Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Research Paper

A dynamic nonlinear model used for controller design of a 600 MW

supercritical circulating fluidized bed boiler-turbine unit
Hongfu Zhang a, *, Mingming Gao a, Haoyang Yu a, Haohao Fan a, Jiahui Zhang b
a
The State Key Laboratory of Alternate Electric Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, School of Control and Computer Engineering, North China Electric Power
University, 102206 Beijing, China
b
State Grid Beijing Electric Power Company, Xicheng District, 100031 Beijing, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Large-scale circulating fluidized bed (CFB) power generation units with high steam pressure and temperature
Supercritical CFB unit have been put into operation in order to obtain high cycle efficiency and less emissions. To ensure the flexible
Coordinated control system operation of such CFB units, it is necessary to build a model for the design of coordinated control system (CCS).
Dynamic nonlinear model
However, few studies focus on modeling of such CFB units. Thus, this work develops a mechanistic dynamic
Operational flexibility
nonlinear model of a large-scale supercritical CFB unit, which is suitable for CCS design because of its relatively
Transfer function matrix
low complexity. Firstly, model structure is derived from mass and energy conservation laws, combined with
analysis of operational characteristics of a 600 MW supercritical CFB unit. Then, unknown parameters and
nonlinear functions in model are identified based on running data by using regression analysis and optimization
algorithm. Validation results show that the model has satisfactory accuracy and it can capture essential dynamic
characteristics of the unit and nonlinearity of CCS. More importantly, the model accuracy is further improved by
proposed variable dynamic parameters and correction of coal quality. After this, transfer function matrix of CCS
is derived from dynamic nonlinear model, which can be applied to controller design and simulation analysis.

operational flexibility of large-scale supercritical CFB units depends on

1. Introduction
In recent years, circulating fluidized bed (CFB) boiler technology has
fast-paced development [1] due to its advantages, such as excellent fuel
flexibility, wide-range load adjustment and low-cost pollutant control
[2–5]. In China, the total installed capacity of CFB units used for power
generation continues to increase, which is over 98,000 MW among 509
units by the end of 2020. Moreover, CFB power generation technology is
developing towards large-scale, higher steam pressure and temperature
in order to obtain high cycle efficiency and less emissions [6]. Nowa­
days, large-scale supercritical CFB units operating with once-through
technology have been put into operation. Therefore, it is necessary for
researchers to carry out relevant studies on large-scale supercritical CFB
units.
Recently, the use of wind and solar energy is increasing rapidly due
to their economic and environmental contributions [7,8]. However, the
intermittent and random nature of them have a great influence on stable
and safe operation of power grid, and this results in a serious curtailment
of wind and solar energy [9,10]. To solve this problem, coal-fired CFB
units are required to improve their operational flexibility [11]. High
the good performance of coordinated control system (CCS) [12]. How­
ever, the design of CCS is still in the beginning stage due to the lack of
studies on dynamic characteristics and modeling of large-scale super­
critical CFB units, which restricts the improvement of operational flex­
ibility. Therefore, it is meaningful to develop a dynamic model that can
be used for CCS design.
In previous studies, the models of CFB units can be roughly classified
as steady-state models and dynamic models. The modeling methods can
be summarized in two types, namely, mechanistic modeling and data-
driven modeling. The model based on mechanistic modeling was
derived from mass and energy conservation laws, thermodynamic and
hydrodynamics principles, which has general structure. The previous
studies on mechanistic modeling of large-scale CFB units focused on gas-
solids flow [13], mass balance [14] and heat transfer [15]. Ma et al. [16]
developed a prediction model for the thermal deviation of a 600 MW
CFB boiler to examine the factor that can influence the final deviation of
the outlet steam temperature. To simulate mass flow rate of internal
circulation, Li et al. [17] developed a comprehensive 1D model of the
550 MW ultra-supercritical CFB unit. The above mechanistic models can
be classified as steady-state models, which were developed to define

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhanghf@ncepu.edu.cn (H. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2022.118547
Received 9 October 2021; Received in revised form 14 March 2022; Accepted 16 April 2022
Available online 21 April 2022
1359-4311/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Nomenclature Sa heating surface area (m2)

Tb bed temperature (◦ C)
CO2 average oxygen concentration (mol/m3) T temperature of working fluid (◦ C)
cn inertia time (s) uAir total air flow rate (m3/s)
cs material specific heat (kJ/(kg⋅◦ C)) uB coal-feed command (kg/s)
cj metal specific heat (kJ/(kg⋅◦ C)) ut throttle valve opening (0 ≤ ut ≤ 1)
D flow rate of working fluid (kg/s) V furnace volume (m3)
h enthalpy of working fluid (kJ/kg) Wc coal-feed rate (kg/s)
Hb calorific value of carbon (kJ/kg) Wfl fly ash rate (kg/s)
hfl fly ash enthalpy (kJ/kg) WPZ slag discharge rate (kg/s)
hpz slag discharge enthalpy (kJ/kg) Xc fixed carbon content of coal (%)
Hv calorific values of volatiles (kJ/kg) Xfl carbon content of fly ash (%)
k1 combustion rate constant Xi mass fraction of each volatile component (%)
ka heat transfer coefficient (kW/(m2⋅◦ C)) Xo oxygen content released from volatile (%)
kAir conversion constant of air (mol/m3) XPZ carbon content of slag discharge (%)
kf ratio coefficient of flue gas Xv volatile content (%)
ks total combustion rate constant ρ density of working fluid (kg/m3)
kv conversion constants of volatile (mol/kg)
mb burning carbon mass (kg) Subscripts
Mc molar mass of carbon (kg/mol) fw state of water-feed
ms material mass (kg) m in steam-water separator
mj metal mass (kg) s state of steam before spray attemperators
Ne active power (MW) st at the outlet of superheater
p pressure of working fluid (MPa) sw state of spray water
Q1 heat absorbed by mental wall and working fluid (kJ/s) Abbreviations
Qa real-time combustion heat (kJ/s) CCS coordinated control system
Qb released heat of burning carbon (kJ/s) CFB circulating fluidized bed
Qs sensible heat of coal (kJ/s) MW megawatt
Qv heat released by volatile combustion (kJ/s) PC pulverized coal-fired
ΔqAir calorific value variation of air (kJ/m3) QGA quantum genetic algorithm
Rb combustion rate of burning carbon (kg/s)

