Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Dynamic modeling and simulation of a palm

wastes boiler
T.M.I. Mahlia a,∗, M.Z. Abdulmuin b, T.M.I. Alamsyah c,
D. Mukhlishien d
a
University of Malaya, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
b
Open University of Malaysia, Centre for Engineering and Technical Studies, Block A, Level 4,
Academy of Islamic Studies Buildings, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
c
University of Syiah Kuala, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Darussalam 23111, Banda Aceh,
Indonesia
d
University of Syiah Kuala, Department of Chemical Engineering, Darussalam 23111, Banda Aceh,
Indonesia

Received 27 March 2002; accepted 3 October 2002

Abstract

A state-space dynamic model for a palm wastes boiler is being developed and simulated.
The unique feature of this boiler is that it uses wastes in the form of fiber and shell from the
palm oil processing as its fuels. Specific characteristics of oil palm waste boilers are non-
uniform fuel feed, compositions, sizes and moisture content of the fuel. These features intro-
duce additional dimensions to the difficulty of boiler control. The superheated steam produced
is used to generate electricity, which drives numerous motors and other equipment for palm
fruit processing thus causing severe interactions between the power plant and other parts of
the mill. The main work of this paper is the development of a dynamic model and simulation
of the boiler. The boiler unit can be divided into several sections for analysis viz., the furnace,
superheater, drum, risers, and downcomer. A tenth-order, physical, linearized process model
was developed. The linearized model consists of ten first-order simultaneous equations and is
represented by a (10 x 10) state matrix and (4 x 10) input matrix in the state space form.
 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Palm wastes boiler; Dynamic modeling; State space; Simulation; Power plant

∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +603-7967-6842; fax: +603-7967-5317.
E-mail address: indra@um.edu.my (T.M.I. Mahlia).

0960-1481/03/$ - see front matter  2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0960-1481(02)00218-5
1236 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Nomenclature
Aw, As, Ar, Ad steam drum surface, superheater, riser, and downcomer flow
areas (m2, ft2)
A, B, C, D matrices of constant coefficients of the system
Cp, Cg, Cst, Crt heat capacitance of superheated steam, flue gas, superheater,
and riser tubes (J/kg °C, Btu/lb °F)
Dr, Ds, Dd riser, superheater, and downcomer tube diameters (m, ft)
fs, fr, fd superheater, riser, and downcomer friction coefficients
hi, hw, hv, hr, hs, hf enthalpy of liquid, saturated liquid, vapor, liquid–vapor
mixture, and superheated (J/kg, Btu/lb)
kec drum liquid mass evaporation rate constant (kg/s °C, lb/s °F )
kF gas temperature/fuel rate constant (°C s/kg, °F s/lb)
ks, kr, kgs, kgr heat transfer coefficients for superheater and riser tubes to
steam and boiling liquid and from flue gas to superheater and riser
tubes (J/kg °C, Btu/lb °F)
Ls, Lr, Ld superheater, riser, and downcomer tube lengths (m, ft)
Ms,Mr, Mw superheater tubes, riser tubes, and steam drum liquid mass (kg,
lb)
ps, pv, pw superheater, steam, and water-drum pressures (bar, psig)
Qg,Qgs,Qs,Qgr,Qr,Qf steady-state heat release and heat input rates from flue
gas and calorific value (J/s Btu/s)
Tg, Tgs, Tgr flue gas temperatures (°C, °F)
Ts, Tv, Tw superheated steam, saturation, and liquid temperatures (°C, °F)
Tst, Trt superheater and riser tube-wall temperatures (°C, °F)
Vw, Vv liquid and vapor-phase volume of steam drum (m3, ft3)
wA/wF air/fuel ratio
ws, wv, wr, wd, we, wi, wF, wec mass flows of steam or water at superheater,
riser, downcomers, feed water, fuel, and drum liquid evaporation
(kg/s, lb/s)
x riser outlet mixture quality (%)
x(t) state variable vector of process system
y water-level displacement (m, ft)
y(t) system input or control vector [ws, wi, wf, Te]
rs, rv, rr, rw steam, saturated vapor, liquid–vapor mixture and liquid
densities (kg/m3, lb/ft3)

