erereli Topics: EPRI c5.4554 Heat rate Project 1403-3 ‘Combustion efficiency Final Report Performance testing May 1986 Instrumentation Operation Maintenance Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants Prepared by Delian Corporation Monroeville, PennsylvaniaSUBJECTS ToPics AUDIENCE BACKGROUND OBJECTIVE APPROACH RESULTS REPORT SUMMARY Steam turbines and related auxiliaries / Boilers and related auxiliaries / Plant systems and performance assessment Heat rate Instrumentation ‘Combustion efficiency Operation Performance testing Maintenance Generation engineers and managers / R&D engineers and scientists Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants ‘A1983 utility survey covering 129 units concluded that a mean heat-rate improvement of more than 400 Btu/kWh can be achieved. For a typical 500-MW fossil-fueled power plant, a 400-Btu/kWh reduction in heat rate translates into $4 million annual fuel savings. Utilities can use the guidelines presented here to implement programs to bring about these savings. Many utilities are faced with deteriorating heat-ate performance in their {ossilfueled electric power plants. Increased cycling requirements, worsen- ing fuel quality, and stringent environmental regulations have led to a gradual rise in plant heat rates since the mid-1960s. EPRI's heatrate improvement workshops in 1981 and 1983 found that most utilities had no formal heat-rate improvement programs. To develop generic guidelines enabling utilities to implement plant heat-rate improvement programs. In acquiring information for the guidelines, project investigators reviewed recent literature, focusing on the experience of utilities that have already developed heat-rate performance programs. The scope of the project em- phasized state-ofthe-art techniques and practices to maximize the applica bility of the guidelines to less-experienced ulities and those with older {ossil units. Two project advisory committees consisting of more than 30 utility representatives provided information on program justification, organi- zational structure, performance improvement, and management and training. Utility contacts and visits enabled researchers to document ‘successful heat-rate improvement activities and to note potential problems encountered. The generic guidelines developed in this project will assist utilities in estab- lishing formal heat-rate improvement programs. Recognizing the varying levels of heat-rate experiences and the various organizations within the util. ity industry, these guidelines can be applied in whole or in part to establish lor augment specific programs. Topics addressed in four major report sections are EPRI CS4s640EPRI PERSPECTIVE PROJECT + The potential benefits of heat-ate program activities and the justitica- tion for establishing a program «Initiation and implementation of a formal program, costeffective mea- ures for improving unit heat rates and methods of identifying degraded performance of critical components, and parameters that must be con- trollad for efficient unit operation + Performance measurement systems, key activities needed to sustain and enhance an existing program beyond its formative stages, and con- tinuous tracking of heat rate ‘+ Heat-rate program management, long-term organizational structure, Programs and techniques to gain support among plant operators, and training ‘To provide their customers with power at the lowest cost, utilities have identified heat-rate improvement of their fossil units as an important corporate objective. Surveys have revealed a need for guidelines such as these. This report provides utility engineers and managers with procedures for establishing a heat-rate program where none exists or for improving one under way. Activities covered in the guidelines range from program planning to implementation. Also highlighted are ideas on organizational structure and performance monitoring systems to verify and quantify heat-rate improvement. EPRI intends to demonstrate the use of these guidelines at selected utlity sites, RP1403-3, EPRI Project Manager: Frank Wong Coal Combustion Systems Division Contractor: Delian Corporation For further information on EPRI research programs, call EPRI Technical Information Specialists (416) 855-2411,Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants cS.4554 Research Project 1403-3 Final Report, May 1986 Prepared by DELIAN CORPORATION (One Monroeville Center Suite 700 Monroeville, Pennsyivania 18146 Principal Investigators A.E. Tome, Jt D. E. Leaver RG. Brown Prepared for Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94304 EPRI Project Manager Frank K. Wong Performance and Advancad Technology Program Coal Combustion Systems Division‘ORDERING INFORMATION Requests for copies of this report should be directed to the EPRI Distribution Center. 207 Coggins Drive, P.O. Box 23206, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523, (510) 994-4212. There is no charge for reports requested by EPRI member utilities. loto Power ResearenInetite snd EPA te egistared sacs mare of Bache Power Research ests ne copyright © 1966 octe Power Resear tue, ea ge eared DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY THE OAGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK ‘SPONSORED Of COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTAUG POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPR). NETHER EPRI 'ANY MEMBER OF EPR, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION|S) BELOW, WOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM {A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OF IMPLIED () WITH RESPECT TO ‘THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT. INCLUDING MEACHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, O8() THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OF INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY QMRIED RIGHTS, INCLUDING RY PARTY'S INTELLEC- TTUAL PROPERTY, OF (Il) THAT THIS AEPORT I SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTARGE; OR {@) ASSUMES RESPOUSIBILTY FOR AY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER ('NCLUDING KY CO: ‘SEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY ‘OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS REPORT OR AD INFORIAATION, ‘APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, O SIMILAA EM DISOLOSED IN THIS REPORT. ‘ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS REPORT: Delian Corporation ‘Monroeville, PennsylvaniaABSTRACT This report synthesizes the experiences of fossil utilities in the area of heat rate improvement into a set of guidelines for use by utilities who wish to either begin a heat rate improvement program or further refine an already existing program. Every utility, with the exception of those with the most sophisticated programs, should find information contained within this report that will help ‘then improve or enhance their heat rate programs. The report is structured to provide guidance to utilities in every phase of a heat rate progran including: justification, implementation, and continuance. The implementation section describes low cost activities which can be implenented at many utilities for an inmediate improvement in heat rate as well as methods for identifying the degraded performance of critical plant components which can affect unit performance. Through the use of the guidelines presented in this report, utilities will be able to structure a heat rate improvement program which fits within the limita- tions of their resources yet results in the optimum performance of their fossil- fired units.EPRI FOREWORD Heat-rate improvement is an important issue in the utility industry because of rapidly escalating fuel costs and increasing regulatory attention to power plant efficiency. Plant aging, increased cycling requirements, and new environmental controls have increased plant heat rate by 10% on average. This project was initiated to develop generic guidelines for utilities to use when establishing their own in-house heat-rate improvement programs. The guidelines in this report condense current utility industry experience and provide a methodology to solve heat-rate degradation problems in a manner thet optimizes the expenditure of utility capital and the use of manpower resources. Both technical and programmatic issues are covered. Two project utility advisory committees (East Coast and West Coast) were particularly helpful in providing the utility input to these guidelines. The two committees consisted of more than 30 utility representatives including plant engineers, design engineers, and research and development managers. Utility contacts and visits enabled the contractor (Delian Corporation) to document successful heat-rate improvement activities and to note potential problems encountered. The guidelines apply to heat-rate improvement programs that are new or extensions of ongoing ones. For example, section 4 of this report describes various levels of performance measurement systems that can be considered, ranging from periodic off-line testing systems to continuous wonitoring with on-line cathode-ray tube operator interface systens. A follow-on demonstration phase of this project is now under way. Host utilities have been solicited to apply these guidelines at their selected power plents and to establish current performance, identify heat-rate losses, define achievable goals, and implement performance optimization activities. The guidelines in this report will subsequently be expanded and updated to reflect the additional knowledge and practical experience gained in the demonstration phase.‘An estimated 300-500-Btu/kwh improvement in heat rate fs a realistic target. Ina 1983 survey of utilities covering 129 units, mean potential heat-rate improve- ment of nearly 400 Btu/kkh was regarded as achievable. For a typical 500-MW unit, ‘2 400-Btu/kwh reduction in heat rate translates into a $4 miIlfon per year fuel savings. Frank K. L. Wong, Project Manager Coal Combustion Systems Division viACKNOWLEDGMENTS This progect could not have been successfully completed without the assistance and cooperation of the many utilities that provided information for use in this report. We were always extended the warmest welcome, our endless questions and requests for information met with patience, and access to information, plants, and personnel enthusiastically provide by every utility visited. Particular thanks goes to the utility Steering Committee which was set up to direct and review the progress of this project. We would like to extend our thanks and gratitude excellent comprised to the Steering Committee members, any one of whom would be an supplemental source of information. The Steering Committee was of the following utility personnel. Roy E. Peffley and Dean Cross of Lansing Board of Water and Light Roger Roosa of Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation Alan Sloboda of Boston Edison Company Edward Strickland of Carolina Power and Light Company Robert H. Waskey, Jr. and Richard W. Perry of Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Dominick DiGiorgio, Jr. and William Reilly of Consolidated Edison Company Dr. Richard Jaworski and Lee Harrow of Onaha Public Power District Daniel Bernt of Northern States Power Company Bruce A. Bowers of Minnesota Power Company Anthony Warburton of Sierra Pacific Power Company Stanley V, Wanklyn of Florida Power and Light Company G. Bruce Golden of Houston Lighting and Power Company Eileen Pitchford and James E. Hamann of Lower Colorado River Authority Dale Luksan of Consumers Poner Company viiJohn Lungren of Colorado-Ute Electric Company Travis L. Neador of Salt River Project James A, Panacek of Public Service Electric and Gas Company Timothy Peterson of £1 Paso Electric and Gas Company Jye-Fu Shiau of Tennessee Valley Authority Joseph Sind of Union Electric Company Glenn Conover of Utah Power and Light Al De Weese of San Diego Gas and Electric Company Philip W. Copsey of Dayton Power and Light Company Joseph S. Davis of Duke Power Company Harold ¢. Crim of Potomac Electric Power Company David Devendorff of Niagara Mohawk Power Company Gregory L. Hauger of Public Service of Indiana Bruce Insdahl of Nontana-Dakota Utilities George C. Julovich of Northern Indiana Public Service Company Stanley W. Lovejoy of Long Island Lighting Company David Potthoff of Towa Power and Light Company Bryan Eskra of Wisconsin Electric Power Company viiiCONTENTS: Section 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 2.1 Background 1.2 Project Motivation 1.3 Purpose of Guidelines 2 HEAT RATE PROGRAM JUSTIFICATION Incremental Cost Curve Estimation Efficient Unit Operation Predictive Maintenance Comparison of Equipment Performance Against Contract Guarantee 2. 2 2s 2s 2.5 Baselining and Tracking Unit Performance 3. INITIATING A FORMAL HEAT RATE PROGRAM 3.1 Estimating Current Unit Performance 3.1.1 Accounting Heat Rate 31112 Operating Heat Rates 3.1.3 Fuel Measuring and Sampling 3.2. Determining Best Achievable Performance 3.2.1 Best Achievable Performance Over a Load Range 3.2.2 Best Achievable Performance Over a Time Period 3.3. Characterizing Unit Performance 3.3.1 Limited Cycle Evaluation 3.3.2 Performance Parameter Monitoring 3.3.3. Performance Testing 3.4 Improving Unit Performance 3.4.1 Short Term Achievable Heat Rate 3.4.2 Long Term Achievable Heat Rate 4 GUIDELINES FOR SELECTION OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Criteria For Performance Measurement Systems 4.2.1 Basic Objectives of Performance Measurement 4.2.2 Levels of Achievement and Associated Criteria ixCONTENTS (continued) Section 4.3. Expanded Definitions of Criteria 4 Efficient Unit Operation Maintenance Planning Special Investigations for Performance Problem Solving Input/Output Curve Definition Acceptance Testing and Baselining of Equipment Performance 4.4 Use of Performance Measurenent System Criteria and Example System Descriptions 5 CONTINUING HEAT RATE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 5.1 Organization and Responsibilities 5.1.1 Role of General Office Group 5.1.2 Role of Stations 5.2 Information Flow 5.2.1 Periodic Results Meeting 5.2.2 Results Reporting 5.2.3 Procedures 5.2.4 Audits 5.2.5 Participation in Utility Owners Groups 5.3 Motivation of Personnel 5.3.1 Establish Corporate and Station Goals 5.3.2. Direct Motivation of Station Personnel 5.4 Training 5.4.1 Training of Operators and Technical Service Personne? 5.4.2. Training of Engineers 5.5. Securing Management. Support 6 REFERENCES APPENDIX A HEAT RATE LOGIC TREE APPENDIX B PERFORNANCE PARAMETER ACCOUNTING MANUAL B.1 High Pressure Turbine Efficiency B.2_ Intermediate Pressure Turbine EfficiencySection APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX E CONTENTS (continued) 3 Main Steam Pressure 4 Main Steam Temperature 5 Reheat Tenperature 6 Superheater Attenperation 7 Reheat Attenperation 8 Excess Air (0,) 9 Exit Gas Température 10 Condenser Beck Pressure 11 Unburned Carbon 12 Coal Moisture 33 Auxiliary Power 14 Makeup 15 Feedvater Heater Performance 46 Reduced Load Operation 17 Startup DESCRIPTIONS OF SIX OPERATING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS C.1 Format of Example Systems Descriptions €.2_ System Descriptions MANUAL HEAT BALANCE SENSITIVITY STUDIES 1 Introduction 2 Effect of a Change in Throttle Pressure 3 Effect of a Change in Throttle Tenperature "4 Effect of @ Change in Reheat Temperature 5 Effects of Superheat Attemperation 6 Effect of Reheat Attemperation BIBLIOGRAPHY xiILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1-1 12 3-1 32 34 365 3-6 3-88 3-8b 368 369 3410 3411 3-12 3-13 Difference Between 1980 Actual Heat Rate and Design Heat Rate for Baseload Units Estimated Potential Heat Rate Inprovenent Definitions of Standards for Thermal Efficiency Hypothetical Heat Rate Curves Exanple of a Typical Power Distribution Plot Comparison of Calculated and Measured Wet Sulb Temperature Thermal Effects of Alternate Heater Drains Example of Parameter Trending with Design Envelope Superimposed Example of Trended Parameter with Regression Curve Superimposed Hypothetical First Trend of Nonitored Paraneter First Trend of Monitored Parameter with a Regression Curve Superimposed Last Trend of the Monitored Parameter Effect of Excess Air on Dry Gas and Incompleted Combustion Heat Losses (0, Generation as a Function of Excess Air Typical CO vs. 0, Curves for Primary Fuels Determining Optimum CO Setpoint Optimization of Feedwater Heater Liquid Level 3-14 Main Steam Temperature Decision Tree 41 42 5-1 Turbine Efficiency Example of Unit Efficiency Multipliers for Adjusting Input/Output Curve Typical Utility Organization xiii 3-68 3479 3-79 3-81 3-81 3-86 3-92 415 4-25 54ILLUSTRATIONS (continued) Figure 5-2 Typical Utility Organization 5-3 Conceptual Model of General Office Performance Group 5-4 Results Reporting Form As1 Heat Rate Logic Tree—Main Diagram A-2 Heat Rate Logic Tree—foiler Losses A-3. Heat Rate Logic Tree—Dry Gas Losses An4 Heat Rate Logic Tree—Turbine Cycle Losses A-5 Heat Rate Logic Tree—Cooling Water Cycle Losses A-6 Heat Rate Logic Tree—Turbine Losses A-T Heat Rate Logic Tree—Electrical Auxiliary Losses A-8 Heat Rate Logic Tree—Steam Auxiliary, Fuel Handling, and Heat Losses A-9 Cycle Isolation C-1 Block Diagram for System #1 C-2 Flow Diagram of Performance Calculations (+3 Block Diagram of Microprocessor System C-4 Block Diagram for System #3 €-5 Data Scanning Program (-6 Data Analysis Program C-7 Typical Heat Balance Diagram Plotted Out by the System (-8 Block Diagram for System #4 C-9 Example of 24 Hour Heat Rate Display for System #4 xiv Page 55 5-15 Ae? An3 AAS Ab AT AB Ad A-10 5 CL C21 24 (225 31 ¢-37 C43,ILLUSTRATIONS (continued) Figure C-10 Format of the Demand Performance Log for System #4 C-11 Block Diagram for System #5 C-12 Software Flow Dizgram C-13 Example Graph of Fuel Savings Versus Time (System 45) C-14 Block Diagram for System #6 C-15 Turbine Test Data Aquisition System C-16 Testing Section Computer Program Organization C-17 Typical Pressure Transducer Set-up D-1 Example Unit Configuration D-2 Typical High Pressure Turbine Efficiency Curve Xv Page C85 49 c-52 c-60 c-63 c-64 c-70 cre Deg D8TABLES Table 2-1 Impact of Performance Parameter Deviation on Heat Rate 2-2 Priority Ranking of Efficiency-Related Najor Maintenance and Nodi fication Projects 3-1 Impact of Performance Parameter Deviation on Heat Rate 3-2, Performance Parameters 3-3 Parameters Most Often Monitored by Utilities With Controllable Loss Programs and Their Typical Deviations 3-4 Example Calculation of Heat Rate Loss by Parameter Deviation Nethod 3-5 Thermal Effects of Alternate Heater Drains 3-6 List of Possible Efficiency-Rated Routine Maintenance Tasks 3-7 Effects of Feedwater Heater Removal From Service on Unit Heat Rate 4-1 Achievement Levels and Associated Criteria for Performance Measurement System Objectives 4-2. Sunmary of System Description in Appendix ¢ C-1 List of Hardware for System #1 C-2 List of Hardware for System #2 (-3 Test Instrument Calibration C-4 Example Test Results Summary for System #2 C-5 List of Test Hardware for System #3 G-6 Test Instrument Calibration €-7 Sample Data Scanning Program Output C-8 Sample Data Scanning Program Output C-9 Sample Data Scanning Program Output xvii Page 268 314 3425 3-29 3-32 3-58 3-65 3-86 4-6 4-28 C4 C12 c-13 c-19 c-22 26 c-32 +33 6-34TABLES (continued) Table C-10 Sample Analytical Program Output C-11 List of Hardware for System #4 (-12 Controllable Parameters C-13 Hardware List for Existing System C-14 Example of Hourly Trend Data for System #5 (+15 Example Monthly Performance Report for System #5 C-16 Hardware List for System #6 D-1 Design Parameter at VWO xviiiSection 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY il BACKGROUND Since the mid sixties, the average heat rates of fossil fueled electric power plants in the United States have gradually increased. Several factors contributed to this slow degradation in unit performance. One important reason was the introduction of nuclear generating units to shoulder an increasing share of the baseload generation, and the anticipation of a large expanding nuclear construction program in the next several decades. With these Tow cost generating units forecast to provide a large fraction of the baseload capacity, utilities devoted less attention to the maintenance and upkeep of their older fossil stations in anticipation of their retirement. This became particularly true as nuclear construction costs escalated, reducing the funds available for maintaining fossil station performance as well as diverting the attention of utility upper management from the operation of these stations. For those utilities that brought nuclear units on line, many of the fossil plants that formerly comprised their system's baseload capacity were changed to cycling duty. The thermal inefficiencies associated with start-ups, shutdowns, and swings in Joad, as well as extended periods of operation at Tess than full power resulted in increased heat rates for these units. In addition, environmental regulation was enacted that forced many utilities to retrofit eneray consuming pollution control equipment. Finally, in some areas, decreasing coal quality has contributed to a reduction in unit performance. In the last decade, this performance degradation has become a more visible issue. This awareness was brought into focus by the rapidly escalating fuel costs of the seventies. Rising fuel costs, which in most states are passed directly through to the customer, caught the attention of the rate payers and the state regulatory agencies that oversee utility operation, As a result, Public Service Commissions are now paying close attention to the efficiency of utility operations. In some LLstates, legislation has been enacted that penalizes utilities for the poor performance of their units by disallowing recovery of part of these expenses as permitted by their fuel adjustment clause, or otherwise reducing rate increase requests. The problem of improving fossil plant heat rates is made more difficult by the penalties associated with backfitting pollution control equipment, declining coal quality, and aging of operating fossil units. This latter concern 1s becoming particularly important as utilities look to extend the operating life of their fossil units as an alternative to financing new plant construction. Nevertheless, utilities stil] recognize that there is room for improvement, and that improvenents in heat rate can be realized. This was demonstrated by a survey conducted as part of the project described in this report. A poll of performance engineers and managers from over 50 utilities indicated there was an average deviation of almost 1000 Btu/kih between the actual heat rate of operating baseload units and the design value specified when the machine was constructed (see Figure 1-1). Of this deviation, the survey respondents estimated that 419 Btu/kWh (on average) could be recovered (See Figure 1-2). Similar results were reported for cycling fossil units. Extrapolating these results to the entire industry indicates that @ substantial savings in fuel costs can be achieved. In an effort to provide their customers with power at the lowest possible cost as well as respond to the denands of the regulator, many utilities have established heat rate improvement of their fossil units as an important objective. To assist utilities in their effort to improve the heat rate of their fossil plants, the Electric Power Research Institute has initiated several research projects to address utility needs, The EPRI goal is to provide the technology to help utilities achieve a 3 percent {improvement in existing plant heat rate and a 10 percent improvement in the performance of new generating units. The key projects in this effort include: Heat Rate Improvement in Existing Fossil Plants (RP-1403-3) Plant Performance Monitoring and Instrumentation System (RP-1681) Improved Coal-fired Power Plant Development (RP-1403-4) Root Cause Analysis of Power Plant Performance Problems (RP=1711-2) Current Fossil Fuel Power Plant Performance Monitoring (RP-1737-2) 12Ibe of Resonese 43 as n ean 998 Besta. 