January 2015 by Energy-Tech Magazine

Ins and outs of HEP systems 5 • Vibration monitoring 13 • Training Tips 21

ENERGY-TECH

JANUARY 2015

A WoodwardBizMedia Publication

www.energy-tech.com

Dedicated to the Engineering, Operations & Maintenance of Electric Power Plants In Association with the ASME Power Division

Automating HRSG water and steam controls

G E N E R AT E NEW ideas.

NEW

connections.

NEW

opportunities.

ird Early B ds Rate en — Save 0 3 . n a J $300!

NEW resources.

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, USA

www.electricpowerexpo.com

ENERGYT ECH P.O. Box 388 • Dubuque, IA 52004-0388 800.977.0474 • Fax: 563.588.3848 Email: sales@WoodwardBizMedia.com www.energy-tech.com Energy-Tech (ISSN# 2330-0191) is published monthly in print and digital format except in January and July, when it is published in digital format only by WoodwardBizMedia, a division of Woodward Communications, Inc. WoodwardBizMedia assumes no responsibility for inaccuracies, errors or advertising content. Entire contents © 2015 WoodwardBizMedia. All rights reserved; reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Printed in the U.S.A. Group Publisher Karen Ruden – kruden@WoodwardBizMedia.com General Manager Randy Rodgers – randy.rodgers@woodwardbizmedia.com Managing Editor Andrea Hauser – ahauser@WoodwardBizMedia.com Editorial Board (editorial@WoodwardBizMedia.com) Bill Moore – Director, Technical Service, National Electric Coil Ram Madugula – Executive Vice President, Power Engineers Collaborative, LLC Kuda Mutama – Engineering Manager, TS Power Plant Editorial views expressed within do not necessarily reflect those of Energy-Tech magazine or WoodwardBizMedia. Advertising Sales Executives Tim Koehler – tkoehler@WoodwardBizMedia.com Joan Gross – jgross@WoodwardBizMedia.com Thea Somers – thea.somers@WoodwardBizMedia.com Creative/Production Manager Hobie Wood – hwood@WoodwardBizMedia.com Graphic Artist Valerie Vorwald – vvorwald@WoodwardBizMedia.com Address Correction Postmaster: Send address correction to: Energy-Tech, P.O. Box 388, Dubuque, IA 52004-0388 Subscription Information Energy-Tech is mailed free to all qualified requesters. To subscribe, go to www.energy-tech.com or contact Linda Flannery at circulation@WoodwardBizMedia.com Media Information For media kits, contact Energy-Tech at 800.977.0474, www.energy-tech.com or sales@WoodwardBizMedia.com. Editorial Submission Send press releases to: Editorial Dept., Energy-Tech, P.O. Box 388, Dubuque, IA 52004-0388 Ph 563.588.3857 • Fax 563.588.3848 email: editorial@WoodwardBizMedia.com. Advertising Submission Send advertising submissions to: Energy-Tech, 801 Bluff Street, Dubuque, Iowa 52001 E-mail: ETart@WoodwardBizMedia.com.

FEAtUrEs

The ins and outs of high-energy piping systems By John Arnold, Niantic Bay Engineering, and Marshal Clark, Investigative Engineering Corp.

HRSG water/steam chemistry control: Automating the process By Brad Buecker, Energy-Tech contributor

CoLUMNs

Maintenance Matters

Vibration monitoring considerations in high EMI environments By Shalvi Desai and Renard Klubnik, Meggit Sensing Systems

Training Tips

Programmed instruction By Harold Parker, HPC Technical Services

AsME FEAtUrE

Justification for long-distance transmission By Nathan Smith, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Alex Pavlak, Future of Energy Initiative

iNdUstrY NotEs

4 23 24

Editor’s Note and Calendar Advertisers’ Index Energy-Tech Showcase

oN tHE WEB Do you Facebook? Like Energy-Tech’s Facebook page! If you’re LinkedIn, you can join us there too. And if Twitter is more your style, see what we’ve tweeted lately and follow along.

A division of Woodward Communications, Inc.

JANUARY 2015

ENERGY-TECH.com

Editor’s Note

What to expect in 2015 Exciting changes, consistent quality from Energy-Tech January seems to come faster every year and it’s hard to believe that this year marks my eighth as the managing editor for Energy-Tech magazine. Time really does fly when you’re having fun. As we go into the New Year, here’s a Top 5 list of things to look forward to from Energy-Tech magazine. 1. Continued digital growth – Whether you’re visiting our website, Facebook page, LinkedIn group or Twitter, Energy-Tech’s digital presence is growing and will get even stronger in the coming year. If you haven’t “Liked” us on Facebook yet, joined our LinkedIn group or started following us on Twitter, please do today.You’ll be glad you did. 2. Technical expertise from trustworthy contributors – Energy-Tech’s contributors are recognized experts in the industry and we will continue to highlight their projects and advice throughout the coming year. Do you have a particular question or topic you’d like to see addressed? Please let us know by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com. Our contributors love to answer reader questions and help solve problems. 3. New voices in the magazine – In addition to the columnist and contributors you trust, Energy-Tech will continue bringing new voices into the magazine. A great example of this is in this month’s ASME article, Justification for long-distance transmission, by Nathan Smith from the University of Maryland, and Alex Pavlak. Smith won ASME’s inaugural student paper competition this year and we’re excited to share his work with you. 4. Online learning opportunities – Energy-Tech’s webinar learning opportunities will continue in 2015, so keep an eye out for emails about upcoming course opportunities. And again, let us know if there are any topics you would like to see specifically addressed. These have grown in popularity since we began and we want to make sure we’re giving our attendees the information they need – so let us know! 5. Strong relationship with the ASME Power Division – We include their articles in every issue of the magazine and many of their members have become regular contributors to Energy-Tech in the past few years. This is a partnership we will continue to develop, and we hope you’ll join us.

CALENDAR Feb. 16-20, 2015 Introduction to Machinery Vibrations (IMV) Tempe, Ariz. www.vi-institute.org March 23-27, 2015 Basic Machinery Vibrations (BMV) Knoxville, Tenn. www.vi-institute.org April 21-23, 2015 Electric Power Conference & Exhibition Rosemont, IL www.electricpowerexpo.com May 11-15, 2015 Advanced Vibration Analysis (AVA) Houston, Texas www.vi-institute.org June 15-19, 2015 Rotor Dynamics and Modeling (RDM) Syria, Va. www.vi-institute.org June 28-July 2, 2015 ASME Power & Energy 2015 San Diego, Calif. www.asmeconferences.org/powerenergy2015 Sept. 21-25, 2015 Machinery Vibration Analysis (MVA) Salem, Mass. www.vi-institute.org Oct. 12-16, 2015 Balancing of Rotating Machinery (BRM) Knoxville, Tenn. www.vi-institute.org Nov. 30-Dec. 4, 2015 Advanced Vibration Control (AVC) Houston, Texas www.vi-institute.org

Submit your events by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

I’m looking forward to what the coming year has in store – I hope you are too and that we have a chance to meet you, whether at a conference, through a webinar or even via email. In the meantime, thanks for reading.

Andrea Hauser 4 ENERGY-TECH.com

JANUARY 2015

FEATURES

The ins and outs of high-energy piping systems By John Arnold, Niantic Bay Engineering, and Marshal Clark, Investigative Engineering Corp.

Historically, high-energy piping (HEP) system assessments in fossil-fuel power plants were performed to satisfy a utility or plant-driven desire to avoid failures and achieve industry-common goals of safe and reliable operation. The assessments would support this through the timely detection of service-related damage. While some insurance carriers might have fostered such activities, jurisdictional mandates generally were not applied to piping condition assessment activities. This is a significant deviation from the nuclear power industry, where in-service inspection is a common activity in operating plants. The publication of the 2007 Addenda of the ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code closed the gap between the power industries by requiring a program for the in-service assessment of selected (or “covered”) piping systems designed and built to that edition of B31.1, or later. This article is intended to provide an overview of these requirements and an understanding of the more common damage mechanisms that are required to be addressed, as well as an additional concern for owners of more modern plants containing Grade 91 steels.

High-energy piping systems The phrase “high-energy piping (HEP) system” is a generic description of piping that operates at elevated temperatures and pressures. There is no defined threshold for “high-energy” or “elevated,” and the definition of an HEP system can vary from plant to plant. In general, the classification is applied to those systems where there is concern about component failure and the potential for personnel safety and consequential damage. For conventional power plants, these systems include the main steam piping, hot reheat piping and cold reheat piping. Sometimes boiler components such as outlet headers and boiler external piping are added to the mix, as are feedwater piping systems. Combined-cycle plants typically lump the high pressure steam, hot reheat, cold reheat and low pressure steam systems into their definition. Combined-cycle plants also might include boiler (HRSG) components and feedwater systems into their definition. HEP systems operate at conditions where a number of damage mechanisms might be active, causing wall thinning, cracking and/or degraded material properties. To avoid failures, the timely detection of service-related damage due to these mechanisms is necessary. Detection is possible through a regimen of complimentary nondestructive examination inspection and metallurgical evaluation tools that target system and component-specific manifestations of damage. Due to the complexities associated with material performance, and the routine variations in plant operation, these assessments must consider

all potential damage mechanisms and modes when determining the appropriate examination approach.