correlation on different operational parameters and predict the perfor­
mance. However, these models cannot be available for controller design
of CCS due to insufficiency in describing dynamic characteristics of
large-scale CFB units. In addition, there were some studies on dynamic
model of CFB units based on mechanistic modeling method. Lappalainen
et al. [18] presented the dynamic model of 300 MW boiler, which was
developed by APROS program. However, detailed descriptions about
model were not available. Kim [19] described the dynamic model of a
340 MW CFB boiler and transient behavior of sub-models, while the
mathematical expressions about model were not given. Zhang et al. [20]
proposed a dynamic model of a 300 MW coal-fired subcritical CFB unit
to design CCS. Nevertheless, the model cannot be applicable for large-
scale supercritical CFB units because there have great differences in
operational parameters and characteristics for subcritical CFB units and
supercritical CFB units.
With the development of artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence
algorithms have been used for establishing data-driven models of CFB
units [21]. Most of data-driven models were established for one of
important operation parameters of CFB unit, such as pollutant emissions
[22,23], furnace temperature [24,25]. Although data-driven modeling is
easier to obtain more acceptable modeling accuracy, it cannot reflect
dynamic characteristics of units and be used for CCS design in practice.
Compared to CFB power generation technology, the development of
pulverized coal (PC) power generation technology is earlier. There have
been many studies on dynamic models of different large-scale once-
through PC units that can be used for CCS design [26–30]. However, the
dynamic models of supercritical PC units are not suitable for supercrit­
ical CFB units due to the obvious differences on design and operation
mode [31]. The combustion and heat transfer characteristics of CFB
units are more complex than those of PC units. Therefore, Gao et al. [32]
established the nonlinear model of supercritical CFB units with high
accuracy. However, there were no results on open-loop validation and
transfer function matrix of CCS, and the developed model in that work
cannot correctly reflect overall dynamic characteristics of supercritical
CFB units due to its irregular structure and constant dynamic parameters
in different load conditions. The control performance of CCS designed
based on the model cannot be satisfactory. Thus, it is necessary to
establish a dynamic model of large-scale CFB units with regular physical
structure, which can capture nonlinear and dynamic characteristics of
units.
Up to date, there has been no models of large-scale supercritical CFB
units that can be used for design of CCS. To fill this gap, a dynamic
nonlinear model of with high accuracy and reasonable structure is
developed in this study. Firstly, the study analyzes different operational
characteristics of a 600 MW supercritical CFB boiler-turbine unit and the
differences on CCS compared to subcritical CFB units. And secondly, the
variations of combustion heat loss, energy storage of bed material, coal
quality, some dynamic parameters in different load conditions that were
neglected in previous studies are considered to further improve perfor­
mance and generality of the established model. Thirdly, simulation
validation is conducted to show the reasonableness of model structure
and reflect the nonlinear and dynamic characteristics of the large-scale
supercritical CFB unit. Finally, the simulation results demonstrate
effectiveness of model, and transfer function matrix of CCS [20] that can
be used for CCS design is derived from the dynamic nonlinear model,
which cannot be found in previous studies.
The rest of this paper is presented as follows: Section 2 introduces the
study plant, a 600 MW supercritical CFB unit operates with once-
through technology. Section 3 develops a dynamic nonlinear model,
including boiler system and turbine system. Unknown parameters and
functions in model are identified in Section 4. In Section 5, steady-state
and dynamic validations, open-loop simulation are conducted to test

2
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

modeling accuracy and effectiveness of model structure. The transfer Table 1

function matrix of CCS is presented in Section 6. In Section 7, conclu­ Main parameters of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit.
sions and research directions in future are presented. Item in BMCR Value

Power output (MW) 600

2. Description of a 600 MW supercritical CFB unit Superheated steam flow (t/h) 1900
Superheated steam pressure (MPa) 25.4
Compared with subcritical CFB units, supercritical CFB units have Superheated steam temperature (◦ C) 571
higher power generation efficiency and lower emissions per megawatt Reheated steam flow (t/h) 1600
Reheated steam temperature (◦ C) 569
generation. In addition, supercritical CFB units own faster speed of load Feed water temperature (◦ C) 290
response due to the less energy storage per megawatt. Thus, more ac­ Steam-water volume (m3) 560
curate control for operating parameters is required for supercritical CFB
units, and it depends on better control performance of CCS. In this work,
a 600 MW supercritical coal-fired CFB unit is investigated, whose
Table 2
schematic diagram is given in Fig. 1. It operates by a supercritical single Coal properties of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit.
reheat condensing steam turbine and a supercritical sliding-pressure
Car (%) Har Oar Nar Sar Aar Mar Vd.af Qnet.ar
CFB boiler characterized by external heat exchanger. The main param­
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (MJ/
eters of the 600 MW supercritical unit are shown in Table 1, and coal kg)
properties are presented in Table 2.
41.08 1.62 2.06 0.54 3.3 43.82 7.58 14.74 15.17
For supercritical coal-fired CFB units, major task of CCS is to regulate
unit load to meet the load command from power grid and ensure the safe
and economical operation of unit. CCS generates target load and steam 3. Modeling
pressure at the outlet of superheater pst according to the load command.
In practice, coal-feed command controls coal-feed rate to provides 3.1. The model of CFB boiler system
enough energy input. The preheated air controlled by total air flow is
sent to furnace to maintain normal fluidization and provide oxygen for A dynamic model that can be used for controller design usually has
combustion, which is different from PC units. Feed water through CFB acceptable accuracy and relatively low complexity of model structure.
boiler absorbs heat released from combustion and then converts to su­ Therefore, a lumped parameter method is adopted in this study, and the
perheated steam. Steam enthalpy in steam-water separator that can certain simplifications and assumptions are as follows:
reflect the variation of ratio of coal to water is an essential controlled
parameter [33], and it is controlled in a certain range to maintain safe (a1) Inertia of volatiles combustion and heat of desulfurization in
steam temperature at the outlet of superheater Tst, which cannot be furnace are ignored;
found in CCS of subcritical CFB units. Moreover, pst should be controlled (a2) Slag discharge rate or fly ash rate is proportional to coal-feed rate;
at a certain value depended on unit load to ensure economical operation (a3) Steam-water system is regarded as a whole tube with same vol­
of unit, and it can reflect the energy balance between boiler and turbine ume, which consists of economizer, waterwall, steam-water
systems. Throttle valve opening can change steam flow at the outlet of separator, superheaters, and working fluid has uniform
superheater Dst rapidly to regulate unit load, and thus it has a great properties;
impact on pst. Consequently, in CCS model of large-scale supercritical (a4) Temperature variation rate of mental wall is equal to that of
coal-fired CFB units, there are four inputs, namely, coal-feed command steam temperature at the outlet of superheater.
uB, total air flow uAir, water-feed flow Dfw and throttle value opening ut,
and three outputs, namely, steam pressure at the outlet of superheater
pst, steam enthalpy in steam-water separator hm and unit load Ne, which 3.1.1. Combustion heat
is different from supercritical PC units [26]. Fig. 2 presents the structure In order to ensure modeling accuracy, the mass of coal particles in
of CCS for the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit. slag discharge and fly ash cannot be ignored. The mass balance equation

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a 600 MW supercritical coal-fired CFB unit.