1. Introduction

Electricity is now viewed as a necessity. The basic principle functions of power

generation are to convert energy from any kind of resource to electrical energy and
to transmit this energy to the consumers. Steam boilers today range in size from
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1237

those required to heat a small-size home to the very large ones used in electric power
generating stations. The fundamental requirement for the power plant system is how
to ensure the smooth and continuous energy flow. To satisfy this requirement, it is
desirable that the power generation units be properly controlled so that the production
and consumption of energy can be maintained in equilibrium at all times. To reach
this requirement, many ways of modeling and controls have been applied. Simulation
of the operation of the system is achieved by the utilization of computers. Modeling
and simulation provides key information as to the characteristics that are vital for
the investigation and prediction of the plant. It enables the modeler to measure the
performance of existing or proposed systems under different operating schemes.
The model developed in this research is intended for further research to understand
the behavior of palm wastes boilers under steady state and transient operations, and
can be used in control system and operational optimization studies. This boiler uses
a different type of fuel from conventional boilers, using fiber and shell waste products
from oil palm processing. It has commonly been taken for granted that this energy
is free in the palm oil mills industry. Specific characteristics of the boiler are non-
uniform fuel feed and moisture content in fiber and shell. These features result in
additional dimensions to the difficulty of controlling palm waste boilers. The nature
of fuels, stoichiometric air-to-fuel ratio, and mass balance of a palm waste boiler
are discussed in Ref. [1].

2. Plant description

Parameters of the model equations are either computed using construction data or
identified using the steady state operation test data. Since a large number of variables
are required to describe the boiler system, it is necessary to devise a systematic
convention for naming the variables. The boiler is modeled based on the follow-
ing subsystems:

앫 Furnace,
앫 Superheater,
앫 Drum,
앫 Downcomer,
앫 Risers.

The simplified block diagram of oil palm wastes boiler process is presented in
Fig. 1.
For simulation purposes, two types of data are required. First, data that will not
change while the plant is operating — physical data. Second, data that will experi-
ence small changes when the plant is operating — steady state operating data. There
are many data needed to simulate the systems, and they are obtained by several
methods given below:

앫 On-line reading from the boiler plant,

1238 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Fig. 1. Simplified block diagram of oil palm wastes boiler.

앫 Design specifications of the boiler,

앫 Published work on oil palm waste boiler,
앫 Calculations from available data,
앫 Polynomial Curve Fitting (PLCF).

2.1. Physical data

Complete physical data of the boiler that is used for simulation are shown in
Table 1.

2.2. Steady state operating data

The steady state operating data have been collected with on line reading from the
plant. These data are then used to calculate other necessary data together with data
available in the design specification of the boiler and steam tables. Steady state
operating data that are used for the simulation are shown in Table 2.

3. Methodology

The important basic equations used in the analysis and developments of the boiler
model are the following equations [2–6]:
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1239

Table 1
Physical data of the boiler

Description Values

Amount of superheater tubes 65

Outlet diameter of superheater tubes 0.0381 m
Tick of superheater tubes 0.003505 m
Superheater tube lengths 2.6 m
Amount of riser tubes 560
Outlet diameter of riser tubes 0.0762 m
Tick of riser tubes 0.003505 m
Riser tube lengths 4.5 m
Amount of downcomer tubes 24
Outlet diameter of downcomer tubes 0.1016 m
Tick of downcomer tubes 0.003988 m
Downcomer tube lengths 5.25 m
Drum diameter 1.203 m
Lengths of drum 5.29 m
Steel boiler and superheater tubes densities 7850 kg/m3

Table 2
Steady-state operating data

Description Values

Drum outlet pressure 17.24 Bar

Superheater outlet pressure 16.41 Bar
Enthalpy of superheated steam 592 kJ/kg
Liquid vapor mixture density 558.46 kg/m3
Air temperature 30 °C
Flue-gas temperature in the furnace 1575 °C
Feedwater temperature 60 °C
Superheated steam temperature 234 °C
Riser tubes temperature 206 °C
Superheater tubes temperature 242 °C
Fuel mass flow 4.51 kg/s
Steam mass flow 18.8 kg/s
Riser friction coefficient 0.0531
Air:fuel ratio 8.036
Low heating value of fuel 2373 kJ/kg

