Why Build a Circulating Fluidized Bed Boiler

to Generate Steam and Electric Power

S. Kavidass
G.L. Anderson
G.S. Norton, Jr.
The Babcock & Wilcox Company
Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A.

Presented to: BR-1708

POWER-GEN Asia 2000
September 20-22, 2000
Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract electric utility applications. B&W’s design is an inherently com-

In Asia, demand for electric power continues to rise steeply
due to population growth, economic development, and progres-
sive substitution of alternate technology with clean forms of
energy generation. Atmospheric circulating fluidized bed (CFB)
technology has emerged as an environmentally acceptable tech-
nology for burning a wide range of solid fuels to generate steam
and electricity power. CFB, although less than 20 years old, is a
mature technology with more than 400 CFB boilers in opera-
tion worldwide, ranging from 5 MWe to 250 MWe.
Electric utilities and Independent Power Producers must now
select a technology that will utilize a wide range of low-cost
solid fuels, reduce emissions, reduce life cycle costs, and pro-
vide reliable steam generation for electric power generation.
Therefore, CFB is often the preferred technology. Even though
pulverized coal (PC) fired boilers continue to play a major role
worldwide, they have inherent issues such as fuel inflexibility,
environmental concerns and higher maintenance costs.
This paper discusses the benefits of CFB boilers for utility
and industrial applications. Specific emphasis is given to B&W’s
Internal Recirculation CFB (IR-CFB) technology, CFB technol-
ogy comparisons, PC vs. CFB technology, emissions benefits,
and economics including maintenance cost and boiler reliabil-
ity.
Introduction
Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) is a leading global supplier of
industrial/utility boilers and has supplied more than 700 units
totaling more than 270,000 MWe. Many of B&W’s CFB boiler
design features have been adapted from vast experience design-
ing and building boilers of all types and sizes for industrial and
pact, distinctive internal recirculation fluidized bed (IR-CFB)
boiler featuring U-Beam solids separators. The furnace and con-
vection pass of the IR-CFB boiler are within a single, gas–tight
membrane enclosure as commonly found in Pulverized Coal
(PC) fired boilers. This CFB technology has been successfully
introduced in the global market.
To date, B&W, including B&W joint ventures and licensee
companies, has sold 16 CFB boilers worldwide, shown in Table 1.
B&W offers IR-CFB boilers up to 175 MW e, both reheat and
non-reheat, with full commercial guarantees and warranties. The
IR-CFB boiler is simple in configuration and compact, requires
a smaller boiler foot print, has minimal refractory, requires low
maintenance, features quick startup, and provides high avail-
ability.
The modern way of burning solid fuels requires fuel flex-
ibility and reliable technology, plus good combustion efficiency
with low emissions. CFB technology is well suited for a wide
range of sold fuels. CFB technology is proven, mature and com-
petitive.
What is CFB Technology?
CFB technology utilizes the fluidized bed principle in which
crushed (6 –12 mm x 0 size) fuel and limestone are injected
into the furnace or combustor. The particles are suspended in a
stream of upwardly flowing air (60-70% of the total air) which
enters the bottom of the furnace through air distribution nozzles.
The balance of combustion air is admitted above the bottom of
the furnace as secondary air. While combustion takes place at
840-900 C, the fine particles (<450 microns) are elutriated out
of the furnace with flue gas velocity of 4-6 m/s. The particles

Babcock & Wilcox 1

 Table 1
B&W Circulating Fluidized-Bed Boiler Experience
Including B&W Joint Ventures and Licensees

Start-up Customer Name & Unit Type No. of Units Steam Thermal Fuels
Date Plant Location Output, TPH Output, MW t
1986 Ultrapower CFB (E) 1 100 77.0 Wood wastes & wood chips
West Enfield, Maine, USA
1986 Ultrapower CFB (E) 1 100 77.0 Wood wastes & wood chips
Jonesboro, Main, USA
1986 Sithe Energy CFB (E) 1 74 58.0 Wood wastes
Marysville, California, USA
--- Los Angeles County CFB (E) 3 22 16.0 Sewage sludge
Sanitation Dist.
Carson, California, USA
1989 Lauhoff Grain Company CFB (I, E) 1 102 79.0 Bituminous coal, petroleum coke
Danville, Illinois, USA
1990 Ebensburg Power Co. CFB (I, E) 1 237 172.0 Waste coal
Ebensburg, Pennsylvnia, USA
1991 Pusan Dyeing Company CFB (I, E) 2 80 58.0 Coal & heavy fuel oil
Pusan, Republic of Korea
1993 Thai Petrochemical Industries CFB (I, E) 1 136 93.0 Coal, lignite, petroleum coke,
Rayong, Thailand heavy fuel oil
1996 Southern Illinois University CFB (I) 1 54 35.0 Coal, petroleum coke & natural gas
Carbondale, Illinois, USA
1997 Kanoria Chemicals, LTD CFB (I) 1 105 81.0 High ash coal
Renukoot, India
2001 Anshan Co-Generation Plant CFB (1) 2 75 58.0 Bituminous coal
Anshan, Liaoning, P.R. China
2002 EC Tychy Heat and Power Plant CFB (1) 1 317 250.0 Bituminous coal, biomass, sludge
Tychy, Poland

