errel Keywords: EPRI TR-102122 Heat rate Project 2818-05 Performance evaluation Final Report Performance testing March 1993 Boilers ‘Auxiliary systems Demonstration of EPRI Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines at North Omaha Unit 5 Prepared by ‘Omaha Public Power District ‘Omaha, Nebraska ant Black & Veatch, Engineers-Architects Kansas City, MissouriINTEREST CATEGORIES Fossil steam plant systems and performance Reliabilityfavailabilty, capacity, and heat rate Diagnostic monitoring KEYWORDS Heat rate Performance evaluation Performance testing Boilers ‘Auxiliary systems REPORT SUMMARY Demonstration of EPRI Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines at North Omaha Unit 5 Omaha Public Power District used EPRI's Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants to evaluate thermal performance, determine magnitude and causes of heat-rate degradation, and recommend corrective actions at its North Omaha unit 5. The project showed that cost-effective heat-rate improvements ranging between 250 Btu/kWh at full load and 1000 Btu/kWh at part load are possible. Utilities can use the methods in this report to adapt EPRI guidelines to their own needs. BACKGROUND Utilities can achieve substantial fuel cost savings and emissions reductions by optimizing the thermal performance of their fossil steam-generating units. EPRI has produced a set of generic guidelines (report CS-4554) to help utili- ties use systematic plant heat-rate improvement programs. OBJECTIVES + To show the usefulness and advantages of EPA's heat-rate improvement guidelines. + To compare project results with those of guideline demonstrations at other power plants. APPROACH The project team developed a plan for using the guidelines, including schedules, communication channels, and responsibilities of key individuals. The team determined the best achievable heat rate for the unit by evaluating design information, acceptance test data, and plant changes. By comparing these data with current unit performance, investigators were able to determine the potential for heat-rate improvement. They also modified a set of heat-rate logic trees, orig) nally presented in EPRI report CS-4554. These modifications helped them diag- nose causes of heat-rate losses at North Omaha unit 5. They then determined the Potential performance improvement of the corrective measures identified in the Foot-cause evaluation. Using economic studies, researchers identified and ranked cost-effective methods for improving heat rate. RESULTS Plant improvements with recovery periods of five years or less may yield large heat-rate gains. Investigators identified the following plant improve- ‘ments, resulting in heat-rate gains of 250 Btu/kWh: + High-pressure turbine seal replacement + Air heater seal replacement + Improved feedwater heater level monitoring EPRI PERSPECTIVE Research at North Omaha unit § showed that utilities can use the EPRI heat-rate improvement guidelines as a basis to expand and tailor @ heat-rate improvement program. Focusing on current unit performance EPRITR-1021225 Electric Power Research Instituteand evaluating potential improvements are the most productive activities. ‘Avallablty and reliability are important along with unit heat rate; at North Omaha unt 5, a long-term, low-cost supply means that availablity is an important factor in the total economic assessment of operations. PROJECT RP2618-05 Project Manager: Robert Leyse Generation & Storage Division Contractors: Omaha Public Power District; Black & Veatch, Engineers-Architects, For further information on EPRI research programs, call EPRI Technical Information Specialists (415) 855-2411.Demonstration of EPRI Heat-Rate Improvement Guidelines at North Omaha Unit 5 ‘TR-02122 Final Report, March 1993, Prepared by OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT 444 South Sixteenth Street Mall ‘Omaha, Nebraska 68102 BLACK & VEATCH, ENGINEERS-ARCHITECTS. 8400 Ward Parkway Kansas City, Missouri 64114 Prepared for Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94304 EPRI Project Manager R. Leyse Fossil Plant Performance Program Generation & Storage DivisionDISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES “THis REPOAT WAS PREPHAED BY THE ORGANIZATIONS) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTR POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPR). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPR, ANY COSPONSOA, THE DORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW. NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, () WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ADV” INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR EM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PRRTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (I) THAT SUCH USE OOES NAT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY ‘NED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR i) THAT THIS REPORT IS SUTABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR, USER'S CIRCUNSTANCE; OF (@) ASSUMES RESPONSIBLITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ICY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN Ir EPAL OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBLITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM ‘OUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS REPORT OR ANY FORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SINILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT (ORGANIZATIONS) THAT PREPARED THIS REPORT ‘OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT ‘BLACK & VEATCH, ENGINEERS-ARCHITECTS ORDERING INFORMATION Requests for copies of this report should be directed to the EPAI Distribution Center, 207 Coggins Drive, PO, Box 23205, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523, (510) 934-4212. There is no charge for reports requested by EPRI member ullities and affiliates. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of Electric Power Research Institue, Ine Copyright © 1989 Electric Power Research Institut, Inc.All rights reserved.aasmRAcT EPRI developed heat rate improvement guidelines to assist utilities in enhancing the performance of fossil fueled power plants. EPRI, Omaha Public Power District, and Black & Veatch co-funded a project at North Omaha Unit 5 to demonstrate the EPRI guidelines. ‘The subject unit for the heat rate improvenent project is the 200 MW North Omaha Unit 5. The North Omaha Station consists of five coal fired units on the Missouri River, located north of the Omaha Airport. The combined net generating capacity of the station is 631 MW. Unit 5 began commercial operation on May 1, 1968. The unit has a Foster Wheeler pulverized coal fired steam generator and a General Blectric 1C-2F-30" LSB turbine generator. ‘The approach used on the project folloved the EPRI heat rate improvement guide- Lines and consisted of four tasks. ‘The first task involved developing a compre- hensive project plan. In Task 2, Project Implementation, the best achievable heat rate and current unit performance were determined. These activities identified the current performance level and the improvement potential at North Omaha Unit 5. Other Task 2 activities included the identification of heat rate losses, heat rate Amprovenent evaluation, and eubsequent implementation of heat rate improvement activities. In Task 3, Heat Rate Improvement Monitoring, a plan to measure heat rate improvement was developed and the heat rate reporting system was developed. Low capital cost alternatives will be implemented first. Task 4 consisted of reporting the results of the heat rate improvenent project. Heat rate improvenent activities were identified and analyzed on a cost-benefit basis. These activities varied from no cost to $1,350,000 and net unit heat rate improvements of 10 to 350 Rtu/kh. The activities with the lovest payback periods (feedwater heater level adjustments, air heat seal replacement, and high-pressure turbine seals replacement) will be implemented. All of these activities have capital recovery periods of five years or less. Improvements of about 250 Btu/kWh are expected when these activities are completed. Fryconrenrs Section INPRODUCTION Background Omaha Public Power District Utility system Omaha Public Power District Heat Rate Improvenent Program Project Objectives Heat Rate Improvenent at North Omaha Unit 5 ‘Turbine Generator Steam Generator Condenser Feedwater Heaters Report Organization PROJECT TMPLEMENTATION Determination of Best-Achievable Heat Rate As-Designed Heat Rate As-Built Heat Rate Best-Achievable Heat Rate Determination of Current Unit Performance unit Testing Test Data Acquisition ‘Testing Data Reduction Test Results Corrections Testing Uncertainty current Unit Performance Identification of Heat Rate Losses Heat Rate Logic Trees Boiler Losses Condensate/Feedwater System Losses Circulating Water Cycle Losses ‘Turbine tosses Electrical Auxiliary LossesSection Evaluation of Heat Rate Improvenent Potential Heat Rate Improvenents Heat Rate Improvement Bvaluation Implementation of Heat Rate Improvenent Activities Heat Rate Improvement Activities Preventive Maintenance Program Summary of Implementation Activities HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT Monitoring of Heat Rate Improvement Operator Controllable Parameters Soot Blower Optimization Engineer ing/Maintenance Paraneters Long-Term Monitoring of Heat Rate Improvement Boiler Stuy Proposed Boiler Modifications Heat Rate Reporting System Operations Report Performance Group Report RECOMMENDATIONS Implementation of Heat Rate Improvenent Guidelines Research and Development Activities APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX ¢ APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX APPENDIX APPENDIX Ht APPENDIX I AS-DESIGNED HEAT BALANCE DIAGRAMS AS-BUILT UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST DATA APRIL 1988 FOSTER WHEELER BOILER TEST DATA AUGUST 1988 UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST DATA AND CALCULATIONS APRIL 1989 UNIT PERFORMANCE—-DATA. AND ‘CALCULATIONS UNIT 5 PERFORMANCE CALCULATION ALGORITHMS PERFORMANCE ‘TES? PROCEDURE--DETERMINING (CURRENT UNIT PERFORMANCE HEAT RATE LOGIC DIAGRAMS NORTH OMAHA STATION FEEDWATER HEATER TEST PROGRAM 237 2-40 2-50 2-55 2-56 2-58 2-59 aun coILLUSTRATIONS Omaha Public Power District Service Area Omaha Public Power District Capacity Mix (1989) Omaha Public Power District Generation Mix (1989) Heat Rate Comparisons 1954-1987 OPPD system vs. Industry North Omaha Station Heat Rate Inprovenent Committee North Omaha Power station North Omaha Unit 5 Turbine Generator North Omaha Unit 5 Conteo? Room Heat Rate Curves Best-Achievable Heat Rate Relative Effect of Unit Modifications on Heat Rate Current Unit Performance Heat Rate Logic Tree Main Diagram North Omaha Unit 5 Heat Rate North Omaha Unit § Soot Blowing Optimization Performance Group Report (Heat Rate Data) Performance Group Report (Operational Data) vad a2 EStTable a 2 2-2 23 24 2-5 2-6 27 28 2-9 2-10 2 242 23 2-14 24s 2-16 2-17 218 as 2-20 2-21 2-26 a 32 TABLES ‘PPD Generating Stations As-Designed Unit Performance As-Built Unit Performance Best-Achievable Unit Performance Results of Foster wheeler Energy Corporation Boiler Test--April 1988 Results of OPPD Unit Performance Test--August 1908 Results of OPPD Unit Performance Test--April 1989 Test Codes Corrections to Tested Unit Performance (OPPD--August 1988) Corrections to Tested Unit Performance (OPPD--April 1989) Net Plant Heat Rate Uncertainty, Input-Output Method Net Plant Heat Rate Uncertainty, ASME Turbine and Hi Loss Method Boiler Heat Losses Due to Moisture and Dry Gas Condensate/Feedwater System Losses--Feedwater Heater Performance Circulating Water System Losses--Condenser Performance ‘Turbine Losses--itigh-Pressure Section Efficiency ‘Turbine Losses--Main Steam and Reheat Steam Desuperheat ing Spray Economic Parameters Summary of Potential Heat Rate Inprovenent Activities Economic Analysis of Switching Fuel to Dried Western Coal (Belle Ayr) Economic Evaluation of Replacement Seals for Air Heater Economic Evaluation of Optimization of Feedwater Heater Levels Economic Evaluation of Increased Frequency of Condenser Cleaning Bconomic Evaluation of Replacement of High-Pressure Turbine Seals Economic Analysis of Main and Reheat Steam Desuperheating Spray flows--Operator Controllable Impact Economic Analysis of Replacement High-Pressure Sodium Light ing Ranking of Potential Heat Rate Improvement Activities North Omaha Operation Data Report North Omaha Unit 5--Heat Rate Report 2-35 2-16 217 a9 221 2-22 2-28 2-25 2-32 235 2-36 2-38 239 aan 2-42 248 2-45, 2-51 2-52 254 +9 3-10Section 1 INTRODUCTION In 1981, results of an Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) survey indicated that many utilities wanted EPRI to develop guidelines for heat rate improvement progr: Responding to that request, EPRI initiated Research Project (RP) 1403-3, “Heat Rate Improvenent in Existing Fossil Plants." The objective of the project was to develop guidelines to assist utilities in establishing a formal heat rate improvement pro- gram, and to provide methods and direction to help utilities identify and resolve heat rate problens cost-effectively. The project final report was published in 1986.* In 1987, EPRI initiated five parallel projects to demonstrate the heat rate improve~ described in this ment guidelines developed in RP 1403-3; one of those projects i report. In this project, Demonstration of EPRI Heat Rate Improvement Guidelines at North Omaha Unit 5, Onaha Public Power District (OPPD) has served as the prime con- tractor to EPRI; Black & Veatch, Engineers-Architects has been a subcontractor to orp. BACKGROUND Recently, utilities have placed a high priority on improving the heat rate of exist- ing fossil fired power plants. The 1973 ofl embargo ended the era of low fossil fuel prices and initiated a period of mich higher fuel prices ané uncertain fuel avail~ ability. In addition, many utilities were forced to cancel or postpone the construc~ tion of new nuclear and fossil units because of the high inflation rates and lower than expected growth in electrical demand. Further, sone state regulatory agencies have enacted incentive programs to encourage utilities to improve power plant per- formance to counter rising fuel costs. In response to these factors, the need to Amprove the heat rate of existing fossil fired units has become increasingly appar~ ent. ‘Heat Rate improvement Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants, EPRI CS-4554, May 1986.EPRI has sponsored several interrelated research projects to assist utilities in improving the heat rate of existing fossil fuel power plants. The goal of the EPRI research program is to provide the required technology to utilities to allow achieve~ ment of a 3% heat rate improvement in existing units as well as a 108 heat rate improvement for new units. The Heat Rate Improvenent Guidelines for Existing Fossil Plants are one of the products of the EPRI research program. Because of its concern about heat rate, OPPD, in parallel with the EPRI research effort, initiated its own program to improve the performance of its fossil fueled generating units. OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT UTILITY SYSTEM OPPD is a publicly owned electric utility, organized in 1946 as a political subdivi- sion of the State of Nebraska, subject to laws enacted by the state legislature. Policies and rates are set by a seven-menber Board of Directors elected by the people of the area served. Major projects are financed by the sale of revenue bonds, which may be purchased by the general public. OPPD provides electricity for approximately 577,000 people in a 5000-square mile area in southeastern Nebraska. OPPD's service area is shown in Figure 1-1. A total of 53 towns and surrounding farm areas in a 13-county region are served by OPPD. In 1989, OPPD served approximately 215,194 residential, 29,439 small general service, 75 large general service, and 457 government and municipal customers. OPPD's historical peak system load is 1,597,000 kw. Generating stations owned and operated by OPPD are identified in Table 1-1; the geo~ graphic location of the generating stations is indicated in Figure 1-1. currently, OPPD operates six fossil fueled steam power units with a combined maximum net gen- erating capability of approximately 1,217,000 kW. In addition, OPPD operates the 492,000 kW Fort Calhoun Station (nuclear) and four combustion turbine units. OPPD's generating mix in terms of capacity is shown in Figure 1-2, OPPD's generating mix in terms of annual generation for 1989 is shown in Figure 1-3. OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OPPD has a strong commitment to providing reliable electric power service at the low Yt cost to its customer-owners. As part of this commitment, OPPD is concernedFort Calhoun Station Nebraska Missouri Kansas Figure 1-1. Omaha Public Power District Service AreaTable 1-1 OPPD GENERATING STATIONS Turbine Net unit Generator Maxima Nameplate Capability Rat ing Year in Station Name unit unit Type (iti) (iw) Service Nebraska city a coal/Steam Turbine 585,700 565,000 1979 Fort Calhoun 2 Nuclear/steam 492,000 481,477 1973 Turbine North Omaha l Coat or Gas/stean 77,100 75,000 1954 Turbine a Coal or Gas/stean 102,200 100,000, 1957 qurbine 3 Coal or Gas/stean 102,200 100,000 1959 Turbine 4 coal or Gas/stean 131,300 125,000 1963 Turbine 5 coal or Gas/stes 218,700 200,000, 1968 Turbine Jones street a 011 or Gas/ 63,700 58,000 1973 Combustion Turbine 2 041 oF Gas/ 63,700 $8,000 1974 Corbustion Turbine Sarpy County a O12 or Gas/ 62,300 54,000 as72 Combustion Turbine 2 011 or Gas/ 62,300 54,000 1972 Combustion Turbine(xr's2) uvatonN Wf) Ij sn WaVO “XV 'IVLOL6861) XIW WOT3BIauED 3OqI3S4q ZeMOE DTTaNa BYEYO “CT LZ — — LEE _—— , | (verve) WVELS Tissod =" (“9°Sh) UVETOON SS Se aea 0 a S75 GEE TS SS SS Awith lowering the unit heat rates for its existing fossil fueled power units. of six fossil fueled steam power units, five have been in service more than ‘Therefore, improving these units’ h trates and maintaining the improved heat rates are critical to OPPD. OPPD formally initiated its Heat Rate Improvement Program in 1982. The Heat Rate Improvenent Program has set heat rate goals for each of OPPD's units and has estab- lished a heat rate improvement organization. ‘The heat rate improvenent organization consists of a central group as well as team members from each plant. Responsibil- ities of the heat cate improvement teans include performance testing, identifying heat rate losses, and implementing actions to improve heat rate. The Heat Rate Improvement Program is based on closing the gap between actual and @esign performance levels. Several factors beyond the control of the plant staff Such as unit design, modifications, environmental elements, and fuels affect this performance gap. These factors make achievement of the design heat rate an unreal- istic standard. Many losses are, however, recoverable through improved operation and maintenance and through justifiable capital expenditures. The objective of the Heat Rate Improvement Program is to reduce the recoverable losses by defining existing performance, setting goals, strengthening accountability, monitoring performance, and making known the substantial energy and cost savings through the initiative and dili- gence of personnel at all levels. Heat rate improvement at OPPD has been made the responsibility of all personnel associated with the operation, maintenance, evalua~ tion, dispatch, and management of the generating units. Good communication and a strong team effort have been emphasized as being vital to the success of the program. There have been many notable results of the Heat Rate Improvement Program. Signifi~ cant progress has been made in instilling in each employee the commitment to heat rate improvement. Management is taking a strong, active role in support of the pro- gram. Communications regarding heat rate have been substantially improved. Fig- ure 1-4 shows a plot of the trend in system heat rate before and after initiation of the Heat Rate Improvement Program. The increasing trend in heat rate which started in 1970 has been arrested and significant improvement has been noted. ‘his improve- ment is understated because the coal supply was changed at the North Omaha Station at about the same time the program was initiated. The lower Btu fuel source has had a Substantially adverse impact on boiler efficiency. Had the coal supply not been changed, the improvement would have been greater than that observed.ose Axysnpur * oasis dado La6t-r56t suosyredaog ayey yeoH *y-T aanbyz AaLsaaNI —— dado a ava get ozer os6T ocet 1 | GALVLLINI WVEDOUd LNaWaAOUANT aLva LVaH oooot oozot oosot ‘oo8oT oot ooztT OOFTT oostt oostt ooozt oozet oorer Giatvni@) Siva Ivan LanHeat Rate Tmprovenent Committees have been established at each power plant in accord- ance with the Heat Rate Improvement Program. ‘The plant manager is designated the chairman of the committee; other members include the supervisory personnel of the operations, maintenance, and technical groups. Also acting as menbers of the group fare personnel from the Test and Performance Group of Technical Services who serve as consultants on heat rate improvenent activities. Figure 1-5 summarizes the North Omaha Station Heat Rate Improvenent Committee structure ‘The meetings of the conmittees serve to focus the plant staff's attention on the subject of heat rate rather than the day-to-day operating problems. Each person in the committee is expected to provide input on possible heat rate improvement proj~ ects. After the projects are designated, they are assigned to a committee member for evaluation, design, and implementation. Tracking of projects is achieved by the oral reports each committee member must make on projects assigned to them at each meeting. The Test and Performance Group, besides having its own projects, assists the members of the committee in their evaluation of projects. The meetings also serve as a feed back mechanism in that the heat rate achieved for the previous month is discussed and the overall progress of the plant in meeting its heat rate goal is discussed. PROJECT OBJECTIVES EPRI signed contracts with OPPD and four other utilities to validate and to denon- strate the usefulness of the guidelines developed in RP 1403-3. In undertaking the demonstration of the EPRI”heat rate improvenent guidelines, OPPD sought to determine if the EPRI guidelines would enhance their system-wide perform ance improvement program by carefully implementing the guidelines at one of their coal fueled units, North Omaha Unit 5. ‘The project has the following principal objective: © Establish a heat rate improvement program at an existing fossil fueled power plant using the EPRI heat rate improvenent guidelines. © Implenent cost-effective heat rate improvement activities. © Monitor the actual heat rate improvenent.