the impaction efficiency was examined using the DRWM to
investigate the characteristics of turbulent dispersion. In order
to consider the impaction efficiency, the deposition model was
implemented using Fluent code, and the deposition rate was
predicted by the simulation based on the interrelation of forces.
First, Fig. 6 shows the contour of flow velocity distribution
at 1, 10, and 30 m/s for three inline tubes. The results clearly
showed that the velocity between the tube and the wall in-
creased approximately two times over the initial flow velocity
owing to the narrow area, whereas the flow distribution at the
rear of the tube was hindered, which decreased the velocity.
The hindered area at the back side of the tube gradually ex-
pands as the flow velocity increases, which leads to further
reduced velocity. The distribution of flow velocity is not af-
fected by gravity direction. Fig. 7(a) shows the deposition
rates depending on the particle size and velocity when the
flow and gravity are in the same direction. Figs. 7(b)-(d) also
present the deposits and particle trajectory on three tubes for
particle sizes and velocities to understand clearly the deposit
characteristics. The exhaust gas temperature was 800 K, and
m/s
All of the deposition occurred on the front side of the tubes;
in particular, higher ash deposits occurred at the lowest veloc-
0
ity (1 m/s) and smallest particle size (1 μm). Most of the parti-
21
m/s cles (1–30 μm) were deposited when the velocity was 1 m/s,
whereas only 1 μm particles were deposited at 10 and 30 m/s.
0 This indicates that the interrelation of forces in the deposition
66 model presented earlier caused the adhesion force to be great-
m/s
er than the elastic rebound force when the particle size was
small. This result shows that, as in the case of actual boilers
0
[22], the particles are more likely to be captured by a surface
at a smaller particle size and lower speed; otherwise, they
rebound. In addition, the deposit tendency of the second tube
at all particle sizes of velocity 1 m/s is lower than that of the
first tube; thereafter, the deposit of the third tube is lower
again except for particle size 30 μm, which is the result of the
particles rebounding from the neighboring rows of tubes. The
higher rebounding force affects to the third tube from particle
size 30 μm at 1 m/s.
Fig. 8(a) shows the deposition rates depending on the parti-
cle size and velocity when the flow and gravity are in the ad-
verse direction. Figs. 8(b)-(d) also present the deposits and
particle trajectory on three tubes for particle sizes and veloci-
ties to understand clearly the deposit characteristics. Most of
the particles were deposited at a velocity of 1 m/s, just as
when gravity was in the positive direction. Particles larger
than 7.5 μm mostly rebounded at 10 m/s. This did not hold
true for the 1 μm particles, which means that smaller particles
are more dominated by the adhesion force than are the larger
particles. As shown in Fig. 8 and unlike Fig. 7, particles that
were 7.5 μm or larger were deposited on the back side of the
tube. This indicates that the gravity force allowed larger im-
pacting particles to rebound and move to the back; these parti-
cles then decelerated, resisted gravity, and were deposited on
the back side of the tube. In addition, the deposits for all tubes
at 1 μm occur on the front side of the tubes, as shown in Fig. 8.
That is, the gravity effect of 1 μm particles is less significant
than that of larger particles. The deposit tendency of 1 μm at
10 m/s velocity (or more than) gradually increases from the
first tube to the third tube, unlike Fig. 7, because the gravity
force leads to the further deposit on the back side of the tube
with increasing velocity.
 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900 2895

(a) Size effect (a) Size effect

(b) 1 m/s velocity (b) 1 m/s velocity

(c) 10 m/s velocity (c) 10 m/s velocity

(d) 30 m/s velocity (d) 30 m/s velocity

Fig. 7. Deposition rates of particles with different sizes and velocities Fig. 8. Deposition rates of particles with different sizes and velocities
in the three inline tubes with a positive gravity force. in the three inline tubes with an adverse gravity force.
2896 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