Table 2
Benefits of a CFB Boiler Over a PC-Fired Boiler (<150 MW)

Description CFB Boiler PC-Fired Boiler Benefits of CFB

Fuel size 6-12 mm x 0 >70%<75 microns Crushing cost is reduced
Fuel range (ash + moisture) Up to 75% Up to 60% Accepts wider range
Higher sulfur fuels (1-6%) Limestone injection FGD plant required Less expensive SO 2 removal system
Auxiliary fuel support (oil or gas) Up to 20-30% Up to 60% Less oil/gas consumption
Auxiliary power consumption Slightly higher Lower If FGD is used in PC, CFB power is lower
Emissions
SO 2, ppm <200 <250 with FGD Lower emissions in process, less expensive
NO x, ppm <100 <100 with SCR No SCR (or SNCR) system required
Boiler efficiency, % Same Same No difference
O&M cost (85% CF) 5-10% lower 5-10% higher Lower because of less moving equipment
Capital cost 5-10% higher 5-10% lower w/o FGD & SCR ---
8-15% lower 8-15% higher w/ FGD & SCR ---

are then collected by the solids separators and circulated back
into the furnace. This combustion process is called circulating
fluidized bed (CFB). The particles’ circulation provides effi-
cient heat transfer to the furnace walls and longer residence time
for carbon and limestone utilization. Similar to PC firing, the
controlling parameters in the CFB combustion process are tem-
perature, residence time and turbulence.
PC Vs. CFB Technology Comparison
Designers and power plant operators have vast experience
in PC-fired boiler design and operations. Adapting and under-
standing CFB technology by those familiar with the PC envi-
ronment requires time. CFB technology brings the capability of
designs for a wide range of fuels from low quality to high qual-
ity fuels, lower emissions, elimination of high maintenance pul-
verizers, low auxiliary fuel support and reduced life cycle costs.
A PC vs. IR-CFB comparison is given in Table 2.
The combustion temperature of a CFB (840-900 C) is much
lower than PC (1350-1500 C) which results in lower NO x for-
mation and the ability to capture SO2 with limestone injection
in the furnace. Even though the combustion temperature of CFB
is low, the fuel residence time is higher than PC, which results
in good combustion efficiencies comparable to PC. The PC pul-
verizers, which grind the coal to 70% less than 75 microns, re-
quire significant maintenance expenses. These costs are virtu-
ally eliminated in CFB because the coal is crushed to 12 - 6 mm
x 0 size. Even though CFB boiler equipment is designed for
relatively lower flue gas velocities, the heat transfer coefficient
of the CFB furnace is nearly double that of PC which makes the
furnace compact. In an IR-CFB, auxiliary fuel support is needed
for cold startup and operation below 25% versus 40-60% MCR
with PC. One of the most important aspects is that CFB boilers
release very low levels of SO 2 and NO x pollutants compared to
PC, as shown in Table 2. PC units need a scrubber system, which
requires additional maintenance.