2 20 a8 as 4 i 40 A 2 Pa er er er a) iererece (a/b) Figure 1-1, Difference Between 1980 Actual Heat Rate and Design Heat Rate for Baseload Units vA aA FA > a 1900 1500 Ditterence (Beulah) Figure 1-2. Estimated Potential Heat Rate Improvement 13This report is the product of the first of these projects. The following sections discuss the motivation behind this project and the purpose of the resulting heat rate guidelines. 1.2 PROJECT NOTIVATION The genesis of this project was the utiTity feedback received at the EPRI Heat Rate Improvement Workshop held in August, 1981 at Charlotte, North Carolina, In working group discussions among utility engineers and in the response to a questionnaire distributed at the workshop, there was a strong expression of the need for some guidance in developing formal heat rate improvement programs. In responses to the survey, advising EPRI on the direction of future research, two of the strongest recommendations were that EPRI develop guidelines to assist utilities in establishing a formal heat rate improvement program, and provide some methods and direction to help utilities identify and resolve heat rate problems cost effectively. The first reconmendation led to the establishment of EPRI Research Project 1403-3, "Heat Rate Improvenent In Existing Fossil Plants." The guidelines developed by this project in conjunction with a companion EPRI project, 1711-2, "Root-Cause Investigation of Power Plant Performance Problems", will provide utilities with guidance required to identify sources of heat rate degradation at their units and solve these problems in a menner which minimizes the expenditure of utility capital and manpower resources. The 1981 Heat Rate Improvement Workshop survey also indicated that nearly 80% of the utilities represented at the heat rate conference had no formal heat rate ‘improvenent. prograns or had programs that had been in existence for two years or less. This indicates that four out of five of these utilities could use help in either establishing a program or in refining a program in the formative stages. With this information, the scope of the guidelines was expanded to address the needs of not only those utilities wo wished to inaugurate heat rate programs, but also toward those utilities who wished to improve upon already existing programs. 1.3 PURPOSE OF GUIDELINES The purpose of the heat rate guidelines is to provide utility engineers and their managers with a tool which will aid them in either establishing a heat rate ‘improvenent program, where none exists, or in improving 2 heat rate program, 14where a rudimentary program may exist. Recognizing that there are varying levels of heat rate experience and organization within utilities, it is neither possible nor appropriate to develop a set of specific procedures that will be applicable to a given utility, Therefore, the project focused on developing a generic planning tool which could be applied by individual utilities to establish or augment specific programs that are taflored to their particular needs. Rather than providing guidelines which contain significant technical details on the conduct of performance analysis, the focus will be on the information and insights to help prioritize components of a heat rate program and to aid utilities in the decision making required to justify resource commitments. The intent of the project can be summarized as follows: To synthesize and condense current industry experience into a set of useable guidelines, @ To document what is being done with proven technology on operating plants, and @ To consider the needs of utilities that are under severe constraints with regard to available resources, by documenting cost effective measures which can be taken to improve heat rate. One observation from reviewing recent literature and monitoring utility feedback at the early heat rate conferences was that most of the papers were being written by the same utilities. These were utilities who had established heat rate programs. For the most part, the subjects of these papers dealt with program activities at @ level of sophistication that was far beyond the experience base and resource limitations of most other utilities. This gap left most of these utility personnel wondering how to develop comparable programs at their companies. Many also wondered if there were any intermediate levels at which credible ‘improvements in heat rate could be achieved without requiring huge capital expenditures. These utilities needed the answer to many basic questions, such as: - What are the potential benefits of heat rate program activities, and how can data generated by these activities be used to justify a formal, continuing program to management? (Section 2). = What are the initial steps that should be taken to develop a formal heat rate improvement program? (Section 3). - What cost effective measures can be taken to improve heat rate at a unit? (Section 3). 18= What parameters need to be controlled to ensure the most efficient operation of a unit? (Section 3). - What are the key activities to sustain and enhance an existing program beyond its formative stages? (Section 4). = lihat_ types of performance monitoring and turbine testing systems exist, and what are their potential roles in a developing program? (Section 4). ~ hat programs and techniques can be used to gain the support and generate enthusiasm for perforance among plant operators and other personnel? (Section 5). - How can utility management be convinced of the need for a heat rate improvenent program? (Section 5). These are some of the questions which have been addressed by these guidelines and form the basis for their outline. The sections that address these basic questions are noted in parentheses above. In acquiring the information to answer these questions, it was recognized that considerable experience already exists among sone of the utilities with more advanced performance programs. It was determined that assimilation of the experience of these utilities in developing their programs would provide the most relevant and effective guidance for utilities that currently have little or no experience in heat rate improvement. Hence, the information gathering for RP-1403-3 was focused on this valuable resource of utility experience. The scope of this research was generally restricted to state-of-the-art techniques and practices to maximize the applicability of the guidelines to the lesser experienced utilities and those with older fossil units. In inquiring about the historical evolution of existing utility prograns, information was acquired on what activities were not successful, as well as those that worked. This enabled ‘the guidelines to note potential problem areas that might be encountered in developing a formal heat rate inprovement program. These guidelines should provide useful advice and information to a utility independent of their current level of heat rate experience. This report is structured to allow a utility to recognize the level of sophistication of its heat rate improvenent efforts, help identify achievable activities (including managenent and organizational activities) that will enhance and expand their program, and assist in estimating the costs associated with achieving this next level of program evolution.Section 2 HEAT RATE PROGRAM JUSTIFICATION A utility, by its charter, should be dedicated to providing the public with the best possible service. Hence, striving to improve the efficiency of its operations should be a continuing objective of a reasonable company. Heat rate improvement provides a direct benefit to the customer by lowering the costs passed through to the customer via the fuel adjustment clause. By saving money for its customers, the company enhances its image in its service area, and lessens the chance of creating adverserial relationships with the public and ‘their representatives on the Public Service Commission. Utility personnel unanimously agree that the most essential elenent of a successful heat rate program is management support. This support must permeate all levels of utility management. For the utility engineer wishing to implement a heat rate program at their utility and desiring to obtain management support, it fs extremely beneficial to know the motivational forces which inspire the decision process within the utility managenent structure. Many times the benefits of efficient operation may not be inmediately obvious and a utility engineer faced with the prospect of convincing managenent of the efficiency of supporting oF developing @ heat rate program confronts a formidable task. A survey of utilities conducted at the outset of this project attempted to tdentify the reasons utilities instituted heat rate programs. The main reasons for the implementation or support of heat rate programs were the desire to increase profits by loxering fuel costs through more efficient generation and to better relations between the utility and its rate payers by lowering the cost of electricity. There were other responses that received recognition as factors in the establishment of a heat rate program which are interesting and should be presented. These were: © Contribute to improved unit availability through the early detection of problems. © Eliminate or postpone the need for additional generating capacity.© — Reduce maintenance costs through predictive analysis and diagnostic testing. © Establish a core of highly trained, skilled technical personnel capable of consulting with the plant staff on problems affecting unit availability and heat rate. This section is intended to provide qualitative reasons for utility management support of a heat rate program. Hopefully, the rational of these points will convince management of the worthiness of a program based on its own merits without the need for detailed cost justifications. From the results of the survey presented above, it can be seen that one of the stimuli for the implementation of a program is return-on-investment (ROI) and at some point management will require @ demonstration of the potential benefits, This is the beginning of a "one step at a time" approach to heat rate improvement. The following reasons are designed to provide the motivation for management to desire ‘a more complete analysis of potential heat rate improvement on a unit-by-unit basis. ‘An understanding of how performance data are used is a fundamental starting point in formulating a heat rate program. With this understanding cones the ability to estimate the benefits of collecting various types of datas to make or influence decisions regarding resource commitments to collect and analyze datas and to modify plant operation, maintenance, and design to improve heat rate. In many circumstances, the benefits may not be easily defined or quantifiable or may be partly political, or it may not even be clear exactly who is benefitting. It is extremely beneficial to know the motivational forces which inspire decision making within the utility managenent structure in order to judge which of the below reasons are most likely to elicit a favorable response. A heat rate program is in actuality the generation of performance parameters which characterize the operation of a unit. By developing appropriate performance gauges, the utility engineer is in @ position to either make inmediate corrections in performance, or estimate when it would be cost effective to make corrections. The uses of performance data and the benefits to be derived by the utility have been defined in terms of the type of action or decisions which can be influenced by that data. Five types of actions have been identified based upon the typical uses utilities have made of performance data. These actions are:1. Improved economic dispatch of units 2, Improved unit operation 3, Predictive maintenance 4, Comparison of equipment performance against contract guarantees 5, Baselining and tracking unit performance Each of these actions will be described in more detail in the sections which follow. 21 INCREMENTAL COST CURVE ESTIMATION units within a utility system and within a power pool are dispatched, i.c., Toaded upon the grid, based upon their incremental cost curve. In addition to its usefulness for economic dispatch, the incremental cost curve is also used in production simulation for maintenance planning and projecting fuel procurement needs and for pricing of power for sale or resale. The benefit of accurate input/output data for a unit (and the benefit of an accurate increnental cost curve) will depend upon the particular utility system which the unit is a part and on how the unit is operated. One example that illustrates the importance of accurately knowing a units generation costs 1s in the case of sale of power for resale. In this example consider utility A (a seller) whose actual cost of generation is 2.1é/kWh and utility B (2 buyer) whose actual cost of generation is 6¢/kwh. If the two utilities agree to split the difference of the cost of generation as the terms for the purchase of power by utility B, the revenue to utility A would be 4,05¢/khh or 1.95¢/kMh profit. If, however, utility A has incorrectly estimated ‘its generation costs to be 2.0¢/kWh (a 5% error) it would then receive 4.0¢/khh fron utility 8 for a paper profit of 2.0¢/kWh, a difference of .05 Wh. If sale for resale power comprises a substantial fraction of total generation for utility A, the benefit of accurate generation cost data are significant. In the above example, a utility selling 500,000 MW-hours per year would Tose $250,000 per year fron not knowing their generation costs accurately. The estimation of the unit incremental cost curve utilizes input/output (1/0) data for the unit. 1/0 data are obtained in two ways. One is by varying unit load and measuring the rate of energy into the bofler (f.e., fuel flow and heating value) and poner produced by the generator (i.e., poner at the generator 2-3bus bar). This approach is practical for oft and gas units where the technology for reasonably accurate fuel flow measurements and relatively consistent fuel heating values exist. However, for coal units this approach is Tess than optimum due to the difficulty in obtaining accurate coal flow measurements and due to the constantly changing heating value of the fuel. The possibility of introducing errors into the cost curves is high. for the most part a unit's incremental cost curve is based upon estimates of a unit's performance which are nontypical of that unit's actual performance. For example, a unit may be operating with some equipment problem which is affecting its heat rate yet no adjustments are made to that unit's incremental curves to account for the decreased (less efficient) performance. A second approach to obtaining 1/0 data, which may be more suitable for pulver~ ized coal-fired units, is to measure turbine heat rate vs. load (corrected to standard conditions), botler efficiency vs. load, and then calculate energy input rate for various values of power output according to: Rate of Energy = Corrected Turbine Heat Rate (Btu/kih)* Input (Btu/hr) Gross Generation/Boiler Efficiency Once the 1/0 data are obtained, an 1/0 model must be developed which fits the data and also meets the constraints of operation. The mein constraint is that the input/output curve, fitted through the unit valve points, must be monotonically increasing with a concave upward curvature, This curve is then differentiated to obtain the increnental heat rate curve which, together with fuel and maintenance costs, yields the incremental cost curve. It is worth noting that EPRI Project RP1681, “Plant Performance Monitoring and Information System", is addressing the question of the development of on-line ‘incremental cost curves. A description of the activities of this project can be found in Reference 1, 2.2 EFFICIENT UNIT OPERATION Efficient unit operation has been referred to by utility personnel as the prime motivator of a sound heat rate program. The desire for efficient unit operation should be dictated by sound business practices and the desire to generate a utilities main product, power, as economically as possible.However, with fuel adjustment clauses (FAC), many people believe that utilities have no incentive to operate their units in an efficient manner, Still, more and more utilities are being scrutinized by both the rate payers and Public Service Commissions for the demonstration of sound management practices. This examination is in the form of managenent, availability and heat rate audits. Many of these same Public Service Commissions are even setting heat rate and availability goals which utilities must meet prior to the granting of rate increases. Unfortunately, most times these bonus/penalty programs are heavily weighted on the penalty side. The use of performance data are of particular value as an aid in achieving efficient unit operation. For every Toad point at which a unit operates there are specific values of key performance parameters at which the unit operates at peak efficiency. When the unit is operated at an off-design condition, the unit is operating inefficiently and the utility is spending more money, in the form of fuel costs, to produce an equivalent amount of power. Not every performance parameter is equal in its effect on the efficiency of the unit. Some parameters have a more pronounced effect on heat rate than do others. The total effect which any one performance parameter has upon heat rate is Proportional to the amount that parameters deviates from its optimum value. The ‘importance of sone of these parameters are highly dependent upon specific design features of the plant while others are consistent among units of different design. A list of some of the more important performance parameters, ranked by their effect on heat rate assuming a devietion equivalent to one engineering unit, 1s shown in Table 2-1, This table fs an average of performance parameter effects supplied by a number of utilities. These effects are determined either fron the plant thermal kit or as a result of heat balance code sensitivity analyses. The effect of operating a unit at off design conditions will be explored in further detail in Section 3.3. However, the effect of operating with just one parameter off-design can be seen in the following example. Consider a 400NW unit operating at a capacity factor of 80% which is burning fuel costing $2.00 per NBtu. Using the value of 1.4 Btu/khh/°F deviation from Table 2-1, a 20°F deviation in throttle temperature would result in an annual loss of $157,000.Table 2-1 IMPACT OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEVIATION ON HEAT RATE Engineering Variation Performance Parameter Units (E.U.) (Btu/kihr/E.U.) Condenser Backpressure Ing 204.0 Auxiliary Power % 86.0 L.P. Efficiency g 57.0 Excess Oxygen % 2914 Makeup £ 24.0 H. P, Efficiency % 18.8 I, P. Efficiency % 14:5, Unburned Carbon ‘ 7 Feedwater Inlet Temperature oF 8.7 Coal Moisture 78 Flue Gas Temperature oF 27 Main Steam Temperature oF La Hot Reheat Temperature °F 1:3 Main Steam Pressure psia 04 2.3 PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE Predictive maintenance is an area which can draw heavily on the performance data generated by a heat rate program to aid in outlining a comprehensive maintenance progran and be used as input into the maintenance decision making process. There ‘are several ways in which the use of performance data can enhance utility predictive maintenance activities. These include using performance date for preventive maintenance planning, predicting equipment maintenance or modification needs, and cost/benefit evaluations of maintenance projects. Efficiency related preventive maintenance is defined as that which is expected to be regularly required to prevent or minimize the degradation of equipment which reduces the efficiency of the unit. Examples of efficiency related preventive maintenance include inspection and checks of fuel supply system components, control system components, fuel burning equipment, heat transfer surfaces, instrumentation, fan blades, fen and pump motors, and steam traps and drains. The need to periodically perform a particular task and the tine interval between task performance is based on past experience, vendor recommendations, or degradation of a performance parameter.One way in which performance data can aid in preventive maintenance planning is through the use of heat rate deviation data such as shown in Table 2-1. These data identify the parameters which are the major contributors to heat rate degradetion. Each of these parameters has associated with it a set of equipment whose operation directly influences the performance of that parameter. This can be used as a simple guideline for the establishment of a preventive maintenance program. Neans of using the data provided in Table 2-1 and other mechanisms for specifying a preventive maintenance program will be given in Section 3.4. Predicting the need for maintenance or cycle modification 1s another potentially valuable use of performance data. There are several examples of utilities which have identified efficiency degradation through their testing programs and then have justified an early unit outage based upon the savings associated with correcting the efficiency losses. Other utilities have used the results of testing or the trending of performance paraneters to predict the condition of the ‘turbine prior to a scheduled overhaul. This allows the utility to order critical parts in advance to minimize the length of the outage. Examples of maintenance activities which can be influenced by performance data are: condenser tube cleaning, sootblowing, turbine nozzle block repair or replacement, turbine blade repair or replacement, contro? system tuning, repair or replacement, location and repair of cycle water losses, and location and repair of boiler casing leaks. On an industry wide basis, the use of performance data to predict maintenance needs is an action which could be used to a much greater benefit than it currently is. A third use of performance data in predictive maintenance is as @ factor in the cost/benefit evaluation of maintenance and modification projects. Some utilities have cultivated a disciplined capability to make decisions on improvement projects based on cost/benefit ratios. The costs and benefits relative to heat rate inprovenent include the project costs (labor and material), lost revenue costs for the outage, and fuel costs with and without the modification. Performance data are required to estimate the fuel savings and also to aid in identifying the root cause of the problem and designing a modification to resolve the problem and designing a modification to resolve the problem. An example of an actual utility project priority ranking for a unit is shown in Table 2-2. Such @ ranking could be used as @ decision tool for allocating limited capital dollars to efficiency improvement projects.