Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Process Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jprocont

An approach to optimum combustion control using parallel type and

cross-limiting type technique
Madan Bhowmick ∗ , Satish Chandra Bera
Department of Instrumentation & Measurement, Applied Physics, Calcutta University, Kolkata, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the paper, a new approach to the combustion control by introducing the parallel type air–fuel com-
Received 14 September 2010 bustion control and cross-limiting type (or lead-lag type) combustion control technique designed in one
Received in revised form 22 June 2011 control system in a boiler is presented. This new approached combustion control system is designed in
Accepted 23 June 2011
such way that controlled the air–fuel ratio in furnace in parallel way for small steam demand variation
Available online 15 September 2011
and in cross-limiting way for high steam demand variation. This approach does not require any extra field
instrumentation or modified process parameter. All original instruments are used to measure the process
Keywords:
parameters for combustion control and final control elements controlled the process. It is shown that air
Combustion control
Fuel–air ratio control
and fuel flow can be successfully optimized for the required steam demand by new designed combustion
Cross-limiting control control. The accurate air–fuel ratio obtained in the proposed technique also minimizes some problems of
Demand signal the conventional system like incomplete combustion during sudden load change, boiler stuck-up prob-
Excess oxygen lem and bump problem. The complete derivation of the required mathematical models is reported in the
Process parameter paper. Performance of three boilers incorporated with the proposed system is observed for a long period
and the performance report is presented. A very efficient performance in three boilers has been observed.

© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Combustion refers to the rapid oxidation of fuel accompanied
by the production of heat, or heat and light. Complete combustion
of a fuel is possible only in the presence of an adequate supply
of oxygen. Oxygen (O2 ) is one of the most common elements on
earth making up 20.9% of our air. Rapid fuel oxidation results in
large amounts of heat. Fuel gases burn in their normal state if
enough air is present. For combustion control, the air–fuel ratio
control is one of the most important controls in a boiler, furnace,
gas-turbine or thermal power plant. It consists of fuel flow and air
flow control systems which maintain the desired air–fuel ratio for
complete combustion. For efficient and safe operation of a boiler
or power plant with better economy, it is required to maintain the
air–fuel ratio at a desired value according to demand by proper
design of combustion control system. Since for boiler, the steam
drum pressure or steam header pressure is an indication of the bal-
ance between the inflow and outflow of heat, this signal is used as
an indication of demand signal in the combustion control system
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +966532794335/919477373269.
E-mail addresses: msbhowmick776@rediffmail.com,
msbhowmick2458@rediffmail.com (M. Bhowmick).
[1–6]. A change in steam pressure will result from a change in fuel
firing rate with a delay of few seconds to 1 min, depending on the
boiler capacity and load level.
The combustion control is generally of two types, which are
parallel air–fuel measurement & control type and cross limiting
type. Parallel type combustion control is generally used for low
capacity boiler or medium capacity boiler for low load condition
whereas cross limiting type combustion control is widely used
for large capacity boiler. In the cross-limiting type combustion
control system, a pressure transmitter measures the steam drum
pressure or common steam distribution header pressure and this
measured pressure signal is compared with the set point signal by
a steam pressure controller. The output of this controller, taken as
the demand signal, goes to the boiler loading station from where a
boiler is loaded according to a biasing facility for two or more boil-
ers are sharing the total demand. This biased signal is compared
with the fuel flow signal in the high signal selector and with the
airflow signal in the low signal selector of a typical cross limiting
type combustion control system. When the demand is high, the
high signal selector selects the demand signal for its use as the set
point signal of the airflow controller so that with the increase of
demand, the airflow is first increased followed by fuel flow. When
the demand decreases, the low signal selector selects the demand
signal as the set point of fuel flow controller, which reduces fuel

