Maintaining Maximum Efficiency in Power

Generation Units
Issue 9 and Volume 119.
9.14.15

  
  


By Brad Buecker, Contributing Editor

Virtually everyone in the power, chemical process, and other industries is no doubt
aware of the greatly expanded efforts to lower carbon dioxide emissions from
industrial sources. This concern continues to lead increased efforts into maximizing
plant efficiency both through good operating principles and through design
improvements. This article examines several of these issues with regard to steam-
generating facilities.

An Overview of the Rankine Cycle

Power production via steam generation to drive a turbine is based on the Rankine
cycle, whose fundamental outline is shown below.

Even this simple diagram (Figure 1) clearly illustrates several fundamental aspects
from the first and second laws of thermodynamics. First, and for the time being
ignoring entropy increases due to heat losses, friction, and other mechanisms, the
theoretical work available from the turbine (WT) can be approximated by the
following straightforward equation.

WT = m(h2 – h1) Eq. 1, where

m = mass flow rate of steam through the turbine

h1 = enthalpy of turbine exhaust steam

h2 = enthalpy of turbine inlet steam

QB = heat input to the steam generator

QC = heat extracted in the condenser

WP = work done by the feedwater pump (usually negligible in this particular

calculation)

The diagram also indicates a key component of the second law; for any process that
produces work, not all of the heat input can be utilized for work, some heat must be
extracted as waste energy. We will later examine how this thermodynamic aspect
makes condensers, and proper operation of them, so important for power
generation.

In the meantime, let’s consider another important issue from Figure 1. If the steam
from this simple system were to be immediately injected into a turbine, very little
work would occur, as the steam would immediately begin condensing to water upon
passage through the blades. For this reason among others, all utility steam
generators include superheaters to raise the steam temperature well above
saturation and allow much more work from the turbine. Even so, the net efficiency of
Rankine-cycle only plants ranges from 1/3 in the least efficient plants to perhaps a bit
above 2/5 for the most efficient plants. The primary reason regarding this seemingly
low efficiency is that the usable energy is contained in the superheat of the steam,
perhaps 500 to 600 Btu/lbm is not as large as the steam latent heat, approximately
1000 Btu/lbm. We will examine several examples shortly, when examining
condenser and heat exchanger cleanliness.

This then is one aspect, among several, that is driving industry towards higher
efficiency machines. The two processes that stand out are combined-cycle power
generation and combined heat and power (CHP) or co-generation. We will consider
CHP/co-generation first.

The previous example from the Rankine cycle showed that much heat is lost during
the condensation process in the condenser. This lost energy represents the latent
heat of the exhaust steam. However, if in place of the condenser which simply
exhausts the heat to a cooling tower or other heat sink, the steam is transported to
heat exchangers to drive chemical processes or even simply to warm water for
district heating systems, much of the latent heat is productively utilized. Consider
100,000 lbm/hr of saturated steam flowing to a heat exchanger with water as the
process fluid, say for building heat. Energy transfer from condensation alone could
warm approximately 3,000,000 lbm/hr of the water from 70oF to 100oF. On the flip
side, heat is a requirement for such devices as absorption-refrigeration chillers,
which are common devices for cooling large office buildings. Again, latent heat is a
potential source of energy for these systems.

Net efficiencies of up to 80 percent have been reported for co-generation processes.

The power industry continues to see steady installation of combined-cycle power
plants, which also offer increased efficiency. These plants, of course, use
combustion turbines for partial power production with heat recovery steam
generators (HRSG) for additional power generation from a steam turbine or turbines.
This is truly a combined cycle process, as the HRSGs operate on the Rankine cycle
while the combustion turbines operate on the Brayton cycle. Maximum efficiencies in
some units have now topped 60 percent, which is immensely better than efficiencies
for some of the old coal plants that are still operating. From a combustion turbine
aspect, the key limiting factor to efficiency is the parasitic power requirement for the
inlet air compressor. But much energy is, of course, regained by converting the
combustion turbine exhaust heat into steam for Rankine cycle power generation.
But, even with these design efficiency improvements, it is still very important to
maintain top efficiency from an operating standpoint. This is particularly true when it
comes to proper cooling water and steam generator cleanliness.

Keep the Heat Exchangers Clean

A thread through all of the technologies mentioned above is that the exhaust heat
from the steam generation process must be transferred in one or more heat
exchangers. It is paramount to keep condensers and heat exchangers clean from
chemical and biological deposits, and also operating properly from a mechanical
perspective to avoid costly impacts. We will examine heat transfer issues below,
starting with a non-condensing steam turbine.

