Power Plant

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.

ENERGY RECOMMENDATION SAVING (MUs)

A

Auxiliary Power Consumption study

1

Main Plant Auxiliaries

a

Boiler Feed Pump Checking of internals of BFP 2A, 2B & 2C and their recirculation valve 2.44 and overhauling if required Condensate Extraction Pump Checking of internals of condensate pump B and its recirculation valve .09 and overhauling if required Induced Draft Fan Arresting Air ingress across heaters and in flue gas ducts from APH 0.54 outlet to ID fan inlet and optimizing fan performance Forced Draft fan Optimizing air flow and inspection/maintenance 0.8 of Forced draft fan A & B Primary Fans Optimization of primary 1.0 air flow

(i)

b

(i) c

(i)

d (i) e (i)

2

SAVING IN RUPEES (LAKH)

57.4

2.18

12.6

19

23

INVESTMENT IN RUPEES (LAKH)

f (I) g (i) h

Coal Mills overhauling of Mills & three mill operation Circulating Water Pump Providing polymer coating on CW pump internals Provision of Online energy monitoring system

2

OFFSITE AUXILIARIES

a

Coal Handling System

(i)

Direct bunkering of coal

b

AHP and other pumps Polymer/ceramic on pumps Lighting System Voltage reduction in lighting circuit in AHP & CHP areas Replacing 763 numbers 40W FTL by 28W T-5 Tube-light Asbestos sheets to be replaced with translucent sheets in CHO Conveyors gallery

i c (i) (ii)

(iii)

B a

b

2.8

66

0.34

7.9

10

0.36

8.5

10

0.44

10.4

0.16

3.77

0.08

2

0.18

4.24

5.7

0.17

4.02

16.6

Boiler Efficiency Test Reduction sensible heat loss by trimming excess air Reduction of un-burnt carbon in fly ash and bottom ash by combustion optimization

85.5

60.9

C

Turbine Heat Rate and efficiency test

a

Improvement in heat rate ( including HR improvement by improving vacuum as given below )

D

Condenser Performance test

a

Improvement in vacuum by overhauling of CWCT system

Total

7.9

186

4.6

108

17.3

553

3

3

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) (ii)

All drains and vents in feed water line should be checked for passing. 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 (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.) 4

(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) (ii) (iii)

Ash water ratio needs to be checked on regular basis (once a day) and to be maintained as per design. In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump to be checked for under loading, 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 Consumption The Plant Load Factor and auxiliary power consumption ( provided by TPC energy audit team ) during audit period is given below Date 08.01.07

PLF

APC

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:

Specific energy Consumption of BFPs, Kw/T of flow

8.40 8.20

7.40 7.20

7.95

7.61

7.80 7.60

8.29

8.00

BFP A

BFP B

BFP C

Specific Energy Consumption of CEPs, Kw/T of flow

0.65 0.60

0.68

0.70

0.75

0.75

CEP A

CEP B

7

Power consumption in ID Fans, Kw 460

459

440

408

420 400 380

IDFAN A

ID FAN B

Power Consumption in FD FANS, kW

320

319

300

273

280 260 240

FD FAN A

FD FAN B

Power Consumption in PA FANs, kW

400

100

248

200

308

300

0 PA FAN A

PA FAN B

8

Specific Energy Consumption of Mills, Kw/T of flow 25.0 20.0

0.0

MILL A

MILL B

MILL C

21.8 MILL D

15.7

5.0

14.7

14.4

10.0

15.5

15.0

MILL E

17

19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16

19

Power Consumption of SA FANs, kW

SA FAN A

SA FAN B

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 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 a b iv 12 13 14 15 16

Description Unit Load BFP Suction Flow Feed Water Flow Speed DP Across FRV BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure FW Pressure At Heater Inlet At Heater Outlet Power Consumption Pump Hydraulic Power Specific Energy Consumption Combined Efficiency Motor Loading Flow Loading

Units MW TPH TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2

BFP A 119.00 190.10 371.90 3562 4.40 6.27 149.57

BFP B 119.67 180.70 372.27 3565 5.43 6.30 150.37

BFP C 120.33 175.90 371.30 3486 5.83 6.33 152.00

Kg/cm3 Kg/cm4 kW kW

148.13 147.23 1447.5 742.33

150.13 149.00 1497.8 709.40

150.27 149.07 1399.2 698.22

Kwh/T % % %

7.61 51.28 72 88

8.29 47.36 75 84

7.95 49.90 70 82

RECOMMENDATIONS Based 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 SEC of BFP 2A Difference in SEC Hence energy saving potential

= 7.3 kW/T of feed water = 7.6 kW/T of feed water = 0.3 kW/T = 0.3*190.1 = 57 kWh Annual 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 SEC of BFP 2B Difference in SEC Hence energy saving potential

= 7.3 kW/T of feed water = 8.3 kW/T of feed water = 1.0 kW/T = 1*180.7 = 180.7 kWh Annual 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 lakh BFP 2C Designed SEC SEC of BFP 2A Difference in SEC Hence energy saving potential = Annual energy saving potential = = Annual saving potential in Rs

= =

= 7.3 kW/T of feed water = 8.0 kW/T of feed water = 0.7 kW/T = 0.7*175.9 123.1 kWh = 123.1*5300 652589 kWh 0.65 MUs 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 13

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.

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 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency Suction Temp. CEP Flow Condenser back Pressure(-) Hot-well Level Discharge Pressure Power Consumption Specific Energy Consumption Motor Loading Pump Loading Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio

Units MW Hz ºC TPH Kg/cm2 mm Kg/cm2 kW kWh/T % % TPH/MW

CEP A 118 48.77 46.8 332 0.91 809.6 16.5 225.1 0.68 90 92 2.8

CEP B 119 48.91 47.6 309 0.90 822.3 16.6 230.9 0.75 92 86 2.6

RECOMMENDATIONS Based 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 SEC of CEP B Difference in SEC Energy saving potential

= = =

Hence annual energy saving potential = = Annual energy saving potential in Rs =

14

0.68 kW/T of water flow 0.75 kW/T of water flow = 0.07 kW/T of water flow = 0.07*332 23.24 kW = 23.24*4000 92960 kWh 0.09 MU = 2.35*92960 2.18 lakh

INDUCED DRAFT FAN 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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Unit Load Frequency Total Air Flow Coal Flow Suction Pressure (-) Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B Current ( Control room )

8 i ii iii iv 9

Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Motor Loading

Units

A

B

MW Hz TPH TPH mmwcl deg C Amps

120 48.93 430 64 174 133/131 48.6

119 48.62 429 64 176 133/131 52.7

Amps Kv

48.4 6.5 0.75 408 60

52.6 6.5 0.78 459 67

kW %

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 Running hour assumed Annual energy saving potential = = Annual energy saving potential = = It is recommended that 15

= 67 kW = 8000 = 67*8000 536000 kWh 0.54 MUs = 0.54*2.35*1000000 12,59,600 12.6 Lakh

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)

Provision of Flue gas flow measurement in all ID Fans should be made. This will help in monitoring of air ingress. 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. 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. Internal inspection of fan B should be done as it is consuming more power compared to fan A. Whenever opportunity comes, complete flue gas duct from APH to Fan inlet should be checked by pressurizing the furnace for detecting air ingress point. Provision of pressure gauge at all ID Fans outlet should be made. This will help in calculating air power and other auditing parameters.

16

FORCED DRAFT FAN 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. 1 2 3 4 5 a b 6 a b 7 a b 8 9

Description Unit load Frequency Total Secondary air Flow Discharge Pressure Secondary Air Pressure After AH ( L ) After AH ( R ) Secondary Air Flow After AH ( L ) After AH ( R ) Wind Box Pressure Left Right Power Consumption Secondary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio

Units MW Hz TPH mmwcl

FD FAN A 121 49.08 257 232

FD FAN B 121 48.81 258 245

mmwcl mmwcl

102 103

101 106

TPH TPH

136 121

136 122

kW TPH/MW

101 102 319 2.1

102 102 273 2.1

RECOMMENDATIONS The 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 Running hour assumed Annual energy saving potential = = Annual energy saving potential = =

= 100 kW = 8000 = 100*8000 800000 kWh 0.8 MUs = 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. 17

(iii) (iv)

Whenever opportunity comes, complete air duct from fan to wind box should be checked by pressurizing the furnace. 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. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Description Unit load Frequency Total Primary air Flow Coal Flow Discharge Pressure DP across PAH air side Power Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio Primary Air to Coal Ratio

Units MW Hz TPH TPH mmwcl TPH kW TPH/MW

PA FAN A 121 48.86 173 65 864 32 248 1.42 2.65

PA FAN B 120 48.96 173 65 864 32 308 1.44 2.65

RECOMMENDATIONS Based 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 = Actual primary air flow Additional primary air flow = PA Fans Cumulative SEC = Saving in Power consumption = Running hour assumed Annual energy saving potential = = Annual energy saving potential = =

135 T = 173 T 38 T 3.21 kWh/T = 3.21*38 122 kW = 8000 = 122*8000 975840 kWh 1 MUs = 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.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a b i ii iii iv 17 18 19

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure Mill Differential Pressure Cold Air Damper position Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air pre-heater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption Motor Loading Mill Loading

Units

MILL A

MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc mmwc % %

119.0 49.1 430.0 804.3 439.8 381.4 62.9 27.0

0

MILL B 118.3 48.9 430.0 805.5 509.3 71.6 30.9

MILL C 119.3 49.0 430.4 806.1 496.9 368.7 53.8 33.4

MILL D 119.3 48.9 430.8 806.5 363.3 192.4 65.2 31.3

MILL E 119.3 48.9 431.0 799.6 393.3 170.9 41.2 27.8

C

297.0

297.1

297.4

297.4

289.8

C C TPH TPH TPH %

148.2 88.5 17.6 45.9 177.2 85.2

153.8 87.4 18.0 46.5 176.9 85.6

160.8 88.5 17.6 42.9 177.0 88.1

114.0 85.9 10.1 43.5 176.5 91.7

171.4 91.8 13.3 47.1 187.6

Amps

30.4

29.9

30.0

26.8

30.0

Amps kV

31.3 6.5 0.8 273 15.5 90.9 48.2

30.0 6.5 0.8 260 14.4 86.5 49.3

30.1 6.5 0.8 259 14.7 86.3 48.1

26.7 6.5 0.7 220 21.8 73.4 27.7

25.6 6.5 0.7 209 15.7 69.8 36.4

0 0

kW kW/T % %

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 kW Total power consumption for three mill = 759 kW Energy saving potential = 1012-759 = 353 kW Running Hours = 8000 Hrs Annual 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 kW Expected 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 Annual energy savings (For year 2005-06)

: :

72.33 MUs 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 bunkering Wagon 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-9A/9B

Conveyor-6→

Conveyor-7A/7B→

Conveyor-8A/8B→

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

kW

CONVEYOR - 1A CONVEYOR - 2

kW/MT kW/MT

0.044 0.230

32.85 173.10

26

CONVEYOR - 3 CONVEYOR - 4 CONVEYOR - 5 CONVEYOR - 6 CONVEYOR - 7B CONVEYOR - 8B CONVEYOR - 9B CONVEYOR - 10 CONVEYOR - 12 CONVEYOR - 13 PRIMARY CRUSHER-1 SECONDRY CRUSHER-1

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.108 0.135 0.085 0.194 0.223 0.235 0.118 0.098 0.018 0.062 0.044 0.196

Direct Bunkering

UNITS

SEC

CONVEYOR - 1A/1B CONVEYOR - 2 PRIMARY CRUSHER-A/B CONVEYOR - 3 CONVEYOR - 4 SECONDRY CRUSHER-A/B CONVEYOR - 5 CONVEYOR - 6 CONVEYOR - 7A/7B CONVEYOR - 8A/B CONVEYOR - 9A/B

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.043568 0.229576 0.043568 0.108024 0.134947 0.195756 0.084947 0.193827 0.223385 0.233525 0.117923 1.609

Uncrushed coal Stacking

UNITS

SEC

CONVEYOR - 1A/B CONVEYOR - 2 CONVEYOR - 12 CONVEYOR - 13

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.043568 0.229576 0.017905 0.061671 0.353

Uncrushed coal reclaiming

UNITS

SEC

CONVEYOR - 1B CONVEYOR - 1A CONVEYOR - 2 PRIMARY CRUSHER-B CONVEYOR - 3 CONVEYOR - 4 SECONDRY CRUSHER-B CONVEYOR - 5 CONVEYOR - 6 CONVEYOR - 7B CONVEYOR - 8B CONVEYOR - 9B

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.043568 0.043568 0.229576 0.043568 0.108024 0.134947 0.195756 0.084947 0.193827 0.223385 0.233525 0.117923 1.653

Crushed coal Stacking

UNITS

SEC

CONVEYOR - 1A/B CONVEYOR - 2 PRIMARY CRUSHER-A/B CONVEYOR - 3 CONVEYOR - 4 SECONDRY CRUSHER-A/B

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.043568 0.229576 0.043568 0.108024 0.134947 0.195756

27

81.45 101.75 64.05 117.75 145.20 148.15 76.65 95.40 13.50 46.50 32.85 147.60

CONVEYOR - 5 CONVEYOR - 10 / 6,14

kW/MT kW/MT

0.084947 0.098351 0.939

Crushed coal Reclaiming

UNITS

SEC

CONVEYOR* - 11/15 CONVEYOR - 6 CONVEYOR - 7A/B CONVEYOR - 8A/B CONVEYOR - 9A/B

kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT kW/MT

0.108370 0.193827 0.223385 0.233525 0.117923 0.877 *Conv-11 Power consumption calculated assuming 140 amps current, 0.7 pf and 415 volt supply

