Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CT Perf Monitoring 31aug10
CT Perf Monitoring 31aug10
Centre Centre for for Power Power Efficiency Efficiency & & Environmental Environmental Protection Protection
CenPEEP
Prepared on 16th March, 2010 All data on annual basis
Installed Capacity 24400 MW, GCV 3500 kcal/kg , Coal Cost Rs 1400 per Ton, PLF 90%, FC 34%
1 % Eff. Improvement
67 kcal//kWh Improvement
500 MW Unit
500 MW Unit
Same as above
5 kcal//kWh Improvement
You could check this directly using an electric kettle. Put in 1 liter of water (1 Kilocalorie will heat this by 1 deg celsius) Note the kettle wattage, and the cold water temperature, then note how many seconds to reach boiling temp (100 celsius). The number of kilocalories is just the temperature rise in degrees C, the number of Kwseconds is the wattage times the time to reach boiling in seconds.
10 mmHg Improvement in Condenser Vacuum Leads to 20 Kcal/kwh Improvement in Heat Rate for a 210 MW Unit
CenPEEP Condenser Performance Monitoring Factors affecting Condenser Performance Tube fouling Air ingress into the system High Condenser heat load CW Inlet temperature CW Flow
CenPEEP Cooling Tower Thermal Performance Testing Importance of Cooling Tower Performance Cooling water system plays a vital role in dissipation of waste heat in power station. More than 60 % of total heat input to the plant is finally dissipated as waste heat. The waste heat from the power plant is carried away by circulating water and ultimately gets dissipated in cooling tower.
Monitoring
For a 200 MW Unit : Cooling Tower Heat Duty is equivalent to approx. 275 MW For a 500 MW Unit : Cooling Tower Heat Duty is equivalent to approx. 700 MW
CenPEEP
Wet Bulb Temperature (WBT) at Tower inlet Cold Water Temperature Hot Water Temperature CW Flow to each Tower Fan Motor Power
CenPEEP
Difference between the Cold Water Temperature at CT outlet and Inlet air Wet Bulb Temperature Range Difference between the Hot Water Temperature (inlet to CT) and Cold Water Temperature (outlet of CT)
CenPEEP Cooling Tower Performance Salient Terms Used in CT Testing Tower Capability The most reliable means to assess the cooling tower thermal performance. It is defined as the percentage of water that the tower can cool to the design cold water temperature when the inlet wet-bulb, cooling range, water flow rate and fan motor power are all at their design value.
Predicted Water Flow Rate =Calculated from Manufacturer graphs and actual test conditions i.e. WBT, Range and Cold water temperature.
Where : QT = Measured water flow rate, t/hr Predicted water flow rate, t/hr No. of cells for design water flow rate No. of cells in operation during test Fan motor power design, kW Fan motor power measured, kW
CT Performance Test
TEST DATA
Average Hot Water Temperature Average Cold Water Temperature Average Inlet Air WBT Average Wind Velocity Actual KW of Fans during Test (Average) T HOT WATER T COLD
WATER
CenPEEP
UNITS
C C C Meter / sec kW
TEST VALUE 46.30 36.10 28.50 2.97 36.59 18 26100 29000 31900 32.00 11.00 4.40 18
P Des
No.
T/Hr T/Hr T/Hr C C C
No.
kW meter
WATER - 90%
From CT [90%] Characteristic curve From CT [100%] Characteristic curve From CT [110%] Characteristic curve T/Hr
WATER - 100%
WATER - 110%
CT Performance Test
CenPEEP
CT Performance Test
FIELD TEST PARAMETERS Average Hot Water Temperature Average Cold Water Temperature Average Inlet Air WBT Average Wind Velocity COMPUTATION OF EXPECTED COLD WATER TEMPERATURE Average Inlet Air WBT Average CW Cooling Range Expected Cold Water Temperature : 90% Flow Expected Cold Water Temperature : 100% Flow Expected Cold Water Temperature : 110% Flow UNITS C C C m/sec C C C C C
CenPEEP
TEST VALUE 46.30 36.10 28.50 2.97 28.50 10.20 32.25 32.93 33.53
CORRECTION IN EXPECTED COLD WATER TEMPERATURE DUE TO WIND Correction factor due to Wind Velovity C Expected Cold Water Temp C RESULTS DESIGN EXPECTED Cold Water Temperature (C) 32.00 32.95 Cooling Range of Cooling Tower (C) 11.00 13.35 Approach of Cooling Tower (C) 4.40 4.45 Cooling Tower Effectiveness (%) No. of Cells Design No. of Cells in Service during Test TOWER CAPABILITY Measured CW Flow (T/Hr) Predicted CW Flow corres.to Test Cold Water Temp. Design KW of Fans Actual KW of Fans during Test (Average) Adjusted CW Flow (T/Hr) Tower Capability 71.43 18 75.02
18 Q Meas Q Pred. P P
Des Act
Q Adj %
CT Performance Test
Design CWT HWT WBT CW Flow Fan Power (Average) Range Approach Effectiveness (Actual) Effectiveness (EXP) Capability 100 32 44 27.7 2222 47.81 12 4.3 73.62 CT Cell (19mm flute) 31.33 40.51 24.52 2520 45.65 9.18 6.81 57.4 63.22 87.13
CenPEEP
CT Cell (17mm flute) 31.84 41.13 24.42 2515 43.84 9.29 7.42 55.59 64.4 80.04
CenPEEP Cooling Tower Performance Performance Analysis CT degradation to be assessed based on Capability test Deviation to be derived from actual temperature and predicted cold water temperature