Power Plant Thermodynamic

Performance Monitoring

National Energy Efficiency Conference

September 2012

Agenda

• Performance Monitoring Objective

• Performance Monitoring Methodology

• Examples of Issues Identified

• Case Studies

• Experience Establishing a PM Program

• Alignment to ISO 50001 EMS

Introduction of Tuas Power

• 2 x 600 MW oil fired

steam plants, Unit 1 &

2

• Mar & Dec 99

• 2 x 367.5 MW gas fired combined cycle plants, CCP 1 & 2

• Nov 01 & Jan 02

• 2 x 367.5 MW gas fired combined cycle plants, CCP 3 & 4

• Jul 05 & Sep 05

Installed capacity - 2,670 MW

• Facilitate Operational Adjustments and

Corrective Maintenance to ensure plant

operates at optimum thermal efficiency

• As fuel is a substantial part of power generation

cost, small gains in thermal efficiency could

achieve significant fuel savings

• Enable advance maintenance planning to

restore degraded performance of plant

components

Performance Monitoring Objective

Performance Monitoring Objective

Singapore 2009 Primary Fuel and Electricity Consumption

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Primary HC Fuel Electricity Cons

Kil

o T

on

s O

il E

qu

ivale

nt

Others

Domestic

Commerce

Industry

Transport

Industry, Commerce,

HouseholdsPower Plants

Performance Monitoring Objective

• Proactively identifying the plant sections that

have degraded performance

• Quantifying the degradations in terms of effect

on overall plant efficiency

• Enabling a condition based predictive

maintenance program to set and prioritize

maintenance activities that will minimize

degradation and hence maximize efficiency

Performance Monitoring Objective

Actual and Potential Efficiency Improvement

49.600%

49.800%

50.000%

50.200%

50.400%

50.600%

50.800%

GT Compressor Fouling 0.051% 0.150% 0.320% 0.423% 0.030%

BFP Inefficiency 0.012% 0.020% 0.025% 0.026% 0.026%

LP Bypass 0.300% 0.320% 0.288% 0.310% 0.310%

HP Bypass 0.150% 0.150% 0.150% 0.150% 0.150%

Condenser Fouling 0.085% 0.092% 0.224% 0.225% 0.225%

IAF Pressure Drop 0.005% 0.022% 0.033% 0.054% 0.054%

Actual Efficiency 50.300% 50.100% 49.800% 49.700% 50.040%

Nov 06 Dec 06 Jan 07 Feb 07 Mar 07

GT Compr

Cold Wash

Note : Figures in this chart are fictitious to maintain data confidentiality

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Modeling Application

To make a Complete Heat and Mass

Balance

Establishing current performance level of

individual components and total system

Establishing the benchmark for the

individual component and for total system

Set targets for improvement/maintenance

Performance Monitoring Methodology

HRSG

HRSG Effectiveness

Duty of individual heat

transfer components

Steam Turbine

HP Turbine Power

IP Turbine Power

LP Turbine Power

HP/IP/LP Turbine Eff

Condenser

Condenser Water Flow

Condenser Duty

Condenser effectiveness

Auxiliaries

CWP Performance

BFP Performance

CEP Performance

Distribution Valve passing

Line Loss

GT GT Power Generation

GT Comp Eff.

GT Turbine Eff

GT Heat rate

IAF performance

CCP Power Station

Performance Monitoring Methodology

HPSH2

RHTR2

RHTR1 HPSH1 HPEVAP HPECO2 IPSHTR LPSHTR IPEVAP

IPECO2

HPECO1

LPEVAP HPECO0 IPECO1 LPECO FWPRHT

SP1 M1 M2SP2

HPST

IPST

M3

M4

RHDSH

HPSDSH

SP3

PI1

PI2

GTCOMP

GTCOMB

GTTURB

INLFLT

SSGEN

CONDSR

MAKEUP

M5

GLNDCN

DEAER

SP4

169298

GT Power kW

109848

ST Power kW

PUMP1

BFWHDR

HPBFWP

LPBFWP

IPBFWP

SP5

SP6

278.91

Gross Generator Output MW

LPST

M6

DUCT1

PI3

HPBYPS

V1

V2

GTEXH

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5S6 S7 S8

S9 S10 S11 S12

S13

S14

S15

S16

S17 S18 S19 S20 S21STACK

COND

DFW

LPBFW

S22

S23

S26

IPBFW

S27

S28

S29

HPSTOT

LPSHPS

IPS

S24

S25

RHTRS

HPBFW

S30S31

S32S33

S34

S35

S36

LPSTOT

HPBFW1

HPBFW2

S37

S39S40

AIR COMPIN

CMPDSC TURBIN

FUELGS

S41

S42

S43

LPDEAR

S44S45S46

S47

S49

BFWSPP

S50

S51

S52

S53

S54

S55

S48

S56

S57 S58

CWS

CWR

S59

GLNSTM

HPBPSS

S38

S60

Performance Monitoring Methodology

• Complete quantification of all streams in a power

plant eg flue gas, cooling water, steam and fuel

flows

• Establish the present performance level of the

individual equipment eg efficiency, heat transfer

coefficients, leakages

• Enables data validation

– Measured values can be compared against the heat

balance output for validating the accuracy of

measurement.