0959-1524/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jprocont.2011.06.016
 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337
Nomenclature
E excess air (%)
F flow rate (kg/h)
K constant (dimensionless)
L infiltration in furnace (kg/h)
O oxygen concentration (%)
Q stemflow rate (kg/h)
t time
X master signal in heat flow rate (kcal/h)
Greek symbols
ı small charge
Subscript
a refers to air
f refers to fuel
m refers to measured
o refers to oxygen
s refers to desired set point
ad refers to air demand
an refers to air in time t
as refers to air set point
ca refers to combustion air
AFR refers to fuel ratio
flow first according to demand, followed by airflow. This means
that there is always an air-enriched mixture in the furnace and this
ensures safe operation of boiler [1–6] with minimum loss of pro-
duction in the form of unburnt fuel. In parallel type combustion
control, fuel flow and air flow increase in parallel way with the
increase of demand and vice versa. In this case, fuel flow and air
flow change independently according to demand, but their proper
ratio for complete combustion is not cross checked. Hence there is
a maximum chance of creating unsafe condition like unburnt fuel
for insufficient air, loss of flame for high air flow in the furnace at
the time of fuel flow or air flow controller failure. So parallel type
combustion control cannot be used in medium to high capacity
boilers.
In DCS system, all the above functions are performed on the
basis of digital calculations along with proper supervision of the
operations of the whole system. This ensures more accurate and
faster operation of the plant compared to the earlier analog system.
The conventional combustion control system in both DCS based
and analog based instrumentation, sometimes suffers from many
operational problems [7,12], such as incomplete combustion dur-
ing sudden load change, boiler stuck-up and bump problem. These
problems may lead to loss of production, decrease in efficiency,
increase in maintenance cost, life time degradation of equipments,
and environmental effect. So various works [7–17] are still being
reported to analyze these problems and different models of com-
bustion control system to minimize these problems are proposed.
Kojiro [7] has identified different problems of double cross-limiting
combustion control system and has described the importance of
improvement of the conventional air/fuel ratio control technique
for improving the efficiency of power plant and reducing the
environmental effect. Kocijan [8] has explained the multivariable
combustion control design within the Individual Channel Design
(ICD) framework for analysis and control design. Izumiya et al. [9]
have reported the experimental results of improvement of com-
bustion control system in Nippon Steel Corporation. Gui-e et al.
[10] have proposed that the application of double-crossing-limiting
ratio control method is the best to get the best proportion of
air–fuel. Zi-xue et al. [11] also confirmed that maximum of Radiant
331
Energy Signal (RES) has been obtained by optimizing the con-
trol strategy of wind–coal ratio in combustion control system of
coal fired thermal power plant. Zhi-min et al. [12] have studied
and tested 600 MW thermal power plant with the application of
novel and practical non-linear active disturbance-resistant control
(ADRC) technologies in combustion control systems. Wang Zhao
Yuan Donglin [13] has set up a mathematical model of the combus-
tion control system in MATLAB. Optimization of combustion control
has been studied by Liu Zenghuan et al. [14]. Schaffernicht et al.
[15] have suggested machine learning techniques for combustion
control.
In the present paper, an approach has been made to combine the
parallel type and cross-limiting type techniques in one unit in order
to minimize the limitations of both the techniques. In this unit, the
high signal selection part of the air flow controller has been replaced
by a pre-calculated feed-forward set point signal calculator in a DCS
based system. The mathematical equations and the correspond-
ing block diagram of the proposed technique are presented in the
paper. This technique calculates the feed-forward set point signal
of air flow controller by using five measured variables, namely main
steam flow, excess percentage oxygen in flue gas, demand signal,
air flow signal and fuel flow signal. The technique helps in adjusting
the fuel flow and air flow in such a way that there is no possibility
of incomplete combustion in the furnace. Thus optimum condition
of air–fuel ratio is maintained in the furnace and no safety hazards
from air–fuel ratio are possible. The proposed control system has
been designed and installed in a captive power plant and its smooth
performance has been observed for a long period of four years. The
performance data are reported in the paper.
2. Combustion process
Combustion or burning is the sequence of exothermic chemi-
cal reactions between a fuel and an oxidant accompanied by the
production of heat and conversion of chemical species. The release
of heat can result in the production of light in the form of either
glowing or a flame. Fuels of interest often include organic com-
pounds (especially hydrocarbons) in the gas, liquid or solid phase.
In a complete combustion reaction, a compound reacts with an oxi-
dizing element, such as oxygen or fluorine, and the products are
compounds of each element in the fuel with the oxidizing element.
Complete combustion is almost impossible to achieve. In reality, as
actual combustion reactions come to equilibrium, a wide variety of
major and minor species will be present such as carbon monoxide
and pure carbon (soot or ash). Additionally, any combustion in air,
which is 78% nitrogen, will also create several forms of nitrogen
oxides.
In complete combustion, the reactant burns in oxygen, pro-
ducing a limited number of products. When a hydrocarbon burns
in oxygen, the reaction will only yield carbon dioxide and water.
When elements are burned, the products are primarily the most
common oxides. Carbon will yield carbon dioxide, nitrogen will
yield nitrogen dioxide, sulfur will yield sulfur dioxide, and iron will
yield iron(III) oxide.
Incomplete combustion occurs when there is not enough oxy-
gen to allow the fuel to react completely to produce carbon dioxide
and water. It also happens when the combustion is quenched by a
heat sink such as a solid surface or flame trap.
The objective of good combustion is to release all of the heat
in the fuel. This is accomplished by controlling the “three T’s” of
combustion which are (1) temperature high enough to ignite and
maintain ignition of the fuel, (2) turbulence or intimate mixing of
the fuel and oxygen, and (3) time sufficient for complete combus-
tion. Also the quality of combustion can be improved by design
of combustion devices, such as burners and internal combustion
332 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337

