Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Large coal-fired plants are being asked to perform in ways their original designers never
consideredsuch as routinely operating at part load. Remember, terms such as
"deregulation" and "merchant plant" weren't even in a designer's lexicon back when these
plants were on the drawing boards.
If your plant needs to "turn down" to meet part-load demands, but the control system is
limited to fixed-pressure operation and is just not up to the task, you may want to consider
retrofitting your plant to sliding-pressure operation.
Fixed-pressure operation means the pressure in the steam turbine is nominally fixed and
determined by the setpoint to the steam-turbine governor valves, even at part-load
conditions. During sliding-pressure operation, steam pressure in the turbine is determined
by actual process conditions in the boiler, the main-steam line, and the steam turbine.
Essentially, the steam turbine becomes just another pressure loss in the system.
Advantages of sliding-pressure operation include:
Higher reheat steam temperature at part load.
Higher high-pressure turbine internal efficiency at part load.
Faster step increases in load when loading rates are limited by material stresses in the
turbine.
Shorter startup times.
Greater operational flexibility at part loads.
Less boiler feedwater pumping power at part load.
Typically, plants are designed with a combination of fixed- and sliding-pressure operation;
some call this "modified sliding-pressure operation." The plant is operated under slidingpressure control for loads less than 95% maximum continuous rating (MCR), but engages
the throttle valves when operating above 95% load. When the load drops to, say, 40%, the
fixed-pressure controls reengage. The specific point typically is determined by heat-transfer
limitations on the fireside or minimum-pressure limitations on the waterside of the steam
generator.
Tohoku Electric Power Co (Sendai, Japan) recently completed sliding-pressure modifications
to a supercritical 600-MW unit, which enables the plant to control load from 100% down to
10%. The modifications required two 14-in. ANSI-class 2,500-lb boiler-throttle valves for
accurate steam-temperature control upstream of the high-pressure turbine inlet and two 8 x
6 ANSI-class 2,500-lb boiler-throttle bypass valves to control steam flow to the final
superheater and throttle pressure up to approximately 30% load. These Fisher
(Marshalltown, Iowa) valves were installed upstream of the primary superheater for
accurate temperature control. The cycle efficiency is enhanced because of the higher inlet
temperature into the high-pressure turbine, and the turbine outlet temperature is higher,
making it easier to control hot reheat temperatures. The modifications are expected to
improve the plant heat rate by at least 0.8%. Valve cost was $1 million.
6
Save to myPOWER
http://www.pow favorite
27946
The drivers may be different, but the destinationhigher efficiencyis the same
worldwide. As a primary component of current efforts to reduce the environmental
impact of burning low-cost coal, new and more-efficient steam plant designs are once
again being considered by the U.S. generation industry.
Even though current market conditions in the U.S. tend to favor diversification of
technologies and operating capabilities, the lowest-cost generating units will still be first
in line for dispatching. The present and expected makeup of regional generating fleets
in the U.S. generally indicate that any modern supercritical, coal-fired unit will have a
significant fuel cost advantage and could be dispatched at costs approaching those of
current nuclear plants.
Although seasonal and daily load reductions could be plausible in the long term, much
of any new supercritical coal-fired capacity will not be frequently shut down or
continually load-cycled. This is one major difference between the market conditions and
practices of the U.S. and Europe, and a main reason why it should not be assumed that
the pressure-control mode and technology prevalent in Europe should be embodied in
the bulk of new unit construction in the U.S.
To advance plant efficiencies to 40% (HHV) and beyond, supercritical steam conditions
(higher than 3,208 psia) are employed. Operation at these pressures, where there is no
phase distinction between liquid and vapor, requires unique steam generator design
features, most notably in furnace circuitry and components. Within this category of
steam generators, the design is also very much influenced by the intended operating
mode: constant pressure or sliding pressure (see box).
