Power Plant Thermodynamic Performance Monitoring National Energy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Power Plant Thermodynamic Performance Monitoring

National Energy Efficiency Conference September 2012

Agenda

• Performance Monitoring Objective
• Performance Monitoring Methodology
• Examples of Issues Identified
• Case Studies
• Experience Establishing a PM Program
• Alignment to ISO 50001 EMS

Introduction of Tuas Power

• 2 x 600 MW oil fired

steam plants, Unit 1 & 2

• Mar & Dec 99
• 2 x 367.5 MW gas fired

combined cycle plants, CCP 1 & 2

• Nov 01 & Jan 02
• 2 x 367.5 MW gas fired

combined cycle plants, CCP 3 & 4

• Jul 05 & Sep 05

Installed capacity - 2,670 MW

• Facilitate Operational Adjustments and

Corrective Maintenance to ensure plant

• perates at optimum thermal efficiency
• As fuel is a substantial part of power generation

cost, small gains in thermal efficiency could achieve significant fuel savings

• Enable advance maintenance planning to

restore degraded performance of plant components

Performance Monitoring Objective

Performance Monitoring Objective

Singapore 2009 Primary Fuel and Electricity Consumption

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 Primary HC Fuel Electricity Cons Kilo Tons Oil Equivalent Others Domestic Commerce Industry Transport Industry, Commerce, Households Power Plants

Performance Monitoring Objective

• Proactively identifying the plant sections that

have degraded performance

• Quantifying the degradations in terms of effect
• n overall plant efficiency
• Enabling a condition based predictive

maintenance program to set and prioritize maintenance activities that will minimize degradation and hence maximize efficiency

Performance Monitoring Objective

Actual and Potential Efficiency Improvement

49.600% 49.800% 50.000% 50.200% 50.400% 50.600% 50.800%

GT Compressor Fouling 0.051% 0.150% 0.320% 0.423% 0.030% BFP Inefficiency 0.012% 0.020% 0.025% 0.026% 0.026% LP Bypass 0.300% 0.320% 0.288% 0.310% 0.310% HP Bypass 0.150% 0.150% 0.150% 0.150% 0.150% Condenser Fouling 0.085% 0.092% 0.224% 0.225% 0.225% IAF Pressure Drop 0.005% 0.022% 0.033% 0.054% 0.054% Actual Efficiency 50.300% 50.100% 49.800% 49.700% 50.040% Nov 06 Dec 06 Jan 07 Feb 07 Mar 07

GT Compr Cold Wash

Note : Figures in this chart are fictitious to maintain data confidentiality

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Modeling Application

To make a Complete Heat and Mass Balance Establishing current performance level of individual components and total system Establishing the benchmark for the individual component and for total system Set targets for improvement/maintenance

Performance Monitoring Methodology

HRSG

 HRSG Effectiveness  Duty of individual heat transfer components

Steam Turbine

 HP Turbine Power  IP Turbine Power  LP Turbine Power  HP/IP/LP Turbine Eff

Condenser  Condenser Water Flow

 Condenser Duty  Condenser effectiveness

Auxiliaries

 CWP Performance  BFP Performance  CEP Performance

Distribution

 Valve passing  Line Loss

GT

 GT Power Generation  GT Comp Eff.  GT Turbine Eff  GT Heat rate  IAF performance

CCP Power Station

Performance Monitoring Methodology

169298 GT Power kW 109848 ST Power kW

278.91 Gross Generator Output MW

Performance Monitoring Methodology

• Complete quantification of all streams in a power

plant eg flue gas, cooling water, steam and fuel flows

• Establish the present performance level of the

individual equipment eg efficiency, heat transfer coefficients, leakages

• Enables data validation

– Measured values can be compared against the heat balance output for validating the accuracy of measurement.

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Modeling Application

To make a Complete Heat and Mass Balance Establishing current performance level of individual components and total system Establishing the benchmark for the individual component and for total system Set targets for improvement/maintenance

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Each piece of equipment modeled separately to match guaranteed data, then read by overall model

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 EXH S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15

GT uses curves or spreadsheet data HRSG matches HRSG vendor COND matches HEI/condenser ST model matches ST vendor

Performance Monitoring Methodology

• Construct software models of the plant components tuned

to design performance

• New & Clean performance is the benchmark

Inputs Benchmark

Gas Turbine Ambient Temp, Press, Load Heatrate HRSG GT Exh Flow, Temp HP, IP, LP steam Stack Temp Steam Turbine HPS Flow, Temp, Press, IPS Flow, Temp, Press, Condenser Press HP, IP, LP section sliding Press, Power, Efficiency Condenser LPST Exh Flow, Enthalpy, Cooling Water Flow, Temp Vacuum

