-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[FEATURE] Partition_plate_leak pressure drop issue #462
Comments
Hello Aymeric, thanks for this issue ! We agree on the fact that currently the partition_plate_leak does not affect the pressure loss, and because of that it does not affect the total flowrate in the line. Also, we are wondering if this change is not a bit negligible, in the end, since we're talking of half the leak flow rate being compensed on each line, which is very small compared to the total feedwater flow rate. In the meantime, you can simply manually model partition plate leaks as external leaks in your faulty model if you really need it. |
Putting both pipes and a default equation that would be overriden is not satisfactory from our point of view. We'll have to see with a bit more details what's the difference to see if we prefer before or after the pipe, but it will take us some time as we don't have lot of bandwidth right now. |
Ok, I can manage on my side so there is no rush, it is more a recommandation. I don't intend to override the equation, I intend to act on the fouling fault of the new pipe : Added things in the reheater component In the faulty model using the component (like a test) equation reheater_corrected.fouling = 0; reheater_corrected.partition_plate_leak_pipe.fouling = 0.5; end Reheater_faulty; In this way, it doesn't change anything for a normal user who doesn't use this fault (except the Start Values). But I understand that it makes the component a bit "heavier". |
What is your precise need ?
I have used the partition_plate_leak from the WaterSteam/Reheater (and it is made the same way in the SuperHeater and the DryReheater). Analyzing the results of the failure, we noticed that the water that goes by the partition_plate_leak stream meets the same pressure drop as the water going through the tubes. It means there is no natural preference for the water to go a way or another.
Thus, if we have two heat exchangers in parallel branches and that one has a partition_plate_leak, then, the flowrate splitting between the two branches will not be changed although it should be. Indeed, the exchanger which has the failure should have a total pressure drop lower than the total pressure drop of the non-failing exchanger.
![image](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/141400508/278599741-73426576-4f3e-488c-aa51-c42600a5b97c.png?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3MjU4MTg2ODIsIm5iZiI6MTcyNTgxODM4MiwicGF0aCI6Ii8xNDE0MDA1MDgvMjc4NTk5NzQxLTczNDI2NTc2LTRmM2UtNDg4Yy1hYTUxLWM0MjYwMGE1Yjk3Yy5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjQwOTA4JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI0MDkwOFQxNzU5NDJaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT0xOWNkMzY1NTZlZGRlOGE3MThhMjZiMzI5YmRmN2I3YTFkMTk0M2Q4MWQ4ZGUzM2UwMTZjZjA2OGM1ZjhiZGI1JlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCZhY3Rvcl9pZD0wJmtleV9pZD0wJnJlcG9faWQ9MCJ9.n0IH5FwNr-Jm6Boj4Pp8aazenxQf5oxx-_CIJwMP92A)
This can become a problem for the creation of the failure signature of some partition_plate_leaks.
What solution do you see ?
I think the partition_plate_leak should be taken before the pressure drop in the Graphics view of the Reheaters. Maybe it should also have its own pressure drop, different from the main one.
![image](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/141400508/278600406-49f42a20-dadf-4b29-a8a8-e66772636a45.png?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3MjU4MTg2ODIsIm5iZiI6MTcyNTgxODM4MiwicGF0aCI6Ii8xNDE0MDA1MDgvMjc4NjAwNDA2LTQ5ZjQyYTIwLWRhZGYtNGIyOS1hOGE4LWU2Njc3MjYzNmE0NS5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjQwOTA4JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI0MDkwOFQxNzU5NDJaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT00NjJjZGIzMjRkMGNkMjA2YzAwNjVkMWM4OWIwNTI2NGU1MTBiMzFlMTNkOTQ3Nzg5MmI2ZjJiOTU0YzhjNDYzJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCZhY3Rvcl9pZD0wJmtleV9pZD0wJnJlcG9faWQ9MCJ9.bSWfZUfJWK-saaw6ktyW3PFb4fC3nOzCU6wow78aueQ)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: