SEP 09

98

04:36PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRQRY

P .2/20

EVALUATION

OF AIR HEATER PERFORMANCE AND THE ACCURACY OF THE RESULT

Joseph T. Maskew, Duane C. McCoy, (CONSOL Inc., R&D), Burton L. Marker (NYSEG), and James U. Watts (DOE, FETC) With the increasedemphasison the efficiency of fossil-fuel-fired, steamgenerationfacilities, the performance of ancillary equipment is becoming increasinglyimportant. The air heater is a souteeof lost thermal efficiency in two ways -- air leakageinto flue gas side andpoor heat recovery. Moreover, air inlcak makesit difftcult to determinethe exiting flue gas temperature and the performance of the air heater. This paper addresses issue of properly evaluating the the air heater performance and the accuracyof the final result. The appendix discusses the proceduresused to determinethe individual measurements the uncertainty of these and measurements. Background As part of the I-J.S. Department of Energys (DOE) Clean Coal Technology IV Demonstration Progrsm, New York State Electric & GasCorporation (NISEG) selectedthe Milliken Station for installation of innovative SO?and NO, control technologiesand efficiency improvements. These improvements will allow utilities to comply with the CleanAir Act Amendmentsof 1990. The air heaterson Unit 2 were replacedto improve unit efficiency as part of the demonstration program. The original air heater was a regenerativeLjungstrom unit; the replacementair heater was a low pressuredrop, high eff%cirncyheatpipe. CONSOL R&D evaluatedthe performance of the air heater and estimatedthe uncertainty in the evaluation. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers(ASME) provides a standardmethod of computing the performance of air heaters. This is performancetest code (PTC) ASME PTC 4.3. This method was specified as the standardof acceptable performanceby warranteesof the new a.irheaters. While the AShfE code is often specifiedin equipmentwarrantees,it appearsto be rarely applied. Instead,performanceindicators such asthe measuredeffectivenessof the air- and gas-sidesand the X-ratio are compareddirectly againstdesign values. Such comparisonsare poor substitutesfor the ASME PTC which correctsfor part of the differencesbetween test and design conditions independentlyof the vendors designalgorithms. The algorithms, normally provided by the vendor asperformancecurvesand/or correlationsthat predict the outlet temperaturebasedon inlet conditions, cannotbe applied directly in the ASME code. The ASME code predicts the temperaturecorrectedto the designvalue while the performancecurvespredict the expectedtemperatureat operating conditions. This paperprovides a method of applying the vendors performance curves to evaluatethe performancecorrectedto design asper ASTM PTC 4.3. An air heater is shown schematicallyin Figure I. Note that the ASh4F PTC 4.3 nomenclatureis used in Figure 1 and throughout this paper. In the air heater,energy in the flue gas is recovered by the incoming combustion air. While normally severalair streamsarc present(primary and secondary),in this paper we examineonly one sectionof the air heater.

SEP 09

98

04:37PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRARY P .a20

s----L--,

FloeGa Enkdng

Figure 1 Air Heater Schematic ASME PTC 4.3 calculates a totally correctedflue gas outlet temperature(TCFGOT), rc,$nrord, shown below (ASME Supplement as Equation 7.12):
f GlSSTotd = fG15cU + tG156G + ki15&Y + lG1566 -3tG15

(1)

Flue gas temperature leaving the air heater corrected for deviation from design entering air temperature, OF, lo,sJo = Flue gas temperature leaving the ah heater corrected for deviation from design entering flue gas temperature, F, f015M7( Flue gas temperature leaving the air heatercorrected for deviation from design = X - ratio, F, f G,5SE Flue gas temperature leaving the air heater corrected for deviation from design = entering gas ff ow, F, and tGi5 = Measured flue gas temperature leaving the air heater, F. The PTC provides equationsfor the first two of the temperaturecorrectjons,rGIJdA tc,,6G,but and not for the other two, rca WR rc,Jh. Theselatter temperaturecorrectionsare unique to a and specific air heater. If these temperaturecorrectionsarenot provided by the equipment manufacturer as algorithms (or plots), they can be estimatedby the procedurepresentedin this paper. The procedure usesdesignperformancecurvesand/or algorithmsnormally provided by the vendor to evaluatethe temperaturecorrectionsrequiredby Equation 1. The TCFGOT is then compared to the design flue gastemperature. The computedvalue of the TCFGOT should be less than or equal to the design flue gas temperature,if the air heateris performing properly. The TCFGOT The two temperaturecorrection factors provided by the PTC sre tGIs and tns rl0 These are d,, defined in terms of design values and of measured results of a standardtest of an air heater. For the deviation from the design entering air temperature,rclJM,this is:
'ABD' ~Gl56A = G14 - rGIS) + rG14+G15 - 1.4s) - rR8)