3
H. Zhang et al.
Fig. 2. The structure of CCS for the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit.
of burning carbon [20] can be expressed as.
dmb /dt = Xc Wc − Rb − Xpz Wpz − Xfl Wfl
For supercritical CFB boilers, dynamic of coal-feed system can be
described as time delay τ, and the time delay mainly consists of coal
transmission in coal feeder (τ1) and delivery time in coal conveying pipe
(τ2), which can be expressed by.
Wc = uB (t − τ) = uB (t − τ1 − τ2 )
The combustion rate of burning carbon depends on burning carbon
mass and oxygen concentration.
Rb = 6mb Mc ks Co2 /dc ρc = k1 mb Co2
The average oxygen concentration Co2 can be expressed as.
dCo2 /dt = [kAir uAir + kv Xo Xv Wc − 1000Rb /12 − kf Co2 uAir ]/V
And heat released by combustion of burning carbon Qb can be
expressed as.
Qb = Rb Hb = k1 mb Co2 Hb
For supercritical CFB boilers, combustion heat of volatiles cannot be
ignored. The mass fraction of each volatile component Xi can be
expressed as Eq. (6), and the calorific values of CH4, H2, CO,
CH0.689O0.014 are 50.02 MJ/kg, 124.24 MJ/kg, 10.08 MJ/kg, 37.0 MJ/
kg respectively [20].
XCH4 = 0.201 − 0.469Xv + 0.241Xv2
XH2 = 0.157 − 0.868Xv + 1.388Xv2
XCO = 0.428 − 2.653Xv + 4.845Xv2
XCH0.689 O0.014 = − 0.325 + 7.279Xv − 12.88Xv2
The heat released by combustion of volatiles Qv can be expressed as.
∑
Qv = W c ⋅ Xi Hi = Wc Hv (7)
The real-time combustion heat Qa depends on combustion heat of
burning carbon and volatiles.
Qa = Qb + Qv
3.1.2. Heat transfer
In practice, bed temperature can represent the energy between
combustion heat and heat transfer, and it has a great influence on
combustion rate and heat transfer coefficient. Different from the study
[32], the energy storage characteristic of bed material is introduced to
modeling of bed temperature. The bed temperature can presented as
follow:
Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547
cs ms (dTb /dt) = Qa + Qs − uAir ΔqAir − Wpz hpz − Wfl hfl − Q1 (9)
(1)
Steam temperature at the outlet of superheater Tst can reflect vari­
ation of absorbed heat energy, so it is considered as a lumped parameter
for metal wall and working fluid. Based on assumptions, (a3) and (a4),
Q1 can be expressed as.
Q1 = k2 Dnfw (Tb − Tst ) (10)
(2)
where k2 and n model coefficients.
3.1.3. Steam-water system
(3) The enthalpy of working fluid in steam-water separator is sensitive to
change of ratio of coal-feed rate to water-feed flow, and steam pressure
in steam-water separator can strongly track load change [30]. Thus,
(4) steam states in steam-water separator can be treated as lumped pa­
rameters to establish steam-water model. In order to ensure modeling
accuracy and capture dynamic characteristics of supercritical CFB
boilers, the energy storage characteristic of mental wall is introduced in
(5) this work. Combined with mass and energy conservation laws, the dy­
namic model of steam-water system can be expressed as.
Vm (dρm /dt) = Dfw − Ds (11)
Vm (dρm hm /dt) + cj mj (dTj /dt) = Dfw hfw − Ds hs + Q1 (12)
where Vm (dρm hm /dt) +cj mj (dTj /dt) represents energy storage change of
working fluid and metal wall, kJ/s; Vm (dρm /dt) represents mass change
of working fluid, kg/s.
(6)
Water-feed enthalpy is related to real-time load condition, the
following simplified expression can be given.
hfw = h(Ne ) (13)
where h (⋅) are nonlinear functions.
Combined with partial derivatives, Eqs. (11) and (12) can be
rewritten as.
c11 (dpm /dt) + c12 (dhm /dt) = Dfw − Ds (14)
(8)
c21 (dpm /dt) + c22 (dhm /dt) = Dfw hfw − Ds hs + Q1 (15)
where
c11 = Vm (∂ρm /∂pm ), c12 = Vm (∂ρm /∂hm )
c21 = Vm hm (∂ρm /∂pm ) + cj mj (∂Tm /∂pm )
c22 = Vm [hm (∂ρm /∂pm ) + ρm ] + cj mj (∂Tm /∂hm )
Steam temperature at the outlet of superheater can be adjusted by
changing spray water flow. The static relation can be expressed as.
4
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Table 3
Measured values of operational parameters in different steady-state conditions.
Ne (MW) Wc (kg/s) Air (Nm3/s) ut (%) Dfw (kg/s) Dst (kg/s) pst (MPa) pm (MPa) hst (kJ/kg) hfw (kJ/kg) Tb (◦ C) Tst (◦ C)

363.65 56.39 283.92 67.84 283.77 278.67 15.54 16.78 3487.68 1084.41 877.65 566.37
416.07 67.45 304.58 67.35 334.40 327.29 18.28 19.67 3456.55 1122.56 888.36 565.52
489.77 78.36 355.94 68.50 389.10 380.90 20.87 22.52 3428.89 1164.41 883.68 565.74
543.24 90.49 417.40 68.36 452.11 436.27 23.89 25.82 3398.73 1198.45 886.19 566.57
593.06 94.11 436.01 76.54 495.86 482.20 23.67 25.95 3397.49 1228.41 901.17 565.50

Dst = Ds + Dsw (16) {

Ẋ = A(X) + B(X, U)
(25)
Dst hst = Ds hs + Dsw hfw (17) Y = C(X)