Regulatory requirements Generally HEP systems are designed and fabricated in accordance with the requirements of ASME B31.1, Power Piping[1]. Historically these construction codes have not included requirements for the operation and maintenance of the piping systems; but following the catastrophic failures of longitudinally seam welded hot reheat piping at the Sabine (1979), Mohave (1985) and Monroe (1986) Stations, requirements were added. Initially the 1989 edition of B31.1 added non-mandatory Appendix V to provide recommendations for plant practices to achieve both reliable service and a predictable life in the operation of power piping systems. Finally, in the 2007 addenda of B31.1 the new Chapter VII, was added to the main body of the document. This chapter, while limited in scope, established a requirement for the

Applications: • Steam pressure vessels • Hot water heaters • Demineralizers • Steam humidifiers • Water purifiers • Refrigeration units • Liquid treatment vessels

• Compressed air tanks • Filtering units • Dryer cans in paper mills • Water towers • Water softeners • Deaerators • Make-up tanks

The Topog-E Gasket Company produces gaskets to fit every boiler in production today. Topog-E® Series 180 molded rubber gaskets are special for many reasons. Over forty years as the industry standard have given us feedback as to why!

1224 North Utica | Tulsa, OK 74110 T: 918-587-6649 | E: info@topog-e.com W: www.topog-e.com

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

FEATURES issuance of written operation and maintenance procedures for Covered Piping Systems (CPS)[2]. The CPS category includes NPS 4 and larger main steam, hot reheat steam, cold reheat steam and boiler feedwater piping systems. In addition, CPS also included NPS 4 and larger piping in other systems that operate above 750°F (400°C) or above 1,025 psi (7,100 kPa). CPS isn’t limited to those systems, other piping systems can be included if the utility determines that the system is hazardous based on an engineering evaluation of probability and consequence of failure. These requirements are only needed for power piping systems constructed to the 2007 addenda or later. However, insurance providers are encouraging their clients to develop written operating and maintenance procedures for CPS constructed to earlier editions of the code. In the future it is plausible that the National Board Inspection Code also will adopt requirements for operation and maintenance procedures for CPS.

Program requirements For CPS, B31.1 requires operation and maintenance procedures intended to ensure safe operation. The following items are required to be included in those procedures: 1. Operating procedures for the piping systems in accordance with design limits 2. Operating hours and modes of operation (i.e. cycles) 3. Actual operating temperatures and pressures 4. Documentation of significant transients or excursions (both pressure and temperature) 5. Details on piping system modifications, repairs or replacements 6. Documentation on pipe support maintenance (only for systems operating in the creep regime) 7. Documentation of piping system maintenance, including vents, drains, valves, desuperheaters, etc. 8. Identification of active damage mechanisms, including creep, fatigue, graphitization, corrosion, erosion and flow accelerated corrosion (FAC) 9. Fluid quality (i.e. dissolved oxygen content, pH) 10. Documentation of the Condition Assessment (as described in B31.1 Paragraph 140) The B31.1 Condition Assessment Program is intended to assess and document the condition of CPS based on assessments performed at periodic intervals as determined by an engineering evaluation. The extent of the assessment is not specified, but will be based on established industry practices. The assessment efforts may range from a review of previous inspection and operating history to a thorough nondestructive examination and engineering evaluation, and the documentation is required to include the following: 1. System name 2. Original material specification, including date/edition 3. Design and actual pipe dimensions 4. Design operating temperature and pressure 5. Normal operating temperature and pressure

6 ENERGY-TECH.com

6. Operating hours (both total and since the prior condition assessment) 7. Operation modes since last condition assessment (number and type of cycles) 8. Pipe support walkdown data (only for systems operating in the creep regime) 9. Modifications and repairs 10. Information on transient events 11. Summary of inspection findings 12. Recommendations for re-inspection interval and scope Supporting information for these programs is provided in B31.1 Nonmandatory Appendix V.

Common damage mechanisms The damage mechanisms listed in the CPS operation and maintenance procedures are dependent on temperature and pressure. The main steam, hot reheat steam and some extraction steam lines operate at temperatures where time-dependent properties apply and creep damage is expected. The boiler feedwater systems are susceptible to flow-accelerated corrosion, and while steam-bearing systems like the cold reheat piping might not normally be subject to creep, they can be susceptible to thermal fatigue cracking. While exceptions are often found, the following summary can be applied for the damage mechanisms specified in B31.1: • Creep (stress rupture) and creep fatigue: Because creep is a time-dependent damage mechanism, as a unit ages, the likelihood of creep related failures increases. Of greatest concern is the potential for a failure in longitudinally seam welded components, since these failures might be catastrophic and result in the release of large quantities of steam. Historically, creep failures at circumferential welds have occurred at welds subject to considerable bending stress, concentrating the damage to one side of the pipe and promoting a leak-before-failure event. When creep accumulates at welds that are not subject to high bending stresses, the damage is expected to be more uniform around the circumference and the risk for a guillotine type failure increases, especially in association with a major transient event such as water/steam hammer. • Fatigue: Fatigue is the phenomenon leading to fracture under repeated or fluctuating stresses that are less than the tensile strength of a material and include corrosion fatigue, thermal fatigue and mechanical fatigue. Examples of different forms of fatigue and their affect on HEP systems include: • Mechanical fatigue might occur where flow induced or mechanically induced vibration is present. • Corrosion fatigue is common in many fossil boilers, but has only rarely occurred in HEP. A catastrophic failure of the cold reheat piping at Texas Genco’s W.A. Parish Unit 8 was attributed in part to the occurrence of corrosion-assisted fatigue initiating at

JANUARY 2015

FEATURES two-phase. Two-phase FAC occurs when the steam is at geometric discontinuities at the toe of the longitudisaturation and flashing occurs. Systems subject to twonal seam weld[3]. phase FAC include the heater drains, the deaerator and • Thermal fatigue is a common failure mechanism in HEP where flashing or repeated wetting-and-drying low-pressure heater shells. occurs. • Graphitization: Graphitization is generally defined as the Creep strength enhanced ferritic steels accumulation of free carbon as a result of the equilibriWhile the development of operation and maintenance um decomposition of carbides (mostly Fe3C, or cemenprocedures for traditional units is important, owners of faciltite). Graphitization has been recognized within various ities using the newer creep strength enhanced ferritic steels, industries for many decades and is known to affect like Grade 91, will especially benefit from these procedures. carbon and carbon-molybdenum steels.[4] Depending Creep strength enhanced ferritic (CSEF) steels were specifion the shape and distribution of the graphite, mechanical properties might ® be affected. • Corrosion: Generalized corrosion of HEP systems in base-load units is not common; however, units operating in a cyclic manner or for peaking might be subject to corrosion. Corrosion generally occurs on the inner surfaces of piping systems low points, but external corrosion due to corrosion under insulation can affect all types of piping systems if the piping is not protected with sealed insulation casing or other appropriate protective coatings. • Erosion: Similar to corrosion, erosion 90° Prism & • Sharp, Clear Photos & Video is more commonly found in the Close-Focus • Large 5-inch LCD Monitor lower temperature piping systems that tips available! contain water. Erosion is the wastage • Easy-to-Use Controls of metals by the abrasive action of • Annotation Feature moving fluids, and is often exacerbated by the presence of solid particles • Rugged Tungsten Sheathing or other matter in suspension. Steam • Quality Construction erosion, while commonly found to • Precise 4-Way Articulation be the cause of consequential damage in superheater tube leak events, is not • Starting at only $8,995 commonly found in steam piping. • Flow Accelerated Corrosion (FAC): FAC is the result of the localized disIn stock, ready for overnight delivery! solution of the otherwise protective Hawkeye® V2 Video Borescopes are fully portable, magnetite (Fe3O4) film that forms finely constructed, and deliver clear, bright high along the internal surface of piping resolution photos and video! The 5” LCD monitor component systems exposed to steam, allows comfortable viewing, and intuitive, easy-to-use feedwater and condensate.[5] The discontrols provide photo and video capture at the touch Quickly inspect cooling tubes solution of the protective magnetite inside heat exchangers, turbine of a button! V2’s have a wide, 4-way articulation range, and are small, lightweight, and priced starting at only blades, and much more! exposes the underlying pipe surface $8995. V2’s are available in both 4 and 6 mm diameters. to potentially rapid corrosion. FAC Optional 90° Prism and Close-Focus adapter tips. does not occur in superheated steam, since a liquid film must be present for the corrosion process to occur. TRY BEFORE FAC is characterized as single-phase, YOU BUY! occurring in water piping, such as VIDEO BORESCOPES feedwater and condensate piping, or gradientlens.com 800.536.0790 Made in USA

Hawkeye

Videoscopes

Fast, Reliable, Affordable, Visual Inspection!

