Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
JOJOBERA THERMAL POWER STATION
(TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED)
ENERGY AUDIT OF
Auxiliary Power Consumption
Boiler Efficiency
Turbine Heat Rate and Efficiency
And
Condenser Performance
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An auxiliary power consumption and Heat rate energy audit was carried out for unit 2 and associated off-site auxiliaries at Jojobera Thermal Power Station, Tatanagar by NTPC. At the outset, the audit team compliment the plant management towards excellent house-keeping in boiler area, The major findings and brief summary of the recommendations in each area is given below. For technical and saving details please refer respective equipment / area sheet.
(1) The recorded Auxiliary Power Consumption during the audit was 8.63 %.(2) Major recommendations and their energy saving potential are given below
S No. RECOMMENDATIONENERGY SAVING
(MUs)
SAVING IN RUPEES (LAKH)
INVESTMENT IN RUPEES
(LAKH)
A Auxiliary Power Consumption study1 Main Plant Auxiliaries
a Boiler Feed Pump
(i)
Checking of internals of BFP 2A, 2B & 2C and their recirculation valve and overhauling if required
2.44 57.4
b Condensate Extraction Pump
(i)
Checking of internals of condensate pump B and its recirculation valve and overhauling if required
.09 2.18
c Induced Draft Fan
(i)
Arresting Air ingress across heaters and in flue gas ducts from APH outlet to ID fan inlet and optimizing fan performance
0.54 12.6
d Forced Draft fan(i) Optimizing air flow and
inspection/maintenance 0.8 19
2
of Forced draft fan A & B
e Primary Fans
(i)Optimization of primary air flow
1.0 23
f Coal Mills
(I)overhauling of Mills & three mill operation
2.8 66
g Circulating Water Pump
(i) Providing polymer coating on CW pump internals
0.34 7.9 10
hProvision of Online energy monitoring system
0.36 8.5 10
2 OFFSITE AUXILIARIESa Coal Handling System
(i) Direct bunkering of coal 0.44 10.4
b AHP and other pumps
iPolymer/ceramic on pumps
0.16 3.77 3
c Lighting System
(i)Voltage reduction in lighting circuit in AHP & CHP areas
0.08 2
(ii)Replacing 763 numbers 40W FTL by 28W T-5 Tube-light
0.18 4.24 5.7
(iii)
Asbestos sheets to be replaced with translucent sheets in CHO Conveyors gallery
0.17 4.02 16.6
B Boiler Efficiency Test
aReduction sensible heat loss by trimming excess air
85.5
b
Reduction of un-burnt carbon in fly ash and bottom ash by combustion optimization
60.9
C Turbine Heat Rate and efficiency test
a
Improvement in heat rate ( including HR improvement by improving vacuum as given below )
7.9 186
D Condenser Performance test
3
aImprovement in vacuum by overhauling of CW-CT system
4.6 108
Total 17.3 553
Remark : (i) Saving in Rs includes saving against s.no. B.a & B.b also (ii) Energy saving does not include saving against s.no. D.d
(3) Other recommendations ( in addition to above ) in each area is given below.
(1) Main Plant Area(i) All drains and vents in feed water line should be checked for passing.(ii) Merit order operation in BFPs can be done. Considering the audit period SEC
of BFPs, it is recommended to keep BFP A & C in service and BFP B can be used as standby.
(iii) It is recommended to keep FRS DP as low as possible. It can be seen from the comparison table above, that there was no operational problem at FRS DP of 4.4 Kg/cm2. FRS DP can be kept at 4 Kg/cm2and if no problem is faced in maintaining drum level it can be reduced to 3 Kg/cm2. it will reduce BFPs power consumption.
(iv) Provision of Flue gas flow measurement in all ID Fans should be made. This will help in monitoring of air ingress.
(v) Provision for sample collection for O2 should be made in all the places e.g. APH inlet, APH outlet and each ID Fan inlet. This will help in monitoring of air ingress at various places in the flue gas duct.
(vi) Provision of Flue gas temperature measurement at all ID Fans’ inlets should be made. This will also help in monitoring of air ingress and exit temperature of flue gas.
(vii) Internal inspection of fan B needs to be done.(viii) Complete flue gas duct from APH to Fan inlet should be checked by
pressurizing the furnace before unit overhaul.(ix) Provision of pressure gauge at all ID Fans outlet should be made. This will
help in calculating air power and other auditing parameter.(x) Provision of individual fan flow measurement in all FD Fans should be made.
This will help in monitoring of air flow and fan performance.(xi) Internal inspection of both the fans.(xii) Whenever opportunity comes, complete air duct from fan to wind box should
be checked by pressurizing the furnace.(xiii) Efforts need to be made for three mill operation. Because of four mill
operation, primary air flow was high and secondary air flow was less. Due to low secondary air flow, fans were running at low load i.e. in low efficiency zone. Therefore three mill operation will lead to operate FD fans in high efficiency zone.
(xiv) Provision of individual fan flow measurement in all PA Fans should be made. This will help in monitoring of air flow and fan performance.
(xv) Internal inspection of both the fans.(xvi) Whenever opportunity comes, complete air duct from fan to mills including
air heater should be checked.(xvii) Efforts need to be made for three mill operation. Because of four mill
operation, primary air flow was high and secondary air flow was less. Due to high air flow, primary air fans were consuming more power. Therefore three mill operation will help in optimizing primary air flow.
(xviii) Three mill operation should be tried
4
(xix) Mill maintenance philosophy should be reviewed. This should include review of roller and other associated auxiliaries replacement practice.
(xx) Rollers spring tension should be lessened (xxi) Roller and other auxiliaries running hour vise status should be maintained
( presently not available.)(xxii) Coal fineness of 70% through 200 mesh should be maintained. This level of
fineness is sufficient for coal having volatile matter of more than 18 %. Classifier opening should be increased.
(xxiii) CW ducting inspection should be done at suitable opportunity. If scaling inside duct is observed, it could be one of the reason of low cooling water flow .
( 2 ) Offsite Area (a) Coal Handling Plant
(i) Conveyor running hours along with Crushers running hours may be logged and analyzed on daily, monthly and yearly basis. For accurate monitoring, time totalizers should be installed at major CHP auxiliaries switchgears. This will help in monitoring and controlling idle running of equipments.
(ii) No-load power consumption in CHP may be reduced by optimizing no-load run of the conveyors, which is very routine in nature.
(b) Ash Handling Plant & Other auxiliaries pump
(i) Ash water ratio needs to be checked on regular basis (once a day) and to be maintained as per design.
(ii) In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump to be checked for under loading, (iii) HP water pumps to be checked for poor flow.
(d) Compressed Air System(i) Provision to isolate compressor with receiver tank is to be made during annual
maintenance of compressed air system. This will help to evaluate Free air delivery (FAD) test of Compressors and efficiency thereafter.
(e) Cooling Tower 1 Performance test of Cooling tower to be conducted during peak summer and rainy
season. During this period heat load on CT is maximum due to ambient conditions and actual performance can be evaluated.
2 For energy savings and better air flow FRP fan blades are being used. Which is a good practice and to be continued.
3 CW flow needs to be increased up to design level i.e 18000 m 3/hr. CW pumps to be checked for less flow.
4 Increased air flow measured during the test, may be due to use of FRP blades.5 Cooling tower fills needs to be checked for fill chocking and poor water
distribution.. Equal and uniform water flow to each cell to be ensured for proper distribution of water. This will improve effectiveness of CT. Improved CT performance will allow to stop one CT fan during extreme cold conditions (night time of winter)
6 Voltage level needs to be increased up to 415 Volt for CT fan 1,2 and 6 by tap adjustment.
5
Auxiliary Power Consumption Audit
6
Auxiliary Power ConsumptionThe Plant Load Factor and auxiliary power consumption ( provided by TPC energy audit team ) during audit period is given below
Date PLF APC08.01.07 99.93 8.14
09.01.07 100.03 8.97
10.01.07 99.91 8.68
11.01.07 100.14 8.67
12.01.07 99.06 8.70
The power consumption pattern of major auxiliaries are given below:
7.6
1
8.2
9
7.9
5
7.20
7.40
7.60
7.80
8.00
8.20
8.40
BFP A BFP B BFP C
Specific energy Consumption of BFPs, Kw/T of flow
0.6
8 0.7
5
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
CEP A CEP B
Specific Energy Consumption of CEPs, Kw/T of flow
7
40
8
45
9
380
400
420
440
460
IDFAN A ID FAN B
Power consumption in ID Fans, Kw
31
9
27
3
240
260
280
300
320
FD FAN A FD FAN B
Power Consumption in FD FANS, kW
248 30
8
0
100
200
300
400
PA FAN A PA FAN B
Power Consumption in PA FANs, kW
8
15
.5
14
.4
14
.7
21
.8
15
.7
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
MILL A MILL B MILL C MILL D MILL E
Specific Energy Consumption of Mills, Kw/T of flow
19
17
16
16171718
181919
SA FAN A SA FAN B
Power Consumption of SA FANs, kW
9
SPECIFIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR
REDUCTION
IN
AUXILIARY POWER CONSUMPTION
10
MAIN PLANT AUXILIARIES
11
BOILER FEED PUMP
There are three BFPs in the units. Two BFPs are kept in service and third act as standby. The designed flow is 215.2 TPH and motor capacity is 2000 kW.
The comparative study of all BFPs is given below.
S.No Description Units BFP A BFP B BFP C1 Unit Load MW 119.00 119.67 120.333 BFP Suction Flow TPH 190.10 180.70 175.904 Feed Water Flow TPH 371.90 372.27 371.305 Speed rpm 3562 3565 3486
6 DP Across FRV Kg/cm2 4.40 5.43 5.838 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 6.27 6.30 6.33
9 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 149.57 150.37 152.0010 FW Pressure
a At Heater Inlet Kg/cm3 148.13 150.13 150.27
b At Heater Outlet Kg/cm4 147.23 149.00 149.07 iv Power Consumption kW 1447.5 1497.8 1399.212 Pump Hydraulic Power kW 742.33 709.40 698.22
13Specific Energy Consumption Kwh/T 7.61 8.29 7.95
14 Combined Efficiency % 51.28 47.36 49.9015 Motor Loading % 72 75 7016 Flow Loading % 88 84 82
RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the observation recorded above in comparison sheet, following are the major recommendations.(i) The Specific energy consumption (SEC) for BFP 2A, 2B & 2C was 7.6, 8.3 & 8 kWh/T.
As per the pumps specification, design SEC can be calculated as 7.3 kW/T of feed water. The specific energy consumption pattern indicates that all BFPs were consuming more power than the designed power consumption. As performance guarantee test specific energy consumption and efficiency is not available, the designed SEC is taken for performance comparison. Since unit loads were near to full load during audit of all BFPs, pump flow and other conditions can be considered same . Since all the BFPs configuration are same, the possible reason for high SEC can be
(a) Deterioration in performance of BFP (b) Increase in system resistance.
Therefore (a) Overhauling of pumps 2A, 2B & 2C may be done. (b) All drains and vents in feed water line should be checked for passing.
The energy saving potential is calculated below.
12
BFP 2A
Designed SEC = 7.3 kW/T of feed water SEC of BFP 2A = 7.6 kW/T of feed waterDifference in SEC = 0.3 kW/T Hence energy saving potential = 0.3*190.1
= 57 kWhAnnual running hours is assumed as 8000 Hrs. As there are three BFPs in the unit and only two are kept in service during normal running condition, therefore running hours for one BFP can be taken as 5300 hrs.
Annual energy saving potential = 57*5300= 302100 kWh= 0.3 MUs
Considering energy cost as Rs 2.35 per kWh Annual saving potential in Rs = 0.3*1000000*2.35
= 7.1 lakh
BFP 2B
Designed SEC = 7.3 kW/T of feed water SEC of BFP 2B = 8.3 kW/T of feed waterDifference in SEC = 1.0 kW/T Hence energy saving potential = 1*180.7
= 180.7 kWhAnnual energy saving potential = 180.7*5300
= 1487710 kWh= 1.49 MUs
Considering energy cost as Rs 2.35 per kWh Annual saving potential in Rs = 1.49*1000000*2.35
= 35 lakhBFP 2C
Designed SEC = 7.3 kW/T of feed water SEC of BFP 2A = 8.0 kW/T of feed waterDifference in SEC = 0.7 kW/T Hence energy saving potential = 0.7*175.9
= 123.1 kWhAnnual energy saving potential = 123.1*5300
= 652589 kWh= 0.65 MUs
Annual saving potential in Rs = 0.65*1000000*2.35= 15.3 lakh
(ii) Merit order operation in BFPs can be done. Considering the audit period SEC of BFPs, it is recommended to keep BFP A & C in service and BFP B can be used as standby.
(iii) It is recommended to keep FRS DP as low as possible. It can be seen from the comparison table above, that there was no operational problem at FRS DP of 4.4 Kg/cm2. FRS DP can be kept at 4 Kg/cm2and if no problem is faced in maintaining drum level it can be reduced to 3 Kg/cm2. it will reduce BFPs power consumption.
13
CONDENSATE EXTRACTION PUMP
Two CEPs are available in the unit. One pump is kept in service and other act as standby. The designed flow is 360 TPH and motor capacity is 250KW.
The comparative study of all CEPs is given below.
S. No Description Units CEP A CEP B1 Unit Load MW 118 1192 Grid Frequency Hz 48.77 48.913 Suction Temp. º C 46.8 47.64 CEP Flow TPH 332 3095 Condenser back Pressure(-) Kg/cm2 0.91 0.906 Hot-well Level mm 809.6 822.37 Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 16.5 16.68 Power Consumption kW 225.1 230.99 Specific Energy Consumption kWh/T 0.68 0.75
10 Motor Loading % 90 9211 Pump Loading % 92 8612 Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio TPH/MW 2.8 2.6
RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the observation recorded above in comparison sheet, following are the major recommendations.(i) The Specific energy consumption (SEC) for CEP A was 0.68 KWh/T which was lower than the pump B SEC. During the audit of CEPs, it was observed that when pump B was started , its discharge pressure was continuously dropping. CEP B could be run for 2 minutes only and CEP A was again taken in to service. It indicates that CEP A NRV was passing. Due to passing of NRV , some portion of CEP B discharge was returning back to condenser and discharge pressure was falling. Hence CEP A NRV should be attended at the earliest. As design specific energy consumption was not available, the lowest specific energy consumption is taken for comparison. The energy saving potential by attending CEP A NRV, is calculated below.
SEC of CEP A = 0.68 kW/T of water flowSEC of CEP B = 0.75 kW/T of water flowDifference in SEC = 0.07 kW/T of water flowEnergy saving potential = 0.07*332
= 23.24 kWHence annual energy saving potential = 23.24*4000
= 92960 kWh = 0.09 MU
Annual energy saving potential in Rs = 2.35*92960 = 2.18 lakh
INDUCED DRAFT FAN14
There are 2 induced draft fans in the unit. Both fans are kept in running condition. The fan capacity is 126 m³/sec ( 453600 m³/hr ) and the motor rated output is 800 kW. Each fan was tested separately. Rated flue gas exit temperature is 139 deg C.
The comparison study of ID Fan is given below.
S. N0. Description Units A B1 Unit Load MW 120 119
2 Frequency Hz 48.93 48.623 Total Air Flow TPH 430 4294 Coal Flow TPH 64 645 Suction Pressure (-) mmwcl 174 1766 Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B deg C 133/131 133/131
7 Current ( Control room ) Amps 48.6 52.7
8 Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 48.4 52.6 ii Voltage Kv 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.75 0.78 iv Power kW 408 4599 Motor Loading % 60 67
The possible reason for higher power consumption in B could be due to air ingress and deterioration in fan & motor performance. As per the on line data and chemistry reports , calculated gas flow at ID Fan inlet was 533.6 TPH. The calculated air ingress across APH and flue gas duct is 62.4 TPH which is about 12-13 % of total flue gas flow at APH inlet ( 489 TPH ). Due to non availability of PG test or designed power consumption, expected power consumption is tried to assess by using performance curve. As per the performance curve of the fan ( provided by Tata Power ), the expected fan flow with design coal is 489 TPH. As calculated gas flow in audit condition and design condition are same, the power consumption can also be assumed to be same. Calculated Power consumption at design condition is about 380-390 kW ( assuming motor efficiency as 90 %). Hence total power consumption of both ID Fans in the unit would be about 760 kW, but considering coupling and other losses, let us assume it to be 800 kW. As observed cumulative ID Fan power consumption was about 867 kW, it can be said that fans are consuming about 67 kW more power, which can be saved.
Expected saving in Power consumption = 67 kWRunning hour assumed = 8000Annual energy saving potential = 67*8000
= 536000 kWh= 0.54 MUs
Annual energy saving potential = 0.54*2.35*1000000= 12,59,600= 12.6 Lakh
It is recommended that(i) Provision of Flue gas flow measurement in all ID Fans should be made. This will
help in monitoring of air ingress.
15
(ii) Provision for sample collection for O2 should be made in all the places e.g. APH inlet, APH outlet and each ID Fan inlet. This will help in monitoring of air ingress at various places in the flue gas duct.
(iii) Provision of Flue gas temperature measurement at all ID Fans inlets should be made. This will also help in monitoring of air ingress and exit temperature of flue gas.
(iv) Internal inspection of fan B should be done as it is consuming more power compared to fan A.
(v) Whenever opportunity comes, complete flue gas duct from APH to Fan inlet should be checked by pressurizing the furnace for detecting air ingress point.
(vi) Provision of pressure gauge at all ID Fans outlet should be made. This will help in calculating air power and other auditing parameters.
FORCED DRAFT FAN
16
Two FD Fans (two running + no standby) are available in the unit. The design capacity of each fan is 75.83 m3/sec and the output of the motor is 480 kW. Each fan was tested separately.
The comparative study of all FD fans is given below
S. N0. Description Units FD FAN A FD FAN B1 Unit load MW 121 1212 Frequency Hz 49.08 48.813 Total Secondary air Flow TPH 257 2584 Discharge Pressure mmwcl 232 2455 Secondary Air Pressure a After AH ( L ) mmwcl 102 101b After AH ( R ) mmwcl 103 1066 Secondary Air Flow a After AH ( L ) TPH 136 136b After AH ( R ) TPH 121 1227 Wind Box Pressure a Left 101 102b Right 102 1028 Power Consumption kW 319 273
9 Secondary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio TPH/MW 2.1 2.1
RECOMMENDATIONSThe possible reason for higher power consumption in A could be due high air flow or/and deterioration in fan & motor performance. As per the on line data, total secondary air flow was 257 TPH. As only total secondary air flow was available on-line, individual fan specific energy consumption can not be calculated.Due to non availability of PG test or designed power consumption, expected power consumption is tried to assess by using performance curve. As per the performance curve of the fan ( provided by Tata Power ), power consumption at observed air flow and pressure should be about 240 kW ( assuming motor efficiency as 90 %). Hence total power consumption of FD Fans in the unit should be about 480 kW. As observed cumulative FID Fan power consumption was about 592 kW, it can be said that fans are consuming about 100 kW more power, which can be saved.
Expected saving in Power consumption = 100 kWRunning hour assumed = 8000Annual energy saving potential = 100*8000
= 800000 kWh= 0.8 MUs
Annual energy saving potential = 0.8*2.35*1000000= 18,80,000= 19 Lakh
It is recommended that(i) Provision of individual fan flow measurement in all FD Fans should be made.
This will help in monitoring of air flow and fan performance.(ii) Internal inspection of both the fans.(iii) Whenever opportunity comes, complete air duct from fan to wind box should be
checked by pressurizing the furnace.
17
(iv) Efforts need to be made for three mill operation. Because of four mill operation, primary air flow was high and secondary air flow was less. Due to low secondary air flow, fans were running at low load i.e. in low efficiency zone. Therefore three mill operation will lead to operate FD fans in high efficiency zone.
PRIMARY AIR FAN
18
Two PA Fans (two running + no standby) are available in the unit. The design capacity of each fan is 44.26 m3/sec and the output of the motor is 675 kW. Each fan was tested separately.
The comparative study of PA fans is given below:
S. N0. Description Units PA FAN A PA FAN B1 Unit load MW 121 1202 Frequency Hz 48.86 48.963 Total Primary air Flow TPH 173 1734 Coal Flow TPH 65 655 Discharge Pressure mmwcl 864 8646 DP across PAH air side TPH 32 327 Power kW 248 3088 Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio TPH/MW 1.42 1.449 Primary Air to Coal Ratio 2.65 2.65
RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the observation recorded above in comparison sheet, following are the major recommendations.As recorded above, It can be seen from the above, that primary air to coal ratio is 2.65. This is quiet high against the design primary air to coal ratio of 1.65. All effort should be done to optimize the present ratio. The possible reason for high ratio could be four mill operation against the design provision of three mill operation. Other reason could be air leakage from the ducts or air heaters.The possible reason for higher power consumption in B could be due to high air flow or / and deterioration in fan & motor performance. As per the on line data, total primary air flow was 173 TPH. As only total primary air flow was available on-line, individual fan specific energy consumption can not be calculated.Due to non availability of PG test or designed power consumption, expected power consumption is tried to assess by using performance curve. As per the performance curve of the fan ( provided by Tata Power ), the expected power at rated air flow and pressure is about 230 kW ( assuming motor efficiency as 90 %). Hence total power consumption of PA Fans in the unit should be about 460 kW. As observed cumulative PA Fans power consumption was about 556 kW, it can be said that fans are consuming about 90-100 kW more power which can be saved.
It is recommended that(i) Provision of individual fan flow measurement in all PA Fans should be made.
This will help in monitoring of air flow and fan performance.(ii) Internal inspection of both the fans.(iii) Whenever opportunity comes, complete air duct from fan to mills including air
heater should be checked.(iv) Efforts need to be made for three mill operation. Because of four mill operation,
primary air flow was high and secondary air flow was less. Due to high air flow, fans were consuming more power. Therefore three mill operation will help in optimizing primary air flow.
As already discussed above, actual primary air to coal ratio was high at the time of testing, energy saving potential if primary air flow is reduced by having three mill operation, is calculated below
Saving potential is given below
19
Designed primary air flow = 135 TActual primary air flow = 173 TAdditional primary air flow = 38 TPA Fans Cumulative SEC = 3.21 kWh/TSaving in Power consumption = 3.21*38
= 122 kWRunning hour assumed = 8000Annual energy saving potential = 122*8000
= 975840 kWh= 1 MUs
Annual energy saving potential = 1.0*2.35*1000000= 22,93,000= 23 Lakh
COAL MILLING SYSTEM
20
Five coal mills are available in the unit. . The mills are XRP-683 bowl mills with capacity of 36.5 T/hr and motor capacity of 300 kW.
Comparative study of all mills is shown below
S. N0. Description UnitsMILL
AMILL
BMILL
CMILL
DMILL
E1 Unit load MW 119.0 118.3 119.3 119.3 119.32 Frequency Hz 49.1 48.9 49.0 48.9 48.93 Total air flow TPH 430.0 430.0 430.4 430.8 431.04 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 804.3 805.5 806.1 806.5 799.65 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 439.8 509.3 496.9 363.3 393.36 Mill Differential Pressure mmwc 381.4 368.7 192.4 170.97 Cold Air Damper position % 62.9 71.6 53.8 65.2 41.28 Hot Air Damper position % 27.0 30.9 33.4 31.3 27.8
9Primary air temp after mill air pre-heater
0C 297.0 297.1 297.4 297.4 289.8
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 148.2 153.8 160.8 114.0 171.4
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 88.5 87.4 88.5 85.9 91.812 Coal flow to mill TPH 17.6 18.0 17.6 10.1 13.313 PA flow TPH 45.9 46.5 42.9 43.5 47.114 Total PA flow TPH 177.2 176.9 177.0 176.5 187.615 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 85.2 85.6 88.1 91.7 16 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 30.4 29.9 30.0 26.8 30.0b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 31.3 30.0 30.1 26.7 25.6ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7iv Power kW 273 260 259 220 20917 Specific power consumption kW/T 15.5 14.4 14.7 21.8 15.718 Motor Loading % 90.9 86.5 86.3 73.4 69.819 Mill Loading % 48.2 49.3 48.1 27.7 36.4
OBSERVATION
It can be seen from the table that all the mills are less than 50% loaded, though their motor loading are much higher. One reason for high power consumption of mills is use of middling coal having HGI of 45. But this factor alone can not be held responsible for high power consumption. As per mill performance curve, due to reduction in HGI from 55 to 45, mill capacity should be reduced by 15-20 %. But low moisture ( about 4.5 % ) in the middling coal compared to high moisture( 12 % ) in design coal should also help in getting better mill output. For reduction in moisture content from 12 to 5 % , mill output should be increased by about 5 %. Therefore due to change in coal properties like HGI and moisture, mill capacity can be assumed to be reduced by about 15 %. High fineness could be one of the major reason for high power consumption. As per design, coal fineness of the order of 70 % through 200 mesh at mill outlet is sufficient for coal of 18 % or more volatile matter. As per fineness vs mill output curve, for coal fine-ness of 85 % or more, mill output is reduced to 60 %. Therefore based on the above observations, it can be said that three mill operation is possible even with middling coal.
21
It was reported that un-burnt carbon in bottom and fly ash is high. As already written above, because of four mill operation, coal air mixture is too lean to have sufficient temperature in combustion zone.. Moreover due to high primary air, coal particle velocity at burner outlet will be high. This may even lead to flame un-stability and secondary combustion.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Therefore considering all above it is recommended (i) Three mill operation should be tried(ii) Mill maintenance philosophy should be reviewed. This should include review of
roller and other associated auxiliaries replacement practice.(iii) Rollers spring tension should be lessened (iv) Classifier opening should be increased. (v) Roller and other auxiliaries running hour vise status should be maintained
( presently not available.)(vi) Coal fineness of 70% through 200 mesh should be maintained. This level of
fineness is sufficient for coal having volatile matter of more than 18 %.
The energy saving potential by three mill operation is given below:Total power consumption of four mills = 1012 kWTotal power consumption for three mill = 759 kWEnergy saving potential = 1012-759
= 353 kWRunning Hours = 8000 HrsAnnual energy saving = 353*8000
= 2824000 kWh= 2.8 MUs
Cost of annual energy saving (Rs) = 2824000 *2.35= 66 Lakh
CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS
22
There are two CW Pumps at JJPS, which are common to both units. Pump designed flow is 9500 M³/Hr and motor capacity is 610 kW.Average power consumption of CW Pump A & B was 527 & 531 kW respectively during the audit. Their discharge flow was 8216 & 8102 M³/Hr respectively. It can be said that both the pumps performance are same. Both the pumps discharge flow was less than the design flow, hence their internal inspection should be done for impeller and casing surface roughness, gaps etc.
RECOMMENDATIONS (i) Pump efficiency and can be improved by applying polymer coating on pump
internals. There are manufacturers, who claim that pump efficiency can be improved by 5-6 % by coating. Energy consumption by such coating can be reduced by 4-5 %.
Total Power Drawn by both the pumps = 1058 kWExpected Power after improvement in efficiency = (1-0.04)*
(Assuming 4 % improvement in power consumption) = 1016 kW Expected Running Hours (assumed) = 8000 Hrs Power saving = (1058-1016)
= 42 Annual energy saving (Units) = 42 * 8000
= 3,36,000 kWh= 0.34 MUs
Cost of annual energy saving (Rs) = 3,36,000 *2.35 = 7,89,600
= 7.9 Lakh Approximate cost of polymer coating on both pump internals (Rs)
= 10 Lakh Pay Back Period = Two Years
Since it is a new initiative, coating should be tried on one pump and depending on the extent of efficiency improvement achieved, it may be tried on other pumps.
(ii) On line flow measurements should be provided in the cooling water flow duct.
(iii) CW ducting inspection should be done at suitable opportunity. If scaling inside duct is observed, it could be one of the reason of low cooling water flow .
23
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
ESP at jojobera was in good working condition. Energy efficient BAPCON system is already commissioned at Jojobera power station. The chimney exhaust was also quiet clear. As individual field power measurement was not possible, ESP transformer power measurement was done. Power consumption of ESP transformer 2A & B was 566.88-577.98 kW & 76.13-97.96 kW respectively.
OTHER SAVING POTENTIAL
(i) On line energy monitoring/management system
It is claimed by the vendors that it is possible to conserve 0.5 – 2% of annual electricity consumption by using on line energy monitoring system.
Taking minimum of 0.5 % savings in auxiliary power consumption
Auxiliary power consumption of unit 2 for 2005-06 : 72.33 MUs Annual energy savings (For year 2005-06) : 72.33*0.005
: 0.36 MU
Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35/kWh : Rs. 8.5 lakh
Investment cost : Rs. 10 lakh
Simple payback period : Two Year
24
OFFSITE AUXILIARIES
25
COAL HANDLING PLANT
Jojobera Thermal power plant is having a well designed and well maintained Coal handling plant. In CHP coal is received through rail and fed to coal bunkers. Presently most of the coal used is middling coal and fired through pre determined coal mills, and 100% coal is stacked and reclaimed Following Coal feeding circuits are being used to feed the coal.
Direct bunkeringWagon Tripler-1→ Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor-2→ Primary Crusher-A→ Conveyor-3→ Conveyor-4→ Secondary Crusher-A→ Conveyor-5→ Conveyor-6→ Conveyor-7A→ Conveyor-8A→ Conveyor-9A
Wagon tripler-2→ Conveyor-1B→ Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor-2→ Primary Crusher-B→ Conveyor-3→ Conveyor-4→ Secondary Crusher-B→ Conveyor-5 → Conveyor-6→ Conveyor-7B→ Conveyor-8B→ Conveyor-9B
Uncrushed Coal stacking
Wagon Tripler-1 → Apron feeder (AFD)-A → Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor-2→ Conveyor 12→ Conveyor 13→Uncrushed coal yard
Wagon tripler-2→Apron feeder (AFD)-B → Conveyor-1B → Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor-2→ Conveyor 12→ Conveyor 13→ Uncrushed coal yard
Uncrushed Coal Reclaiming Uncrushed coal yard→ Apron feeder (AFD)-C→ Conveyor-2→ Primary Crusher-A/B → Conveyor-3→ Conveyor-4→ Secondary Crusher-A/B → Conveyor-5→ Conveyor-6 → Conveyor-7A/7B→ Conveyor-8A/8B→ Conveyor-9A/9B
Crushed Coal stacking
Wagon Tripler-1 → Apron feeder (AFD)-A → Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor 2→ Primary Crusher-A→ Conveyor-3 → Conveyor-4→ Secondary Crusher-A→ Conveyor-5→ Conveyor-10→ Stockyard-1
Wagon tripler-2→Apron feeder (AFD) B → Conveyor-1B → Conveyor-1A→ Conveyor 2→ Primary Crusher-B→Conveyor-3→ Conveyor-4→Secondry Crusher-B→ Conveyor-5 → Conveyor-6→ Conveyor-14→ Stockyard-2
Crushed Coal Reclaiming
Stockyard-1→ Conveyor11→ Conveyor-6→ Conveyor-7A/7B→ Conveyor-8A/8B→ Conveyor-9A/9B
Stockyard-2→ Conveyor15→ Conveyor-7A/7B→ Conveyor-8A/8B→ Conveyor-9A/9B Specific Energy Consumption s of various drives in CHP are given below
EQUIPMENT UNITS SEC kWCONVEYOR - 1A kW/MT 0.044 32.85CONVEYOR - 2 kW/MT 0.230 173.10
26
CONVEYOR - 3 kW/MT 0.108 81.45CONVEYOR - 4 kW/MT 0.135 101.75CONVEYOR - 5 kW/MT 0.085 64.05CONVEYOR - 6 kW/MT 0.194 117.75CONVEYOR - 7B kW/MT 0.223 145.20CONVEYOR - 8B kW/MT 0.235 148.15CONVEYOR - 9B kW/MT 0.118 76.65CONVEYOR - 10 kW/MT 0.098 95.40CONVEYOR - 12 kW/MT 0.018 13.50CONVEYOR - 13 kW/MT 0.062 46.50PRIMARY CRUSHER-1 kW/MT 0.044 32.85SECONDRY CRUSHER-1 kW/MT 0.196 147.60
Direct Bunkering UNITS SECCONVEYOR - 1A/1B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 2 kW/MT 0.229576PRIMARY CRUSHER-A/B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 3 kW/MT 0.108024CONVEYOR - 4 kW/MT 0.134947SECONDRY CRUSHER-A/B kW/MT 0.195756CONVEYOR - 5 kW/MT 0.084947CONVEYOR - 6 kW/MT 0.193827CONVEYOR - 7A/7B kW/MT 0.223385CONVEYOR - 8A/B kW/MT 0.233525CONVEYOR - 9A/B kW/MT 0.117923 1.609
Uncrushed coal Stacking UNITS SECCONVEYOR - 1A/B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 2 kW/MT 0.229576CONVEYOR - 12 kW/MT 0.017905CONVEYOR - 13 kW/MT 0.061671 0.353
Uncrushed coal reclaiming UNITS SECCONVEYOR - 1B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 1A kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 2 kW/MT 0.229576PRIMARY CRUSHER-B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 3 kW/MT 0.108024CONVEYOR - 4 kW/MT 0.134947SECONDRY CRUSHER-B kW/MT 0.195756CONVEYOR - 5 kW/MT 0.084947CONVEYOR - 6 kW/MT 0.193827CONVEYOR - 7B kW/MT 0.223385CONVEYOR - 8B kW/MT 0.233525CONVEYOR - 9B kW/MT 0.117923 1.653
Crushed coal Stacking UNITS SECCONVEYOR - 1A/B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 2 kW/MT 0.229576PRIMARY CRUSHER-A/B kW/MT 0.043568CONVEYOR - 3 kW/MT 0.108024CONVEYOR - 4 kW/MT 0.134947SECONDRY CRUSHER-A/B kW/MT 0.195756
27
CONVEYOR - 5 kW/MT 0.084947CONVEYOR - 10 / 6,14 kW/MT 0.098351 0.939
Crushed coal Reclaiming UNITS SECCONVEYOR* - 11/15 kW/MT 0.108370CONVEYOR - 6 kW/MT 0.193827CONVEYOR - 7A/B kW/MT 0.223385CONVEYOR - 8A/B kW/MT 0.233525CONVEYOR - 9A/B kW/MT 0.117923 0.877
*Conv-11 Power consumption calculated assuming 140 amps current, 0.7 pf and 415 volt supply
OBSERVATIONS1 Coal Handling Plant found to be in Good healthy condition.2 Conveyor 11 and 15 found to be designed for 750 TPH. Where as rest of the CHP
system is designed for 1176 TPH. These conveyors (11 & 15) are used for reclaiming coal. Presently 100% coal is stacked and reclaimed. These conveyors leads to capacity under utilization.
3 As per energy meter data, Specific power consumption for the coal handled, varies from 1.21 to 1.43 Kwh /Tone during FY 05-06. and the average for the year 05-06 found to be 1.28 Kwh /Tone.
4 As per details provided, Total running hrs of Conv-1A and 1B are recorded as 5271 hrs and total coal unloaded during the FY 05-06 is 1777397 MT. Through put rate is calculated 337.20 TPH, against the design of 1176 TPH Which indicate poor plant utilization factor 28.67%
5 Power consumption of conveyors 1B, 7A, 8A, 9A, 11, 14, 15 and Primary Crusher-B and Secondary Crusher-B could not done due to operational constrains. (flash over in switchgear during audit period). Specific Power consumption of these conveyors assumed equal to identical conveyors for further analysis.
6 Specific power consumption during direct bunkering found to be 1.609 kW/MT 7 Specific power consumption during Uncrushed coal stacking found to be 0.353
kW/MT8 Specific power consumption during Uncrushed coal Reclaiming found to be
1.653 kW/MT9 Specific power consumption during Crushed coal stacking found to be 0.939
kW/MT10 Specific power consumption during Crushed coal Reclaiming found to be 0.877
kW/MT
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 It is recommended to improve through put rate from existing average 337.50 to average 600-650 TPH by increasing the conveyor loading. Average system running is calculated as 14.44 hrs/day. After increasing the through put rate to 600 TPH system running will be reduced to 8.11 hrs/day This will reduce energy consumption by reducing overall system running time.
2 It is recommended to start direct bunkering. This will lead to less power and better capacity utilization. (operation of low capacity Conveyor 11 & 15 will be reduced).
28
(case-1) Energy savings potential is 297048 kWh / annum, or Rs 6.98 lakh /annum and ).(case-2) Energy savings potential is 146544 kWh / annum, or Rs 3.44 lakh /annum assuming 50 % of coal is fed directly instead of (case-1) Uncrushed coal stacking and reclaiming or (case-2) Crushed coal stacking and reclaiming
Case-1Avg Specific power consumption during direct bunkering = 1.631 kW/Tone
Avg Specific power consumption during Uncrushed coal Stacking and reclaiming = 0.353 +1.653
= 2.006 kW/MTSavings potential in direct bunkering 2.006-1.631 = 0.375 kW/MTAnnual Coal consumption ( FY-05-06) = 1584258 TonSavings potential if 50% coal is directly fed to bunkers
= 1584258 x 0.5 x 0.375=297048 kWh
Saving potential in RS (Lakh) =2.35 * 297048/100000
=6.98 Lakh
Case-2Avg Specific power consumption during direct bunkering = 1.631 kW/Tone
Avg Specific power consumption during Crushed coal Stacking and reclaiming = 0.939 +0.877=1.816 kW/MT
Savings potential in direct bunkering 2.006-1.631 = 0.185 kW/MTAnnual Coal consumption ( FY-05-06) =1584258 ToneSavings potential if 50% coal is directly fed to bunkers = 1584258 x 0.5 x 0.185
= 146544 kWh
Saving potential in RS (Lakh) =2.35 * 146544/100000
=3.44 Lakh
3 Time totaliser may be installed on all major drives for accurate monitoring over idle running of equipments.
COOLING TOWER
29
Cooling tower provided for unit-2 at Jojobera thermal power station has following design specifications
Make BDWT Chennai
TypeInduced draft counter flow
Water flow 18000 M3/hrNos of cell 6
Hot water Temp 43OC
Cold water Temp 33OC
Wet bulb temp 28.8OCApproach 4.2Evp Loss 289.8 TPHDrift Loss 1.8 TPHRange 10
REDUCTION GEAR BOXManufacturer Flender (Kharagpur)Model Kemns 200Type Bevel - helicalQnty 6Reduction Ratio 12 : 5.1Nos of Stages 2Nominal kW Rating 45Transmission efficiency 97.5
FANManufacturer Prag Fan, IndoreNos of fans / Cell 1Nos of fans / Tower 6Nos of Blade / fan 4
Max discharge through fan 1789369.2 M3/hrStatic head at Max discharge 6.8 MWCSpeed 116 RPM
MOTORMake ABBCapacity 45 kWCurrent 37.128RPM 1500
30
OBSERVATIONS
COOLING TOWER PERFORMANCE
Units Design Measured
Unit Load MW 120 120
Inlet Cooling Water Temperature oC oC 43 43.25
Outlet Cooling Water Temperature oC OC 33 32.15
Air Wet Bulb Temperature near Cell oC OC 28.8 15.8
Air Dry Bulb Temperature near Cell oC OC 24.3
Number of CT Cells Nos 6 6
Cooling Water Flow M3/hr 18000 16318
CT Fan Flow M3/hr 1789369.2 1939045
Excess air flow / cell M3/hr 149676Excess air flow / cell % 8.36CT Flow/Cell, m3/hr = 3000 2720CT Fan Flow, m3/hr (Avg.) = 1789369 1939045CT Fan Flow kg/hr (Avg.)@ Density of 1.08 kg/m3
=1932519 2094168
L/G Ratio of C.T. kg/kg = 1.55 1.30CT Range = 10 11.1CT Approach = 4.2 16.35% CT Effectiveness = 70.42 40.44Cooling Duty Handled/Cell in kCal = 180000000 181129800(i.e., Flow * Temperature Difference in kCal/hr) = Evaporation Losses in m3/hr = 266.67 268.34m3/hr per cell = 44.44 44.72Percentage Evaporation Loss = 0.25 0.27Blow down requirement for site COC of 4 = 14.81 14.91Make up water requirement/cell in m3/hr = 59.26 59.63
1 Energy audit performance test was conducted during peak winter Jan 2007.2 In cooling tower fans, FRP blades are being used.3 Comparison of CT actual performance vis a vis design are shown in table.4 Power measurement of CT fans during performance testing is enclosed 5 Air flow measured during the test found to be 8.36 % more than design.6 Water flow measured 16318 m3/hr (design 18000 m3/hr) which is 9.34 % less than
design.7 CT range found to be 11.1 against design 108 CT approach found to be 16.35 against design 4.2 indicates, low ambient temp
and poor heat transfer. 9 CT effectiveness found to be 40.44 % against design 70.42%. which indicates
poor heat transfer in CT10 Evaporation Losses found to be 268.34 m3/hr against design 266.67 m3/hr.
31
11 Blow down requirement for (COC of 4) found to be 14.91 m3/hr against design 14.81 m3/hr.
12 Make up water requirement/cell found to be 59.63 m3/hr against design 59.26 m3/hr.
13 Power measurement indicate normal loading on CT fan motors and power factor is around 0.85 . Which is normal.
14 Voltage level found to be 399-400. which is on lower side in CT fans 1,2 and 6
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Performance test of Cooling tower to be conducted during peak summer and rainy season. During this period heat load on CT is maximum due to ambient conditions and actual performance can be evaluated.