(SYSTEM OPERATIONS) CPLA) (TECHNICAL seavices) Plant Nonoger Cheirmon Supervisor system Operations zn j Supervisor a || = |__Performance | | [ an Operations ee Plant Engineer erformence i eee | Engineers ; u shitt Maintenance ee esting | Supervisors Supervisor —— IT | ] T& C and Mechanical Electrical Maintenance Maintenonce Supervisor Supervisor Figure 1-5. North Omaha Station Heat Rate Improvement CommitteeEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT AT NORTH OMAHA UNIT 5, The North Onaha Station, shown in Figure 1-6, is located approximately 6 miles north of downtown Omaha on the west bank of the Missouri River, It has a total generating capacity based on turbine generator nameplate rating of approximately 600 MW. ‘The 100-acre site was purchased in 1951, and the first unit of 75 MW was placed in regu- lar commercial operation on July 1, 1954. The second and third units, each 100 MW, were placed in regular commercial operation on april 9, 1957 and April 11, 1959, respectively. Unit 4, a 125 MW unit, was placed in regular commercial operation on March 15, 1963. Unit 5, rated at 200 MW, was placed in regular commercial operation on May 1, 1968. Three screenhouse structures are located on the bank of the river. The first contains the screens and circulating water pumps that serve Units 1 and 2; the second serves Units 3 and 4; and the third serves Unit 5. One central control. room serves Units 1 and 2. A second control room serves Unite 3 and 4, and a third control room serves Unit 5. All steam generators are equipped to burn pulverized coal and/or natural gas. A 900-ton/h coal handling system is installed to deliver coal to the units. A description of the major North Omaha Unit 5 components follows. ‘Turbine Generator The turbine generator was manufactured by General Electric and is a 3600-rpm impulse, 20-stage tandem compound, double flow reheat-type s! turbine, direct connected to ‘a hydrogen cooled 20,000 volt generator. ‘The turbine is rated at 200,000 kw with throttle steam conditions of 2400 psig and 1000¢F, with a single reheat temperature of 1000". ‘The turbine has extraction openings to support seven stages of feedwater heating. ‘The generator is rated at 256,000 kVA at 45 psig hydrogen and 0.85 power factor. The turbine generator is shown in Figure 1-7, ‘The Unit 5 control room is shown in Pigure 1 Steam Generator ‘The steam generator, which vas manufactured by Foster wheeler, is a front-fired unit with a maximum continuous rating of 1,600,000 1b/h main steam flow with a superheater outlet pressure of 2600 psig and temperature of 1005°F at both the superheater and reheater outlets. ‘Temperature control is by back-pass dampers and by spray for both superheat and reheat. Iwo horizontal shaft, Gjungstrom-type air heaters are in- stalled. There are 12 intervane burners for gas and coal firing. ‘Three coal pul- verizers have a capacity of 74,000 1b/n each. ‘There are sets of two forced draftFigure 1-7, North Omaha Unit 5 Turbine Generator Figure 1-8, North Omaha Unit § Control Room 1-13wurized (#D) fans, and two induced draft (1D) fans. The unit was initially a pre unit with no ID fans, The fans were added at the sane tine as the second electro- static precipitator and the unit was converted to balanced éraft. Three automatic feeders measure the coal flow to the unit. Dust collection was originally by a Single electrostatic precipitator. Later, a second electrostatic precipitator was added downstream of the first, necessitating the addition of the ID fans and a new stack. Condenser ‘Phe condenser was manufactured by Foster-Wheeler and is 145,000-square foot, single~ shell, two-pass type, equipped with valves for reversing the circulating water flow. ‘Tubes are fabricated from stainless steel. Feedwater Heaters ‘There are seven stages of feedvater heating consisting of three low-pressure heaters, lan open deaerating heater, and three high-pressure heaters. The first two low pressure heaters are located in the condenser neck. The first three heaters were manufactured by Foster-wheeler and are of the closed design with an integral drain cooler on Heaters 2 and 3 and an external drain cooler on Heater 1. Drains from Heater 1 flow to the condenser. ‘The three high-pressure heaters were manufactured by Yuba and are of the closed design with integral drain coolers. Heater drains cascade to the next Lower heater. An open-type deaerating feedwater heater manufactured by the Chicago i er Company is located between the low- and high-pressure heaters. REPORT ORGANIZATION Generally, this report is organized according to the order in which the work on the project was carried out. Section 2 discusses the implementation of the project: determining best-achievable heat rate, establishing current unit performance, iden- titying heat rate losses, evaluating heat rate improvenent, and implementing heat rate improvement activities. Section 3 presents methods of monitoring and measuring Amprovenents in heat rate and developing a system for heat rate reporting. Sec~ tion 4 contains recommendations for implementing a heat rate improvement program. Supporting material is included in appendices.Section 2 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ‘The implementation of the EPRI Heat Rate Improvement Guidelines at OPPD's North Omaha Unit 5 began with the determination of the best-achievable heat ra Next, the unit was tested to establish current unit performance, Heat rate losses were identified through a comparison of the best-achievable heat rate with current unit performance. ‘Then, the economic evaluation of the potential heat rate improvement activities was conducted. Finally, some of the heat rate improvement activities which appeared to be economically attractive are being implemented at North Omaha Unit 5. DETERMINATION OF BEST-ACHIEVABLE HEAT RATE ‘The best-achievable heat rate is defined as the lowest, realistic, achievable heat rate at which the unit is capable of operating given current equipment and operat ing conditions. The following steps were implemented to determine the best-achievable heat rate: © Establish the "as-designed" heat rate. @ Adjust the “as-designed” heat rate to the “as-built” heat rate, © Adjust the "as-built" heat rate to the estimated "best-achievable” heat rate. As-Designed Heat Rate ‘The “as-designed” heat rate curve established the basis from which the “as-built” and “best-achievable" heat rate curves were constructed. It represents the unit's heat rate curve as it existed during detailed design of the unit. facturers* performance estimates. The curve is based on the unit arrangements and assumptions that existed during the detailed design phase of the project. “‘Turbine~ generator manufacturer's and engineer-architect's heat balance diagrams, boiler manufacturer's boiler efficiencies and OPPD's estimate of the auxiliary power © quirements based on manufacturers’ performance estimates were used to construct the et unit heat rate curve as a function of net load.‘The engineer-architect's heat balance diagrams used to determine the “as-designed" net unit heat rate were based on natural gas firing and did not include any air preheating or desuperheating spray flows. The auxiliary power requirements est imated by OPPD were based on gas-firing and adjusted for boiler manufacturer's predictions of the power requirements for the primary air (PA) fans, mills, and precipitators. The curve was calculated at the turbine valve points using the boiler efficiency and auxiliary power associated with those points. Other design assumptions include the following: A design turbine back pressure of 1.5 inches HgA based on a river water temperature of 65°F. © Boiler efficiency is based on an ambient temperature of 80°F and Kansas coal. Heat losses include 1.58 for unaccounted losses. © Makeup, blowdown, and soot blowing are assumed to be zero. ‘The "as-designed™ gross turbine heat rate (GTHR) was provided on the Gibbs, Hill, Durham and Richardson heat balances for North Omaha Station Unit $. GTHR is defined ‘as the total heat added to main and reheat steam divided by gross generator output. ‘These heat balances are included in Appendix A and have expected unit performance for four valves wide open (VWO), three VWO, two YWO, and one VWO. The “as-designed" unit performance at the various valve points is shown in Table 2-1. As-Built Heat Rate ‘The "as-built" heat rate curve was constructed based on the “as-designed” heat rate curve and includes any changes in performance that occurred between the design ph and initial operation of the unit. the differences between the “as-built” and “as-designed” heat rates are outlined in the EPRI Report CS-4554. They include extraction line and reheater pressure drops, boiler and turbine efficiencies, and desuperheat ing spray requirenents. The "as-built" heat rate curve represents the most likely performance of the plant at the start of the unit's operation in the spring of 1968. The "as-built" heat rate curve was constructed from the “as-designed" heat rate curve using the results of a unit performance test for the turbine generator and the boiler conducted shortly after initial operation in 1968.30308 sopntour “w/aag ot 3s02¥0u 243 03 pspuNoY, sauowezynbex zomod dand peaz z8tyoq waAyz. ssxoqeaydyoord pue ‘strym ‘sues (va) 27e Aawuy2d 9y3 203 squouaxznbez zanod ayy JO sozeur ise eouewsozzed s,ze22egnueu 29TTOq 703 parsnfpe pu BUZZ #¥6 UO pes¥q aad Aq pareuyas9 oMod AreTTTxAY, 4 *de000T/ae0001/6184 ozsz a2” suot3ypuca MoTZ aT3307ur “seyouayors39 seTt0q peazedxe zets0uN zexsor puE suesbeyp sDuUTER aWoN NOsPIeyOTA pu ‘weYING ‘TTTH ‘saqrD Jed, oay'tt os't6 oze‘on osr’s z90'6 ore eez‘ore uedo aprm eaten T o10'6 08-68 oor’tt o0s’a se9'e o0s‘6rt ——a00'sze edo aprm seaten z o66'@ oz'6a 0z0"06t ouz‘or zr9'e 06z’00z = oos'zez*t ado aprm soaten € 000'6 savas oos‘arz oss‘tr geste oso‘ocz —Got*z0s'T © —uado @prm seatea ¥ Ta OaT T THAT THAT Ca7aaT TART CERT WOTSDUOS PROT 23PH WeaH — AouETOTZIa peo7 onod 038 ROH uOyzI9UID REY OTE arun yen settoR arua axrrrany eurqang, ‘$5039 e1aa07uz 32N 5029 eHONWINORZa LINN GaNDTSIO-SY Tot erate 23Several parameters vary depending on operational requirements and ambient conditions Such as turbine throttle pressure, condenser pressure and FD fan air inlet tempera~ ture. In order to provide realistic comparison between design conditions and actual operating conditions, the actual test data were corrected to reference ambient condi— tions (80°F ary-bulb temperature and 65°F river temperature) and the turbine throttle pressure was corrected to the design reference pressure (2520 psig). Corrections to the test data were made using the turbine manufacturer's thermal kit, Black & Veatch's heat balance computer program "Thermodynamic Analysis of Power Plant Sys~ tens" (TAPPS), and the methods set forth by the American Society of Mechanical Engi- neers (ASME) in PIC 6.1, "Interim Test Code for an Alternative Procedure for Testing Steam Turbines." In addition, OPPD's estimated auxiliary power for the “as-designed” unit heat rate curve was used for the “as-built” heat rate curve because of insufficient test data. The "as-built" heat rate curve ie b fed on the performance test data contained in the "Boiler and Turbine Tests Report" dated January 1969. These data are included in Appendix B. The test data were corrected to reference ambient air temperature of 80°F. Black & Veatch's TAPPS computer program was used to estimate the effect of varying the air preheating water flow on turbine heat rate and generator output. The turbine heat rate and generator output were then corrected to an air preheating water flow corresponding to an ambient temperature of 80°F. This approach adjusts the turbine steam cycle performance for the air preheating re~ quirement, The air heater inlet temperature is kept relatively constant and, thus, the boiler efficiency is unaffected by changes in ambient temperature. Similarly, the turbine heat rate and generator output were corrected to the reference river water temperature. It was assumed that the condenser and its auxiliaries oper late at their design capabilities for development of the "as-built" hk erate. A river temperature of 65°F was assumed to correspond to a turbine back pressure of 1.5 inches HA. Therefore, river water temperature is the only parameter that affects the condenser pressure, Based on these assumptions, the turbine heat rate and generator output were corrected to a condenser back pressure of 1.5 inches HigA using back pressure correction curves supplied by the turbine-generator manufacturer in the thermal kit.Finally, it was assumed that no administrative or operational constraints exist that jure, 2520 psig. ‘There: q Prevent operation of the unit at the reference throttle pre: fore, the test throttle pressure was corrected to 2520 psig using the methods forth in ASME PTC 6.1. ‘The "as-built" net unit heat rates at various valve points are shown in Table 2-2. The "as-built" and the ‘as-designed" heat rate curves are plotted in Figure 2-1. ‘The difference between the two curves represents the net effect of the changes that occurred between design and initial operation. Some of the more significant change: to the steam turbine cycle include a reduction in the reheater pressure drop from 108 to 58, resulting in a lower heat rate and increased output; the addition of main steam desuperheat ing spray flow, which decreased bi t rate and output; and the addi- tion of air preheating flow from the deaerator, which decreased heat rate and in creased output. Changes which affected boiler efficiency include slightly higher excess air require- ments, addition of main steam desuperheating spray flow, and a slightly different coal quality. These changes had a combined effect which slightly lowered the boiler efficiency by about 0.5% at four WO and 2.3% at one VHO. Best~Achievable Heat Rate ‘The "best-achievable” heat rate curve was developed from the as-built" heat rate curve by making adjustments for all irreversible changes or modifications that could be quantified. All modifications to equipment, additional auxiliary loads, and oper- ational constraints were included. Equipment degradation over time was not included t rate is addressed in in the adjustments. The effect of equipment degradation on hi Section 2.3, Identification of Heat Rate Losse: Changes to the unit which have had significant effects on the unit performance in~ clude conversion of the boiler from pressurized operation to balanced draft oper tion, modifying the turbine control valves from partial are admission to full are admission for cycling service, addition of a second electrostatic precipitator and new stack, addition of a desuperheating station on cold reheat steam line, and chang- ing the fuel from the design Kansas coal to low sulfur, high moisture Wyoming coal. Another major modification which was determined not to have a significant effect on unit heat rate was the complete replacement of three high-pressure feedwater heaters with heaters having the same design criteria as the original heaters,“weveag OT asazeeu 243 03 pepunoy, jioxe*Tdr002d pue ssrtya ‘suey va aya 107 squswasrnbex ronod oy 30 soneuyae0 soueez0j304 s, zermowjnuew 30T}0q 203 paxsntpe puY SuI313 SEB UO pesea dead MY bowers eos serrsxny, “ganssoad 91330343 eusqins rsd ozsz pue suoyaypuOD quetque ,eduezej0r, OF Moasen 4 PETE 4a pervoss09 pue g96r AzeNUES woIz eI~p ise JoTTOG puY sJolEsouaG-sutINy oe pasea, one‘ot ares oz" asus 1988 o66tL ——ocavese odo 2erm saten T ov0's ssree —orerset—ouev ueste ost'srt —ote'ase edo apta soaten z 068s ooo'est ——o08or can'e Qor'eoz © ovavrsz’t usd aptm seaten ¢ or0'6 oer'sze cart esste 06679¢2 © 020'L05'T —_uado ptm soaten » aaa THT GAT ayaa TART WERT | uaF a pSS BOT 208 289K peor zenoa eae aweH —uoyaezeuen ney nota 37ua 39N stun Aa8styxny — aurqang, $8039 eT 2024r, au $8029 eHONWNORUZE ZINN sTInE-se 2-2 erqua 2-6soainp 93ey 39H “T-Z amnbrg Ma 00 1H ‘yawns “ey 0H wen ONTable 2-3 lists these modifications and their effects on unit performance. the effect of modifying the turbine from partial are admission to full arc admission on turbine heat rate and generator output was estimated using Black & Veatch's TAPPS heat balance computer program. The corresponding values estinated by General Elec- tric are also shown in Table 2-3 for comparison. The effect of switching fuel from the a ign Kansas coal to Wyoming coal was esti- mated using another Black & Veatch computer program, the Steam Generator Heat ‘Transfer Model (SGM). SGM was used to estimate the change in boiler efficiency and determine predicted values of in steam desuperheating and cold reheat steam desu perheating spray flows. For purposes of this subtask, the predicted values of main steam and reheat steam desuperheating spray flows were considered to be “best- achievable." The effect on turbine heat rate and generator output of spraying main steam and cold reheat steam at these predicted values was evaluated using the TAPPS heat balance computer program. ‘The net effect of adding new ID fans, precipitators, and a new stack on the auxiliary power requirements was estimated using design boiler draft information and 1D and FD fan curves to determine new fan power consumption. The new precipitator power requirements were estimated by OPPD. ‘The "best-achievable,* “as-built," and “as-designed™ net unit heat rate curves are shown for comparison in Figure 2-2. ‘The relative effect each modification had on unit heat rate is shown in Figure 2-3. The effect of each modification is shown as a percentage of the total difference between the "as-built" and "best-achievable" heat rates at each of the four original turbine valve points. As illustrated in the figures, the coal change has the largest impact on unit heat rate at all turbine valve points. the relative effect of the turbine control valve modification increases substantially at the off-design valve points. DETERMINATION OF CURRENT UNIT PERFORMANCE ‘The current unit performance was determined by compiling and analyzing the results of three separate groups of tests performed over several months starting in April 1988 and ending in April 1969. 2-8Table 2-3 ‘BEST-ACHIEVABLE UNIT PERFORMANCE Approximate Turbine Valve Point 4 vwo 3vwo 2 wo a wio. Turbine Heat Rate Equipsent Modifications As-built heat rate (Btu/kkh) 74553 7,487 1817 BEV estimate of change (4) 0.00 1.22 2.67 G. B. estinate of change (4)° 0.00 1.00 2.20 Adjusted Turbine Heat Rate” 7,553 7.578 119 Operational Modif icat ions Predicted SH spray flow (1b/h) 130,000 104,000, 64,000 20,000 Predicted CRH spray flow (1b/h) 140,000 103,000, 54,000 ° BEV estimate of change (¥) 1.95 1.79 1.20 0.3 Best-Achievable Gross Turbine Heat Rate (Btu/kWh) 7,700 ana 7,873 9,306 Generator Output, gross As-bullt (partial are) 236,990 203,400 145,190 71,990 FuLL are admission ° 4,200 6,300 4,900 cold reheat spray 15,500 11,500 6,700 2,100 Best-Achievable Output, gross 252,490 210,700 «148,590 69,190 Auxiliary Power as-built 11,870 10, 400 8,370 6,790 Blectrostatic precipitator a0 a0 a0 a0 Balanced draft (net effect) 1,620 1,450 2,180 789 Best-Achievable Auxiliary Power 13,890 12,260 9,960 7,980 Boiler Efficiency As-built (Kansas coal), (4) 88.22 Current (Wyoming coal), (4) 28.99 Best-Achievable Boiler BEEiciency (¥) 83.68 83.79 24.30 05.16 Net Unit Heat Rate (BEu/kHh) as-built 9,010 8,690 9,040 10,970 Best-achievable 9,740 9,780 10,030 12,350 Differential 730 890 990 1,380 per General Electric correspondence with OPPD dated October 31, 1979. Ppased on BEV estimate of change. Rounded to the nearest 10 Btu/kin.ey IOH oTqeAoTYOY-38eq -z-z o:nbrg Ma 9g 1H 02 oa oon mo % % oy way pautsog sy o@ ‘ung “ey ven aN YN“E19 xg'oT) ue'Ta| OMA + ayey yaH UO suOTyeOTZTPOW FUN JO 29933G eArzeTAH “E-Z aznbTE SMOTd AVads [7\] SHATVA ANIGUNL 77) uamod Auvrtixay KCY ALITvAb Tvoo [NJ WIGVASIHOV LSH@ GNY LING SV NaaMLaa x OMA & L OMA 2 1. xorTs) usar “Les “L6 xe'or OMA T 1 xo'ty L xe'ee t xg‘ot - uve — | oot oz ove oor os 009 002 08 006 ooo ott oozt ovet oor oost x SLVG LVGH ‘IVLLNausaaia 2a‘The net unit heat rates at various net unit loads were calculated with available test data and were corrected to the baseline ambient conditions. The heat rate estimates and net load were corrected as required to obtain comparable values that are consistent with the assumptions used to develop the best achievable heat rate. Corrections were made for inlet air temperatures, circulating cooling water temperatures and other conditions that are not controllable by the operators. Unit Testing Heat rate testing is conducted periodically at North Omaha Unit 5 as part of OPrD's station maximum capability requirements and to monitor heat rates by trending per~ formance. Testing that occurs during these periods is representative of normal day-to-day operations. ‘Thus, it is reasonable to expect that the heat rates observed during these tests are also representative of the normal performance of the unit. Three sets of recent test data were used to determine the current unit performance: © Foster Wheeler Testing Data obtained in April 1988 (appendix C). © Data from the station testing conducted in August 1988 (Appendix D). © Data from the station testing conducted in April 1989 (Appendix &). ‘The August 1988 and April 1989 data represent the typical testing that is completed by station personnel. The Foster Wheeler tests are special tests conducted to obtain specific information on steam generator steam flow. Foster wheeler used these test results to evaluate improvenents which can be made to obtain additional steam genera tion capability. Test Data Acquisition Unit test data are collected using the unit data acquisition system. The Unit 5 Data Acquisition System is a microprocessor based plant conputer system designed to pro- vide a full range of data acquisition, display, and logging functions including: © Analog to digital conversion for process variables. © Engineering units conversion. © Thermocouple and RTD Linearization. © Marming and out-of~sean functions.