*,o4quo> [anal 493.204 soueuisosag “o00' Is $ € “ooo'zet $ weqempaas aanssaid-Mo| aoeidey 499284 4azeMpae $ *sua|ouquo9 [aray 499204 aouemosueg “000° sors. 9 “ooo'os $ uaqempaas aunssoud-ybiy aoe_dey 494294 saneMpaad 2 *seipung agny ajay uazenpaas aanssaad aoueitiosted 00* 6Iss of “000° 000*e$ -yOhY paresJojazep aly aoeiday ——uaqeay! segeMpeed 9 *(sipsaueg aye4 aoueuios yeoy Kuepuoses ua! -aad 4a5uapuo9 ‘quoudinda 10J warShs Sujuea{> Supqany uey “ono'se $ z “oootzy $ ‘ygeuogne Aasuapuoo 1404 1 [e3SUT seud-paod0d € suoyaeLAap aya oasuod oy voy zoe aqefadoudde 992% luayg ue> Jo3evado ay, *stanat unwy3do woay suo}rey nap sreuy pue squauaunseau vajaueued Bul yesado fox [Le 40 Sao3etodo 3}un 03 Aeldsip dydess aq L Lb papniouy *4aqndo2. $S9904d 6u}351x9 03 Bul sayouataissa *000' 198s 05 “oootost $ ~uo3 uo aouewojiad a3e4 4294 PPY yun 1 aunssaid *ooo'ztes at "000" 000*z$ swoasfs Suyues|> sasuapuod | [eysur yoeg sasuapuo) L *soaten uorye4a =duaaye qeayau aoeiday * 10/3U09 uot ze49 “ooo' ects ot “oootose § aumpesaduoa 40J SuaHo[q 3008 957) -dusaay 228yay ’ RTS) BuEReS “(u/s TS) 4505 WoO JO VOT ISeq SOT IA aay Lenuuy ° aaey ae uy pageuasa ROH JO eody Aa LOL ad paqoadya —uoyzonpay —40-pagabpng paqoadyg $19300Ud NOTIVOTJTOON ONY JOMVNBLNTWN YOPWM G31Y79N-AINITIIIST 40 ONIANYY ALTYOTYE 2-2 aiaeL, 2-824 COMPARISON OF EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE AGAINST CONTRACT GUARANTEE This application of performance data is primarily for acceptance testing during start-up of new units. The ASME has developed detailed testing procedures for the acceptance testing of every major cotsponent comprising 2 modern power plant. Honever, due to the complexities and cost of performing these tests less than 15% of new units have had ASME acceptance tests performed, However, the Power Test Code committees are continually revising many of the tests to make them less expensive to perform while retaining the accuracy of the original tests. With the tests becoming simpler to perform, many utilities have found it beneficial to develop the capability of conducting their onn acceptance tests. This gives then the ability to verify the performance of a component as well as to perform periodic tests to trend its performance. In those cases where the utility feels that the ASME Power Test Codes are too cumbersome they have used then as guidelines in developing simplified testing procedures which provide them with the information they consider essential in monitoring unit performance. 25 BASELINING AND TRACKING UNIT PERFORMANCE As mentioned in the previous section, most utiTities do not perform initial ASME acceptance tests of their units. This leaves them in the positton of not knowing what the performence of their units was originally. They do not have an acceptable benchmark for gauging the performance of their unit in the future. Even without an initial acceptance test, it is beneficial for a utility to baseline or benchmark the performance of their unit. This allows future performance to be compared to some relative standard. The’ generation of performance date are fundamental to the baselining and tracking of unit performance. Methods of tracking unit performance are through the conduct of periodic component tests, by establishing the actual and best achievable performance levels of the unit, and through deviation accounting. AIT of these methods are described in Section 3.3.Section 3 INITIATING A FORMAL HEAT RATE PROGRAM This section of the heat rate guidelines provides a step-by-step approach for ‘implementing a heat rate improvement program. While it is intended primarily for the use of those utilities interested in initfating heat rate programs, there are areas which may be of interest to those utilities who have heat rate programs in existence yet wish to institute more advanced activities. The heat rate activ- ities discussed in this section can be performed without the need of plant computers or microprocessors. While certainly not a necessity for a successful heat rate program, these tools can further enhance the quality of a program and the efficiency with which program activities are performed. The uses of comput- ers ina heat rate program will be discussed in detail in Section 4.0. There are a number of activities associated with implementing a heat rate pro- gram, These activities are designed to accomplish several objectives. These objectives include providing information to justify heat rate program expendi- tures, identifying areas of concentration for heat rate improvement activities at individual units, identifying low cost activities to achieve heat rate improve ment, and providing the foundation for establishing a dynamic, continuing heat rate program, The key to achieving these objectives is the realization and demonstration of heat rate improvement at the utility's power stations, In general, heat rate improvement at a unit involves three functions: © Establishing the current performance of the unit. © Establishing the best achievable performance of the unit. © Defining and implementing a program to achieve optimum unit performance. The means and methods for performing each of the above functions is the central focus for this section of the guidelines. To improve unit performance neither ‘the first nor second components listed above are essential. If a performance engineer knows that there is room for heat rate improvement they can innediately begin to implement the steps of the third component. However, if the performance 31engineer is to measure the success of a heat rate improvement program, he will need some yardstick against which to make that measurement. Performing steps one and two can also be used to demonstrate to utility management the magnitude of a heat rate problem and can be used by the performance engineer to perform an economic justification of performance activities. Therefore, while it can be concluded that the first and second steps are optional, it will be shown in the following discussions that there is a benefit to performing them. 3.1 ESTIMATING CURRENT UNIT PERFORMANCE Although the specific objectives of @ heat rate improvenent program will vary fron utility-to-utility and from plant-to-plant, a necessary prerequisite to fornalizing progran activities is to obtain some understanding of the current conditions of a unit. This is essential to ensure the cost-effective expenditure of the limited resources available to improve unit heat rate. Although some problem areas may be known at a unit, many units have substantial heat rate degradations which are unknown. The purpose of the activities described below is to outline an approach which will begin to aid utility personnel in cheracter- izing the performance of a unit in order to establish the amount of improvement which can be made in heat rate performance. Heat rate is defined in units of Btu/kWh and is simply the amount of heat input into a systen divided by the amount of power generated by a system, While the definition seems simple, the nunber of ways in which heat rate can be computed are numerous. This section will describe the standard heat rate definitions currently being used by utilities and the purpose and usefulness of each. The definitions provided are those commonly used by utflities to report heat rate for management information purposes. It is recognized that utilities use different fuels - coal, natural gas, ofl, wood waste, refuse, bagasse, etc. - to produce electricity or steam for consump- tion. However, this discussion will center on the more popular fuels - coal, ofl, and natural gas. Special emphasis will be given to the calculation of the heat rate of coal-fired units due to the complexities of accurately measuring fuel flow and heating values. Regardless of the fuel burned, the principles involved in computing a heat rate are identical. However, the accuracy of measuring both fuel usage and the heating value of oil and natural gas are less uncertain than for other types of fuel. 323.1.1 Accounting Heat Rate Accounting heat rate is calculated from the heat energy consumed by a unit or station for a specified time period regardless of the operating status of the unit or station. The accounting heat rate, specified in Btu/kih, is the ratio of the total fuel consumed by the unit or station divided by the gross electrical energy produced by the generator. The fuel input into the furnace or the unit, in Btu's, is simply the fuel consumed by the unit, in pounds, multiplied by the fuels heating value, in Btu/Ibm. The total fuel consumed is considered in the heat rate calculation including fuel used during light-off and start-up, The power generated is measured in units of kilowatt-hours. Accounting heat rate may be referred to by different names at other utilities. Some of the more common synonyms are: generation cost heat rate, gross overall heat rate, and heat rate of record. Accounting heat rate is not a useful measure of unit performance to a performance engineer wishing to evaluate the efficiency of a particular unit. However, because this heat rate indice has widespread exposure within a utility organization, the performance engineer should be familiar with how it is computed and with the manner in which he can influence its accuracy. This is normally the heat rate value which is reported for publi- cation and comparison with the performance of other utilities. Accounting heat rate is primarily influenced by fuel and power measurements. The performance engineer can influence the accuracy of this calculation by ensuring the proper maintenance and calibration of fuel weighing and sampling equipment, by reviewing and auditing fuel sampling procedures, and by reconciling fuel inventory measurements with fuel as-recetved and as-burned records. This latter point can be very important to an accurate accounting of heat rate because some utilities wil] adjust the heat rate calculation based upon fuel consumption which is adjusted for fuel inventories. The fuel consumed by a unit or a station is determined by the difference between the fuel received, as estimated from fuel supplier receipts or as-received measurements, and the fuel stored or stockpiled. The anount of stabilizing or start-up fuel must also be considered in determining the total amount of fuel consumed. For instance, oil-fired units, which burn No. 6 of1, will use either natural gas or No. 2 of] as a start-up fuel and coal-fired plants will use either oil or gas for flame stabilization at low loads and during start-up. The energy input into the unit 33‘is calculated by multiplying the amount of fuel consumed by the average heating value for that fuel. This total eneray consumed is then divided by the gross electrical generation to determine the gross accounting heat rate. A net ac- counting heat rate can be computed by subtracting from the gross electrical generation the energy consumed by the unit or station during power generation and ‘the energy consumed by the unit during non-operating periods during the specified time period. The obstacles to calculating an accurate heat rate for a coal-fired unit using this method ai @ The difficulty of accurately assessing the quantity of coal which has been diverted to the stockpile. @ The inaccuracies of the as-received coal scales and the large uncertainty associated with measurements made over long periods of time. @ The use of an average heating value for a fuel whose heating value may vary widely with different fuel suppliers. 3.1.2 Operating Heat Rates A unit's operating heat rate is determined by measuring the amount of fuel consumed by the unit during a specified time period while the system is generat- ing power. The heat rate during this period, in Btu/kWh, can then be calculated from the energy equivalent of the fuel consumed and the power generated during that period and is expressed as: GOPHR = Fuel Flow * Heating Value ‘Sbrass bower Generation The net operating heat rate is calculated from the ratio of the energy equivalent of the fuel consumed and the gross power generation less the power required for plant auxiliaries, This is expressed as: NOPHR = Fuel Flow * Heating Value ‘Brose Power Generation — Elecerteal MRTTTATTES To accurately calculate a unit's operating heat rate, only the fuel actually consumed during power production is factored into the heat rate calculation. With oi] and natural gas this is not a deterrent since the fuel is measured as it 3-4is being consumed. However, in coal-fired units, instantaneous fuel flow mea surements cannot be made, The measurement of fuel usage is made either at the entrance to the coal bunkers or between the bunkers and the coal pulverizers. The main advantage of the scales being located at the entrance to the bunker is that they can be periodically calibrated since they are not in continuous use and are easily accessible. This enables an accurate measurement of coal delivery to be made. The disadvantage of this method is that the fuel consumed cannot be easily measured over short tine intervals with any degree of accuracy. However, to determine the amount of fuel actually consumed, the coal delivery values must be adjusted to account for the coal which is stored in the bunkers. That rele- gates this method of calculating operating heat rate to long periods of time. Other uncertainties associated with this method are: @ The inaccuracies of the as-consumed scales and the large uncer- tainty interval associated with measurements made over long tine periods. © The inaccuracies associated with estimating the coal storage of the bunkers. @ The inaccuracies associated with using average fuel heating value measurenents. The method described above can provide a gross estimate of a unit's operating heat rate. However, these measurements do not provide adequate information for making sound decisfons regarding heat rate improvement. It is used mainly for management information purposes and as an overall indicator of the performance of ‘the unit. To obtain useful measurements of a unit's heat rate, the calculation must be performed over small time intervals with accurate measurements of fuel usage and heating value. The location of the fuel measurements in the above ethod make short time period tests nonfeasible. To achieve the accuracy needed to perform short time period tests, the fuel measurement should be made as close to the combustion chanber as possible. Again, for oi] and natural gas fired units this poses few problems since there is no fuel storage to take into consideration. In a pulverized coal-fired unit the ‘optimum location to make the fuel flow measurement would be between the pulverizer and the furnace as this would eliminate errors introduced by coal storage within the pulverizers. However, this is not possible with present technology.At present, the most accurate fuel flow measurements can be made as the fuel is delivered from the bunkers to the pulverizers. As menciuned, this introduces a storage error due to the coal which resides within the pulverizer. However, this error is small when compared to the total amount of fuel consumed during the period for which a heat rate is being calculated. Fuel measurements made at the pulverizer inlet give an almost direct indication of the amount of fuel consumed by the unit over any period of time without the need to adjust the measurements for coal storage. The use of the pulverizer inlet coal scales to measure coal consumption can be used to characterize unit heat rate over the load range at which the unit operates. This is accomplished by measuring the coal consumed during short time periods when the unit is operat~ ing at a constant load point. By performing this test at several valve points, ‘the information can be used to generate input/output curves for dispatching purposes and compare the unit's actual operating heat rate against its best achievable heat rate. The uncertainties involved in making heat rate calculations fron pulverizer inlet measurements are: @ The inaccuracies associated with the coal measuring device. © The inaccuracies associated with the heating value of the fuel. There is another method available for calculating operating heat rate which can be very accurate but is also costly and difficult to perform compared to the input/output method, This method involves calculating the turbine heat rate and the boiler efficiency at 2 valve point. This heat rate can then be expressed as NUHR = (THR/BE) * (EG/EN) where: MUHR = Net Unit Heat Rate THR = Turbine Heat Rate BE = Boiler Effictency EG = Gross Poxer Generation EN = Net Power Generation (Gross Generation - Electrical Auxiliaries) This method will be discussed in more detail in Section 3.3.3, 3-63.1.3 Fuel Measuring and Sampling To calculate heat rate using any of the above described input/output methods it is necessary to have accurate measurements of both the amount of fuel consumed and its heating value. These two important aspects of heat rate calculation using the input/output method will be discussed in this section. Fuel Flow Neasuring Methods and Devices. The accuracy with which the amount of fuel delivered to a unit can be measured is highly dependent upon the type of fuel being consumed. Homogeneous, single phase fuels such as of] and natural gas can be measured with greater accuracy than can nonhomogeneous fuels such as coal. When using the input/output method of heat rate determination, every one percent error in the measurenent of the fuel flow is reflected as a one percent error in the heat rate calculation. Natural gas can be measured using orifice flow meters, densitoneters, or turbine flow meters. Orifice flow meters have a generally accepted accuracy of 42 percent while the accuracy of turbine flow meters is 41 percent. Commercially available on-line gas densitoneters are available which have accuracies of +.25 percent however, they have not gained wide spread acceptance in the utility industry. A discussion of current utility practices in the measurement of gas flow, as well as that of of] and coal, can be found in Reference 2. Reference 2 states that oi! flow measurements can be made with an accuracy of +.1 percent to +.25 percent with rotary type positive displacement flow meters with the higher accuracy being associated with calibrated flow meters. It fs further stated in Reference 2, that orifice flow meters are more widely used by U.S. utilities than any other type and that these meters are capable of accurate measurements when calibration is maintained. Unlike the positive displacement flow meter, the orifice meter is not accurate over @ wide range of flow rates. The Central Electricity Generating Board reports that the turbine flow meter is replacing the positive displacement flow meter as a means of of] flow measurement in many industries, yet have not achieved widespread use by utilities. The CEG cites the main advantage of turbine flow meters to be the repeatability of measurements taken over wide load ranges at varying viscosities. The stated 37accuracy of these flow meters given in Reference 3 is mation on the measurement of natural gas and of] can be found in the following reports: 1 percent. More infor- © ASME PTC 4.1 - 1964 @ — Anerican Gas Association: Orifice Metering of Natural Gas - Gas, Measurenent Committee Report No. 3, April 1955, Coal flow is normally measured by either coal scales or belt feeders, The latter can be either volumetric or gravimetric feeders. Both coal scales and gravi- metric feeders directly measure the weight of the coal being consumed. Volu- metric belt feeders deliver @ constant volume of coat but do not compensate for density changes. Gravimetric feeders are normally in-line devices through which all coal consumed by the unit must be delivered. Coal scales and volumetric feeders are often designed with provisions for bypassing the scale if a mal- function should occur. The accuracy of gravimetric feeders and coal scales are considered by many utility personnel to be no better than 24 percent, although the manufacturers claim much higher accuracies. Some utilities whose units contain scales or feeders with bypass features have an alternate method for estimating the amount of coal consumed during those periods when the fuel measuring devices are bypassed. During periods when the scales or feeders are operational, the amount of coal weighed is correlated with the power usage of the pulverizer mills. From this correlation, the fuel used during periods when the scales are not available can be estimated. ‘The accuracy of coal scales or gravimetric feeders would be much higher if proper maintenance and calibration could be provided. However, because these scales are in-line, they are in continuous use during plant operation requiring maintenance and calibration to wait until the plant is operating at @ reduced load or during an outage. The drift in calibration during this time span can, in some cases, be several percent. This problem has been further intensified due to declining coal quality which necessitates units being run with all pulverizers operating to maintain the unit near its rated load, The accuracy of fuel measurements made at either the entrance to the bunker or at the coal unloading site is much higher. Utility estimates place the accuracy of "as-received" belt scales to be on the order of +.25 percent and that of the “as-burned" scales to be #1 percent. These scales have an advantage in that they are not in continuous use and are posi- tioned where it is easy to maintain and calibrate them, 38Further information on coal weighing can be found in the following sources: © ASME PTC 4.1 - 1964 © ASME PTC 3.2 - Solid Fuels Fuel Sampling Methods and Devices. The accurate determination of heat input into ‘the combustion chamber of a fossil unit is dependent upon the accurate measure- ment of the energy contained in that fuel. The energy content of the fuel is referred to as its heating value. There are two heating values for any fuel - high and low. The difference between the two is the latent heat of evaporation of the water vapor formed during combustion. In calculating the energy input to the boiler it is normally the high heating value (HAV) which is used. In homogenous fluids and gases the heating value will not change significantly within a batch and changes between batches provided by different suppliers will normally be within § percent. One oi] burning utility reported that the weekly variance in the heating value of daily samples was less than 1 percent. With coal, the variability of the heating value is much greater. The heating value of fuel from the same supplier may vary 2s much as 15 percent while between sup- pliers the variance may be as much as 25 percent. Therefore, to accurately determine the energy input into a boiler, it is necessary to take frequent and voluminous samples of coal. To meet the guidelines of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the Power Test Code (PTC) for coal sampling, it is almost a necessity that the utility have a mechanical sampling system. The shear volume of the coat removed for sampling can be overwhelming. For example, for a 500 MW unit using 2" x 0 sized coal, the number of samples required during an assumed eight hour shift of coal loading would be 175 and the total sample weight would be 1050 pounds if the guidelines of ASIN D-2234 were followed. With a mechanical sampling system a continuous sample of coal is taken from the coal transfer chutes. Even with mechanical samplers, it is necessary to insure that a representative sample is being taken. This requires that the sampling system be installed so that the sample taken is not biased, but rather is a composite of the coal being transported by the coal conveyors. The cost of installation, the need for continuous maintenance, and the lack of justification 3-9for sophisticated sampling devices have precluded the wide acceptance of mechan- ical coal samplers by utilities. An accepted method of coal sampling is to take a manual sample either at the end of the last coal transfer chute or from the feeder at the pulverizer inlet. When the sample is taken at the pulverizer inlet the general procedure is to take one sample per shift from each feeder to form a composite sample of the fuel burned in @ 24 hour period. The sampling frequency at the coal transfer chute will depend upon the frequency with which the bunkers are filled. This period usually does not exceed 24 hours under normal operating conditions. The procedure for taking @ manual sample is no different than for the collection of a sample by an automated device. The operator should collect a uniformly distributed sample from either the transfer chute or feeder discharge. Once the sample has been taken, it should be tightly sealed to prevent moisture evapo- ration. Industry estimates of the accuracy of hand sampling is #4 percent when performed according to ASTM procedures and 28 percent when procedures are not followed. The industry standard for the accuracy of mechanical sampling devices is +1 percent. Further information on sampling and the determination of heating values can be found in the following sources: ASME PTC 3.1 ~ Diesel and Burner Fuels © ASME PTC 3.2 ~ Solid Fuels @ ASME PTC 3.3 - Gaseous Fuels © ASTM D-1322 ~ Sampling Petroleum and Petroleum Products © ASTM D-260 = Heat of Combustion of Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuels e ASTM 0-234 Collection of a Gross Sample of Coal © ASTM D-2013 Preparing a Coal Sample for Analysis © ASTM D-2015 Determining the Heating Value of a Coal Sample © ASTM 0-900 - Test for Calorific Value of Gaseous Fuels On-line sampling of coal is still in the developmental stage and is presently too costly and complex for general utility application. According to Reference 2 thetechnology presently exists to perform on-line caloric value analysis of gas on a continuous basis. It is stated that the accuracy of on-line gas sampling is 4.5 percent. The caloric value of oi] does not vary significantly between batches and therefore, sampling need only be performed periodically. 