Implementing

Sliding Pressure Operation

A Study in Benefits, Challenges, Design and Tuning

Presented by
Don Parker
Provecta Process Automation

Greg Alder
Scientech
August 2015

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 1

 Overview
 Historical Setting:
 Many base-load drum boilers in 70-90s were designed for
 fixed pressure,

 normal operation range 80-100%.

 The changing operating scene:

 Life extension
 Unregulated renewables
 Economic imperatives:
 Wider range operation

 Fuel cost reduction

 CO2 reduction

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 2

 Energy Market Challenges –
Pressures on Capacity and Performance

 Wider, more flexible

operation
 Faster Ramping
 Improved efficiency
at low load

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 3

 Range and Performance Changes:
4x500MW Station (Australia)

Mill auto-
bias

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 4

 Sliding pressure

Steam
Pressure

TV Posn
100%

100%

Steam Flow

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 5

 Why Sliding Pressure?
 Benefits in Unit Heat Rate at low load
 Reduced turbine throttling losses (wider valve
opening)
 Reduced Feed Pump Power
 Improved Hot RH temperature attainability

 Reduced Turbine inlet temperature

variations on load changes

 Economic benefits:
 Fuel costs reduced
 CO2 emissions reduced

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 6

 The Challenges
 How do I quantify the benefits?
 How do I optimise the pressure curve?
 What are the potential downsides?
 Fast ramping  Increased drum saturation temperature
changes
 Greater fuel input variations – impacts on combustion
and pulverizers
 How is the control system changed to:
 Calculate additional fuel input requirements during
ramps
 Minimise pressure overshoot/undershoot
 Minimise steam temperature deviations from fuel/steam
flow imbalances during ramps

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 7

 A Complete Solution

Known PEPSE Benefit Controls

Potential Scenario Determination Implementation
Efficiency Modelling and Tuning
Improvement
Areas

UTILIZING:
Scientech’s Scientech’s Cost model Provecta’s wide
wide industry deep knowledge (Client); controls
experience and capability Calculations experience
(Scientech)

16/09/2015 8
 1. Quantifying the Benefits
 PEPSE model example
 550MW gross, drum boiler, fixed pressure
 Fixed and sliding pressure comparisons at half load
 Two pump models applied: Electric and steam-driven
 Two Hot RH temperature scenarios for 50%, fixed pressure
 No temperature loss (ie full HRH temperature at 50%)
 30 Deg F temperature loss (and recovery in sliding pressure)
 Six 50% scenarios run:

Model HRH temp Fixed Sliding

loss at 50%? Pressure Pressure
Elec MBFPs Y  N/A
Elec MBFPs N  
Steam MBFPs Y  N/A
Steam MBFPs N  

16/09/2015 9
16/09/2015 10
16/09/2015 11
16/09/2015 12
16/09/2015 13
 1. Quantifying the Benefits
 Outcomes: Turbine Net Cycle Efficiency at Half Load
 Case 1: Fixed Pressure HRH Steam Temp 970°F
 Case 2: Fixed Pressure HRH Steam Temp 1000°F
 Both cases: Sliding Pressure HRH Steam Temp 1000°F

MBFP Case Fixed Prs Sld Prs % Improvement Net Heat rate
Model improvement
1 39.88 2.00 168.4 B/kWh
Electric 40.68
2 40.09 1.47 123.1
1 40.19 1.52 128.4
Steam 40.80
2 40.40 0.99 83.86

16/09/2015 14
 1. Quantifying the Benefits
 Cost Benefits
 Based on typical fuel costs $2.27/MMBTU

MBFP Case Net Heat rate Saving/hr Sav per unit per
Model improvement 298MW year @ 4h/day
low load (*.85)
1 168.4 B/kWh $114 $140k
Electric
2 123.1 $83 $80k
1 128.4 $87 $85k
Steam
2 83.86 $57 $55k

16/09/2015 15
 2. Optimising the Sliding Pressure Curve
 PEPSE can quantify all scenarios

 Required load change rate will determine drum metal

temperature change rate for any given pressure
profile.

 Sliding pressure setpoint will be lagged:

 To reflect boiler milling/heat release delay and steam energy
storage delay.
 Delayed pressure setpoint also minimises temperature
deviations.
 Ensure delayed pressure setpoint curve does not cause
turbine governor to reach maximum at fastest ramp rate.