2. For energy savings and better air flow FRP fan blades are being used. Which is a good practice and to be continued.
3. CW flow needs to be increased up to design level i.e 18000 m3/hr. CW pumps to be checked for less flow.
4. Increased air flow measured during the test, may be due to use of FRP blades.5. Cooling tower fills needs to be checked for fill chocking and poor water
distribution.. Equal and uniform water flow to each cell to be ensured for proper distribution of water. This will improve effectiveness of CT. Improved CT performance will allow to stop one CT fan during extreme cold conditions (night time of winter)
6. Voltage level needs to be increased up to 415 Volt for CT fan 1,2 and 6 by tap adjustment.
32
ASH HANDLING SYSTEM AND OTHER PUMPS
OBSERVATIONS1 Presently Ash water ratio is not being monitored regularly.2 In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump found to be under loaded, as shown in above
table.3 HP water pumps are consuming more than design Specific Energy Consumption,
Which is due to less flow.4 Ash slurry pump series -2 was not available for testing. And flow of Ash slurry
series -1 could not be measured.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 It is recommended to check & monitor Ash water ratio on regular basis. This will control ash water pumping power, Ash slurry pumping power, Ash water recirculation pumping power and Raw water savings
2 In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump to be checked for under loading, 3 HP water pumps to be checked for poor flow.4 It is recommended to provide Polymer / Ceramic coating on ACW Pumps, ACW
Booster Pumps and HP water pumps internals. Savings potential in ACW pumps, ACW Booster Pumps & HP Water pumps per annum = 160706 kWh or Rs 3.77 lakh / year (considering 2 ACW pumps, 2 ACW Booster pumps and 1 HP Water Pump running for 8000 hrs/year)
Savings and pay back calculations are as under
S.No. DESCRIPTIONPOWER CONS
kW
SAVINGS POTENTIAL@
4% kW
Annual R/H
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
/ANNUM (kWh)
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
/ANNUM (Rs)
1 ACW-2A 117.95 4.7216000 74515 1751112 ACW-2B 118.14 4.73
3 ACW-2C 113.2 4.53
4ACW Booster Pump -2A 56.36 2.25
16000 37604 883705
ACW Booster Pump –2B 62.28 2.49
6ACW Booster Pump -2C 57.63 2.31
7 HP Water Pump-2A 150.4 6.028000 48587 1141798 HP Water Pump-2B 150.4 6.02
9 HP Water Pump-2C 154.7 6.19
Total 160706 377659
33
Presently all the water pumps i.e. ACW Pumps, ACW Booster Pumps, HP Water Pumps etc which are working with raw water, consume considerable amount of electrical energy & their internals gets eroded with time necessitating their replacement.A new technology has emerged, in which Polymer coating is provided on the pump internals to improve the efficiency of the pump this hard layer of polymer also provide increase in pump life. The supplier is providing polymer coating with guaranteed 4% energy savings.( As per our experience 6-7 % energy savings can be achieved) Since it is a new technology, it is recommended to provide polymer coating on one of the water pump and depending on the results , this may be provided on the other pumps also.
Energy Saving Potential
ACW Pumps Annual energy savings (two pumps in service) : 74515 kWh Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh : Rs. 1.75 lakh Investment cost : Rs. 1.2 lakh Simple payback period : under 1 Year
ACW Booster Pumps Annual energy savings (two pumps in service) : 37604 kWh Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh : Rs. 0.88 lakh Investment cost : Rs. 0.9 lakh Simple payback period : 1 Year
HP Water Pumps Annual energy savings (one pump in service) : 48587 kWh Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh : Rs. 0.48 lakh Investment cost : Rs. 0.9 lakh Simple payback period : under 2 Year
34
COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEMOBSERVATIONS1 Individual compressor with its receiver tank could not be isolated, hence it is not feasible
to conduct free air delivery test.2 Pressure survey conducted in unit 2 areas, and no major pressure drop was observed.3 Compressed air Leakages points observed during pressure survey are listed below.
a) IAC # 2C drain line leakage from Separator tank sampling line b) Ext AS-4 valve at 5-M TG.
4 No Loading / Unloading of compressors observed.5 Compressors power measured and table listed below. 6 Running Hrs of different compressors are as under
Comp No Power (On) Running Hrs Load Hrs Nos of Stops2A 41211 38038 30188 3052B No data2C 43654 38383 33018 281
Compressed Air Pressure Survey
Project : Jojobera Thermal Power Station
Date : 12/1/07
Time : 12:15 to 13:00 Hrs
System : Instrument Air & Service Air
S.No. Location Actual Pressure(Kg/cm2)
Remarks
1 Control Room 7.26 2 Comp. – 2A 7.38 Combined3 Comp. – 2C 7.37 Combined3 Local Gauge 6.75 Service Air4 Local Gauge 7.15 Instrument Air 5 Boiler # 1I (15-M) AB Elevation 6.80 Service Air
35
Voltage Current PF Freq kW
R Y B R B
AHP Air Comp-A 443.4 444.3 443.9 139.7 86.31 141.1 0.8 48.9 86.31 443.6 442.8 443.2 140.9 86.28 140.4 0.8 49.16 86.28 AHP Air Comp-B 441.2 442.3 443.1 160.2 102.1 161.4 0.83 49.1 102.10 440.2 441.2 441.2 165.3 104.9 167.2 0.83 49.2 104.90 Air Comp-2A 6.5 6.4 6.4 58.488 608.58 58.568 0.94 49.2 608.58 6.5 6.4 6.4 58.712 609.36 58.496 0.94 49.3 609.36 Air Comp-2B 6.9 6.8 6.9 63.272 711.76 64.016 0.94 49.12 711.76 6.9 6.9 6.9 56.104 626.87 56.552 0.93 49.22 626.87 6.9 6.9 6.9 63.272 713.78 63.872 0.94 49.26 713.78 Air Comp-2C 6.7 6.6 6.6 59.792 661.77 61.08 0.95 48.8 661.77 6.7 6.6 6.7 56.704 631.63 57.936 0.95 48.9 631.63 6.7 6.6 6.7 56.344 626.63 57.504 0.95 49.0 626.63
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 Heat of compression may be used in air dryer in place of electric heater, which may be a good energy conservation option.
2 Loading hrs of Comp -2A may be increased by proper loading / unloading pressure settings, which will save unload power otherwise wasted.
3 Provision to isolate compressor with receiver tank is to be made during annual maintenance of compressed air system. This will help to evaluate Free air delivery (FAD) test of Compressors and efficiency thereafter.
4 Leakages identified during audit needs to be plugged at the earliest for energy savings.
36
LIGHTING SYSTEM
OBSERVATIONS
General
1. Plant lighting at most of the locations was good and well maintained.
Based upon power measurement
1. Power consumption measured at different feeders is enclosed.2. Voltage level at most of the feeders was in the range of 230-240 Volts.
But in AHP feeder voltage level found to be in the range of 262-264 Volts and CHP feeder voltage level found to be in the range of 251-259 Volts
3. Power Factor was normal
Based upon lux measurement
1 Around 763 FLTs have been provided at different location in unit # 2 MCC room, Control room, DM plant MCC room & Control room, CHP MCC room & Control room and Ash Plant MCC room & Control room. These 763 FLts are consuming (40+15 watt each) glowing 24 hrs/day.
2 In CHP area conveyors galleries of Conveyors 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,13,14 &15 are Covered with conventional asbestos sheets. Lights are kept on day/night for normal working.
3 Lighting lux level at Switch yard Control room, Ash pump house found to be on higher side.
4 At cooling tower top lighting fixtures found dirty
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 Voltage level to be reduced to 215-220 Volt in AHP lighting circuit by tap adjustment. Saving potential in load after voltage reduction is estimated as 5.18 kW average on a day. Annual savings potential after voltage reduction to 220 V in AHP lighting circuit is 45376 Kwh /annual or Rs 1.06 Lakh.
2 Voltage level to be reduced to 215-220 Volt in CHP lighting circuit by tap adjustment. Saving potential in load after voltage reduction is estimated as 3.92 kW during day load & 5.19 kW during night load. Annual savings potential after voltage reduction to 220-230 V in CHP lighting circuit is 39911 Kwh /annual or Rs 0.93 Lakh.
3 763 FLTs may be replaced with 28 watt Energy efficient T-5 technology tube lights with electronic chock in phased manner. Annual savings potential is calculated below :
Saving in wattage : 763 * (55-28): 20600 Watt:
Saving potential : 20600*24*365/1000: 180464 Kwh
Saving potential in RS : 2.35 * 23652: 424092
37
Approximate 28 watt T-5 tube lights is Rs 750
Total cost of replacement : 750*763: Rs 572250
Simple payback period : One to Two year (1.35 year)
4 In CHP area conveyors galleries of 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,13,14 &15 Conveyors 1/3 rd of existing asbestos sheets may be replaced with fire resistant translucent sheets (Polycarbonate sheets) for controlling day light power consumption. Energy savings potential Rs 4.02 Lakh and simple pay back period is 4.13 years.
Total nos. of sheets (approx.) at Conveyors 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,13,14 &15
= 4742 nos.
Nos. of sheets to be replaced (1/3 of total sheets) = 4742 / 3
= 1581 nos.
Cost of one sheet (Rs) = 1050/ Sheet
(@525/-M2)
Total cost of sheets (Rs) = 1581 x 1050
= 16,59,700
Nos. of light fittings can be switched off during day time = 558 nos. x 70 watt
= 39.06 kW
Total energy savings potential / annum = 39.06 x 365 x 12
(assuming sun light availability 12 hrs/ day) = 171082 KWh
Total energy savings / annum (Rs)(@ 2.35 /-KWh) = 176076 x 2.35
= 402044
Simple Pay back period = Four to Five year
38
EFFICIENCY AND HEAT RATE TESTS
39
BOILER EFFICIENCY
40
METHODOLOGY
The method of performance assessment chosen is the indirect method of heat loss and boiler efficiency as per BIS standard 8753 and the employed relationships are presented in annexure-I.Prior to the trial, the list of boiler operating parameters to be monitored and the corresponding transducer reference in the data acquisition system were identified and the same was monitored every fifteen minutes interval. The list of access points for various parameters are presented as annexure-II.The boiler efficiency trials were conducted during January 2007 for unit no. 2, 120 MW in as run operating condition. During the trial, values of as-run parameters observed, are indicated in annexure- III. During the trial period, the following conditions and procedures were adopted: The test was carried out for a 4 hour duration each, during which both CBD and IBD was stopped. No soot blowing was carried out during this period. During the period of as run testing, the unit no. 2 remained isolated and at steady full load condition The steam flow was maintained steady during the as run trial. Coal samples were collected at regular intervals during period of testing, were mixed and a composite sample was prepared. Ash samples were collected during de-ashing and from ESP hoppers during the testing. Exit gas analysis for O2, CO2, CO and temperature was measured using portable gas analyzer IMR I400. For comparison of operating data, design data for the unit was referred to, the same was also compared with he PG test results of unit no. 3, in the absence of PG test data of unit no. 2, Since both the units are identical.
41
BOILER HEAT LOSS PROFILE
The heat loss profile covering losses through unburnt in ash, sensible heat loss in flue gases, moisture in combustion air, loss due to presence of hydrogen and moisture in coal, radiation and unaccounted loss, are as follows:
SL. No
Operating Parameters UnitAVG
AVG
DATE 10/01/2007 10/01/2007
DURATION HR10.30 hrs to 15.00
hrs15.00 hrs to 19.00
hrs
A. HEAT INPUT TO BOILER KCAL/HR 299776213.125 299765713.569
B. HEAT LOSSES IN THE SYSTEM :
B1 UNBURNTS IN ASH :
BOTTOM ASH % 0.65866 0.65845
FLY ASH % 1.06508 1.06687
B2 SENSIBLE HEAT IN FLUE GAS % 4.28299 4.27665
B3 MOISTURE IN FLUE GAS % 8.78621 8.78560
B4 MOISTURE IN COMB. AIR % 0.07059 0.07072
B5 RADIATION & UNACCOUNT & 1.21000 1.21000
C. TOTAL LOSSES % 16.074 16.068
D.BOILER EFFICIENCY (100 - TOTAL LOSSES)
% 83.926 83.932
E. EXCESS AIR % 23 23
FOVERALL HEAT RATE KCAL/KWH 2549.76791 2524.22476
Above trial data is average value during 15 min. interval.It may be observed that as against 87% design efficiency, there is a margin of about 3-4% improvement by various measures, which are largely O&E related and R&M related. About 2% improvement is possible by various O&E related aspects mentioned above. For further improvement in efficiency, R&M activities are required specially in the area of mills.
42
OBSERVATIONS
(i) The thermal efficiency of boiler of unit no. 2 estimated based on heat loss method during the trial period is found to be around 83% with the firing of middlings as against 87% as per design at 100% TGMCR.
(ii) The average boiler heat losses ranges from around 16.1% against design value of 12.97%.
(iii) The average controllable losses like combustible loss in ash, sensible heat loss to dry flue gas range from 6%.
(iv) The excess air percentage maintained at air pre-heater outlet is found to be 23% with an oxygen percentage of 3.9% as against design value of 20% equivalent to 3.5% oxygen level. Though the excess air level is reasonably satisfactory, scope exists towards fine tuning the same to bring down excess air level to 17% to 18% using washery middlings. It was observed that at present the oxygen analyzer installed at APH inlet and outlet respectively indicate oxygen percentage as 7.7% and 5.5% respectively and was reported out of commission during the observation period by the plant management. It is strongly recommended to repair, calibrate or replace the same for trimming of oxygen level apart from controlling relevant operating parameter. This will restrict the sensible heat loss through the dry flue gases to a large extent thereby reducing boiler losses and improve operating efficiency. The details of flue gas measurement for oxygen, excess air, temperature as against desired design values are given in Table – I
Table – I : Flue Gas Analysis Results :
SL. No.
Parameter Unit Location of SamplingECO Outlet / APH
InletAPH Outlet / ESP
InletID Fan Inlet
Design Actual Design Actual Design Actual
1 O2 % 3.00 3.9 5.5 5.9
2 Co2 % 15.0 16.8 15.2 14.8
3 Co ppm 65 10 12 13
4 Temperature oC 345 343* 142 148 137 135
5 Excess Air % 20%
* Measured 31.7oC at UCB
(v) The exit flue gas temperature after air pre-heater outlet was found to be 147 to 148oC as against design value of 139oC in spite of dilution and air ingress. This has also lead to higher dry flue gas losses.
(vi) The in-leak air in the air pre-heater area as well as between APH inlet to ID fan inlet ranges from 10% to 15% equivalent to 6% oxygen level, as against design value of maximum 2% increase in oxygen content. The in leak air specially in APH flue path as well as flue duct between APH and ID fan causes detrimental effect towards effectiveness of heat transfer of APH area. It may also shift the draft level in the flue gas path apart from increase in ID fan motor load. It is recommended to regularly monitor oxygen percentage of flue gas through portable oxygen analyzers
43
at ESP inlet as well as ID fan inlet, analyze the data with respect to on line monitoring system at APH inlet and outlet towards control of in leak points in the ducting area. Any effort to minimize the in leak air would directly help in ID fan capacity release apart from power saving in ID fan.
(vii) Pertinent to boiler operations, the recognized concern area are with regard to coal quality are GCV of coal, ash content in coal, VM and HGI towards mill performance. GCV of coal fired during the observation as compared to design value was found to be much higher than design, apart from Ash & FC content which are favourable compared to design. The middling coal fired during trial was little harder since HGI is 45 as compared to design coal of HGI 55. With this the mill output is expected to be reduced by 15%. However, since moisture content in coal used during the trial period is much lower compared to design coal moisture, the effect should be favourable towards output. The design vis-à-vis actual coal utilized during observation period is given Table-2:
TABLE – 2: DESIGN VIS-À-VIS ACTUAL COAL UTILIZED
Sl.
No.Parameter Unit
Coal used during
trail and
observation
Coal used
December’06
**
Design Coal
(MCL)
1. Moisture * % 0.53 - 12
TM ** 4.44 to 4.56 4.5
2 Ash % 35.61 to 36.11 34.13 45
3. VM % 20.33 to 20.78 19.12 21.8
4. Carbon 43.53 to 42.58 41.62 21.2
5. Hydrogen 3 to 4 - -
6. Nitrogen 0.2 to 0.6 - -
7. Sulpher 0.4. to 0.8 - -
8. GCV *Kcal per
Kg5006.2 to 48.36.3 3350
GCV **4646.19 to
4803.384850
9. HGI 45 55
*Air dry basis
** As received basis
(viii) The losses due to moisture and Hydrogen in coal are comparable to design value. (ix) Coal mill fineness observed during the trial period is found about 85 to 91% passing
through 200 mesh size compared to design coal fineness of 70% passing through 200 mesh (i.e., 75 micron level) and is found to be over grinded. This will also lead to reduced mill output apart from increasing the mill electrical power loading and reduced residence time within the furnace area. These are separately discussed in the auxiliary power consumption study of the mill. The mill fineness observed during the study period is given below in Table –3. It may further be pointed out that over grinding may also lead to higher wear and tear of mill parts. The present
44
preventive maintenance schedule of the mills are after every 750 to 1000 running hours.
Table – 3: Mill Fineness Analysis : 10/1/2007
Mill No. and
range of fineness
(micron)
+ 300 - 300 + 250 - 250 + 125 - 125 +75 - 75 + 0
A 0 0.06 1.36 13.43 85.15
B 0 0.25 3.83 10.31 85.61
C 0. 0.08 2.31 9.53 88.08
D 0 0.02 2.71 5.59 91.73
(x) Total coal flow to maintain full load at design is 81% of rated mill TPH using a combination of 3 mills: ie., @ 27 TPH using design MCL coal, where as during trial observation period 4 mills are being utilized to maintain full load using Middlings, total coal flow is found to be 63-64 TPH, @ 17-18 TPH per mill, the load of 4th mill is only 10-11 TPH, leading to lean air coal mixture. However there is no mill gap and adjacent mills were being utilized during trial and observation period. The mill motor load was approaching almost full load at this condition leaving no margin. Details are given in Table – 4 & 5.
Table – 4 : Mill Loading Analysis
Mill No. / Parameter A B C D Total
Actual Coal Flow, T/hr
(using Middlings)11.2 18 18.3 17.4 64.9
Design coal flow /
PG test value of unit # 3,
T/hr (using ROM coal)
- 27.19 28.63 27.85 83.67
% Loading 66% 64% 62.5%
Table – 5: Mill Power Consumption using washery coal
Mill No. A B C D
kW 274 261.1 261 221.8
Loading % 98 93 93 79
Rating /
PG test value*280 / - 280 / 240.71 280 / 224.28 280 / 206.65
* During PG test of mill unit no. 3, MCL coal was used and mill was operated at higher than 80% output to meet 100% TG MCR capacity.
Improvement in mill operations towards achieving rated coal flow with 3 mill operation is identified as key result area of concern. The results would manifest as
45
reduced excess air loss as well as reduced loss due to unburnt in bottom ash and fly ash apart from reduced auxiliary consumption.
(xi) During the observation, mill reject quantity for mill no. 2C was found to be much higher 0.14% of coal flow) compared to other operating mills (mill combination 2A, 2B, 2C & 2D). The GCV of mill reject is about 2300-2400 KCAL/KG requiring thorough maintenance of the mill apart from classifier vane adjustment. The details are given in the table –6 below :
Table – 6 : Mill rejects analysis result : 10.1.07
Mill No. A B C D
Quantity (Kg/hr) 13.25 9 25.5 18.5
*GCV (Kcal/Kg) 2325.9
Moisture (%) 0.5
Total moisture (%)
2.19
Ash (%) 61.13
*Air dry basis
(xii) Combustible matter in bottom ash and fly ash is found to be in the range of 5.7% and 2.7% respectively, which is much higher than the design value of 4% and 0.5% respectively using design coal. The same for unit # 3, PG test value is 1.37% and 0.11% respectively. This loss is directly related to fuel combustion efficiency and also upon operational factors. The loss due to unburnts in ash is about 2.31% as compared to design value of 1.1%. The details of unburnt analysis results using middling coal is given in the table –7. It may be mentioned that combustible in ash is also a function of the ratio of fixed carbon and volatile matter in the coal fired and with the increase in the ratio there is a tendency towards increase in the combustible matter both in the fly ash and bottom ash, the ratio being almost double for middlings compared to ROM coal.
46
Table –7: Combustible matter in fly ash and bottom ash :
date of sample 10.1.07.
Location
Combustible matter in Fly Ash Combustible matter in Bottom Ash
Design
Analysis of
Dec’06
(avg)
10.01.2007 Design
Analysis of
Dec’06
(avg)
10.01.2007
Field 23 V1
0.5 1.62
2.6
4 5.52 5.72
23 V2 2.25
23 V3 2.29
23 V4 2.32
Vessel 21 (1 to 6)
1.79
Vessel 22 (1 to 6)
1.78
(xiii) The heat required/heat released at full load is 280-290 MKCAL/Hr as per design. The same during operation at full load (100% TG MCR) using Washery Middlings is found 7.5% higher (Coal GCV being 3600 KCAL/KG at design as compared to Middling at 4725 KCAL/KG fired during trial observation). This clearly indicates that gain in terms of higher heat value of middlings is lost towards very lean air : coal mixture, loss of combustion efficiency, very low capacity output of the mills, coal being harder resulting use of more no. of mills leading to lean air coal mixture.
(xiv) The primary air through the mills was found 30% to 31% above design/test value indicating lean air coal mixture. This is also corroborated by higher unburnt percentage of combustible in fly ash and bottom ash. However, secondary air flow is controlled for restricting total air quantity, the secondary air flow is kept only 59% of total air quantity. The details of FD air flow, primarily air coal ratio, primary air flow, primary : secondary air ratio at 100% TG MCR both at design as well as during observation on 10.1.07 using middlings is given in Table-8.
Table-8: FD Air Flow, Primary Air Coal Ratio, Primary air flow, Primary air/secondary air ratio ( at 100% TG MCR).
Parameter UnitDesign Coal with 3 mill operation
Observation on 10/1/07 using Middlings.
1. No. of Mills in operation
Nos. 03 04
2. Total air flow T/hr. 438 430
3. Primary air flow
* Primary air flow as % of total air flow
T/hr
%
135
31176.4
41
47
4. Secondary air flow* Secondary air flow as
% of total air flow
T/hr
%
303
69
253.6
59
5. Coal flow T/hr 81.5 63.5
6. Primary air : coal ratio 1.65 2.78
7. Primary Air: secondary air ratio
0.45 0.69
After the trial, an attempt was made by plant operating personnel to reduce primary air flow and also restricting to 3 mill operation, however, it was reported by the operating personnel that there is deposition of coal particles at the mill outlet and at the first level of coal pipelines and load could not be maintained with 3 mill operation. The PA fan header pressure was found to be well within limit during observation period.