앫 Flow equations: Navier–Stokes-type equations for one-dimensional non-turbulent

flow are used in this study. Viscous friction is neglected so that the velocity profile
across the flow is constant. However, a friction loss term proportional to the square
of velocity is included in the momentum equation. Continuity, momentum, and
energy conservation equations are applied with certain simplifying assumptions
that will be mentioned in the following section.
앫 Heat transfer equations: these are empirical equations used to determine the rate
1240 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

of heat transfer from hot gases to tube banks in turbulent flow, from tube wall
to steam and to boiling liquid. The tube wall temperatures are determined by the
heat capacitance of the walls.
앫 State equations: these equations are obtained from steam tables at saturated and
superheated steam for the steady state operating conditions. The relations are
assumed to be linear for a given range of values of the variables.

Some fundamental physics laws are reviewed in the time-dependent form, and the
process model is established using the following fundamental equations:

3.1. Conservation of mass

The mass balance equation or conservation of mass is expressed by:

d(Vr)
⫽ win ⫺ wout. (1)
dt

3.2. Conservation of energy

The conservation of energy is the first law of thermodynamics and can be

expressed in terms of the relationship:
d(Vrhout)
⫽ winhin ⫺ wouthout ⫹ Q ⫺ W. (2)
dt

3.3. Conservation of momentum

The law of conservation of momentum is expressed in terms of the following[3]:

Ln d wout Ln w2out 1 w2out
Pin⫺Pout ⫽ ⫹ fn ⫺ L nr out ⫹ (3)
gAn dt g rout(An)2Dn 2g(An)2 rout

⫹ 冉 w2out
2 ⫺
w2in
rout(An) g rin(An)2g
. 冊
3.4. Heat transfer

The risers and superheater are assumed to receive heat from the flue gas by con-
vection only. The heat is assumed to be transferred from the flue gas to the metal
and from the metal to the fluid by convection only. The equations used are [7]:

앫 Gas to metal:
Qg ⫽ kg w0.6
g (Tg ⫺ Tm) (4)
앫 Metal to fluid (one phase flow)
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1241

Q ⫽ k w0.8 (Tm⫺ T) (5)

앫 Metal to fluid (two phases flow)
Q ⫽ k (Tm ⫺ T)3 (6)

3.5. Method for model linearization

The model of a boiler represented by a large number of non-linear partial differen-

tial equations. Most of the equations are related to fluid flow and heat transfer involv-
ing partial derivatives of time and space. Solutions of a set of these equations are
very difficult and therefore some simplifying assumptions have to be made. In the
analysis, the boiler is divided into a number of sections and for each lumped para-
meter section, the steam and gas are assumed to vary only in the axial directions
and linearly with space. Linearizing the partial differential equations reduces these
equations to ordinary linear differential equations by applying small perturbation and
difference equation techniques. Suppose an equation of the general form:

冉 ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y
f x,y,z,..., , , , ,...
∂t ∂l ∂t ∂l 冊 ⫽ 0 (7)

∂ ∂
where indicates time derivative and is the derivative with respect to the space
∂t ∂l
variable. It is assumed that for small space intervals L, the variables x, y, z,... may
be written in linear functions of the variable l, so that:
∂x x2⫺x1 ∂y y2⫺y1 ∂z z2⫺z1
⫽ , ⫽ , ⫽ ,..., (8)
∂l L ∂l L ∂l L
where x2,y2,z2,..., and x1,y1,z1,..., denote the value of the variable x, y, z,... at the end
and at the beginning, respectively, of the space interval L. Even though x1,y1,z1,...,
x2,y2,z2,..., are no longer functions of l, they are still functions of time .
∂x ∂y ∂z
x,y,z,..., , , ,... are now assumed to be the value of variables at the beginning of
∂t ∂t ∂t
the space interval, hence Eq. (8) can be written as:

冉
f x1,y1,z1,...,
∂x1 x2⫺x1 ∂y1 y2⫺y1 ∂z1 z2⫺z1
,
∂t L
, ,
∂t L
,
∂t
⫽
L
,..., 冊 ⫽ 0. (9)

