Available online at http://www.urpjournals.

com

Advanced Engineering and Applied Sciences: An International Journal

Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved

ISSN 23203927

Original Article Modelling of Air Pollution Equipment (ESP)

Anil Sharma1 and Omprakash Sahu2 Department of Chemical Engineering, ITGGV, Bilaspur, India Correspondence author Email:ops0121@gmail.com, Tel:+919752610957 Received 01 May 2013; accepted 21 May 2013 Abstract Performance of Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) deteriorates over the years and they are not able to meet the required emission standard. In the present paper we discuss the performance of ESPs in a power plant, which is situated right in the centre of a mega city. As the power plant is surrounded by densely populated area of the city the other emission control methods like flu gas treatment with SOx/NOx cannot be applied due to a further risk of pollution. Pulse charging method has also limited scope of further enhancing the particulate collection efficiency of ESPS. The decision was taken to put additional unit of ESP along with existing unit of ESP. Performance Guarantee (PG) tests were carried out for the whole ESP systems. Samples were collected from the inlet and outlet of the each ESP systems. The collection efficiencies were determined for individual and for the whole set of ESPs. The results indicate a significant deterioration of collection efficiency old ESP unit at the level of (90-93%) against designed value of more than 99%. The new ESP unit, which was put ahead of old ESP unit, was operating in the range of (93-96) % of collection efficiency. The overall Collection efficiency of the system exceeded all the time more than 99%. 2013 Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved Keywords: Pollutant, Suspended particulate matter, Sulphur Oxides, Nitrogen Oxide. Therefore, a more rigorous control of SPM is necessary and 1. INTRODUCTION: The concern with the environment is becoming more and the electrostatic precipitator (ESP) stands out as an air more present in the daily life of everyone. An increasing cleaning equipment with high removal efficiency in a wide involvement with the environmental issue is demanded size range, including sub-micron particles [8]. Although from the governments, companies and, eventually, from the relatively well studied, the behaviour of the electrostatic society as a whole. Conscious decisions need to be taken to precipitators lacks experimental data on their performance preserve the ecosystems with minimum interference in the due to the high number of influential parameters, which development of the nations. These ideas are contained in include: particle properties (density, electrical resistivity, the Declaration of Rio on the Environment and size distribution, etc.), process variables (gas velocity, Development approved in the ECO92 [1], which assumes particle concentration, etc.), construction and geometrical as a principle the acquisition and improvement of the elements (electrode type and geometry, space between the necessary scientific knowledge for promoting the plates and electrodes, etc.), and operational variables sustainable development. Of the several aspects involved in (applied potential, corona polarity, dc and pulse the study of air pollution, the presence in the atmosphere of energization, cleaning frequency, etc). Attempting to particles smaller than 2.5 m in diameter is becoming a maximize the performance of the precipitators, many matter of great concern. These particles, known as PM2.5 researchers [8-14] have addressed the problem of or high risk respirable particles have been proved to be very quantifying the influence of some of these variables. harmful to the human health, especially to the children, the However, the quantity of experimental data on the elderly and the sick [2-4]. These particles possess a high performance of electrostatic precipitators is still relatively superficial area, thus favouring the adsorption of toxic scarce, even more in SPM size range [15, 16]. The present substances and increasing the potential harmful effects to work evaluates experimentally the influence of the gas the human organism [5, 6]. SPM is directly associated to velocity, the field strength, the diameter of the discharge asthma, bronchitis, loss of the breathing capacity and has electrodes and of the distance between them in the been pointed as responsible for the decrease of the life performance of a plate-wire precipitator operating in the expectation in some areas [7]. removal of very fine particles. Theoretical predictions are Advanced Engineering and Applied Sciences: An International Journal 2013; 3(2): 21-23