16/09/2015 16
 3. Modifying the Controls
 Main areas affected
 Boiler Demand (dynamic feedforward; pressure controller)
 Pressure setpoint
 Steam temperature (gain adaption and feedforwards)

 Design changes

 Response analysis tests

 Simulation and tuning

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 17

 Unit Coordinated Mode (BF+MW)
Unit
AGC Pressure
Demand
SP
Overfiring +
+ + + PI
O2 Trim + PID _
_

P
F
FUEL MW

MILLS
TV
SUPERHEATER
Boiler

AIR

FEEDWATER

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 18

Load changes in Fixed and Sliding Pressure (simulations)

180 180
Press Bar
160 MW%
160
Gov Posn %
Press Bar MWD
140 140
MW% Coord Mode Fuel Flow% Coord Mode
Gov Posn % Load Ramp (Sliding Pressure)
120 120 New P-SP
MWD Basic P-SP
100 Fuel Flow% 100
New P-SP
80 Basic P-SP 80

60 60

40 40

20 20
2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 19

 Design Basis: 2-DOF Controller
 A 2-Degree-of-Freedom structure provides control
parameters to independently manipulate both
setpoint and disturbance responses.
 Simpler structures do not model the expected
process response into the setpoint, nor provide
model-based feedforward dynamics.
Tuned for load changing

Tuned for disturbances

16/09/2015 20
 Model-based Sliding Pressure Control
 Simulation results showing the effect on pressure
response (light blue) when
 a feedforward to fuel (green) is added to the fuel demand and
 the pressure setpoint is passed through a second order lag.
10 10

8
8

6
6

5
4

3
2

0 1

-2 -1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Basic control structure (left) and 2-DOF structure (right).

16/09/2015 21
 Pressure Setpoint (Response Model) Dynamics
 Simplified pressure model:

Turbine CV
X
position

Steam flow

Fuel Steam Pressure

Demand PT 3 LAG I
Integ.
Grinding and Boiler energy storage
Heat release delay

 Field Data:

Step change in fuel flow (CV fixed) Step change in Throttle Valve position

16/09/2015 22
 Pressure Setpoint Formation
 The sliding pressure setpoint is dynamically modified
to minimise:
 Pressure controller over-correction
 Steam temperature disturbances.

 Three setpoint model components:

 Initial pressure change as governor moves before fuel has any
impact on steam production (pressure direction reversal)
 Delay to pressure changes due to energy storage in metal and
waterwalls as the saturation temperature changes
 Delay in heat input from the additional fuel due to milling,
combustion and heat transfer processes

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 23

 Pressure Setpoint Formation
 Model-based pressure setpoint
Governor-movement
pressure response model

Calculated F(t)
Dyn
CV Posn

Adapt

Unit Load Rate F(t) P-SP

F(x) High order
Demand Lim

Energy + Inertial
Storage Delay
Model Model

 Identification tools used to determine parameters

 Need to ensure sufficient throttle valve ‘headroom”
for fastest ramp rate.

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 24

 System Identification: Boiler Energy Storage

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 25

 MW AGC or Local
Demand

Syst. Freq.
Tracking

Unit Master Droop F(x)

Transfer signals

w ith DB

Modifications < Capability

Gross MW MSP

 Add static Setpoint

curve F(t)
ULD
F(x) F(t)

Press-SP Delay model

 Delay P-SP
∆ MSP
F(x)
 (model based) Decoupling a
and relief b
 Add overfiring transient PID
a/b

component PID
Dyn Dyn ULD

MW trim **

storage
Calc CV demand compensat'n
feedfwd

delay compensation
feedfwd
<>

Turbine Fuel/Air
Dem and ** Dyn - adaptive transient overfiring Dem and

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 26

 Tuning
 Pressure-ramp tuning – overfiring calibration
 Initial settings from energy storage models
 Set procedures followed to optimise

 Load-ramp tuning – dynamic setpoint calibration

 Low/mid/high range ramps
 Load-based adjustments around model data

 Steam temperature – attemperator outlet temperature

setpoint feedforward calibration
 Based on steam/fuel dynamic mismatch
 Iterative: spray flow affects pressure response

16/09/2015 27
 Load ramping

Turbine
Main Steam
SH and RH Master
Pressure and SP
Temps

Overfiring signals

Fuel Demand

16/09/2015 Scientech Plant Performance Users’ Group Symposium August 2015 28

 Conclusion
 Low load operation is expected to become more
prevalent as renewable penetration increases.

 PEPSE has shown Sliding Pressure can provide

significant
 Cost savings
 CO2 reduction
 Reduction in turbine inlet thermal cycling.

 Model-based DCS design provides fast ramping with

minimal disturbances.

 Use of advanced identification and tuning tools

minimises optimisation time.
16/09/2015 29