Eq. (9) is then perturbed at steady state operating conditions to eliminate the non-
linearities, giving the following equation:
∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f (∂x1)
⌬x ⫹ ⌬y ⫹ ... ⫹ ⌬x ⫹ ⌬y ⫹ ⌬ ⫹ ... (10)
∂x1 1 ∂y1 1 ∂x2 2 ∂y2 2 (∂x1) ∂t
∂
∂t
⫽ 0
(∂x1) (∂y1) d d
where ⌬ , ⌬ , .... can be replaced by (⌬x1), (⌬y1),... for small pertur-
∂t ∂t dt dt
1242 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

bations. It is seen from the equations above that time-derivative terms

dx1 dy1 dz1
, , , ... are treated as independent variables and second or higher order terms
dt dt dt
in perturbed variables are neglected. The partial differentials ,冉
∂f ∂f ∂f
,
∂x1 ∂y1 ∂z1 冊
, , which
are the coefficients of the perturbed variables, are evaluated at initial steady state
operating conditions about the dynamic behavior of the boiler to be analyzed. As a
result of these simplifications, Eq. (10) becomes linear first order ordinary differential
equations with constant coefficients in the perturbed variables written as
⌬x1, ⌬x2, ⌬y1, ⌬y2, ⌬z1, ⌬z2.

4. Model development

4.1. General assumptions and abbreviations

The following general assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for
the boiler. Additional assumptions are listed under each section:

앫 Feed water temperature is assumed to be constant.

앫 State equations for vapor phase are determined from steam tables and estimation
of the actual pressure, temperature, and density relation within a given range of
value of the variables.
앫 Linear relations between the mentioned variables are obtained from steam tables
both for saturated and superheated steam.
앫 No rate of change of stored mass in the gas path.
앫 Turbulent heat transfer rates from hot gas to tube banks or from the superheater
tube to the steam are obtained from empirical relations.
앫 The heat transfer coefficients are determined from the steady state operating con-
dition.
앫 A lumped parameter approach with ordinary differential equations is used to
describe the system.
앫 Water and steam in the drum and in the risers are in saturation equilibrium.
앫 Mixture of fiber and shell in the fuel is constant.
앫 No mass and momentum transfer at the tube side.

The following abbreviations are used in the model development:

앫 COM: Conservation of Mass

앫 COT: Conservation of Momentum
앫 COE: Conservation of Energy
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1243

4.2. Model development

4.2.1. Furnace
The following assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for the fur-
nace:

앫 The fuel (fiber and shell) consumption is assumed to be constant.

앫 Calorific value and moisture content of the mixture of palm fiber and shell are con-
stant.
앫 The air–fuel ratio is assumed to be constant.
앫 Temperature of combustion gases in furnace is proportional to the fuel rate.
앫 In each tube bank the heat transfer rate is determined by the tube wall temperature,
the average gas temperature is a function of the temperature of incoming gases
and the amount of the heat loss of that particular bank.
앫 Inertia of the hot gases is neglected and the velocity changes take place instan-
taneously.
앫 Delay due to the heat capacitance of the hot gases is neglected; that is, temperature
changes take place instantaneously in combustion gases.
앫 Turbulent heat transfer is assumed throughout the process.

COM:
d rF d rA
VF ⫹ VA ⫽ (wF ⫹ wA) ⫺ wg (11)
dt dt
d rF
from point 3 of the general assumptions, it is known that ⫽ 0, VF
dt
d rA wA
VA ⫽ 0, therefore (wF ⫹ wA) ⫽ wg where Air⫺fuel ratio ⫽ , wA ⫽
dt wF
wA wA
wF, wg ⫽ wF ⫹ w
wF wF F

wg ⫽ 冉 1 ⫹
wA
wF 冊 wF (12)

COT:Not relevant.
COE:
d(rghg)
Vg ⫽ (wFhF ⫹ wAhA) ⫺ wghg ⫺ Qg (13)
dt

where
d(rghg)
Vg
dt
⫽ 0, wg ⫽ 冉1 ⫹
wA
wF 冊 wF , hg ⫽ hF ⫹ hA, therefore
Qg ⫽ wg hg, Qg ⫽ wg Cg Tg
Qg ⫽ wg . LHV (14)
1244 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Qg
Tg ⫽ (15)
Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF

4.2.2. Superheater
The following assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for the super-
heater:

앫 Inertia term in the flow equation is neglected.