(xv) The wind box pressure, FD fan discharge pressure, furnace draft, wind box to furnace DP was found well within design limits during the operation on 10/1/07. The details are given in Table-9.
Table – 9 : Wind box pressure, FD Fan discharge pressure, furnace draft,windbox to furnace.
Sl.
No.Parameter Unit Design Actual
1. Wind box pressure mmwc (+) 100 (+) 95-96
2. FD fan discharge pressure mmwc 240 234 to 238
3. Furnace draft mmwc (-) 4 (-) 6.4 to 8.8
4. Windbox to furnace DP mmwc - (+) 100 – 105
(xvi) Combustion efficiency is closely linked with temperature of secondary air as also mill performance with respect to moisture removal and coal fineness and unburnts in ash and any drop may affect combustion. During trial, the secondary air temperature was found 280-290 OC as against design value of 273- 282 OC and is well within the design limit.
(xvii) Though housekeeping in boiler area is commendable and, improvements are possible in the following areas :
Leakage from bottom ash de-ashing hopper. Hot Air leakage from secondary air heaters. Improvement of insulation in economizer and APH area. Though the inspection doors/peep-holes are tightly fitted and kept closed properly, high
radiation loss from them was noted.
RECOMMENDATIONSTwo energy conservation opportunities are identified in the area of boiler operations namely
48
Excess air control Control of combustible in fly ash and bottom ash
6.1
Present Condition :
O2% at APH out let = 5.5%Corresponding excess air level at APH out let = 35.48%Sensible heat loss in flue gas = 4.28%Boiler Efficiency = 83% (Avg.)
The improvement in operating efficiency of boiler, by reduction excess air level (and there by reduction in sensible heat loss percentage) is identified as a key result area.
Proposed Condition :
O2% at APH out let = 3.5%Corresponding excess air level at APH out let =20%Sensible heat loss in flue gas = 3.35%Boiler Efficiency = 83.95% (Avg.)Fuel savings by operation of Boiler at 83.95% = 63 TPH x 8000 x {1- (83/83.95)}
= 5703 MT per year
Landed cost of coal = 1500 MT Annual saving potential (Rs.) = 85.5 Lakh
Control of combustible in fly ash and bottom ash, through mill performance improvements, is identified as a key result area for attention. During field study period, lab. Analysis of un-burnt in bottom & fly ash, w.r.t. design values are given below :
Date
Un-burnt Carbon % in Fly Ash & Bottom Ash
Un-burnt Fly Ash (%) Un-burnt in bottom Ash (%)
Design Actual Design Actual
10th January, 2007 0.5% 2.7% 4% 5.7%
PG test value of Unit # 3 0.11 1.37
Energy Savings estimate
Existing heat loss due to un-burnt in fly ash & bottom ash =1.724%Existing boiler efficiency =83% (avg.)Envisaged heat loss with improved mill performance. = 1.05%Increased Boiler Efficiency after reduction in un-burnt loss =83.674 %(avg.)Improvement in Boiler Efficiency =0.674%
Annual reduction in coal consumption (MT) by boiler efficiency improvement=63 x 8000 x {1 - (83/83.674)}
= 4059 MT
(i) SAVINGS POTENTIAL BY O2 TRIMMING (EXCESS AIR CONTROL)
(ii) SAVINGS BY CONTROL OF COMBUSTIBLES IN FLY ASH AND BOTTOM ASH
49
Landed cost of coal = 1500 MT
Annual saving potential (Rs.) =Rs.60.9 lacs.
50
TURBINE HEATRATE AND EFFICIENCY TEST
51
Background Performance assessment of turbine system, based on ‘As- run trials’ was conducted during January, 2007 with the objective of validation against design value. The as run trials , findings are envisaged to help in assessing the performance, vis-à-vis design/ rated values, factors and parameters affecting performance, key result areas for improvement and attention.This ‘ As - Run Performance Test ’ determines the turbine performance with regard to performance indices as follows: HP & IP Cylinder efficiencies Turbine Heat Rate
METHODOLOGY
The ‘ As - Run Performance Test’ is conducted by the enthalpy drop efficiency method. Enthalpy drop test are used as a method of trending the performance of high pressure (HP) and intermediate pressure (IP) sections of the steam turbine. This method determines the ratio of actual enthalpy drop across turbine section to the isentropic enthalpy drop. This efficiency method provides a good measure for monitoring purposes, provided certain qualifications are met in obtaining results.
While it is very difficult to make immediate corrections to turbine performance degradation, the information can be used as part of cost benefit analysis to determine the optimum point at which the losses due to decreased performance are greater than the costs associated with turbine maintenance. The enthalpy drop test is performed at the valve wide-open condition. The test at valve wide open provides a base line and the test at similar Pre and post condition is used to evaluate the improvements made during turbine overhaul.
As run trial results with respect to HP and LP cylinder efficiency, Heat rate , Heat load are presented in Annexure –I & II.
HP & IP Cylinder Efficiency:In connection with the requirements of ‘ As - Run Performance Test ‘, two numbers of turbine trials of one hour duration each was conducted on the same date. The requisite numbers of readings taken for the relevant operating parameters during the trial period were averaged out for computing HP & LP cylinder efficiencies.. The trial values are provided in Annexure II&III.
The values of average operating parameters were obtained from trial I&II and corresponding design data, as required for computation of Turbine Cylinder Efficiency by Enthalpy drop method was complied. Based on the respective Inlet and outlet steam condition at HP, IP & LP Cylinders, the Turbine Cylinders Efficiency have been computed. The details of cylinder efficiency computation are provided below
52
Table-1: Computation of HP, IP and LP Cylinder EfficiencyDesign values As- run Values
Parameters Pr. Temp Flow Enthalpy
Entropy Pr. Temp. Flow Enthalpy
Entropy
Unit Kg/cm2 OC Tph Kcal/ kg Kcal/kgOK Kg/cm2 OC Tph Kcal/ kg Kcal/kgOK
H1 Steam Inlet condition (H P Cylinder)126 535 355.5 822.2 1.559 122.3 531 359 820.81 1.577
H2 Steam outlet condition
h1 CRS Steam32 342 301 740.4 1.604 31.99 345.7 302.67 742.30 1.603
h 2 HPH-633.06 342 36.6 739.4 1.595 31.0 348.0 37.16 734.20 1.592
h1+h2
CRS+HP-6
(at actual)
32 342 337. 738.9 1.595 31.99 346.88 339.83 738.75 1.597
h1+h2 CRS+HP-6 (at iso – entropic)
32 327 337.6 735.64 1.559 31.99 318.2 337.1 726.00 1.577
Actual enthalpy drop[H1- ( h1 + h2)] 83.30
[H1- ( h1 + h2)]82.06
Iso entropic enthalpy drop)[H1- ( h1 + h2
’ )] 86.56[H1- ( h1 + h2
’ )]94.81
HP cylinder Efficiency[Actual drop/ Iso-entropic drop] x 100 %
96.23 86.6
53
IP CylinderH3 Steam Inlet condition
Hot Reheat. Steam
29.8 535 301.7 845.9 1.757 29.4 533 304.5 844.9 1.757
H4
Steam Outlet condition
H3
HPH-5 Ext. Steam
10.6 398.0 19.2 779.6 1.779 12.6 419.3 19.53 772.5 1.754
h 4
Back Pr. Ext. steam to LPT
5.33 288 285 727.00 1.777 5.49 301 15.94 734.2 1.744
h 5
Back Pr. Ext. steam to DA
5.1 294 15.9 730.14 1.779 5.44 264.4 292.1 715.0 1.746
h4+h 5
Iso entropic enthalpy
5.1 269.5 15.9 717.9 1.757 5.44 279.2 267 722.5 1.757
H5Actual enthalpy drop
[(H3-h3)+(h3-h4)] 118.9 [(H3-h3)+(h3-h4)] 110.7
H6Iso entropic enthalpy drop
[H1 – ( h4 + h5)] 128.00[H1 – ( h4 + h5)] 122.5
IP cylinder efficiency [ H5 / H6 ]x100 % 92.9 [ H5 / H6 ]x100 % 90.4Overall HP+IP Cylinder
efficiency
H7Actual enthalpy drop
202.2192.76
H8Iso entropic drop in HP&LP
214.56217.23
Overall HP stage efficiency 94.24 88.74LP cylinder efficiencyH9 Steam inlet conditionLPT inlet steam(IPT EXT)
5.33 288 285 727 1.76 5.44 264.4 289.78715.30
1.746
H10 Steam outlet conditionh7 LPH-3 Ext.
Steam1.87 195 14.7 685.4 1.226 1.852 224.51 14.77
682.31.913
h8 LPH-2Ext. Steam
0.91 105 12.5 645.2 2.039 0.65 187.43 11.82681.59
1.945
h9 LPH-1Ext. Steam
0.35 86.5 10.58 635.88 1.866 0.32 70.1 10.87618.90
1.855
h10 LPT outlet steam
0.07 41.6 249.3 616.5 1.985 0.1 45.5 260.51618.18
1.947
LPT outlet steam(iso entropic)
0.07 38.63 249.3 546.2 at 0.87 DF
1.769 0.1 45.42 260.51552.39 at 0.87 DF
1.745
Actual enthalpy drop 110.5 97.12Iso entropic enthalpy drop(H9-h10) 180.8 162.91LP cylinder efficiency 61.1 59.6
54
In the absence of steam metering at various operating points, the same has been computed by making mass & energy balance wrt each of the operating parameters and the corresponding design values. Dryness fraction at LPT outlet considered same i.e. 0.87 as design value.
Turbine Cycle Heat Rate
Along with turbine cylinder efficiency assessment the’ Turbine Cycle Heat Rate’ value which is a key performance indicator and defined as the ratio of energy input to the turbine cycle to the net electrical generation arrived at . The relevant trial parameters as follows:
Correction Factors for variation in Parameters The following parameters, which have considerable deviation from the design condition, is corrected as per the specified figures in Heat Rate Calculation.
Table- 3 : Correction Factors in Turbine Heat Rate
Parameter Deviation Effect on Heat Rate
Main steam temp. -3.8 0C +1.74 Kcal/ KwhMain steam Pressure -2.68 Kg/ cm2 +2.68 kcal/ KwhRe-heater circuit pressure drop +0.39 Kg/ cm2 - 0.39 Kcal/ KwhFeed water Temp. - 1.2 0C + 0.552 Kcal/ KwhCW inlet Temp. -3.06 0C +1.40 kcal/ KwhTotal Correction + 5.98 kcal/ Kwh
55
Sl. No.
Parameters Unit Design Value Trial Value
1 MS Flow Tph 355.5 359.00
2 RH steam flow Tph 301.7 304.52
3 Main Steam Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 822.2 820.81
4 FW Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 239.57 238.34
5 R. H. Steam Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 845.9 844.90
6 Cold Reheated Steam Enthalpy Kcal/ Kg 740.4 742.30
7 Generator Net power MW 120 117.760
8 Heat Rate = (MS Flow x (MS Enthalpy - FW Enthalpy) + ( RH steam Flowx(RH Enthalpy- CRS Enthalpy)) /Generation net power
Kcal/ Kwh
1991
240350482117760= 2036
9 Heat Rate After parameter Correction
Kcal/ Kwh2041
Correction in heatrate wrt deviation of different parameters were made after considering the permissible fluctuations
Heat load of the turbine was calculated based on the as run trial values, as follows
Table -4 : Heat Load Calculation
The Heat load of turbine is at as run condition = 139.72 million Kcal/hr. In comparison the design Heat Load is = 134.24 million Kcal/hr.
RECOMMENDATIONSBased on the As-Run turbine performance test, the performance parameters of turbine systems are summarized as below:
56
Sl. No.
Parameters UnitDesign value
Trial-Value
1 Inlet Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 822.2 820.81
2 Inlet Flow T/Hr 355.5 359.00
3 CRS Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 740.4 742.30
4 HRS Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 845.90 844.90
5 HRS Flow T/Hr 301.7 304.52
6 FW Enthalpy Kcal/ Kg 239.88 238.34
7 Mechanical Losses kW 412.0 422.00
8 Generator Output kW 120000 117760
9 Generator Efficiency at 98% load
% 99% 99 %
10 CW Inlet(L) Temp. 0C 34.0 30.15
11 CW Inlet(R) Temp. 0C 34.0 31.74
12 CW output(L) Temp. 0C 43.0 41.67
13 CW output(R) Temp. 0C 43.0 42.72
14 CW DP (CCP-01) Pr. Kg/ cm2 0.383
15 CW DP (CCP-02) Pr. Kg/ cm2 0.400
16 Heat Load Kcal/ Hr 139726698
Heat Load = (Inlet Enthalpy - FW Enthalpy) x Inlet Flow x 103 + (HRS Enthalpy - CRS Enthalpy ) x HRS Flow x 103 - (Generator Output / Generator Efficiency + Mechanical Losses ) X 860
=134247366Kcal / hr
=139726698 Kcal / hr
Table-5: Summarized Turbine Performance Parameters
Sl. No. Performance Parameters Design values Test values
1 HP Cylinder Efficiency 96.23 86.62 IP Cylinder Efficiency 92.90 90.403 HP & IP Cylinder Efficiency 94.24 88.744 LP Cylinder Efficiency 61.10 59.605 Turbine Efficiency 54.63 46.666 Turbo Generator Efficiency
(Taking 98% & 99% as mechanical transmission and alternator Efficiency)
35.31 34.37
7 Turbine Heat Rat 1991 2036*8 Unit Heat rate 2288** 2483***
*Value is taken without correction.** Based on design boiler efficiency = 87 %*** Based on operating boiler efficiency = 83%It can be noted that Performance gap between design and test values for
HP turbine (HP + IP) efficiency = 5.8 % Similarly, the gap with respect to design and test value of turbine heat rate
= 2.2 % (45 Kcal/Kwh ) The annual loss wrt. above gap in heat rate of the turbine = 17.8 MU ( @ of 75 % plant PLF and average generation 90 MW – basis 2006-07 generation figure) On a conservative estimate, a reduction in HR deviation of 20 Kcal/ Kwh will result in benefit. In terms of cost the annual savings is = 7.9 MU = Rs. 186 lacs@ Rs. 2.35 / Unit) The following actions are recommended for sustainability of Heat Rate / Efficiency Improvement Programme, Introduction of Formal Efficiency Management System. Establishing Base Line Performance Data. HR Deviation System on Real Time basis instead of Design. Analysis of HR deviation in terms of Cost. Routine Performance Testing on Sub-System basis.Specific improvement option may be established by inspection especially during overhaul, and diagnosis of pre and post overhaul conditions/trials.
57
CONDENSER PERFORMANCE TEST
58
BACKGROUND The assessment of condenser performance is important to determine equipment performance degradation. Plant performance assessment was done through the use of automated data collection and processing devices. The “As run performance tests” can be used as the base line for evaluating the performance improvement activities, as well as maintenance efficiency.
The design data (key technical specifications) of condenser is presented as Annexure 4.
METHODOLOGY Prior to trials conducted on 11th January 2007, the list of condenser operating parameters to be monitored and corresponding transducer reference in the data acquisition system were identified and the same was monitored every 15 minutes interval.
During trial period the following conditions were adopted :
o The test was carried out for 45min.
o The Unit-II remain isolated and at steady full load condition.
o The steam flow rate was maintained steady.
o The steady back pressure was observed during trial.
o The pressure drop (DP) across condenser was kept steady.
o Cooling water flow was measured by Ultrasonic Flow Meter.
o Condensate temperature was found steady.
o For comparison of operating data, design data of condenser was referred to.
OBSERVATIONS
The ‘As- run’ trial was carried out with an objective to arrive at performance in indicators and scope areas for improvement.
The ‘As- run’ performance indicators observed during trial, are summarized as follows.:
59
As-run Condenser Performance data
Trial Date : 11-01-2007
Sl. No.
DESCRIPTION UNITSNomenclatu
reDESIGN
(TIME)12:00 12:10 12:28 12:45 Avg
1 Unit Load MW 120 116.6 115.9 120.5 115.9 117.2
2 Frequency Hz 50 49.3 49.0 49.1 49.2 49.1
3Condenser Back Pressure (Vacuum)
Kg/cm2 0.106 at 34 OC
0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
4CW Inlet Temp. (Left)
°C t1L 29.8 29.8 30.0 29.5 29.7
5CW Inlet Temp. (Right)
°C t1R 31.3 31.4 31.6 31.1 31.3
6CW Inlet Temp. (L/R-Avg)
°C( t1 ) 34 30.5 30.6 30.8 30.3 30.5
7CW Outlet Temp. (Left)
°C ( t2L ) 43 41.3 41.3 41.6 40.9 41.3
8CW Outlet temp. (Right)
°C ( t2R ) 43 42.3 42.3 42.7 41.9 41.8
9CW Outlet Temp. (L/R-Avg)
°C( t2 ) 43 41.8 42.8 42.15 41.4 41.5
10CW Temp. rise (Avg)
°C ( t2 – t1 ) 9.0 11.3 12.2 11.35 11.1 11
12 Saturation Temp °C ( T ) 46.5 45.3 45.3 45.3 45.3 45.3
13Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD)
°C (T – t2) 3.5 3.5 2.5 3.15 3.9 3.8
14Condenser Effectiveness
Factor 0.72 0.764 0.830 0.783 0.740 0.743
15DP Across Condenser (L)
mmWC 3894 3812 3823 3823 3838
16DP Across Condenser (R)
mmWC 4006 3941 4089 4080 4029
17DP Across Condenser (L/R-Avg)
mmwc 3950 3876.5 3956 3951 3934
18 Condenser CW flow m3/hr 16000 14640
19 Condensate Temp. (L)
°C 46.3 46.7 46.4 46.4 46.5
20Condensate Temp. (R)
°C 46.5 46.9 46.6 46.6 46.6
21Condensate Temp. (L/R-Avg)
°C 46.4 46.8 46.5 46.5 46.5
22 LMTD °C 7.07 7.837 6.887 7.434 8.240 8.090
60
23Condenser Thermal Load
MKcal/hr
H* 145.23 161.04
24Heat transfer coefficient
Kcal/hr-m2 U** 2652.64 2570.41
* H = CW flow X T ** U = Thermal load x 106
7743.88 SQM x LMTD
CW FLOW ADEQUACY:
Based on As run Trial, the measured CW flow across condenser, of 14640 CMH amounts to 91.5% of rated 16000 CMH flow, indicating CW inadequacy.
CONDENSER THERMAL LOAD:
The Condenser Thermal Load being served (As measured) works out to 161.04 MKCal/hr for measured flow and temperature difference, as against rated 145.23 MKCal/hr, i.e. 10.88% higher w.r.t. design.
CW VELOCITY:
With reference to the design CW velocity of 1.96 m/sec, the actual velocity works out to 1.79 m/sec, on account of reduced CW flow, affecting the heat transfer.
CW DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE & FLOW ESTIMATE:
The measured average differential pressure across condenser, of 3.934 mwc, against rated 5 mwc value, translates to 89% of rated CW flow, taking place across condenser, w.r.t. rated (by Corelation).
It is felt that CW inadequacy is a key result area for attention. The lower flow (14640 CMH) could be due to any / combination of reasons which include, low frequency (pump rpm), increased drawal by other auxiliary loads tapped before condenser, or, drop in CW pump efficiency.
CONDENSER EFFECTIVENESS:
As run value of condenser effectiveness, of 0.743, w.r.t. rated value of 0.72 is felt to be comparable on account of lower CW inlet temperature.
TTD:
As run TTD of 3.8 OC, w.r.t. rated value of 3.5 OC indicates scope for improvement.
LMTD:
As run value of LMTD of 8.09 OC w.r.t. rated 7.07 OC indicates effects of inadequate CW flow, fouling etc. and scope for improvement.
HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT:
Condenser heat transfer Coefficient, (U factor) in as run condition, is assessed to be 2570.41 Kcal/hr-m2 w.r.t. rated value of 2652.64 Kcal/hr-m2, mainly on account of increased thermal load, despite increase in LMTD. The Surface heat transfer area considered is 7743.88 SQM.
61
The as-run condenser cleanliness factor, being a ratio of as run heat transfer Coefficient and design heat transfer Coefficient, works out to 96.90% of design, i.e. 0.823 (design cleanliness factor being 0.85). The drop in cleanliness factor also indicates scope for improvement.
In the absence of condenser curves and accurate back pressure measurement, PG test data of condenser, the scope for improvement is assessed, based on relevant co-relations and accepted norms.
The reference parameters are as under:
Item Reference Unit Design As-Run
C W t e m p e r a t u r e
( I n l e t )OC 34 30.5
C W t e m p e r a t u r e
( O u t l e t )OC 43 41.5
CW temp. Diff. OC 9 11.0
Condenser Vacuum mbar
103.95 at 34 OC CWin. (w.r.t. 0.106
kg/cm2)
98.06 (w.r.t. 0.10 kg/cm2)
Saturation temp. OC 46.5 45.3
TTD OC 3.5 3.8
62
Analysis
(i) Back pressure with clean tubes at design 34 OC CW Inlet temp.
= 103.95 mbar
(ii) Saturation temp. Predicted due to CW Inlet temp. being lower, at ideal conditions
= 30.5 OC + Design CW temp. drop + Design approach
= 30.5 + 9 + 3.5= 43 OC
(iii) Corresponding predicted back pressure in ideal conditions with lower CW in tem.