© dynamic process displays. © Unit performance calculations. @ trend Logs Performance Log. @ Post trip log. © Sequence of events tog. © Analog trend recorders. © Special iogs. © Special calculations. Several standard displays, logs, and calculations were configured during the initial installation of the system. However, extensive capacity exists for the additional custom configurations in each of these categori The Unit 5 Data Acquisition System consists of four major components. Bach component je by OPPD personnel to is a stand-alone commercial grade product which was progr: Provide the necessary functions for the unit's computer system. The major components and their functions are: © Acronag 6,000 Mult iplexor--Provides analog to digital signal con- version for all process variables. Also performs linearization of thermocouple and RTD signals. © Allen-Bradley PLC3 Programmable Controller--Performs engineering units conversion, alarming, and out-of-scan functions. Interfaces with the operator control console and analog recorders. Provides all Logging functions and serves as the central communication device for all system components. © ID? Classicmate 11 Color Graphic Display--Displays plant process data as graphic information. two independent operator selected displays are provided. © TBM PC/xP Personal Computer--Perfores on-line calculations for unit performance. A Listing of the algorithms used in the programs by the North Omaha Unit 5 data acquisition system is included in Appendix F, Data inputs for the performance calculations are processed by the Allen-Bradley Progranmable Controller. ‘These inputs are averaged and transferred to the T8M input file every two minutes.Resting Data Reduction Because of the different approaches used to collect data for each of the three sets of unit performance tests, the data reduction for each test was completed differently also. Foster wheeler Energy Corporation Boller Tests--April 1988. ‘The primary objective of the Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation boiler tests conducted in April 1988 was to obtain information for evaluation of boiler modifications with the boiler performance data available. Heat rate was estimated using calculated net unit generation. The results of the test are summarized in Table 2 OPPD Unit Performance Tests~-August 1988. OPPD conducted unit performance tests in August 1988 to determine current unit performance at three load points. The test information is included in Appendix D. The results of the test are included in Table 2-5. OPPD Unit Performance Tests--April 1989. Because of the inconclusive results of the August 1988 tests, additional unit performance tests were conducted on April 25, 1989. ‘This test was conducted at two load points. The results of the test are Listed in Table 2-6. Test Procedures. For the August 1988 Unit Performance Test, the turbine heat rate and boiler efficiency were determined using procedures in general agreement with ASME PIC 6.1, "Interim Test Code for an Alternative Procedure for Testing Steam Turbines," and a modified form of the abbreviated heat loss method discussed in ASME PIC 4.1, "Steam Generating Units." The heat rates obtained using these procedures were com pared to results obtained using an input/output method based on fuel flow and net unit output. Cycle isolation was performed using the previously existing checklist for normal operation. 1t was believed that by not complying more closely with test code requirements and by not performing a detailed cycle isolation, unidentifiable uncertainties were being introduced. At low loads, the results from the two methods of heat rate calculation varied more than predicted by the uncertainty analysis and there was a general lack of repeatability of results between the methods and among tests. Therefore, it was decided to use a more formal test procedure during the next testing period. A formalized test procedure was developed to support the April 1989 and future heat rate testing. ‘The purpose of completing this procedure was to identify all testingTable 2-4 RESULTS OF FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY CORPORATION BOILER TEST--APRIL 1988 mest Date anes 4nryee Test Tine 10-12:00 15-17:00 Gross Generation (Mm) 106.27 148.47 coal Burn Rate (ton/h) 63.09 85.91 Coal Heating Value (Btu/1b) (HAV) 8,115 8,130 Fuel Heat Input (10° Btu/h) 1,024 1,397 Measured Auxiliary Power (Mi) 2.85 3.36 Estimated Auxiliary Power (Ma) 8.99 10.35 Gross Unit Heat Rate (GUER) (Btu/kWh) 9,640 9,400 Net Unit Heat Rate (NUHR) (Btu/kWh) 10,530 10,110 Corrected Gross Generation (Mf) 106.80 149.22 Corrected Gunn (Btu/kWh) 9,630 9,400 Corrected Net Generation (Mi) 97.81 138.87 Corrected NuHR (BEu/k¥h) 10,520 20,100 ores: 1, Based on measured auxiliary power requirements for PA, FD, and ID fans, coal mills, and estimated auxiliary power from recent operating and test data. 2. Foster Wheeler test data corrected for throttle pressure and station power only. Insufficient data were available to rake corrections for circulating water temperature and air preheater extraction stean. 3, Heat rates have been rounded.Table 2-5 RESULTS OF OPPD UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST--AUGUST 1988 ‘Pest Date 8/12/88 8/12/88 ASME PEC 6.1 and 4.1 Method Corrected gross turbine heat rate (atu/ewny 7,240 7,510 Corrected gross output (MW) 76.67 118.72 Auxiliary power (MW) 9.84 na Boiler efficiency (4) 83.27 84.63 Net unit heat rate (Btu/kWh) 9,980 9,810 Fuel Input ~ Generator Output Method Coal burn rate (ton/h) 45.98 67.17 HV coal (Btu/1b) 8,436 8,436 Fuel heat input (10° Btu/n) 76 ass Net unit heat rate (Btu/kWh) 11,580 10,170 NOTE: The feedwater flow nozzle was visually inspected prior to the testing. 8/12/88 7,520 150.73 12.37 84.99 9,630 83.77 8,436 3,413 9,630Table 2-6 RESULTS OF OPPD UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST--APRIL 1989 ‘Test Date 4725/89 ASME PTC 6.1 and 4.1 Methods test 1 Test 2 Corrected gross turbine heat rate (atu/ainy 7,360 7,850 Corrected gross output (06) 103.06 136.16 Auxiliary power (MH) 9.74 121d Boiler efficiency (4) 83.03 e419 Net unit heat cate (Btv/kkh) 10,590 10,230 Fuel Input ~ Generator Output Method Coal burn rate (ton/) 62.96 80.25 HV coal (Btu/1b) 8,662 8,710 Fuel heat input (10° Beu/h) 1,093, 1,398 Net unit heat rate (Btu/kith) 11,410 12,330 Noves: 1, The flow of the feedwater flow nozele was checked indirectly prior to this 2. testing. Unit capacity was restricted during this period because of unit avail- ability concerns regarding boiler tube failures at higher loads.requirements in a single document for station personnel and testing personnel usage. This test procedure is included in Appendix G. The test procedures include a valve isolation list and are in general compliance with the appropriate ASME and ASTM test codes. A listing of the applicable test codes is included in Table 2-7. Test Reeulte Corrections To permit a proper comparison of the current unit performance with the "best~ achievable" heat rate, corrections were made to the turbine heat rate, generator output, and boiler efficiency calculations for test conditions which were uncon- trollable by the unit operators. The data were corrected to the same conditions which were used to adjust “as-built” heat rate for comparison with “as-designed” heat rate as well as for the calculation of “best-achievable” heat rate. Throttle Pressure Correction. Corrections for throttle pressure were made using data from the manufacturer thermal kit. ‘The turbine was designed to operate at a throttle pressure of 2520 psig. North Omaha Station has used this pressure for their target value. However, not all of the test data were collected at this pressure. Corrections were made to turbine performance to reflect operation at this condition. Circulating Water Temperature Corrections. Turbine performance was corrected to the “best-achievable" turbine back pressure based on a circulating water temperature of 65°F. Corrections to turbine output were made using the back pressure correction curves included in the General Electric thermal kit, This correction assumes that the condenser and associated accessories are performing as designed. Air Preheater Correction. Turbine performance was corrected for ambient air tempera: ture losses due to air preheating. Heat loss from the turbine cycle was adjusted and corrected turbine performance was calculated. A design anbient air temperature of 80°F was used as the basis for comparison. Corrections were required for test data taken when ambient temperatures were below this value. At lower temperatures, hot water is extracted from the deaerator and used as a heat source for air preheating. ‘his has a negative impact on the turbine performance but maintains the air heater at fan inlet temperature which maintains boiler efficiency. ‘The Black & Veatch TAPPS computer model of the turbine cycle was used for the air heater preheater correc- tions. si tion. Station power as indicated in the control room does not tion Power Cor! include some power used by Unit 5. The precipitator power and coal handling powerSystem or Component. Steam Generator Unit Coal Pulverizer Air Heater Simplified Procedur Tests of Steam Turbine Closed Feedvater Heaters ste Condenser Apparatus Deaerator Table 2-7 rest copes Applicable Test code ASME PTC 4.1 ASME PTC 4.2 ASME PTC 4.3 for Routine Performance ASME/ANSI PFC 65 ASME/ANSI PTC 12.1 ASME PIC 12.2 ASME /ANSI PTC 12.3 Guide for Bvaluation of Measurement of Uncertainty in Performance Tests of Steam ‘Turbines Proximate Coal Analysis Precision Repeatability Precision Reproducibility Fans ‘Temperature Measurenent Pressure Measurement ASME/ANSI PIC 6 AST D2015 ASTM 16.1.1 ASTM 16.1.2 ASME PIC 11 ASME /ANST 19.3 ASME PIC 19.2 Analyzed by Orsat or Teledyneused by Unit 5 are on a common bus shared with loads from the remaining units. ‘Therefore, these unit loads cannot be determined with total accuracy. Corrections were made to auxiliary power on the basis of estimated precipitator and coal handling system load Other Conditions. Several operating conditions were not corrected back to "best~ achievable" parameters. These included such items as main steam desuperheating spray 1 the condition flow, cold reheat flow, and cycle makeup flow. In these instanci could not be changed by operational choice or a change in ambient conditions. These items represent areas of potential improvement that are addressed in the section on Identification of Heat Rate Losses. ‘Tables 2-8 and 2-9 summarize the corrections that were made to the actual measur: unit performance levels for the August 1988 and April 1989 tests, r: pectively. Testing Uncertainty An uncertainty analysis was performed to determine the total uncertainty of the heat rate calculations and the relative influence of each instrument's inaccuracy on the total uncertainty of the calculation. The individual instrument accuracies were determined using the methods presented in ASME guidelines such as PIC 19.1 and PTC 6 and data provided by the manufacturer of the instrument. ‘The analysis was performed by changing each measured input by a small amount and calculating the resultant change in the associated output variable. the percent change in the calculated output variable divided by the percent change in the mea~ sured input yields the sensitivity coefficient for the measured input. The sensi- tivity coefficient multiplied by the input instrument's accuracy determines the effect of that instrument on the uncertainty of the calculated output variable. The square root of the sum of the squares of these effects determines the total uncer- tainty of the calculation. Not all uncertainties were analyzed. No attempt was made to determine spatial uncertainty or uncertainty due to variability with time. Therefore, this uncertainty analysis should be considered an abbreviated one. ‘The calculations for which uncertainty analyses were performed included Net Unit Heat Rate by the Input-Output method and Net Unit Heat Rate using the ASME turbine heatoct‘9er Couey ozo't ose’set a8" ou *6uy3se3 Buranp esnyexeduay querque ay; uo paseg Azessos0u you sen UoT390zz09 seyeoyerd ITY *z ocz‘or errs a etre oco'eet ovt'zt a ovtret ose'e w (oo ose'e Ca7aTaT cd 2 358E corer ovy‘sot ac ou9 suwx/nig of asezeau 03 pepunoz ueaq aney saze2 aeoH “T o6s‘or co"ee coree oze‘es. ove's one's 96/4 oor oz overs Caney en TT SELON (awx/era) 99eu yeaH arun 12H pea20z709 (a) Aouator33a t8tt0E 924293700 suoy3992709 Kousyor 33a 791TOR (8) Sousrors3a zeTroa 3885 (4) andino royezeu99 39N, (wx) ran0g uotaeas paveayasa TeI0E s (1) xen0@ uotye3g pa2a3z00un, (1) suos3202209 sana us eouewz03104 eurqany $8029 p23201709 exnqesoduay 103em 6uyIeTNOITD aanssazd 21330205, suoty9e1109 souewioz30q eouewz03184 eurqiny 85029 paasoy (6861 ‘T1¥av--Gado) JONVHYOIWEd LINN OZISAL OL SNOTIOGHIOD 6-2 oraeyrate calculation and ASME abbreviated heat loss boiler efficiency. Results of the uncertainty analysis are presented in Tables 2-10 and 2-11 for the input-output and ASME methods, respectively. ‘The estimated uncertainty of the net plant heat rate using the input-output method is £3.798 and using the heat lose method (feedwater flow nozzle) is #3.47%, ‘The instrument accuracies specified by the ASME codes are designed for performance acceptance tests of major plant eystems. Thus, their accuracies are very conserva~ tive and instrument characteristics such as calibration and inspectability weigh heavily upon the specified accuracy. Tables 2-10 and 2-11 list the instrument accuracies and the sensitivity coefficients used to determine the overall calculation uncertainty. In general, it is suggested that if any parameter‘s effect on the calculated output value is greater than 208 of the effect of the most sensitive parameter, attention should be given to its accu- racy. For example, the greatest effect on net plant heat rate is contributed by the feedwater flow measurement. Thus, any instrument whose effect is more than 208 of the effect of the feedwater flow measurement should be concentrated on to improve calculational accuracy. Using this criteria, the critical parameters for each type of calculation can be identified. Current Unit Performance As Figure 2-4 shows, the results of the performance tests vary significantly from test to test and over the load range. The information from the August 1988 tests should be representative of current unit performance. These data appear suspect, however, and are not used as a conclusive representation of performance levels. Additional testing was warranted to define the current unit performance. ‘The results of the April 1989 tests are also plotted on Figure 2-4, Heat rates for these tests were calculated using the heat loss method. Also, the results of the uncertainty analysis are shown on Figure 2-4 as uncertainty ranges associated with testing accuracy. These “uncertainty margins” are plotted due to the significant variations in testing results. If the uncertainty margins are used to compare test results, there are overlapping are te results among the tests. The April 1989 t fall within most of the testing uncertainty range associated with testing accuracy. 2-23Table 2-10 NEP PLANT HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY, INPUT-OUTPUT METHOD Sensitivity Instrument Parameter Coefficient Accurac’ Effect ¥ of mean Coal Flow 1.0000 3.0 2.9999 Gross Generator Output arenes a -1.8889 Higher Heating Value of Fuel 1.0000 1.2 1.2000 Auxiliary Power oun 5.6 0.6221 Sun of squares of instrument effects = 14.3941 Root-su! 2-24 aquare of total effects = 3.798 of most probable heat rateMable 2011 NED PLANT HEAT RATE UNCERTAINTY, ASME TURBINE AND HEAT LOSS METHOD Sensitivity Instrument Parameter Seetticient “Accuracy tect Economizer Inlet Feedvater Flow 1.0012 27 2.7032 Grots Generator Output, mL 17 -1.8889 AuriLiary Power oan 5.6 0.6221 Beonomizer Inlet Feedvater Tenperature 0.5737 0.9 0.5163, Wain Steam Temperature 0.5804 0.6 0.3483 Cold Reheat Steam Tenperature 0.3074 aa 0.3301 Hydrogen Content of Fuel 0.0578 5.7 0.3295 Hot Reheat Steam Tenperature 0.4180 0.6 0.2508 Bigher eating Value of Fuel 0.1351 12 0.2622 BP Heater 7 Inlet Peedvater Temperature 0.0819 13 0.1064 Radlation and Convection Lose 0.0022 50.0 0.1038 Carbon Content of Puel 0.0644 re 0.0901 Alr Heater Beit Gas Temperature 0.1103 0.8 0.0882 Ambient Relative Huataity 0.0166 5.0 0.0828 Air Heater Outlet Excess Oxygen 0.0236 2.0 0.0873 Sulfur Content of Fuel 0.0072 5.9 0.0426 Anbient Dry-Bulb Temperature 0.0432 0.9 0.0389 Oxygen Content of Fuel 0.0019 ret -0.0350 Air Heater Inlet Air Temperature 0.0379 0.8 0.0303, NP Heater 7 Drain Temperature 0.0084 La 0.0109 Cole Reheat Steam Pressure 0.0363 0.3 0.0109 HP Heater 7 Extraction Temperature 0.0073, 13 0.0095 Main Steam Pressure 0.0738 ona 0.0074 Barometric Pressure 0.0169 0.3 0.0051 Economizer Outlet Excess Oxygen 0.0022 2.0 0.0044 Boller Blowdown Plow 0.0011, 3.7 0.0042 Hot Reheat Steam Pressure 0.0125, 0.3 0.0038, Higher Heating Value of Refus 0.0001 20.0 0.0028 Mitrogen Content of Fuel 0.0001 15.9 0.0023 Moistuce Content of Fuel 0.0071 0.3 0.0021 Refuse Content of Fuel 0.0001 22 0.0003 MP Heater 7 Extraction Pressure -0.0008 0.3 0.0003 Drum Pressure 0.0005, 0.3 0.0001 Economizer Inlet Feedvater Pressure ~0.0002 0.3 0.0001 Economizer Outlet Carbon Monoxide 0.0000 1.0 0.0000 Sum of squares of instrument effects = 12.0151 Root-sun-square of total effects = 3.474 of most probable heat cateeouewzojz0g 37Un quer) *y-z 9mnbTE ort et oz ou ot 06 08 oo oo i. T : * 000'8 cow's z z ost 061 way ~ ss9) .9j04q 11804 © poate ovatBased on these results, and since the April 1989 data were collected using a formalized testing procedure, the April 1989 test results were used as being representative of current unit performance, IDENTIFICATION OF HEAT RATE LOSSES To establish the overall improvement that could be obtained from a heat rate improve- where the heat rate of North Omaha Unit 5 has This ment program, OPPD identified ar: deteriorated and estimated the heat rate loss associated with each ai process consisted of two basic steps: © Tailor heat rate logic trees to North Omaha Unit 5 to aid in identi- fication of sources of performance degradation. © Estimate the amount of degradation associated with each source. ‘The heat rate logic trees presented in the EPRI Report CS-4554 were modified and customized for North Omaha Unit 5. Heat rate losses were evaluated using several different methods. Various losses con- tributing to turbine cycle inefficiency were evaluated using a heat balance computer model of the cycle, tosses and inefficiencies in the boiler were evaluated using @ Predictive steam generator computer model developed by Black & Veatch. Other eval uations were performed using ASME performance test codes and the associated correc~ tions which are included as part of the test codes. Heat Rate Logic Trees The heat rate logic tree is a diagnostic tool for identifying areas in the plant cycle where heat rate degradation may be occurring. The logic tree is structured to provide a set decision process by which the cause of a problem can be determined by successively narrowing down the problem scope based on available information. The Logic tree begins with a description of the overall problem being investigated--in this case, heat rate loss. The next level identifies major areas in the plant cycle (e.g, systems) which are potential contributors to the overall problem of heat rate loss. Typical examples are boiler, turbine, cooling water system, auxiliary stean system and cycle isolation. Each successive level of the tree provides more detail ‘as to the possible source of the heat rate loss. ‘The tree continues until the root causes of the problem are identified.Associated with each potential cause or problem on the logic tree are decision cri- teria. These are a set of conditions which must be evaluated to determine if the potential cause is the actual cause of the immediate problem. In some cases, deci- sion criteria may be based on the value of a single paraneter (e.g., throttle tem perature <1000°F) or the values of multiple parameters. In other cases, the trend of one or more parameters may be an appropriate decision criteria, Sometimes more complex decision criteria are needed. These may be equations or calculations, table or graphs of parameter values versus plant conditions, checklists of the status of various equipment, or references to tests which can be used to verify postulated problem causes. EPRI Report CS-4554 provides an example of a heat rate logic tree for a generic coal~ fired generating unit. The logic tree addresses most of the major areas to evaluate for potential heat rate degradation; however, many of the decision criteria need to be specifically related to plant parameters which are normally or readily measured. Getting to the root cause level is often difficult or impractical using information or techniques normally available to the engineer or operator. In many areas, the logic tree needs to be redefined considering the data and monitoring technology available. Using the example in the EPRI report as a basis, the heat rate logic tree diagrans was modified and customized for North Omaha Unit 5. The modified logic tr are included in Appendix #. Key changes to the heat rate logic tree main (first level) diagram shown on Fig- ure 2-5, were as follow: @ The top decision criterion was specified as the actual heat rate being greater than the design heat rate, © Boiler feed pump efficiency was added to the condensate/feedwater system losses. © Turbine losses performance parameter flow factor (Ww ¥P7V ) was replaced by pressure ratio. @ Blowdown flash tank flow and soot blower Elow were added as per- formance parameters to evaluate auxiliary steam losses. © Two areas on the second level of the heat rate logic diagram were re- defined. Turbine cycle losses became condensate/feedwater systen losses. --Cooling water system losses became circulating water system losse: 2-28wes6era Uren 903%, 97601 a3¢y aor S¥D3H9 dvUL WY3LS © ‘SAA TWA. NOTLVI0ST WY 5 : = 3 NOLAW0S1 ‘38807 ONTIONYH AMY TEX AaWw TE TLXAY 31A3 103H BEUEI WSLS: WI1813373 y y Y y $38so) I31SAS USL uh WAISAS Ma $3ssor $35801 BLve LW3H 2-29Key changes which were made to the second level of the h it rate logic tree for boiler losses were a followe: Incomplete combustion and carbon losses were combined. Stack gas losses were deleted. ‘The decision criterion for incomplete combustion was specified as unburned carbon losses greater than design for load. ‘The decision criterion for moisture losses was specified as moisture losses greater than design for load. ‘The decision criterion for dry gas losses was specified as dry gas losses greater than design for load. The specified decision criteria for radiation losses are as follows. --Boiler skin temperature greater than 50°F above ambient teapera- ture. ~-Surface air velocity greater than 100 fp. Decision criteria for subsequent second and third level areas were specified with values for each parameter here possible. Key changes to the logic tree for circulating water cycle losses were as follows: The top decision criterion was redefined as the condenser back pres~ sure being greater than design at actual condensate steam loading and inlet circulating water temperature. The design value is obtained from a series of design curves for various circulating water temper: tures. ‘The second level identifies the three major areas to be investigated if condenser back pressure is greater than design. ‘Air binding of condenser tubes. Fouled condenser tubes or reduced tube surface area, ~-Low circulating water flow rate. ‘These three areas are evaluated by trending the following five per- formance paraneters. 