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

FEATURES cally developed to provide exceptional strength at the elevated temperatures commonly experienced in the power generation industry. CSEF steels achieve these properties though a careful mix of additive elements that vary based on the alloy. For Grade 91, the strengthening is due in part to a complex system of nitrides and carbonitrides that form during fabrication and heat treatment. The strength of these CSEF alloys is based on careful thermal processing and improper fabrication or manufacturing practices that can create material microstructures that do not exhibit the strength anticipated by the designer. In many cases, improper thermal processing has resulted in creep rupture failures after a relatively short incubation time. Commonly these failures have occurred at field-fabricated welds, pipe bends and castings (e.g. valves). Another concern with creep strength enhanced ferritic steels is improperly heat-treated materials and welds. The immediate emphasis is on addressing lower-bound property material, but “good” material also can be expected to incur damage, albeit at a slower rate. Moreover, in addition to maltreated base metal having increased susceptibility to damage, accompanying welded locations can be expected to experience even higher rates of damage accumulation that include creep initiation at outer surface and subsurface positions or stress corrosion cracking.

Like Energy-Tech? Like us on Facebook for exclusive content, conversations and events!

8 ENERGY-TECH.com

Dedicated to the Engineering, Operations & Maintenance of Electric Power Plants

Conclusions The power generation industry has found that a periodic assessment of high-energy piping systems (or covered piping systems) is an important tool to avoid failures and achieve industry-common goals of safe and reliable operation through the timely detection of service-related damage. Until now, these assessment programs have been voluntary, and performed at the urging of underwriters and jurisdictions. However, it is important to understand the program goals with respect to the damage mechanisms of concern to optimize the use of personnel and budgets. In-service examinations do not, in themselves, correct in-service damage or otherwise mitigate failures. In fact excessive inspection can utilize necessarily limited maintenance budgets and take away from the performance of other prudent maintenance activities. The changes in ASME B31.1 strengthen program requirements, and make these programs mandatory for newer plants. Given this foundation, it is likely that jurisdictional and insurance agencies will consider expanding the requirement to older equipment. These programs, if properly set up and executed, do not need to be onerous and can work smoothly within the existing plant operations and maintenance structure. ~ References 1. ASME B31.1-2012, “Power Piping” ASME Code for Pressure Piping, B31, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Three Park Avenue, New York, New York, June 29, 2012 2. Frey, J., “High-Energy Piping Systems Are Now Covered Piping Systems,” ASME PVP2010-2; Proceedings of the ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels & Piping Division/K-PVP Conference, July 18-22, 2010, Bellevue Washington 3. Guidelines for the Evaluation of Cold Reheat Piping, EPRI Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1009863 4. R.W. Emerson, “Carbide Instability of Carbon-Molybdenum Steel Piping,” Presented at the Annual American Society of Mechanical Engineers Meeting, New York, NY, December 1943. 5. Guidelines for Controlling Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Fossil and Combined Cycle Plants, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1008082 John Arnold has been helping utilities manage aging fossil plant assets for more than 20 years through the development of comprehensive assessment programs, field engineering evaluations and laboratory metallurgical testing. His work is mainly focused on boilers and the evaluation of water and steam-touched tubing and the heavy-wall pressure parts. He has worked with Structural Integrity Associates since 2005 in its Fossil Plant Services group, focusing on the nondestructive testing of boiler tubing. Arnold has a master’s degree in Metallurgy and Materials Engineering from the University of Connecticut, and is a member of ASME’s Steam Generators and Auxiliaries Committee. You may contact him by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com. Marshal Clark is an engineer with Investigative Engineering Corp. You may contact him by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

JANUARY 2015

FEATURES

HRSG water/steam chemistry control: Automating the process By Brad Buecker, Energy-Tech contributor

Decades of direct experience by power plant personnel and R&D work by such organizations as the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the International Association of the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS) have shown how critical proper water/steam chemistry control is in utility boilers. Even seemingly minor excursions may lead to problems that cause forced outages due to equipment failure. These failures can cost an owner hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars in lost generation and repairs. And a number of events have caused fatalities, which is the ultimate cost. For the many combined-cycle power plants that have recently been commissioned, or are in the design stage, several factors have the potential to negatively impact the ability of plant personnel to monitor and properly control steam generator chemistry. These factors include: Figure 1. An HRSG schematic with sample inputs that can be displayed on DCS and workstation screens throughout the • Many plants are minimally plant. This is one of several HRSG configurations possible, but is a common design with a feed forward LP (FFLP) circuit. staffed, with few or no personnel having chemistry expertise. ance of an owner’s engineer, call for reducing agent (hydrazine • Chemistry control is akin to running on the razor’s edge, or a substitute) feed to the condensate. The mindset simply as modern treatment programs must be controlled within will not go away. Continued education is improving the battle narrow windows to be effective. against FAC. The old all-volatile treatment reducing [AVT(R)] • Most HRSGs are of multi-pressure design, with different program (ammonia or amine feed for pH control and reducing chemistry requirements for each circuit. agent feed for oxygen removal and metal passivation) is being replaced by AVT(O), which stands for all-volatile treatment This article summarizes current thinking regarding water/ (oxidizing). In this program, only ammonia, or perhaps an steam chemistry, and then examines technology for monitoramine, is utilized for pH control with no reducing agent feed. ing and control. A standard pH control range is 9.2-9.6, and ideally leaning toward the higher end of this range. HRSG chemistry highlights Phosphate treatment is the choice for high-pressure (HP) As I have reported in previous Energy-Tech articles, most and intermediate-pressure (IP) chemistry control in many recently in the December 2014 issue, per research conducted HRSGs. Experiences in coal-fired power plants have revealed by EPRI, the IAPWS and others, the use of reducing agents many important factors regarding phosphate treatment that (aka, oxygen scavengers) in power boiler condensate/feedwaalso are applicable to HRSG operation, and particularly for ter systems is a discredited concept unless the system contains high-pressure HRSG circuits. EPRI developed very specifcopper alloys; virtually unknown in HRSGs. Reducing agents ic guidelines and control charts for HRSG phosphate use. establish and perpetuate single-phase flow accelerated corroImportant items include: sion (FAC), yet, as this author can attest, many HRSG specifications issued by project developers, and often with the guidJANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

FEATURES Want to learn more about power plant chemistry?

For those readers who are interested in learning more about utility and industrial steam generator makeup water treatment, cooling water chemistry, lay-up and effluent issues, I invite you to consider attending the annual Electric Utility Chemistry Workshop and the annual International Water Conference. Also, please feel free to contact me directly.

• Of the various phosphate compounds, only tri-sodium phosphate (Na3PO4) should be utilized, since other phosphate species can establish corrosive deposits on boiler internals. • Above 300°F, phosphate solubility greatly decreases. Thus, at normal loads much of the phosphate may precipitate on the boiler waterwall tubes. This phenomenon is known as “hideout,” and the mechanism can negatively influence chemistry control. Therefore, in high-pressure steam generators most programs are operated with a bulk phosphate concentration of under 2 parts-per-million (ppm), and often closer to 1 ppm. Higher phosphate dosages are possible in the IP due to the lower pressure and heat flux. For HRSGs where the LP evaporator serves as a heating source for HP and IP feedwater, solid alkalis are not permitted as a treatment method, since they can be introduced directly to main steam via the attemperators. Rather, the ammonia or amine used for condensate/feedwater treatment also serves as the pH-conditioning agent in the LP circuit. • The free caustic (NaOH) concentration should be maintained at less than 1 ppm, since otherwise under-deposit caustic gouging is possible. • A properly maintained TSP program, with perhaps a bit of caustic addition at unit startups, will maintain the pH within the range (9.0-10.0) shown on control charts. Alternatives to phosphate treatment in the HRSG include caustic treatment and AVT. For caustic treatment, the 1 ppm free caustic limit must be rigidly maintained, again due to potential difficulties with under-deposit caustic corrosion. Even when chemistry appears to be under control, impurity ingress from a condenser tube leak or other sources might cause significant to potentially severe problems. Contaminants, and especially chlorides, can initiate corrosion fatigue, under-deposit corrosion and hydrogen damage in high-pressure steam generators. This is why EPRI lowered the normal limit for condensate chloride, sulfate and sodium concentrations to 2 parts-per-billion (ppb) in units without condensate polishers. The 2 ppb limit for chloride and sulfate also was established for steam, since it’s known that trace concentrations of these impurities can lead to pitting, stress corrosion cracking and corrosion fatigue in turbines. Some researchers think that even

10 ENERGY-TECH.com

the current 2 ppb requirements for impurities such as chloride are too lenient.