Equation 1 approximates the heat transfer in an ideal steam turbine, while in

actuality turbines are typically 80 to 90 percent efficient. To simplify the discussion,
we will consider an isentropic (no energy losses) turbine, as this example is still quite
sufficient to outline the principles intended. Conditions for the non-condensing steam
turbine example are:

Main Steam (Turbine Inlet) Pressure – 2000 psia

Main Steam Temperature – 1000oF

Turbine Outlet Steam Pressure – Atmospheric (14.7 psia)

The steam tables show that the enthalpy of the turbine inlet steam is 1474.1 Btu per
pound of fluid (Btu/lbm). Thermodynamic calculations indicate that the exiting
enthalpy from the turbine is 1018.4 Btu/lbm (steam quality is 86%). Per Equation 1
the maximum unit work available from this ideal turbine is (1474.1 Btu/lbm – 1018.4
Btu/lbm) = 455.7 Btu/lbm. To put this into practical perspective, assume steam flow
to be 1,000,000 lb/hr. The overall work is then 455,700,000 Btu/hr = 133.5
megawatts (MW).

At this point, if the exhaust steam were transported for co-generation or CHP
purposes, excellent efficiency would be possible. However, in the power industry
steam condensation is a very important step. Therefore, consider a second example,
where the unit has a condenser that reduces the turbine exhaust pressure to 1 psia
(approximately 2 inches of mercury). Again assuming an ideal turbine, the enthalpy
of the turbine exhaust is 904.9 Btu/lbm. The unit work output equates to 1474.1 –
871.0 = 603.1 Btu/lbm. At 1,000,000 lb/hr steam flow, the total work is 603,100,000
Btu/hr = 176.7 MW. This represents a 32 percent increase in available work from the
previous example. Obviously, condensation of the steam has an enormous effect
upon turbine efficiency.

One can also look at this example from a physical perspective. Calculations indicate
that the steam quality at the turbine exhaust pressure of 1 psia is 77 percent. (In
actuality, this would be excessive moisture that could damage low-pressure turbine
blades. Techniques such as steam reheating are common for reducing moisture in
the low-pressure turbine.) This means that 23 percent of the steam has condensed
to water. However, the remaining steam takes up a specific volume of 257 ft3/lbm.
The corresponding volume of water in the condenser hotwell at saturation
temperature is 0.016136 ft3/lbm. Thus, the condensation process reduces the fluid
volume nearly 16,000 times. The condensing steam generates the strong vacuum in
the condenser, which actually acts as a driving force to pull steam through the
turbine. (The strong vacuum also pulls in air from outside sources, where excessive
air in-leakage can seriously affect heat transfer.)
In the next example, we can see why it is important to maintain proper cleanliness in
condensers and heat exchangers. Consider again a condensing turbine, but where
waterside fouling or scaling (or excess air in-leakage) causes the condenser
pressure to increase from 1 psia to 2 psia.

Thermodynamic calculations show that the work output of the turbine drops from
603.1 to 569.2 Btu/lbm. So, at 1,000,000 lb/hr steam flow, a rise from 1 psia to 2 psia
in the condenser backpressure equates to a loss of 33,900,000 Btu/hr or 9.9 MW of
work. This is a primary reason why proper cooling water chemical treatment and
condenser performance monitoring are very important. Severe fouling may require a
reduction in unit load. If this occurs on a hot summer day with emergency power
pricing in effect, the financial consequences can be enormous. Techniques continue
to emerge to improve condenser, heat exchanger, and cooling tower performance.
These include more effective biocides, improved cooling tower film fill, more rugged
condenser tube materials, and enhanced instrumentation for monitoring physical and
chemical operating parameters.

Similarly, for co-generation and CHP facilities it is important to keep heat exchangers
free of deposits and corrosion to ensure maximum efficiency and equipment
availability.

Often, cooling towers are neglected because they may be isolated from the main
equipment. Improper chemistry control in chillers and building heat systems may
lead to severe corrosion. The list goes on.
Don’t Forget About the Steam Generator
Although we have focused upon methods to maximize heat extraction from the
steam generation process, it is important to remember that heat input efficiency
should be maximized as well. Poor makeup water treatment and water/steam
chemistry programs can lead to deposition and corrosion in steam generators. While
boiler tube failures often result from poor chemistry, even in units with seemingly
good treatment programs, problems can arise. The most common deposit on steam
generator tubes and internals consists of iron oxide particulates that are generated in
the condensate/feedwater system. (The concentration can be very large in systems
equipped with air-cooled condensers.) So, it is absolutely vital to operate with the
proper feedwater chemistry, and to have the ability to immediately detect impurity
ingress from a leaking condenser tube or other source. [2] For units with ACCs, a
condensate particulate filter is an absolute must.