0, concentration in the condensate. Condensate subcooling in the condenser hot well. Condenser terminal temperature difference. Circulating water pressure drop across the condenser. Circulating water temperature rise across the condenser.© Change in ambient conditions and increased heat load on the condenser were deleted from the list of areas to be investigated. Based on the use of the logic trees as well as unit performance pai jeter monitoring, computer modelling, and performance testing, several items were identified as areas where heat rate improvement is most Likely to occur. Items identified by OPPD personnel as potential heat rate improvement areas asso- ciated with boiler losses include the following: © Unbatanced fuel/air mixture in burner registers (optimize burner and register settings while firing coal or gas). © Excessive air h er leakage (replace seals). © Change in coal quality (test burn dried AMAX coal). © Poor boiler steam/water circulation (perform Foster Wheeler boiler modifications). © Boller radiation losses due to defects in boiler insulation (replace/aéé insulation based on IR scan test). © Changes in mill fineness (conduct periodic testing). © No soot blowing optimization (install soot blowing optimization as part of performance monitoring systen). The majority of the performance limitations associated with North Onaha Unit 5 are related to the boiler. The two areas where improvements in boiler efficiency could be made are moisture losses and ary gas losses. Moisture losses are those losses associated with sensible and latent heat of the moisture present in the fuel and the combustion air. Poor coal quality has resulted in derating of the unit capacity and contributed to frequent outages caused by num- erous tube leaks. The AMAX coal company has proposed burning a “dried western coal with a lower moisture content than the Ravhide coal that is currently being burned. The effect of burning a drier coal on boiler efficiency was estinated using a con puter model of the Unit 5 steam generator. The results from the computer model are shown in Table 2-12, ‘The computer model as based on unit operating conditions identical to those in the unit performance test on April 25, 1969, the results inTable 2-12 BOILER HEAT LOSSES DUE 70 MOISTURE AND DRY GAS April 1989 Dried Bele oe air Test Results! ‘Aye Coal’ Heater Leakage Description «s) a) cs) Heat Loss Due to Moisture 7.84 5.06 7.81 Heat Loss Due to Dry Gas 4.90 4.57 4.46: 1.50 1.50 2.50 Boiler Efficiency 85.769 88.97 86.23 Differential Base 31 0.47 Unit Heat Rate (Btu/kWh) 10,100 9,750 10,050 Potential Unit Heat Rate Improvement (Btu/kWh) Base (350) (50) Potential Unit Output Improvement (kW) Ba ° a7 *poiler efficiency calculations are based on unit performance data from performance test on April 25, 1989, Pettect of moisture in fuel based on coal analysis of Dried Belle Ayr coal (108 moisture) supplied by AMAX coal company. “pttect of air heater leakage based on April 25, 1969, performance test with 208 air heater leakage. me absolute boiler efficiency shown for the April 1989 test does not correspond exactly with the value calculated in Section 2.2 (85.768 as compared with 84.198). The difference occurs because of the different methods used. The computer model was not calibrated to obtain the identical results since the absolute value of boiler efficiency was not required for this moisture and dry gas losses analysis. The con- parative (differential) numbers shown in this table are representative of the changes that could be expected if dried coal or reduced air heater leakage were implemented. 2-32ein boiler ‘Table 2-12 show that burning the @ried coal would result in an iner: efficiency of approximately 3% compared to the current Rawhide coal. The majority of the improvement in boiler efficiency results from reducing the amount of heat losses due to moisture in the fuel. In addition, optimization of the boiler soot blowers would also help reduce moisture losses. Dry gas losses are those losses resulting from the heating of combustion air from ambient conditions to the flue gas conditions leaving the unit. ‘The energy required to heat the air cannot be recovered. The magnitude of dry gas losses is directly proportional to the excess airflow and to the difference between the inlet air temperature and the flue gas outlet temperature. Dry gas losses could be reduced by adjusting the burners and registers to optimize boiler efficiency when firing gas or losses would be to reduce the air coal. Another possible method to reduce dry 9} heater leakage. Currently, the air heater leakage is about 20%, Air heater leakage also increases the unit heat rate by increasing the auxiliary power requirements for the forced draft and induced draft fans. Replacing the seals on the air heater would reduce leakage and dry gas losses. ‘The effect of reducing the air heater leakage to 10% is shown in Table 2-12. As shown in Table 2-12, boiler efficiency increases by about 0.5%. In addition, the auxiliary power requirenents for the FD and ID fans would decrease by about 17 kW. Unburned combustibles do not appear to be a major source of boiler heat loss. Periodic sieve testing of mill fineness would help to keep the unburned combust ibles to a minimum, Better control of both éry gas losses and unburned combustibles would be possible by monitoring CO and 0, levels and optimizing the combustion process by adjusting the amount of excess air. Boiler radiation losses are difficult to measure as part of a performance test; how- ever, it is believed that they are also a major contributor to boiler heat losses. Additional infrared scan testing would help to identify severe radiation losses and aid in the replacement of the boiler insulation and lagging required to reduce these losses. Poor boiler steam/vater circulation does not have as great an impact on boiler effi- ciency as it does on unit availability. Poor circulation leads to hot spots which contribute to the unusually high number of tube leaks. the boiler manufacturer, Foster Wheeler Corporation, has proposed modifications to improve the distribution ofSteam/vater flow through the boiler. These modifications could increase boiler efficiency, but would be expected to significantly improve the unit availability. Condens 2/Peeds ler System Losse: Improved feedwater heater performance, by adjusting feedvater heater level con- trollers, was identified by OPPD personnel as a potential heat rate improvement area associated with turbine cycle losses. This area was verified by unit testing as the most significant turbine cycle loss. Table 2-13 shows the performance of the feed- water heaters as recorded during the performance test conducted on April 25, 1989. ‘As shown in Table 2-13, the drain cooler approach and terminal temperature ditfer~ ences are different than the design values. ‘The resulting impact on the turbine heat rate is also shown in Table 2-13. Feedwater heater performance could be improved by optimizing the heater shell liquid level. This involves varying the liquid level in the heater while recording the drain cooler outlet pressure, drain cooler approach temperature, and the terminal temperature difference. By plotting these three param eters versus the heater liquid level, the optimum level can be determined. This optimum level occurs when an increase in the liguid level results in a minimal Gecrease in the drain cooler approach tenperature. The feedwater heater testing pro- gran for North Omaha Station is discussed in Appendix I. Circulating Water Cycle Losse: Improved condenser performance by reducing air inleakage and improving tube clean— Liness was identified by OPPD pergonnel as a potential heat rate improvement area associated with circulating water system losses. Condenser performance has a nliness are dramatic effect on unit rate. As a result, air inleakage and tube cli important parameters which should be monitored closely. Table 2-14 shows the con~ denser performance during the performance test conducted on April 25, 1989. The turbine heat rate and output deviations from the expected design condenser per- formance are about 50°Btu/kWh and 80 kW, respectively. Periodic condenser clean- Lines tests would be helpful in determining the optimum time to perform condenser cleaning. Air inleakage levele can be determined by measuring the vacuum pump exhaust flow rate or by measuring the temperature difference between the exhaust saturation temperature and the condensate temperature at the inlet to the first low-pressure heater. Turbine Losses Items identified by OPPD personnel as potential heat rate improvenent a ciated with turbine losses include the followin:Table 2-13 CONDENSATE/FEEDWATER SYSTEM LOSSES--FEEDWATER HEATER PERFORMANCE®/® ‘Terminal Temperature Drain Cooler Difference (°F) Approach (°F] Feedvater Heater etual Design ietual Design Drain Cooler - 5.3 5.0 Heater 1 1.0 5.0 _ - Heater 2 25.7° 5.0 10.4 20.0 Heater 3 6.7 5.0 16.8 10-0 Deaerator 4 - - - Heater 5 2.2 0.0 8.3 10.0 Heater 6 5.4 -5.0 31.0% 10.0 Heater 7 2.6 -3.0 0.3 10.0 Turbine Heat Rate Deviation (Btu/kwh) 6.0 Output Deviation (kW) (44.0) “pased on performance testing conducted on April 25, 1989. Pueat rate and output deviation estimated using PEPSE computer model with actual feedwater heater performance data from April 25, 1989, performance test. “Instrument accuracy vas suspect on Heater 2 extraction pressure and Heater 6 drain temperature.Table 2-14 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM LOSSES--CONDENSER PERFORMANCE Condenser Back Pressure (in. HgA) 13 Condenser Saturation Temperature (°F) 87 Circulating Water Inlet Temperature (°F) 66 Circulating Water Outlet Temperature (°F) n Log Mean Temperature Difference (°F) 15.4 Estimated Circulating Water Flow Rate (gpm) 320,000 Estimated Condenser Heat Load (10° Btu/h) 658.8 Expected Design Condenser Back Pressure, for Circulating Water Inlet Temperature and Heat Load (in. HgA) a Turbine Heat Rate Deviation (Btu/kWwh) so Output Deviation (KW) (80) NorEs: 1. Condenser performance based on April 25, 1989, performance test (Test 2 data). 2, Design condenser performance based on original condenser design data sheet and HEI, "Standards for Steam Surface Condensers" performance calculations. 3. Heat rate and output deviation based on General Electric back pressure correction curve, 334 HB 552, from North Onaha Unit 5 thermal kit.© High-pressure turbine section efficiency (reduce seal 1 cage). © Excessive desuperheating spray flows (adjust gas bypass dampers). ‘The turbine efficiency for the high-pressure section is given in Table 2-15. As shown in Table 2-15, the high-pressure turbine section efficiency is approximately 738. The “best-achievable" high-pressure section efficiency was about 838 for the same high-pressure section pressure ratio. The loss in high-pressure section effi ciency is caused by excessive seal cl ances and deposits. Installing new turbine seals would improve the high-pressure turbine efficiency. ‘The turbine losses associated with main steam and reheat steam desuperheating spray flows are shown in Table 2-16. The heat rate degradation is based on ASME PTC 6.1 correction for desuperheating spray flow. ‘The turbine heat rate degradation due to Gesuperheating spray flow is approximately 60 Btu/kwh. The total output adjustment (actual Lo in generating capacity) caused by desuperheating spray flow is approxi- mately 5210 kW. This is based on correcting the test data to zero desuperheating spray flow. Electrical Auxiliary Losses Tkens identified by OPPD personnel as potential heat rate improvement areas include the followin ciated with electrical auxiliary los © Vibration monitoring for rubs (continue program that is cur- rently in place). © Switch unit lighting from incandescent to more efficient high Pressure sodium (HPS) lighting. A vibration monitoring program is currently in place at North Omaha Unit $. this activity is targeted toward identifying equipment rubs and is used to aid in main- tenance planning. Additional auxiliary power saving could be realized by replacing the existing incan- descent lighting with HPS lighting. The electrical auxiliary savings due to the more efficient HPS Lighting was estimated to be approximately 92 kW. EVALUATION OF HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT ‘The method used to evaluate heat rate improvement activities consisted of four steps. First, each heat rate loss source identified was considered. For each of these heat 2-37table 2-15 ‘TURBINE LOSSES--HIGH-PRESSURE SECTION EFFICIENCY Measured Dat. Load (Gross), (MK) 223.8 Main Steam Flow (1b/h) 1,400,000 Main Steam Temperature (°F) 970 Main Stean Pressure (psia) 2,580 Cola Reheat Temperature (°F) oa Cold Reheat Pressure (psia) 559 Calculated Main Steam Enthalpy (Btu/1b) 1433.7 cold Reheat Enthalpy (Btu/1b) 1303.8 Ideal Cold Reheat Enthalpy (Btu/1b) 1256.4 High-Pressure Section Efficiency (4) High-Pressure Section Pressure Ratio 0.216 "Best-Achievable" High-Pressure Section Efficiency (¥) 82.9 High-Pressure Section Efficiency Degradation (%) 20.2 Turbine Heat Rate Degradation (Btu/kwh)® 40 Output Degradation (KH)° 6710 ‘Measured data obtained from Unit 5 URGE (uniform rating of gen— erating equipment) test conducted on August 16, 1989. Pupest-Achievable" high-pressure section efficiency was estimated using Black & Veatch computer mode) of Unit § steam turbine. Creat rate and output degradation were estimated using Black & Veatch computer model of Unit 5 steam turbine and data from URGE test. 2-38Table 2-16 TURBINE LOSSES--MAIN STEAM AND REHEAT STEAM DESUPERHEATING SPRAY Measured Data” Main Steam Flow (1b/n) Main Steam Desuperheating Flow (1b/h) Reheat Steam Desuperheating Flow (1b/h) Main Steam Flow/VWO Throttle Flow (4) Main Steam Desuperheating Flow/Main Steam Flow (4) Reheat Steam Desuperheating Flow/Main Steam Flow (8) Heat Rate and Output Degradation” Main Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (Btu/kWwh) Main Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (kW) Reheat Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (Btu/kWwh) Reheat Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (k#) Turbine Heat Rate Degradation Due to Main and Reheat Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (Btu/kWh) ‘Total Output Degradation Due to Main,and Reheat Steam Desuperheating Spray Flow (kW) 817, 450 64,670 41,200 a2. 250 51.0 4,390 60 (5,210) phased on Unit 5 performance test (Test 3 data) conducted on April 25, 1989. *caiculated from ASME PIC 6.1, "Interim Test Code for an Alterna- tive Procedure for Testing Steam Turbines." “correcting to zero spray flow results in a loss of generating capacity. 2-39rate loss sources, potential improvenent activities were developed. Next, the cost of implementing each of these potential improvenent activities vas determined based on existing in-house information and quotes from equipment manufacturers. Then, the capital recovery period method along with economic parameters provided in the EPRI Technical Assessment Guide, Report P-4163-SR, was used to compare the implementation cost for each improvement to the potential fuel cost, demand charge, and replacement energy cost savings to determine its cost effectiveness, ‘The economic parameters used in the evaluation are listed in Table 2-17. Finally, the potential improvement activities for each of the heat rate losses were ranked based on their cost effec~ tiveness. Potential Heat Rate Improvements Table 2-18 lists each of the significant heat rate losses identified with the corre: sponding potential heat rate improvement activity which could restore part or all of the performance loss. The unit performance improvement (heat rate and output) and estimated installed capital costs (1990 $) are also presented. ach heat rate improvement activity was evaluated against the "status quo" option using the capital recovery period method. ‘The economic parameters used for the evaluation were found in the EPRI Technical Assessment Guide, Report P-4463-SR, or provided by OPPD. In the capital recovery period method, the total fixed charges for each plan are charged to that plan at the beginning of the evaluation period. The cumulative annual present worth costs of operation are then added to the fixed charges on a year-by-year basis. The results of each heat rate improverent activity evaluation are shown graphically with the intersection of the curves representing the year which the present worth of savings in annual operating costs of the heat rate improvement activity equals the lifetime present worth sum of the fixed charges on the difter- ential capital investment. this is defined as the capital recovery year. In other words, the capital recovery year is that year in which the cumilative savings in operating costs for the heat rate improvement activity completely offsets the dif- ferential capital investment conmitted to the heat rate improvement activity over the Life of the improvenent. Moisture Losses (Coal Quality--Svitch to Dried Western Coal). Boiler moisture losses were identified as a significant heat rate loss. The coal quality associated with the Rawhide coal currently being burned at North Omaha is a contributing factor to this heat rate loss. Improving the coal quality by burning a dried western coal was evaluated as a potential heat rate improvement activity. Currently, OPPD‘s fuel cost‘able 2-17 ECONOMIC PARAMETERS Present Worth Discount Rate (1) Fixed Charge Rate (4) Indirect Costs (8) Demand Charge ($/kW) Fuel Cost Rawhide Coal ($/10° Btuy Fuel Cost Belle Ayr Coal (5/10° atu) Replacement Energy Cost (mills/kwh) Escalation (4) Annual Operating Hours (hours) Average Load (kW) Study Period (years) 12.5 12.0 15.0 24.0 0.65, 4,380 135, 470 20‘s1vek 02 30 porzed Apnas & uo pastaes “Sa¥TTOP 066T UT 53509 JoezypUT PUR UOTIETTEISUy SepNToUry soxnaxya unypos oznsseza-yStH se8so1 6 ue z6 L uaa s3u871 qe2sapueour sowtdey = AxeyTyxny TeO}3309TE SToAoT unuqUTH OF = ° (ores) ov snota Ke2dg butaveqzednsed 103300) eurqang, s oset ows zor aanssazg-ubqu uo steas soetdou sossor ourqins surueat9 sessor waasis - o oe 09 esuapuog Jo Kousnberg aseoz0uT yeqem 6uyyeTnoz19 sessor worsis t € w or Steser zeqeeH soyenpeed ezruy3do To} enpaag/azesuapOD € 09 un os 10g zeqvon a1y eovtdey —sesso1 sv Aq I0TTOR - ° ° ose Teop wx9380q poTIa 07 YOITAS «SSO ozNISTON IOTIOR Tsaesxy | “(G00 TST THT TaR7ATaY AqTATION WwoUBAOTTAT SIeE TOT S07 Saee Won POrIed «=e 43809 autonordur —-quouenordur Bxanc00% Tetde andang eqey 7H, Teaydeo, area SAIGIAMIOW INGWEAOWANI GIVE LVGH IVIGNGUOA JO RUWWINS ate eraen 242for the Rawhide coal is approximately $0.65 per million Btu (10° Btu). ‘The dried western coal from AMA's Belle Ayr Mine costs approximately $0.93/10° Btu. It was assumed that switching to the Belle Ayr coal would not require any capital improve ments. ‘The unit heat rate improvement associated with burning the Belle Ayr coal is about 350 Btu/kWh. The results of the economic evaluation of switching to the Belle Ayr coal are shown in Table 2-19, It is evident