engines. Further improvements are achievable by catalytic after-

burning devices (such as catalytic converters) or by the simple
partial return of the exhaust gases into the combustion process.
Such devices are required by environmental legislation for cars in
most countries, and may be necessary in large combustion devices,
such as thermal power plants, to reach legal emission standards.
Too much, or too little fuel with the available combustion air
may potentially result in unburned fuel and carbon monoxide
generation. A very specific amount of O2 is needed for perfect com-
bustion and some additional (excess) air is required for ensuring
complete combustion. However, too much excess air will result in
heat and efficiency losses.
Carbon, hydrogen and sulfur in the fuel combine with oxygen
in the air to form carbon dioxide, water vapour and sulfur dioxide,
releasing 8084 kcal, 28,922 kcal and 2224 kcal of heat respectively.
Under certain conditions, carbon may also combine with oxygen
to form carbon monoxide, which results in the release of a smaller
quantity of heat (2430 kcal/kg of carbon) carbon burned to CO2 will
produce more heat per pound of fuel than when CO or smoke are
produced.

C + O2 → CO2 + 8084 kcal/kg of carbon

2C + O2 → 2CO + 2430 kcal/kg of carbon
2H2 + O2 → 2H2 O + 28, 922 kcal/kg of hydrogen
S + O2 → SO2 + 2224 kcal/kg of sulfur
Each kilogram of CO formed means a loss of 5654 kcal of heat
(8084-2430).
Not all of the heat in the fuel are converted to heat and absorbed
by the steam generation equipment. Usually all of the hydrogen in
the fuel is burned and most boiler fuels, allowable with today’s
air pollution standards, contain little or no sulfur. So the main chal-
lenge in combustion efficiency is directed toward unburned carbon
(in the ash or incompletely burned gas), which forms CO instead of
CO2 .
In most industrial applications and in fires, air is the source of
oxygen (O2 ). In air, each kg of oxygen is mixed with approximately
3.76 kg of nitrogen. Nitrogen does not take part in combustion,
but at high temperatures, some nitrogen will be converted to NOx ,
usually between 1% and 0.002% (2 ppm). A more complete air com-
bustion reaction is therefore for most common part of natural gas
CH4 :
2CH4 + yO2 + N2 → CO2 + 4H2 O + CO + 2NOx + heat
More details of combustion analysis of combustion formation
model is presented by Gregor Dolanc et al. [17].
3. The conventional cross-limiting type combustion
control system
The conventional cross-limiting type air–fuel ratio control sys-
tem of a thermal power plant is shown in Fig. 1. In this system, the
air flow controller (FIC305) first increases the air flow rate accord-
ing to increase of demand and then fuel flow controller (FIC308)
adjust the fuel flow according to the air flow signal. When the
demand decreases fuel flow controller (FIC308) decreases the fuel
flow first and then air flow controller (FIC305) adjusts the air flow
according to this fuel flow. Demand signal is calculated in boiler
master (HIC301) from the output of steam pressure controller
(PIC501). This system operates satisfactorily under normal load
condition, but it may suffer from various problems such as incom-
plete combustion, boiler stuck-up and bump problem as described
below.
Fig. 1. Conventional cross limiting type air–fuel ratio control system.
3.1. Incomplete combustion problem
In conventional system, both the low signal (FY-Lo) and high
signal (FY-Hi) selectors directly receive the signal from boiler mas-
ter. But in normal operation, low signal selector (FY-Lo) always
selects the boiler master signal and the fuel flow is controlled
according to boiler master signal. So during sudden increase of
demand fuel flow is increased without increasing the air flow. This
results in incomplete combustion of fuel during sudden increase of
demand.
Also the conventional control system as shown in Fig. 1 suf-
fers from incomplete combustion of fuel due to time lag [12]