2
hour

6
hour

10
hour
(a) Flow and gravity are in the same direction

16

12

Deposit height, mm
8

4
Numerical
Experimental from ref. 9
(b) Flow and gravity are in the adverse direction 0

Fig. 9. Shape of deposit rate on tubes at condition of particle velocity 1 0 2 4 6 8 10

m/s, size 7.5 μm depending on flow and gravity direction. Time, h

Fig. 10. Variation in deposition thickness for three inline tubes as a

function of time.
Fig. 9 shows that the contour of deposit at different gravity
direction of same condition (particle velocity 1 m/s, particle
size 7 μm) presents a graph that can confirm the shape of de- 0.0039Dt 4 - 0.1163Dt 3 + 0.9948Dt 2 - 0.7341Dt + 0.0595
b (Dt ) = .
posit to investigate the characteristics of deposition rate, de- Dt
pending on direction of flow and gravity. The lower figure of (15)
Figs. 9(a) and (b) shows that the points are deposition rate of
tube surface from 0 to π (left and right direction) and the red m&&effctive indicates that the deposition amount over time.
lines are derived by polynomial fitting method through above m& deposit , which was earlier calculated by Eq. (12), is ruled by
all points at each tube. Fig. 9(a) shows that a bell-shaped de- the β(∆t) function rather than linearly increasing over time.
posit develops on the front side of the tubes in same flow and The β(∆t) function is a nondimensional function that may vary
gravity, while Fig. 9(b) shows that particles are able to deposit depending on the particles; thus, it needs to be verified ex-
on the rear side of the tubes in different flow and gravity. perimentally. The thickness is the particle density divided by
This result is similar to the results for an experiment con- &&effctive :
m
ducted by Kalisz et al. on super heater parts of an actual boiler
[21]; the same phenomena were observed on the tube. This meffective
shows the importance of gravity in the development of a dep- H thickness = [ m] (16)
r deposition _ zone
osition model.

