0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
189 vues4 pages
Cooling water infiltration into steam systems can cause many problems. Calcium phosphate (Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 is a major scale-former in open recirculating systems (cooling towers) calcium carbonate (cs) is a common fouling mechanism in condensers.
Cooling water infiltration into steam systems can cause many problems. Calcium phosphate (Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 is a major scale-former in open recirculating systems (cooling towers) calcium carbonate (cs) is a common fouling mechanism in condensers.
Cooling water infiltration into steam systems can cause many problems. Calcium phosphate (Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 is a major scale-former in open recirculating systems (cooling towers) calcium carbonate (cs) is a common fouling mechanism in condensers.
Heat Transfer ell-run plants often have personnel dedi- cated to monitoring process heat exchang- er performance and recommending correc- tive actions when needed. However, many facilities fre- quently pay less attention to steam generation and to the heat exchangers within the boiler system. A common steam-recovery method, especially at plants that cogen- erate power, is to pass the turbine exhaust steam through a water-cooled condenser the performance of which, or lack thereof, can cost a plant many thousands of dol- lars per year in lost efficiency. This article outlines im- portant aspects of condenser performance monitoring and provides the code for a short, simple computer pro- gram that can be used to track peformance. Condenser scaling and fouling mechanisms Cooling water inltration into steam systems can cause many problems. Typical cooling waters contain the hardness ions, calcium and magnesium, and other cations such as sodium and potassium, all of which are counter- balanced by bicarbonate, chloride and sulfate anions. Groundwaters usually contain higher concentrations of dissolved ions, while surface waters are often softer but typically contain suspended solids, organic compounds and numerous microorganisms. Silica is another prob- lematic contaminant, and in some areas of the country, silica concentrations in groundwater exceed 50 ppm. Many compounds formed by the reaction between these ions are inversely soluble that is, they begin to precipitate as temperature increases. These include some of the hardness compounds, such as calcium car- bonate (CaCO 3 ), and silicates, including magnesium silicate (MgSiO 3 ). Because the cooling water tempera- ture rises in the condenser, the condenser is susceptible to scaling. Problems may be more severe in open recir- culating systems (cooling towers), where the concen- trations of impurities multiply depending upon the cy- cles of concentration. Calcium phosphate (Ca 3 (PO 4 ) 2 ) is a major scale-former in these systems due to the breakdown of phosphate-based scale or corrosion in- hibitors. Scale has very poor heat-transfer properties, and even a thin scale layer will seriously retard heat exchange in the condenser. Waterside fouling is often caused by poor microbio- logical treatment of the cooling water. Once microbes at- tach to the tube walls, they secrete a sticky, protective lm that increases the deposit volume. This layer in turn absorbs silt and other debris from the cooling water, fur- ther increasing the deposit mass. Like scale, microbio- logical foulants seriously retard heat transfer. Microbial formations also may initiate corrosion due to oxygen differentials that develop between the aerated cooling water and the oxygen-decient zone under the deposit. Many microbes produce acids as part of their metabolic processes, and the acids, which are trapped beneath the deposit, can directly attack the tube material. Excess air leakage into a condenser represents an- other potentially serious heat-transfer problem. Air en- ters a steam-generating system at points around the condenser due to the strong vacuum generated within the system. Prime spots for in-leakage include the ex- pansion joint between the turbine and condenser, pene- trations of heater drip lines into the condenser shell, turbine seals and explosion diaphragms, and conden- sate pump seals. Air in-leakage is virtually impossible to prevent, but the effects are manageable under nor- mal conditions. Most condensers are equipped with one or more air-removal compartments, in which a me- chanical vacuum is applied to remove gases that enter the condenser. When the air-removal system functions properly, dissolved oxygen concentrations in the con- densate may be as low as 7 ppb. However, structural An effective monitoring program can extend equipment life, improve operations, and yield substantial energy savings. Track Condenser Performance W Brad Buecker, Kansas City Power and Light Co. CEP February 2003 www.cepmagazine.org 41 failures in the condenser shell or other mechanical prob- lems can increase air in-leakage, sometimes very rapidly and to a point where the air-removal