t G,56A =

SEP 09

98

04:37PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY P. 4/a

rAsD= Design air temperatureentering the air heater, F, ro,4 = Measured flue gastemperatureentering the air heater, F, and t AB= Measured air temperatureentering the air heater, F. Similarly, for the deviation from the design entering flue gas temperature,the temperature correotion is:
*c14ll tGlsSG = (to14 - tA8) &S - 48) + 18 +G14 - h)

where tG,4n= Design flue gastemperature enteringthe air beater,F.

X-Ratio Correction

Flue Gas Flow Correction

Design ~Ossign X-Ratio

\ Flue Gas Flaws

Measured X-Ratio

Measured Entering Flue Gas Flow

Figure 2 X-Ratio Correction

Figure 3 Flue GasFlow Correction

The other two temperaturecorrectionsmust be derived from vendor designperformancecurves or provided by the vendor in analytical form. In the caseof the NYSEG heat pipe air heater, the vendor supplied a set of performancealgorithms to be applied th performancefigures similar to Figures 2 and 3, shown above. Thesepredicted the performancetemperature;that is, the expectedexit flue gastemperaturesfor the actual operating conditions. The algorithm was of the form:
where

SEP 09

98

04:38PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRARY

P. 5/20

9 = Correlation ooefftcient, and fG,.Jx = Correction factors for deviations from design flue gas flow and from design X- ratio, respectively. For easeof analysis and of estimating the uncertainty, theseplots were convertedinto mathematical expressionsof the form: fg=~,+h.& for the flue gas flow, and for the X-ratio: f, *a2 +&.X+cS2.X2 where ~,,~,,a,,&6s = Correlationcoefficients, Fo = Flue gas flow rate, and X = X-ratio for the air side.
(6)

(5)

The forms of these equationsagreewith the shapes the curvesin Figures 2 and 3. A least of squarescorrelation or some other curvy fitting technique can be usedto evaluatethe correlation constants. In the caseof the Milliken study, the correlation equationsagreedwith results from the plots within the ability to read the plots. Since the X-ratio is defined aathe weight times heat capacityratio of the air over that of the flue gas, the X-ratio can be approximatedas the ratio of the temperaturechangesfor the two fluids:
x= WA9 CpA %I4 pG

(7)

where cpA= Heat capacityof air, Btu I lb- F, cpG= Heat capacityof flue gas, But / lb-* F, fg5 = Averageflue gasoutlettemperature corrected no-leak conditions, OF, to w,,s = Weight of air exiting the air heater, lb / h, and
wG]4

= Weight Offlue gasenteringthe air heater,lb/h.

The no-leak flue gas temperature,rz,, is calculatedfrom the measuredflue gas temperatureby:

sEP 09

98

04:38PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY

P.WZB

tNL Cl5

= rG15 +

- Lb)

(8)

where

A, = Weight percent air leakageinto the flue gas, and = t lunb Tempetatureof the air leaking into the flue gas. In most air heaters,the majority of the air in the flue gasis leakagefrom the higher pressure, airside of the air heater. The ASME defines the position ofthe air leak as occurring after the flue gas exits the ai~ heater,but before rc,, is measured. Thus, there can he no correction to beat transfer within the air heater for air leakage. In thesecases,
t omb = fA8

(9)

and

fAa be substituted for z,,,,,~ the following equations. However, this derivation will be can in general. Substituting Equation 8 into Equation 7 yields:
tG14 - '015 - ".[q.(tG,5 1oo cpo x= - '-)I (10)

[
OA9 - [,!8)