Monitoring and control So, for those plants with limited staff to monitor and control water/steam chemistry, how can adequate measures be established? A key is to equip the plant with the necessary on-line instrumentation to monitor all important parameters. In today’s climate, where capital funds may be tight, plant designers often cannot select a sample panel and system with every desired analysis. The following discussion outlines the most important on-line analyses, and why they are so important. The list is based upon the three-pressure HRSG shown in the schematic below. Condensate pump discharge The condensate pump discharge (CPD) is a critical monitoring point, since steam surface condensers are the most likely source for major contamination. Condenser tube leaks on unpolished systems have been known to cause boiler tube failures within days, sometimes even hours. Recommended on-line analyses are: Core on-line • Degasified Cation Conductivity (D.C.C.) • Sodium • Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.) Degasified cation conductivity is a method to quickly detect contaminant in-leakage from failed condenser tubes. In drum-type steam generators, the cation conductivity should be maintained at less than 0.2 µS/cm. Sodium monitoring is an excellent and recommended complement to D.C.C. In a condenser with no leaking tubes, sodium levels in the condensate should be very low, <3 ppb, and in many cases less than 1 ppb. Dissolved oxygen analyses are important for monitoring air in-leakage to the condenser. Ideally, if the condenser air removal system is operating at maximum efficiency, dissolved oxygen levels should be below 10 ppb. A sudden increase in dissolved oxygen might indicate a problem at or near the condenser, which allows excess air, including carbon dioxide, to enter the system. Condenser shells have many penetrations, so the potential for air in-leakage is great.

Feedwater/Economizer inlet This sample is very important, since it is the last checkpoint before the boiler itself. Feedwater chemistry can have a significant impact on boiler operation for several reasons. First, excessive feedwater contamination will reduce the boiler cycles of concentration and require increased blowdown. Second, improper control of feedwater chemistry might cause corrosion of feedwater piping and heat exchanger tubes, which will introduce iron oxide particles and copper corrosion products to the boiler. Third, in many steam-generating systems feedwater is sprayed into main and reheat steam for temperature con-

JANUARY 2015

FEATURES

Figure 2. A modern sample panel arrangement. Photo courtesy of Swan Analytical Instruments.

trol. Contaminants are directly introduced to the superheater and turbine via spray attemperation. Recommended feedwater analyses include: Core On-Line • pH • Dissolved Oxygen • Specific Conductivity • Degassed Cation Conductivity • Iron (corrosion product sampling) • Sodium

steam, where they might form deposits and/or corrode superheater tubes and turbine components. Recommended boiler water analyses include: Core On-Line • pH • Specific Conductivity • Degassed Cation Conductivity • Phosphate (for those units on phosphate treatment) Optional On-Line • Silica

The optimum feedwater pH for systems containing mixed copper and iron metallurgy is 9.0-9.3, while for strictly ironbased systems the range is higher at 9.2-9.6. The pH is controlled by ammonia feed, which in turn is typically controlled by specific conductivity. Measurement of degassed cation conductivity and sodium supplement the condensate pump discharge analyses to ensure that excessive impurities are not reaching the steam generator. It also is important to ensure that impurities are not being introduced to main and reheat steam via attemperator sprays. Corrosion product sampling for iron is quite important to ensure that the chemical treatment program is operating effectively. Ideally, the concentration should be less than 2 ppb.

The most important analysis is pH. It must be maintained within a fairly narrow range (typically 9.0-10.0) to prevent corrosion. This measurement is the one criteria that, if the reading drops below 8.0, calls for immediate unit shutdown, provided the value is accurate and not due to instrument error. A sudden drop in pH, most likely preceded by a sudden rise in CPD cation conductivity and sodium, is a quick indicator of a condenser tube leak. Specific and degassed cation conductivity analyses provide direct indication of the amount of impurities in the boiler water, and with some mathematical manipulation can be utilized to calculate the concentration of the harmful corrosive agents sulfate and particularly chloride. Although EPRI lists silica as an optional analysis, it could easily be placed in the “Core Analysis” category. Silica must be held below pressure-dependent limits, as silica will vaporize, carry over with steam and precipitate in the turbine. This effect becomes dramatic as pressure increases. For example, in a 900 psi boiler the recommended maximum drum water silica concentration is 2.8 ppm. In a 2,400 psi boiler the recommended maximum is 0.21 ppm!

Boiler water Along with condensate pump discharge, the boiler water sample is the most important of all, especially for drum-type units. This is due to high temperatures and the concentrating effect caused by recirculation of the boiler water. These factors greatly influence potential corrosion and scaling mechanisms. Furthermore, high concentrations of dissolved solids in the boiler water can introduce excessive contaminants to the

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

FEATURES Main and reheat steam Main and reheat steam analyses indicate not only what impurities exist due to carryover from the boiler water, but also those impurities introduced via spray attemperators. For new units, the primary sampling criteria is cation conductivity, where a common turbine manufacturer limit for warranty issues is ≤0.2 µS/cm. Recommended analyses include: Core On-Line • Degassed Cation Conductivity • Sodium Optional On-Line • Silica Although silica is shown as an optional parameter, it is the author’s belief that it belongs in the “Core Parameter” category. The recommended limit is ≤10 ppb, and silica in higher concentrations can precipitate on turbine blades and influence the aerodynamics of the turbine. Sodium is a measurement that is typically utilized to track mechanical carryover of impurities in the steam.

Automated data evaluation A key to the successful implementation and operation of chemistry monitoring and chemical feed systems is ensuring that the data is acted upon promptly to prevent chemistry upsets and to keep conditions within proper control parameters. A technology is now available (please contact me for more details) that is designed to accept continuous on-line readings and, via algorithms incorporated into the plant distributed control system (DCS), perform several functions. First, a properly designed system will provide continuous, real-time readouts of system chemistry from the condensate/feedwater system through the boiler, superheater and into the steam turbine. This data gives operators and technical personnel instantaneous access to complete steam generator conditions. The system can be configured to immediately alarm plant personnel if any sample exceeds recommended chemistry guidelines. In many cases, chemistry excursions may be minor and easily correctable. However, some alarms are vital, including: • If boiler water pH drops below 8.0, immediate unit shutdown is necessary unless an error is discovered in the instrument. • If condensate pump discharge degassed cation conductivity and sodium sharply rise above normal limits of 0.2 µS/cm and 3 parts-per-billion (ppb), respectively, unit shutdown within four hours might be required. These readings indicate a major condenser tube leak, in which the impurities can rapidly cause hydrogen damage and other corrosion in the steam generator. • Excursions in main or reheat steam chemistry can indicate one of several serious problems, including failed drum moisture separators, excessive firing or poor boiler water chemistry control.

12 ENERGY-TECH.com

Instrumentation capabilities The revolution in electronics during the last several decades has not been lost in the analytical chemistry field. Instruments can now detect impurities at extremely low concentrations, and reliability has greatly improved. Furthermore, many of the instruments, such as those shown in Figure 2, have self-diagnostic capabilities. This can be extremely important. Consider the most critical case, in which unit shutdown is called for if the boiler water pH drops below 8. A self-diagnostic pH meter can inform plant personnel if the readings are valid or incorrect due to an instrument error. Also, in some cases multiple instrument readings can be integrated into chemistry evaluations. For example, if boiler pH begins to rapidly decrease, the primary reason would be cooling water in-leakage at the condenser or malfunction of the makeup water treatment system. If the condensate pump discharge cation conductivity and sodium monitors indicate no contamination, the pH meter is almost certainly in error. Automated chemical feed control As the initial discussion outlined, for utility steam generators the primary chemical feeds are ammonia or an amine for pH control in the condensate/feedwater system, and tri-sodium phosphate (or in some cases caustic) for boiler water pH conditioning. The standard technique for ammonia feed is to calibrate the feed control based on specific conductivity readings, which are very straightforward and reliable. Much more complicated is control of the tri-sodium phosphate feed. Drum boilers, by their very nature, “cycle up” impurities, even when they enter in trace amounts. These impurities typically will include chlorides, which can be very detrimental if not properly controlled by chemistry. Furthermore, any ammonia that enters the boiler will influence the pH of cooled samples, but has little effect at the temperatures in the boiler. However, calculations have been developed that allow for accurate calculation of system chemistry, and subsequent chemical feed, based on standard on-line readings including, specific and degassed cation conductivity, pH and phosphate concentration. The upshot is that this technology can incorporate chemical feed capabilities into the monitoring and data display functions to provide as much as possible a complete, automated system. ~ Brad Buecker is a process specialist with Kiewit Engineering and Design Company, in Lenexa, Kan. He has more than 33 years of experience in, or affiliated with, the power industry, much of it in chemistry, water treatment, air quality control and results engineering positions with City Water, Light & Power in Springfield, Ill., and Kansas City Power & Light Company’s La Cygne, Kan., station. He has a bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Iowa State University with additional course work in fluid mechanics, materials and energy balances, and advanced inorganic chemistry. He has written many articles and three books on steam generation topics. He also is a member of the ACS, AIChE, ASME, CTI and NACE, as well as being part of the ASME Research Committee on Power Plant & Environmental Chemistry and the program planning committee for the Electric Utility Chemistry Workshop.

