You are on page 1of 14

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.

Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Abstract: This paper discusses the model identified for combustion control of two boilers (baggase fired) with common header pressure control. The model discusses the fully metered cross limiting (Fuel/Air) with oxygen trim under multi fuel (baggase, wood dust and coal) firing. This provides the basement for new way of control for these types of boilers. Keywords: ID/FD fans, Feeders, Dyno drives 1. Introduction: The purpose of this paper is to discuss the Combustion Control as is implemented in EID Parry, Nellikuppam, Tamilnadu and to highlight the benefits seen. The implementation was jointly done by Honeywell and EID, Parry. 2. Topics of discussion: Boiler Details Problems Encountered Action towards Improvements Control Strategy Employed. Benefits from an Operation angle Financial Benefits Future Plans for Improvement 3. Boiler Details: Manufactured by BHEL Multi fuel fired, membrane wall stoker fired, traveling grate, balanced draft boiler. Fuel feeding system consists of Silos with rotary drum feeder driven by Dyno drives. Constant

speed screw conveyers convey the baggase to the boiler. Baggase is fed through to Silos through Slat conveyer. Back feeding arrangements enable supply during sugar mill interruptions. 3.1 Boiler Design Data: Air required for combustion is supplied by two FD fans with total capacity of 124 Tons/hour. Control of airflow is by inlet vanes. Two ID fans designed for 180 Tons/hour handle flue gas. Control of draft is by pneumatically operated inlet vanes. Each boiler has 4 feeders 8 tons/hour of baggase to meet 100% MCR conditions. Boiler supply steam to an extraction cum condensing type Skoda turbine to generate 25 MW of power. Input: Baggase (GCV 2272 kcal/kg)32 T/Hr Moisture of baggase 50% Airflow (APH outlet) 112 T/Hr @ 3.5% oxygen. Output Steam Flow at SH outlet- 70 T/Hr Steam Pressure 66 Kg/Sq.Cm Steam Temperature 485+/- 5 Deg C

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

4. Problems Encountered Combustion control was ineffective resulting in manual operation. Airflow was ineffective due to control vane providing full airflow at less than 15% open condition. Feeders rated at 8 rpm dumping excess baggase resulting in wide fluctuation of steam pressure. Difficulty in operation on account of independent combustion control interface for both boilers. Difficulty in manually controlling the steam pressure. Wide variation of steam temperature on account of very poor combustion control. Lower than expected power generation due to constantly changing steam parameters. Feeders tripping at less than 1 rpm. A combination of above factors resulting in boiler being run at lower efficiency. 5. Actions towards improvement FD fan control vane linkages were altered to give better linearity. Later the FD fan motor speed was made variable through VFDs. This gave a even better linearity. Feeder calibration showed that the baggase flow is achieved at 2.7 rpm for normal baggase and 3.5 rpm for wet baggase. The eddy current drives were

re-calibrated and the maximum speed was limited to 5 rpm. The design fuel flow versus rpm characteristics was corrected after online testing. The entire control strategy was revised. Both boilers were made to work from a common master header pressure control with individual A/M stations for each boiler. Fuel Masters were introduced for each boiler from where all the feeders can be operated together. Individual biasing facility was provided. This made manual operations considerably easier. Control strategies were revised and approvals were obtained from BHEL prior to implementation. Control strategies were revised and approvals were obtained from BHEL prior to implementation. To overcome the feeder tripping problem, a mechanical speed reduction was introduced through a V pulley belt driving arrangement between dyno drive and gear box. This resulted in the drive not tripping at speeds as low as 0.5 rpm. The actions above resulted in the possibility of combustion control working on automatic continuously.

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

6. Control Strategy The revised control strategy employs a common header pressure control. The control strategy implemented uses the fully metered cross limiting for air/fuel. Oxygen controller trims the air set point to arrive at the desired excess air. The control scheme is as indicated in Appendix A 7. Benefits from operation angle Considerable ease of operation due to the combustion control working on automatic with Master pressure controller common for two boilers. When loop is on manual, the feeders can be operated together from the common master. Facility to run any one boiler on automatic and the other on manual. 8. Financial Benefits Base line power in lakh units/day- 5.10 Average power in lakh units/day 5.39 Increase in power in lakh units/day- 0.29 Increase in power generation/hour-1.208 MW Unit power rate Rs.3.08/unit

Increase in revenue0.29X3.08X100000 = Rs.89320/day Cost of additional fuel used for additional steam generation Rs.62000 Net revenue Rs.27,320/day For 300 days operation Rs.82 lakhs/annum

9. Improvements in control scheme To allow different fuels to be fired without much operator intervention, a calorific value correction loop has been introduced. This loop biases the measurement of fuel flow by plus minus 5% through a slow integral. Considerable improvement is seen when wood chips and other fuels are added. The scheme works without manual intervention when multiple fuels are mixed. 10. Way forward Hold the gains continuously Work towards achieving the design levels. There is scope for improvement. Focus on improving the steam to fuel ratio.

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry

Combustion Control for Baggase Fired Boilers Common Header Pressure control with Two Boilers K.Rajaram Honeywell S.M.Ramesh- EID, Parry