Periodic removal of boiler tube deposits by chemical cleaning is often a necessary

procedure to improve heat transfer. Not only will deposits reduce heat transfer in
general, they will also cause an increase in tube metal temperatures which can lead
to accelerated metal deformation known as “creep.” Finally, and often most
important, is that some deposits, and most notably transported iron oxides, are
porous and can allow impurities in the bulk boiler water to concentrate underneath
the deposits. Local and rapid corrosion may be the result. In fact, the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) now recommends a normal (and very low) limit of 2 parts-
per-billion for chloride and sulfate in condensate, precisely because these impurities,
and chloride in particular, can generate severe under-deposit corrosion in the steam
generator.

Power Plant Boilers: Condenser

Performance Monitoring – Part 1
Brad Buecker5.17.19

  
  

The steam condenser of a power plant boiler is a critical heat exchanger in the
process.  Poor performance due to restricted heat transfer can have a dramatic
influence on unit efficiency.  And, condenser tube leaks will introduce impurities to
the condensate that can cause severe steam generator damage.

Part 1 of this article examines fundamental thermodynamics of condenser heat

transfer, and how efficiency losses can cost a plant much money.  In Part 2, my
colleague Kevin Boudreaux and I will examine how waterside fouling and scaling
(and excess air in-leakage on the steam-side) can affect condenser performance,
and in Part 3 we will review chemistry upsets that occur due to in-leakage of cooling
water into condensate. 

Too often, plant personnel feel that they can safely operate for several days or even
weeks with a condenser tube leak to keep producing power.  The negative results of
such actions can be monumental.

Basic Condenser Thermodynamics

Quite often those who are new to the steam generation power industry ask why
turbine exhaust steam is condensed and not just returned to the boiler as steam. 
The answer lies in efficiency. For simplicities’ sake, consider the simple power
system shown below.
Fig. 1.  A basic steam generation system with isentropic turbine.

An explanation of the symbols is as follows:

·         QB – Heat input to the boiler from fossil fuel combustion or other sources

·         WT – Work done by the turbine

·         QC – Exhaust heat from the condenser (no thermodynamic process is possible
without the discharge of some heat)

·         WP – Work done to raise the pressure of the condensate for return to the boiler

The diagram assumes 100 percent turbine efficiency, when in actuality turbines are
typically 80 to 90 percent efficient, but this factor does not need to be included here
to show the importance of steam condensation and maintaining condenser
cleanliness.  Consider the following hypothetical case.

Main Steam (Turbine Inlet) Pressure – 1000 psia

Main Steam Temperature – 1000oF

Turbine Outlet Steam Pressure – Atmospheric (14.7 psia)

Call this Example 1.  The steam tables show that the enthalpy of the turbine inlet
steam is 1505.9 Btu per pound of fluid (Btu/lbm).  Thermodynamic calculations
indicate that the exiting enthalpy from the turbine is 1080.9 Btu/lbm (steam quality is
93 percent).  The energy transfer can fundamentally be calculated by multiplying the
difference between the turbine inlet and outlet enthalpies times the mass flow rate
[WT = m(h1 – h2)].  Accordingly, the unit work available from this ideal turbine is
(1505.9 Btu/lbm – 1080.9 Btu/lbm) = 425.0 Btu/lbm.  To put this into practical
perspective, assume steam flow (m) to be 1,000,000 lb/hr.  The overall work is then
425,000,000 Btu/hr = 124.5 megawatts (MW).

Now consider Example 2, where the system has a condenser that reduces the
turbine exhaust pressure to 1 psia (approximately 2 inches of mercury).  Again
assuming an ideal turbine, the enthalpy of the turbine exhaust is 923.4 Btu/lbm.  The
unit work output equates to 1505.9 – 923.4 = 582.4 Btu/lbm.  At 1,000,000 lb/hr
steam flow, the total work is 582,400,000 Btu/hr = 170.6 MW.  This represents a 37
percent increase from the previous example.  Obviously, condensation of the steam
has an enormous effect upon efficiency.  An important point from this very basic
example is that the steam quality would be just above 80 percent.  A general rule-of-
thumb recommends less than 10 percent moisture in exhaust steam to prevent
damage to the last stages of the LP turbine.  That is a primary reason why most
modern steam generators have at least one steam reheating circuit.  Not only does
reheating improve unit efficiency, but it raises steam quality at the turbine exhaust. 
Also, note that when discussing steam, quality refers to the percentage of steam in
two-phase mixtures.  Plant personnel sometimes confuse quality with purity, which,
as the name implies, refers to how pure the steam is, where normally it should
contain very low concentrations (<2 parts-per-billion) of sodium, chloride, and sulfate.

