Energies, Vol. 16, Pages 4690: Validation of the CFD Tools against In-House Experiments for Predicting Condensing Steam Flows in Nozzles

Energies, Vol. 16, Pages 4690: Validation of the CFD Tools against In-House Experiments for Predicting Condensing Steam Flows in Nozzles

Energies doi: 10.3390/en16124690

Authors: Shabani Majkut Dykas Smołka Lakzian Zhang

The issues addressed in this work concern the condensing steam flows as a flow of a two-phase medium, i.e., consisting of a gaseous phase and a dispersed phase in the form of liquid droplets. The two-phase character and the necessity to treat steam as a real gas make the numerical modeling of the flow in the last steam turbine channels very difficult. There are many approaches known to solve this problem numerically, mainly based on the RANS method with the Eulerian approach. In this paper, the two Eulerian approaches were compared. In in-house CFD code, the flow governing equations were defined for a gas–liquid mixture, whereas in ANSYS CFX code, individual equations were defined for the gas and liquid phase (except momentum equations). In both codes, it was assumed that there was no velocity slip between phases. The main aim of this study was to show how the different numerical schemes and different governing equations can affect the modeling of wet steam flows and how difficult and sensitive this type of computation is. The numerical results of condensing steam flows were compared against in-house experimental data for nozzles determined at the Department of Power Engineering and Turbomachinery of the Silesian University of Technology. The presented experimental data can be used as a benchmark test for researchers to model wet steam flows. The geometries of two half nozzles and an International Wet Steam Experimental Project (IWSEP) nozzle were used for the comparisons. The static pressure measurements on the walls of the nozzles, the Schlieren technique, and the droplet size measurement were used to qualitatively identify the location of the condensation onset and its intensity. The CFD results obtained by means of both codes showed their good capabilities in terms of proper prediction of the condensation process; however, there were some visible differences in both codes in the flow field parameters. In ANSYS CFX, the condensation wave location in the half nozzles occurred much earlier compared to the experiments. However, the in-house code showed good agreement with the experiments in this region. In addition, the results of the in-house code for the mean droplet diameter in the IWSEP nozzle were closer to the experimental data.