앫 Load disturbance is a change in the steam flow rate.
앫 To calculate superheater section average gas temperature, both risers are con-
sidered as one lumped section.

Gas side
COM:
drgs
Vgs ⫽ wg ⫺ wgs (16)
dt
drgs
where Vgs ⫽ 0 therefore
dt
wg ⫽ wgs. (17)
COT:Not relevant.
COE:
d(rgs hgs)
Vgs ⫽ wghg ⫺ wgshgs ⫺ Qgs (18)
dt
d(rgshgs)
where Vgs ⫽ 0 therefore wghg ⫺ wgshgs ⫺ Qgs ⫽ 0, Qgs ⫽
dt
wghg ⫺ wgshgs , Qgs ⫽ wg Cg Tg ⫺ wgs Cgs Tgs where wg ⫽ wgs , Cg ⫽
Cgs then Qgs ⫽ wg Cg (Tg ⫺ Tgs), Qgs ⫽ Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF (Tg ⫺ Tgs)
Therefore the flue gas temperature leaving superheater banks and entering riser
banks is as follows:
Qgs
Tg1 ⫽ Tg ⫺ (19)
Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF
Tube Bank
COE:
d Tst
Ms Cst ⫽ Qgs ⫺ Qs (20)
dt
where
Qgs ⫽ kgs w0.6
F (Tgs ⫺ Tst) (21)
1 Qgs
Tgs ⫽ Tg ⫺ (22)
2Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) . wF
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1245

Qs ⫽ ks w0.8
v (Tst ⫺ Ts). (23)
Water/Steam Side
COM:
drs
As L s ⫽ ws ⫺ wv. (24)
dt
COT:
w2v
pv⫺ps ⫽ fs . (25)
rv
COE:
drs hs
As L s ⫽ wv hv ⫺ ws hs ⫹ Qs. (26)
dt

4.2.3. Riser
The following assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for the risers:

앫 Only natural circulation exists.

앫 Vapor and liquid velocities in the risers are identical.
앫 Heat transfer rate to boiling liquid from tube wall is proportional to the cube of
the temperature difference between the wall and the liquid.
앫 Liquid temperature is always the same as the saturation temperature corresponding
to the drum pressure; that is, instantaneous evaporation takes place in the riser
when the drum pressure changes.
앫 Both risers are considered as one lumped section.

Gas side
COM:
drgr
Vgr ⫽ wgs ⫺ wgr (27)
dt
drgr
where Vgr ⫽ 0 therefore wgs ⫽ wgr.
dt
COT:Not relevant.
COE:
d(rgr hgr)
Vgr ⫽ wgshgs ⫺ wgrhgr ⫺ Qgr (28)
dt
d(rgrhgr)
where Vgr ⫽ 0 therefore wgshgs ⫺ wgrhgr ⫺ Qgr ⫽ 0, Qgr ⫽
dt
wgshgs ⫺ wgrhgr , Qgr ⫽ wgs Cgs Tgs ⫺ wgr Cgr Tgr where, wgs ⫽ wgr ,
Cgs ⫽ Cgr then Qgr ⫽ wg Cg (Tg ⫺ Tgr), Qgr ⫽ Cg (1 ⫹
wA / wF) wF (Tg ⫺ Tgr).
1246 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Therefore the flue gas temperature leaving the riser is as follows:

Qgr
Tg2 ⫽ Tg ⫺ . (29)
Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF
Tube Bank
COE:
d Trt
Mr Crt ⫽ Qgr ⫺ Qr (30)
dt
where
Qgr ⫽ kgr w0.6
F (Tgr ⫺ Trt). (31)
Qgs
Rewriting Eq. (9); Tg1 ⫽ Tg ⫺ therefore,
Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF
1 Qgr
Tgr ⫽ Tg1 ⫺ . (32)
2Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF
Substituting Eq. (9) into Eq. (32) results in the following equation:
Qgs 1 Qgr
Tgr ⫽ Tg ⫺ ⫺ (33)
Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF 2Cg (1 ⫹ wA / wF) wF
Qr ⫽ kr (Trt ⫺ Tv)3. (34)
Water/Steam side
COM:
drr
Ar Lr ⫽ wd ⫺ wr. (35)
dt
COT:

pw⫺pv ⫽
Lr dwr
gAr dt
⫹ fr
Lr w2r
g rrA2rDr
⫹ Lr r r ⫹
w2r
2g rrA2r
⫹
w2r
⫺冉w2d
rrA2rg rwA2g 冊 (36)

COE:
d(rr hr)
ArLr ⫽ wdhw ⫺ wrhr ⫺ Qr (37)
dt
1 x (1 ⫺x)
⫽ ⫹ (38)
rr rv rw
hr ⫽ xhv ⫹ (1⫺x) hw (39)
hr ⫽ xhfg ⫹ hw. (40)

4.2.4. Drum
The following assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for the drum:

앫 There is no temperature gradient in the vapor phase in the drum and the tempera-
ture is always the saturation temperature corresponding to the drum pressure.
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1247

앫 The liquid phase has no temperature gradient except through a very thin layer at
the liquid surface because of the turbulence in the drum.
앫 Evaporation or condensation rate in the drum is proportional to the difference of
liquid and saturation temperatures.
앫 Liquid level changes due to bubble formation in the drum are neglected.
앫 Feed water temperature is assumed to be constant.

Gas side
Not relevant.
Tube bank
Not relevant.
Water/Steam side
COM:
Water
d
(V r ) ⫽ wi ⫹ (1 ⫺ x) wr ⫺ wd ⫺ wec. (41)
dt w w
Steam
d
(V r ) ⫽ wec ⫹ x wr⫺ wv (42)
dt v v

⌬ Vv ⌬ Vw
⌬y ⫽ ⫺ ⫽ (43)
Aw Aw
⌬ M ⫽ Aw rw ⌬y. (44)
COT:
Not relevant.
COE:
d
(V r h ) ⫽ (1 ⫺ x) wrhv ⫹ wihi ⫺ wdhw⫺wechv. (45)
dt w w w

4.2.5. Downcomers
The following assumptions are made in deriving the dynamic model for downco-
mers:

앫 Only natural circulation exists.

앫 No boiling takes place in downcomers.
앫 Downcomers liquid temperature is the same as the drum liquid temperature.

Gas Side
Not relevant.
Tube bank
1248 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Not relevant.
Water/Steam side
COM:
drw
Ad Ld ⫽ ww ⫺ wd (46)
dt
drw
where Ad Ld ⫽ 0, hence ww ⫽ wd
dt
Ld w2d 1 w2d Ld d wd
COT: pv⫺pw ⫽ fd 2
⫺ Ldrw ⫹ ⫹ . (47)
g rwAdDd 2g A2drw gAd dt
COE:
Not relevant.

4.2.6. State equations

Linear relations are assumed to exist between pressure, temperature, and density
at the steady state operating points. Saturated state equations are:
∂Tv
⌬Tv ⫽ ⌬ pv (48)
∂pv
∂rv
⌬ rv ⫽ ⌬p (49)
∂pv v
∂hw
⌬ hw ⫽ ⌬ pv (50)
∂pv
Superheated state equations are:
∂rv ∂ps
⌬ ps ⫽ ⌬ Ts ⫹ ⌬ rs. (51)
∂Ts ∂rs

4.3. Linearization of the Model

As mentioned in the methodology, the first two types of equation involve partial
differential equations as well as non-linearities; These equations are then reduced to
the ordinary linear equations from applying small perturbations and difference equ-
ation techniques. Linearizing the boiler process model about steady state operating
points and transforming using the Laplace operators with zero initial conditions pro-
duces perturbed equations. The complete linearization process is given in Ref. [8],
and sample linearization of an equation is presented in Appendix A.