JANUARY 2015

MAINTENANCE MATTERS

Vibration monitoring considerations in high EMI environments By Shalvi Desai and Renard Klubnik, Meggit Sensing Systems

Components of electrical machines are subject to thermal, electrical, ambient and mechanical stresses that lead to degradation as materials lose strength over time. Condition monitoring can detect premature failure and extend the life of the machine. Rotating machinery critical to the process chain â&#x20AC;&#x201C; including AC/DC motors, turbines, fractional horsepower motors,VFD controllers, SCR controllers and generator exciters â&#x20AC;&#x201C; should be continuously monitored to detect impending failures. Energy distribution networks are highly dependent on transformers and failure of equipment or surrounding components can lead to blackouts or catastrophic failures. Any change in machinery performance, including vibration, temperature or current draw should be frequently examined to ensure continuous operation. Vibration monitoring of crucial equipment can help detect a variety of machinery faults, including looseness, imbalance and misalignment. Bearing and lubrication issues can be resolved before causing damage to internal components. Monitoring machinery located in close proximity to wind turbine generators or VFD/SCR controllers requires instrumentation capable of withstanding high levels of electromagnetic interference (EMI) and electrical fast transients (EFT). High voltage, high electric and magnetic fields can cause strong EMI, vibration sensors mounted in industrial environments should be able to operate without damage or risk of degradation. Rugged design and high performing components ensure reliable operation in harsh industrial environments without communication loss or delays. Most accelerometers are suitable for hot and humid industrial environments, but can fail when exposed to high transient voltages. HV series accelerometers are immune to electrically noisy environments by providing extraordinary EMI and EFT protection and high electrical isolation between the sensor circuitry and the machine. A material with high electrical resistance and high breakdown voltage provides the necessary electrical insulation between the mounting surface and the accelerometerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s case and connector. The sensor casings are a ceramic material much like the type used for insulators on high voltage power lines. Inside the high voltage ceramic outer case, which serves as an isolator, the internal accelerometer is housed in a stainless steel case, providing additional support to the ceramic structure. Internal potting adds additional isolation and improves the frequency response of the sensor, making it comparable to standard sensors. Since the majority of vibration sensors use stainless steel outer casings, the new ceramic material was fully tested to ensure equal durability in the field. The sensors passed a 500 lb pull-strength test, confirming the survivability of the potting

Figure 1. Internal components

and ceramic material under severe stress conditions. Another design consideration was shock survivability. The shock limit of a working accelerometer is specified to 2,000 g peak. To demonstrate the strength of the ceramic insulator, HV sensors were subjected to a series of shock pulses up to 8,500 g peak through the sensitive axes during the development phase. No cracks developed in the ceramic cup, proving its suitability as an industrial-grade sensor. Without insulator cups, typical sensors have

Figure 2. HV accelerometer

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

MAINTENANCE MATTERS eter’s base for a period of one minute. Impedance measurements were made between the connector Table 1 – Comparison Of Frequency Response Levels and base, with the results shown in Table 2. A protection circuit helps protect against damFrequency Range age from EFT and Electro Static Discharge (ESD) Amplitude Limits Without Insulator Cup With Insulator Cup events induced through the accelerometer’s cable. ± 5% 3.0 Hz to 5.0 kHz 3.0 Hz to 5.0 kHz ESD events often occur during installation, commissioning or servicing of monitoring systems. ± 10% 1.0 Hz to 9.0 kHz 1.0 Hz to 7.0 kHz While proper ESD precautions are always recom± 3 dB 0.5 Hz to 14.0 kHz 0.5 Hz to 12.0 kHz mended, the built-in protection circuit can help prevent failures due to transient events. Laboratory testing confirmed that no damage to the sensor Table 2 – Impedance Measurements occurred when exposed to EFT and surge levels of 6 kV, as well as ESD levels up to 15 kV. Frequency Resistance Between Connector And Base Motors and generators are often located next to or near instrumentation cable trays. EMI and Radio DC > 10 GΩ Interference (RFI) can interfere with signal trans100 Hz > 10 GΩ mission causing data errors. These cable runs pro1 kHz > 10 MΩ vide a path with a means to store charge through 10 kHz > 1 MΩ the wire capacitance. Some monitoring systems might use up to 1,000´ of wire between the sensor and data access point. To reduce interference, shielded cables and connectors should be used with high EMI resistance sensors to ensure reliability of data. Two primary types of shielding are available for high EMI environments: braided wire or foil shielding. Foil shields are typically used with high frequency signals within electronic circuitry. They can be used in machinery health monitoring applications, but the effectiveness of the shield can be compromised by the strength of the RFI. Foil shields also provide poor isolation of low frequency signals, such as ground loop interference. Braided shields offer up to 95 percent shielding of signal carrying conductors. The wire gauge and tightness of the weave determines the effectiveness of the braided shield. The mass of the braid is higher than a foil shield, offering better conductivity to ground and secure connections at the terminal blocks. Figure 3. Types of shielding, braided shield (top) and foil shield (bottom) When monitoring vibration in high EMI environments, it is important that sensors output reliable data over time. a nominal resonance of 30 kHz. The addition of the insulator Monitoring equipment should be able to endure conditions cup drops the resonance frequency of the HV sensors to 25 that can include extremely strong electric and magnetic fields. kHz. The effect on the frequency response is minimal when Standard industrial accelerometers can suffer severe failures in making measurements on typical machinery, with no difference such environments. By employing sensors specifically designed in the ±5 percent response within the amplitude range. with high EMI resistance, failure and replacement can be Arcing can occur when high potential is separated by a avoided. Severe interference can cause erroneous data and misnon-conductive material, like in a capacitor, and the breakdown inform personnel about the true nature of machinery health. voltage is exceeded. HV sensors are designed with connectors Employing long-lasting and durable monitoring solutions helps that utilize an ability to withstand high voltage dielectric to ensure the reliability of the entire industrial process, maintaining prevent arcing between pins and pins to the shell. The new continuous output and eliminating unnecessary downtime. ~ design employs a cup that holds the ceramic insert. A high dielectric potting material between the ceramic cup and stainless steel cup adds to the overall performance of the sensor. Shalvi Desai is a marketing communication specialist with Meggitt Sensing Systems, www.wilcoxon.com. You may contact her by Testing was conducted to determine the ability to withstand emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com. voltage between the accelerometer’s mounting surface and the connector. DC levels up to 6 kV and an AC level of 5 kV were Renard Klubnik is an application engineer with Meggitt Sensing successfully applied between the connector and the acceleromSystems, www.wilcoxon.com. You may contact him by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

14 ENERGY-TECH.com

JANUARY 2015

ASME FEATURE

Justification for long-distance transmission By Nathan Smith, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Alex Pavlak, Future of Energy Initiative

Introduction The objective of this paper is to determine if long distance transmission between east coast wind farms (PJM) and Midwest wind farms (MISO) enables standalone wind to have system capacity. More specifically, if PJM and MISO were interconnected, can conventional generation be retired and still maintain pre-connection levels of reliability. Long distance transmission has been justified on the basis of transmitting power from where it is generated to where it is needed. A much stronger argument could be made if long distance interconnection increased the capacity of a system. Wind can contribute to system capacity in two ways: 1) If standalone wind has capacity when measured by traditional reliability metrics or 2) If the combination of wind with the traditional generators on the grid somehow increases system capacity. In Wind System Reliability and Capacity, Pavlak & Windsor[2] address the latter question. This paper is directed at the former question. If the wind is always blowing somewhere, then the time series from a standalone wind system would, with long distance interconnection, never drop to zero and the standalone wind system would contribute to overall system capacity. If the time series does drop to zero, wind also can contribute to system capacity if it is reliably blowing during peak load. The method used to quantify system capacity is called Effective Load Carrying Capacity.

Figure 1. Calculating System ELCC

Methodology The methodology used in this paper was developed in a Power2014 paper by Pavlak & Figure 2. DFs for Standalone Wind Systems Windsor[3]. Figures 1 & 2 are taken from that paper. A typical LOLE for electrical systems is one-day-inEffective Load Carrying Capacity (ELCC) is a statistical 10-years.[5] This does not correspond to a blackout or technique that was developed to calculate the capacity of system failure, but an inability to satisfy load in which the electric power systems.[4] The red curve in Figure 1 above load would have to be managed some other way, such as is a Cumulative Distribution Function (DF) of 100 indedemand management or importing power. In dimensionpendent generators. The ELCC is the power level at which less terms, one-day-in-10-years is equivalent to a LOLE of the system can be said to have adequate reliability. The 1/3,650 or 0.00027 (rounded to 0.0003). Alternatively, this adequacy of the reliability is determined by a reliability corresponds to a loss of load for 0.0003 * 365 days * 24 factor known as the Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE). 15 ENERGY-TECH.com

ASME Power Division Special Section | JANUARY 2015

AsME FEAtUrE

Figure 3.