2 Babcock & Wilcox

 Table 3

Description World Bank Emission Requirements CFB Boiler Emissions

Sulfur dioxide (SO2), ppm 730 <200

Nitrogen oxides (NOx), ppm 365* <100

Particulate matter, mg/Nm 3 50+ 50

* Coal with 10% volatile matter, NOx is 730 ppm

+
Less than 50 MWe, P.M. is 100 mg/Nm 3

CFB is a fuel-driven and flexible
technology
CFB can be the technology of choice for several reasons.
The CFB can handle a wide range of fuels such as coal, waste
coal, anthracite, lignite, petroleum coke and agricultural waste,
with low heating value (>1500 kcal/kg), high moisture content
(< 55%), and high ash content (< 60%). The fuel flexibility pro-
vides use of opportunity fuels where uncertainty of fuel supply
exists and economics are an issue. If a CFB boiler is designed
for coal, the same boiler can be used to burn lignite or petro-
leum coke or anthracite. The material handling and feeding sys-
tem should be properly designed to meet these fuel variations.
Such fuel flexibility is not available in the competing conven-
tional PC-fired boiler technologies. This is one of the important
features of CFB that the customer needs to analyze carefully
before selecting a technology.
Environmental benefits of CFB
technology
The CFB combustion process facilitates steam generation
firing a wide range of fuels while meeting the required emis-
sions such as sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)
even more effectively than World Bank guidelines, as shown in
Table 3.
The major environmental benefit of selecting CFB technol-
ogy is the removal of SO2 (90-95%) and NOx (emission is less
(thermal NOx). With low temperature and staged combustion,
the oxidation of fuel nitrogen is suppressed resulting in very
low NOx emissions. NO x emissions are <100 ppm with CFB.
CO and hydrocarbon emissions in the CFB boiler are well
controlled. In recent years, financial institutions have pushed
the power project developers to meet the World Bank emissions
requirements. Therefore obtaining the project permit is less dif-
ficult with CFB technology.
Design Features of B&W IR-CFB Boiler
Technology
B&W IR-CFB technology is very comparable to PC-fired
boilers in arrangement. The IR-CFB boiler design consists of
the following major systems, shown in Fig. 1. The main CFB
boiler components are:
• Boiler furnace
• Furnace bottom air distributor and nozzles
• Primary solids separators and recirculation system
• Secondary solids separators and recirculation system
• Pendant superheater / reheater
• Economizer and horizontal tubular air heater
• Air assisted gravity fuel /limestone feed system
Primary U-Beam
Separators

than 100 ppm) in the combustion process without adding post- Wing Wall
Superheater/Reheater

combustion cleaning equipment such as wet or dry flue gas de-

sulfurization (FGD) systems and selective catalytic reduction Economizer
Division Wall
(SCR) systems. When the limestone is injected into the furnace,
the following reactions occur.
• Oxidation of sulfur
S+O 2 --> SO 2 Secondary Solids
Separator
• Limestone is calcined to form calcium oxide
CaCO3 --> CaO + CO2 –425 kcal/kg (of CaCO3)
• Sulfur dioxide gas reacts with solid CaO Fuel Silo
SO2 + 1/2 O2 + CaO --> CaSO 4 (Solid) +3740 kcal/kg
(of S) Tubular Air Heater

The resulting calcium-sulfate-based ashes are chemically

stable and are easily disposed. This ash can be used as raw ma- Air Assisted Gravity
terial for cement manufacturing, soil stabilization, concrete Feed System

blocks, road base, structural fills, etc. Limestone injection is Furnace

required for fuels with sulfur greater than >0.5%. Lime (CaO)
and unburned carbon content must be considered in re-use ap- Forced Draft Fans

plications, depending on the fuel being fired.

NO x present in flue gas generally comes from two sources:
the oxidation of nitrogen compounds in the fuel (fuel NOx) and
reaction between the nitrogen and oxygen in the combustion air Fig. 1 B&W’s IR-CFB boiler.