= 86.39 mbar
(iv) Saturation temp. predicted due to actual CW Outlet temp. and design approach.
= 41.5 OC + Design approach of 3.5 OC
= 45 OC
(v) Corresponding predicted back pressure with lower CW Inlet temperature, actual CW T due to lower flow and design approach.
= 95.8 mbar
(vi) Saturation temperature w.r.t. actual CW Outlet conditions and actual approach (As-Run condition)
= 41.5 OC + actual approach of 3.8 OC
= 45.3 OC
(vii) As-Run back pressure, at above condition = 98.06 mbar
(viii) Loss in vacuum on account of lower CW flow, and fouled condenser tubes, at 31.5 OC CW Inlet temp. in as run conditions.{Item (vii) – Item (iii)}
= (98.06 – 86.39) mbar
= 11.67 mbar
(ix) Loss in vacuum on account of lower CW flow, and fouled condenser tubes above, at 31.5 OC CW Inlet temperature.{Item (vii) – Item (v)}
= (98.06 – 95.80) mbar
= 2.26 mbar
A profile of desirable vacuum conditions at varying inlet CW temperature from 28 OC to 36 OC, with 9 OC as CW T and 3.5 OC as approach, are as follows:
CW Inlet Temperature (OC)
Predicted Saturation temperature in OC (Ideal)
Predicted Vacuum in mbar (Ideal)
2 8 40.5 75.76
3 0 42.5 84.15
32 44.5 93.4134 46.5 103.4136 48.5 114.49
63
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. It is recommended to install an accurate vacuum gauge for regular monitoring of performance. (with mbar reading).
2. The CW flow to condenser needs to be enhanced to 16000 CMH (rated condition) by reducing other drawals in the CW path before condenser, CW pump performance improvements etc. Once indicator of performance and flow adequacy being that pressure drop across condenser should always be greater than rated 5 MWC. If necessary, separate CW pump may be installed for aux. Cooling, so that condenser CW flow is increased.
3. State of the art measures for performance upkeep like chlorination (for bio fouling), online cleaning of condenser tubes, opportunity based back wash of condenser, may be taken up.
4. The vacuum improvement margin of 11.67 mbar, if achieved through above improvements, would translate as equivalent heat rate improvement, i.e. 11.67 kcal/kWh, and accordingly, would easily justify any investments towards improvements in condenser performance. The detailed CW-CT system overhauling action plan is attached in the annexure
Taking average generation 90 MW ( on the basis of 2006-07 generation figure) for 8000 hours
Saving potential = 11.67*90*1000*365*24= 9200628000 Kcal
Designed Turbine Heat Rate = 1991Kcal/kWAnnual energy saving = 9200628000/1991
= 4.6 MUsEnrgy cost (Rs./kWh) = 2.35 Annual saving potential = 108 Lakh
64
ANNEXURE
65
A n n e x u r e 1
O B S E R V A T I O N S H E E T S
( E Q U I P M E N T / A R E A W I S E )
BFP A
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit Load MW 119 118 120 119.002 Grid Frequency Hz 48.85 48.85 48.96 48.893 BFP Suction Flow TPH 190.7 190.1 189.5 190.104 Feed Water Flow TPH 375.2 364.8 375.7 371.905 Speed rpm 3552 3537 3596 3561.67
6 DP Across FRV Kg/cm2 3.5 5.9 3.8 4.40
7 Deaerator Pressure Kg/cm2 5 5 5.1 5.03
8 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.27
9 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 149.3 149.1 150.3 149.57
10 FW Pressure
a At Heater Inlet Kg/cm3 148 147 149.4 148.13
b At Heater Outlet Kg/cm4 147.6 145.8 148.3 147.2311 BFP Power Analysis i Current A 139.85 139.48 135.44 138.26 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 iv Electrical Power kW 1464 1460 1418 144812 Pump Hydraulic Power kW 742.33
13Specific Energy Consumption Kwh/T 7.61
14 Combined Efficiency % 51.2815 Motor Loading % 7216 Flow Loading % 88
17BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio
TPH/Mw 1.60
NO LOAD OBSERVATION
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Average1 BFP Suction Flow TPH 80.6 79.5 80.052 Speed rpm 2250 2245 2247.50
3 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 13.45 13.33 13.39
4 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 77.8 77.4 77.605 Power kW 591 581 591
66
BFP B
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit Load MW 120 120 119 119.672 Grid Frequency Hz 49.2 49.08 48.73 49.003 BFP Suction Flow TPH 178.5 179.2 184.4 180.704 Feed Water Flow TPH 366.2 367 383.6 372.275 Speed rpm 3572 3572 3550 3564.67
6 DP Across FRV Kg/cm2 5.3 5.2 5.8 5.43
7 Deaerator Pressure Kg/cm2 5.1 5.1 5 5.07
8 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.30
9 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 150.7 151 149.4 150.3710 FW Pressure
a At Heater Inlet Kg/cm3 150 151 149.4 150.13
b At Heater Outlet Kg/cm4 148.9 149.9 148.2 149.0011 BFP Power Analysis i Current A 141.70 141.76 142.60 142.02 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 iv Electrical Power kW 1500 1485 1509 149812 Pump Hydraulic Power kW 709.4
13Specific Energy Consumption Kwh/T 8.3
14 Combined Efficiency % 47.415 Motor Loading % 7516 Flow Loading % 84
17BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio
TPH/Mw 1.51
NO LOAD OBSERVATION
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Average1 BFP Suction Flow TPH 77.6 77.4 77.502 Speed rpm 2217 2220 2218.50
3 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 13.19 13.18 13.19
4 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 74.2 74.1 74.155 Power kW 614 615
67
BFP C
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit Load MW 120 121 120 120.332 Grid Frequency Hz 48.85 48.85 48.85 48.853 BFP Suction Flow TPH 173.7 182.5 171.5 175.904 Feed Water Flow TPH 369.6 377.3 367 371.305 Speed rpm 3462 3541 3455 3486.00
6 DP Across FRV Kg/cm2 6 4.7 6.8 5.83
7 Deaerator Pressure Kg/cm2 5.1 5.2 5.1 5.138 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.33
9 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 151.4 153.8 150.8 152.0010 FW Pressure
a At Heater Inlet Kg/cm3 150.2 152.4 148.2 150.27
b At Heater Outlet Kg/cm4 149.1 151.2 146.9 149.0711 BFP Power Analysis i Current A 129.98 137.20 129.48 132.22 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 iv Electrical Power kW 1375 1452 1370 139912 Pump Hydraulic Power kW 698.22
13Specific Energy Consumption Kwh/T 7.95
14 Combined Efficiency % 49.915 Motor Loading % 70.016 Flow Loading % 82
17BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio
TPH/Mw 1.46
NO LOAD OBSERVATION
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 BFP Suction Flow TPH 80.9 61.8 80.4 74.372 Speed rpm 2188 1618 2197 2001
3 BFP suction Pressure Kg/cm2 13.61 13.67 13.65 13.64
4 BFP Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 75.1 47.2 75.9 66.075 Power kW 570 622
68
CONDENSATE EXTRACTION PUMP
Pump AS.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
1 Unit Load MW 116 119.00 119.00 118.002 Grid Frequency Hz 48.73 48.73 48.85 48.773 Suction Temp. º C 46.5 46.9 46.9 46.84 CEP Flow TPH 334 329 332 332
5Condenser back Pressure(-)
Kg/cm2 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91
6 Hotwell Level M 808 811.5 809.3 809.607 Disch. Pressure Kg/cm2 16 17 17 16.58 CEP Amps ( Control room ) A 22.6 22.8 22.9 22.89 Power Analyser Readings i Current A 22.9 23.0 23.0 23.0 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 iv CEP Power kW 225 225 225 225
10Specific Energy Consumption
kWh/T 0.68
11 Motor Loading % 9012 Pump Loading % 92
13Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio
TPH/MW 2.81
Pump B
S.No Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Average1 Unit Load MW 119 119 1192 Grid Frequency Hz 48.96 48.85 48.913 Suction Temp. º C 47.5 47.7 47.64 CEP Flow TPH 298 320 3095 Condenser back Pressure(-) Kg/cm2 0.90 0.90 0.906 Hotwell Level M 818.1 826.5 822.307 Discharge Pressure Kg/cm2 17 16 16.558 CEP Amps ( Control room ) A 22.4 23.1 22.79 Power Analyser Readings i Current A 23.1 23.5 23.3 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 iv CEP Power kW 229 233 23110 Specific Energy Consumption kWh/T 0.7511 Motor Loading % 9212 Pump Loading % 86
13Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio
TPH/MW 2.60
69
INDUCED DRAFT FANS
ID FAN A
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit Load MW 120 120 120 120.00
2 Frequency Hz 48.85 48.97 48.97 48.933 Total Air Flow TPH 430.1 430.2 429.5 429.94 Coal Flow TPH 63.8 63.9 63.8 63.85 Suction Pressure (-) #DIV/0!a ID Fan A mmwcl 173.9 174.1 173.9 174b ID Fan B mmwcl 177.8 177.9 177.7 1786 Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B 0C 133/131 133/131 133/131 133/131
7 Fan power analysis
8 Current ( Control room ) Amps 48.5 48.9 48.5 48.6
9 ID Fan A i Current Amps 48.3 48.5 48.4 48.42 ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.49 iii Power Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 iv Power kW 40810 Motor Loading % 60.02
ID FAN B
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit Load MW 119 120 119 119.33
2 Frequency Hz 48.9 48.73 48.23 48.623 Total Air Flow TPH 429.1 429 430.2 429.44 Coal Flow TPH 63.9 63.9 63.9 63.95 Suction Pressure (-) a ID Fan A mmwcl 173.4 171.5 172.4 172b ID Fan B mmwcl 1 77.6 176.2 176.7 176
6Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B
0C133/131 133/131 133/131 133/131
7 Fan power analysis
8 Current ( Control room ) Amps 53.1 52.6 52.5 52.739 Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 52.9 52.5 52.4 52.59 ii Voltage kV 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 iii Power Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 iv Power kW 458.6210 Motor Loading % 67.44
70
AIR INGRESS CALCULATION
S.No Parameter Description Units Test 1 Unit Load MW 120.003 Total Air Flow TPH 430.004 Flue gas temperature at ID inlet deg C 132.00
5 Flue gas density Kg/m3 0.876 Total Coal flow TPH 64.007 % Ash in Coal % 35.618 Total Bottom ash (20% of total ash) TPH 4.569 Total Fly ash ( 80% of total ash) TPH 18.23
10 Flue Gas at APH inlet TPH 489.4411 ESP Efficiency % 99.9012 Flue Gas without fly ash TPH 471.23
13 Avg. O2 at APH inlet % 3.9014 Flue Gas at APH inlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air ) % 122.81
15 Avg. O2 at APH outlet % 5.50
16Flue Gas at APH Outlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air ) % 135.48
17 Avg. O2 at ID fan inlet % 5.90
18Flue Gas at ID Fan inlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air ) % 139.07
19 Flue gas Flow at APH inlet TPH 489.4420 Flue gas Flow at APH outlet TPH 538.1021 Flue gas Flow at ID inlet TPH 533.6622 Air ingress across APH TPH 48.6623 Air Ingress between APH & ID fan TPH 13.7724 Total Air Ingress TPH 62.43
FORCED DRAFT FAN
FAN A
71
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit load MW 120 121 122 121.002 Frequency Hz 48.85 49.32 49.08 49.083 Total Secondary air Flow TPH 257.6 258.1 255.1 2574 Discharge Pressure Fan A mmwcl 233.5 231.1 230.7 231.8 Fan B mmwcl 242.1 243.1 241.4 242.25 Secondary Air Pressure After AH ( L ) mmwcl 105.3 96.6 102.8 101.6 After AH ( R ) mmwcl 100.9 101.1 106.9 103.06 Secondary Air Flow After AH ( L ) TPH 136.4 136.8 134.9 136.0 After AH ( R ) TPH 121.2 121.3 120.2 120.97 Wind Box Pressure Left 100.1 99.1 103 100.7 Right 100.4 102.3 104 102.28 FD Fan power Analysis a Current( Control room ) A 33.1 33 32.5 32.9b Power Analyser Readings i Current A 33.3 33.5 32.9 33.2ii Voltage kV 6.47 6.47 6.43 6.5iii Power Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86iv Power kW 319.3
FAN B
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit load MW 121 121 121 121.002 Frequency Hz 48.85 48.85 48.73 48.813 Total Secondary air Flow TPH 258.1 257.2 257.5 2584 Discharge Pressure Fan A mmwcl 234.8 231.5 232.8 233.0 Fan B mmwcl 244.5 245.1 244.3 244.65 Secondary Air Pressure After AH (L) mmwcl 101.5 101.3 100.1 101.0 After AH R mmwcl 109 107 103.2 106.46 Secondary Air Flow After AH R TPH 136.2 135.7 136.1 136.0 After AH (L) TPH 121.9 121.5 121.4 121.67 Wind Box Pressure Left 103 101 103 102.3 Right 102 100 103 101.78 FD Fan power Analysis a Current A 32.8 32.7 32.6 32.7b Power Analyser Readings i Current A 28.8 28.7 28.6 28.7ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.47iii Power Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85iv Power kW 273.3
PRIMARY AIR FANFAN A
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
72
1 Unit load MW 121 122 121 121.332 Frequency Hz 48.96 48.85 48.78 48.863 Total Primary air Flow TPH 173 172.4 172.5 1734 Coal Flow TPH 65 65 65 655 Discharge Pressure i Fan A mmwcl 864 863 865 864.0ii Fan B mmwcl 863 861 863 862.36 Primary Air Temperature i AH inlet 0C 34 34 34 34
ii After AH 0C 296 297 297 2967 Hot PA header mmwcl 803 801 803 8038 DP across PAH air side TPH 31.5 31.7 31.5 31.69 PA Fan power Analysis a Current ( Control room ) A 28 28.1 28.5 28.2b Power Analyser Readings i Current A 28.5 28.4 28.5 28.5ii Voltage kV 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4iii Power Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78iv Power kW 247.5
10Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio
TPH/MW 1.42
11 Primary Air to Coal Ratio 2.65
FAN B S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
1 Unit load MW 121 119 120 120.002 Frequency Hz 48.98 48.92 48.97 48.963 Total Primary air Flow TPH 172 173 173 1734 Coal Flow TPH 65 65 65 655 Discharge Pressure i Fan A mmwcl 870 862 863 865ii Fan B mmwcl 868 862 862 8646 Primary Air Temperature i AH inlet 0C 34.4 34.3 34.4 34.4
ii After AH 0C 296.5 296.8 296.8 296.77 Hot PA header 811.5 807 804 807.58 DP across PAH air side TPH 31.8 32 32.2 32.009 PA Fan power Analysis a Current ( Control room ) A 28 27.8 28.2 28.00b Power Analyser Readings i Current A 32.65 32.76 32.91 32.77ii Voltage kV 6.47 6.47 6.47 6.47iii Power Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84iv Power kW 308.3310 Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio TPH/MW 1.4411 Primary Air to Coal Ratio 2.65
MILLS MILL A
73
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit load MW 119 119 119 119.02 Frequency Hz 49.2 49.11 48.96 49.13 Total air flow TPH 430 430 430 430.04 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 807.6 802 803.4 804.35 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 438.3 442 439.2 439.86 Mill Differential Pressure mmwc 382 382 380.1 381.47 Cold Air Damper postion % 63 62.9 62.9 62.98 Hot Air Damper position % 27 27 27 27.0
9Primary air temp after mill air preheater
0C 297 297 297 297.0
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 148 148 148.7 148.2
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 88.3 88.6 88.6 88.512 Coal flow to mill TPH 17.6 17.6 17.6 17.613 PA flow TPH 46 45.7 45.9 45.914 Total PA flow TPH 177.4 177.3 176.9 177.215 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 85.1516 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 30.4 30.4b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 31.2 31.0 31.6 31.3ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.8iv Power kW 273 269 276 27317 Specific power consumption kW/T 15.518 Motor Loading % 90.919 Mill Loading % 48.2
MILL B
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
74
1 Unit load MW 118 118 119 118.32 Frequency Hz 48.85 48.85 48.85 48.93 Total air flow TPH 430 430 430 430.04 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 804.1 806.9 805.4 805.55 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 511 507.5 509.4 509.3
6 Mill Differential Pressure mmwcNOT
AVAIALABLE
7 Cold Air Damper postion % 71.25 72.4 71.22 71.68 Hot Air Damper position % 30.84 30.84 30.89 30.9
9Primary air temp after mill air preheater
0C 297.2 297.2 297 297.1
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 153.8 153.7 154 153.8
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 87.4 87.4 87.4 87.412 Coal flow to mill TPH 18 18 18 18.013 PA flow TPH 44.7 49.8 45 46.514 Total PA flow TPH 176.9 176.8 176.9 176.915 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 85.6116 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 29.9 29.9b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 30.1 29.8 29.9 30.0ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.78 0.77 0.77 0.8iv Power kW 263 257 258 260
17Specific power consumption
kW/T
14.4
18 Motor Loading % 86.519 Mill Loading % 49.3
MILL C
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit load MW 120 119 119 119.32 Frequency Hz 48.97 48.96 49.08 49.03 Total air flow TPH 430 430.6 430.5 430.44 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 805.9 806.5 806 806.15 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 494.1 498.8 497.7 496.96 Mill Differential Pressure mmwc 368.1 367.5 370.5 368.7
75
7 Cold Air Damper postion % 53.9 53.68 53.89 53.88 Hot Air Damper position % 33.38 33.39 33.35 33.4
9Primary air temp after mill air preheater
0C 297.4 297.4 297.4 297.4
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 160.8 160.9 160.7 160.8
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 88.4 88.5 88.5 88.512 Coal flow to mill TPH 17.6 17.6 17.5 17.613 PA flow TPH 42.6 43.2 43 42.914 Total PA flow TPH 176.6 177.3 177 177.015 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 88.0816 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 30.12 29.84 30.15 30.0b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 30.0 30.1 30.2 30.1ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.77 0.76 0.77 0.8iv Power kW 260 256 261 259
17Specific power consumption of Mill
kW/T
14.7
18 Motor Loading % 86.319 Mill Loading % 48.1
MILL D
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average1 Unit load MW 119 120 119 119.32 Frequency Hz 48.85 48.97 48.97 48.93 Total air flow TPH 431.1 431.2 430.2 430.84 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 808.7 805.6 805.2 806.55 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 364.4 362.2 363.3 363.36 Mill Differential Pressure mmwc 191.9 192.8 192.6 192.47 Cold Air Damper postion % 65.26 65.25 65.23 65.2
76
8 Hot Air Damper position % 31.34 31.34 31.36 31.3
9Primary air temp after mill air preheater
0C 297.4 297.4 297.4 297.4
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 113.8 114 114.2 114.0
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 85.8 85.9 86.1 85.912 Coal flow to mill TPH 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.113 PA flow TPH 43.4 43.7 43.3 43.514 Total PA flow TPH 176.6 176.6 176.3 176.515 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 91.7316 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 27.05 26.88 26.44 26.8b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 26.1 27.0 26.8 26.7ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.7iv Power kW 214 224 222 220
17Specific power consumption of Mill
kW/T
21.8
18 Motor Loading % 73.419 Mill Loading % 27.7
MILL E
S. N0. Description Units Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Average
1 Unit load MW 120 120 118 119.32 Frequency Hz 49.05 48.88 48.85 48.93 Total air flow TPH 430.5 429.2 433.3 431.04 Hot PA header pressure mmwc 800 799.6 799.2 799.65 Mill inlet pressure mmwc 393 393 393.9 393.36 Mill Differential Pressure mmwc 172.2 170 170.4 170.9
77
7 Cold Air Damper postion % 41.3 41.2 41.2 41.28 Hot Air Damper position % 27.8 27.8 27.8 27.8
9Primary air temp after mill air preheater
0C 289.8 289.8 289.9 289.8
10 Air temp at mill inlet 0C 171.6 171.3 171.2 171.4
11 Mill Outlet temp 0C 92.1 91.9 91.5 91.812 Coal flow to mill TPH 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.313 PA flow TPH 47.3 46.6 47.3 47.114 Total PA flow TPH 186.9 187.5 188.3 187.615 Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh % 16 Mill power analysis a Current (control room) Amps 30.12 29.84 30.15 30.0b Power Analyser Readings i Current Amps 25.6 25.5 25.6 25.6ii Voltage kV 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5iii Power Factor 0.73 0.72 0.73 0.7iv Power kW 210 207 210 209
17Specific power consumption of Mill
kW/T
15.7
18 Motor Loading % 69.819 Mill Loading % 36.4
COAL HANDLING PLANT
CONVEYOR - 1A Motor Rating 132 kW Length 26257 mm Width 1600 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 1.6 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
78
1 Coal Flow TPH 754 754 7542 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 97.10 99.40 98.25b Voltage Volt 444.00 445.70 444.85c Power Factor 0.6 0.60 0.60d Power kW 44.80 46.10 45.454 SEC kW/MT 0.060
CONVEYOR - 2 Motor Rating 277 kW Length 348235 mm Width 1600 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 1.6 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754 754 7542 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 17.00 17.10 17.05b Voltage Volt 6.70 6.70 6.70c Power Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87d Power kW 172.60 173.60 173.104 SEC kW/MT 0.230
CONVEYOR - 3 Motor Rating 132 kW Length 103241 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754 754 7542 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 112.80 111.60 112.20b Voltage Volt 442.20 440.40 441.30c Power Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95d Power kW 82.10 80.80 81.454 SEC kW/MT 0.108
CONVEYOR - 4 Motor Rating 150 kW Length 168069 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754 754 7542 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 12.00 11.90 11.95b Voltage Volt 6.80 6.80 6.80
79
c Power Factor 0.72 0.73 0.73d Power kW 101.30 102.20 101.754 SEC kW/MT 0.135
CONVEYOR - 5 Motor Rating 132 kW Length 136330 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754 754 7542 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 121.50 120.60 121.05b Voltage Volt 440.30 439.20 439.75c Power Factor 0.69 0.70 0.70d Power kW 63.90 64.20 64.054 SEC kW/MT 0.085
CONVEYOR - 6 Motor Rating 225 kW Length 322526 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 605 610 6082 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 349.00 355.70 352.35b Voltage Volt 6.70 6.70 6.70c Power Factor 0.72 0.72 0.72d Power kW 116.60 118.90 117.754 SEC kW/MT 0.194
