ESP Gas Flow Fundamentals
Robert Mudry, P.E.
Vice President – Engineering
Airflow Sciences Corporation
[email protected] [email protected] ESP/FF Round Table & Exposition
August 12, 2002
Airflow Sciences Corporation
1
Outline
v Introduction
v ESP Fluid Flow Basics
v Assessing Flow Characteristics
v ESP Flow Modeling
v Case Studies
v Questions
Airflow Sciences Corporation
2
Introduction
v Why Worry About Fluid Dynamics?
• Strong influence on performance of pollution control
equipment (ESP, FF, SCR, LNB, Scrubber, etc.)
• Relatively low cost performance enhancements are possible
v Example Cases
v About Your Speaker
Airflow Sciences Corporation
3
Example Cases
v How important is flow distribution?
Plant Baseline Performance After Flow Improvements
Mississippi Power Full load opacity 25% Full load opacity less than 5%
Watson Unit 5
Southern California High opacity causes 23% reduction in particulate
Edison Mohave 240 MW derate per emissions allows load
Units 1&2 unit increase of 150 MW per unit
Essroc Materials High opacity (14%) Improved dust capture
Nazareth Unit 1 and high pressure reduces opacity to 7%;
loss cause high system pressure loss reduced
operating costs by 5 inches H2O
Airflow Sciences Corporation
4
About Your Speaker
v BSE, MSE Aerospace Engineering – University of Michigan
v 13 years as fluid dynamics consultant to industry
v Involved in 300+ testing/modeling projects
v Institute of Clean Air Companies (ICAC) member
v Author of 6 power industry technical papers
v Registered Professional Engineer – MI, NC, VA
Airflow Sciences Corporation
5
Outline
v Introduction
v ESP Fluid Flow Basics
• Gas Velocity Distribution
½ Ductwork
½ Collection Region
• Gas Flow Balance
• Pressure Drop
• Gas Temperature
• Gas Conditioning
v Assessing Flow Characteristics
v ESP Flow Modeling
v Case Studies
v Questions
Airflow Sciences Corporation
6
Gas Velocity Distribution – Ductwork
v Ductwork Design Criteria
• Maintain minimum
velocity requirements
to avoid particle dropout
• Provide good flow
characteristics to ESP
v Considerations
• Horizontal surfaces
• Cross sectional area
• Bends
• Structure
Airflow Sciences Corporation
7
Gas Velocity Distribution –
Collection Region
v Uniform Flow Concept
• ESP inlet & outlet planes
v Industry Standards
• ICAC
• % RMS Deviation
v “Skewed” Flow
Concepts
ICAC: 85% of velocities 1.15 * Vavg
99% of velocities 1.40 * Vavg
Other: % RMS Deviation 15% of Vavg
Airflow Sciences Corporation
8
Gas Velocity Distribution –
Collection Region
v Flow Control Methods
• Vanes, baffles
• Flow straighteners
• Perforated plates
Airflow Sciences Corporation
9
Gas Flow Balance
v Industry Standards
ICAC: Flow within each chamber to be
v Control Methods within ±10% of its theoretical share
Percent of total mass
flow through each
chamber 21 %
35 %
26 %
18 %
Airflow Sciences Corporation
10
Pressure Drop
v General goal:
• Minimize DP
v Methods
• Vanes
• Duct contouring
• Area management
Ductwork redesign saves
2.1 inches H2O over baseline
Flow
Airflow Sciences Corporation
11
Gas Temperature
v Average temperature
v Temperature stratification
Resistivity
v Inleakage
Temperature
Airflow Sciences Corporation
12
Gas Conditioning
Modify ash resistivity
Resistivity
v
• SO3, ammonia, others
v Alter gas density, viscosity
• Humidification 5 ppm SO3
Low SO3 Temperature
Concentration
Humidification principle:
m= *v*A
m, A = constant
High SO3 = f (T)
Concentration If T is reduced, increases
Thus v decreases when water is added
SO3 Concentration
Airflow Sciences Corporation
13
Outline
v Introduction
v ESP Fluid Flow Basics
v Assessing Flow Characteristics
• Inspections
• Field Testing
½ Ductwork
½ Collection Region
v ESP Flow Modeling
v Case Studies
v Questions
Airflow Sciences Corporation
14
Inspections
v Ash Patterns
v Geometry Influence on
Fluid Dynamics
v Irregularities
Airflow Sciences Corporation
15
Field Testing – Ductwork
v Velocity
v Temperature
v Pressure
v Particulate
v Resistivity
v Chemical Species
Airflow Sciences Corporation
16
Field Testing – Collection Region
v Velocity Distribution
• Cold flow conditions
• Vane anemometer
½ Accuracy 1% in 33-10
-10 ft/sec range
½ Lightweight, portable
½ Sensitive to flow angularity, turbulence, dust
Airflow Sciences Corporation
17
Outline
v Introduction
v ESP Fluid Flow Basics
v Assessing Flow Characteristics
v ESP Flow Modeling
• Physical Models
• Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Models
v Case Studies
v Questions
Airflow Sciences Corporation
18
ESP Modeling – Physical Models
v Background
v Theory
v Simulation Parameters (how the model is set up)
v Results Analysis (what you get from the model)
Airflow Sciences Corporation
19
Physical Models – Background
v Utilized for fluid flow analysis for a century … or more?