Thus, Eqs. (14) and (15) can be rewritten as. where X, Y and U are state variables, output variables and input vari­
ables defined by.
dpm (d1 − lhm )(hst − hfw )
b1 = (hfw − d1 )Dfw + Dst + Q1 (18)
dt (lhm − hfw ) X = [x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 ]T = [mb Co2 Tb pm hm Ne ]T
Y = [y1 y2 y3 y4 ]T = [pst hm Ne Tb ]T
[ ]T
dhm (d2 − lhm )(hst − hfw ) U = [u1 u2 u3 u4 ]T = uB uAir Dfw ut
b2 = (hfw − d2 )Dfw + Dst + Q1 (19)
dt (lhm − hfw )
The details of state-space model are expressed below:
Where l is ratio coefficient and l = hs/hm; b1, b2, d1 and d2 are lumped ẋ1 = − k1 x1 x2 − Xpz Wpz − Xfl Wfl + Xc u1 e− τs
parameters, and.
ẋ2 = [ka u2 + kv Xo Xv u1 − 1000k1 x1 x2 /12 − kf u2 x2 ]/V
c11 c22 ∂ρ ∂ρ c12 c21
b1 = c21 − = − ρm Vm m / m , b2 = c22 − = ρm Vm , ẋ3 = [Qa + Qs − ΔqAir u2 − Wpz hpz − Wfl hfl − k2 un3 (x3 − Tst )]/(cs ms )
c12 ∂pm ∂hm c11
[h(x6 ) − d1 ]u3 (d1 − lx5 )[hst − h(x6 )] k2 un3 (x3 − Tst )
c22 ∂ρ cj mj ∂Tm /∂hm c21 cj mj ∂Tm /∂pm ẋ4 = + Dst +
d1 = = hm + ρm / m + , d = = hm + b1 b1 [lx5 − h(x6 )] b1
c12 ∂hm Vm ∂ρm /∂hm 2 c11 Vm ∂ρm /∂pm
[h(x6 ) − d2 ]u3 (d2 − lx5 )[hst − h(x6 )] k2 un3 (x3 − Tst )
ẋ5 = + Dst +
The pressure drop in superheater is related to pm [26,32]: b2 b2 [lx5 − h(x6 )] b2
Δp = pm − pst = g(pm ) (20) ẋ6 = − x6 /cn + k3 Dst [hst − h(x6 )]/cn
y1 = x4 − g(x4 )
where g (⋅) is a nonlinear function.
In normal load condition, the variation of Tst is small and steam y2 = x5
enthalpy at the outlet of superheater changes slightly. The following y3 = x6
expression is adopted.
y4 = x3
hst = f (pst , Ne ) (21)

where f (⋅) is a specific function.

Tst depends on steam pressure and enthalpy at the outlet of super­
heater, and it can be expressed as.
Tst = T(pst , hst ) (22)

where T (⋅) is a nonlinear function.

3.2. Turbine system

Steam flow at the outlet of superheater Dst is only related to throttle

valve opening and main steam pressure in previous study [28]. How­
ever, the change of steam enthalpy also affects steam flow. Thus, Dst can
be calculated as below:
Dst = ut pst D(pst , hst ) (23)

where D (⋅) is a nonlinear function.

Dynamic process of turbine can be described as an inertia section,
which is expressed as.
cn (dNe /dt) = k3 Dst (hst − hfw ) − Ne (24)

wherek3 = k(pm ); k (⋅) is nonlinear function.

3.3. Summary

The model structure of the supercritical CFB boiler-turbine unit can

be expressed in the form of state-space equation as follow: Fig. 3. Optimization procedure of dynamic parameters.

5
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

4. Model parameter identification
In dynamic nonlinear model of the supercritical CFB unit, there are
two static parameters, l and k3; two dynamic parameters, τ and cn; six
functions k (⋅), h (⋅), g (⋅), T (⋅), f (⋅), D (⋅) and Q1 that need to be iden­
tified. In order to improve modeling accuracy, the static parameters and
functions k (⋅), h (⋅), g (⋅) and D (⋅) are be identified in different steady-
state conditions by using regression analysis, and T (⋅), f (⋅) and Q1 are
running data of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit from DCS is used to
identify the above functions, combined with non-linear least squares
algorithm in Python. The results of identification based on running data
are presented below:
T(pst , hst ) = − 611.07 + 8.766pst + 0.324hst − 0.00164pst hst
f (pst , Ne ) = − 9.547pst − 0.0502Ne + 3653.266
Q1 = 52.326D0.656
fw (Tb − Tst )

identified by using non-linear least squares algorithm and combining

with running data. The optimization algorithm, namely, quantum ge­
netic algorithm (QGA) [34,35], is used to optimize two dynamic pa­
rameters in this work, and it has better performance on finding optimal
solution compared with genetic algorithm.
4.1. Steady-state identification
To identify static parameters and functions k (⋅), h (⋅), g (⋅) and D (⋅),
the measured values of operational parameters of the 600 MW super­
critical CFB unit in different steady-state conditions are obtained from
distributed control system (DCS) of the unit, which is presented in
Table 3. Steady-state equations are expressed as.
0 = Xc Wc* − R*b − Xpz Wpz
*
− Xfl Wfl*
The dynamic parameters, b1, b2, d1 and d2 are essential for reflecting
dynamic characteristics of 600 MW supercritical CFB unit correctly. The
four dynamic parameters can be identified by optimization algorithm
based on dynamic running data, whose procedure was presented in
previous work [30], and the modeling accuracy is high for specific
segment of running data. However, it can be found that the modeling
accuracy decreases and dynamic characteristics of unit cannot be re­
flected under different load conditions, and this can be attributed to the
reasons: the parameters obtained by optimization algorithm are not
varied with unit load and beyond actual physical constraints. Thus,
parameters, b1, b2, d1 and d2 are calculated by using the design param­
eter of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit and IAPWS-IF97 [36] in this
work, and computational burden of parameter identification is signifi­
cantly reduced. They are given as follows:
(26)

− 0.005248hm + 19.7835
b1 = − 560∗(− 0.005248pm hm − 0.003204hm + 19.7835pm + 9.7266)
− 0.005248pm − 0.003204
b2 = 560∗(− 0.005248pm hm − 0.003204hm + 19.7835pm + 9.7266)
− 0.005248pm hm − 0.003204hm + 19.7835pm + 9.7266 cj mj − 0.001811pm + 0.2012 (30)
d1 = hm + +
− 0.005248pm − 0.003204 560 − 0.005248pm − 0.003204
cj mj − 0.001811hm + 11.143
d2 = hm +
560 − 0.005248hm + 19.7835

