Heat Rejection Cycle Testing Kenneth Hennon CleanAir Engineering - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
heat rejection cycle testing
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Heat Rejection Cycle Testing Kenneth Hennon CleanAir Engineering - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 23, 2022 403 likes •850 views

Heat Rejection Cycle Testing Kenneth Hennon CleanAir Engineering Performance Group Clean Coal International Conference November 2013 Overview Heat Rejection Cycle Testing Combining Tests Water Flow Rate Cost of Malperformance

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Kenneth Hennon CleanAir Engineering Performance Group Clean Coal International Conference November 2013

Heat Rejection Cycle Testing

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Overview Heat Rejection Cycle Testing

  • Combining Tests
  • Water Flow Rate
  • Cost of Malperformance
  • Case Studies
slide-3
SLIDE 3
  • Cooling tower thermal performance

testing

  • Condenser cleanliness testing
  • Pump performance through circulating

water flow rate determination

  • Evaluation of the component impact on

turbine back pressure

Heat Rejection Cycle Testing

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Why Test? ECONOMICS

  • Thermal efficiency

– A 650 MW – 85 percent load factor – Fuel costs $50/ton

  • Saves $950,000 in the first

year by improving heat rate by only one percent and reduces emissions.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

50,000 gpm 57% of New Acceptance Tests >50,000 gpm Yielded Tower Capability

  • f 100% or greater

Why Test? 2011 Test Results

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Water Flow Rate (l/s) Test Capability -- % Design Flow

50,000 gpm

Why Test? 2010 Test Results

22% of New Acceptance Tests >50,000 gpm Yielded Tower Capability

  • f 100% or greater
slide-7
SLIDE 7

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Water Flow Rate (l/s) Test Capability -- % Design Flow

50,000 gpm 38% of New Acceptance Tests >50,000 gpm Yielded Tower Capability

  • f 100% or greater

Why Test? 2009 Test Results

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Why Test?

2008 COOLING TOWER THERMAL TESTS ACCEPTANCE TESTS -- NEW COOLING TOWERS

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Water Flow Rate (l/s) Test Capability -- % Design Flow

2,000 l/s (32,000 gpm) 6 out of 13 passed (46%)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Component Performance and CO2

Change in Component Performance Change in HR (BTU/kWh) Annual HR Cost Increase in CO2 (TPY) 10% Condenser Cleanliness 30 $330,000 17,000 10% Cooling Tower Capability 15 $165,000 8,500 10% Circulating Water Flow 20 $220,000 11,400

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Component Performance and CO2

Change in Component Performance Change in HR (BTU/kWh) Annual HR Cost Increase in CO2 (TPY) 10% Condenser Cleanliness 30 $330,000 17,000 10% Cooling Tower Capability 15 $165,000 8,500 10% Circulating Water Flow 20 $220,000 11,400

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Component Performance and CO2

Change in Component Performance Change in HR (BTU/kWh) Annual HR Cost Increase in CO2 (TPY) 10% Condenser Cleanliness 30 $330,000 17,000 10% Cooling Tower Capability 15 $165,000 8,500 10% Circulating Water Flow 20 $220,000 11,400

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Component Performance and CO2

Change in Component Performance Change in HR (BTU/kWh) Annual HR Cost Increase in CO2 (TPY) 10% Condenser Cleanliness 30 $330,000 17,000 10% Cooling Tower Capability 15 $165,000 8,500 10% Circulating Water Flow 20 $220,000 11,400

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Component Performance and CO2

Clean Air Engineering,

Change in Component Performance Cost in CO2 Allowances Annual HR Cost Total Annual Cost 10% Condenser Cleanliness $57,000 $330,000 $387,000 10% Cooling Tower Capability $29,000 $165,000 $194,000 10% Circulating Water Flow $39,000 $220,000 $259,000

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Major Test Parameters

  • Water Flow Rate
  • Hot Water Temperature
  • Cold Water Temperature
  • Inlet Wet Bulb Temperature
  • Fan Motor Power

Cooling Range Approach

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Water Flow Instrumentation

  • Unreinforced – risers
  • Reinforced – large

pipes

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Water Flow Rate Measurements

  • Dye dilution can be used where

pitot tube access is limited

  • Good applications for once-

through systems

  • Can be used for closed loop

systems with large volumes

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Alternative Flow Measurement Techniques

Dye Dilution Ultrasonic ???

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Cooling Tower Performance Curves

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Cooling Tower Performance Curves

  • Water Flow Rate
  • Wet Bulb Temp
  • Hot Water Temp
  • Cold Water Temp
  • Fan Motor Power
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Fan Blade Pitch

  • On a historical basis, over 30% of

the tested cooling towers have fans that are drawing significantly less power than designed

  • The loss of airflow equates to a

5% loss in operating cooling tower capability

  • $82,500/yr in HR & 4,250 TPY

CO2

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

1/6 H H 1/2 H 5/6 H

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

  • In flowing channel – matrix of temperature sensors are

used

slide-23
SLIDE 23
slide-24
SLIDE 24

Cold Water Hot Water Water Cooling Tower Circulating Water Pump Condenser Steam Fan Drift

Heat Rejection Cycle

Hot Water Temp at cooling tower is the condenser discharge temp

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

Water Flow Rate

– Key to heat rejection cycle

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Water Flow Rate Measurements

  • Pitot Tube, manometer,

accessories

  • Water flow rate can be

measured in pipes up to 20ft in diameter

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

Condenser performance (cleanliness) has the greatest impact

  • n heat rejection

cycle. Relatively easy to address cleanliness issues – air infiltration.