OBSERVATIONS 1 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/MT 8 Specific power consumption during Uncrushed coal Reclaiming found to be 1.653 kW/MT 9 Specific power consumption during Crushed coal stacking found to be 0.939 kW/MT 10 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 28

reduced).(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-1 Avg 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/MT Savings potential in direct bunkering 2.006-1.631 = 0.375 kW/MT Annual Coal consumption ( FY-05-06) = 1584258 Ton Savings 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-2 Avg 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 Annual Coal consumption ( FY-05-06) Savings potential if 50% coal is directly fed to bunkers Saving potential in RS (Lakh)

= 0.185 kW/MT =1584258 Tone = 1584258 x 0.5 x 0.185 = 146544 kWh =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 Type Water flow Nos of cell Hot water Temp Cold water Temp Wet bulb temp Approach Evp Loss Drift Loss Range

BDWT Chennai Induced draft counter flow 18000 M3/hr 6 43OC 33OC 28.8OC 4.2 289.8 TPH 1.8 TPH 10

REDUCTION GEAR BOX Manufacturer Model Type Qnty Reduction Ratio Nos of Stages Nominal kW Rating Transmission efficiency

Flender (Kharagpur) Kemns 200 Bevel - helical 6 12 : 5.1 2 45 97.5

FAN Manufacturer Nos of fans / Cell Nos of fans / Tower Nos of Blade / fan Max discharge through fan Static head at Max discharge Speed

Prag Fan, Indore 1 6 4 1789369.2 M3/hr 6.8 MWC 116 RPM

MOTOR Make Capacity Current RPM

ABB 45 kW 37.128 1500

30

OBSERVATIONS COOLING TOWER PERFORMANCE

Unit Load

Units

Design

Measured

MW

120

120

43

43.25

Inlet Cooling Water Temperature oC

o

Outlet Cooling Water Temperature oC

O

33

32.15

o

Air Wet Bulb Temperature near Cell C

O

28.8

15.8

Air Dry Bulb Temperature near Cell oC

O

C C C C

24.3

Number of CT Cells

Nos

6

6

Cooling Water Flow CT Fan Flow Excess air flow / cell Excess air flow / cell

M3/hr M3/hr M3/hr %

18000

16318

1789369.2

1939045 149676 8.36

CT Flow/Cell, m3/hr

=

3000

2720

CT Fan Flow, m3/hr (Avg.)

=

1789369

1939045

CT Fan Flow kg/hr (Avg.)@ Density of 1.08 kg/m3 L/G Ratio of C.T. kg/kg CT Range

= 1932519

2094168

1.55

1.30

10

11.1

CT Approach

=

4.2

16.35

% CT Effectiveness Cooling Duty Handled/Cell in kCal

= =

70.42

40.44

180000000

181129800

(i.e., Flow * Temperature Difference in kCal/hr)

=

= =

3

Evaporation Losses in m /hr

=

266.67

268.34

m3/hr per cell

=

44.44

44.72

Percentage Evaporation Loss Blow down requirement for site COC of 4 Make up water requirement/cell in m3/hr

= = =

0.25

0.27

14.81

14.91

59.26

59.63

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Energy audit performance test was conducted during peak winter Jan 2007. In cooling tower fans, FRP blades are being used. Comparison of CT actual performance vis a vis design are shown in table. Power measurement of CT fans during performance testing is enclosed Air flow measured during the test found to be 8.36 % more than design. Water flow measured 16318 m3/hr (design 18000 m3/hr) which is 9.34 % less than design. CT range found to be 11.1 against design 10 CT approach found to be 16.35 against design 4.2 indicates, low ambient temp and poor heat transfer. CT effectiveness found to be 40.44 % against design 70.42%. which indicates poor heat transfer in CT Evaporation Losses found to be 268.34 m3/hr against design 266.67 m3/hr. 31

11 12 13 14

Blow down requirement for (COC of 4) found to be 14.91 m3/hr against design 14.81 m3/hr. Make up water requirement/cell found to be 59.63 m3/hr against design 59.26 m3/hr. Power measurement indicate normal loading on CT fan motors and power factor is around 0.85 . Which is normal. 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 OBSERVATIONS 1 2 3 4

Presently Ash water ratio is not being monitored regularly. In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump found to be under loaded, as shown in above table. HP water pumps are consuming more than design Specific Energy Consumption, Which is due to less flow. Ash slurry pump series -2 was not available for testing. And flow of Ash slurry series -1 could not be measured.

RECOMMENDATIONS 1 2 3 4

S.No.

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 In Ash slurry pump series, Ist pump to be checked for under loading, HP water pumps to be checked for poor flow. 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

DESCRIPTION

POWER CONS kW

SAVINGS POTENTIAL@ 4% kW

Annual R/H

SAVINGS POTENTIAL /ANNUM (kWh)

SAVINGS POTENTIAL /ANNUM (Rs)

16000

74515

175111

16000

37604

88370

8000

48587

114179

160706

377659

1

ACW-2A

117.95

2

ACW-2B

118.14

3

113.2 56.36

2.25

62.28

2.49

6

ACW-2C ACW Booster Pump -2A ACW Booster Pump – 2B ACW Booster Pump -2C

4.72 4.73 4.53

57.63

7

HP Water Pump-2A

150.4

8

HP Water Pump-2B

150.4

9

HP Water Pump-2C

154.7

2.31 6.02 6.02 6.19

4 5

Total

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) Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh Investment cost Simple payback period

ACW Booster Pumps Annual energy savings (two pumps in service) Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh Investment cost Simple payback period

HP Water Pumps Annual energy savings (one pump in service) Annual Cost savings @ Rs. 2.35 /kWh Investment cost Simple payback period

34

: : : :

74515 kWh Rs. 1.75 lakh Rs. 1.2 lakh under 1 Year

: 37604 kWh : Rs. 0.88 lakh : Rs. 0.9 lakh : 1 Year

: : : :

48587 kWh Rs. 0.48 lakh Rs. 0.9 lakh under 2 Year

COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM OBSERVATIONS 1 2 3 4 5 6

Individual compressor with its receiver tank could not be isolated, hence it is not feasible to conduct free air delivery test. Pressure survey conducted in unit 2 areas, and no major pressure drop was observed. 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. No Loading / Unloading of compressors observed. Compressors power measured and table listed below. Running Hrs of different compressors are as under

Comp No 2A 2B 2C

Power (On) 41211 No data 43654

Running Hrs 38038

Load Hrs 30188

Nos of Stops 305

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.

1 2 3 3 4 5

Location

Actual Pressure (Kg/cm2)

Control Room Comp. – 2A Comp. – 2C Local Gauge Local Gauge Boiler # 1I (15-M) AB Elevation

35

7.26 7.38 7.37 6.75 7.15 6.80

Remarks

Combined Combined Service Air Instrument Air Service Air

Voltage

AHP Air Comp-A AHP Air Comp-B Air Comp2A Air Comp2B

Air Comp2C

Current

PF

Freq

kW

R

Y

B

R

B

443.4 443.6

444.3 442.8

443.9 443.2

139.7 140.9

86.31 86.28

141.1 140.4

0.8 0.8

48.9 49.16

86.31 86.28

441.2 440.2

442.3 441.2

443.1 441.2

160.2 165.3

102.1 104.9

161.4 167.2

0.83 0.83

49.1 49.2

102.10 104.90

6.5 6.5

6.4 6.4

6.4 6.4

58.488 608.58 58.568 58.712 609.36 58.496

0.94 0.94

49.2 49.3

608.58 609.36

6.9 6.9 6.9

6.8 6.9 6.9

6.9 6.9 6.9

63.272 711.76 64.016 56.104 626.87 56.552 63.272 713.78 63.872

0.94 0.93 0.94

49.12 49.22 49.26

711.76 626.87 713.78

6.7 6.7 6.7

6.6 6.6 6.6

6.6 6.7 6.7

59.792 661.77 61.08 56.704 631.63 57.936 56.344 626.63 57.504

0.95 0.95 0.95

48.8 48.9 49.0

661.77 631.63 626.63

RECOMMENDATIONS 1 2 3 4

Heat of compression may be used in air dryer in place of electric heater, which may be a good energy conservation option. Loading hrs of Comp -2A may be increased by proper loading / unloading pressure settings, which will save unload power otherwise wasted. 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. 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

2

3

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. 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. 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 Saving potential Saving potential in RS

: : : : :

763 * (55-28) 20600 Watt: 20600*24*365/1000 180464 Kwh 2.35 * 23652 37

:

424092

Approximate 28 watt T-5 tube lights is Rs 750 Total cost of replacement Simple payback period 4

: : :

750*763 Rs 572250 One to Two year (1.35 year)

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 Nos. of sheets to be replaced (1/3 of total sheets) Cost of one sheet (Rs)

=

4742 nos.

=

4742 / 3

=

1581 nos.

=

1050/ Sheet

(@525/-M2)

Total cost of sheets (Rs)

=

1581 x 1050

=

16,59,700

=

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

=

Four to Five year

Nos. of light fittings can be switched off during day time

Simple Pay back period

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

Unit

DATE

AVG

AVG

10/01/2007

DURATION

HR

A.

HEAT INPUT TO BOILER

B.

HEAT LOSSES IN THE SYSTEM :

B1

UNBURNTS IN ASH :

10/01/2007

10.30 hrs to 15.00 15.00 hrs to 19.00 hrs hrs

KCAL/HR

299776213.125

299765713.569

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.

%

16.074

16.068

%

83.926

83.932

E.

TOTAL LOSSES BOILER EFFICIENCY (100 - TOTAL LOSSES) EXCESS AIR

%

23

23

F

OVERALL HEAT RATE

KCAL/KWH

2549.76791

2524.22476

D.

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. The average boiler heat losses ranges from around 16.1% against design value of 12.97%. The average controllable losses like combustible loss in ash, sensible heat loss to dry flue gas range from 6%. 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

(ii) (iii) (iv)

Table – I : Flue Gas Analysis Results : SL. No.

Parameter

Unit

Location of Sampling ECO Outlet / APH Inlet Design Actual

APH Outlet / ESP Inlet Design Actual

ID Fan Inlet 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

C

345

343*

5 Excess Air % o * Measured 31.7 C at UCB

20%

(v) (vi)

o

142

148

137

135

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. 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 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 43

to minimize the in leak air would directly help in ID fan capacity release apart from power saving in ID fan. 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:

(vii)

TABLE – 2: DESIGN VIS-À-VIS ACTUAL COAL UTILIZED Sl. No. 1.

Parameter Moisture *

Unit

Coal used during

Coal used

trail and

December’06

observation

**

0.53

-

4.44 to 4.56

4.5

%

TM **

Design Coal (MCL) 12

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 * GCV **

9. HGI *Air dry basis

Kcal per Kg

5006.2 to 48.36.3 4646.19 to 4803.38 45

3350 4850 55

** 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 preventive maintenance schedule of the mills are after every 750 to 1000 running hours. Table – 3: Mill Fineness Analysis : 10/1/2007 44

Mill No. and

(x)

range of fineness

+ 300

- 300 + 250

- 250 + 125

- 125 +75

- 75 + 0

(micron) A

0

0.06

1.36

13.43

85.15

B C D

0 0. 0

0.25 0.08 0.02

3.83 2.31 2.71

10.31 9.53 5.59

85.61 88.08 91.73

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 Actual Coal Flow, T/hr (using Middlings) Design coal flow /

A

B

C

D

Total

11.2

18

18.3

17.4

64.9

-

27.19

28.63

27.85

83.67

66%

64%

62.5%

PG test value of unit # 3, T/hr (using ROM coal) % Loading

Table – 5: Mill Power Consumption using washery coal Mill No. kW Loading % Rating / PG test value*

*

(xi)

A

B

C

D

274 98

261.1 93

261 93

221.8 79

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 reduced excess air loss as well as reduced loss due to unburnt in bottom ash and fly ash apart from reduced auxiliary consumption. 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 : 45

Table – 6 : Mill rejects analysis result : 10.1.07 Mill No. Quantity (Kg/hr) *GCV (Kcal/Kg) Moisture (%) Total moisture (%) Ash (%)

A 13.25

B 9

C 25.5

D 18.5

2325.9 0.5 2.19 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.

Table –7: Combustible matter in fly ash and bottom ash : date of sample 10.1.07. Combustible matter in Fly Ash

Combustible matter in Bottom Ash

Analysis of

Location Design

Analysis of

Dec’06

10.01.2007

(avg)

Design

Dec’06 (avg)

46

10.01.2007

Field 23 V1 23 V2 23 V3 23 V4 Vessel 21 (1 to 6) Vessel 22 (1 to 6)

0.5

2.6 2.25 2.29 2.32 1.79

1.62

4

5.52

5.72

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).

Unit

Design 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

T/hr

135

176.4

%

31

41

4. Secondary air flow * Secondary air flow as % of total air flow

T/hr

303

253.6

%

69

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

Parameter

3. Primary air flow * Primary air flow as % of total air flow

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 47

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 furnace. Sl.

Parameter

No.

draft,windbox to

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.

RECOMMENDATIONS Two energy conservation opportunities are identified in the area of boiler operations namely • Excess air control • Control of combustible in fly ash and bottom ash (i) SAVINGS POTENTIAL BY O2 TRIMMING (EXCESS AIR CONTROL) 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.)

48

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 Corresponding excess air level at APH out let Sensible heat loss in flue gas Boiler Efficiency Fuel savings by operation of Boiler at 83.95% Landed cost of coal Annual saving potential (Rs.)