Nomenclature

DF – Cumulative Distribution Function. The probability that a system value is greater (or less) than the abscissa. EirGrid – The Irish national grid. ELCC – Effective load carrying capacity, a statistical technique for measuring system capacity. LOLE – Loss of Load Expectation, a reliability criterion, typically one-day-in-ten-years or 0.00027. MISO – Midcontinent Independent System Operator PJM – PJM Interconnection, LLC, The largest independent system operator

hours/day = 2.6 hours/year. By this metric, any standalone wind system where wind production drops to zero for more than 2.6 hours/year has no system capacity. However, since any wind system has a parasitic electrical load, a more realistic evaluation might be to consider any wind system that drops below 0.5 percent of nameplate for more than 2.6 hours/year to have no system capacity. Figure 2 shows the DFs calculated for several standalone wind systems; the solid red curve is the reference, the same 100 independent generator system depicted in Figure 1. The dotted black curve is the DF for a single (Vestas 3 MW) wind farm calculated by assuming Rayleigh wind fluctuations and an average capacity of 0.25. The purple dash-dot curve is the DF for standalone wind on the PJM grid for 2012. The long-dash green curve is the DF for standalone wind on EirGrid for 2012. The boxes are DF data reported by Cox for the British market in 2007.[6] 16 ENERGY-TECH.com

The DFs for the standalone wind systems (PJM, EirGrid and British grid) are all remarkably similar to each other, but drastically different from the 100 independent generator system. This shows that wind generators must be analyzed differently than classical generators. The determination of the ELCC comes from the upper left hand corner of Figure 2. A detailed description of the process used to calculate ELCC is shown and explained in Figure 3. • Step 1: The hourly wind data for both PJM and MISO regions is imported and put into a suitable format for data analysis. • Step 2: For the year analyzed (2012), PJM was building new wind farms. In order to correct for this capacity increase, the nameplate of the fall was adjusted to have the same nameplate as in the spring as described in the following section. Time zone differences and Daylight Savings Time also were accounted for to ensure the two time series had the correct hours matched. • Step 3a: The time series were sorted to order the wind production values from greatest to least in order to prepare for the DF calculations. A time series of the sum of PJM and MISO at each given hour was created to simulate a connected system. • Step 3b: To simulate a statistically independent combination, the PJM series was scrambled out of order and then added to the MISO as in step 3a. This was done to simulate a statistically independent combination. • Step 4: The DFs for the various time series were calculated; they are defined by F(x) = P(X < x), which is essentially a way of saying that the function gives the probability that the system power is greater than any given power value. X is a random variable representing the system power and x are given power values. • Step 5: The ELCC was determined according to the method described in[4], by simply finding the number of data points above an availability of 0.9997 (See Figure 1).

Interconnected PJM+MISO Using hourly averaged wind data from 2012, Cumulative Distribution Functions (DFs) were created for each of the time series (PJM and MISO)[7][8] and the summation of the time series on an hour by hour basis (PJM + MISO). The wind data was given by both ISO for every hour beginning on January 1st at 12:00AM of 2012 and ending on January 1st at 12:00AM of 2013. Inconsistencies due to time zone differences and daylight savings time were accounted for. PJM also was building wind during the year; this was corrected for by identifying the peak wind in the fall and spring and multiplying the spring data by the ratio to ensure it had the same nameplate as the

ASME Power Division Special Section | JANUARY 2015

AsME FEAtUrE fall, as an approximation for the increased production. The resulting DFs are shown below in Figure 3. The black curve is the DF for standalone wind on the PJM grid in 2012, the red curve is the DF for standalone wind on the MISO grid in 2012, and the green curve is the DF for standalone wind on a theoretical interconnected PJM-MISO grid in 2012. As outlined in Figure 1 in the methodology section, the ELCC can be determined by finding the power level where the DF crosses an availability of 0.9997 (corresponding to a LOLE of 0.0003). The determination of the ELCC comes from the upper left hand corner of Figure 3, depicted below in Figure 4. The DFs for standalone wind are repreFigure 4. DFs for PJM, MISO and PJM + MISO sented in the same manner as in Figure 3 and the black line corresponds to an avail2014 ASME Student Paper ability of 0.9997. Ergo, the power (% of nameplate) where these DFs cross this availability are the ELCC values. For Competition Winner this scenario, the ELCC values were determined to be: PJM = 0%, MISO = 0.29%, and PJM + MISO = 0.69% (values given in % of nameplate). The PJM values include negative system powers since The ASME Power Division held its first Student Paper they account for the parasitic electrical loads inherent in Competition during the 2014 Conference, attracting wind systems. As the MISO data does not account for more than 25 abstracts that resulted in 8 final papers being these losses, any wind system dropping below 0.5 percent presented at the conference, and representing student of nameplate for more than 2.6 hours/year will be said authors from four different countries. In addition to the to have no capacity. By this metric, both PJM and MISO rigorous peer review process required by ASME for all can be said to have negligible capacity. However, the PJM technical papers; these student papers, as well as the pre+ MISO interconnected system does have defined system sentations, were further scrutinized by a Committee of capacity as it only drops below 0.5 percent of nameplate for 2 hours/year (based on 2012 data). Judges. The purpose of this competition is to encourage active Balanced interconnected PJM+MISO participation of students in the ASME Power Conference Another pertinent exercise is balancing the PJM and by submitting high quality technical papers on various MISO data so that they have the same average power. By aspects of the Electric Power Generation Industry. The taking the ratio of the unbalanced averages and multiplying competition seeks to promote the interaction of future all of the PJM data by the result, the same three time series engineers with practicing and experienced engineers and were reconstructed. help them establish mentoring and networking links with The black curve is the balanced DF for standalone wind experts in their areas of interest. on the PJM grid in 2012, the red curve is the balanced DF The ASME Power Division and the Student Paper for standalone wind on the MISO grid in 2012, and the Competition Committee is honored to announce orange curve is the balanced DF for standalone wind on a theoretical interconnected PJM-MISO grid in 2012. Power2014-32144 â&#x20AC;&#x153;Justification for Long Distance In an identical fashion to the unbalanced DFs, the Transmission,â&#x20AC;? authored by Nathan Smith from the ELCC values were determined using the upper left hand University of Maryland, Baltimore County as the winner corner of Figure 5, as depicted below in Figure 6. of this competition. Smith received a $2,000 cash award The balanced DFs for standalone wind are representand his paper is highlighted in this issue of Energy-Tech ed in the same manner as in Figure 5 and the black line for its readers to enjoy. corresponds to an availability of 0.9997. Ergo, the power (% of nameplate) where these DFs cross this availability Justin Voss are the ELCC values. For this scenario, the ELCC values ASME Student Paper Session Chair

A Message from the Chair

JANUARY 2015 | ASME Power Division Special Section

ENERGY-TECH.com

ASME FEATURE Statistically independent Table 1 – Summary of ELCC Values combination PJM MISO PJM+MISO Pavlak & Winsor[2] showed that the parallel Unbalanced 0.0% 0.29% 0.69% connection of a large Balanced 0.0% 0.29% 0.49% number of independent generators results in a system availability that is Table 2 – Final Summary of ELCC Values greater than that of any one generator. It is the PJM MISO Interconnected Independent statistical independence that makes a difference. Unbalanced 0.0% 0.29% 0.69% 2.04% Wind farms are not Balanced 0.0% 0.29% 0.49% 2.22% independent of each other and exhibit corwere determined to be: PJM = 0%, MISO = 0.29%, and relations with space, time and load. So a pertinent question PJM + MISO = 0.49% (values given in % of nameplate). is whether the MISO and PJM wind farms are indepenIn the balanced case, the PJM + MISO interconnected has dent of each other. more than 2.6 hours/year in which the power drops below By scrambling (disordering) the PJM data before sum0.5 percent of nameplate, as do the PJM and MISO time ming it with the MISO data, a theoretical data set was series. As a result, all three cases can be said to have neglicreated that predicts the behavior of PJM and MISO supgible system capacity. posing they are independent systems. A summary of the ELCC values for both scenarios is The orange curve is the unbalanced, interconnected provided in Table 1. DF (data as published and seen in Figure 3) and the green curve is the balanced, interconnected DF (as seen in Figure 4). The blue curve is the unbalanced, independent DF and the magenta curve is the balanced, independent DF. In an identical fashion to the previous sections, we can compute the ELCC for the independent scenarios and analyze the results. The ELCC values were determined using the upper left hand corner of Figure 7, as depicted in Figure 8. The balanced DFs for standalone wind are represented in the same manner as in Figure 5 and the black line corresponds to an availability of 0.9997. Ergo, the power (% of nameplate) where these DFs cross this availability are the ELCC values. For this scenario, the ELCC values were determined to be: independent PJM/MISO = 2.04% and independent PJM/MISO (balanced) = 2.22% (values given in % of nameplate). Both of the ELCC values for the independent scenario are well above the values calculated with the actual PJM and MISO data. This indicates that wind production from MISO and PJM are not independent of each other.

What’s the word on the wire?

Follow Energy-Tech and keep up with the industry chatter!

@ETmag

Dedicated to the Engineering, Operations & Maintenance of Electric Power Plants

Conclusions This paper looked at the value to be derived from the long distance combination of PJM and MISO wind farms. Specifically, does the combined standalone system offer more capacity than that of the separated systems? Capacity is determined by a reliability criteria of one-day-in-tenyears. By this criteria a standalone wind system has no ELCC if the wind production time series is zero (or negligibly small) for more than 2.6 hours per year.