Babcock & Wilcox 3

Boiler Furnace
The furnace cross section is selected based on flue gas su-
perficial velocity. B&W typically uses furnace depths of 3.7 m,
4.6 m and 5.4 m, depending on the unit size. The furnace enclo-
sure is made of gas-tight membrane water-cooled walls having
63.5 mm or 76 mm tube diameters on 102 mm centers. The fur-
nace primary zone is reduced in plan area cross section to pro-
vide good mixing and promote solids entrainment at low load.
The auxiliary startup burners, fuel feed points and secondary
ash re-injection (multicyclone/MDC) points are located in this
region.
A thin layer of refractory is applied on all lower furnace walls,
including the lower portion of the division walls and wing wall
nose to protect against corrosion and erosion. An ultra high
strength abrasion-resistant low cement alumina refractory 16-
25 mm thick is applied over a dense pin studded pattern. B&W
has patented a RDZTM reduced diameter zone feature that elimi-
nates erosion concern at the furnace interface. The furnace tem-
perature is precisely controlled by maintaining proper inven-
tory and thus the combustion efficiency and the limestone utili-
zation are maximized.
Air Distributors and Nozzles
The furnace bottom air plenum or wind box is made of wa-
ter-cooled panels or casing depending on startup air tempera-
ture. Bubble caps are fitted on the water-cooled distributor floor
panels as shown in Fig. 2. The bubble caps are designed to dis-
tribute air uniformly, prevent the back sifting of solids at low
load operation, and create good turbulence for fuel /sorbent
mixing in the primary zone. The bubble caps are spaced 102
mm x 117 mm with 60-70% of total combustion air admitted
through the bottom. The balance 30-40% of total air is admitted
through overfire nozzles (high velocity) in the front and rear
furnace walls.
Fig. 2 Furnace distributor floor panel and bubble caps.
4 Babcock & Wilcox
1. Sidewall Membrane Panel
2. U-Beam
3. Seal Baffle
Fig. 3 U-beam primary separators—plan view.
Primary Solids Separators
The solids separation system is a key element of any CFB
boiler design. The B&W separation system is designed for the
life of the unit without replacement, influencing life cycle costs.
The B&W IR-CFB has a two stage primary solids separator as
shown in Fig. 3, comprised of in-furnace U-Beam separators
and external U-Beam separators. The in-furnace U-Beams (two
rows) are able to collect nearly 75% of the solids. The remain-
ing solids are collected by the four rows of external U-Beams
and are discharged from the hopper directly into the furnace through
the transfer hopper located beneath the external U-Beams (See Fig.
4). The flue gas velocity across the U-Beams is approximately 8-
10 m/s, limiting the gas-side pressure drop to 0.25 kPa as com-
pared with a typical cyclone separator’s pressure drop of 1.5 to 2.0
kPa. A commercially available, high-grade stainless steel material
is used for the U-Beam separators.
Secondary Solids Separator
The multicyclone dust collector (MDC) is located in the con-
vective pass either upstream or downstream of the economizer.
The MDC typically has a top inlet and top outlet as shown in
Fig. 5. The MDC tube diameter is normally 229 mm arranged
over the second pass entire cross section. The MDC provides
outstanding retainment of fine particles up to 50 microns. The
MDC collection tubes and spin vanes have high hardness (550
BHN), designed for longer life and easy replacement during
planned outages.
The small quantities of fines which escape from the external
U-Beams are collected by the MDC. The collected fines are
stored in the MDC hopper. Variable speed rotary feeders or in-
Furnace Roof
Gas Flow
In -Furnace
U-Beams
U-Beam Support
External
In -Furnace U-Beams
U-Beams
Solids
External U-Beams Transfer
Hopper
Solids Transfer Hopper
Furnace
Fig. 4 IR-CFB primary particle collection system.