= 3.5% =20% = 3.35% = 83.95% (Avg.) = 63 TPH x 8000 x {1- (83/83.95)} = 5703 MT per year

= 1500 MT = 85.5 Lakh

(ii) SAVINGS BY CONTROL OF COMBUSTIBLES IN FLY ASH AND BOTTOM ASH

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 : Un-burnt Carbon % in Fly Ash & Bottom Ash Date

Un-burnt Fly Ash (%) Design Actual

10th January, 2007 PG test value of Unit # 3

0.5%

Un-burnt in bottom Ash (%) Design Actual

2.7%

4%

5.7%

0.11

1.37

Energy Savings estimate Existing heat loss due to un-burnt in fly ash & bottom ash Existing boiler efficiency Envisaged heat loss with improved mill performance. Increased Boiler Efficiency after reduction in un-burnt loss Improvement in Boiler Efficiency

=1.724% =83% (avg.) = 1.05% =83.674 %(avg.) =0.674%

Annual reduction in coal consumption (MT) by boiler efficiency improvement =63 x 8000 x {1 - (83/83.674)} Landed cost of coal

= 4059 MT = 1500 MT

Annual saving potential (Rs.)

=Rs.60.9 lacs.

49

50

TURBINE HEATRATE AND EFFICIENCY TEST

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

51

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 Efficiency As- run Values

Design values

Parameters H1

Pr.

h1+h2

Flow

O Kg/cm2 C Tph Unit Steam Inlet condition (H P Cylinder)

126 H2 h1 h2 h1+h2

Temp

Steam outlet condition CRS Steam 32 33.06 HPH-6 32 CRS+HP-6 (at actual) CRS+HP-6 32 (at iso – entropic)

Actual enthalpy drop Iso entropic enthalpy drop) HP cylinder Efficiency

Enthalp y

Entropy

Pr.

Kcal/ kg

Kcal/kgOK

Kg/cm2

O

C

Flow

Enthalp y

Entropy

Tph

Kcal/ kg

Kcal/kgOK

535

355.5

822.2

1.559

122.3

531

359

820.81

1.577

342 342 342

301 36.6 337.

740.4 739.4 738.9

1.604 1.595 1.595

31.99 31.0 31.99

345.7 348.0 346.88

302.67 37.16 339.83

742.30 734.20 738.75

1.603 1.592 1.597

327

337.6

735.64

1.559

31.99

318.2

337.1

726.00

1.577

[H1- ( h1 + h2)] [H1- ( h1 + h2’ )] [Actual drop/ Iso-entropic drop] x 100 %

[H1- ( h1 + h2)] [H1- ( h1 + h2’ )]

83.30 86.56 96.23

IP Cylinder H3

Temp.

Steam Inlet condition

53

82.06 94.81 86.6

Hot Reheat. Steam H4 H3 h4 h5 h4+h 5

29.8

535

Steam Outlet condition HPH-5 Ext. 10.6 398.0 Steam Back Pr. Ext. 5.33 288 steam to LPT Back Pr. Ext. 5.1 294 steam to DA Iso entropic 5.1 269.5 enthalpy

301.7

845.9

1.757

29.4

533

304.5

844.9

1.757

19.2

779.6

1.779

12.6

419.3

19.53

772.5

1.754

285

727.00

1.777

5.49

301

15.94

734.2

1.744

15.9

730.14

1.779

5.44

264.4

292.1

715.0

1.746

15.9

717.9

1.757

5.44

279.2

267

722.5

1.757

54

Actual [(H3-h3)+(h3-h4)] enthalpy drop Iso entropic H6 [H1 – ( h4 + h5)] enthalpy drop IP cylinder efficiency [ H5 / H6 ]x100 % Overall HP+IP Cylinder efficiency Actual H7 enthalpy drop Iso entropic H8 drop in HP&LP Overall HP stage efficiency LP cylinder efficiency H9 Steam inlet condition LPT inlet steam(IPT 5.33 288 285 EXT) H10 Steam outlet condition h7 LPH-3 Ext. 1.87 195 14.7 Steam h8 LPH-2Ext. 0.91 105 12.5 Steam h9 LPH-1Ext. 0.35 86.5 10.58 Steam h10 LPT outlet 0.07 41.6 249.3 steam LPT outlet steam(iso 0.07 38.63 249.3 entropic) H5

Actual enthalpy drop Iso entropic enthalpy drop(H9-h10) LP cylinder efficiency

118.9

[(H3-h3)+(h3-h4)] [H1 – ( h4 + h5)]

128.00 92.9

110.7 122.5

[ H5 / H6 ]x100 %

90.4

202.2

192.76

214.56 217.23 94.24

88.74

727

1.76

5.44

264.4

289.78

685.4

1.226

1.852

224.51

14.77

645.2

2.039

0.65

187.43

11.82

635.88

1.866

0.32

70.1

10.87

616.5

1.985

0.1

45.5

260.51

546.2 at 0.87 DF

1.769

0.1

45.42

260.51

110.5 180.8 61.1

715.30 682.3 681.59 618.90 618.18 552.39 at 0.87 DF 97.12 162.91 59.6

55

1.746 1.913 1.945 1.855 1.947 1.745

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:

Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9

Parameters

Unit

Design Value

Trial Value

MS Flow RH steam flow Main Steam Enthalpy FW Enthalpy R. H. Steam Enthalpy Cold Reheated Steam Enthalpy Generator Net power Heat Rate = (MS Flow x (MS Enthalpy - FW Enthalpy) + ( RH steam Flowx(RH Enthalpy- CRS Enthalpy)) /Generation net power Heat Rate After parameter Correction

Tph Tph Kcal/Kg Kcal/Kg Kcal/Kg Kcal/ Kg MW Kcal/ Kwh

355.5 301.7 822.2 239.57 845.9 740.4 120

359.00 304.52 820.81 238.34 844.90 742.30 117.760 240350482 117760 = 2036

1991

Kcal/ Kwh

56

2041

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/ Kwh 2 -2.68 Kg/ cm Sl. Main steam Pressure Design+2.68 valuekcal/ Kwh Parameters Unit Trial-Value 2 No. Re-heater circuit pressure drop +0.39 Kg/ cm - 0.39 Kcal/ Kwh 1 Inletwater Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 822.2 820.81 Feed Temp. - 1.2 0C + 0.552 Kcal/ Kwh 0 2 Inlet Flow T/Hr-3.06 C 355.5 CW inlet Temp. +1.40 kcal/ Kwh 359.00 3 CRS Enthalpy Kcal/Kg 740.4 742.30 Total Correction + 5.98 kcal/ Kwh 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 % 99% 99 % at 98% load 0 10 CW Inlet(L) Temp. C 34.0 30.15 0 11 CW Inlet(R) Temp. C 34.0 31.74 0 12 CW output(L) Temp. C 43.0 41.67 0 13 CW output(R) Temp. C 43.0 42.72 2 14 CW DP (CCP-01) Pr. Kg/ cm 0.383 2 15 CW DP (CCP-02) Pr. Kg/ cm 0.400 16 Heat Load Kcal/ Hr 139726698 Heat Load = (Inlet Enthalpy - FW Enthalpy) x =134247366 =139726698 Kcal 3 Inlet Flow x 10 + (HRS Enthalpy - CRS Kcal / hr / hr 3 Enthalpy ) x HRS Flow x 10 - (Generator Output / Generator Efficiency + Mechanical Losses ) X 860 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

57

• •

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.

RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the As-Run turbine performance test, the performance parameters of turbine systems are summarized as below:

Sl. No.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Table-5: Summarized Turbine Performance Parameters Performance Parameters Design values Test values

HP Cylinder Efficiency IP Cylinder Efficiency HP & IP Cylinder Efficiency LP Cylinder Efficiency Turbine Efficiency Turbo Generator Efficiency (Taking 98% & 99% as mechanical transmission and alternator Efficiency) 58

96.23 92.90 94.24 61.10 54.63 35.31

86.6 90.40 88.74 59.60 46.66 34.37

7 8

1991 2288**

Turbine Heat Rat Unit Heat rate

2036* 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.

59

CONDENSER PERFORMANCE TEST

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. 60

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.:

As-run Condenser Performance data Trial Date : 11-01-2007 Sl. DESCRIPTION No. 1 Unit Load 2 3 4 5 6

Frequency Condenser Back Pressure (Vacuum) CW Inlet Temp. (Left) CW Inlet Temp. (Right) CW Inlet Temp. (L/R-Avg)

UNITS MW

Nomenclatu DESIGN re 120

Hz

50 0.106 at 34 OC

Kg/cm2

12:00 116.6

(TIME) 12:10 12:28 12:45 115.9 120.5 115.9

Avg 117.2

49.3

49.0

49.1

49.2

49.1

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

0.10

°C

t1L

29.8

29.8

30.0

29.5

29.7

°C

t1R

31.3

31.4

31.6

31.1

31.3

30.5

30.6

30.8

30.3

30.5

°C

( t1 )

34

61

CW Outlet Temp. (Left) CW Outlet temp. 8 (Right) CW Outlet Temp. 9 (L/R-Avg) CW Temp. rise 10 (Avg) 7

°C

( t2L )

43

41.3

41.3

41.6

40.9

41.3

°C

( t2R )

43

42.3

42.3

42.7

41.9

41.8

( t2 )

43

41.8

42.8

42.15

41.4

41.5

°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

Terminal 13 Temperature Difference (TTD)

°C

(T – t2)

3.5

3.5

2.5

3.15

3.9

3.8

Condenser Effectiveness

Factor

 t 2 − t1    T − t  1 

0.72

0.764

0.830

0.783

0.740

0.743

mmWC

3894

3812

3823

3823

3838

mmWC

4006

3941

4089

4080

4029

DP Across 17 Condenser (L/R-Avg)

mmwc

3950

3876.5 3956

3951

3934

18 Condenser CW flow

m3/hr

14

DP Across Condenser (L) DP Across 16 Condenser (R) 15

Condensate Temp. (L) Condensate Temp. 20 (R) Condensate Temp. 21 (L/R-Avg)

19

22 LMTD 23 24

Condenser Thermal Load

°C

16000

14640

°C

46.3

46.7

46.4

46.4

46.5

°C

46.5

46.9

46.6

46.6

46.6

°C

46.4

46.8

46.5

46.5

46.5

7.837

6.887

7.434

8.240

8.090

°C MKcal/h r

7.07 H*

Heat transfer Kcal/hrU** coefficient m2 * H = CW flow X ∆T ** U = Thermal load x 106 7743.88 SQM x LMTD

145.23

161.04

2652.64

2570.41

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: 62

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. 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 CW temperature (Inlet) CW temperature (Outlet) CW temp. Diff.

Unit

Design

As-Run

O

34

30.5

O

43

41.5

O

9

11.0

C C C 63

103.95 at 34 OC CWin. (w.r.t. 0.106 kg/cm2)

98.06 (w.r.t. 0.10 kg/cm2)

Condenser Vacuum

mbar

Saturation temp.

O

46.5

45.3

TTD

O

3.5

3.8

C C

Analysis (i) (ii)

(iii) (iv)

Back pressure with clean tubes at design 34 O C CW Inlet temp. Saturation temp. Predicted due to CW Inlet temp. being lower, at ideal conditions

Corresponding predicted back pressure in ideal conditions with lower CW in tem. Saturation temp. predicted due to actual CW Outlet temp. and design approach.

=

103.95 mbar

=

30.5 OC + Design CW temp. drop + Design approach

= = =

30.5 + 9 + 3.5 43 OC 86.39 mbar

=

41.5 OC + Design approach of 3.5 OC 45 OC

= 64

(v)

(vi)

(vii) (viii)

(ix)

Corresponding predicted back pressure with lower CW Inlet temperature, actual CW ∆T due to lower flow and design approach. Saturation temperature w.r.t. actual CW Outlet conditions and actual approach (AsRun condition) As-Run back pressure, at above condition 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)} 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)}

=

95.8 mbar

=

41.5 OC + actual approach of 3.8 OC

= =

45.3 OC 98.06 mbar

=

(98.06 – 86.39) mbar

=

11.67 mbar

=

(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) 28 30 32 34 36

Predicted Saturation temperature in OC (Ideal) 40.5 42.5 44.5 46.5 48.5

Predicted Vacuum in mbar (Ideal) 75.76 84.15 93.41 103.41 114.49

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.

