See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/270852319

Burner Performance Evaluation Using Test Code

Article in Journal of Energy Engineering · June 2007

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9402(2007)133:2(78)

CITATIONS READS
7 2,677

2 authors, including:

Carlos E. Romero
Lehigh University
167 PUBLICATIONS 2,100 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CO2 separation View project

Heat-Pipe PCM Based Cool Storage for ACC Systems View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Carlos E. Romero on 21 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Burner Performance Evaluation Using Test Code
Crisanto Mendoza Covarrubias1 and Carlos E. Romero2

Abstract: Development of new burner technology is common practice nowadays. Standardized test codes are available to conduct tests
to determine operating characteristics and thermal performance of different parts of steam generating units. This paper describes the
results of testing performed to evaluate thermal efficiency of a 74.5 kW fire-tube steam generator fired with a new premixed flame burner
in comparison to a typical standard-retrofit diffusion flame burner system. Two premixed flame burners sized at 7.6 and 10.1 cm were
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by LEHIGH UNIVERSITY on 07/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tested. Testing was performed in accordance with the ASME PTC 4.1 Power Test Code. The evaluation was conducted in the range of
small- to mid-sized, natural gas-fired applications, from 1.06 to 2.64⫻ 106 kJ/ h. The environmental nitrogen oxide 共NOx兲 emissions
performance was also compared for both burner technologies. The results of this evaluation indicate that firing the test boiler with the
7.6 cm new burner slightly improves unit thermal efficiency by 4.0–3.3% for a unit load ranging from approximately 1.06 to 1.79
⫻ 106 kJ/ h, respectively. Operation with the 10.1 cm new burner improves the thermal efficiency by approximately 1.6% at 2.32
⫻ 106 kJ/ h. The uncertainty in the measurements used in the efficiency calculations should account for approximately ±1.5% uncertainty
in the reported gross efficiency. Reductions in NOx emissions of the order of 10% resulted from operation with the new premixed flame
burners.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9402共2007兲133:2共78兲
CE Database subject headings: Thermal energy; Emission; Codes; Evaluation.

Introduction evaluation was conducted in the range of small- to mid-sized,

This paper provides a summary of the results of testing performed
to evaluate thermal efficiency and nitrogen oxide 共NOx兲 reduction
effectiveness of a new premixed flame burner technology, in com-
parison to a standard diffusion flame burner system. The intent
was to compare the thermal and environmental performance of
the new premixed flame burner to a typical diffusion flame low-
NOx burner under controlled conditions, using industry standards.
A description of the burner design details is not provided in this
paper because of patent issues. However, the premixed burner
design relies on increasing the radiant component of heat transfer
at the burner throat, as a method to improve thermal performance
on burners for industrial package boilers. These boilers have
small dimensions and the convective component of heat transfer
sees its performance affected by the short residence time of the
flue gases that typically result in hotter outlet stack temperatures.
This paper reports on the evaluation method and the results
achieved. Testing was performed in accordance with the ASME
PTC 4.1 Power Test Code 共ASME 1972兲. The ASME PTC 4.1
Power Test Code provides detailed procedures to conduct perfor-
mance tests to determine thermal efficiency, capacity, and operat-
ing characteristics of items used in steam generator units. The
1
Facultad de Ingeniería Mecánica, Univ. Michoacana de San Nicolás
de Hidalgo Ciudad Universitaria CP 58000, Morelia, Michoacán, México.
E-mail: cmendoza@zeus.umich.mx
2
Energy Research Center, Lehigh Univ., 117 ATLSS Dr., Bethlehem,
PA 18017. E-mail: cerj@lehigh.edu
Note. Discussion open until November 1, 2007. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on April 22, 2005; approved on August 3, 2005. This
paper is part of the Journal of Energy Engineering, Vol. 133, No. 2,
June 1, 2007. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9402/2007/2-78–81/$25.00.
natural gas-fired applications, from approximately 1.06 to 2.64
⫻ 106 kJ/ h, using two premixed flame burners sized at 7.6 and
10.1 cm, and a 17.8 cm diffusion flame burner. A 1,350 lb/ h of
steam fire-tube research boiler in Santa Ana, Calif., was used in
the testing. The burners were fired with natural gas. The results of
the evaluation indicate that firing the test boiler with the 7.6 cm
new burner slightly improves unit thermal efficiency by 4.0–3.3%
for a unit load ranging from approximately 1.06 to 1.79
⫻ 106 kJ/ h, respectively. Reported efficiency improvements in
this report are absolute values. Operation with the 10.1 cm new
burner improves the thermal efficiency by approximately 1.6% at
2.32⫻ 106 kJ/ h. The uncertainty in the measurements used in the
efficiency calculations should account for approximately ±1.5%
uncertainty in the reported gross efficiency. Additionally, as part
of this evaluation, the environmental NOx emissions performance
was also compared for both burners. Reductions in NOx emis-
sions of the order of 10% resulted from operation with the new
premixed flame burners.
Test Equipment and Procedure
Testing was performed on a fire-tube research boiler, nominally
rated at 74.5 kW, 1,350 kg/ h of steam. A schematic of the test
boiler is shown in Fig. 1. This unit presents a simplified configu-
ration to perform efficiency tests. The boiler can be fired with
natural gas and fuel oil; however, it was fired with natural gas.
The boiler draft is made with an air handling unit and an induced-
draft fan. Combustion air can be preheated, however, this option
was not used during these tests. The reference or standard burner
used in the tests was a 17.8 cm diameter, standard diffusion