between the instant of change of air flow and the instant of its
detection by oxygen analyzer (AIT301) in flue gas. Due to this
incomplete combustion, soot may be deposited on different sec-
tions of boiler.
3.2. Boiler stuck-up problem
In the conventional control system small change of demand
sometimes becomes not sufficient to produce the minimum force
required to produce the movement of the air damper type final
control element. Thus the whole control system is stuck up during
small change of demand.
3.3. Boiler bump problem
The stuck-up condition described above does not produce
any counter action signal for the change of a demand. As a
result with the increase of stuck-up interval, the change of
demand may increase to a large value. This again may produce
a large sudden change in control action which may lead to a
severe bump in boiler operation producing undesired oscillation
in the whole system. Under this condition, incomplete combus-
tion, header pressure hunting, disturbance in drum level three
element control, disturbance in all related equipments and some-
times plant tripping are observed. This may lead to thermal
shock which slowly forces to material failure in the boiler or fur-
nace area. These types of operational problems are commonly
observed in every industry with the conventional combustion
control and to reduce the effect of these problems, operators
may be forced to run the boilers in manual mode at the cost
 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337
of plant efficiency, plant life, cleaner environment, etc. only
maintaining the target of continued production at the time of
sudden load variation. This manual operation may also lead to
degradation of steam quality which may affect the turbine perfor-
mance.
4. Method of approach
The idea of introducing a new model of combustion control
system originates from the above problems observed in the conven-
tional cross-limiting combustion control system in industries. The
basic function of this new designed combustion control system is to
keep the boiler or furnace safety by maintaining the air–fuel ratio
for complete combustion. The basic design concept is to introduce
the parallel type air–fuel combustion control and cross-limiting
type combustion control technique designed in one control sys-
tem, as parallel type combustion control is generally used for low
capacity boiler or medium capacity boiler for low load condition,
whereas cross limiting type combustion control is widely used for
large capacity boiler. In order to minimize the problems of the con-
ventional cross-limiting type combustion system as stated above,
the control system shown in Fig. 1 is modified by a system as shown
in Fig. 2.
In Fig. 2, the high signal selector block (FY-Hi), ratio conversion
block (RC305), multiplier block (FY305), oxygen controller block
(AIC303) and calculation block (AY303) of the conventional system
as shown in Fig. 1, are omitted and in their place, a feed forward
control loop is designed to control the air flow and to eliminate the
problems of the conventional high signal selection technique. A
new calculation block (CAL305) has been designed in the modified
system. This calculation block receives the steam demand signal
from ratio bias controller (HIC301) of boiler master, fuel flow signal
from fuel flow transmitter (FT308), measured percentage oxygen
signal in flue gas from O2 analyzer (AIT303), desired percentage
of oxygen signal from PLI301 and also the air flow signal from
air flow transmitter (FT305). From all these five input signals, the
desired air flow signal required for complete combustion of fuel
for the particular demand is calculated by the proposed calcula-
tion block (CAL305) as explained in block diagram shown in Fig. 3.
This calculation block is the most critical block in this new designed
combustion control system. This block acts like a feed-forward con-
trol for air flow controller as well as optimize the air–fuel ratio for