CONVEYOR - 7B Motor Rating 225 kW Length 275300 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 650 650 6502 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 6.70 6.70 6.70b Voltage Volt 6.70 6.70 6.70c Power Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84d Power kW 145.60 144.80 145.204 SEC kW/MT 0.223
80
CONVEYOR - 8B Motor Rating 225 kW Length 178093 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 650 610 6302 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 399.00 399.90 399.45b Voltage Volt 6.80 6.70 6.75c Power Factor 0.79 0.80 0.80d Power kW 147.80 148.50 148.154 SEC kW/MT 0.235
CONVEYOR - 9B Motor Rating 225 kW Length 219750 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 650 650 6502 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 264.20 265.80 265.0b Voltage Volt 6.70 6.70 6.70c Power Factor 0.61 0.63 0.62d Power kW 75.20 78.10 76.654 SEC kW/MT 0.118
CONVEYOR - 10 Motor Rating 150 kW Length 159937 mm Width 1200 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 940.00 1000.00 970.002 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 11.70 11.60 11.65b Voltage Volt 6.70 6.80 6.75c Power Factor 0.70 0.70 0.70d Power kW 94.90 95.90 95.404 SEC kW/MT 0.098
81
CONVEYOR - 12 Motor Rating kW Length 103241 mm Width 1600 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 Average1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 754.002 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 34.30 34.30b Voltage Volt 456.00 456.00c Power Factor 0.5 0.50d Power kW 13.50 13.504 SEC kW/MT 0.018
CONVEYOR - 13 Motor Rating kW Length 103241 mm Width 1600 mm Capacity 1176 T/Hr Speed 2.66 M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 754.00 754.002 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 108.00 107.70 107.85b Voltage Volt 457.20 455.60 456.40c Power Factor 0.54 0.55 0.55d Power kW 46.20 46.80 46.504 SEC kW/MT 0.062
PRIMARY CRUSHER-1 Motor Rating kW Length mm Width mm Capacity T/Hr Speed M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 754.00 754.002 Power Analyser Reading 3 On Load a Current Amp 8.40 8.30 8.35b Voltage Volt 6.80 6.80 6.80c Power Factor 0.34 0.33 0.34d Power kW 33.70 32.00 32.854 SEC kW/MT 0.044
SECONDRY CRUSHER-1 Motor Rating kW Length mm Width mm Capacity T/Hr Speed M/Sec
S.NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 754.00 754.002 Power Analyser Reading
82
3 On Load a Current Amp 51.60 52.80 52.20b Voltage Volt 6.80 6.80 6.80c Power Factor 0.24 0.24 0.24d Power kW 145.20 150.00 147.604 SEC kW/MT 0.196
COAL CONSUMPTION DATA (FY05-06)
Coal receipt (MT)
Coal Stacked
(MT)
Coal Reclaimed
(MT)
Coal Consumed
(MT)
Aux. Power Kwh / Ton
Coal Handled
Month April, 05 161366 161366 125461 125461 1.43May, 05 129649 129649 116772 116772 1.29June, 05 92918 92918 114490 114490 1.26July, 05 125167 125167 106734 106734 1.33August, 05 123133 123133 116346 116346 1.30September, 05 123489 123489 123489 123489 1.33October, 05 176911 176911 136512 136512 1.26November, 05 153579 153579 125452 125452 1.22December, 05 141463 141463 142428 142428 1.21January, 06 174314 174314 178442 178442 1.25February, 06 142796 142796 154707 154707 1.29March, 06 232612 232612 143425 143425 1.22TOTAL 1777397 1777397 1584258 1584258 1.28
S.No.Conv
Name / No
Conveyor Length
Motor Rating
Volt CurrentMotor Speed
ConvCapacity
Conv Speed
Yearly Running Hrs
(FY 05-06)
Meters kW Volt Amps RPM TPH M/sec
No Load
On Load
1 Conv # 1A 62 132 415 227.00 1485 1176 1.60 127 25352 Conv # 1B 42 132 415 227.00 1485 1176 1.60 124 24853 Conv # 2 690 277 6600 30.00 1486 1176 1.60 127 25354 Conv # 3 224 132 415 227.00 1486 1176 2.66 127 25355 Conv # 4 338 150 6600 17.80 1480 1176 2.66 127 25356 Conv # 5 232 132 415 227.00 1486 1176 2.66 127 25357 Conv # 6 670 225 6600 24.00 1484 1176 2.66 1105 4420
8Conv # 7A & 7B
559 225 6600 24.00 1484 1176 2.66 876 4380
9Conv # 8A & 8B
378 225 6600 24.00 1484 1176 2.66 876 4380
10Conv # 9A & 9B
600 225 6600 24.00 1484 1176 2.66 876 4380
11 Conv # 11 307 132 415 227.00 1486 750 2.66 584 292012 Conv # 14 387 55 415 94.00 1475 1176 2.66 207 1035
83
84
COOLING TOWER AREA
POWER MEASUREMENT SHEET OF CT FANS
EQUIPMENT
DATE TIME Voltage Current PF Freq kW
R Y B R Y B
CT FAN-1 13.01.07 12.33 398.50 398.20 398.20 58.73 59.83 58.72 0.86 49.26 34.7013.01.07 12.35 399.20 398.80 399.00 58.76 59.44 58.45 0.86 49.20 34.60
CT FAN-2 13.01.07 12.38 399.20 398.60 398.90 56.86 57.74 59.57 0.87 49.14 34.5413.01.07 12.40 399.60 399.40 399.50 56.74 57.53 59.60 0.86 49.19 34.45
CT FAN-3 13.01.07 12.26 411.70 410.90 411.30 55.50 55.77 55.44 0.85 49.45 32.6013.01.07 12.28 411.70 411.30 411.50 55.85 56.21 55.86 0.85 49.44 32.90
CT FAN-4 13.01.07 12.20 411.00 410.00 410.00 57.92 57.60 57.48 0.85 49.25 34.4913.01.07 12.22 411.80 410.20 411.30 58.16 57.66 57.67 0.85 49.30 34.65
CT FAN-5 13.01.07 12.11 407.80 407.40 407.60 56.24 57.37 56.40 0.85 48.93 32.9413.01.07 12.13 407.60 406.50 407.10 56.21 56.99 56.18 0.85 48.97 32.78
CT FAN-6 13.01.07 12.45 399.80 398.80 399.30 56.86 58.01 58.30 0.86 49.20 34.1313.01.07 12.47 399.80 399.20 399.50 56.84 57.77 58.28 0.86 49.20 34.07
AIR FLOW MEASUREMENT SHEET
Wind velocity Measurement AVG Area Flow Air In
let Temp
Water In let
Temp
Water Out let Temp
M/Sec M/sec (M2) m3/hr Db deg C deg C
Cell No-1 2.2 2.8 2.6 3.3 3.3 3.5 2.95 168.03 1784459
24.4 43.25 32.15
Cell No-2 2.5 2.3 2.0 5.0 4.3 3.5 3.27 168.03 1976011Cell No-3 2.4 3.1 2.7 3.8 3.3 2.9 3.03 168.03 1834867Cell No-4 3.1 2.7 2.8 3.7 2.5 3.6 3.07 168.03 1855031Cell No-5 2.8 3.1 3.0 4.0 3.8 3.7 3.40 168.03 2056665Cell No-6 2.5 2.4 2.8 4.3 4.5 4.6 3.52 168.03 2127236
AVG FLOW 1939045
ASH SLURRY AND WATER PUMPS85
ASH SLURRY PUMP-1AMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 35 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 460 NA2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 219 73.30 72.90 Voltage Volt 443.40 441.60 Power Factor 0.45 0.46
3 Power kW 125.0 25.30 25.60 25.454 Motor Loading % 20.36
ASH SLURRY PUMP-3AMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 35 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average1 Flow TPH 460 425.002 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 219 74.10 74.50 Voltage Volt 415 444.10 443.20 Power Factor 0.48 0.49 Power kW 125.0 27.40 28.00 27.70
3 Suction Pr Mts 2.50
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 3.405 Net Head Mts 35 36.50
6 Combined Efficiency % 152.60
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.27 0.078 Motor Loading % 22.169 Head Loading % 104.2910 Flow Loading % 92.39
86
ACW PUMP-2A
Motor Rating 125 kW
Capacity 770 TPH
Disch. Head 35 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 770 932.50
2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 219 194.60 194.90 Voltage Volt 415 406.60 406.30 Power Factor 0.86 0.86 Power kW 125 117.90 118.00 117.95
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 2.00
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 5.005 Net Head Mts 35 30.00
6Combined Efficiency %
64.63
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.16 0.138 Motor Loading % 94.369 Head Loading % 85.7110 Flow Loading % 121.10
ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2AMotor Rating 75 kWCapacity 945 TPHDisch. Head 15 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 Average1 Flow * TPH 945 895.50*2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 131 100.75 Voltage Volt 408.87 Power Factor 0.79 Power kW 75 56.36 56.36
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 1.10
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 2.505 Net Head Mts 15 14.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 63.96
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.08 0.068 Motor Loading % 75.159 Head Loading % 93.3310 Flow Loading % 94.76
* Combined flow of two pumps measured and divided equally, as it was not possible to measure flow individually.
87
H P WATER PUMP-1Motor Rating 175 kWCapacity 430 TPHDisch. Head 105 MtsPump efficiency 79 %Motor efficiency 95.5 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average1 Flow TPH 430 285.002 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 240.40 236.50 Voltage Volt 415 444.20 444.00 Power Factor 0.82 0.82 Power kW 175 151.7 149.10 150.40
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 10.205 Net Head Mts 105 102.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 75.45 52.67
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.41 0.538 Motor Loading % 85.949 Head Loading % 97.1410 Flow Loading % 66.28
ASH SLURRY PUMP-1BMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 25 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 460 NA2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 219 105.80 106.20 Voltage Volt 415 442.70 446.50 Power Factor 0.71 0.70 Power kW 125 57.60 57.50 57.558 Motor Loading % 46.04
88
ASH SLURRY PUMP-3BMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 25 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average1 Flow TPH 460 425.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 219 106.70 107.30 Voltage Volt 415 439.80 441.60 Power Factor 0.71 0.71 Power kW 125.0 57.70 58.30 58.00
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 3.40
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 6.005 Net Head Mts 25 26.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 51.92
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.27 0.148 Motor Loading % 46.409 Head Loading % 104.0010 Flow Loading % 92.39
ACW PUMP-2B
Motor Rating 125 kW
Capacity 770 TPH
Disch. Head 35 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 770 960.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 219 193.00 194.40 Voltage Volt 415 410.30 408.80 Power Factor 0.86 0.86 Power kW 125 117.90 118.37 118.14
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 2.00
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 4.405 Net Head Mts 35 24.00
6Combined Efficiency %
53.15
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.16 0.128 Motor Loading % 94.519 Head Loading % 68.5710 Flow Loading % 124.68
89
ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2BMotor Rating 75 kWCapacity 945 TPHDisch. Head 15 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 Average
1 Flow* TPH 945 895.50*2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 131 102.28 Voltage Volt 404.07 Power Factor 0.87 Power kW 75 62.28 62.28
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 1.10
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 2.405 Net Head Mts 15 13.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 53.75
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.08 0.078 Motor Loading % 83.049 Head Loading % 86.6710 Flow Loading % 94.76
* Combined flow of two pumps measured and divided equally, as it was not possible to measure flow individually.
H P WATER PUMP-2Motor Rating 175 kWCapacity 430 TPHDisch. Head 105 MtsPump efficiency 79 %Motor efficiency 95.5 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 430 280.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 291.90 299.00 Voltage Volt 415 439.50 440.80 Power Factor 0.84 0.85 Power kW 175 151.7 149.10 150.40
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 9.805 Net Head Mts 105 98.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 75.45 49.72
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.41 0.548 Motor Loading % 85.949 Head Loading % 93.3310 Flow Loading % 65.12
90
ASH SLURRY PUMP-1CMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 25 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 460 NA2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 219 106.70 107.00 Voltage Volt 415 435.70 436.70 Power Factor 0.71 0.71 Power kW 125.0 57.10 57.50 57.303 Motor Loading % 45.84
ASH SLURRY PUMP-3CMotor Rating 125 kWCapacity 460 TPHDisch. Head 25 MtsPump efficiency 67 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 460 425.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 219 106.20 106.50 Voltage Volt 415 443.50 445.50 Power Factor 0.68 0.67 Power kW 125.0 55.50 55.00 55.25
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 6.00
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 8.005 Net Head Mts 25 20.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 41.92
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.27 0.138 Motor Loading % 44.209 Head Loading % 80.0010 Flow Loading % 92.39
91
ACW PUMP-2C
Motor Rating 125 kW
Capacity 770 TPH
Disch. Head 35 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average
1 Flow TPH 770 931.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 219 191.90 190.00 Voltage Volt 415 404.80 405.60 Power Factor 0.85 0.84 Power kW 125 114.40 112.00 113.20
3 Suction Pr Kg/Cm2 1.80
4 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 4.005 Net Head Mts 35 22.00
6 Combined Efficiency % 49.31
7 SEC kW/Ton 0.16 0.128 Motor Loading % 90.569 Head Loading % 62.8610 Flow Loading % 120.91
ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2CMotor Rating 75 kWCapacity 945 TPHDisch. Head 15 Mts
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 Average1 Flow* TPH 945 NA2 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 131 106.10 Voltage Volt 407.3 Power Factor 0.77 Power kW 75 57.63 57.633 Motor Loading % 76.84
* Flow could not be measured individually
92
H P WATER PUMP-3Motor Rating 175 kWCapacity 430 TPHDisch. Head 105 MtsPump efficiency 79 %Motor efficiency 95.5 %
S.No. DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN TEST 1 TEST 2 Average1 Flow TPH 430 282.00
2Power Analyser Reading
Current Amp 247.30 246.80 Voltage Volt 415 441.00 440.80 Power Factor 0.82 0.82 Power kW 175 154.9 154.50 154.70
3 Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 10.104 Net Head Mts 105 101.00
5 Combined Efficiency % 75.45 50.17
6 SEC kW/Ton 0.41 0.557 Motor Loading % 88.408 Head Loading % 96.199 Flow Loading % 65.58
S.No Pump detailsDesign
kWActual
kWDesign SEC
Actual SEC
1 H P WATER PUMP-1 175 150.40 0.41 0.532 H P WATER PUMP-2 175 150.40 0.41 0.543 H P WATER PUMP-3 175 154.70 0.41 0.55
4 ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2A 75 56.36 0.08 0.065 ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2B 75 62.28 0.08 0.076 ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2C 75 57.63 0.08 NA
7 ACW PUMP-2A 125 117.95 0.16 0.138 ACW PUMP-2B 125 118.14 0.16 0.169 ACW PUMP-2C 125 113.20 0.16 0.12
10 ASH SLURRY PUMP-1A 125 25.45 0.27 NA11 ASH SLURRY PUMP-1B 125 57.55 0.27 NA
12 ASH SLURRY PUMP-1C 125 57.30 0.27 NA
13 ASH SLURRY PUMP-3A 125 27.70 0.27 0.0714 ASH SLURRY PUMP-3B 125 58.00 0.27 0.1415 ASH SLURRY PUMP-3C 125 55.25 0.27 0.13
COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM93
Design data
1.0 Compressed Air required for Normal Operation Service : 7315.5 Nm3/Hr
Instrumentation : 2058.74 Nm3/Hr
2.0 COMPRESSOR DETAIL
2.1 Number of Pump 2 + 12.2 Manufacturer Inger-soll Rand Ltd.2.3 Type Centrifugal2.4 Model No. CENTAC (C45MX3)2.5 Stage 32.6 Normal capacity Capacity Discharge Pressure kW (M3.Hr.) (Kg/Cm2(a) 50 Hz (2975 rpm) 7213.52 9.818 693.24 48.5 Hz (2885 rpm) 6535.45 9.812 622.32 47.5 Hz (2826 rpm) 5982.5 9.81 574.302.7 Inlet Pressure 0.991 Kg/Cm2(a)2.8 Design Ambient Temperature 47.2 deg. C2.9 Relative Humidity 63 %2.10 Inlet/Outlet Air Temperature for Inter Cooler - I 143.5/37.3 deg.C Inter Cooler - II 133.1/40 deg.C After Cooler 125.8/41 deg.C2.11 Inlet/Outlet Air Pressure for Inter Cooler - I 2.228 / 2.188 Kg/Cm2 (a) Inter Cooler - II 4.960 / 4.909 Kg/Cm2 (a) After Cooler 9.917 / 9.812 Kg/Cm2 (a)2.12 Min. Air Pressure for Instrument & 7.0 Kg/Cm2 (g) Service at consumption point.2.13 Direction of Rotation of Motor Counter Clock Wise (from coupling end)2.14 Main Motor Rating / Current / 76 A / 6.6 kV / 754 kW
3.0 SUCTION AIR FILTER
3.1 Total No. 33.2 Supplier Kirloskar Knecht, Pune3.3 Type Dry / Washable3.4 Filter Element Pre Filter (4 nos / filter) Washable, Fibre Glass Paper Fine Filter (4 nos./filter) Non Washable, Non woven Filter Fibric3.5 Rated Capacity 11043 M3/hr.3.6 Pressure Drop 0.2 PSI
94
3.7 Efficiency Final filtering 99.97% down to 2 micron as per F209 D and 97% to 98% down to 3 micron
4.0 AIR RECEIVER
4.1 Total No. 44.2 Manufacturer Everest fabricators, Ahmedabad4.3 Installation Indoor, Vertical (in compressor room)4.4 Design Capacity 8 M3
5.0 AIR DRIER
5.1 Total No. 1 + 15.2 Manufacturer Trident Corporation, Coimbtore5.3 Type Blower Reactivated Dryer5.4 Duty Continuous5.5 Max. Capacity at operating condition (FAD) 4800 m3/hr.5.6 Type of Desiccant Activated Alumina5.7 Quantity of Desiccant per chamber 1190 Kg5.8 Expected Life of Desiccant 2 years5.9 Air Pressure drop across drying plant at 0.3 Kg/Cm2 maximum flow5.10 Due point of air at atmospheric pressure - 49 deg. C5.11 Due point of air at operating pressure - 20 deg. C5.12 Rate of water removed per cycle 95 Kg5.13 Regeneration air temperature 180 deg. C5.14 Adsorption Cycle Time 3 Hrs.5.15 Reactivation Cycle TimeHeating 1 Hrs. and 52 min. / AdsorberCooling 1 Hrs.Purging 8 Min.5.16 Heater Rating 123 kW
6.0 COOLING WATER REQUIREMENT
6.1 Cooling Water Inlet Temperature 39 deg. C6.2 Cooling Water Outlet Temp. from each Cooler 49 deg. C6.3 Cooling Water Outlet Temp. from Oil cooler 44 deg. C6.4 Cooling Water Inlet/Outlet Pressure 3.5 Kg/Cm2(g) / 2.5 Kg/Cm2(g)
ASH HANDLING COMPRESSORS1 Total Nos for unit # 2 2 2 Model XF 125 W/C SP3 Capacity 621 CFM
95
4 Rated operating Pr. 72 PSIG5 Max discharge Pr 75 PSIG6 Max module Pr. 75 PSIG7 Drive Motor 125 HP8 Fan Motor 1 HP9 Power Supply 415 Volt / 3 Ph / 50 Hz
96
LIGHTING SYSTEMS
POWER MEASUREMENT OF DIFFERENT FEEDERS
Lighting Feeders (Off site area)
Voltage Current PF Freq Power REMARKS
CHP Lighting R Y B R Y B Hz kW
LBD Incomes - 1 252.8 251.3 252.9 7.09 14.82 31.94 0.84 49.1 7.337 Day loadLBD Incomes - 1 255.5 254.6 251.5 23.86 16.00 32.93 0.59 49.1 10.68 Night loadLBD Incomes - 2 256.4 258.2 259.9 10.05 10.25 0 0.69 49.2 9.237 Night loadLBD Incomes - 2 251.4 255.4 256.6 9.69 9.94 0 0.70 49.2 8.567 Day load
Ash Handling Plant LDB
262.0 264.2 264.1 27.65 13.5 29.64 0.98 48.9 17.12Day load & Night Load
Same
Lighting Feeders (Main Plant area)
Voltage Current PF Freq Power REMARKS
R Y B R Y B
Hz kW
LDB # 1 233.4 233.1 202.9 22.33 23.48 25.69 0.98 48.8 17.19 Day loadLDB # 1 233.4 233.2 232.5 22.67 25.38 26.19 0.99 48.9 17.80 Night loadLDB # 3 229.5 230.1 228.2 29.78 34.3 37.11 0.98 48.9 21.18 Day loadLDB # 3 229.5 230.1 228.2 29.78 34.3 37.11 0.98 48.9 21.18 Night loadLDB # 5 233.4 232.4 231.5 21.84 25.33 23.64 0.92 48.8 15.48 Night load LDB # 1 233.2 232.9 232.2 5.79 5.25 6.76 0.98 48.8 1.07 Day loadLDB # 1 233.2 232.9 232.2 6.44 7.37 6.8 0.98 49.2 4.80 Night loadLDB # 3 230.1 229.9 227.8 6.83 8.44 8.02 0.98 49.1 5.16 Day loadLDB # 3 228.0 229.2 227.6 7.27 8.7 8.9 0.73 49.1 5.7 Night loadLDB # 5 233.9 233.3 232.5 No
Load Day load
LDB # 5 232.0 230.0 231.5 5.07 6.33 5.96 0.93 48.8 3.7 Night loadLDB # 3 NIE No Load Day load Load is 3.7 Amp. Night loadLDB # 7 230.9 239.1 237.8 0.61 48.9 3.16 Day loadLDB # 7 230.9 239.1 237.8 0.83 48.9 3.50 Night loadLDB # 7 240.3 241.5 239.0 21.98 24.2 25.18 0.84 48.9 14.71 Night loadLDB # 7 240.3 241.5 239.0 18.34 21.15 24.22 0.86 48.9 12.89 Day load
97
LUX MEASUREMENT OF DIFFERENT LOCATIONS
Measured & Recommended Lux Level
Date: 9.01.07 Time: 10:00 - 12:00 hrs
Area Measured Lux Recommended Lux (BIS Standard)
Remarks
Switch Gear 3M, MCC
Front 73.0, 53, 62.3, 62.7, 72.6, 139.7, 126.7, 85.4, 94.4, 124.2, 93.6, 92.7, 73.1
100-150-200
Vertical 56.7, 51, 40.8, 81.7, 71.2, 51, 58.2, 94.2, 35.3, 44.5
100-150-200
Rear Side 89.5, 107.4, 69, 104, 92.2, 82.7, 114, 102
100-150-200
ESP # 2 Switch Gear Room O-M
Rear Side 200+, 32.2, 72.8, 183.4, 103.9(V), 27.7 (V), 59.6(V)
100-150-200
Front 79.3, 187, 200+ 100-150-200
ESP Control RoomFront 144.7, 142, 135, 215, 212, 287,
164(V), 77(V), 104(V)200-300-500
Rear Side 200+, 235, 217 200-300-501
Ash Plant MCC # 2&3
Front 166, 171, 242, 113, 142, 85(V), 95(V), 196(V)
100-150-200
Rear Side 153, 79, 68, 104, 452, 203(V), 166(V), 114(V), 183(V)
100-150-200
Ash Plant Control Room
Vertical Penal
164, 101(V), 210, 111(V), 216(Table), 163(Table)
200-300-500
Front 337, 327, 215 200-300-500 Rear Side 144, 42, 129 200-300-500
CHP C/RTable 169, 187, 170 200-300-500 Front 167, 148, 92, 138(V), 56, 115(V) 200-300-500 Rear Side 258, 345, 357 200-300-500
CHP MCC Room OM
120, 234, 157(V), 194, 143(V), 261, 116(V), 145, 127(V), 248, 126(V), 178, 121(V), 165, 106(V), 215, 118(V), 189, 155(V), 238, 120(V), 115, 115(V), 196, 145, 232
100-150-200
Rear Side 77, 64(V), 244, 167(V), 36, 170,
137(V), 46, 98(V)100-150-201
CHP Office 354, 363, 287 150-200-300 Battery Room CHP 263, 187, 136, 142 50-100-150 PLC Room CHP 201, 196, 137(V), 159, 123(V) 150-200-302 Rear Side 329, 456, 421, 158(Table) 150-200-303 Cony-6
79, 203, 152, 49, 48, 57, 86, 201, 50, 138, 238, 29(mu)
50-100-150
UCB # 2
Front 192, 92.0(V), 169.4, 88.1(V), 265, 173(V), 250, 153(V), 261, 251(V), 238, 213(V), 206, 140(V)
200-300-500
Main Penal 191, 141(V), 116, 98(V), 111, 91(V), 143, 86(V), 264, 105(V)
200-300-500
Table114, 128, 128, 150(computer table), 221(CT)
200-300-500
Rear Side 112, 269, 259, 243, 159 200-300-500
Relay Room
105, 225, 205, 126, 157, 126, 203, 141(V), 218, 140(V), 107, 310, 252, 147, 226, 143, 53, 97, 288, 153, 244, 281, 229, 183, 36, 192
200-300-500
98
Service Building AGM Office 132, 236 150-200-300 Conference Room 113, 251, 118 150-200-300 GM Office 180, 149 150-200-300 Table 197, 201 150-200-300 Library 199, 201, 160 150-200-300 Conference Room 259, 204, 194, 226, 180 150-200-300 C & I Office 235, 241 150-200-300 Service Room 204 No 200
150-200-300
Service Room 201 No 295
150-200-300
BE Group Room 382, 494, 362 150-200-300 EMD 178, 320, 381, 183, 107, 154, 160, 311 150-200-300 C&F Lab 209, 305, 235, 241, 175, 154, 114, 196 150-200-300 Mechanical Maint. off.