78 / JOURNAL OF ENERGY ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2007

J. Energy Eng., 2007, 133(2): 78-81

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by LEHIGH UNIVERSITY on 07/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Research boiler schematic
flame, 4.22⫻ 106 kJ/ h combustor provided with a flue gas recir-
culation 共FGR兲 option for NOx emission control. Flue gas recir-
culation capabilities are available on the test boiler and were used
on one standard burner test.
Venturi flow meters were available for total air measurement
共total secondary air and FGR兲, see Fig. 1. Air flow measurements
were temperature compensated and assumed to be within a ±0.5%
accuracy. Maximum standard error recommended by the standard
performance code for Venturi tubes and thin plate orifices is
±0.35%. Feedwater was supplied by the city water system. Steam
from this boiler is vented to the atmosphere 共saturated steam at
101,300 Pa, 195° C兲, this facilitates steam production measure-
ments, which were inferred, from feedwater water consumption
measurements, using a cumulative flow meter. On-site calibration
of this meter indicated a maximum ±1.0% uncertainty. Maximum
standard error recommended by the standard performance code is
±0.25%.
Testing was performed with natural gas with a reference com-
position of 88.17% methane, 6.04% ethane, 2.49% propane,
0.27% butane, 0.02% pentane, 0.88% nitrogen, and 2.13% carbon
dioxide. Reference higher heating value of the fuel gas was
39,289 kJ/ m3 共at 21.1° C, 759.9 mm Hg兲. A commercial rotame-
ter was used for natural gas flow measurements. These readings
were corrected for total pressure and are assumed to have less
than ±1.0% uncertainty at full scale. Additional instrumentation
included standard thermocouples for ambient, air, fuel, water, and
flue gas temperatures, and a barometer for atmospheric pressure.
The uncertainty in these measurements was assumed negligible in
calculating heat credits 共less than 0.5% of total heat input兲. Com-
bustion air moisture was not measured and an average dry-bulb
temperature was assumed for moisture calculations. A portable
gas sampling analyzer was also used for single point excess oxy-
gen 共O2兲, carbon monoxide 共CO兲 and NOx emission measure-
ments in the flue gas. A preliminary survey of the flue gas flow,
J. Energy Eng., 2007, 133(2): 78-81
indicated severe stratification. However, these measurements and
gas temperature measurements were not corrected using an equal
area method over the stack cross section.
An agreement was made to perform the testing following 共as
closely as possible兲, the ASME PTC4.1 Power Test Code. This
code establish procedures for testing steam generating units to
determine thermal efficiency and heat engine capacity for mul-
tiple purposes, one of them, for determining the performance of
different parts of a boiler and comparing the effects of changes to
equipment. A total of eight tests was performed at an approxi-
mately constant excess O2 level of 3.0%. Test duration was of the
order of half an hour. The ASME test code specifies run time for
efficiency tests of steam generating units to be of not less than
four hours duration, however, time constraints precluded execu-
tion of longer test runs. Steady state conditions were achieved for
each test, as indicated by the readings of all process variables.
Two, back-to-back tests were run per load 共as specified in the test
code兲. The overall test range of nominal heat inputs was set from
1.06 to 2.64⫻ 106 kJ/ h. Four tests were performed with the
standard diffusion flame burner 共including one test with FGR兲.
The ASME test code suggests that runs be made at not less than
four different outputs. Two series of two tests were performed
with the new premixed flame burner using a 7.6 and 10.1 cm
configuration.
The 7.6 cm, 3.17⫻ 106 kJ/ h burner was the benchmark burner
supplied by the new technology for the tests. Limitations on fan
capacity and, consequently, burner upstream static pressure, pre-
cluded the 7.6 cm burner to be fired at heat input rates larger than
approximately 1.69⫻ 106 kJ/ h. Modifications were made to this
burner to upgrade it to a 10.1 cm configuration for additional
testing. The maximum heat input rate achieved with the modified
configuration was approximately 2.32⫻ 106 kJ/ h.
JOURNAL OF ENERGY ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2007 / 79
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by LEHIGH UNIVERSITY on 07/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. Steam generator capacity versus actual heat input