4.1.3 Change in deposition thickness as a function of time
The β(∆t) function was introduced to calculate the deposi-
tion thickness over time. In general, existing studies assumed
that deposition increases linearly over time [23]; however, we
applied the β(∆t) function in the simulation based on the ex-
periment results. β(∆t) was used in this study as follows; this
is a numerical expression of the correlation based on the ex-
perimental results of an existing study [10]:
&&effective = m&deposit ´ Dt ´ b (Dt ) [kg/m2]
m (14)
where, ρdeposition_zone was assumed to be 800 kg/m3 [23].
Fig. 10 indicates the deposition thickness over time and
compares the simulation and experiment results. The simula-
tion results were used to calculate the average thickness of the
general surface. The comparison of the present simulation
results was based on the experimental values of real full-scale
investigations [21]. These experimental results concerned the
deposit rate at the convective heating surfaces of selected
power boilers and consisted of an observation of the deposi-
tion process through inspection windows with the advantage
 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11. Contour of (a) deposition rate; (b) velocity distribution in
HRSG.
of periodical insertion of a measuring rule and observation of
a height indicator. Investigations were conducted at the upper
side of tubes in the bundle until the buildup of deposit was
completed. The results presented were only the heights of the
deposit wedge built on the upper surface, even though ash
bridges between tubes were also observed as a result of the
deposition. The experimental results confirmed that more than
10 mm height for deposition at the upper side of the tubes can
be achieved due to the gravity effect. The difference between
the simulation and experiment values showed an acceptable
discrepancy; they had the same tendency and showed reason-
able agreement.
4.2 Deposition characteristics for HFO-HRSG
Fig. 11 shows the contour of the deposition rate and veloc-
ity distribution at a flow velocity of 15 m/s and particle size of
1–30 μm (Rosin–Rammler) for an HRSG with 15 fin tubes.
The flow and gravity were in the adverse direction. There
were 15 rows from the front to the back; the deposition model
validated earlier was applied to each fin tube. The results also
showed that the velocity between the fin tube and wall gradu-
ally increased along the flue gas flow direction due to the nar-
row area, whereas the flow velocity distribution at the rear of
the fin tube decreased, which corresponds to results of the
three line tubes as shown in Fig. 6. As shown in the deposition
rate of the figure, it seems that most deposits were stuck on the
front side of the tube; fine particles were stuck on the front
side at 15 m/s, as shown in the validation cases.
Fig. 12 shows the deposition rate for the internal and exter-
nal arrays of the 15 fin tubes of the HRSG. The particles flow-
ing out would hit an external array, whereas particles flowing
in would hit in an internal array. The internal array can be
considered to be a representative fin tube because this geome-
try is a simplified form of the entire fin tube, and the external
array represents the external side near a wall. The deposition
2897
(a)
(b)
Fig. 12. Deposition rate depending on (a) internal; (b) external arrays.
rates were the highest at the first and second rows where the
particles would hit first, and 34% of all deposits were concen-
trated in these sections. This resulted from the impaction of
the gas flow and corresponds to the results of existing studies
[23]. As shown in the figure, the deposits on the external ar-
rays gradually decreased as the row was enlarged. However, it
is interesting that deposition on the internal array increases
again from the eleventh row. This is because the particles
rebounding from the first fin tube module decelerated and
were deposited at the rear side of the tube by adverse gravity
after the particles were transported toward the back. Fig. 12(a)
shows that deposition from the ninth row occurred on the rear
side of the fin tube because of the adverse gravity effect, as
shown in the 2D simulation. This result was supported by
observation of actual deposition from photographs of the first
(rows 1–3), fourth (rows 10–12), and fifth modules (rows 13–
15) shown in Fig. 13. The figure clearly shows that the great-
est deposition occurred at the first module. The ash deposits
adhered strongly to the tube surfaces and increased; this was
considered to be the formation of sintered deposits. There was
almost no obvious deposit in the fourth module based on field
observations of both sides. However, the results confirmed
2898 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900
First module Forth module Fifth module
(1-3 rows) (10-12 rows) (13-15 rows)
Fig. 13. Comparisons of ash deposits formed in the HSRG.
evident ash deposits on top of the fifth module (row 15) and