3.2 DETERMINING BEST ACHIEVABLE PERFORMANCE To characterize the performance of a unit properly it is not only necessary to determine its operating heat rate, but also the heat rate at which the unit is capable of operating, At the time of a unit's construction, every utility is provided with heat balance diagrams, generated by the turbine vendor, and a curve of boiler efficiency for one or more of the load points at which the unit is expected to operate. Using this information the performance engineer can readily generate a curve of the unit's design gross heat rate. This curve is not totally representative of the unit, even at initial start-up. Furthermore, the gap between its predicted performance and the unit's best achievable performance widens over the years. This is due to the following reasons: © The heat balance diagrams are generated from a set of design assumptions which may not be consistent with the unit's actual operating conditions. Differences between "as-built" and "as- designed" conditions include: extraction line pressure drops, reheater pressure drops, condenser backpressure as a function of joad, and boiler and turbine design deficiencies. The assumptions used’ in the boiler design which can vary include: superheater and Teheater spray flows, coal quality, and excess air requirements. Heat rate performance will begin to decline as the unit begins to age. Unit overhauls and equipment modifications can bring the unit back to near optimum performance but sone of the lost per- formance will not be economically recoverable. © The unit's performance will vary with a change in ambient con- ditions. Typical conditions which affect unit performance, yet are not controllable, are air tenperature, which affects both air preheater and cooling tower performance, coal quality, and cooling water temperatures. @ Many times during the course of a unit's operating life it is modified in a manner which directly affects heat rate performance. Typical modifications include: conversion from pressurized to balance draft, addition of cooling towers, changes in fuel used, and the retrofit of electrostatic precipitators or flue gas desul- phurization. Other modifications could include: addition or renoval of heat transfer surface or the replacement of heattransfer surfaces with more efficient designs, replacement of stean turbine nozzles or blading with designs which may improve unit performance, replacement of feedwater heaters, or replacement of the condenser tubing with a more efficient design. © Many of these changes have a detrimental effect on net unit heat rate due to the additional station service requirements which are imposed. Other modifications, particularly those related to pollution control, effect heat rate because of the need to control stack gas temperatures to prevent acid formation. This requires the utility to either operate at higher boiler exit temperatures or to use steam to reheat the flue gases above the acid dewpoint. ‘The modifications to heat transfer surfaces will affect heat rate by either improving throttle or reheat steam temperatures, or, as in the case of condenser tube replacements by improving condenser backpressure. © Because most units have not had ASME approved acceptance tests performed at initial start-up, many of these units may be oper- ating with design deficiencies that prevent a unit from operating at the conditions specified by the equipment manufacturer. There are several cases where utilities have identified the need to either add or remove boiler heat transfer surface to control steam temperatures or have identified a cooling tower's performance as not being up to expectation. Usually these conditions were identified after equipment warranties had expired and conditions were rectified after unit operation at the utility's expense. In Section 3.1 it was discussed how @ unit's operating heat rate could be calcuT- ated either for a specified tine period or as a function of the unit's Toad range. To make a meaningful comparison of either of these heat rates, the performance engineer needs some basis for determining whether the unit is per- forming acceptably. Only by knowing how well @ unit can perform will the per- formance engineer be able to make intelligent decisions regarding performance improvement. 3.2.1 Best Achievable Performance Over the Load Range It can be seen from the above discussion that it may be necessary to make ad- Justments to the design heat rate of the unit to arrive at a best achievable operating heat rate. Definitions for various levels of performance standards are shown in Figure 3-1, the optima level of performance which can be achieved by the unit is the heat rate calculated as a result of acceptance tests at initial unit start-up. The optimum level, however, does not necessarily coincide with 3.42Realistic, achievable net heat rate with present equipment. and operating conditions Net heat rate after plant modi fications and additions. Net heat rate Actual Net Heat Rate Undefined Losses Heat Rate Deviation Accountable Losses Best Achievable Heat Rate Losses that are not normally monitored through operating statistics or routine performance tests. Expected net heat rate corrected for deviation of selected paraneters from their expected values. Includes control lable losses and certain losses requiring capital expendi- ture. Net heat rate (Better Standard) corrected for new expected values of Uncontrollable selected parameters. New Losses expected values of selected parameters stem from actual operating constrainits such as safety and reliability considerations, changes of ambient conditions, etc. Acceptance test net heat rate corrected for un- Unrecoverable recoverable losses such Losses of initial Acceptance Standard acceptance test. Figure 3-1, as power and steam consumed by environmental equipment Definitions of Standards for Thermal EfficiencyTable 3-1 IMPACT OF PERFORMANCE PARAMETER DEVIATION ON HEAT RATE Performance Paraneter Engineering Variation Range Units (E.U.) (Btu/kilhr/E.U.) Condenser Backpressure Inka 204.0 = 269.0 Auxiliary Power 4 86.0 97.0 L. P. Efficiency 5 57.0 Excess Oxygen % 29.4 = 36.0 Wakeup, % 24.0 = 88.0 H.-P. Efficiency % 18.8 = 215 1. PL Efficiency % 14.5 = 1911 Unburned Carbon 3 17 = 128 Feedwater Inlet Temperature. SF 8.7 Coal Moisture x 7:8 - 10.0 Flue Gas Tenperature °F 27 - 42 Nain Steam Temperature °F °F 14 Sein 7 Hot Reheat Temperature oF 1.3 - 19 Nain Stean Pressure psia 04 3-165 ‘the best achievable level. Acceptance tests are performed under ideal, yet non- realistic conditions, such as complete cycle isolation, and represents an unachievable condition under normal operating conditions. Correcting the acceptance standard for normal operating conditions, such as the effects of boiler blowdown and the power and steam requirements of environmental equipment, represents a more realistic standard of achievable heat rate. It should be noted that the original design estimate of the vendor could be either better or worse than the acceptance standard depending upon the validity of the assumptions made by the boiler and turbine vendors and whether the “as-built” equipment performance matches the "as-designed" specifications. The more realistic standard is then corrected for changes in ambient conditions, plant modifications, coat quality, etc. to arrive at the best achievable heat vate, The corrections to the design or acceptance standards, depending upon which base the performance engineer has available as a starting point, can be made manually or through the use of performance codes. To perform these 3-14calculations manually, the performance engineer needs to evaluate each modifi- cation independently to precisely determine the effect it has on the operating parameters of the unit. The performance engineer then uses available infor mation, such as the plant thermal kit or heat balance codes, to estimate the effect that the change will have on unit heat rate. This may be best illustrated by the following examples: Example 1: Impact of an electrostatic precipitator retrofit on heat rate. The installation of a pollution control device, such as an ESP, affects heat rate by increasing the derand upon the required station load and by also affecting flue gas temperatures. The latter are controlled to Protect the stack from corrosion due to the formation of sulphur based acids. To raise the flue gas temperature above the dewpoint tempera- ture, either the boiler conditions must be adjusted to increase boiler exit temperature or some means of flue gas reheating must be employed. The latter case either diverts steam from the system, thereby reducing ‘the amount of power being generated by the turbine, or requires the use of auxiliary steam. This, in effect, increases heat rate. By raising boiler exit temperatures, the amount of energy absorbed by the boiler heat transfer sections is reduced which resuits in either reduced throttle or reheat steam temperatures or the necessity of burning more fuel to achieve the same thermodynamic conditions. For purposes of illustration assume that the affects of an ESP retrofit are an increased demand for station load and that the stack gas temper- atures are maintained by allowing the boiler exit temperature to increase. Assume that prior to the retrofit the best achievable heat rate for this unit at the valves wide open condition was 9800 Btu/kih. The ESP increases the auxiliary load by 1% and the exit gas temperature is raised 10°F. Using the generic figures previously given in Table 3-1, the new net heat rate can be computed. The new heat rate is: New Heat Rate = Old Heat Rate + Effect of Deviations tiew Heat Rate = 9800 + (1% * 86Btu/kwh/3) + (10°F * 2.7 Btu/kih/?F) = 9913 Btu/kbh The estimates of the increases in gas temperature and auxiliary power could be generated analytically, by test after the ESP is installed, or fron the vendor's estimate of the effects of the installation on piant performance. Example Higher Than Expected Condenser Circulating Water Inlet Temperatures When a unit is provided with heat balance diagrams the heat rates are normally calculated assuming a design condenser backpressure. Con- denser backpressure is not static but is determined by the power 3-15level, the circulating water inlet temperature, and the circulating water flow rate. This example illustrates how adjustments can be made ‘to heat rate to determine the effects of changes in condenser back- pressure due to changing circulating water inlet temperature. The effect of a change in circulating water inlet temperature can be estimated from the performance curves supplied by either the turbine or ‘the condenser vendor. The corresponding change in condenser back- pressure can be converted into an effect on the turbine heat rate and a new best achievable heat rate calculated. However, a change in the condenser backpressure will also have an effect upon the performance of the feedwater cycle, which in turn has an effect upon the steam cycle, This highlights the fact that changes in system parameters can not always be considered in isolation but many times must be analyzed with respect to what is happening in the remainder of the steam cycle. If the engineer uses the thermal kit or a heat balance code all of these synergisms are factored into the heat rate calculation. Again, this may be illustrated more clearly by @ numerical example. Assume that a unit's best achievable turbine heat rate at valves wide open condition with a design backpressure of 2.0 In. Hig. is 7987 Btu/kwh. The valves wide open conditfon corresponds to 2 power output of 320 MW. Suppose that during the sumer, due to increased circu- lating water temperature, the condenser back pressure is normally at 3.5 In. lig. and the performance engineer wishes to determine the corrected, best achievable turbine heat rate. The heat rate correction specified by this unit's thermal kit for the throttle flow of interest is 100 Btu/kWh for the change from 2.0 to 3.5 In. lig. The new turbine heat rate based upon the change in condenser backpressure is: New Heat Rate = 7987 + 100 Btu/kkh = 8087 Btu/kWh The previous examples underscore the usefulness of heat balance codes which can be used by the performance engineer to determine the magnitude of the effect that a change in either the unit design or a parametric change will have on unit heat rate. This section was intended to deal with nonconputer aided heat rate im- provement programs and further discussion of these codes will be given in Section 4. However, it is mentioned at this time to allow the performance engineer to realize that tools are available which can aid him in the calculation of heat rate effects. Having determined the best achievable heat rate at one valve point, valves wide ‘open for example, or at a load point, maximum guarantee for example, the operator can estinate the shape of the best achievable heat rate performance over the remainder of the load range. This can be done by duplicating the shape of the design heat rate curve. This is a satisfactory estimate as long as it is 316remenbered that the best achievable heat rate at lower loads would be adjusted for parametric changes not reflected in the design curve. A notable example is ‘the condenser backpressure which is usually assumed constant over the load range when developing the design heat rate curves but in reality is a function of load. The alternative to using a single point estimate to characterize performance is for the engineer to gather data at the valve points and to make the corrections to the design heat rate at each of these points. The corrections would be made using the locus of the valve points heat rate curve provided by the vendor and the thermal kit. It should be noted that not all of the heat balance diagrams prepared by the turbine vendor represent valve points, some are based on con- venient increments of the unit's Toad range. Once the performance engineer has estimated the best achievable performance of the unit, preferably over the units load range, they can compare the actual and the best achievable heat rates to determine the amount of improvement that can be made in the units performance. An example of hypothetical heat rate curves is shown in Figure 3-2. Actual Heat Rate Best Achievable Design Load Figure 3-2. Hypothetical Heat Rate Curves3.2.2 Best Achievable Performance Qver a Tine Period If the actual performance of the unit is calculated on a dafly, monthly, or yearly basis - as was described in previous discussions, it is of benefit if the expected performance of the unit can also be provided for comparative purposes. The simplest situation is the case where the unit has operated at a constant Toad level for the time period of interest. This is within the realm of possibility for short time periods, such as a shift, a day, or possibly @ week. In this case, the best achievable heat rate is the heat rate which corresponds to the unit's average load level during the time period. The best achievable heat rates were calculated for a specific set of conditions and should be adjusted for changes in ambient conditions to be truly accurate. This would require the performance engineer to adjust the best achievable heat rate for changes in circulating water inlet temperature and combustion air temperature. These adjustments are usually made based upon average values for the time period. If the unit is being cycled, the best achievable heat rate can still be based upon a weighted average of the unit's load during the time period. The weighted average would be calculated from the total power generation for that period, in NWchr, and divided by the total hours of power generation. Adjustments to the best achievable heat rate calculation due to average changes in ambient con- ditions can also be made. A more accurate method of determining the best achievable heat rate for a time period is to take the average of the heat rates calculated for sub-intervals of that time period. Using a distribution of the unit load during the time period such as shown in Figure 3-3, and an estimated best achievable heat rate curve as shown in Figure 3-2, heat rate values are selected from the curve for each load point in the distribution. A weighted average of the heat rate values is then obtained using the equation below: a Ave. Heat Rate = £m (HR); ie i 1 3-1800'%6 01d UoLanqiagsig 4aMog [wotdAL e Jo aduexa (MN) aaMod oo'etT oo'veT o0'¥sT “ee eunbiy oo'rAT 00°*6T 3-19where: (HR); = The best achievable heat rate at each load point in the distribution m= The frequency of accurrence of each load point in the distribution The best achievable heat rate can be corrected for average anbient conditions if they are known, It should be reiterated that the comparison of the best achievable heat rate and the operating heat rate using this method does not provide the performance engineer with sufficient information to make sound heat rate improvement de- cisions. This method is only useful for providing @ relative comparison of heat rate performance. 3.3 CHARACTERIZING UNIT PERFORMANCE Having established both the actual unit performance and the best achievable performance, the utility engineer is in @ position to begin to identify areas of heat rate degradation. A rough measure of how well the unit is performing can be found by taking the difference between the best achievable and actual unit performance. However, simply knowing the difference between actual and best achievable performance does not give the performance engineer an indication of where to look for the root causes of performance degradation. The programs described in this section can be performed without first having determined either the unit's operating or best achievable heat rates. However, by having these two pieces of information, it will be easier for the performance engineer to outline the extent of the performance improvement program and to measure its success. A paraneter which utilities find useful in trending the performance of a unit is the performance factor (P.F.). A performance factor is the ratio of the target fuel usage to the actual fuel usage during a specified tine period. To calculate this factor many of the components of heat rate measurement discussed in previous sections are required. This may be clearer by expressing the performance factor as an equation. It can be expressed as: 3-20Pee (Ave. Load)i * (Target Heat Rate @ Ave. Load)i (Fuel Usage)i * (Heating Value)i (Duration of Time Interval 4) where: (Ave. Load)i = The average load during time interval 7 In the above equation the target heat rate is the same as the best achievable heat rate as a function of load. To accurately calculate this factor the best achievable heat rate should be computed over small time intervals as described in the previous section. The inaccuracies associated with computing the denominator are the same as those stated for computing the operating heat rate. The following sections provide the possible ways that areas of heat rate degra- dation can be identified and addressed. The ideal starting point for the charac terization of unit performance would be a complete unit performance survey. This would include tests of both the boiler and turbine cycles to as close to ASME specifications as possible. Realizing that acceptance testing is beyond the means of many utilities that are in the process of implementing heat rate pro- grams and that testing may in fact be a significant obstacle to the implemen tation of a heat rate program, alternative methods of characterizing a units performance have been established. Of course, cycle and component testing does have a place in a formal heat rate program and test descriptions and guidelines will be covered in Section 3.3.3 of this report. The following sections describe three options which a performance engineer has available to assist him in identifying the sources of heat rate degradation. These options are: © Limited Cycle Evaluation © Performance Parameter Monitoring © Performance Testing fach of these options is intended to be independent of the others, However, it may become apparent to the performance engineer that a limited number of equipment tests are required as a result of information obtained from either the limited cycle evaluation or performance parameter monitoring and the results of the limited cycle evaluation can be used to define a performance monitoring program. 