0 = D*fw − D*s (27)

Dynamic parameters τ and cn in model cannot be identified with
measured values in Table 3. Based on dynamic running data from DCS,
0= D*fw h*fw − lD*s h*m + Q*1 (28)
QGA is used to optimize the two dynamic parameters, and the optimi­
( ) zation procedure is presented in Fig. 3, which is performed in MATLAB/
0 = Ne* − k3 D*st h*st − h*fw (29) SIMULINK. The dynamic parameters are identified as follows:
τ = 19, cn = 36
where superscript * represents the steady-state conditions.
The results of steady-state identification are presented below: Fig. 4 presents the comparisons between measured values and model
output, where the green line refers to output of model with identified
k1 = 0.000401
parameters b1, b2, d1 d2 and the blue line represents output of model with
l = 1.268 changed parameters shown in Eq. (30). Fig. 5 shows the changed pa­
k(pm ) = 0.000343p0.1602
m rameters b1, b2, d1 and d2. The mean absolute relative errors (MAREs)
h(Ne ) = 0.6204Ne + 861.161 and root mean square errors (RMSEs) [37] of pst, hm, Ne, Tb are shown in
g(pm ) = 0.0256p1.352
m
Table 4. As shown in Fig. 4 and Table 4, the model outputs are in strong
D(pst , hst ) = 3263.44*(18.441pst + 0.585hst − 0.00498pst hst − 574.29)− 0.6607 agreement with the measured values and the model has high dynamic
accuracy. More importantly, MAREs of pst, hm, Ne, Tb in model with
changed parameters are 1.29%, 0.55%, 1.27%, 0.42%, respectively, and
it has acceptable modeling accuracy compared to model with identified
4.2. Identification based on running data
parameters. Thus, it is the best option to build the model of supercritical
CFB unit in this study because of satisfactory accuracy and
The errors of T (⋅), f (⋅) and Q1 identified in steady-state conditions
practicability.
are large due to diversity of steady-state conditions. Therefore, dynamic

6
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 4. Comparisons between measured values and model output.

7
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 5. The changed parameters b1, b2, d1 and d2.

Table 4
The error performance of model with different method.
Method Ne (MW) hm (kJ/kg) pst (MPa) Tb (◦ C)

Identified parameters MARE (%) 1.33 0.59 1.35 0.44

RMSE 7.53 21.1 0.338 4.98
Changed parameters MARE (%) 1.27 0.55 1.29 0.42
RMSE 7.22 18.1 0.318 4.71

Table 5
Model outputs and absolute relative errors in different steady-state load conditions.
Model output Absolute relative errors (%)

Ne (MW) pst (MPa) hm (kJ/kg) Tb (◦ C) δNe δpst δhm δTb

362.61 15.74 2724.79 882.26 0.29 1.29 0.83 0.53

417.66 18.2 2666.31 885.1 0.38 0.44 0.42 0.37
488.73 21.02 2669.16 896.03 0.21 0.72 0.88 1.40
546.98 23.64 2600.81 894.54 0.69 1.05 1.36 0.94
591.33 23.22 2603.92 900.51 0.29 1.90 0.93 0.07

5. Validation

This section presents steady-state and dynamic validations to test

model performance and compare the modeling accuracies. Moreover,
open-loop step response simulations in different load conditions are
conducted to validate model structure and obtain dynamic characteris­
tics of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit.

Fig. 6. The ratio of water-feed flow to coal-feed command.

8
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 7. Measured values and model outputs in Case I.

9
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Table 6
Error performance of every output in two cases.
Case Method Ne (MW) hm (kJ/kg) pst (MPa) Tb (◦ C)

Case I Unmodified model MARE (%) 6.01 3.60 5.09 2.88

RMSE 33.22 108.49 1.24 27.05
Modified model MARE (%) 1.80 1.17 1.67 1.37
RMSE 11.09 40.09 0.43 13.83
Case II Unmodified model MARE (%) 6.12 4.21 5.89 1.51
RMSE 36.48 135.45 1.49 17.68
Modified model MARE (%) 1.94 1.35 2.11 1.22
RMSE 11.41 43.36 0.52 12.50

5.1. Steady-state validation ( )

Validation is performed to obtain the steady-state accuracy of the
developed model in different load conditions, from 363.65 MW to
593.06 MW, and Table 5 presents the model outputs and absolute
relative errors (AREs) of them. The above results indicate that the model
has generally acceptable steady-state performance and can be used for
predicting value of each state variable under different steady-state load
conditions.
5.2. Dynamic validation
Two groups of running data from the DCS of 600 MW supercritical
CFB unit are used to validate dynamic modeling accuracy, namely, Case
I and Case II, and the sampling time is 1 s. The model with changed
parameters b1, b2, d1 and d2 is adopted in Case I and Case II.
In Case I, unit load increases from 362.1 MW to 626.3 MW, and then
decreases to 486.1 MW. In practice, the variation of coal quality cannot
be ignored and it is sensitive to the change of time, as shown in Fig. 6,
the ratio of water-feed flow to coal-feed command changes greatly after
11000 s. Therefore, the real-time correction of coal quality is introduced
in this study, as shown in Eq. (31).
( )
Hb = 27.9 + 4.5*
Dfw
− 5.16 G1 (s)
uB (31)
G1 (s) = 1/(6000s + 1)
The measured values, outputs of unmodified model (constant coal
quality) and outputs of modified model (corrected coal quality) are
compared in Fig. 7, and Table 6 presents error performance of model
outputs. Although the unmodified model cannot obtain satisfactory ac­
curacy, the dynamic trends of model outputs are in strong agreement
with the measured values, which indicates that model structure is
reasonable. In addition, it is obvious that the modified model has higher
modeling accuracy, and the MAREs of model outputs are generally less
than 1.80%. It also indicates that the model developed in this work can
capture essential dynamic characteristics of the 600 MW supercritical
CFB unit.
In Case II, unit load increases from 367.3 MW to 555.7 MW, and then
decreases to 452.4 MW. Finally, unit load increases to 544.3 MW. The
model with changed parameters is adopted and real-time correction of
coal quality is as follow:
Dfw
Hb = 27.9 + 4* − 6.1 G2 (s)
uB (32)
G2 (s) = 1/(4000s + 1)
The model outputs are shown in Fig. 8, and Table 6 presents the error
performance of model in Case II. From the above results, it is obvious
that proposed modified model has more satisfactory modeling accuracy
compared to unmodified model. In Case II, the MAREs of model outputs
are generally less than 2.11%. It indicates that the lumped model pro­
posed in this study can be used for on-line prediction on operational
parameter, performance analysis and control system design of the 600
MW supercritical CFB unit.
5.3. Open-loop simulation and validation
Open-loop step response simulations are conducted to validate the
correctness of the established model and reflect the dynamic charac­
teristics of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit. Step inputs of coal-feed
command, total air flow, water-feed flow and throttle valve opening
are 6.939 kg/s, 78.48 m3/s, 24.79 kg/s and 3.83%, respectively. The
results of open-loop step response simulations developed under 54%,
78%, 91% and 100% load conditions show the difference on dynamic
characteristics of the unit in different load conditions, as shown in
Figs. 9–12.
As shown in Fig. 9, when coal-feed command increases, burning
carbon mass increases. The bed temperature, steam pressure at the
outlet of superheater, steam enthalpy in steam-water separator and unit
load increase to higher level due to more released combustion heat.
As presented in Fig. 10, when total air flow increases, the average
combustion rate increases. Hence, bed temperature, steam pressure at
the outlet of superheater, steam enthalpy in steam-water separator and
unit load increase. However, based on energy conservation principle,
then they decline because of unchanged coal-feed rate. Moreover, they
decrease to the lower level because heat loss of flue gas increases shown
in Eq. (9), which is not considered in previous study [32]. Consequently,
the developed model in this study can better capture the dynamic
characteristics of supercritical CFB unit.
Fig. 11 shows the responses under step disturbance on water-feed
flow. As the water-feed flow increases, the water-feed pressure in­
creases and then steam pressure at the outlet of superheater increases.
Thus, more steam is sent to turbine, unit load increase, and then de­
creases due to unchanged combustion heat energy. Besides, steam
enthalpy in steam-water separator gradually decreases due to the