Examples of Issues Identified

• Lost of efficiency after MI due to IGV reprogramming
• Boiler Feed Pump minimum flow recycle valve passing
• Identification of Passing HPST Bypass Valve
• FW Preheater Bypass Valve passing
• Selection of Optimum Inlet Air Filter
• Condenser Cooling Water Optimization
• Condenser Cooling Water Debris Filter Choke
• HPST Bypass Spray Valve Passing
• HRSG HP and RH Spray Valve Passing
• Condenser Air Ingress
• Condenser Tube Fouling

Case Study : FW Preheater Bypass

Flue Gas Inlet Flue Gas to Stack Feed water Preheater

E-3

Condensate Extraction Pump Preheated Water To Deaerator

V-1

Bypass Valve

Passing Valve

Case Study : FW Preheater Bypass

Stack temp Vs Feedwater Preheater Temperature Stack temp Vs Feedwater Preheater Temperature 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.10 1.10

1-Jan-05 15-Jan-05 29-Jan-05 12-Feb-05 26-Feb-05 12-Mar-05 26-Mar-05 9-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 7-May-05 21-May-05 4-Jun-05 18-Jun-05 2-Jul-05 16-Jul-05 30-Jul-05 13-Aug-05 27-Aug-05 10-Sep-05 24-Sep-05 8-Oct-05 22-Oct-05 5-Nov-05 19-Nov-05 3-Dec-05 17-Dec-05 31-Dec-05

Stack T Feedwater Preheater T

Valve Repaired (Actual) / (New and Clean Performance)

Case Study : Cond Debris Filter Choke

Condenser Cooling Water A Side Cooling Water Out LPST Exhaust (steam water mixture) Condensate (saturated water) Cooling Water B Side

Cooling Water B Side Debris Filter Choke

Debris Filter

Condenser Cooling Water Flow (T/H)

Debris Filter Repaired

• Condenser cooling water flow dropped in June 2011 and it is because B

side water path was choked.

• Transmission shaft gear of debris filter was replaced with a new one during

July 2011 shutdown. Condenser cooling water flow resumed back.

Case Study : Cond Debris Filter Choke

• Condenser performance was very poor in Q1 and Q2 2007 (Condenser

Pressure ACT/NC is very high). It was then found out that the vacuum pump sealing strainer was clogged and the pump was running with less sealing

• water. After it is rectified, the Condenser performance has improved

significantly.

Case Study : Condenser Air Ingress

Condenser Press ACT/NC

Condenser Air Ingress Solved

Experience Establishing a PM Program

• 2003 engaged ACTSYS for thermodynamic analysis of

MHI GT performance

• 2004 – Present, annual Performance Monitoring contract

with ACTSYS on all CCPs

• Quarterly reporting and presentations, review

performance gaps and required corrective actions

• Involvement of Maintenance, Equipment specialists,

Instrumentation, Operations

• Close working relationship where ACTSYS engineers

track plant performance and correlates findings to

• perational and maintenance events

Experience Establishing a PM Program

Operations & Maintenance Presentation & Discussion of Results Plant Data

Reports Discussion Points Plant Info System

Data Reconciliation Heat Balances Performance Models Plant Data Theoretical Analysis & Interpretation

Decision Support

Alignment to ISO 50001 EMS

TP Mgmt provides the framework for setting and reviewing energy objectives and targets Allocating resources and setting up of a methodology for analyzing energy usage Operating and maintaining systems and equipment, in accordance with operational criteria For all Energy Performance Indicators review non-conformities => check Actual versus “New & Clean” Determining and implementing the appropriate action needed Quarterly Performance Review Meetings

ISO 50001 EMS Implemented PM System

Thank you

GT SHAFT POWER (34.23%) I N L E T A I R ( 1 . 4 5 % ) HP STEAM (34.39%) HP TURB POWER (2.18%) LP TURB POWER (10.87%) CONDENSER LOSS 33.53% SHAFT POWER IP TURB POWER (6.68%) AUXILIARY POWER (0.22%) ROTOR COOLING LOSS (2.09%) COMBUSTOR LOSS (0.49%) COMPRESSOR WORK (….% of GT Shaft Power) FUEL SENSIBLE HEAT 1.00% DUCT LOSS (0.35%) RADIATION LOSS (0.34%) PIPE LOSS (0.08%) LP STEAM (4.03%) STACK LOSS (8.97%) IP STEAM (8.6%) CHEMICAL ENERGY (97.32%) RADIATION LOSS (0.06%) RADIATION LOSS (0.09%) RADIATION LOSS (0.04%)