from Table 2-19 that the higher unit fuel cost of $0.93/10° Btu for the Belle Ayr coal more than offsets any perceived wings due to improved unit heat rate. Dry Gas Losses (Replace the Air Heater Seals). Boiler dry gas losses were identified as significant heat rate losses. Air heater leakage at North Omaha is currently about 208. Replacing the air heater seals would reduce the air heater leakage to 108 and would result in lower dry gas losses. The estimated installed capital cost to replace the air heater seals is $60,000. The expected service life of this heat rate improvement activity was estimated to be 20 years. the results of the economic eval- vation of replacing the air heater seals are shown in Table 2-20, which lists the cumulative present worth of the annual costs associated with each plan. ‘The differ~ ential savings between the cumulative present worth of total costs for new air heater seals and the “status quo" option show that the initial capital investment to replace the air heater seals is recovered by the third year of operation. Condensate and Peedvater System Losses. Feedvater heater performance was identified as a heat rate loss. Optimizing the feedwater heaters’ liquid levels was identified as a potential heat rate improvement activity. OPPD has developed a feedwater heater performance test program as part of thelr overall heat rate improvement program. The estimated unit heat rate improvenent associated with optimizing the feedwater heaters’ liquid levels is about 10 Btu/kWh and the increased unit output is approxi- mately 44 kW. ‘The results of the capital recovery period evaluation are shown in Ta: ble 2-21. the cost to optimize the feedvater heaters’ levels was estimated to be $2760. As shown in Table 2-21, the operating cost savings associated with optimizing the feedwater heaters’ levels offsets the initial cost during the first year of operation. Circulating Water System Losses. High turbine back pressure caused by condenser tube fouling was identified as a source of heat rate loss. Regular tube cleaning vas identified as a potential heat rate improvenent activity. Currently, OPPD performs mechanical cleaning of the condenser tubes annually. It was hypothesized that byox sov'eeo't oz ° oe on sporeze't st ° st ox Bt ° at oe a ° a oe a ° x oe st ° Aa on ° et ou et ° ft on tee t on or ° ot on : 3 5 on ‘ ° t on 5 ° 5 ox 3 o : on + 3 * = e roc" E oe : cane" t rreey | ASTI ar ready Saren —Wayom auesezg Buy 0 = er0E sabre pants ua204 sueserE sa top ay sttog-ssssor ormastox ose, ° ° ° uses eso oet6 Soot Baer Sensser tse 0 ooo ooortt O36" beeser Ey, TEE core ar cra or 3809 6uy ssa (ony aT1g) 109 seetusan cara of tang SMTHOIIHS 20 SISK oTHoNOOE 244vseovat aT vod eras umzOYTaRE 20 OTAYINAR OTNONOORi gHERRORRSRERRERRBRERE enpeeg peztur3éo 2-46increasing the frequency of condenser tube cleaning to twice a year, the condenser Performance could be improved to nearly its original design performance. The poten tial net plant heat rate improvement was estimated to be 60 Btu/kWh; the increase in unit output was estimated to be approximately 80 kW. The additional annual mainte ance cost was estimated to be $10,000. The results of the economic analysis, shown in Table 2-22, indicate that the savings in fuel costs, demand charges, and re~ Placement energy costs do not offset the added maintenance expense associated with cleaning the condenser twice a year. High-Pressure Section Efficiency. High-pressure turbine section efficiency degrada- tion due to seal leakage was identified as a significant source of heat rate loss. Replacing the high-pressure section packing seals was identified as a potential heat rate improvenent activity. Replacing the turbine seals with Brandon packing rings results in an increase in the high-pressure turbine efficiency from about 73% to 83 ‘The estimated heat rate improvement associated with replacing the seals is approxi~ mately 190 Btu/kih and the estimated increase in output is about 6710 kW. The in ure turbine seals was stalled cost to replace the high-, intermediate-, and lowprei estimated to be approximately $1,350,000. The results of the capital recovery period analysis are shown in Table 2-23. The capital cost associated with the replacement of the turbine seals is recovered by the fifth year of operation as indicated by the intersection of the curves in Table 2-23. Main Steam and Reheat Steam Desuperheating Sprays. The manually controlled spray flows for main steam and reheat steam desuperheat ing are sources of heat rate los In the Identification of Heat Rate Losses discussion, it appeared that the high levels of desuperheating spray flows are caused by the poor stean/water circulation through the boiler backpass circuits. Improvement of the boiler circulation would require significant modifications. Controlling the desuperheating spray flows to reasonable values was identified as a potential heat rate improvement activity. For purposes of comparison, an arbitrary value of zero was selected as the base con- trolled desuperheating spray flow. Because controlling the desuperheat ing spray flow to zero is impractical, it was logical to assume that if a zero desuperheat ing flow cannot be economically justified, then some nominal level of desuperheating greater than zero would not be justified either. Therefore, the economic analysis of con- trolled desuperneating spray flows was based on zero spray £low.i Seggeaeeeeeeeecegeasesysop Suyzezedo yenmuy rersuezeszta “¥ STVaS sNIEunE TunsSHNs-ROTH 40 UKEDVIEM 40 NotayNAR 2THOKOOEThe unit heat rate improvement associated with zero main steam and reheat steam Sesuperheat ing spray flow was estimated to be approximately 46 Btu/kWh (the turbine heat rate improvenent is 60 Btu/kWh). Reducing the desuperheating spray flow from 8 the turbine extraction flows to the the boiler feed pump discharge to zero increa: high-pressure feedvater heaters due to increased feedwater flow. This results in decreased turbine-generator output. The decrease in unit output associated with zero desuperheat ing spray flow was estimated to be 5210 kW. Controlling the desuperheat— ing spray flows decreases unit output and results in demand charges and replacement energy costs being applied to the heat rate improvenent activity. The results of the ‘economic analysis of controlling the desuperheating spray flows are shown graphically in Table 2-24. The cumulative present worth of total costs for controlling the Gesuperheat ing spray flows to zero never becones less than the costs associated with uncontrolled desuperheating spray flows. The additional demand charges and replace- ment energy costs more than offset the fuel savings associated with controlling the Gesuperheat ing spray flows to zero. Auxiliary Electrical Losses. Decreasing the unit's auxiliary power requirement by replacing the existing incandescent lights with high-pressure sodium (HPS) Lights was identified as a potential heat rate improvement activity. Based on equivalent light output, one 95 W HPS fixture will replace tyo 150 W incandescent fixtures. There are approximately 900 existing incandescent light fixtures at North Omaha Unit 5. The installed capital cost associated with replacing the existing 900 incandescent light fixtures with 450 new HPS Light fixtures was estimated to be $210,640. The auxiliary ings associated with the new HPS lights were determined to be about 92 kW. power The economic analysis also takes into account differential annual maintenance costs associated with replacing light bulbs between the incandescent lights which have an estimated 1ife of approximately 750 hours versus the HPS lights which have an esti- mated life of 24,000+ hours. The results of the capital recovery analysis are shown in Table 2-25. The cunulative present worth of total costs for the HPS lights becomes less than the cumulative costs for the incandescent Lights during the ninth year of operation. As a result, the savings associated with reducing the auxiliary power requirenents and lower maintenance costs offsets the additional capital expen- @iture to change from the incandescent lights to HPS lights. Heat Rate Tmprovenent_£ fon Of the seven potential heat rate improvement activities evaluated, four activities resulted in adequaté savings in fuel costs, demand charges, and replacement energyco on oe on on oe oe oe oe oerable 2-25 A. bitterential Annual operating Costscosts to offset the initial capital investment within the Eirst few years of opera: tion. The following heat rate improvement activities were determined by the economic evaluation to merit further consideration for implementation as heat rate improvement activities: © Optimization of the Feedvater Heater Levels. Replacement of the Air Heater seals. © Replacement of the High-Pressure and Intecmediate-Pressure Turbine Packing Seals. © Replacement of Incandescent Lights with HPS Lights. The primary factor driving the economic evaluation of the potential heat rate improvenents is the relatively low cost of fuel at North Omaha. A fuel cost of $0.65/10° Btu makes it difficult to justify economically the heat rate inprovenents that provide only modest reductions in unit heat rate or increases in unit output. Based on the results of the economic analysis, the potential heat rate improvement activities were ranked according to their cost effectiveness, as indicated by the length of their capital recovery period. For example, the heat rate improvement activity with the shortest capital recovery period wae ranked first, the activity with the next shortest capital recovery period was ranked second, etc. ‘Those act ivi- ties which never recover the initial capital investment were ranked on the basis of the differential cost between the potential improvement and the “status quo" option. Table 2-26 lists the potential heat rate improvements in the ranked order in which they were finally evaluated. Optimization of the feedwater heater levels was ranked fas the most cost-effective heat rate improvement because its one-year capital recovery period is the shortest of all the activities evaluated. Replacement of the air heater seals ranked as the second most cost-effective heat rate improvement because of its three-year capital recovery period. Replacement of the high and intermediate-pressure turbine seals with Brandon packing rings ranked as the third most cost-effective heat rate improvement activity since its capital recovery period is five years. Finally, replacement of the units’ incandescent lights with more efficient and lover maintenance high-pressure sodium lights ranked as the fourth most cost-effective heat rate improvenent activity with a capital recovery period of nine years.raze oz Jo poysed Apnas w uo p. pepuoicsey 208 (oes‘90) 02 ° Teop uzersom faq 03 yoatas ‘ popuoumosey 308 (sare) +02 ° Aexds Suyqeoyzednseg tox3U09 9 pepusmcoay 208 (see) +02 ° Suyueet> 30 Kouanboxa s uowatéur cot 6 mz S3u6;T Saq UITM 834677 eovTdox ’ uowotdur us‘z s ose’t ‘sTe9g surging omssoxg-0ye;pouz0qUr ue emnsserg-ubrH aoetdey e quowo dur get e 09 steog soqvon ary eeTdoy z quewstéur vs t € steno] 20380 roqenpoeg szturado t WOT TEpUSTODDH TOOT TST T TOOO"TST AVIATION WWOUBAOTEMT OTEE FET sae s7¥0x oz #00 s9622u0, 3933y (83809) Azea020% pexza 30 sburaes 39M 30 ($ 0661) (s 0661) 304 quasezg eayaetnung U3I0M quaszg SUILIAIIOY GNGWGAOWANI SAVE IVEH IWEINELOd 20 ONDINE se-2 orqen 2-54None of the remaining heat rate Improvenent activities resulted in sufficient savings to recover the initial capital investment. IMPLEMENTATION OF HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES ‘The method used to implement heat rate improvenent activities consisted of the fol- lowing steps: © Utilization of the heat rate improvement evaluation results. Determination of long-term versus short-term activities, based on cost and outage scheduling. © Implementation of short-term activities. © Completion of a schedule for long-term activities. ‘The heat rate improvement activities are ranked in Table 2-26 according to compari- sons made between the implementation cost for each improvement and the potential fuel cost, demand charge, and replacement energy cost savings. The items which were iden~ tified for implementation are discussed in more detail in this section. ‘These heat rate activities are divided into short-term and long-term categories. The short-term activities include items which can be initiated early in the program and do not require a significant capital investment. Long-term heat rate improvenent activities include items which require a capital investment and, therefore, longer periods to implenent. ‘The four activities recommended for implementation are as follows: © optimize feedwater heater levels. © Replace air heater seals. © Replace #P/1P turbine seals. © Replace Lights with high-pressure sodium (HPS) fixtures. ‘The items are ranked here in order of their cost effectiveness. Optimization of the feedwater heater levels resulted in the shortest payback or recovery period of less than one year.Intenance and operations controllable Heater level optimization is considered a parameter and, therefore, a short-term activity. The latter three items are con sidered long-term activities which require a capital cost and, with the exception of a scheduled the HPS fixture: Intenance outage. In addition to implementation of heat rate activities, a heat rate preventive main~ tenance program is currently in progress, ‘he objective of this program is to main tain the unit heat rate as close to the best achievable heat rate as is practicable Areas requiring maintenance will be determined through performance monitoring and will be reported to the plant on a monthly basis. Heat Inprovenent Activities ‘The four activities that were identified for implementation were subdivided into short-term and long-term actions based upon initial cost and unit outage scheduling considerations. Short-tera activities could be implemented promptly with little or no capital expenditure. This type of action would most likely involve a change in operating practice and/or maintenance support. As shown in Table 2-26, the long-term activities require a more significant capital items must be impli expenditure and generally have a longer payback period. Th mented when the unit is off-line, such as during a major, scheduled outage. Optimize Feedvater Heater Levels (Short~Term Activity). Optimization of feedwater heater levels is the most economical heat rate activity. Heater level optimization consists of adjusting the liquid level in order to attain the most efficient operation. Three parameters are used to evaluate heater performance. They are terminal temperature difference (TTD), drain cooler approach (DCA), and the feedwater temperature rise across the heater. ach parameter is defined below: ‘MD = extraction steam saturation temperature - feedwater outlet temperature DCA = drain outlet temperature - feedwater inlet temperature FW rise = feedwater outlet temperature - feedvater inlet temperature 2-56‘The heater design specifications are used as the target parameters. ‘Typically, the DCA is specified to 10°F. If the liquid level is too high (i.e., the DCA is le: than the target value), an excessive number of tubes may be submerged which will result in decreased heat transfer from the steam to the feedvater. If the level is maintained too low (i.e., the DCA is greater than the target value), the fluid will not be subcooled adequately. This may result in flashing which can damage the heater @rain cooler and/or downstream piping. A low level may also allow steam to pacs through to the drain cooler zone. This would er te high velocities which would result in mechanical damage and decreased performance. To implement the heater level optimization, a test program was developed (Appendix I). Actual testing of the heaters requires coordination between the test group, operations, and maintenance. Data are recorded prior to the test, then at various intervals between level adjust ments. A final reading is taken at the end of the testing. ‘The predicted heat rate improvement associated with optimizing the heater levels is approximately 10 Btu/kWh and the unit output is expected to increase about 44 kW. Replacement of Air tleater Seals (Long-Term Activity). Air heater seal leakage ha been identified as a significant heat rate loss. The current air heater leakage is approximately 20%. The cost to implement this improvenent is estimated at $60,000. 1d by corrosion. A reconmendation has been made to replace the baskets, in addition to the Periodic inspections of the air heater baskets have revealed degradation cau: seals. Because of the magnitude of cost and time required to install the air heater seals and baskets, this activity has been scheduled for the next major outage which will occur in the spring of 1991. Replacement of High-Pressure Turbine Seals (Long-Term Activity), High-pressure tur- bine efficiency is presently about 10% below the target value. This efficiency loss, as with the heater seals, was revealed through current unit performance tests. Seal replacement may improve unit heat rate by approximately 190 Btu/kWh and increase out put by about 6710 kW. Implementation of this activity requires a major turbine overhaul. The overhaul is currently scheduled for the spring of 1991. Follow-up tests will be conducted to determine the actual effect of the newly installed seals.Replacement of Incandescent Lights with High-Pressure Sodium Fixtures (Long-Term Activity), Implementation of thie activity would lower the amount of auxiliary power consumed by Unit 5 by approximately 92 kW while the net unit heat rate would decrease by about 0.7 Btu/kWh. ‘The payback period for the new lighting system would be about nine years. At present, this activity remains under consideration by the Heat Rate Improvement Group. The feasibility of this project remains under study for two reasons. First, Unit 5 shares a common location with four additional units. If the fixtures are installed on Unit 5, the retrofit should be applied to the other four units as well, in order to achieve consistency. It is not known if modifying the entice station lighting system would be cost-effective. Second, the age of the units at the station varies from 35 years (Unit 1) to 21 years (Unit 5), Since the payback period ie approximately nine years, it may not be beneficial to install the fixtures in the older units. Preventive Maintenance Program currently, the Preventive Maintenance Program is incorporated into the Heat Rate Improvement Program through the Station Heat Rate Improvement meetings. The meet ings provide a forum in which performance degradation, with respect to certain components, ay be discussed. Areas of performance degradation may be determined through the monthly reporting system or while conduct ing various performance procedures/test. ‘Components which require maintenance may either be reported during the heat rate meeting (included in the meetings are three supervisors from the maintenance depart— ment} or documented through a work order. In addition to the monthly report, the Performance Group has several methods for identifying areas of deteriorating unit performance. Listed below are various proce- dures used by the Performance Group along with the affected areas or components: © Periodic unit performance tests. ~-furbine efficiencies may be measured by conducting enthalpy drop tests on the HP/IP turbines. “-Air heater tests determine leakage rates and component efficien~ --Mills are checked for coal fineness periodically. Unburned carbon found in the ash may also reveal a problem with mill fineness. Boiler efficiency is usually determined during a total unit per- formance test, utilizing the heat loss method.