10
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

increase of water-feed flow. ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ 19s

⎞⎛ ⎞
Fig. 12 presents the responses under step disturbance on throttle
pst G11 e− G12 G13 G14 uB
⎜ hm ⎟ ⎜ G21 e− 19s
G22 G23 G24 ⎟⎜ uAir ⎟
⎟⎜
valve opening, where water-feed enthalpy is regarded as a constant. ⎜ ⎟=⎜
⎝ Ne ⎠ ⎝ G31 e−
⎟ (32)
19s
G32 G33 G34 ⎠⎝ Dfw ⎠
When throttle valve opening increases, steam pressure at the outlet of 19s
Tb G41 e− G42 G43 G44 ut
superheater decreases due to the enlarged flow area and steam flow at
the outlet of superheater increases quickly. Therefore, steam enthalpy in where

1.53*10− 6 s4 + 3.43*10− 7 s3 + 1.13*10− 8 s2 + 6.51*10− 11 s + 6.01*10− 14 3.99*10− 4 s3 + 1.45*10− 5 s2 + 6.14*10− 8 s − 1.07*10− 25

G11 =
s + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10−
6 13
− 9.90*10− 8 s4 + 2.16*10− 8 s3 + 9.16*10− 10 s2 + 4.37*10− 12 s − 1.56*10− 15
G12 =
s + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10−
6 13
G13 =
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9
− 0.3s3 − 9.92*10− 3 s2 − 5.25*10− 5 s − 5.71*10− 8
G14 =
s + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10−
4 9

7.66*10− 5 s4 + 1.73*10− 5 s3 + 5.91*10− 7 s2 + 4.05*10− 9 s + 3.91*10− 12 − 7.01*10− 3 s3 − 3.22*10− 4 s2 − 2.37*10− 6 s − 6.75*10− 9

G21 = G23 =
s6 + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10− 13
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9
− 4.95*10− 6 s4 + 1.07*10− 6 s3 + 4.77*10− 8 s2 + 2.86*10− 10 s − 1.00*10− 13 − 0.56s3 + 0.05s2 + 1.03*10− 4 s − 1.1*10− 7
G22 = G24 =
s6 + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10− 13
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9

− 7 3 − 7 2 − 9 − 12 − 4 2 − 6 − 25
8.57*10 s + 1.65*10 s + 1.13*10 s + 1.08*10 2.23*10 s + 1.09*10 s + 9.49*10
G31 = G33 =
s6 + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10
s + 1.26*10− 13
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9

− 8 3 − 8 2 − 11 − 14 3 2 − 6 − 7
− 5.53*10 s + 1.38*10 s + 7.88*10 s − 2.78*10 17.74s + 0.093s − 3.67*10 s − 1.81*10
G32 = G34 =
s6 + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10− 13
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9

− 3 4 − 4 4 − 5 3 − 7 2 − 10 − 13
2.36*10 s + 5.45*10 s + 2.11*10 s + 2.07*10 s + 6.71*10 s + 5.3*10 − 6.88*10 s − 3.04*10 s − 2.79*10 s − 7.06*10− 10
− 4 3 − 5 2 − 7
G41 = G43 =
s6 + 0.21s5 + 7.97*10− 3 s4 + 8.24*10− 5 s3 + 3.06*10− 7 s2 + 3.78*10− 10 s + 1.26*10− 13
s4 + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9
− 1.53*10− 4 s5 + 3.22*10− 5 s4 + 1.66*10− 6 s3 + 1.54*10− 8 s2 + 3.56*10− 11 s − 1.36*10− 14 − 5.66*10− 4 s2 − 7.77*10− 6 s − 2.4*10− 8
G42 = 6 5 − 3 4 − 5 3 − 7 2 − 10 − 13
G44 = 4
s + 0.21s + 7.97*10 s + 8.24*10 s + 3.06*10 s + 3.78*10 s + 1.26*10 s + 0.046s3 + 4.77*10− 4 s2 + 1.64*10− 6 s + 1.48*10− 9