Note the ASME definition for the X-ratio is baaedon zero leak. If the vendor baseshis X-ratio correction curve on an X-ratio with a design leak, this plot should be correctedto zero leak before generating Equation 6. For application of Equation 1, two additional, independenttemperaturecorrectionsare required. Thesecan be obtained from the vendors air heaterperformanceequation,Equation 4, and the associatedplots -- Figures 2 and 3. Equations similar to Equation 4 can be usedto estimatethe effect of one parameterindependentof the other parameters the equationto obtain a of temperaturecorrection for that parameteralone. This is achievedby evaluatingEquation 4 for the change in one parameterwhile holding the othersconstant. FOT the deviation from the design X-ratio, this procedureproducesthe following equation for the temperaturecorrection, tCISMR:
~G~~~~=~~~~+~~~G~SD-~G~~D~[~-~~~~D~~X]-~A~D~~~~~O~~X

where t o,sn = Design flue gastemperatureleaving air heater, and fpD = De&go flue gasflow correction factor.

A.4(k15 CPA II - I[- 1 -L6) + cpc [100

(11)
(12)

For the deviation from design flow, the temperaturecorrection,to,, 6nis:

rGlS,=tGl5+~~fG,5~-tGl4D~~-9~fG~fXD]-r~80~9'fg~~~[~

SEP 09

98

04:38PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY

Pa 7120

where

fm = Design X - ratio correction factot.

Equations 1I and 12 apply the performanceequationsand/or curvesprovided by the vendor to evaluate the effect of the changem X-ratio and flue gas flow on the measuredtemperature. The changesfrom the design TCFGOT, the terms within the double lines (\I), are applied to the measuredflue gas outlet temperatureto provide the temperaturecorrections. ASME PTC 4.3 specified the air heatertemperaturecorrectionsat design leak. For the NYSEG unit, the design leak was zero. This is reflected in quation 10 where the X-ratio is correctedto the design leak of zero before being applied to the calculation of the temperaturecorrection. The leak correction term, (13) is re-+red since (1) the performanceequation and factor plots were basedon a zero leak design, and (2) ASME PTC 4.3 specifiescomparingthe TCFGOT at the design conditions, which in this caseis zero leak. Therefore, the TCFGOT must be on the samebasis as the design. The first four terms of Equation 1 add in threeleak terms. The measuredflue gastemperatureleaving the air heater, lcls, subtractsout three leak terms asthis measuredvalue containsleak. Thus, the inclusion of a leak correction term in Equation 11 evaluatesthe TCFGOT by Equation 1, i,,,,, at zero leak, the design condition, as specifiedby the ASME PTC 4.3. Substituting
(14)

into Equation 11 and then expandingEquation 1 by substituting Equations2,3,11, and 12, along with the air heaterperformance correlations(Equations5 and 6), resultsin the following revised equation:

SEP 09

98

04:39PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRFIRY

P . E/20

Inspection of this equation revealsthat calculation of the TCFGOT requiresonly four measured ,and 2 determined values: inlet and outlet air temperatures, inlet and outlet flue gastemperatures, entering flue gas flow and the air leak. All of the other parametersare constants. The calculated value oftbe TCXGT from an air heaterperformancetest must be equal to or less than the design value for optimal air heaterperformance.
Uncertainty Analysis

The uncertainty in the calculation of the TCFGGT by Equation 15 was estimatedin support of a study of air heaterperformance conductedat the Milliken Station ofNew York StateElectric & Gas Corporation (IWSEG) in 1995 and 1996. Details of the air heaterperformanceand of the uncertainty analysis can be found in the referencedreports.23 The uncertainty in the result of a calculation can normally be estimateddirectly by partial differentiation of Equation 15 with respectto each parameter, To accuratelyevaluatethe uncertaintywith an explicit equation, the equation must not be significantly nonlinear. In the caseof Equation 15, the air leak introduces a significant non-linearity which invalidates this approach. Thus, a mathematicalapproximation was required to evaluateme uncertainty in the TCFGOT. Errors in measurementsare of two types: bias errors and random errors. Biasesare associated with the measuring equipment or procedureand cannot be minimized by repeatmeasurements. However, the TCFGOT temperaturecorrectionsconsist of differencesand ratios. This tends to compensatefor bias errors. Random errors arereducedby repeatmeasurements.The following derivation assumesonly one test and thus represents maximum estimatederror. the The bias and random errors are propagatedseparatelyusing Taylor seriesexpansionsfor highly nonlinear equations:

P .9/20 SEP 09 98 04:39PM CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY

Sbnv =

(16)

where -Af = Incremental changein the function f with respectto xi,

&i

- Af = Incremental changein the function f with respectto x j, &ni crX,= Error in parameteri, oXj = Error in parameterj, and f = Function shown above asEquation 15. This numerical approachof estimatingthe uncertaintyin the TCFGOT is similar to the one that Carl James4 uses for estimating the uncertainty in the d&gn of a cross-flow heat exchanger. Of interest is the fact that the uncertainty in the design of a heat exchangerestimatedby Jamesis much larger than the uncertainty in the estimateof the performance. For a numerical approach, Equation 16 must approximate the surfaceofthe function as a linear segmentparallel to the true functional relationship. With independentparameters, only the i=j terms of Equation 16 are nonzero, simplifying the Taylor seriesexpansion. However, if the terms are correlatable,that is, not independent,then the sum of the crossproducts in Equation 16 is not zero and theseterms must be included in the estimate. This is discussedfurther in the appendix. This expansion is used to evaluatethe bias and random error contributions separately. The bias and random errors are summedseparatelyto form the bias error statistic and the random error statistic, and then combined to estimatethe total uncertainty by:

u=p+(r.s)]~
where U = Uncertainty interval, B = Overall bias error statistic, S = Overall random error statistic, and t = Appropriate Students t value. (For 95 % significance, reasonable sample size.)
t

(17)

= 2.0 for a

The parametervalues used for the estimation of the uncertainty of the TCFGOT and the bias and random erroreassociatedwith them are shown below in Table I. The bias and random errors were estimatedby separateerror propagationcalculationsfor standard,multipoint sampling arrays in the inlet and outlet ducts of the air heater. Thesemultipoint sampleswere used to

P . lW20 SEP 09 '98 04:4BPM CONSOL R&D LIBRARY

evaluate averagetemperaturesand compositionsin the ducts. The appendixpresentsa brief discussionof this with a more detailed discussionavailable in the project reports5 As discussed in the Appendix, examination of the derivation of thesesampleerrorssuggeststhat for standard, multipoint traversesof utility-scale equipment,the bias and random errorsshown in Table II for these averagetemperaturesand compositionsare typical. Table K Value of Parameters and Their Associated Bias and Random Errors
Parameter Unit F Value 100 644 680 285

Bias Error
1.00 6.44 6.81 2.85 9.82 0.05

Random Error 0.15

0.74

Air Temperature @ Inlet and Ambient

Air Temperature

OF F F 1,000 lb/h percent

@ outlet Flue Gas Temperature @ Inlet Flue Gas Temperature @ Outlet Flue Gas Flow Air Leak 0.81
0.35 0.72 0.77

157
6

Theseparametersare propagatedusing Equation 16. The bias and random errors arepropagated separatelyand summedto form the B and S componentsof Equation 17. Equation 17 is then usedto estimatethe overall uncertainty interval. The following example shows the evaluation of one of the incrementalchangeterms required by Equation 16. To evaluatethe bias error associated with the air temperatureat the inlet: 1.
2. 3.

The TCFGOT is calculatedat the basetemperature,100 OF,plus three times the bias error. Then the TCFGOT is calculated at 100 F minus three times the bias error. Designating these two values of the TCFGOT asf, andfp, respectively,the contribution to the bias error of the TCFGGT for the inlet air temperatureis evaluatedby the following:

!iEP 09

98

04:40PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRQRY

P. ii/20

q=fa

6.0, =31231-313.17

-f,

(18)

6.1
= LO143

All other parametersare held constantat the values shown in Table I during this calculation. Equation 15 is used to calculate the TCFGCT. Since the parametersh and4 were evaluatedat three times the bias error, o,, greater and three times the bias error lower than the actual value of the temperatureof the inlet air, the total delta is six times a,. That is, the difference between f. sndfp is divided by six times the bias error. To be an accurateestimateof the error, the function equation& must be relatively hear over the range of the error. That is, iffis the value of TCFGOT at an inlet air temperatureof 100 F, then if,

f, -fO sfO -fp

(31291-312.74)=(312.74-313.17) 0.436 = 0.422 then the assumptionof linearity and, in turn, the validity of the estimateis conflrmed. This calculation is repeatedfor the other parameters listed in Table I and the products summed as shown in Equation 15 to produce the resulting bias and random errors shown in Table II, This is the estimate of the uncertainty from Equation 17 in the determinationof the totally corrected flue gas outlet temperature, or TCFGOT, for an air heater. The estimateof the error in the determination of the totally correctedflue gastemperatureis +4.75 *F for the specific conditions shown in Table I. As a percentage,-2%, this uncertainty can be applied to evaluation of other air heatn3. Table II Estimate of the Uncertainty of the Totally Corrected Flue Gas Temperature Parameter TCFGOT JI&F Bias
4.57