system becomes over- whelmed. Some of the excess air coats the condenser tubes, seriously inhibiting heat transfer. The thermodynamics of fouling and air blanketing Instead of condensing turbine exhaust steam, why not transport it directly back to the boiler? The main reason (in addition to the obvious piping difficulties) relates to efficiency. Consider, for the sake of simplicity, a turbine with no frictional, heat or other losses, and thus no entropy change. (In actuality, turbines are typically 80% to 90% efficient, but this does not need to be included here to demonstrate the importance of condenser performance.) The turbine op- erating conditions are: inlet steam pressure = 1,500 psig, inlet steam temperature = 1,000F, and outlet steam pres- sure = atmospheric (14.7 psia). The energy equation for steady-state ow, which is common in a turbine, is w t = m(h inlet h outlet ), where w t is the work produced by the turbine, mis the mass owrate of steam, h inlet is the enthalpy of the inlet steam, and h outlet is the enthalpy of the outlet steam. At these conditions, the enthalpy of the inlet steam is 1,490.5 Btu/lbm and the exit- ing enthalpy is 1,050.5 Btu/lbm. So, the maximum unit work from the turbine is w t /m= 1,490.5 Btu/lbm 1,050.5 Btu/lbm = 440 Btu/lbm. To put this into practical perspec- tive, assume the steam ow to be 1 million lb/h. The over- all work is then 440 million Btu/h = 128.9 MW. Now consider a system with a condenser that reduces the turbine exhaust pressure to 1 psia. Again assuming no en- tropy change through the turbine, the enthalpy of the turbine exhaust is 898.0 Btu/lbm. The unit work output is 1,490.5 898.0 = 592.5 Btu/lbm. For a 1 million lb/h turbine, the total work is 592.5 million Btu/h = 173.6 MW. The turbine output is 44.7 MW, or 35%, greater. Clearly, condensation of the steam has a signicant effect on efficiency. Lets look at the situation in reverse, where waterside fouling or scaling (or excess air in-leakage) causes the con- denser pressure to increase from 1 psia to 2 psia. The work from the turbine is reduced to 557.2 Btu/lbm. So, in a 1 mil- lion lb/h system, an increase in the condenser backpressure from 1 psia to 2 psia results in a loss of 35.3 million Btu/h, or 10.3 MW, of work. This dramatically illustrates the importance of proper con- denser performance monitoring. Techniques for monitoring condenser performance Various methods are available to evaluate condenser performance. The simplest is to record the condenser backpressure and watch for any signi- cant changes over time. Another common technique is monitoring of the cooling water inlet, cooling water outlet, and condensed steam temperatures. Changes in these values, especially those of the terminal temperature difference (TTD) i.e., the dif- ference between the condensed steam temperature and cooling water outlet temperature reect changes in con- denser performance. Consider the data shown in Table 1, which is taken from the log sheet of an actual condenser. The tubes were relatively clean when the first set of data was col- lected, but had become fouled with microbiological de- posits by the time of the second reading. The cooling water inlet temperature during the second reading is higher due to summer warming. This alone would have an effect on outlet and condensed steam temperatures, but the important thing is the change in the TTD. Under normal conditions, the TTD will remain nearly constant. Here it increased significantly because of the reduction in heat transfer due to the deposits. Monitoring for air in-leakage is also important. At many plants, the discharge line from the condenser air- removal section is equipped with a bypass loop contain- ing a flowmeter. Plant operators should routinely check the air flowrate from the condenser. The Heat Exchange Institute (HEI) suggests that the flowrate should average at or below 1 scfm per 100 MW of output. However, conditions vary from unit to unit. It is more important to establish baseline data during normal operation and then watch for changes. Computer-aided monitoring Fouled or scaled condenser tubes, air in-leakage, and cooling water ow restrictions will all cause an increase in the TTD. However, condenser performance problems may go undetected because changes in tube conditions are often gradual. Several computer programs can be used to accu- rately track condenser performance. One such program (developed at the authors for- mer utility) is based on technical data supplied by the General Physics Corp. (1). The program, whose calcu- lations are outlined in Tables 2 and 3, can be easily written into a spreadsheet with a log sheet included. The following simple-to-obtain data are required for the calculations: Table 1. Condenser data indicate changes in performance. Date July 11 Aug 16 Unit Load, MW 185.0 190.0 Cooling Water Inlet Temperature, F 80.0 88.5 Cooling Water Outlet Temperature, F 96.0 106.5 Condensed Steam Temperature, F 106.0 128.0 Terminal Temperature Difference (TTD), F 10.0 21.5 cooling water density (lb/ft 3 ) cooling