Fig. 2. Performance curves for standard and new burners

Efficiency was calculated using the input-output method,

burner was tested at two loads, 1.11 and 2.27⫻ 106 kJ/ h. The
where, efficiency 共%兲 = 共heat abs. by working fluid/ heat in fuel
performance of this modified burner at 1.11⫻ 106 kJ/ h is compa-
+ heat credits兲 ⫻ 100 or by the following equation:
rable to the standard diffusion flame burner, however, its effi-

冋 册
ciency improves by 1.61% at the 2.27⫻ 106 kJ/ h load in
Wse31共hs32 − hw24兲 + Wwe35共hw35 − hw24兲
␩g = ⫻ 100 共1兲 comparison to the standard burner.
H f ⫻ W fe + Be Capacity calculations were performed for all test runs. Capac-
where ity was defined as actual evaporation in pounds of steam per hour
delivery per million kilojoules of heat input from the fuel. Fig. 3
W fe = Q fe ⫻ ␥ f 共2兲 shows the results of these calculations. Similarly, to the efficiency
results, the 7.6 cm premixed flame burner improved steam pro-
duction at the 1.06⫻ 106 kJ/ h nominal heat input by approxi-
Be = BAe + B fe + BmAe 共3兲 mately 6.5%. The modified 10.1 cm premixed flame burner did
and not improve the steam generator capacity at this load, however, an
improvement was noticed at a higher load.
NOx emissions determined from the flue gas are compared in
BAe = WA⬘ ⫻ W fe ⫻ c pA⬘共tA7 − tRA兲 共4兲
Fig. 4 for the standard diffusion flame burner and the premixed
flame burners. The average NOx emission levels over the load
B fe = W fe ⫻ c pf 共t f 1 − tRA兲 共5兲 range used in these tests are approximately 126, 108, and
113 ppmv 共on a dry basis and corrected at 3% O2兲 for the standard
burner, and 7.6 and 10.1 cm new burners, respectively. This rep-
BmAe = WmA⬘ ⫻ WA⬘e ⫻ c ps ⫻ 共tA7 − tRA兲 共6兲 resents approximately 12% reduction in NOx emissions. How-
ever, the use of FGR in the standard diffusion flame reference

Test Results

Results of calculated gross efficiency for the steam generating

unit operating under both burner configurations are shown in Fig.
2. Gross efficiency results are plotted as a function of the actual
heat input. The standard diffusion burner showed the typical be-
havior of increased efficiency versus heat input. The standard
burner gross efficiency ranged from 62.4 to 66.05% over the
tested nominal load range 共1.06– 2.64 kJ/ h兲. The efficiency of the
standard burner with FGR, at a 2.27 kJ/ h load, was 0.78% lower
than for the no-FGR configuration. The average 共of two consecu-
tive runs兲 gross efficiency for the new 7.6 cm premixed flame
burner was 4.03% higher, for a nominal 1.06 kJ/ h load, than for
the standard burner. Efficiency standard deviation for consecutive
tests was better than 0.005%. Interpolation of the performance
curve for the standard burner indicates that the 7.6 in. premixed
flame burner performed at 3.34% better efficiency, at a load of
1.74 kJ/ h, than the standard burner. The 10.1 cm premixed flame Fig. 4. NOx characteristics versus actual heat input