3-213.3.1 Limited Cycle Evaluation A limited cycle evaluation consists of the performance engineer taking key parameter measurements around the boiler, turbine, feedwater, and cooling water cycles. The purpose of the test is to pinpoint specific areas of unit operation where heat rate degradation may be occurring. The test is intended to be con- ducted with @ minimum of expense and pre-test activity. Many of the measurements can be made with existing plant instrumentation, however, there may be some arees where it would be expedient to have test quality instrumentation available to increase the reliability of the measurenents. Tt is not intended that the results of this test be used for comparison with vendor guaranteed equipment performance. This test is solely intended to provide a focus for the performance engineer of equipment performance that might not be up to standard and can be a possible source of heat rate degradation. There are hundreds of measurements made during the normal operation of a modern power station, the performance engineer may wish to have some assistance in focusing on those areas of the plant where heat rate degradation is most likely to occur. The area where degradation is Iikely to occur in any particular unit will be influenced by plant design, operational history, and fuel quality. The Limited cycle evaluation can help provide that focus. Prior to conducting a limited cycle evaluation, the performance engineer should perform a thorough review of the design of the unit paying particular note to all of the equipment critical to efficient operation. It would also be helpful if 2 list of performance parameters was compiled for each critical component which reflects the degraded performance of each piece of equipment. To assist him in this matter, @ methodology has been developed which will aid the performance engineer in approaching the investigation of heat rate loss in a logical manner. This methodology is termed the heat rate logic tree. The logic tree is a logical step-by-step approach to identifying the areas in the plant cycle where heat rate degradation might be occurring. The logic tree is a deductive tool which uses fault tree construction techniques to identify sources of performance degradation. Although the logic tree can also be used to aid in identifying sources of availability degradation, only its use in identifying heat rate loss will be discussed here. 3-22A logic tree which was constructed for a natural recirculation, pulverized coal-fired unit is shown in Appendix A. This should be referred to for clarity of the following discussion. The logic tree construction begins with 2 de- scription of the basic problem being investigated, in this case heat rate loss. Each successive level of the tree provides additional details on the potential sources of heat rate degradation and is more specific than the inmediately proceeding level. The construction of each branch of the tree continues until the root-causes of heat rate degradation are identified. The logic tree was developed to enable the performance engineer to quickly isolate sources of heat rate degradation. In order to do this, adequate infor mation is required which will give them an unambiguous indication of where heat rate degradation is occurring. To accomplish this, the information requirenents at each level, which allows the operator to trace a heat rate loss from where it is first identified to its source, are given on the logic tree. The last level of the logic tree identifies the root cause of heat rate degra~ dation. At this level, a unique set of parameters is associated with each root cause to enable the operator to make an unambiguous identification of the source of degradation. Once the root cause has been identified, appropriate corrective actions can be taken. The logic tree can not only be used as a diagnostic tool but also as a predictor of where future problems can occur which affect heat rate. From the root causes of heat rate degradation, the plant staff can opti- mize their preventive maintenance progran, their instrumentation requirements, and their performance parameter monitoring needs. Al of these will be discussed in later sections. The construction of the logic tree not only facilitates the conduct of the limited cycle evaluation by identifying critical equipment functions and para~ metric measurements but also is a dynamic tool which can be used by the per- formance engineer to solve heat rate problems. For the conduct of the limited cycle evaluation test, the performance engineer can identify both the equipment crucial to efficient plant operation and the parameters that need to be measured ‘to unambiguously identity poor equipment performance. 3-23Other sources of information that are valuable aids in determining which areas of the plant might be prime contributors to heat rate degradation are plant mainte- nance records and outage reports. By reviewing these documents, the performance engineer can focus on those areas which historically have proven to be detri- mental to efficient operation. Some areas which may be highlighted are: air heater seal wear, air heater basket deterioration, condenser or feedwater heater tube pluggage, nozzle block or turbine blade erosion, turbine seal wear, and cycle isolation valve problems. Once the process of identifying sources of heat rate degradation has been con- pleted, arrangerents can be made for the conduct of the limited cycle evaluation. Several items should be clarified prior to the conduct of the test. A test procedure should be drafted which specifies the conditions under which the test is to be performed and delineates any support which may be required of the plant operations or maintenance staff. To minimize extraneous effects upon the para- meters to be measured, a cycle isolation walkdown should be performed prior to the test. Badly leaking valves and steam traps should be noted and arrangenents made to have them repaired or isolated during the test. Cycle isolation is an ‘important consideration to a successful heat rate improvement program and is discussed in further detail in Section 3.4.1 The performance parameters measured in each area of the plant cycle should then be compared with the turbine and boiler vendors design values or with the unit's baseline data if it is available. This comparison will allow the performance engineer to perform a rough economic evaluation of the cost of the degradation, define areas where more rigorous testing or higher quality instrumentation might be needed, institute a preventive maintenance program, or take measures to ‘improve the operation of the unit. 3.3.2 Performance Parameter Monitoring Performance parameters are a collection of plant parameters that are directly related to heat rate, These parameters may be measured directly or are calcu- lated from other parameters. Table 3-2 presents a list of performance paraneters for a large pulverized coal-fired plant. Using this Tist of performance para- meters, it is possible to obtain a reasonably conplete characterization of all important contributors to heat rate. The complete list of parameters shown in 3.26TURBINE Table 3-2 PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS* Main Stean Tenperature Main Steam Pressure Reheat Steam Temperature Reheater Pressure Drop HP Turbine Section Efficiency IP Turbine Section Efficiency LP Turbine Section Efficiency First Stage Pressure Turbine Shaft Seal Leak-Off Flow Throttle Flow TURBINE CYCLE Feedwater Flow Condensate Flow Feedvater Heater Terminal Temperature Difference Feedwater Heater Drain Cooler Approach Feedwater Tenperature Rise Extraction Line Pressure Drop Steam Attenperation Water Flow Unit Makeup Flow Kir Preheater Steam Flow Pump Seal Leak-Off Flow Pump Seal In-Leakage cycle Isolation Stean Driven Auxiliaries Generator Hydrogen Pressure Generator Power Factor *For a Pulverized coal-fired, natural circulation, reheat boiler. 3:25Table 3-2 (continued) PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS CONDENSER Circulating Kater Inlet Temperature Circulating Water Outlet Temperature Condenser Backpressure Condensate Temperature BOILER Exit Gas Temperature Exit Gas 0, Exit Gas CO Exit Gas CO, Conbustibles in Ash Coal Moisture MITT Rejects Draft Losses AUXILIARIES Auxiliary Electrical Power Consumption Auxiliary Steam Consumption MISCELLANEOUS Makeup Wet Bulb Temperature Wind Speed and Direction 3-26Table 3-2 will not apply to every type of unit but must be adjusted for the type of fuel consumed and any design differences which affect heat rate performance. In formulating this list, the intent is to ensure that ell major contributors to heat rate degradation will impact at least one of the performance parameters. In addition to helping to characterize a unit's performance, the performance parameters will be useful in trending equipment performance. The information presented in @ logic tree which has been constructed for a specific unit can aid in identifying important performance parameters. The intent is to define a subset of the total set of performance parameters which best characterizes the performance of the unit. This subset can be the performance parameters which have the greatest effect on heat rate, such as is shown in Table 3-1, or as @ result of the information obtained by performing a Vimited cycle evaluation which identifies those areas where degradation is occurring. Other sources of information which can be used to help identify ‘important performance parameters are: the experience of the plant operations and maintenance staff, information supplied by equipment vendors, the plant thermal kit, heat balance codes, baseline and acceptance tests, and the experi- ence of other utilities. If the list is developed properly by using al7 available sources of information, most of the heat rate degradations which occur should be identified by a change in one of the performance parameters. It is not cost effective to attempt to monitor all of the possible performance parameters. It is best to concentrate fon those which will give the most information regarding the performance of the unit. By applying Pareto's Principle, it can be assumed that 80 percent of the total heat rate degradation will be found by monitoring 20 percent of the performance parameters. This depends, of course, upon formulating the correct set of performance parameters for a unit beforehand. For example, condenser backpressure can be @ large contributor to heat rate deviation and for most. utilities would be @ parameter worth monitoring. However, if you have no reason ‘to suspect an abnormal deviation in condenser backpressure at your unit it may not be justifiable to include it on the list of parameters to be monitored, 3-27To illustrate this concept let's look at an actual utility experience. This utility had determined that the deviation between a unit's actual and best achievable heat rate was 281 Btu/kh. At first this utility was examining the effects on heat rate of the five parameters which are listed in the table below. The effect on heat rate of these parameters was Condenser Back Pressure 31 Beu/ Kuh Reheat Steam Tenperature 11 Btu/kih Excess Air 2 Btu/kith Nain Steam Temperature 3 Btu/kith Exit Gas Temperature 0 Beu/kih Total Heat Rate Losses 47 Btu/kéh The total of the heat rate losses which could be attributed to these five parameters was 17 percent of the known deviation, This indicated that the proper set of performance parameters was not being monitored. The list was expanded to include additional parameters. These additional parameters and their heat rate deviations were: Station Load 77 Btu/kilher Throttle Pressure -13 Btu/ielhr Makeup 1 Btu/kihe Reheat Attemperation 12 Btu/kiihe HP Efficiency 67 Btu/ kth IP Efficiency 7 Btu/kth kp tr T7D 1 Btu/kihe Coal Moisture 11 Beu/kithr The total heat rate losses which could be accounted for from all of the monitored parameters was now 210 Btu/kWhr or 75 percent of the calculated deviation. Additional information is available on the experience of utilities which can be used in assisting in the development of the monitorable parameter ist. Table 3-1 presents typical effects on heat rate of the deviation of selected parameters. The heat rate deviations presented in this table have been complied from actual utility estimates derived from either plant thermal kits or heat balance code analysis. To properly gauge the importance of any one parameter in identifying heat rate degradation, it is necessary to know not only what effect @ deviation of that parameter will have on heat rate but also the expected magni- ‘tude of the deviation of that parameter fron an expected value. Table 3 3-28provides utility's experiences with typical deviations between monitored parame- ters expected and actual values, and the magnitude of the effect which that deviation had on heat rate. This information has been obtained from utility deviation accounting reports. Additional information on performance parameters and their effects on heat rate is presented in Appendix B. For each performance parameter listed, generic utility information on that parameter's effect on heat rate is given. The average value is given along with the parameters range. An equation is provided to allow specific heat rate deviations to be calculated and possible causes of a deviation of this parameter and possible corrections which can be made by either the operator or through maintenance are also presented. If plant thermal kit information on a heat balance code is unavailable, an estimate of the effect of some process parameters can be made using manual heat balance methods. Examples of this technique are given in Appendix 0. Table 3-3 PARAMETERS MOST OFTEN MONITORED BY UTILITIES WITH CONTROLLABLE LOSS PROGRAMS AND THEIR TYPICAL DEVIATIONS Parameter Heat Rate Deviation Typical Deviation Heat Rate Per Percent Change From Expected Deviation Fron Expected Value Value (Btu/kWh/%) (3) (Btu/kwh) Backpressure 2.3 7.1 Auxiliary Power 5.1 5912 Excess Oxygen v1 40:9 Wakeup 2:3 30.8 Unburned Carbon 0:3 20:3 Coal Moisture 0.6 9.6 Throttle Temp. 13.4 8.8 Hot Reheat Tenp. 14:2 8.6 Feed. Inlet Temp, 44.2 75 HP. Efficiency 16.9 49 Main'Steam Press. 6.7 45 I. P. Efficiency 12.8 -1.2 Fiue’Gas Temp. 10:0 =20:1 Once it has been decided which performance parameters should be monitored, and the affect of each of these parameters on unit heat rate has been determined, the type of instrumentation to be used and the frequency of monitoring each parameter 3-29must be decided. Measurements can be made using either normal station instru~ mentation, calibrated station instrumentation, or test instrumentation. Calibrated test instrumentation would provide the most accurate indication, however, the cost of purchasing, installing, and maintaining this instrumentation for monitoring performance parameters may be beyond the budgetary constraints of the utility. The next preferable method would be to have all of the required station instrumentation calibrated prior to collecting the performance parameter data. There is normally no problem with calibrating plant pressure gauges but plant thermocouples normally cannot be calibrated in-situ. To resolve the latter problem, it may be necessary to install redundant thermocouples in spare thermo- wells to be read either locally or by an automated data collecting device. The data should be collected for a period of time which will give @ representa tive sample of the unit's performance. The data should be collected at all of ‘the load points at which the unit is normelly operated for extended periods of time. The data should be averaged to smooth out any fluctuations. It may be necessary to conduct limited tests to completely collect al] of the needed data. Depending upon the arrangement and location of oxygen measuring probes, it may be necessary to have 02 data manually collected. Oxygen measure~ ments taken at the boiler exit are sufficient to provide the utility engineer with needed information on incomplete combustion, however, by also measuring 02 at the exit of the air heater, information can be obtained on the performance of the air preheater and the effect of air inleakage on exit gas temperatures. Equipment testing will be covered in detail in Section 3.3.3, Other special measurements which may be required are coal and ash samples, wet bulb temperature measurements, or pitot traverses of flue gas and circulating water flow to determine average flow rates and tenperatures. It is valuable to collect performance parameter data from as many sources as possible, this is necessary when only station instrumentation is being used to cross check the validity of the measurements. Many times addittonal redundant measurements can be obtained in most power plants. Potential sources include control room indicators, local gauges, special test gauges, and autorated data collecting devices which might be available in the control room. 3-30Once an estimate of the deviation in each of the performance parameters has been made, the next step is to determine the impact of these deviations on heat rate. This involves translating the deviations in each performance paremeter into a Btu/kWh loss. This is done by multiplying the deviation of the performance parameter from its expected value by the estimated worth of that parameter on heat rate. An example calculation using actual parametric deviations and the heat rate effects given in Table 3-1 is shown in Table 3-4. The expected value can be either the design value of that parameter, as determined by the boiler or turbine vendor, or it can be some value which is less than the design value determined by any limiting conditions of operation or design which affect that paraneter. The collection of performance parameter data can give the performance engineer his first indication of where heat rate degradation is occurring in the unit. Poor operation of the unit can give misleading indications and should be cor- rected before an extensive data collection effort is undertaken, Methods which the performance engineer can use to correct operating deficiencies are described in Section 3.4.1 Once operating problems which can affect performance are corrected, the remaining deviation between the expected and actual values of the parameter should be attributable to equipment malfunction or degradation. The Jogic tree provides 2 method of relating performance parameters to equipment performance. The example presented in Table 3-4 demonstrates that it is possible for the performance engineer to obtain information on the performance of the unit without having first computed the operating or best achievable heat rates. If the parameter list has been developed using all of the sources mentioned previously and the short term heat rate activities described in Section 3.4.1 are imple~ mented, the performance engineer should feel confident that the majority of heat rate deviations have been identified. 3-31Table 3-4 EXAMPLE CALCULATION OF HEAT RATE LOSS BY PARAMETER DEVIATION METHOD Performance Parameter Actual Target Deviation (Btu/kih) Throttle Pressure 1819.0 1820.0 0.4 Throttle Temperature 993.0 100020 Hot Reheat Temperature 976.0 1000.0 Station Service 7.63 6.39 Condenser Backpressure 2b 1.84 Nakeup 299 780 Exit Gas Temperature 348.0 293.0 Excess Oxygen 5.04 4.26 Unburned Carbon 9:3 5.0 Coal Moisture 6.9 70 HP. Efficiency 82.0 29.5 1, P. Efficiency 89.5 84.1 TOTAL DEVIATION 3.3.3 Performance Testing Performance testing is valuable in determining equipment performance degradation when the methods defined above do not provide sufficient direction, Plant performance testing can be greatly simplified through the use of automated data collection and data processing devices, however, it is possible, but at times less attractive, to perform these tests manually. This section will describe the procedure for performing those tests which can greatly aid the performance engineer in maintaining or optimizing unit heat rate and which are typical of tests normally performed by utilities who routinely test. In addition, sone of the described tests, while not directly improving heat rate, can provide the performance engineer with the necessary information to influence plant maintenance decisions which result in improved performance. Boiler Testing. The primary purpose of conducting boiler tests is to trend the performance of the boiler over time and to compare that performance against accepted performance. The parameter which is normally used to trend boiler performance is boiler efficiency which is the ratio of the energy absorbed by the working fluid to the energy input into the boiter. 3:32Boiler efficiency can be calculated by one of two methods - the input/output method or the method of heat losses. In the input/output method, the energy absorbed by the working fluid is calculated from the enthalpy rise of the fluid entering the economizer and the enthalpy rise of the fluid entering the reheater. The equation for boiler efficiency is: Efficiency = Energy out/Energy in wi* (hi-h2) + w2* (h3-h4) Fuel Flow * Heating Value where: wl = throttle flow (ibm/hr) we = reheater flow (1bn/hr) hi = enthalpy at throttle conditions he = enthalpy at economizer inlet h3 = enthalpy at hot reheat ha enthalpy at cold reheat The above form of the boiler efficiency equation assunes that there is no flow diversion from the system in the form of boiler tube leaks or boiler mess blow down. It also does not take into account any desuperheating spray which may exist. If either superheater or reheater spray is functional during the test, the following terms should be added to the numerator of the above equation: Energy added to superheater spray = w3*(hi-h5) Energy added to reheater spray = wi#(h3-h5) where: w3 = superheater spray flow (1bu/hr) wh = reheater spray flow (Ibm/hr) nS = enthalpy of the spray water (Btu/1bm) Boiler continuous blowdown is normally isolated during a boiler test and does not need to be factored into the calculation. 3633The energy input to the boiler is the product of the measured fuel input into the boiler for a specified time period and the fuel's higher heating value (HAV). From this information it can be seen that the following measurements must be made to calculate boiler efficiency by the input/output method: Throttle Pressure and Temperature Cold Reheat Pressure and Temperature Hot Reheat Pressure and Temperature Economizer Inlet Pressure and Temperature Feedwater Flow Reheater Flow Fuel Flow Higher Heating Value of Fuel The prescribed routine for the performance of a boiler efficiency test is to isolate boiler continuous blowdown and combustion air heating equipment during the period of the test. Rather than measure the reheater flow, it can be esti- ated using the measured value of the feednater flow and the heat balance esti- nates of high pressure heater extraction flow and seal flows. If a more accurate estimate of the reheater flow is desired, additional measurenents must be made to allow the extraction flow to be calculated from a mass and energy balance around the high pressure heater. These measurenents include: Extraction Pressure and Temperature Heater Inlet Pressure and Temperature Heater Drain Cooler Pressure or Temperature Yost of the measurements needed for performing an input/output efficiency catcu- lation are part of the plant's normal complement of instrumentation. It would be desirable to have all pressure instrumentation calibrated prior to the test and to use test quality thermocouples for the required temperature measure- ments. Due to the criticality of accurate fuel flow measurements, it is es- sential to have fuel flow measuring equipment, particularly coal scales for coal-fired plants, calibrated prior to the test. Calculating boiler efficiency by the input-output method is desirable because of the simplicity of the method but is subject to the inaccuracies of all of the measurements required. The method of heat losses increases the accuracy of the calculation but, while the number of measurements is decreased, the difficulty of obtaining accurate measurements is increased. 