no deposit on the bottom side of the same row. These observa-
tions implied that the HRSG simulation reasonably predicted
the experimental results and can provide reliable data to pre-
vent ash deposition in HRSG fin tubes.
Based on the simulation results, the thermal-transfer expres-
sion applicable to the HRSG fin-tube can also be designed
[24]. Generally, high-temperature flame and gas heat are de-
livered to the deposit surface through radiation and convection,
and this heat is again delivered to the tube through conduction.
The ash deposits accumulated on the tube surface hinder the
heat from being delivered to the inside of the tube, which de-
creases the general heat within the tube surface. Thus, it is a
significant factor for the accurate prediction of the ash deposit
rate and thickness. Experiment-based studies will be con-
ducted in the future to gain more accurate values and verify
the model and constants.
As a result, this reliable ash deposition model will be useful
in helping engineers predict the consequences of combustion
of various coals in boilers. It can be used to assess the impact
of ash deposition phenomena on power plant performance as
well as assess the impact of ash deposition, fouling, and slag-
ging in the operation of coal-fired power plants. For design
and operational purposes, it can be used to identify the major
causes of fouling/slagging so that measures to reduce the
problem can be implemented. Especially, optimized soot-
blowing scenarios can be implemented at the HRSG to ensure
a higher frequency of cleaning in the region of high deposition
formation and a lower frequency of cleaning in the lower dep-
osition region. This strategy helps the HRSG optimize soot-
blowing usage to improve heat transfer to the tubes, while
maintaining the same cost and avoiding excess soot-blowing.
Further efforts will be made to improve the accuracy of the
prediction from this tool through fine-tuning the ash deposi-
tion models and better integrating the CFD simulations and
the ash behavior models. Also, the shape change and reshap-
ing of the tube surface during calculation were not considered
in this study. Our purpose was to reveal the overall character-
istics of ash deposition and distribution, but not to seek the
accurate and specific shape of ash deposits formed on each
tube. Prediction of the realistic shape of ash deposits requires
mesh refinement and can be obtained using a more advanced
turbulent flow model combined with a moving mesh approach
[10, 25], which will be conducted in our next work to improve
the accuracy of modeling.
5. Conclusions
The characteristics of ash particle deposition and distribu-
tion in an HFO-HRSG were investigated using a numerical
deposition model coupled with a gas–solid two-phase flow
model.
(1) The deposition model was developed based on the force
balance equations such as elastic rebound, van der Waals and
gravity. The proposed deposition model was implemented
using user defined files (UDFs) in Fluent code.
(2) The developed deposition model was evaluated with
three inline tubes (2D simulation) for impaction and capture
efficiency. The results show that greater ash deposits occurred
on surfaces when the particle size was smaller and motion was
slower because of the higher adhesion force. The adverse
gravity effect led to deposits on the back side of the tube when
the particle size was 7.5 μm or greater.
(3) The HFO-HRSG simulation results show that deposition
rates were highest (~34%) in the first and second rows, which
the particles hit first. Deposition for external arrays gradually
decreased as the row was enlarged, whereas deposition in the
internal array rather increased again from the eleventh row
because of the adverse gravity effect. The simulation results
for ash deposition agreed well with the field observation of an
HRSG.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the project of Doosan Heavy
Industries & Construction Co., Ltd. and financially supported
by the “2012 Post-Doc. Development Program” of Pusan
National University. It was partially supported by the Human
Resources Development program (No. 20124010203230-11-
1-000) of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evalua-
tion and Planning(KETEP) grant funded by the Korea gov-
ernment Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.
Nomenclature------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ai : Surface area (m2)
B : Particle coupling constant (kgm2 /s2)
D : Tube diameter (m)
Dp : Particle diameter (m)
FD : Drag force (N)
FG : Gravitational force (N)
Fx : Thermophoretic force (N)
Fs,n : Elastic rebound force (N)
Fvw : Van der Waals force (N)
k : Fluid thermal conductivity (W/Km)
kp : Particle thermal conductivity (W/Km)
Kr : Ratio of k to kp (k/kp)
Kn : Knudsen number (-)
K : Proportional constant depending on the elasticity
 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900 2899