21

presented and discussed. 2. METHODOLOGY: The basic formula describing ESP performance is the Deutsch equation [17], The ESP collection efficiency, , is defined as: = 1-Zo/Zi (1) Where, Zi and Zo represent the dust concentrations at the inlet and outlet of the ESP. General information provided by ESP manufacturers often calculate ESP efficiency as: = 1- exp -ktotal (2) Where, ktotal is known as the total efficiency factor, which can be calculated as: ktotal = kd k1....kn (3) Where, kd is the efficiency factor in design conditions and k1...kn are several correction factors accounting for operating deviations of the gas and ash flow characteristics. The value of kd is determined by the constructive characteristics of the ESP, mainly the design of its electrodes, its R/T control system, and its rapping system. Correction factors usually refer to volumetric gas flow rate, gas temperature, coal moisture and sulfur content, unburned coal in fly ash, and dust concentration at the ESP inlet. These factors are strongly dependent on the performance of the equipments upstream the ESP (mainly boiler and gas-air preheaters), some global operation criteria (such as excess air), or they are imposed by strategic reasons (e.g., the composition of the coal blend being fired). Equation (2) is just a simplified form of the Deutsch equation: = 1- exp( -w A/Q) (4) Where, w is the migration velocity (m/s), A is the effective collection area (m2), and V is the volumetric gas flow rate (m3/s). White (1977a) and Riehle & Loffler (1992) present interesting studies about the limitations and significance of the Deutsch formula [18-20]. 3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION: (CALCULATION FOR EFFICIENCY OF ESP) The test program at the NTPC Korba Power Station was the test personnel were more experienced with the test equipment. The test program consisted of both mass loading and particle size distribution measurements. Internal inspections and gas velocity distribution measurements were planned for a later date. The ESP upgrade options considered for NTPC. The mass indicate that the ESP is not in as good condition. The model calibration does not provide as good since the specific collecting electrode area is for NTPC. For the worst case coal condition, the upgrade options were rerun the NTPC, This means that the NTPCs ESP must be repaired and brought to a good condition, before the upgrade options will provide the full measure of improvement. Present ESP installed in NTPC Korba which have 98% efficient, now theoretical collection efficiency of ESP is calculating by the Deutsch Anderson equation [21]. It can be used for both tubular and plate type precipitator. This expressed in terms of =1-exp (-Ws x A/Q) Where, A- Area of plate/wire

Ws- Migration Velocity Q- Gas Flow Rate From NTPC Power Station we find, A= Area of the plate=18.55 m2 Q=Gas flow rate inlet=287.28m3/s Ws=Migration velocity of gaseous=59.0m/s Then, =1-exp (-59.0 x 18.55/278.28) =98% Now velocity of the gas can be calculated by the equation v=Q/A =15.48 m/s Volume of the precipitator can calculate by, A/V=2/S Where, S is the distance between the two plates. The specific consumption gas rates 0.82ton/MW/hr. It required the electric load 39MW. From the quality parameter of coal we find that, it contains ash will appox. 0.625 i,e. 62.5% Fly Ash=0.92=92% Now the inlet dust concentration can be calculated, Inlet dust concentration= (39*1000000*0.82*0.92*0.625)/3600*287.78 =17.870gm/m3 Out dust concentration Dust collection efficiency can be define as Ratio of difference in the load to inlet load, and calculated by the equation, From the table no 4.5 & 4.6 we get, Dust collection efficiency = (Inlet-Outlet)/Inlet = (17.87*1000-347.78)/17.87*1000 =98% To determine the pollutant level in chimney probe is used to take the sample. It was observation that the in sample SPM 350g/m3, SOx 165g/m3 and NOx 155g/m3 respectively. But According to Central Pollution Control Board the permissible limit of pollutant in Industrial area are 250g/m3, SOx 150g/m3 and NOx 150g/m3. So it was cross the permissible limit. Now we modified the area of same ESP Our conclusion for NTPC Korba -Efficiency of ESP is defined as the Deusch Anderson equation. =1-exp(-A*Ws/Q) e= exponential factor A= Area=21.8 m (if we are change the area of plate then) Q=Gas flow rate=287.28m/s Ws=migration velocity=59.0m/s For the gas velocity v=Q/A =15.48 Efficiency=1-exp(-59.0 x 21.8/278.28) =99% By applying our modification we get the SPM 200g/m3 , SOx 65g/m3 and NOx 55g/m3 the pollutants level which is under permissible limit. The efficiency of was observed 99%. From the above we find that pollutant level is much low than pollution control board norms. 4. CONCLUSION: The Over-all collection efficiencies for particulate have been improved by putting two ESPs in series. Further improvement is possible on adopting following steps. Plugging of leakage in the boiler / ESP system up to