v Applied to ESPs for decades
v Underlying principle is to reproduce fluid flow behavior in a
controlled, laboratory environment
Airflow Sciences Corporation
20
Physical Models – Theory
v Key criteria is to generate “Similarity” between the
scale model and the real -world object
real-world
• Geometric similarity
½ Accurate scale representation of geometry
½ Inclusion of all influencing geometry elements (typically those >4”)
½ Selection of scale can be important
• Fluid dynamic similarity
½ Precise Reynolds Number (Re) matching is not feasible
½ General practice is to match full scale velocity but ensure that Re remains
in the turbulent range throughout the model
v Dh
Re =
Airflow Sciences Corporation
21
Physical Models –
Simulation Parameters
v ESP geometry
½ 1/8th to 1/16th scale
representation
½ Include features >4” in size
v Flow conditions
½ Scaled air flow rate (ambient
temperature)
½ Reproduce velocity profile at
model inlet
½ Simulated chemical injection
½ Simulated particle tracking
Airflow Sciences Corporation
22
Physical Models – Results Analysis
v Quantitative data available at discrete measurement points
• Velocity magnitude, directionality
• Pressure (corrected to full scale)
• Chemical species concentrations
v Integrated/reduced data
• Mass balance between ESP chambers
• Comparison to ICAC conditions or
target velocity profiles
• Correlation to test data
v Qualitative data
• Flow directionality (smoke, tufts)
• Particle behavior, drop
drop-out
-out
Airflow Sciences Corporation
23
Flow Modeling –
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
v Background
v Theory
v Simulation Parameters (how the model is set up)
v Results Analysis (what you get from the model)
Airflow Sciences Corporation
24
CFD – Background
v Developed in the aerospace industry c.1970 (with the advent
of “high speed” computers)
v Applied to ESPs for 15+ years
v Underlying principle is to solve the first
first-principles
-principles
equations governing fluid flow behavior using a computer
S NASA
ource:
Airflow Sciences Corporation
25
CFD – Theory
v Control Volume Approach
• Divide the flow domain into distinct control volumes
• Solve the Navier
Navier-Stokes
-Stokes equations (Conservation of Mass,
Momentum, Energy) in each control volume
Inflow Outflow
Control Volume
or “Cell”
ESP model with
850,000 cells
Airflow Sciences Corporation
26
CFD – Simulation Parameters
v ESP geometry
½ Full scale representation
½ Include features >4” in size,
more detail if possible
v Flow conditions
½ Full scale gas flow rate
½ Reproduce velocity profile at
model inlet
½ Reproduce temperature profile
at model inlet
½ Simulated chemical injection
½ Simulated particle tracking
Airflow Sciences Corporation
27
CFD – Results Analysis
v Quantitative data available at all control volumes
• Velocity magnitude,
directionality
• Temperature
• Pressure
• Turbulence
• Chemical species
concentrations
• Particle trajectories
v Integrated/reduced data
• Mass balance between ESP chambers
• Comparison to ICAC conditions or target velocity profiles
• Correlation to test data
Airflow Sciences Corporation
28
Outline
v Introduction
v ESP Fluid Flow Basics
v Assessing Flow Characteristics
v ESP Flow Modeling
v Case Studies
• Reducing Forced Outages for Hot Side ESP Cleaning
• Improving Capture Efficiency to Avoid MW Derates
• Gas Conditioning System Design
v Questions
Airflow Sciences Corporation
29
Reducing Forced Outages for ESP Cleaning
v Hot side ESP
v Southeast U.S.
v 185 MW unit
v ESP cleaning required every 2
2-3
-3 months to operate
within opacity limits
v Unit derate and eventual forced outage as ESP
capture performance degrades
Airflow Sciences Corporation
30
Reducing Forced Outages for ESP Cleaning
v Known problem: Poor sideside-to-side
-to-side gas velocity
distribution within collection region
v Solution: Expand flow more efficiently in the ESP
inlet ductwork
v Result: ESP operates for 12 months without
cleaning; no derates due to opacity
Airflow Sciences Corporation
31
Avoiding MW Derates
v Cold side ESP
v Western U.S.
v Two 790 MW units
v Undersized ESPs
v Both units regularly derated by 240 MW to operate
within opacity limits
Airflow Sciences Corporation
32
Avoiding MW Derates
v Baseline CFD modeling indicates poor gas velocity
distribution within collection region
v Solution: Redesign flow control devices (turning
vanes, perforated plates)
v Results
• 23% reduction in
particulate emissions
• Output increased by 150
MW per unit
Airflow Sciences Corporation
33
Gas Conditioning System Design
v Cold side ESP
v Midwest U.S.
v 422 MW unit
v Humidification system injects water into ESP inlet
ductwork
v Severe buildup on internal
structure causes forced outages
and high maintenance costs
Airflow Sciences Corporation
34
Gas Conditioning System Design
v Baseline CFD modeling indicates water droplets do
not evaporate completely before impacting structure
v Solution: Redesign spray nozzles and internal
structure
v Results: Minimal material
buildup, elimination of
forced outages
Airflow Sciences Corporation
35
Questions?
If you would like an electronic copy of this
presentation, please contact Rob Mudry as follows:
[email protected] Tel. 734-464-8900
Airflow Sciences Corporation
36