Beyond the apparent differences in component and construction design features, the
choice of mode has broader implications, for example, on overall furnace sizing
differences and materials options. These less-discussed differences can have a
noticeable impact on cost and can become even more significant as steam conditions
are gradually advanced toward ultra-supercritical conditions in pursuit of greater
efficiency and reduced emissions. Plant designers should factor these steam generator
design implications into their strategic planning and their development of specifications
for new plants to arrive at the most cost-effective generation portfolio for particular U.S.
and regional market environments.
graph
Constant pressure
Two-phase heat transfer crises are not encountered in furnaces maintained at
supercritical pressure, so constant-pressure operation allows greater flexibility and the
use of a conventional design. By employing furnace recirculation smoothly over the
entire operating range, low load does not dictate furnace design. As a result, a furnace
can be designed with:
A single upward pass with the same simple construction as a conventional drum
unit.
Beyond plumbing
In addition to incorporating these constructional differences, a sliding-pressure furnace
(evaporator system) must be sized to yield a greater outlet enthalpy (energy content of
steam), so it requires a greater heat duty and furnace size.
To illustrate this, Figure 5 compares the steam generator operating conditions and
trends on an enthalpy-pressure steam diagram. This steam property diagram is used to
trace the rising heat content (enthalpy) of the steam as it flows and loses pressure
through the boiler (the series of circled data markers and dashed lines at right).
Sliding-pressure operation during load reductions moves the furnace operation into the
subcritical, two-phase region at loads below 70% to 75% MCR. The nearly horizontal
dashed lines in Figure 5 indicate the trend of furnace inlet and outlet conditions over the
load range. To accommodate the two-phase boiling condition of steam, there are
specific steamside conditions that must be fulfilled at the minimum once-through load,
and so it is sometimes low loadrather than full loadthat determines the heat duty
and size of the furnace or evaporator system. Those conditions are:
A visible difference
Is it worth it?
Can the additional capital investment in a sliding-pressure plant be recovered by
operating cost advantages in the U.S. market? With uncertainty about long-range load
dispatching, the efficiency of new plants at low loads becomes important for considering
a plants payback of capital and, indeed, for dispatch competition. Many people have
been under the impression that sliding-pressure units offer better efficiency (lower heat
rate) than constant-pressure units at reduced loads. The extent to which this is true
depends greatly on the turbine control mode, and so a closer review of heat rate
differentials is in order.
Though old, throttle-control turbines at constant pressure indeed suffer in efficiency at
part loads, comparative data from turbine manufacturers indicate that modern, nozzlecontrol turbines at constant pressure have nearly the same efficiency as at sliding
pressure across the load range. This is mainly due to the sequential use of the turbine
admission valves, and at several loads (the "valve best points") the remaining valves
are fully open and there is negligible throttling loss before the first turbine stage.
Using differential heat rate data from turbine manufacturers, heat rates were evaluated
for both constant- and sliding-pressure systems, with both throttle and nozzle control.
Plant operating costs were evaluated at all loads for each turbine control mode using a
detailed economic model including fuel, reagent, and emissions costs according to
typical U.S. conditions.
Even assuming a nightly load reduction to 35% to 80% every night over an entire 20year evaluation period, the present value of the difference in operating costs is
calculated to be only $0.5 million for PRB coal firing and less than $1 million for highsulfur bituminous coal firing of a modern 650-MW unit with nozzle control. As Figure 8
makes clear, the present value of 20 years of operating cost savings is not nearly
enough to justify the additional $6 million to $7 million capital investment required for
the sliding-pressure steam generator. Meanwhile, the sliding-pressure turbine cost
savings are reportedly estimated to be on the order of $0.5 million and would be partly
offset by any additional feedwater heater and steam generator costs to handle sliding
pressure and any associated load and pressure cycling.
entirely different, moving from the peaking role into the baseload and average-load
roles.
Regarding start-up, it should be noted that not all of the start-up systems and features
employed on modern generating units around the world are inherently or exclusively
applicable to sliding-pressure operation, and the expense of once-through slidingpressure steam generators need not be assumed to gain such features. The Riley Power
recirculating units in operation since 1970 already prove the successful application of
recirculation to facilitate start-up of a constant-pressure supercritical unit. For the future
generation of coal-fired plants in the U.S., other modern start-up features can be
developed and integrated with appropriate plant designs for the range of expected
domestic needs, for both constant- and sliding-pressure applications.