65

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/kW Annual energy saving = 9200628000/1991 = 4.6 MUs Enrgy cost (Rs./kWh) = 2.35 Annual saving potential = 108 Lakh

66

ANNEXURE

Annexure 1 O B S E R VA T I O N S H E E T S (EQUIPMENT/AREA WISE)

BFP A S.No 1 2 3 4 5

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency BFP Suction Flow Feed Water Flow Speed

Units MW Hz TPH TPH rpm

67

Test 1 119 48.85 190.7 375.2 3552

Test 2 118 48.85 190.1 364.8 3537

Test 3 120 48.96 189.5 375.7 3596

Average 119.00 48.89 190.10 371.90 3561.67

6 7 8 9 10 a b 11 i ii iii iv 12 13 14 15 16 17

DP Across FRV Deaerator Pressure BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure FW Pressure At Heater Inlet At Heater Outlet BFP Power Analysis Current Voltage Power Factor Electrical Power Pump Hydraulic Power Specific Energy Consumption Combined Efficiency Motor Loading Flow Loading BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio

Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2

3.5 5 6.2 149.3

5.9 5 6.3 149.1

3.8 5.1 6.3 150.3

4.40 5.03 6.27 149.57

Kg/cm3 Kg/cm4

148 147.6

147 145.8

149.4 148.3

148.13 147.23

A kV

139.85 6.5 0.93 1464

139.48 6.5 0.93 1460

135.44 6.5 0.93 1418

138.26 6.5 0.93 1448 742.33

kW kW Kwh/T % % %

7.61 51.28 72 88

TPH/Mw

1.60

NO LOAD OBSERVATION S.No 1 2 3 4 5

Description BFP Suction Flow Speed BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure Power

Units TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 kW

Test 1 80.6 2250 13.45 77.8 591

Test 2 79.5 2245 13.33 77.4 581

Average 80.05 2247.50 13.39 77.60 591

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency BFP Suction Flow Feed Water Flow Speed DP Across FRV Deaerator Pressure BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure FW Pressure At Heater Inlet At Heater Outlet BFP Power Analysis Current

Units MW Hz TPH TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2

Test 1 120 49.2 178.5 366.2 3572 5.3 5.1 6.3 150.7

Test 2 120 49.08 179.2 367 3572 5.2 5.1 6.3 151

Test 3 119 48.73 184.4 383.6 3550 5.8 5 6.3 149.4

Average 119.67 49.00 180.70 372.27 3564.67 5.43 5.07 6.30 150.37

Kg/cm3 Kg/cm4

150 148.9

151 149.9

149.4 148.2

150.13 149.00

A

141.70

141.76

142.60

142.02

BFP B S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a b 11 i

68

ii iii iv 12 13 14 15 16 17

Voltage Power Factor Electrical Power Pump Hydraulic Power Specific Energy Consumption Combined Efficiency Motor Loading Flow Loading BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio

kV kW kW

6.5 0.94 1500

6.4 0.94 1485

6.5 0.94 1509

6.5 0.94 1498 709.4

Kwh/T % % %

8.3 47.4 75 84

TPH/Mw

1.51

NO LOAD OBSERVATION S.No 1 2 3 4 5

Description BFP Suction Flow Speed BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure Power

Units TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 kW

Test 1 77.6 2217 13.19 74.2 614

Test 2 77.4 2220 13.18 74.1 615

Average 77.50 2218.50 13.19 74.15

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency BFP Suction Flow Feed Water Flow Speed DP Across FRV Deaerator Pressure BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure FW Pressure At Heater Inlet At Heater Outlet BFP Power Analysis Current Voltage

Units MW Hz TPH TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2

Test 1 120 48.85 173.7 369.6 3462 6 5.1 6.4 151.4

Test 2 121 48.85 182.5 377.3 3541 4.7 5.2 6.3 153.8

Test 3 120 48.85 171.5 367 3455 6.8 5.1 6.3 150.8

Average 120.33 48.85 175.90 371.30 3486.00 5.83 5.13 6.33 152.00

Kg/cm3 Kg/cm4

150.2 149.1

152.4 151.2

148.2 146.9

150.27 149.07

A kV

129.98 6.5

137.20 6.5

129.48 6.5

132.22 6.5

BFP C S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a b 11 i ii

69

iii iv 12 13 14 15 16 17

Power Factor Electrical Power Pump Hydraulic Power Specific Energy Consumption Combined Efficiency Motor Loading Flow Loading BFP Suction flow to unit load ratio

0.94 1375

kW kW

0.94 1452

0.94 1370

0.94 1399 698.22

Kwh/T % % %

7.95 49.9 70.0 82

TPH/Mw

1.46

NO LOAD OBSERVATION S.No 1 2 3 4 5

Description BFP Suction Flow Speed BFP suction Pressure BFP Discharge Pressure Power

Units TPH rpm Kg/cm2 Kg/cm2 kW

Test 1 80.9 2188 13.61 75.1

Test 2 61.8 1618 13.67 47.2 570

Test 3 80.4 2197 13.65 75.9 622

Average 74.37 2001 13.64 66.07

CONDENSATE EXTRACTION PUMP Pump A S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i ii iii iv 10

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency Suction Temp. CEP Flow Condenser back Pressure(-) Hotwell Level Disch. Pressure CEP Amps ( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor CEP Power Specific Energy

Units MW Hz ºC TPH

Test 1 116 48.73 46.5 334

Test 2 119.00 48.73 46.9 329

Test 3 119.00 48.85 46.9 332

Average 118.00 48.77 46.8 332

Kg/cm2

0.91

0.91

0.91

0.91

M Kg/cm2 A

808 16 22.6

811.5 17 22.8

809.3 17 22.9

809.60 16.5 22.8

A kV

22.9 6.5 0.87 225

23.0 6.5 0.87 225

23.0 6.5 0.87 225

23.0 6.5 0.87 225 0.68

kW kWh/T

70

11 12 13

Consumption Motor Loading Pump Loading Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio

% %

90 92

TPH/MW

2.81

Pump B S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i ii iii iv 10 11 12 13

Description Unit Load Grid Frequency Suction Temp. CEP Flow Condenser back Pressure(-) Hotwell Level Discharge Pressure CEP Amps ( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor CEP Power Specific Energy Consumption Motor Loading Pump Loading Condensate Flow to Unit Load ratio

Units MW Hz ºC TPH Kg/cm2 M Kg/cm2 A

Test 1 119 48.96 47.5 298 0.90 818.1 17 22.4

A kV kW kWh/T % %

Test 2 119 48.85 47.7 320 0.90 826.5 16 23.1

23.1 6.5 0.88 229

Average 119 48.91 47.6 309 0.90 822.30 16.55 22.7

23.5 6.5 0.88 233

TPH/MW

23.3 6.5 0.88 231 0.75 92 86 2.60

INDUCED DRAFT FANS ID FAN A S. N0.

Description

Units

Test 1

Test 2

Test 3

Average

1 2 3 4 5 a b 6 7 8

Unit Load Frequency Total Air Flow Coal Flow Suction Pressure (-) ID Fan A ID Fan B Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B Fan power analysis Current ( Control room )

MW Hz TPH TPH

120 48.85 430.1 63.8

120 48.97 430.2 63.9

120 48.97 429.5 63.8

mmwcl mmwcl 0 C

173.9 177.8 133/131

174.1 177.9 133/131

173.9 177.7 133/131

120.00 48.93 429.9 63.8 #DIV/0! 174 178 133/131

Amps

48.5

48.9

48.5

48.6

9 i ii

ID Fan A Current Voltage

Amps kV

48.3 6.5

48.5 6.5

48.4 6.5

48.42 6.49

71

iii iv 10

Power Factor Power Motor Loading

0.75

0.75

0.75

0.75 408 60.02

kW %

ID FAN B S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 a b 6 7 8 9 i ii iii iv 10

Description Unit Load Frequency Total Air Flow Coal Flow Suction Pressure (-) ID Fan A ID Fan B Flue gas temperature at ID inlet A/B Fan power analysis Current ( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Motor Loading

Units

Test 1

Test 2

Test 3

Average

MW Hz TPH TPH

119 48.9 429.1 63.9

120 48.73 429 63.9

119 48.23 430.2 63.9

119.33 48.62 429.4 63.9

mmwcl mmwcl

173.4 1 77.6

171.5 176.2

172.4 176.7

172 176

133/131

133/131

133/131

133/131

Amps

53.1

52.6

52.5

52.73

Amps kV

52.9 6.4 0.78

52.5 6.5 0.78

52.4 6.5 0.78

52.59 6.5 0.78 458.62 67.44

0

C

kW %

AIR INGRESS CALCULATION S.No 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Parameter Description Unit Load Total Air Flow Flue gas temperature at ID inlet Flue gas density Total Coal flow % Ash in Coal Total Bottom ash (20% of total ash) Total Fly ash ( 80% of total ash) Flue Gas at APH inlet ESP Efficiency Flue Gas without fly ash

Units MW TPH deg C Kg/m3 TPH % TPH TPH TPH % TPH

Test 120.00 430.00 132.00 0.87 64.00 35.61 4.56 18.23 489.44 99.90 471.23

13 14

Avg. O2 at APH inlet Flue Gas at APH inlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air )

% %

3.90 122.81

15 16

Avg. O2 at APH outlet Flue Gas at APH Outlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air )

% %

5.50 135.48

72

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Avg. O2 at ID fan inlet Flue Gas at ID Fan inlet (In % of Stoichiometric Air ) Flue gas Flow at APH inlet Flue gas Flow at APH outlet Flue gas Flow at ID inlet Air ingress across APH Air Ingress between APH & ID fan Total Air Ingress

%

5.90

% TPH TPH TPH TPH TPH TPH

139.07 489.44 538.10 533.66 48.66 13.77 62.43

FORCED DRAFT FAN FAN A S. N0. 1 2 3 4

5

6

7

8 a b i ii

Description Unit load Frequency Total Secondary air Flow Discharge Pressure Fan A Fan B Secondary Air Pressure After AH ( L ) After AH ( R ) Secondary Air Flow After AH ( L ) After AH ( R ) Wind Box Pressure Left Right FD Fan power Analysis Current( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage

73

Units MW Hz TPH

Test 1 120 48.85 257.6

Test 2 121 49.32 258.1

Test 3 122 49.08 255.1

Average 121.00 49.08 257

mmwcl mmwcl

233.5 242.1

231.1 243.1

230.7 241.4

231.8 242.2

mmwcl mmwcl

105.3 100.9

96.6 101.1

102.8 106.9

101.6 103.0

TPH TPH

136.4 121.2

136.8 121.3

134.9 120.2

136.0 120.9

100.1 100.4

99.1 102.3

103 104

100.7 102.2

A

33.1

33

32.5

32.9

A kV

33.3 6.47

33.5 6.47

32.9 6.43

33.2 6.5

iii iv

Power Factor Power

0.86

0.86

0.86

0.86 319.3

Units MW Hz TPH

Test 1 121 48.85 258.1

Test 2 121 48.85 257.2

Test 3 121 48.73 257.5

Average 121.00 48.81 258

mmwcl mmwcl

234.8 244.5

231.5 245.1

232.8 244.3

233.0 244.6

mmwcl mmwcl

101.5 109

101.3 107

100.1 103.2

101.0 106.4

TPH TPH

136.2 121.9

135.7 121.5

136.1 121.4

136.0 121.6

103 102

101 100

103 103

102.3 101.7

A

32.8

32.7

32.6

32.7

A kV

28.8 6.5 0.85

28.7 6.5 0.85

28.6 6.5 0.85

28.7 6.47 0.85 273.3

kW

FAN B S. N0. 1 2 3 4

5

6

7

8 a b i ii iii iv

Description Unit load Frequency Total Secondary air Flow Discharge Pressure Fan A Fan B Secondary Air Pressure After AH (L) After AH R Secondary Air Flow After AH R After AH (L) Wind Box Pressure Left Right FD Fan power Analysis Current Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power

kW

PRIMARY AIR FAN FAN A S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 i ii 6 i ii 7 8 9 a b i ii iii iv 10

Description Unit load Frequency Total Primary air Flow Coal Flow Discharge Pressure Fan A Fan B Primary Air Temperature AH inlet After AH Hot PA header DP across PAH air side PA Fan power Analysis Current ( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio

Units MW Hz TPH TPH

Test 1 121 48.96 173 65

Test 2 122 48.85 172.4 65

Test 3 121 48.78 172.5 65

Average 121.33 48.86 173 65

mmwcl mmwcl

864 863

863 861

865 863

864.0 862.3

C C mmwcl TPH

34 296 803 31.5

34 297 801 31.7

34 297 803 31.5

34 296 803 31.6

A

28

28.1

28.5

28.2

A kV

28.5 6.4 0.78

28.4 6.4 0.78

28.5 6.4 0.78

kW

28.5 6.4 0.78 247.5

TPH/MW

1.42

0 0

74

11

Primary Air to Coal Ratio

2.65

FAN B S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 i ii 6 i ii 7 8 9 a b i ii iii iv 10 11

Description Unit load Frequency Total Primary air Flow Coal Flow Discharge Pressure Fan A Fan B Primary Air Temperature AH inlet After AH Hot PA header DP across PAH air side PA Fan power Analysis Current ( Control room ) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Primary Air Flow to Unit load Ratio Primary Air to Coal Ratio

Units MW Hz TPH TPH

Test 1 121 48.98 172 65

Test 2 119 48.92 173 65

Test 3 120 48.97 173 65

mmwcl mmwcl

870 868

862 862

863 862

TPH

34.4 296.5 811.5 31.8

34.3 296.8 807 32

34.4 296.8 804 32.2

34.4 296.7 807.5 32.00

A

28

27.8

28.2

28.00

A kV

32.65 6.47 0.84

32.76 6.47 0.84

32.91 6.47 0.84

32.77 6.47 0.84 308.33 1.44 2.65

0 0

C C

Average 120.00 48.96 173 65 865 864

kW TPH/MW

MILLS MILL A S. N0.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure Mill Differential Pressure Cold Air Damper postion Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air preheater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room)

Units MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc mmwc % %

Test 1 119 49.2 430 807.6 438.3 382 63 27

Test 2 119 49.11 430 802 442 382 62.9 27

Test 3 119 48.96 430 803.4 439.2 380.1 62.9 27

Average 119.0 49.1 430.0 804.3 439.8 381.4 62.9 27.0

C

297

297

297

297.0

C C TPH TPH TPH %

148 88.3 17.6 46 177.4

148 88.6 17.6 45.7 177.3

148.7 88.6 17.6 45.9 176.9

148.2 88.5 17.6 45.9 177.2

Amps

30.4

0 0 0

75

85.15 30.4

b i ii iii iv 17 18 19

Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption Motor Loading Mill Loading

Amps kV

31.0 6.4 0.78 269

31.6 6.5 0.78 276

31.3 6.5 0.8 273 15.5 90.9 48.2

Test 1 118 48.85 430 804.1 511 NOT AVAIALABLE 71.25 30.84

Test 2 118 48.85 430 806.9 507.5

Test 3 119 48.85 430 805.4 509.4

Average 118.3 48.9 430.0 805.5 509.3

72.4 30.84

71.22 30.89

71.6 30.9

C

297.2

297.2

297

297.1

C C TPH TPH TPH %

153.8 87.4 18 44.7 176.9

153.7 87.4 18 49.8 176.8

154 87.4 18 45 176.9

153.8 87.4 18.0 46.5 176.9

Amps

29.9

kW kW/T % %

31.2 6.5 0.78 273

MILL B S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure

Units MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc

6

Mill Differential Pressure

mmwc

7 8

Cold Air Damper postion Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air preheater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room) Power Analyser Readings