80 / JOURNAL OF ENERGY ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2007

J. Energy Eng., 2007, 133(2): 78-81

 Table 1. Summary of Results
Burner Standard without FGR Standard with FGR Premixed Premixed
Size 共cm兲 17.8 17.8 7.6 10.1
Number of runs 3 1 2 2
Nominal firing rate 1.06, 2.64 2.27 1.06, 1.74 1.11, 2,27
共106 kJ/ h兲
Turndown 共%兲 14, 36 36 33, 50 48, 98
Thermal efficiency 共%兲 62.41, 66.05 64.54 66.44, 67.26 62.46, 66.72
NOx emissions 共ppmv兲 128.0, 122.2 9.3 105.9, 109.8 126.0, 99.3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by LEHIGH UNIVERSITY on 07/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

burner caused a significant reduction in NOx to below 10 ppmv. Notation

CO emissions for all tests were below 5 ppmv 共on a dry basis and
corrected at 3% O2兲. Time constraint prevented investigation of
the NOx and CO characteristics for these burners and how they
relate to the amount of excess air in the boiler.
Conclusions
Performance evaluation tests were performed to assess thermal
efficiency and NOx reduction effectiveness of a new premixed
flame burner technology, in comparison to a standard diffusion
flame burner system. Tests were run on a 74.5 kW fire-tube test
boiler. Testing was performed, in accordance with the ASME
PTC4.1 Power Test Code.
This code gives procedures for testing steam generating units
to determine thermal efficiency and heat engine capacity for de-
termining the performance of different parts of a boiler and com-
paring the effects of changes to equipment. Two premixed flame
burners sized at 7.6 and 10.1 cm were tested. The results of this
evaluation indicate that firing the boiler with the 7.6 cm premixed
flame burner slightly improves unit thermal efficiency by 4.0–
3.3% for a unit load ranging from approximately 1.06 to 1.79
⫻ 106 kJ/ h, respectively. Operation with a 10.1 cm premixed
flame burner improved the thermal efficiency by approximately
1.6% at 2.32⫻ 106 kJ/ h. No improvement was achieved at the
1.06⫻ 106 kJ/ h nominal load. A summary of the results achieved
are included in Table 1. It should be noticed that the uncertainty
in the measurements used in the efficiency calculations should
account for approximately ±1.5% uncertainty in the reported
gross efficiency. Reductions in NOx emissions of the order of
10% resulted from operation with the new premixed flame burn-
ers. Baseline NOx emissions for the standard burner were at the
125 ppmv average level versus 110 ppmv for the premixed flame
technology. However, the standard burner with flue gas recircula-
tion outperformed the new burners with a NOx reduction to the
sub-10 ppmv level.
The following symbols are used in this paper:
BAe ⫽ heat supplied by the entering air 共J/h兲;
Be ⫽ total heat credits added to the steam generator other
than the chemical heat in the fuel 共 J/h兲;
B fe ⫽ heat supplied by sensible heat in fuel 共J/h兲;
BmAe ⫽ heat supplied from the moisture entering with the
inlet air 共J/h兲;
c pA⬘ ⫽ mean specific heat of dry air at inlet temperature
共J/kg °C兲;
c pf ⫽ mean specific heat of fuel, determined for
temperature difference between fuel inlet temperature
and reference temperature 共J/kg °C兲;
c ps ⫽ mean specific heat of steam 共J/kg °C兲;
H f ⫽ heating value of fuel obtained by laboratory
analysis 共J/kg fuel兲;
hs32 ⫽ enthalpy of steam 共J/kg steam兲;
hw24 ⫽ enthalpy of feedwater entering unit
共J/kg water兲;
hw35 ⫽ enthalpy of blowdown 共J/kg water兲;
Q fe ⫽ quantity of gaseous fuel fired 共cm3 / h兲;
t1 ⫽ fuel inlet temperature 共°C兲;
tA7 ⫽ inlet air temperature 共°C兲;
tRA ⫽ reference air temperature 共°C兲;
WA⬘ ⫽ pounds of dry air per pound of “as fired” fuel
共kg/kg fuel兲;
WA⬘e ⫽ pounds of dry air supplied per hour 共kg/h兲;
W fe ⫽ measured fuel rate 共kg fuel/h兲;
Wse31 ⫽ steam flow 共kg steam/h兲;
WmA⬘ ⫽ pounds of water vapor per pound of dry air
共kg/kg dry air兲;
Wwe35 ⫽ blowdown flow 共kg water/h兲;
␩g ⫽ gross efficiency; and
⌼ f ⫽ fuel gas specific weight, correct to 20° C 共kg/ cm3兲.
References
ASME. 共1964兲. “ASME power test code.” ASME PTC 4.1-1964, New
York.

JOURNAL OF ENERGY ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2007 / 81

View publication stats J. Energy Eng., 2007, 133(2): 78-81