complete combustion. A modification in the fuel flow control loop
is proposed as the air flow signal is not directly sent to the low sig-
nal selector (FY-Lo), but through a second piecewise linear input
block (PLI305) as shown in Fig. 3. This block is introduced for tak-
ing parallel type action for small load variation and cross-limiting
action for high load demand discussed later.
The analysis of mathematical model of calculation block
(CAL305) is described below:
Let at any instant of time tn , the fuel flow rate in boiler be Ffmn ,
measured excess oxygen percentage in flue gas at the boiler out-
let be Omn , steam flow rate is Qsn at which the desired excess
oxygen percentage obtained from look-up table (PLI301) is Osn ,
corresponding demand signal obtained from boiler master in per-
centage of fuel flow rate is Xn and air flow rate measured by air flow
transmitter is Famn . Let the theoretical value of air to fuel ratio for a
given fuel be KAFR . Therefore theoretical air flow Ftan requirement
for stoichiometric combustion of fuel will be
Ftan = Ffmn × KAFR (1)
The measured percentage excess air in flue gas is given by Eamn .
Omn
Eamn = × 100 (2)
21 − Omn
333
And for the steam flow rate Qsn , required percentage excess air
to be maintained in the furnace is given by Easn ,
Osn
Easn = × 100 (3)
21 − Osn
Hence the deviation of measured percentage excess air from the
desired value for the given steam flow rate Qsn is
ıEan = Eamn − Easn (4)
So corresponding value of excess air is given by
ıFaen = ıEan × Ftan (5)
Now for demand signal Xn in percentage of fuel flow rate, the
current fuel flow rate Ffmn appears as previous demand Xn−1 . Hence
the excess demand in percentage of fuel flow rate is
ıXn = Xn − Xn−1 (6)
and the corresponding excess air for change in demand is given by
ıFadn = (Xn − Xn−1 ) × K × KAFR (7)
where K is the conversion factor from percentage fuel flow to actual
flow.
Therefore the net change of air flow due to change of demand
and excess air present in furnace is
ıFatn = ıFadn − ıFaen (8)
Therefore the required total air flow to compensate the change
in demand is given by
Fasn = Famn + ıFatn (9)
where Fasn is the desired air flow rate to be maintained by forced
draught fan to counter act the change in demand. So the deviation
of measured air flow rate from this desired value or feed-forward
set point value for air flow controller is given by
ean = Famn − Fasn (10)
The controller produces the required control action according
to this error signal.
Now with the change of demand, air flow rate is changed by
air flow controller. But the air flow rate has a nonlinear relation
with steam load or demand since excess oxygen has a parabolic
relation with steam load. So the fuel flow calculated on the basis
of air flow may deviate from desired value due to this non linear
characteristic and this may lead to deviation of fuel from its desired
value. Hence to compensate this deviation a correction factor Kc
is incorporated in the proposed system, which varies non-linearly
with the variation of load. Since the percentage of excess oxygen in
flue gases decreases in a parabolic way with the increase of load as
shown in Fig. 4 (drawn from design data of PLI301), so the values of
Kc will also decrease in a parabolic way with the increase of load.
Hence if we divide this parabolic curve into piecewise linear zones
then different values of Kc must be selected for different zones.
The value of this correction factor is determined by trial and error
method, so that there is no deviation of fuel flow from the desired
value at different ranges.
Now the air flow controller produces the air flow signal Famn
according to feed-forward signal Fasn until Famn = Fasn . This air flow
signal is converted into fuel flow signal by dividing it with air–fuel
ratio factor KAFR in the conversion block, which gives output accord-
ing to the following equation,
 Fasn
Ffsn = (11)
KAFR
334 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337