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a b

% % 0 0 0

76

85.61 29.9

i ii iii iv 17 18 19

Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption Motor Loading Mill Loading

Amps kV

30.1 6.5 0.78 263

kW

29.8 6.5 0.77 257

29.9 6.5 0.77 258

30.0 6.5 0.8 260

kW/T

14.4

% %

86.5 49.3

MILL C S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a b i ii iii iv 17 18

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure Mill Differential Pressure Cold Air Damper postion Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air preheater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption of Mill Motor Loading

Units MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc mmwc % %

Test 1 120 48.97 430 805.9 494.1 368.1 53.9 33.38

Test 2 119 48.96 430.6 806.5 498.8 367.5 53.68 33.39

Test 3 119 49.08 430.5 806 497.7 370.5 53.89 33.35

Average 119.3 49.0 430.4 806.1 496.9 368.7 53.8 33.4

C

297.4

297.4

297.4

297.4

C C TPH TPH TPH %

160.8 88.4 17.6 42.6 176.6

160.9 88.5 17.6 43.2 177.3

160.7 88.5 17.5 43 177

160.8 88.5 17.6 42.9 177.0

Amps

30.12

29.84

30.15

30.0

Amps kV

30.0 6.5 0.77 260

30.1 6.5 0.76 256

30.2 6.5 0.77 261

30.1 6.5 0.8 259

0 0 0

kW

77

88.08

kW/T

14.7

%

86.3

19

Mill Loading

%

48.1

MILL D S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a b i ii iii iv 17 18 19

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure Mill Differential Pressure Cold Air Damper postion Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air preheater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption of Mill Motor Loading Mill Loading

Units MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc mmwc % %

Test 1 119 48.85 431.1 808.7 364.4 191.9 65.26 31.34

Test 2 120 48.97 431.2 805.6 362.2 192.8 65.25 31.34

Test 3 119 48.97 430.2 805.2 363.3 192.6 65.23 31.36

Average 119.3 48.9 430.8 806.5 363.3 192.4 65.2 31.3

C

297.4

297.4

297.4

297.4

C C TPH TPH TPH %

113.8 85.8 10.1 43.4 176.6

114 85.9 10.1 43.7 176.6

114.2 86.1 10.1 43.3 176.3

114.0 85.9 10.1 43.5 176.5 91.73

Amps

27.05

26.88

26.44

26.8

Amps kV

26.1 6.5 0.73 214

27.0 6.5 0.74 224

26.8 6.5 0.74 222

26.7 6.5 0.7 220

0 0 0

kW

78

kW/T

21.8

% %

73.4 27.7

MILL E S. N0. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a b i ii iii iv 17 18

Description Unit load Frequency Total air flow Hot PA header pressure Mill inlet pressure Mill Differential Pressure Cold Air Damper postion Hot Air Damper position Primary air temp after mill air preheater Air temp at mill inlet Mill Outlet temp Coal flow to mill PA flow Total PA flow Mill Fineness (-)75 Mesh Mill power analysis Current (control room) Power Analyser Readings Current Voltage Power Factor Power Specific power consumption of Mill Motor Loading

Units MW Hz TPH mmwc mmwc mmwc % %

Test 1 120 49.05 430.5 800 393 172.2 41.3 27.8

Test 2 120 48.88 429.2 799.6 393 170 41.2 27.8

Test 3 118 48.85 433.3 799.2 393.9 170.4 41.2 27.8

Average 119.3 48.9 431.0 799.6 393.3 170.9 41.2 27.8

C

289.8

289.8

289.9

289.8

C C TPH TPH TPH %

171.6 92.1 13.3 47.3 186.9

171.3 91.9 13.3 46.6 187.5

171.2 91.5 13.3 47.3 188.3

171.4 91.8 13.3 47.1 187.6

Amps

30.12

29.84

30.15

30.0

Amps kV

25.6 6.5 0.73 210

25.5 6.5 0.72 207

25.6 6.5 0.73 210

25.6 6.5 0.7 209

0 0 0

kW

79

kW/T

15.7

%

69.8

19

Mill Loading

%

36.4

COAL HANDLING PLANT Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a

CONVEYOR - 1A 132 kW 26257 mm 1600 mm 1176 T/Hr 1.6 M/Sec UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

TEST 1 754

TEST 2 754

Average 754

97.10 444.00 0.6 44.80

99.40 445.70 0.60 46.10

98.25 444.85 0.60 45.45 0.060

TEST 1 754

TEST 2 754

Average 754

17.00

17.10

CONVEYOR - 2 277 kW 348235 mm 1600 mm 1176 T/Hr 1.6 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current

UNITS TPH

Amp

80

17.05

b c d 4

Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

6.70 0.87 172.60

6.70 0.87 173.60

6.70 0.87 173.10 0.230

TEST 1 754

TEST 2 754

Average 754

112.80 442.20 0.95 82.10

111.60 440.40 0.95 80.80

112.20 441.30 0.95 81.45 0.108

TEST 1 754

TEST 2 754

Average 754

12.00 6.80 0.72 101.30

11.90 6.80 0.73 102.20

11.95 6.80 0.73 101.75 0.135

TEST 1 754

TEST 2 754

Average 754

121.50 440.30 0.69 63.90

120.60 439.20 0.70 64.20

121.05 439.75 0.70 64.05 0.085

CONVEYOR - 3 132 kW 103241 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

CONVEYOR - 4 150 kW 168069 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

kW kW/MT

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

Volt

UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

CONVEYOR - 5 132 kW 136330 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

81

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

TEST 1 605

TEST 2 610

Average 608

349.00 6.70 0.72 116.60

355.70 6.70 0.72 118.90

352.35 6.70 0.72 117.75 0.194

UNITS TPH

TEST 1 650

TEST 2 650

Average 650

Amp Volt

6.70 6.70 0.84 145.60

6.70 6.70 0.84 144.80

6.70 6.70 0.84 145.20 0.223

kW kW/MT

TEST 1 650

TEST 2 610

Average 630

399.00 6.80 0.79 147.80

399.90 6.70 0.80 148.50

399.45 6.75 0.80 148.15 0.235

CONVEYOR - 8B 225 kW 178093 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width

UNITS TPH

CONVEYOR - 7B 225 kW 275300 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

CONVEYOR - 6 225 kW 322526 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

CONVEYOR - 9B 225 kW 219750 mm 1200 mm

82

Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

1176 2.66 UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

TEST 1 650

TEST 2 650

Average 650

264.20 6.70 0.61 75.20

265.80 6.70 0.63 78.10

265.0 6.70 0.62 76.65 0.118

TEST 1 940.00

TEST 2 1000.00

Average 970.00

11.70 6.70 0.70 94.90

11.60 6.80 0.70 95.90

11.65 6.75 0.70 95.40 0.098

kW mm mm T/Hr M/Sec TEST 1 754.00

Average 754.00

CONVEYOR - 10 150 kW 159937 mm 1200 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

CONVEYOR - 12 Motor Rating Length 103241 Width 1600 Capacity 1176 Speed 2.66 DESCRIPTION UNITS Coal Flow TPH Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Amp Voltage Volt Power Factor Power kW SEC kW/MT

Motor Rating Length Width Capacity Speed

T/Hr M/Sec

34.30 456.00 0.5 13.50

CONVEYOR - 13 kW 103241 mm 1600 mm 1176 T/Hr 2.66 M/Sec

83

34.30 456.00 0.50 13.50 0.018

S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Amp 108.00 Voltage Volt 457.20 Power Factor 0.54 Power kW 46.20 SEC kW/MT PRIMARY CRUSHER-1 Motor Rating kW Length mm Width mm Capacity T/Hr Speed M/Sec

TEST 2 754.00

Average 754.00

107.70 455.60 0.55 46.80

107.85 456.40 0.55 46.50 0.062

S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION UNITS TEST 1 Coal Flow TPH 754.00 Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Amp 8.40 Voltage Volt 6.80 Power Factor 0.34 Power kW 33.70 SEC kW/MT SECONDRY CRUSHER-1 Motor Rating kW Length mm Width mm Capacity T/Hr Speed M/Sec

TEST 2 754.00

Average 754.00

8.30 6.80 0.33 32.00

8.35 6.80 0.34 32.85 0.044

S.NO. 1 2 3 a b c d 4

DESCRIPTION Coal Flow Power Analyser Reading On Load Current Voltage Power Factor Power SEC

TEST 1 754.00

TEST 2 754.00

Average 754.00

51.60 6.80 0.24 145.20

52.80 6.80 0.24 150.00

52.20 6.80 0.24 147.60 0.196

UNITS TPH

Amp Volt kW kW/MT

COAL CONSUMPTION DATA (FY05-06)

Month April, 05 May, 05 June, 05 July, 05 August, 05 September, 05 October, 05 November, 05

Coal receipt (MT)

Coal Stacked (MT)

Coal Reclaimed (MT)

Coal Consumed (MT)

Aux. Power Kwh / Ton Coal Handled

161366 129649 92918 125167 123133 123489 176911 153579

161366 129649 92918 125167 123133 123489 176911 153579

125461 116772 114490 106734 116346 123489 136512 125452

125461 116772 114490 106734 116346 123489 136512 125452

1.43 1.29 1.26 1.33 1.30 1.33 1.26 1.22

84

December, 05 January, 06 February, 06 March, 06 TOTAL

S.No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Conv Name / No

Conv # 1A Conv # 1B Conv # 2 Conv # 3 Conv # 4 Conv # 5 Conv # 6 Conv # 7A & 7B Conv # 8A & 8B Conv # 9A & 9B Conv # 11 Conv # 14

141463 174314 142796 232612 1777397

141463 174314 142796 232612 1777397

142428 178442 154707 143425 1584258

142428 178442 154707 143425 1584258

1.21 1.25 1.29 1.22 1.28

Yearly Running Hrs (FY 05-06) No On Load Load 127 2535 124 2485 127 2535 127 2535 127 2535 127 2535 1105 4420

Conveyor Length

Motor Rating

Volt

Current

Motor Speed

Conv Capacity

Conv Speed

Meters

kW

Volt

Amps

RPM

TPH

M/sec

62 42 690 224 338 232 670

132 132 277 132 150 132 225

415 415 6600 415 6600 415 6600

227.00 227.00 30.00 227.00 17.80 227.00 24.00

1485 1485 1486 1486 1480 1486 1484

1176 1176 1176 1176 1176 1176 1176

1.60 1.60 1.60 2.66 2.66 2.66 2.66

559

225

6600

24.00

1484

1176

2.66

876

4380

378

225

6600

24.00

1484

1176

2.66

876

4380

600

225

6600

24.00

1484

1176

2.66

876

4380

307 387

132 55

415 415

227.00 94.00

1486 1475

750 1176

2.66 2.66

584 207

2920 1035

85

COOLING TOWER AREA POWER MEASUREMENT SHEET OF CT FANS EQUIPME NT CT FAN-1 CT FAN-2 CT FAN-3 CT FAN-4 CT FAN-5 CT FAN-6

DATE

13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07 13.01.07

TIME

12.33 12.35 12.38 12.40 12.26 12.28 12.20 12.22 12.11 12.13 12.45 12.47

Voltage R 398.50 399.20 399.20 399.60 411.70 411.70 411.00 411.80 407.80 407.60 399.80 399.80

Current

Y 398.20 398.80 398.60 399.40 410.90 411.30 410.00 410.20 407.40 406.50 398.80 399.20

B 398.20 399.00 398.90 399.50 411.30 411.50 410.00 411.30 407.60 407.10 399.30 399.50

R 58.73 58.76 56.86 56.74 55.50 55.85 57.92 58.16 56.24 56.21 56.86 56.84

Y 59.83 59.44 57.74 57.53 55.77 56.21 57.60 57.66 57.37 56.99 58.01 57.77

B 58.72 58.45 59.57 59.60 55.44 55.86 57.48 57.67 56.40 56.18 58.30 58.28

PF

Freq

kW

0.86 0.86 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.86

49.26 49.20 49.14 49.19 49.45 49.44 49.25 49.30 48.93 48.97 49.20 49.20

34.70 34.60 34.54 34.45 32.60 32.90 34.49 34.65 32.94 32.78 34.13 34.07

Wate r In let Temp

Water Out let Temp

AIR FLOW MEASUREMENT SHEET

Cell No-1 Cell No-2 Cell No-3 Cell No-4 Cell No-5 Cell No-6

Wind velocity Measurement

AVG

Area

Flow

Air In let Temp

M/Sec

M/sec

(M2)

m3/hr

Db

deg C

deg C

24.4

43.25

32.15

2.2 2.5 2.4 3.1 2.8 2.5

2.8 2.3 3.1 2.7 3.1 2.4

2.6 2.0 2.7 2.8 3.0 2.8

3.3 5.0 3.8 3.7 4.0 4.3

3.3 4.3 3.3 2.5 3.8 4.5

3.5 3.5 2.9 3.6 3.7 4.6

2.95 168.03 3.27 168.03 3.03 168.03 3.07 168.03 3.40 168.03 3.52 168.03 AVG FLOW

1784459 1976011 1834867 1855031 2056665 2127236 1939045

ASH SLURRY AND WATER PUMPS 86

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

3 4

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Motor Loading

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ASH SLURRY PUMP-1A 125 kW 460 TPH 35 Mts 67 % UNITS

DESIGN

TPH

460

Amp Volt

219

kW %

125.0

TEST 2

Average NA

73.30 443.40 0.45 25.30

72.90 441.60 0.46 25.60

25.45 20.36

ASH SLURRY PUMP-3A 125 kW 460 TPH 35 Mts 67 %

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head

UNITS TPH

DESIGN 460

TEST 1

TEST 2

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Mts Kg/Cm2 Mts

125.0

74.10 444.10 0.48 27.40

74.50 443.20 0.49 28.00

Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

TEST 1

35

% kW/Ton % % %

87

Average 425.00

27.70 2.50 3.40 36.50 152.60

0.27

0.07 22.16 104.29 92.39

ACW PUMP-2A

S.No.