Clean Air Engineering,

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Case Study 1 AC Power – Colver, PA

  • 110 MW waste coal

fired plant

  • Single Pressure

Condenser

  • Four cell counterflow

tower

  • Two circulating pumps

Clean Air Engineering,

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Case Study 1

Test Parameter Unit Design Test Water flow rate gpm 57,000 56,873 Hot water temperature F 101.0 80.0 Cold water temperature F 81.0 59.8 Wet bulb temperature F 72.0 36.2 Cooling range F 20.0 20.5 Fan power hp 192.4 246.7 Capability % 100 98 Cold water temperature deviation at design conditions °F 0.3

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Case Study 1

Parameter Units Design Test Heat duty Btu/hr 4.94x108 5.76x108 Steam condensed lbm/hr 522,520

  • Condensing steam pressure

InHg 2.3 1.48 Condensing steam temperature °F 105.85 91.3 Circulating water flow Gpm 57,000 56,873 Inlet water temperature °F 91.0 59.5 Outlet water temperature °F 101.0 80.0 Cleanliness 85% 67%

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Case Study 1 AC Power – Colver, PA

  • Cooling tower

performance – OK

  • Pump performance – OK
  • Condenser – significant

issues

  • Other plant

instrumentation issues

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Comparison of 67% to 85% Condenser Cleanliness

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 54 59 64 69 74 79 Inlet Water Temperature (F) Change in Heat Rate (Btu/kWhr) 32 39.7 47.4 55.1 62.8 70.5 Wet Bulb Temperature (F)

Case Study 1

55 Btu/kWh increase in HR due to Condenser Cleanliness at 70.5 WB

slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

Predicted Pressure

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Wet Bulb Temperature (F) Predicted Pressure (InHg) Current Cooling System Performance 100% Cooling Tower 85% Cleanliness

Case Study 1

.3 InHg backpressure increase due to Condenser Cleanliness

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Case Study 2 Hope Creek NGS

  • 1220 MW nuclear
  • Natural draft CF tower
  • 15% uprate approved
  • Single pressure

condenser

  • Four circulating water

pumps

slide-35
SLIDE 35

35

Case Study 2

Test 1 Test 2 Test Parameter Unit Design 11:20-12:20 12:20-13:20 Water Flow Rate gpm 552,000 571,736 571,736 Hot Water Temperature F 119.0 110.9 111.1 Cold Water Temp F 90.0 86.7 87.2 Wet Bulb Temperature F 76.0 61.8 62.2 Dry Bulb Temperature F 87.3 71.4 71.4 Barometric Pressure In Hg 29.92 29.86 29.86 Cooling Range F 29.0 24.2 23.9 Relative Humidity % 60 58 60 Wind Speed mph N/A 7.6 4.8 Capability % 100 76 75 Cold Water Temperature Deficit °F 4.6 4.8

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Case Study 2

Parameter Units Value Number of units 2 Heat duty Btu/hr 7726x106 Steam condensed lbm/hr 7.926x106 Condensing steam pressure inHg 4.56 Condensing steam temperature °F 130.3 Circulating water flow gpm 552,000 Inlet water temperature °F 92.0 Outlet water temperature °F 120.0 Cleanliness 64%

slide-37
SLIDE 37

37

Case Study 2 Hope Creek NGS

  • Cooling tower – significant

issues

  • Condensers performance- OK
  • Circulating flow rate - OK
slide-38
SLIDE 38

Expected Condenser Pressure

2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 40 50 60 70 80 Wet Bulb Temperature (F) Condenser Pressure (inHg) Current Cooling Tower Perf 100% Cooling Tower

Case Study 2

.6 InHg backpressure increase at 75F WB

slide-39
SLIDE 39

39

Predicted Power

1200 1210 1220 1230 1240 1250 1260 1270 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Wet Bulb Temperature (F) Predicted Power (MW) Current Cooling System Performance 100% Cooling Tower 70% Cleanliness

Case Study 2

14 MW loss due to cooling tower at 75F WB About 3 MW loss due to condenser at 75F WB

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Planning a performance test begins with defining its

  • bjectives:
  • The validation of contractual guarantees for a new
  • r modified plant,
  • Diagnostic tests to identify or quantify problems
  • Establish a performance benchmark against which

future performance can be contrasted

Planning for a Test

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Heat Rejection Cycle Testing

  • Solid tool for effective allocation of O&M
  • Quantifying impact and payback

– Some problems are easy\inexpensive to fix

  • Complements other plant test programs
slide-42
SLIDE 42

Any Questions?

slide-43
SLIDE 43

43

Thank You for Your Attention!

Contact Information: Ken Hennon 865.938.7555 Khennon@cleanair.com