Fig. 2. Proposed combustion control system.

Fig. 3. Block diagram of the proposed combustion control system.

Therefore the corrected percentage of fuel flow set point for the
fuel flow controller through low signal selector is given by,

Fasn
Ffsn = × Kc (12)
KAFR

The deviation signal for fuel flow controller is given by

efn = Ffmn − Ffsn (13)

Fuel flow controller produces the necessary control action

according to this deviation signal and the fuel flow is adjusted by
the fuel flow control valve until the deviation becomes zero and
the fuel flow becomes Ffsn maintaining its proper ratio with air for
Fig. 4. Load-excess O2 % design characteristic for naphtha fuel.
complete combustion. Since Ffsn is calculated from Eq. (12) giving
 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337
air–fuel ratio as KAFR /Kc , so optimum amount of fuel for complete
combustion in the available air is always selected.
5. Online operation and testing of the proposed
combustion control system
The proposed combustion control system as shown in Fig. 2
has been designed and installed in a DCS based control systems
in steam generation unit with captive power unit of naphtha and
natural gas based fertilizer plant at the Thal unit of Rashtriya Chem-
icals and Fertilizers Ltd. (RCF) in India. The Steam Generation Plant
consists of three boilers, each having capacity of 275 MT/h with
steam pressure and temperature maintained 100 kg/cm2 (Design:
105 kg/cm2 ) and 510 ◦ C respectively. Out of the three boilers, two
boilers are in service and third boiler is kept as standby. These boil-
ers are designed for natural gas as a fuel. Since 1997 naphtha is
being used as a supplement to natural gas fuel.
The proposed combustion control system was firstly installed
in one boiler, with Honeywell Experion PKS DCS for operation and
control of whole steam generation unit and Rockwell Control-Logix
system for burner management system. Before taking in line, the
proposed control system was designed in DCS in simulated form
and was tested repeatedly for 3–4 months and after satisfactory
result the control system was installed in one boiler. The boiler was
then run with the proposed control system successfully. This boiler
was then tested for load variation from 60% to 100% of MCR as per
steam demand by downstream plants, where normal running load
was 70–80%. In the proposed combustion control system, very fast
response was observed than the conventional system and incom-
plete combustion, stuck-up problem and bump problem were not
observed for these load variations. After satisfactory online opera-
tion of the proposed combustion control system, it was installed in
two other boilers. These boilers were also found to function satis-
factorily without any problem of the conventional system. All the
three boilers have been running satisfactorily for the last four years.
The typical measured parameters for boiler-2 at varying load
were recorded for 24 h in full auto mode of boiler master, fuel mas-
ter and air master with remote oxygen set point. From the recorded
data, the fuel-load characteristic was drawn as shown in Fig. 5.
During online operation of Boiler-1 and Boiler-3 incorporated
with the proposed combustion control systems, a sudden decrease
of demands produced almost constant header pressure as shown
in Figs. 6 and 7 respectively. These figures indicate the DCS based
performance data of the proposed combustion control system
observed for 8 h in one shift from 21:00 h to 5:00 h at 1 h interval
for high and low steam demand variations.
Fuel - Load Characteristic
15200
15000
Fuel Flow in Kg/H
14800
14600
14400
14200
14000
13800
13600
13400
235 240 245 250 255 260
Steam Load in T/H
Fig. 5. Fuel-load characteristic of Boiler-2.
335
Fig. 6. Boiler-1 operational trend at high and low steam demand variations.
6. Discussions
In the proposed combustion control system as shown in
Figs. 2 and 3, the feed forward set point of the airflow con-
troller (FIC305) is automatically calculated in the calculation block
(CAL305) by utilizing the load signal received from boiler master
and the feed-back signal received from percentage excess oxygen
analyzer as shown in Eqs. (6)–(10). So during increase of steam
demand, the air flow controller immediately increases the air flow
according to demand.
For small demand variation, correction factor Kc shown in Eq.
(12) operates in the corresponding linear zone. Hence the proposed
control system operates in a linear fashion with a constant value
of Kc . Under this condition, low signal selector (FY-Lo) selects the
demand signal as the set point of fuel flow controller whereas feed-
forward set point calculation block (CAL305) dictates the air flow
controller to adjust the air flow according to demand. Thus the two
systems act simultaneously in a parallel way.
For high demand variation, low signal selector selects the equiv-
alent fuel flow of air flow signal since boiler master signal is on the
higher side. At the same time, air flow controller starts to increase
the air flow as per the desired feed forward air flow signal produced
by the proposed system according to Eq. (10). After the increase of
air flow, fuel flow is increased proportionately. This is continued
for a particular value of Kc in a small linear region of the demand
change. When the demand variation changes from this small linear
