Sootblowing is a process in which supersonic steam jets are used to periodically blast deposits off heat transfer tubes in kraft recovery boilers. However, sootblowing significantly consumes the valuable high pressure steam generated by the boiler, hence it should be optimized. A recovery boiler consists of three convective sections - superheater, generating bank and economizer. The tube arrangement in these sections, particularly the tube spacing is different from each other. Moreover, tubes in an economizer are finned. A sootblower jet will interact differently with these tube arrangements, potentially affecting its strength, and hence deposit removal capability. The objective of this work was to characterize jet/tube interaction in the three sections of a recovery boiler. Lab-scale experiments were conducted in which these interactions were visualized using the schlieren technique coupled with high-speed video, and were quantified by pitot pressure measurements. This work is the first to visualize the interactions. The offset between the jet and tube centrelines, the nozzle exit diameter relative to the tube diameter, and the distance between the nozzle and tube were varied to examine their effects on jet/tube interaction. Results showed that due to the very low spreading rate of a supersonic jet, a jet (primary jet) stops interacting with a superheater platen when the jet is only a small distance away from it. When the jet impinges on a tube, the jet deflects at an angle, giving rise to a weaker ‘secondary’ jet. Due to the large inter-platen spacing, a secondary jet has an insignificant impact in a superheater. In a generating bank, the primary jet weakens between the closely spaced tubes due to increased mixing. However, a secondary jet impinges on the adjacent tubes exerting a high impact pressure on those tubes. The primary jet also weakens between finned economizer tubes, but remains stronger for a greater distance than in a generating bank. As in the case inside a generating bank, a secondary jet also impinges on adjacent rows of tubes in an economizer. The results imply that in a superheater, a sootblower jet must be directed close to the platens to yield useful jet/deposit interactions, and to avoid wasting steam by blowing between the platens. In a generating bank, deposits beyond the first few tubes of a row experience a weaker sootblower jet, and thus may not be removed effectively. However, secondary jets may contribute to removing deposits from the first few adjacent tubes. They may also induce erosion-corrosion of those tubes. Secondary jets may also help remove deposits from adjacent rows in a finned tube economizer. In an economizer, the strength and hence, the deposit removal capability of a sootblower jet diminish only slightly beyond the supersonic portion of the jet. A mathematical model was also developed to determine the feasibility of using inclined sootblower nozzles in recovery boiler superheaters, and suggests that it may be possible to clean superheater platens more effectively with slightly inclined nozzles.

Sootblowing is a process in which supersonic steam jets are used to periodically blast deposits off heat transfer tubes in kraft recovery boilers. However, sootblowing significantly consumes the valuable high pressure steam generated by the boiler, hence it should be optimized. A recovery boiler consists of three convective sections - superheater, generating bank and economizer. The tube arrangement in these sections, particularly the tube spacing is different from each other. Moreover, tubes in an economizer are finned. A sootblower jet will interact differently with these tube arrangements, potentially affecting its strength, and hence deposit removal capability. The objective of this work was to characterize jet/tube interaction in the three sections of a recovery boiler. Lab-scale experiments were conducted in which these interactions were visualized using the schlieren technique coupled with high-speed video, and were quantified by pitot pressure measurements. This work is the first to visualize the interactions. The offset between the jet and tube centrelines, the nozzle exit diameter relative to the tube diameter, and the distance between the nozzle and tube were varied to examine their effects on jet/tube interaction. Results showed that due to the very low spreading rate of a supersonic jet, a jet (primary jet) stops interacting with a superheater platen when the jet is only a small distance away from it. When the jet impinges on a tube, the jet deflects at an angle, giving rise to a weaker ‘secondary’ jet. Due to the large inter-platen spacing, a secondary jet has an insignificant impact in a superheater. In a generating bank, the primary jet weakens between the closely spaced tubes due to increased mixing. However, a secondary jet impinges on the adjacent tubes exerting a high impact pressure on those tubes. The primary jet also weakens between finned economizer tubes, but remains stronger for a greater distance than in a generating bank. As in the case inside a generating bank, a secondary jet also impinges on adjacent rows of tubes in an economizer. The results imply that in a superheater, a sootblower jet must be directed close to the platens to yield useful jet/deposit interactions, and to avoid wasting steam by blowing between the platens. In a generating bank, deposits beyond the first few tubes of a row experience a weaker sootblower jet, and thus may not be removed effectively. However, secondary jets may contribute to removing deposits from the first few adjacent tubes. They may also induce erosion-corrosion of those tubes. Secondary jets may also help remove deposits from adjacent rows in a finned tube economizer. In an economizer, the strength and hence, the deposit removal capability of a sootblower jet diminish only slightly beyond the supersonic portion of the jet. A mathematical model was also developed to determine the feasibility of using inclined sootblower nozzles in recovery boiler superheaters, and suggests that it may be possible to clean superheater platens more effectively with slightly inclined nozzles.

Deposits in municipal waste incinerators are very inhomogeneous in structure and constitution. They cause corrosion and reduce the efficiency, so they need to be removed frequently. Among other systems, operators use water cannons for the deposit removal. Two different removal mechanisms of water-cannon cleaning are suggested: A direct shattering of the deposit by the impact of the water jet, as well as the cracking caused by thermal stresses where droplets cool the deposits. As the contribution of each of the aforementioned mechanisms to the overall cleaning efficiency is unknown, we performed empirical investigations to determine the dominating effect. In a first experimental setup focusing on thermal stress, cold droplets were applied onto hot deposits taken from a waste incinerator. Results showed that the cleaning effect strongly depends on the deposit thickness and structure, so that the deposits could be categorised in three different groups. A second measurement campaign focused on the influence of deposit material, deposit temperature and water jet momentum. It could be shown that both deposit material and temperature have a significant effect on the cleaning efficiency, whereas an increase in water jet momentum only led to modest improvements. The combination of these two parameter studies implies that the influence of the thermal stress outweighs that of the momentum. This knowledge is applicable to the cleaning setup by increasing the temperature gradient.