3-34The abbreviated heat loss method, as described in ASME PTC 4.1, determines the boiler efficiency by defining the anount of heat lost from: Dry Gas Losses Fuel Moisture Losses Noisture Losses From Hydrogen Conbination Losses Due to Moisture in Conbustion Air Unburned Conbustibles in Refuse Radiation Losses, and Unmeasured Losses. Unmeasured Tosses are normally supplied by the steam generator manufacturer and can be found in design boiler efficiency calculations. If these are unavailable, a typical accepted value is .5 to 1.0 percent. Radiation losses can be estimated using information provided in Figure 8 of PTC 4.1. Dry gas loss is calculated from the measured levels of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide in the flue gas and the calculated level of nitrogen. The sensible heat of these gases is computed from the difference between the exit gas temperature and the reference air temperature. In the case of units with a cold precipitator, the exit gas temperature should be measured at the air heater exit. If the temperatures are measured at the air heater exit, oxygen (0,) and carbon dioxide (cO,) level measurenents mist be taken on both sides of the air heater to allow the tenperature measurements to be corrected for air heater in-leakage. If the unit has a hot precipitator, the 0, and CO, level measurements should be taken at the precipitator inlet and outlet and at the air heater outlet. This is to allow separate air in-leakage calculations to be performed for the air heater and the precipitator. Losses due to moisture in the fuel are calculated from the measured value of fuel moisture determined from either the fuel proximate or ultimate analysis and the difference between the enthalpy of water vapor at 1 psia and the exit gas temper- ature and the enthalpy at the reference air temperature. Moisture losses due to hydrogen combination are calculated from the measured hydrogen levels taken from the ultimate analysis, In this calculation it is assumed that all of the hydrogen combines with oxygen to form water vapor. The weight of water formed is nine times the weight of hydrogen contained in the fuel. The heat loss is determined using the enthalpy difference as described above. 3-35The heat loss due to unburned combustibles in the refuse is determined by multi- plying the weight of the combustibles in the flyash by the energy content of the combustibles. These values must be obtained by a laboratory analysis of ash samples. Optimally, samples should be taken at the boiler hopper, the economizer hopper, and the precipitator hopper. Each sample should be analyzed separately for combustible content and a weighted average used to determine the overall loss. From the above descriptions the following information requirements are necessary to perform the heat loss calculations: Reference Air Temperature Gas Temperatures at the Boiler Exit Gas Analysis of 0), CO), and CO at Boiler Exit Fuel Sanple Colle€tion“énd Ultimate Analysis Ash Sample Collection and Analysis The obvious advantage of the heat oss method versus the input/output method is in the amount of information available to the performance engineer. The heat. Joss method gives a detailed breakdown of the individual losses. If there is a deviation in the boiler efficiency, the performance engineer is better able to pinpoint the source of that deviation. The effort and accuracies involved in performing both types of tests should be discussed. Only one person is needed to gather all of the information required to calculate boiler efficiency by the input/output method. The assistance of plant personnel will be required to gather fuel samples and to isolate the boiler blowdown prior to the test. The test should always be performed at a consistent valve point, such as valves wide open. If the calculated boiler efficiency is to be compared to the manufacturers design value or a baseline value, it is usually recomended by the boiler vendors that the test be performed at a constant steam Flow. For the heat loss method one person is normally needed to monitor the plant conditions to ensure that the test is valid and one or two persons are needed to take flue gas measurements. Again, the assistance of the plant staff is needed to take fuel and ash samples and for boiler blowdown isolation. 3-36The flue gas analysis is the most critical and the most difficult measurenent to obtain. Normally, the 0, and flue ges temperature measurenents used for normal operation are taken at the economizer outlet and many times are single point measurements which are subject to error due to gas stratification and air leakage. Accurate flue gas measurements require that grids be constructed at each location where measurements are to be taken. Reconmendations for the grid construction are given in PTC 4.1, In lieu of constructing a permanent grid, the same results can be obtained by using portable temperature probes with gas sampling ports. This requires that the flue ducts have the necessary entry ports. This method is less expensive in the short term than the permanent installation but requires additional manpower to assist in positioning the probe, collecting the gas samples, and recording the data. The flue gas analysis can be taken with either an Orsat analyzer, wet chemical analyzers, or a portable gas analyzer, The Orsat analyzer measures oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide levels. Usually carbon monoxide is in such Tow concentrations that the indications provided by the Orsat are meaningless. The Orsat can give results accurate to within £.2 percent when the chemicals are fresh and the instrument is used by an experienced person, however, the time required to analyze each of the gas samples is Tong which reduces the number of data points that can be obtained during standard four hour testing period. For this reason, boiler efficiency tests are seldom performed using Orsat analysis except as a check of the accuracy of other types of gas analysis. Wet chemical analyzers are simple to use, have an accuracy of +.5 percent, and can be used to measure both oxygen and carbon dtoxide. Care mist be taken that the chenicals are fresh or the results will be suspect. Normally the chemicals are good for approximately 100 measurements. Since a typical boiler test can require nearly that many gas measurements, the chemicals should be renewed at the beginning of each test to eliminate the possibility of erroneous readings which will invalidate the test results. The simplest, least time consuming, and most expensive method of measuring flue gas concentration, is by means of a portable gas analyzer. The results of the analysis can be obtained quickly with an accuracy of +1 percent. A portable 3-37analyzer costs on the order of $5,000.00. If tests are conducted on a regular basis, the cost of an analyzer and permanently installed grid may be more than offset by the costs of the additional manpower needed to take gas measurenents. A comparison of the relative accuracies of both the input/output and heat Tosses method may be of benefit to the performance engineer in determining which type of test they will perform. To demonstrate the relative accuracies of both methods, an analysis of the accuracy of the input/output and the heat oss method is presented. This analysis was prepared by the Central Electricity Generating Board and is presented in Reference 3. The measurements required for the ‘input/output test and their stated accuracies are: Steam Flow + .3t Heat Content of Steam 2 .2t Fuel Flow = 14e Heat Content of Fuel 21.0 Using the above accuracies and performing a statistical analysis on the data, the error in the calculation of the boiler efficiency would be #1.2 percent. Performing a similar analysis on the heat loss method yields the following results: ory gas Hoe Moisture in fuel +78 Hydrogen in fuel #102 Carbon in refuse 320% Radiation Nit Unaccounted Nil Statistical analysis of the above accuracies indicated that the overall error in the estimation of boiler efficiency was +.69 percent. This is almost twice the accuracy as could be expected with the most accurate input/output measurements. Enthalpy Drop Testing. Enthalpy drop tests are used as a method of trending the performance of the high pressure (HP) and the intermediate or reheat pressure (IP) sections of the steam turbine. Although it is difficult to make immediate corrections to turbine performance degradation, the information can be used as part of a cost/benefit analysis to determine the optinun point at which the losses due to the decreased performance are greater than the costs associated 3-38with turbine maintenance. There have been a number of cases where turbine overhaul schedules have been changed based upon the information obtained through enthalpy drop tests. In addition to performance trending, the performance engineer and plant staff can use the data to infer the possible cause of degradation in order to allow long lead time turbine parts to be obtained to minimize maintenance tine. It is possible to calculate the efficiency of each individual turbine stage, however, the normal practice is to calculate the overall efficiencies of the high pressure and the intermediate or reheat sections. The efficiency of these turbine sections is defined as the ratio of the used energy to the available energy. The following measurements are necessary to calculate high pressure section enthalpy: Throttle Pressure and Temperature Cold Reheat Pressure and Temperature The measurements needed for calculating intermediate pressure section efficiency are: Hot Reheat Pressure and Temperature Intermediate Exhaust Pressure and Temperature The mathematical representation of section efficiency is: Efficiency = (hin - hout)/(hin ~ ha) where: hin = enthalpy of the steam at the section inlet conditions hout = enthalpy of the steam at the section outlet conditions ha = enthalpy of the outiet steam calculated at the outlet pressure and the entropy determined by the inlet conditions The section efficiencies should be determined at the same conditions each time that the test is performed, This will enable the performance engineer to deter- mine if variations in section efficiencies are due to changes in the turbine 3-39conditions rather than due to changes in the test condition. These repeatable conditions are usually determined by the valve point rather than the power level or flow condition. For instance, the enthalpy drop test should be performed at the valves wide open condition or at one of the other valve points at which the unit may operate, Optimumly, testing should be performed over the entire oper- ating range of the unit. If pre and post overhaul tests are to be performed when valve maintenance or adjustments have been made, the performance engineer may wish to perform the post overhaul test at both the valves wide open position and with the valves set to duplicate the flow conditions of the pre overhaul test. The test at valves wide open will provide a future baseline while the test at similar flow conditions is used to evaluate the improvenents made during turbine overhaul. There are no special preparations required for performing the enthalpy drop test. However, as with all tests, the instruments needed to make the required measure~ ments should be calibrated prior to the test. Test grade thermocouples should be used where possible, redundant readings should be taken for comparison if test ‘thermocouples are not available or cannot be used. Depending upon the location of the instruments needed to take the required measurements, the test can be performed by one to two persons over a several hour period. No special equipment is required, except for possibly test instru mentation, to perform the test and all of the calculations can be performed using a hand calculator and a copy of steam tables. It should be noted that if the section efficiencies are to be compared with the design efficiencies supplied by ‘the vendor, steam tables consistent with those used by the vendor should be used to perform the calculations. For additional information on instrumentation, measuring points, and sample calculations the reader is referred to the following publications: © ASME PTC 6 - Steam Turbines © ASME PTC GA ~ Appendix A to Test Codes for Steam Turbines Condenser Efficiency Testing. Due to the importance of condenser backpressure on unit heat rate, it 4s important that condenser efficiency checks be performed routinely to optimize condenser cleaning schedules and to identify severe air in-leakage. There are three parametric indicators of condenser problems. The 3440first, high temperature rise across the tube bundle is indicative of low circu lating water flow. The second a difference between the turbine exhaust temper- ature and the condensate temperature, is indicative of excess 0, concentrations in the condenser or an increase in high energy drain flows. Under normal circum- stances this difference is zero. The last measure is the terminal temperature difference between the exhaust and circulating water outlet temperatures. If this is higher than normal, it indicates fouling of the condenser tubes. An alternate indication of this condition is increased pressure loss across the tube bundle. An increased pressure drop can also be caused by plugged tubes. Regular condenser cleanliness checks should be conducted at periodic intervals to determine the optinum time to perform condenser cleaning, These checks should be conducted under the condition of a constant condenser heat load. Since condenser backpressure curves are provided as a function of circulating water inlet temper- ature and condenser heat load, it is necessary to know the heat load to accu rately assess the condenser backpressure. It is also necessary to ascertain that extraneous affects, such as air in-leakage, are not affecting the backpressure measurements. The air in-leakage levels can be determined by measuring the vacuum pump or ejector flow rate or by measuring the temperature difference between the exhaust saturation temperature and the condensate temperature to the first low pressure heater. The methodology for developing condenser cleanliness factor curves are described in several excellent papers that are readily availeble to utility personnel and will not be restated here. These papers are available in References 4 and 5. The basic premise for the development of condenser cleanliness curves is that there is an optimum point at which it becomes economically justifiable to perform condenser maintenance. The conditions under which the break even point is found will depend on the manner fn which 2 unit 1s being operated. This information can also be used as part of the economic justification for alternate means of condenser cleaning, such as on-line continuous cleaning. The following information is needed by the performance engineer to generate the condenser cleanliness curves: 3-41© Circulating Water Inlet Tenperature © Circulating Water Outlet Tenperature © Condenser Backpressure @ Throttle Flow, Feedwater Flow, Condensate Flow, or Circulating Mater Flow The following information is useful in identifying condenser tube foul ing: @ Condenser Tube Bundle Inlet Pressure © Condenser Tube Bundle Outlet Pressure @ Circulating Water Flow Circulating water flow is a useful parameter but it is very seldom measured on 2 routine basis in most power plants. The two methods most often used to measure CCH flow are a pitot traverse and ultrasonic flow measuring devices. The latter has been used by several utilities with mixed results. Some believe they can measure very accurate flows while others have not had much success. The Central Electricity Generating Board (Great Britain) has reported success in the use of ultrasonic flow measuring devices to determine circulating water flow. The stated accuracy is +18. Routinely circulating water flow is calculated by performing a pitot tube traverse of the circulating water system. Another problem in performing a condenser cleanliness test is the measurement of the circulating water temperatures due to the stratification of the cooling water. The circulating water inlet temperature should be measured near the discharge of the circulating water pump where the fluid should be thoroughly mixed. The outlet water temperature should be measured downstream of the con- denser outlet to ensure proper mixing. In most cases, this would be near the cooling toner inlet or near the circulating water discharge. When measuring the circulating water outlet temperature in plants with retrofitted cooling towers, be sure to take the measurement upstream of the booster circulating water pump or a correction for heat addition by the punp to the fluid must be nade. The British have had success in measuring circulating water temperatures under stratified conditions using platinum RTD's which measure average temperature over their length. These RID's measure average temperature with a reported accuracy of #1 percent with very little calibration drift. A description of the pletinun RID's and the ultrasonic flow measuring device can be found in Reference 6. 3.82One last note should be made regarding condenser performance tests. ASHE PTC 12.2 provides guidelines for the conduct of condenser cleanliness tests; how- ever, the guidelines contained in the code are impractical for the determination of performance trade off analysis. Cooling Tower Efficiency Testing. Condenser backpressure is determined by the circulating water inlet temperature and the heat load, The circulating water ‘temperature is determined by ambient conditions and - for units so equipped - by ‘the performance of @ cooling tower. There is nothing that can be done to alter the weather or the temperature of the ultimate sink. However, the performance of ‘a cooling tower can be improved upon and cooling tower performance tests could prove beneficial. The cooling tower has an indirect effect upon the condenser backpressure through its effect on circulating water temperature. The greatest effect on cooling tower performance is wet bulb temperature. The only influence which the operator has on the tower's performance is through the control of the nunber of cells that are in operation at any one tine. The proper operation of a cooling tower is very difficult to determine. There is no clear correlation between the nein parameters of influence, wet bulb temper- ature and circulating water flow rate, and the outlet temperature of the tower. The method of determining acceptable performance of the toner is to correct all of the test conditions to the reference design conditions. This is the only point which the manufacture guarantees, even though performance curves are supplied for off design conditions. The physical condition of the tower can greatly influence its performance - refer to the logic tree of Appendix A. Conditions which cause flow maldistribution and deteriorated fi11 material can affect tower performance yet are difficult to Pinpoint as the exact root causes of poor performance. This is due to the fact that it is difficult to relate process parameters to the internal functioning of the cooling tower. ‘As a supplement to the rigorous tests outlined in either ASME PTC 23 or Cooling Tower Institute performance testing guidelines, 2 simpler method of tracking or ‘trending cooling tower performance is recommended. This method involves back calculating the wet bulb temperature which would result in the measured cooling 3-43tower range and compare it with the actual measured wet bulb temperature. This can be done using performance curves provided by the manufacturers. An example of the output using this methodology is shown in Figure 3-4. If the tower was performing at or better than expected, the points on the plot should lie above or near the line; if the tower is performing less than expected, the points will lie below the Tine. This method is not as rigorous as a cooling tower test but it does give the performance engineer some insights into the performance of the tower and allows him to make a decision whether @ test or a detailed root cause investigation is necessary. The information provided by the informal method will allow the performance engineer to perform sone scoping calculations of the effect of the towers performance on unit heat rate and to weigh potential improvements versus the cost of testing and repairs. The information needed to generate the data shown in Figure 3-4 is: © Cooling tower circulating water outlet temperature @ Cooling tower inlet tenperature Circulating water flow The difference between cooling tover inlet and outlet temperatures provides the range of the toner. Using the range and the toner outlet temperature, the corresponding wet bulb temperature can be found from the vendor's design curves using either the design or measured value for circulating water flow. A more accurate estimation of the wet bulb tenperature can be found if measured circu- lating water flow is used. Normally the toner manufacturer provides performance curves calculated for 90, 100, and 110 percent of design circulating water flow. If the measured flow lies within this range, the wet bulb tenperature can be computed by interpoleting between the values found from the available curves on either side of the known circulating water flow. The cooling tower inlet and outlet temperatures should be measured at a location where the flow is well mixed. The inlet temperature should be measured near the cooling tower and the outlet tenperature at the discharge of the circulating water pump, The outlet temperature should be corrected for the effects of heat input from the mechanical work performed by the pump. Guidelines for performing this correction can be found in chapter 10 of Reference 7. 3-44Measured Wet Bulb Temperature 7 2 744 ooo owomo mo @ 734 oo 0 om o mmm com| 724 up wooo o mm mono n4 oo 0 oo oon ooo 70+ e 2 moo Om 69 4 joo 0 9 mOMMMmGMO 900 684 2 mm oman oo 674 coo mmo mop oo es 4 apo wooo ° 654 ooo como 644 0 oom © 634 oF eeaeG aero tc ee 624 . om mo a 64 o 604 a D se o 584 374 56 : + 55 65 % as 95 Calculated Wet Bulb Temperature Figure 3-4. Comparison of Calculated and Measured Wet Bulb Temperature 3-45It should be noted that the calculated range may be outside the boundaries given jn the vendor's performance curves. Only those values inside the provided range boundaries should be used to calculate a wet bulb temperature. Air Heater Efficiency Testing. The efficiency of the air heater has a direct influence upon boiler efficiency. If the transfer of heat from the outgoing flue gases to the incoming combustion air is impaired, boiler efficiency will decrease. Normally air heater efficiency tests are performed simultaneously with a boiler performance test, however, utility surveys indicate that the frequency of performing air heater tests is monthly while that of boiler tests ranges from quarterly to annually. A complete description of the conduct of en air heater test can be found in ASME PTC 4.3 An air heater test can give the performance engineer an indication of deteriorated heat transfer performance of the baskets and of air in-leakage which affects both exit gas temperatures and induced draft fan performance. The measurenents needed are: © Air Heater Air Inlet Temperature Air Heater Air Outlet Temperature © Air Heater Gas Inlet Temperature © Air Heater Gas Outlet Temperature © Oxygen or Carbon Dioxide Measurements at the Air Heater Gas Side Inlet and Gutlet The recommended procedures for placing of instrumentation has been previously covered in the section on boiler testing and applies to this situation also. ‘The parameter which can best be used to trend air heater performance is gas-side efficiency. This is the ratio of the differences between gas inlet temperature and corrected air heater outlet temperature and gas inlet temperature and air heater inlet temperature. This can be expressed as: 3.46Efficiency = (Tgi - Tao)/(Tgi - Tai) where: Tgi = Air heater Gas Inlet Temperature Tao = Air heater Air Outlet Temperature Corrected for air in-leakage Tai = Air heater Air Inlet Temperature MiT1 Performance Test. Another test which can be associated with the boiler test is the pulverizer mill capacity and coal fineness test. The primary importence of this test is to determine if the pulverizer is grinding the coal to the required fineness. If the coal leaving the pulverizer is too coarse, the amount of unburned carbon appearing in the ash refuse will increase, and if the coal is too fine, unit net heat rate may be increased due to excess mill power requirements. As mentioned previously in the discussion on boiler testing, the amount of unburned carbon appearing in the ash directly affects boiler efficiency. The greater the amount of unburned carbon the lower the efficiency. Procedures for conducting a mill capacity test are covered in ASME PTC 4.2. The procedure calls for the collection of a sample of coal from the outlet of a pulverizer mill and the performance of a sieve test to determine the distribution of coal fines, A number of measurements should be made in conjunction with this test to adequately determine the overall performance of the pulverizer mills. These are: Power Consumption © Weight of Coal Delivered to Each Pulverizer Mi11 Each of the above measurements should be taken during the time period over which the test is conducted, Some special apparatus is required to collect the coal sample and a conplete description is provided in PTC 4.2. Punp Performance Testing. Pump performance testing should be performed when the performance engineer or plant staff suspects a problem with a particular pump or set of pumps, or when a root cause investigation indicates possible poor perform- ance. There are several parameters which can be used to indicate punp perform ance. These include flow capacity versus pump head and pump efficiency. An additional relative indication of performance can be obtained by comparing the performance of several pumps under similar conditions. 