water heat capacity (Btu/lb-F) cooling water inlet temperature (TIN, F) cooling water outlet temperature (TOUT, F) condensed steam temperature (TSAT, F) cooling water owrate (FLOW, gal/min) cooling water correction factor (CWCF, from Table 3) condenser tube correction factor (CTCF, from Table 3) number of (unplugged) condenser tubes (NT) number of tube passes (NP) inside tube diameter (ID, in.) outside tube diameter (OD, in.) tube length (L, ft) a constant (C, from Table 3). Because the tube dimensions for any condenser are con- stant, the program can be simplied by including xed values for tube length, i.d., o.d., number of tubes, and number of tube passes. In addition, the density of water decreases by only 0.5% over the temperature range of 40F to 90F, so a con- stant value for water density can be used without noticeably affecting the calculation. The same is true for cooling water heat capacity. Guidelines for selecting the cooling water cor- rection factor, condenser tube correction factor, and the cor- rection factor C are outlined in Table 3. These values help the program account for changes in condenser design and changes in cooling water inlet temperature. For any particular condenser, C and the condenser tube correction factor are con- stant, and may be permanently placed in the program. The program calculates an ideal heat-transfer coefficient (U i ), which it then compares to a calculated actual heat- transfer coefficient (U a ). The inverse of this value multi- plied by 100 is known as the cleanliness factor. When condenser tubes are placed in service, they quick- ly develop an oxide coating. This coating, which helps pro- tect the metal substrate from corrosion, retards heat trans- fer. Thus, a condenser free from mineral or microbiological deposits will still only achieve about 85% of the ideal heat transfer. A cleanliness factor of 85% indicates non-fouled condenser tubes. The program will detect changes in condenser perfor- mance due to scaling, microbiological fouling or excess air in-leakage. For example, the condenser operating data out- lined in Table 1 correspond to cleanliness factors of 70.3% for the rst set of data and 43.7% for the second set. This was consistent with the change in TTD and before-and- after visual tube inspections. An important issue with this program is accurate tem- perature readings. The literature suggests that inlet and out- let cooling water may stratify and give different tempera- ture readings at the pipe wall than in the center. This will affect absolute values, although the program may still be used successfully to identify trends. Also, results are most accurate and consistent when the system is operating at high load. This allows the observer to notice subtle trends. As one of the following examples illustrates, however, the program can also detect problems during low-load operation. Applications The program was originally used to monitor the perfor- mance of three electric utility condensers over a ve-year period. Following the initial publication of the results, it was adopted by other utilities as well. Example 1. Cleanliness factor analyses of a utilitys largest condenser, rated at 870,000 lb/h, were conducted three times a week. Readings were consistently in the mid-70% range for several months, but suddenly they dropped to 45%. Waterside scaling and fouling rarely occur with such rapidity. Such dras- tic changes more likely indicate excess air in-leakage. When maintenance personnel inspected the condenser, they discovered a crack in the condenser shell where a heater drip line penetrates. Once they sealed this crack, the cleanliness factors returned to their previous values, where they remained for two months until they suddenly dropped again. The seal had failed. The maintenance crew then welded a collar around the drip line, which totally sealed the crack and cured the problem. Example 2. In another instance, thrice-weekly readings on two 477,000-lb/h condensers indicated good perfor- mance. Suddenly, one condenser began performing errati- cally. At full unit load, the cleanliness factors ranged be- tween 70% and 75%, but at low loads the factor dropped to as low as 18%. Again, such uctuations could not have been the result of waterside fouling. A leak detection contractor was hired to look for air Heat Transfer 42 www.cepmagazine.org February 2003 CEP Table 2. Calculations for spreadsheet program to monitor condenser performance. Log mean temperature difference in the condenser (F): DTLM = (TOUT TIN)/LOG(TSAT TIN)/(TSAT TOUT) (1) Heat transfer in condenser (Btu/h): Q = 499.7*FLOW*(TOUT TIN) (2) Actual heat-transfer coefficient (Btu/h-F-ft 2 ): U a = Q/(DTLM*[3.14159*(OD/12)]*L*NT) (3) Cooling water linear velocity (ft/s): V L = (0.002228*FLOW)/((3.14159*(ID/24) 2 )*(NT/NP)) (4) Ideal heat-transfer coefficient (Btu/h-F-ft 2 ): U i = C*(V L ) 0.5 (5) Design heat-transfer coefficient (Btu/h-F-ft 2 ): U d = U i *CWCF*CTCF (6) Cleanliness factor : CF = (U a /U d )*100 (7) Notes: The constant 499.7 in Eq. 2 is the multiplication of