One can also look at this example from a physical perspective.  Calculations indicate
that the steam quality at the turbine exhaust in Example 2 is 82 percent.  This means
that 18% of the steam has condensed to water.  However, the remaining steam
takes up a specific volume of 274.9 ft3/lbm.  The corresponding volume of water in
the condenser hotwell is 0.016136 ft 3/lbm.  Thus, the condensation process reduces
the fluid volume over 17,000 times.  The condensing steam generates a strong
vacuum in the condenser, which acts as a driving force to pull steam through the
turbine.  (The strong vacuum also pulls in air from outside sources, where excessive
air in-leakage can seriously affect heat transfer, as will be discussed later in this
series.)

Of importance also is that the work (WP) required by the feedwater pump is fractional
compared to other energy flows within the process.  The energy required by a
compressor to return turbine exhaust steam directly to the boiler would be much,
much greater than WP.    

Let’s take these energy transfer concepts a step further in Example 3.  Consider if
waterside fouling or scaling (or excess air in-leakage to condenser steam-side)
causes the condenser pressure of Example 2 to increase from 1 psia to 2 psia. 
Thermodynamic calculations show that the work output of the turbine drops from
582.4 to 546.1 Btu/lbm.  So, at 1,000,000 lb/hr steam flow, a rise of 1 psia in the
condenser backpressure equates to a loss of 36,300,000 Btu/hr or 10.6 MW of
work.  This is a primary reason why proper cooling water chemical treatment and
condenser performance monitoring are very important, as will be discussed in
subsequent parts of this series.  Even a very thin coating of an insulating deposit,
such as calcium carbonate, magnesium silicate, or others will greatly inhibit heat
transfer.  Microbiological fouling may be even worse.  The microbial colonies and
accompanying slime/silt layer not only retard heat transfer but can induce severe
under-deposit corrosion.
Figure 2.  Microbiologically fouled condenser tubes.

Figure 3.  Microbiologically fouled cooling tower film fill.

Some Co-Generation Comments

Ponder again for a moment the conditions outlined in Example 2, where the well-
functioning unit extracts 582.4 BTU/lbm of energy in the turbine.  The enthalpy of the
condensate at 1 psia condenser pressure is 69.7 BTU/lbm.  Thus, the heat “wasted”
in the condenser is 923.4 – 69.7 = 853.7 BTU/lbm.  So, even in this ideal condition
only about 40% of the energy in the turbine influent steam is utilized.  Most of the
wasted heat represents the latent heat required to convert water to steam in the
boiler.  This is the reason why co-generation is a common process at many industrial
plants (and is becoming increasingly popular for combined heat and power (CHP)
applications.)  These plants often have turbines to produce electrical or mechanical
power (for example, large steel mills use turbines to produce the “blast” air for blast
furnaces), but rather than condensing the steam it is extracted from the turbine while
still dry (100 percent quality) and is utilized for process heating.  Very common is to
have the steam condense as it flows over heat exchanger tubes or plates, such that
the latent heat of the fluid is directly extracted.  Overall net efficiencies of such plants
may reach 80 percent.  A very good exercise at many plants, and which the author
has participated in the past, is identifying locations to utilize waste steam or hot
water for process improvements.

About the author: Brad Buecker is Senior Technical Publicist with ChemTreat.  He
has 36 years of experience in or affiliated with the power industry, with nearly two
decades of it in steam generation chemistry, water treatment, air quality control, and
results engineering positions at City Water, Light & Power (Springfield, Illinois) and
Kansas City Power & Light Company’s La Cygne, Kansas station.  This experience
also includes 11 years at two engineering firms, and he spent two years apart from
power as acting water/wastewater supervisor at a chemical plant.  He has authored
many articles and three books on power plant water/steam chemistry and air
pollution control topics.  He is a graduate of Iowa State University.  He may be
reached at bradley.buecker@chemtreat.com.