Motor Rating

125

kW

Capacity

770

TPH

Disch. Head DESCRIPTION

1

Flow

2

Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Mts DESIGN

TPH

770

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts

125

Combined Efficiency

TEST 1

TEST 2

Average 932.50

194.60 406.60 0.86 117.90

194.90 406.30 0.86 118.00

35

%

SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head S.No. 1 2

35 UNITS

117.95 2.00 5.00 30.00 64.63

kW/Ton % % %

0.16

0.13 94.36 85.71 121.10

ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2A 75 kW 945 TPH 15 Mts

DESCRIPTION Flow * Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency

UNITS TPH

DESIGN 945

TEST 1

Amp Volt

131

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts

75

100.75 408.87 0.79 56.36

15

%

SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

kW/Ton % % %

56.36 1.10 2.50 14.00 63.96

0.08

* Combined flow of two pumps measured and divided equally, as it was not possible to measure flow individually.

88

Average 895.50*

0.06 75.15 93.33 94.76

H P WATER PUMP-1 175 kW 430 TPH 105 Mts 79 % 95.5 %

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency Motor efficiency S.No. 1 2

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

8

UNITS TPH Amp Volt

DESIGN 430

415

kW Kg/Cm2 Mts % kW/Ton % % %

175

TEST 1

TEST 2

240.40 444.20 0.82 151.7

236.50 444.00 0.82 149.10

105 75.45 0.41

Average 285.00

150.40 10.20 102.00 52.67 0.53 85.94 97.14 66.28

ASH SLURRY PUMP-1B 125 kW 460 TPH 25 Mts 67 %

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Motor Loading

UNITS

DESIGN

TPH

460

Amp Volt

219 415

kW %

125

89

TEST 1

TEST 2

Average NA

105.80 442.70 0.71 57.60

106.20 446.50 0.70 57.50

57.55 46.04

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

ASH SLURRY PUMP-3B 125 kW 460 TPH 25 Mts 67 % UNITS TPH

DESIGN 460

TEST 1

TEST 2

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts % kW/Ton % % %

125.0

106.70 439.80 0.71 57.70

107.30 441.60 0.71 58.30

TEST 1

TEST 2

25 0.27

Average 425.00

58.00 3.40 6.00 26.00 51.92 0.14 46.40 104.00 92.39

ACW PUMP-2B

S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Motor Rating

125

kW

Capacity

770

TPH

Disch. Head DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

35 UNITS

Mts DESIGN

TPH

770

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts

125

35

% kW/Ton % % %

90

Average 960.00

193.00 410.30 0.86 117.90

194.40 408.80 0.86 118.37

118.14 2.00 4.40 24.00 53.15

0.16

0.12 94.51 68.57 124.68

S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2B Motor Rating 75 kW Capacity 945 TPH Disch. Head 15 Mts DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN Flow* TPH 945 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 131 Voltage Volt Power Factor Power kW 75 2 Suction Pr Kg/Cm Discharge Pr Kg/Cm2 Net Head Mts 15 Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

TEST 1

102.28 404.07 0.87 62.28

%

Average 895.50*

62.28 1.10 2.40 13.00 53.75

kW/Ton % % %

0.08

0.07 83.04 86.67 94.76

* Combined flow of two pumps measured and divided equally, as it was not possible to measure flow individually. Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency Motor efficiency S.No. 1 2

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

H P WATER PUMP-2 175 kW 430 TPH 105 Mts 79 % 95.5 % UNITS

DESIGN

TPH

430

Amp Volt

415

kW Kg/Cm2 Mts % kW/Ton % % %

91

175 105 75.45 0.41

TEST 1

TEST 2

Average 280.00

291.90 439.50 0.84 151.7

299.00 440.80 0.85 149.10

150.40 9.80 98.00 49.72 0.54 85.94 93.33 65.12

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

3

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Motor Loading

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ASH SLURRY PUMP-1C 125 kW 460 TPH 25 Mts 67 %

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

UNITS

DESIGN

TPH

460

Amp Volt

219 415

kW %

125.0

TEST 1

TEST 2

Average NA

106.70 435.70 0.71 57.10

107.00 436.70 0.71 57.50

TEST 1

TEST 2

57.30 45.84

ASH SLURRY PUMP-3C 125 kW 460 TPH 25 Mts 67 % UNITS

DESIGN

TPH

460

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts % kW/Ton % % %

125.0

92

25 0.27

Average 425.00

106.20 443.50 0.68 55.50

106.50 445.50 0.67 55.00

55.25 6.00 8.00 20.00 41.92 0.13 44.20 80.00 92.39

ACW PUMP-2C

S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

S.No. 1 2

3

Motor Rating

125

kW

Capacity

770

TPH

Disch. Head DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Suction Pr Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

35 UNITS

Mts DESIGN

TPH

770

Amp Volt

219 415

kW Kg/Cm2 Kg/Cm2 Mts

125

TEST 1

TEST 2

931.00

191.90 404.80 0.85 114.40

190.00 405.60 0.84 112.00

35

% kW/Ton % % %

93

113.20 1.80 4.00 22.00 49.31

0.16

ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2C Motor Rating 75 kW Capacity 945 TPH Disch. Head 15 Mts DESCRIPTION UNITS DESIGN Flow* TPH 945 Power Analyser Reading Current Amp 131 Voltage Volt Power Factor Power kW 75 Motor Loading %

* Flow could not be measured individually

Average

0.12 90.56 62.86 120.91

TEST 1

106.10 407.3 0.77 57.63

Average NA

57.63 76.84

Motor Rating Capacity Disch. Head Pump efficiency Motor efficiency S.No. 1 2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 S.No

H P WATER PUMP-3 175 kW 430 TPH 105 Mts 79 % 95.5 %

DESCRIPTION Flow Power Analyser Reading Current Voltage Power Factor Power Discharge Pr Net Head Combined Efficiency SEC Motor Loading Head Loading Flow Loading

UNITS TPH

DESIGN 430

Amp Volt

415

kW Kg/Cm2 Mts % kW/Ton % % %

Pump details

175

TEST 1

TEST 2

247.30 441.00 0.82 154.9

246.80 440.80 0.82 154.50

105 75.45 0.41

Average 282.00

154.70 10.10 101.00 50.17 0.55 88.40 96.19 65.58

Design kW 175 175 175

Actual kW 150.40 150.40 154.70

Design SEC 0.41 0.41 0.41

Actual SEC 0.53 0.54 0.55

1 2 3

H P WATER PUMP-1 H P WATER PUMP-2 H P WATER PUMP-3

4 5 6

ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2A ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2B ACW BOOSTER PUMP-2C

75 75 75

56.36 62.28 57.63

0.08 0.08 0.08

0.06 0.07 NA

7 8 9

ACW PUMP-2A ACW PUMP-2B ACW PUMP-2C

125 125 125

117.95 118.14 113.20

0.16 0.16 0.16

0.13 0.16 0.12

10 11 12

ASH SLURRY PUMP-1A ASH SLURRY PUMP-1B ASH SLURRY PUMP-1C

125 125 125

25.45 57.55 57.30

0.27 0.27 0.27

NA NA NA

13 14 15

ASH SLURRY PUMP-3A ASH SLURRY PUMP-3B ASH SLURRY PUMP-3C

125 125 125

27.70 58.00 55.25

0.27 0.27 0.27

0.07 0.14 0.13

COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM 94

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 2.2 Manufacturer 2.3 Type 2.4 Model No. 2.5 Stage 2.6 Normal capacity Pressure kW

2+1 Inger-soll Rand Ltd. Centrifugal CENTAC (C45MX3) 3 Capacity Discharge 50 Hz (2975 rpm)

(M3.Hr.) 7213.52

(Kg/Cm2(a) 9.818

48.5 Hz (2885 rpm)

6535.45

9.812

693.24 622.32 47.5 Hz (2826 rpm) 5982.5 9.81 574.30 2.7 Inlet Pressure 0.991 Kg/Cm2(a) 2.8 Design Ambient Temperature 47.2 deg. C 2.9 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.C 2.11 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. 3.2 Supplier 3.3 Type 3.4 Filter Element Pre Filter (4 nos / filter) Paper Fine Filter (4 nos./filter) Filter Fibric 3.5 Rated Capacity 3.6 Pressure Drop 95

3 Kirloskar Knecht, Pune Dry / Washable Washable, Fibre Glass Non Washable, Non woven 11043 M3/hr. 0.2 PSI

3.7 Efficiency down to 2 micron as

Final filtering 99.97% per F209 D and 97% to

98% down to 3 micron

4.0 AIR RECEIVER 4.1 Total No. 4.2 Manufacturer Ahmedabad 4.3 Installation compressor room) 4.4 Design Capacity

4 Everest fabricators, Indoor, Vertical (in 8 M3

5.0 AIR DRIER 5.1 Total No. 1+1 5.2 Manufacturer Trident Corporation, Coimbtore 5.3 Type Blower Reactivated Dryer 5.4 Duty Continuous 5.5 Max. Capacity at operating condition (FAD) 4800 m3/hr. 5.6 Type of Desiccant Activated Alumina 5.7 Quantity of Desiccant per chamber 1190 Kg 5.8 Expected Life of Desiccant 2 years 5.9 Air Pressure drop across drying plant at 0.3 Kg/Cm2 maximum flow 5.10 Due point of air at atmospheric pressure - 49 deg. C 5.11 Due point of air at operating pressure - 20 deg. C 5.12 Rate of water removed per cycle 95 Kg 5.13 Regeneration air temperature 180 deg. C 5.14 Adsorption Cycle Time 3 Hrs. 5.15 Reactivation Cycle Time Heating 1 Hrs. and 52 min. / Adsorber Cooling 1 Hrs. Purging 8 Min. 5.16 Heater Rating 123 kW 6.0 COOLING WATER REQUIREMENT 6.1 Cooling Water Inlet Temperature 6.2 Cooling Water Outlet Temp. from each Cooler 6.3 Cooling Water Outlet Temp. from Oil cooler 6.4 Cooling Water Inlet/Outlet Pressure Kg/Cm2(g) ASH HANDLING COMPRESSORS 1 Total Nos for unit # 2 2 Model 96

39 deg. C 49 deg. C 44 deg. C 3.5 Kg/Cm2(g) / 2.5

2 XF 125 W/C SP

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Capacity Rated operating Pr. Max discharge Pr Max module Pr. Drive Motor Fan Motor Power Supply

621 CFM 72 PSIG 75 PSIG 75 PSIG 125 HP 1 HP 415 Volt / 3 Ph / 50 Hz

97

LIGHTING SYSTEMS

POWER MEASUREMENT OF DIFFERENT FEEDERS Lighting Feeders (Off site area)

Voltage

Current

PF

Freq

Power

Hz

kW

CHP Lighting LBD Incomes - 1 LBD Incomes - 1 LBD Incomes - 2 LBD Incomes - 2

R 252.8 255.5 256.4 251.4

Y 251.3 254.6 258.2 255.4

B 252.9 251.5 259.9 256.6

R 7.09 23.86 10.05 9.69

Y 14.82 16.00 10.25 9.94

B 31.94 32.93 0 0

0.84 0.59 0.69 0.70

49.1 49.1 49.2 49.2

7.337 10.68 9.237 8.567

Ash Handling Plant LDB

262.0

264.2

264.1

27.65

13.5

29.64

0.98

48.9

17.12

PF

Freq

Power

Hz

kW

Lighting Feeders (Main Plant area)

Voltage

Current

REMARKS

Day load Night load Night load Day load Day load & Night Load Same

REMARKS

LDB # 1 LDB # 1 LDB # 3 LDB # 3 LDB # 5

R 233.4 233.4 229.5 229.5 233.4

Y 233.1 233.2 230.1 230.1 232.4

B 202.9 232.5 228.2 228.2 231.5

R 22.33 22.67 29.78 29.78 21.84

Y 23.48 25.38 34.3 34.3 25.33

B 25.69 26.19 37.11 37.11 23.64

0.98 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.92

48.8 48.9 48.9 48.9 48.8

17.19 17.80 21.18 21.18 15.48

Day load Night load Day load Night load Night load

LDB # 1 LDB # 1 LDB # 3 LDB # 3 LDB # 5

233.2 233.2 230.1 228.0 233.9

232.9 232.9 229.9 229.2 233.3

232.2 232.2 227.8 227.6 232.5

5.25 7.37 8.44 8.7

6.76 6.8 8.02 8.9

0.98 0.98 0.98 0.73

48.8 49.2 49.1 49.1

1.07 4.80 5.16 5.7

Day load Night load Day load Night load Day load

LDB # 5 LDB # 3 NIE

232.0

5.79 6.44 6.83 7.27 No Load 5.07

6.33

5.96

0.93

48.8

3.7

LDB # 7 LDB # 7 LDB # 7 LDB # 7

230.9 230.9 240.3 240.3

0.61 0.83 0.84 0.86

48.9 48.9 48.9 48.9

3.16 3.50 14.71 12.89

Night load Day load Night load Day load Night load Night load Day load

230.0 231.5 No Load

Load is 3.7 Amp. 239.1 239.1 241.5 241.5

237.8 237.8 239.0 239.0

21.98 18.34

24.2 21.15

98

25.18 24.22

LUX MEASUREMENT OF DIFFERENT LOCATIONS Measured & Recommended Lux Level Date: 9.01.07

