Optimization of a District Heating Network with the focus on heat loss

In the Netherlands most houses and buildings are connected to a gas network since the nineteen seventies to heat our houses and cook. In march of this year the new Dutch government announced that to meet the climate accord of Paris all dutch household should be of the gas net in 2030. To do this multiple alternatives to heat homes are available and one of those which has proven to be feasible over the last years is district heat. In a district heating network hot water is pumped round a city through a network of pipe lines to houses and other buildings. The network is split into a primary and a secondary network. In the primary network the heat is transported from the source, and in the secondary network the heat is pumped from a substation to the customers. The heat usually is rest heat of a STEG- or waste incineration power plant. With the increasing demand for heat due to the disconnection of the gas network, and at the same time the search for a more sustainable heat source for the district heating network like geothermal heat the prices and costs rise rapidly. This makes the heat loss in the system a more important issue also from a financial perspective. The current installed networks are all series 1 single pipe lines of ST/PUR/PE, this means the inner pipe through which the water flows is steal, followed by an insulating PUR layer which is covered by a protective PE layer. To decrease the heat loss from the pipe lines Nuon is looking at two possible options. Series 2 single piping which has a thicker insulating PUR layer and second the twin pipeline where both the steal supply and return lines areembedded into one insulating PUR layer and a protective PE shell. The heat loss calculations for the buried pipelines in the ground are done using empirical formulas found in literature. These are checked numerical using a pde-solver. Comparing both results it was the concluded the empirical formulas give a good approximation of the heat loss. It also showed the heat loss is for a great deal depended on the temperature in the pipe and the ground temperature. In current heat loss calculations done by Nuon the temperature gradient of the water entering the network and leaving the network in not taken into consideration. By using the ambient temperature and a formula formulated in literature an estimation of the ground temperature at the buried depth of the pipelines can be made. By dividing the network into a number of pieces with length 푑푥 and an individual temperature 푇 the temperature gradient overthe entire network is taken into account. Collected data by Nuon concerning the user demand and the ambient temperature makes it possible to simulate what is the mass flow through the system at any given time and to analyze how the system responds to a demand fluctuation. By analyzing what happens in the networks in term of heat loss during a diurnal heat curve the results show that the heat loss stays nearly constant during a day. There are however big differences between different days in different times of the year. Analyzing what happens over the course of a year especially in the summer during times of very low demand the system under performs. A main reason for this is caused by theminimum required temperature of 70 degrees Celsius at the customers due to salmonella regulations. This causes a lot of extra mass flow of hot water pumped around the system which heats up the return flow. This is also clearly notable from the efficiency of the network which drops tremendously in the summer. Comparing the difference in heat loss for the series 1, series 2 and twin system the results where as expected an decrease in the amount of heat lost, by 14.6% for series 2 and 39.70% for twin compared to series 1. The overall image of what happens actually stays the same with high return temperature and relative high heat loss and low efficiency in summer. There are a few options to further improve the performance of the system with a few percent by changing the inlet temperature or the location of the bypass valve. Financially speaking the twin system is also the better choice of the three. Compared to series 1 for series 2 the investment costs will increase because the materialsand instalment costs will increase. For the twin system the prices of the materials will increase and the placements of the welds will become more expansive however only half the number of pipe lines and joints is needed, so in total the prices will stay nearly the same compared to series 1. There is a lot of discussion on whether or not the maintenance costs will increase for the twin system, arguments for both cases are given. However the maintenance costs are so small compared to the costs of the heat loss that in every case the twin system is clearly the better choice.Mechanical Engineerin