Random
0.66

_Uncertaintv
zk4.75

Conclusions The ASME PTC 4.3 provides a standardizedmethod for evaluatingthe performanceof utility air heaters. It provides a mathematically cotr&Ct meansof evaluatingthe performancewhich aids in

P. 12/20 SEP 09 98 04:40PM CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY

minimixing disputes between suppliersand purchasers when guarantee performauceevaluations are conducted. In operating plants, it is generally impossibleto establishdesign conditions to verify performance. To overcomethis, the PTC specifiesthat the measuredflue gas outlet temperaturemust be correctedfor differencesfrom design inlet air temperature,design inlet flue gas temperature,design X-ratio, and designflue gasrate. Oncethesecorrections are determined, the totally corrected flue gasoutlet temperaturecan be calculatedand comparedwith the design outlet temperature. Calculation of the first two temperaturecorrectionsis explicitly defined by the ASME code. The determinationof the temperaturecorrectionsfor differences from design X-ratio and design flue gas flow are left to the supplier or purchaserto determine. Normally the manufacturer will supply the purchaserwith designperformancecurves or equations,but not with those to calculatethe temperaturecorrectionsspecified by the PTC. This paper provides a method for evaluating the remaining two temperaturecorrectionsusing the performance curves. Should the manufactureralsoprovide proceduresfor calculating the specified PTC temperaturecorrections,the results can be checkedusing the proposedprocedure. This was done for the Mill&en air heaterperformancetesting with good agreementfound between the two methods. As part of the Mill&en air heatertest program, the uncertainty in the ASME PTC 4.3 equation for calculating the TCFGOT was determined. Becauseof the non-linearity of the final equation, numerical approximationswete usedto determinethe differentials neededfor the propagation procedure. For the examplepresented,the estimateduncertainty is 4.75 F for the TCFGOT at a 95% confidence level. This showsthat the uncertaintyin the codeprocedureis relatively small, about 2% of the design outlet temperatureas expressed degreesFahrenheit. in References Air Heaters-Supplement to Performance Test Codefor SteamGenerating Units, I. Pl-C 4.1; ASME/ANSI PTC 4.3 - 1974;Reaffirmed 1991,The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,New York, 1968. 2. McCoy, D. C.; Bilonick, R. A.; Milliken Station Heat Pipe Air Heater Performance Uncertainty Analysis, Report preparedby CONSOL Inc., R&D for New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, Binghamton, New York, June 1995. Maskew, J. T.; Milliken Station Heat Pipe Air Heater PerformanceUncertainty Analysis of Totallv Corrected Gas TemneratureLeavine the Air Heater, Report preparedby CONSOL Inc., R&D for New York StateElectric & GasCorporation, Binghsmton, New York, April 1996. James,C. A.; Taylor, R. F.; Hedge, B. K.; The Application of Uncertainty Analysis to Cross-Flow Heat ExchangerPerformancePredictions;Heut Transfer Engineering; 16, 4; pp 50-61; 1995. McCoy, D. C.; Heat Pipe Performance-- Final Report; Final report preparedby CONSOL Inc., R&D for New York StateElectric & GasCorporation, Binghamton, New York, August 1998.

3.

4.

5.