Time: 10:00 - 12:00 hrs Area

Measured Lux Front

Switch Gear 3M, MCC

Vertical Rear Side

ESP # 2 Switch Gear Room O-M

Rear Side Front Front

ESP Control Room Rear Side Front Ash Plant MCC # 2&3

Ash Plant Control Room

CHP C/R

Rear Side Vertical Penal Front Rear Side Table Front Rear Side

CHP MCC Room OM Rear Side CHP Office Battery Room CHP PLC Room CHP Rear Side Cony-6 Front UCB # 2

Main Penal

Table Rear Side Relay Room

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 56.7, 51, 40.8, 81.7, 71.2, 51, 58.2, 94.2, 35.3, 44.5 89.5, 107.4, 69, 104, 92.2, 82.7, 114, 102 200+, 32.2, 72.8, 183.4, 103.9(V), 27.7 (V), 59.6(V) 79.3, 187, 200+ 144.7, 142, 135, 215, 212, 287, 164(V), 77(V), 104(V) 200+, 235, 217 166, 171, 242, 113, 142, 85(V), 95(V), 196(V) 153, 79, 68, 104, 452, 203(V), 166(V), 114(V), 183(V) 164, 101(V), 210, 111(V), 216(Table), 163(Table) 337, 327, 215 144, 42, 129 169, 187, 170 167, 148, 92, 138(V), 56, 115(V) 258, 345, 357 120, 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 77, 64(V), 244, 167(V), 36, 170, 137(V), 46, 98(V) 354, 363, 287 263, 187, 136, 142 201, 196, 137(V), 159, 123(V) 329, 456, 421, 158(Table) 79, 203, 152, 49, 48, 57, 86, 201, 50, 138, 238, 29(mu) 192, 92.0(V), 169.4, 88.1(V), 265, 173(V), 250, 153(V), 261, 251(V), 238, 213(V), 206, 140(V) 191, 141(V), 116, 98(V), 111, 91(V), 143, 86(V), 264, 105(V) 114, 128, 128, 150(computer table), 221(CT) 112, 269, 259, 243, 159 105, 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

99

Recommende d Lux (BIS Standard) 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 200-300-500 200-300-501 100-150-200 100-150-200 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 100-150-200

100-150-201 150-200-300 50-100-150 150-200-302 150-200-303 50-100-150 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500

Remarks

Service Building AGM Office Conference Room GM Office Table Library Conference Room C & I Office Service Room 204 No Service Room 201 No BE Group Room EMD C&F Lab Mechanical Maint. off. Electrical Store CWP MCC RoomFront OM Rear DM Plant MCC

Front Rear

DM Plant C/R Rear DM Plant Equipment area AC Plant service building TG OM # 2 Near HP Dozing Tank Walk Way Centrifugal area Near Condenser Near ACW Pumps

132, 236 113, 251, 118 180, 149 197, 201 199, 201, 160 259, 204, 194, 226, 180 235, 241

150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300

200 295 382, 494, 362 178, 320, 381, 183, 107, 154, 160, 311 209, 305, 235, 241, 175, 154, 114, 196 132, 234, 215, 183, 182, 169, 269, 129, 189 178, 200 253, 134(V), 224, 124(V), 156, 105(V), 160 92, 88(V), 58, 51, (V), 48, 76(V), 66, 49(V) 220, 159(V), 204, 224(V), 183, 137(V) 126, 103(V), 94(V), 129 116, 84(Penal), 68, 135(V), 82, 113(V), 180(Table), 123, 98(V), 174 141, 154 37, 63, 103, 126, 144 166, 43.9, 37.9, 46.7(Table), 137.5 57.5(BFP Area), 41.5, 8.9, 17.9, 24.1, 50.9, 37.1, 33.0, 42.5 104.1, 46.3 12.3, 6.4, 59.5 79.2, 21.9 50.4, 48.3, 60.1, 25.5 6.9

100

150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 150-200-300 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 200-300-500 200-300-500 100-150-200 100-150-200 150-200-300 30-50-100 50-100-150 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200

Date: 10.01.07

Time: Night 18:00 - 19:30 hrs

Area

Measured Lux

# 2 Control Room # 2 Control Room

Rear

# 2 Control Room

Relay Room

TG-Hall # 2, HP Heater area 5.5 M, TG # 2 Switch Gear Room 3-M, MCC Room

Front

Street Light Front CHP MCC Room CHP MCC Room

Front Rear

CHP MCC Room CHP - CR CHP - CR CHP Relay Room

Front Rear Front Rear

Walk Way C/R outside Outside C/R open Conv - 6 Coal yard near light tower

38.3, 8.0

C/R Entrance AHP MCC room

Front

AHP MCC room Near ESP Pathway

Rear

ESP Area Boiler O-M, MILL Area

Rear Relay Room

Remarks

200-300-500 200-300-500 200-300-500 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 5-20 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 200-300-500 200-300-500 150-200-300 150-200-300 200-300-500 50-100-150 5-20

4.3(Entrance), 5.3, 15.4(seal Pump), 145, 463, 324,

HP Water Pumps Slurry Pump

ESP MCC room

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) 28.6, 5.3, 27, 4, 11.6, 7.2, 20 229, 197, 162, 150, 94, 135, 200, 135, 144, 97(V), 95(V), 110(V) 209, 176, 189, 135, 96(V), 196 127, 200, 187(V), 32, 27(V), 140, 116, 163, 38(V), 201, 164(V) 364, 181, 201, 208, 86, 155(V), 94, 138(V) 216, 271, 277, 210 138, 228, 146, 202, 164, 205(Table) 209, 190, 105, 40 245, 68, 125, 50, 400, 300 4, 7 14.5, 46, 28, 21, 3.5, 22

Ash Plant

OM ESP C/R ESP MCC room

165, 274, 194(V), 279, 130(V), 260, 120(V), 213, 188, 95(V), 144, 92(V), 177, 85(V) 234, 310, 211, 107 30, 141, 160, 26, 257, 146, 95, 140, 98, 110, 180, 240, 134(V), 130, 336, 110(V), 205, 121, 127(V), 130 36, 38, 12 (Near Turbine), 39, 64(T6 Front), 26, 32, 15, 37, 32(Gen Rear), 40, 49, 57, 34(LPH), 41 (Stair) 84, 45, 22, 66 (CRH NRV), 65, 29, 34 (Rear), 18, 43

Recommended Lux (BIS Standard)

330, 229, 143, 211 290, 270, 360, 167, 359 65, 259, 314, 325, 200 (Penal), 105(V), 150(Table) 215, 61, 280, 236, 131(V), 60, 87, 61(V) 105, 81(V), 48, 8, 7(V), 16, 52(V), 9, 10(V) 7.1, 4.9, 16.7 27, 32, 25, 28, 25, 52, 30, 33, 20 (Near Air Tank) 11, 8, 31, 17, 22(ID fan), 10(FD fan) 4, 2, 4, Near Ash Hoppers, 10, 29, 7(IBD Tank), 14 13(Entrance) 154, 148, 157, 126(V), 58, 214 196, 145(V), 71, 108, 79(V), 149

101

100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 200-300-500 100-150-200 100-150-200 50-100-150 50-100-150 50-100-150 50-100-150 200-300-500 100-150-200 100-150-200

Excess light

Cable Gallery

50-100-150

10, 29, 21, 35, 8, 50, 15 110, 6(condenser), 6, 34, 5, 34 (LP dozing Tank), 16 31, 30, 86, 91, 14, 5, 21, 85 131(Table) 15, 39(MOT), 7, 93, 16, 10, 3(condenser rear), 19 13(Entrance), 25, 65, 88, 71, 73(Tank receiver), 73 41 20, 37, 45, 37, 15, 17, 6, 21, 17, 51, 20, 24

O-M,TG Area BFP area O-M, Operator Lub oil cooler Air Compressor Room GT Area Switch Yard

100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200 100-150-200

Switch Yard C/R

133, 368, 440, 410, 291, 366, 236

200-300-500

Stairs

167

50-100-150

Excess light

Savings Potential calculations after Voltage reduction to 220 Volts in Lighting Circuits. Lighting Feeders (Off site area)

CHP Lighting LBD Incomes – 1 (Day Load) LBD Incomes – 1 (Night Load) LBD Incomes – 2 (Night Load) LBD Incomes – 2 (Day Load) AHP LDB (Night Load and Day Load Same)

Existing Recommen Voltage ded Voltage (Average) (Average)

Existing Power Cons.

Expected New Power Cons.

Expected Power Savings (kW)

Expected Annual Energy Savings (Kwh)

Expected Annual Energy Savings (Rs)

252.33

220

7.337

5.58

1.76

7708

18114

253.87

220

10.68

8.02

2.66

11648

27374

258.17

220

9.237

6.71

2.53

11078

26034

254.47

220

8.567

6.40

2.16

9476

22270

263.43

220

17.12

11.94

5.18

45376

106634

Total Savings in CHP Lighting Day Load = 1.76+2.16 = 3.92 kW Total Savings in CHP Lighting Night Load = 2.66+2.53 = 5.19 kW Total Savings in AHP Lighting load, (Day & Night)= 5.18 kW Location

U#1,2,3, 3.0 mtr swgr. UPS Engineer's Room control room# 2&3 THL #2 UPS#2 N/E #2 DM PLANT MCC DM PLANT C/R ESP#2 CR+MCC CW#2&3 MCC ASH PL2&3 C/R MCC FLY ASH AIR COMP ROOM CHP MCC+CR+PLC Room

No.of fittings

No. of FLTs

Watts/Tube+ Bllast extra

Existing Power Consumption

Expected Power Consumption (with T-5 FLTs)

142 6 10 34 48 6 11 14 10 15 12 28

254 12 20 68 95 12 22 28 20 30 24 56

40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40

13970 660 1100 3740 5225 660 1210 1540 1100 1650 1320 3080

7112 336 560 1904 2660 336 616 784 560 840 672 1568

10

20

40

1100

560

51

102

40

5610

2856

102

TOTAL

Conveyor Number Conveyor#2 Conveyor#3 Conveyor#4 Conveyor#5 Conveyor#6 Conveyor#7 Conveyor#8 Conveyor#10 Conveyor#11 Conveyor#12 Conveyor#13 Conveyor#14 Conveyor#15

763

No. of corrugated sheets on each side 222 123 222 139 336 382 232 194 39 21 220 123 118

41965

No of light fittings on each side

Watt/Fixture

26 15 26 16 39 43 27 23 6 3 26 15 14

70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

103

21364

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)

X

%C %S + 100 267 Comb. in B. Ash X B. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg) _ 100 _

X 30.6

Comb. in F. Ash X F. Ash in Coal (Kg/Kg) 100

O X Gas Temp at APH Out ( C)

___-Air Intake Temp (OC)

100 X G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)

3. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO MOISTURE IN FLUE GAS: 104

=

%M – 9X%H 100 X

X 1.88

Gas Temp at APH Out (OC) _ Air Intake Temp (OC)

+ 2442

100 X G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg) 4. PERCENTAGE HEAT LOSS DUE TO MOISTURE IN AIR: =

Air supplied (kg/kg of coal)

X

X Moisture load (kg/kg of air)

Gas Temp at APH Out (OC)

X 1.88

_ Air Intake Temp (OC)

100 X G.C.V. of Coal (KJ/Kg)

5

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.

Heat Input OVERALL HEAT RATE (KCAL/KWH) = Generation

ANNEXURE – 2B

Parameter used for efficiency computation Sl. No

Operating Parameters

Unit 105

Source

1

Avg. Unit Load

MW

2

Main Steam Flow

TPH

3 4

Main Steam Pressure Main Steam Temperature

5

Feed Water Temperature

6

GCV of Coal (as received basis)

7

Avg. Coal Flow

8

Hot Reheat Steam Pressure

9

Hot Reheat Steam Temperature

10

Cold Reheat Steam Pressure

12

Cold Reheat Steam Temperature

Sl. No

KG/CM

DAS DAS 2

O

DAS

O

C

DAS

KCAL/KG

Plant laboratory

TPH

DAS

KG/CM2

DAS

C

O

C

DAS

KG/CM2

DAS

O

DAS

Unit

Source

C

Operating Parameters

DAS

1

POWER GENERATION (avg.)

MW

DAS

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

106

Sl. No 13

Operating Parameters

Unit

Source

Flue Gas Analysis (APH Outlet)

13.1

CARBON DIOX!DE (CO2)

%

Plant laboratory

13.2

CO

%

13.3

OXYGEN (O2)

%

Plant laboratory Plant laboratory

13.4 14 14.1 14.2

TEMPERATURE Ambient conditions DRY BULB TEMP WET BULB TEMP

DEGC

Plant laboratory

DEGC DEGC

Measured Measured

15

Proximate Analysis of Coal

15.1

FIXED. CARBON

%

Plant laboratory

15.2

VOLATILE MATTER

%

Plant laboratory

15.3 15.4

TOTAL MOISTURE ASH

% %

15.5

G C V OF COAL (as received basis)

KCAL/KG

Plant laboratory Plant laboratory Plant laboratory

16 16.1

Ultimate Analysis of Coal CARBON (C)

%

Plant laboratory

16.2

HYDROGEN (H)

%

Plant laboratory

16.3 16.4 16.5

NITROGEN (N) SULPHUR (S) MOISTURE (H2O)

% % %

Plant laboratory Plant laboratory Plant laboratory

ANNEXURE – 2C 107

BOILER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: AS RUN KEY PARAMETERS DURING BOILER TRIALS (UNIT # 2) Sl. No

Operating Parameters

Unit

DATE

AVG.