steam-water separator decreases, and unit load increases due to release

of heat energy stored in boiler. Then, heat energy stored in boiler is
consumed, unit load declines.
From the step responses of model outputs in different load condi­
tions, it is obvious that the CCS of the 600 MW supercritical CFB unit is
featured with strong nonlinearity, which cannot be found in previous
works. Moreover, the step responses of model outputs are in accord with
operational experience, it is demonstrated that the proposed model
structure is reasonable and the model can describe the dynamic
nonlinear characteristics of large-scale supercritical CFB unit and it can
be directly applied to controller design and simulation analysis.
6. Transfer function matrix of CCS
In this section, transfer function matrix of CCS for the 600 MW su­
percritical CFB unit is derived from dynamic nonlinear model estab­
lished in this work, which can be applied for the design of CCS for other
researchers.
In order to obtain transfer function matrix of CCS, the dynamic
nonlinear model needs to be linearized under a specific load condition,
combined with Eq. (25). Taylor series approximation is adopted and the
steady-state load condition is selected as:
Y0 = (pst0 hm0 Ne0 Tb0 ) = (20.87, 2645.97, 489.77, 894.53)
Transfer function matrix calculated by algebraic operation with
Laplace transform is shown below:
7. Conclusion
In this study, a dynamic nonlinear mathematical model of large-scale
supercritical CFB boiler-turbine units used for CCS design is developed
based on mechanistic modeling method. Unknown parameters and
functions in the model are identified by using regression analysis and
quantum genetic algorithm. Subsequently, steady-state and dynamic
validations and open-loop simulation are conducted to demonstrate the
model performance. Lastly, the transfer function matrix of CCS is
derived based on the established model. Specific conclusions are drawn
as below:
(1) The dynamic nonlinear model can provide acceptable modeling
accuracy in different load conditions, and it can be used for real-
time prediction on operation parameters and condition moni­
toring of large-scale supercritical CFB units.
(2) Four changed dynamic parameters in model introduced in this
work can ensure high modeling accuracy and describe the
nonlinear characteristics of supercritical CFB units in different
load condition. Moreover, the real-time correction of coal quality
built in model can further improve dynamic accuracy.
(3) The results of open-loop simulation illustrate that step responses
of model outputs are in accordance with operational experience
and that the model can reveal the nonlinear of CCS. Therefore,
the model can be used for establishing control model of units and
simulation analysis.

11
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 8. Measured values and model outputs in Case II.

12
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 9. Step responses of model outputs on coal-feed command.

Fig. 10. Step responses of model outputs on total air flow.

13
H. Zhang et al. Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547

Fig. 11. Step responses of model outputs on water-feed flow.

Fig. 12. Step responses of model outputs on throttle valve opening.