SEP 09

98

04:41P,,

CCNSOL R&D CIBRFlRY

APPENDXX Estimation of Uncertainty in the Individual Parameters Required for the Evaluation of the ASMlE PTC 4.3 Totally Corrected Flue Gas Outlet Temperature The uncertainty analysesdiscussedin this paper are for the American Society ofMechanical Engineering (ASME) proceduresfor testing the performanceof air heatersand, specifically, for the equation to predict the totally correctedflue gasoutlet temperature(TCFGOT). The estimatesof bias errors and random errors for the individual parameters were derived for the equipment and methodology used in obtaining the datarequired for a test program. This test program focused on evaluating the performanceof an air heaterrecently installed in the Milliken Station of New York StateEleotric & Gas. The methods followed in deriving the estimatesof the uncertainty of the individual parametersarepublished by ASME. Comprehensive discussion of all of the calculationsis published e1sewhere.l Milliken Station Unit 2 is a 150 MW, pulverized coal-fired boiler with twin, parallel air heaters. Each air heater heats both primary and secondaryair for half of the unit in separatesectionswith the flue gas mixed before and after the tir heater. The uncertaintyanalysispresentedbelow contains the results for both the primary and secondarysidesof the air heater. The design of the air heater was such.that all of the air leakageoccurred at sootblowerports. Air leaked from outside of the air heaterinto the flue gasheating the primary air. Leakageinto the side heating the secondaryair was insignificant and was ignored in the following evaluation. Test Procedure The general test procedure followed in the determinationof the TCFGOT was the ASME PerformanceTest Code (PTC) PTC 4.1 and PTC 4.34. Individual parametersrequired by the PTC 4.3 were measuredfollowing generally acceptedmethods,normally U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methods. For gas velocity, EPA Method 2 was used along with EPA Method 16. The gas composition was determinedgenerally following the proceduresof EPA Method 3?. Since the ASME procedurebasesthe flue gas and air flow rates on the coal feedrate andgasproperties, rather than on the measuredgasand air velocities, the derivation of the errors of the individual parametersis complex. However, using the coal feedrate,from calibrated feeders,and gas compositions as a basecreatesa commonbond betweenthe air and flue gas flows. This createsa consistentbasis for the calculations. Background Error propagation is calculatedby Taylor Seriesexpansionof the resultant function. In general, if r =f(xa x2,. ., x, . . ., xJ, then the error statistics,S,,,, for either the bias error or the random error is calculated by

where

SEP 09

98

04:42PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRFIRY

P .14/20

ax, c%cj cr,,, oxj = Error with respectto xi (or xj).

af -al = Partial derivatives of j with respectto Y, (or xi), and

when the parametersare independent,only the i=j terms are significant. For many of the parametersexamined in this work, the parameters were a independentand all of the terms in Equation Al were evaluated. Note that using a single thermocoupleto measureall of the temperaturesin the traverseof a plane in a duct createsa dependency betweenthese measurements. The bias error associated with tbe thermocoupleis the samefor all points. Thus, it is dependent. To illustrate the calculation complexity for the estimateof the errors of the individual paran~eters, step-by-stepcalculation of the estimateof the uncertainty for a weight a averagetemperatureof a gas is shown below. The averageis basedon a traverseof an inlet (or outlet) duct. For the details of the estimation of the uncertaintiesof other parameters,refer to the final Milliken project report8 Only the errors and uncertainty for theseother evaluations are presentedhere. Temperature Traverse Uncertainty Calculation The weight averagetemperatureof a gas flowing in a duct is basedon a flow weighted average of the temperaturesobtained from a standardtraverseof the duct. That is,
t AiwT,

T=%

j=l i ill A,wi

(a

where Ai = Cross sectional areafor point i, ft2, i = Traversepoint number, q = Temperahuemeasuredat point i, R, vi = Velocity in areaAi determinedat point i, fps, and pi = Fluid density in areaA;, lb / f?. The fluid velocity is determinedby a Pitot tube measurement.The gas is assumedto behave ideally and the velocity is constant over the entire cross-sectional A,. The velocity is area calculated by:

Mi.T, vi cl: 1 = .1 2 P,,.Mi

I

85.49

(A31

P .15/20 SW 09 98 04:42PM CONSOL R&D LIBRRRY

CP, - Pitot

tube

flow

coeffkzicnL

dimensionless,

0,

- Vclacity

head in area i, inches W. C.,

pressure

P,, = Static

in area i, inches Hg. absolute, in CWS i. Ib / lb - mol.

and

M, = GAS mole weight

Similarly, the gas density is calculated: 0.04578. Mi .I,;

Pi = T,

(A41

Substituting the formulas for vi (Equation A3) andp, (Equation A4) into Equation A2 and simplifying yields:

Equation A5 is partially differentiated with respectto A, CP, dP,, M,, PI,, and T,, and the resulting partial summed asindicated in Equation Al. Equation A5 producessix setsof partial differential equations. If the denominatorof Equation A5 is set equal to Sum1and the numerator equal to Sum2 to simplify the resulting equations,thesepartial differentials are:

,.(~~.~i).sum2 Gg c~.(~..M,.P,i.7;)t.suml-cP. -= SumI 34

dr,,=
~.(~.~,.~i.T)f.Suml-A, , Sum2

(A6)

@I

e, -= aw

xsuml-c<.A,. 2.Suml

sum2

(A@

P SEP 09 98

x/20

t&,:&W,

CONSOL R&D LIBRARY

a -=Lg a&f;

C4. A;.

~Suml-Ce.4, 2~SurnP

.Sum2

,&ml-Cf.A,, ae, = 2.sum12

(AlO)

Theseindividual differentials aremultiplied and summedas shown by Equation Al. The bias errors and random errors, a,, for this calculation are listed in Table A-I. Table A-I also lists the source of the bias and random errors for eachof the parameters.As previously mentioned, many of the crossproduct terms must be included in the bias calculationssince the sameequipment was usedto measurea parameter. The inclusion of crossproducts,i@ terms, addssignificantly to the number of terms that must be evaluated. If there were no crossproduct terms, a duct traverseof 12 samplepoints in Equation A5 would require 72 terms. With the crossproducts, this increasesto 864 terms. In the caseof the bias error, the crossproduct telms accountfor essentially all of the error in determining the averagetemperature. Since the bias errors are not reducedby taking multiple measurements, bias errors accountfor most of the uncertainty in the air the final averagetemperatureas shown in Table A-II. In the caseof the secondaxy inlet, which has only four traversepoints, the bias error is 90% of the uncertainty in the dctetination of the averagetemperature. Table A-II summarizesthe uncertainty estimatesfor the Milliken air heater for the averageai* and gas temperatures. The bias error is responsiblefor the majority of the uncertainty evenwith only a four-point traverse. Repetitive measurements to reducethe random error. tend Table A-III shows the efTorsfor the other parametersrequired to evaluatethe TCFGOT. The uncertainty is shown as a percent of the final calculatedvalue. All uncertainty estimatesare at the 95% confidence limit.

P. 17/20 SEi= 09 98 04:43PM CONSOL R&D LIBRARY

Table A-I Summary of Bias Errors and Precision Indices for Uncertainty Calculations Palsmeter llmension Width Length Yemperature 0.5 (0.042) 0.5 (0.042) l%ofF Reading 0.5 (0.042) 0.5 (0.042) % % of OF Reading Assumed Assumed Bias - Typical for Type K Thermocouples, Random - ASME PTC 1 Bias Error RandomError lOne Stand.Dev.) CommentsI Basis

Barometric Static Vel. Head, AP

0.04 Hg 0.05 WC 2 % of Avg. Reading

0.04 Hg 0.05 WC 0.00005 WC

Calibration of Aneroid BarometerScale Water Manometer Scale ShortridgeAir Data Multimeter, Model ADM-870 Bias - Instrument Design Spec. Random - % Design Spec. Calibration Accuracy

itot Factor,

CP

0.01

0.0

:oal Analysis Moisture C I-l N S Ash 3.9 % rel. 3.9 % rel. 3.9 % rel. 3.9 % rel. 1.9 % rel. 3.9 % rel. LO.20 O.O12*MQ Bias - AssumedSameas Ash + (2 * 1.414) Random -ASTM Repeatability Q.&Q (2 * 1.414) (Q&J (2 * 1.414) Bias - AssumedSameas Ash Random - ASTM Repeatability

Bias -Assumed Sameas Ash Random - ASTM Repeatability 10.11) Bias -Assumed Sameas Ash (2 * 1.414) Random - ASTM Repeatability (0.06 + O.O3S*S\ Biss - From Washability Data (2 * 1.414) Random - ASTIM Repeatability Bias -From Washability Data 10.07+ 0.02*&h\ (2 * 1.414) Random - ASTM Repeatability

P. m/20 SEP 09 98 04:43PM CONSOL R&D LIBRFlRY

Table A-I Summary of Bias Errors and Precision Indices for Uncertainty Calculations Parameter Coal Analysis (Cont.) CinAsh
25 % rel.