AVG.

10/01/2007

10/01/2007

DURATION

HR

10.30 hrs to 15.00 hrs

15.00 hrs to 19.00 hrs

1

POWER GENERATION (avg.)

MW

117.57

118.756

2 3

% OF NCR COAL CONSUMPTION

% TPH

97.98 63.48

98.96 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 14 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4

TEMPERATURE Ambient conditions DRY BULB TEMP WET BULB TEMP RELATIVE HUMIDITY MOISTURE LOAD

DEGC

147.5

148

DEGC DEGC % KG/KG

25.6 15.95 36.003 0.0073405

26 16 35.64 0.007365

108

15

Proximate analysis of Coal

15.1

FIXED. CARBON

%

41.62

41.62

15.2

VOLATILE MATTER

%

19.72

19.72

15.3 15.4

TOTAL MOISTURE ASH

% %

4.5 34.13

4.5 34.13

15.5

G C V OF COAL (as received basis)

KCAL/KG

4724.8

4724.8

16 16.1

Ultimate analysis of Coal CARBON (C)

%

46.5

46.5

16.2

HYDROGEN (H)

%

3.5

3.5

% % %

0.4 0.6 5.5

0.4 0.6 5.5

16.3 NITROGEN (N) 16.4 SULPHUR (S) 16.5 MOISTURE (H2O) NOTE: Above trial data is average value during 15 min. interval.

109

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

No

14000 1200

5

Tube Length between Tube Plates

Meters

7.400

6

OD of Condenser Tubes

mm

22

7

Thickness of tubes

mm

8

Tube Material

9

Velocity through Tubes

10 TTD at design CW flow & temp. 11 Condenser Vacuum 12 CW temperature Rise

m/sec O

18BWG for condenser & 22BWG for air cooler C+Ni 90/10 for condensing and SA249CP304 for air cooler 1.96

C

3.5

kg/cm2

0.106 at 34 OC

O

C

9

13 Surface area

SQM

7743.88

14 Condenser CW flow

CMH

16000

%

85

16 Water Box Diff. pressure

mwc

5.0

17 CW Flow (capacity on line)

CMH

9500*2

18 CW Pump speed

rpm

495

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.

0

535.0

26 Cold Re-heat steam Temp.

0

335.0

27 FW entering Econ. Temp.

0

233.0

15 Cleanliness Factor

19 CW pump discharge pressure

C C C

110

Annexure 4 CHEMISTRY REPORT COAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS TIME INGREDIENTS

S.NO. 1 2 3 4 5

FC% VM% TOTAL MOISTURE ASH% GCV Kcal/Kg

7:00 AM SAMPLE 1

3:00 PM SAMPLE 2

43.53 20.33 4.56 35.61 4803.38

42.58 20.78 4.44 36.11 4646.19

SIEVE ANALYSIS COAL FINENESS S.NO. 1 2 3 4

DATE/TIME MILL A B C D

-300+250* 0.06 0.25 0.08 0.02

-250+125* 1.36 3.83 2.31 2.71

-125+75* 13.43 10.31 9.53 5.54

UNBURNT CARBON ANALYSIS S.NO. BOTTOM ASH % FLY ASH % 1 2.6 5.72 FLUE GAS ANAYSIS O2 % S.NO.

APH inlet R/L 1 3.9

APH outlet R/L 5.5

ID Fan inlet R/L 5.9

APH inlet

APH outlet 15

ID Fan inlet 14

CO2 % S.NO. 1

16

REJECT ANALYSIS AIR DRY BASIS MOISTURE

ASH %

GCV(kcal/kg )

0.5

61.13

2325.9

111

TM(%) 2.19

-75+0* 85.15 85.61 88.08 91.73

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.

112

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 VOLUME CONTROL METHOD

PERCENT OF FAN VOLUME COMPARISION OF VARIOUS FAN OUTPUT CONTROL METHODS.

113

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 frequency The variable frequency drive have an efficiency of 95% or better at full load.

114

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.

115

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. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

CT fan gearbox, backlash checking CT gear box internal inspection Oil seals replacement Gear Box oil replacement Foundation bolds, beam healthiness to be checked Fan blades cleaning with soap etc.

CT internals as given below should be checked and attended. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Nozzle cleaning and replacement of damaged nozzles PVC fills cleaning (for film type by water jet cleaning) Damage fills replacement Damage drift eliminators to be replaced Cold water basin cleaning Structure algae removal. 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 116

• •

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 points 1. 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.

117

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.

Annexure 9

118

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/fouling 3. 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. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Water washing of ESP internals Cleaning of ESP hoppers Inspection and replacement of Emitting Electrodes Inspection and replacement of Collecting Electrodes 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 apparatus 9. Cleaning and checking of support insulators and replacement of damaged insulators 10. Cleaning and checking of shaft insulators and replacement of damaged insulators 11. checking and replacement hopper heaters and their thermostats 12. checking transformer rectifier unit, control cubicle their protection and interlocks 13. Overhauling of rapping motors 14. Alignment of fields 15. Trail charging.

Ducting Following job may be done for duct overhauling. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Cleaning , inspection and repair of duct Checking of all hangers and supports of duct and rectify as necessary. Checking and repairing of duct internal support pipes and stiffeners. Cleaning, inspection & repair or replacement of expansion joint. Repair & replacement of duct walls based on the thickness survey during walls. Replacement of all duct manholes packing rope / gaskets. R&M work for fabric expansion joints.

119

Damper/Gates Following jobs may be done for damper and gate overhauling. 1. 2. 3. 4.

Servicing of actuators. Replacement of worn out parts. Checking/repair or replacement of gates/damper / shaft and bearings etc. Repack glands with new graphite / carbon packing, as the case be. Checking of seal air line

120

Annexure 10 UNIT AUXILIARIES POWER CONSUMPTION OBSERVATIONS ( UNIT#2 ) TEST 1 S. NO. Description 1

BFP A

Phase R Y B

Date 9.1.07

Time 11:00

Average

2

BFP B

R Y B

9.1.07

12:03

Average

3

BFP C

R Y B

9.1.07

12:36

Average

4

CEP A

R Y B

9.1.07

16:34

Average

5

CEP B

R Y B

12.1.07 16:39

Average

6

ID FAN A

R Y B Average

10.1.07 12:28

V

kV

6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

I

Amps

140.3 139.2 140.1 139.9 142.8 141.2 141.2 141.7 130.7 128.8 130.4 130.0 23.0 22.8 23.1 22.9 23.2 23.0 23.2 23.1 48.9 47.7 48.3 48.3

PF F

TEST 2 Hz

P

kW

Time 11:05

0.93 48.90 0.93 48.90

1464 12:08

0.94 49.20 0.94 49.20

1500 12:41

0.94 48.90 0.94 48.90

1375 16:39

0.87 48.80 0.87 48.80

225 16:41

0.88 48.90 0.88 48.90

229 12:33

0.75 48.90 0.75 48.90

406

121

V

kV

6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

I

Amps

139.8 138.4 140.3 139.5 142.7 141.1 141.4 141.8 137.9 136.0 137.8 137.2 23.1 22.7 23.2 23.0 23.5 23.3 23.6 23.5 49.3 47.9 48.4 48.5

PF F

TEST 3 Hz P

kW

Time

V

kV

0.87 48.90 0.87 48.9

11:10 6.5 6.5 6.5 1460 6.5 12:13 6.5 6.5 6.5 1485 6.5 12:46 6.5 6.5 6.5 1452 6.5 16:44 6.5 6.5 6.5 225 6.5

0.88 48.90 0.88 48.9

233

0.93 48.90 0.93 48.9

0.94 0.94

49 49

0.94 48.9 0.94 48.9

0.75 49.1 0.75 49.1

410

12:38 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

I

Amps

135.8 135.1 135.5 135.4 143.5 142.3 142.0 142.6 130.2 128.1 130.2 129.5 23.2 22.8 23.1 23.0

49.0 47.9 48.3 48.4

PF F

0.93 0.93

Hz

P kW

48.9 48.9

1418

0.94 48.90 0.94 48.9

1509

0.94 0.94

48.9 48.9

1370

0.87 48.80 0.87 48.8

225

0.75 0.75

409

49 49

S. NO. Description 7

ID FAN B

Phase R Y B

Date

Time

10.1.07 12:04

Average

8

FD FAN A R Y B

9.1.07

18:15

Average

9

FD FAN B R Y B

9.1.07

18:33

Average

10

MILL A

R Y B

10.1.07 10:35

Average

11

MILL B

R Y B

10.1.07 10:52

Average

12

MILL C

R Y B Average

10.1.07 11:16

V

kV

6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

I

Amps

53.4 52.5 52.7 52.9 33.5 32.9 33.4 33.3 29.1 28.3 29.1 28.8 31.4 31.1 31.0 31.2 30.6 29.6 30.1 30.1 30.5 29.6 29.9 30.0

PF F

Hz

P

kW

0.78 48.90 0.78 48.90

460

0.86 48.90 0.86 48.90

320

0.85 48.90 0.85 48.90

274

0.78 49.10 0.78 49.1

273

0.78 48.90 0.78 48.9

263

0.77 49.00 0.77 49

260

Time

V

KV

12:09 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 18:20 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 18:38 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 10:40 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 10:57 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 11:21 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

TEST 1

I

Amps

53.1 52.1 52.4 52.5 33.7 33.2 33.6 33.5 28.9 28.2 28.8 28.7 31.4 30.7 30.9 31.0 30.2 29.6 29.8 29.8 30.7 29.6 30.0 30.1

PF F

kW

0.78 0.78

48.8 48.8

459

0.86 0.86

49.4 49.4

323

0.85 0.85

48.9 48.9

273

0.78 49.20 0.78 49.2

269

0.77 48.90 0.77 48.9

257

0.76 49.00 0.76 49

256

TEST 2

122

Hz P

Time

V

kV

12:14 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 18:25 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 18:43 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 10:45 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 11:02 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 11:26 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

I

Amps

52.9 51.9 52.3 52.4 33.1 32.5 33.0 32.9 29.0 28.1 28.9 28.6 31.9 31.3 31.5 31.6 30.3 29.6 29.9 29.9 30.8 29.7 30.2 30.2

PF F

Hz

P kW

0.78 0.78

48.8 48.8

457

0.86 0.86

49.1 49.1

315

0.85 0.85

48.5 48.5

273

0.78 49.00 0.78 49

276

0.77 48.90 0.77 48.9

258

0.77 49.20 0.77 49.2

261

TEST 3

S. NO. Description 13

MILL D

Phase R Y B

Date

Time

10.1.07 11:40

Average

14

MILL E

R Y B

12.1.07 16:00

Average

15

CWP A

R Y B

11.1.07 12:13

Average

16

CWP B

R Y B

11.1.07 12:24

Average

17

PA A

R Y B

9.1.07

17:57

Average

18

PA B

R Y B

9.1.07

17:37

Average

V

KV

I

6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

Amps

26.5 25.9 26.0 26.1 25.8 25.4 25.7 25.6 57.1 55.9 56.1 56.4 57.5 56.3 56.0 56.6 28.8 28.0 28.6 28.5 33.0 32.2 32.8 32.7

PF F

Hz

P

kW

Time 11:45

0.73 48.90 0.73 48.9

214 16:05

0.73 0.73

48.8 48.8

210 12:15

0.83 0.83

48.9 48.9

527 12:29

0.83 0.83

49 49

529 18:02

0.78 0.78

49.8 49.8

248 17:42

0.84 0.84

48.9 48.9

307

V

kV

I

6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

Amps

27.4 26.7 27.0 27.0 25.7 25.3 25.6 25.5 57.2 55.7 56.2 56.4 58.0 56.9 56.6 57.2 28.8 28.0 28.5 28.4 33.1 32.3 32.9 32.8

TEST 1 S. NO. Description

Phase

Date

Time

V

kV

I

Amps

PF

PF F

Hz

P

kW

0.74 49.00 0.74 49

224

0.72 48.80 0.72 48.8

207

0.83 0.83

48.9 48.9

527

0.83 0.83

49.1 49.1

534

0.78 0.78

48.9 48.9

247

0.84 0.84

49 49

308

Time

V

KV

I

Amps

11:26 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5 16:10 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5

27.2 26.5 26.8 26.8 25.8 25.4 25.6 25.6

18:07 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.4 17:47 6.5 6.4 6.5 6.5

28.8 28.2 28.5 28.5 33.2 32.4 33.1 32.9

TEST 2 F

Hz

P

kW

Time

123

V KV

I

Amps

PF

PF F

P

Hz

kW

0.74 49.00 0.74 49

222

0.73 48.90 0.73 48.9

210

0.78 0.78

48.8 48.8

248

0.84 0.84

49.1 49.1

310

TEST 3 F

Hz

P kW

Time

V kV

I

Amps

PF

F

Hz

P

kW

19

SA FAN 1 R Y B

10.1.07 13:05

Average

20

SA FAN 2 R Y B Average

10.1.07 15:30

0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

34.5 34.3 35.2 34.7 33.1 30.9 33.6 32.6

0.76 0.76

0.74 0.74

49 49

49 49

19

17

13:10 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 15:45 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

124

34.5 34.3 35.3 34.7 32.2 31.0 33.3 32.2

13:15 0.76 0.76

48.9 48.9

19 15:50

0.74 0.74

49 49

17

0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

34.8 34.6 35.5 35.0 33.1 31.0 33.3 32.5

0.77 0.77

49 49

19

0.73 0.73

49 49

17