5. Results

The boiler model is based on the following subsystems: furnace, superheater,

drum, downcomer, and risers. The range of operations modeled is at normal operating
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1249

conditions, which is between 17.2 bar (250 psig) and 22 bar (320 psig) of drum
pressure. The dynamic physical model can be summarized as follows:
Type of model: state space
Number of input variables: four

앫 Steam flow-rate (ws)

앫 Feed water flow rate(wi)
앫 Fuel flow rate (wF)
앫 Feed water temperature flow rate (Ti)

Number of output variables: ten

앫 Superheated steam density (ρs)

앫 Superheated steam temperature (Ts)
앫 Superheater tube wall temperatures (Tst)
앫 Quality of mixture leaving riser (x)
앫 Riser mass flow rate (wr)
앫 Drum pressure (Pv)
앫 Riser tubes wall temperatures (Trt)
앫 Drum and downcomers liquid temperature (Tw)
앫 Drum liquid level (y)
앫 Superheater pressure (Ps)

The main difficulty in this work is the size and complexity of the boiler unit.
When the model was formulated and linearized it was found that many manipulation
steps were required before arriving at the final form of the model. The reason was
that a set of ten simultaneous differential equations together with large number of
the steady-state ones needed to be suitably rearranged and solved.
In simulation, the set of equations developed and linearized in the previous section
are reduced and rearranged in order to obtain a suitable model for simulation in
state-space form. This palm wastes boiler model has been simulated using MATLAB.
Before the simulation can be performed it is necessary that all the unknown constants
and parameters are made available to the model. These unknowns include steady-
state balance equations and operating points, boiler physical data, and curve fitting
relationship if data extracted from the steam tables. The set of linearized equations
may be written in the following matrix form:
x(t) ⫽ Ax(t) ⫹ Bu(t) (52)
y(t) ⫽ Cx(t) ⫹ Du(t) (53)
where A is a (10 x 10) state matrix, B (10 x 4) input matrix, C output matrix and
direct transmission matrix D are constant matrices. The value of the matrices is
presented in Appendix A.
The response of the output variables for 10% step inputs of steam, feed water,
flow rate, temperature, and fuel are shown in Figs. 2–5.
1250 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Fig. 2. Response with 10% steam flow rate step.

 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1251

Fig. 3. Response with 10% feedwater flow rate step.

Validation of the model was done by on-line reading of drum pressure from the
plant using HP 3497A Data Acquisition and Control Unit and HP BASIC as the
programming language. This data was transferred to a MATLAB file. Pneumatic
cylinders were used as mechanisms (actuators) for adjusting the amount of the input
fuel (fiber and shell) to the furnace of the boiler plant. The responses model for
1252 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

Fig. 4. Response with 10% fuel flow rate step.

T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1253

Fig. 5. Response with 10% feedwater temperature step.

1254 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

drum pressure (Pv) with respect to fuel flow rate (wF) is presented in Fig. 6. From
validation it can be seen that the result obtained is quite encouraging and the simu-
lated model of drum pressure matches fairly well with the experimental plot.

6. Conclusion

In the reduction of the system order, it is important to select dependent variables

to give the best reduced system. For control studies, it is suggested that the dependent
variables can be reduced to several significant output variables such as:

앫 superheated steam temperature (Ts)

앫 quality of mixture leaving riser (x)
앫 drum pressure (Pv)
앫 drum liquid level (y)
앫 superheater pressure (Ps)

with system inputs:

앫 feed water flow rate(wi)
앫 fuel flow rate (wF)
앫 feed water temperature flow rate (Ti)

and consider the steam flow rate (ws) as a disturbance. In a more simplified structure
the output variables can be reduced to Pv and y only while the input variables are
reduced to only one, i.e., wF.
The model has been developed with certain assumptions that might make the
model less accurate. The number of assumptions can be reduced especially in the
riser part, where a more accurate representation can be expected if the riser could
be derived separately. However, from the validation shown, the result matches fairly
well with the experimental plot. Finally, this model should be useful as a basis for
further studies of the two following purposes:

앫 To be a basis for a linearized model to be used for design of a multivariable

control system of a palm wastes boiler.

Fig. 6. Steam drum pressure response with 20% fuel flow rate step.
 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256 1255

앫 To be a basis for a reduced order linearized transfer function model for related
control applications.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from the Ministry
of Science, under the IRPA financing scheme. The research was carried out under
IRPA research Project No. 03-02-03-0353.