Fig. 5 Multicyclone dust collector.
clined screws are used to control the ash recycle flow rate from
the hopper. Precise furnace temperature control is achieved by
adjusting the speed of the rotary feeders or inclined screws, tak-
ing the temperature signal from the furnace.
Pendant Type Superheater/Reheater
The superheater may consist of vertical pendant type pri-
mary and secondary banks, located in the convection pass, as
well as surface in the furnace in the form of superheater wing
walls. An attemperator is used to control the final steam tem-
perature over the design load range. The flue gas velocities are
relatively low and selected by considering the dust loading and
ash erosivity of the fuel. When required, the reheater is located
in the convection pass, and steam bypass is recommended to
control the final reheater temperature.
Economizer and Horizontal Tubular Air Heater
The economizer is designed with tubes running front to back
in an in-line arrangement. Flue gas velocities used consider the
dust loading and ash erosivity of the fuel. If the MDC is located
upstream of the economizer, higher velocities are used and both
the economizer and the air heater are located in an in-line ar-
rangement to minimize ash fouling. The air heater is located
after the MDC and the economizer. The flue gas is outside the
tubes and air is passed through the tubes. A hopper is provided
at the bottom of the air heater and the ash collected in the hop-
per is purged to the ash disposal system. The tube material and
flue gas velocities are selected by considering the dust loading
and the ash erosivity of the fuel. A steam coil air heater (SCAH)
is used to protect the cold end of the air heater if required.
Air-Assisted Gravity Fuel/Limestone Feed System
Fuel handling and feeding is one of the major challenges in
CFB boiler operation, especially with waste fuels because of
high fines and moisture content. The crushed fuel (6-12 mm x
0) is stored in the silo, usually located in front of the boiler as
shown in Fig. 6. Fuel is fed to the boiler via down spout from
silo discharge to feeder and a series of feeders and gravity feed
chutes. The fuel chute will have at least a 65 degree angle from
horizontal. Primary air is used to sweep the fuel into the fur-
nace and as seal air to the feeders. The number of feed points is
set to achieve even fuel distribution in the furnace.
Babcock & Wilcox
The limestone handling and feeding system is relatively
simple compared to the fuel feed system. Limestone is fed ei-
ther pneumatically or mechanically into the CFB boiler. The
pneumatic system feeds the limestone directly into the furnace
through furnace openings in the front and rear walls. In the
mechanical system, the limestone is fed into the discharge end
of the fuel feeders via rotary feeders. The limestone falls by
gravity down the fuel feed chute with the fuel into the furnace,
and is a function of fuel velocity and required emissions.
CFB Technology Comparison
Virtually all major boiler manufacturers are involved in
CFB technology. Two distinct types of solids separation sys-
tems are used. One type is cyclone–based, which provides single
stage solids collection systems, and the second type is impact
separator-based, which provides a two-stage solids separation
system. A comparison of B&W IR-CFB technology features with
those of other major commercial CFB technologies is given in
Table 4.
Advantages of the B&W IR-CFB Boiler
Technology
• Boiler is compact with primary U-Beam separators and
provides internal solids recycle.
• Boiler has a smaller foot print (up to 20 to 30% less build-
ing volume compared to a hot cyclone-based CFB boiler)
• Boiler design is especially suitable for retrofitting of older
PC-fired boilers within the existing support steel.
• Two-stage solids separation efficiency (>99.7%) provides
higher carbon efficiencies and better limestone utiliza-
tion through higher solids residence time.
• Wide turndown ratio (4:1) without auxiliary fuel is pos-
sible due to the selection of furnace velocity and control-
lable solids recycle.
• Less refractory in the boiler allows for quicker startup
and lower maintenance costs.
Fuel Silo
Down Spout
Feeder
Primary Air
Fig. 6 IR-CFB gravity feed chutes.
5
 Table 4
CFB Boiler Comparison

B&W IR-CFB Hot-Cyclone CFB “Compact” Square Cold-Cyclone CFB

Cyclone CFB

Solids Separation System Two-stage Single-stage Single-stage Single-stage

(100% efficiency (100% efficiency (100% efficiency (100% efficiency
for particles of for particles of for particles of for particles of
d>80 micron*) d>100 micron) d>100 micron) d>100 micron)

*Recycling finer particles increases furnace heat transfer rate, improves combustion
efficiency and limestone utilization.

Upper Furnace Density, 11-16 8-11 8-11 5-8

(kg/m 3)

Furnace Temperature Desired temperature Temperature is pre- Temperture is pre- Lower bed temperature
Control can be maintained determined by determined by is controlled by
within +/-5C interval furnace and heat furnace and heat adjusting cold cyclone
for wide range of exchanger design exchanger design ash recycle rate.
fuels and operating along with fuel and along with fuel and Temperature span
conditions by limestone limestone across furnace height
adjusting secondary properties/sizing. properties/sizing. is up to 100C.
solids recycle rate.

Boiler Turndown Without 5:1 3.5 : 1 3.5 : 1 3.5 : 1

Auxiliary Fuel

Refractory:
Thickness, mm 15-50 ~75 ~75 ~50

Covered Areas Lower furnace, Lower furnace, Lower furnace, Entire furnace,
U-beam zone cyclone, recycle cyclone, recycle cyclone (3-4 times
enclosure walls loop (5-10 times loop (3-5 times more than B&W
more than B&W more than B&W CFB)
CFB) CFB)

Hot-Temperature None 3-5 per cyclone Number varies with None

Expansion Joints arrangement

Furnace Velocity, m/s 4.9-7.3 4.9-5.5 4.9-5.5 4.0-4.5

Furnace Exit Velocity, m/s 6.4-9.8 22-26 22-26 ?