region to a next higher linear region, a new value of Kc is automat-
ically selected from look-up table in PLI305 block and corrected
desired fuel flow is obtained according to Eq. (12). The fuel flow
controller accordingly changes the fuel flow. Thus at high demand
variation, the system acts in a cross-limiting fashion in which the
airflow is first increased according to demand and then fuel flow is
increased according to air flow.
For sudden decrease in demand, the low signal selector selects
the demand signal from boiler master (HIC301) as the set point of
the fuel flow controller and fuel flow adjusted according to demand.
The feed-forward set point calculation block now provides the set
point of the air flow controller according to steam demand and
Actual changes the air flow. Thus the system acts in a parallel way as incase
Ideal of low demand variation.
From the above discussions, it may be concluded that the pro-
posed control system is free from the effect of time lag between
percentage excess oxygen analyzer in flue gas and air flow con-
troller in conventional cross-limiting type combustion control
265 system due to the incorporation of feed-forward with feed-back
control system instead of only feed-back control system. Thus
proper air–fuel ratio and complete combustion of fuel is possible
under all load conditions in the proposed control system.
336 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337
Fig. 7. Boiler-3 operational trend at high and low steam demand variations.
For sudden increase of steam demand signal, the low signal
selector FY-Lo selects the air flow signal and starts to increase the
fuel flow for the available excess air present in the furnace without
any delay. But this increase in fuel flow again modifies the air flow
until the system is stabilized. Thus smooth operation of the plant
without any bump is possible. This facility is not available in the
conventional system, where increase of demand increases the air
flow and increase of airflow increases the fuel flow. But this increase
of fuel flow has no effect on the increase of air flow this may lead
to sudden change of fuel flow and thus occurrence of bump. Since
feed-forward set point of air flow controller is calculated accord-
ing to fuel flow, and fuel flow is adjusted according to air flow,
so mutual action between the two flow control systems helps in
achieving stabilization of the plant within very small time.
In the proposed system air–fuel ratio is maintained accurately
to counteract the change of demand due to the effect of feed-back
between two control systems. Thus better air–fuel ratio is possible
without any loss of fuel. This is not possible in the cross limiting
type conventional system, where no feed-back between the two
control systems is provided.
It is a well known fact that excess oxygen percentage has a
parabolic relation with steam load [1,3,4]. Since the steam flow rate
is almost directly related with fuel flow rate, so the fuel flow rate
should also have similar parabolic relation with air flow rate. That is
why the factor Kc is selected in order to compensate this parabolic
relation in a piecewise linear manner. Hence accuracy of proposed
control system must depend on proper selection of the value of
Kc . Therefore the multiplier block of PLI305 as shown in Fig. 3 is
vital block to obtain accurate control. That is why the actual fuel-
load characteristic almost coincide the ideal linear characteristic as
shown in Fig. 5.
The problems 3.2 and 3.3 namely “Stuck-up problem” and
“Bump Problem” occur in the final control element running under
the conventional DCS system. All the fault detection/isolation algo-
rithm [18] (Valve Travel or Bump Test, Use of Valve Positioner Data,
Changes in Controller Gain) are followed for detection of valve stic-
tion. These problems are found to exist even after adopting these
algorithms for avoiding stiction. From plant operation it has been
confirmed that the problems are due to malfunction of the con-
ventional cross-limiting combustion control system as mentioned
above.
During online operation of Boiler-1 and Boiler-3 incorpo-
rated with the proposed combustion control systems, a sudden
decrease of demands produced almost constant header pressure
as shown in Figs. 6 and 7 respectively, but these trends were not
observed by conventional system, where both the boilers were
running with 232–236 MT/H steam load (84–85% of design load)
at 100.50 kg/cm2 header pressure (PT501). Suddenly total steam
demand is reduced to approximately 200 MT/H, each boiler load
reduces 100 MT/H from average load 234 MT/H to 134 MT/H, but
from header pressure curves as shown in Figs. 6 and 7, it is
found that header pressure has only a variation of 0.2 kg/cm2 from
100.5 kg/cm2 to 100.7 kg/cm2 and no hunting was observed. Sim-
ilarly when load demand increases, steam header pressure was
found to maintain a steady value without any disturbance. But it
is not observed in conventional combustion control system.
It has been observed that in the conventional cross-limiting type
control system, the steam header pressure fluctuates from its nor-
mal steady value when steam demand changes. This is mainly due
to the time lag between the instant of change of air flow and the
instant of detection of the corresponding excess percentage oxygen