18 ENERGY-TECH.com

ASME Power Division Special Section | JANUARY 2015

ASME FEATURE PJM wind has no ELCC. Indeed, the number is negative for 8 hours because PJM subtracts parasitic electrical operating load from wind production, resulting in 8 hours of negative net generation. MISO has an ELCC of ~0.3 percent, but MISO does not subtract parasitic electrical loads. It could well be that after subtracting parasitic loads, standalone MISO ELCC would also be zero. The long distance interconnection of PJM & MISO wind does increase system ELCC, but only to a level of 0.7 percent. Balancing the system so PJM and MISO are the same average size does not make a significant difference. Fractional percentages are lost in the noise because MISO, unlike PJM does not subtract parasitic operational electrical loads. If PJM and MISO wind systems were statistically independent of each other, ELCC would be on the order of 1.5-2.5 percent. This suggests that correlations are significant even at these distances. From the practical perspective of comparing system concepts, when ELCC for independent generators are in the range of 90 percent, fractional percentages for standalone wind systems can be ignored as negligible. Long distance transmission can be justified by the need to move power from point A to point B. Geographic diversity reduces the volatility of cumulative wind production. This paper shows that long distance transmission does not significantly increase system capacity, (<1 percent) at least for the MISO & PJM ISOs. ~

Figure 5. Calculating System ELCC

Figure 6. Balanced DFs for PJM, MISO and PJM + MISO

The authors acknowledge the support of the Future of Energy (FoE) Initiative.

References 1. Asari, M., Nanahara, T., Maejima, Yamaguchi, K., Sato, T., A Study on Smoothing Effect on Output Fluctuation of Distributed Wind Power Generation, 0-7803-7525 IEEE 2002 2. Pavlak, A., Winsor, H., Wind System Reliability and Capacity, Power2014-32148, Proceedings of the ASME 2014 Power Conference (submitted), July 28-31, 2014 Baltimore 3. Pavlak ibid 4. Billinton, R., Allan, R.N., Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems, Plenum Press, 1984.

JANUARY 2015 | ASME Power Division Special Section

5. Planning Resource Adequacy Assessment Reliability Standard, US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 18 CFR Part 40, [Docket No. RM10-10-1000; Order No. 747] March 17, 2011, available at: http://www.ferc. gov/whats-new/commmeet/2011/031711/E-7.pdf 6. Cox, J., Impact of Intermittency: How Wind Variability could Change the Shape of the British and Irish Electricity 6 Copyright ÂŠ 2014 by ASME Markets, Fig.5, Poyry, July, 2009, available at:http://www.uwig. org/impactofintermittency.pdf 7. PJM Averaged Hourly Wind Data available at: http:// www.pjm.com/markets-and-operations/ops-analysis.aspx 8. MISO Averaged Hourly Wind Data available at: https:// www.misoenergy.org/Library/MarketReports/Pages/ MarketReports.aspx Nathan Smith is a first year graduate student working toward his PhD in Materials Science and Engineering at the Pennsylvania State

ENERGY-TECH.com

ASME FEATURE University. He completed his undergraduate career in 2014 at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, earning a bachelor’s degree in Physics and Mathematics. In 2012, he began his work in the energy sector with an internship at NIST focused on improving the design and efficiency of Si solar cells. Currently, he is involved with research on recycling rare-earth elements via high temperature electrochemical methods at Penn State. During his senior year at UMBC, he worked with Dr. Pavlak to produce the paper on a theoretical interconnection of wind farms, which he presented at the ASME POWER14 conference. You may contact him by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

Figure 7. ELCC calculation for balanced DFs

Alex Pavlak, Ph.D., is a professional engineer with 45 years of experience developing a variety of first-of-a-kind systems. He started his career with the Apollo project (master’s thesis), then worked on ballistic missile development for the General Electric Company. In the 1970s he co-founded and became the president of ConSuntrator Inc., a solar collector development company based on patented Solyndra-like optical technology. In the 1980s he led a team that invented and developed a sonar system concept for detecting quiet submarines for the U.S. Navy. In the 1990s he lectured on the use of Modern Tiger Teams for advanced problem solving. He is currently Chairman of the Future of Energy Initiative. His core competencies are systems architecture, energy systems and combining systems engineering with fact‑based policy making. He received his PhD in mechanical engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology and is currently a member of INCOSE, IEEE and Sigma Xi. You may contact him by emailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

Figure 8. DFs for Independent and Interconnected Systems

Figure 9. ELCC calculation for independent systems

20 ENERGY-TECH.com

ASME Power Division Special Section | JANUARY 2015

TRAINING TIPS

Programmed instruction By Harold Parker, HPC Technical Services

Decades ago, while employed at GE’s Field Engineering Development Center as a technical instructor, I had an opportunity to attend several formal adult educational programs. Two that come to mind are Robert Mager’s seminar on Criterion Referenced Instruction and another seminar at Indiana University. An internet search can yield numerous results for Criterion Referenced Instruction (CRI). You will learn that the CRI framework is a comprehensive set of methods for the design and delivery of training programs. Some of the critical aspects include: 1. Goal/task analysis – To identify what needs to be learned. 2. Performance objectives – Exact specification of the outcomes to be accomplished and how they are to be evaluated (the criterion). 3. Criterion referenced testing – Evaluation of learning in terms of the knowledge/skills specified in the objectives. 4. Development of learning modules – These should be tied to specific objectives. Training programs developed in CRI format tend to be self-paced courses involving a variety of different media (e.g., workbooks, videotapes, small group discussions, computer-based instruction). Students learn at their own pace and take tests to determine if they have mastered a module. A course manager also can administer the program and help students with problems. CRI is based upon the ideas of mastery learning and performance-oriented instruction. It also incorporates many of the ideas found in Gagne’s conditions of learning (e.g., task hierarchies, objectives) and is compatible with most theories of adult learning because of the emphasis on learner initiative and self-management. Fundamentally, one could write an objective that a student shall be able to describe the operation of the AC Lube Oil Pump. Then you could give the student the turbine-generator OEM manual. Now instruct the student to read tab 12, pages 1-25. In doing so, one would learn the operation of the AC Lube Oil Pump. This points out the importance of item

#4 in the CRI critical aspects, the development of learning modules. During the adult education seminar at Indiana University, I also learned many different things – but the most significant was the importance of the training manual. How many times in your career have you picked up a manual and in your reading found a sentence that said “refer to Figure 5”? Then you flip through the pages to finally find Figure 5, and once you find it start thinking, “What was I supposed to be looking for?” You forgot, being distracted as you turned through all the pages to find the figure. Now, unless you put a yellow sticky note in the text that referred to Figure 5, it’s difficult to pick up where you left off. My question is, why do we write a manual and organize the material for the convenience of the author, or the convenience of the printer, and sacrifice the need of the reader? Hence, we make the suggestion to not interrupt a thought with a page turn. In the 1970s when we first realized this relevance, it was difficult since everything was printed and this meant there would potentially be a lot of partially blank pages. In today’s world, however, with the computer screen, a partially blank screen is

Keep up-to-date with the

ENERGY-TECH

digital edition Our interactive digital issue is available the first of every month! Visit Energy-Tech.com to get an exclusive “first look” at our new issue, every month!

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

TRAINING TIPS

Figure 1.

no cost (unless you consider the extra ions that are needed to keep the computer screen “on” for a longer period of time). A couple other relevant items learned at Indiana University were related to the use of graphics that make it easy to understand the topic at hand. Use a simplified piping & instrument diagram to understand the real diagram function. Then use the real diagram to demonstrate how the newly understood principle is applied. Consider Figure 1 as an example. This is a drawing that shows all the major components making up the lube oil system on a particular gas turbine. By comparison, wouldn’t you agree that Figure 1 is easier to understand than Figure 2? Figure 1 is used to better understand the actual piping and instrument diagram (we didn’t show one here, but likely you can imagine what the drawing really looks like). By the way, there is likely another dozen simplified drawings that are used to better understand the final piping and instrument drawing. Now let’s take these two concepts and put them together to create a well-written programmed instruction – a Learning-Doc, as we call them. Take a given topic, say the lube oil system on a turbine-generator. Now let’s write a set of Learning-Objectives. One (of many) such objective might read: “Describe the purpose of the major components found within this turbine lube oil system.” The objective prior to this might ask the reader to list the major components.