22

Advanced Engineering and Applied Sciences: An International Journal 2013; 3(2): 21-23

stack. This will minimize infiltration as well as make ID fans operation suitable to create adequate suction in the furnace. Operating the boiler at stable load with minimum fluctuation. Increasing current level of collecting electrodes of NTPC ESPs with lower current in initial fields and higher current in final fields. ACKNOWLEDGE: Authors acknowledge to department chemical engineering ITGGV, Bilaspur and Pollution control department NTPC Korba for providing facilities. REFERENCE: 1. UNEP, United Nations Environment Program, http:// www. unep. org/ Documents. Multilingual, 2005. 2. Ferin, J., G. Oberdrster, D.P. Penney, S.C. Soderholm, R. Gelein and H.C. Pipier, Increased Pulmonary Toxicity of Ultrafine Particles I. Particle Clearance Translocation, Morphology, Journal of Aerosol Science, 21, 381-384 (1990). 3. Oberdrster, G., J. Ferin, G. Finkelstein, P. Wade and N. Corson, Increased Pulmonary Toxicity of Ultrafine Particles II. Lung Lavage Studies, Journal of Aerosol Science, 21, 384-387 (1990). 4. Pui, D.Y.H. and D.R. Chen, Nanometer Particles: a New Frontier for Multidisciplinary Research, Journal of Aerosol Science, 28, 539-544 (1997). 5. Donaldson, K., X.Y. Li and W. MacNee, Ultrafine (Nanometer) Particle Mediated Lung Injury, Journal Aerosol Science, 29, 553-560 (1998). 6. Harrison, R.M. and J. Yin, Particulate Matter in the Atmosphere: Which Particle Properties are Important for its Effects on Health, Science of the Total Environment, 249, 85-101 (2000). 7. US-EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Assurance Project Plan for EPA Particle Matter Supersite: PM2.5 Technology Assessment and Characterization Study in New York, http://www.epa.com. (2000). 8. Parker, K.R., Why an Electrostatic Precipitator, Applied Electrostatic Precipitation, K.R. Parker (ed.), London, Blackie Academic, 1-9 (1997). 9. Triantafyllou A.G., PM10 Pollution Episodes As A Function Of Synoptic Climatology In A Mountainous Industrial Area, Environmental Pollution 2001;

112 (3):491-500. 10. James K.B. Bishop: The Correction and Suspended Particulate Matter Calibration of Sea Tech Transmissometer Data. Deep Sea Research Part-A, Oceanographic Research Papers, 2003; 33(1):121-134. 11. Donald J. OConnor and John P. Connolly, The Effect Of Concentration Of Adsorbing Solids On The Partition Coefficient, 2003; 14(10):1517 -1523. 12. Chandra A., Particulate Reduction Using A Series Of ESPs In A Coal Based Thermal Power Plant. Centre For Energy Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Jun 2004. 13. Ruilin G., Wenlin M., Jinhua K., Jianbin K., Sizing And Design Of Electrostatic Precipitators For Iron Ore Sinter Band, ICESP X Australia 2006. 14. Huntera P.D., Tylera A.N., Kovacsband A.W., Prestonc T., Spectral Discrination of Phytoplankton Colour Groups: The Effect Of Suspended Particulate Matter and Sensor Spectral Resolution, 2007. 15. Kocik, M., J. Dekowski and J. Mizeraczyk, Particle precipitation efficiency in an electrostatic precipitator, Journal of Electrostatics, 63, 761-766 (2005). 16. Bacchiega, G., I. Gallimbertia, E. Sani, R. Sala, V. Arrondel, M. Hamlil and E. Christensen, Experimental study of the mass balance in a pilot industrial electrostatic precipitator, Journal of Electrostatics, 64, 297309 (2006). 17. Matts S., Ohnfeldt P-O. Efficient gas cleaning with the SF electrostatic precipitator. Flakt Review, Vol. 6/7, 105, 1963/1964. 18. Bart D. Ostro: Air pollution and morbidity revisited: A specification test 1. U.S. Envirinmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.,USA , 24thJuly 2008. 19. Sumit Sharma, Avinash Chandra: Simullation of Air Quality using an ISCST3 Dispersion Model. Online Available 25thJan 2008. Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 118-124. 20. Marieke A. Elevelda, ReinoldPasterkampa and Julie D: Remotely seasonality in the spatial distribution of seasurface suspended particulate matter in the southern North Sea. 2008. 21. Hongli Liu, Changxi Li: Prediction of The Concentration And Diameter Distribution Of Indoor Suspended Particulate Matter. 2009, Kybernetes, Vol.38, Iss:3/4, Pages 381-387.

Source of support: Nil; Conflict of interest: None declared

23

Advanced Engineering and Applied Sciences: An International Journal 2013; 3(2): 21-23