constants for water density (62.3 lb/ft 3 ), water heat capacity (1.00 Btu/lb-F), water volume conversion (1 ft 3 = 7.48 gal) and 60 min/h. The constant 0.002228 in Eq. 4 is the multiplication of the water volume conversion (1 ft 3 = 7.48 gal) and 60 s/min. leaks. The inspectors used helium leak detection to com- pletely check the condenser and low-pressure end of the turbine. They classied leaks as large, medium and small, and found over a dozen leaks, including two large ones, one of which was a crack in the expansion joint between the turbine exhaust and condenser. Maintenance crews re- paired all the leaks, but that did not solve the problem. Finally, an operator discovered that a trap on a line from the gland steam exhauster to the main condenser was sticking open at low loads. The gland steam exhauster condenses used steam from the turbine seals before it is returned to the steam generator. The exhauster is also equipped with a vent to dis- charge non-condensible gases to the atmosphere. When the condensate trap stuck open, the strong vacuum from the main condenser pulled outside air in through the vent. Once maintenance personnel re- placed the trap, the condenser perfor- mance problems disappeared. Example 3. The 870,000-lb/h con- denser mentioned in the rst example had been in operation for ten years but had never suffered from scaling. It is a once-though condenser and takes cool- ing water comes from a lake. During one very dry summer, the lake volume decreased dramatically, and lab chemists calculated that the dissolved solids con- centrations in the lake were four times normal values. However, no one sus- pected that scale formation might occur. Throughout the summer, the cleanliness factor declined slowly but noticeably from around 80% to 45%. When the unit came off-line for an autumn outage, an inspection team found that the water- side of the tubes was completely cov- ered with a layer of calcium carbonate (less than 1 mm thick). The deposits were a direct result of the drought. The program generates similar data when condenser tubes accumulate micro- biological deposits, and it can be very use- ful for detecting the onset of microbiologi- cal fouling and for scheduling shock chlo- rine treatments. However, keep in mind that once microbiological colonies become established, shock chlorination does not al- ways completely clean the tubes. One year, the cleanliness factor of the 870,000-lb/h condenser dropped from around 80% in the early spring to 40% by early summer. Past experience suggested microbiolog- ical fouling, which turned out to be the case. In mid-summer, plant personnel shock-chlorinated the condenser, but this only restored the cleanliness factor to around 65%. When the main- tenance staff opened the condenser during an autumn outage, many slime deposits were still evident. The crew had to me- chanically scrape the condenser tubes to restore performance to optimum conditions. This points out the tenacity of microbi- ological deposits. CEP CEP February 2003 www.cepmagazine.org 43 BRAD BUECKER (beakertoo@aol.com) is the plant chemist at Kansas City Power and Light Co.s La Cygne, KS, power station. He has previous experience as a chemical cleaning services engineer, a water and wastewater system supervisor, and a consulting chemist for an engineering firm. He also served as a results engineer, flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) engineer, and analytical chemist for City Water, Light and Power, Springfield, IL. He has written more than 50 articles on steam generation, water treatment and FGD chemistry, and he is the author of three books on steam generation topics published by PennWell Publishing, Tulsa, OK. He has a BS in chemistry from Iowa State Univ., and is a member of AIChE, ACS, ASME and NACE. Li t erat ure Ci t ed 1. Buecker, B., Computer Program Predicts Condenser Cleanliness, Power Engineering, 96 (6), pp. 3940(June 1992). Table 3. Correction factors for performance monitoring program. Cooling Water Correction Factors (CWCF) T, F CWCF T, F CWCF T, F CWCF T, F CWCF 32 0.574 50 0.810 68 0.986 86 1.063 33 0.586 51 0.822 69 0.993 87 1.066 34 0.601 52 0.833 70 1.000 88 1.069 35 0.615 53 0.844 71 1.005 89 1.072 36 0.628 54 0.855 72 1.010 90 1.075 37 0.641 55 0.865 73 1.015 91 1.078 38 0.655 56 0.875 74 1.020 92 1.080 39 0.668 57 0.885 75 1.025 93 1.083 40 0.683 58 0.895 76 1.029 94 1.085 41 0.694 59 0.905 77 1.033 95 1.088 42 0.707 60 0.915 78 1.037 96 1.090 43 0.720 61 0.925 79 1.041 97 1.092 44 0.733 62 0.934 80 1.045 98 1.095 45 0.747 63 0.942 81 1.048 99 1.097 46 0.760 64 0.951 82 1.051 100 1.100 47 0.772 65 0.960 83 1.054 48 0.785 66 0.970 84 1.057 49 0.797 67 0.978 85 1.060 Condenser Tube Correction Factors (CTCF) Correction Factor (C) Tube Wall Gauge, BWG Tube Outside Material 22 20 18 Diameter, in. C Admiralty 1.04 1.02 1.00 0.625 and 0.75 267 90-10 Cu-Ni 0.97 0.94 0.90 0.875 and 1.0 263 70-30 Cu-Ni 0.90 0.87 0.82 1.125 and 1.25 259 304 and 316 SS 0.79 0.75 0.69 1.375 and 1.5 255 Titanium 0.81 0.77 0.71 1.625 and 1.75 251 1.875 and 2.0 247