© Valve management program. “-Cycle isolation is accomplished by monitoring drain and vent lines for proper valve line-up and steam trap operation. © Condenser performance procedure. =-Condenser performance paraneters are monitored periodically for evidence of tube fouling or other areas of performance degradation. “-Air inleakage Is monitored regularly. Helium testing is employed to locate leaks if the air inleakage becones excessive. @ — Feedwater heater test procedure. “-Heater levels and vents are checked for proper set points to maxi- mize thermal perforaance. © Vibration monitoring program. “-Pumps, fans, and motors are monitored periodically for high vibr tion. High levels of vibration can result in an inefficient use of auxiliary power and, if allowed to continue, a decrease in unit reliability. Summary of Implementation activities The feedwater heater level optimization program has been implemented. Testing is conducted on a biannual or as-needed basis. The air heater seals and turbine seals are scheduled for replacement during the next major outage, which will occur in 1991. ‘The Light fixture replacement remains under consideration at present. Tt is unknown if this modification would be feasible for one unit versus the entire five unit station.Section 3 HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT As part of their heat rate improvement program, OPPD is monitoring the results of those improvement activities which are being implemented. This section describes the approach which OPPD is using to monitor heat rate improvement. It also describes two reports which are being used to communicate unit heat rate within the OPPD organiza~ tion. MONITORING OF HEAT RATE IMPROVEMEND Unit 5 had a computer based data acquisition system installed during its original construction in 1968. The original system had data conversion functions, drove trend recorders with operator selected data points, and provided alarm and logging func~ tions. No capability existed for long-term storage or trending of data. Operator interface was through a series of thumb wheels and push buttons for input and, with the exception of the trend recorders, strictly printer output. Over the years, the availability of parts and the limitations of the 1960s vintage system led to the @ecision to replace the original system. ‘The on-Line performance monitoring system was incorporated into the unit data acqui- sition system at the time of its installation in 1985. The unit data acquisition system is described in Section 2 of this report. ‘The system has the capability of Storing long-term trends of selected variables. An upgrade to the on-line perform ance monitoring system is planned which will allow the long-term storage of all data points monitored. In addition, the boiler controls were upgraded in 1986 to a Bailey Net 90 system which also has independent capability of long-term storage and recall of selected boiler related data points. ‘The new data acquisition system was originally programmed with the algorithms carried over from the old computer system. These were generally in accordance with ASME and ASTM calculation methods. During this project, the algorithms were updated to con- form with the calculations in the test procedure included in Appendix &. All pro- gramming was performed by OPPD personnel.The new system allowed the programming of displays of data points and calculated values on two graphics terminals installed in the control room. Numerous displays were developed by OPPD personnel for the operators to monitor the operation of the unit, the operators have the capability to compare the actual operating conditions with programmed target values which take into account the operating conditions of the unit at that time. ‘wo displays were developed by OPPD personnel strictly for moni- toring or optimizing the heat rate of the unit. Operator Controllable Parameters ‘The first display generated was an operator controllable parameters screen. ‘the Primary purpose of the heat rate controllable parameter calculation is to provide the operators with a display of information relating to unit performance and effi- ciency. ‘The parameters selected for the display have a significant impact on heat rate and are those over which the operators have significant control. The actual value for each parameter is compared to the reference value. ‘he reference values are calculated taking into account the loading of the unit and ambient condi- tions. For example, the reference value for condenser back preseure is based on river water inlet temperature and the heat load entering the condenser. A percentage change in heat rate is then’ calculated based upon the deviation from the reference value using manufacturer supplied curves or curves developed by OPPD in accordance with ASME and ASTM calculation methods. ‘The cost or savings of the deviation is calculated for the percentage change in heat rate for each parameter using the Predicted unit gross heat rate, gross generation, and fuel cost. The total cost or javings for all parameters is also displayed. The actual values of the parameters are updated every 10 seconds. To smooth out the effects of minor transients, a 10-minute rolling average is used for the reference values and the costs or savings Eight parameters are displayed: ¢ Main Steam Temperature. © Main Steam Pressure. © Hot Reheat Temperature. © Exit Gas Temperature. © Excess air. © Superheat spray.© Reheat spray. © Condenser Absolute Pressure. ‘The display takes the form of a multiple bar chart with a bar for each parameter, as well as one for the total, indicating the cost or savings in dollars per hour. A representation of the display is shown on Figure 3-1, The display available to the operator at any time is in color with different colors used for costs or savings. By observing this display, the operator is able to see the effects of changes in any of these parameters on the heat rate and in dollars per hour. Soot Blower optimization The other display developed for improving unit performance was the soot blover optimization screen. The primary purpose of the calculations and display is to Provide the operators with a diagnostic tool to aid in determining when and where to blow soot in the boiler, Insufficient soot blowing leads to reduced boiler effi- ciency caused by fouled or plugged gas passages. Too much soot blowing reduces efficiency by the loss of the additional steam and may cause excessive spray flows. The first step in developing these calculations was to develop baseline curves of various temperatures and pressures at several different load set points with the boiler in an operationally clean condition. Additional temperature and pressure instrumentation was installed in the boiler's gas and steam passes for this purpose. ‘The boiler was washed with high-pressure water to achieve a clean condition and cleanliness was maintained by burning natural gas during the development of the curves. From these curves, the baseline cleanliness factors and pressure drops for each section of the boiler were established. The boiler was split into six major areas for these calculations: © Furnace © Pendant Superheater © Convection superheater © Reneater © Front Economizer © Rear EconomizerHAIN | MATH REHEAT /EXIT EXCESS |SHTR (RKTR |COND. | TOTAL, reas |oreaw (areas" (Gast ("ase [Seen [Senay [once ene’ [ouess. [rext™ [reee. Paces. pes,’ este foes.’ foese'® | x |roovae [nuova |onuon rerenence [i000 " {2400 [000 * [ass " fasto {#0 (M8 [7880 sow, fso0s fogs oor [262 fio.0 aaa | 20.6 [2.26 cesses] 0 fo fo fir fa | 2 fa fas |e = « wo Ps 10 int Q — i} COST TH DOLLARS PER HOUR SAVINGS IN DOLLARS PER HOUR (tt ACTUAL [GROSS HEAT RATES | LOAD 123.2 HW fprepicteo 943 | DATE 09/30/89 gese [Time a1: 200 Figure 3-1. North Omaha Unit 5 Heat RateThe display screen was developed with the input of unit operators. The operators are accustomed to monitoring the pressure drop across sections as an aid in determining when to blow soot. The screen displays the actual pressure drop across each sect ion and the system compares it to a predicted pressure drop. A representation of the Gisplay is shown on Figure 3-2. ‘The predicted pressure drop shown on the display is 4 Eunction of both the baseline predicted pressure drop and a comparison of the actual to the baseline predicted cleanliness factor. the actual cleanliness factor is calculated using the data from the temperature and pressure instrumentation in stalled in the gas and steam passes, It has been found that the pressure drop across @ section does not vary significantly from the baseline data at a given load until the passage is nearly plugged. therefore, the predicted pressure drop shown on the display is mainly driven by the calculated cleanliness factor. As the pass becomes fouled in operation, the predicted pressure drop will be driven lover by the lowered cleanliness factor while the actual pressure drop cemains con~ stant or increases only slightly. When the difference between the actual and pre~ dicted pressure drop exceeds a predetermined Limit, an alarm is logged and the bar representing the actual pressure drop changes color on the display. Engineering/Maintenance Paraneters ‘The on-Line performance monitoring system tracks many parameters which affect heat rate, but are not under the direct control of the operators. These include feedwater heater performance, the enthalpy drop efficiency of the high-pressure and intermediate-pressure turbines, the cleanliness factor of the condenser, and the effectiveness of the air heaters. Deviations are calculated between the actual value and the predicted value of the parameter. The predicted values are determined using manufacturer supplied curves or curves developed by OPPD in accordance with ASME and ASTM calculation methods and corrected to reflect the ambient conditions and the system load. The deviations are logged and may be trended over a long term. The magnitude or trend of the deviation is used to help determine the need for, or timing of, maintenance activities. Long-Term Monitoring of Heat Rate Improvenent The impact of all Improvements made may be measured in the form of the net unit heat rate. This performance parameter is trended versus time at preset load points, thus allowing a graphical representation of relative changes in heat rate with time. This capability of the performance monitoring system has not been fully utilized to date because of high forced outage rates experienced by the unit.FINAL SUPERHEATER (P2-P1) Pi ‘on on Oa G4 OS 2 ro ite g2 ‘PRIMARY SUPERNEATER (P9-P2) lo 0.4 0.8 1.2 16 2.0 138 hg. ACTUAL PRED REHEATER (P4-P2) 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 LE 2.0 acTuAL, PRED 1.07 4 FRONT ECONOMIZER (PS- oo4 08 1.2 16 ACTUAL no. [REAR ECONOWIZER (P6 Jo 0.4 08 12 1.6 ’ 1 R p7 | [Pe ‘AIR PREMEATER SA (PBA-P7A) # Oe eerie 12 120) E a ACTUAL if 45 t E COMBUSTION ATR R ‘AIR PREHEATER SB (POB-P78) Ogee siete tzeig ez) Figure 3-2. ACTUAL 3.77 LOAD 121.9 Hy] TIME 7349346 DATE 12/20/89 North Onaha Unit 5 Soot Blowing OptimizationThe forced outage rate has steadily incr fe in the past few years from 5.08 in 1983 to 16.48 in 1989. The primary cau of forced outages on this unit is boiler leaks, mainly restricted to the backpa in the years 1985 through 1989. The unit experienced a total of 55 boiler leaks Boiler stuay ‘The boiler manufacturer conducted a study to determine the effects of the shift from the high Btu design coal to the lower Btu coal which is pri ntly being burned. The study revealed that, since startup of the unit, the low temperature superheater tubes have been overstressed due to higher-than-design steam temperatures. The primary superheater outlet temperature was not routinely monitored during the early years of operation and the boiler manufacturer had provided no limits on its temperature until the numerous failures began developing. Since the limit has been established, it has proved to be the most restrictive factor fon the loading of the unit. In early 1990, the maximum sustainable load on coal had ry to highly the need for excessive Gropped to 135 MW gross. Even when operating at this load, it is neces bias the flue gas flow to the reheater pass. This causi Gesuperheat ing sprays to control reheat temperature. When the shift to the lower Btu fuel wae made, it vas predicted that the maximum capability of the unit would be reduced to about 175 MW gross and that a lover efficiency would be obtained. Natural gas was one of the design fuels for the boiler when it was constructed. The unit we to be a igned for a gross output of 240 MW when burning gas. This output was easily obtained when the primary superheater outlet temperature was not monitored, as was the case during the early years of this unit's operation. Since the temperature Limit was established, the maximum unit output on gas has been reduced to 215 MW. ‘These lowered limits and the very poor availability of the unit have led to the Justification of design changes to correct these problens. Specifications have been prepared and given to several boiler manufacturers to redesign the unit to correct the problems and to achieve a higher output on coal and a return to the design capa- bility on natural Proposed Boiler Modif ications ‘The selected proposal generally leaves the furnace section of the boiler intact. The proposal decreases the heat entering the backpass by adding division wall steam gen- erating tubes. The proposal increases the spacing in the primary superheater andupgrades the materials in the backpass sidewalls, partition wall, and primary super~ heater. It was specified by OPPD that new coal mills be installed. ‘The selected vendor predicts a more even split of flue gas between the superheater and reheater and predicts that no excessive desuperheating sprays will be required for control of either the main or reheat steam temperatures. ‘The proposed modifications are predicted to increase the gross output to 195 MW on coal and back to 240 MW on natural gas. The boiler efficiency will improve and the turbine heat rate will decrease because of the reduced spray flows. ‘Thus, the modi— Eications to the boiler will have the potential of improving unit heat rate. OPP plans to perform the modification of the unit in an outage scheduled for the spring of 1991. During this outage, the turbine and air heater seal work identified in Section 2 will also be accomplished. ‘the major modifications to the boiler will require that the current unit performance be reneasured. The best-achievable heat rate will also have to be recalculated. tong-term trending of the heat rate will, then reconmence with a much more reliable unit. HEAT RATE REPORTING ‘The objective of the heat rate reporting system is to identity parameters or components where performance exceeds or falls short of heat rate improvement goals. ‘The information is distributed to key personnel who are involved with heat rate improvement. Communication of results with management is also important as it may foster support for the progral The District plans to issue two reports for North Omaha Unit 5. First, a monthly report is presently issued by the System Operations, or dispatch, department (Ta ble 3-1). Second, a monthly report will be produced by the Performance Group (Ta~ ble 3-2). while a degree of overlap exists between the two reports, there is independent, useful data in both. To a certain extent, the information presented in each report tends to complement the other. ‘The dispatch report contains reliability/ capacity statistics while the other report concentrates on more detailed performance information. System Operations Report ‘The @ispatch report, Table 3-1, is divided into seven categories: unit capacity, unit hourly status, electrical generation, fuel burned, heat rate, miscellaneous‘rable 9-1 Wonth and Year of Report Month 89 Competed By J. Doe nit capacity 1. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Gross Mi) (Urge) aaa 2. Maxisun Dependable Capacity (Wet Ia) 98.3 3. ate of Denonsteated Capacity Test (Uese) syajes = Design Capacity (Ma) 200 cunuiative mis Over Lite nit Hovely st font, (OF unit. 5. Gross tours in Reporting Period no 190,656 6. Hours Generator on-Line 539 129,055 7. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hove u 21,574 #8. unit Planned outage Houce 8 ai669 9. Forced Outage Hours 2 8,258 - Electcical Generation 20, Gross Blectricat Energy Generation (Wah) $1,897 495,67 17,977,442 21, met Electrical Energy Generation (6h) 45,867 440,202 16,689,026 12. coal (tons) 30,990 313,862 seus 8,221 a,2a1 13, matural Gas (HCE) 32,705 198,546 peu/icr) 967 93 14. Propane (Gal) ° ° peusican) 91,500 ° Heat Rates (stun 15. Unit Gross Heat Rate 10,405 10,728 9,323 16. unde Net tear Race 11,798 12,062 10,046 —__tiecettaneous ote (4) 17, Unit Avallability Factor 36.5 3.9 73.0 18, Unit Capacity Factor (Using Design) as a6 a8 19, Unit Capacity Factor (MOC per Urge? 22.2 23.9 ae 20, unit Forced outage Rate 5.6 10.8 oa ne eful Unit Starte 1 1 aetabie 3-2 NORTH OMAHA UNIT 5 MEAT RATE REPORT Vitel statistics Average Gross Pover Generation 95.73 Mw Average Net Power Generation 85.10 Mwe otal Gross Electrica! output 51,597 4h ‘otal Net Electrical output 45,067 Hm coal usage 30,980 ton coal a 8,221 Beu/ie as Usage 32,705 Wot Gee maw 967 atu/et otal Heat in 5.419811 atu Gross Unit Heat Rate 10,485 Beu/awn Net Unit Heat Rate 12,795 Beu/ein Target Net Heat Rate at @5.10 Hie 11,250 Btu/iein Average CH Inlet Temperature 70.67 Average Anbient Air enperature 6t.er Corrected Target Heat Rate 11450 Beu/ki Sunaaey During the past sonth the actual heat rate exceeded the corrected target heat rate by 345 Bu/kin. Controllable paraneteca accounted for 39% of the deviation. More spe: cifically, tne lov reheat steam temperatures combined with the high exit gas tempera tures accounted for the aajority of the heat rate loss. The low condenser pressure helped to offset the heat rate losses. Noncontrollable, or imposed conditions, accounted for the 56% of the deviation while 58 wae undetermined. controllable Losses Yala tase ates ‘Gam Throttle Pressure (pels) ony (2.0) Tarottle Teeperature (*F) 0.0 Reheat Tompesature (F) o7.6 Supecneat Sprays (mib/m) 13.6 Reheat Speay (Mib/m) 0.0 0.0 a0 a0 excess Ale (4) re. 18.0 16.5 10 Exit Gas Terperature (*F) 260.2 253.0 0.4 a? FW Hleater Pertornance . 8.0 os Average serge toss cont Noneontrollable Losses value value tori san nuxitiary Power (ie) 10.6 ~ 4p turbine B&tictency (4) see no 140.0 1D turbine Refseteney (4) 9.9 2.0 0.0 Air Heater Leakage ( 20.0 10.0 55.0data, and (unit) starts, ‘This data is tracked on a monthly, yearly, and cumilative basis. The report provides useful, vital statistics for the unit. The unique elements of this report, with respect to the performance report, are the statistics regarding unit availability, capacity factor, forced outage rate, and number of startups. With the recent history of Unit 5 boiler tube failures and other maintenance related occurrences, this reliability information can give added insight ‘as to the reasons for significant changes in heat rate. For example, during a cer~ tain month the unit may incur a high heat rate; however, review of the performance parameters reveals no significant deviations from the target values. Further study Of the dispatch report may disclos that the unit had required several startups dur- ing that particular month, resulting in a higher heat rate. Performance Group Report ‘The performance report, Table 3-2, will provide a more detailed account of the performance parameters and their effect on net unit heat rate. In the report, the net unit heat rate is divided into four portions--controllable losses, noncontrol- lable losses, base or target heat rate, and unaccountable losses. The controllable losses repr nt conditions that may be controlled by operations, such as main st Pressure and temperature. Noncontrollable losses account for those conditions under which the plant must operate. In most cases, a change of policy or further main tenance would be required to eliminate a noncontrollable Jo: + The base or target heat rate corresponds to the best achievable heat rate. Other unknown losses would fall into the unaccountable losses category. ‘The EPRI Heat Rate Guidelines were used as an outline for the proposed performance report. Graphics have been added to enhance the report. Figures 3-3 and 3-4 are examples of the graphics that are used. A summary paragraph is also included on the first page which provides a brief explanation of the heat rate figures.Actual Heat Rate = 11795 Controllable Losses = 134 SH Sprays (Net) Excess Air 16 Ex Gas Temp 60 FW Htr Perf 8 HP Trb Eff 140 Air Htr Lkg 55 Noncontrollable Losses = 195 * All units are Btu/kWwh Target Corr Net Unit Heat Target or Base Net Unit Heat Rate = 11450 Rate = 11450 Figure 3-3. Performance Group Report (Heat Rate Data)(eyea teuoyyezado) yz0dey dnoz9 souvwzozx0a -p- aanbta GgNosvyrrWNyHar oNosvyrrnKyn ae o on ° 9 & a 8 oz 8 oy ov ze iS oo = 08 a _ 08 > on = ‘oot gNosyrewnynae anosyrrnvnage ee) coos 8 A oot 2 coat oz gE E> >o 000'LL oo iy 5 : 5 oooh oor 5 m os ooo'et S ‘ON JINN VHYNO HLYON quedieg YOLOVA ALIOVdVO w/e ALVY LV3H LINN LANSection 4 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of this project, the EPRI Heat Rate Improvement Guidelines can be used to effectively develop, expand, and maintain a utility heat rate improvement program. The EPRI guidelines should be used as the basis from which to expand and tailor a heat rate improvement program for the specific utility and station. the following recommendations are included as suggestions for an improved heat rate improvement project. Implementation guidelines and research and development activities are included. IMPLEMENTATION OF HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT GUIDELINES ‘The following recommendations are presented for modifying the implementation of the heat rate improvement guidelines contained in EPRI Report CS~455: © Less time and effort can be spent on developing the best-achievable heat rate values. For this project, OPPD's North Omaha Unit 5 went into commercial operation in 1968. Fortunately, historical records were well saintained, and it wae a relatively simple task to develop the as-built and best-achievable heat rates. This may not always be the case, however, and the manpower and effort may be more produc tively used to establish current performance levels and then con- centrate on heat rate deficiencies. @ Emphasis should be placed on conducting accurate unit performance testing. Formalized test procedures should be developed that establish the plans to be used on a continual and consistent basis. These procedures can then be used to obtain a correct assessment of the unit heat rate. The procedures should be tailored to each specific station and modified as experience dictate: Along the same line as formalized test procedures, more emphasis could be placed on determining current unit performance. Again, time and effort can be best applied by concentrating on current performance and then evaluating potential improvements. New instrumentation and con- tinued calibration of existing instrumentation are examples of where this emphasis can be made. © The effects of other performance factors should be considered in addi- tion to heat rate improvenents. Availability and reliability are equally important along with efficiency. For this project, fuel cost and unit output are significant elements of the heat rate improvementProgram. OPPD has a long-term fuel contract for Wyoming Powder River Basin coal at a present-day cost of $0.65 per million Btu. With this low cost fuel contract, availability 1s equally, if not more, impor tant to heat rate in the total economic assessment of operations. © Suggestions and methods for improving operator controllable parameters should be stressed. For OPPD, these low or no cost options are the most practical ones to implement from an economical standpoint. with the low fuel costs, short payback period activities are only possible with low initial capital costs. © ‘The guidelines are very useful at providing “rules-of-thumb* for evaluating heat rate improvements. Use of a heat balance computer Program is desirable for evaluating major alternatives, but for routine heat rate analysis activities, a quick reference for various performance impacts is a handy tool. The BPRI Guidelines appendices are very useful and helpful. @ ‘The heat rate logic tree diagrams are useful for plant results and performance engineers. For the logic diagrams to be completely bene- ficial for the plant operators, the logic should be incorporated into a performance monitoring system or some other “user friendly format. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES ‘The following research and development activities are suggested to further improve heat rate improvement activities: © Develop methodology to address repeatability of tests when units (such North Omaha Unit 5) have been converted from sequential valving to "€ull arc* admission. For these units, valve points are no longer applicable and a uniform method to repeat tests is desirable. Various means/methods to achieve this repeatability could be evaluated. © Continue to follow the successes of the Five EPRI demonstration projects to track and trend longer term developments. © Develop and continue to report on alternative methods of measuring circulating water flow rate. This would apply to once-through cooling systems (e.g., OPPD North Omaha Station) as vell as the recirculating cooling systems (cooling towers). © Support testing and development of coal drying options and alterna~ tives. © Support testing on a before-and-after basis of replacing turbine seals and air heat seals to quantify the effects of the performance inprove— ment. Comparative cost impacts and savings could be quantified also. © Support the analysis and development of alternative methods of boiler tube leak detection. Analysis and predictive methods of anticipating severe boiler failures would be beneficial.Support and document “lessons learned” for utility experience with on-line performance monitoring systems. Develop methods/procedures to upgrade and modify existing monitoring systems based on operator needs and suggest ions.Appendix A AS-DESIGNED HEAT BALANCE DIAGRAMSAppendix B AS-BUILT UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST DATA° 9th 120 '08 98 "er M0'et ges ‘et ey9'92 126 eve 19°59 610% 6198 gu"e9 81°68 8°16 ae va 98s'8 096 ‘02 999 ‘96 509 ‘Le 26s ‘oz 29¢ ez Lb" ee 1206 16'06 6'0L e194 ys08 22"e9 0s "88 60°06 Ty ogg ‘21 e82'9z weliey £99'Sh £90 "92 002 ‘82 296'ss v9s8 99°06 65° 960°EH1 veo Ly's9 66°88 96°98 ee Ey ser'er 295 ‘BE £10'LS £0109 oer ‘ze 029'ze 68518 sess 6°06 LL'8L $85 "861 2e9L. 04°99 29°88 11°68 ve u saInsoy posetnoteD 989 ‘86 925 '6e ger'eo 02°19 Soc ‘or ore '9F 282'26 9858 35°06 SL°6 066 "661 S292 19°59 2°88 s2°6e oF se Teng TeoD ut'z9 1s2'Le 020" $80 ‘6. Szv ‘or Lou ‘as soz‘Lit £298 29°06 2218 s9s"eez 6r98. 50°99 22-88 ¥L'88 ‘om eo wre 304, souwuojred § “ON HUN aH/ 8a. sH/ 997 sH/ 8a sH/ 8a sH/ 80 sH/ eq 3H/ 897 ame, % % an ang RRR “BH Tf 0: wonoesE, “nH 2# 0 uoRDEIE, “nH Gf 03 uonseAXG. sn "eed uonseRKE, “nH gf 01 woe, “2H gf 0: woRDSeaKE “OH Lf 03 wonSeaXE sxr0p orey “3H NEN Aousjousa “@xn4 aT Aous\ouna “A= dH +320 semedoy vexop wee 39H “any suraany, spis sep Aouroure HEY “4205 #8071 30H andino-anduy Aouatourra 91108 aulod eater, con a9,¥5°0 09°0 ad ° 9'8 ser 6r6z ° 68"% weet su-6er 8"6er so-ae S¥"905 $6888 96st o'ser 2891 129"eyy 00"esz ° ¥6 "926, o'ziyz 060 ‘cor 968 ‘95 02"89 ee ve ort oz" ee 62 ° so"y 00°F er'sz ° Ley £9°F1 stoss o'zzt og "162 09 "195 56 "966 oresz LcLys eru92 61099 se"vez 002'6 82 "¥00T e "882 086 ‘oes, £9628 ov'stt oF yt os't oe ° 99°F 86"E1 vu ve ° oey Se" shrus saczzt 59°267 S¥¥I9 Se °L66 S906 L°855 Lizee ast‘zun Se“ez 086" 204001 60682 016 ‘858 069'201 96 "261 7 2 one sez ez" ou-z oe'z ozre 92°08 68 "v2 19-9 ° ° ° s0°s sey os"y 06"er se'wr zit 1s "b2 96°02 ov'zz ° ° ° o's ube 26"€ ww 11'St ¥6 "br se "S09 0z'009 os "ze9 st‘vit S9"FIT 0s €or 59 "962 ST'We os “ote $2"399 s6°099 ot"ten Se "666 02666 = 02866 orn Leey 9928 8°09 €£09 6 "829 1684 Ege 2°¥55 19F*290't BEB ‘LIT'T O49‘ 9EE'T oz'ete se"gte ov 'aze 069'0¥ ozr‘9¢ —og0"1S SL"E001 68°2001 2 "0001 9-60v2 Br06y2 Lk 6642 Osz'gat't —o¥9‘¥s2'1 0z0'z0S ‘Tt 968 "FEI ove'tt 09°99 Orr t6r "002 2b Hee vt ” “Om Ww sé ce qeng Te09 veimq 3901, soueurzosseg § “ON uN. 38/807 3H/80T AW Hav OT “aad 82D OLE Hay e807 “zg 99 ont Hav woz; ayy ssooxg Hav woz; 0D Hav woss 20, Hav wosy 205 Hav 01 ny seooKy Hav 0} 09 Hay 0 79 Hav 0 209 Hay wos ny Hav ow Hav 1a se ontg HAV 03 $25 antz sduxoz, ywouay 108, tx VENUS 304 sdutez 7eoyoy PIOD *sozd F8ON9Y PTOD mold 49H POD sduroy, 034 Syydnsog ‘Mord x938/4 B1ydnsoq sduoy, oTOIyL, ssorg aoxqT, mort ures OLE Ted snemeson, autod eaten “ON 380,or‘orr te"801 ou "vor 06°66 oz"u6 e162 $8"1 se“set 2Us2 - Vet on"61> o°9ne 06 "T= s*sLy 06°61 8"ee9 £6°0% S69, e°8L 2-966 s'99sz e-¥re 000 ‘092 09°0 oso 2 v4 09"60T ¥S "LOL oe "For 08°66 oz"86 si6z se"t gteer rye eet 12'91- wz oz'z yess LULe S"¥L 220L oveve eet o-as o-oz92z ovsesz osu'est oe't oz't scot voor oc 46 oc -26 ov'ts ya'e2 ort BLLET og "e2~ 0186 6U'st~ c"ery oss zr6ss €c°9F erg 22°98 6'L¥8 91st 6-ssor o-9s92 wrusse oss*szt 9971 09°t eo aH ‘eed ys01, soweurzozz0g ¢ “ON HEN oF'¥6 00 "or ov'se oe "L6 o8'se 02°96 06 "08 08°16 02°08 ors ox “8z S162 oz" orl orent 29°94 ze-z2- oe*zz- gereat Lieat ys "O1- at'6- ve Liew oset orer ve9s 9°095 s1's9 e189 LL 2°91 oe “61 oz’szt s7L98 ove 2402 Levi Weert Lest or1s9z ovoszz erense w'se9z ooo’91t = ogz "Sz o8'z 06°2 082 08°z cy ve uw st Teng Teed at's6 0°18 e2's8 otros Lye 98"8z 16°0 $6°8h1 enrtz ¥L66T vers "Loy 5°81 9°655 98°28 over og "ost v20e 9'ssz eB 16t ovzvaz 0°s692 020'ver 00°F ‘om oe T00D Go AC “AT “dwroy, oxesuopuoy fo fo “Bey “ur yea Bea aH/9qT ota “ur ot ur 1883 “aq 04 ‘duiog, svesuapso9 2s9 oy “duro, ssessapee3 3 2 oy dures, opestspu0y ae sary “dung, peomepeeD xooworeg, 4a ‘sav zesvapuop, rdurez, “83s WET srd "338 WOT sduroy, “Big 81 vad “B38 Bt sdwox “Bg 191 “835 WIT “S35 WL “83s WET “83s Wet “Bas WT “83s WOT tsord “83s HOT +s0xg o8tis 381 reorg oBzeyona gad eanssorg uinzg. mort “BH mV “quI0D «HEV 8807 “3a 01 HaV S507 “sa ny Wied SATeA ron 359z sw ose s9z¢ 8°62 00192 oz"Lst 06 "621 067121 00"01t 6zer zie or'see 06 -68z 00"asz 2642 o6-aet 06-091 oo-szt 669er wrtet ae ve z esr 2°96 08 "6s¢ 00"sze or'6az 05 "641 06"zer 00"azt 5 "601 9-0Et ga'ery ot‘ese os “61e se"vez vue ssi 06191 09621 escuit vest 08 z zy 9°96 06 "exe oz"ece o€ ‘008 oua8t 06 "bet og tet yy'hOr eet 90"0C% o9"te 06 "tee Se"vez e'eaz o0-vzz oc ‘out os "ver e-zit 96H eh 2 01866 ot" t9¢ on" Ize oe "coz on "8rt 0s "9e1 L°s6 0 "601 02"95y 00°s6¢ o9*2s¢ ozete B°L0E 00 ‘ove oz‘eat ov-ort 0-86 e-uzt oh we z ees ze 08 "zoy 06 "H9E o9"sze o¥'s0z ov1st o2"6et 06 "40r 06-811 a4 2°66E 00"9s€ sz-9te se-ore sorte os "rat 06 "ert 22°60 2°6e1 vi st Teng 10D ess sae o6'Lty oc "o8e oz"1e oni os"sst On" tHT 9176 97L0r 96°08» ogee vy 898 ovaze Ly'zee szr1sz 92-e6r onset £9°96 went ‘Om e# wre 1801, souwuizojzed § “ON HUA S0yAr0g UE ExOTETROMD “ON, 380 duro, seve BuREINOND ur sduroy, 203244 Buysetnoz49 cH LA cag wea “OH 9B 2a mes “0H sf xa wer “33H CF °25 urea “0H @f ‘xa urea “8H 1p ‘za wes sooo “aq ‘2g uyesq 989 ‘xg ures. “OH LY “AT MS “aH OF “AT ME “OH SH "AT MG duet “wna daa dwoy, “ong dad “aH sve 03 “duroz, syeeuapuos “oH €# 0} “duroy, eyesuapu0y “nH 24 02 “duro, aesuopuoy “0H 1# 0} “dur9y, oyesuopuey HYD sxa “dure, eyesuapuo wrod eaten “ON 3894, Bszo0'zt 0000°t 280° be0" o6ot ceeo" 010" 0940 6699" et cI scott 000°, 680° 0050" e901" oceo" 600° ¥s¥0" 0999" ow r9t'et 000° 180" oso" 6sor" £260" 1600" 1940" sto" ef ay 226 ‘tT 0000°1 $160" 9950" 0610" w2e0* $110" S90" 1599" ve ry sto"zr 0000°t 2680" 2640" £901" EEO" 2600" oso" 2599" ve se Teng Te0D 920'et 0000"1 £980" +940" wort’ vec" 6600" 9590" £999" ‘om ef ‘eyeq 90, soueutzosz0g § “ON HUN. ama avet erat aa/at ea/9t at/at aT/at amat awat erm rex, xm stow uaBAxO wy says wo80IIN walosphH woaseD eyekteuy 10s, yayod eaten ron 3894,Appendix C APRIL 1988 FOSTER WHEELER BOILER TEST DATA caLINE GESBEE wexvauson Onaha Public Pover District North Omaha Unit #5 Boiler Test Data Date Time Load (Gross) HW FLOWS Feedvater (MLB/HR) Steam (HLB/HR) Total SH Spray (HLB/HR) R. He Spray (MLB/HR) Sootblover Flow Blowdown Flow Auxiliary Stean Flow Boiler Air Flow, RT(MLB/HR) Boiler Air Flow, LF(HLB/HR) Boiler Air Flow, Total(#LB/HR) Secondary Air (NLB/HR) Primary Air (HLB/HR) Teapering Air (HLB/HR) Coal (TON/HR) PRESSURES (PSIG) Economizer Inlet (psig) Drum (psig) Fin, Superheater Outlet (psig? Cold Reheat (peig) Hot Reheat (psig) ‘TEMPERATURES(DEG F) Econonizer Inlet Economizer Outlet - Left Economizer Outlet - Right Primary S.#. Inlet Primary S. H. Outlet (before spray) - Left Primary 5. H. Outlet (before spray) - Right Div. Wall Inlet (after spray) - L Div Div. Wall Inet (after spray) - R Div Div. Wall Outlet (before pray? Fin. S. H. Inlet (after spray) Fin. S. H. Outlet Spray Water Teperature Gold Reheat (Avg. Cold Reheat Temp) (Cold Reheat Left) (Cold Reheat Right) Cold Reheat after Spray Hot Reheat AJ. Ade Inlet (5A) AH. Air Inlet (SB) anises 10-12:00, 108.27 391.98 618.63 28.65 14.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 470.29 494.73 965.02 679.62 285. 40 42.97 63.085 2725.62 2556.33 2510. 93 256.93 297.48 407.30 495.68 496.16 685.55 792. 26 202. 28 760.33 764.67 282.33 868.67 1002.33 281.96 609.95 613. 40 605.78 361.93 1005. 67 132.38 124.10 4/11/88 15-17:00 148.47 775.85 830. 10 36.52 64.56 0.00 0.00 9.00 617.58 645.20 1262.78 951.42 311.36 63.54 85. 907 2736.25, 2561.00, 2485. 67 362. 46 306. 8 498.20 320.76 520.04 692. 30 823. 82 225. 20 779.33 776.67 286. 33 855, 00 1005.33, 303. 56 698.72 696. 96 633.74 507.6 1010.70, 81.20 79.044 36 37 Osaha Public Pover District North Omaha Unit #5 Boiler Test Data Date Time Load (Grogs) HW AH. Air Outlet (SA ALH. Air Outlet (58) AH. Gas Inlet (5A) ACH. Gas Inlet (58) ALH. Gag Outlet (SA AvH. Gas Outlet (58) Ambient Air Gag Temp Lvg. Main Econ. Gas Temp Lv. Reheat Bypasa ID Fan Inlet (Precip 5A Outlet) ID Fan Inlet (Precip 58 Outlet) FD Fan Inlet (ambient) FD Fan Outlet (5A) FD Fan Outlet (SB) TOP FEEDWATER HEATER Top Feedvater Inlet Top Feedvater Outlet Top Feedvater Heater Ext. Stm. Top Feedvater Heater Drain Top Feedvater Heater Ext. Sta (psig) Baronetric Pressure(IN HG) AIR AND GAS PRESSURES(IN W. C.) FD Fan Inlet (atm pressure! FD Fan Qutlet (Fan SA) FD Fan Outlet (Fan 58) ID Fan Inlet (Fan AP ID Fan Inlet (Fan B) ID Fan Qutiet (Fan A) Outlet (Fan B) PA Fan Inlet PA Fan A Outlet PA Fan 8 Outlet PA Fan C Outlet Windbox Furnace (avg of XNTR A and XMTR B) Miscellaneous S.H. Pass Damper Pos (x) RH. Pass Damper Pos (x) ID Fan Inlet Excess 02 (x) AvH. Inlet Excess 02 (4) (SA) 4ni/e8 10-12:00 106.27 599.72 537.80 583.00 594.88 258.50 295.71 36.77 476.06 641.24 269.66 277.52 ‘36.77 89.95 29.20 351.50 407.30 599.66 352.58 265.33 29.25 0.00 2.01 177 7.43 7.55 nag a7 Lon Ales 14.67 15.74 1.01 0.43 19.10 81.23 5.85 4.03 4/98 15-17:00 148.47 572.42 570.56 642.88 645.50 261.25 289.71 67.17 518.36 693.78 234.42 287.26 67.17 21.92 80.00 378.26 438. 20 620. 68 380.30 359.67 29.20 9.00 4.74 3.80 3.18 9.18 1.27 “143 an 14.43 17.27 18.77 13k -0.46 8.33 91.73 4.78 1.60101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 an uz 413 Date Tine Load AH. AH. AH Omaha Public Pover Distriet Horth Onah Unit #5 Boiler Test Data (Grose) 4 Inlet Excess 02 (x) (5B) Outlet Excess 02 (x) (SAI Outlet Excess 02 (x) (SB) FD Fan Ampe (Fan A) FD Fan Anpa (Fan BY FD Fan Volts (Fan A? FD Fan Volta (Fan B) FD Fan Pover Factor (Fan A} FD Fan Pover Factor (Fan B) ID Fi ID Fan sn Amps (Fan A} ID Fan Volts (Fan A) ID Fan Volts (Fan 8) ID Fan Pover Factor (Fan A} ID Fan Pover Factor (Fan B) PA Fan Amps (Fan AP PA Fan Amps (Fan 8) PA Fan Amps (Fan C) PA Fan Volts (Fan A) PA Fan Volta (Fan 8) PA Fan Volts (Fan Cl PA Fan Pover Factor (Fan A} PA Fan Pover Factor (Fan 8} PA Fan Pover Factor (Fan C) Mah Mall mill Ma mail mall mill mad mall Tube ‘Amps (Hill AD Amps (Hill BP ‘Amps (Mi11 C) Volts (M111 A) Volts (mill B) Volts (M111 Cc) Pover Factor (#i11 A) Pover Factor (Will 8) Pover Factor (Will C) Temperatures HRA Sidevall Inlet Headers North Side East Middle anes 10-12:00 106. 27 2.70 5.95 5.48 86.40 84.80 3820.54 3823.87 3793.92 3828. a6 0.998 998 32.19 29.01 31.89 39822. 21, 3822. 21, 3892. 19 -0.951 -0.951 -0,.942 679.00 678.50 676.00 676.50 4/11/88 15-17:00, 148.47 1.36 4.4L 4.34 99.20 92.80 3797.25 3797.25 70.974 -0.964 201.60 212.40 3797.25 3797.25 71.000 1,000 62.10 539.70 61.50 3797.25 3797.25 3797.25 -0. 998 -0.998, -0.998 35.88 33.80 35.01 3797.25, 3797.25 3797.25 -0.963 0.958 0.966 675.00 675.00 676.00 672.00Omaha Public Pover District North Omaha Unit #5 Boiler Test Data Date 4nisea 4/11/88 LINE Tine 10-12:00 15-1730 1 Load (Gross) AW 108.27 148.47 114 Middle 678.00 673.00 115 West 683. 50 683. 00 Elevation 1083 Sidevall Tubes North Side 116 East Panel #1 695.50 692.00 417 East Panel #2 694.50 691.00 118 East Panel #3 691.50 691.00 119 Middle Panel #1 683. 00 688.00 120 Middle Panel #2 679.50 677.00 121 Middle Panel #3 870.00 668. 00 122 West Panel #1 680. 50 676.00 123 671.50 665.00 124 678.00 672.00 South Side 125 East Panel #1 686.00 689.00 126 East Panel #2 629. 50 629. 00 127 East Panel #3 680. 50 682.00 4128 Middle Panel #1 687.50 688.00 129 Middle Panel #2 675.50 674.00 130° Middle Panel #3 674.50 674.00 131 677.00 679.00 332 672.50 674.00 133 676.00 677.00 Elevation 1089 Partition Wall Chordal Thermocouples 198k 778.00 803. 00 13542 7a1.00 796. 00 13843 778.00 792.00 Sidevall Outlet Headers North Side 137 East 700.00 701.00 198 Middle 708. 00 709.00 139 West 689.00 689.00 South Side 440 East 698.00 703.00 141 Middle 699.50, 702.00 142 West 683.50 688.00Omaha Public Pover District North Omaha Unit #5 Boiler Test Data Date ania 4/11/88 LINE Time 10-12:00 15-17:00 1 Load (Gross) AW 106.27 148.47 Partition Wall Outlet 443° Worth 728.50 743.00 144 Middle 746. 50 764.00 145 South 718.00 737.00 Rear Wall Outlet 146 North 701.00 671.00 147 Middle 704.00 707.00 148 South 698.00 708. 00 osSMMLSTOW xs2°8r Ly J Ocez IV 38T0s EZ OSTA wD a 19H ero Ozwy sy ww 2 0 (2) SArTwnY Stamos saavn (19H) ALIevanrya 3dAL ONEINOS BdAL ONIONS Oriya vars o3a onze oszi waz osez arms ‘ orivy uraw/asva BEEZ B¥ ro"0> aN MOHD zzeze nase 00% 00001 = WAU, szcrt stra avna = - oso sero wasias Lt n394x0 s NagoxgaH 00°00r oorcor WoL a7 NOBNYS nnn enn 26:0 Nap0yLTW ysege sree 9 axis osro ‘wnans: 296 grok ALLY TONE ware su vae gers ny un.stoM 6e-08 aunLs1 OH dua aagy se aud 4334 sv @D SISATUNY aLYHTLIN (2) SISATUNY BLYHIxONS STaN4 ONINEVES HOS SLIEA MISY OMISH OIZATWHY & Ba-zI-¥ wia3ds ‘oN ee NOLLVIS Y3RGd VHYHO “W AOLMLSIG YSEMO4a SEIN VHEHO B6-Avn-zo : pe SSIHOLWHOSWT SHOo WA a crsunASION zeE"1Z ty 4 voce 4v 38104 £9 asin wa £9 1roH 2x0 ‘Ozyw sv Tava x «> sarin santos yaivn (1oW) ALITravanras 343033 34A1 ONTINOS nO B4A1 ONEgSYIS errs Oriya voITIS 49y0 Zezz sz. gazz vere ana 19"0 Oliva urav/asve = 9st ocez = WaruaHasIWaH ero ML MM/ungiNS SEL ZeIz Boze ‘ONIN3LZ0S on. Nua MHsHSY SE1 ETE. ostz Wwrint zoree fg WHzozN Sat esrzr 8907 ANa_AI¥ OMIZNURY — ONIZTGIXO viva TUNOTiIuay (4) WSY 40 BunivNadWaL NOTSNS > aNsINS 40 sHUOS rwion aannsas.guNa (%) aunisIOW HNTYAITIIADS 3arxa Foro> — 10"0> aN. gO IHD 301x0 nusave BOrxOryt ooroor = Wau ote aviua a 90 yasins Na94xo. na0uNaAH oo"00f oroot = Wa0L NoayeD, ae Some NagOUL EN gyroe eyree 9 aaxrs ‘wnsINS orgy itor | anTAvTuas usv sez srs sv aunusiD sStos awnisioH ua a934 sv aya a234 sy (> SISATUNY SLYHILIN (2) SISA WHY BLeNIxONS STan4 ONIUVES MOS SZtEE MASY GNISH GaZA-WHY t ee-zt-¥ AJOFMLS£O Vamos JArauNa vHYENO aB-AvH-co — Sergauwanonn SaHOLVHORW? suo Wa rwisads s son ces caAppendix D AUGUST 1988 UNIT PERFORMANCE TEST DATA AND CALCULATIONSOPPD NEP PLANT HEAT RATE 8/25/88 TEST DATA TEST ¢ TEST POINT 1 2 A GEN Mw (va1) 66.7 106.79 138.7 GEN MEGAVARS (¥1010) 10.39 19.51 9.52 AUX POWER MW (¥42) 9.04 1.3 12.37 PRESSURES (psig) Assume Atmos. = 14.7 MAIN STM PRESS (P48) 2,500.08 2,502.32 2,507.04 RH PRESS (P49) 164.98 254.44 326.39 CRH PRESS (P50) 182.6 278.56 355.33 BFP DISCH PRESS (P56) 2,681.18 2,712.38 2,745.62 FW PRESS LV HTR7 (P65) 2,593.48 2,616.98 2,653.43 RH EXT PRESS (P57) 178.06 262.75 330.97 COND PRESS (P69) in. Higa 344 3.4 3.39 Flows FW FLOW (F89) 393,450 641, 600 802,230 SH APTEMP FLOW (P90) 22,320 30,230 61,930 RH APTEMP FLOW (F1061) 23,600 39,970 54,430 ‘TEMPERATURES MAIN STM TEMP L (71064) 974.33 1,012.24 1,006.53 MAIN STM TEMP R (71065) 969.52 1,007.3 2,002.18 RH TEMP L (7106) 950.2 906.8 985.24 HRH TEMP R (T1067) 945.39 982.42 980.6 CRH TEMP L (71068) 580.82 635.96 637.76 CRH TEMP R (71069) 561.56 626.64 634.36 BFP DISCH TEMP (71122) 264.77 285.2 301.8 FW TEMP LVG HTR 7 (71126) 377.93 414,08 435.22 FW TEMP LvG HTR 6 (71124) 327.75 357.95 376.67 BTR 7 DRN TEMP (71079) 328.08 358.84 378.08, crit ExT TEMP (71072) 566.31 626.72 631.16 RH EXT PRESS (P57) 178.06 262.75 330.97 wre 7 970 (¥2161) 0.35 -2.29 4.38 BTR 7 DCA (¥2162) 0.27 0.82 a2.‘VALUES TO BE FOUND USING STEAM TABLES VARIABLES a 2 2 ae 354.78 392.95, 415.65 Hfntr 302.82 334.01, 353.55 Hee? 1,305 1,330.7 1,328.3 ubtrd 299.02 331.32 351.78 ae 3,437.2 1,463.3 1,459.5 Bshs 239 259.7 276.6 heh 1,502.6 1,519.2 1,516.2 Berk 1,307.2 1,332 1,329.2 rhs 239 259.7 276.6 vt 0.2953 0.3079 0.3083 ‘TABLE OF VALUES CALCULATED BY HAND OR FOUND PROM GE HEAT BALANCE VARIABLES 1 2 3 AUX PLOW 25,520 24,530 24,150 AUX HEAT LOAD 3,739,956 4,130,216 4,410,031 SUBCOOLING (F) 6.7 6.3 5.9 REHEAT deiP.¥ 8.93 8.22 7.82 Wipvsi (cE 2) 315. 303 ean psi (GE 3) 10,028 16,276 20,970 Wnpsi (GE 4) 3,479 5,559 7,059 Wipst (ce 5) 122 1,766 2,217 BOILER EFFICIENCY 0.8128 0.8327 0.8357 REFERENCE CONDITIONS THROTTLE TEMP Ts 1,000 PRESSURE Ps 2,535 FLOW Ws 1,502,108 SPEC. VOL. vs 0.3021 77 770s 3 REHEAT TEMP lr 1,000 REHTR delF¥ Pr 10 XH PRESS Px. 1s GEN KVAS —KVAS 256,000 PWR FACTOR PFS 0.85 H2 PRESS Phe “s boa‘TURBINE CYCLE PERFORMANCE 1. THROPTLE STEAM FLOW We = WE + Wehs + Weer + Wejae - Wun - Was VARIABLE 1 2 3 we 415,770 671,830 864,160 2. COLD REHEAT PLOW Werh = We ~ Wipvs1 ~ Wpsl - Whpsl - Wipsi ~ Wer? Wer] = WE(HE ~ HEntr)/(Her7 ~ Hhtra) VARIABLES a 2 3 Wer? 20,322.14 37,839.36 52,016.35 Werh 380,503.86 609,886.64 782, 256.65 3. NET TURBINE HEAT RATE NPHRE = [(Wt - Wshs) (Ht ~ HE) + Wshs(Ht - Hshs) + Werh(heh + Wehs)(Hheh ~ Hens) ]/KWE VARIABLES 1 2 3 Kat 66,700 106,790 138,700 NTHRE 8,347.7 8,312.0 8,108.8 4. EFFECTIVE THROTTLE FLOW RATIO (EPTR). § VALVES WIDE OPEN (8 BIFR = We(sart((Ps x vty/(PE x ve))) vWo = ETPR/WS VARIABLES 1 2 3 ETFR 422,712.52 680, 668.08 871,005.76 ‘avwo 27.48 45.31 57.99BEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT EPRI/0Ps PD BOILER BFPICIENCY CALCULATION BASED ON TEST DATA FROM AUGUST 25, 1988 Item Description 1 a 3 Comments Unit Load, MW 66.70 106.79 138.70 ‘Throttle Flow 415,770 671,830 864,160 1 Ambient Relative Humidity, & 60.00 60.00 60.00 Assumed 2 Ambient Dry Bulb Temperature, F 65.91 76.8 89.48 Gas Temp Lvg AH SA (1123) 278.79 283.77 291.40 Gas Temp Lvg AH SB (1125) 258.48 277.15 291.13 3 ave Gas Temp Lvg AHL 268.63 280.46 291.26 Gas Temp tvg Econ $A (7126) 559.83 614.64 650.72 Gas Temp ivg Econ 5A (7127) 564.49 620.49 653.38 4 ave Gas Temp Lvg Econ 562.16 617.56 652.05 Ale Temp Ent AH SA (1122) 83.40 91.46 100.39 Air Temp Ent AH 5B (9224) 83.80 91.09 99.50 5 ave Air Temp Ent AHL 83.60 © 91.28 99.95 Econ 58 OX, * by Vol 4.96 2.59 1.94 Econ 5B OX, 4 by Vol 5.5 2.70 1.88 6 Ave Econ OX, & by Vol 5.25 2.65 1.91 AH 5A Ox, & by Vol 7.24 5.34 4.46 AW 5B OX, 4 by Vol 8.19 5.29 4.55 7 Ave AH OX, 4 by Vo an 5.32 451 8 HAV Fuel, Beu/Ib 8,436 8,436 8436 9 carbon, 4 by weight 50.49 50.49, 50.49 10 Hydrogen, ¥ by weight 3.61 3.61 3.61 11 oxygen, & by weight 10.96 10.96 10.96 12 Nitrogen, 4 by weight 0.74 0.74 0.74 13° Sulfur, & by weight 0.38 0.38 0.38 14 Ash, & by weight 5.43 5.43 5.43 15 Moisture, % by weight 28.41 28.41 28.41 16 Unburned Carbon in Ash, ¥ by weight 1.00 1.00 1.00 Assumed 17—Dry Ash/lb As-Fired Fuel 0.0548 0.0548 0.0548 18 -Btu/Ib ash 145.00 145.00 145.00 19 Carbon/lb As-Pired Fuel o.s04¢ 0.5044 0.504 20 Theo Dry Air/lb As-Fired Fuel 6.5809 6.5809 6.5809 D5BpRI/oP! HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT 2D BOILER EFFICIENCY CALCULATION BASED ON TEST DATA FROM AUGUST 25, 1988 Itew Description 1 2 3 Comments 21a Dry Mol FG/LD As-Fired Fuel 5.2377 $.2377 $2377 2ib Wet Mol Air/Ib As-Fired Fuel 8.5288 8.5288 8.5288 2ic Theo Mol Air/1b As-Pired Fuel 22.7194 22.7194 22.7194 214 Lbs Moisture/1b Dry Air Inlet 00083 © 0.029.028 22 Dry Excess Air, ¥ 39,6100 17.1707 12.0228 23° bbs Dry Air/Ib As-Fired Fuel 9.1876 7.7109 7.3721, 24 Lbs Moisture in FG/Ib As-Fired Fuel 0.6829 0.6984 0.7401 25 Lbs Dry Gas/1b As-Fired Fuel Ent AH 9.7032 8.2265 7.8877 26 Leakage Across Air Heaters, % 18.6249 17.0771 15.7799 27 bs Dry Gas/1b As-Fired Fuel Lvg AH 11-5104 9.6313 9.1323 28 Moisture Correction Term 0.0150 0.0167 0.0225, 29 Lbs Wet Gas/Ib As-Fired Fuel Ent AH 10.3861 8.9249 8.6278, 30 Lbs Wet Gas/Ib As-Fired Fuel Lvg AH 12.2083 10.3465 9.8950 Specific Heat of Air Ent AH 0.2400 0.2400» 0.2400 Specific Heat of Gas Lvg AH @ Trem 3 0.2425 0.2426 © 0.2427 31 Bit Gas Temp Corr for NO Leakage 302.74 312.42 322.11. Unit Load, Mi 66.70 106.79 138.70 throttle Flow 415,770 671,830 864,160 Steam Generator Efficiency Heat Loss Method dheneeneeenteneeeensesnneneanneneeennne 100.00 100.00 100.00 32 Heat Loss Due to Dry Gas, 6.1363 5.2548 5.0441 Enthalpy of Vapor at Item 31 & APS 1196.96 1201.41 1205.42 Enthalpy of Water at Item 2 33.97 44.84 57.50 Enthalpy of Vapor at Item 2 1090.36 1095.02 1100.54 33. Heat Loss due to Moisture in Fuel 3.9166 3.8950 3.8658. 