High-Pressure Air Not required Required for Required for Required for siphons
J-valves J-valves

Total Pressure Drop Across 1.0 1.5-2.0 ~1.5 1.0-1.5

Solids Separator(s), kPa (U-beams + MDC)

Aux. Power Consumption Lower Higher Higher Moderate

Economics of CFB Technology Reliability of CFB Technology

CFB technology can burn a wide range of low cost solid
fuels and competes well with oil/gas fired plants. The decision-
makers often ask, “What are capital and operating costs and
benefits of a CFB boiler?” The experience in Europe and North
America suggests that for a sulfur fuel (>0.5%S) and less than
150 MW, a CFB boiler has 8-15 percent lower capital costs as
well as 5-10% lower operating costs than a PC-fired boiler be-
cause of the FGD system. In general, CFB-based power plants
provide low emissions control costs and low O&M costs, which
lead to lower life cycle costs. In the end, owner profit margin
increases and payback period improves as shown in Table 5.
Costs not included in Table 5 are items such as land, project
development, permitting, escalation, taxes and owner’s costs,
since these costs are common for both PC and CFB-based power
plants.
CFB boiler design is simple and proven, compared to other
technologies. Experience indicates that operating and mainte-
nance costs are relatively lower than PC-fired boilers because
of the ability to burn lower rank fuels, thus reducing fuel cost-
escalation uncertainty. Since maintenance areas are very mini-
mal in the CFB boiler, the availability of the boiler is relatively
higher. The CFB design allows emissions reduction without sig-
nificant capital cost, since SO2 and NO x removal are inherent
within the combustion process.
Conclusion
Even though a number of competing technologies are
available in the market for steam and electric power genera-
tion, CFB is an excellent choice due to its fuel flexibility, wider

6 Babcock & Wilcox

turndown without support oil/gas, superior environmental per- design offers compact, superior performance due to two-stage
formance, lower operating and maintenance costs, and safe, re- solids separation, and is cost effective for multiple fuel firing
liable and simple boiler operation. The B&W IR-CFB boiler in both PC retrofit and greenfield applications.

Table 5
Typical Economic Evaluation for 125 MW
CFB vs. PC with FGD-Based Power Plant

Description Units CFB-Based PC w/ FGD-Based

Unit size (gross) MW e 125 125
Unit size (net) MW e 112.5 112
EPC price $ 000 120,000 134,375
Capacity factor % 85 85
Coal heating value kcal/kg 5,550 5,550
Coal cost $/MT 35 35
Limestone cost $/MT 8 8
Ash disposal cost $/MT 10 10
Annual O&M cost $ 000 3,000 3,300
Percent financed % 100 100
Debt payment term years 10 10
Interest rate % 9 9
Discount rate % 10 10
Tariff to yield 20 years, 10% ROI $/MWh 39.50 41.60
Payback period, at $45/MWh years 6.8 7.6

Notes: 1. The above analysis does not include escalation or taxes.

2. Heat rate and construction period are assumed same for both.
3. Land, project development, permitting fee, owner’s costs are not included.

References
1. Kavidass S., Alexander K.C., “Design Consideration of
B&W IR-CFB Boilers,” Power-Gen Americas ’95, Anaheim, Cali-
fornia, U.S.A., December 5-7, 1995.
2. Kavidass S., “Why CFB is perfect for India,” Powerline
Magazine, India, February 1999.
3. Kavidass S., Walker D.J., Norton G.S., “IR-CFB bringing
new life to old coal-fired boilers,” Modern Power Systems, Febru-
ary 2000.
4. Maryamchik M., Wietzke D.L.,“B&W IR-CFB Boiler Op-
erating Experience Update and Design,” Power-Gen International
’99, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A., December 2, 1999.

Copyright © 2000 by The Babcock & Wilcox Company,

a McDermott company.
All rights reserved.

No part of this work may be published, translated or reproduced in any form or by any means, or incorporated into any information retrieval system,
without the written permission of the copyright holder. Permission requests should be addressed to: Market Communications, The Babcock &
Wilcox Company, P.O. Box 351, Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A. 44203-0351.

Disclaimer

Although the information presented in this work is believed to be reliable, this work is published with the understanding that The Babcock & Wilcox
Company and the authors are supplying general information and are not attempting to render or provide engineering or professional services.
Neither The Babcock & Wilcox Company nor any of its employees make any warranty, guarantee, or representation, whether expressed or implied,
with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, product, process or apparatus discussed in this work; and neither The
Babcock & Wilcox Company nor any of its employees shall be liable for any losses or damages with respect to or resulting from the use of, or the
inability to use, any information, product, process or apparatus discussed in this work.

Babcock & Wilcox 7