(kg/s0.8m2.2) 44 (2012) 57-68.

m& deposit : Mass of the deposition particles (kg/s) [9] K. Wacławiak and S. Kalisz, A practical numerical approach
m& p , i : Mass flux of impacting ash particles (kg/cm2 s) for prediction of particulate fouling in PC boilers, Fuel, 97
m& p : Mass flow of ash particles in the free stream over the (2012) 38-48.
entire domain (kg/s) [10] J. Tomeczek and K. Wacławiak, Two-dimensional model-
P : Total pressure (Pa) ing of deposits formation on platen super heaters in pulver-
Re : Reynolds number (-) ized coal boilers, Fuel, 88 (2009) 1466-1471.
S1 S2 : Transverse, longitudinal pitch of tube bundle (m) [11] A. Guha, Transport and deposition of particles in turbulent
uf : Fluid phase velocity (m/s) and laminar flow, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech,, 40 (2008) 311-341.
up : Mean particle velocity (m/s) [12] D. G. Bogard and K. A. Thole, Simulating particle deposi-
wp : Perpendicular component of impaction velocity (m/s) tion and mitigating deposition degradation effects in film
cooled turbine sections, UTSR Peer Review Workshop VI,
Oct (2009).
Greeks
[13] L. Y. Huang, J. S. Norman, M. Pourkashanian and A. Wil-
γ : Angle of impaction (degree) liams, Prediction of ash deposition on superheater tubes from
δ : Distance between the deposition surface and the parti- pulverized coal combustion, Fuel, 7 (1996) 271-279.
cles (m) [14] S. A. Morsi and A. J. Alexander, An investigation of parti-
ηimp : Impaction efficiency cle trajectories in two-phase flow systems, J. Fluid Mech.,
λ : Mean free path (m) 55 (2) (1972) 193-208.
μf : Fluid molecular viscosity (Pa s) [15] J. Lin, C. Tsai, K. Tung and H. Chiang, Thermophoretic
μg : Dynamic gas viscosity (Pa s) particle deposition efficiency in turbulent tube flow. J. Chin.
ρf : Fluid density (kg/m3) Inst. Chem. Eng., 39 (2008) 281-285.
ρp : Particle density (kg/m3) [16] L. L. Baxter, Ash deposit formation and deposit properties:
τp : Particle relaxation time (s) A comprehensive summary of research conducted at San-
ψ : Correction factor in the particle Stokes number (-) dia’s combustion research facility, Sandia report,
SAND2000-8253, August (2000).
[17] R. Israel and D. E. Rosner, Use of a generalized Stokes
References
number to determine the aerodynamic capture efficiency of
[1] J. Ma, Z. Ma, J. Yan, M. Ni and K. Cen, Development of an non-Stokesian particles from a compressible gas flow, Aero-
evaporation crystallizer for desalination of alkaline organic sol Sci. Technol., 2 (1) (1982) 45-51.
wastewater before incineration, J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. 6A [18] ANSYS Fluent-Solver Modeling Guide, Release 12.1,
(10) (2005) 1100-1106. ANSYS Inc. (2009).
[2] B. C. Pak, B. J. Baek and E. A. Groll, Impacts of fouling and [19] M. U. Degereji, D. B. Ingham, L. Ma, M. Pourkashanian and
cleaning on the performance of plate fin and spine fin heat A. Williams, Prediction of ash slagging propensity in a pulver-
exchangers, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, ized coal combustion furnace, Fuel, 101 (2012) 171-178.
17 (11) (2003) 1801-1811. [20] L. I. Hanxu, Y. Ninomiya, Z. Dong and M. Zhang, Appli-
[3] Q. Fang, H. Wang, Y. Wei, L. Lei, X. Duan and H. Zhou, cation of the FactSage to predict the ash melting behavior in
Numerical simulations of the slagging characteristics in a reducing conditions, Chin. J. of Chem. Eng., 14 (6) (2006)
down-fired, pulverized-coal boiler furnace, Fuel Process. 784-789.
Technol., 91 (1) (2010) 88-96. [21] S. Kalisz and M. Pronobis, Investigations on fouling rate in
[4] A. Zbogar, F. Frandsen, P. A. Jensen and P. Glarborg, Shed- convective bundles of coal-fired boilers in relation to opti-
ding of ash deposits, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci., 35 (1) mization of soot blower operation, Fuel, 84 (2005) 927-937.
(2009) 31-56. [22] K. Laursen and F. J. Frandsen, Classification system for ash
[5] R. W. Bryers, Fireside slagging, fouling, and high tempera- deposits based on SEM analysis, in: Gupta et al. (Eds.), Im-
ture corrosion of heat transfer surface due to impurities in pact of Mineral Impurities in Solid Fuel Combustion, Klu-
steam raising fuels, Prog. Energ. Sci., 22 (1) (1996) 29-120. wer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, USA (1999)
[6] H. B. Vuthaluru, N. Kotadiya, R. Vuthaluru and D. French, 205-216.
CFD based identification of clinker formation regions in large [23] R. P. Blanchard, Measurements and modeling of coal ash
scale utility boiler, Appl. Therm. Eng., 31 (2011) 1368-1380. deposition in an entrained flow reactor, BYU dissertation (2008).
[7] P. Chaivatamaset, P. Sricharoon and S. Tia, Bed agglomera- [24] A. Zbogar, F. J. Frandsen, P. A. Jensen and P. Glarborg,
tion characteristics of palm shell and corncob combustion in Heat transfer in ash deposits: A modeling tool-box, Prog. in
fluidized bed, Appl. Therm. Eng., 31 (2011) 2916-2927. Energy and Combust. Sci., 31 (2005) 371-421.
[8] L. Mu, L. Zhao and H. Yin, Modeling and measurements of [25] J. D. Isdale, A. M. Jenkins, V. Semião, M. G. Carvalho and
the characteristics of ash deposition and distribution in a M. C. Welbourne, Fouling of combustion chambers and high-
HRSG of wastewater incineration plant, Appl. Therm. Eng., temperature filters, Appl. Thermal Eng., 17 (1997) 763-775.
2900 B.-H. Lee et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 28 (7) (2014) 2889~2900

Byoung-Hwa Lee received his B.S. Chil-Yeong Seon received his B.S.
degree in Mechanical Engineering from degree in Mechanical Engineering from
Korea Maritime University in 2003. His Ajou University in 1997 and his M.S.
Ph.D. is from Pusan National University degree from Changwon University in
in 2011. Dr. Lee is currently a research 2008. He is currently a senior research
fellow at Pusan Clean Coal Center in engineer at Thermal & Fluid Research
Pusan National University. Team in Doosan Heavy Industries &
Construction.

Min-Young Hwang received his B.S. Chung-Hwan Jeon received his B.S.
degree in Mechanical Engineering from (1985), M.S. (1987) and Ph.D. (1994)
Pusan National University 2008, and his from Pusan National University. Dr.
M.S. degree in 2010. He is currently a Jeon is currently a professor at the
Ph.D. student there. school of mechanical engineering in
Pusan National University and serving
as a director of Pusan Clean Coal Center.