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Modeling Application

To make a Complete Heat and Mass

Balance

Establishing current performance level of

individual components and total system

Establishing the benchmark for the

individual component and for total system

Set targets for improvement/maintenance

Performance Monitoring Methodology

Each piece of equipment modeled separately to match guaranteed data,

then read by overall model

GT

HPSHT HPEVAP HPECONDUCT

DEAER

CONDEN

CONDST

CNDPMP

HPPUMP

CNDMIX

MAKEUP

S1 S2

S3

S4

S5 S6

S7EXH

S8

S9

S10

S11

S12

S13

S14

S15

GT

uses curves or

spreadsheet data

HRSG matches

HRSG vendor

COND matches

HEI/condenser ST model

matches ST vendor

Performance Monitoring Methodology

• Construct software models of the plant components tuned

to design performance

• New & Clean performance is the benchmark

Inputs Benchmark

Gas Turbine Ambient Temp, Press,

Load

Heatrate

HRSG GT Exh Flow, Temp HP, IP, LP steam

Stack Temp

Steam Turbine HPS Flow, Temp, Press,

IPS Flow, Temp, Press,

Condenser Press

HP, IP, LP section sliding

Press, Power, Efficiency

Condenser LPST Exh Flow, Enthalpy,

Cooling Water Flow, Temp

Vacuum

Examples of Issues Identified

• Lost of efficiency after MI due to IGV reprogramming

• Boiler Feed Pump minimum flow recycle valve passing

• Identification of Passing HPST Bypass Valve

• FW Preheater Bypass Valve passing

• Selection of Optimum Inlet Air Filter

• Condenser Cooling Water Optimization

• Condenser Cooling Water Debris Filter Choke

• HPST Bypass Spray Valve Passing

• HRSG HP and RH Spray Valve Passing

• Condenser Air Ingress

• Condenser Tube Fouling

Case Study : FW Preheater Bypass

Flue Gas Inlet Flue Gas to StackF

ee

d w

ate

r

Pre

he

ate

r

E-3

Condensate

Extraction PumpPreheated Water

To Deaerator

V-1

Bypass

Valve

Passing Valve

Case Study : FW Preheater Bypass

Stack temp Vs Feedwater Preheater Temperature

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1-Jan-05

15-Jan-05

29-Jan-05

12-Feb-05

26-Feb-05

12-Mar-05

26-Mar-05

9-Apr-05

23-Apr-05

7-May-05

21-May-05

4-Jun-05

18-Jun-05

2-Jul-05

16-Jul-05

30-Jul-05

13-Aug-05

27-Aug-05

10-Sep-05

24-Sep-05

8-Oct-05

22-Oct-05

5-Nov-05

19-Nov-05

3-Dec-05

17-Dec-05

31-Dec-05

Stack T

Feedwater Preheater T

Valve Repaired

(Actual) / (New and Clean Performance)

Case Study : Cond Debris Filter Choke

Condenser

Cooling Water A Side

Cooling Water Out

LPST Exhaust

(steam water mixture)

Condensate

(saturated water)

Cooling Water B Side

Cooling Water B Side

Debris Filter Choke

Debris

Filter

Condenser Cooling Water Flow (T/H)

Debris Filter

Repaired

• Condenser cooling water flow dropped in June 2011 and it is because B

side water path was choked.

• Transmission shaft gear of debris filter was replaced with a new one during

July 2011 shutdown. Condenser cooling water flow resumed back.

Case Study : Cond Debris Filter Choke

• Condenser performance was very poor in Q1 and Q2 2007 (Condenser

Pressure ACT/NC is very high). It was then found out that the vacuum pump

sealing strainer was clogged and the pump was running with less sealing

water. After it is rectified, the Condenser performance has improved

significantly.

Case Study : Condenser Air Ingress

Condenser Press ACT/NC

Condenser

Air Ingress

Solved

Experience Establishing a PM Program

• 2003 engaged ACTSYS for thermodynamic analysis of

MHI GT performance

• 2004 – Present, annual Performance Monitoring contract

with ACTSYS on all CCPs

• Quarterly reporting and presentations, review

performance gaps and required corrective actions

• Involvement of Maintenance, Equipment specialists,

Instrumentation, Operations

• Close working relationship where ACTSYS engineers

track plant performance and correlates findings to

operational and maintenance events

Experience Establishing a PM Program

Operations &

Maintenance Presentation & Discussion of Results

Plant

Data

Reports

Discussion Points

Plant Info System

Data Reconciliation Heat Balances

Performance Models

Plant

Data

Theoretical Analysis &

Interpretation

Decision Support

Alignment to ISO 50001 EMS

TP Mgmt provides the framework for setting and

reviewing energy objectives and targets

Allocating resources and setting up of a

methodology for analyzing energy usage

Operating and maintaining systems and

equipment, in accordance with operational

criteria

For all Energy Performance Indicators review

non-conformities => check Actual versus “New

& Clean”

Determining and implementing the appropriate

action needed

Quarterly Performance

Review Meetings

ISO 50001 EMS Implemented PM System

Thank you

GT

SH

AF

T P

OW

ER

(3

4.2

3%

)

INLET AIR (1.45%)

HP STEAM (34.39%)

HP

TU

RB

PO

WE

R (

2.1

8%

)

LP TURB POWER (10.87%)

CONDENSER LOSS 33.53%

SHAFT POWER

IP TURB POWER (6.68%)

AU

XIL

IAR

Y P

OW

ER

(0

.22

%)

ROTOR COOLING LOSS (2.09%)

COMBUSTOR LOSS (0.49%)

CO

MP

RE

SS

OR

WO

RK

(…

.% o

f G

T

Sh

aft

Po

we

r)

FUEL S

ENSIB

LE HEAT

1.00%

DUCT L

OSS (0

.35%

)

RADIATION LOSS

(0.34%)

PIPE L

OSS (0

.08%

)

LP STEAM (4.03%)STACK LOSS (8.97%)

IP STEAM (8.6%)

CHEMICAL

ENERGY

(97.32%)

RADIATION LOSS (0.06%)

RA

DIA

TIO

N L

OS

S

(0.0

9%)

RA

DIA

TIO

N L

OS

S

(0.0

4%)