Bias Error

Random Error (One Stand.Dew.1 10 %rel.

Comments/ Basis

Bias - Experiencewith Milliken Unit 2 Loss On Ignition Data Random - Assumed Bias - Assumed Random - Typical, PTC 4.1

Coal Rate
Gas Analysis

5 % rel.

0.25 %rel

02
CO co,

0.05 % abs.

0.05 % abs.

Bias - Calibration Gas Spec Random - Low 0, Instrument Design Spec. Same OrsatMeter Bias - Burette ScaleDivision Random -Experience, PTC 4.1 Bias - Error of 1 F in Reading Wet Bulb Temperature(WBT) Random - Error of 2 F in Reading WBT

20

mm

10Ppm
3 % rel.

0.1 % abs.

Air Moisture

10 % rel.

20 % rel.

Molecular Wt. Flue Gas Air 0.05

0.025

0.07
0.05

CombinedUncertainty of Analysis for Ash and Flue Gas Combined Uncertainty for Humidity

SEP 09 98

04:43PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRQRY

P. 19/2!2

Table A-II Uncertainty Estimates for Average Duct Temperatures Based upon Multi-Point Traverses No. of Traverse Points 12 20 4 24 20 24 Bias Error, %F 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.oo 1.oo Random Jrror. %F 0.15 0.11 0.25 0.11 0.12 0.14

Location Primary Air Inlet Primary Air Outlet SecondaryAir Inlet SecondaryAir Outlet Flue Gas Inlet Flue Gas Outlet

Uncertaintv. %F 1.05 1.03 1.11 1.03 1.03 1.04

Table A-III Uncertainty Estimates for Other Parameters Required to Evaluate TCFGOT Location Primary Air Flow, Inlet Primary Air Flow, Outlet SecondaryAir Flow, Inlet/Outlet Flue Gas Flow, Inlet Flue Gas Flow, Outlet Flow Split Between Air Beaters Air Leak @ 6.87% Leak Bias Error. % 3.31 2.61 5.02 6.28 6.25 0.43 0.85 RandomError. o/n 2.93 2.08 0.68 0.75 0.46 0.49 12.60 Uncertaintv. % 6.72 4.92 5.20 6.46 6.32 0.94 25.21

Conclusions Two conclusions can be reachedafter examining theseresults. The estimatesofthe uncertainties shown in Table A-II and A-III are valid for all air heaters,when a valid duct traversecari be

SEP 09 98

04:44PM

CONSOL R&D LIBRARY

P .20/20

performed. The uncertainty for a duct traversewith as few as4 points is still dominated by the bias errors. Secondly, since the dornimtnt errorsin the raw data are expressed percentages,the as results shown in Tables A-II and A-HI, and in the main body of this paper, are independentof the absolute values of the parameters. Thus, they apply to any air heater. Appendix Referencea Measurement Uncertain@Part 1. Instrumentsand Apparatus, ANSJJASME 1. PTC 19.1-1985, The American Society ofMechanical Engincera,New York, 1986. 2. McCoy, D. C. and Bilonick, R. A.; Milliken Station Heat Pipe Air Heater Performance Uncertainty Analysis; Report preparedby CONSOL Inc., R&D for New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, Binghamton, New York, June 1995. Steam Generating Units, AShEJANSI PTC 4.1 - 1974; Reaffumed 1991,The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,New York, 1970. Air Heaters, Supplementto Performance Test Codefor SteamGenerating Units, PTC 4.1, ASM&A.NSI PTC 4.3 - 1974; Reaffirmed 1991, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,New York, 1968. ERA Method 2, Determination of Stack Gas Velocityand VolumetricFlow Rate (Tjqe S Pitot Tube), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Code of FederalRegulations 40, Washington, D. C., 1996. EPA Method 1, Sampleand Velociy Traverses& Stationary Sources,U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Code of FederalRegulations40, Washington, D. C., 1996. EPA Method 3, GasAnalysisfor CO, 0, ExcessAir, and Dry Molecular Weight, W. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Code of FederalRegulations 40, Washington, D. C., 1996. McCoy, D. C.; Xeat Pipe Performance-Final Report, Final report preparedby CONSOL Inc., R&D for New York StateElectric & GasCorporation, Binghmton, New York, August 1998.

3. 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.