132, 234, 215, 183, 182, 169, 269, 129, 189
150-200-300
Electrical Store 178, 200 150-200-300 CWP MCC Room-OM
Front253, 134(V), 224, 124(V), 156, 105(V), 160
100-150-200
Rear92, 88(V), 58, 51, (V), 48, 76(V), 66, 49(V)
100-150-200
DM Plant MCCFront 220, 159(V), 204, 224(V), 183, 137(V) 100-150-200 Rear 126, 103(V), 94(V), 129 100-150-200
DM Plant C/R 116, 84(Penal), 68, 135(V), 82, 113(V), 180(Table), 123, 98(V), 174
200-300-500
Rear 141, 154 200-300-500 DM Plant Equipment area 37, 63, 103, 126, 144
100-150-200
AC Plant service building 166, 43.9, 37.9, 46.7(Table), 137.5
100-150-200
TG OM # 2
57.5(BFP Area), 41.5, 8.9, 17.9, 24.1, 50.9, 37.1, 33.0, 42.5
150-200-300
Near HP Dozing Tank 104.1, 46.3 30-50-100 Walk Way 12.3, 6.4, 59.5 50-100-150 Centrifugal area 79.2, 21.9 100-150-200 Near Condenser 50.4, 48.3, 60.1, 25.5 100-150-200 Near ACW Pumps 6.9 100-150-200
99
Date: 10.01.07 Time: Night 18:00 - 19:30 hrs
Area Measured Lux Recommended Lux (BIS
Standard)
Remarks
# 2 Control Room
165, 274, 194(V), 279, 130(V), 260, 120(V), 213, 188, 95(V), 144, 92(V), 177, 85(V)
200-300-500
# 2 Control Room Rear 234, 310, 211, 107 200-300-500
# 2 Control RoomRelay Room
30, 141, 160, 26, 257, 146, 95, 140, 98, 110, 180, 240, 134(V), 130, 336, 110(V), 205, 121, 127(V), 130
200-300-500
TG-Hall # 2, HP Heater area
36, 38, 12 (Near Turbine), 39, 64(T6 Front), 26, 32, 15, 37, 32(Gen Rear), 40, 49, 57, 34(LPH), 41 (Stair)
100-150-200
5.5 M, TG
84, 45, 22, 66 (CRH NRV), 65, 29, 34 (Rear), 18, 43
100-150-200
# 2 Switch Gear Room 3-M, MCC Room
Front 140, 120, 92, 91, 65(V), 34(V), 60, 84, 61, 60(V), 80(V), 157, 89, 48, 105, 112, 60, 48(V), 57, 518(operater table)
100-150-200
Street Light 28.6, 5.3, 27, 4, 11.6, 7.2, 20 5-20
CHP MCC RoomFront 229, 197, 162, 150, 94, 135, 200, 135,
144, 97(V), 95(V), 110(V)100-150-200
CHP MCC Room Front 209, 176, 189, 135, 96(V), 196 100-150-200
CHP MCC RoomRear 127, 200, 187(V), 32, 27(V), 140, 116,
163, 38(V), 201, 164(V)100-150-200
CHP - CRFront
364, 181, 201, 208, 86, 155(V), 94, 138(V)
200-300-500
CHP - CR Rear 216, 271, 277, 210 200-300-500
CHP Relay RoomFront 138, 228, 146, 202, 164, 205(Table) 150-200-300 Rear 209, 190, 105, 40 150-200-300
Walk Way C/R outside 245, 68, 125, 50, 400, 300
200-300-500
Outside C/R open 4, 7 Conv - 6 14.5, 46, 28, 21, 3.5, 22 50-100-150 Coal yard near light tower
38.3, 8.0 5-20
Ash Plant
4.3(Entrance), 5.3, 15.4(seal Pump), 145, 463, 324,
100-150-200
HP Water Pumps 330, 229, 143, 211100-150-200
Excess light
Slurry Pump 290, 270, 360, 167, 359 100-150-200
C/R Entrance65, 259, 314, 325, 200 (Penal), 105(V), 150(Table)
200-300-500
AHP MCC room Front215, 61, 280, 236, 131(V), 60, 87, 61(V)
100-150-200
AHP MCC room Rear 105, 81(V), 48, 8, 7(V), 16, 52(V), 9, 10(V)
100-150-200
Near ESP Pathway 7.1, 4.9, 16.7 50-100-150
ESP Area 27, 32, 25, 28, 25, 52, 30, 33, 20 (Near Air Tank)
50-100-150
Boiler O-M, MILL Area 11, 8, 31, 17, 22(ID fan), 10(FD fan)
50-100-150
OM 4, 2, 4, Near Ash Hoppers, 10, 29, 7(IBD Tank), 14
50-100-150
ESP C/R 13(Entrance) 200-300-500 ESP MCC room Rear 154, 148, 157, 126(V), 58, 214 100-150-200
ESP MCC roomRelay Room 196, 145(V), 71, 108, 79(V), 149
100-150-200
100
Cable Gallery 10, 29, 21, 35, 8, 50, 15 50-100-150
O-M,TG Area 110, 6(condenser), 6, 34, 5, 34 (LP dozing Tank), 16
100-150-200
BFP area 31, 30, 86, 91, 14, 5, 21, 85 100-150-200 O-M, Operator 131(Table) 100-150-200
Lub oil cooler 15, 39(MOT), 7, 93, 16, 10, 3(condenser rear), 19
100-150-200
Air Compressor Room
13(Entrance), 25, 65, 88, 71, 73(Tank receiver), 73
100-150-200
GT Area 41 100-150-200
Switch Yard
20, 37, 45, 37, 15, 17, 6, 21, 17, 51, 20, 24
100-150-200
Switch Yard C/R 133, 368, 440, 410, 291, 366, 236 200-300-500Excess light
Stairs 167 50-100-150
Savings Potential calculations after Voltage reduction to 220 Volts in Lighting Circuits.Lighting Feeders (Off
site area)Existing Voltage
(Average)
Recommended Voltage (Average)
Existing Power Cons.
Expected New
Power Cons.
Expected Power
Savings(kW)
Expected Annual Energy Savings (Kwh)
Expected Annual Energy Savings
(Rs)CHP LightingLBD Incomes – 1 (Day Load)
252.33 220 7.337 5.58 1.76 7708 18114
LBD Incomes – 1 (Night Load)
253.87 220 10.68 8.02 2.66 11648 27374
LBD Incomes – 2 (Night Load)
258.17 220 9.237 6.71 2.53 11078 26034
LBD Incomes – 2 (Day Load)
254.47 220 8.567 6.40 2.16 9476 22270
AHP LDB (Night Load and Day Load Same)
263.43 220 17.12 11.94 5.18 45376 106634
Total Savings in CHP Lighting Day Load = 1.76+2.16 = 3.92 kWTotal Savings in CHP Lighting Night Load = 2.66+2.53 = 5.19 kWTotal Savings in AHP Lighting load, (Day & Night) = 5.18 kW
LocationNo.of
fittingsNo. of FLTs
Watts/Tube+ Bllast extra
Existing Power
Consumption
Expected Power Consumption
(with T-5 FLTs)
U#1,2,3, 3.0 mtr swgr. 142 254 40 13970 7112UPS 6 12 40 660 336Engineer's Room 10 20 40 1100 560control room# 2&3 34 68 40 3740 1904THL #2 48 95 40 5225 2660UPS#2 6 12 40 660 336N/E #2 11 22 40 1210 616DM PLANT MCC 14 28 40 1540 784DM PLANT C/R 10 20 40 1100 560ESP#2 CR+MCC 15 30 40 1650 840CW#2&3 MCC 12 24 40 1320 672ASH PL2&3 C/R MCC 28 56 40 3080 1568FLY ASH AIR COMP ROOM 10 20 40 1100 560CHP MCC+CR+PLC Room 51 102 40 5610 2856
101
TOTAL 763 41965 21364
Conveyor Number
No. of corrugated
sheets on each side
No of light fittings on each side
Watt/Fixture
Conveyor#2 222 26 70Conveyor#3 123 15 70Conveyor#4 222 26 70Conveyor#5 139 16 70Conveyor#6 336 39 70Conveyor#7 382 43 70Conveyor#8 232 27 70Conveyor#10 194 23 70Conveyor#11 39 6 70Conveyor#12 21 3 70Conveyor#13 220 26 70Conveyor#14 123 15 70Conveyor#15 118 14 70
102
ANNEXURE – 2A
BOILER EFFICIENCY TEST
The method of performance assessment chosen is the Indirect method of heat loss and Boiler Efficiency calculation, drawn from Indian Standard ( IS – 8753 / 1977 ) and the deployed relations are presented as follows.:
BASIS FOR HEAT LOSS CALCULATIONS:
A. HEAT LOSS CALCULATION (IN PERCENTAGES)
1. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO UNBURNTS IN ASH:
i) IN BOTTOM ASH
C. V. of Carbon (KJ/Kg) X Comb. in B. Ash (%) X B. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg) G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)
ii) IN FLY ASH
C. V. of Carbon (KJ/Kg) X Comb. in Fly. Ash (%) X Fly. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg) G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)
2. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE SENSIBLE HEAT IN DRY FLUE GAS:
100 12 (%CO2 + %CO)
30.6
3. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO MOISTURE IN FLUE GAS:
103
=
=
= X
%C100 +
%S267
Comb. in B. Ash X B. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg)100
_
Comb. in F. Ash X F. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg)100
_
X X ___Gas Temp at APH Out (OC) Air Intake Temp (OC)
100 G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)X
%M – 9X%H 100
4. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO MOISTURE IN AIR:
Air supplied (kg/kg of coal) Moisture load (kg/kg of air)
5. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO RADIATION & UNACCOUNTANTED = 1.21%
B. HEAT INPUT TO BOILER (KCAL/HR)
Coal cons (kg/hr) X G.C.V. of coal (Kcal/kg) - Mill Rejects (kg/hr) X G.C.V. of Reject (Kcal/kg)
C. OVERALL HEAT RATE (KCAL/KWH) =
ANNEXURE – 2B
Parameter used for efficiency computation
Sl. No Operating Parameters Unit Source
104
= X
2442
X
1.88
X Gas Temp at APH Out (OC) _ Air Intake Temp (OC) +
100 G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)
= X
X
X Gas Temp at APH Out (OC) _ Air Intake Temp (OC)
100 G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)
1.88X
Heat InputGeneration
=
1 Avg. Unit Load MW DAS
2 Main Steam Flow TPHDAS
3 Main Steam Pressure KG/CM2 DAS
4Main Steam Temperature OC DAS
5 Feed Water Temperature OC DAS
6 GCV of Coal (as received basis) KCAL/KG Plant laboratory
7 Avg. Coal Flow TPH DAS
8 Hot Reheat Steam Pressure KG/CM2
DAS
9 Hot Reheat Steam Temperature OC DAS
10 Cold Reheat Steam Pressure KG/CM2 DAS
12 Cold Reheat Steam Temperature OC DAS
Sl. No Operating Parameters Unit Source
1 POWER GENERATION (avg.) MWDAS
3 COAL CONSUMPTION TPH DAS
4 G C V OF COAL (as received basis) KCAL/KG Plant laboratory
5 TOTAL AIR FLOW TPH DAS
6 MILL REJECTS KG/HR Plant laboratory
7 G C V OF MILL REJECTS KCAL/KG Plant laboratory
8 C V OF CARBON KCAL/KG Plant laboratory
9 BOTTOM ASH QTY. (Dry basis) KG/KG Plant laboratory
10 COMB. IN BOTTOM ASH % Plant laboratory
11 COMB. IN FLY ASH % Plant laboratory
12 FLY ASH QTY. (Dry basis) KG/KG Plant laboratory
105
Sl. No Operating Parameters Unit Source
13 Flue Gas Analysis (APH Outlet)
13.1 CARBON DIOX!DE (CO2) % Plant laboratory
13.2 CO % Plant laboratory
13.3 OXYGEN (O2) % Plant laboratory
13.4 TEMPERATURE DEGC Plant laboratory
14 Ambient conditions
14.1 DRY BULB TEMP DEGC Measured
14.2 WET BULB TEMP DEGC Measured
15 Proximate Analysis of Coal
15.1 FIXED. CARBON % Plant laboratory
15.2 VOLATILE MATTER % Plant laboratory
15.3 TOTAL MOISTURE % Plant laboratory
15.4 ASH % Plant laboratory
15.5 G C V OF COAL (as received basis) KCAL/KG Plant laboratory
16 Ultimate Analysis of Coal 16.1 CARBON (C) % Plant laboratory
16.2 HYDROGEN (H) % Plant laboratory
16.3 NITROGEN (N) % Plant laboratory
16.4 SULPHUR (S) % Plant laboratory16.5 MOISTURE (H2O) % Plant laboratory
ANNEXURE – 2C
106
BOILER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: AS RUN KEY PARAMETERS DURING BOILER TRIALS (UNIT # 2)
Sl. No Operating Parameters Unit AVG. AVG.
DATE 10/01/2007 10/01/2007
DURATION HR10.30 hrs to 15.00
hrs15.00 hrs to
19.00 hrs
1 POWER GENERATION (avg.) MW 117.57 118.756
2 % OF NCR % 97.98 98.96
3 COAL CONSUMPTION TPH 63.48 63.478
4 G C V OF COAL (as received basis) KCAL/KG 4724.8 4724.8
5 TOTAL AIR FLOW TPH 429.98 429.994
6 MILL REJECTS KG/HR 66.25 66.25
7 G C V OF MILL REJECTS KCAL/KG 2325.9 2325.9
8 C V OF CARBON KCAL/KG 8077 8077
9 BOTTOM ASH QTY. (Dry basis) KG/KG 0.0698 0.06978
10 COMB. IN BOTTOM ASH % 5.52 5.52
11 COMB. IN FLY ASH % 2.36 2.36
12 FLY ASH QTY. (Dry basis) KG/KG 0.264 0.26
13 Flue gas analysis (APH Out)
13.1 CARBON DIOX!DE (CO2) % 16.8 16.8
13.2 CO % 0 0.0
13.3 OXYGEN (O2) % 5.5 5.5
13.4 TEMPERATURE DEGC 147.5 148
14 Ambient conditions
14.1 DRY BULB TEMP DEGC 25.6 26
14.2 WET BULB TEMP DEGC 15.95 1614.3 RELATIVE HUMIDITY % 36.003 35.6414.4 MOISTURE LOAD KG/KG 0.0073405 0.007365
107
15 Proximate analysis of Coal
15.1 FIXED. CARBON % 41.62 41.62
15.2 VOLATILE MATTER % 19.72 19.72
15.3 TOTAL MOISTURE % 4.5 4.5
15.4 ASH % 34.13 34.13
15.5 G C V OF COAL (as received basis) KCAL/KG 4724.8 4724.8
16 Ultimate analysis of Coal
16.1 CARBON (C) % 46.5 46.5
16.2 HYDROGEN (H) % 3.5 3.5
16.3 NITROGEN (N) % 0.4 0.4
16.4 SULPHUR (S) % 0.6 0.6
16.5 MOISTURE (H2O) % 5.5 5.5NOTE: Above trial data is average value during 15 min. interval.
108
ANNEXURE – 3
CONDENSER DESIGN DATA
Sl. No.