Appendix A

w2v
Rewriting Eq. (25), pv⫺ps ⫽ fs or in perturbed form can be written as:
rv
2 w̄v w̄2v r̄v r̄v
⌬pv⫺⌬ps ⫽ fs ⌬pv ⫹ fs 2 ⌬ rv ⌬wv ⫽ ⌬p ⫺ ⌬p ⫹
r̄v r̄v fs 2 w̄v v fs 2 w̄v s
w̄v
⌬ rv. Then in simplified form, ⌬wv ⫽ z1 ⌬pv ⫹ z2 ⌬ps ⫹ z3 ⌬ rv
2 r̄v
r̄v r̄v w̄v
where z1 ⫽ , z2 ⫽ ⫺ , z3 ⫽ ⌬ rv.
fs 2 w̄v fs 2 w̄v 2 r̄v
Input matrices A (10 x 10) and B (10 x 4) and output matrix C and D:



 ⫺ 0.85972


⫺ 0.00092 0 0 0 1.33932 × 10-5 0 0 0 0

15.93825 ⫺ 0.22675 0.15181 0 0 ⫺ 0.00025 0 0 0 0

42.04492 0.14517 ⫺ 0.10124 0 0 ⫺ 0.00066 0 0 0 0

⫺ 0.00441 ⫺ 4.7223 × 10-6 0 ⫺ 0.17506 ⫺ 3.02126 × 10-8 ⫺ 2.24703 × 10-7 4.12171 × 10⫺6 0.00013 0 0

⫺ 5264.27236 ⫺ 0.96792 ⫺ 2.91963 1.00392 × 106 ⫺ 0.92565 ⫺ 4.31077 1830.09555 157.59312 0 0




A⫽


1285.64960 1.37760 0 0 0 ⫺ 0.55027 209.41783 24.49676 0 0

0 0 0.00044 0 0 0.19445 ⫺ 87.82094 0 0 0

0 0 0 ⫺ 3.51597 0.00035 0.00160 0 ⫺ 0.72774 0 0

⫺ 6.80509 ⫺ 0.00729 0 ⫺ 269.36171 ⫺ 4.64881 × 10-5 ⫺ 0.00031 ⫺ 0.00879 0.19556 0 0

 ⫺ 56620.34223 ⫺ 78.22541 10.93006 0 0 0.88206 0 0 0 0

 ⫺ 0.00339 0 0 0 

 
0 0 0 0
0 0 1.49170 0
0 ⫺ 1.77767 × 10 -7
0 0
60.69606 ⫺ 23.94852 ⫺ 530.97106 1.16471
B⫽ 

 
0 0.05186 0 0
0 0 22.98759 0
0 ⫺ 0.02530 0 0.00229
0 ⫺ 2.17627 × 10 -6
0 0
 ⫺ 228.02653 0 0 0 
1256 T.M.I. Mahlia et al. / Renewable Energy 28 (2003) 1235–1256

1.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

 
0 1.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1.000 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1.000 0 0 0 0 0
C⫽ 

 
0 0 0 0 0 1.000 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 
0 0 0 0

 
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
D⫽ 

 
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

References

[1] Mahlia TMI, Abdulmuin MZ, Alamsyah TMI, Mukhlishien D. Energy Conversion & Management
2001;42:17.
[2] Nicholson H. H Proc IEE 1965;112(2):383.
[3] Chien KL, Ergin E, Ling C, Lee AT. Trans ASME 1958;80:1809.
[4] Kwan HW, Anderson JH. Int J Control 1970;12:977.
[5] Nam H. Modeling and control system design study of coal fired power plant. PhD dissertation, The
University of Texas at Austin, USA, 1986.
[6] Zhao J. Simulation of boiler drums process dynamics and control. M.Eng. dissertation. McGill Univer-
sity, Canada, 1992.
[7] Babcock, Wilcox. Steam/Its Generation and Use. The Babcock & Wilcox Company, 1972.
[8] Mahlia TMI. Dynamic modeling, simulation, and experimental validation of a palm oil mill boiler.
M.Eng.Sc. thesis. University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1997.