14
H. Zhang et al.
(4) A transfer function matrix is derived based on the established
model, and it can be used for control system design and controller
optimization to improve high operational flexibility of large-scale
supercritical CFB units.
In future, it is necessary to further modify expression of real-time
heat absorbed by mental wall and working fluid and then improve
modeling accuracy. Moreover, transfer function matrix will be further
verified by conducting field disturbance experiments. Advanced control
algorithms based on the proposed model will be designed and tested.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Huaneng Group science and tech­
nology research Project (Grant Number: HNKJ21-H31) and National
Key R&D Program of China (Grant Number: 2016YFB0600205).
References
[1] J. Lyu, H. Yang, W. Ling, Li Nie, G. Yue, R. Li, Y. Chen, S. Wang, Development of a
supercritical and an ultra-supercritical circulating fluidized bed boiler, Front.
Energy. 13 (1) (2019) 114–119, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-017-0512-4.
[2] R. Cai, X. Ke, Y. Huang, S. Zhu, Y. Li, J. Cai, H. Yang, J. Lyu, M. Zhang, Applications
of ultrafine limestone sorbents for the desulfurization process in CFB boilers,
Environ. Sci. Technol. 53 (22) (2019) 13514–13523, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.
est.9b0474710.1021/acs.est.9b04747.s001.
[3] G. Yue, R. Cai, J. Lu, H. Zhang, From a CFB reactor to a CFB boiler – The review of
R&D progress of CFB coal combustion technology in China, Powder Technol. 316
(2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2016.10.062.
[4] J. Koornneef, M. Junginger, A. Faaij, Development of fluidized bed combustion-An
overview of trends, performance and cost, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 33 (1)
(2007) 19–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2006.07.001.
[5] R. Cai, H. Zhang, M. Zhang, H. Yang, J. Lyu, G. Yue, Development and application
of the design principle of fluidization state specification in CFB coal combustion,
Fuel Process. Technol. 174 (2018) 41–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuproc.2018.02.009.
[6] J. Yan, X. Lu, Y. Song, X. Zheng, X. Lei, Z. Liu, X. Fan, C. Liu, A comprehensive
understanding of the non-uniform characteristics and regulation mechanism of six
external loops in a 600 MW supercritical CFB boiler, Energy 222 (2021), https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120032.
[7] W. Wang, J. Liu, D. Zeng, F. Fang, Y. Niu, Modeling and flexible load control of
combined heat and power units, Appl. Therm. Eng. 166 (2020) 114624, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114624.
[8] D. Zhang, J. Wang, Y. Lin, Y. Si, C. Huang, J. Yang, B. Huang, W. Li, Present
situation and future prospect of renewable energy in China, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 76 (2017) 865–871, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.023.
[9] L. Bird, D. Lew, M. Milligan, E.M. Carlini, A. Estanqueiro, D. Flynn, E. Gomez-
Lazaro, H. Holttinen, N. Menemenlis, A. Orths, P.B. Eriksen, J.C. Smith, L. Soder,
P. Sorensen, A. Altiparmakis, Y. Yasuda, J. Miller, Wind and solar energy
curtailment: a review of international experience, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65
(2016) 577–586, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.06.082.
[10] S.Ó. Garðarsdóttir, L. Göransson, F. Normann, F. Johnsson, Improving the
flexibility of coal-fired power generators: Impact on the composition of a cost-
optimal electricity system, Appl. Energy. 209 (2018) 277–289, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.085.
[11] F. Hong, J. Chen, R. Wang, D. Long, H. Yu, M. Gao, Realization and performance
evaluation for long-term low-load operation of a CFB boiler unit, Energy 214
(2021) 118877, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118877.
[12] M. Gao, F. Hong, G. Yan, J. Liu, F. Chen, Mechanism modelling on the coordinated
control system of a coal-fired subcritical circulating fluidized bed unit, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 146 (2019) 548–555, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2018.09.119.
[13] S. Shah, K. Myöhänen, S. Kallio, J. Ritvanen, T. Hyppänen, CFD modeling of gas-
solids flow in a large scale circulating fluidized bed furnace, Powder Technol. 274
(2015) 239–249, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2015.01.019.
[14] A. Blaszczuk, A. Zylka, J. Leszczynski, Simulation of mass balance behavior in a
large-scale circulating fluidized bed reactor, Particuology 25 (2016) 51–58,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.partic.2015.04.003.
[15] H. Wu, M. Zhang, Y. Sun, Q. Lu, Y. Na, Research on the heat transfer model of
platen heating surface of 300MW circulating fluidized bed boilers, Powder
Technol. 226 (2012) 83–90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2012.04.020.
15
Applied Thermal Engineering 212 (2022) 118547
[16] Y. Ma, X. Jin, J. Lyu, Analysis of thermal deviations in L-shape platen superheaters
of a supercritical 600 MW circulating fluidized bed boiler, Appl. Therm. Eng. 166
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114752.
[17] D. Li, X. Ke, M. Zhang, H. Yang, S. Jung, S. Ahn, C.-H. Jeon, A comprehensive mass
balance model of a 550 MWe ultra-supercritical CFB boiler with internal
circulation, Energy 206 (2020) 117941, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2020.117941.
[18] J. Lappalainen, A. Tourunen, H. Mikkonen, M. Hänninen, J. Kovács, Modelling and
dynamic simulation of a supercritical, oxy combustion circulating fluidized bed
power plant concept-Firing mode switching case, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 28
(2014) 11–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2014.06.015.
[19] S. Kim, S. Choi, J. Yang, Dynamic simulation of a circulating fluidized bed boiler
system Part I: Description of the dynamic system and transient behavior of sub-
models, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 30 (12) (2016) 5781–5792, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12206-016-1148-8.
[20] H. Zhang, M. Gao, F. Hong, J. Liu, X. Wang, Control-oriented modelling and
investigation on quick load change control of subcritical circulating fluidized bed
unit, Appl. Therm. Eng. 163 (2019) 114420, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2019.114420.
[21] J. Grochowalski, P. Jachymek, M. Andrzejczyk, M. Klajny, A. Widuch, P. Morkisz,
B. Hernik, J. Zdeb, W. Adamczyk, Towards application of machine learning
algorithms for prediction temperature distribution within CFB boiler based on
specified operating conditions, Energy 237 (2021) 121538, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2021.121538.
[22] J. Krzywanski, T. Czakiert, A. Blaszczuk, R. Rajczyk, W. Muskala, W. Nowak,
A generalized model of SO2 emissions from large- and small-scale CFB boilers by
artificial neural network approach: Part 1. the mathematical model of SO2
emissions in air-firing, oxygen-enriched and oxycombustion CFB conditions, Fuel
Process. Technol. 137 (2015) 66–74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuproc.2015.04.012.
[23] D. Adams, D.-H. Oh, D.-W. Kim, C.-H. Lee, M. Oh, Prediction of SOx–NOx emission
from a coal-fired CFB power plant with machine learning: Plant data learned by
deep neural network and least square support vector machine, J. Clean. Prod. 270
(2020) 122310, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122310.
[24] Y. Lv, F. Hong, T. Yang, F. Fang, J. Liu, A dynamic model for the bed temperature
prediction of circulating fluidized bed boilers based on least squares support vector
machine with real operational data, Energy 124 (2017) 284–294, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.031.
[25] F. Hong, D. Long, J. Chen, M. Gao, Modeling for the bed temperature 2D-interval
prediction of CFB boilers based on long-short term memory network, Energy 194
(2020) 116733, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116733.
[26] Y. Niu, M. Du, W. Ge, H. Luo, G. Zhou, A dynamic nonlinear model for a once-
through boiler-turbine unit in low load, Appl. Therm. Eng. 161 (2019) 113880,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.113880.
[27] H.e. Fan, Z.-G. Su, P.-H. Wang, K.Y. Lee, A dynamic mathematical model for once-
through boiler-turbine units with superheated steam temperature, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 170 (2020) 114912, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2020.114912.
[28] J.-Z. Liu, S. Yan, D.-L. Zeng, Y. Hu, Y. Lv, A dynamic model used for controller
design of a coal fired once-through boiler-turbine unit, Energy 93 (2015)
2069–2078, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.10.077.
[29] A. Chaibakhsh, A. Ghaffari, S.A.A. Moosavian, A simulated model for a once-
through boiler by parameter adjustment based on genetic algorithms, Simul.
Model. Pract. Theory 15 (9) (2007) 1029–1051, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
simpat.2007.06.004.
[30] H.e. Fan, Y.-F. Zhang, Z.-G. Su, B. Wang, A dynamic mathematical model of an
ultra-supercritical coal fired once-through boiler-turbine unit, Appl. Energy 189
(2017) 654–666, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.074.
[31] B. Deng, M. Zhang, L. Shan, G. Wei, J. Lyu, H. Yang, M. Gao, Modeling study on the
dynamic characteristics in the full-loop of a 350 MW supercritical CFB boiler under
load regulation, J. Energy Inst. 97 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
joei.2021.04.014.
[32] M. Gao, F. Hong, B. Zhang, J. Liu, G. Yue, A. Yang, F. Chen, Study on Nonlinear
Control Model of Supercritical (Ultra Supercritical) Circulating Fluidized Bed Unit,
in: Zhongguo Dianji Gongcheng Xuebao/Proceedings Chinese Soc. Electr. Eng. 38
(2018). https://doi.org/10.13334/j.0258-8013.pcsee.171271.
[33] M. Gao, B. Zhang, F. Hong, F. Chen, Design and application of the feed water
control strategy for a 350 MW circulating fluidized bed boiler, Appl. Therm. Eng.
125 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.06.145.
[34] J. Xiao, YuPing Yan, J. Zhang, Y. Tang, A quantum-inspired genetic algorithm for
k-means clustering, Expert Syst. Appl. 37 (7) (2010) 4966–4973, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.017.
[35] C. Liu, W.-Z. Wu, W. Xie, Study of the generalized discrete grey polynomial model
based on the quantum genetic algorithm, J. Supercomput. 77 (10) (2021)
11288–11309, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-03713-8.
[36] W. Wagner, J.R. Cooper, A. Dittmann, J. Kijima, H.-J. Kretzschmar, A. Kruse,
R. Maresˇ, K. Oguchi, H. Sato, I. Sto¨cker, O. Sˇifner, Y. Takaishi, I. Tanishita,
J. Tru¨benbach, T.h. Willkommen, The IAPWS industrial formulation 1997 for the
thermodynamic properties of water and steam, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power. 122 (1)
(2000) 150–184, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.483186.
[37] A. Afram, F. Janabi-Sharifi, Gray-box modeling and validation of residential HVAC
system for control system design, Appl. Energy. 137 (2015) 134–150, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.10.026.