DESCRIPTION UNITS VALUE
1 Load MW 120.0
2 Frequency HZ 50
3 Number of Passes No 2
4 Total Number of Tubes No140001200
5 Tube Length between Tube Plates Meters 7.400
6 OD of Condenser Tubes mm 22
7 Thickness of tubes mm18BWG for condenser & 22BWG for air cooler
8 Tube Material -C+Ni 90/10 for condensing and SA249CP304 for air cooler
9 Velocity through Tubes m/sec 1.96
10 TTD at design CW flow & temp. OC 3.5
11 Condenser Vacuum kg/cm2 0.106 at 34 OC
12 CW temperature Rise OC 9
13 Surface area SQM 7743.88
14 Condenser CW flow CMH 16000
15 Cleanliness Factor % 85
16 Water Box Diff. pressure mwc 5.0
17 CW Flow (capacity on line) CMH 9500*2
18 CW Pump speed rpm 495
19 CW pump discharge pressure Kg/cm2 1.3
20 Main Steam flow TPH 352.2
21 Main steam press Kg/ cm2 126
22 .Hot Re-heat Steam press Kg/ cm2 28.8
23 Cold Re-heat steam press Kg/ cm2 32.0
24 Main steam Temp. 0C 535.0
25 .Hot Re-heat Steam Temp. 0C 535.0
26 Cold Re-heat steam Temp. 0C 335.0
27 FW entering Econ. Temp. 0C 233.0
109
Annexure 4C H E M I S T R Y R E P O R T
COAL SAMPLE ANALYSISTIME 7:00 AM 3:00 PM
S.NO. INGREDIENTS SAMPLE 1 SAMPLE 2
1 FC% 43.53 42.582 VM% 20.33 20.783 TOTAL MOISTURE 4.56 4.444 ASH% 35.61 36.115 GCV Kcal/Kg 4803.38 4646.19
SIEVE ANALYSIS COAL FINENESS
DATE/TIME
S.NO. MILL -300+250* -250+125* -125+75* -75+0*1 A 0.06 1.36 13.43 85.152 B 0.25 3.83 10.31 85.613 C 0.08 2.31 9.53 88.084 D 0.02 2.71 5.54 91.73
UNBURNT CARBON ANALYSISS.NO. BOTTOM ASH % FLY
ASH %1 5.72 2.6
FLUE GAS ANAYSIS
O2 %S.NO. APH inlet APH outlet ID Fan inlet
R/L R/L R/L1 3.9 5.5 5.9
CO2 %S.NO. APH inlet APH outlet ID Fan inlet
1 16 15 14
REJECT ANALYSIS AIR DRY BASIS
MOISTURE ASH %GCV(kcal/
kg) TM(%)0.5 61.13 2325.9 2.19
110
Annexure 5
On – Line Energy Monitoring/Management System
The On – Line Energy Monitoring System involves recording and display of pre-defined electrical parameters of the auxiliaries attached to this. It helps in monitoring of electrical power consumption of the auxiliaries. With on-line energy monitoring system, deviations in power consumption pattern or in other electrical parameters can be detected early and suitable action can be taken accordingly. Management may consider the long-term benefits of the system which includes:
(i) Accurate energy accounting and control.
(ii) Cumbersome process of manual readings is avoided and data is available on PC.
(iii) Data of several months can be stored in PC. Hence comparison with past consumption can be done using trends periodically.
(iv)Energy efficiency reports of attached auxiliaries can be generated.
(v) Early detection of variation in energy consumption pattern of auxiliaries as hourly, daily reports can be prepared and analysed.
(vi)Merit order operation of equipments / drives can be introduced.
The use of data recording and analysis enables the plant to explore hidden energy saving potential.
It is possible to conserve 0.5 – 2% of annual electricity consumption by the efficient use of on line energy monitoring system.
It is proposed to have on line energy monitoring for all motors above 50 kW. A comprehensive on line energy monitoring system may include all HT auxiliaries , compressed air system, Ash handling plant, Coal handling plant, DM Water plant and integrated lighting feeder. After commissioning of monitoring system, monitoring schedule and system can be devised for effective use.
For motors below 50 kW rating, monitoring of energy and other parameters can be done with the help of energy analyzer. With this palm top analyzer having its own memory, it is possible to collect data of each motor at various locations for few hours. The Data from this analyzer can be downloaded in a PC as per convenience. This analyzer can measure all electrical parameters . Harmonic analysis can also be done.
111
Annexure 6
Variable Speed Drives For Fans
Although, variable speed drives are expensive, they provide complete variability in speed control. Variable speed operation involves reducing the speed of the fan to meet reduced flow requirements. Since power input to the fan is directly proportional to the cube of the flow, this is the most efficient form of flow control. However, variable speed control may not be economical where flow variations are less. Before considering variable speed drive, comparative techno-economics of various control system i.e. fluid coupling, eddy-current, VFD, etc. should be analysed,
COMPARISION OF VARIOUS FAN OUTPUT CONTROL METHODS.
PERCENT OF FAN VOLUME
COMPARISION OF VARIOUS FAN VOLUME CONTROL METHOD
112
VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE
The speed of an induction motor is proportional to the frequency of the AC voltage, as well as the number of poles in the motor stator. This is expressed as given below:
RPM = (f x 120) / p
Where f is the frequency in Hz, and p is the number of poles in any multiple of 2.
Therefore, if the frequency applied to the motor is changed, the motor speed changes in direct proportion to the frequency change. The frequency control is done by VSD.
The VSD's basic principle of operation is to convert the electrical system frequency and voltage to the frequency and voltage required to drive a motor at a speed other than its rated speed. The two most basic functions of a VSD are to provide power conversion from one frequency to another, and to enable control of the output frequencyThe variable frequency drive have an efficiency of 95% or better at full load.
113
Annexure 7
Polymer coating on water pump internals
A new technology has emerged, in which Polymer coating is provided on the pump internals to improve the efficiency of the pump this hard layer of polymer also provide increase in pump life. The supplier is providing polymer coating with guaranteed 4% energy savings. Since it is a new technology and yet to be fully proven, it is recommended to provide polymer coating on one of the water pump and if proven successful, this can be extended to other pumps also.
114
Annexure 8
General guideline for overhauling of Circulating water system and cooling tower system
Cooling Tower
Depending on the availability of type of cooling tower system/equipment following job can be taken up for overhauling:
1. CT fan gearbox, backlash checking2. CT gear box internal inspection3. Oil seals replacement4. Gear Box oil replacement5. Foundation bolds, beam healthiness to be checked 6. Fan blades cleaning with soap etc.
CT internals as given below should be checked and attended.
1. Nozzle cleaning and replacement of damaged nozzles 2. PVC fills cleaning (for film type by water jet cleaning)3. Damage fills replacement4. Damage drift eliminators to be replaced5. Cold water basin cleaning6. Structure algae removal.7. Anti-corrosive paint (EPCO 2020 TX, Tar extended amine adduct quick curing)
during capital O/H in cement structure (At least once in 10 years).8. Any vegetation growth near CT which obstructs air flow to be cleared (to avoid
this permanently, ash brick paving can be done all around CT 10-15 meter Wide).9. Painting of corroded pipes to be done.10. Riser V/V's servicing to be done, if required (once in two years).
In addition to above following work should be taken up to improve CW-CT system performance.
CW Pumps internals should be checked and any damage to pump impeller or other surface should be attended.
On Line Tube cleaning System if not available, their availability is to be ensured. Chlorine dosing should be done regularly. De silting of intake canal & CT basin should be done. HP/LP bypass checking should be done. All the steam and water drain valves passing should be checked and attended. Ejector & vacuum pump performance should be checked. Nozzle diffuser air gap
to be checked. Helium test for air ingress in the condenser. Cleaning of hot well and stand pipe and inspection of butterfly valves
115
Condenser flood test. CEP suction strainer cleaning and inspection of CEP suction valve gland sealing
& servicing.
Following are the recommendations made during a workshop on cooling towers and can be used as check points1. Permanent approach platform to gearbox from stock door to be provided in all
fans for ease in inspection and maint. It may be in the form of collapsible type
so that air path restriction can be avoided.
2. For inspection and maintenance of nozzles, fills, hot water distribution pipes
in counter flow tower the sufficient space may be provided between Drift
Eliminator and hot water distribution pipe. It must be minimum man height.
Because of smaller space drift eliminators (DE) have to removed every time
and then only inspection/maintenance of nozzles, water distribution pipes, fills
can be done. In this process the DE also get damaged and also it takes more
time.
This is the main season which causes maintenance problems in counterflow
tower.
3. Proper working walkway above fills and below HWD pipes, to be provided
around covers and in central position for maint. of nozzles & pipes.
4. Based on the experience of various sites, double helical gearbox has been
found to be a better option for CT fan, whereas worm & worm wheel gearbox
are maintenance prone.
5. For replacement, G/B should be double helical gear type and service factor to
be not less than 3.
6. For the measurement of CT cold water temperature in the basin at least 2
RTD are to be provided (in 1/3rd and 2/3rd depth of water flowing in CT cold
water basin outlet channel as per ATC-105) for averaging the temperature.
7. At CT cold water outlet, trash rack / sieve to be provided for removal of debris
etc. to prevent these going to condenser water box through CW pumps.
8. Vibration pick up to be provided in CT fan gearbox only and not on the motor.
It has been experienced in stations where motor did not trip and CT fan gear
box failure problem occurred though the vibration sensor mounted on motor
was working all right.
9. From design point of view Poppe method is assumed to be best in industry.
116
10. Delinking of CW system from other systems like Ash Water, Fire system for
technical reason due to chemical treatments etc. is proposed.
11. On-line measurement of key parameters of CW system such as pH,
conductivity, ORP, are proposed to be provided at proper locations.
12. Routine microbiological test kits to be made available.
13. In place of Cl2 the possibility of ClO2 system for CW water may be
considered for ease in maintenance.
14. Flow measurement provision of CW water in CW pipe inlet to CT and for air
flow in fan stack to be made.
15. On line monitoring equipment for scaling, fouling, corrosion and bio fouling
to be installed.
16. The cleaning of CT fills (film type) must be taken up about 50% every year
(mech. Cleaning) where clogging problem is there and CT effectiveness is
poor.
17. The circulating water pH to be maintained between 7.5 to 8.0.
18. During long shut down proper preservation is to be carried out for film fills
cooling towers by dozing Chlorine at a level of 2 ppm before shutting down.
19. Chlorine dozing is to be done continuously in CW system with residual
Chlorine 0.5ppm followed by shock dozing 1ppm once a day for one hour.
20. Cold water basin cleaning is to be done every year which is followed by most
of the stations.
21. CT fan gearbox oil to be checked for its quality by chemistry quarterly.
22. Periodic cleaning of film fills from controlled pressure water jet from bottom
is to be done once in 3 months.
23. Efforts are to be made to optimize the performance of clarifiers so as to
achieve minimum possible turbidity in the outlet water.
24. All around cooling tower area it should be cleared from trees, bushes for clean
air inlet to CT. About 30 mtrs. From CT paving with ash brick or lawn to be
made.
117
Annexure 9
General guideline for overhauling of Flue Gas system
Following jobs may be taken up for flue gas system overhauling
Air pre heater area
Depending on the type of air pre heater availability following job can be done
1. Checking general health of air pre heater and associated ducting and reparing if required.
2. checking of tube choking/fouling3. checking of leakage, thinning of tubes etc.
If 10 % or more heater tubes are blocked than those tubes or sets should be replaced.
Electro Static Precipitator area
Depending on the type of ESP, following jobs can be done
1. Water washing of ESP internals2. Cleaning of ESP hoppers3. Inspection and replacement of Emitting Electrodes 4. Inspection and replacement of Collecting Electrodes 5. Inspection and replacement of Shock bar mechanism (shock bars, rapping shaft,
inner arms, collecting hammer, emitting hammer, plain bearings)6. Inspection and servicing of Rapping mechanism (CRM, ERM gear box, drive etc)7. Inspection and replacement of Gas distribution screen 8. Cleaning and repairs of Flushing apparatus9. Cleaning and checking of support insulators and replacement of damaged
insulators 10. Cleaning and checking of shaft insulators and replacement of damaged insulators11. checking and replacement hopper heaters and their thermostats12. checking transformer rectifier unit, control cubicle their protection and interlocks 13. Overhauling of rapping motors14. Alignment of fields15. Trail charging.
Ducting
Following job may be done for duct overhauling.
1. Cleaning , inspection and repair of duct2. Checking of all hangers and supports of duct and rectify as necessary.3. Checking and repairing of duct internal support pipes and stiffeners.4. Cleaning, inspection & repair or replacement of expansion joint.
118
5. Repair & replacement of duct walls based on the thickness survey during walls.6. Replacement of all duct manholes packing rope / gaskets.7. R&M work for fabric expansion joints.
Damper/Gates
Following jobs may be done for damper and gate overhauling.
1. Servicing of actuators. Replacement of worn out parts.2. Checking/repair or replacement of gates/damper / shaft and bearings etc.3. Repack glands with new graphite / carbon packing, as the case be.4. Checking of seal air line
119
Annexure 10
UNIT AUXILIARIES POWER CONSUMPTION OBSERVATIONS ( UNIT#2 )
TEST 1 TEST 2 TEST 3
S. NO. DescriptionPhase Date Time
V kV I Amps PF F HzP
kW
TimeV kV I Amps PF F Hz
P kW
TimeV kV I Amps PF F Hz
P kW
1 BFP A R 9.1.07 11:00 6.5 140.3
0.93 48.90
11:05 6.5 139.8
0.93 48.90
11:10 6.5 135.8
0.93 48.9 Y 6.5 139.2 6.5 138.4 6.5 135.1 B 6.5 140.1 6.5 140.3 6.5 135.5 Average 6.5 139.9 0.93 48.90 1464 6.5 139.5 0.93 48.9 1460 6.5 135.4 0.93 48.9 14182 BFP B R 9.1.07 12:03 6.5 142.8
0.94 49.20
12:08 6.5 142.7
0.94 49
12:13 6.5 143.5
0.94 48.90 Y 6.5 141.2 6.4 141.1 6.5 142.3 B 6.5 141.2 6.4 141.4 6.5 142.0 Average 6.5 141.7 0.94 49.20 1500 6.4 141.8 0.94 49 1485 6.5 142.6 0.94 48.9 15093 BFP C R 9.1.07 12:36 6.5 130.7
0.94 48.90
12:41 6.5 137.9
0.94 48.9
12:46 6.5 130.2
0.94 48.9 Y 6.5 128.8 6.5 136.0 6.5 128.1 B 6.5 130.4 6.5 137.8 6.5 130.2 Average 6.5 130.0 0.94 48.90 1375 6.5 137.2 0.94 48.9 1452 6.5 129.5 0.94 48.9 13704 CEP A R 9.1.07 16:34 6.5 23.0
0.87 48.80
16:39 6.5 23.1
0.87 48.90
16:44 6.5 23.2
0.87 48.80 Y 6.5 22.8 6.5 22.7 6.5 22.8 B 6.5 23.1 6.5 23.2 6.5 23.1 Average 6.5 22.9 0.87 48.80 225 6.5 23.0 0.87 48.9 225 6.5 23.0 0.87 48.8 2255 CEP B R 12.1.07 16:39 6.5 23.2
0.88 48.90
16:41 6.5 23.5
0.88 48.90
Y 6.5 23.0 6.5 23.3 B 6.5 23.2 6.5 23.6 Average 6.5 23.1 0.88 48.90 229 6.5 23.5 0.88 48.9 233 6 ID FAN A R 10.1.07 12:28 6.5 48.9
0.75 48.90
12:33 6.5 49.3
0.75 49.1
12:38 6.5 49.0
0.75 49 Y 6.4 47.7 6.5 47.9 6.5 47.9 B 6.5 48.3 6.5 48.4 6.5 48.3 Average 6.5 48.3 0.75 48.90 406 6.5 48.5 0.75 49.1 410 6.5 48.4 0.75 49 409
120
S. NO. DescriptionPhase Date Time
V kV I Amps PF F Hz P kWTime
V KV I Amps PF F Hz P kWTime
V kV I Amps PF F HzP
kW 7 ID FAN B R 10.1.07 12:04 6.5 53.4
0.78 48.90
12:09 6.5 53.1
0.78 48.8
12:14 6.5 52.9
0.78 48.8 Y 6.4 52.5 6.4 52.1 6.4 51.9 B 6.4 52.7 6.5 52.4 6.5 52.3 Average 6.4 52.9 0.78 48.90 460 6.5 52.5 0.78 48.8 459 6.5 52.4 0.78 48.8 4578 FD FAN A R 9.1.07 18:15 6.5 33.5
0.86 48.90
18:20 6.5 33.7
0.86 49.4
18:25 6.5 33.1
0.86 49.1 Y 6.4 32.9 6.4 33.2 6.4 32.5 B 6.5 33.4 6.5 33.6 6.4 33.0 Average 6.5 33.3 0.86 48.90 320 6.5 33.5 0.86 49.4 323 6.4 32.9 0.86 49.1 3159 FD FAN B R 9.1.07 18:33 6.5 29.1
0.85 48.90
18:38 6.5 28.9
0.85 48.9
18:43 6.5 29.0
0.85 48.5 Y 6.4 28.3 6.4 28.2 6.4 28.1 B 6.5 29.1 6.5 28.8 6.5 28.9 Average 6.5 28.8 0.85 48.90 274 6.5 28.7 0.85 48.9 273 6.5 28.6 0.85 48.5 273
10 MILL A R 10.1.07 10:35 6.5 31.4
0.78 49.10
10:40 6.5 31.4
0.78 49.20
10:45 6.5 31.9
0.78 49.00 Y 6.4 31.1 6.4 30.7 6.4 31.3 B 6.5 31.0 6.4 30.9 6.5 31.5 Average 6.5 31.2 0.78 49.1 273 6.4 31.0 0.78 49.2 269 6.5 31.6 0.78 49 276
11 MILL B R 10.1.07 10:52 6.5 30.6
0.78 48.90
10:57 6.5 30.2
0.77 48.90
11:02 6.5 30.3
0.77 48.90 Y 6.4 29.6 6.4 29.6 6.4 29.6 B 6.5 30.1 6.5 29.8 6.5 29.9 Average 6.5 30.1 0.78 48.9 263 6.5 29.8 0.77 48.9 257 6.5 29.9 0.77 48.9 258
12 MILL C R 10.1.07 11:16 6.5 30.5
0.77 49.00
11:21 6.5 30.7
0.76 49.00
11:26 6.5 30.8
0.77 49.20 Y 6.5 29.6 6.4 29.6 6.4 29.7 B 6.5 29.9 6.5 30.0 6.5 30.2 Average 6.5 30.0 0.77 49 260 6.5 30.1 0.76 49 256 6.5 30.2 0.77 49.2 261
121
TEST 1 TEST 2 TEST 3
S. NO. DescriptionPhase Date Time
V KV I Amps PF F Hz P kWTime
V kV I Amps PF F Hz P kWTime
V KV I Amps PF F HzP
kW 13 MILL D R 10.1.07 11:40 6.5 26.5
0.73 48.90
11:45 6.5 27.4
0.74 49.00
11:26 6.5 27.2
0.74 49.00 Y 6.4 25.9 6.4 26.7 6.4 26.5 B 6.5 26.0 6.5 27.0 6.5 26.8 Average 6.5 26.1 0.73 48.9 214 6.5 27.0 0.74 49 224 6.5 26.8 0.74 49 222
14 MILL E R 12.1.07 16:00 6.5 25.8
0.73 48.8
16:05 6.5 25.7
0.72 48.80
16:10 6.5 25.8
0.73 48.90 Y 6.5 25.4 6.5 25.3 6.5 25.4 B 6.5 25.7 6.5 25.6 6.5 25.6 Average 6.5 25.6 0.73 48.8 210 6.5 25.5 0.72 48.8 207 6.5 25.6 0.73 48.9 210
15 CWP A R 11.1.07 12:13 6.5 57.1
0.83 48.9
12:15 6.5 57.2
0.83 48.9
Y 6.5 55.9 6.5 55.7 B 6.5 56.1 6.5 56.2 Average 6.5 56.4 0.83 48.9 527 6.5 56.4 0.83 48.9 527
16 CWP B R 11.1.07 12:24 6.5 57.5
0.83 49
12:29 6.5 58.0
0.83 49.1
Y 6.5 56.3 6.5 56.9 B 6.5 56.0 6.5 56.6 Average 6.5 56.6 0.83 49 529 6.5 57.2 0.83 49.1 534
17 PA A R 9.1.07 17:57 6.5 28.8
0.78 49.8
18:02 6.5 28.8
0.78 48.9
18:07 6.5 28.8
0.78 48.8 Y 6.4 28.0 6.4 28.0 6.4 28.2 B 6.4 28.6 6.4 28.5 6.4 28.5 Average 6.4 28.5 0.78 49.8 248 6.4 28.4 0.78 48.9 247 6.4 28.5 0.78 48.8 248
18 PA B R 9.1.07 17:37 6.5 33.0
0.84 48.9
17:42 6.5 33.1
0.84 49
17:47 6.5 33.2
0.84 49.1 Y 6.4 32.2 6.4 32.3 6.4 32.4 B 6.5 32.8 6.5 32.9 6.5 33.1 Average 6.5 32.7 0.84 48.9 307 6.5 32.8 0.84 49 308 6.5 32.9 0.84 49.1 310
TEST 1 TEST 2 TEST 3
S. NO. DescriptionPhase Date Time
V kV I Amps PF F Hz P kWTime V
KVI Amps PF F Hz
P kW
Time V kV
I Amps PF F Hz P kW
19 SA FAN 1 R 10.1.07 13:05 0.4 34.5 0.76 49 13:10 0.4 34.5 0.76 48.9 13:15 0.4 34.8 0.77 49
122
Y 0.4 34.3 0.4 34.3 0.4 34.6 B 0.4 35.2 0.4 35.3 0.4 35.5 Average 0.4 34.7 0.76 49 19 0.4 34.7 0.76 48.9 19 0.4 35.0 0.77 49 19
20 SA FAN 2 R 10.1.07 15:30 0.4 33.1
0.74 49
15:45 0.4 32.2
0.74 49
15:50 0.4 33.1
0.73 49 Y 0.4 30.9 0.4 31.0 0.4 31.0 B 0.4 33.6 0.4 33.3 0.4 33.3 Average 0.4 32.6 0.74 49 17 0.4 32.2 0.74 49 17 0.4 32.5 0.73 49 17
123