22 ENERGY-TECH.com

Now, we develop the materials. Seen in Figure 2 is one page of our electronic text describing the lube oil filters, one of the major components in the lube oil system. Notice that a real simple piping & instrument diagram is provided, as well as a photograph of the filters, and text that is describing the filter in question. Also, notice the wasted white space in the lower left corner. We didn’t put any material at this location since a page turn would likely interrupt the information flow. There will be more than just one page describing the lube oil filters. Following this description, we author a “check-your-understanding” question. For example, a high differential pressure alarm is typically set to occur at this value. • 10-psid (69-kPad) • 15-psid (103-kPad) • 20-psid (138-kPad) • 30-psid (206-kPad) When the reader selects his answer, he/she should be given the opportunity to see the correct answer and some explanation about why the correct answer is correct, or the incorrect answers are wrong, or both. Remember, this check-your-understanding activity is still part of the learning process. Next, assuming the reader has gotten the correct answer, the reader should be assigned an “on-the-job learning activity.” For example, the reader might be advised to get out the

JANUARY 2015

TRAINING TIPS OEM piping and instrument diagram and locate these filters on that diagram (in our electronic version we suggest a link to automatically pull up this diagram). The reader might be further advised to go out to the oil tank and physically locate the filters, the transfer valve and the instrumentation. It might be further suggested that he/she record the differential pressure. The author should go out of his/ her way to emphasize safety and plant procedures when going out to see equipment. Once this “check-your-understanding” Figure 2. and the “on-the-job learning activity” has been completed, the reader can either take a break or proceed to the next component description making up the lube oil system. The process continues until the entire document has been completed. The reader studies a “unit of instruction,” takes the quiz, performs an on-the-job activity and proceeds to the next “unit of instruction.” Once complete, a final on-the-job learning activity might be offered, and a final examination should be given. If you are new to the plant, this learning exercise takes you a few major steps forward to the understanding of the principles of operation of this system. We suggest that after some time passes – maybe a few months, or even a year – the reader should repeat the entire programmed instruction. The reader will learn more depth and should do a more detailed on-the-job learning activity. Let some more time pass and repeat. With each repetition the learner will move forward a few steps. Keep in mind that the reader does not go from “knowing nothing about the topic” to being an “expert” with the completion of study of one document. Instead, the learner takes a few steps forward. If you repeat, you’ll take a few more steps forward. At the end of this series of repetitions, along with some practical experience, you might become a ‘course consultant’ that future learners might approach. Interesting enough, in my experience I continue to learn from the questions the new learners ask. Every so often, you will hear something you had never thought of before. In summary: 1. Write good, measurable, learning objectives. 2. Break down the technical content into manageable “units of instruction.” 3. Ask “check-your-understanding” questions at the end of each “unit of instruction.”

4. Offer “on-the-job learning activities,” when applicable, after each “unit of instruction.” 5. Offer a realistic final examination. You also might be prepared for a lot of work. You will likely find, as an author, there are a lot of things you have not thought about before you started. This means a lot of research. After decades of experience as we’ve written electronic programmed instruction on gas turbines, combined-cycle, fossil and nuclear steam turbines and generators, we have found this to be true of every system we’ve worked on. ~ Harold Parker started work in 1969 as a field engineer for GE in Detroit, Mich. He later became a GE start-up engineer, responsible for commissioning new turbine-generators and resolving operational problems as they occurred. In the mid-1970s he became a training specialist and then a training manager, responsible for training new and experienced engineers. Today, he is part owner of HPC Technical Services, www.hpcnet.com, and continues to implement ADDIE training programs in the power generation industry. You may contact him by e-mailing editorial@woodwardbizmedia.com.

JANUARY 2015 Advertisers’ Index CU Services EagleBurgmann Gradient Lens Corp. Hexeco Indeck Power Equipment Co. Miller-Stephenson Chemical Topog-E Gasket Co. TradeFair Group, Inc.

www.cuservices.net

www.eagleburgmann-ej.com

www.gradientlens.com

www.hexeco.com

www.indeck.com

www.miller-stephenson.com

www.topog-e.com

www.tradefairgroup.com

JANUARY 2015 ENERGY-TECH.com

Energy-tech showcase

High Pressure Silencers     

Expansion joint solutions and turnkey services for power generation

Simple yet effective diffuser silencing Suitable for high pressure, high temperature steam and gas Compact size and weight Non Clogging Minimum supporting requirement

Model D800 Silencer

• • • • • • •

CU Services LLC

725 Parkview Cir, Elk Grove, IL 60007 Ph 847-439-2303 rcronfel@cuservices.net

www.cuservices.net

Crossover Piping & Ducting Exhaust Systems Gas & Steam Turbines ASME Code Heat Exchangers HRSG Boiler Penetration Seals Refurbished Expansion Joints Complete Turnkey Solutions

EagleBurgmann KE Inc. Tel: +1 (619) 563 6083 ejsales@us.eagleburgmann.com www.eagleburgmann-ej.com

EnergyTech-1/6 11-20-2014.qxp_PowerAd#43-2.3

Coming in BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS BOILERS February BOILERS RENT RENT RENT SALE SALE SALE LEASE LEASE LEASE 2015

RENT RENT RENT SALE SALE SALE LEASE LEASE LEASE

Look for the next issue of Energy-Tech magazine and read about: •• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••

• and Boilers &Boilers Pressure •Rental Rental Rental and and Stock Stock Stock Boilers Boilers •Generators Generators Generators Systems •Chillers Chillers Chillers • Software O&M •Deaerators Deaerators Deaerators •Parts Emissions •Boiler Boiler Boiler Parts Parts •Boiler Boiler Boiler Services Services Tech: Gas •Services Turbine •Combustion Combustion Combustion Controls Controls Controls •Fuel ASME: Plant •Solid Solid Solid Fuel Fuel Applications Applications Applications Operations

ENERGYT ECH

•• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••

•Rental Rental Rental and and and Stock Stock Stock Boilers Boilers Boilers •Generators Generators Generators •Chillers Chillers Chillers •Deaerators Deaerators Deaerators •Boiler Boiler Boiler Parts Parts Parts •Boiler Boiler Boiler Services Services Services •Combustion Combustion Combustion Controls Controls Controls •Solid Solid Solid Fuel Fuel Fuel Applications Applications Applications

Vertrel XF Cleaning Agent

MS-730

Precision Cleaning Solvent

MS-780

Acrylic Conformal Coating

m Plastic, Glass & Metal Cleaner

m MS-580

s Boilers • • •Rental Rental Rental and and and Stock Stock Stock Boilers Boilers m s • • •Generators Generators Generators • • •Chillers Chillers Chillers • • •Deaerators Deaerators Deaerators • • •Boiler Boiler Boiler Parts Parts Parts Miller-Stephenson Offers a • • •Boiler Boiler Boiler Services Services Services Wide Range of Chemicals • • •Combustion Combustion Combustion Controls Controls Controls for• •the Power Industry! •Solid Solid Solid Fuel Fuel Fuel Applications Applications Applications MS-260

MS-465N

DuPont™Krytox® Lubricants Freeze Spray Conformal Coatings Contact Lubricants

Aero-Duster® Contact Cleaners Solvent Cleaners Specialty Cleaners

Low Global Warming Formulations Available

24/7 24/7 24/7 Emergency Emergency Emergency Service Service Service

P P847-541-8300 847-541-8300 P 847-541-8300 ••F • F847-541-9984 847-541-9984 F 847-541-9984

Contact Re-Nu®

MS-738

24/7 24/7 24/7 Emergency Emergency Emergency Service Service Service info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com

Contact Re-Nu® & Lube

RENT RENT RENT SALE SALE SALE LEASE LEASE LEAS m

info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com

sEmergency 24/7 24/7 24/7 Emergency Emergency Service Service Service

miller-stephenson chemical company, inc.

P P847-541-8300 847-541-8300 P- 847-541-8300 ••F- • F847-541-9984 847-541-9984 F 847-541-998 Connecticut Illinois - California Canada

info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com info@indeck-power.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com www.indeck.com

800-992-2424 203 743.4447 supportET@mschem.com miller-stephenson.com

Call For Presentation-Only Abstracts! Deadline: May 12, 2015

JUNE 28-JULY 2, 2015 SAN DIEGO CONVENTION CENTER | SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA | GO.ASME.ORG/POWERENERGY

ENERGY SOLUTIONS FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE In 2015, four of ASME's major conferences come together to create an event of major impact for the Power and Energy sectors: ASME Power & Energy 2015. Fossil and nuclear power generation, solar, wind, fuel cell applications and much more will be discussed in each of the four concurrent conferences within this larger event.

The ASME Power Conference delivers the very latest power engineering solutions in plant operations, maintenance and construction with cuttingedge technology.

The ASME Conference on Energy Sustainability is the world class exchange of innovative technology and R&D efforts that offer a path to renewable solutions.

The ASME Fuel Cell Conference offers the very latest technology research and solutions for fuel cells.

The ASME Nuclear Forum presents the most recent developments in the Nuclear Power industry.

Call For Presentation-Only Abstracts!

Demonstrate your involvement in this critical industry by submitting your presentation-only abstract (for oral or poster presentation) to a track within the events above. In addition, we welcome case studies and real world applications/ best practices. ASME’s Power & Energy event is the can’t miss event in 2015.

Visit go.asme.org/powerenergy for full track listings and submission details. Presentation-only abstracts are due May 12, 2015!

SPONSORSHIP & EXHIBITION OPPORTUNITIES ARE LIMITED, SO ACT NOW! GO.ASME.ORG/POWERENERGY About ASME For more than 100 years, ASME has successfully enhanced performance and safety for the energy and piping industries worldwide through its renowned codes and standards, conformity-assessment programs, training courses, journals, and conferences – including the Offshore Technology Conference (OTC), the International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE), the International Pipeline Conference (IPC), and Turbo Expo.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)