3-47By comparing relative performance, the performance parameters of one pump, such as current draw, discharge pressure, flow, pump speed, etc. can be compared against the performance of another pump to detect a component which may not be performing satisfactorily. These comparisons would be made under conditions which would require operation of only one pump at a time for accurate determ nation of the above parameters. This can be accomplished during low power operation when equipment needs can be reduced. Another method of determining pump performance would be the comparison of the calculated head loss versus delivered flow with the manufacturer's design values. This method involves the measurement of the suction and discharge pressures and the delivered flow. Unless the flow measurement is taken close to the discharge of the pump being tested, corrections may need to be made to the measured flow to account for temperature differences. This will be required in the determination of actual condensate or feedwater pump discharge flows where the flow measurement may be removed from the pump by several feedwater heaters. The measured flow will also have to be corrected for any flow diversion which occurs between the pump and the location where the flow measurement is made, It will be necessary to measure suction and discharge temperatures to determine the ‘correct density for conversion of pressure into head, ‘The measurements necessary to perform the above test are: @ Pressure at the pump suction and discharge © Temperature at the pump suction and discharge Pressure and temperature at the flow measurement location © Flow © Pump Speed Another test which is more difficult to perform but which can provide the performance engineer with more detailed information on pump performance is an efficiency test. There are actually two efficiencies involved in the performance of a pump, that of the driver and that of the pump.The total efficiency of the pump is equal to the product of the efficiencies of the driver (motor) and the pump. This can be expressed as: Eff = Effm * Effp The efficiency of the motor is the ratio of the shaft horsepower and the energy input to the motor converted to horseponer. The energy input can be measured either directly fn kilowatt-hours or as a voltage and a current. Both measurenents can be converted directly into horsepower. The efficiency of the pump is the ratio of the water horsepower to the shaft horsepower. The water horsepower 1s the product of the total head developed by ‘the pump and the flow rate delivered by the pump expressed in horsepower. In each of these ratios shaft horsepower is difficult to determine and the manufacturer's design motor efficiency should be used unless there is reason to believe otherwise. Therefore, shaft horsepower is calculated by: Shaft Horsepower = Driver Design Eff. * Power Input Converted to Horsepower The pump efficiency can now be calculated from: Pump Efficiency = Water Horsepower/Shaft Horsepower The additional measurements needed to calculate pump efficiency in addition to those above are: © Power input into the driver in either kilowatts or volts and amps Pump efficiency can also be calculated from the enthalpy rise across the pump. Since shaft horsepower is the product of the driver efficiency and the power input to the driver, the pump efficiency can now be expressed as: Pump Efficiency = (Flow * Enthalpy Rise)/(Driver Efficiency * Power Input to the Driver) 3-49To calculate pump efficiency using this method requires a very accurate determination of the temperature rise from the punp suction to the discharge. This is usually accomplished by using instrumentation which directly measures temperature differential rather than measuring the individual suction and discharge tenperatures. Turbine Heat Rate Test. The most complex and costly of all the performance tests is the turbine heat rate test. The methodology for the performance of the turbine heat rate test is completely specified in ASME PTC 6. Realizing the difficulties and the costs involved in performing the rigorous test described in PTC 6 and desiring to formate a test procedure which would enable more utilities to perform turbine heat rate testing, the code committee developed PTC 6S, "Simplified Procedures for Routine Performance Tests of Steam Turbines". This procedure was not intended to be used to compare absolute levels of performance but to provide a more economic means of monitoring performance trends. The Power Test Code Committee has proposed a simplified version of the full ASME turbine test which reduces both cost and complexity without significantly affecting the accuracy. This test is normally referred to as the "Alternative Procedure for Testing Steam Turbines". At this time this procedure is available only in draft form and not as a fully approved procedure. ‘As an alternative to the full PTC 6 test, the alternate test is intended to reduce the number of measurements required to perform an acceptance test. While the alternate test does not provide as mich information about cycle components as the full test, it costs considerably less to perform and is intended to increase ‘the number and quality of turbine tests being performed. The following table illustrates the reduction in the amount of instrumentation required to conduct the alternate test as opposed to the full ASME PTC 6 test. Full ASME Alternate Acceptance Test Acceptance Test Temperature 66 18 Pressure 47 13 Differential Pressure 18 7 3-50The greatest simplification is in the area of primary and secondary flow measurenents. The primary flow measurenent in the alternate test is a direct measurement of the feedwater flow using an inspectable, in-line feedwater flow nozzle. The full PTC 6 test code required that the primary flow measurement be made at the inlet to the deaerator this required heat balances to be performed around the deaerator and all of the high pressure heaters to determine final feedwater Flow. With the alternate test, only a heat balance around the highest pressure heater must be performed. The high pressure feedwater heater heat balance is needed to determine the high pressure heater extraction flow in order to calculate the flow through the reheater, Corrections to the reheater flow for desuperheating sprays are handled the same as in PTC 6, these flows must be measured. However, corrections to reheater flow for turbine Jeakage through the seals can now be made using the values from the heat balance diagrams rather than through direct measurement as required by PTC 6. Another significant difference between PTC 6 and the alternate test is in the manner of correcting the turbine heat rate for off design conditions. It is no Jonger necessary to perform contract cycle calculations. Rather, Group 1 and 2 corrections are made using standard correlations. Correlation curves for Group 1, given in Reference 8, are typical for single reheat type units. Group 2 corrections are made using the turbine manufacturer's thermal kit or the thermal kit supplemented by heat balance code computations. A denonstration of the accuracy of the alternate test to the full scale test has been performed at an operating plant. The results showed the corrected heat rate of the alternate test to be within .06 percent of the corrected full scale test heat rate at the valves wide open condition. A Weighted average of all tests showed a .1 percent agreement between alternate and full scale corrected heat rates. A description of the test and its results are presented in Reference 9. This demonstration shows that utilities can accurately calculate turbine heat rates using the more desirable alternate test. The main drawback for already constructed units to performing the alternate test would be the need to retrofit 2 feedwater flow nozzle. Estimates of the cost of performing the alternate test, if implemented at plant design, are $50,000 in 1980 dollars. The cost for @ retrofitted unit was on the order of $100,000, again estimated in terms of 1980 dollars. 3-51An alternate method of determining turbine heat rate has been proposed and is presently being used to calculate “as-run" turbine heat rate in operating units in Britain. This method reduces the total number of measurements that are needed to calculate a heat rate to four. The method determines the heat input to the turbine by calculating the heat rejected to the condenser and the power output of the generator. An added advantage of this method is that the heat rate being calculated is an operating heat rate which will include the effects of any cycle isolation problems which may be occurring. The heat rejected to the condenser is calculated by measuring the circulating water flow rate and multiplying it by the temperature rise across the condenser ‘and the specific heat of the fluid. The power output of the generator is converted into its energy equivalent. The four measurements needed are: * Circulating water flow into the condenser © Circulating water inlet temperature © Circulating water outlet tenperature © Generator output The difficulties of measuring circulating water flow rates and accurate inlet and outlet temperatures have already been discussed previously. This systen also allows the thermal performance of the condenser to be determined with the addition of pressure measurenents. This has the advantage of measuring the two parameters considered to be of most value in identifying performance problems in a survey of utility performance engineers, condenser efficiency and turbine heat rate. 3.4 IMPROVING UNIT PERFORMANCE The previous discussions have concentrated on the methods used to characterize unit performance. Methods have been presented for determining the amount of improvement which can be made in a unit's heat rate, This section deals with methods for improving a unit's performance. Performance improvenent activities are divided into those which can be realized with 1ittle capital investment, short term achievable, and those which would require an expenditure of resources, Tong term achievable. 3482Figure 3-5 presents a breakdown of the components that comprise the heat rate gap between actual unit operating heat rate and best achievable unit heat rate. The potential improvenents in unit performance through short term and ong term achievable objectives will be discussed in the following sections. 3.4.1 Short Term Achievable Heat Rate The short term achievable heat rate represents the level of performance that can be achieved with the least amount of effort, in terms of time and expenditure of resources, on the part of the plant staff. This component of the total heat rate deviation is that which can be recovered through activities such as, increased or improved preventive maintenance, attention to cycle configuration, and improved unit operations. These activities can normally be accomplished without large expenditures of capital or increases in the plant operating staff. Some of these activities simply involve paying closer attention to the quality with which routine activities are performed. Many of these improvenents involve attention to those activities which should be performed on @ routine basis but which are ignored due to the diversion of plant personnel to activities which are necessary “to keep the plant operating". Many times a well planned preventive maintenance program can actually eliminate much of the need to continually respond to those "Fire drills" which are frequently necessary to keep the plant operational. Those activities which can result in an inmediate improvement in plant performance and which can be implemented at little or no cost will be discussed in greater detail in the following section. Cycle Configuration. Every steam plant has a normal path for the flow of liquid or steam at every load point. These paths are usually well represented on the heat balance diagrams provided by the turbine and boiler vendors. what is not shown on these diagrams are the numerous paths which are available for either liquid or steam to escape from these normal flow paths. Vinen flow is diverted from the normal steam path it is either lost from the cycle completely or it is returned to a section of the cycle where energy is removed from the fluid without providing any useful work. This is true of fluid which is diverted from the condensate and steam cycles to the condenser or deaerator before it has performed work in the turbine. 3-53Controllable losses through improved operation and maintenance Recoverable losses through cost-effective capital expenditures Recoverable losses through non-cost-effective capital expenditures ‘Actual Unit Heat Rate Short-Term Achievable Unit Heat Rate Long-Term Achievable Unit Heat Rate Best Achievable Unit Heat Rate Figure 3-5. Thermal Effects of Alternate Heater Drains 3-54Most utilities do not place a great deal of emphasis on ensuring that these potential steam or water diversion paths are {isolated during normal operation. The result of a survey of typical low cost heat rate improvement activities indicated that few utilities routinely perform cycle isolation checks. There could be hundreds of flow paths through which energy can be lost from a cycle. These potential diversion paths range fron instrument tapping lines which are .25 to .5 inch in diameter to feedwater heater bypass lines which can be 14 inches in diameter or greater. Sone pathways represent a greater potential for energy loss ‘than do others. For exemple, it is obvious that 2 leak in a partially open 6 inch feedwater heater drain can divert more energy from the cycle than will a fully open .25 inch instrument Tine. The only way to appropriately deal with cycle isolation problens is to perform periodic cycle isolation walkdowns. Periodic walkdowns will allow a utility to identify the particular losses that are occurring in a unit and schedule maintenance activities to correct these problens as required. The first step in preparing for @ cycle isolation walkdown is to prepare a detailed cycle configuration check list. This check list contains all of the Tines not used during normal operation which should be isolated. This list should contain the following information: a description of the Tine, including where it originates and where it terminates the isolation valve identification - this is the valve which should be closed to prevent flow through a diversion flow path, the location of the isolation valve, the valve size, and an identification of the drawing from which the information was obtained. It is also important that the isolation checklist contain all drain lines which have steam traps in order to perform a steam trap operability check. Once the checklist is compiled, the performance engineer should begin a cycle isolation walkdown using the isolation checklist. The check consists of deter- mining if there is any Teakage through the isolation valve by checking either the downstream pipe wall temperature or by listening for flow through the isolation valve. The downstream temperature can be checked by hand or by using @ pyrometer and flow checks can be made using a stethoscope. The performance engineer should make note of any valve seals, pipe flanges, or pump seals which may be leaking and require repair. Caution should be exercised around high energy steam piping to avoid possible injury from high energy steam leaks. To make cycle isolation checks simpler, consideration should be given to installing contact thermometers 55on piping downstream of an isolation valve. This thermoneter should be marked with the expected upstream temperature. The magnitude of @ leak can be deter- mined by the proximate of the temperature to upstream temperature. Lines which terminate at the base slab drain or are vented to atmosphere can be checked for leakage visually. Some lines which vent to atmosphere include main steam safety and relief valves and steam drum safety valves. Drains which discharge to the base slab include feedwater heater shell side drains, condenser hotwell drains, and boiler drains. The performance engineer may wish to determine whether the normal cycle vent paths are functioning properly. These include: continuous blowdown dezerator vent flow, and feedwater heater vent flows. The continuous blowdown from the steam drun is normally set to ensure that the unit will experience no imbalance of chemical impurities in the condensate. However, the amount of margin may be too great and the amount of blowdown may be excessive resulting in unnecessary energy losses. Attention to the dearator and feedwater vents can be important for two reasons. First, excessive venting will result in unnecessary energy losses from the cycle. This can occur if the deaerator and feedwater heater vents have eroded and are venting excessive steam. If, however, the feedwater heater vents have plugged or have mineral build-up they may be venting inadequate amounts of noncondensibies thereby impeding heat transfer and increasing the possibility of damage to turbine or boiler components. Also, many units vent the dearator back to the condenser. If the vent flow is greater than necessary, this would add an ad- ditional load upon the condenser which could result in higher than expected condenser backpressures. Having completed the inspection of cycle isolation, the performance engineer now has a Vist of those valves which require repair. Once a complete cycle isolation walkdown has been performed, the list can be reduced to a manageable number of flow paths to inspect on a routine basis. This list should include those flow paths which were found to be leaking, those which are known to be high maintenance items - identified from maintenance work orders, and those which are known from utility expertence. The following flow paths are known from utility experience to cause problems: 3-56© High Pressure Emergency Drain Lines @ High Pressure Heater to Low Pressure Heater Low Load Bypass Line @ — BotTer Feed Pump and Condensate Pump Minimum Recirculation Lines @ Start-up Valves The reduced list should be used on a frequent basis to check cycle isolation condition, however, a walkdown using the complete checklist should be performed periodically, preferably prior to the scheduled annual maintenance, This in- spection should be performed sufficiently in advance to influence scheduled maintenance activities. If the performance engineer is unable to prepare a detailed cycle isolation checklist, he should perform the cycle walkdown developing @ list of leaking Vines which require repair and @ list of those paths which are known "offenders". Included on the checklist should be 211 lines which have the potential to divert Targe amounts of energy away from the normal flow path. It should be noted that for many plants which are experiencing large deviations between actual and best achievable levels of heat rate as much as 20 percent of ‘the total deviation can be recovered from proper cycle isolation. To accurately determine the flow paths which are the biggest contributors to heat loss would require sone data gathering and analysis using one of the heat balance codes. An analysis of this type has been performed by a utility, and the results are shown in Table 3+ . The complete results are presented in Reference 10. Another method which may be used to determine the overall affect of inadequate cycle isolation is to perform two limited cycle evaluations, one at the unisolated condition and the other with the major leaking lines isolated. The results can be compared to determine changes in the power output of the unit. These tests should be performed at the valves wide open condition to allow accurate comparisons. Improved Operations. Another area where large gains in heat rate improvement can be made is increased attention to the proper operation of the unit. The premise of ‘improved operations is to ensure that the unit is operating at the optimum condition at every load point. The unit will be operating at its most efficient state when each controllable parameter is at its design or target value. When 3-57THERMAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATE HEATER DRAINS Leakage, & of Heater Drain Outlet Flow. 50% No. 6 Heater Drain to Condenser 5% No. 6 Heater Drain to Condenser 50% No. 5 Heater Drain to Condenser 5% No. 5 Heater Drain to Condenser 50% No. 5 Heater Drain to No. 3 Heater 5% No. 5 Heater Drain to No. 3 Heater 50% No. 3 Heater Drain to Condenser 5% No. 3 Heater Drain to Condenser 50% No. 2 Heater Drain to Condenser 5% No. 2 Heater Drain’ to Condenser % of Deaerator Fi Outlet to Condenser Turbine Cycle Heat Rate Degradation Bane 37 a nil nil Table 3-5 3-58 0.5 O.1 0.5 OL on nil nil nil nil nil on Generation Loss 1.6 0.2 17 0.2 0.3 nia 0.1 nil nil nit 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.5 o1 on nil ni nil nil nil O12the variable is maintained below the design or target value, the unit will be operating at less than peek efficiency and heat rate losses will be incurred. There may be conditions or reasons why the unit cannot be operated at these target values over all or a portion of its load range. However, it is these conditions or reasons that the performance engineer needs to discover in order to determine if the condition can be corrected. To be able to determine Timiting conditions of operation the performance engineer must first establish where, with respect to operating parameters, the unit can be operated. If the performance engineer has performed the procedure outlined in Section 3.3.2 - Performance Parameter Monitoring, he may already have much of the information he needs to begin improving operations. To begin improving operations, the performance engineer needs to collect controllable operating parameter data over the unit's operating load range. The data should be collected for a period of sufficient length to provide a representative sample of data. If the unit cycles on a periodic basis, the data collection should be Tong enough to include several cycling periods. A one month period, assuming the unit is continuously available, is usually sufficient to characterize the unit's performance over its operating load range. The parameters selected for trending should be those that the operator has control of. These would normally include: @ Throttle Pressure © Throttle Temperature © Hot Reheat Temperature © Excess Oxygen ¢ Exit Gas Temperature Once the data have been trended, the performance engineer must now decide the best method for bringing the operating variables to their best attainable state. There ave a number of ways of accomplishing this. The performance engineer should plot the design or best attainable envelope on the data trend of each of the parameters as shown in Figure 3-6, This will allow the performance engineer to determine whether the unit is being operated at or near the design values over the entire load range. 