change in flue gas and optimum condition is difficult to be attained
in the conventional cross-limiting type control system. This leads
to overshoot and undershoot as in the case of feed-back control
system. But in the proposed control system exact air flow is cal-
culated from the measurement of all load variables. As a result,
the exact air–fuel ratio is maintained in order to keep the steam
header pressure at constant value irrespective of load variation.
This is shown in online characteristic graph shown in Figs. 6 and 7
of running captive power plant. Hence it may be concluded that the
proposed combustion control system maintains the air–fuel ratio
at its optimum value just require to compensate the load change.
7. Conclusion
From the operation of three boilers incorporated with proposed
control system following concluding observations are obtained.
(a) Boilers are running with design excess oxygen, optimizing the
air–fuel ratio in furnace. But this was not possible in conven-
tional control system. Hence proposed combustion control may
help for improving the efficiency of power plant and reducing
the environmental effect [7].
(b) Steam demands are maintained without upsetting the equip-
ments, which may improve the plant reliability and increase
the life of plant equipments.
(c) As air–fuel ratio is maintaining in furnace satisfactorily, no
soot deposition is observed on the tubes of different sections,
whereas with conventional combustion control system previ-
ously huge amount shoot was observed on all tubes of different
sections.
 M. Bhowmick, S.C. Bera / Journal of Process Control 22 (2012) 330–337
(d) Previously many tube failures were observed in the boiler due
to thermal shock with the conventional combustion control
system. But in present system no such tube failure has been
observed.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the RCF management
to study, diagnosis the problems, modify the combustion control
system and incorporate such of type new design in high capacity
boilers.
References
[1] Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Limited, Operation and Maintenance Manual for
Dual Fuel Conversion (Naphtha/Natural Gas) of existing Service Boilers, vol. 1
for Burners Logic and Combustion Control.
[2] Babcock & Wilcox Co.: Steam, Its Generation and Use New York: BabCock &
Wilcox Co.
[3] Foster Wheeler Power Project Ltd.: Technical, Operation, Maintenance & Con-
trols Manuals, vol. 1–13, vol. 1 for Design Data and others for Operation and
Maintenance manual for Boiler and Common Section.
[4] Liptak, G. Bela, Process Measurement and Analysis, 3rd edition, Butterworth
Heinman Ltd., 1999 (Boiler Controls and Optimization section).
[5] C.A. Smith:, Automated Continuous Process Control A Wiley-Interscience Pub-
lication, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002, ISBN 0471215783.
[6] A. Houtz, D. Cooper, Ratio with Cross-Limiting Override Control of a Combus-
tion Process Chapter: Advanced Classical Control Architectures, Controlguru,
practical process control e-text book.
[7] I. Kojiro, New Efforts Of Combustion Technology for Energy Sav-
ing/Environmental Conservation. Upgrading of Industrial Furnace Combustion
337
Control Technology J-EAST, Keiso-F0485A, vol. 43; No. 2, 2000, pp.
22–30.
[8] J. Kocijan, An approach to multivariable combustion control design, Journal of
Process Control 7 (4) (1997) 291–301.
[9] I. Tooru, B. Kenji, K. Hitoshi, U. Jun’ichi, F. Masakazu, Experimental Study of
Improvement on Combustion Control of Fluidized Bed Combustion Chamber
J-EAST, Shinnittetsu Giho – G0186A, vol. 372, 1999, pp. 56–61.
[10] L. Gui-e, M.A. Hong-zhao, Z. Wei, Z. Yue, Application of Double-cross-limiting
Ratio of Closed-loop Control in Boiler Control System Control and Instruments
in Chemical Industry, HGZD.0.2008-05-015.
[11] L. Zi-xue, L. Cheng-yong, T. Mao-gang, Z. Huai-chun, Combustion Control of
Optimized Wind-Coal Ratio in Once-through Boiler, Journal of Power Engineer-
ing, DONG.0.2008-05-013.
[12] G. Zhi-min, L. Yong-jun, W. Bing-shu, Active Disturbance-resistant Control of a
Combustion System for Supercritical Units Journal of Engineering for Thermal
Energy and Power, RNWS.0.2009-04-016.
[13] Wang Zhao Yuan Donglin, The simulation of boiler combustion control system
based on MATLAB, Journal of Electric Power Vocational Technology (2009) 02.
[14] L. Zenghuan, H. Guangxiang, W. Lizhen, Optimization of furnace combustion
control system based on double cross-limiting strategy, in: International Con-
ference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation (ICICTA), 2010,
pp. 858–861.
[15] E. Schaffernicht, V. Stephan, K. Debes, H.M. Gross, Machine learning techniques
for selforganizing combustion control advances in artificial intelligence, Lec-
ture Notes in Computer Science 5803/2009 (2009) 395–402.
[16] K.J. Astrom, R.D. Bell, Drum-Boiler Dynamics, Automatica, vol. 36, Elsevier Sci-
ence, 2000, pp. 363–378.
[17] G. Dolanc, S. StrmcÏnik, J. PetrovcÏ ic, NOX selective catalytic reduction control
based on simple models, Journal of Process Control 11 (1 (February)) (2001)
35–51.
[18] M.A.A.S. Choudhury, V. Kariwala, S.L. Shah, H. Douke, H. Takada, N.F. Thornhill, A
simple test to confirm control valve stiction, in: The 16th IFAC World Congress,
Prague, Czech Republic, 2005.