34 Heat Loss Due to Moisture from H2 4.4472 4.4227 «4.3896 35 Heat Loss Due to Moisture in Air 0.415¢ 0.2577 0.2705 36 ‘Heat Loss to Unburned Carbon 0.0644 0.0644 = 0.0644 37 Heat Loss Due to Radiation (ABMA) 0.7500 0.4750 0.3750 38 —Unneasured Losses 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000, 39 Boller Efficiency--Heat Loss 83.2700 84.6305 84.9906,EPRI/OPPD HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT BOILER EFFICIENCY CALCULATION BASED ON TEST DATA FROM AUGUST 25, 1988 Item Description 1 2 3 Conments Unit Load, MW 66.70 106.79 138.70 Throttle Flow 415,770 671,830 864,160 Steam Generator Efficiency Input-Output Method Boller Feedwater Flow 393,450 641,600 802,230 Blowdown Flow 1,170 _1,020 1,120 Net Feedwater Flow 392,280 640,580 801,110 Superheater Outlet Enthalpy 1,437.2 1,463.3 1,459.5, Feedwater Inlet Enthalpy 354.78 392.95 415.65 40 Superheated Steam--wBtu/h 424.61 685.64 836.24 Reheat Steam Plow 380,508 609,887 782,257 Hot Reheat Stean Enthalpy 1,502.6 1,519.2 1,516.2 cold Reheat Steam Enthalpy 1,307.2 1,332 1,329.2 41 Reheat Steam 74.35 9-14.17 146.28 Superheat Steam Spray Flow 22,320 30,230 61,930 Superheater Outlet Enthalpy 1,437.2 1,463.3 1,459.5 Superheat Spray Water Enthalpy 239 259.7 276.6 42 Superheat Steam Spray 26.74 36.38 73.26 Reheat Steam Spray Flow 23,600 39,970 $4,430 Hot Reheat Steam Enthalpy 1,502.6 1,519.2 1,526.2 Reheat Spray Water Enthalpy 239 259.7 276.6 43° Reheat Steam Spray 29,82 50.34 67.47 Continuous Blowdown Flow avo 1,020 1,120 Blowdown Water Enthalpy 734.34 737.59 740.76 Feedwater Inlet Enthalpy 354.78 392.95 415.65 44 Blowdown 0.86 0.35 0.3646 ” a7 EPRI/OPPD HEAT RATE IMPROVEMENT BOILER EFFICIENCY CALCULATION BASED ON TEST DATA FROM AUGUST 25, 19} Description Total Outputs Sum (40 through 44) Higher Heating Value of Fuel Rate of Fuel Fired Chemical Heat in Fuel Total Heat Input Boiler Bfficiency--output/Input, & 555.97 8,436 92,100 776.96 776.96 71.56 296.09 8,436 134,430 1,134.05 1,134.05 78.21 3 Comment 2,123.61 8,436 167,540 1,413.37 1,413.37 79.50Appendix E APRIL 1989 UNIT PERFORMANCE DATA AND CALCULATIONSjorth Omaha Unit 5 Ral Test Date: April 1989 fest 2 Gross Gen (Mi) 105.56 135.47 Gen Hegavars 9:10 3.43 ‘ux Power (2) 9:74 aa Pressures (peti Main Steam Press 2548.08, 2501.89 ARE Press 232117 302.20 CRH Press 249.23 524.25 BEP Disch Press 2592.30 2572.15 Fu Press Lvg Htr 7 2515.65, 2369.53, CRE Extr Press 264.44 309.78 Turb Exh Press (in Hg) 27.64 27142 Cond Press (in Hea) 210 1130 Baronetric Press (in Hg) 20.88 20.87 lows (lb/hr: Fi Flow 610310 752780 SH Attemp Flow 37100 64670 RH Attenp Flow 13760 41200 Tonperatures (F) Main steam Temp 995.36 994.91 BRE Temp 974.69 992.22 CRE temp 607.50 625.13 BFP Disch Temp 200.76 297.95 FW Temp Lvg Her 7 405.70 426.68 Fu Temp Ent Her 7 351.50 372.80 Her 7 Den Temp 351.48 372.94 RH Extr Temp 604.78 622.57Values to be found using steam tables: Enthalpies (Beu/1b)_ HE (final feedwater) Héhtr (feedwater into htr 7) Her? (CRA extr) Hhtrd (htr 7 drain) Ht (main stm) Hshs (SH spray) Hhrh Herh Hrhs (RH spray) Test 1 303.96 327.17 1319.97, 323.56 1452.08, 255.02 1514.68 1321.08 255.02, 406.07 349.05 1324.82 346.27 2453.37 272.41 1521.89 1325.19 272.81 Other values calculated by hand or found on GE heat balance Wipvsl (GE no 2 leakage, 1b/hr) Weel (GE 3) Whpsi (GE 4) Wipel (GE 5) Boiler Eff (2) Throttle Temp Te Pressure Ps Flow We Reheat Temp Tr Reheat delPz dPr Exh Press Px Gen KVA's VAs Pwr Factor PF H2 Press Pha 404 13651 5362 1700 83.03 1000 2535 1,502,109 ‘L000 10 as 256,000 285 43.0 610 19774 6705 2107 84.19Turbine cycle Performance 1. Throttle Steam Flow We = WE + Wehs + Wesr + Wejae - Wun - Was Le Test 1 Test 2. we 647,410 817,450 2. Cold Reheat Flow Werh = We - Wipvel - Wgsl - Whpsl - Wipsl - Wer? Wer? = WE (HE - HEhtr) / (ler? ~ Hhtrd) Variable Test 1 Test 2 Wer? 36,834 47,933 Werh 598,327 755,665, 3. Gross Turbine Heat Rate GTHR = ((We ¥ Ht) + (Werh + Wehs) * heh - (Werh * Heh) = (Wshs * Hshs) - (Wehs * Hrhs)] / Gross Gen kit Variable Test Test 2 ewe 105,540 135,470 oruRe 7,844 7,944Boiler Efficiency Calculation Based on Test Data From 4/25/89 Description Ambient relative humidity Ambient dry bulb temp Air heat flue gas out temp Economizer flue gas out temp Air heater air inlet temp Econ flue gas out 02, 1 by volune Air her flue gas out 02, 2 by volume HUV of fuel as fired, Btu/1bm Fixed carb content of fuel, Z by wt H2 content of fuel, I by wt 02 content of fuel, Z by wt N2 content of fuel, 1 by wt Sulfur content of fuel, 2 by we Ash content of fuel, Z by wt Moisture content of fuel, I by wt Unburned carbon in ash, 7 by we Dry ash per 1b as-fired fuel Btu/1b in ash Carbon/1b as fired fuel Theo dry air/1b as fired fuel Dry moles flue gas/1b as fired fuel Wet moles flue gas/1b as fired fuel Theo moles air/Ib as fired fuel Lbs moisture/1b dry air inlet Dry excess air, Z Lbs dry air/1b'as fired fuel Lbs moist in flue gas/1b as fired fuel Lbs dry gas/1b as fired fuel AH inlet Leakage across air htrs, 2 Lbs dry gas/1b as fired fuel AM outlet Moisture correction term Lbs wet gas/1b as fired fuel all inlet Lbs wet gas/1b as fired fuel aH outlet Exit gas temp corr for no leakage Heat loss due to dry gas, I Heat loss due to moisture in fuel, 7 Heat loss due to moist from H2 comb, z Heat loss due to moisture in air, 2 Heat loss due to combustible in ash, 2 Heat loss due to radiation, z Unneasured losses, Z Boiler efficiency, z ES 26.53 92.44 284.80 608.61, 92.46 2.66 5.42 8682 48.03 3.45 22.45 0.75 0.30 5.39 30.63 0.05, 0.05 8.41 0.48 6.23 5.04 8.45 22.52 9.01 17.24 7:30 0.67 779 17.82 9.18 0.01, 8.47 9.87 315.19 3.67 4103 4.06 181 0.00 0.40 1:00 83.03 est 2 18.84 100.67 297.30 645.06 100.67 1.65 4.87 8710 47.54 3.42 32.02 0.76 0132 3.38 30.57 0.04 0.05 5.55 0.48 5.14 5.00 8.39 21.19 0.01 10.22 6.77 0.66 7.28 20.06 B72 0.01 7.91 9.38 332.16 5.50 son 4:01 1:00 0.00 0.32 1.00 e4.19Appendix UNIT 5 PERFORMANCE CALCULATION ALGORITHMSThe following summary of performance alculation algorithms are utilized in the Unit #5 Data Requisition Syst DRAIN COOLER PERFORMANCE DCADC - Drain Cooler OCA HEATER 1 PERFORMANCE TTOL = Heater 1 Terminal Temp Diff PITOL - Heater 1 predicted term temp diff TTDIDV = Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater 1 HEATER 2 PERFORMANCE TTD2 - Heater 2 term temp diff OCA2 - Heater 2 drain cooler approach PTTOZ - Heater 2 predicted term temp diff POCA2 - Heater 2 predicted drain cooler approach TTDZDV - Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater 2 DCAZDV ~ Deviation between actual and predicted DCA for Heater 2 HEATER 3. PERFORMANCE ‘TTD3 = Heater 3 term tenp diff OCA3 - Heater 3 drain cooler approach PTTD3 - Heater 3 predicted term temp diff POCA3 - Heater 3 predicted drain cooler approach TTD3DV - Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater OCA3DV - Deviation between actual and predicted OCA for Heater HEATER 5 PERFORMANCE TIDS - Heater 5 term temp diff CAS - Heater § drain cooler approach PTTDS - Heater 5 predicted term temp diff POCAS = Heater 5 predicted drain cooler approach TTOSDV - Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater DCASDY - Deviation between actual and predicted DCA for Heater HEATER 6 PERFORMANCE ‘TTD6 = Heater 6 term temp diff DCAG - Heater 6 drain cooler approach PTTOG - Heater 6 predicted term temp diff POCAG - Heater 6 predicted drain cooler approach TTDEDY - Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater 6 DCAGDV - Deviation between actual and predicted DCA for Heater 6 HEATER 7 PERFORMANCE TTD? = Heater 7 term temp diff OCA7 - Heater 7 drain cooler approach PTTO7 - Heater 7 predicted term temp diff POCA? - Heater 7 predicted drain cooler approach TTD7DV = Deviation between actual and predicted TTD for Heater OCA7DV = Deviation between actual and predicted DCA for HeaterUNIT GROSS HEAT RATE UGHR - Unit Gross Heat Rate UNIT NET HEAT RATE UNHR - Unit Net Heat Rate TURBINE GENERATOR HEAT RATE GTGHR - Gross turbine generator heat rate NTGHR - Net turbine generator heat rate HI AND IP TURBINE EFFICIENCIES EHP - High pressure turbine efficiency EIP - Intermediate pressure turbine efficient CONDENSER PERFORMANCE QR - Heat rejected to condenser R - Temp rise of circ water WCW - Cire water flow Vs Water velocity U_- Overall heat transfer coefficient for condenser TSATC - Predicted condensing temp for condenser PSATC - Predicted condenser saturation pressure PCAD - Deviation from optimum condenser pressure BOILER EFFICIENCY BE - Boiler efficiency PBE - Predicted boiler efficiency BEDEV - Boiler efficiency deviation Pa‘OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT UNIT #5 DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM 2, PERFORMANCE CALCULATION ALGORITHMS Poa4 ‘ypeosdde 42[009 utesp paroipasd 2 493°—H = 2¥90d___ 2(90NODM)9.0L X°LOL"S + (90NODK)4 OL x 8°S - 6O0L"E = (90NOIK)S = ZVI0d Jo 1441p dua way payoipasd Z 497e9H = ZdLLd __ 2(90NOIM)9.01 X 12E°T + (90NOIM)e_OT x 25°2 + BB12°0 = (20NOIK)s = ZOLLd ‘duay 43139 useag Z 497aH = ZOOL eoaddy 49/00) useag 2 493eaH = Z¥I0 (pb)vaL - (12)¥WL = ToDL - zooL = 2¥00 do (OL) WAL = 42 ‘dua, 39L3ND prog 2 499eAH = ZODL (62)¥WL = OH ut *ssaad Lays Z 49908H = Z1¥Sd saygey wears wo4y (Zivsd)s = do *d¥OL 3eS 2 492eH = ZIVSL fq duay way 2 499e9H = 2011 (orn - ((62)vaL 4 divsi] = zoo - zivsi = 201 TONWHUOSUIE @ UILVIN Jo ‘1 492e2H 404 LL por2{po4d pue fem2e usaM—q UOIIELA—P = ATOLL Udlid - WOLL = AGIOLL (0v)vHL = 4U/aiH ‘M013 puo> pay2a4409Un = QNODK do S5tp duay way payoipaid | 4a3eaH = TOLld (ov)ynt * [1 + 60000°((0z)vML-001)] = (GNOMI990)s = s4/aLH MOLs PuOD paI22440 = DONOIM 2(Q0NOIM)9_OL ¥ $/6°1+ (IGNOIM)e_OL x G20°2 + SOS*O- = (20N0IM)5 = TOLId (pb)VHL = do *dway 32139 puog { 49389H = TOIL (oe)wni = 6H ul ‘ssa4g [194s 1 49ze—aH = T1VSd Sayqey wears wos (Livsd)s = Jo ‘dwaL 4S 1 49Ve9H = LIVSL do *43'p duay [euimaay T 49309H = T0LL (pb)van - [(OE)WWL 4° divs2) = 10dL ~ LivSi = TOLL TONWROSUSE 1 WaLVIN ‘YLUI puoy 491009 uteag = 1990 14NQ wtesg 49[00) UteAG = O0Id__ (oz)wwi - (ez)vwL = 1990 - 0090 = 30vI0 SONVHAOIHId WIT00) WIVEG SWHLIYOOTY NOLLVINITVI IONVMYOIUId SF LINN VHVWO HLYON Fs.saiqey weays wory (S1VSi (e9)waL ~ 404 GLL payripasd pue [enzre uaanjaq uorzeLAap = AGECLL €vogd - €vod = AOEVIG €0lid ~ coLt = AGEOIT = 800d jayatpaad ¢ 4azeaH = COLid + 0602°0- = (20N09K)3 = EOLIE SNWHEOTUSd © WILVIH 49yeaH 404 y9q par24pasd pue jenjoe uaamyaq UOLIeLAa = ADZVIO 491e2H 404 G11 par>tpaid pue [endoe uaaMyaq uo}IeLAP = AOZOL| 2vo0d - 2vo0 = AdzWo0 2dLid - zai. = AG2iL ‘SHHLIYO9TV NOLLVIND V9 3INVWYOIHId SF LINN VHYWO HLYON Fs90Ltd - 9011 = AOSOLL do ‘yeosdde 491009 uyeup 2(MJM)g_O1 X COTE + (MIM)y_OT * pasd 9 493¢0H = 9¥90d_ § - €08°E = (MIN)S = 9VI00 Jo ‘44D duoy waa paroipaad g 49909 = 90114 ___ 2(MIM)o_OL X 9BL°T + (MIM), _OT x 982°2 - 222°8- = (MJK)S = 9OLLd Jo ‘29[n0 reap 9 4a9eIH = 9OGL Je ‘yoeosdde 431009 uieup 9 49Ve—H = 9¥90 (ea)vuL ~ (89)wWL = S041 - 9001 = 9VI0 Jo ‘diay 1213N0 4axeMpIa} 9 J9IeaH = 9OIL 61sd *ssoud [134s 9 4990—H = 91VSd = de *du91 YRS 9 48I"AH = SIVSL ip dwoy wisy 9 492e9H = Ogi __ (w9)wan - [(S2)WHL 3° divs] = 9041 - 94vSL = 90LL TOWWHBOSUIA 9 WILVIN saigea weays wosy (91) 4 ‘§ 49282H 405 vod payatpaid pue yeny2e UaaMaq UO} = ngswoa 4o *$ 49229H 403 O11 para4paud pue (ema2e uasMzaq WOIZeLAEP = AOSOLL S¥a0d = svo0 = AOSVDG Solid - Sait = AOSOLL do ‘yreosdde 491009 uyeap paroypaud s 4a9eaH = SyOOd 2(M4M)g OL X LETS"2 + (MIM)y_OL X 92952 + ZL¥°E = (NIN)S = SVOEd duay wiay paytpaud g sayeaH = Solid V)YHL = 4U/QLW MOLS 4ORRMPIO4 = KIM 2(MIM)y OF x 21E°2 + (MIM)y OL X ¥S6°R - L8PB"E- = (MIM)s = SULLd de 133) 2 JO ORY do ‘day 291UL saveMpaaS G 4990OH = adJEL jo dua} 3130 WLeIp s 497eH = SOO 2 ULeIp G 41H = S¥D0 2/t(ea)v + (19)WWL) ~ (69)WWL = Gd38L - SOOL = S¥O0 SHHLIYOOT NOLLVINITY) JONVAYOSYIE S¥ LINN VHVWO HLYONwoy/mg ‘aya yeay ssou6 yyun = ia 8)YRL = MW ‘UO: (26)¥HL = aL/mq *(queysuo> e se ynduy) (20> Jo aner Gujreay 9: (e)wan + (2)¥WL + (T) YL = 37¥0IK + aTVOOK + VIVOIR ‘31Va 1V3H SSOD LINN ‘£ 48322H 404 yI0 paz2}pa.d pue jeny>2e uaanjaq UOLIeFAaP = AQLVIG 21e3H 405 G11 par2ipaad pue Lend" uaaraq UO}IeLADP = AULULL 4w90d ~ L¥90 = AdLVIO dolid - cai. = NOLO 4a[oo> useap ver>ypoud 1 491e9H = LyO0d de 2{ AJM) 9 OT 2 + (MIM) 401 + 2tp'e = (MIM)S = LVI0d £0Lid__ 2(MHM) g OL * = (nam)s = TOLLE ayeMpII} / 19VLAH = HSL 2 40 OAV de * id [L9ys 4a309H = LIVSd saqqer weays wors (c4 2/((99)¥uL + (S9)vaL) 40 divsi} = AJL - CivSL = Z0LT SONWWORId 7 W1VaH {9 42323 105 ¥9q par2ipaud pur yenz2e uaaKzaq uo} ra cyesrstern LL Pay2}pa4d pue Lenr2e u—Mzaq uo} SHHLIYODTY WOLLVINDTV9 3ONVAYOSEIE SH LINN VHYHO HLYON Fe2200°2 = (VIUIPLO"EL = 2(yId)LLLL Yo eLYYaIVOS Gh gyvuyevey vo yeeeerecs soa eae’ + (wasjescerzt ~ e(vou}sooo-et + etvDdjtboo's ~ yWvaahesee'a + slvogletso O- = 204d 1948 + (1948 - 2348)_* B58°08D = SHA = Ida Udy 24U/Qt 2L0°6L9 > SHA > 4U/L B58°PBr JT HO (9¢)vWL = 6H us ‘aunssasd aynyosqe sasuapuo> = vod ne “LL = | TLET "92 + e(¥9d)9089°2T - 4(¥9d)1626°2 + ¢(VId)bz292"O- = [Idd = Jd8 UOyd 2200°2 - (vod)2bI6"ZT - 2(¥d) () | Maa teTenie onTAH GNU] WOTLIINIOD TANSSIEd WV uo1ze1aap ayes eay ssouB 31Un = ayHON duHON ~ YHON = GBHON % ‘Kouata453@ 491104 par2ipasd = 38d OOK » (Ev)VAL = 4N/aL *MoLy 1930M aduanze pazeaysadns = ISOM Jo, *dua3 39ya4 104 = HHL 5isd°*ssaud qeayes 04 = HUHd Bisd ‘*ssaud yeayas plo> = HuDd Gisd *ssaad wears ule = Shd Jo duo) weaIs ULeH = SHL SM - GM - SOM + IRM = 44/QL ‘MOLY 21720149 40 weaIS ULM = SHH vogL2 + (SWH)L2260° - 2(SHA), OL«280°2 + e(SHM)er0T + 86566°2 - 4(SH)gr OT + S055°L + (SHH) oz OT + E0TZE"S - 9(ShM)ee Ol = 90EbS*L = WHXZNig ‘3ye4 Teay SSO4b IHUN"paa>rtpaid = dYHON (S3N¥n9 NOILITHOI IWASSIUd XIVE 33S) + iunye ‘ssaad Jasuapuos 405 uofy>a1J09 a7e4 ey = Ide (2t0") * [soot - 2/((S5)waL + (vs)wuL)] = (210°) * (Soot ~ H¥HL) = UNVE ‘dua} IeIYs4 404 UO!ZDI109 BIe4 3eIY = IY Tex (or ~ (oor x E(ct) wut / ((9T)waL ~ (2t)vML)])) =U *(OL = Ot * (HaD/(HUHS ~ HuDd))) = yNvx doup danssasd Zeayas 40y U0lyDI4I09 a3eA 7eOY = Idy 90° x Coot - oot * (00b2/(969"bt-(St)wAL))] = 80° x [oot - Oot * (O0¥z/SHd)] = MHOE "Ssa4d 31330443 405 UO}DI4409 |3EA TOY = 941 {soot - 2/((es)vnt + (25)vwL)]I0° = (SOOT~SWL)LO" = MHVE *du9} 91330443 405 UOLII2II09 |7e1 IeAy = ILL OOT/SHA = SHA GOT X Le(TSWH)g_OT % Cb'L - 2(TSHH)< OL * 9199°S + (TSWM)z_OT X blb2"L - ¥20°LOT] = nY/naq ‘dea yey 4oye4aUa6 dUgiM sso46 p>rD}Pa4g = dYHOLD guwon oot x (oot7a4a + T)(oOT 751 + T)TOOT7Iau + T)(OOt/Iai + T)TOOT/OLE + T)aWHOLD = 3°30d SHHLTYODTY NOLLVINDV) JINYWYOSHId SP LINN VHYWO HLYONAU/AL *SHH » £2000" - ETS = 19 0001» (8)¥WL = OOOT + SMW = OMY COT X (S)VAL = 4U/qL *MOLy weays 4aMO[qIO0S = aSH TX (Lb) HL = AU/qL ‘HOLS UMOPMOLG = GH cOL X (2p) VL = 4U/aL *MOLJ 4axeMPIag LeULS = THIM Wor/mg ‘91ey IaH 4oyeLaUaD aULGan] $S019 = YHOLD sot Ng9_sso¥9 Siva vai wOLvEINa aNTeuAT uoLzeLaap ayes yeay 9U 3LUN = OYHNN___ dyHNN ~ YHNN = GANT NMHY/(8)VHL»d4HON)=WAW/(SMHedsHON) = dUHNN (6)vaL = ‘49M0g xny = dVAW (8)at = “vorzesau99° ssog = SAN (6) WML ~ (8)¥HL = dVOM = OR = ‘uoLe10uI9 190 = NAY wax/mq ‘ayes ye0q 320 31un = HRN wet = Nab — B)VHL x YHON ~ ORM x yHON = BRAT ive van 13" LIWn ¥L05"0 - (VOd)EEWT“2 + 2(VOd)HHLS"E - e(vId)9ZL2"2 + n(VOd)bTES*O - s(¥Dd)9Pb0"O+ = Hoda = Ida U9ND Frso"9zb'T < SH dT YO 205"0 - {rajecon'2 + 2(VOd)bLS"C - e(vod)9z2"2 + ¥(vad)PIES*O - s{uaaisnv0"o8 = pode vd 208s"0 - (vad)Zeee"0 + 2(vod)ccee'2 - e(vod)2@6e°2 + 4(¥9d)2059°0 - s(v9d)99S0"O+ = EIdd £949 + (€9d8 - $949) x TH0"RIO'T - SHA = Qua vouD Pts" 9ze°T > SWAP BO9*BIO'T 4T YO 20ss"0 ~ (vod)zege"o + 2(yod)cece“2 - «(vod)2a6E°2 + n(v9d)Z059°O - s(vId)99S0"0+ = E940 8E28"0 + (vod)BS28"2t - 2(¥Id)S966°ET + ¢(¥Id)TPOO"S ~ n(¥Od)EGER"O + s(VId)EESO"O- = 2348 tg 2ad8 + (29d8-€948) * 2702629 - SHA = J49 Vaud F@09*BIOT > SHH > 20°629 41 YO SHHLTYODTV NOLLVIN V9 JONVYOUId SPLINN VHVHO HLYON P-10woi/nag ‘axed Pay 4oye4aua6 - auLgany 390 = YHOIN Nai uab au DAW X yHOLD = Partddns yeoy = YHOIN woryerAap aze1 eay 4ozesUI6 au;quMy ssoUy = GYHDLD guH919 ~ W919 = TBHDIS T)VAL = d 6ursn saqqey wears wory wears yeay4 plod 30 Adyeyrua = JY mq * ’ . Sijane {ZaeLESIML# CORDamL) = 4 "Cee Wir a“g guysn soyqey ueeys may wrass sesqas sou 40 Adveqyuo © iH qi /nag *(2/((S5) wnt + (bS)¥WL) = 1 4u/4t *91S200° * SWM = SD 44/91 *60800" * SHH = 19 4AU/4L *L¥2bZ0" * SHH = £9. 44/QU ‘E6E2000" X SHA = 29 $9 + 9 + £9 + 29 = SYVIT au/at *£ sare9y 04 Mo[y weayS UOIZDENIX = 23K es) *(29)¥HL = 1 Sussn aiqey wears wo4y AdjeyquD 913n0 UJeAp { 4aIe—Iy = LOH Wal = d Bush a{qey wears wo1y ¢ 49y—y 02 weaIS VOLTDeIIxa 40 AdjeyaUa = [IH €2)¥WL = d Suisn sajqey weays wosy / 49ze—y GussaqUa AdyeyguUa 4arempaas = 71H TEIN AgH)IAJN = (38 SAAT = £3 ~ GSM- QM - TSOM + TAIN = 4U/qL “HOLS WeaIS Jeayad = HUM auynag (pi iu/maq_*(09) wi = at/mg *(49) va 2/((29)YML + (19)VHL) = Jo *26.0u951p dund puo> pa2y 49{10q 4 duod = QdddL (eZ)WuL = 615d *a6s0yostp dund paay sa{yoq ge sunssaud = Qdstd 91/929 “Gddal PUe Gerad BuLsn sajqey weays wory aBseyrstp 4.7 3e Adyeyqua uazeMpaay = SQH 2/((99)WHL + {sayy = dy ‘dwar aarempaay [Ours = muL E)YHL = b1sd "7 494 Busaral ssaud 4azeMpaas = Add 4u/maq ‘ML pue HJd BULSN Saiqer wears woss Adj eyIUD 49zEMPIB) [eUI} = KIH 2/{(€S) WAL + (25)VWL) = do ‘day wears usem = Sup (SU)WaL = 61sd"*ssaad weays uyew = sid 4U/M4 ‘SHA pUe Hd BuLsN S9{ged weas wous Ady eyzUD wears ULEN = SHH SHHLIYOOTY NOLLVINITV) JONVAYOSUIE SH LINN VHYHO HLYON rau4U/aL ‘MOLy 4970M 2419 = HOM ab mw Z/(EL)WAL + (BT)WHL) = Jo ‘4asuapu0> Gursazua dwas HD = IHDL WH = 4. ‘4asuapuos Buraea, duay A) = OMIL ~ de ‘490M 2419 40 aSt4 duaa = yy Ino WHL = IK0L - OMI = @ aunyq *4asuapucs 07 paz2afa4 3824 = YD ((s)wnt * ooot * (etve - YHOL9)] = 9MM x OOOT x (ETvE - ¥HOLD) = WO JONVHUOSHId WISNIONOD /maq *2/((S5) WL + (PS)YWL) = 1 JWAL = 4 6ussn ssaud ysneyxa ausquny gi 03 suo13{puo> 2eaya4 30y wos UOLSUedxE audosiuast pue (61)WL = d Ssasd Janossoso Gulsn Adceyjua ysneyxa ausquny gf >4dosquas! = 14TH U/mg *2/((6S)WML + (85)¥ML) = 1 “(6E)WML = d Suisn saiger wears wosy Adyeygua ysneyxa ouLquna gi = 31H s £9 + HUM = 4U/QL ‘BuFQIM dT YBNOIR MOLY = dIM ; (EHX ED) + (HUH HBA) = G1/mq *Adyeyqua tmoq dI = dIH % *Adua12}452 Gupqumy aunssaid azeypamiaquy = d17 oot * (adi = diH) = d13 ai/mag *2/((€S)¥HL + (2S)¥WL) = 2 “(St)WHL = d Sutsn suot3;pu02 weays ujew wo1y uo!suedxd 24do43uasy JWHL = d SSa4d yeayas pyo> Buisn Adjeyqua asmeyxa ausquny gH 2}douquas} = [gH D+ WD + £9 + 29 + TD)= SHN = 4U/GL “BULGIM gH wo4s MOL} WRITS ENEYAD = 3QHA TO(SuH ~ “SHAY - OuH = aL/mq *Ad,eyqua asneyxa auyquma dH = dH 4 *Aoua}21552 aurqum aanssaud yBhy = gH OOL * (IdHH SHH)/(dHH - SHH) = dHI SHIONSIOIag3 INTaUNL aT GAY dH SWHLIYODTY NOLLVINDTVI JONVAYOSYIE S# LINN VHYHO HLYONPasty (209 41/91 ~ uabos3N - NY pasty 1203 qL/qL - uabAx9 - 0 Pasys [209 G1/4L ~ Ua604PkH - H assy 1209 GL/aL ~ woquey - 9 rSysKjeue azew.3,n wosy uoLzemosuy BusMol tos anduy % Tuotrernap Aou9}91459 491 10g = A308. 39 - 38d = A300 sabed 9 yoeg (uolzeinaje> 4a}{4ee 29s) = 30d quansad #Koua131359 491109 = 39 Oot * (yHon/YHDLD) = 36 ANgTI1as3 TOG (9€) WML = v6H UL ‘aunssa4d aynjosqe sasuapuos (em2e = yod lut *anssaud aasuapuor wnayydo wos UOLaeLAd = aYId 3 Duwsd ~ (9€)¥WL = DLVSd - WOd = GVOd a aud = SAVSd. aanjosge 6y ut ‘aunssa4d uoryeames sasuapu0d pe 3uvS1)3 = SIWSd (5aqqer weays wos) duoz Gur suapuos pay2ipasd 0} Gurpuodsaio> aunssaud uolyeanye: 4asuapuos Jo ease ares = 000'SHT Je ‘4asuapuos 405 duay 6uysuapuo> paraipaid = D1vSL___ [(naM/000' stts(n-))4x2 - t]/a + IDL = JIVST samesaduay 12{ut 4970 BuLye{MD419 404 404984 WOLI>aLL09 IU919154909 4aysURIa Pay = Fy Ussby"O + (IMDL)z_O X L2vv2"T ~ 2(IMDL) OU * B6¥6L°C + c(IHDL)o.O1 X E25°6 ~ w(INDLe OL * S9°E = 24 aaqonu 40 [= 40398) Buj{Noy aga = Ty Joz¥s 4u/miq *u913133909 4agsuedy YeIy {[e19A0 = ASX e92 * 600 x Fy x A Sdy *£}20194 421M = A —SeEIS6(E HOH =a ‘SWHLTYODTV NOLLYINOTW2 39NVHUOSYId SP LINN VHYWO HLYONmots se6 any kup yo x - aBeyeal sazeay a4e ~ AVIV. Uw + Oot) = Oot x [t ~ (Isszax + OOL)/(2ss39x + OOL)) = WIV 4 *s4ayeay s4e Guyneay seb aniy us ate ssaoxa = 25539K (ELI )WHL = (9S1x2 Ayquasana you saop anduy) = ZSS3IK Oot x [t-((p)vHL + 001). 4 ‘su9ze9y 44 GuJsaqUa seB aniy ul ape ssaoxa = 15S39K (w)wHL = TSS39K paving voque> = 99 w- 1 = 99 NOW = IN (IW x 6/8) + (Wy x 6/8 - O)¥V = 10 (iy x 6/1) + (Hv x G/U - H)xY = TH OW = 19 L/maq ‘anper aumysiou 494644 - 9AHH pasts Le09 ai/q = aumsiow - Tay Padty LOD qL/aL - Usy - IV pasty L802 qI/aL - angins - 1s tspsdyeue ayempxoud A,pep wou Guymol tos anduy Pa4ts L209 GL/aL = asnja4 uy woque> - ¥9 ‘asnyau uy uoquey us (erg P24ty L209 QL/aL - 24mston - WY pouty 1809 at/al = usy - y Pasty Le0d GL/QL - angins - § aseq e Se pasn ase asoua) vorreujmuayap anjen Gulreay pur s{sfeue areajxoud Gujpuodseiso> wi.) Guymo| 04 anduy SWHLIYOOTY NOLLVIND V9 3ONVHYOSUId SF_LINN VIVO HLYONJo 'duay Seb aAe payoa.402 = 9091 (owt = 091) * (oot/avaqv)86"0 + 091 = 3091 '[(@e)WwL-(SE)vWL]o2"0 x (8E)YWL = (9091 - B19L)Sb2°/(BIVL - GOVL) ¥2°O * GYM = BHVON ‘C(ob)wni~(ve)wHL] ¥2°0 x (ZE)WHL = (VOOL-VI9L)Sb2"/(WIVL - VOVL) b2°O x WWM = VHVOR eyo duay = gIvL GuyAeal aye 40 dua = gOvL 4. _49reay aye yo ssauanty2ajJ9 = VHVI43 2 $e yo dua, = VOL = = x Ut — VIL =“(hedwa * oot * vive = vove = Wavasa SWHLIYODTV NOLLVINIV9 3INVHUOIYId SF LINN VHVWO HLYON4 *SS0{ 40g pagunoa2.eun = 29VKN, (38 + avd + y9d + 41WD + 4IHD + vWD + 90D) - OOL = JOVNN (Lenuew) erep anduy = x ‘uoraerpes 02 anp ssoj 44a uattog = OVE (1enuew) erep anduy = x ‘uogses pauanqun 03 anp sso = ¥90 oot * [9AHH/(¥D x O09'vI)] = 390 % 19NJ uy aanysyow 03 anp sol = 41ND ‘OO * [OAHH/(43H ~ 9H) * IHW] = 3TRO at/maq *(sarqes wears) avi @ 493m 3eS 40 Adyeysua = 43H % ‘19n5 ut vaboapky 03 anp ssor = 414d OT * OAMH/(44H - 9H) x (IHX O¥6°8)] = STAD P16 at/maq *(91qe2 weays) avi @ soden sagen yes 30 Adyeyaua = voH at/mq *(53tqe2 wears) 2091 Fe: Jodea 493em Jo £dyeyqua = oH % ‘ayo up a4mstow 0} anp ssol = vWD Oot x COAHH/(VOH-9H) X WHA] = WHO “Ayypyuny 215 499ds = MHdS Uy 24n35 40m 40 y6}aK = YAR MHS * VHLM(OOT/(P)VHL + 00°T) = WHA yueysuod us Leyp, = Le QL tang t/a 4 S01 se6 Aap = 900 Oot x [OAHH/(O¥L - 2091) X S¥2°0 x 90K] = 900 pauang 19mg qi/q ‘S26 ants ap 40 3y61am = 90H (10 + TH x Ov6"c = INV + TS + 89) + (WHIM) (OOT/(H)¥AL + T) = 50 pauang tang 41 994093 = VAN (IS « ze" + (8 +9 0ST) = WHI SHHLIYOOTW NOLLVINITI 3ONVHYOSYIE SF LINN VHYWO HLYON(Toava) * 2py"1és2 = MOTESVS 35. n.08 | (22) + 686Se | ae LZ OF (S20 - AW) 9¥9°0 * 69°61S % (SE)WML + (iz)vaL + (EE)WML = TOOVE 5 pecteaey = Se" + “L((6e)wnL) vea"2s = AW ‘SWHLIYOOTV NOLLVIND V9 JINVWAOSHId SP LINN VHYHO HLUON