3-59ECONOMIZER INLET TEMPERATURE 2 80 120 160 200-240 280320 LOAD (MW) Figure 3-6. Example of Parameter Trending with Design Envelope Superimposed 3-60The next step is to determine how much of the deviation observed fron the trending is attributable to improper operation of the unit. This will require ‘the involvement and the close cooperation of the operations staff. The performance engineer should begin to feedback the results of his study to the operations staff. Any presentation to the staff concerning improving the operations of the unit should be preceded or accompanied by a seninar on the effect of off-design operation on unit efficiency. This will demonstrate the importance of good operation in contributing to the financiel soundness of the utility. Information, based upon the results of the data trending, can be given to the operations staff of the effect off-design operation has in terms of both Btu/kih and dollars Tost. If the data trending has shown that the unit can be operated at the design values over the load range, then a feedback session which emphasizes the importance of maintaining the design values on unit efficiency may be all that is required to begin to improve operation of the unit. However, if the performance engineer is uncertain from the results of the data trend exactly what are the best attainable values for operation of the unit, he may wish to approach operations improvenent in a different manner, An alternative method is to set target values for operation based upon the trended data. These target values can be determined from a regression analysis of the trended data as shown in Figure 3-7. This technique can be of value in a situation where the operations staff might feel very strongly that the plant is unable to operate near the actual design values. The target values which are based upon a regression analysis are average values. The plant staff should not feel that unrealistic targets are being placed upon them since the data show they are capable of operating the unit at these values. Recognizing the importance of their job, through reinforcenent from the feedback sessions, and by the fact that operators take pride in doing @ good job, the performance engineer should begin to see that the unit is being operated at or above the designated target values. After the target values have been established, the performance engineer continues to trend the data for an accep~ table time period. He again performs the regression analysis and presents the results to the operations staff providing them with a new set of target values. Because of the tighter control on operating parameters, the target values will be closer to the design envelope, 1.¢., the margin between the design and the target values will be reduced. This sequence is repeated until the performance engineer sees that further improvement cannot be made in the operation of the unit. A 3-61aoa a cooo o a ooo goo) ono 00 oo oo8 do coo ono © 0 aoc oo0cen coo o GoD noc = oO oo 3 ecoo oa G oo comac | 1.02 3 1.01 oo o o 0 2. 900 oo ag oo 14 ccmmens ooo coomoosooo cocoosoooconoooooooCEMmO 4 housands) SUPERHEATER, STEAM, TEMPERATURE 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 LOAD (MW) Figure 3-7. Example of Trended Parameter with Regression Curve Superimposed 3-62hypothetical example of the continued trending and regression analysis is shown in Figures 3-8a through 3-8c. The final result of this exercise will be that each parameter is at or near its design value, or that each parameter has reached fa best attainable value - which is something less than the design value - over the load range, Potential methods for recovering the difference between the design value and the best attainable value will be discussed in Section 3.4.2. Preventive Maintenance. A well planned preventive maintenance program can have ‘the following benefits: @ Maintain the efficient operation of the unit at a consistent high level © Increase the availability of the unit by increasing equipment reliability Nany times preventive maintenance is not performed because there is inadequate time and manponer available to respond to both the maintenance requirements needed to keep the plant on-line and to perform preventive maintenance. One of the highest priorities of the plant staff is to keep the unit operating and capable of generating power. Therefore, many of the preventive maintenance routines which are important to maintaining good unit heat rate are not perceived ‘as being essential to continued plant operation. However, many or most of these preventive maintenance activities are necessary to prevent partial deratings of the unit. For example, much has been said about the importance of condenser backpressure on unit heat rate, yet a high condenser backpressure can also limit ‘the maximum output of the unit. The importance of coal fineness on boiler efficiency has been discussed several times. If pulverizer maintenance is neglected, increased coal size can result in limitations on the units capacity. A list of some preventive maintenance activities which will enhance unit performance is presented in Table 3-6. Presented are some routine maintenance tasks and 2 reconmended frequency with which they should be performed. Actual Frequencies can be established by the utility through either trial and error or by establishing a frequency of repair from a review of maintenance records. Performance parameters which can be monitored to assess the need for preventive maintenance are also identified in Table 3-6. Methods of using monitorable performance parameters to define maintenance needs will be discussed further in this section. 3-63mozprzoname mMOZDsRoOnRMD nam mazps BMAMEDBDD zmMamapapD amamspang Figure 3-8a. Hypothetical First Trend Of A Monitored Parameter Figure 3-8b. First Trend Of A Monitored Paraneter With A Regression Curve Superimposed Figure 3-8c. Last Trend Of The Monitored Parameter 3-64suatqoad 44no419 do ‘unipes uolaeinsuy *s39e3U09 ALD 404 WaISAS [O4qUOD dLUoA2a19 IDadsuT sso uoqueg Bus inog so aBeyea{ Jos saut{ [ouqueD pue go $8 3x3 squeuoduo9 Buysuas weyshs [ouqu0D 21geuneud qoadsuy 0.SeB 4147 woysks jouqUo) auanbas4 sqoafad [Lu 49349 429M 404 Suey JO S4aqsnoyxo pur reuo4se090 suopaeaugissei2 ‘squed SuLpuLsb yadsuy quanbaud yonpoud yo ssououts 4994) papeau sy ‘angstow [an 4984) sOuy(tea LLW papaau sy 0} MOS 41 9949 woques pauanqua, quanbauy aun go $86 303 quanbaug aanzeaaday 72[3N0 0 Seb 340g Liew [209 papaau sy aanssaad 49[9n0 dund 42349 popaou sy Bupyoo 40 Butynog 10} sayRay Yuez y>adsuT papaau sy shnjd soy aouyeirs yadsuT papeau sy uoya2uns Leu 405 4042 [NBs4 ainsseid 33adsu} quanbaug 3@luL dund 3@ sumexaduar any 9949 quanbag sauang 2 aanssaad [ang 4994) go $28 33 juanbaug ayes MOLy Lang 299u9 0 Se6 41¥3 warsfs Alddns 140 papaau sy ‘sBnyd 10} soureays weaaysdn qoadsuy papaau sy ‘aanssaud 3u} Ladyd 42949 quanbsay suot}2uny [eu 40J soyeinBe. aunssaad yoedsuy 299 $26 apg juanbas aaeu MOL} LANs 4994) Qo 508 31x3 uueasés Atddns juanbas saauung 1 aunssead 49949 0 S®6 1Ka ‘seg. [e4ngeH TemroqaT SEL TOT TEPEIBS FUSTOAHTG quauoduoy Aq pai2as3¥ do 499 545, saaqauieweg 2DUbuLLOJ4ad SASWL JONVNBINIVW INTL0¥ O3LVTBH-AQNBIDT43 FTAISSOd JO 1ST gre atqeL 3-65papaau se 40 AU penuuy Sa}un pairs [P09 uo UoLS049 4oMO|q 300s Jo aduapLAa Jos q2adsuy sabessed seb papaau se ut suaduep Jo sa{sseq Jo uoratpuos 2adsuy 4o ALLenuuy — quaUBL[estu 40g squauEla soyeaysodns y>edsuT Bupuea|> pepaou sy Leoiueyoau 40/pue Buyysem 193em wostag papaau ssau Sedo “Bul aeayzaA0 40 a0uay Atenuuy 4005 og sadeJuNs 4aysuEL Je—aYy {Le IDadsuy Peo} wn, xeu 94un quanbaug BuynoLq3005 iwioy4ad 187 woUuo39 due weags 220y9y quanbouy ssaoe [e}qud4eJsEp aunssaud Se6 4294) ainyesoduey wears uLeN juaud pnb quanbaay 3013N0 Ja[40q 48 ounssaud seb x94) aaysuesy ywoH auanbaay ‘aunssaud ageuing Yay] —aangeaadiay seb 11x] 4aLtog J0 apis seg Leuoyseo29 s}eouya saudng ut dnpLing 2409 405 oadsut oy3epix0 pue 1euo1se929 ean 40} $40399L49p 4ouing [209 y9adSuT aunssoud age quanbay Letqueda5sup aoeuing 02 xoqpUIM y99H9 juanbaay S6ujagas Aoduep sauang 9994) suauang quanbaay 118 03 VoLgnqLaastp Lang Jadoud Ay 1494 ean 40} y2adsup quanbaay pue sdi3 sauing-{}0 uea19 pue arciay papaau sy aBeGHn|d 40 Bo1s140 seB yoadsur 1eu015e929 San|}25 40 U013eMs0JP 404 Peo} wnuyxew a1up quanbaay aouruadde y9eas 49949 jusud nb quanbaag saouedvadde sues y99u3 Sujuang i3ng TRAST S5eL TUSuOTIOS guauoduog £9 paroassy 4o ua3s%g ‘SHSWL JONYNELNIVH 3NILNOY G3LVTHY-AINIIITIS3 31GISSOd 40 1517 (panuyquos) 9-¢ aLgeL sdaqamedeg SoUBUOSJad 3-66Leuo}seo09 Leuoyse299 papaau se ao. yenuuy quanbas, quanbasg, quanbaug {euoyse299 399 [euo}se299 quanbaud Attenuuy yewo}se299 papaau sy Papaau se 4o AL enuuy yo AL Lenuuy uoygequaunaysuy ayeup J2{yoq “MOLL ate uo|3snquos ‘78 |uj seqeayasd ye aanzeua dua} Ipe “puewlap yua.ina 4o/pue paads upy faunssaad pue aunjesaduey wears uyeu ‘mo|4 pue ‘eanssa.d ‘aunaeyaduoy uaysAs xtddns any 99 $6 34x0 *%9 se 4px@ ‘Sounyesaciuay Seb 1x3 Butpnioup uo,qequaunaysuy Jo soueuaquyeu pue UOL3RAGL LED sayrayaud ssoue asta % aunseay S80U} [uea|> 40g squauals vagea4add yo9dsuy @qeayoud 4 aunzesadia, seB 49049 woyzanpoid 2e sumpedaduay Le 99y9 apeay ye UL ssade LeyquadassP aunssasd 49949 a6ey901q uo} susau9s 3a[uL yoadsuy SSauy[uva|2 40} Sapelq ues jo0dSUT puewop IuaLand ues 4424p parwos 49849 woigisod uadwep wes 3424p paru0} 99849 aunssaid ab4eyosip ues 1484p panto) 9904 uo}eLNSUL Jo UOJFeLOL 4939p 404 3D0dsUy Syeal Buse> 405 3294) SLeusaquL 30 Buyueay> [eD4uayo 40 Leo}URYDA_ quaujessy 4o1em 43] [og S[eusaqUL wNJp 40 UOLzLpUOI [eoLUEYosU yDadsul Ssaup(ubalD [PusaqU} OJ saqny I2adsuT go $06 303 0 $6 41x3 soangesoduay seb 304 Zo se6 aia sounjeuadua} $28 38d peot wnuyxew 31un go se6 apa 0 se6 3h aumyesoduey ueors ute 2 seb axa peo| unuyxew 34un aunyesaduay se8 7103 =duay wears 7eay9% aumesaduioy weags uLeH uo} qequaw =naqsuy 49) {0g saazeauaag LY sued Bulaaag 49.03 uaudy nbg daysueaL qeeH 01109 40 apts aanen TeRaeTT SHSEL Woy sepeIb ET uauoduoy Xq paq2054¥ saazeuedeg aDUeULOjad SSL 3ONVNZLNIVW 3NILNOY GBUVTSY-AINILIL443 31G1SSOd 40 1ST (panutquos) 9-¢ aiqey qwUoTHE, 40 waasKs 3-67papavu sy lpung agny 49qvay uagempaas ueaty papacu sy lena, 4aqeay sazeMpaay asncpy Ay penuuy S89}5140 UDA 99U) Auquanbaad Syyod Pue S,atL 929u9 yok Atquanbaag aangesaduay 39[UL Jexenpaas 99U9 yoo ‘aL. soqenpaed 319K) A\saysend SapoUBpII}59 UOLIDaS azepN1e9 ——-KoUayDx442 UO}IDa5 auygan] papaou sy Buyqm, Jasuapuos wea A guoyd 4oz9e4 $Sau} [ueat> 94 [Nd10) Aiquanbaay doap aanssaad ajpung aqny 32949 Aquanbaag s0uaday 1p azesuapuo-ysneyxe 42aU) Aquanbaad 90uada43{p aunyesedusy (Rusa) 39949 Atquanbaad asta aumyeaaduay 4ayem BuLyepNO419 yD9y) aanssaadyoeq sasuapuog sasuspuoy TeARBTUT Sse] oy aepeIBaG asTTTIIDS quavoduoy £q pay2assy 40 wayshs sdozouedeg a2ueULlos.iag SYSWL BONVNBINIVN 3NLLNOY G3LVTSU-ADNETIIAAT 3TSISSOd 40 LST (panupzuoa) 9-¢ aLged 3-68Often the degraded performance of equipment can be determined by the operator if he is aware of the proper set of parameters which need to be monitored. Just as the controitable parameters alert the operator to the existence of heat rate losses, there is a comparable set of parameters for each plant component which, if monitored, will alert the operator to degraded component performence. There has already been considerable discussion in previous sections how performance parameters, which are used to indicate heat rate losses, can also be indicative of equipment performance, For example, the presence of unburned carbon in the bottom or flyash can indicate 2 problem with the operation of the pulverizer mills. These parameters do not require continuous monitoring but should be checked periodically to identify abnormal performance of equipment in order to accomplish timely repairs, perform preventive maintenance, and prevent catastrophic failure. For the operator to use performance parameters to infer abnormal operation of equipment, there needs to be some way of associating the correct set of paran- eters with individual equipment performance. This is particularly important where the operation of more than one piece of equipment can affect the sane performance parameter. A mechanism is needed which will allow a unique and unambiguous set of performance parameters to be assigned to each and every possible malfunction of every plant component. One method of accomplishing this is the construction of a logic tree similar to the one discussed in Section 3.3.1 and presented in Appendix A. ‘The logic tree can put in one convenient document all of the contributors to either availability or heat rate degradation. By constructing a logic tree, the plant staff or performance engineer can identify the failure mechanisms of plant equipment that can result in performance degradation. By using the logic tree and other available information, such as maintenance records, the plant staff can identify components critical to plant operation and formulate @ preventive maintenance program. Using past maintenance activities to help structure a preventive maintenance progran in conjunction with the information presented in the logic tree is very important. It may be discovered that many of the root causes identified by the logic tree have existed in the past and that many of the failures could have been prevented or would have been less severe if additional instrumentation were installed to monitor the unique parameters which warn of impending failure or 3-69abnormal operation. Maintenance procedures should also be reviewed to determine if a change in the frequency or type of maintenance can possibly prevent reoccurrences. The discussions which follow will concentrate on sone of the areas which deserve the attention of performance and maintenance personnel for ensuring maintenance of equipment crucial to heat rate performance. Fuel burning equipment. An area where regular preventive maintenance can result in substantial heat rate savings is fuel burning equipment. Fuel burning equipment involves the set of equipment needed to ensure preparation, delivery, and conbustion of the primary fuel, In a pulverized coal plant this would include the pulverfzers, the coal ‘transport piping, and the burners. The combustion air system will be considered separately. The pulverizer's primary purpose is to grind coal to a consistency where complete conbustion can be achieved in the boiler. The most direct indication of incomplete combustion is unburned carbon in ash samples taken from either the bottom hopper, the economizer hopper, or ‘the flyash removal system, This is not a measurement which the operator can use for control since it takes several days to a week to receive the results of an ash sample analysis. ‘An unambiguous indication of pulverizer malfunction is @ mill fineness test which can be performed by plant personnel and the results provided in a timely manner, The mill fineness test will indicate if it is necessary to make adjustments to the pulverizer classifier vanes. Adjustments may be necessary due to a change in fuel quality or because of increasing classifier vane erosion. ‘The fuel burning system and the combustion air system are not inde- pendent as evident by the need to control air and fuel flow into the boiler. Therefore, imbalances in fuel and air delivery can result in either incomplete combustion, the presence of high levels of CO in the flue gas, or unburned carbons in the refuse. These imbalances can be as a result of improperly set registers at the burners or a malfunction of the burner itself. 3-70Indication of incomplete conbustion would be increased CO levels at the boiler exit. Sy measuring CO and 0, levels the operator can balance Josses from incomplete combustion with dry gas losses from excessive Jevels of oxygen. Since CO levels are little affected by botler Jeakage, this method obviates the drawbacks of identifying incomplete combustion fron excess air measurements alone. Excess air monitoring is within the economic and technical levels of most utilities whereas CO monitoring may be outside the economic boundaries of many utilities. A rule of thunb that can be used to evaluate the feasibility of CO monitoring is that efficiency will ‘improve fron .5 to 1 percent if good 0, control has been practiced beforehand. If 0, control had been lacking previously, efficiency improvenents credited to CO monitoring my be inflated and utilities may wish to first investigate incorporating a good 0, control system. As previously noted, burner malfunctions can also contribute to both incomplete combustion and to localized increased 0, levels. The operator may receive misleading indication if the plant 0, measurenents are directly in the path of the flue gas which contains the high level of 0, concentration. Tests performed on boilers have indicated that flue gases remain stratified from the conbustion chanber to the boiler exit, It has also been observed that a detailed 0, measurenent system at the boiler exit can aid in identifying the exact location of a malfunctioning burner, A multipoint 0, measuring system can also help pinpoint the Tocation of bottler casing leaks. A multipoint sampling systen is the only system currently available which will aid the operator in identifying individual burner maifunc— tions. Mork 1s being performed on another project - EPRI RP-1681 - which is investigating the possibilities of performing local measure- ments of excess 0p levels in the conbustion chamber. the individual setting or control of burner air registers in order to achieve greater optimization of excess 0, levels. Under present design restrictions, an unequal amount of coal and air is delivered to each burner due to the imbalance of indi windbox resistances. vis will allow idual_ coal transport pipe and anA similar phenomena can exist in oil-fired and gas-fired plants. Particularly in ofl-fired plants where burner flow distribution is controlled by flow nozzles in the burners, it has been shown that a spread of 15 percent can exist in the delivery of different burners at the same fuel pressure. This shows that local imbalances of oxygen can occur with fuels other than coal. Combustion air system. The combustion air system provides air for both ‘the combustion process within the combustion chamber and, in the case of a coal-fired plant, for the renoval of moisture from the fuel and ‘the transport of the fuel to the boiler, The equipment which is related to heat rate performance are the primary and secondary air heaters and the forced draft fans with its associated ducts and vanes. A discussion of the importance of air in the combustion process has been given in the preceding section, This section deals primarily with ‘the importance of the combustion air temperature and the adequacy of combustion air delivery. Not all of the sensible heat of the flue gases is recovered in the heat transfer sections of the combustion chamber. The remainder, above the minimum flue gas temperature, is transferred to the incoming combustion air in the air heater, The minimum exit gas temperature is determined by the dew point temperature corresponding to the particular fuel used in the unit. The closer the exit flue ges temperature is to the minimum temperature the more efficient is the combustion process. The main parameter to be monitored to ensure maximum conbustion air temperature is the air preheater exit gas temperature. This may or may not be the same parameter which the operator is using for his controllable parameters. Exit gas temperatures measured at the air heater exit can be heavily influenced by air heater leakage. The true air heater exit temperature mist be found by correcting for air in- Jeakage. This requires that 0, measurements be performed on both sides of the air heater. If the unit has a hot side precipitator, this may require that 0, measurenents be taken at three separate locations. If the unit has a cold side precipitator, then the boiler exit and the air heater entrance measurenents would be the same. 3-72Performance of a regular air heater efficiency calculation would allow the performance engineer to determine when the need for air heater sootblowing arises. It would also provide him with information on the need for air heater basket replacement due to corrosion or erosion. Acceptable levels of air heater leakage should be established so that when the air heater 0, measurements indicate air leakage 1s above this acceptable value, the appropriate maintenance could be performed at the next convenient outage to minimize heat rate losses. Air heater in-leakage affects unit performance in two ways. First, it requires the operator to maintain boiler exit temperatures higher than normai to compensate for the cooling effect of the air in-leakage or it requires the use of energy using devices such as steam coils, glycol heaters, or hot air recirculation to raise the incoming conbustion air temperature. Second, it places an additional duty upon the induced draft fans in a balanced draft plant which may result in capacity limitations. The flow of air into the boiler depends upon the efficiency of the forced draft fans, the correct adjustment of the air inlet vanes, and the setting of the burner registers. The latter has been discussed in the previous section. Incorrect: vane settings can result in either too Tittle or too much air delivery to the boiler which results in either heat losses due to unburned carbon or in dry gas losses. Maintenance of heat exchanger surfaces. Sootblowing can be viewed as a preventive maintenance activity. Sootblowing in many utilities is performed on a perfunctory basis, The sootblowing is done on a regular interval without regard to any parametric indications. It should be kept in mind that sootblowing is 2 heat rate penalty both due to the diversion of steam, if high pressure steam is used, and due to the heat that is absorbed by either the steam or the compressed air which is introduced into the flue gas stream. Using steam as the sootblowing redium can also result in corrosion problens in the cold end of the unit. For these reasons sootblowing should be performed on an as needed basis. The parameters which indicate the need for heat exchanger sootblowing are exit gas temperature, throttle and reheat temperatures, economizer outlet temperatures, furnace draft losses, desuperheating spray flows, 3-13